Search for the facts, not the term

Submitted by Amitabh tripathi (India), Aug 19, 2006 at 04:48

Dr Daniel Pipes has drawn a real conclusion "The use of Islamic fascists should be seen as part of a decades-long search for the right term to name a form of Islam that is recognizably political, extreme, and often violent. I have already confessed in that I am on my fifth term (having previously used neo-orthodox, fundamentalist, and militant, and now using radical and Islamist). While Islamic fascists beats terrorists, let’s hope that a better consensus term soon emerges. My vote is for Islamists."

Use of term Islamic fascism is nothing other than to elaborate the real motive of Islamic terrorism . In October 2005 when President of America first time identified enemy and named him as radical Islam , it was first time when Islamic terrorism was defined beyond militancy and merely a law & order problem. It seems American President is testing water by floating new terms. But Including him, every jihad affected nation should come together to fight against this menace of terrorism, which is more important rather than definitions.

Whether you call it radical Islam, Islamic fascism or Islamic terrorism, the fact remains intact that this terrorism is driven by Islamic ideology and nourished by false propaganda of atrocities on Muslims.

Several people in most of the world has reservations in connecting terrorism with Islam but ground reality compels to point out Islam as paramount insiration behind this global phenomenon. Terrorism affected people have some questions for those Islamic apologists who are not ready to equate Islam with terrorism.

In any part of world not a single rally was organised by those Muslims who denounce this terrorism, in contrast to those demonstrations when thousands and millions of Muslims of any country come out on streets to protest publication of caricature of their prophet, to protest attack of Israel on Lebanon or to protest visit of American president in India. Why Islamic organisations were unable to mobilise people of their community against terroist attacks or to protest against Osama Bin Laden .

Whenever any big terrorist attack took place in any part of world, so called Islamic leaders start pressuring their respective government with false propganda of Muslim harrasment during investigation. Islamic leaders of any country come out openly to blame media and security agencies for singling out Muslims. Why these community leaders never take initiative to identify sleeper cells living within them?

Every time when some so called intellectual Muslims talk on Islamic terrorism they always try to balance it with some theory of atrocity on Muslims .

Intellectual Muslims never respond why their personal law are above the constitutions of their living countries. They always keep mum on state of Muslims in their society and some ayats which put obligation on Muslims to kill non-believers, instead they try to defend it in name of interpretation in right persepective.

In background of all these questions only one conclusion come to mind, that common Muslim is guided by their opinion makers and preachers who are in consonace with this Islamic revival movement and tiny minority among them which is oppose to this terrorism or medieval mentality of this religion do not have courage to come out openly because they have example of Salman Rushdie, Taslima Nasreen, Ayan Hirsi Ali before them who are running out of their countries to save their lives.

As long as we waste our time in defining the real nature of this problem we will invite more disaster for this humanity. For diplomatic reasons one should give it any name, but perception should be clear about the nature of problem.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".