Friday, September 02, 2016

Counter-Jihad Mainstream deficiencies (again...)

My commentary in square brackets.

Canadian Human Rights Commission advertises Islam as a religion of peace and justice

[Christine Williams, as I've noted before, is a frequent writer at Jihad Watch.  Since Jihad Watch is a bastion of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream, and since Robert Spencer, the founder and still energetic publisher, promoter and writer of Jihad Watch is a shrewd and intelligent man, he wouldn't pick someone to be a frequent writer of his publication if she weren't on track with his views on the problem of Islam.  And so we can reasonably assume that Christine Williams, when she editorializes, reflects the Counter-Jihad Mainstream view on the problem of Islam.]

The Canadian Human Rights Commission sponsored a webinar entitled “Building Bridges Between Cultures,” promoting Islam as a religion of peace and justice that shares values with other major faiths.

[Nowhere in her lengthy editorial analysis does Williams advert to the obviously main reason why the  Canadian Human Rights Commission -- and the whole bloody rest of the mainstream West -- indulges this kind of nonsense:  Because they are anxious to protect innumerable Muslims who are (seemingly) innocent -- moms and pops like the rest of us, Muslims who just wanna have a sandwich, who seem to be just going about their daily lives, who seem to be nice people, who are not stabbing anyone, not shooting anyone, not exploding, not running people over with trucks, etc.  This is the same anxiety I've seen countless times from the Jihad Watch comments regulars (the "Rabbit Pack" as I've dubbed them, a lynch-mob-cum-high-school-clique, whose leading member (if only because he has been so indefatigably active, like an Energizer Bunny, in pestering & policing those who don't abide by the lockstep rules of the aforementioned Rabbit Pack) -- including gravenimage, Mirren, dumbledoresarmy, Wellington, Western Canadian, PRCS, JayBoo, mortimer, and Philip Jihadski (though with his anger management issues, attacking hapless commenters who mean no harm (example, this one, where his victims were Peggy and Ernie. two decent people whom Philip Jihadski savaged) so venomously his comments had to be scrubbed by Robert Spencer's tech genius, Marc, one could say he belongs to the "Rabid Pack" as well...

Unless Williams believes that all Muslims pose an equal problem to the societies of the free world, how is her position (and the position of the rest of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream) really all that different from that of the Canadian Human Rights Commission?  Numerous indications from many of her Jihad Watch writings over the months, however, lead one to surmise that Williams does believe that innumerable Muslims are harmless and innocent, and should be treated as such.  At any rate, she -- and the entire Counter-Jihad Mainstream -- needs to clarify this, because it is the crucial nodus of the reason why the two Mainstreams -- the Counter-Jihad Maisntream and the broader Western Mainstream -- remain rhetorically at odds in an incoherent and inconsistent fashion, talking past each other.  Where there is no traction of explicitly articulated disagreement, there will be no productive movement forward.]

But given the sizeable problem the globe is experiencing with political Islam, the first question one might ask is, why is this ignored? The second question might be...

[Woah, Nelly.  Before you proceed with your questions, Miss Williams, we have a question for you:  How is your 'political Islam' any different from 'Islam'?]

[But of course, she does barrel ahead without answering that most important question, because the Counter-Jihad Mainstream to which she belongs rarely poses that question amongst themselves...]


Shahina Siddiqui, President of the Islamic Social Services Association (ISSA) of Canada, was the keynote speaker at the webinar. She’s also a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Commissioner’s National Advisory Committee on Diversity, and the RCMP Commanding Officers’ Diversity Committee. She stated:
So going back to Islamophobia…. to really understand what the definition of Islamophobia is – it is proposed that Islam and Muslims are monolithic, and cannot adapt to new realities. This is one of the elements of Islamophobia…..
It also says that they cannot share, Islam does not share values with other major faiths, and this consistently you hear it in the media coming from Islamophobic websites…
What reasonable person could disagree with Siddiqui about how it is incorrect to think Muslims are unable to adapt to new realities?

[It depends on what "unable" means.  If one means it in an ontological sense, well sure.  But if one reasonably concludes that Muslims -- given everything we know about their history, culture and psychology -- are mostly likely not able to "adapt to new realities" (i.e., to stop following their evil, fanatical ideology), then all reasonable people will, unlike Christine Williams (and probably also Robert Spencer and most of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream), not agree with Siddiqui.]

That is, if her statements were as innocent and authentic as they appear. If Muslims are fully willing to be citizens of Western countries and fully reject Sharia law, then they should be embraced, as is everyone of other faiths who upholds the same values.

[There's Williams shoulding Muslims again -- here also "If-Thenning" them:  "If Muslims blah blah blah, then they should blah blah blah..."  No.  We need to stop framing the problem this way.  When we have good reason to believe Peter is not going to do X in a million years, then we should stop saying he "should do X".  We should stop critiquing Muslims altogether, and just figure out ways to protect our society from them.  We already know what's wrong with them.  Now we have to work on waking up our society to do what needs to be done -- which is not rocket science.]


Siddiqui also says:
Islam in fact is not a violent religion. The word Islam comes from two root words: peace and submission. The objective of an Islamic way of life is to bring peace, not only to the individual, to the family, to the community, but to the world.
Islam believes that peace comes when there is justice. A great responsibility on Muslims to pursue justice, to establish justice, to work against oppression and any kind of oppression and to speak up against it.
How might Siddiqui explain 1,400 years of violence and conquest, and the current human rights violations in Muslim states, especially against women, Christians and apostates? Come to think of it, how might she also explain the slaughter of over 10 million Muslims since 1948 at the hands of other Muslims, for not being Muslim enough?

[Who gives a flying F what Siddiqui "might explain"?  We need to stop having discussions with Muslims altogether.  The time for dialogue should be over -- speaking of shoulds.]

No comments: