Why Aren't All Muslims Violent?


If it's true that devout believers in Islamic doctrine would kill all non-believers, why aren't there more deaths? Someone asked us this question, and the answer is very interesting.

First of all, many Muslims are really not practicing or devout Muslims, just like in any other religion. They don't even know the doctrine of their own religion. They were simply born a Muslim and so that's what they call themselves.

There are also those who know what the doctrine says but they don't want to do some of it, so they ignore certain teachings even though it says in the doctrine you must not ignore any of its directives.

But for the true believers, the orthodox Muslims (and according to Islamic doctrine) the goal is not indiscriminate murder. Killing is one tool allowed to be used to accomplish the goal, which is to establish the law of Allah everywhere on earth. The goal is not even to make everyone Muslim, but to make sure everyone is under the rule of Islamic law. It can be done in many ways, and it is being done in many ways all over the world.

In the U.S., for example, the Muslim Brotherhood, which is, by the way, the largest international Islamic organization in the world, has created many organizations that work to establish Islamic law incrementally. They've got their members into high places in the government, they have teams of lawyers who sue people or put pressure on companies when one of their employees is critical of Islam (one of the laws of Islam is that nobody can criticize Islam), they have organizations that influence what is printed in our public school systems about Islam, they've got organizations that pressure Hollywood to depict Muslims in a positive light, and on and on.

They don't advocate violence, but not for moral reasons. They advocate these nonviolent methods for strategic reasons. They feel that violence doesn't help the cause yet. But they take full advantage of violent episodes by other Muslims, having press conferences about fears of "backlash" and blaming free speech for the atrocities. 

The Muslim Brotherhood plan was first uncovered in an FBI raid. They have created what is called the “Civilization-Jihadist Process” – a term taken from a key 1991 Brotherhood document, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," submitted as evidence by the Justice Department in the landmark 2008 U.S. versus Holy Land Foundation, a HAMAS terror funding trial. Here's what the document says:

“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers, so that is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

By its nature, the object of such a stealthy form of jihad is to ensure that the target community remains unaware of the extent of the threat until it is too late.

Another group working nonviolently toward Islam's prime directive is the OIC (the Organization of Islamic Cooperation — the “collective voice of the Muslim world” and second largest intergovernmental organization in the world after the United Nations, and the largest voting block in the UN). Their goal is to establish a limit on free speech worldwide. It is one small step in the direction of Islamic law.

OIC General Secretary Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu admitted in a speech in June of 2008 that the OIC is working to criminalize speech that offends Muslims, noting their success is causing the West to deter "freedom of expression." Ihsanoglu said, "In confronting the Danish cartoons and the Dutch film Fitna, we sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed."

For strategic long-game reasons, then, not even all orthodox Muslims are violent.

Citizen Warrior is the author of the book, Getting Through: How to Talk to Non-Muslims About the Disturbing Nature of Islam and also writes for Inquiry Into Islam, History is Fascinating, and Foundation for Coexistence. Subscribe to Citizen Warrior updates here. You can send an email to CW here.


Does it Really Matter What the Doctrine Says?


Did you know it is a Mormon practice to fast once a month for 24 hours? Not all Mormons practice it, but the practice is recommended in the Mormon doctrine.

Did you know it is a Muslim practice for husbands to hit their wives if they disobey? Not all Muslims practice it, but the practice is recommended in Islamic doctrine.

What is different about those two statements? The first and most obvious difference is that the content of the doctrine is different. The actual teaching is different.

To many people, the statement about the Muslim practice seems like a criticism. But in the Muslim world, hitting a disobedient wife is not considered a bad thing to do. It is recommended in the Koran, so a devout Muslim may not want non-Muslims to know about the practice, but among themselves, if they truly believe the doctrine, it is not negative at all. In the Middle East, they have talk shows discussing the ins and outs of this practice. Where on her body should you hit your wife? Under what circumstances is it permitted?

So in mixed company (Muslims and non-Muslims in the same room talking to each other), it may be an insulting thing for a non-Muslim to say, but to a Muslim in his own mind, it is not insulting any more than the statements about the Mormon practice is to a Mormon.

Some people may disagree with the Mormon practice of fasting. Maybe they think it's unhealthy or too difficult. But it is just fine to say this is part of their religion, whether you like the practice or not. The same is true for wife beating in Islam or the obligation of jihad. This is part of their religion. When you get resistance from people, make this point. This will not only clarify that it is okay to talk about religious beliefs, no matter which religion it is, you will simultaneously make a second very important point: Different religions have different beliefs and practices. Not all religions are the same. And those different practices have real consequences in the world. The rules don't only apply to spiritual, non-physical practices.

Use this example in your conversations. These discussions need to be happening with our friends and family — as gently and kindly as possible, but also as effectively as possible.

Citizen Warrior is the author of the book, Getting Through: How to Talk to Non-Muslims About the Disturbing Nature of Islam and also writes for Inquiry Into Islam, History is Fascinating, and Foundation for Coexistence. Subscribe to Citizen Warrior updates here. You can send an email to CW here.


Article Spotlight

One of the most unusual articles on CitizenWarrior.com is Pleasantville and Islamic Supremacism.

It illustrates the Islamic Supremacist vision by showing the similarity between what happened in the movie, Pleasantville, and what devout fundamentalist Muslims are trying to create in Islamic states like Syria, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (and ultimately everywhere in the world).

Click here to read the article.


All writing on CitizenWarrior.com is copyright © CitizenWarrior.com 2001-2099, all rights reserved.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP