Moderate Muslims turning radical?
Unintended consequence of tolerance toward Islam.
February 15, 2008

By Willam J. Federer

Britain's Daily Mail, Jan. 29, 2007, reported in the article
"Multiculturalism drives young Muslims to shun British values":

Multiculturalism has alienated an entire generation of young Muslims
and made them increasingly radical, a report has found. In stark
contrast with their parents, growing numbers sympathize with extreme
teachings of Islam, with almost four in 10 wanting to live under
Sharia law in Britain. The study identifies significant support for
wearing the veil in public & and even punishment by death for Muslims
who convert to another religion. Most alarmingly, 13 percent of young
Muslims said they "admired" organizations such as al-Qaida which are
prepared to "fight the West."
Germany's Spiegel, Dec. 20, 2007, reported in the article "Interior
Ministry warns of radicalization of Muslims":

A new study released by Germany's Interior Ministry has added new
fuel to the debate about integration of Muslims in Germany, with the
report warning about the danger of radicalization of Muslims.
According to the study ... 40 percent of Muslims surveyed had a
"fundamentalist orientation" ... 6 percent of those surveyed were
classified as having "violent tendencies," while 14 percent of
respondents had "anti-democratic" tendencies. ... The report also
concluded that religious beliefs are becoming increasingly important
for young people.
Europe is wondering why fundamental Islam is not assimilating;
history may reveal the reason.

The word "Islam" means submission to the will of Allah, and a
"Muslim" is someone who has submitted. A "dhimmi" is an inferior
non-Muslim coerced to submit.

Muhammad divided the world into two parts: those who have submitted
and those yet to submit. He called these two parts the House of Islam
and the House of War, pronounced in Arabic "dar al-Islam" and "dar
al-harb."

Within 100 years of Muhammad's death in A.D. 632, fundamental
Islamic caliphs, with cavalry armed with scimitar swords, subjugated
vast areas of the world: Arabia, Persia, the Holy Land, North Africa,
Spain, Southern France, Sicily, Central Africa, the Middle East and
Central Asia.

Egypt was conquered by Muslim Gen. Amr ibn al-As. Gen. Khalid ibn
al-Walid was called the "Drawn Sword of Allah" for being undefeated
in nearly 100 battles.

In the next 1,000 years, Sultans subdued Indonesia, Java, Borneo,
Sumatra, the Byzantine Empire, the Balkans, Armenia, Greece, Romania,
Bulgaria, Albania, Wallachia, Moldova, Serbia and regions of China,
Tibet, Bengal, Mongolia, India, Russia, Hungary and Poland.

In 1529 and 1683, over 100,000 Turkish Muslims attacked Vienna,
Austria.

Whereas "world peace" in the West means peaceful coexistence, "world
peace" in Islam means the world submitting to the will of Allah.

Since there is no one theological body governing all of Islam,
faithful Muslims have developed differing views.

Moderate Muslims think the remaining area of the world will submit
to Allah in the distant future, maybe at the Hour of Judgment.
Therefore, since it is so far off, it is acceptable to get along with
non-Muslims in the present.

Fundamental violent Muslims think the rest of the world is
submitting to Allah now and feel it is Islam's "manifest destiny" to
make it happen. They would just as soon fight moderate Muslims,
considering them backslidden from following the example of Muhammad
and the caliphs.

Moderate Muslims are hesitant to speak out against fundamental
violent Muslims, as occasionally one does and they are threatened,
intimidated, forced to change their names for protection, have fatwas
put on them and even killed.

So there could, in a sense, be three groups of Muslims: a minority
of fundamental violent ones; a majority of moderate ones who are
afraid of the fundamental violent ones; and the courageous dead ones
who were not afraid of the fundamental violent ones.

The West may be inadvertently fueling the problem by not
understanding that fundamental Muslims interpret their "politeness"
as weakness or submission.

Saudi Arabia was pressured to revise its fundamental textbooks
supplied to Muslim schools around the world, including the U.S.,
because they contained intolerance.

The Washington Post, May 21, 2006, published excerpts of these
textbooks in an article "This is a Saudi textbook (after the
intolerance was removed)":

4TH GRADE: "True belief means ... that you hate the polytheists and
infidels."

5TH GRADE: "It is forbidden for a Muslim to be a loyal friend to
someone who does not believe in Allah and His Prophet."

8TH GRADE: "The apes are Jews, the people of the Sabbath; while the
swine are the Christians, the infidels of the communion of Jesus."

9TH GRADE: "It is part of Allah's wisdom that the struggle between
the Muslim and the Jews should continue until the Hour [of
Judgment]."

11TH GRADE: "Do not yield to Christians and Jews on a narrow road
out of honor and respect."

One may have to read that last line again:

"DO NOT YIELD to Christians and Jews on a narrow road out of honor
and respect."

In other words, when a Christian or Jew thinks they are being polite
by letting a Muslim go first, the fundamental student is taught that
they are simply acknowledging Islam's superiority.

Thus the dilemma:

If the West naively promotes tolerance of a belief system that does
not promote tolerance, it is effectively promoting intolerance.

If the West refuses to promote an intolerant belief system, it is
accused of being intolerant.

Muslims still sees the West, and particularly America, as a
predominately Judeo-Christian.

Newsweek Magazine (September 2005) reported America as 85 percent
Christian (58 percent Protestant, 22 percent Catholic, 5 percent
other Christian); 2 percent Jewish; 1 percent atheist; 0.5 percent
Buddhist; 0.5 percent Hindu; 10 percent other/non-reporting; and 1
percent Muslim.

So the question is: What goes through the mind of a moderate Muslim,
who thinks the world will submit to Allah in the distant future, when
he sees this predominately Judeo-Christian nation going to great
lengths to tolerate Islam now?

Let's look at the history of Islam's influence in the United States:

1991 Imam Siraj Wahhaj was the first Muslim to offer prayer in the
U.S. House of Representatives.

1992 Imam Warith Deen Muhammad was the first Muslim to offer
prayer in the U.S. Senate.

1993 Abdul Rasheed Muhammad became the first Muslim U.S. Army
chaplin (imam), spiritually instructing about 5,000 Muslim soldiers.

1996 Monje Malak Abd Al-Muta"Ali ibn Noel Jr. became the First
Muslim U.S. Naval chaplain (imam).

1996 First lady Hillary Clinton hosted a White House reception for
Muslims on Id al-Fitr, the end of Ramadan.

1999 New York City Police Department appointed its first Muslim
chaplain, Imam Izak-El M. Pasha.

1999 U.S. Postal Service published its first stamp honoring a
Muslim leader, Malcolm X.

2001, Aug. 1 U.S. Postal Service issued the Islamic postage stamp,
"Eid Mubarak."

2001, Sept. 11 Fundamental Muslim terrorist attacks.

2001, Nov. 16  Muslim chaplain of Georgetown University prayed in
the U.S. House of Representatives, followed by a dinner hosted by
President Bush to honor the occasion.

2001, Nov. 19  President Bush was the first president to invite 50
ambassadors from Islamic countries to celebrate Ramadan, where, for
the first time in the White House, Muslims knelt and touched the
floor with their foreheads in a formal ceremony.

2002, Dec. 5 President Bush was the first president to take off
his shoes to visit an Islamic Center.

2005, Jan. 20  President Bush was the first president to mention
the Quran in an Inaugural Address.

2007, Jan. 4 Nancy Pelosi stood next to Keith Ellison as he swore
upon a Quran to become the first Muslim U.S. congressman.

2007, April 5  Highest member of the U.S. Congress, speaker of the
House Nancy Pelosi, went to Syria and submitted to Islamic law by
covering her head with a Muslim Hijab (veil).

2007, April 17 President Bush was the first president to appoint a
Muslim U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad.

2007, June First Muslim prayer meeting began in the U.S. Capitol
building, bowing toward Mecca.

2008, Jan. 9 President Bush was the first president to call for
fulfilling the Muslim dream of pressuring Israel to give up sole
sovereignty of Jerusalem.

2008 Barak Hussein Obama, the first presidential candidate whose
middle name is that of Muhammad's grandson, told the French magazine
Paris Match, Jan. 31, 2008: "Once I'm elected, I want to organize a
summit in the Muslim world."

So the question again is: What goes through the mind of a moderate
Muslim, who thinks the world will submit to Allah in the distant
future, when they see this predominately Judeo-Christian nation going
to great lengths to tolerate Islam now?

Though America's actions are done in hopes that tolerance of Islam
will result in Muslims being more tolerant of non-Muslims, an
unintended consequence is emerging, namely, that these actions are
actually radicalizing some moderate Muslims by providing proof that
the world is submitting to Allah not in the distant future  but
right now before their eyes!

They become persuaded that that their long-awaited desire of the
non-Muslim world "dar al-harb" (House of War) becoming "dar al-Islam"
(House of Islam) is imminent.

The excitement many Muslims feel is akin to what Christians and Jews
felt in 1948.

For centuries, Old Testament verses about Israel being gathered from
the nations to their homeland (i.e., Ezekiel 36:24, Isaiah 66:8) were
taken figuratively or thought to occur in the distant future. When
Israel suddenly became a nation again in 1948, there was great
excitement in Jewish and Christian circles at the possibility these
Old Testament scriptures were literally being fulfilled.

Islamic excitement can be understood in the context of honor or
pride.

In a football analogy, if a team is dishonored by many seasons of
poor performance, fans are humiliated, embarrassed and become
passive. But if the team suddenly has a winning streak and is headed
toward the playoffs, fans are filled with pride. They come out of the
woodwork, put on the team's jerseys, fill stadiums, paint their
bodies, mascots are lifted high, and when the opposing team fumbles,
the cheering mob roars with enthusiasm. They become radicalized.

In nature, when a fleeing antelope becomes exhausted, the pursing
lion charges harder.

This is similar to a presidential candidate no one takes seriously
suddenly winning a few primaries. The increased media coverage
energizes supporters to work harder, thus catapulting the candidate
to be a front-runner.

Islam's rapid growth is exhilarating to fundamental Muslims. The Pew
Forum on Religion & Public Life (October 2005) reported:

Islam is already the fastest-growing religion in Europe. Driven by
immigration and high birthrates, the number of Muslims on the
continent has tripled in the last 30 years. Most demographers
forecast a similar or even higher rate of growth in the coming
decades.
Could it be the more the West exhibits hyper-tolerance, the more it
turns some moderate Muslims, who believe the world will submit to
Allah in the distant future, into fundamental violent Muslims, who
view this tolerance as evidence the world is submitting to Allah now?

"Personal" tolerance in the West is rooted in Judeo-Christian
concepts like "love your enemies" and "turn the other cheek," but
Franklin D. Roosevelt warned regarding "national" tolerance in a
Fireside Chat, Dec. 29, 1940:

"No man can tame a tiger into a kitten by stroking it."