"There is a war being waged against western civilization; against every liberal norm and value we Westerners hold dear and we must take increasingly drastic steps to defend our way of life from extinction..." or so Dutch politician Geert Wilders would have us believe.
This narrative of war, of a besieged West fighting for its life against the onslaught of Islamization is replete across the Dutch politician's new book "Marked for Death."
The narrative is a compelling one, fuelled by media images of failed terrorist plots, stories of Western homegrown extremism and sound bites from vocal and outspoken Islamists.
Only -- the hard facts would appear to burst this Islamophobia bubble that Mr. Wilders and others like him have been preaching for quiet sometime. Away from sound bite filled media interviews, well-researched studies on radicalization and the Islamist threat fail to support Mr. Wilders' assertions of a strong correlation between authentic Islam and Muslim communities on the one hand and violent extremism on the other.
Researchers at Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, for instance, found the threat of Islamic extremism to be over-exaggerated. According to the study, it was Muslim-American communities themselves who played a key role in keeping the number of radicalized members low.
This assertion is supported by statistics from the FBI database on terrorist attacks on US soil between 1980-2005, showing that terrorist attacks committed by Muslims accounted for just 6 percent of all such attacks on US soil during that period. This was less then the number of attacks made by Jewish, Latino and far left extremists respectively.
Wilders' claims of a correlation between authentic Islam, as he perceives it, and terrorism are also undermined by a ground breaking study on the types of people most susceptible and resistant to becoming terrorists. Conducted by former Rhodes College professor Quintan Wiktorowicz, a leading expert on why people decide to become terrorists, he interviewed hundreds of Islamists and found that very religious Muslims were in fact amongst the most resistant to radicalization. It was in fact those who did not have a good grounding in the religion that were most likely to be attracted to radical Islam. Wiktorowicz's reputation as an expert in the field has not gone unnoticed and he has since been appointed Director of the White House National Security Council.
Examples like these, whilst certainly not as media-worthy as stories about failed terror plots, provide a powerful evidential basis to counter the "we're at war at with authentic Islam" and "Muslim communities pose a seismic threat to the West" narratives that Wilders so passionately promotes.
In addition to conflicting with authoritative data, the rhetoric of Wilders and co. also poses a real danger of galvanising violent extremism -- not countering it.
Whilst it is true that Wilders does not himself explicitly endorse violence, this fails to tell the whole story. By expounding an ideology that arouses a deep-seated insecurity (in this case an attack on Western identity), and offering a solution with no rational manifestation in real life (in this case an Islam-free Europe), adherents are left to come up with their own irrational solutions. This is exactly what Anders Breivik did in the Norway massacres. His concerns over an imagined demographic war that Islamists were waging against Europe and a vision of an Islam-free Europe were no different to those of Wilders'.
In his new book, Wilders also compounds the war rhetoric and the subsequent dehumanizing of Muslims by comparing Islam and Muslims with Nazism and Nazis, seeing each as mirroring the other. Of course, the insinuation is that just as there is no such thing as a good Nazi, there is neither any such thing as a good Muslim. Each and every one is complicit in Wilders' perceived war against the western world. As such it can come as no surprise that Wilders was a major source of inspiration for Breivik (as per Breivik's 1500-page manifesto) just as it should come as no surprise if any future perpetrators of anti-Muslim violence also look upon Wilders as their ideological inspiration.
The narrative is also dangerous for conflating a particular issue of concern (radical Islamism) with unrelated events and issues; thereby working to create into existence the very imagined war between Islam and the Western world that Wilders and co. rely on for their advocacy efforts.
For instance, in his book, Wilders mischaracterizes the Israel-Palestine struggle as a fault line between the West and the imperial Islamic advance. This ignores the fundamental nature of the conflict, one that is about land and self-determination -- not the legitimate Palestinian struggle for statehood being some front for a wider sinister attempt at world domination by the Islamic world.
The perspective put forward by Wilders is similar in principle to the worldview of violent extremists in the Muslim world, who interpret any Western intervention anywhere in the Muslim world as part of a wider sinister Western plot to take over the entire Islamic world.
Similarly Wilders mischaracterizes the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) as a part of some kind of imperial Islamist front. The fact that the OIC has gone to lengths to "condemn terrorism in in all its forms, and rejects any justification or rationalization for it" appears to cuts no ice with Mr. Wilders.
So whilst the facts fail to support Mr. Wilders' wild assertions of a clash between Islam and the West, the irony is that if his dangerous rhetoric ever grows strong enough -- it could end up creating the very problems he is purporting to address.
What is very troubling is the increasing support and popularity of Mr. Wilders and people like him in Europe and North America. The message and the fear culture that they are trying to promote are regretfully becoming more and more mainstream. This only shows clearly that Western world is increasingly loosing its health and immunization against the various viruses of hate, exclusion and intolerance. I wonder how much these "protectors of great Western civilization" realize the kind of damage and destruction they cause to the Western civilizational and civic achievements through their troubling ideologies and actions. One can only hope and pray that the Western world is still healthy and strong enough to overcome and heal from this pathology over time. God willing...
Follow Imam Abdullah Antepli on Twitter: www.twitter.com/aantepli
Geert Wilders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wilders: my message to Muslims - Geert Wilders
BBC News - Netherlands Islam Freedom: Profile of Geert Wilders
Dutch populist Geert Wilders acquitted of hate speech | Reuters
If Lady Warsi thinks us non Muslims are Islam phobic she is wrong, because phobia means an unrational fear. Well for one my fear of Islam is real and rational and I will tell you why, and PM Cameron shares it to, by the speech he gave the other Saturday.
Every time I put the news on somewhere in the world a bomb has gone off killing men, women & children and wounding many in the name of a Jihadist terrorist version of Islam be it Shiite or Sunni, this morning it’s a French child killer. Our Security Services keep issuing weekly chilling warnings that it is monitoring over 2000 dangerous Muslim fanatics and dozens of active terrorists plots, mostly home grown by UK Muslims, and many educated to the highest level at our Universities. Every day for months our news carries in detail the terrible tales of suffering & carnage that took place when Islamist attacked London Transport, as evidence is given to the Inquest into 52 people that died that day. In fact as I write this the radio has said a bomb has gone off in Syria killing many, it won’t be the Salivation Army that did it?
Hate: Please see this verse from the Quran :Qur’an 3.28 and Qur’an 3:56 “As for those disbelieving infidels, I will punish them with a terrible agony in this world and the next. They have no one to help or save them.” and many more like this
Exclusion:Qur’an 9.28 O you who believe! the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque (Mecca) after this year; and if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise.
Tolerance: 7:33 Say: My Lord forbiddeth only indecencies, such of them as are apparent and such as are within, and sin and wrongful oppression, and that ye associate with Allah that for which no warrant hath been revealed, and that ye tell concerning Allah that which ye know not.
So we have the right to ask esteemed islamic scholars as to why we should not question this level of hate, exclusion and tolerance practised by mainstream islamic scholars for over 1300 years and what is being done to change this now? So it is not fair to criticise Hon MP Wilders prior to resolution of these question.
thanks
May we all one day learn to live together in peace.
Peace be with you and all creation.
Again, these are referring to specific events that took place between Muslims and those who oppressed, threatened, harrassed and persecuted them. Quran says knowledge is found through contemplation (4:82, etc). Verses on mercy, tolerance, etc, carry more weight.
Hate- O mankind, We have created you male and female, and appointed you races and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely the noblest among you in the sight of God is the most godfearing of you. God is All-knowing, All-aware. (15:75)
Worship God: and do not associate partners with Him. Be good to your parents, to relatives, to orphans, to the needy, and the neighbour who is a kinsman, and the neighbour who is not related to you and your companions and the wayfarers and those whom you rightfully possess. God does not like arrogant, boastful people,(4:36)
Exclusion- God tells Muhammad: We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures.(21:107)
Tolerance-And the servants of the Almighty who walk on the Earth in humility and if the ignorant speak to them, they Say: "Peace." (25:63)
And not alike are the good and the evil. Repel (evil) with what is best, when lo! he between whom and you was enmity would be as if he were a warm friend. (41:34)
Do you deny that Quran has verses which promote tolerance, peace and compassion? Is your own hatred of Islam blinding you?
Peace.
And the opposite, hateful, intolerant verses abrogate them. So no! They DON'T carry more weight. They carry no weight at all.
The quote included from the OIC, "condemn terrorism in in all its forms, and rejects any justification or rationalization for it" might actually be a real one, but since their definition of "terrorism" is basically limited to anything that Israel does while their co-religionists' bombings and mass shootings always seems to fall into the category of "legitimate struggle", it doesn't carry that much weight. Just look at how the OIC has abused their clout at the UN human Rights Council (on the topic of which, putting the OIC in charge of a Human Rights committee is like electing Michael Vick head of PETA):
http://www.unwatch.org/site/c.bdKKISNqEmG/b.3820041/
I guess I'll give the author credit for holding off on the usual "Wilders is responsible for the Breivik massacre" line until the 10th paragraph, though.
The media helped create the hysteria and paranoia some of us have about the Muslim world. I suspect the Iranian gov't. also feeds into the hysteria and paranoia the Iranian population may have about the west.
We all have a garden in us where peace can grow.
We can't say you are the enemy and not expect our enemy to react in a defensive way. If we would like to give our children and grandchildren a world free of wars and strife, we must be willing to plant seeds of peace in our hearts. Then we must offer those seeds nourishment that they require to grow. We have to educate ourselves and we have to make an intention to create peace in our hearts. And to open our hearts to others. Peace isn't someone else's responsibility. I can't make you a peacemaker. I can only make me a peacemaker.
Peace be with all creation.
If these above sources (relied upon by Hon MP Geert Wilders) are islamphobic can you please kindly advise us as to what sources we should use?
thanks kindly.
In the global culture of HUMANBEINGS, to carry the title of HONORABLE is a distinction...it has to be deserved and earned...wouldn't you agree?
Thank you
I´m no scholar when it comes to Islam, I´ll be the first to admit it. But if Iran is the example of living under islam, then I´m afraid I have to say NO. I´m not even dutch, but I´d rather die than let these people have free rein around here.
Is it therefore rational to fear Americans?
As In: the tiny fraction of 1% of any vast group of humans who are violent are not representative of the 99.9%+ of that vast group who are not violent.
Antepli seems to think, or wants us to think, that the book is about "a correlation between authentic Islam, as he perceives it, and terrorism." No, that is not what the book is about. It is about the correlation between Islam and loss of human rights, especially free speech.
Again, Antepli seems to think, or wants us to think, that Wilders' complaints about the OIC have to do with terrorism. They don't. They have do to with the OIC's opposition to human rights, including free speech.
Antepli accuses Wilders of "promoting a fear culture." That is not what we find in the book. We find a warning that the Islamic ideology poses a challenge to societies based on human rights and freedom of speech, and a call to make sure Islam does not take them away. To some extent, in some places, it already has - and that must be reversed.
I encourage all Americans, including all Muslim Americans, who cherish human rights and free speech to read Wilders' book. You will find that Wilders has written an excellent book, very informative and interesting.
That's why as an ex-Catholic and agnostic, I fully agree with Antepli.
Wilders is an extremist, who refuses to take reality into account. He carefully picks out his examples in order to create a completely biased and wrong picture of Islam.
He has the right to do so, of course, as the Constitution protects free speech.
But people who know the Quran and the history of Islam will always speak out too (whether they are Muslims, students of the science of religions, or simply people worried about the truth) when someone wants to ignore the facts.
"Promoting a fear culture" - issuing death warrant fatwas for insulting Muhammad - inciting the murder of a film-maker - forcing a novelist into hiding for years, merely for writing an impertinent novel - etc., etc., etc. - yes, very clearly, fear is being promoted. But not by Wilders. It is being promoted, as it has been for the last 1400 years, by the Islamic ideology, which does not grant freedom of speech to anyone in the world.
The fact that our Constitution protects free speech, but the Islamic ideology is determined to deprive us of it nonetheless, is the problem which Wilders addresses in his book - and if you take the time to read it, you will find that it is an excellent book with nothing "extreme" about it.
The banning of the Malay edition of “Allah, Liberty & Love” is
a) a "jihad against Islam"
b) another "Islamophobia bubble"
c) an attempt to promote a "fear culture"
d) just "very troubling"
e) a sign that the East is "increasingly loosing its health".
Anyway, great thoughts as always, Jelle.
Yes, there is a lot wrong with this mad Dutchman's modern Mein Kamf but you have to pick one and focus on it.
"Lesbians In Electrified Pen To Kill Them Off or Uganda revives anti-gay legislation, ohh wait let me guess that is not true teaching of christ but when some so-called muslim does same thing that has to be 100% real true teaching of islam"
By Buraq Obama?
This is the PERFECT example of lying with statistics, and this author knows that.
He's an imam, an educated man, he checks his quotations back to their original sources.
Note: The FBI report title is confusing, because the report date is misleading:
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005
This contains the 1980-2005 complete report, but as one continuous unpaginated text.
Perhaps the PDF version is a little more helpful, as it has page numbers:
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05.pdf
Does it give the percentages of acts by group/ideology? I couldn't find that. Or did the author create the percentages from the chronological summary, pages 58-66?
OK, only 6% of terrorist acts on the US soil were by moslems, 7% were by jews, (he had to include that fact). Now turn to page 31 for the CASUALTIES, and stand his arguments on their head.
There were 2983 deaths from the two WTC attacks, out of 3,178 over the 25 years; that's an astounding 93.9%. The 13,059 injured in the same attacks, out of 14,038 over 25 years is 93%.
So 6% attacks = 94% deaths and 93% injuries. Is that taqiyya?
OK city bombing is on the same page as 9.11.2001
Norway you know done by a guy who also thinks like you Is terrorism no matter he only killed 70 people
and 3 please look up the term taqiyya before throwing it around
Thank you, so we agree.
"Norway you know done by a guy who also thinks like you..."
No, we don't agree on that. Where do you get the impression that Breivik thinks like me? You don't know how either of us thinks. Perhaps you would like to quote some things which I wrote, which sound like what you think that Breivik thinks, and thus makes his thinking similar to mine, or my thinking similar to his?
No? I thought not.
Taqiyya is bending, massaging, stretching, twisting, distorting, extending...or truncating the truth in the favor of mohammedanism. Here, Imam Abdullah Antepli has truncated the truth, by quoting one side, which I believe isn't in the FBI report, while ignoring the elephant in the room.
He could easily have covered the topic of casualties, and given his good reasons for choosing the other metric. He would have come across as a bit more honest, and possibly disarmed that obvious weakness/bias in his argument.
Of course he may not have known about the casualty data, in which case he is merely ignorant. Or he could have read the whole report, (as a responsible person), and decided that the umma was better off without the publication of that information. In which case, that is taqiyya.