Considering the Japanese style sneak attack of Islamic terrorists on 911, it is remarkable that there is not more public information being disseminated to the American public.
The lack of information is remarkable but I do understand the reasoning. The Mainstream Media and a Politically Correct (PC) U.S. government are afraid that if the negative side of Islam is disseminated to the American public that an increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes would increase. Indeed the well financed Islamic-American organizations are also a huge factor in enforcing PC thinking in America. These Islamic-American organizations gravitate toward radical Islam even though publicly they claim to represent the American mainstream Islam. To all the Muslim-Americans that claim to be moderate Muslims eschewing Radical Islam as an aberration of Islam, the existence of Islamist agenda Muslim-American organizations should be sending up red flags. Yet one rarely reads of an influential Muslim-American castigating these Islamist oriented Muslim-American organizations.
I have often read that Islamist/Salafist/Wahhabist Islam statistically only represents 10% of practicing Muslims globally. I am assuming that this statistic is representatively associated with the primary sect of Islam which is the Sunni.
The PC crowd has effectively kept Americans in the dark about the negative aspects of Islam.
An even darker knowledge is that of understanding where Shia Islam resides in the moderate/radical realm of Islam. Shia has had to be radical to survive the dislike of the majority Islamic sect of Sunnis. Thus it is very easy for Shias to radicalize even though there is a “quietist” element which developed to be non-confrontational. Nonetheless, the very nature of Shia (the party of Ali) has to do with the thought that the fourth Caliph after Mo’s death should have been the second Caliph.
Ali was a cousin and son-in-law of the prophet Mohammed. When Ali was defeated and assassinated by his rival, the closest thing to blood descent to the prophet ended. This made a significant portion of Muslims displeased. Thus this portion developed Imams as descendants of Mohammed through Ali as the true heirs of spiritual-political leaders of Islam. The majority of Islam got behind the Caliphate apart from the party of Ali. Thus Shia faired adversely accept in the land that had a traditional heritage of empire and independence. That land was Persia which is present day Iran.
Now I am fairly certain that my brief explanation of Shia would be castigated by an adherent as a weak interpretation. Nonetheless, it is important to understand the roots of Shia to get a grasp of the radical nature of Iran and its radical thinking of a global Caliphate with the Shia perspective rather than the Sunni perspective.
With this in mind I encourage you to read this Hudson Institute publication entitled, “The Paradoxes of Shiism”.
JRH 6/23/09
The lack of information is remarkable but I do understand the reasoning. The Mainstream Media and a Politically Correct (PC) U.S. government are afraid that if the negative side of Islam is disseminated to the American public that an increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes would increase. Indeed the well financed Islamic-American organizations are also a huge factor in enforcing PC thinking in America. These Islamic-American organizations gravitate toward radical Islam even though publicly they claim to represent the American mainstream Islam. To all the Muslim-Americans that claim to be moderate Muslims eschewing Radical Islam as an aberration of Islam, the existence of Islamist agenda Muslim-American organizations should be sending up red flags. Yet one rarely reads of an influential Muslim-American castigating these Islamist oriented Muslim-American organizations.
I have often read that Islamist/Salafist/Wahhabist Islam statistically only represents 10% of practicing Muslims globally. I am assuming that this statistic is representatively associated with the primary sect of Islam which is the Sunni.
The PC crowd has effectively kept Americans in the dark about the negative aspects of Islam.
An even darker knowledge is that of understanding where Shia Islam resides in the moderate/radical realm of Islam. Shia has had to be radical to survive the dislike of the majority Islamic sect of Sunnis. Thus it is very easy for Shias to radicalize even though there is a “quietist” element which developed to be non-confrontational. Nonetheless, the very nature of Shia (the party of Ali) has to do with the thought that the fourth Caliph after Mo’s death should have been the second Caliph.
Ali was a cousin and son-in-law of the prophet Mohammed. When Ali was defeated and assassinated by his rival, the closest thing to blood descent to the prophet ended. This made a significant portion of Muslims displeased. Thus this portion developed Imams as descendants of Mohammed through Ali as the true heirs of spiritual-political leaders of Islam. The majority of Islam got behind the Caliphate apart from the party of Ali. Thus Shia faired adversely accept in the land that had a traditional heritage of empire and independence. That land was Persia which is present day Iran.
Now I am fairly certain that my brief explanation of Shia would be castigated by an adherent as a weak interpretation. Nonetheless, it is important to understand the roots of Shia to get a grasp of the radical nature of Iran and its radical thinking of a global Caliphate with the Shia perspective rather than the Sunni perspective.
With this in mind I encourage you to read this Hudson Institute publication entitled, “The Paradoxes of Shiism”.
JRH 6/23/09
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment