Semantics
Reader comment on item: Proving Our Point

Submitted by Geppetto, May 24, 2014 13:38

Most of the world has no problem in making any distinction between Nazi and Nazism. There is none. The vast majority also have no problem with the fact that many prewar Germans, perhaps a plurality, were not Nazis but were patriotic Germans who were caught up in the world war ambitions of the head Nazi and bombastic German leader, Hitler, spurred on by his fiery rhetoric exalting the "super race" and their invincibility all successfully reinforced by his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels and the iron fist of the Gestapo. There was no problem with semantics here. In any discussion or reporting on events in this era the distinction between Nazi and German remained reasonably clear.

Not so with Islam, Islamism, Muslims, Jihad, etc. In writing or speaking about the most prominent, dangerous and determined attempt to achieve what Hitler so fervently desired, world domination, chroniclers are faced with a seemingly insurmountable problem in semantics. The big question is not yet, "who is the enemy?" but what do you call them? How do you define and identify them? Muslims? They are undoubtedly that, as mountains of evidence indicates, but are they all? As was the case with the Germans in Nazi Germany, of course not. And what is their common denominator regardless of nationality or race? Islam. But in navigating this verbal minefield, using the "wrong" terminology will evoke a firestorm of rage and condemnation from the likes of CAIR, etc. and their media and political enablers.

What CAIR, et al, have successfully created is the dreaded "disease," "Islamophobia," as if a rational fear of the extreme brutality of a subset of Muslim culture irrevocably mired in 7^th century mores and customs, is extremely irrational and psychotic. The "subset" are terrorists, Jihadists, radical Islamists, Islamists, Muslims who have "hijacked a religion," etc. Point being it is impossible to verbally separate the adherents of "political Islam" and Muslims. Point is, contrary to the popular consensus, Islam is not a religion in the conventional, western sense. It is a political, social, judicial system with a religious component; i.e., a belief in Allah, their infallible G_d, whose immutable proclamations are written in the Quran.

There are cracks beginning to appear in this wall of deception and the constant whining and claims of victim status by a religious group that available crime statistics prove is completely bogus, is slowly becoming exposed for what it is; organized and largely successful attempts to completely sever any connection, no matter how obvious or trivial, between terrorism and its Jihad and Islamic roots. The vast majority of western media remains righteously subdued, smugly ignorant and content in their cocoon of multiculturalism, political correctness and collegial camaraderie, with few exceptions in the so called "mainstream"; Megan Kelly of late, perhaps the most prominent and fearless of the latter. That this is the same media glorified for the much touted, heroic exposé of Watergate, makes their self immersion in this quagmire of deception befuddling, disturbing and dangerous. It is no mystery that an enemy cannot be defeated unless it is first clearly and definitively identified. Almost 13 years after 9/11/01 this is still not the case but these challenges to the Islamophobia narrative are a step in the right direction.

Note: IPT will moderate reader comments. We reserve the right to edit or remove any comment we determine to be inappropriate. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that include swearing, name calling, or offensive language involving race, religion or ethnicity. All comments must include an email address for verification.