Recent Islamic smoke-screens that need to be nipped in the bud

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Apr 5, 2017 at 22:26

Dear Dr Pipes,

Systematic Islamic lies to look good and advance the Islamic agenda are not hidden from anyone. But recently some new lies have gained currency. We need to control them before they become a part of established history and matters of academic papers (of the kinds that you heard in the conference that you attended in UPenn). Here are some of the recent and modern lies:

1. Hijab is a feminist issue: A lot of Muslim women are saying these days that wearing Hijab is a feminist issue. I have not seen even one non-Muslim woman fighting for her right to wear a Hijab. So Hijab is a Muslim issue and it is not evenly remotely a feminist issue.

2. Muslim connection with brown skin: Just like Muslim women enlarge the scope of their protest by attempting to make Hijab a feminist issue, Muslim men try to enlarge their scope by shamelessly generalizing their cause to all brown skinned people (example Dean Obaidullah). First of all, people's skin color should not be mentioned in social discourse unless necessary. Further, the problems faced by non-Muslim brown-skinned Americans are very different from the problems faced by Muslim Americans. My biggest problem, for example, is to make sure that I can grab a slice of vegetarian pizza before the party runs out of them. More serious problems like I should be allowed to refuse to transport passengers with liquor or dogs in a taxi do not even touch me.
Also, Islam is not supposed to be racist. So even when every one screams black, white, brown, pink, yellow, Muslims should not violate their creed by mentioning the race or color.

3. Muslim association with BLM: 'Black Lives Matter' movement adresses important social issue. But it has nothing to do with Islam or Muslims. In fact, I will go on to say that the problems faced by Black Americans also are very different from the problems faced by Muslims in America (and worldwide),

4. 'Islam is perfect but I am imperfect': This is the newest apology that I have heard form the Islamic apologists. What is its purpose except glorifying Islam to the agenda and to once again not accepting any shortcomings in the religion (e.g. the good old Q5-33). It seems it is the other rehashing of the old apology 'terrorists are not true Muslims'.

5. Brutal Muslim invaders did what invaders always do: This is the newest one. As the world gets more and more vocal about the violent history behind the spread of Islam, a new apology is ready. This apology says that Islamic invaders were not any different from the other invaders of the past (I think most recently apologist Reza Aslan propounded this view but I do not have the exact reference). Once again this is a mis-representation of history. Alexander the great, for example, advanced as far as the western borders of the then India but even after he left, Persians followed their local religions and did not start worshiping Apollo, Artemis or Athena exclusively. Muslim invaders invaded, brutalized and, in many case, converted by force. Even Prophet Muhammad used armies to advance his cause.

If we do not oppose these lies early, very soon you will start seeing academic papers comparing women's right to vote with women's right to wear Hijab or conferences glorifying Tamerlane and Alexander the Great in the same vaunted academic hall.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".