The public is confused: statement
Reader comment on item: [Mosque Mischief and] Counting Mosques

Submitted by Jordan Katz (United States), Nov 21, 2005 at 18:51

Statement: "The public is confused: Policy statements piously reject any link between Islam and terrorism, but the actions of fighting terror implicitly make just such a connection."

Response: I have a deep respect for Mr. Pipes and in large part I agree with many of his arguments. However, I vehemently disagree with his statement which is stated above. If Islam is in fact a religion of peace or a religion of war is arguable and not germane to my comments here. I do not believe that the 'war on terrorism' and fighting terrorism makes an implicit connection between Islam and terrorism. The 'war on terrorism' is a war against religious extremism and those who pervert the teachings of Islam and seek to do harm. 'Fighting terror' implies fighting terrorists, not followers of Islam.

Allow me to make an example. If a hypothetical a group of fundamentalist Christians decide to murder large numbers of abortion doctors because they believe abortion is evil. The president may then issue a policy statement saying Christianity is a religion of 'peace and understanding' and at the same time vow to fight the 'abortion doctor murdering extremists'. In this instance the president declares Christianity a religion of peace and at the same time vows to fight the extremists. This analogy is very pertinent to Mr. Pipes' arguments. 'Fighting terror' implies fighting extremists who use terror and it is wrong to assume that all followers of Islam support terrorism. Thus, one deny to link Islam to terror and fight terrorism without an inherent contradiction.

---

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 for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.