Muslims continue insisting that one of the West’s favorite dichotomies—radical vs moderate Islam—is a myth.
A Muslim cleric recently devoted an entire sermon making this point. Uploaded onto YouTube on Oct. 16, 2022, Sheikh Yunus Kathradas, a Canadian imam, made several assertions (in both Arabic and English) that contradict what every person living in the West has been repeatedly told since September 11, 2001—that the true face of Islam is “moderate” and upholds the same values prized by the West; whereas those who distort and/or selfishly seek to exploit Islam are “radical” and do not represent Islam.
Throughout his sermon, Sheikh Kathradas repeatedly emphasized that the moderate/radical dichotomy is an outrageous fiction made up and employed by Islam’s enemies (the West) as well as ignorant or hypocritical Muslims.
He also correctly defined Islam as submission to Allah, and the enforcement and upholding of his rules—as enshrined in sharia—which tend to be black and white, and, therefore, afford little wiggle room for moderate or radical “interpretations.”
The sheikh cited jihad as an example: “Allah in the Koran commands that jihad be established, and the prophet Muhammad commands that jihad be established.” Period: waging jihad is, therefore, neither a radical nor moderate endeavor; it is merely the submission to and upholding of the commandments of Allah.
In this context, and as Kathradas stressed, anyone who accuses any part of Islam—or accuses those Muslims who sincerely implement it—of being “radical,” is ultimately accusing Allah himself of being “radical.”
Kathradas is, of course, hardly the first Muslim to argue against the much cherished concept of moderate Islam. In late 2017, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan famously said, “Islam cannot be either ‘moderate’ or ‘not moderate.’ Islam can only be one thing”—that is, Islam can only be what it teaches, that and nothing more or less.
What, then, are these teachings that are not open to debate—that are not open to being “moderated” or “radicalized”?
An Arabic-language article published in 2011 offers perspective. Titled (in translation) “The Truth about the Moderate Muslim as Seen by the West and its Muslim Followers,” its author, Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr, begins predictably enough:
Islamic researchers are agreed that what the West and its followers call “moderate Islam” and “moderate Muslims” is simply a slur against Islam and Muslims, a distortion of Islam, a rift among Muslims, a spark to ignite war among them. They also see that the division of Islam into “moderate Islam” and “radical Islam” has no basis in Islam—neither in its doctrines and rulings, nor in its understandings or reality.
Khadr goes on to note the many ways that moderates and radicals differ. For instance, radicals (“true Muslims”) aid and support fellow Muslims, especially those committed to jihad, whereas moderates (“false Muslims”) ally with and help Western nations.
Among the more important distinctions made in Khadr’s article are the following (translated verbatim). Keep in mind that “radicals” here means “true Muslims,” whereas “moderates” means “false Muslims”:
- Radicals want the caliphate to return; moderates reject the caliphate.
- Radicals want to apply Sharia (Islamic law); moderates reject the application of Sharia.
- Radicals reject the idea of renewal and reform, seeing it as a way to conform Islam to Western culture; moderates accept it.
- Radicals accept the duty of waging jihad in the path of Allah; moderates reject it.
- Radicals reject any criticism whatsoever of Islam; moderates welcome it on the basis of freedom of speech.
- Radicals accept those laws that punish whoever insults or leaves the religion [apostates]; moderates recoil from these laws.
- Radicals respond to any insult against Islam or the prophet Muhammad—peace and blessings upon him—with great violence and anger; moderates respond calmly and peacefully on the basis of freedom of expression.
- Radicals respect and reverence every deed and every word of the prophet—peace be upon him—in the hadith; moderates do not.
- Radicals oppose democracy; moderates accept it.
- Radicals see the people of the book [Jews and Christians] as dhimmis [second-class “citizens”]; moderates oppose this.
- Radicals reject the idea that non-Muslim minorities should have equality or authority over Muslims; moderates accept it.
Continue reading the full story at Front Page Magazine
As Dr. Gad Saad, a Lebanese-Canadian marketing professor at the John Molson School of Business at Concordia University, explains, “It’s not radical Islam, it’s not Islamism, It’s not militant, violent, extremism – It’s Islam.”
“Islam is codified in the Quran. It’s codified in the Hadith; it’s codified in the Sīrah, the biography of Muhammad. That’s it. Now, is there a way that I could read those texts and come up with a message of brotherly love and love for Jews? No, that’s not Islamism. That’s not radical Islam. That’s Islam.”
Saad was born in 1964 in Beirut, Lebanon, to a Jewish family. His family fled in October 1975 to Montreal, Quebec, Canada, to escape the Lebanese Civil War.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of more than ten books. In an interview with Vocab Malone, Spencer answered, “is there such a thing as moderate Islam”? He also discusses the attempted reform within Islam:
Netherland’s Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders explains, “There is no moderate Islam; there is no European Islam or that kind of nonsense. There’s only one Islam. And that is the Islam of the book, the Koran, of the life of Muhammad. And that is the Islam that we know and that, unfortunately, cannot and will never be changed. It’s not extreme; extreme Islam is a pleonasm. That means exactly the same.”
“Even with the right to religious freedom in the United States, Byrne suggested there is no reason for animal sacrifice in modern times. ”
YOU ARE ALL SO STUPID. ISLAM IS NO RELIGION, SO THERE CAN BE NO “RELIGIOUS FREEDOM”!
STUPID US GOVERNMENT!
AND BIDEN-THE-TOILET-BIDET IS “HEAD”(?) Hahahaa! OF THAT MENTAL INSTITUTION CALLED THE WHITE HOUSE.
Change the sign please, should read:
WHITE HOUSE MENTAL INSTITUTION
The Foundering Fathers failed to ensure that religion should be tolerated only as long as it doesn’t disrupt anybody outside of its own group or threaten basic secularism–the collective culture and state. Their reality was way different then and needs updating.
Islam is a cult, if you leave the religion you get killed and sent to hell. Christianity is a cult and will only send you to hell to burn and suffer for all eternity.
Nearly fifty years ago I was living near a community of Muslim fishermen. While they followed certain traditions, they were not into the teachings of the Qur’an. I think we need to speak of nominal and devout Muslims. They were nominal and not hostile towards Christians. They were good neighbors.
The problem is with the devout Muslims that have to be like Muhammad. Devout Christians want to be like Christ who taught that they had to love their enemies, do good to those who hate them and pray for those who persecute them. Muhammad taught no such thing but to either force conversion or heavily tax Christians and in some instances kill them. Mark Durie has written much about Islam and shows that groups like ISIS are devout Muslims. Their behavior is determined by following the example of their prophet.
The radical Muslim wants to cut off your head. The moderate Muslim wants the radical Muslim to cut off your head.
Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.
–Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos 1350–1425, as quoted by Pope Benedict XVI, 2006
Skip Allah. Allah and Mohamed are the same person. One crazy numbskull has perpetuated his bloodthirsty, idiotic point of view.