In the BBC article, the word “mullah” and “Taliban” are used as she describes what happened when they attempted to force the idea on her. But there is no mention of Islam or Sharia law in the rest of the article. There was a Taliban denial. Similarly, in the VOA article, again other than noting that her brother was Taliban, no mention of Islam or Sharia law and a Taliban denial was noted.
Here’s the point. Noting what the Taliban are — an Islamic fundamentalist political movement which began in Afghanistan and enforces strict interpretation of Sharia law — is considered bad form in the Western media. Bad form and dangerous for those who wish to stay alive. Bad things happen to those who call attention to the inconvenient fact that people are regularly committing atrocities in unprecedented numbers in the name of the Islam.
Muslims who don’t share such extremist beliefs, which I would assume is the overwhelming majority, understandably resent the association. But here’s the tragic standoff Western democracies–especially those in need of immigration from Muslim countries to offset declining birth rates–are at today. The people best positioned to call out Islamofacist policies, practicing Muslims who interpret Sharia law differently, appear either unable or unwilling to distance themselves from the Taliban-types in the public square.
In a debate questioning whether Islam is a religion of peace, the debater [Maajid Nawaz] defending the idea actually cites as an explanation for why moderate Muslims cannot be expected to speak out [view at 73 min mark] against extremists, as the understandable fear they have for their lives. The opposing side [Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Douglas Murray] quickly pointed out how a similar discussion on the topic involving any other major faith, e.g. Quakerism, would be unimaginable.
The level of brutality associated with the Taliban has no parallel to any other political group, let alone people of faith. Yet, Western democracies are inhibited from noting said extremism for fear of offending legitimately practicing Muslims.
I check out an anti-Islamofacist blog — labelled, The Politically inconvenient truth about Islam, one really messed up religion — periodically. They detail terrorist attacks associated with people and groups who identify as Islamic. When I go to the site, I basically do a ‘snopes’ test on one of the terrorist acts noted through a conventional browser search. Sometimes I will fail to find a secondary source, but I’ve never seen one of their incidents characterized differently in terms of who the terrorists were. The regularity and brutality of the attacks are shocking and depressing.
The United States, first with President Bush and now with President Obama, I believe have shown great resolve to attempt to fight this enemy, Islamofacism, as best they can. Understandably, the political will to continue the fight has diminished after so many years. But the more I learn about who and what we are fighting, the more I appreciate this country’s soldiers for again being on the front lines against the evil of Islamofacism. The least people like me can do, is to call it what it is.
The poet T.S. Eliot on lost causes:
If we take the widest and wisest view of a Cause, there is no such thing as a Lost Cause, because there is no such thing as a Gained Cause. We fight for lost causes because we know that our defeat and dismay may be the preface to our successors’ victory, though that victory itself will be temporary; we fight rather to keep something alive than in the expectation that it will triumph.