The Demeanor is the Message

A consistent fact worth noting: Jihadists in the dock are invariably unrepentant, proud of their criminal deeds and aggressive toward the justice system that is judging them. They appear quite certain that their behavior is correct and that those judging them have no right to do so. They frequently wear a calm smile, as if they are in on something and no one else in the courtroom has a clue.

Where does this attitude come from? Ordinary criminals are sometimes repentant, sometimes not. Why are Islamic criminals 100% unrepentant? Are Muslim criminals this defiant in courts of Islamic law?

This is the last sentence of the Fatiha, the very important opening prayer of the Koran, which pious Muslims are obliged to repeat many times daily:

Guide us to the straight path: the path of those You have blessed, those who incur no anger and who have not gone astray. [Haleem translation]

The usual interpretation of this verse is that the “straight path” is Islam, “those You have blessed” are Muslims, “those who incur anger” are Jews and “those who have gone astray” are Christians. If a Jew or a Christian said this prayer, it would have a very different meaning. When a Muslim says this prayer at an interfaith meeting with Jews and Christians, are they aware of the Muslim’s meaning?

So starts a divergence of meaning given to words used on both sides of the present war, and an explanation of why the two sides so often seem to be speaking past each other with no common ground. How can non-Muslims understand what Muslims say if commonly used, crucial words do not have the same meaning to both sides?

I have been puzzled for years over knee-jerk charges of racism against those who criticize Islam. My reaction is “What race is Islam?” The penny dropped for me when I read our UN Representative explaining to Muslims that racism is not an appropriate charge because, unlike one’s race, one’s religion can be changed.

But the Muslims charging critics with racism do not see the difference. One’s religion, for them, is no more changeable than one’s race. They do not recognize that a Muslim has the right to change his religion. So of course when Islam is criticized the charge should be racism—you are criticizing an aspect of a Muslim that is unchangeable. Racism is also a handy way to demonize a bothersome critic and place anything he says beyond consideration.

Wolfgang Bruno explains some more results of this divergence of meaning:

Peace: “Peace” in Islam equals submission to the will of Allah through his divine and eternal law, sharia, and the extension of the Dar al-Islam – or 'House of Islam' – to cover the entire world. The absence of sharia is the absence of peace. Since it is the will of Allah that Islam will rule the entire planet, entering non-Muslim lands to subjugate the population and wipe out their corrupt, infidel culture is not seen by Muslims as "waging war," but as spreading peace.

Freedom: Hurriyya, freedom, means freeing all people from being slaves of the laws of men and making them live in perfect slavery, in submission to the will of Allah and his laws.

Religious freedom: Subjugation of non-Muslims to religious apartheid and second class citizenship in their own country under Islamic rule. This option is only available to Christians and Jews, not Hindus, Buddhists or others, who have only the choice between embracing Islam or death. Muslims should practice sharia. Since these laws require the subjugation of non-Muslims, “freedom of religion” for Muslims essentially means the freedom to make others unfree.

Jihad: Peaceful, inner struggle that has killed up to 80 million people in the Indian subcontinent alone, and enslaved or killed tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people on three continents for 1350 years. It can also be violent, but only for defensive purposes, such as the Muslims who defended their way from the Arabian Peninsula to the borders of China, wiping out the indigenous cultures along the way.

Aggression: When non-Muslims do anything to preserve their culture and resist the Islamization of their country. Even when this “aggression” is non-violent, such as publishing a cartoon critical of Islam, this intolerable insult to Islamic supremacy on earth can be answered with violence by Muslims. Since a refusal to submit to sharia is a rebellion against Allah, the very existence of non-Muslim communities can be viewed as an act of aggression.

Do not let Mr. Bruno’s tone of grim humor mislead you. His assessment is spot on, and is no joke. I am told, and I believe, that some misunderstandings are simply due to the difficulty of translating from the Arabic.

The root of the problem comes from the necessity for early Muslims to differentiate Islam from Judaism and Christianity and to demonstrate Islam’s superiority. They did this by simultaneously absorbing Jewish and Christian ideas and leaders and rejecting the legitimacy of the religions:
• Moses and Jesus are accepted prophets in Islam.
• Jews and Christians have incurred anger and gone astray.

Doublespeak was present from the inception of Islam.

The next time you hear or read a pious Muslim call for peace and justice, remember that these words have special meaning to that Muslim. Peace and justice can only be attained by those who are subject to Islamic law. Everyone who lives under the rule of infidels is in the house of war and subjected to injustice; peace and justice are established when Islamic law is supreme.

Ask a pious Muslim to explain to you the laws that determine to whom he can offer the traditional Islamic greeting “Peace be upon you.” If you get a straight answer, you will be told that peace is to be offered only to those under Islamic law and known infidels may not be greeted with that phrase.

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four featured three examples of how deliberate manipulation of language works to impose a desired mental attitude in the target audience:
• War is Peace
• Freedom is Slavery
• Ignorance is Strength
From the Western point of view, all three reversals of meaning are present in Islamic law.

The Muslim accused of a crime by an infidel state can only be contemptuous and amused by those who think they are speaking his language.


Originally posted on 5/24/09