MEMRI: Reformist Egyptian Writer Critiques Islamist Education and Propaganda

This excerpt is especially telling:

At the end of his essay, Al-Qimni presents a famous episode in early Muslim history to support his argument. When 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib became caliph in 656 A.D., he was opposed by a number of the Prophet Muhammad’s closest companions, including Muhammad’s wife ‘Aisha. In the first intra-Muslim fighting (fitna) in history, these opponents met ‘Ali at what is known as the Battle of the Camel, in December 656 A.D. Although killing animals in war is generally forbidden in Muslim law, and despite the aura of sanctity attached to 'Aisha, Muslim tradition relates that ‘Ali ordered his followers to bring down the camel on which ‘Aisha rode, as he considered this necessary in order to win the battle for the caliphate. Al-Qimni uses this episode to urge Egyptians to oppose those who threaten society, even if they speak in the name of religion.

As well he might. Plus ça change, plus ça reste. Muslim law is set at naught when higher goals are at stake, eh?

And how about this:

This suicide bomber was not a lone drop-out from society. He was certainly part of a cell... Nonetheless, it is now possible that an isolated individual can carry out a bombing, as indeed occurred when an [Egyptian] citizen stabbed a tourist who was kissing his [own] wife one week prior to the recent explosion. It is taught in the schools, on television, in the mosques, and within the family that this scene [of a husband kissing his wife], which touches the hearts of people all over the world, and makes them overflow with feelings and humanity - is ugly, promiscuous, and immodest. Thus, the terrorist act of that citizen was merely a result of what we planted in him. He was unable to resist the generator of hate and repugnance within him, so he stabbed the couple with a switchblade.

Now I've heard about rules against "public displays of affection." But this is the limit. Mr. Al-Qimni goes on to remind everyone that Muslims hem themselves in with all manner of do's and don'ts. Of course, any Christian will tell you that one's works, good or bad, will never save him. But Mr. Al-Qimni seems to suggest that Muslims now lack any objective distinction between good and evil. Actually, this might not be correct: to a Muslim, everything is evil that the Koran does not permit, and that the only good thing is anything that leads to the establishment of a global Muslim federation, or a revived caliphate.

This, of course, is the sort of person that the American left has now fallen in love with. If they only knew that they are taking the side of cold-hearted murderers who would order them beheaded on the first day after they achieved their political goals, they might not be so quick to support them.

Unfortunately, Mr. Al-Qimni's perspective seems to be anti-religious in general. A dedicated secularist could write this about Christians--and probably would, even though no Christian ever flew an airliner into a building, nor do Christians in general support any acts of murder or sabotage. If this is all that anyone can muster against Islamic terrorism, then we shall someday see the War Against Terror re-made into the War of the Moderns Against the Anti-moderns.