"Unfortunately we seem blind", said Tony Blair in his speech at Bloomberg. Yes, Mr Blair: it is what happens to us when we have had the wool pulled over our eyes. Those devout, observant Muslim advisers have deliberately obstructed our vision â€“ everybody's â€“ including the government, the press, the BBC and all the public. They have devoutly and observantly employed taqiyya, Islam's authorised lying.
"Understand that lying is not wrong in itself. If a lie is the only way to achieve a good result [for Islam], it is permitted."
So said Al Ghazali (1059-1111), one of Islam's most important theologians.
Lying for Islam is approved: it is a way of being devout.
Warped and Twisted
The lie fed to us all is the old, tired duping of Bush. We have heard it by now ad nauseam: it is the increasingly worn and threadbare narrative that "Islam is peace" ... but has been hijacked, radicalised, politicised, warped, twisted, distorted, perverted, misunderstood, wrongly interpreted, and so on and so on. On this basis, it has to be pointed out, the devout advisers make it appear that Islam must be just about the world's worst-taught subject, with appalling teachers and hopeless students; not very flattering, and not very convincing, either. George W. Bush was duped, maybe even quite willingly duped. He had no reason to doubt the advice he was given, and, besides, he had many Saudi friends. Paul Wilkinson, on the other hand, at the receiving end of Islamic cultural enrichment, has plenty of reason to doubt: "If you want to know about Islam", he advises, "don't talk to Muslims".
That is sound advice. All these deceptive excuses have been put forward in the attempt to distance Islam from those loyal, devout Muslims who commit killings in its name, and to draw attention away from the Koranic texts commanding them to do so, which they quote to justify their actions.
Islam: An Ideological Political Movement
Showing how well-trained he is by the deception, Mr Blair continued: "At the root of the crisis lies a radicalised and politicised view of Islam, an ideology that distorts and warps Islam's true message."
Here we go: "radicalised ... politicised ... distorts and warps". No, Mr. Blair, Islam is political: it is political to the ROOT (Latin radix) of all its teachings, its radical doctrines, its core. Islam is "an ideological political movement", Anjem Choudary explained to the BBC (Newsnight, January 2010). Nothing has been distorted, nothing warped. Islam is emphatically NOT limited to private conscience. Its 'true message' is total submission to control by coercion.
"Islam is not a religion", said Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, senior spiritual advisor to the Muslim Brotherhood, "it is a complete way of life ... individual and social, material and moral, economic and political, legal and cultural, national and international."
In Islam there is no separation of mosque and state: the mosque is the arm of the state. It is the judgement seat where death sentences are passed, the seat ofÂ legal administration civil and criminal,Â the court, the school, the gathering centre for applying 'peer pressure', the campaign planning room, the training base, the storage place for arms. "The mosques are our barracks ... the faithful our soldiers", said Recep Tayyip Erdogan, now Turkey's Prime Minister, quoting an old Islamic poem, an act which earned him a prison sentence for sedition. From its inception Islam has maintained its quasi-military identity, as an armed brotherhood enjoined to spread submissionÂ â€“ what the word Islam means â€“ "by persuasion or by force", as early scholar Ibn Khaldun expressed it. The Muslim Brotherhood's own internal memorandum, "The Project", helpfully refers to "battalions" in the mosques.
The driving mission of Islam, its overriding objective, is the imposition of sharia law on all mankind. This is to be in the envisaged Global Caliphate, a one-world government under an Islamic caliph, extinguishing democracy and all nation states. The West is Dar al Harb, the Realm of War, where the action is.
Islam advertises itself as a total way of life, with total control over dress, hair, beards, diet, hygiene, fasting, education, music, compulsory assembly, marriage, divorce, inheritance, burialÂ â€“ the works. Famous scholar Maududi wrote:
No one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private. Considered from this aspect the Islamic State bears a kind of resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states.
The Koran, at 33:36, is definitive:
It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision.
The Muslim community "possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey", said Dr Salah al-Sawy, the secretary-general of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America in a fatwa or judgement citing the above verse. Members are not permitted to leave: the penalty is death, which can be lawfully carried out by anyone, "since it is killing someone who deserves to die" (Manual of Islamic Law o8.4). The adherent is trapped: Islam's uncompromising control is total.
Hear Mr Blair further, in a statement that has quite a number of assertions:
"In fact it is often the most devout who take most exception to what they regard as the distortion of their faith by those who claim to be ardent Muslims whilst acting in a manner wholly in contradiction to the proper teaching of the Koran."
Let us remember, in the glow of this seemingly authoritative and learned pronouncement, that Mr Blair is well-trained in politics; he is not trained in Islamic law. He is not an authority on the "proper teaching of the Koran", but can only be reiterating what he has been told by his devout taqiyya-observing advisers. There is quite an array of deceptions dutifully retailed in this statement: they need a lot of unpacking. He has, it must be said, articulated them well.
Firstly, it is only an allegation, at second hand, that the most devout "take most exception": Mr Blair has not been round asking them personally. The allegation is dishonest: they do not really take exception. Note that it is "often" the most devout: should you find some most devout who do not hold this view, well, they are the others, the "less often". Secondly, "what they regard as the distortion of their faith" is only what they are said to regard: he did not ask them himself. This is another false assertion: they know it is not a distortion. Thirdly, those doing it "claim to be ardent Muslims". Saying "they claim to be" is to cause the listener to think that perhaps they are not ardent Muslims, and that this must be an erroneous claim. In reality the claim is indeed valid: they are Muslim, and the lying advisors know they are, but seek to give the impression that they do not accept the claim. Note again, the hoped-for reaction is left to the listener: the speaker did not actually say it. Fourth, consider the manner in which the ardent Muslims act. This is alleged to be "in contradiction to the proper teaching of the Koran". Is it really? No, not at all: it is wholly in keeping with it. The ardent Muslims are faithfully fulfilling the Koran's hostile and homicidal commands, like "Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them", verse 5 of chapter (sura) 9, the "Sura At-Tawba" cited by the Woolwich killer. It is this chapter, being the latest complete one, which, under Islamâ€™s doctrine of abrogation, overrides and 'abrogates' all the peaceful verses elsewhere in the Koran. "The verses of forgiveness", wrote ancient scholar Mohammed As-Shawkani, "are abrogated by the obligation of fighting".
This rich tapestry of deception is an elaborate curtain to screen attention away from the harsh, cruel reality of the Koran and its unrelenting commands for killing, maiming, subjugating and oppressing non-Muslims. The Koran, incidentally, forms part of Islamic law. It is instructed as being "true ... universal and trans-time", its teachings "valid from eternity to eternity". Denying any verse calls for the death penalty, which, like that for leaving Islam, apostasy, can be performed lawfully by anyone in Islam's by now familiar vigilante killing technique (Manual of Islamic Law o8.4, o8.7(7)).
Mr Blair again: "in certain cases, they will support the use of violence." This crafty understatement sounds unmistakeably supplied by advisers: it artfully implies that these are the exceptions, and that everywhere else, apart from these "certain cases", Islam is all peace and tranquillity. Note, though, that it does not say so. It is, shall we say, a "part-lie". Islam has a word for that: it has words for several different kinds of artfully misleading statements. The reality is that the Koran, part of Islamic law, mandates violence against the non-Muslims over and over again, in something like 164 verses. "Violence is the heart of Islam", said Ayatollah Yazdi, adviser to former President Ahmedinejad of Iran. There is no denying this: what the lie-suppliers hope for with these blandishments is to lead the listener away from ever bothering to look for himself.
Back to Mr Blair's text again:
"At this point it must again be emphasised: it is not Islam itself that gives rise to this ideology. It is an interpretation of Islam, actually a perversion of it which many Muslims abhor."
An "interpretation"? A "perversion"? What other interpretations are there for "kill"? As former PLO terrorist Walid Shoebat asks, in his "Question for the West" (Islam â€“ What the West Needs to Know):
What part of "kill" don't they understand?
The interpretation is correct. "Kill" does mean kill: that is no "perversion". We can all see this for ourselves day after day in news from Syria, where the Islam-motivated fighting is taking place, complete with beheadings, as instructed by Koran 47:4, "Strike [their] necks". Mr Blair tells us that this is something that "many Muslims abhor". Maybe many do. Where is this information from? A survey? A personal impression? A taqiyya-artist? The instruction is still there in the Koran: it does not become "abhorred" away by wishful abhorrence. It is clear enough from Syria that this is something that many Muslims, plenty of them, do not abhor: they are ardently obeying the instruction. It is time to re-word Mr. Blair's assertion:
"It must be emphasised: it is indeed Islam that gives rise to this ideology. It is a correct interpretation, and one which many Muslims are actively putting into effect."
The problem facing the world is not Islamism. The problem is Islam.