Nice, though I misunderstood your title. Apparently this is an open letter 
someone posted on congress.org, to Mark Warner as well as President Obama and 
others:

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?id=3181&letter_id=5897669141

Not a bad idea, though I fear unlikely to make much of a ripple.

-- Ernie P.

On Oct 18, 2010, at 1:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:

>  
> from the site :
> Congress.org
> Subject:
> ISLAMISTS: ISLAM FLY WILL FLY OVER WH. ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION OF PEACE.
> 
> To:
> President Barack Obama
> Rep. Bobby Scott
> Sen. Jim Webb
> Sen. Mark Warner
> 
> October 8, 2010
> 
> Amanpour Inadvertently Exposes the Real Issue with Islam
> William Sullivan
> 
> Christianne Amanpour hosted a panel discussion meant to explore the 
> misunderstood delineation between moderate and extremist Islam.
> 
> A dichotomy is certainly brought to light in discussion, but considering 
> Amanpour is a staunch Islamic apologist, it is probably not the one she meant 
> to expose. She likely sought to support the notion that Islam is peaceful, 
> and to advance the belief that only a small contingent of radicals corrupts 
> the faith. To those ends, she enlisted guests of Christian and Muslim 
> backgrounds for her panel, and I'm fairly certain she expected the Christian 
> guests to attack Islam as an intolerant faith bent on universalizing Sharia, 
> while her Muslim guests and audience members would defend themselves as 
> peaceful practitioners of the tolerant faith of Islam. 
> 
> Americans are familiar with the strategy. It's the standard stuff that tends 
> to make Christians look intolerant and Muslims look misunderstood.
> 
> But one portion of the discussion hurls a monkey-wrench into those plans. 
> When Amanpour addresses the ideas of Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary, she has 
> the audacity to question his ideas about Islamic domination. Choudary 
> proclaims that he disagrees with the entire focus of the segment, and argues 
> that the notions of moderate Islam or extremist Islam are nonsense. There is 
> only Islam, whose followers        "submit to the creator." Then, in an 
> effort to convey that Islam can live in peace with the Western world, he 
> concludes, "We do believe as Muslims that the east and the west will one day 
> be governed by the Sharia. Indeed we believe that one day the flag of Islam 
> will fly over the White House."
> 
> It is obvious that his statements reinforce what some Christian panel guests 
> believe to be the truth, and that those statements certainly don't support 
> the notion of peaceful and tolerant Islam. 
> 
> So a Muslim woman in the panel decided to take Choudary to task for his 
> reckless and inflammatory statements, and she went on to instruct him that 
> Islam is a faith of pluralism, and that it provides an allowance of other 
> faiths to exist in a state of equal importance. 
> 
> Had she been speaking to the panel's Christian reverend in that moment, she 
> likely could have won the argument just as she has probably won countless 
> others; by merely saying, "I know better than you Christians do about Islam. 
> I'm a Muslim." But my guess is that she forgot that she was speaking with 
> someone who had given far more study to the Quran and Hadith than most 
> Christian theologians. 
> 
> To her assumption of Islamic tolerance of other faiths and legal systems, 
> Choudary simply suggests that she knows nothing of what Islam desires or 
> requires; she doesn't even have the good sense to cover herself. Doesn't she 
> know that the Quran forbids her appearance in that way? So in his eyes, she 
> is not truly a Muslim, as true Muslims are not granted the liberty to sift 
> through Islamic doctrine and select their preferred methods of religious 
> practice. He even makes the comparison that she is a Muslim in the same way 
> that a person who occasionally eats beef burgers is a vegetarian.
> 
> And she cannot argue. The holy book of her faith does explicitly forbid women 
> to present themselves as she does.
> 
> This exchange reveals that cleric Anjem Choudary practices fundamental 
> adherence to Islam in an effort to live in reflection of and submission to 
> the prophet. Those Muslims who believe in religious autonomy and peace only 
> do so because Western concepts like personal freedoms have somewhat permeated 
> the contemporary practice of a religion that mandates universal submission. 
> And to the Muslims who read the Quran literally, such augmentation of Quranic 
> instruction is a sin.
> 
> So in regards to the child in the Middle East watching this panel discussion 
> on Al-Jazeera, who is he more likely to believe is correct in their way of 
> thinking? The harlot who does not cover her chest and speaks of the equality 
> of wretched infidels, or the cleric that espouses the will of the prophet?
> 
> And that is the true dichotomy exposed in this panel discussion. It is not as 
> the title of segment        implies, "Moderates vs. Extremists." It would 
> more aptly be called "Fundamentalist Islam vs. the Western world." 
> 
> While it is important to note that moderate Muslims do exist, it is 
> imperative that we keep that fact within the proper global context. Amanpour 
> and liberal pundits the world over can host hundreds of panels comprised of 
> thousands of Muslims that have embraced Western culture, and that will not 
> change the fact that such voices are irrelevant in the Islamic world. The 
> millions and millions of Muslims that share Choudary's literal belief in 
> fundamental Islam are ultimately compelled to achieve the goal of universal 
> Sharia, or die trying.
> 
> Disputanta , VA
> 
> -- 
> Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
> <[email protected]>
> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
> Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to