Daniel Pipes: Ignorance at its Finest, as he Desperately Tries to Keep Islam Alive in America!

Daniel PipesIn a war in which we are losing ground to Islam, there are so called experts who continue to blatantly mislead non-Muslim Americans. As they are $elling what is nothing more than a feel good fantasy. One of the biggest culprits of this crime against America is so called historian, and specialist on the Middle East and “Islamism”, Professor Daniel Pipes.  Here is his latest fantasy posting….

Can Islam Be Reformed?

History and human nature say yes

by Daniel Pipes July/August 2013 Islam currently represents a backward, aggressive, and violent force. Must it remain this way, or can it be reformed and become moderate, modern, and good-neighborly? Can Islamic authorities formulate an understanding of their religion that grants full rights to women and non-Muslims as well as freedom of conscience to Muslims, that accepts the basic principles of modern finance and jurisprudence, and that does not seek to impose Sharia law or establish a caliphate?

Currently? Mohammad himself was a backward, aggressive, and violent force.

Bukhari Hadith Volume 9, Book 92, Number 432:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

The Jews brought a man and a woman who had committed illegal sexual intercourse, to the Prophet and the Prophet ordered them to be stoned to death, and they were stoned to death near the mosque where the biers used to be placed.

Sahih Muslim Hadith Book 019, Number 4366:

It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Bukhari Hadith Volume 8, Book 82, Number 795:

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of ‘Uraina and did not cauterise (their bleeding limbs) till they died.

Pipes:

A growing body of analysts believe that no, the Muslim faith cannot do these things, that these features are inherent to Islam and immutably part of its makeup. Asked if she agrees with my formulation that “radical Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution,” the writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali replied, “He’s wrong. Sorry about that.” She and I stand in the same trench, fighting for the same goals and against the same opponents, but we disagree on this vital point.

LW: When I read such ignorant comments from Pipes, I sake my head in disbelief that he has the nerve to look people in the eyes as he takes their checks. Obviously those features are inherent to Islam, and its call for dominance over non-Muslims is extremely clear.

Koran 9:33:

{ هُوَ ٱلَّذِيۤ أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِٱلْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ ٱلْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى ٱلدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْمُشْرِكُونَ }

He it is Who has sent His Messenger, Muhammad (s), with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may manifest it, make it prevail, over every religion, all the religions which oppose it, even though the disbelievers be averse, to this.
Pipes:
My argument has two parts. First, the essentialist position of many analysts is wrong; and second, a reformed Islam can emerge.

 Arguing Against Essentialism To state that Islam can never change is to assert that the Koran and Hadith, which constitute the religion’s core, must always be understood in the same way. But to articulate this position is to reveal its error, for nothing human abides forever. Everything, including the reading of sacred texts, changes over time. Everything has a history. And everything has a future that will be unlike its past.

LW: For starters, Muslims believe the Koran is the literal word of God. NOT man made, and the Koran itself states its words cannot be changed!

Koran 10:64:

{ لَهُمُ ٱلْبُشْرَىٰ فِي ٱلْحَياةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا وَفِي ٱلآخِرَةِ لاَ تَبْدِيلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ ٱللَّهِ ذٰلِكَ هُوَ ٱلْفَوْزُ ٱلْعَظِيمُ }

Theirs are good tidings in the life of this world: in a hadīth verified by al-Hākim this has been explained as [referring to] a propitious vision which an individual might have or [a vision] which another might have of that person; and in the Hereafter: Paradise and reward. There is no changing the Words of God, no failing of His promises; that, mentioned, is the supreme triumph.

Besides that, Pipes does not even begin to define what Islam is, and I challenge him to name just ONE Muslim who believes Islam is man made. Pipes:

   Only by failing to account for human nature and by ignoring more than a millennium of actual changes in the Koran’s interpretation can one claim that the Koran has been understood identically over time. Changes have applied in such matters as jihad, slavery, usury, the principle of “no compulsion in religion,” and the role of women. Moreover, the many important interpreters of Islam over the past 1,400 years—ash-Shafi’i, al-Ghazali, Ibn Taymiya, Rumi, Shah Waliullah, and Ruhollah Khomeini come to mind—disagreed deeply among themselves about the content of the message of Islam.

Unfortunately Pipes provided no real information about them. So I will take the time to do it.

ash-Shafi’i: One of the four Sunni schools of Islamic Law. One that the nightmarish Islamic Law Manual, Reliance of Traveller was written on. A manual which clearly states non-Muslims are to be dominated under Islamic rule.

Ibn Taymiya: Was a Hanbali jurist (Sunni). Here are a couple of quotes from him.

The Jihaad against the soul is the foundation for the jihad against the disbelievers and hypocrites. (Ibn al-Qayyim, ar-Rawdah, p.478) What can my enemies do to me? I have in my breast both my heaven and my garden. If I travel they are with me, never leaving me. Imprisonment for me is a chance to be alone with my Lord. To be killed is martyrdom and to be exiled from my land is a spiritual journey. (Ibn al-Qayyim, Waabil, p.69) He also argued for the limitation of Christian expression on juristic and historical grounds, to protect Muslim practice and identity. Sounds like a heck of a guy….

Rumi: The poet. The following is an excerpt from “All Religions, all This Singing, one Song”

What is praised is one, so the praise is one too, many jugs being poured into a huge basin. All religions, all this singing, one song. The differences are just illusion and vanity. That sounds nice, but according to the Koran he is not even close to being correct.

Koran 5:51:

{ يَـٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ ٱلْيَهُودَ وَٱلنَّصَارَىٰ أَوْلِيَآءَ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَآءُ بَعْضٍ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُمْ مِّنكُمْ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْهُمْ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي ٱلْقَوْمَ ٱلظَّالِمِينَ }

O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as patrons, affiliating with them or showing them affection; they are patrons of each other, being united in disbelief. Whoever amongst you affiliates with them, he is one of them, counted with them. God does not guide the folk who do wrong, by affiliating with disbelievers.
Can Pipes provide ANY evidence of Rumi actually addressing that verse, and proving me wrong about it being divisive? Or was Rumi as delusional as Daniel is?
Shah Waliullah: THOUGHTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS
The Shah’s message makes as much sense as Pipes’, when he evades the reality of Islam itself being the problem.
Shah Waliullah
On Daniel’s site, it has Shah defined as the following: Shah Waliullah (1703-62) a leading thinker of Indian Islam.
Shah:
Necessity of the reformation is when the downfall happens in the course of time and place. But the reformation is not meant to bring something new. Their responsibility is bringing the community back to proper and strong path.
Political thoughts of Shah Wali Ullah:
Shah Wali Ullah felt the impact of decay and decline in every walk of life,analyzed the causes of downfall of and suggested the ways and means toarrest them. Firstly his aim was to restore the Islamic political thought. 
His explanation of the Islamic politics is below:
(2) Al men are equal. Nobody is good enough to rule over others or enslave them.
(5) The above mentioned rights are fundamental and every body,irrespective of race, religion, caste and class is entitled to them
Is that so? Because Koran verse 9:29 clearly shows that to be a false statement.
Fight those who do not believe in God, nor in the Last Day, for, otherwise, they would have believed in the Prophet (s), and who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, such as wine, nor do they practise the religion of truth, the firm one, the one that abrogated other religions, namely, the religion of Islam — from among of those who (min, ‘from’, explains [the previous] alladhīna, ‘those who’) have been given the Scripture, namely, the Jews and the Christians, until they pay the jizya tribute, the annual tax imposed them, readily (‘an yadin is a circumstantial qualifier, meaning, ‘compliantly’, or ‘by their own hands’, not delegating it [to others to pay]), being subdued, [being made] submissive and compliant to the authority of Islam.
Times like this make me wonder if Pipes has actually even read a Koran….
What was that he said about no slavery in Islamic politics?
(According to CenturyLearner, the Shah thoroughly studied the Sahih Bukhari Ahadith.)
Narrated Jabir: A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet cancelled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). No’aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him.
Shah:
4. Jihad is a sacred duty for every Muslim. It means that is order to defend the sanctity of principles and policies, on should cherish the passions of dedication and devotion so much so that one should lay down one‟s life for them
Is anyone else itching to live under this Shah’s “Islam” yet?
Philosophical Interpretation:
2) The life of Muhammad (PBUH) or the uswah-i-rasul, should be taken asan the life of the three pious caliphs should be emulated (Ali, the fourthcaliph is conspicuous by absence
3) the Shia interpretation and practices of Islam should altogether be discarded, as they are misguiding to the people at large
Is Pipes actually promoting this guy as  non-threatening?
Sahi Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 448:
So Allah’s Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet’s judgment (unconditionally after 25 days of fierce resistance) but he directed them to Sad (ally) to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, “I give my judgment that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed.”
Wow! A non-Muslim “friendly” version of Islam! This is just sooooo exciting!
Conclusion:
Shah Wali Ullah was prolific warrior of Islam. He bravely challenged theproblematiccontemporary situations. Shah Wali Ullah did not hesitate toanalysis the formidable political atmosphere. His encyclopedic knowledgeand steadiness in practical life are the great models for the Muslim world.As Allamah Muhammad Iqbal remarks he was the first Muslim to feel theurge for rethinking the whole system of Islam without any way breaking away from its past.
Well if all that was supposed to convince me that  Islam can become a non-threat, Pipes did an awful job! Unlike Pipes, I am not willing to gamble away America and the lives of my future generations on a fantasy!
BurkaRedWhitandBlue-vi
Islam will be fought!
Coming up in part II. Pipes plays an evasive game….

Comments

comments

11 comments for “Daniel Pipes: Ignorance at its Finest, as he Desperately Tries to Keep Islam Alive in America!

  1. July 14, 2013 at 7:33 pm

    Visit http://www.crusadersarmory.tk/
    go to the Fliers page and download “Can Islam Be Reformed?”. No hope in Hell; abandon it entirely!!! Allah’s Turd forbids it and Moe cursed anyone who tries it. Details in the pdf.

  2. ChrisLA
    July 14, 2013 at 7:54 pm

    Daniel Pipes, like Bill Cosby, has gotten himself lost in the takiyya thicket. He, perhaps, has also not read Sayyid Qutb’s commentary on the Quran, “In the Shade of the Quran,” where Qutb states regarding the final major surah of the Quran (Surah 9), “Some defeatist elements are overwhelmed by the pressures resulting from the desperate situation of present-day Muslims, who have nothing of Islam other than its name, and from the wicked attack by the Orientalists on the concept of jihad. Hence they try to find excuses by relying on provisional rulings and ignoring the true basis of the Islamic approach that moves forward to liberate mankind form servitude to other human beings, so that they can worship Allah alone.” (Continued)

  3. ChrisLA
    July 14, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    (Qutb continued) “If the Muslims today, in their present situation, cannot implement these final rulings, then they are not, now and for the time being, required to do so. . . But they may not twist the final texts in order to show them as consistent with the provisional ones. They may not impose their own weakness on the divine faith, which remains firm and strong. Let them fear Allah and not attempt to weaken Allah’s faith under the pretext of showing it to be a religion of peace. . . Those defeatists twist texts in order to save themselves from their imagined embarrassment in trying to explain why Islam moves beyond its original borders to save mankind from submission to anyone other than Allah.”(pp. 25-28) Pipes and those who envision Islam as a “religion of peace” need to read Surah 9 to understand the final will and testament of the author of Islam.

  4. Jack Ellison
    July 15, 2013 at 7:30 am

    As if we, by intercepting Islam’s original intent, at its source, at the origin of the tunnel, could somehow skillfully change it in place, such that it now comes out the end of the tunnel looking and behaving peaceful, tolerant and neighborly. And we could do all this on our own approval as infidels? I think we’d need a time machine then, because Islam as it is is Islam as it has been for 1400 years, its immutable basis being Allah, Mohammed and the Quran. If the basis is immutable and not one word of it can be changed, then Islam as such is already Islam as it is, without needing to add a suffix “ism” to it.

    • admin
      July 15, 2013 at 8:35 pm

      “And we could do all this on our own approval as infidels?”

      Bingo!

  5. July 16, 2013 at 1:08 am

    Pipes reminds me of a sanitized Esposito.
    He is a useless tool of Islam and sharia law.

    Nice job on tearing Pipes and Islam apart.
    I sure as hell will never take any chances on Islam, period. Islam sucks. Always has and always will.

    • admin
      July 20, 2013 at 1:20 pm

      Espo is a treacherous sellout.

  6. July 17, 2013 at 10:05 am

    It

  7. emmi
    July 28, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    From all this information, it seems to me that Daniel Pipes has spent too long in an academic ivory tower. He really needs to get out to rundown places and see the misery caused by Islam in the West. See the rate at which Muslims are taking over. The mosque building, the harassment of nearby residents so that they flee and sell their properties at a very low price, to Muslims, the proliferation of halal meat, the demands of Muslim children in schools and students in universities, the separate prayer rooms, a crafty way of land grabbing and staking claims.
    I wonder if Pipes has ever been near a Muslim loudly praying and playing Muslim prayers on the radio or tv? It is the most hideous howling, but Daniel Pipes is cushioned against this. He is indulging in that academic activity of pulling everything apart in order to ‘see’ both sides.
    This is not an academic exercise, Islam is the greatest threat the world has ever known and ‘moderate’ Muslims are the smiling face of this threat.
    They are so soulless that they are unmoved by Muslim barbarity in nearly every country. This leads me to think that they are secretly looking forward to the day when they, like their ancestors, have have both black and white slaves, have the best jobs and implement sharia law which efficiently crushes the opponents of Islam on trumped up charges. Remember takkya.

    • admin
      August 1, 2013 at 1:02 pm

      I think Pipes’s ego is too big to admit he is wrong, either that or he cannot let go off the massive funding he receives. Could be both!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *