Isis doesn’t deserve to be called Islamic, Australian imams say

AUSTRALIAN imams have called for the term “Islamic” not to be used when referring to the Islamic State (Isis) group, saying it serves only to give credibility to the group’s claims of religious authority.

There was nothing Islamic about its murderous actions, the Australian National Imams Council said, and the phrase “Islamic State” referred to an era when Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together harmoniously.

But the militants had misappropriated the terminology for their own political and violent goals.

“Since the Isis group was established we have been very clear about denouncing their lies and betrayal of our faith,” the grand mufti of Australia, Ibrahim Abu Mohammad, said in a statement on Monday.

“These criminals are committing crimes against humanity and sins against God. Forced eviction, threats of execution and burning of places of worship including churches have no place in any faith.”

But the imams council does not support the federal government’s decision to deploy a 600-strong military force to the United Arab Emirates to provide support for Kurdish and Iraq fighters battling Isis. It says there is a clear link between foreign wars and radicalisation in Australia.

Some 60 Australian nationals are said to be fighting in Syria and Iraq.

The council also warned Muslim Australians not to trust the internet and social media “as some material may have dangerous influences on vulnerable minds”.

“Instead Muslims must get proper religious advice from knowledgeable, respected and qualified imams,” it said.


6 thoughts on “Isis doesn’t deserve to be called Islamic, Australian imams say

  1. I remember a few days ago that the Australian Islamic Council took a pot shot blaming TA for Australian involvement in ME conflicts.

    Can Bryan post this on the Andrew Bolt’s tips of the day forum and see what reaction this has?


    • davinci,
      this is not connected to the current thread here. But it has been noticeable to me, that with the answers I’ve given you in recent discussions, there has been no further comments from you. I’d still love to know just how you would deal with my arguments. I cant really believe that you have been defeated by me??? eh?

      Rian (all prepared to thump his chest again if given the opportunity.


  2. Transcript (in part)

    Mal Fletcher interviews Bishop Dr Michael Nazir-Ali about the historical, political and religious origins of militant extremism and what might be done about the problem of persecution, and how to support the persecuted.


    Hosea 8:7 Those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind


    Question : “In what ways do you think western governments might have unwittingly or otherwise, been part of the increase of extremism in the Middle East, and what lesson should we be learning from that?”

    Answer : “Well, during the Cold War for instance, western policy was to encourage Islamism. I mean I’ve seen this on the ground myself in the situation in Afghanistan in the l980’s to encourage Islamism as a bulwark against Marxism. That happened quite a lot and I’ve had a student who was doing some research in this area who showed that in terms o foreign policy this encouragement held even at the expense of how minorities fared.

    The intervention in Afghanistan was to rid the country of what the west saw as the Soviet Union’s invasion. So to do this they identified, recruited, trained and financed a whole lot of very dubious people and groups in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. They even armed them with the sort of weaponry reserved for governments, like Stinger missiles, and of course they succeeded in removing the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. In fact, we might even say it went further than that and it led to the eventual unravelling of the Soviet Union itself. But in doing so they have created an international Radical Islamist Movement that is now everywhere, because the people who are fighting in the Pakistan, Afghanistan theatre were not just Pakistanis and Afghans, they were people from all over the world.

    Well Syria, again, is a more recent example. In Syria, and I know this personally, there was a trade-off, some social freedom and some freedom of belief in exchange for restrictions on political freedom. Now to manage the influence of Iran in Syria, the west supported Saudi Arabia and Qatar and a national Islamist Movement in Syria that had been waiting for its opportunity to create the situation that we have now.

    The apple cart has been well and truly upset, but what have we got out of it? We’ve got a country that’s been destroyed, historic cities lie in ruins, and the Christian population of Syria, which is proportionately more numerous than in Iraq, is in terrible circumstances.”

    Question : “We read about the Jihadist Movements that are very often made up of young men, and many of those young men have come from western countries and have gone to fight in what they think of as holy war, and yet at the same time we’ve got young people being a voice for change; more liberalism in other parts of the Middle East, with the Arab Spring and so forth. Which two of those forces among young people do you think will win out over the next few years, and how can we prevent more young men from leaving our home shores to take up Jihadist campaigns?”

    Answer : “These are two very different questions because lets deal with those who were blogging and internetting at the time of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’. I mean, these were jeans wearing and university educated young people, and the west; the media certainly, made the mistake of thinking that was the revolution. It wasn’t! The revolution was the Salafis who were escaping from prison. The revolution was the burning of Christian churches. The revolution was closing down freedom of speech—all of those things. So we’ve got to be wary that what presents itself now, particularly electronically, is not necessarily representative of what’s happening on the ground. But secondly, where there are large numbers of people who are disenchanted with ‘Islamism’; Shia or Sunni, as in Iran, they have been ruthlessly supressed. Ruthlessly !

    Coming to the second part of your question, what’s happening with British born or European born young people going off to fight in Syria is the logical result of multiculturalism.

    Now, of course, we all live in multicultural societies, and that’s to be welcomed, you know in terms of food, music and dress, but multiculturalism is an ideology. It is a way of accommodating diversity and it arose in the west at precisely the time when it was losing Christian discourse in the public place.

    So what did multiculturalism do? It promoted tolerance for instance as a virtue, which in England, particularly, means leaving people alone. Well, if you leave people alone what happens? They become ghettoised. People grew up in separate communities. They were provided services in their own language. They did not adopt a lingua franca sufficiently. They were educated separately, even in state schools that had ninety-nine percent of pupils from one community, for instance. And of course, the extremists who were becoming influential at this time; for them this was a heaven-sent, or a hell-sent opportunity one should say, to radicalise the young instead of integration around a common vision, a common view of citizenship, a common language. This has come about because of multiculturalism. I mean this is now widely recognised. When I first said it I was maligned widely in the media, but it needs to be set aside.

    What Britain should have said at the very beginning for example, is yes; we are a nation because of the Judaeo-Christian tradition of the Bible. That is what has made us a nation. A very senior Judge said to me the other day, “Well of course Bishop, our laws are based on the Ten Commandments and our Lord’s summary of them.” So I said, hallelujah, but how does this reflect in your judgment?

    What is the point in holding all of these things back to say yes; this is who we are, now you are welcome with this new diversity to make a contribution? But to pretend we have come from nowhere and are going nowhere is a recipe for disaster.”

    Australian Christian Channel


    • Hi Monica,

      Interesting article, but a bit of a curate’s egg. I thought the majority was quite good. But the last bit. How on earth are the 10 commandments applicable to a modern justice system ? 3 of the commandments do seem to be covered by the modern criminal law. But that leaves 7 that really should have no bearing.


  3. Maybe some of the imams ought to read the Koran. Not only does it tell Muslims to “kill unbelievers wherever you find them” and “cause terror among the unbelievers”. but even Mohammed said, “I have been made victorious through terror”..

    It mandates the beheadings, the hostage-taking for ransom, and spends about 60% of its time talking about how to treat unbelievers firmly and badly, which seem incredible. But most people assume it is benign, just like any other religion. Well all of the extremists are quoting and waving Korans while they murder people, yet we still find people asking, “Why are they doing all these things? It must be all our fault.” Yes, it’s our fault for not being Muslim.

    They don’t seem to know that the Koran has been inspiring the same sorts of things since the seventh century. Even the Crusades were a belated response to 450 years of previously unanswered Islamic aggression and expansion..

    Allah claims to be the “greatest deceiver of them all, a great schemer”, etc. With that as a role model and the example of Mohammed, together with the well-established practice of taqiyya and kitman, how on earth are we supposed to tell the “moderate” Muslims from the extremists, especially when there is no moderate Koran, and no moderating literature.

    I would like to think the imams COULD make a difference in the scheme of things but if they start quoting some apparently peaceful passage from the Koran, any firebrand who knows his Koran can say, “Yes, but you KNOW that passage is abrogated by the later, more warlike passages, so it doesn’t apply anymore. It USED to say,’You have your religion and I have mine,’ but that has been superseded by “Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.”

    Until ordinary Muslims repudiate jihad in no uncertain terms, it will be with us for a very long time.
    But saying that jihad has nothing to do with Islam is like saying that Jesus has nothing to do with Christianity.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s