Muslims have suspended history. The main ideas dictating their morals and behavior, and the foundations of their belief system, were never challenged publicly in Muslim countries, official representatives of the religious institution, preachers, and even ordinary citizens do not allow it. Texts, audios, and videos attempting to oppose or reread Islam’s main or secondary concepts and regulations are often, effectively, banned from circulating between people. Terrorists are not isolated elements in the Muslim community, they represent the far end, from that end to the middle you will find Muslims believing in ideas circling Takfirism to less extreme degrees, like Muslims who think now is not the time for establishing the Islamic state or Muslims who don’t condone terrorism but sympathize with its motives.
Takfirism: A radical approach to Islam by which Muslims who profess to believe in Islam but don’t follow the takfirists’ way are labeled infidels and become fair game to be blown up in pursuit of the caliphate or Islamic supremacy through terror.
Muslims with the understanding that only a flourishing love for sciences and a booming economy can achieve prosperity for the Muslim world exist, but these Muslims are neither popular nor active enough, and Muslim youths would not find a science and economy discourse as attractive as the one with jihad against a well-defined enemy and gorgeous chicks in heaven.
After every terrorist attack by Muslims, mainstream western media begins appeasing Muslims and Islamists via the routine the-terrorists-were-not-really-Muslims articles, just a bunch of rogue elements from the Muslim world. This is not true because a dominant ideology in a group of people, including its extreme ends, exists in a spectrum or a cloud, not single, separated nodes. For example, in a society of Muslims, it is not one person loves music and life and the individual just next to him on the scale towards the extremist terrorist is a terrorist. Beliefs in a peaceful Islam and a terrorist Islam have a big blurred border.
When ideas conducive to terrorism are shielded from criticism they become more rancid and cancerous. Promoting moderate Islam as a counter-terrorism method is absolutely useless if not meaningless, how would you sell your version of Islam to extremists with the dogmatic conviction that they understand what Islam is and think their interpretation is the correct one? You cannot, not without challenging, deconstructing, and disintegrating their ideas, otherwise they will disintegrate us. And challenging the books of terrorism is not enough, Islam itself, as a religion and state, must be subjected to challenge, like Christianity is. Challenge will lead to skepticism and skepticism curbs extremism.
Instead of discussing whether or not we should kill infidels, apostates, and gays, we should discuss what is Allah, what is mercy, what is good, and what is evil, discussion means less absolutes means less negative motivation means less explosions.
Muslims suffer radical Islam almost weekly.
But no, the media doesn’t want to offend Muslims, or provoke Muslims? fearing a Charlie Hebdo? Have we been taken hostages by the religion of peace?