Yes, Jake Wallis Simons is right: appeasement never works. The West is handing a victory to jihad terrorism. But it’s also true that Jake Wallis Simons himself is not fully coming to grips with the problem that confronts us. Why does he call the foe “Islamist” terrorism? What does he think is the difference between “Islamic” and “Islamist”? If anyone confronted him on this matter (as he almost certainly won’t see this, so blocked and demonized are we), he would likely say that the distinction is between Muslims who want to coexist in peace with their non-Muslims and those who do not. And while there are undoubtedly numerous Muslims who do indeed have no interest in waging jihad and are happy to coexist as equals with non-Muslims in a secular society, has Jake Wallis Simons ever looked into what the Qur’an actually says, and how it is understood in mainstream Islam? Has he pondered the implications of the fact that those happily coexisting Muslims have no theological leg to stand on within Islamic tradition? Does he realize that using a term such as “Islamist,” which does not exist in Islamic theology or law, only hinders, rather than aids, our ability to understand what we’re dealing with, and insofar as it distances us from reality, keeps us from formulating effective strategies to confront it?
“The West is proving that Islamist terrorism works,” by Jake Wallis Simons, Telegraph, May 9, 2024:
What would be the worst foreign policy message imaginable? There are many contenders, but the frontrunner has to be simply that “terrorism works”. Once this lesson has been learnt, the door will be open to years of violence against us. It’s called appeasement, and history has taught us where it leads.
If you, like me, are concerned by the rise of Islamist extremism around the world, the danger it poses to Jewish communities everywhere, and the way it threatens both the firmness of liberal values and our national security, the inconstancy of Western support for Israel in its mission to destroy Hamas – including here in Britain – should fill you with dread….
somehistory says
Perhaps it ‘should fill me with dread,’ but it does not.
I put my trust in Someone other than ‘nobles and sons of men.’
The Someone has foretold the outcome of this war between good and evil.
Good is the Victor.
FYI says
The media bias against Israel is ridiculous.
A group of Israeli soldiers are seen running towards a hospital entrance.The camera suddenly cuts to inside the hospital showing babies in an incubator
What might you assume?”oh no they are going to kill the babies”
No! that’s what the media want you think ..
Reality of situation:they are gonig afier hamas who like to hide in hospital.
images of ruin
“Carpet bombing”:?but carpert bombing is pretty useless..targeted bombing is more effective
There were images of the Russo-Ukraine war that were clearly repeated or looped.
The media have a STORY to sell you and with Israel it will always be biased
A close up shot of a child’s shoe…..2 babies in prams…but no relevance to anthing except what the medis want you to think;Genocide
John Smith says
I totally agree with you here FYI. For far too long the MSM has twisted and perverted the truth because it doesn’t comply with their evil narrative, that Israelis are the baddies, and hamas are the goodies. The manner in the way they report things is absolutely disgusting.
FYI says
hamas were firing missiles into Israel BEFORE oct 7th last.
hamas and their “innocent” palestinian suporters chose war over peace
hamas carried out unspeakable atrocities against innocent Jews.
hamas and their pally supporters brought this on themseves
They chose war
I know all about the conspiracy theories:there is a bigger picture of course but there is no excuse for what hamas did.I believe the Globalist elite are pushing for WW3 and the best way to do that is to trigger Iran and Israel.
Deus Vult says
UK media has rapidly become a muslim mouthpiece they plug islamamism whenever they can I feel for the fools that buy a TV licence.
cornelius says
Just got suspended from Reddit for giving a passionate defense of Israel that got over 500 up-votes. They claim I was promoting “hate”…..even though I never even used the word “Islam” or “Arab” or “Iranian” in my denunciation of Israel’s enemies.
Yet, the vitriolic hatred directed at Israel and the USA on Reddit is somehow always exempt from this kind of censorship. Such is life on 21st century Planet Earth.
Namer says
The American left has repeatedly embarrassed the US and will continue to do so, It doesnt stop me from being ashamed of our gov’t and what harm it has done to Israel and the world. May a better man fill out Whitehouse soon and end this mess.
Peacelover says
+
Anonymous says
If all the population of Gaza were ex-Muslims, Gaza would be prosperous and friendly.
Islam wants especially to kill ex-Muslims.
Just showing Islam’s face.
George Williamson says
Don’t use Reddit
maria says
i never did. it was bad from the beginning
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Anyone who ever uses the term “islamist” or “islamism”, I have one simple question other than Robert’s question above:
What are the equivalent terms of “islamist” and Islamism” in muslim languages like Arabic, Turkish, Urdu…. that are different from their terms for “islam” or “islamic”?
James Lincoln says
Infidel,
To your point, from Merriam-Webster:
Islamism:
1. the faith, doctrine, or cause of Islam
2. a popular reform movement advocating the reordering of government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/islamist
࿗Infidel࿘ says
James
I’m no longer sure about their credibility as a source. For instance, they’ve redefined standard words like “they” and “them” to be conditionally singular, depending on “gender”, which it never was even a few years ago
Similarly, I had never read nor heard of the terms “islamism” nor “islamist” until after 9/11, when Western people from all walks of life decided to split islam into 2 versions, and branded “islamism” as the version they didn’t like. Which is why I asked for the equivalents of those words in muslim languages that are different from their words for “islam” itself. They don’t exist, b’cos muslims themselves draw no such distinctions
somehistory says
Just as that ghoul in Turkey says there is no “moderate” islam. It’s just islam. Some mozlums are more devoted to forcing islam on other people, but the islam they know is the same as the islam of those , seemingly, for the present time, less devoted to forcing us.
James Lincoln says
Infidel,
Your points are well taken.
And yes, the current Merriam-Webster dictionary is certainly more “woke” than a copy from, say, 50 years ago.
Mick says
A country of moderate Muslims can be radicalised (by poverty, unemployment, TV reports on Bosnia… and imported wahhabism), within 30 years.
Female Fertility is the driver. Islam provides direction, discipline and a sense of entitlement; whether or not the economic migrants read the Koran, attend the mosque or pray 5 times a day..
Islamisation and Arabisation led to civil war in Algeria in the 90s..Between the haves and have nots, radicals and moderates, Berber and Arab. Population growth will continue to drive the exodus of the have-nots to greener pastures.
somehistory says
One might say that osama bin laden was “radicalized,” and he was very wealthy.