And that settles it. Doesn’t it?
There are still many people in the U.S. and Europe today who carefully draw a distinction between “Islamism” and “Islam,” insisting that while the former is a danger, the latter is benign and cuddly, and should be welcomed wholeheartedly into the West. Last month, on September 10, 2026, The Economist made this plain with an article entitled “Islamism is a threat to Britain. Islam is not.” And now Fatima Ezzahra El Mansouri, who became prime minister of Morocco on September 29, has agreed, stating of Moroccans that “we are Muslims, not Islamists.”
As they say in the South, Well, shut my mouth. I’ve noted many times over the years that “Islamism” is a Western construct designed to distance Islam from the crimes done in its name and in accord with its teachings. There is no concept of “Islamism” in Islamic theology or law; Islam is inherently political, and all the elements of “Islamism” are found in standard Islamic teaching across all mainstream sects and schools of jurisprudence. Cowards and trimmers still use it to court mainstream approval, but those who are more interested in truth and accuracy than mainstream acceptance and big donor checks do not use it.
Yet here is the prime minister of Morocco using the term “Islamist.” So I must have been wrong all these years, no? Well, maybe. As it happens, other Muslims are criticizing El Mansouri for making this statement, because they recognize that the term has no legitimacy from an Islamic standpoint. A typical response to El Mansouri from a Muslim on X: “‘Islamists’ is a Western term and this term ‘Islamist’ does not exist in Islam. The religion is call Islam and its believers are Muslims. Yes she is not an Islamist. ‘Islamist’ is a misleading term against Islam.”
In fact, the desire to separate “Islamism” from “Islam” stems from nothing within Islam itself, but from the impulse of non-Muslim Westerners to regard Islam as a benign entity having to do purely with spiritual matters, and to exonerate Islam from the crimes done in its name and in accord with its teachings by consigning those crimes to the realm of “Islamism,” which is understood to be a certain adulteration or bastardization of the genuine, benign Islam.
This is just wishful thinking on a grand scale. Islamism, i.e., political Islam, is part of Islam proper. The West will never figure out a way to have its fantasy of a benign and pluralistic Islam without having jihad terrorists and Sharia supremacists who are working to make their countries into Islamic states.
Certainly there are Muslims who do not wish to pursue the expansion of political Islam. Muslims, like everyone else, being susceptible to a wide variety of influences, priorities, desires and goals, with the religious impulse being just one of these. That is an obvious and undeniable fact. However, the political, supremacist, expansionist and violent aspects of Islam cannot really be separated, as “Islamism,” from Islam proper. There is not now and never has been such a distinction within Islamic theology and law, and even today, there is no major sect or school of jurisprudence that does not teach that under certain circumstances, Muslims must wage jihad, understood as physical warfare with guns and other weapons, in order to establish the hegemony of sharia over a hitherto non-Muslim entity.
So what is Fatima Ezzahra El Mansouri, when her people know that the distinction between “Muslims” and “Islamists” is entirely spurious, and she knows that they know? She is courting the West, hoping for foreign aid and to smooth over any objections that anyone may have to that aid based on suspicions that it will end up in the hands of jihadis. She is also trying to signal to her own people that jihad activity will not be tolerated in Morocco. This also could even be a signal to Spain that the invaders from Morocco who have poured by the thousands into Ceuta are nothing to worry about, for the Islam in Morocco is harmless.
Whatever Fatima Ezzahra El Mansouri may have intended, however, the jihad against unbelievers is an imperative that is firmly rooted in Islamic texts and teachings, as is the goal of imposing Sharia and denying basic rights to unbelievers. Some Muslims in Morocco will continue to pursue that goal, no matter what their new prime minister says about “Islamists.”
Rick Gordon says
As the author notes, we are comfortable with making the distinction between Islam and Islamism. We wish that all peoples were like us and celebrated the values enshrined in our founding documents and culture – but alas, that is not to be.
The vast majority of Muslims hate western civilization and only uses it to gain economic benefit while planning their eventual dominance over all non-Muslims. When will western society and government leaders realize that and act.
Tim gallagher says
That’s the most important question when it comes this evil ideology, Islam, rick. When are most people in our countries going to wake up and see Islam as the evil filth that it is. Most people should have woken up by now. There is so much evidence of the evil nature of islam by now. So many people keep giving stinking Islam a free pass despite the endless evil acts Muslims commit. It is sickening.
OLD GUY says
It appears that our education system, media and political leaders are ignorant of the problem with islam. Or they know but ignore the dangers of supporting islam because of financial and the muslim vote. If we don’t stop the migration invasion and deport these islamic invaders we will see the same riots and terrorism that is hitting parts of Europe right now.
Tim gallagher says
Yes, old guy, the ignorance about Islam’s evil nature is disastrous. There is a refusal to face reality. You’re right, it will lead to the riots that France is facing. The dumbest move of all time is letting Muslims into our countries.
somehistory says
Various words for the same subject….man, , male, guy, fellow, dude, bloke…all meaning the same thing.,
Various qualifiers add information to distinguish one ‘male’ from another.
You can’t have ‘islamism’ without islam. There are no muzzie terrorists without islam.
Attempting to conceal the facts, with the implication that an “ist” is not the same as the original,. is not honest.
Someone said truthfully years ago, “a rose by any other name is still a rose.”
People who are too afraid, or too evil, to say it like it is, use the ‘ism” or ‘ist’ to conceal the Truth.
GE says
Yep. And Islam by any other name is still Islam.
somehistory says
Thank you, GE.
Patti Inwood Krol says
And all islamists are Muslims.
Greg Conway says
Alump of shit by any other name is still a piece of Shit. You can call it Albanese but it is still a piece of shit.
Beto says
Typical of Leftists to play with words
Greg Conway says
Whether you consider yourself a islamist or a muslim you are all the same. You all read from the same books. The quoran says in 109 places to kill the infidel where ever you find him.Kill the nonbeliever where ever you find him. Look at lebanon in the 1970s it was over 98% christian now it is nearly 100% muslim. Where ever you lot go there is always bloodshed and killing until you take over. Well not in Australia You all hate jews.
.
del says
Dear Mr. Spencer, Thank you for your clarity: “Islam is inherently political”.
Billy says
Islam and its Muslims are totalitarian against Non-Muslims with Muslim discrimination, deceit, segregation, violence, and terrorism as taught in Islamic Law and in Islam’s Qur’an(Qur’an 9:5, 29, 41, 111; 49:15, etc.). Since Western Leaders are elected through a political process to gain power, Muslims operate in the political process to gain ultimate power and control. Allah in Qur’an 8:39 commands, “And engage in war with them[Non-Muslims] until there will not be sedition and the religion will be completely to Allah…”
Public Funding is a privilege that should NOT BE granted to organizations that are against the US Constitution or Western Constitutions. Totalitarian Islam and its Muslim Organizations including Muslim Schools and Mosques are against the US Constitution due to Muslim funding, teaching, and promoting discrimination, segregation, hatred, rape, violence, totalitarianism, and terrorism against Non-Muslims to make Islamic Law supreme WITH NO EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW. Islam’s Muslims are murderous, Totalitarian Terrorists of Allah operating as a Criminal-Terrorist-Gang Enterprise under Islamic Law to ultimately conquer the enemies of Allah, the Non-Muslims, with Islamic Law DBA Islam(Qur’an 8:60; 9:5, 29, 111; 49:15, etc.).
STJOHNOFGRAFTON says
Muslims, Islamists but same Quran, same hateful verses about Jews and Christians, same supremacist ideology, same dar al Islam, dar al harb.
gravenimage says
Morocco’s Prime Minister: ‘We Are Muslims, Not Islamists’
………………………………………………………………………………..
I guess the Moroccan Muslim thugs who murdered the Scandinavian toursists were just Muslims, and not :Islamists”, as well?
A distinction without a difference…
John E Sharp says
You are berbers
Muslims colonized you…
Taffy says
Tomato tomahto!
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Reposting a Q&A that I had a while ago w/ Brave Leo AI some months ago. Granted the engine used here was Qwen, but it was an interesting exchange. Splitting out each Q&A into different posts so that Ms Sucuri doesn’t get annoyed 😈
࿗Infidel࿘ says
My question:
The term **”Islamism”** has a complex history with two distinct phases of usage:
### 1. Early Usage (17th–19th Centuries)
The word first appeared in English as **”Islamismus”** in **1696** and later as **”Islamism”** in **1712**. During this period, it was simply a synonym for the religion of **Islam** itself, not a political ideology. It was used interchangeably with “Islam” to describe the faith, its followers, or its teachings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://www.etymonline.com/word/Islamist https://timelessmyths.com/stories/islamism/. By the early 20th century, the shorter term “Islam” had largely replaced “Islamism” in English usage, and the term fell out of favor until the 1970s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism.
### 2. Modern Political Usage (20th Century)
The term was revived and repurposed to describe a **political ideology** advocating for the implementation of Islamic law (Sharia) and the establishment of Islamic states.
* **Who coined it?** The specific Turkish intellectual **Ziya Gökalp** is credited with coining the terms **”Islamcılık”** (Islamism) and **”İslamcı”** (Islamist) in **1913**. He introduced these terms in the context of the Ottoman Empire to distinguish between those who viewed Islam purely as a personal faith and those who saw it as a comprehensive political and social system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/turkey-ottoman-secret-history-political-islam https://andrewhammond.substack.com/p/the-secret-history-of-political-islam.
* **Context:** Gökalp, a nationalist sociologist, used the term during debates on secularism and the role of religion in the state. He aimed to counter traditionalist clerics who claimed their opponents were not truly Muslim. By creating a specific label for the political movement, he helped formalize the ideology decades before it became widespread in Arabic or Western discourse https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/turkey-ottoman-secret-history-political-islam https://andrewhammond.substack.com/p/the-secret-history-of-political-islam.
* **Popularization:** The term gained global prominence after the **1979 Iranian Revolution**, when Western media and scholars began using “Islamism” (or “political Islam”) to describe the new wave of movements seeking to establish Islamic governments, distinct from the religion of Islam itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://timelessmyths.com/stories/islamism/.
### Summary
* **First recorded use:** 1696 (as “Islamismus”), meaning the religion of Islam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://www.etymonline.com/word/Islamist.
* **Coined as a political term:** **1913** by **Ziya Gökalp** in the Ottoman Empire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/turkey-ottoman-secret-history-political-islam https://andrewhammond.substack.com/p/the-secret-history-of-political-islam.
* **Modern meaning:** An ideology seeking to reorder society and government according to Islamic principles, becoming a standard term after 1979 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism https://timelessmyths.com/stories/islamism/.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Yes, the Turkish words are different and serve distinct grammatical and conceptual roles compared to *İslamcılık* and *İslamcı*.
Here is the breakdown:
### 1. The Religion Itself
* **Turkish Word:** **İslam**
* **Meaning:** This is the direct loanword for the religion itself (Islam).
* **Usage:** It functions exactly like the English noun “Islam.”
* *Example:* “İslam dinidir” (It is the religion of Islam).
### 2. The Adjective (“Islamic”)
* **Turkish Word:** **İslami**
* **Meaning:** This is the adjective meaning “Islamic” (pertaining to Islam).
* **Usage:** It is formed by adding the suffix *-i* (meaning “of” or “pertaining to”) to the root *İslam*.
* *Example:* “İslami hukuk” (Islamic law) or “İslami sanat” (Islamic art).
* *Note:* Sometimes you might see **İslâmî** (with a circumflex) in older or more formal texts to emphasize the Arabic pronunciation, but *İslami* is the standard modern spelling.
### 3. The Ideology (“Islamism”)
* **Turkish Word:** **İslamcılık**
* **Meaning:** This refers to the **political ideology** or movement (Islamism).
* **Breakdown:**
* *İslam* (Islam) + *-cı* (agent suffix, meaning “one who does” or “follower of”) + *-lık* (noun suffix, meaning “the state of” or “doctrine of”).
* Literally: “The doctrine of the Islam-doer” or “Political Islam.”
* **Usage:** It describes people or movements that seek to implement Islam as a political system.
* *Example:* “İslamcılık akımı” (The Islamist movement).
### 4. The Adherent (“Islamist”)
* **Turkish Word:** **İslamcı**
* **Meaning:** This refers to an **Islamist** (a person who supports the ideology).
* **Breakdown:** *İslam* + *-cı*.
* **Usage:** It describes a person who advocates for the political application of Islam.
* *Example:* “O bir İslamcıdır” (He/She is an Islamist).
### Summary Table
| English Concept | Turkish Word | Root | Suffix | Meaning Nuance |
| :— | :— | :— | :— :— |
| **Islam** (Religion) | **İslam** | – | – | The faith itself. |
| **Islamic** (Adjective) | **İslami** | İslam | *-i* | Pertaining to the faith (e.g., Islamic art). |
| **Islamist** (Person) | **İslamcı** | İslam | *-cı* | A political adherent (e.g., an Islamist activist). |
| **Islamism** (Ideology) | **İslamcılık** | İslam | *-cı* + *-lık* | The political movement/ideology. |
**Why the distinction matters:**
In Turkish (as in English), there is a significant semantic gap between **İslami** (Islamic) and **İslamcı** (Islamist).
* A mosque is *İslami* (Islamic).
* A politician who wants to enforce Sharia law through the state is *İslamcı* (Islamist).
* Just as a “Christian” person supports the religion, an “Islamist” (*İslamcı*) supports the political ideology of Islamism, which is a specific subset of political thought, not a synonym for being a Muslim (*Müslüman*).
This distinction was precisely what **Ziya Gökalp** was highlighting in 1913 when he coined *İslamcı* and *İslamcılık* to separate the political movement from the general religious identity.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
**No, Turkish does not follow that convention.**
In fact, using *İslamcı* as a substitute for *İslami* (Islamic) would be considered **incorrect**, confusing, and often politically charged in Turkish. The distinction is much stricter and more widely observed in Turkish than in modern English usage.
Here is why the confusion happens in English but not in Turkish:
### 1. The Semantic Gap
* **In English:** The term “Islamist” has unfortunately become a “catch-all” in Western media and casual speech. It is often used loosely to describe anything related to political Islam, and sometimes erroneously used as a synonym for “Islamic” (e.g., “Islamist art” or “Islamist culture”), even though this is technically incorrect. This creates the ambiguity you noticed.
* **In Turkish:** The distinction is **binary and absolute**.
* **İslami** = Anything related to the religion (neutral/descriptive).
* **İslamcı** = Someone who actively advocates for Islam as a political system (ideological/political).
### 2. Why “İslamcı” cannot replace “İslami”
If you call a mosque *İslamcı* instead of *İslami*, a Turkish speaker would think:
* “You are calling this mosque an **Islamist** organization.”
* “You are implying this mosque is part of a political movement trying to overthrow the government or enforce laws.”
It changes the meaning from **”religious”** to **”political activist.”**
**Examples of the difference:**
| English (Ambiguous/Incorrect Usage) | Turkish (Strict Usage) | Meaning |
| :— | :— | :— |
| “Islamic art” (Art belonging to the religion) | **İslami sanat** | Art created within the Islamic tradition. |
| *Incorrect:* “Islamist art” | *Incorrect:* **İslamcı sanat** | Art created by political Islamists (rarely used this way). |
| “Islamic finance” (Sharia-compliant banking) | **İslami finans** | Banking following religious rules. |
| *Incorrect:* “Islamist finance” | *Incorrect:* **İslamcı finans** | Finance controlled by political Islamists. |
| “An Islamic scholar” (Religious expert) | **İslam alimi** or **İslami alim** | A scholar of the religion. |
| *Incorrect:* “An Islamist scholar” | **İslamcı alim** | A scholar who is also a political activist. |
### 3. The “Muslim” vs. “Islamist” Distinction
This strictness extends to people as well:
* **Müslüman**: A Muslim (a believer).
* **İslamcı**: An Islamist (a political activist).
In Turkish, a person can be a devout *Müslüman* (Muslim) without being an *İslamcı* (Islamist). In fact, many traditional Turkish Muslims explicitly reject the label *İslamcı* because they view their faith as spiritual and personal, not political. If a Turkish person is called an *İslamcı*, they may take offense if they do not identify with political activism, whereas in English, the term is often applied broadly and sometimes indiscriminately.
### Summary
* **English:** Often blurs the line, using “Islamist” as a shorthand for “Islamic” (even if technically wrong).
* **Turkish:** **Never** blurs this line.
* Use **İslami** for “Islamic.”
* Use **İslamcı** *only* for “Islamist” (the political ideology).
If you hear a Turkish speaker use *İslamcı* to describe a non-political religious thing, it is almost certainly a mistake or a deliberate political provocation. The language preserves the conceptual separation that Ziya Gökalp originally intended.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
This is a crucial distinction. You are correct to challenge the assumption that the separation between “Islam” (the religion) and “Islamism” (the political ideology) is a universal linguistic reality. In fact, for many decades, **most Muslim-majority languages did not have a distinct, native word for “Islamism” as a political ideology.**
The concept of “Islamism” as a specific political movement is largely a **Western academic and journalistic construct** that was later translated into these languages, often creating awkward or contested terms.
Here is the breakdown for Arabic, Urdu, Malay/Indonesian, and Persian:
### 1. Arabic: The “Translation Problem”
Arabic presents the most complex case because the root *I-s-l-m* is the same for both the religion and the ideology.
* **The Religion:** **إسلام** (*Islām*).
* **The Adjective:** **إسلامي** (*Islāmī*).
* **The “Islamist” (Ideology):**
* **The Problem:** Historically, *Islāmī* simply meant “Islamic.” If you said *Jamāʿah Islāmiyyah* (Islamic Group), it just meant a group of Muslims.
* **The Modern “Islamist”:** To distinguish the political activist from the regular believer, modern Arabic media and scholars have adopted the term **إسلامي** (*Islāmī*) **specifically in a political context**, or they use the phrase **حركة إسلامية** (*Ḥarakah Islāmiyyah* – Islamic Movement).
* **The “Western” Term:** There is a term **إسلاموية** (*Islāmiyyah* with a specific suffix) or **إسلامي سياسي** (*Islāmī siyāsī* – Political Islamist). However, **no classical Arabic word exists** that strictly means “Islamist” in the sense of “someone who wants to turn Islam into a political state” without also meaning “someone who is religious.”
* **The Controversy:** Many Arabic speakers **reject** the term *Islāmī* for political activists because it implies they are the *only* “Islamic” ones, or that the religion itself is the problem. They often prefer **أحرار** (*Aḥrār* – Free/Activists) or simply **دعاة** (*Duʿāh* – Callers/Preachers).
* **The “Islamism” Noun:** The noun **إسلاموية** (*Islāmiyyah*) is a modern loan-translation from the French *Islamisme* or English *Islamism*. It is widely used in media (e.g., *Al-Jazeera*) but is often criticized by scholars as a Western imposition that doesn’t fit the classical grammar perfectly.
**Verdict:** Arabic **borrows** the concept. It forces the word *Islāmī* to do double duty (Adjective + Ideology) and relies on context, or invents a new word (*Islāmiyyah*) that feels foreign to traditional speakers.
### 2. Urdu: The “Political Islam” Distinction
Urdu, heavily influenced by Arabic and Persian, follows a similar pattern.
* **The Religion:** **اسلام** (*Islām*).
* **The Adjective:** **اسلامی** (*Islāmī*).
* **The “Islamist”:**
* **No Single Word:** There is no single, native Urdu word that exclusively means “Islamist” (political).
* **The Workaround:** The term **سیاسی اسلام** (*Siyāsī Islām* – Political Islam) is the standard phrase used to describe the ideology.
* **The Person:** An adherent is often called **اسلام پسند** (*Islām pasand* – Islam-lover) or **سیاسی اسلام پسند** (*Siyāsī Islām pasand* – Political Islam-lover).
* **The “Ideology” Noun:** **اسلامیت** (*Islāmiyat*) is sometimes used to mean “Islamism,” but it can also mean “Islamic-ness” in a general cultural sense. It is ambiguous.
**Verdict:** Urdu avoids a specific “ism” word. It relies on the phrase **”Political Islam”** (*Siyāsī Islām*) to make the distinction clear. If you say *Islāmī* in Urdu, it usually just means “Islamic.”
### 3. Malay / Indonesian (Bahasa): The “Islamisasi” Distinction
Malay and Indonesian have a very clear structural distinction because they use the suffix *-isme* (from Dutch/English) for ideologies.
* **The Religion:** **Islam**.
* **The Adjective:** **Islami**.
* **The “Islamist” (Ideology):**
* **The Word:** **Islamisme**.
* **The Adjective:** **Islamis**.
* **The Person:** **Islamis**.
* **The Distinction:** In Indonesian, the distinction is **grammatically precise**:
* *Seni Islami* = Islamic Art (Religious).
* *Gerakan Islamis* = Islamist Movement (Political).
* *Orang Islam* = Muslim (Religious believer).
* *Orang Islamis* = Islamist (Political activist).
**Verdict:** **Yes**, Malay/Indonesian **does** have a distinct word (*Islamisme/Islamis*). However, this is a **modern loanword** adopted from Western political science in the late 20th century. It is not a traditional word. Many traditional Muslims in Indonesia still find *Islamis* a bit foreign and prefer *Muslim politik* (Political Muslim) or *Gerakan Islam* (Islamic Movement).
### 4. Persian (Farsi)
* **The Religion:** **اسلام** (*Eslām*).
* **The Adjective:** **اسلامی** (*Eslāmi*).
* **The “Islamist”:**
* **The Word:** **اسلامگرا** (*Eslām-garā*) or **اسلامگرایانه** (*Eslām-garā-ye*).
* **Meaning:** *Garā* comes from *garāyesh* (inclination/tendency). So *Eslām-garā* literally means “one inclined toward Islam” or “Islam-oriented.”
* **Nuance:** This is the most accurate native construction. It distinguishes the *political inclination* from the *religion itself*.
* **The “Ideology”:** **اسلامگرایی** (*Eslām-garāyi* – Islam-ism).
**Verdict:** Persian has a **native, distinct construction** (*Eslām-garā*) that is widely accepted and used to separate the political ideology from the religion. This is perhaps the most linguistically successful adaptation among the languages.
### Summary Table
| Language | Word for “Islam” | Word for “Islamic” (Adj) | Word for “Islamism” (Ideology) | Word for “Islamist” (Person) | Is it a native distinction? |
| :— | :— | :— | :— | :— | :— |
| **Turkish** | *İslam* | *İslami* | *İslamcılık* | *İslamcı* | **Yes** (Coined 1913, native suffixes) |
| **Arabic** | *Islām* | *Islāmī* | *Islāmiyyah* (borrowed) / *Islāmī* (contextual) | *Islāmī* (contextual) | **No** (Relies on context or borrowed term) |
| **Urdu** | *Islām* | *Islāmī* | *Siyāsī Islām* (Political Islam) | *Islām pasand* (contextual) | **No** (Uses phrases, not a single word) |
| **Indonesian** | *Islam* | *Islami* | *Islamisme* | *Islamis* | **Yes** (Loanword, but grammatically distinct) |
| **Persian** | *Eslām* | *Eslāmi* | *Eslām-garāyi* | *Eslām-garā* | **Yes** (Native construction) |
### The Core Answer to Your Challenge
Your challenge is valid: **The distinction is not inherent to the languages themselves.**
1. **Western Origin:** The specific concept of “Islamism” as a separate ideology from “Islam” is largely a **Western political science construct**.
2. **Translation Struggle:** When this concept was introduced to the Muslim world, languages had to **adapt**:
* **Turkish** and **Persian** managed to create distinct native terms (*İslamcı*, *Eslām-garā*) that successfully separate the two.
* **Arabic** and **Urdu** struggle with this because their root *Islām* is so central that adding a political suffix often feels like a corruption of the religious term. They often resort to phrases like “Political Islam” (*Siyāsī Islām*) rather than a single “Islamism” word.
* **Indonesian** simply borrowed the Western term (*Islamisme*).
**Conclusion:**
The existence of a distinct word for “Islamism” in these languages is **not** proof that the distinction is an ancient or universal truth recognized by all Muslims. Rather, it is proof that **modern political movements forced these languages to evolve** to accommodate a new, Western-style ideological category. In many cases (like Arabic), the “Islamist” is still just called “Islamic” (*Islāmī*), and the context does the heavy lifting, which is why the confusion you noticed in English often persists in the original languages too.
Lizabee says
If only there was a way to delegitimize Islam as a “religion” the West might be saved.
Our Achilles heel that will allow Islam to take over America is our “freedom of religion” (not otherwise specified) even if Islam doesn’t tolerate other religions. They will out-reproduce us and take demographic control and thus political control.
gravenimage says
Islam is a religion–it is an *evil* religion. We don’t allow people to sacrafice babies to Ba’al or virgins to the Volcano God. In the same way, many of the diktats of Islam are illegal,
Troybeam says
Is there a different Quran for the Muslim and one for the Islamists?
Do not think so.
Peter Burrows says
Tsk, tsk. Shame on you, Morocco. You are all apostates. Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 219, quotes Allah’s Messenger (may he rot in Hell) as saying: “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their leader” Furthermore, The Reliance of the Traveller, page 672, quotes Muhammad (MHRIH): “Men are already destroyed when they obey women.”
Walter Sieruk says
The prime minister of Morocco, Fatima Ezzahra El Mansouri, had well and truly spoken by declaring “We are Muslims, not Islamists,”
For two pseudo words are “Islamists ” and ‘Islamism” that had made up after September 11th 2001 in order not to offend non-violent peaceful Muslims. As for the later made up word “Islamist,” the term should be used is Muslim terrorist.
It’s very important to call individuals and religions for what they really are .Therefore, the real word is “Islam”. As the devout Muslim President of Turkey, Erdogan, rightly, declared “Islam is Islam.”
Walter Sieruk says
Inn any dictionary or book about the major religions of the world that was printed and published before September 11th 2001 can that so called word “Islamism” be found It was made up to avoid upsetting or offending non-violent Muslims.
Nevertheless , it’s important to be honest in the use of words by engaging in what is called “plain talk:” in using real words ,and not fiction “words”
It’s best called things as they really are , Including calling Islam by its real name that it actually is which is Islam..