Posted by Wymark on 7/12/2009, 8:55 pm, in reply to "Re: Minister warns of ‘inbred’ Muslims"
82.23.179.222
And don't get me wrong. Criticising the Taliban, or the House of Saud, for their repressive practices which they try and justify by appealing to Islam, isn't Islamophobic.
But if you were to take the examples of the Taliban and the House of Saud, and argue that Islam must therefore *necessarily* be that repressive in practice, which makes it inherently 'backwards', 'violent', 'misogynistc', that Islam and muslims don't 'belong in Europe', how there's no such as a 'moderate/progressive muslim', how Islam is clearly worse than any other religion, and that's why you hate and fear Islam and muslims, then that most certainly *would* be Islamophbic.
It'd be like taking the example of the Lords Resistance Army, a Christian militia in Uganda who are fighting to form a state built on the Old Testament ten commandants, and who have committed some terrible atrocities in the course of that fight - rape, cutting the ears and lips of children according, massacres, so that their actions were 'terrorism of the worst kind anywhere in the world', according to a senior U.N. official) - and arguing that they're typical of Christians and Christiaity, and that the religion is an inherently 'violent', 'backwards', 'child killing', 'woman raping' one that has no place in 'civilised Europe'.
Or like taking the example of former Sephardi chief rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, who has said that, according to 'Jewish war ethics', the Israeli military would be justified in killing 'a million' Arabs in response to rocket fire from Gaza, or the example of IDF Chief Rabbi Avichai Ronski who says women shouldn't be allowed in the armed forces, and then arguing that Judaism is an inherently 'genocidal', 'violent' and 'sexist' religion, and that Judaism and jews have no place in 'civilised Europe'.
It'd be completely stupid, irrational and prejudiced in all three cases.
