Evidently, An Event occurred over at Ace of Spades HQ over virulent anti-Islamic sentiment.
Now, let me make it clear that I am no fan of Islam. Indeed, I find a number of bloggers I admire very much to be way too soft on the issue. But I cannot deny the reality that not all Muslims are the same. There are very many Muslims who love America, who are tolerant, and who are have not a violent bone in their selves. There are many who are otherwise.
While I, and others, may carry on detailed and convoluted discussions as to what “real” Islam is and as to what Islam actually teaches, the fact remains that despite the results of such a debate, Muslims remain varied and with substantial plurality amongst themselves. (And this greatly annoys extremists.)
If someone hates on Muslims, they are hating on Muslims who are quite decidedly non-violent, such as the Nizari and Bohra Ismailis. Or the Lahori and Qadiani Ahmadis. (Indeed, the Ahmadis have been excommunicated by Muslim authorities partly because of their rejection of jihad.) There are even a number of high-profile historical contextualists, such as Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and Amin Ahsan Islahi and Hamiduddin Farahi all of Pakistan, who categorically reject the relevance of violent jihad.
Indeed, the case may be made that Muslims are ferociously debating jihad among themselves, which explains the desperation and fanaticism of the mujahidun (those who wage jihad): they have enemies from within Islam. The debate continues, believe it or not, and the modernists’ message is being spread.
My point is that it benefits no one when we categorically hate on Muslims, when we engage in Muslimehess. There is a difference between hating ideologies and hating a whole group of people. It does not behoove us to engage in the sort of blanket hatred that some of our enemies are wont to do. When we do so, we loose track of the elements among the Muslims that are, wittingly or not, on our side.