Is Daniel Pipes an expert on World History? The statement that you agree with has significant subjectiveness in it. Beware of what you believe; ideas have power.There's nothing subjective about the fact that militant Islam differs from a more traditional form. It's all about knowing your enemy. As for Pipes . . . hmm, let's see, a former instructor at Univ. of Chicago and Harvard.
There's nothing subjective about the fact that militant Islam differs from a more traditional form.
--------------------------------
I'm a little lost here. Was the first seige of Vienna in 1527 the traditional form, or the new form? When Mo was first started out and slaughtered a mess of people was that the old for, or the new form?
Do you mind if I ask you why you are defending this bull shit? There must be some sort of reason in the background.
There certainly is! The concept that militant Islam is an aberrant form of Islam is extremely subjective and is an idea I do not hear any reputable Islamic scholars putting forward at this time. The only scholars that seem to be putting that idea forward are Western scholars who are acting as apologists for Islam. How Islam was practiced most likely varied from place to place; depending the measure of power which Islam controlled. If you want to believe that Islam is a basically peaceful religion that has been hijacked by Osama Bin Laden and others like him be my guest, but don't tell me there is nothing subjective about one individual's interpretation of History even if he teaches at Harvard or U of Chicago.