A caller, the second to last on Nov. 11th to John’s show on CFRA AM radio Ottawa mentioned a large number of issues in terms of Islam and its ambitions for global manifest destiny. There were many things in that call that anyone would understand why muslims might take issue with.
Interestingly, the only issue raised by the caller ‘James’, was the one about Islam, muslims, mosques and dogs and the general antipathy that islam has for dogs in general. The last call to the show was by a muslim trying to claim that Islam was pro dog but with nothing but unsubstantiable hearsay as evidence. The next night, nearly the entire show was about Islam and dogs.
By a coincidence, the host, John Counsell, had already booked a guest to be on the broadcast who is a PhD. in Islamic studies. He began on another matter about the nature of koran and islam’s inherent peacefulness. ‘James’ called in again to clarify some points on koran and it was interesting overall.
Many thanks to Ken at Tundra Tabloids who did a fantastic job of applying images to the audio of this radio broadcast to make it entertaining, funny and poignant at times.
Great show, but my impression (perhaps unfair) was that without James pressing Dr. Bannister on key issues, the waffle content from Dr. Bannister would have been a lot higher.
Even so, Dr. Bannister is able to say, for example,
‘The basic problem we have is that the Koran is being read through the filter of the life of Mohammed, and Mohammed ends up in political power using religion as a weapon. And whenever religion and politics get together, it goes very, badly, wrong. And it did in early Islam, and that’s left its imprint on Islam.’
And he returns to the point that the trouble with Islam is not so much the Koran, but Mohammed. And that thankfully, as he says, millions upon millions of Muslims know next to nothing about Mohammed, or about Islam in general.
Sure. So what there is to be thankful for is that those millions upon millions of Muslims are not presently following the full-on example of Mohammed. If or when these millions learn the basic facts of Mohammed’s biography, there might not be a lot of time to give thanks.
And the race is on to subtract Mohammed from Islam before the millions find out about him.
I would like to know what success Dr. Bannister has had, with the Muslims he outreaches to, persuading them to consider having their Islam without Mohammed. Even with those Muslims who are poorly informed about Mohammed. Has Dr. Bannister made a single convert to his new faith?
Barreling along the tracks, and with renewed power these days, is the speeding locomotive of authentic Islam, with its momentum of 1400 years of Islamic history, tradition, exegesis, law-making and the rest of it, as practiced by Islamic State and preached by authentic-Islam imams and, even out of range of such preaching, as it informs the lives of the billion-plus Muslims conditioned to do whatever their Muslim upbringing tells them to.
Standing on the tracks with their chins up and their hands outstretched are Dr. Bannister and a handful of friends he has who are Muslims.
English optimism has not served Dr. Bannister’s England well in the matter of authentic vs. ‘moderate’ Islam. But he presents a good deal of realism here too. I hope that is what he brings to his talk in Ottawa.
Another useful idiot spreading his poison.
Don C: My impression of the Dr. was more a function of his feeling uncertain about what he was able to say on the air. Once James pressed him he seemed eager to agree and endorsed all the points made by him.
I think your analysis is accurate but I’m not sure if he took that approach for political expedience or because he believed it.
Eeyore, Yes, I agree, he advances and certainly seconds many factual views, but listening to him again I hear someone who is either naively or over-optimistically over-welcoming of his ‘many many many’ moderate Muslim friends in Canada who just want to find a peaceful Islam blah blah blah. And we in the West neglect that Islam is very diverse blah. And look at the Sufis and the Amadiya blah.
Dr. Bannister says ‘there is a battle for the heart and soul of Islam.’ I don’t see enough evidence of real fighting from the ‘moderate’ side, whatever that is, to call it a battle. At best it’s sporadic shoving matches here and there between authentic Muslims and Muslims who are dishonest with themselves about Islam. Where is the great opposing army of Islam re-inventors? It does not exist. Does Dr. Bannister believe it is politically expedient to pretend it does? I would suggest that doing so only facilitates more self-deception all around. Shades of Daniel Pipes. ‘There is a lot of work to be done if it’s going to be a moderate Islam that wins out.’ Is that ever an understatement, if Dr. Bannister is betting on Muslims coming up any time soon with an Islam minus Mohammed.
I agree with Daniel Greenfield. Most moderate muslims are soldiers of occupation. Much like the moderate Russians in Crimea.