Islam Has Nothing To Do With Islam

Two nights ago in Philadelphia, a man later identified as Edward Archer attempted to kill a police officer in his patrol car, shooting at him thirteen times. Mr. Archer later told police that he did it for Islam, and that he had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. Mr. Archer’s mother told the media that her son was a devout Muslim, and had been for a long time.

Yet Philadelphia Mayor Jim McKenney said that Mr. Archer’s attempted murder was a simple criminal act, and had nothing to do with Islam.

Let’s try a little thought experiment here: Suppose Edward Archer had, say, set up a food bank for orphan children, and said that he did it for Islam. Would the mayor have contradicted him?

Not hardly! It’s only bad stuff that has nothing to do with Islam. All the good stuff — hey, that’s Islamic.

How can a Philly pol, who is not Muslim and knows nothing about Islamic doctrine, expect to be taken seriously when he pontificates about what is and is not Islamic?

Dr. David Wood has more to say about Edward Archer’s act of jihad in Philadelphia:

18 thoughts on “Islam Has Nothing To Do With Islam


  2. At this point I think we’ve heard that:
    – mosques have nothing to do with Islam
    – the Sunna (acts of Mohammad) have nothing to do with Islam
    – Mohammad has nothing to do with Islam
    – Islamic scripture has nothing to do with Islam
    – Muslims have nothing to do with Islam
    – sharia law has nothing to do with Islam
    – imams have nothing to do with Islam
    – jihad has nothing to do with Islam
    – caliphate has nothing to do with Islam
    – the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam.

    So yes, at this point I’m pretty sure that Islam itself has nothing to do with Islam.

    • — knives have nothing to do with Islam (they’re tableware)
      — location has nothing to do with Islam (it’s anywhere)
      — heritage has nothing to do with Islam (people convert)
      — government has nothing to do with Islam (it’s a religion)
      — speeches have nothing to do with Islam (they’re personal opinions)


      — lunch does have something to do with Islam (no porky, etc.)
      — carpets have something to do with Islam
      — airplanes have something to do with Islam (certain passengers not allowed)
      — allegiance has something to do with Islam
      — moon and star have something to do with Islam (but not in the form of space flight)
      — clothes have something to do with Islam (especially when they replace the now vanished black-robed Christian nuns)

    • But the Qu’ran and Hadith have something to do with Islam. And some of it’s passages promote killing of ‘non-believers.

      So these two books have at least SOMETHING to do with Islam; how much of each passage, depending on the reader…That’s reasonable.

      • No, we are being told that all of that stuff in the Quran and Hadith has nothing to do with Islam. Apparently, the vast majority of the text of the Quran and Hadith have nothing to do with Islam, if we are stupid enough to believe what we are told.

        I’d be more than happy to have 3/4ths of the Quran edited out, but there would seem to be little interest among Muslims in believing that most of the Islamic scripture has “nothing to do with Islam” and thus removing it.

        The most disturbing thing here is that there are so many lazy ostriches out there that politicians can keep getting away with telling such blatant lies like this.

        I don’t think it can continue forever. Information about the reality of Islamic doctrine is slowly leaking out of the Islamic bucket and soaking into even the most denialist of the non-Muslim public.

  3. The Baron asked:

    “How can a Philly pol, who is not Muslim and knows nothing about Islamic doctrine, expect to be taken seriously when he pontificates about what is and is not Islamic?”

    Before becoming mayor, on July 17, 2015, a Muslim holiday, Kenney signed ‘Pledge to Combat Bigotry’ at Germantown Ave. mosque

    WashingtonFreeBeacon: White House Launches ‘Task Force’ To Combat ‘Violent Extremism’ Omits Reference To Muslim Terrorism, dated January 8, 2016

    Official launch of thought police – (includes online discussions) ?
    Consider Countering Violent Extremism Task Force
    Release Date: January 8, 2016

    “The federal government’s top priority is protecting the American people from all forms of violent extremism,” said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch. “

    This from the same character who earlier stated:

    “The attorney general stated that her “fear” of the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric… is my greatest fear.”

    – via DailyCaller: 1:20 AM 12/07/2015

    Consider familiarizing oneself with this 13 minute video discussing such ludicrous terminology as revealed by Stephen Coughlin Moment: The “Countering Violent Extremism” Deception
    The CVE, “Counter Violent Extremism”, was set up at the DHS with the assistance of the Muslim Brotherhood. Where we have the DHS, FBI or State Dept. engaged with the Muslim Brotherhood in CVE initiatives, these initiatives are

    “In no way, shape, or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on that screen. That is abhorrent, it’s just terrible and it does not represent the religion in any way, shape, or form in any of its teachings”.

    – Philadelphia Mayor Jim McKenney, DOUBLEPLUSGOOD DUCKSPEAKER

  5. Watching the video I noticed that the Philadelphia mayor pronounced Muslim (Muzzlum or Muzzlim as most of us pronounce it) as “moosslum”. This is a new trend among English speaking politicos. They pronounce as such because they believe that this is how an authentic Muslim pronounces the word and they will bend over backwards to appease Muslims, validating themselves in the eyes of Muslims by pronouncing the word as they believe Muslims do, not as Americans do. The road to dhimmitude is traversed in small steps.

    • Yes, that’s exactly right. And it’s an argument in favor of saying “Moslem” or “Mohammedan” (the latter is the one used by Churchill, if I recall correctly).

      • ‘Musslim’ sounds less threatening than ‘Muzlim’. Note also ‘Isslam’ as opposed to ‘Izlam’.

    • Talking head media types are always trying to redefine how we use the language. I remember fifteen or twenty years ago when the harass had to be pronounced as ‘harris’; I guess the talking heads didn’t want to utter a syllable that sounded like ass. I think that one went away.

      Currently the word purposely has been almost completely replaced with purposefully; it’s not a distinction without a difference and each of these words has a place.

      Another trend is inappropriately pronouncing words beginning with the letter h as if the h were silent; huge becomes ‘uge’, for instance. I also notice lately people falling all over themselves to make sure they are heard to pronounce the ‘t’ in often. My Webster’s indicates that both ways of pronouncing the word are acceptable, however the pronunciation with a silent t is listed first and so I would presume is preferred.

      I was once lectured by someone that language is fluid and words are always changing in meaning and don’t have rigid definitions. My reply was, yes they do. Just what do you call the entries in a dictionary? Definitions. I went on in my reply to say that such an argument, if successful, would permit one to run off at the mouth saying anything and then to decide to define what their words meant after the fact. I call b.s. on this notion, well chosen words should speak for themselves. This kind of argument usually comes from someone who has just had it pointed out that enormity doesn’t describe something that is enormous, or that irregardless isn’t even a proper word – one should simply use ‘regardless’ or if it’s necessary to use ten dollar words irrespective is a valid choice.

      Mouth breathers will always mangle our language. It’s great fun listening to news casters when they go off-script. Vernacular is one thing, not knowing grammar is another. Can we see a show of hands, who has a Harbrace College Handbook on their shelf?

      • Language is fluid? Not as fluid as the writers of Marxist Newspeak at the Ministry of Truth would like it to be.

        • I also notice there is somewhat of a trend – not sure if it a determined attempt to create Orwellian Newspeak – to distribute the stress equally within some multi-syllabic words. Often is one of those words, in which both syllables are stressed equally. As with Newspeak, it creates speech that is ugly and jarring. They assault one’s ear-drum with sounds that are staccato and monotonous. Some may find their utterance a sign of elegance and education, but I find it revolting.

  6. It was a heroic act, not a cowardly act.
    Killing police is not criminal, it is a defense of the community.
    Police is not there to help people they, are there to attack people.
    The lie by this police officer proves is, an honest man does not need to lie.

    If Muslims are shooting police, than they are loyal citizens, loyal to the community.
    In 1993, a hundred Sabbath keeping Christians where murdered by the police in WACO Texas.

    The history of police is proofing my points very well.
    Police was set up as the secular arm of the Holy Inquisition in Spain, and first police would mainly murder Jews, but also Christians that do not support the lies of Rome. Initially the where named Hermandad.

    South Africa tried to defend it self against terrorism using police.
    Police lost, as they always did and always will, because propaganda is the doctrine of police. Police was taken over by the terrorists in South Africa. Today South African police is all black, and their job is to cover up racist torture and murders of white people.

    Just visiting here for the first time, after hearing an interview with Barry Chamish, where a man in Israel first explains how dangerous Israel is, while Palestinians use cluster bombs with rat poison in their rockets to attack villages in Israel. Later than this man said, he moved from Western Asia to Israel, because it is safer there for his family. His argument for safety was, that Jews will be persecuted in “Europe”.

    I suppose we have to deal with “secularism” here.
    “Europe” is is a Greek Goddess. Accepting that name for countries in Western Asia, it is conducting paganism. Idolatry. Europe is an Idol. The Torah and the prophets clearly warned about the worship of Idols, and people, whether Jews or not, that don’t defend against “Europe” as an idol, are idolaters.

    The worship of police is the same.
    If a Muslim attacks this idol of police, than he is doing a holy thing.
    Attacking 13 police officers is VERY brave.
    The police at the beginning f the video calls is a cowardly act, he is lying.
    Liars are supported by the secularists.
    The Hashem is not feared, no, the idols are the things the secularist fears.

    Just an opinion here, that you may want to consider.
    If there would be no religious Jews in Israel, Israel would have lost the wars they had, all Jews would already have been killed. That is the viewpoint of religious Jews. And I share that view, although I am not a Jew myself.

  7. If a person SAYS he is doing something in the name of ‘whatever’ belief, you have to take their word for it-don’t you? In less it can be proven there was another motive.

    ALL ideologies are a matter of personal interpretation of some others writings.Being no verifiable facts in religion of political beliefs.

    But what could that be? The usual motives for murder are love or money; but you can rule that out here.

  8. Real Islam, as prescribed in the Quran and Hadith is what is practised by the Islamic state. Indeed, the whole raison d’etre of the IS is to implement Islam.

    Its founder has a Ph.D. in Islamic studies, is a native arabic speak who can read the Kuran and Hadith in original, and indeed comes from a clan that has descended from Mohammed’s (and is therefore held in high esteem for their understanding of Islam).

    The truth is that IS = Islam. And anyone who doubts this can read their Dabiq magazine: they give all the Kuranic/Hadithic suras/hadiths that apply to any of their actions. They take great care to follow Islam.

    I’d rather believe them than Obama, Blair, Mayor of Philly, Clinton etc. who probably don’t even know the names of the sahih Hadiths. It is amazing how someone so ignorant about Islam can tell the world what it is and is not. It is like me speaking about the American constitution knowing almost nothing about it (I’m Indian Hindu, and live in India, I visit America for business, but know very little about the constitution etc. since I don’t need to). Can any of these fellows even tell us how many suras are in the Kuran and how they are arranged? They would not pass an Islam 101 class. Their bluff needs to be called.

    • These people cannot be believed, and it is not because of their lack of knowledge. Even if they had complete knowledge of Islam, still you could not trust what they say. The problem is not due to lack of knowledge.

      The problem is in how they see the world. They see the world as made up in whatever way each individual perceives it to be. The world does not exist outside of the mind. Consequently, they can make it up in whatever they want. If they, for political reasons, believe or want to believe a Mohammedan who claims to be a follower of Mohammed is not a Mohammedan, they feel they are correct to do so. They will say that race is a social construct; it does not really exist. They will say there is no Truth; it is all relative. They will say there is no difference between men and women; a man can be a woman if he so desires, and vice versa. They believe that marriage is between two persons, not between a man and a woman. In the end, they believe whatever they want to believe, regardless of reality. There is no reality outside of the mind. They make it up as they go.

  9. When the mayor says, “That is abhorrent, it’s just terrible and it does not represent the religion in any way, shape, or form in any of its teachings”, what does he mean? What is he referring to with the word “That?” What is abhorrent and terrible? Is he referring to the evil deed that the Mohammedan displayed on the TV screen? Or is he referring to the thought held by some that Islam may have something to do with the deed the criminal did? That is the kind of double-speak the Party members perform.

Comments are closed.