It seems like Islamists are everywhere nowadays. But the latest trend is intriguing because now it looks like you don’t even have to be a Muslim to be an Islamist.
It seems like Islamists (also here) are everywhere nowadays. Turn a rock and you find an Islamist underneath. But the latest trend is intriguing because now it looks like you don’t even have to be a Muslim to be an Islamist.
Kenny Baer was supposed to be knowledgeable about British politics and elections and was substituting for Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo while Josh was enjoying his honeymoon. But Kenny doesn’t sound much like an expert to me.
Word just came in that the far-far-far left, Islamist candidate George Galloway has defeated Oona King.
Gorgeous George Galloway an Islamist? How? Why? Does the word “Islamist” mean anything? Or is it reduced to a slur now?
The other culprit is a regular one, Daniel Pipes.
Is Grover Norquist an Islamist? Paul Sperry, author of the new book, Infiltration, in an interview calls Grover Norquist “an agent of influence for Islamists in Washington.” When asked by FrontPageMag.com why a Republican anti-tax lobbyist should so passionately promote Islamist causes, Sperry implied that Norquist has converted to Islam: “He’s marrying a Muslim, and when I asked Norquist if he himself has converted to Islam, he brushed the question off as too ‘personal.’” As Lawrence Auster comments on this exchange, “Clearly, if Norquist hadn’t converted to Islam, or weren’t in the process of doing so, he would simply have answered no.”
There is more circular and specious reasoning in the same blog post. According to Pipes, Norquist is an Islamist because he married a Muslim and might even secretly have converted. Also, his wife is an Islamist because she worked at an Islamist organization which was co-founded by Norquist. Thus, through his wife, Norquist is an Islamist. And on and on it goes.
I have profound and vehement political disagreements with both George Galloway and Grover Norquist. In fact, I don’t even like their political style. But come on, they are not Islamists in any useful sense of the term.
While the term “Islamist” might have some meaning among scholars, it has no information value, other than that the person using it doesn’t like the person he is accusing, in normal usage. I guess Bill Allison should be convinced now that the term [Islamist …] is […] meaningless.