ISIL (Islamic State) flag ‘nothing to do with ISIL (Islamic State)’

The mainstream media are clear: this is an ISIL flag

The mainstream media seem to be pretty clear: this is an ISIL flag

And anyone who says otherwise will be beheaded by the Religion of Peace.

The flag goes back to the 7th century and, despite the fact that non-Muslims would not have even been aware of its existence until ISIL (Islamic State) brought it to the world’s attention about six months ago, it’s pure coincidence that a Liverpool mosque decides to auction one right now, at the time when the flag has become synonymous with barbaric violence as the backdrop to countless ISIL (Islamic State) photos and video including beheadings of American journalists.

And while we are on the subject of asserting our superiority over the infidels, we also object to the filthy kafir’s grammatically incorrect use of an Arabic word…

This isn’t a joke by the way. The bullshit meter just went off the scale. Here’s the pompous press release by the religion of the perpetually offended, which, as you would expect,

(a) disgracefully fails to condemn the vicious and medieval acts of violence which are carried out under that flag, and

(b) fails to acknowledge that it may have been just a teensy-weensy insensitive to the thousands of people murdered by ISIL over the past six months to be auctioning a flag, in an Australian mosque, which (while technically not an ISIL flag) is in fact, really, er, an ISIL flag:

The Daily Telegraph newspaper this morning accused the Markaz Imam Ahmad (MIA) in Liverpool of supporting terrorism by auctioning a “jihadist” flag. This accusation is unfounded and defamatory. The News Corporation paper is engaging in the worst kind of sensationalism as part of a scare campaign to sell papers.

The black and white flag being referred to is an important symbol in Islam which contains the first pillar of the Muslim creed, the testimony of faith (shahaadah) that “there is no god except God and Muhammad is His Messenger”; and the seal of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him). This flag has been in existence for more than a thousand years, long before any terrorist organisation misappropriated it for its own political goals.

In addition, the newspaper’s use of the term “jihadist” is false and inappropriate. The unusual combination of an Arabic word with an English suffix negatively stereotypes the noble Islamic concept of striving for what is better. The frequent misuse of this term by sensationalist media only serves to promote hatred of Muslims and Islam.

Er, no, actually. The thing that ‘promotes hatred of Muslims and Islam’ is the ever present suspicion aroused by the constant reluctance by organisations like MIA to acknowledge that groups like Islamic State justify their violent ideology by reference to the Qur’an, and then issue disdainful and patronising press releases which fail to make any apology for the despicable acts carried out in the name of the religion they practise.

And just in case you haven’t got the message, it finishes with a veiled threat of further violence:

“We reject any attempts to tarnish the good reputation of our centre and pledge to stand firm against the current wave of Islamophobia. We also believe that scapegoating and fear mongering has the serious potential of radicalising disaffected youth,” said the head of MIA, Sheikh Abu Adnan.”

Wow. I don’t think there’s any point in bothering to engage this community any more.


  1. luisadownunder says:

    Ah, the poor radicalized and disaffected youth. They have now been welcomed into the warm embrace of the Islamic community….so they can join ISIL, where radicalized and disaffected youth go.
    But it has nothing to do with Islam, mind.
    No, because we strive for what is better: the radicalizing of disaffected youth so they can carry out jihad.
    And we take that seriously!


  2. Interesting to read in this ABC piece that the new UN High Commissioner for Human rights, Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein doesn’t actually appear to condemn outright, the actions of ISIS/ISIL anywhere in his speech, just describes the horrors we already know about, and warns of what may lie ahead, and says the ‘international community’ needs to focus on the “increasingly conjoined” conflict.

    I presume by “international community” he means everyone but the middle east, as is usually the case.

    Mind you, I don’t claim to have read a full transcript, so it could well be the ABC leaving out any sort of condemnation for fear of being labelled Islamophobic, even if it’s in the context of a quote, but whoever is at fault, it’s a pretty poor performance by someone, somewhere…


%d bloggers like this: