When ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) started beheading captives and destroying historical monuments, people all over the world were appalled by their barbarity. Muslims were especially dismayed, as such acts by their brethren reflected poorly on them, and their religion.
Some spoke out stridently against the inhumanity of ISIS, while others chose to keep quiet, lest they draw unnecessary attention to themselves. A select few, though, became apologists whose mission it was to dispel any notion that ISIS was Islamic in any way.
Didier François was claimed to have said that ISIS didn't even have the Quran in response to the question of whether ISIS was Islamic. That's why it's being shared as "evidence" that ISIS isn't Islamic, hinting that it was formed by those who wish to make Islam look bad.
That's quite a startling claim, isn't it? How can an organisation that bases its authority and laws on Islam not even have the Quran? How plausible is that? Let's find out what the truth is.
Claim #1 : Didier François was held hostage by ISIS for a year.
Verdict : False. He was held hostage for 10 months.
On the 3rd of February 2015, CNN's Christiane Amanpour interviewed Didier François about his experience as an ISIS hostage. You can view the 13+ minute video here.
At around 10:45, Christiane asked Didier if any of the British or French jihadists ever talked "about their background, about why they were there". Didier replied.
"There was never really discussion about texts or… it was not a religious discussion. It was a political discussion. It was more hammering what they were believing than teaching us about the Quran. Because it has nothing to do with the Quran.
As Didier himself pointed out at 10:55 of the interview, his English "was not that good". What he really meant was his ISIS captors refused to lend the hostages anything, not even the Quran.
Claim #2 : Didier François was asked, "Is ISIS Islamic?".
Verdict : False. Christiane asked him if the British or French jihadists ever talked "about their background, about why they were there".
Claim #3 : Didier François said, "They didn't even have the Quran".
Verdict :True, but taken out of context. Didier did say, "They didn't even have the Quran" but he meant that his ISIS captors refused to lend them the Quran, not that they didn't have the Quran at all.
So there you go – all three claims are false. Yes, even the third point was false, because it was a comment that was intentionally taken out of context.
Muslims need to speak out against ISIS barbarity, but they do not need to be ashamed of what ISIS has done.
They didn't commit murder unarmed men and women. ISIS did.
They didn't hang or behead civilians. ISIS did.
They didn't destroy historical sites. ISIS did.
Would you blame all Christians for what the Crusaders did in the past? Would you blame all Christians for what the Westboro Baptists say or do?
Of course, not. So why should all Muslims be blamed for the crimes (as heinous as they may be) of their fellow Muslims?
That said, Muslim apologists must accept the FACT that ISIS is Islamic. It is an organisation that is based on Islamic principles and laws. Sure, one may argue that it is merely their interpretation, but that doesn't negate the Islamic origin and purpose of ISIS.
ISIS was established by Muslims to form a Caliphate, period. You cannot and should not lie about ISIS being established by the Israelis, the Mossad, the Americans, the British, the green lizard aliens or Kim Kardashian, just so you won't feel guilty or embarrassed.
As I pointed out above, other Muslims do not have to feel ashamed about ISIS being an Islamic organisation. However, it is wrong and actually immoral for Muslim apologists to tell lies to cover up this inconvenient fact.
This poster was originally posted by the Revert To Islam Facebook group, which is an Islamic evangelism group. There is nothing wrong in evangelising their religion, but I would like to point out lying is a SIN in Islam.
Islamic apologist groups like Revert To Islam would do well to remember them.