Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Islamophobiaphobia

That dread epithet: "Islamophobic!" It seems nearly every measure is taken to avoid it. Even discussing the obvious, such as "Perhaps Nidal Hasan did what he did because of his Islamic convictions" can land a label of libel for the good-willed.

But, praise God, people are finally catching onto this disease, this politically correctitis leading to paralysis by fear and ultimately terminal niceness. According to Dorothy Rabinowitz, author of an opinion article on the Wall Street Journal:

What is hard to ignore, now, is the growing derangement on all matters involving terrorism and Muslim sensitivities. Its chief symptoms: a palpitating fear of discomfiting facts and a willingness to discard those facts and embrace the richest possible variety of ludicrous theories as to the motives behind an act of Islamic terrorism. All this we have seen before but never in such naked form. The days following the Fort Hood rampage have told us more than we want to know, perhaps, about the depth and reach of this epidemic.

This article is an excellent read. Highly suggested. And, in order to further battle the incidence ratio of this disease, I would like to fully quote Imam Aulaqi, the man who presided over the burial of Major Hasan's mother and who seemingly influenced his theology:

Nidal Hasan is a hero ... Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.

The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former.

The Muslim organisations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal's operation ... The inconsistency of being a Muslim today and living in America and the west in general reveals the wisdom behind the opinions that call for migration from the west. It is becoming more and more difficult to hold on to Islam in an environment that is becoming more hostile towards Muslims.

In light of Major Hasan's use of Allah's name as a battle cry, his inclinations against the US military's involvement abroad, and his clear association with pro-terrorist imams, I'm calling this what it is: Violence in the name of Islam, based off of Islamic doctrine. Take that, Islamophobiaphobia.

14 comments:

The Fat Man said...

David WOOD, the ReveloutionMuslim crew gathers outside the 96 street mosq after Friday Prayers. Well thats what CNN just reported.

The Fat Man said...

I still think these guys are FBI, or Mossad agent provacters. There a lighting rod to the true muslims.

ubiquitouserendipity said...

for the veterans:

The Price of Freedom

dedicated to my brother and sister veterans, and the staff of the va hospital in sheridan, wyoming

The price of freedom is evident here
It glistens bright in each shed tear
It shouts its glory in nightmare screams
In ravaged lives and shattered dreams

Yet each of us would proudly stand
As brothers in arms and sacrifice again
For love of country, family and home
We'd give our all, or part, or some

We've all lost friends, buddies and brothers
And left broken hearts and grieving mothers
Now as we stand and struggle to mend
For many the pain can not ever end

Veterans we are, and together we stand
Shoulder to shoulder, ready to lend a hand
We know each other's story because we share
The love of country and the strength to care

And a grateful nation provides for such
A desperately needed loving touch
So in this one man's humble way
"I'm proud to be an American," is all I can say.

© Copyright 2004 JDCII

Stand For the Veterans

dedicated to all combat vets, and especially D. Eugene Fletcher

Ladies and gentlemen,
please stand for a moment
And in that moment
please remember
that real blood has drained
the vitality from the youth
of this nation

Too many times in our history!

Yet always, we
have stepped forward
with great dignity
and bravery unmatched
to offer our lifes blood
for your rights

to speak, pray, worship, assemble, travel, work, play, love, vote, read, write, smile in public, acutally think, and most importantly, dissent

Many, willingly on the first line of defense
became the last in their line of descent
these never to know the joy of their childs smile

The liberty and security
which epitomizes this nations greatness
is bought with the blood of the young,
and the sanity of some,
warped by the warriors mentality
to never again fit into their
rightful place in society

So that you might!

These would not have survived
the field of battle
without developing the warriors mind
and find no place
in our society to apply
what they so willingly embraced
Pickles
which can never again be cucumbers

So yes, please stand
and honor our dead

But,
you the comfortable
when you see that man with the thousand yard stare in the twenty
f
o
o
t
Room
you stand, and offer
your heart,
your hand,
your seat

Talk is cheap
The words thank you
are as meaningful as
Im sorry
to the parents of a soldier
lost in the dignity
of the battle for
your freedom

The very life blood of the youth
of this nation is what makes
this nation great

So you, stand!
bow your heads,
and see
the rivers of blood,
the oceans of tears,
and hear the
death cries of the young,
which has bought you this
very
freedom to stand.

© Copyright 2003 JDCII

to the families and loved ones of those lost to the despicable hand of the mohammedan coward (a redundancy) in texas, our prayers and hearts are with you. we will not ever forget.

islamoleery, not islamophobic.

aussie christian said...

Seeing as Cair and the imam's all think its become untenable to be a muslim in america and other countries because of hostility, my suggestion to you good muslims is:

Go to your nearest international airport, purchase a one way ticket to an islamic country, board said flight, land, tear up your forign passport and stay in islamic country. problem solved.

Cause if you dont like where you live, why stay??

Peace and Love

Abdullah said...

David Wood and Nabil Qureishi,

If you think that Islamaphobia does not exist, or is a misnomer - we challenge you to a debate on this next year. Let's see if your political philosophy is better than your theology.

Secondly, we are debating whether the Islamification of western countries is a reality or is a pure myth. Our first event is on 10th December 2009 (www.thedebateinitiative.com). I challenge yourselves to hold a similar event in the US (I already have contacts with the Stop the Islamification of America group, if you want to do a joint venture).

Lets see if you guys can prove your wild sweeping statements in the realm of politics and current affairs.

minoria said...

Hello Abdullah:

I am glad you read us.Listen,this thing concerning ISLAMOPHOBIA is not wrong.You are confusing two DIFFERENT words:ISLAM and MUSLIM.

ISLAM is merely a set of ideas,religious ideas about a book and a man.

MUSLIM is one who believes in it.

So if I beat up a Muslim for being a believer it is a hate crime,criminal.But if (like Ayan Hirsi Ali,Robert Spencer,Ali Sina,etc)criticize ISLAM and its beliefs about Mohammed and the Koran,or ISLAMOPHOBIA,as Muslims call it,then there is nothing wrong,it is a VERBAL disagreement.Freedom of speech.

CONFUSING THE TWO

To beat up a Muslim for being one would be MUSLIMOPHOBIA,since a Muslim is a person,not ideas.But it can NOT be ISLAMOPHOBIA since Islam is NOT a person of flesh and blood.

I hope you see the logic of it all and convince the Muslims in your oganization to drop the word Islamophobia.

minoria said...

To Abdullah again:

I certainly see ISLAMIFICATION in Europe in a certain sense.Abdullah,you do agree it is factual that in MUSLIM countries criticism of Islam is PUNISHED,correct?There are laws against BLASPHEMY of Islam,correct?
Even in TURKEY,supposedly secular,you can go to jail for 1 1/2 years.

SELF-CENSORSHIP

Now in the West many oganizations and people avoid criticism of Islam(but they criticize eveything else)because they know they could get KILLED.

EXAMPLES:

The case of VanGogh,of the Danish newspaper people,of Ayan Hirsi Ali,Magdi Allam,etc.PUNISHMENT for CRITICISM of Islam is not legal in the West but many Muslims are willing to take the law into their hands and punish those who do.That is why the situation is SIMILAR to the Muslim countries...it is ISLAMIFICATION.

EVEN IN THE US

A while ago a university professor wrote a book about the Danish cartoons and he wanted to include them in his book...natural.Yet the university press refused saying they would have BLOOD on their HANDS if they did.Muslims would kill non-Muslims for it.That is ISLAMIFICATION.

A QUESTION

One question,do you agree to the statement:"I am 100% to the right of all to criticize any belief system like Christianity,Hinduism,Islam,etc ANYWHERE,even in Muslim lands,and NOT be punished for it,since it is a human right?"

So far I have not found a single Muslim who would say yes,only silence.It is like saying:"Are you against racism?"...and you get silence.

Abdullah said...

Hi Minoria,

You said:

“I certainly see ISLAMIFICATION in Europe in a certain sense.” - minoria

In what sense Minoria? In the sense that the European countries are allowing Muslims to live according to their own beliefs? Or where non-Muslims are being forced to live according to Islamic belief? If the case is the former, which I believe it to be, then what is the problem with that? Should everyone in society conform to one culture? Surely Liberty and Freedom will cease to exist, when people are told to conform to one set of cultural and social expectations, wouldn’t you agree?

Lastly, have we heard of any incident where Muslims have campaigned politically, or petitioned a Western court, for the law within any European (or the US) state to be changed so that non-Muslims must stop drinking alcohol, give up pork and end fornication? The answer is NO. Every example that David Wood has brought, has been where Muslims want to govern themselves by their own beliefs. The funny thing is, the Christian Right in both the U.S. and Europe have no been so obliging – they actively campaign for the state to be based upon biblical injunctions. 10% of Evangelicals in the U.S. want to abolish freedom and democracy and in it’s place, establish a theonomy. Considering how many evangelicals there are in the U.S., that is quite a sizable population who are trying to undermine the U.S. system in favour of their alternative political agenda.

The question still remains, will David Wood take up the challenge for a political debate on his allegations?

“Abdullah, you do agree it is factual that in MUSLIM countries criticism of Islam is PUNISHED,correct? There are laws against BLASPHEMY of Islam, correct? Even in TURKEY, supposedly secular, you can go to jail for 1 1/2 years.” - minoria

Blasphemy laws do exist in Muslim countries, but they also exist in Christian political thought too – Aquinas, Martin Luther and John Calvin all sanctioned the death penalty for blasphemy. The belief that the state laws ordained in the OT are not to be used anymore is a recent invention of some Christians who have submitted to Secularism and Liberalism. Remember, that Paul was an advocate against Homosexuality for example – and aggregated homosexuals into the same category of murderers and rapists (e.g. 1 Timothy 1:8-11), which means that not only should the law prohibit it, but it potentially merits the death penalty. Historically, the death penalty for sodomy has been the strongest and most predominant Christian opinion for 1,500 years (before the advent of Secularism).

Furthermore, Muslims countries are bad examples to use. In Jordan blasphemy against the Prophet of Islam will get you 5 months max in prison, whereas insulting the Ruler will get you 3 years! (If it is an Islamic state, why the disparity?) Turkey is secular, and insulting Mustapha Kemal will get you a longer prison sentence, then for blasphemy. Furthermore, you’d be surprised just how many non-Muslim countries have blasphemy laws (dating back to the Christian dominant eras), here’s a small list:

Australia
Austria
Canada
Denmark
Finland
Germany
Greece
India (but under the heading ‘Hate Crime’)
Ireland
Israel
Malta
Netherlands
New Zealand
United Kingdom
United States of America (oh yes! Blasphemy is forbidden under law in: Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Wyoming – although prosecution is not actively enforced).

The following countries have a crime named as ‘religious insult’:

Andorra, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Switzerland and Ukraine.

It would seem that Blasphemy law is not just the monopoly of the Middle East.

Abdullah said...

Part 2-

“Now in the West many oganizations and people avoid criticism of Islam(but they criticize eveything else)because they know they could get KILLED.” - minoria

I wish that was true (not the ‘killed’ part though), but the real reality is, there is SO MUCH criticism on Islam. In fact, David Wood is just one of a million (instead of one in a million). But Liberals do not use the word ‘ISLAM’, instead they use the word ‘Sharia’. For example, when the Arch Bishop of Canterbury suggested that an (voluntary-based) recognition of Sharia could be established in civil disputes (in the same manner as the Jewish community has), the Liberal Intelligensia went berserk!! Every Newspaper, Media organisation and Secular/Liberal influential was denouncing him! You see, Liberals don’t care about the spiritual aspect of Islam, thus they do not criticise it – rather they criticise the Legal aspects of Islam. In essence, they want to do to Islam what they did (rather successfully) to Christianity, and encourage an antinomian trend in Muslims. David Wood is actually a campaigner against the Liberal project, because he wants Muslims do retain a concept of following the full extent of the Sharia (albeit a twisted and warped Evangelical perspective of it).

My argument to David is: If you want to end falsehood and campaign for Christ, why encourage who you perceive to be following part of a falsehood, to fully embrace this falsehood? Aren’t you strengthening (what you perceive as) falsehood by your actions?

Lastly, Europe is fighting against Muslims who believe in Sharia (to the full extent) by calling them ‘extremists’ and ‘fundamentalists’ (but I guess you Evangelical Christians would find those terms, highly familiar).

“The case of VanGogh,of the Danish newspaper people,of Ayan Hirsi Ali,Magdi Allam,etc.PUNISHMENT for CRITICISM of Islam is not legal in the West” - minoria

Well actually it is (see above), but traditionally, Blasphemy laws have been used to protect Christianity in the West. What is happening now, is not Islamification, but rather EQUALISATION. In Liberal theory, Islam (in the form of a spiritual faith) should take an equal pedestal to Christianity. If you believe that is not possible, you might as well believe that Jews also must follow everything in the Talmud and Torah – which (as the Nazi’s has said) consists of a considerably bad view towards gentiles, blasphemers, polytheists etc etc (not to mention Jesus and Christians!).

Abdullah said...

Part 3

“but many Muslims are willing to take the law into their hands and punish those who do. That is why the situation is SIMILAR to the Muslim countries...it is ISLAMIFICATION.” – minoria

Well if that means Islamification, when people take the law into their own hands and kill people in the name of their religion – what do you call this:

On September 22, 2000, a 55-year-old man named Ronald E. Gay, angry for being teased about his last name, entered the Back Street Café in Roanoke, Virginia, a gathering place for lesbians and gays just a few miles from Lynchburg. Confident that God's Word supported his tragic plan of action, Mr. Gay shouted, "I am a Christian soldier, working for my Lord." Claiming that "Jesus does not want these people in his heaven," he shot seven innocent gay and lesbian people. One man, Danny Overstreet, died instantly. Others still suffer from their physical and psychological wounds.

Matson and Mowder
In July 1999, Matthew Williams and his brother, Tyler, murdered a gay couple, Gary Matson and Winfield Mowder, in their home near Sacramento, California. Speaking to his mother from the Shasta County jail, Matthew explained his actions in this way: "I had to obey God's law rather than man's law," he said. "I didn't want to do this. I felt I was supposed to. I have followed a higher law... I just plan to defend myself from the Scriptures."

After Matthew Shepard was killed in 1998, a pastor in North Carolina published an open letter regarding the trial of Aaron McKinney that read: "Gays are under the death penalty. His blood is guilty before God (Lev. 20:13). If a person kills a gay, the gay's blood is upon the gay and not upon the hands of the person doing the killing. The acts of gays are so abominable to God. His Word is there and we can't change it."

I guess this must be CHRISTIANISATION by the same token.

“A QUESTION

One question,do you agree to the statement:"I am 100% to the right of all to criticize any belief system like Christianity, Hinduism, Islam etc ANYWHERE,even in Muslim lands,and NOT be punished for it, since it is a human right?" – minoria

You only believe it is a human right, because Secular Liberalism says so. One could argue that God has rights too, could they not? But I shall not dwell on the Political philosophy of the contemporary Western world. Ibn quraysh (a jewish scholar of Al Andalusi) and St John of Damascus, both wrote books attacking Islam from the perspective of their own beliefs. Both books were judged to be of purely intellectual purposes, and not political (like inciting people to violence against Muslims or Islam – unlike Asma bint Safwan, which Nabeel Qureishi and David Wood unwittingly used against Yahya and Abdullah in debate – and got caught out so bad, they had to admit their error – much to the amusement of the audience). Islam is not against Intellectual criticism, it is against gratuitous insult, the incitement of hatred, and violence against itself. The Quran says: “Do not insult their gods, lest they insult your God in their ignorance” – we hold by that universal standard. I’d like to see the Bible come up with that kind of respect for other beliefs, it views as falsehood!

“So far I have not found a single Muslim who would say yes,only silence.It is like saying:"Are you against racism?"...and you get silence.” – minoria

Why not ask the Muslim Debate Initiative (and every single Muslim who has agreed to have their faith debated by others), if memory serves me correctly, Nabeel Qureishi insulted the Prophet Muhammed (saaw) on his first debate with Paul Williams (right after he spoke about not wanting to, for not wanting to offend his mother’s sensibilities..hmmm what happened there?), and the MDI allowed him to, and let him appear on subsequent debates with them! Does this appear to be censorship?..Yeah, didn’t think so either.

I hope your found my complete response, satisfactory

Abdullah

Nabeel Qureshi said...

Abdullah-

When did I say Islamophobia wasn't real? Some people are that way, and it's a shame.

But what's really far more worrisome is the Islamophobiaphobia, where our nation is gripped with a fear of offending Muslims. That's far more widespread.

I hope you can better understand my position now. Cheers,
-Nabeel

Ilena said...

"In what sense Minoria? In the sense that the European countries are allowing Muslims to live according to their own beliefs? Or where non-Muslims are being forced to live according to Islamic belief? If the case is the former, which I believe it to be, then what is the problem with that? Should everyone in society conform to one culture? Surely Liberty and Freedom will cease to exist, when people are told to conform to one set of cultural and social expectations, wouldn’t you agree?"

OK. why then muslim countries dont allow us kuffars do live according to our beliefs? we despise sharia and LOVE democracy. somehow i know that u simply dont care abt it.

"You only believe it is a human right, because Secular Liberalism says so. One could argue that God has rights too, could they not? "

LOL only bc secular liberalism says so.. hmm i dont think so. well, u even cannot prove that god exists and now u wanna have some rights for some1 whom many ppl consider some imaginary being... interesting. sounds the same as if i said that santa claus has his rights too. i wonder how many ppl would take this statement seriously.

"The Quran says: “Do not insult their gods, lest they insult your God in their ignorance” – we hold by that universal standard. I’d like to see the Bible come up with that kind of respect for other beliefs, it views as falsehood!"

LOL quran and respect. abdullah , did u miss those lines where allah insults us and jews (oops pigs and apes and stuff like that) bc of our beliefs.. dont u think that one has to earn respect?! i do. even when it comes to god. and i read quran and i found insults from allah on account of us and jews and the rest of the non-muslim crew. i still fail to realise why should i have respect 4 this guy.

minoria said...

Hello Abdullah;

Interesting reply.I am against punishment for blasphemy because as Ilena has said in essence we are not 100% sure God exists.Rom 2:14-15 has Paul saying the Law,in effect the Golden Rule,can be found out without supernatural aid.

That is God's law.Now do to others as you would have them do to you means that.

If you want to speak against something then you should let another do likewise.So blasphemy or religious insult laws are not necessary.

AGAIN ABOUT DANIELA SANTANCHE

One part caught my attention when you said "Islam is not against intellectual criticism,only gratuitous insult."

She is an Italian feminist who called Mohammed a pedophile because of the Aysha affair.I do not see it as an insult because she used the technical educated word for it.And because the historical evidence is in favor,then it is a valid intellectual criticism.

GRATUITOUS INSULT

It would be if she had said Moh. was f.. bastard who f.. a little girl.But to take a person to court for using the technical word,and when the evidence is in favor is not convincing.

I have been participating in the last 3 or 4 days in Paul Williams blog,the one of Blogging Theology,the one involved in the Muslim Debate Initiative.In the article about the 10 worst verses of the Bible by Ship of Fools,which Paul Williams copied and which is a Christian website,liberal.

I have received quite some insults from one called Ibn and another called Maz-something.But it doesn't matter because they brought up some new themes also and now I am answering those.On top of that Paul Williams praises Ship of Fools are honest Christians but he also apparently approves of death for apostates,like his debate colleague BASSAM ZAWADI.Paul Williams does not see the contradiction that the same liberal Christian he praises would condemn in the harshest terms on his view of death for apostates.That is to say BOTH groups liberal and evangelical are united in freedom of religion.THAT is why where we have common ground.NO liberal Christian would approve of Sharia law either.

Fernando said...

Abdullah saide: «I’d like to see the Bible come up with that kind of respect for other beliefs»...

whell... thats the measure off your knowledge (or ignorance) off the Bible...

whate aboutte this?: «nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hat spoken it. For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever»...

hummmmm...