Some Sanity In An Insane World

Andrew McCarthy posted an article today at National Review Online today about the recent events in Afghanistan following the accidental burning of some Korans.

The article points out:

The facts are that the Korans were seized at a jail because jihadists imprisoned there were using them not for prayer but to communicate incendiary messages. The soldiers dispatched to burn refuse from the jail were not the officials who had seized the books, had no idea they were burning Korans, and tried desperately to retrieve the books when the situation was brought to their attention.

Mr. McCarthy also reminds us:

Also understand this: In sharia societies, non-Muslim religious articles are confiscated and destroyed every single day as a matter of policy. In Saudi Arabia, where sharia is the law of the land, where Mecca and Medina are closed to non-Muslims, government guidelines prohibit Jews and Christians from bringing Bibles, crucifixes, Stars of David, and similar artifacts emblematic of their faith into the country. When that prohibition is violated, the offending items are seized and burned or otherwise destroyed. Moreover, though Saudis deny having an official policy that bans Jews from entering the country at all, reports are rampant of travelers’ being denied visas either because they are Jewish or because their passports bear stamps indicative of prior travel to Israel.

The riots and killings that followed the burning incident were not justified. They should not be acceptable in a civilized society. Apologizing for them simply makes them appear justified. Where is the apology for the Americans killed?

The riots and killings are a part of Sharia Law. When we apologize for someone else’s bad behavior, we are honoring Sharia Law. Since Sharia Law is in direct contradiction to a free society and human rights, that is not something we actually want to do.

Mr. McCarthy concludes:

At the very least, our immigration laws should exclude entry from Muslim-majority countries unless and until those countries expressly repeal repressive sharia laws (e.g., the death penalty for apostates) and adopt American standards of non-discrimination against, tolerance of, and protection for religious minorities.

If you really want to promote freedom in Islamic countries, an immigration policy based on civil-rights reciprocity would be a lot more effective, and a lot less expensive, than dispatching tens of thousands of troops to build sharia “democracies.” It would also protect Americans from people whose countries and cultures have not prepared them for the obligations of citizenship in a free society.

Andrew McCarthy led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks.He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed US embassies in  Kenya and Tanzania. In prosecuting the case in the World Trade Center bombing, he studied closely the teachings of Islam to determine if terrorism was an aberration of the religion or an integral part of it. He concluded that the concept of jihad encouraged terrorism.

He knows what he is talking about.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tonight In Stoughton, Massachusetts

AN EVENING WITH ANDREW BOSTOM

“Understanding the Islam in Muslim Jew Hatred”

 February 14th at

7:30 PM

 Ahavath Torah Congregation

1179 Central Street

Stoughton, MA 02072

 Suggested Donation: $5

 Dr. Bostom will demonstrate Anti-Semitism in the Muslim world—from the 7th century advent of Islam, through the contemporary era—is rooted in the foundational texts of Islam itself.

 Dr. Andrew G. Bostom is the author of the highly acclaimed books The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, and The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History.

 Dr. Bostom has published numerous articles and commentaries on Islam in The New York Post, The Daily News, Washington Times, National Review Online, Pajamas Media, American Thinker, FrontPage Magazine.com, Big Peace, and other print and online publications.

 Dr. Bostom speaks on topics related to jihad, the threat of Shariah Law’s encroachment on Western societies, Islam’s treatment of non-Muslim minorities in general, and Islamic Jew-hatred in particular.

    For information email office@atorah.org

Co-sponsored by Christians and Jews United for Israel, ACT Boston, ACT Framingham, Rabbis and Ministers for Israel

Enhanced by Zemanta

Are You In Favor Of Human Rights ?

It seems an obvious question, but is it? I borrowed the title from Eric Allen Bell. It was the title of the last piece he wrote for the Daily Kos. Mr. Bell’s story is told at Front Page Magazine.

Eric Allen Bell is a writer and a filmmaker. He went to Murfreesboro, Tennessee, in 2010 to follow the story of the people of the town protesting the building of a mosque in their town. As indicated by the fact that he wrote for the Daily Kos (until he was silenced for writing articles expressing his views on Islam), Mr. Bell is not a conservative Christian. He makes clear in his article that his awakening to the truth of Islamic government had nothing to do with religion.

Mr. Bell details some of his search for the truth about Islam in his article:

Over the coming months I watched as the Muslim Brotherhood gained political power in Egypt.  I saw that cab driver’s worst fears come true as Coptic Christians were attacked by Islamic mobs.  I saw Tunisia institute Sharia, the brutal Islamic Law.  After Libya fell, the Transitional Council also instituted Islamic Law.  The nuclear armed Islamic government of Pakistan arrested and punished those who cooperated with the United States in killing Osama Bin Laden.  A woman under the Islamic government of Afghanistan faced execution for the crime of being raped.  Similar news stories emerged from Iran.  A man who typed “there is no god” as his Facebook status in Indonesia, the largest Islamic country in the world, was arrested for blasphemy.

Several Muslim men in England were arrested for handing out leaflets to Londoners demanding that homosexuals be executed by hanging for violating Islamic Law with their lifestyle.

Please read the entire article to hear to story of Mr. Bell’s change of heart toward Islamic governments. He asks the question, “Are you in favor of human rights?” to contrast the differences between freedom and life under Islam. That is the question all of us need to think about.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Arrived In My Email Today

This billboard is currently up in the Kansas City area:

I intend to complicate the message with a few basic facts.

The billboard is sponsored by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), a Muslim Brotherhood connected organization. Note the strategy—that opposition to sharia law is supposedly an infringement on the first amendment protection of religious freedom.

This is, of course, disingenuous. Is ICNA arguing that the following provisions of sharia law be protected by the first amendment?

A Muslim man beating his wife for disobedience.

Punishment, up to capital punishment, of “apostates”—those who leave Islam.

 Polygamy. (In 1879, the Supreme Court ruled that Mormon polygamy was not protected under the first amendment.)

Jihad.

Suppression of criticism of Islam or Muhammad. (This is particularly obnoxious, since the first amendment also protects freedom of speech.)

Punishment for the practice of homosexuality.

Somehow none of these practices seem to be mentioned by those encouraging Sharia Law. No one is telling Muslims that they cannot freely practice their religion. What we are telling them is that if they live in America, they should expect to live under American law. As a religion, they are not entitled to their own legal system–even in America.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

In Case You Missed The New Coming Events Link

AN EVENING WITH ANDREW BOSTOM

“Understanding the Islam in Muslim Jew Hatred”

 February 14th at

7:30 PM

 Ahavath Torah Congregation

1179 Central Street

Stoughton, MA 02072

 Suggested Donation: $5

 Dr. Bostom will demonstrate Anti-Semitism in the Muslim world—from the 7th century advent of Islam, through the contemporary era—is rooted in the foundational texts of Islam itself.

 Dr. Andrew G. Bostom is the author of the highly acclaimed books The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, and The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History.

 Dr. Bostom has published numerous articles and commentaries on Islam in The New York Post, The Daily News, Washington Times, National Review Online, Pajamas Media, American Thinker, FrontPage Magazine.com, Big Peace, and other print and online publications.

 Dr. Bostom speaks on topics related to jihad, the threat of Shariah Law’s encroachment on Western societies, Islam’s treatment of non-Muslim minorities in general, and Islamic Jew-hatred in particular.

    For information email office@atorah.org

Co-sponsored by Christians and Jews United for Israel, ACT Boston, ACT Framingham, Rabbis and Ministers for Israel

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, January 19th

On Thursday, January 19th, Dr. Mark Durie will be speaking at the Ahavath Torah Congregation – 1179 Central Street, Stoughton, MA, at 7:30 pm.
 
Dr. Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.
This lecture by an Australian scholar of Islam discusses the position of non-Muslims – Jews, Christians and others – under sharia law.
There are two stories about non-Muslims living under Islam, who Muslims call dhimmis. One is that dhimmis were the fortunate recipients of Islamic benevolence. The other is that non-Muslims had to buy their heads back each year in a legal system designed to degrade and belittle them, and to ensure their decline. The story of the dhimmis, and their centuries of subjugation under Islamic law, raises troubling questions about the spiritual trajectory of western societies, and their seemingly inexorable drift towards the psychology of surrender.
 
I have heard him speak in the past. He is interesting and informative and well worth listening to. Don’t miss this!
Enhanced by Zemanta

In Egypt Nobody Is Above The Law

No one is above the law in the new Egypt; however, we might want to take a close look at what the law says.

Today’s U.K. Telegraph reports that Naguib Sawiris, Egypt’s richest man, is to be tried for retweeting a cartoon showing Mickey Mouse with a beard and Minnie Mouse wearing a black face-veil (as worn by the Salafis).

The article reports:

The case against Mr Sawiris, owner of the Orascom business empire and the country’s most prominent Christian, was filed originally by a group of lawyers affiliated to the radical Salafi Islamist movement. Few expected it to be taken up by the prosecuting authorities.

But the Salafis have become a powerful force in the new Egypt after sweeping to second place behind the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Freedom and Justice Party in elections. They are pushing for tighter implementation if not a rewriting of Egypt’s constitution, which is supposed to be based on the principles of Sharia law.

The fact that Mr. Sawiris is actually going to be tried is a result of the “Arab Spring” in Egypt. It really doesn’t sound as if democracy and freedom are taking root.

The article quotes Mamdouh Ismail, a member of the once-banned Gamaa Islamiya, who commented that he didn’t really expect the case to actually move forward. He also stated, “This shows that after the revolution nobody is above the law.”

Frankly, it is a little disconcerting to watch that law evolve.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Total Surrender In The Name Of Peace

Andrew McCarthy posted an article in the National Review Online today based on a story published in the Hindu which states that the Obama Administration has chosen Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi to mediate negotiations between the United States and the Taliban. Even if you ignore the concept of negotiating with the Taliban, there are some serious problems with this arrangement.

These are a few of the things in Sheikh al-Qaradawi’s past that make him a less than idea moderator. In 2003, he issued a fatwa calling for the killing of American troops in Iraq. He maintains that Islam “will conquer Europe [and] will conquer America.” He urges the destruction of Israel.

The article lists some of his ideas:

Thus does Sheikh Qaradawi champion Hamas, mass-murder attacks, and suicide bombings. “They are not suicide operations,” he brays. “These are heroic martyrdom operations.” Indeed, he elaborates, “The martyr operations is [sic] the greatest of all sorts of jihad in the cause of Allah.”

…Qaradawi uses his al-Jazeera platform to preach this message to the Muslim masses. As the Middle East Media Research Institute and Robert Spencer document, in one memorable Friday “sermon” broadcast in 2009, he prayed that Allah would kill all Jews: “Oh Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers and kill them, down to the very last one.” He added that throughout history, Allah had imposed upon Jews “people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Adolph Hitler.”

There is a concept in Sharia Law called taqiyya. Loosely translated, this term means that it is acceptable to lie to an infidel in order to advance the cause of Islam. The concept is based on Quran 3:28 and 16:106 and other Islamic literature (my reference is SHARIAH, THE THREAT TO AMERICA, AN EXERCISE IN COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS, REPORT OF TEAM B II, published by the Center for Security Policy).

I reported yesterday (rightwinggranny.com) on the discussions to release some terrorist leaders from Guantanamo to Afghanistan as part of the peace discussions. What we are seeing here is the Obama Administration’s desperation to declare peace (and American troop withdrawal) in Afghanistan before the 2012 election. Unfortunately, because of the way they are going about it, all they are doing is setting up a government which includes the Taliban and will be little different from the one that gave us the events of 9/11.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why I Am Concerned About Free Speech

The thing to remember when dealing with Muslim blasphemy laws is that under Sharia Law, the charge of blasphemy has nothing to do with truth. If what has been said about the Muslim religion or its past or present leaders is negative, it can be considered blasphemy, whether it is true or not. I believe that in America some time in the near future, we will see the same standard applied to the concept of ‘hate speech’ against Islam. The case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff in Austria is an example of this happening in the European Union.

Front Page Magazine posted an interview with of Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff today. Please follow the link to read the entire article–it is fascinating. Because of her years of living in Muslim countries in the Middle East, both under Sharia Law and under secular governments, she understands totally how Muslims use ‘hate speech’ laws to curtail free speech.

In the article she explains where she is and how she got there:

What happened? A young woman, a journalist, had infiltrated two of my seminars in October and November, illegally recording my presentation, and then reported me to the Austrian authorities, who in turn began an official investigation. The charge: Hate speech.

The outpouring of criticism from official Austria was astounding. From the vice chancellor to the chief rabbi, from a high-ranking bishop to party leaders: My statements – all taken out of context – were condemned through and through. I was even compared to Bin Laden by one Muslim official. Not one of these so-called leaders bothered to ask for clarification from my side. I was to be vilified, my statements were to be condemned, for two reasons. First, I gave these seminars for the “right-wing, xenophobic” Freedom Party and second, the content of the seminars described Islam.

She continues:

Simply put, I have now been made a victimless convict. On December 20, 2011, my conviction for denigration of a legally recognized religion was upheld by the higher court.

What was the reason for this conviction, you may ask. Well, during the course of my seminars, I mentioned the choking EU directive “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia,” and in order to illustrate my point I told the audience about a conversation I had with my sister and how she believed that one should find a different word for Mohammed’s actions with Aisha. I said, “How does one name what he did if not call it pedophilia?” And this sentence got me convicted, for I am allowed by law to say that Mohammed had sex with a young girl, but I may not qualify this behavior as this is deemed “excessive” and thus denigrating. The Austrian state has created a victimless crime, and a criminal without a single victim.

The trial is now officially over. There is only one way to appeal, and that is taking the matter to the European Court for Human Rights in Strasbourg. But– this will cost a lot of money and will take a lot time (6-8 years minimum).

The law that Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff was convicted under took effect in November 2010, when all members of the European Union were required to implement the “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia”, or, more fully, the “Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008. The intent of the law was to combat racism and xenophobia. The impact of the law was to severely limit free speech.  

In the article, Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff details here supposed ‘crime’:

What was the reason for this conviction, you may ask. Well, during the course of my seminars, I mentioned the choking EU directive “Framework decision on combating racism and xenophobia,” and in order to illustrate my point I told the audience about a conversation I had with my sister and how she believed that one should find a different word for Mohammed’s actions with Aisha. I said, “How does one name what he did if not call it pedophilia?” And this sentence got me convicted, for I am allowed by law to say that Mohammed had sex with a young girl, but I may not qualify this behavior as this is deemed “excessive” and thus denigrating.

Again, under Sharia Law, blasphemy has nothing to do with truth. Evidently, under the new speech rules in the EU, that is also true.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Our State Department Is Focused On The Wrong People

Boston.com posted a story today about some recent remarks about Israel by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton stated that she was worried about the future of Israel’s democracy and the rights of women in that country.

These are amazing statements. Israel is one of two functioning democracies in the Middle East–the other one is Turkey, which is in danger of becoming an Islamic state where women will have very few rights. The ‘Arab Spring’ supposedly brought democracy to a number of countries in the Middle East, but we are now watching those countries turn into Islamic states with Sharia law, which gives very few rights to women.

Israel does practice segregation of the sexes on buses that serve the Ultra Orthodox Jewish community on routes to religious neighborhoods in Israel.That is not limiting women’s rights–it is respecting Orthodox Jewish tradition. However, I have never heard Mrs. Clinton address the fact that women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to drive.

I just don’t think Israel is the problem in the Middle East with regard to women’s rights.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Arab Spring Is Looking A Little Stormy

The Global Post reported today on the elections being held in Tunisia.

The article reports:

Despite deep divisions among the various political parties over Tunisia’s future — the most contentious being the debate between secularists and Islamists — the election itself was a source of both national and regional pride for many Tunisians today.

…“If Ennahda wins, I would like to see sharia [Islamic] law,” said Tawfiq bin Mohammed bin Abdullah, a 62-year-old Ennahda supporter.“There are many women in Tunisia who do not know true Islam. Ennahda will not impose, but it will explain what it is in the Koran. And hopefully they will come to the true Islam.”

Others are drawn to Ennahda not only for its religious message, but for its longer history as a serious opposition group.

“Ennahda, they want to preserve our civil rights,”said 22-year-old Khalil Elalmi, a medical student who was arrested and beaten during the revolution.“They want to preserve our rights and take into consideration the law of Islam.”

“Their objective is to help people get a better life.”

Sharia Law and democracy are not compatible. We need to remember that. One of the most amazing aspects of Brigitte Gabriel’s story (see rightwinggranny.com) was her account of what happened to Lebanon (formerly the garden spot of the Middle East):

Lebanon was 67 percent Christian and was a truly multi-cultural country—there was freedom of religion for all religions. Gradually Muslims immigrated to Lebanon and became the majority of the country. The Muslims formed the Arab Lebanese Army, attacked Christians in a church, and started a civil war. The Muslims killed Christians, burned churches, and committed other atrocities. None of the western democracies came to the aid of Lebanon.

Unfortunately, unless the people involved in the Arab Spring protests wake up quickly, they will see their freedom disappear as quickly as they thought they had obtained it. When the Muslim Brotherhood takes over a country, there is no freedom of religion and no freedom for women.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Brigitte Gabriel In New England

I went to an event tonight sponsored by the Boston Chapter of Act for America. The guest speaker was Brigitte Gabriel, a frequent commentator on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC news programs.  Ms. Gabriel is the founder, president, and CEO of Act for America, a group formed to combat the growing threat to America that Islamist terrorism represents.

Ms. Gabriel began speaking by telling her personal story of life in Lebanon before the radical Muslim takeover of the country. Lebanon used to be the only Christian majority country in the Middle East. It was the garden spot of the region. Lebanon was 67 percent Christian and was a truly multi-cultural country—there was freedom of religion for all religions. Gradually Muslims immigrated to Lebanon and became the majority of the country. The Muslims formed the Arab Lebanese Army, attacked Christians in a church, and started a civil war. The Muslims killed Christians, burned churches, and committed other atrocities. None of the western democracies came to the aid of Lebanon. Finally Israel began to help the Lebanese Christians fight back. They provided food, weapons, and bomb shelters.  Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, setting up a security zone to protect Christians. Ms. Gabriel shared the story of her mother being wounded in one of the Muslim attacks and taking her mother to Israel for treatment. The Lebanese ambulance driver who knew her family and was her fellow countryman charged her half of all the money she had to drive her to the Israeli border. The Israeli ambulance driver, who was a total stranger, who drove her and her mother to the Israeli hospital, charged her nothing. Ms. Gabriel points to this event as one that demonstrated to her the difference between the Israeli culture and the Arab culture. At the Israeli hospital, people of all races and religions were treated with equal care. It did not matter that the Arab soldier, given the opportunity, would gladly have slit the throat of the doctor treating his wounds—the Israeli doctor still treated those wounds with care.

Ms. Gabriel pointed out that the majority of Muslims are moderate and are not terrorists. Radical Muslims represent only about 15 to 25 percent of the Muslim population. Unfortunately, that minority is about 180 to 300 million people. It is that minority that is driving the agenda and forcing the nations of the free world to defend themselves. She rightfully pointed out that the peaceful majority was irrelevant in Germany during the reign of Adolph Hitler. The peaceful majority was irrelevant in pre-World War II Japan, and the peaceful majority was irrelevant in China and Russia.

As someone who is from the Middle East, Ms. Gabriel has a different perspective on terrorism than most Americans born and raised in America. She stated that September 11, 2001, turned her world upside down. She stated, “The terrorists I thought I had left behind had come to America.”

Ms. Gabriel talked about the systematic infiltration of America by groups under the umbrella of the Muslim Brotherhood. “The Project,” introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation Trial details the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan for North America, written in 1991. The plan outlines tactics and proposals detailing how to maintain the appearance of moderation while infiltrating clubs, and offices of government. There were 29 front groups under the Muslim Brotherhood operating in America named in the trial as co-conspirators. CAIR is still trying to get itself taken off that list.

The Muslim infiltration has impacted American education at the college level. Many of the political science departments and Middle East studies departments in our major universities and community colleges are underwritten by Saudi Arabian petrodollars. Pro-Israel speakers are no longer welcome at American universities. We now have Islamic consultants working with children’s textbook publishers. Our sixth and seventh grade textbooks have an Islam course that encourages children to become Muslims for three weeks. Our children are being taught that jihad is a struggle against oppression, invasion, or injustice. Muslim children are taught that jihad is making war against infidels. The Muslim course is indoctrinating our children with the talking points of those who want to destroy our freedom and our country.

Ms. Gabriel set up ACT for American as an action group to fight this sort of indoctrination of American children and the continuing creep of Sharia Law.  ACT has over 175,000 members today, over 600 chapters nationwide, and a full-time lobbyist on Capitol Hill. The organization uses grass roots networks to protect American freedoms and national security. Their website is actforamerica.org. Their purpose is to build a grassroots network to stop the creep of Sharia Law and stop the infiltration of the American schools. They have been effective enough for CAIR to begin to use their name in its fund raising efforts. That is one definition of success!

Please follow the link to their website to learn more about this organization. They are deserving of the support of all Americans. There are ways that all of us can help—big or small. In addition to what they do, they are also making more Americans aware of the threat that we currently face.

I would like to thank Ms. Gabriel for having the courage to speak up. I would also like to note that it was refreshing to hear her appreciation of America and the people in the audience who had served in the American military. I have said before on this blog that I am the daughter of a World War II veteran who landed on Utah beach on D-Day, the wife of a Vietnam-era veteran, and the mother-in-law of someone currently serving in the military. I appreciated her thank you. She is lady of courage doing what she can to preserve her adopted country. Thank you.

Brigitte Gabriel will be speaking again in New England:

October 17, 2011 at 7:00pm-9:00pm

Word of Life Christian Fellowship Church
95 Old Loudon Rd.
Concord, New Hampshire

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Third Choice For A Non-Muslim In An Islamic State

Tonight I had the privilege of hearing the Reverend Dr. Mark Durie, Vicar ofImage of Mark Durie St. Mary’s Anglican Church in Caulfield, Australia, speak on the subject of dhimmitude. Reverend Durie is the author of the book The Third Choice.

Reverend Durie began his lecture with a brief historical perspective of how the religion of Islam treats those who are not Muslims in countries where Islamists are in control. The religion of Islam gives the non-believers in a land they conquer three choices—convert to Muslim, death by the sword, or dhimmitude. Dhimmitude is an option that is traditionally open only to Jews and Christians—pagans must either convert to Islam or be killed.

Reverend Durie points out the Sharia Law (the Islamic justice system) guides all aspects of a man’s life. It assumes an Islamic state. In an Islamic state those who choose dhimmitude are required to pay an annual tax (jizya tax) to the state in recognition of their defeated status. The ritual surrounding that payment makes it clear that the dhimmis are expected to pay the tax gratefully for the privilege of keeping their heads for another year.  Part of the ritual includes two ritual blows to the neck, mimicking the beheading of the person.  At this point it was pointed out that Sharia law will be part of the new Palestinian State when or if it is created—religious freedom will not be part of the state.

The aim of Dhimmitude is to destroy the souls of the conquered people. Even if they do not convert to Islam, they will still be in submission to Islam.  The system is very damaging to the dhimmis. It is designed to destroy their love for life.

There have been some very negative cultural effects of Dhimmitude on western countries. Many western leaders have remained silent as Christians are persecuted in the Islamic world. Western leaders have been afraid to engage in a discourse about the theology of Islam, refusing to look at it critically. All faiths are not equal, and what you believe matters.

One of the problems in dealing with the spread of Islam is that Islamists have successfully controlled the vocabulary. When President Obama spoke in Cairo in June 2009, he exhibited the cultural traits of dhimmitude—he expressed gratefulness for Islam’s contributions to civilization and stated, “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” These statements reflect the gratitude to Islam and the inferiority of the dhimmis in dhimmitude. There was no desire to actually address the intolerance Islam has shown to non-Muslims.

Reverend Durie stated that he is optimistic that Islam will not eventually reach its goal of world domination. He pointed out that where Sharia law is in effect, there has been a negative reaction to it. In Algeria and Iran, thousands are converting to Christianity. Islam’s rise is not based as much on Islam’s strength as much as it is based on the western world’s weakness.  Islam sets long-term goals—centuries rather than years. The western world needs to learn to set longer goals—reflected in education, text books, cultural strength, and appreciation of freedom.  We need to learn to pass the torch of western civilization from one generation to the next.

There is an expression in some Christian circles, “God has no grandchildren—He only has children.” We need to make sure that the coming generations understand the gift and blessings of freedom that are a major part of western civilization.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tonight In Stoughton Massachusetts

 

Image of Mark Durie
ATC Speakers Forum Presents:
“Islam and Dhimmitude: From Ancient Rituals to Present Realities”
With
Dr. Mark Durie
WHEN:            October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM
WHERE:         Ahavath Torah Congregation – 1179 Central Street, Stoughton, MA
PRICE:            $5
Dr. Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.
This lecture by an Australian scholar of Islam discusses the position of non-Muslims – Jews, Christians and others – under sharia law.
There are two stories about non-Muslims living under Islam, who Muslims call dhimmis. One is that dhimmis were the fortunate recipients of Islamic benevolence. The other is that non-Muslims had to buy their heads back each year in a legal system designed to degrade and belittle them, and to ensure their decline. The story of the dhimmis, and their centuries of subjugation under Islamic law, raises troubling questions about the spiritual trajectory of western societies, and their seemingly inexorable drift towards the psychology of surrender.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Islam Is Not A Religion Of Peace (Or Freedom)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OTkJdjVLkrQ/SKWm8L4-srI/AAAAAAAAANg/KVSrkw5vycg/s400/behead+those+who+say+islam+is+violent.jpg

The sign above says is all. Townhall.com posted the above picture at the bottom of an article detailing plans to execute Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani if he refuses to renounce his Christian faith.

An article posted at CBN.com today explains the details:

“As far as we understand, he will be asked again if he wishes to recant,” CSW (Christianity Solidarity Worldwide) press officer Kiri Kankhwende said. “Should he refuse, we understand that he will be facing an execution.”

The article further explains:

“This whole situation, the charges against him and the punishment he’s facing, are illegal — not only by the Iranian Constitution but the international treaties to which Iran is a party to,” Kankhwende said.

The thing that we in America need to realize very quickly is that Islam is neither a religion of peace or a religion of freedom. Under Sharia Law, it is a capital offense to convert to Islam to Christianity. That is not freedom of religion.

The article at Townhall.com points out:

The 11th branch of Iran’s Gilan Provincial Court has determined that Pastor Nadarkhani has Islamic ancestry and therefore must recant his faith in Jesus Christ. Iran’s supreme court had previously ruled that the trial court must determine if Pastor Youcef had been a Muslim before converting to Christianity.

Sharia Law (Islamic Law) and democracy are not compatible. There is an aspect of Islam that is not religious–it is political. In America we have freedom of religion–we do not have freedom to undermine our democracy. That is why any attempt to integrate Sharia Law into American law needs to be turned back forcefully.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Just A Reminder…..October 3

 

Image of Mark Durie
ATC Speakers Forum Presents:
“Islam and Dhimmitude: From Ancient Rituals to Present Realities”
With
Dr. Mark Durie
WHEN:            October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM
WHERE:         Ahavath Torah Congregation – 1179 Central Street, Stoughton, MA
PRICE:            $5
Dr. Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.
This lecture by an Australian scholar of Islam discusses the position of non-Muslims – Jews, Christians and others – under sharia law.
There are two stories about non-Muslims living under Islam, who Muslims call dhimmis. One is that dhimmis were the fortunate recipients of Islamic benevolence. The other is that non-Muslims had to buy their heads back each year in a legal system designed to degrade and belittle them, and to ensure their decline. The story of the dhimmis, and their centuries of subjugation under Islamic law, raises troubling questions about the spiritual trajectory of western societies, and their seemingly inexorable drift towards the psychology of surrender.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Coming On October 3rd

Image of Mark Durie
ATC Speakers Forum Presents:
“Islam and Dhimmitude: From Ancient Rituals to Present Realities”
With
Dr. Mark Durie
WHEN:            October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM
WHERE:         Ahavath Torah Congregation – 1179 Central Street, Stoughton, MA
PRICE:            $5
Dr. Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.
This lecture by an Australian scholar of Islam discusses the position of non-Muslims – Jews, Christians and others – under sharia law.
There are two stories about non-Muslims living under Islam, who Muslims call dhimmis. One is that dhimmis were the fortunate recipients of Islamic benevolence. The other is that non-Muslims had to buy their heads back each year in a legal system designed to degrade and belittle them, and to ensure their decline. The story of the dhimmis, and their centuries of subjugation under Islamic law, raises troubling questions about the spiritual trajectory of western societies, and their seemingly inexorable drift towards the psychology of surrender.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Something To Take Note Of

Shafilea Ahmed

Image via Wikipedia

The U.K. Daily Mail is reporting today that Iftikhar and Farzana Ahmed have been charged with the murder of their then 17 year-old daughter in 2003. Shafilea Ahmed vanished in 2003, and her body was discovered in 2004. The article at the Daily Mail describes this as an ‘honour killing.’

The U.K. Guardian reports:

The couple have always strenuously denied any involvement in their daughter’s death and once stormed into a police press conference to tearfully protest their innocence, claiming the police were racially motivated.

But at the inquest evidence was heard that Shafilea claimed she was held down and beaten by her parents and was fearful of an arranged marriage. The coroner ruled that she had been the victim of a “very vile murder”.

She disappeared shortly after a trip to Pakistan in which she was introduced to a potential suitor. During the trip she drank bleach and harmed herself in an apparent cry for help, and needed regular hospital treatment to correct injuries to her throat.

The coroner said: “Shafilea was the victim of a very vile murder and there’s no evidence before the court as to who did it. There are things people know that have not been told to this court.”

Under Sharia Law, the parents did nothing wrong, and there are Sharia courts in Britain. It will be interesting to see if the parents request a trial in a Sharia court.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ignoring The Facts When Publishing A Newspaper

Young Saudi Arabian woman wearing Islamic clot...

Image via Wikipedia

On Friday the New York Times posted an op-ed piece entitled, “Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America.” I would like to disagree. I am not planning to bore you with the details of Islamic Law–I have written about many of its tenets before. Instead, I would just like to cite a few examples of life in countries where there is Islamic (Sharia) Law. But, as an aside, I suspect that the reason the New York Times is calling it Islamic Law rather than Sharia Law (which it is) is that many people might not realize that they are the same thing.

Yahoo News reported on August 12 of this year:

In its 2010 report, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan says almost 800 women were victims of “honor killings” — murders aimed at preserving the honor of male relatives — and 2,900 women reported raped — almost eight a day.

The bulk, or almost 2,600, were raped in Punjab alone, Pakistan’s most populous province.

And the numbers are rising: media reports say crimes against women have risen 18 percent in the year to May and the human rights commission believes its figures represent only a fraction of the attacks which take place across the country.

Pakistan is a country under Islamic Law.

On November 17, 2010, AOL News reported:

Saudi Arabia has no religious freedom in theory or practice, according to a report released today by the U.S. State Department. The report also slammed other countries, including Iran and China, for their lack of tolerance of diverse faiths.

“The public practice of non-Muslim religions is prohibited” and Saudi government officials “continued to raid private non-Muslim religious gatherings,” the report said.

Saudi Arabia is under Sharia Law. Religious freedom is not part of Sharia Law. It is a very necessary part of our democracy.

Iran is also a country ruled by Islamic Law. Breitbart posted a story about the fashion police in Iran a few years ago:

Tehran’s police have said they are operating a three stage process in implementing the new wave of a crackdown on dress deemed to be unIslamic, which started with some intensity on Monday afternoon.

First, women are given a verbal warning on the street. If the problem is not resolved there, they are taken to the police station for “guidance” and to sign a vow not to repeat the offence. Should this be unsuccessful, their case is handed to the judiciary.

“Sure my manto is short, but there are many others whose clothes are more seductive than mine and they walking by without any punishment,” one of the arrested girls in the minibus complained bitterly.

The arrested women will now go to a “centre for combating vice”.

Their parents will be phoned and they will bring a longer coat and fuller headscarf for their daughters. If the young women sign the pledge they will then be released. 

As someone who raised three daughters, all of whom were teenagers at one time, I would have loved to have the fashion police in my house. However, the idea of fashion police is not compatible with democracy.

If we allow Sharia (Islamic) Law into our courts, we will undermine our democracy. Those who support Sharia Law do not support individual freedom.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Have We Done In Libya ?

The Foundry at Heritage.org posted a draft of the proposed constitution of the new government in Libya.

Article I of the General Provisions states:

Libya is an independent Democratic State wherein the people are the source of authorities. The city of Tripoli shall be the capital of the State. Islam is the Religion of the State and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia). Arabic is its official language while preserving the linguistic and cultural rights of all components of the Libyan society. The State shall guarantee for non-Moslems the freedom of practising religious rights and shall guarantee respect for their systems of personal status.

There is a problem with this paragraph. Sharia Law demands the death penalty for anyone who converts from Muslim to Christianity. Sharia Law demands that non-Muslims convert to Islam or do not have full rights as citizens. Sharia Law does not allow for freedom of religion.

Article 6 includes the sentence:

Libyans are brothers and their official relationship shall be based on law rather than tribal, proud or personal loyalty. Libyans shall be equal before the law. They shall enjoy equal civil and political rights, shall have the same opportunities, and be subject to the same public duties and obligations, without discrimination due to religion, belief, race, language, wealth, kinship or political opinions or social status.

The State shall guarantee for woman all opportunities which shall allow her to participate entirely and actively in political, economic and social spheres.

The above two paragraphs are in total contradiction to Sharia Law. As I said, this is a draft of the proposed constitution. Other than the Sharia Law part, it looks really good. The problem is that the Sharia Law part may override all the other parts and turn the country into another Iran.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Empowering Moderate Muslims

Andrew C. McCarthy posted an article at National Review today about empowering moderate Muslims. The article opens with a quote from John Winthrop, the legendary founder of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, “Liberty must always be exercised, and may only be maintained,“in a way of subjection to authority.” Winthrop further stated, “But if you will be satisfied to enjoy such civil and lawful liberties, such as Christ allows you, then you will quietly and cheerfully submit under that authority which is set over you . . . for your good.”

This is an idea we need to keep in mind as we look at Sharia Law. Mr. McCarthy lists two thoughts on Sharia Law:

First, sharia is a useful barometer for distinguishing real Muslim moderates from Islamists. The latter seek to undermine American liberties, but some have been able to pose as moderates, because they do not employ terrorist tactics in the pursuit of their extreme ends.

Second, focusing on sharia is the most promising strategy for empowering authentic moderate Muslims. Sharia, as classically construed by authoritative scholars, is strewn with tenets that run counter to Western principles of liberty — in the areas of freedom of conscience, equality, free expression, economic liberty, the settlement of policy disputes without violence, what “cruel and unusual punishments” should be unacceptable, and so on.

He goes on to say that John Winthrop’s ideas about obeying God were widely shared in colonial America. What John Winthrop was saying was not considered unusual, as it would be today. There were things done in the early American colonies that were done in the name of Christianity that would be totally unacceptable to us today. It has taken more than two hundred years to attempt to strike a balance between the secular and the religious in America, and we don’t always get it right. Sometimes we forget that the Judeo-Christian ethic is the foundation of our laws, and we should honor that ethic. Mr. McCarthy states that we need to give moderate Muslims the chance to find a balance in Sharia Law. Mr. McCarthy also reminds us that the Muslims who will eventually moderate Sharia Law (if that is possible) are up against 14 centuries of tradition and treatises like Reliance of the Traveller. Sharia Law can be tempered, but it will be difficult.

Enhanced by Zemanta