It's Friday afternoon, the Q-Blog for Sunday is in the can (don't miss this one: it deals the beginning of sura 9, including the "Verse of the Sword"), and Miller Time is fast approaching, and then Jihad Watch reader John sends me this exchange from the comments field of a post at Mideastyouth.com, "Most Arabic Yahoo groups are about sex":
On 09.11.07 at 09:36 MST Tor (Norway) Wrote:
I’ve toyed with the idea of setting up a “moderate muslim pinglist” on FreeRepublic to bring attention to the work (or even just existence) of these allegedly mythical beings, but aside from the fact that I wouldn’t know where to find the relevant stories/events, I’m not sure I’d want to expose them to the armies of Robert Spencer wannabes that would descent on said moderates. And the point of this forum at least is to have middle easterners be well represented on it, You won’t find many of those on FreeRepublic unless you count soldiers posting from Iraq.
So that would be a bad idea, what would be a good one?
On 09.11.07 at 11:18 MST
The armies of Robert Spencer wannabes are linking to this site from all over the web, twisting everything as usual and making idiotic claims about our Muslim “death cult.” I never intended for this entry to be used or interpreted in this hateful manner.
Hi, fellows. It is I, the real Robert Spencer. As for anyone who would want to be me, well, as Mr. T might say, I pity the fool. But I must say I'm puzzled by the reference to me. For one thing, I have never, ever, denied the existence of moderate Muslims.
And you yourself -- Esra'a, the author of the original post, as well as of the second comment above -- already noted the only thing that I myself think interesting about such information (that Muslim countries lead the world in sex-related Internet searches): "All of this information is not in the least bit shocking, but it’s quite ironic."
It is indeed, especially in light of Dinesh D'Souza's fantastic but widely-believed claim that the jihad is simply a defense by people attached to traditional morality against the encroachment of Western libertinism.
Why is this hypocrisy rightly noted by Muslims such as yourself, but when non-Muslims note it, it becomes an expression of hate?
I expect that you might respond that it is hateful coming from non-Muslims because non-Muslims wish you ill, and hate you, as evidenced by the fierce and contemptuous words of the writer "liberty1" at the first site you linked. But you should remember: no non-Muslim would hate Muslims, or wish them ill, or think about them at all, were it not for the violence committed on a more or less daily basis by people who explain their actions by referring to Islamic texts and teachings. If you want to eradicate that hatred, do your utmost to end acts of violence committed in the name of Islam.
And also, speaking strictly for myself but as the man who you think has inspired this hatred, I don't hate you, or any Muslim. I would like to see Muslims worldwide acknowledge the violent and supremacist aspects of their tradition, renounce them definitively, and work to formulate ways in which Muslims and non-Muslims can live together in peace as equals on an indefinite basis. I'd like to see ulama worldwide formulate new laws that establish the equality of dignity of women with men, abolish the commodification of women, and safeguard the equality of rights of all people by abolishing the dhimma (thus nipping in the bud nascent attempts to revive it in Iraq and among the Palestinians). I'd like to see ulama worldwide embrace the freedom of conscience and freedom of religion forthrightly and without equivocation.
Is all this "hate"? I don't think so. And you shouldn't either. And finally, hypocrisy is hypocrisy, no matter who points it out. I've been excoriated and vilified for six years for quoting passages of the Qur'an and Sunnah that the excoriators and vilifiers have said not a peep about when they've been quoted by Osama bin Laden and his ilk. Truth is truth, no matter how inconvenient. I invite you to deal with it.