More of the usual: any open talk about the religion of peace – even from Muslims – is treated as “anti-Islamic.”
“Taboo topic sparks critical debate,” by Kathy English in the Toronto Star, June 21:
In the month since the Star published its investigation into the secret world of polygamy in our community, reporter Noor Javed has braved a firestorm of criticism,
As we shall soon see, luckily she is not living where Sharia is implemented, as she would be braving a “firestorm” of something more tangible than “criticism” -- say, stones?
So too has the Star itself, with several complaints about Javed's groundbreaking articles about polygamy within the Muslim community in the GTA coming to the public editor's office. I've spent considerable time looking into these concerns and I think that the Star's reporting on this was accurate, fair and balanced…
As if these three objective standards ever matter when discussing Islam’s more -- how shall we say? -- “troubling” aspects.
I also believe it was a courageous act of journalism for Javed, a Muslim woman who has written illuminating articles for the Star in the past about her spiritual journey to Mecca to fulfill the holy Muslim pilgrimage called the hajj, and also about her choice to wear the Muslim head scarf, the hijab.
So far, all well and good, since she is only expounding on her “spiritual journey” – you know, the “greater jihad” which infidels should focus on, and her choice -- connoting that beautiful but, according to many, abrogated verse, “There is no compulsion in religion” -- to wear the hijab.
As a journalist and a "visible" Muslim who chose to expose evidence of polygamy within the GTA's Muslim community, Javed well knew she would come under fire. But she also believed that reporting on this controversial, "taboo" issue, which is clearly illegal in Canadian law, could spark critical debate among Canadians. I, however, was surprised by the personal attacks against her.
Get used to it.
Javed's commitment to her faith has been questioned by other Muslims…
Here comes the all-accusing finger of takfir.
…and some have even suggested it was improper for a Muslim reporter to report on this.One "open letter" that came to my office, the Star's letters page, and is now circulating in the online blogosphere, accuses Javed of demonizing Islam itself. "If your intention was to spark debate on polygamy in the community then the Toronto Star was not the forum for it," the letter states. "There is already ample anti-Islamic sentiment in the world and it is not befitting for a Muslim to add to it.
Or, according to Sheikh Ayman Al-Zawahiri, “Sharia forbids us from taking infidels as confidants, inducting them to our secrets.”
"As a Muslim woman, you had an Islamic obligation, to defend this aspect of your faith, not to deliver a further blow to an already bruised community."
And here it is: a “subtle reminder” to Javed that she needs to follow that divisive Islamic doctrine, “Loyalty and Enmity” -- wala’ we bara’: she is kindly reminded of her “obligation” (Sharia law, anyone?) to “defend” Islam -- i.e., to go out of her way to mask, equivocate, and simply dissemble (taqiyya anyone?), not to “deliver a further blow,” i.e., not simply to speak the truth, which may well only expose the “problematic” aspects of Islam to the infidel host, who far from aiding, Muslims are commanded to disavow.
While many North American Muslims have widely, and sometimes justly, criticized the media for anti-Islamic bias in the days since 9/11, I don't think the Star's reporting on polygamy was either anti-Islamic or unfair. Javed spent several months investigating this, talking to dozens of people including four local Muslim women who believe they have been victimized by polygamy. This has not been about "airing dirty laundry," as some have accused Javed of doing, but of airing these concerns.Javed's reporting put the issue into context, explaining the perspective on polygamy of both the Muslim faith and Canadian law. She wrote that while polygamy is generally among the "last taboos" in Western society, it's practised in more than 850 societies worldwide, including within the fundamentalist Mormon community in Bountiful, B.C. She also spoke to several legal experts who believe polygamy will soon be forced to face a constitutional challenge.
But as Star columnist and editor emeritus Haroon Siddiqui also pointed out in a follow-up column to Javed's articles, those practising polygamy in Canada are breaking the law as it now stands: "Muslims are obliged to obey the law of the land where they live" he wrote.
Some Muslims may think that contradicts many Koranic verses, such as “Do not take each other as lords in place of Allah” (3:64). However, the mere utterance of it is in keeping with “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels rather than believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah – unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions” (3:28).
Aly Hindy, the iman of Saluhuddin Islamic Centre who openly told Javed that he has "blessed" numerous polygamous unions, now accuses the Star of bias…
In other words, “free debate.”
…against the Muslim community.
Which is haram, or at least “mukruh” (“disliked,” “discouraged”).
In an email to several hundred people, now posted online, Hindy's son, Ibrahim, states that the Star has an "agenda" to "caricature" the Muslim community and Hindy as "backwards, as anti-women and even anarchist ..."
One newspaper is hardly necessary for such caricatures; the media, TV, and web – which offer pictures and images of Muslims stoning women and rioting over cartoons (often worth a thousand words in any newspaper) has been more than sufficient at “caricaturing” Muslims.
Last week, Hindy submitted a lengthy opinion article suggesting that Javed had quoted him out of context and was inaccurate in her reporting. In fully investigating this, including listening to Javed's tape-recorded interviews with Hindy, I found these charges to be without merit. The Star declined to publish Hindy's article. We did tell him that the Star would publish a letter to the editor to clarify his perspective. He has thus far declined to submit a letter.
When lies, sophistry, and shoutdowns don’t work, silence often follows…
Welcome Raymond!
Welcome to JH Raymond!
I have been reading your book and enjoying it! Keep up the necessary, useful, and (ashamedly) unique work!
We need more people out there doing this sort of work!
Waiting for the next book now!
Welcome aboard, Raymond!
You think it's bad when you mention polygamy? Just try bringing up that other societal enhancement helpfully imported for us by Pakistani Muslims; first-cousin marriages - and the health implications (plus costs to the rest of us) thereof.
Talk about Islamophobia™.
Sweet!
I like the way you broke down that article... Slice 'n Dice.
"..., inducting them to our secrets.”
sounds more like a cult than a religion...
Welcome Raymond!
"But she [Noor Javed] also believed that reporting on this controversial, "taboo" issue, which is clearly illegal in Canadian law, could spark critical debate among Canadians. I, however, was surprised by the personal attacks against her."
by Kathy English in the Toronto Star,
Kathy, just what planet have you been living on for the last few years? Perhaps you have been the Star's reporter for affair in the new province on Nunavut, and stationed in the provincial capital of Iqaluit, and so a bit out of touch. Really, have you never heard of the Moslems' threats to, and attacks on, Salman Rushdie and Geert Wilders and numerous writers and cartoonists?
The Modern Swiss Are Crusaders, but Islam is nothing but nice victimhood... Polygamy isn't problematic... A Swiss Cross is...
When do we stop this nonsense?
Canadian jihadwatchers, especially anyone who resides in Toronto: please write Letters to the Editor of the Toronto Star, commending Kathy English and Noor Javed on their courage and urging them to dig in their toes and stand their ground and keep on Telling the Truth.
You may like to enclose a copy of Ms English's article as posted and discussed here by Mr Ibrahim; give them Mr Ibrahim's potted CV, too, so that they know he knows exactly what he is talking about.
If you are not a subscriber to the Star, you should buy this particular issue of the paper, or a token copy, and in your letter, explain that you have bought a copy of the paper in order to show support for their refusal to publish al-Hindy's demonstrable and proven lies about their reporter. If you are a Canadian Toronto businessperson you should let them know that further acts of courage of this kind - blowing the whistle about polygamy; refusing to publish Mr Hindy's blatant falsehoods - will be rewarded by your purchase of advertising space.
It is much easier for people to be courageous if they know that other people are cheering them on.
Furthermore: if they discover that to publish clear-headed and truthful critique of Islam means that they sell MORE newspapers and sign up more advertisers, then that may outweigh any economic threats that Muslims may make against them.
Hmmm yea. First cousin marriages over many centuries certainly explains islamic thought processes. I'd never thought of that before. Thanks Un:dhimmi. Makes more sense than the idea that their brains are cut in half when they're circumcised. I mean where would you find a brain surgeon in an islamic country?
Wait a minute here. If some unbelievers can have their gay marriages why cant some pious Muslim have 4 wives?
I personally subscribe to the Biblical view, God created man and woman and the TWO shall become ONE flesh, therefore what God has joined....
But if in these modern times we have decided to throw away our Judeo-Christian heritage for the sake of tolerance and moral equivalancies why should we stop at mere numbers?
Why not group marriages, interspecies marriages, polygamy, polyandry and anything else that people can come up with?
We have had floods here in the Midwest, once the levee is breeched you cannot stop the flood from sweeping away the rest of the levee.
Looky here at Hussein criticizing the Bible, but no criticism for Koran I've ever seen:
"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.
Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy — chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."
In addition to Dumbledoresarmy’s good suggestions above, let’s also write to Kathy English to congratulate her on her robust defence of free speech and enquiry. After all, Islamic apologists have had remarkable and disturbing success in browbeating politicians and the media for perceived slights and “Islamophobia”.
My own email to Ms English at the end of this post.
On a wider issue: Islam-apologists have had their “success” in stifling free speech and debate in part by having simple messages: “Islam is a peaceful religion”…, “Islamophobia is a form of racism and should be outlawed”…. “hate speech [viz, we JW-ers know, any criticism of Islam] should be punished”. etc, etc….
We should also have a simple message. While on this site we are often in violent agreement with each other, we are sometimes a bit subtle and abstruse. Perhaps we need simpler messages for the wider public: “Islam means submission”…. “Islamophobia is a rational response to the stealth Jihad”…. “Jihad is central to Islam”. I’m sure the wise heads on this site will have others simple messages!
RE: Stickman’s comment above: the reason that gay marriages are allowed in Canada is that they are legal; that is, the Canadian people and polity have discussed the issue and decided that since homosexuality is legal then it’s logical to allow same-sex marriage. The voters and their representatives have thoroughly aired the issue and made laws about it. Polygamy, on the other hand, is illegal; and is illegal in every common-law country in the world and in every –dare I say it? – *civilised* country in the world. If we were to allow Muslims to have special consideration of multiple wives, the levee would indeed be breached – not to Stickman’s list above, but to more Sharia, to wife beating (it’s in the Koran), to female genital mutilation (it’s in Islamic jurisprudence), and all the rest of the sorry list of barbaric practices that are mandated under the baleful “law” known as “Sharia”….
------------------------------
email to Kathy English
publiced@thestar.ca
Dear Kathy,
Well done on defending the right to free speech and open investigation! (see coverage of your article (1)in one of the best websites about Islam, Jihadwatch.)
If we are as not vigilant and robust, as you have been, in our defence of our precious rights, we may find that Ms Javed and/or your paper are hauled before the supine Canadian kangaroo courts, the various Canadian Human Rights Commissions, as has Maclean in the Mark Steyn case! (see here (2)and here(3)). As one of them notes, it's ironic that legislation drafted to stop racist cranks is now being used to stifle valid information and discussion about the truth of Islam: viz, in three word, that "Islam means submission" -- which, literally, it does). We can be sure that if polygamy is not prosecuted in Canada, without fear or favour, then the next step will be even more Sharia, much to the detriment of a free and democratic Canada.
Keep up the good work; you have much support round the world, including this Aussie in Hong Kong..... We in Australia suffer many of the same PC attitudes, in our unwillingness even to discuss the less savoury aspect of Islam in our societies.
-------------------------------
Sites referenced:
(1) http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021496.php#comments
(2)http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080623.EHUMANRIGHTS23/TPStory/Comment
(3)http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/letters/story.html?id=9d273641-3f9b-4ea2-abf9-54d26d288463
further blow to an already bruised community."
Poor, pitiful "bruised" islamic community, all beat up, bleeding, and despised. In the first official multicultural nation, Canada, I feel sure that muslims go about their segregated lives with little or no interference or discrimination from indigenous Canadians. If real Canadians don't like them, they have to keep their contempt well hidden or risk imprisonment, fines, and life-long surveillance by the thought police.
Muslims are subjected to very little harassment in the West, far too little as far as I'm concerned. To protect ourselves and our children, we should be watching them constantly, monitoring mosques, and loudly condemning their hate sermons, virulent, supremacist literature, and obnoxious cultural practices. If we made enough noise, they would have to go on the defensive and as we all know, islam is very difficult to defend once it has been fully exposed.
They demand respect for islam and can't understand why sacred islamic traditions like wife beating, cruel and unmerciful animal slaughtering rituals; polygamy; jihad; incest; child marriages; FGM; and honor killings should bother anyone. Many people are unaware that muslims engage in this deviant behavior and would be as sickened and appalled by it as we are. Perhaps Hindy would like to defend these vile practices and explain why muslims engage in such savagery in 21st century Canada. Polygamy is just one aberration found in the islamic sub-culture in Canada and elsewhere; there are many, many more. To add insult to injury, muslims believe that these depraved islamic conventions make them more pious and morally superior to the rest of us!
But for some strange reason, they prefer not to discuss them openly for public consumption.
Raymond Ibrahim´s commentary on the Toronto Star article was wonderful. He's going to be posting at Jihad Watch in the future. How excellent is that!!!
dumbledoresarmy, your comment above at 9:05 am is a great suggestion to Canadians...
I meant 9:05 PM
As a Roman Catholic, I was saddened though neither shocked or surprised by the reality of homosexual ephebophilia and molestations in my Church's American clergy. As painful as it was, the independent and often hostile American press did a service to the Catholic Church in the long run by lancing a horrible boil. (Of course they did this with inaccurate, politically correct newspeak substituting "pedophilia" for the more correct diagnosis.)
My point is that as a truly faithful Catholic I was happy the sins were exposed to the sharp light, the sinned against vindicated to some extent, and those covering up for the sinners/abusers held up for the reprobates they had become. Though I am often critical of the American media, they did us Catholics a big favor even though not intending to. I knew my Faith and that rape, molestation, ephebophilia were sins against God and harmful to the Faithful.
Now if polygamy were truly abhorrent to the Islamic ummah, they would be thanking this reporter not trying to silence her. I can only believe though from my readings here and among other source materials, that in the ummah polygamy is accepted and embraced in a way that truth telling is not. - BevC
First cousin marriages are common amongst all Muslims, not just Pakistani Muslims. This may explain their moronic behaviour. No diversity in the gene pool leads to retardation, as exhibited by the Muslims. And to Kathy English: Bravo!
IndianTiger - re. diversity in the gene pool. Polygamy's bad enough, even without first-cousin marriage generation after generation.
I read somewhere that someone had worked it out (sorry I can't give the reference) that polygamy in humans means a reduction in genetic diversity. Why? Because fewer and fewer male genetic lines get reproduced. A few powerful men 'corner' all the available women; many men don't get to reproduce, so their genes disappear from the 'pool'. (In a monogamous society you get more variety because there are more male lines being passed on).
Over successive generations, it gets harder and harder to find a mate who isn't your half-sibling on the paternal side.
This is another area where Islam behaves like a parasite. It cheats: it evades the logical consequences of its social arrangements, by 'stealing' genetic diversity - seizing the women of other, more diverse groups, and absorbing them into the ummah.
But if the jihadis got their wish and turned the whole planet into The Blob - one big Ummah - there would be no Infidels and, in the end, not even any Dhimmis to steal women from, to import new genetic material; the inexorable workings of first-cousin marriage generation after generation, combined with polygamy and ferocious intra-Ummah warfare killing off lots of young males, would just go on inexorably reducing genetic diversity.
It's a physical demonstration that Islam's rejection of difference, its drive to eliminate the Other and pursue the Same, Tawheed/ Oneness, is ...well, it reminds me horribly of the old joke about the Foo Foo Bird that goes round and round in ever-decreasing circles until it disappears up its own backside.
Genetic suicide.
I once spoke to someone who had done research on genetic defects, in Saudi Arabia. She said the place was a sort of petri-dish of every imaginable form of weird recessive condition; and doing genealogies on the families of the affected kids was, shall we say, eye-opening.