During the recent controversy over the planned Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero, Muslim spokesmen have begun claiming that Muslims were killed in the Twin Towers on 9/11, as if that somehow proves that the destruction of the towers was not an Islamic jihad attack. As they've done so, they've characteristically begun wildly to inflate the number of Muslims killed on 9/11 -- Nihad Awad of Hamas-linked CAIR even claimed recently that 300 Muslims died in the Twin Towers, or 10% of the total number of victims. That is, of course, wildly absurd, but certainly a few Muslims were murdered by their jihadist coreligionists. Here we see that the daughter of one of them, however, is not in line with the plans of Feisal Abdul Rauf, Daisy Khan, and Nihad Awad.
Neda Bolourchi says: "I fear it would become a symbol of victory for militant Muslims around the world." Indeed, what would prevent that?
"A Muslim victim of 9/11: 'Build your mosque somewhere else,'" by Neda Bolourchi in the Washington Post, August 8 (thanks to Joseph):
I have no grave site to visit, no place to bring my mother her favorite yellow flowers, no spot where I can hold my weary heart close to her. All I have is Ground Zero.On the morning of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001, I watched as terrorists slammed United Flight 175 into the South Tower of the World Trade Center, 18 minutes after their accomplices on another hijacked plane hit the North Tower. My mother was on the flight. I witnessed her murder on live television. I still cannot fully comprehend those images. In that moment, I died as well. I carry a hole in my heart that will never be filled. [...]
I was born in pre-revolutionary Iran. My family led a largely secular existence -- I did not attend a religious school, I never wore a headscarf -- but for us, as for anyone there, Islam was part of our heritage, our culture, our entire lives. Though I have nothing but contempt for the fanaticism that propelled the terrorists to carry out their murderous attacks on Sept. 11, I still have great respect for the faith. Yet, I worry that the construction of the Cordoba House Islamic cultural center near the World Trade Center site would not promote tolerance or understanding; I fear it would become a symbol of victory for militant Muslims around the world. [...]
There were many mosques in the United States before Sept. 11; their mere existence did not bring cross-cultural understanding. The proposed center in New York may be heralded as a peace offering -- may genuinely seek to focus on "promoting integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture," as its Web site declares -- but I fear that over time, it will cultivate a fundamentalist version of the Muslim faith, embracing those who share such beliefs and hating those who do not.
The Sept. 11 attacks were the product of a hateful ideology that the perpetrators were willing to die for. They believed that all non-Muslims are infidels and that the duty of Muslims is to renounce them. I am not a theologian, but I know that the men who killed my mother carried this message in their hearts and minds. Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed. [...]
The Iranian revolution compelled my family to flee to America when I was 12 years old. Yet, just over two decades later, the militant version of our faith caught up with us on a September morning. I still identify as a Muslim. When you are born into a Muslim family, there is no way around it, no choices available: You are Muslim. I am not ashamed of my faith, but I am ashamed of what is done in its name. [...]
I do not like harboring resentment or anger, but I do not want the death of my mother -- my best friend, my hero, my strength, my love -- to become even more politicized than it already is. To the supporters of this new Islamic cultural center, I must ask: Build your ideological monument somewhere else, far from my mother's grave, and let her rest.
Robert, thank-you for getting this needed truth out.
Those folks who want this mosque at Ground Zero forget that is a GRAVEYARD.
A quick question. Does Islam forbide the building of mosques on or near burial sites?
Thank-you for your response.
"the militant version of our faith"
Oh, I didn't know that there were various "versions" of the Koran. Is there a peaceful version, too?
This message is coming straight from a grieving daughter's heart.
The message is clear: Don't build a mosque/islamic centre near Grould Zero.
And that daughter happens to be a muslim. So no one can accuse her of being a racist or an islamophobe.
Will our shameless politicians heed the message?
Or will they brush it aside saying 'I don't care' (bloomberg) or 'Islam is a great faith' (obama) yadayada.
The family escaped from radical Islam halfway around the world but it 'caught up with them'. Just can't get away from that 'peace'....
'Though I have nothing but contempt for the fanaticism that propelled the terrorists to carry out their murderous attacks on Sept. 11, I still have great respect for the faith'.
Swell...
The Sept. 11 attacks were the product of a hateful ideology that the perpetrators were willing to die for. They believed that all non-Muslims are infidels and that the duty of Muslims is to renounce them. I am not a theologian, but I know that the men who killed my mother carried this message in their hearts and minds'...
Double swell...
'I still identify as a Muslim. When you are born into a Muslim family, there is no way around it, no choices available: You are Muslim. I am not ashamed of my faith, but I am ashamed of what is done in its name'. [...]
Triple swell...
I have sympathy for her mother but not too much for her...
"I have sympathy for her mother but not too much for her..."
Yeah, I noticed those too, swami. Plus, I didn't realize there's a non-militant "version" of Islam, as she implies.
I wonder what she'd be saying if her mother hadn't been killed on 9/11? Probably not much...
No one else could have put it better.
Even the very thought of building a mosque inventing new fangled words like " multicultural mosque " right over the place where so many innocent " Infidels " ( yes non Infidels too) were incinerated is APPALLING .
Is this how one atones ? I don't see a shred of remorse or contrition.This will NEVER heal the pain.
People - I just read this "definition" of 9/11 posted by a Muslim with the nic "Jihad1" on the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram:
"9/11: The day the tall skinny kid sucker punched the school yard bully."
Unbelievable, isn't it? And guess what? Jihad 1 (probably) lives in Ft. Worth, TX, or surrounding areas. I hope LE is watching him.
Wow. Just wow. I don't have to worry about you people winning a PR battle anytime soon. Rather than let this article show that opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque is widespread and inevitable, you turn it into another samey story about how all Muslims are corrupt to the core.
"Hey, here's a self-proclaimed Muslim who opposes this mosque which also we oppose!"
"Nope, her very word is tainted. Gee Muslims are evil aren't they"
"Swell"
Keep it up guys.
This very tendency to condone the perpetrator exhorting and forcing the victim to somehow " make peace " by rapid forgetting, invoking some ridiculous wantonly ill understood karma theory with a lot of impertinent quotations thrown in by scholars in theology is widely prevalent among many in today's world.
It only shows how bereft of EMPATHY & SENSITIVITY most people are.
In Mahabharatham towards the end of Kurukshetra War , the Pandavas get this sudden irrational bout of brotherly affection goaded primarily by the wimpy confused elder brother Yudhishtra towards wily seemingly enfeebled Duryodhana.
Hence when Bheeman starts thawing perilously , it is LORD KRISHNA who gets ENRAGED.
Enraged enough to not only give a FIERY DRESSING DOWN to Yudhishtra but also ORDERING Bheeman to wield the Mace & slay Duryodhana.
The clemency which distraught Draupadi being a woman shows towards the undeserving adversaries leads to ALL HER CHILDREN , new born Infants sleeping peacefully getting massacred in sleep mercilessly by asvathama .
As asvathama would have been slain by Her Husband Arjuna .He made the terrible mistake of asking Draupadi's opinion and she thought the grovelling seemingly repentent aswathama really had had a change of heart.
Never forget Winston Churchill 's very important observation among many. That even when the infidel hater falls at your feet , is actually cunningly AIMING for your throat.
Hence let healing take place by muslims EARNING the TRUST of AMERICANS. By conduct & credentials ALONE.
NOT by hurriedly building an opulent mosque followed by lavish feeding. Never underestimate the power of food offered in swaying & thawing the DETERMINED.
about how all Muslims are corrupt to the core.
It only takes one rotten apple to spoil the whole barrel...That was Mahound...As your 'Prophet Issa' said, as he was pretending to be Jesus...'You can't get good fruit from a bad tree'...Mahound caused the entire ummah to become rotten, it is not possible for the ummah, submitting to Allah, to produce anything that is not rotten...Only by apostasy can you free yourself from the rot...
So yes...Mahoundians by virtue of being Mahoundians are corrupt to the core...But that in not necessarily a fatal condition, since you can free yourself from it if you wish...
So tell us what is the sure way to heaven for the "peaceful" muslim other then:
9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Are you admitting that you are a lazy muslim?:
4.95 Not equal are those believers who sit and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit. Unto all Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit by a special reward,-
How do you "peaceful" muslims get around this?
9.29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
How do "peaceful" muslims explain away sexual violence against children-child brides?:
5.4 Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses: for those who carry, their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.
Are "peaceful" muslims Quran only muslims?
No sharia muslims?
Follow only the peaceful verses muslims?
Consider the peaceful verses the "better" verses sent by allah, even though the better violent verses were sent after the peaceful verses?
I mean really why send a perfectly decent verse and then send a less then better one later?
"...about how all Muslims are corrupt to the core."
I never said that. You just did. IMO, she only opposes the mosk because her mother happened to be one of the victims of 9/11. I don't think we'd be hearing from her, otherwise. She still "identifies" herself a Muslim and, more worrisome, still has "great respect" for the "faith."
Hmmm...Problematic.
I am conflicted. I have a great deal of sympathy for this woman, but her mother is dead not because of "militant" Islam, but because of Islam. Doesn't she read the Qur'an? Or Islamic history? Or even the history of Iran (Persia)? The only reason she and her mother are Muslims is that her ancestors had swords held to their throats and given the choice of Islam or death. That is the choice that Islam offers us today. Why does she not recognize that the attackers of 9/11 are simply following the same instructions that were used in the conquest of Persia?
Do Muslims know anything about their faith?
"..I am not ashamed of my faith, but I am ashamed of what is done in its name. [...]"
You should be ashamed of your faith, you should be ashamed of your self-proclaimed "prophet". Every decent muslim should be ashamed of Muhammad. Read your books! (video)
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/07/perfect-man.html
Wow, this is by far the most powerful and moving opposition to the Cordoba mosque at ground zero. What is most striking is:
1. The opposition is raised by a MUSLIMA
2. The opposition is published in the WASHINGTON POST.
This runs contrary to the general notion expressed on this forum that all muslims are evil and the liberal leftist media are in bed with fundamentalist Islam. I hope the muslim haters and liberal haters start pondering their position.
We must oppose Islam, the ideology. But we must not conflate muslims with Islam. Many muslims are in fact slaves of islam. We must oppose Islam in the same way we oppose slavery. But we must not condemn all muslims. We must liberate them.
She admits she's no theologian, but, then says...
'I know that the men who killed my mother carried this message in their hearts and minds. Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed. [...]'
How does she know they are a product of a hateful ideology?
What ideology is that? Is it an 'idea that corrupted a religion?(Gibbs)
How would she know that they were obedient and dutiful soldiers marching to Allah's paradise if she was not aware of Q 9:111...I believe she mourns for her mother and being against the mosque is fine, but the rest of it is dubious...
You should have closely read what Robert Spencer highlighted in the article:
"When you are born into a Muslim family, there is no way around it, NO CHOICES available: You are Muslim...."
You should have closely read what Robert Spencer highlighted in the article:
"When you are born into a Muslim family, there is no way around it, NO CHOICES
What makes you think I didn't?
Actually, there is a choice, it's called apostasy...
Hmmm, I wonder how that applies to Rasool Obama?
Nice "choice":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam
Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ارتداد, irtidād or ridda) is commonly defined as the rejection in word or deed of their former religion (apostasy) by a person who was previously a follower of Islam.
The traditional schools of Islamic jurisprudence are unanimous in holding that apostasy by a male Muslim is punishable by death....
Yeah so what?
Please don't preach to me about Islam...I already know way more than I want to...
Females can also apostate...What do you think the ruckus about Rifqa Bary was all about?
Wickidpedia is not reliable...Try this...
http://muhammadanism.org/Government/Government_apostasy_1.htm
The Washington Post published this only because she's a Muslim. And, she still gets to "greatly respect" her "faith."
An "Infidel" wouldn't have had the sno-ball's chance. Did the WP contact any "Infidels" who lost family members and oppose the mosk? I doubt it, but if you have an example to show, please do.
"Wow, this is by far the most powerful and moving opposition to the Cordoba mosque at ground zero"
I don't agree with that at all. IMO it's the "Infidels" opposing the mosk like RS and PG and trying to get it stopped who deserve that praise.
I also believe that we wouldn't be hearing from this woman if her mother hadn't been on the flight.
Look, folks, wise-up here, huh? We have a MUSLIM lady coming-out, in an emotional and compelling PUBLIC statement; a statement so moving as to be published in a LIBERAL venue, and she has the cajones to SIGN IT. And we're questioning her reasons, dissing her on details? She witnessed the murder of her beloved mother, making her a victim, that's the best possible reason. This is an extraordinary move on her part & knit-picking her diminishes her and damages our cause.
If we can't conjure any personal feeling or heartache for this lady, let's at least recognize her statement as a PR bonanza against this mosque. She's rendering a huge service, striking Rauf and Co with a cutting PR blow. For that, how about cutting her some slack here rather than ripping her? Hasn't she proved deserving of that small consideration?
Amen. Amen, Neda Bolourchi, to the prayer of your heart.
I completely agree. I wish more people showed empathy and compassion for this brave lady.
We're not theologians either, Neda. We're just your fellow Americans, your human kin.
Well, she had the desired effect on you...and a few others...
Her flowery language describing the terrorists, slid right by a number of people...
In part...'Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed'. [...]
This does not sound like much of a condemnation to me...
Her pleas will be ignored anyway, except by gullible kufr...
"...how about cutting her some slack here rather than ripping her? Hasn't she proved deserving of that small consideration?
---------------
The "Good Muslims" are in need of this teachable moment about their ignorance of their faith. This brave women can't grow beyond the tears and what tore a hole in her heart if she doesn't address her ignorance about Islam. Wilful blindness is no cure. I hope I don't have the counsel of someone with that attitude when I face the next dump in the road of life.
Howdy George.
Thanks for that comment.
Her characterization of her mother's killers belies her own rage and contempt for them, and her seemingly sympathetic portrayal of them drips with sarcasm--sarcasm directed at them and their ilk.
Teachable moment? Their ignorance? I don't think so, Biff.
"Well, she had the desired effect on you...and a few others...
Her flowery language describing the terrorists, slid right by a number of people...
In part...'Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed'. [...]
This does not sound like much of a condemnation to me...
Her pleas will be ignored anyway, except by gullible kufr..."
Agree completely.
"I am conflicted. I have a great deal of sympathy for this woman, but her mother is dead not because of "militant" Islam, but because of Islam."
Exactly. Islam, plain 'ol, not a "militant" version. Islam is militant, period. That's the ONLY "version."
"You should be ashamed of your faith, you should be ashamed of your self-proclaimed "prophet". Every decent muslim should be ashamed of Muhammad. Read your books!"
Right on, Knightemplar2.
"So, yes . . . Mahoundians by virtue of being Mahoundians are corrupt to the core . . . "
Umm, aah--Swami, excuse me, but that sounds outrageously like saying, "so, yes . . . Hebrews [the case in point being a secular Jew] by virtue of being Hebraic are corrupt to the core . . . !"
Your admitted lack of empathy for others on occasions like this is a self-confessed quirk or character flaw of yours, but--do you have to be so obtuse a fellow, as well?
My best to you, your friend,
Lackey--aka Lackluster Nebbish
If you read what Neda Bolourchi says, she really doesn't bother to draw-out distinctions; much less bother to make them. Howevever, anyone who discerns and who has a native grasp of the nuances and idioms of spoken English knows what this woman is saying--in whatever subtlety, on whatever level we comprehend it.
Your post articulates very well the exact points that screamed at me when I read the article.
Although this person's experience has helped her to understand our grievance with the proposed victory mosque, many of the things she said proved that we will never be able to deprogram muslims from their ideology/religion/cult.
Unfortunately, we will have to develop other , perhaps less palatable methods to protect ourselves from islam.
That said, I have compassion for her grief and applaud her speaking up at this time.
For clarity's sake and precision, omit "spoken" preceding "English."
Teachable moment? Their ignorance? I don't think so, Biff.
--------------
Before I wrote that I had just recalled a fond memory of my daughter's potty training days. A surge of optimism filled me. I'll guard myself from such foolish thoughts in the future.
It's possible that she's simply running interference.
It's possible that she doesn't like *this* particular act of jihad, and doesn't want a mosque built to celebrate it, because her mum got killed by it (but that if no Muslims had been killed, she'd be fine with the mosque).
It's also just possible that she is conflicted about Islam; that she is, say, at the point that Nonie Darwish was at, when she first arrived in the USA; dimly aware of 'wrongness' but not able to face where the 'wrong' is coming from. There was, after all, a point in time where Nonie, and others who are now full-on publicly-declared apostates (with targets painted on their shirts), still called themselves Muslim...but with all kinds of doubts and horrid suspicions seeping in through the cracks in their programming.
But if it's that third possibility, then I'm guessing she doesn't *dare* pipe up and say anything that would allow any Muslim to finger her as an apostate or 'blasphemer'.
Because she knows full well that if she does, there WILL be a Muslim *somebody*, right there in the USA, who will appoint him or herself judge, jury and executioner to kill her, sooner or later.
It takes a lot of guts to leave the Mafia, or any other organised crime 'family'.
It takes even more guts to publicly defect from the Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob...even in the middle of the 'free world'.
Pray that - if she *is* starting to question Islam at some level - that she'll run across Ali Sina, or Amil Imani, and that her Islam-programming will, eventually, break.
In the meantime, use her statement for the PR value; *anything* to get this mosque stopped.
Sorry, I was out all day & evening & just got back to see the further commentary here.
Just a couple comments on your post, duh:
"She had the desired effect on you..."
Really? What effect was that? I'm already violently opposed to the 9/11 mosque. Do I believe her that her mother's murder broke her heart? Yes I do. Do I think it takes balls to speak-up publicly against the mob? Yes I do. Do I think that in this case her "victimhood" exceeds her "muslimhood?" Yes I do. Does that change my loathing for islam in general and muslims in particular? Not for a minute. So much for "effect."
"Her pleas will be ignored anyway, except by gullible kufr."
Well, duh? But that's the point! It's gullible kufr who are ENABLING THIS MOSQUE! They're exactly the ones who need to be reached! She surely as hell doesn't need to convince anyone here! This is big-time PR against Rauf, Khan and their dirty mosque--from a MUSLIMA no less. How about let's keep our heads and win this battle first and then we can decide the fate of the losers?
I actually have to agree with Yusef. I'm often reluctant to link to this site, because so many of you are more interested in indiscriminately bashing Liberals and Muslims than actually initiating a reform of Islam.
Once a father, always a father, Biff--good fellow.
Things Neda said:
"but for us, as for anyone there, Islam was part of our heritage, our culture, our entire lives."
"I still identify as a Muslim. When you are born into a Muslim family, there is no way around it, no choices available: You are Muslim."
And of course bhigr is right about the Islamic doctrine of the death penalty for (openly) leaving Islam.
Yet we also know that being critical of Islam is NOT racist, because Islam is NOT a race. We know of many non-Muslim who convert INTO Islam and that is their adult free CHOICE.
I think it would be better if religions were followed on grounds of accountable choice. Choice moreover because of the genuine belief one's religion is the most TRUE one. Not even the most beneficial one, because that could then mean it could be seen as UNTRUE or only a GAMBLE, but still chosen because of some perceived merits. Not a good basis I think.
But in this article and in so many other testimonies a Muslim(a) admits that her being a Muslima is the result of her upbringing (indoctrination), her slavishly following her loved ones and community. And the apparent pressure those loved ones and community exert on their dependents for help and love to be and remain all their lives adherents to Islam!!! This then has nothing to do with it being TRUE or UNTRUE, not even with it being BENEFICIAL or DETRIMENTAL, in a sort of well-pondered conclusion, as motivations.
Is this in the long run acceptable? Because when a person is Muslim that person helps Islam and benefits from any unjust laws and actions of Islam and co-religionists, in the sense that Islam benefits and is maintained at the cost of influence of other religions and ways of life and so to their detriment. And these other religions and ways of life do NOT treat Islam and Muslims in the same way, but in a more fair way.
At the same time, when the followers of the other religions/ ways of life, try to hold Muslims accountable they get: "Oh, but WE are NOT ACCOUNTABLE, responsible for ANY unjust, un-democratic, "rotten" law of Islamic teachings or ANY violent, criminal, unjust action of other Muslims." This is grossly unfair.
I think we've got to solve this conundrum in the end, and we have got to think of a way to be able to really hold a person accountable. At least about a person's attitude to the opposite position of Islam.
That of being first and foremost loyal to Democratic essential laws and values, and to the nation a person lives in, and his fellow-citizens. And to be loyal to these OVER, TRUMPING, being loyal to Islamic teachings and fellow-Muslims and their interests.
And to demand an oath to this effect from Muslims in Democratic countries and to enact good subsequent checks of at least neutral behavior afterwards.
I agree with your analysis demsci.
The first thing we should do is facilitate apostacy for muslims. We need
muslim shelters,
which protect apostates from the former fellow muslims.
We must crack down on muslim violence. We must
enforce secular law.
Fundamentalist muslims must fear law enforcement.
The rifka barry case shows that we must
educate law enforcement agencies and judges
about shariah law, in particular in relation to apostacy and violence in relation to women.
Last but not least, we must ask for a
pledge of allegiance
to the constitution of our countries from every muslim. Why discriminate against muslims? Because their doctrine - Islam - is incompatible with democracy and universal human rights, i.e. our constitutions.
Getting rid of sentiment or metaphysical other-wordily presumption, I think there is a realistic way to view what this woman is saying. I liken her position to a daughter or a son of a mafioso, a drug cartel warlord, or other sociopathic criminal. This "religion" and prevailing culture is like the larger parent and its values are ingrained in her because she was raised in it. Her personal love and devotion to her Mom, who, like herself is relatively, innocent, are very understandable and easy to identify with. This is despite the fact that the surrounding ideology and cultural values lack what western civilization considers to be civilized standards. She and her mother are guilty by association. I think it is highly possible that she can personally denounce the barbaric violence but still feel emotionally bonded to her early foundations. That's what many human beings do. I don't however, believe, that her bonding automatically entitles her to justify the prehistoric mentality that fostered this massacre; also, I don't think that is what she is doing.I think that her tragic testimony is good for "our side" as long as she understands that we are not condoning an ideological operation that issues directives to murder innocent people.
If this thing is funded by the Saudis, then she may be objecting on the basis of Shiite versus Sunni Islam. Those two groups make Protestant and Catholic Christian arguments look tame.
And to be fair, regardless of her ulterior motives, her argument is sound. Too bad Imam Feisal doesn't understand this.
"It's possible that she doesn't like *this* particular act of jihad, and doesn't want a mosque built to celebrate it, because her mum got killed by it (but that if no Muslims had been killed, she'd be fine with the mosque)."
We saw the same outrage and indignation and statements "against terrorism" by Muslims when jihadists blew up a hotel in Jordan a couple of years back, killing mostly fellow Muslims.
Elsewhere, at another time, a Saudi prince wrote an essay published in some Saudi newspaper expressing outrage and sadness at the "monsters we have been breeding among us" -- and why was he moved to write these words? Because his nephew was murdered as part of a jihadist attack in Algeria.
This Muslima's words against the mosque and against the "extremists" of her faith are not words against Islam itself qua Islam.
But then, neither are Spencer's.
Someday (let's hope not too long in the future), the still inchoate anti-Islam movement will actually become anti-Islam.
Thanks a lot bhigr,
I agree with you about facilitating apostasy from Islam so much. But even THIS Political Correct people resist. On the basis of the prohibition of "discrimination of people on grounds of their religion".
That's why your other remark about WHY we should discriminate against Muslims is so apposite and important. They are the followers of an Intolerant ideology with a number of theocratic laws at variance with a number of our democratic laws. Which must be told and proven endlessly to these political correct people who vote and thereby determine the kind of leadership we get.
Once a father, always a father...
-----------
What I failed to state, with a crude example, is that it was overly simplistic to think that because my 2-something year old "got it" that she no longer wanted poo-poo pants, that a good Mulsim should realize they were sitting in their own waste, so to speak.
....they've characteristically begun wildly to inflate the number of Muslims killed on 9/11 -- Nihad Awad of Hamas-linked CAIR even claimed recently that 300 Muslims died in the Twin Towers, or 10% of the total number of victims.
..............
I noticed that grotesque inflation myself.
After 9/11, and for several anniversaries, I attended readings of the names of the victims ceremonies. Of course, it is not always possible to tell from this, but there were a handful of victims who from their names were likely Muslim—twenty or less—but no more than that.
Given the percentage of Muslims in the American population, this sounds roughly correct. The idea that they made up *ten percent* of the victims is absurd.
And of course, Jihadists kill Muslims all the time. In many parts of Dar-al-islam, *all* the victims are Muslim.
Jihadists seem to reconcile this in one of two ways—firstly, through the doctrine of Takfir, they can simply decide that the Muslim victims were, in one way or another, "heretics" or "apostates"—in other words, not *real* Muslims. This is most often the case when an other-sect mosque, police station or army barracks has been attacked.
If the attacks are more general—such as blowing up a market, then it is likely that some Muslims the Jihadists consider "genuine Muslims" will have been murdered, as well.
This is no sticking point for Jihadists. Any "true" Muslim killed in an act of Jihad will simply go straight to paradise.
Incidentally, I welcome Neda Bolourchi's words—even while I agree that some of her all-too-common stances are problematic. She is braver and more decent than most of her co-religionists, and I am glad to hear her speak out.
"I welcome Neda Bolourchi's words—even while I agree that some of her all-too-common stances are problematic. She is braver and more decent than most of her co-religionists, and I am glad to hear her speak out."
With this sentiment, you are restricting yourself to the micro level and remaining incognizant of one important part of the macro level. The macro level in this regard may be gleaned from what another commenter in another thread wrote:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali recently stated down here in Australia, that the 'moderates' are as bad as the violent jihadis -- because they continue to shield and promote what she calls 'the fundamentally flawed ideology of Islam'...
What Bolourchi is effectively doing is a kind of "divide and conquer" strategy -- in this case, not dividing the enemy (Infidels) but dividing Muslims into two camps: 1) the "extremists" (no doubt a minority in her view), and 2) the normal decent Muslims like her. By taking such a public stance as a normal decent Muslim, Bolourchi is reinforcing this division. Of course, this mythical division has been strongly propagandized by clueless Westerners for years, beginning in earnest with none other than Pres. Bush.
If the division is false or misleading, however, what it tends to do is continue to inculcate a false sense of "there must be innumerable numbers of good decent Muslims out there, let's continue to welcome them into our societies -- but of course we will continue to ferret out the tiny minority of 'extremists' among them when we can". Meanwhile, the demographics of Muslims will continue to grow within the West. And meanwhile, the problems Muslims cause through their devotion to Islam will also continue to grow -- including the potentially horrific dangers of mass-murderous attacks on us, facilitated by the fact that the division between the dangerous Muslims and the supposedly harmless Muslims is not clear enough, but rather is porous and amorphous.
Bolourchi is aiding and abetting our enemy in an ingenious way, and it's not my job to try to figure out the impossible: whether she's doing this unwittingly, or cleverly. My job, and the job of every one of my fellow Westerners, is to protect our societies, and given the nature of the problem of Islam, I see no other way than to reject all Muslims -- including Bolourchi -- until they stop adoring the Monster that is tormenting them, and endangering us.
Hesperado,
Our fellow-Westerners don't perceive any big danger!!! And it's hard for us to prove the Islamic danger, when so many leading politicians, journalists, historians downplay that danger.
So, if the danger actually gets more clear AND perceived by large groups of essentially Democracy-Loyalist people, that is detrimental to it's victims but helps the anti-Islam-pro-Democracy-movement.
you said:
"The division between the dangerous Muslims and the supposedly harmless Muslims is not clear enough, but rather is porous and amorphous."
Very true, we should strive in my opinion for a clear division of Democracy-loyalists and Theocracy-loyalists. And the trust for Muslims to be real Democracy-loyalists by Islam-savvy people is now very, very low.
A strategy Anti-Islam-Pro-Democracy-people could consider might be to say; Hey, in a way we can postpone our judgment about how bad theocracy-ambition for whole societies is. And we can admit that democracy-ambition for whole societies has drawbacks too.
So: We can "respect" the choice of Muslims for a theocratic society, as we can respect most of them as great human beings if only they were not so Islamic or Theocratic.
But: Still, it IS our deepest desire, our deepest need and our job to safeguard democratic laws, values, essences and interests of Democratic nations and to safeguard the human rights of apostates of Islam and religious minorities in Islamic countries.
Perhaps in this way current "neutrals" or "enlightened" Muslims can understand what drives us better. That what drives us is not some unreasonable hate or paranoid fear, but that it is genuine desires for great real democratic societies and more justice, human rights.
If we know what we are FOR, then let them try to stop US (and USA). Instead of US trying to stop THEM all the time.
In Holland I hope that other parties than the PVV will adopt the promotion of these very legitimate democratic desires and needs, versus the mighty Islamic encroachment on Democracy and its blockade to Democracy in it's own countries.
I hope too that the justice for all apostates of Islam and equal rights for religious minorities everywhere will also become desires and needs shared by the majority of democracy-loyal people.
Hesperado wrote:
My job, and the job of every one of my fellow Westerners, is to protect our societies, and given the nature of the problem of Islam, I see no other way than to reject all Muslims -- including Bolourchi -- until they stop adoring the Monster that is tormenting them, and endangering us.
..............
Look, I don't disagree with you—and I have far more respect for apostates from Islam than for Muslims who simply decry "terrorism", without tackling head on the Islamic roots of such Jihad terror.
I also agree that there is a whole continuum of "moderate" Muslims, which even include such horrifying figures as Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan, who are actively trying to build the Ground Zero victory mosque and impose Shari'ah on us. Probably neither one is likely to strap on a bomb vest, but they are no less dangerous for that.
I still consider Neda Bolourchi courageous for speaking out—there is no doubt that many of her co-religionists will not be glad to hear her. I also think her words will give heft to the case against the mosque. They should not, of course, be needed—but they are still likely an asset here.
I think we generally see the same points, Hesperado, then come to somewhat different conclusions. I completely respect your position, but I doubt that will change.