Ex-Muslim makes offer

"I would never call anyone who I have never met simply to listen to them say 'Look, I'm for real.' I am suspicious. By revealing myself to this person, I 'blow' my own cover."

1. You are a coward. She has much more to be fearful of than you. She is in a Muslim land. She is an apostate. All you have done is to rail against Islam. I doubt if any Muslim would take the trouble to kill you.

2. You are an idiot.

Dont be confused - go consult with your bosom pal skouti. He will clear all your doubts for you.

Dont be confused - go consult with your bosom pal skouti. He will clear all your doubts for you.

Putting to one side the fact that your personal insult blows away the credibility of your post, let's say she's genuine, as you suppose. OK, then good and well.
However, if she's not, then her blog becomes a collection point for information about critics of Islam and apostates; e-mail addresses, phone numbers, possibly.

That means, on balance, there is a situation that calls for caution, not foolhardy rushing in where angels fear to tread.

Incidentally, Rich, isn't time you stopped skipping your 'anger management' classes? :)

"Having read of the Liberated One's offer for each and every doubting Thomas to contact her for assurance, I am concerned. Why?"

Maybe I'm being a little dense, but the reason for the offer seems obvious. She's trolling for valid phone numbers. Once you have a valid phone number you can initiate all manner of nefarious cons. It wouldn’t surprise me if this was the end game all along.

Most likely only a few people will actually call her, and most of them will use a pay phone...I don't think there is much money in her plan...If that is the plan...She's going to extort money from Skouti? That's funny...

"I suggest LO just simply continue along her merry way, and quit wasting time trying to convince the naysayers. "

Actually, what she could do that would be really valuable to the CJ (the Counter Jihad -- someday to be the AIM (the Anti-Islam Movement), once our unofficial leaders decide that Islam, the whole Kit & Kaboodle including all its enabling Muslims, is what we are opposed to) -- now that she has published a few essays about her general feelings about Islam, Christianity along with vague descriptions of her family -- is to publish a few essays that go into in-depth detail about

1) what Islam meant to her as she grew up, all those years from childhood to the latter days when she began to become disenchanted then finally apostasize

2) how Islam is pernicious in all its many-splendored ways as manifested in the behaviors and conversations of her family members, her neighbors, friends, schoolmates, school officials, clericx, local businessmen & shopkeepers, strangers in the street, etc.

Now, that's something I'd like to read about -- and it's stuuf she is surely aware of, and knowledgeable about. It would be quite useful for the CJ. As it is, her blog is getting a bit navel-gazingly tiresome.

Hey Rich!

"1. You are an idiot."
_____________________

Lay off the ad hominems, K?

You don't need to do that, unless you have some great, larger, "baiting scheme" in mind.

If not, just clam up with the "idiot" stuff, Rich.

Hey Rich!

"1. You are an idiot."
_____________________

Lay off the ad hominems, K?

You don't need to do that, unless you have some great, larger, "baiting scheme" in mind.

If not, just clam up with the "idiot" stuff, Rich.

"As it is, her blog is getting a bit navel-gazingly tiresome."
_________________

Yep.
_________________

On another note, LL. Sorry I went after you so strongly a few months ago. It was overboard, I admit. My apologies; I hope all is well with you and yours.

DMD

Thanks for your apology, David. It's okay, I actually don't recall it that clearly. It's happened to me so often on these pages over the years, my shell-shock turns into a weary forgetfulness -- unless it's protracted and intense (as it was many moons ago with a JWer whose name was just on the tip of my tongue... who was it... oh yes: "awake" (from whose Netiquette book and Anger Management confessionals our little "Rich" seems to have taken a page or two).

You overvalue your own level of internet etiquette, LemonLime. One would think that fact need not be explained to someone who was banned several times from JW previously, but you inability to prevent your own bannings seem to indicate that you are a slow-learner.

It is good to see you here, still arguing with like-minded people. It clearly illiustrates your absolute uselessness to this movement you so desperately wish to shape, and take credit for.

Be well, my friend.

David,

That's a generous gesture, but let me ask you this: Did he apologize to you? I ask, because I saw his initial and unwarranted and disproportionate attack against you, and he never apologized to you for that. Had he apologized to you for that, when he made the initial transgression, then you may never have been moved to respond in kind to him some time later.

Note that in the post above, in response to your apology, he doesn't respond by reciprocating and apologizing to you for his transgression. Rather, he uses it as an opportunity to lament how badly others treat him here.

Poor, innocent, nice guy Hesperado/LemonLime. Cue the violins.

Unlikely, because Robert has her phone number and detailed personal information, etc., so the authorities would contact him for information, if such nefarious cons etc. were carried out.

Now, that too, the conspiracy theorist might suggest, might be part of the scam. But the more layers of criminal intrigue and complexity that one adds to one's speculations, the less probable they become. And they're really just that: Speculations.

...which is why I still think Liberated is genuine, pending any evidence to the contrary that weighs more than Spencer's and Sina's and others' verifications of her authenticity.

David,

With a phone interview and a well-planned out set of questions, I think I could detect in short order whether Liberated/ Shakila was genuine or not. And, I suspect, so could you. (More to the point, so could Robert Spencer and Sina, as obviously they did some form or other of an interview. I don't assume those guys are gullible).

It's amazing what good interview technique can do.

swami,

The suggested arrangement in her offer is that the skeptic emails her, then she calls the skeptic.

No problem then. Just email her your questions and your phone #. If you don't like giving out your phone #, just ask her if she can address those two remaining points in email.

It's easy.

liberty or death asks LO:

"Have you completely lost your mind?"

Not completely, no. But enough to seriously compromise her usefulness to the Counter-Jihad as a general model of the Apostate about whose story we are supposed to learn anything normative about Muslims and apostasy -- except, of course, that some of them suffer from a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome Denial.

"Thanks for your apology, David."
_______________________________

You're welcome. I don't like to hold grudges. I'm too old for that, anymore.

Besides, you and I both know how important your presence here is - to me and others.

Keep going - keep thinking, writing, arguing, re-thinking, etc.

Your Friend,

David

Has she completely lost her mind?

"Not completely, no. But enough to seriously compromise her usefulness to the Counter-Jihad as a general model of the Apostate about whose story we are supposed to learn anything normative about Muslims and apostasy -- except, of course, that some of them suffer from a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome Denial."

Lemonslime,

1. You, and your slimy couple of supporters, great overestimate your importance in the "counter-jihad". In fact you greatly over-estimate your importance, period. You are in fact supremely unimportant in the greater scheme of things, other than manure for plants.

2. Liberated is a human being, an intelligent one at that, with wants and desires, feelings and hurts like any other human being. For you she is just someone "useful" or not so "useful" in your imagined campaign of the "counter-jihad". She should be treated with the respect she is due.

3. You and your couple of supporters should realise your positions as nonentities. Not important at all. Just a couple self-centred, selfish, bigots, swollen by your misplaced sense of self-importance.

I completely agree w/ you. LO is both narcissistic and delusional - the former if it is so important to her that people that she's never likely to meet will believe her, and the latter, if she thinks that giving out to her Muslim family - who are Muslim first and her family next - the fact that she has apostatized will not invite serious repercussions just b'cos she can buy alcohol in Dubai.

But the most insightful thing you noted is the risk she's putting 'John' in. First, she forces him to agree to marry her before he is ready, and next, she goes blabbing to her family that she's a murtad. No doubt it puts her in danger, but it puts John in danger as well. And there is also the danger that her brothers, or other relatives might kill 'John' in the hope of getting her back into Islam, since she sees what her apostasy has done to an innocent infidel.

Navel gazing doesn't even begin to describe it.

Trust "Infidel" to talk straight, no chaser, like Harry Truman. My question is, why can't more Jihad Watchers be like him?

David, I appreciate your unsolicited, kind and magnanimous gesture.

Infidel,

You wrote: "LO is both narcissistic and delusional - the former if it is so important to her that people that she's never likely to meet will believe her,"

Wanting to be believed is not necessarily narcissistic. In this case, wanting to be believed is understandable and normal, in my opinion. I think when most people write on the internet, they want to be believed; they don't want to be dismissed as frauds, liars, crazy--all charges which have been made by some commenters here.

Beyond wanting to be accepted as genuine and having one's story accepted as such, in this case there is the important matter of the larger issues. The larger issues concern freedom of conscience and freedom of expression, and other such freedoms and human rights. Any particular case of apostasy reported and presented on JW, especially a long and serially-reported one like Liberated's case needs to be authenticated. If it isn't authentic (or isn't perceived as authentic), then it is useless or worse. Hence it's important to deal with issues of authenticity, especially since some commenters keep raising doubts.

On the one hand, commenters are demanding that she address issues of authenticity. These same commenters then complain that she is focussing too much on authenticity.

"...and the latter, if she thinks that giving out to her Muslim family - who are Muslim first and her family next - the fact that she has apostatized will not invite serious repercussions just b'cos she can buy alcohol in Dubai."

That's an unfounded assumption. The apostasy has already involved serious repercussions. She has not dismissed the possibility of further serious repercussions. And the point about alcohol I took to be merely one indicator to illustrate that the kind of environment she is in (or was in) isn't Saudi Arabia but is relatively lax Islamically, and therefore (because of being more lax Islamically--not because of the alcohol thing in particular as suggested in your lampoon) lower risk than some Jihadwatchers might have suspected.

She may be underestimating her risk at this point, but keep in mind we don't have all the facts relevant to her particular case.

As Robert said:

"As I have explained before, there have been steps taken to conceal her actual whereabouts, so as to forestall her being in physical danger. But these have in turn led to considerable skepticism."

Re John, her fiancee:

John is an adult who knew what he was getting into. A Christian man having a relationship with a (putatively) Muslim woman is itself a death penalty offense and is one of the main scenarios leading to honour killing.

You wrote: "But the most insightful thing you noted is the risk she's putting 'John' in. First, she forces him to agree to marry her before he is ready,"

Again, John's an adult. He's free to get the hell out of there and not go back, and to bring Liberated to the West (which should be technically easy if he marries her. He is not forced. Pressured maybe, but saying he is forced to do it is too strong.

You wrote: "...and next, she goes blabbing to her family that she's a murtad. No doubt it puts her in danger, but it puts John in danger as well."

True; that increases his risk, but probably not be much, since the transgression that would get John in trouble Islamically would be having the relationship with a (putative) Muslim woman. A non-Muslim man having a relationship with a woman who had already apostatized from Islam is not an offense Islamically. To her credit, Liberated has attempted to explain to her family that John was not responsible for her apostasy and did not proselytize her out of Islam. This may or may not be effective, but it at least shows concern on Liberated's part to protect John.

Again, we don't know all the relevant facts, such as where John and Liberated are each physically located.

Yeah, people do want to be believed, but in the online world, there is a point to which they will go. Usually, it would be in the form of links to credible corroborating evidence, and typically, that's good enough. Beyond that, it's a losing battle, and not worth it. I like to be believed every bit as much as the next guy, but if someone refuses to believe me, I wouldn't even ask him for his/her e-mail, much less his/her phone#. But really, in an online forum, the main reason is so that other readers pick that person over the other.

Yeah, we don't have all the facts of her case, but knowing what we do about Muslims, and particularly, knowing what she does about Muslims, telling her family that she's no longer a Muslim is one of the most most inane things she could have done. The I made the alcohol reference b'cos she had made it, in order to highlight that it's a non-sequitur to how Islamic her environment is. Just b'cos a country allows alcohol doesn't mean that they are tolerant of open apostasy - while they might bend some rules here or there, Islam is still the foremost religion in their land. In case of the Emirates (and I'm sure several other Muslim countries as well), citizenship is not granted to people if they don't happen to be Muslim (even for Muslims, it's an uphill battle, but for non-Muslims, just fuhgeddaboutit)

On one hand, she's taking elaborate security measures, whatever they are. On the other, she yaks out to her family that she's no longer Muslim. It's like hiding a document in a drawer, locking it and then telling someone who can bust up the desk where the document is.

LL/Hesperado,

You wrote:
"If anything, LO should be showcased as the Benighted Apostate suffering from Stockholm Syndrome Denial -- not the lucidly courageous Free Woman whom we must uncritically praise. If people want to praise her, do it privately. This public platform of praising her Stockholm Syndrome Denial is unseemly, wrongheaded -- and dangerous."

I disagree. First of all let me remind you that you are not Editor-in-Chief of Jihadwatch. You are a banned commenter (having been banned several times over the years for various things including violating the site rules), who is significantly at odds with the site director Robert Spencer. You are not, as you seem to imagine, the rightful voice of Jihadwatch. You do not dictate what people can or cannot say here, and no amount of harassment from you will enforce your "rules", try as you might.

If people want to praise Liberated for her courage (while at the same time expressing genuine concerns), I see no problem with that. Liberated is courageous and by coming out with her apostasy appears to have reached a new and better place psychologically. She has taken another step on the path toward freedom of conscience and freedom of expression. Part of the battle is overcoming real, warranted, fears, fears which we must all (whether apostates or non-Muslim critics of Islam) overcome if we are to defeat Islam and stop the Islamization of our countries.

Liberated did not do this blindly; she knew she was facing some significant risk.

With regards to Liberated's coming out to her family, I see the glass more as half full, than half empty.

Infidel,

Liberated is not just some commenter on the internet but rather is an anonymous apostate at an undisclosed (specific) location, telling her story on a blog and featured on JW--a major site reaching perhaps tens of thousands of readers. In addition, hse has received at least one book offer and intends to possibly write a book. She has at present 219 blogger "followers" who've added their profiles to her site. This is an important project where her authenticity is essential to the entire enterprise. It is reasonable and responsible to be concerned about this issue and to address it, since some readers (not just a few Islamic trolls) keep raising the issue over and over and again. Moreover, if you've invested a lot of time and effort in a project, it becomes like your baby and you feel like caring for it. It just normal human nature. None of this can fairly be said to involve narcissism.

p.s., note, that entire paragraph in my linked post was in reply to Infidel in regards to the authenticity issue, arguing that Infidel's "narcissism" charge is unwarranted.

Kinana said

I disagree. First of all let me remind you that you are not Editor-in-Chief of Jihadwatch. You are a banned commenter (having been banned several times over the years for various things including violating the site rules), who is significantly at odds with the site director Robert Spencer.

That is a nasty blow beneath the belt.

"I disagree. First of all let me remind you that you are not Editor-in-Chief of Jihadwatch. You are a banned commenter (having been banned several times over the years for various things including violating the site rules), who is significantly at odds with the site director Robert Spencer."

Talk about red herrings.

"That is a nasty blow beneath the belt."

Not to worry; a straw man was wearing the belt.

You call Liberated a liar, then claim I'm hitting this serially banned troll below the belt by reminding him that he is not editor-in-chief of the site? Gunung, you seem to have gotten awfully sensitive all of a sudden.

LL/Hesperado,

Not a red herring or a straw man. You said:

"If people want to praise her, do it privately."

Hence my comment is entirely appropriate and to the point.

"If people want to praise her, do it privately."

Who the hell are you LemonLime (desparado or whatever) to tell people what or what not to do?

This is not the first time you have told people what to do and attacked them for reasons of their handle or when and where and for how long they have been posting.

You have your own blog I believe. Why dont you slink back there and be the boss there. Dont try and be the boss here.