Forced secularization—including bans on wearing face veils—can be counterproductive. As the testimonies of Muslim women from Yugoslavia revealed, such restrictions can produce deeply negative consequences, including insults and attacks against veiled women. Instead, Muslims’ own questioning of the religious foundations of the face veil can yield progressive interpretations that feel authentic because they’re coming from within the community. For instance, the Bosniak reformist leadership argued that Islam grants men and women rights and responsibilities, and unveiling is both true to Islam and can facilitate women’s access to fulfilling their given rights. Instead of legal bans or enforced dress codes, democratic Western governments would do better to promote Muslim women’s freedom of choice.
The author believes that by not enforcing a ban on the veil, Western governments are more likely to achieve voluntarily the uncovering of Muslim women. But that assumes that Muslim women really can exercise free will in this matter. All around the world, we see Muslim women being forced, by terrific family and societal pressure, to remain veiled. That pressure can include the threat of physical violence, and there have been many cases of Muslim women and girls being beaten, or even killed, for daring to remove their cover — whether hijab, chador, or niqab. If, however, the power of the state is brought to bear, and wearing the veil outlawed, it becomes much harder for Muslim men to enforce their own dress code on “their” women.
The greatest example of “forced secularization” of a Muslim people occurred in Turkey under Ataturk. It was, by all accounts, a great success. The state now required, among many reforms, that women not wear the veil in most public places (courts, universities, government offices). Turkish women did not rebel at this; most were glad to be required by law not to wear the hijab. Those who wanted — or were forced by their husbands — to wear the veil, could still do so at home. Having lost their empire after World War I, many Turks were sufficiently jolted by this colossal defeat to embrace Ataturk’s reforms, and to share his determination to secularize the country and bring it into the 20th century.
Finally, Islamic modernism, born in the 19th century as an effort to reinterpret Islam with a liberal spirit, is not as ineffective as some pessimistic commentators on Islam believe. In today’s Bosnia, Islam is internally diverse: Many Muslims see it as part of their cultural heritage, while others emphasize the importance of daily religious rituals.
Islam in Bosnia may be “diverse” not in an ethnic or sectarian sense, but in the varied level of religious commitment by its adherents. We have no way of knowing, from Riada Akyol’s piece, how many in Bosnia are “cultural” Muslims, who may not even believe in God, and how many are strictly devout, which can reasonably be taken to mean not only that they think the “daily religious rituals” are important — the author limits herself to mentioning that as the sum total of their devotion, deliberately leaving out the most disturbing aspects of the faith, which requires that they also accept, among other things, the 109 Qur’anic verses that command them to wage violent Jihad against the Unbelievers and to “strike terror” in their hearts.
Our modernist Islamic tradition is not immune to global trends, including Salafist currents. But Bosnia’s intellectual legacy offers plenty of evidence that Europe and Islam are far from incompatible—in fact, they have been intertwined for centuries.
Europe and Islam have been “intertwined” in the sense that they have been at war for 1,400 years. Muslims in the West conquered the Iberian Peninsula and thrust deep into central France before being halted at Tours by Charles Martel in 732; they remained the masters of Spain for centuries, mistreating the Christians and Jews with whom Akyol says they were (peacefully) “intertwined.” During the Reconquista by the Christians, that lasted more than 700 years, the Muslims lost first one and then another territory, until Granada, the last kingdom to fall, surrendered to the Christians in 1492. In the West, the Muslims made repeated attempts to conquer the Byzantines. Their final victory over the Christians in this theater of war was achieved with the conquest of Constantinople on May 29, 1453. For centuries after, Muslims raided up and down the coasts of Europe, seizing loot, and kidnapping Christians to be slaves, striking as far north as Ireland and, in one recorded case, Iceland. Later still, Muslims — history’s “Barbary pirates” — would prey on Christian ships and seamen in the Mediterranean. That ‘intertwining” was soaked in rivers of blood.
The moderate Islam that the author claims can be found in Bosnia is the result of one thing: the fact that from 1878 on, the Muslims were under the stern rule of Unbelievers, when Bosnia was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. They had no choice but to compromise, and to find muftis willing to issue fatwas that would justify such compromises as had to be made with the rule of non-Muslim masters.
Riada Akyol does not mention how those “tolerant” Bosniaks demonstrated a much darker side when, during World War II, they formed the S.S. Hanjar Division, that took part in some of the worst atrocities of the Second World War, with the roundup and murder of hundreds of thousands of Jews. Hajj Amin al-Husseini made a substantial contribution to the Axis war effort by organizing “in record time” recruitment to Muslim SS units.
Altogether, it is estimated that some 20,000 Muslims were chosen to serve in the elite Hanjar (Sword) SS Division — there was no lack of volunteers — where they not only murdered Jews, but also fought against the anti-Nazi partisans. Along with the infamous Bosnian 13th Waffen Hanjar (or Handschar) SS division, the Nazis also raised the Albanian Skanderbeg 21st Waffen SS division, consisting entirely of Muslims. SS conscription in Yugoslavia during the war produced a total of 42,000 Waffen SS and police troops.
Facing a true test of their “tolerance,” the Bosnian Muslims failed utterly. Riada Akyol makes no mention of this most important chapter in the history of the Bosniaks. It’s easy to guess why.
black adder says
Albanians and Bosnians, the shame of Europe, the bitches of the Turks.
mortimer says
No, they are the victims of Islam. And so were the Muslims. The Muslims are the victims of Islam too.
Your rage and inability to make a fair assessment is observed.
black adder says
They are not victims at all. During the Ottoman rule they preyed on the Christian populations taking advantage of their muslim privilege.
I am sure the relatives of the people that have been butchered by the Bosnian jihadis in Syria would not agree with you, to say the least.
Buraq says
Forced secularization—including bans on wearing face veils—can be counterproductive. ……….. Instead, Muslims’ own questioning of the religious foundations of the face veil can yield progressive interpretations that feel authentic because they’re coming from within the community.
Try this for a comparison.
Forced ending of slavery – including the shackling of limbs – can be counterproductive. Slave owners’ own questioning of the right to enslave human beings can yield further progress and feel authentic because it is coming from within the slave owning community.
Daft, or what!? Riada Akyol is a clown!
black adder says
More than 300 Bosnians joined ISIS in Syria. Were they moderate too?
gravenimage says
Spot on.
Mark Berlinger says
Thanks for exposing the nonsense of another Islamic Apologist!
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem al-Husseini organized two divisions (42,000) for Hitler including the infamous Bosnian “Handschar” Waffen-SS.
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/yugoslavia_collaboration.htm
CRUSADER says
Looks like Peterson is open to learning from Robert Spencer!
————–
Jordan Peterson – Truth About ISLAM And The Muslim World
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJaeThpnnVc
++++
LB says
I’ve seen the full video, and have seen him talking about Islam on several different occasions. Each time he gave almost exact same answer: he prefaces by saying he doesn’t know much about islam (fair enough), but it seems to him that it is a closed-off and totalitarian religion and that there are some “extreme” elements in it, but he doesn’t want to make rash judgments about it. That’s about it. Kind of lame if you ask me.
You’d think that, for someone who is obsessed with totalitarian regimes (fascism, communism), he’d jump at an opportunity to learn about the oldest, bloodiest and most oppressive regime of all. But it seems that he’s too afraid of the consequences if he starts talking badly (i.e. saying the truth) about islam, most likely because he has a massive audience (thousands of times bigger than Robert Spencer) and is afraid how such a big mass of people would react. He is already being torn apart by the MSM for standing up to leftist craziness (although his defense is flawless each time), I don’t think he wants to open that can of worms.
Don’t get me wrong, I think JP is one of the biggest intellectuals and rational thinkers of today, but his fear of islam is palpable. He could be the leading voice of the West regarding its stealth islamization, but I’m afraid that will never happen. Such a shame…
Stefan Jetchick says
“Jordan Peterson is one of the biggest intellectuals and rational thinkers of today”, says LB here above. Hum, no. But anyway, I DO agree with LB when he says: Jordan Peterson’s “fear of islam is palpable”.
Crusades Were Right says
If the Austria-Hungary and Yugoslavia had treated the religious communities of Bosnia-Herzogovina the same way as the Ottomans – only in reverse – I strongly suspect Islam would be extinct there now.
Ole Pederson says
You are probably right. In Yugoslavia in the 1970’s a man was convicted for racial hatred and calling for the destruction of the state (to replace it with an Islamic system). He is the author of “The Islamic Declaration”, which, when you read it, is the same drivel – Sharia must rule – we read from Muslims wherever they write (eg. the Muslim Brotherhood). In his youth, Yugoslavia being under Nazi occupation, he joined a group called Mladi Muslimani, the
who supported the Nazi Muslim brigade SS Handzar.Unfortunately, the guy was released early, and in the beginning deterioration of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, he fisted another, more popular man out of the way and became Bosnia’s , his name was Alija Izetbegovic, and he is responsible for the vilest atrocities as he was in command.
The Yugoslav Justice system was too … well too much justice, they should have let him rot in a dungeon.
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Riada Akyol Presents the “Tolerant Islam” of Bosnia (Part Three)
………………..
More Taqiyya.
islamic text says
Please download
http://www.islamic-laws.com/download/Islaamic_Sharia_Law_sunni.pdf
Dennis Durkop posted the link of the full English translation of the Arabic Islamic sharia on Facebook
Many Muslims hate this link considering it a fake translation by Jews, but is fully supported by the 57 Islamic member states of the world’s largest devout criminal gang the United Nations Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), that passed into international law to protect their religious right, that only Muslim men are human beings, while Muslim females, children and unbelievers are lowly dirty animals with no rigths! See:
http://www.islamic-laws.com/download/Islaamic_Sharia_Law_sunni.pdf
Many Muslims will runaway from all arguments about the Quran when confronted with the OIC’s official Islamic sharia that shows the full oppressive barbarism of their pagan death rape cult! Most do not know it even exists; as they are so brainwashed by their brainwashed clerics! Great to have their own law to rub their faces in what is in black and white!
Here is another link by someone else about early biography of mohd https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Ishaq
islamic text says
NO FREEWILL in Islam (Qadar)
X-Moose
Published on 13 Oct 2018
In this video I explain how there is NO FREEWILL because of predestination or Qadar in Islam.
All life is predestined and preordained by Allah according to the Quran, Sahih hadiths, and tafsir.
• Quran 54:49
• https://sunnah.com/muslim/46/27
• https://sunnah.com/bukhari/59/19
• Quran 82:20
• Quran 6:125
• Quran 10:100
• https://sunnah.com/muslim/46/17
• Tabari 1:199
• Tabari I:202
• Tabari I:305
• https://sunnah.com/bukhari/81/119
• Quran 7:178-179
• Quran 32:13
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/xmoose
Category Education
Comments:
RiSalam1988 The Cool Man5 months ago (edited)
Free will and predestination is contradictory.
Free will does not exist anyway, choice does in some cases
In Christianity and Sanatan DHARMA u have the free will if u don’t like God still u are accepted.
Pleasse Google
Free Will (Quran Contradiction)
X-Moose
Published on 31 Oct 2018
Muslims are convinced that the Qur’an is free from error, but in this video I discuss one contradiction found in the Qur’an: does Man have free will? Watch more X-Moose videos here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCt83…
• Quran 10:100 (No, Man does not have free will)
• Quran 6:70 (Yes, Man does have free will)
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/xmoose
Category Education
Comments:
ncroc4 months ago
I suspect that tafsir (or the hadith it uses) about Abu Talib is made up by the Abbasids to delegitimize Ali’s descendants. Their argument against the descendants of Ali was something like Abbas became Muslim but Ali’s father Abu Talib died as an infidel.
Totalitarian ideology
…it teaches from the moment you wake up till you did. What you may and should eat, wear, speak, see ,listen,talk,do,..etc….
Very Stupid verse Qur’an 24:61
There is not upon the blind [any] constraint nor upon the lame constraint nor upon the ill constraint nor upon yourselves when you eat from your [own] houses or the houses of your fathers or the houses of your mothers or the houses of your brothers or the houses of your sisters or the houses of your father’s brothers or the houses of your father’s sisters or the houses of your mother’s brothers or the houses of your mother’s sisters or [from houses] whose keys you possess or [from the house] of your friend. There is no blame upon you whether you eat together or separately. But when you enter houses, give greetings of peace upon each other – a greeting from Allah, blessed and good. Thus does Allah make clear to you the verses [of ordinance] that you may understand.
Bishnu Ramdyal21 hours ago
4:37 What eating together have to do with eating in your home?
Also, parents and brothers and sisters are always together in one home, until one leave and start a new family.
Muhammed’ s Allah is suffering from serious Alzheimer’s problem.
BIG BEN4 hours ago (edited)
CP , the verse says : ” eat FROM their house” and not ” IN “. What is the correct translation.? And what can ” eat FROM” mean ?
BTW . Yusuf Ali says ” IN”.
andriani pane2 hours ago
Is there a verse in quran saying….you can walk with your own feet?