| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
This morning the Washington Post contains a story about the ongoing debate over the role of Islam in Iraq's future government. It quotes Judith S. Yaphe, who is identified as "a senior research fellow at National Defense University and a former senior CIA Iraq analyst." She says that Islam is "the first problem and a very big one."
"'I don't know how flexible [the United States] will be,' she said, but warned that there would be trouble if Congress insisted on separation of mosque and state."
But then Yaphe says: "This is an Islamic state. You can have freedom of religion, because the Koran protects Christians and Jews, but 95 percent there are Muslim."
Is Yaphe, to say nothing of her friends at the CIA, aware of what Islamic law actually says about the "protection" of Christians and Jews? It's nothing like the Western understanding of freedom of religion. In Onward Muslim Soldiers I go straight to core texts of Islamic jurisprudence to show what "freedom of religion" means in the context of the Sharia. "The subject peoples," according to a manual of Islamic law, must "pay the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)" and "are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar); are not greeted with ‘as-Salamu ‘alaykum’ [the traditional Muslim greeting, 'Peace be with you']; must keep to the side of the street; may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims’ buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed; are forbidden to openly display wine or pork . . . recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals or feastdays; and are forbidden to build new churches." If they violate these terms, the law further stipulates that they can be killed or sold into slavery at the discretion of the Muslim leader. (See ‘Umdat al-Salik, o11.3, 5).
That's an understanding of freedom of religion that's compatible with or equivalent to Western secularism? Tell me another. (Thanks to "Allah.")
Posted by Robert at December 5, 2003 10:41 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I heard her speak at NDU when I was a student there in 2001. She predicted the vast slaughter of US forces during the battle of Baghdad. She also said that the US was preparing "camps for Arabs like those we had for the Japanese during World War Two." When I challenged her on this she backed down. I asked her to tell me where those camps were. No answer. I told her that I was concerned that she was "indoctrinating" students and I was very worried about her young students at a local women's college who were too young to understand the propaganistic nature of her diatribe. She was not amused...but my fellow students were! Go NDU!
Posted by: Mark Silinsky at December 5, 2003 12:11 PMI know Judith. I can say that she certainly understands the complexities and nuances of the Middle East. You're right, she should have been more careful when speaking about "freedom" for Jews and Christians living under Islam. But I wouldn't go so far as to think of her as an intellectual dhimmi living in the West. On a separate issue, she once told me (jokingly) to stop reading "dead white men." (!). That prohibition would cancel a great deal of whatever has been written in the past....
Habib C. Malik
Posted by: Habib C. Malik at December 6, 2003 5:36 AMI am sure she did tell you to stop reading dead, white, men. At the all-womens' Hood College, where I believe she teaches, she probably needs no such admonition. Dead, white, males probably are not read! Living, white, males are probably not touched or sought. Hmm, wonder why in 2003 there are colleges that do not admit men? What could all the women there have in common? Yaphe may not be a dhimmi, but she strikes me as a dim wit. Try to challenge her and she backs down. The NDU can do better and, in my opinion, should get rid of her.
Posted by: Mark Silinsky at December 9, 2003 4:45 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)