Moina Shaiq discusses the role of women in Islam, claiming that they had the right to vote before American women did. In point of fact, the only Muslim women who were granted the right to vote before American women received it in 1920 were in the new Soviet republics. The Crimean People’s Republic, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, and the Kyrgyz SSR were all under the rule of local Communists, atheists who granted women the right to vote precisely to weaken Muslim power. Local Muslims were not pleased that women were given the right to vote, but the Communists simply ran roughshod over them.
With the exception of Albania, all the Muslim states that throughout the 1920s and early 1930s gave women the right to vote were Soviet republics, under Communist rule, where the suppression of Islam was state policy. These include the Kyrgyz SSR, the Tadzhik SSR, the Turkmen SSR, the Kazakh SSR, and the renamed Azerbaijan SSR.
One Muslim state, Turkey, did grant women the right to vote — in local elections — in 1930, and in national elections in 1934. But this should not be attributed to Muslim desires. Turkey was then ruled by the determinedly secular Ataturk, who granted women the right to vote as part of his campaign of secularization, including complete legal equality of the sexes, which was enacted not because of, but despite, the power of the Turkish ulema.
Another fact left out of Moina Shaiq’s presentation is that the major Muslim states gave women the right to vote very late. Syria granted women the right to vote in 1949, Egypt and Lebanon granted it only in 1957, Iran did so in 1963, Jordan in 1974, Iraq in 1980, Kuwait in 2005, Saudi Arabia as late as 2015.
Moina Shaiq is no doubt counting on her audience not to know any of this. She can simply assert that “several Muslim-majority states gave women the right to vote before the United States did” — true, but wildly misleading, because those states were then under the control of anti-religious Communists who were determined to break the back of Muslim power, and giving women the right to vote was then seen as part of that campaign.
Shaiq claims that domestic violence has “nothing to do with Islam.” But what then shall we make of Qur’an 4:34, where husbands are given license to “beat’ wives who are “disobedient”? Presumably Moina Shaiq does not bring that verse to the attention of her innocent auditors. Nor is she likely to bring up the fact that Muslim fathers wield great power over their children, and in Muslim countries can go unpunished, or are lightly punished, for cases of “honor killings,” where girls and women are punished for disobedience, or for disgracing the family. Everything from not wearing a hijab, to having an Unbeliever for a boyfriend, to wanting a divorce, can result in an “honor killing.” Domestic violence — husband against wife, husband (and sometimes wife) against daughter, brother against sister — in cases where dishonor has been brought to the family — is part of Muslim life.
Moina Shaiq tells her Meet-A-Muslim audiences that Muslims see Jews and Christians as their brothers. This, presumably, is based on the “three abrahamic faiths” notion, but what they share doesn’t go much beyond that claimed descent from Abraham and the belief in monotheism. Far from regarding Jews and Christians as “their brothers,” Muslims are commanded “not to take Christians and Jews as friends, for they are friends only with each other.” (5:51) Moina Shaiq knows this verse, but will not quote it, nor will she quote the description of Unbelievers in the Qur’an as “the most vile of creatures” (98:6). And if, as she claims, Muslims see Jews and Christians as their “brothers,” then one would like someone among her auditors to ask her what explains all the verses in the Qur’an that denounce Unbelievers — that is, both Christians and Jews — and further, what explains the attacks by Muslims on those Unbelievers in so many lands conquered over the past 1400 years? Why are inoffensive Christians right now being attacked and killed in Egypt, in northern Nigeria, in Pakistan, in Indonesia? Why are their churches destroyed? Why did Bishop John Joseph of Faisalabad commit suicide in 1998 to protest the cruel treatment of Christians by Muslims in Pakistan? Why have the Christian bishops of the Eastern church in Iraq bemoaned the failure of Christians in the West to speak out about their plight and predicted that soon, given the persecution they must endure, there will be no Christians left in most of the Middle East? Why were Christian villages burned down and Christian girls kidnapped by Boko Haram? Why, even in “moderate” Indonesia, have Christian schoolgirls had their throats cut? Those are some of the questions — you can no doubt think of a hundred more — that Moina Shaiq needs to be asked. She ought to be followed by a Truth Squad that shows up wherever she does, to bring up all the disturbing verses in the Qur’an and passages in the Hadith that she would prefer not to be discussed.
On the subject of cover, Moina Shaiq claims that the “hijab is optional.” That is not what the Iranian women who were recently arrested for removing their hijabs think. Nor is the hijab, or rather the head-to-toe niqab, optional in Saudi Arabia, or in Aceh Province of Indonesia. In many Muslim countries, the social pressure to wear the hijab, even if wearing it is not legally required, is so great as to never really be “optional.”
When Moina Shaiq claims that the “hijab is optional” (true in some places, false in others) because in Islam she invokes the second favorite verse of Muslim apologists — “There is no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256). But of course there is “compulsion.” There is compulsion for Muslims, who are not permitted to change their religion. Apostates from Islam may be executed. What is that if not “compulsion in religion”? And there has been compulsion for non-Muslims, whenever they were presented with the options of death, conversion, or dhimmi status. That status was so unpleasant that many millions of non-Muslims over the last 1400 years have felt compelled to convert in order to avoid it. To any fair-minded observer, this certainly constitutes “compulsion.”
According to Moina Shaiq, ISIS has nothing to do with Islam. Then where did its members get their ideas, if not from the 109 verses commanding Jihad in the Qur’an, such as the Verse of the Sword (9:5)? “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.’’ Or what about the several verses that command Muslims to “strike terror” in the hearts of the Infidels, such as in Quran 8:12, where Allah says “I have cast terror in the hearts of those who have disbelieved”? Or what should we, and what did members of ISIS, make of Muhammad’s statement in a famous hadith that “I have been made victorious through terror”? Is not Muhammad the Perfect Man and Model of Conduct? Is ISIS wrong to have followed his example?
FYI says
allah’s attitude to women..what does the koran say?
1 the legal testimony of a woman =HALF that of a man k2:282
2 a son’s inheritance =TWICE that of a daughter k4:11
3 a man can have 4 wives k4:3.Of course a muslima can’t have 4 husbands. ‘cos{sarc}THAT would be wrong.
4 pre-pubescent girls can be married off ..k65:4
It’s not very enlightened is it: a woman is only worth half man in allah’s calculus.
We know about middle aged mo and aisha his child 9 year old “wife”
{it’s ok in islam isn’t it for man to marry a little girl?}
As for the Hijabs:that’s to protect them from MUSLIM men!…if they catch sight of a woman’s hair,they might fall into temptation…. so the woman would be to blame!
That’s why muslim women cover up.As for it having anything to do with allah:the koran is a book filled with errors and demonstrably FALSE statements.Why then,should anyone take allah’s teachings seriously?
mortimer says
Women are NOT equal according to the Koran … ISLAM RE-WRITES THE DEFINITION OF ‘EQUAL’
In 4% of the verses about women in the Koran, women were superior, in 91% of the cases they were inferior and in 5% they were equal. But there is a big catch. The only way that women are equal is after death on Judgment day, when men and women will be judged on how well they followed the Koran and the Sunna. And guess what? The only way to follow the Koran and the Sunna is to obey men. Equality means obeying men
Woman are superior by being a mother, who must obey her husband. So the perfect woman on Judgment day will be a mother, who obeyed all the men in her life. So really, the women are subordinate to men in 100% of all of the Koran, Hadith and the Sira.
When Muslim TAQIYYA ARTISTS say ‘EQUAL’ they mean ‘INEQUAL’.
BC says
Half truths are worse than outright lies as the Nazi for example knew very well. The only way to get the truth about Islam is by reading and listening to EX Muslims, like Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish and many others.
The Proselytising Muslims will only tell what they think you need to know to make people accept Islam. They are obviously not going to admit to all the bad stuff. for which there is copious evidence on every side
if one just troubles to look
Ned kelly says
New Zealand gave women the vote 1893, UK 1918, Soviet Republic gave women the vote (against muslim wishes) 1920, USA 1920, Turkey 1930, Syria 1949, Egypt + lebanon 1957, Iran, 1963, Switzerland 1971, Jordan 1974, Iraq 1980, Kuwait 2005, Saudi Arabia 2015,……depends which country she is talking about, the few states in Soviet Republic that had muslims maybe….GOTTA LOVE GOOGLE
Jayell says
Why do muslims constantly try to peddle transparently blatant rubbish and expect all the world to believe them when they should be well aware that (a) the whole world is now well aware of the true facts most of the time (b) most people are now well enough aware of islam to know that it instructs its adherents to lie? Do they think we’re all idiots? Or are they so idiotic that they can’t see anything beyond their own bigotry?
mortimer says
Agree… ALL THE WORLD IS WELL AWARE … at least more every day. People today want to verify what they hear and the INTERNET EXPOSES THE TAQIYYA of smooth deceivers like Moina Shaiq.
ISLAM IS SO HORRIBLE that it cannot be promoted except by telling HUNDREDS OF LIES.
gravenimage says
Jayell, I *wish* the whole world understood the threat of Islam. Certainly, many of the naifs attending these “Meet a Muslim” Taqiyya fest do not.
James Lincoln says
Jayell,
The real irony is that they believe that their ideology is superior to that found in traditional Western culture.
gravenimage says
True, James.
Jayell says
Interesting! And yet they still believe that despite all the evidence that it’s got them absolutely nowhere? And, according to polls, they say they’re happier in NON-MUSLIM cultures? There’s clearly something wrong somewhere.
Elisha says
sura 16:106.
BC says
Lying and obfuscation is what they do it comes naturally to them and is sanctioned in Quran
Roger woodhouse says
Unfortunately there are many millions here in Britain who desperately want to believe muslims who spout these consoling words for no other reason than they just couldnt bare the true Islam living amingst them.The true Islam will require purging from our lands by violence one day but if that ‘one day’can be delayed indefinately they would be happy with that.
gravenimage says
All to true–and not just in Britain.
gravenimage says
All too true
Anjuli Pandavar says
We should thank you for reinforcing the message that non-Muslims need to read the Qur’an for themselves — all of it. The Qur’an can be arcane and often requires the simultaneous reading of several translations in parallel for opaqueness (or simple incredulity) to be dispelled. It’s a long read. Pour a glass and settle down.
For someone new to the subject or experience of Muslims and Islam, a very good place to start is Robert Spencer’s too-little-known Qur’an commentary, Blogging the Qur’an, https://www.jihadwatch.org/quran-commentary, which also makes for good parallel reading, and of course, the celebrated The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran. Also scour YouTube and see how many Muslims left Islam after they had read the Qur’an properly for the first time. We learned all the severe stuff in the madrassa, but none of the psycho stuff. Many of us had no idea just how sick our religion was until we’d read the Qur’an properly. Then, of course, if anyone wants to get into the heavy stuff, there’s always Ibn Warraq, who left no stone unturned, and the pinnacle of Spenser’s oeuvre, The History of Jihad from Muhammad to ISIS, which I’ve only just started reading, and would recommend to everybody.
Up to the late twentieth century, for all intents and purposes, Muslims controlled what non-Muslims knew about Islam. And the Muslims who disseminated that knowledge (read: disinformation) were all Muslims who did what Muslims were supposed to do. The crisis of Islam, as far as I can tell, is not that Muslims have to run like mad to save the image they need the West to have of Islam, or that a war might arise between Turkey and Iran, or between Pakistan-Saudi Arabia and Iran, but that there’s a large and rapidly-expanding ex-Muslim voice *within Muslim lands* that’s totally off-message.
One circumstance fanning the flames of Islam’s internal crisis is non-Muslims reading the Qur’an (and the Hadith) for themselves. Non-Muslims have a propensity to speak their minds, while Muslims tend to keep their mouths shut (or say what they’re supposed to say), because to even hint at your revulsion at what the Qur’an teaches is to line yourself up to get killed. Non-Muslims do not face this problem. So reading the Qur’an and speaking of what you’ve read creates an atmosphere that encourages Muslims to overcome their inner struggle when their worldview starts coming apart, and emboldens ex-Muslims to openly declare their opposition to Islam. And quite frankly, it very often teaches us what we’ve never known about the religion we grew up in.
As the West drops the torch of the Enlightenment, the ones who will pick it up and hold it high again are rising from within Islam itself. While it is the first time in history that Islam has the chance of doing real existential damage to the West, it is also the first time in history that it is losing its stranglehold over so much of its most energetic demographic, and is facing its own existential crisis. For this reason, bleak as things may seem in the West, I think there may be cause for optimism elsewhere. Note that not for one moment am I advocating complacency; jihad has to be fought tooth and nail wherever it rears its ugly head, be that head with or without hijab, with or without a beard.
Chand says
Yes, Anjuli, Islam will surely go the way of the other organized religions, over time, with Muslims rejecting it (or not bothering about literally following and believing it) and from onslaughts of atheistic scientific materialism from the outside. Might take a few generations though and in the meantime, the jihadi murderers will have to be constantly eliminated.
gravenimage says
Uh…right. Ignore the revival of Islam and Jihad, filthy Infidels…
Roger woodhouse says
The problem we face here in the West is the political complacency of our governments to ever raise any concern re. the ever growing ‘presence’ in our countries of Islam almost to the point of favouring it over our own Christianity.Why is this?I cannot believe they are in total ignorance of its history of violence and territorial ambitions.Do they seriously believe that we will happily give up our way of life for this totalitarian regime without a fight?
Wellington says
Just more obfuscation and deception by a follower of the only major religion which is a threat not only to women’s rights but to freedom in general as well as to true equality under the law.
mortimer says
Allah is the best deceiver, and Mohammedans imitate Allah.
But this is a new era in which all knowledge is disseminated via the internet. There is no more hiding.
Moina Shaiq’s lies and their refutations will be read around the world.
MOINA, YOU CANNOT HIDE FROM THE CRITICISM THAT WILL BE LEVELLED AGAINST YOU AND YOUR DECEPTIONS.
Felix Quigley says
This is a very interesting issue and is also deeply historical and Hugh Fitzgerald does not fully answer it.
As explained above the position of Islam to women is this…
“1 the legal testimony of a woman =HALF that of a man k2:282
2 a son’s inheritance =TWICE that of a daughter k4:11
3 a man can have 4 wives k4:3.Of course a muslima can’t have 4 husbands. ‘cos{sarc}THAT would be wrong.
4 pre-pubescent girls can be married off ..k65:4”
By its very nature the Russian Revolution had to come deeply into conflict with this despite compromises that Zinoviev made to Islam (This comes up in Reds based on the film by Warren Beatty based on the politics of John Reid)
This was the time also of a great flourishing of the arts in Russia and there was a full six years or so before Stalinism was to emerge and it was a full ten years before Stalin gained the upper hand over Trotsky.
So that intervening period, Hugh Fitzgerald seems to know little of.
Hugh writes
“Moina Shaiq discusses the role of women in Islam, claiming that they had the right to vote before American women did. In point of fact, the only Muslim women who were granted the right to vote before American women received it in 1920 were in the new Soviet republics. The Crimean People’s Republic, the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, and the Kyrgyz SSR were all under the rule of local Communists, atheists who granted women the right to vote precisely to weaken Muslim power. Local Muslims were not pleased that women were given the right to vote, but the Communists simply ran roughshod over them.”
But there was more to it than this. “Running roughshod over them” has a negative connotation. There was a whole vision of freedom and hope before Stalinism set in, which had to be in conflict with the very repressive family life of Islam, a kind of prison.
Felix Quigley says
I am not sure how Shaiq explains the actual covering of women in public. I saw this action in the East End of London, where women pretty well covered were walking about ten yards behind the husband. That has increased in intensity to now where women are only allowed out by the husband, and Islam, if they wear the Burka. Total oblivion for the woman.
It seems like a complete throw back into time itself.
It is made possible only by the political correctness of the host regime. It would not be logical possible any other way.
mortimer says
The scenario you described of bagged women following 15 paces behind is a perfect example of MISOGYNY. The women are treated as slaves, things and pets commanded to heal and sit when told.
gravenimage says
Felix, Mona Shaiq is not here to explain Islam’s treatment of women, but just to spout Taqiyya to snow the ‘filthy Infidels’.
mortimer says
It is true tragic to see Muslim DAWA/TAQIYYA ARTISTS attempt to SMOOTH TALK AWAY all the inconsistencies and VICIOUS BARBARISM of Islam in an era when ALL INFORMATION IS EASILY OBTAINED from the INTERNET in mere seconds!
DAWA/TAQIYYA ARTISTS like Moina Shaiq remind me of King Canute commanding the tide not to come in.
The tide of KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE ABSURDITIES and AMORALITY of Islam IS COMING IN!
Muslims cannot hide from being EXPOSED for stupidly following a MISOGYNISTIC, XENOPHOBIC DEATH CULT.
To follow Islam you must MAKE YOURSELF STUPID and MAKE YOURSELF AMORAL.
Roger woodhouse says
I have commented here before saying that Islam must be exposed to the whole country by the media.Only then can this fog of misinformation regarding the true interpretations and meanings of the quaran be lifted.I wonder then if these ‘apologists’ and deceivers of that so called religion be so quick to try and hoodwink us ‘unbelievers’
gravenimage says
Sadly, too many in the media are clueless, as well–in some cases, they are even involved in the whitewash of Islam themselves.
gravenimage says
Meet A Muslim: Moina Shaiq (Part Three)
………………………..
The idea that Islam is a ‘feminist’ religion is one of the biggest of big lies. Nothing could be further from the truth.
dan christensen says
Moina Shaiq’s pretty fairy tales are of the same kind as Barack Obama’s.
This former president of the US once opened an exhibition called “1001 inventions in islam”; presumably uncovering a thousand years of scientific and cultural achievements from Muslim countries from the 7th century onwards, and how those contributions helped create the foundations of our modern world.
It appeared that the 1001 inventions actually were only 5 and none of them were real inventions, as the West understands it, merely stolen ideas.
The only thing invented by islam is “taqiyya”, which Moina Shaiq freely applies in rich measure – probably more than 1001 times.
Kasey says
Seems the world hasn’t heard of Australia which gave all women the right to vote in 1902.
What an ignorant lot you are above the equator?
gravenimage says
True, Kasey. The Commonwealth Franchise Act was in 1902, which enabled women to vote at federal elections, and also permitted women to stand for election for the Australian Parliament.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Ignorant lot? I beg, sir, to differ.
I have hunted whales — I’m a dab hand at flensing — in Svalbard with Captain (not yet Admiral) Arthur Phillip, and I was still with him when he entered Botany Bay. I was with Banks and Solander on Captain Cook’s first voyage, and joined them when they went collecting plant specimens in New Zealand. I wrote one of the earliest papers on Banksia in Australia, which was published in the Proceedings of the Linnaean Society of New South Wales. I have spent months sheep shearing in Alice Springs. I was responsible for the first illustrated edition of We Of The Never Never, way back in 1915. I have done a double back flip off the Woolloomooloo Wharf. Last year I took on a Lebanese lout in Lakemba. A copy of Les Murray’s poems, heavily annotated, lies on my bedside table. I never go anywhere without my slouch hat. I have a boomerang that was once owned by David Unaipon. I watch Miss Phryne Fisher. I speak perfect Strine.
gravenimage says
Anyone who can say “i’m a dab hand at flensing” and make mention of the Linnaean Society has my undying admiration. Kudos to you, fair sir.
revereridesagain says
You watch Phryne, Hugh? Crikey!
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Yes. Essie Davis and I go way back, long before Jack
revereridesagain says
Interesting experiment:
Arrive at one of Moina’s talks. Plunk down on the table in front of you — and her — a Quran, a copy of “Reliance of the Traveller”, and 2 or 3 of Robert Spencer’s books on the real nature of Islam. All extensively bookmarked with colorful little Post-It skinny notes.
See what happens…
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Do it, for god’s sake Bring some back-up — Dawes and Prescott — with you, so you can’t be dissed or dismissed as a lone lunatic, or taken hostage at Meriam’s Corner.
dumbledoresarmy says
When you do it, make sure you have two or three friends who can video the whole thing.
One of those friends must focus on getting accurate and continuous video footage of Moina’s whole-body language, and the other, continous video footage of her facial expressions as she reacts.
Why continuous video footage of her face? Because.. Facial Action Coding System. You want the footage so that, later, at leisure, you can slow it down and look at it frame by frame by frame. Because… no matter how good a Muslim is at conscious deception of others, at faking a smile, faking ‘pure and holy’, faking ‘wounded innocence’, etc – their facial muscles are still controlled by a millennia-old – and I mean many millennia – program, the program that enables mothers to ‘read’ their non-verbal child’s mood and needs. One’s real, subconscious thoughts and feelings ‘leak’ through continuously in ‘micro-expressions’. Those micro-expressions can be caught by the video camera.
If her true feeling toward her kuffar audience, for example, is malevolent murderousness and a supremacists’s sneering contempt, then.. it will *show*. Maybe only for a second: but it will show. It wil ‘leak through’.
terry says
They always lie, it’s so much a part of their sick ideology and DNA that they just can’t stop themselves.
The other reason is out of fear if they don’t do what they’re told.
They are not allowed to have thoughts of freedom.
Valkyrie Ziege says
; Muhammadans can twist their bronze-age superstition
any way they want, intelligent people aren’t buying.