Religion of peace [3]

Religion of peace [1]
Religion of peace [2]
Religion of peace [3]
Religion of peace [4]

Part 1 was about the defence of Islam and what detractors point out, Part 2 continued the theme.  Part 3 includes other takes as well and Part 4 will look at the history of the Arabs in the Mediterranean.

It was stated in the post and in the comments thread that many of us have Muslim friends who are the best people in the world – kindly, warm etc. It’s probably not the best analogy because it looks like a parallel is being drawn which I’m really not doing but in pre-Nazi Germany you’d find the nicest of people. I’ve spent time in Austria and found the people I knew delightful.

Yet they are the very people who acted to keep Waldheim in place and that is the area of the world [close to Bavaria] out of which the Thule came.   People will act differently when they are either 1. radicalized by perceived injustices played on by malcontents and 2. begin to lose perspective.

A point made by Gary Brecher’s article on Algeria is that much of the looting, mutilation and murder was done with the direct complicity of the ordinary people. It was not possible for some of those armies to move around unless they were housed and fed. So by doing this and not turning them over to the authorities, the ordinary people were part of it.

This comes out further down in Part 3 and it makes one think a bit about the idea that the average Muslim is the fine, friendly person we think he is.    Yes, he may well be now but not under certain circumstances, e.g. Muslims being attacked en masse in this country.

In the same way, to be fair, if we were attacked by Muslims en masse, which is what they are exhorted to do, then opinions would harden.

This is the polarizing nature of radicalism.   Even reading these three posts leaves a person a little more uneasy than before, if not exactly altering his or her point of view.    The motivation is that forewarned is forearmed.     I’ll still be friends with my Muslim friends but this is still at the back of the mind.

And so to Part 3.

Islam is a Tolerant Religion
Daniel Fox December 7, 2002 ©The Naked Liberal

“Tolerate”, as defined by the Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary is, “To suffer to be, or to be done, without prohibition or hindrance; to allow or permit by not preventing.” Thus, tolerance essentially means that you may not agree with something, but you do not hinder this “something” from being practiced, said, taught, etc. Tolerance does NOT mean agreeing with everything you hear, or promoting every viewpoint.

Separation of church and state was pioneered by Baptists and their European forebears such as the Waldensians and Anabaptists. Colonial Baptist John Leland was instrumental in securing American religious freedom through his persuasion of James Madison to include the language that became the 1st amendment in the Bill of Rights into the Constitution. The builders of this nation, both Christian and not, rightly understood, as the Bible teaches, that there cannot be force used in religious conversion and religious practice:

“For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds.)” (II Corinthians 10:3-4)

Matters of eternity, of the salvation of souls, are to be dealt with through spiritual means (prayer, witnessing, a good testimony), not by carnal (earthly) means.   Is Islam a tolerant religion in matters of internal dissent and external challenge?

During the Gulf War:

“…Prince Nazef had warned that anyone undermining the kingdom’s security would be executed or have a hand and a leg cut off…” 1

The death warrant was placed on the head of Salman Rushdie for writing a book critical of Islam, The Satanic Verses.    The very title of that book offended Muslim sensibilities by its reminder of Mohammed’s penning what are called “the Satanic verses”.

These were verses which he supposedly wrote while under the influence of Satan, condoning that greatest of sins in Islam, shirk, which is when a person turns away from Islam and to idolatry.  There seems to be an inherent tendency in Islam which influences its followers away from toleration of opposition.

The only democratically-elected Muslim government, with freedoms protected by law currently, is Turkey.    Libya, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait, are the norm for the Muslim world.

Islam is, to an extent, the application of 7th century Arabian culture into a 21st century world.    Viewed in this light, it is of little surprise that sharia appear barbaric to Western eyes.    Muslims in the West who have lived here for years and have (supposedly) imbibed Western values and ideas, insist that the Qur’an is “hands-off” as far as being a topic of discussion or debate is concerned, while at the same time attempting to subject the Bible to critical scrutiny.    Criticising the Qur’an, as is written, leads to death or disfigurement.

Columnist Don Feder reports that when the imam of the Hazrat-I-Abubakr Sadiq mosque in New York City denounced the World Trade Centre terror attack, half of the congregation got up and walked out.

Joseph Farah and others associated with online news source WorldNetDaily and its associated printed magazine Whistle Blower have received numerous death threats because of links and articles they have ran exposing the darker side of Islam.    WorldNetDaily’s advertisers have also been the target of a campaign of intimidation from self-identified Muslims.

Dr. Robert Morey, an evangelical Christian apologist who has written several books about Islam, has been the target of verbal harassment and physical attack on his person.

Will a system of thought which discourages and suppresses dissent also suppress and persecute other religions?    Renouncing Islam is a capital crime.    In Sudan, Christians and animists in the South are usually sold north by Muslim (mostly Arab) radicals, with the knowledge of the Sudanese government.

17 people in a Protestant congregation in Pakistan were gunned down by three Islamic fanatics, on 28 October, 2001.       Gospel missionary Martin Burnham was murdered in Mindanao, in the Philippines, by Abu Sayyaf, a Muslim organisation.

There is a prosecution pending, of several Pakistani Christians under anti-blasphemy laws (which carry the death sentence). The Copts of Egypt have undergone similar treatment as the Kurds in Iraq.

Islam has an endemic problem with violence, which stems in large part from intolerance of competition.   With no intrinsic message of being saved through belief alone, it is therefore necessary to add physical pressure to the conversion process.

Islam will rebut this by pointing to the “tolerance” exhibited by the Muslims during the Middle Ages.    When Islamic civilisation was at its height, Islam was wonderfully tolerant and open-minded towards other religions.    While it is true that during this period Islam more often than not refrained from massacring dissenters and rivals (which is more than can be said for Catholicism), nevertheless, during this era, Jews and Christians living in Muslim lands were reduced to the position of dhimmis.

Dhimmitude entailed allowing non-Muslims to remain non-Muslim, so long as certain stringent rules were adhered to.    Dhimmis were not allowed to engage in any outward show of their religion, such as ringing church bells, praying or reading their Scriptures in public, or disputing about religious matters with a Muslim.

They were also not allowed to build any religious buildings nor were they allowed to repair those already existing which wore down with age.    Dhimmis had to wear distinctive clothing that marked them as clearly non-Muslim.

All non-Muslims were to pay the jizyah, the religion tax, levied specifically upon non-Muslims, usually Christians and Jews, which was the only life-preserving alternative to outright conversion to Islam.    The jizyah was designed to “encourage” subject populations to convert to Islam, since conversion meant being relieved of a heavy financial burden.

Islam has fought five wars of annihilation against Israel and failed five times.

In an interview given to an Arab newspaper days after the September 11 attacks, the Egyptian imam Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha made claims that Jewish doctors in New York were poisoning Muslim babies and that the Jews and Israel were responsible for the World Trade Centre terrorism [3].    This is the official position of the Syrian government.

The Saudi Arabian press, in 1961, hailed Adolf Eichmann as a “martyr who bestowed a true blessing on humanity”, and who had “the honour of killing six million Jews”. Yet Holocaust denial continues at the same time. Interesting that Bin Laden is supported by Aryan Nations.

Surah 3:106-107 indicates that on the day of judgment before Allah, those with white faces will receive Allah’s mercy, while those with black faces will receive damnation.

“On the Day when some faces will be white, and some faces will be black: To those whose faces will be black, will be said: “Did ye reject Faith after accepting it? Taste then the penalty for rejecting Faith.” But those whose faces will be white – they will be in Allah’s mercy: therein to dwell.”

Muslims claim that these colour references are to faces “lit up with” white and “in the gloom of” black, but the literal reading of the Arabic does not support this revision [4].

Muslims in India, whose skins are generally darker than those of Arabs from the Middle East, are considered to be “second-class” Muslims of the Middle East often still regard black people as slaves [5].    Muslim Arabs provided a market for African tribes to sell captured prisoners of war as slaves centuries before Europeans became involved in the trade.    It is estimated that 9.3 million black Africans were taken across the Sahara desert to serve as slaves in the Muslim Empire [6].    Of these many died from exhaustion and thirst in the long trek to Mediterranean coast.

This equals in volume, both living and dead, the Trans-Atlantic slave trade with which Muslims chastise the West.    The slaves being taken today in Sudan by Arab Muslims are black Africans as well, mostly from the Christian and animist Nilotic tribes of the South, such as the Dinka peoples.    Mohammed himself kept black people as slaves [7] and he frequently referred to Africans as “raisin-heads” [8].

One of the most common complaints by Muslims is that of American or Western “imperialism”.    The pervasiveness of Western culture, attitudes, and ideas has allowed our way of life to penetrate even behind the Iron Crescent.    Cell phones, McDonalds, and a host of other Western innovations are now commonplace in cities all across the Middle East, and it is even reported that the most popular American television show in many Muslim countries is Baywatch [this is an old article - JH].

But with this have come women’s rights, religious and political freedom, and Western-style secularism.    This phenomenon, coupled with the disparity of wealth between the West and the Muslim world, has caused anxiety.

Islam was and is a religion spread primarily by the sword.    The world according to Islam is divided into two regions: Dar es-Salaam and Dar al-Harb, the house of peace and submission to Islam, and the house of war, respectively.

The Persians were not originally a Muslim people, but were conquered by Islam.    Neither were the Berbers, Kurds, Caucasians, Syrians, or Black Africans. The Arabs themselves weren’t originally Muslims until Mohammed and his successors spread Islam by force of arms.

The veil, the burkha, and other facial coverings for women stem from Mohammed’s Arabia.    Women should be accompanied by male relatives when in public, prevented from driving (Saudi Arabia and others), and do not receive an equal share of inheritance (Quranic law, but comes from Arab culture in the 7th century).    The cutting off of hands for theft and methods of execution stem from the harsh life of desert nomads where force had to prevail to keep the rowdier elements in line and to preserve individual property.

Europe was invaded by the Moors and later the Turks.    India was controlled by Muslim Moghuls for several centuries. Islam reached the Russian steppes at the height of its expansion before being driven back by the Slavs.    The Muslim enclaves in Bosnia and Albania are reminders to this day of Muslim Turkish iexpansion to the Balkans, these being Slavic Europeans who converted to Islam through both force and the persuasion of being free from paying the religion tax imposed on non-Muslims.

This can be coupled with the Spanish conquest of Latin America and the Japanese conquest of China and Korea in the 20th century.

Muslim radicals regularly bomb targets in Indian Kashmir to force Indians out and to unite that region with Pakistan.    Muslims in many northern states of Nigeria are imposing sharia, in violation of Nigerian law.    The guerilla war in the Philippines has the stated aim of setting up a Muslim state in Mindanao.    Monetary bounties are offered to people in South Africa for conversions to Islam.

The American Muslim Council, identifies with the ultimate goal of “Islamising” the United States of America. [9]    Methods include encouraging immigration to the United States from Muslim nations, encouraging acceptance of and the spreading of information about Islamic practices and religion, and silencing dissenters against Islam through legal action.

End Notes

(1) – Associated Press, February 2, 1991
(2) – Insight Magazine, Vol. 17, No. 41, Nov. 5, 2001, p.43
(3)http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/23/nyregion/23IMAM.html?pagewanted=print
(4) – R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion, p. 155
(5) – V. and D. Khalil, “When Christians Meet Muslims”, Christian Herald, July/August 1988, p.44
(6) – K.P. Moseley, “Caravel and Caravan: West Africa and the World-Economies, ca. 900–1900 AD”, Review: A Journal of the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems and Civilizations, Vol. XV (1992), p. 534
(7) – Sahih al-Bukhari vol. 6, no. 435
(8) – Sahih al-Bukhari vol. 1, no. 622; vol. 9, no. 256
(9) – D. Pipes, The Danger Within: Militant Islam in America

The following article I have some issues with and can actually see the Muslim point in principle – their observation of what the changed role of women has done to the society is valid in part.    However, I reject outright the means of enforcing the status quo and the way women really are oppressed – not just in radical feminazi eyes but in reality and there’d be few in this country and the west in general who would condone these practices.

And this is not just overseas but is happening in Britain today, even down to honour killings.    Whilst I agree with the Muslims that girls should not be doing the things they are doing in this dysfunctional society, the notion of locking up or killing a girl is abhorrent.

Women – Respected and Equal in Islam

A Muslim woman in the West will say that she is a Muslim, and that she has the same rights and respect as a man.    She’s a Muslim, and Islam respects her and allows her the same freedom as men have. And in the United States, Canada or Great Britain, their rights are protected.

In the West, both law and popular opinion greatly discourage activities such as beating of wives and marriage to underage girls.   Society would frown upon a man who made his wife wear a veil and stay inside the house unless he was with her.

In Islam, as found in the Qur’an, the woman is inferior to the man in matters of law and justice.    It is stipulated that a woman is to receive only half the inheritance that her brothers receive when their parents pass away:

“Allah thus directs you as regards your children’s inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half.” (Surah 4:11)

“Allah directs thus about those who leave no descendants or ascendants as heirs. If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the inheritance: If such a deceased was a woman, who left no child, her brother takes her inheritance: If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance between them: if there are brothers and sisters, they share, the male having twice the share of the female.” (Surah 4:176)

This apportionment system of giving women half the amount which a man receives is also supported by Mohammed in the ahadith [1].    A woman’s testimony in Islamic jurisprudence only counts for half that of a man’s, thus two women are needed to counter the claims of a man.

“The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that for a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’ ” 2

On homosexuality, the punishment for women is:

“If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four reliable witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some other way.” (Surah 4:15)

For men:

“If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.” (Surah 4:16)

“The statement that ‘men are the guardians of women’ in verse 38 of Sura 4 postulates inequality of men and women in civil rights.  The words are followed by two brief explanations of men’s superiority over women [3]    The right to divorce belongs to the husband but not to wives. [4]”

Women have rights to property and asset ownership but women in many Muslim countries are not free to leave the house without their husbands’ permission.

Pakistan, at one time, had a female Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto. However, radical Islamist agitation brought the fragile democratic government down, and it was replaced with a military dictatorship, currently headed by Pervez Musharraf.   Pakistan is now openly one of the centres of radical Islamic jihadi activity, with thousands of madrassas, or Islamic schools.

Women are in many cases considered to be the property of men, and this dates back to the conditions found in pre-Islamic Arabia.    As Ali Dashti notes:

“In pre-Islamic Arabic society, the women did not have the status of independent persons, but were considered to be possessions of the men. All sorts of inhumane treatment of the women were permissible and customary.” [5]

This bears out in the Qur’an:

“Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property for the support of women. So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.” (Surah 4:34, Pickthal translation)

Likewise, the word “scourge” is translated from an Arabic word which describes the scourging given to violent criminals and which is used to control wild, unruly camels [6].

In Islam, while the woman cannot divorce her husband without being considered an unbeliever and destined for hell, a man can divorce his wife for a reason:

“And if ye wish to exchange one wife for another and ye have given unto one of them a sum of money (however great), take nothing from it. Would ye take it by the way of calumny and open wrong?” (Surah 4:20, Pickthal translation)

Mohammed married Safiya, a Jewish girl, after killing her father and her betrothed husband.    He did not want to go through the long procedure of finding a sponsor, paying the dowry, sending out invitations, or preparing a wedding feast.    He consummated his “marriage” to her on a sand dune.

(Al Hadis, Vol. 2. p. 638) Abdur Rahman- b-Salem reported that the Apostle of Allah said, “You should marry virgins, and verily they are sweeter in tongue, more prolific in wombs, and easily satisfied with little.”

Hassan, a grandson of Mohammed., over the course of his life, had over seventy wives, yet never exceeded the four-wife limit at any one time.    He would marry a woman during the day, enjoy her company for one or a few nights, and then divorce her so that he could marry another, which is within the bounds of Islamic law [7].

In Islam, men may beat their wives, provided they don’t break any of her bones. [8] :

But you must beat her (a Muslim man’s wife) with a “miswak” (a small natural toothbrush) Qur’an 4:34

“On the Day of Judgment, a husband shall not be questioned for beating his wife.” [9]

This bore true also in the earthly realm, with Mohammed commanding,    “No man shall be questioned for beating his wife.” [10]

In many Muslim nations, women are subjected to the laws of purdah, or seclusion, which refers not only to the practice of facial veiling and body coverings, but also to the seclusion of women from all public life, as much as is possible in a given situation.    A woman must be veiled even in the presence of her male in-laws [11].

A woman is not allowed, by Islamic law, to undertake a journey longer than three days unless accompanied by a male relative, and cannot spend money without her husband’s permission [12].

A woman’s body is the possession of her husband, even to the extent that her breast milk is his literal possession [13].

It is recorded that Mohammed stated that if it were proper for any person to be decreed to prostrate themselves in reverence to any other than Allah, that it would be a wife to her husband [14].

In many Muslim countries, women cannot leave the house without written permission from their husbands, and cannot drive automobiles.

Women were considered by Mohammed to be deficient in religion.    He is recorded as saying:

“I have not seen any one more deficient in intelligence and religion than you women.” [15]

Mohammed also forbade women from giving themselves to extra prayer or fasting without the express permission of their husbands, as this might prevent them from being as sexually useful to their husbands as they could be [16].

Mohammed taught that a majority of women would go to hell [17], and that the majority of people in hell were women, as he claimed to have seen in a vision [18].

Mohammed said, “A woman is like a private part. When she goes out the devil casts a glance at her [19].”

The ahadith state that if a man desires sexual intercourse with his woman, that she must respond immediately, even if she is engaged in baking bread at the communal oven [20].

If a woman is riding a camel, and her husband demands intercourse, she must submit, and this is her duty before Allah, that fulfilling of her husband’s desire [21].

If a woman refuses to come to bed with her husband, Islam teaches that she is cursed by the very angels of Allah [22].

“When a wife vexes her husband, then houris of Paradise utter curses on her saying, ‘may Allah destroy you because he is with you only for a short time; he will shortly leave you to come to us.’” [23].

In the Qur’an:

“Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate). So go to your tilth as ye will…” (Surah 2:223)

This is reiterated in the ahadith:

“The most equitable of the conditions of marriage is that you should fulfill that dowry with which you have made private parts lawful.” [24]

“Any female who dies while her husband was pleased with her will enter Paradise.” [25]

End Notes
(1) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 4, no. 10
(2) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 3, no. 826
(3) – Ali Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammed, pp. 113.
(4) – Ali Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammed, pp. 114.
(5) – Ali Dashti, 23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammed, pp. 113.
(6) – R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion, p. 29
(7) – A. Shaikh, Islam: Sex and Violence, Chapter 2
(8) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 439
(9) – Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 105
(10) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, p. 215
(11) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 432
(12) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 265
(13) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, p. 27
(14) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 428
(15) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p. 541
(16) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 300
(17) – Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, p. 1431
(18) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, p. 28 (see also 1:301, 2:161, and 7:124 of the same hadith)
(19) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p. 692
(20) – Sahih Tirmzi, vol. 1, p. 428
(21) – Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p. 520
(22) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7, p. 93
(23) – Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p 560
(24) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p. 657
(25) – Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, p. 211

Mutilation as a practice in primitive societies

Female genital mutilation (sometimes called “female circumcision”) is carried out in many Muslim nations, particularly those in Africa and in particular, Sudan.

The practice involves amputating some or all of the external genitalia – the clitoris, the small genital lips and the large ones – diminishing a woman’s ability to experience sexual pleasure. It can also cause serious health problems, including hemorrhaging and infection.    It is meant to be carried out when an infant but in practice can be done when the girl is 9, 10 or even up to 13.

One account is given of a Yacouba girl in Man, Ivory Coast. Marthe Bleu is an eager initiate but even if she resisted, her father, Jean-Baptiste Bleu, a trim, genial, neatly dressed waiter at a local hotel, would insist on her cutting.    “She has no choice.    I decide.  Her viewpoint is not important.”

Many believe that cutting helps insure a girl’s virginity before marriage and fidelity afterward by reducing sex to a marital obligation.  Often, people follow the custom simply because it has always been done.    “If your daughter has not been excised, the father is not allowed to speak at village meetings,” he said.    “No man in the village will speak with me and no one will marry her. ”

A midwife added, “It is an obligation.   We have done it, we do it and we will continue to do it.”

Typically, the cutting is done by traditional village women without anything to dull the pain.   But sometimes, when midwives or nurses are brought in to do the job, they apply a local anesthetic.

A description of infibulation
by M.A.S. Mustafa, of Djibouti, 
from the thesis of Dr. Alan David

‘The little girl, naked, is immobilised in the sitting position on a low stool by at three women.   One of them with her arms tightly around the the girl’s chest; two others hold the her thighs and her arms are tied behind her back, or immobilized by two other women guests.

The traditional operator says a short prayer: “Allah is great and Mahomet is His Prophet. May Allah keep away all evils.”    Then she spreads on the floor some offerings to Allah: split maize, or, in urban areas, eggs.   Then the old woman takes her razor and excises the clitoris.    The operator cuts with her razor from top to bottom of the small lip and then scrapes the flesh from the inside and this scraping is repeated on the other side.

Then the operator applies a paste and ensures the adhesion of the lips by means of acacia thorns, three or four in this manner down the vulva, held in place either by means of sewing thread, or with horse-hair.    Paste is again put on the wound.

The girl’s legs are then bound with strips of material to immobilize her legs entirely.    She is then dressed and put to bed for up to six weeks.

When she marries, the man opens her again with a dagger in order for her to fulfil her duty.

Does this mean that every Muslim man beats his wife, “loves” her only for the pleasure she can bring him, wants to force his wife to remain secluded from the world and mutilates her?    No, of course not.

Nor does it mean that Muslim women everywhere suffer from the conditions of theocratic Islamic states.    Many Muslim women, particularly in the West but even in some of the more secular Muslim nations such as Turkey and Indonesia, do enjoy varying degrees of personal liberty and political freedom.

However, strict, orthodox Islam holds to those teachings illustrated above, and this must be considered by Muslim women, if they are in a position to do so.

Moving on to the general barbarity of the Muslim world:

Torture and murder in Indonesia

“My name is Vivian, and I am 18 years old. I have a little sister and brother.    As a family we live in what is supposed to be a “secure” apartment.    At 9.15 am, May 14th, 1998 a huge crowd had gathered around our apartment.    They screamed, “Let’s butcher the Chinese!”, “Let’s eat pigs!”, “Let’s have a party!”

We live of the 7th floor and we got a call from a family on the 3rd floor saying that the crowd had reached the 2nd floor.    They even chased some occupants upstairs.    We were all very frightened.   In our fright we prayed and left everything in God’s hands. Afterward we left our room and went upstairs to the top floor, as it was impossible to go downstairs and escape.

We got to the 15th floor and stayed with some friends.    Not long afterwards we were surprised because some of the crowd coming out of the elevators right before we entered the room.   We hurried into the room and locked the door tightly.    At that time we heard them knock at the other rooms loudly and there were some screams from women and girls.   Our room was filled with fear.    We realized that they would come to us.    So we spread throughout the room hiding in the corners.

We could hear girls of 10 to 12 years old screaming, “Mommy, … mommy… mom … mom … it hurts”    That time I didn’t know that these little girls were being raped.    After about half an hour the noise diminished and we had some guts to go out and check.   It was indescribable.    A lot, some of them young girls, were lying on the floor.    “Oh my God, what has happened?”    Seeing all of this we screamed and my little sister Fenny, screamed hysterically and hugged her father.

Tears started coming down from my eyes.    With our friends, a newly-wed couple, we started going downstairs.    Reaching the 10th floor, we heard a scream for help.    The scream was very clear and we decided to go down and see.    But as we turned we saw a lot of people.    I saw a woman in her 20s being raped by 4 men.    She tried to fight back but she was held down tightly.    Realizing the danger we ran as hard as we could.    But unfortunately the mob caught Fenny.    We tried to rescue her, but could not do anything.

There were about 60 of them.    They tied us up with ripped sheets, myself, my father, my mother Fenny, Donny, Uncle Dodi and my Aunt Vera.    They led us to a room.    Uncle Dodi asked what they wanted, but they did not reply.   My father who also screamed was hit with a piece of wood and he fainted.    My mother has fainted when Fenny was dragged to the sofa.

I could only pray and pray that disaster would not befall us.    Uncle Dodi kept trying to stop them by offering money.    His efforts were fruitless.    And in the end 5 people raped Fenny.    Before beginning with the raping they always said “Allahu Akbar” (an Islamic phrase in Arabic meaning “God is great”.   They were ferocious and brutal.

Not long afterward, around 9 men came to the room and dragged me.    I also saw them forcing and dragging my Aunt Vera.    But at that time I passed out and everything went blank.    I became conscious at around 5 or 6 pm.    My head hurt and I realized I had no clothing on my body. I cried and realized my family was still there.    I also saw uncle Dodi lying on the floor and Aunt Vera was crying over his body.   I felt so weak and fainted again.

The next day I was in the Pluit hospital.   My father and mother were beside me.   With all the pains on my body I asked, “Mom, why Fenny. Mom?”   My father told me then what had happened.

After I fainted 7 people raped me.    At that time my father still couldn’t see well after being hit with a piece of wood.    They raped me repeatedly.    Then my father said “Vivian, Fenny is gone…”    I was confused and cried out, “Why Dad?”    My father couldn’t answer.  He told me to rest and went out of the room.    I cried over and over again, feeling that my life had no meaning any more.

A week ago, after I was released from the hospital I was told everything that had happened.    When Fenny was raped she kept on fighting and so she was repeatedly slapped by her rapists.   The last time she fought Fenny spat on one of them.   Offended, the man grabbed a knife and stabbed Fenny’s stomach over and over again.   Finally she died with blood over her whole body.

“God…why should all of this happen?    Where are you God?    Are you still alive?”    My Aunt Vera now stays with her parents.    She is in shock.    Her face is blank and she refuses to eat.    Almost every hour my mother and I cry over all these happenings.    I can never forget.    These mobs of people are uncivilized monsters.

Yet, all Indonesians call themselves believers in God Almighty.    There is no room for preachers filled with fear who think of escape and other selfish plans.    Some Christians are putting signs on their shops “Owned by Muslim”.    May God forgive them.    Pray for us.”

………..

Let me return to the first post and Iftekhar A. Hai [director of interfaith relations for United Muslims of America Interfaith Alliance]:

“Islam is a peaceful, loving religion … backed up with love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness and reconciliation.”

Perhaps we non-Muslims have a different concept of love, mercy and compassion. These three posts have outlined many of the ways that Islam and its founder were anything but compassionate.

One commenter made out that it was the Crusades which radicalized Islam.    Note he is not defending Islam in this, only roping in the Crusades.   Though I do not defend the Crusades in the least, as they were Them on the march under Christian colours, it’s easy to see one of the reasons they were undertaken.

“Christendom” had been under attack, especially along the Mediterranean coastline for some time and the Arabs had their greedy eyes on cities of wealth and prestige such as Constantinople.    They also had eyes on Rome but that was a tougher nut to crack.        Some say that Rome was even complicit in what happened [think Great Schism].

The Arab attacks on and destruction of the civilizations of Christendom were just as much a cultural annihilation as a war between nations.    The effect was that main cities had to move further inland and yet the official histories are sketchy on this.    It’s generally assumed that what the Crusaders found when they visited Muslim lands was a high culture and more sophisticated living than the brutish Europe of Christendom.

What is not mentioned is that the archaeological evidence does not support this view.   Dearieme pointed out some time back:

Civilisation disappeared from most of Britain before Mahomet was ever heard of. Here, at least, the German and Gael destroyed civilisation – aided, very likely, by at least one burst of plague. And when the Celtic church returned from Ireland to Britain, the Roman Church set out to destroy it.

… which was true and I replied:

None of which negates the thrust of the post re the surrounds of the Mediterranean.

That mob who were raping and did the killing – there was certainly an element of the Indonesian in that but what gave them their pretext was Islam – it provided them with the verses of hate and the rest took care of itself.   It is quite offensive to lie that the gospels enable this sort of thing too – they simply do not.   Read them.    The commenter who listed all sorts of non-Christians as Christian perpetrators of atrocity obviously knows nothing about Christianity.   Anyone at all can call out Allahu Akbar while committing the most unspeakable acts and anyone can wear a big red cross on a tunic and create a river of blood too, all in the name of God.

Everyone is so quick to blame God when it is the other entity who should be getting the blame.   Look once again at Gary Brecher’s article and what those groups called themselves and there you have it.   It’s not “religion” per se which needs to be eliminated but this particular one which authorizes this sort of thing, plus the Kabbalah Jewish aberration Madonna and others ago for.

In Part 4, the culture-cide inflicted on Europe by the Arabs.

Religion of peace [1]
Religion of peace [2]
Religion of peace [3]
Religion of peace [4]

2 Responses to “Religion of peace [3]”

  1. Daniel September 26, 2012 at 07:57 Permalink

    Well, I started to write down a few pages with counterarguments in relation to your articles regarding Islam “A Religion of Peace?” until I realized that there is little to gain in my effort to prove otherwise as one enters in a dimension which has little to do with the world out there. There are although, some points I need to clear out to you which I will do via private mail in order to avoid spending too much space on your blog. You decide if you want to include them.

    Humans experience a religion in a certain societal context during a given time and thus indispensably, doctrines vary through time and space. Religion is a human activity, undergoing all kinds of influences irrespective of the permanent status of their Holy Book.

    Islam, as other religions, had their excesses but what we are confronted with, recently, is the result of the growing influence of the Sunni Wahhabist cult that started to move forward since the 70s. They are gradually and patiently cultivating religious memes in mainstream Sunni Islam through their international fundings.

    Ironically Wahhabism is harming Islam by corrupting its faith, even literally by destroying artifacts and symbols of (ancient) Islam. It is not limited to Buddhist statues. Their doctrine is based on purity (intolerance and conflict) and they do control the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

    The countries following this doctrine are our allies and we are witnessing unconsciously, partially through them, the slow ongoing damage of a once grand culture – which we didn’t understand in the first place because the Christian Church created our perception during centuries.

    We are thus, through our alliance, participating and encouraging a Green peril, now the Red one has gone.

    Following quote, “Indeed, in the Arab nations, the rise of extremism in the form of the Wahhabi movement during the twentieth century could not have taken place without the huge investments made by the Al-Saud family in conjunction with the American in the name of democracy, freedom and human rights to destroy Arab nationalism, socialism, secularism, and of course Islam”, demonstrates in a few words a certain political agenda behind the cult.

    Wahhabist dogma still represents a minority of Muslims, although we are motivated to believe that this is mainstream Islam (which doesn’t exist by the way). Apparently It is working as more people of the West are perceiving Muslims negatively.

    This is one of the reasons why I don’t want to go along the path of hatred which is motivated in the articles of ‘Religion of peace’?. These articles are an extension of an emotional state already living in many Western minds, in regard to Muslims. I’m sure it is not difficult to convince readers of the message you want us to see. The quotes, examples and remarks are mirroring your (our) perception through the choices you made of statements and through the wording. Some of the information is false or distorted.

    Dividing by design groups of people is a strong social weapon used by an elite taking advantage via the divide and rule tactic. I quote an example used in Ireland by the British elite: “ To rule in the face of these revolts the British chose to divide.

    Religion was the chosen instrument of division. Religious intolerance, the fostering of mutual suspicion, hatred and violence between Catholic and Protestant – this became the shield of the ruling administration against the overthrow by the people. With these methods an entire social system was dissolved.”

    It is part of a dehumanization technique, through a calculated, media-based, polarization process.

    Once a group is degraded to Untermenschen, one will not mourn their dead. Hate and anger are feeding on both ends within this mindset matrix. Perception becomes reality after controlled cultivation: A self-fulfilling prophecy.

    What we need is unity and a clear sight above the evil deeds that are looking like managed scenario’s to spread fear and hate. Eliminating fear is a major step to be conscious. Luckily there are still initiatives that are based on common sense, like the one of Avaaz.org: Who’s afraid of Muslim Rage?

Leave a Reply

Please copy the string DG6i9Q to the field below: