Muscatine

More on "The Religion of Peace"

Posted in: Muscatine
  • Avatar
  • hiroad
  • Respected Neighbor
  • The Hilltop
  • 5055 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

April 27, 2013

Let My People Go

By Jerrold L. Sobel

Slavery  is explicitly permitted in the Koran.  Recently Sheikh Saleh Al-Fawzan, a  prominent Saudi religious leader called for slavery to be re-legalized  throughout the kingdom.  According to the Sheik, a member of the Senior  Council of Clerics:  "Slavery is a part of Islam.  Slavery  is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam."  

 

In  thought and deed this way of thinking is common throughout the Islamic  world.  Abu Ishaq al-Huwanini, an Egyptian Cleric proudly proclaims he  wishes to apply the ancient Shar'i code  of enslaving populations which refuse to pay the jizia (poll tax) or converting  to Islam when defeated at the hands of a Muslim nation.  He states:   "When I want a sex  slave, I go to the market and pick  whichever female I desire and buy her"

 

Why  such dastardly remarks and proof of such practices are discounted by those so  quick to chastise Israel is perplexing to say the least.  A segment of the  Jewish population, particularly on campuses throughout the world, denounces  Israel as an apartheid state while ignoring the very real practice of Islamic  slavery and the endemic degradation of women which exists to this very day; most  egregiously throughout Africa and the Middle East.

 

Perhaps,  unfortunate to say, slavery is almost discounted in the Arab Middle East, and  recognition of it in today's politically correct world is muted at best.   But one would think the widespread Muslim enslavement of native black people  throughout Africa would be a cause célèbre amongst the self-proclaimed  intelligentsia.  It simply isn't.

 

How  many people have heard the story of  Moulkheir Mint Yarba?  Very few if any I assume.  According to a  CNN story written by John D. Sutter, Moulkheir Mint Yarba is a woman born into  slavery in the West African, Islamic nation of Mauritania.  A country in  which modern slavery is more prevalent than anywhere else in the  world.

 

One  day after returning to her wretched dwelling from tending her master's goats she  was devastated to find her infant daughter left outside in the searing desert heat to  die.  This was done as punishment by her master; a man who had fathered the  infant subsequent to raping this woman.  Why such a despicable act?   He told her she would work  faster without the child on her back.  What recourse did she  have?  The same as the other 10%-20% of slaves that live in Mauritania,  none. 

 

Just  to the South of Mauritania is another West African nation, Senegal.  Its  population is 9.1 million, 80% of whom are Muslims.  Goree  Island, lies less than 2 miles off the coast of Senegal, and was one of West  Africa's largest slave trading outposts during the Atlantic Slave Trade.   While slaves no longer flow in and out of the slave houses of Gorée Island,  slavery continues to riddle the country.  Senegal is a source, transit, and  destination country for modern slaves, according to the U.N.  Human Rights Council.

 

Authorities  in Nigeria say as many as 40,000 girls and women have been trafficked to nearby  West African countries to serve as sex workers.  Simon Egede an  investigator from Nigeria's National Agency for Prohibition of Traffic in  Persons found slave  camps full of Nigerian women and girls in Mali, Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso,  Niger, Libya, and Morocco.  He estimates that there are between 20,000 and  40,000 victims.  What do all these nations have in common?  Political  correctness aside, the least common denominator denotes an average of better  than 75% of their collective population is Islamic.  These are indisputable  facts which are documented and well known to the U.N., the E.U., and in  governmental agencies throughout the world.  So once again, where is the  outcry on American campuses by professors and students so quick to castigate  Israel?  And what has the world body done so far about  it?

 

On  November 8, 2012 the U.N. elected genocidal, misogynistic and tyrannical Sudan  to its 54-member Economic and Social Council.  Laughingly, this U.N. body  regulates human rights groups, oversees U.N. committees on women's rights, and  crafts resolutions from Internet freedom to female genital mutilation.  It  gets crazier. 

 

The  following month, December 12, the U.N.'s top human rights body marked Human  Rights Day by electing Mauritania's Ambassador as one of 4 Vice Presidents  to the Human Rights Council.  At the same time another Vice President  elected was the representative from the Maldives, a predominantly Islamic Island  in the Indian Ocean just off the east coast of Africa. 

 

In  this wonderful country, non-Muslim foreign workers may only practice their faith  in private.  Speech deemed "contrary to the tenets of Islam" is restricted;  women are flogged for extramarital sex, and homosexual activity is a crime  punishable with banishment and flogging.

 

Dismissing  or ignoring the crimes and inhumanities committed by the aforementioned nations,  it's become acceptable for leftist groups on and off campus to demonize,  delegitimize, and judge Israel with a double standard, while issuing a free pass  to Islamic deprivations such as honor killings, misogyny, slavery, as well as  other heinous practices.  Quick to drown out and block appearances by  pro-Israeli speakers on campus, their silence is deafening to the crimes  committed in the Muslim world.  We've all heard of the "Apartheid week"  libel spewed against Israel every March.  Has anyone heard of an equivalent  "anti Slavery week?"  I haven't.

 

It  is biased behavior is par for the course at the U.N. and almost understandable.   It's a lot easier for them and the nations which they're comprised of to  use Israel as a punching bag rather than focus their attention on the many  Muslim nations where barbaric atrocities are continuously committed and are just  a part of daily life. 

 

What's  not understandable is the apathy and blindness self-righteous academia gives to  these uncivilized practices which should be anathema to the ideals they so  sanctimoniously claim to stand for.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/04/let_my_people_go.html#ixzz2Rfb7IWZ0
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

  • Stock
  • mallory
  • Respected Neighbor
  • USA
  • 3461 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

Leviticus 25:44-46

 

Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever.

 

  • Avatar
  • hiroad
  • Respected Neighbor
  • The Hilltop
  • 5055 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

Please direct me to a reliable source that shows a current day Jewish or Christian religious leader calling for the adoption of slavery as a practice condoned by some passage in the Old or new Testament, or a predominantly Christian or Jewish culture or nation where slavery is condoned.

 

Apples and Oranges dumbo.

  • Avatar
  • hiroad
  • Respected Neighbor
  • The Hilltop
  • 5055 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor

Why aren’t liberals more critical of Islam?

Why aren't liberals more critical of Islam?

 

We are now—like it or not—immersed in a real debate about the nature of Islam. The background of deceased Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev is forcing us into it. There is no doubt Tamerlan, the elder brother of the two perpetrators, was transformed by his relatively recent embrace of radical Islam.

And so, we have the very difficult question facing us in regard to Islam: Is the propensity to terror and jihad radical in the deepest sense of word’s origin in Latin, radix, “root”? Is there something at the root of the Quran itself and the essential history of Islam that all too frequently creates the Tsarnaev brothers, Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, Mohamed Atta, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas, or is there some other source, quiet accidental to Islam?

That question must be taken seriously, very seriously.

I am not going to answer that question, but rather pose another: Why do liberals have so much difficulty even allowing that very serious question to be raised?

The answer to this second question is important for the obvious reason that, if liberals won’t allow the first question to be asked, then it surely can’t be answered.

A lot hangs on not answering it, in pretending it is not a legitimate question to raise. If Islam has a significant tendency to breed domestic Islamism—not everywhere, not in every case, but in a significant number of cases—then the current administration’s obsession with, say, Tea Party terror cells is woefully misplaced.

So what is it about liberalism that makes it so difficult for it to take a clear, critical look at Islam, even while liberals have no problem excoriating Christians for every imaginable historical evil?

I believe I can give at least a partial answer, if we take a big step back from the present scene and view the history of Western liberalism on a larger scale.

Liberalism is an essentially secular movement that began within Christian culture. (In Worshipping the State, I trace it all the way back to Machiavelli in the early 1500s.) Note the two italicized aspects: secular and within.

As secular, liberalism understood itself as embracing this world as the highest good, advocating a self-conscious return to ancient pagan this-worldliness. But this embrace took place within a Christianized culture. Consequently liberalism tended to define itself directly against that which it was (in its own particular historical context) rejecting.

Modern liberalism thereby developed with a deep antagonism toward Christianity, rather than religion in general. It was culturally powerful Christianity that stood in the way of liberal secular progress in the West—not Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Druidism, etc.

And so, radical Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire rallied his fellow secular soldiers with what would become the battle cry of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment: écrasez l’infâme, “destroy the infamous thing.” It was a cry directed, not against religion in general, but (as historian Peter Gay rightly notes) “against Christianity itself, against Christian dogma in all its forms, Christian institutions, Christian ethics, and the Christian view of man.”

Liberals therefore tended to approve of anything but Christianity. Deism was fine, or even pantheism. The eminent liberal Rousseau praised Islam and declared Christianity incompatible with good government. Hinduism and Buddhism were exotic and tantalizing among the edge-cutting intelligentsia of the 19th century. Christianity, by contrast, was the religion against which actual liberal progress had to be made.

So, other religions were whitewashed even while Christianity was continually tarred. The tarring was part of the liberal strategy aimed at unseating Christianity from its privileged cultural-legal-moral position in the West. The whitewashing of other religions was part of the strategy too, since elevating them helped deflate the privileged status of Christianity.

And so, for liberalism, nothing could be as bad as Christianity. If something goes wrong, blame Christianity first and all of Western culture that is based upon it.

This view remains integral to liberalism today, and it affects how liberals treat Islam.

That’s why liberals are disposed to interpret the Crusades as the result of Christian aggression, rather than, as it actually was, a response to Islamic aggression. That’s why Christian organizations are regularly maltreated on our liberal college campuses while Islamic student organizations and needs are graciously met. And the liberal media—ever wonder why you didn’t hear last February of the imam of the Arlington, VA mosque calling for Muslims to wage war against the enemies of Allah? Nor should we wonder why, for liberals, contemporary jihadist movements in Islam must be seen as justified reactions to Western policies—chickens coming home to roost. Or when a bomb goes off, that’s why a liberal must hope that it was perpetrated by some fundamentalist patriotic Christian group.

What liberals do not want to do is take a deep, critical look at Islam. To do so just might question some of their most basic assumptions.

Author and speaker Benjamin Wiker, Ph.D. has published eleven books, his newest being Worshipping the State: How Liberalism Became Our State Religion. His website is www.benjaminwiker.com

Advertise Here!

Promote Your Business or Product for $10/mo

istockphoto_12477899-big-head.jpg

For just $10/mo you can promote your business or product directly to nearby residents. Buy 12 months and save 50%!

Buynow