Documenting the very real dangers of the global jihad.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Sweden's Nyamko Sabuni - A Swedish Ayaan Hirsi Ali?
A fighter for women's rights, and an opponent of the the oppressive practices of Islamic extremism, Swedish Minister for Integration and Equality Nyamko Sabuni is often compared to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Both were African immigrants to Europe, both are fighting for women' rights . . . and both have received death threats for their efforts:
In a tall, blond government, a small black woman like Nyamko Sabuni was always going to stand out.
It is, though, the former refugee’s outspoken views that have demanded attention in her adopted Sweden, where she wants a ban on the veil for under-15s and compulsory gynaecological checks for all schoolgirls to protect against genital mutilation masquerading as “female circumcision”.
Her views have led to death threats and round-the-clock protection in Europe’s most tolerant country.
"I will not be scared into silence. I will never accept that women and girls are oppressed in the name of religion.”
Why Don't More Muslims Speak Out Against Islamic Extremism?
Photo: Norwegian-Somalian Kadra, critic of Imams' support of female genital mutilation
People often wonder: "Where are the Islamic 'moderates'?" Why don't the "moderate" Muslims speak out against the extremists? One reason may be what happens when they do.
When Muslims actually do speak out against Islamic extremism, they receive death threats-- and, in many cases they are actually physically attacked by Muslim fundamentalists.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a devout Muslim, born in Somalia. As such, as young girl, she was forced to undergo the cruel practice of "female genital mutilation". She eventually emigrated to the Netherlands, and left Islam.
She is an outspoken critic of Islamic extremism (and had a good platform for expressing her views as she was elected to the Dutch parliament). She teamed up with Theo van Gogh to make Submission, a short film critical of the Islamic abuse of women.
Van Gogh was brutally murdered, and Hirsi Ali is still under constant guard due to the death threats she has received.
Unfortunately, these are not unusual examples. It seems that whenever Muslims speak out against the extremism so prevalent in their religion they become subject to the threat of violence. The Danish cartoonists who published the "Mohammed cartoons" all had to go into hiding. (In the riots and embassy burnings following the publication of the cartoon, over 140 people were murdered-- all over some relatively mild cartoons satirizing Mohammed!)
Kadra is the latest victim of this ongoing violence against critics of Islamic extremism:
Norwegian-Somalian Kadra, who became famous in Norway for exposing imam support of female circumcision, was beaten unconscious on Thursday
Kadra was attacked and beaten senseless by seven or eight persons of Somali origin, newspaper VG reports.
"I was terrified. While I lay on the pavement they kicked me and screamed that I had trampled on the Koran. Several shouted Allah-o-akbar (God is great) and also recited from the Koran," Kadra told VG.
Kadra linked the attack to recent remarks in VG where she said that the Koran's views on women needed to be reinterpreted.
Kadra's role in a 2000 hidden camera TV documentary revealing the positive attitude of Muslim leaders to female circumcision had a massive impact on Norway, and sparked new legislation. (complete article)
For more about FGM ("female circumcision", or "female genital mutilation"), some fascinating information about the life of Ayaan Hirsi Ali , and a video interview of a panel discussion about Islam with Hirsi Ali, Bill Maher and others, click here.
Anti-Semitic sign at a San Francisco "Anti War" rally. (From the Zombie Hall of Shame).
George Bush and the "Neo-Cons," while taking traditionally conservative positions on many issues, have also taken many positions that are the exact opposite of traditional Conservatives, including: allowing a large budget deficit; allowing open borders and illegal immigration; an activist foreign policy; and increasing the role of the federal government (on several social issues, as well as in the War on Terror). Conservatives are changing their traditional positions on many issues.
There has been a lot of recognition of the changes on the "right"-- but not much about changes on the "left". There has been a lot of discussion of Bush' policies, as well as the "Neo-cons" in general, so this post is not about the "new conservatism".
While there has been a lot of attention paid to changes on the political right, I believe that there are significant new trends in the political left, many of which are also the opposite of traditional leftist views-- but this has not received the same amount of attention as those changes on the opposite side of the political spectrum.
Traditionally, the left has considered themselves to be tolerant and open-minded-- currently there seems to be a large movement in the opposite direction. (To cite one example: in the past, when someone who's views they disagreed with were to speak somewhere, leftists would picket and hand out literature. More and more now, the trend has been to disrupt the speaker in an attempt to totally silence him).
In the past, leftists were strongly in favor of freedom of expression-- now many are taking the lead in arguing for the suppression of free speech, as well as being in support of other forms of government censorship.
Traditionally, the left has defended the rights of minorities-- recently there has been quite a bit of anti-Semitism expressed in leftist circles...and it is becoming more and more acceptable there. In addition, other forms of bigotry are beginning to appear.
It seems that there is a large part of the left that is abandoning traditional liberal positions, and becoming increasingly hypocritical.
While not much has been expressed publicly about this, I have seen two unusually perceptive commentaries-- one from a liberal, one from a conservative.
Peter Tatchell is a British human rights activist He has unusually good insights into what is happening, and doesn't let "political correctness" stop him from mentioning it:
WHY HAS THE LEFT GONE SOFT ON HUMAN RIGHTS?
Large sections of liberal and left opinion have gone soft on their commitment to universal human rights. They rightly condemn the excesses of UK and US government policy, but rarely speak out against oppressors who are non-white or adherents of minority faiths.
There are no mass protests against female genital mutilation, forced marriages, the stoning of women and gender apartheid in the Middle East. A perverse interpretation of multiculturalism has resulted in race and religion ruling the roost in a tainted hierarchy of oppression.
In the name of "unity" against Islamophobia and racism, much of the left tolerates misogyny and homophobia in minority communities. It rejects common standards of rights and responsibilities; demanding that we "make allowances" and show "sensitivity" with regard to the prejudices of ethnic and faith communities.
This attitude is patronising, even racist. It judges minority peoples by different standards.
Some liberals and left-wingers mute their condemnation of intolerance when it emanates from non-white people; whereas they would strenuously denounce similar prejudice if it was being vented by whites against blacks or by Christians against Muslims. They argue that we have to "understand" bigots from racial and religious minorities; yet few of them ever urge the same "understanding" of white working class bigots.
We have long experienced the hypocrisy of the political right. In the name of defending "freedom", many conservatives defended the very unfree regimes of Franco's Spain and Pinochet's Chile. Alarmingly, this selective approach to human rights is now echoed by sections of the left, with their lack of protests against the murderous regimes in Iran, Zimbabwe and Sudan.
President Mugabe has massacred more black Africans than PW Botha in South Africa. In contrast to the global anti-apartheid movement, there are no worldwide protests to support the Zimbabwean struggle for democracy.
Why does a black tyrant murdering black people merit less outrage than a white tyrant murdering black people?
He has many more perceptive observations. I highly recommending that you read it all.
The second commentary I have recently come across is a talk by Evan Sayet, a conservative and former former speech writer for Bill Maher. Not surprisingly, as a conservative he is quite critical of liberals, but I believe he also has some keen insights into the "new liberalism".
While I don't necessarily agree with all that he says, I believe he makes some excellent observations-- this guy is really sharp. (In fact, some of what he say is amongst the most perceptive commentary I've heard on the issue).
The video is fairly long and get off to a slow start, but really picks up after the first minute or two:
Video: Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Bill Maher - Panel Discussion of Islam
Is Islam a religion of peace? A panel discussion (shown in this Youtube video) has some people who know a lot about Islam (and several people who don't!) all expressing their opinions: Steven Weber, Bill Maher, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA). They discuss terror, religion, and freedom. Hirsi Ali outshines them all-- her presentation is quite knowledgeable, clear and to the point.
>
Watching the video, I was very impressed with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She really has an in depth understanding of Islam, having been raised as a Muslim.
In contrast, it amazing how some of the others on the panel really don't know much about the subject and are obviously merely repeating politically correct cliches they've heard. (Actually, I think a lot of people in the media don't really know a lot about Islam, so they repeat politically correct things, and try to sound like they know what they're talking about).
Here are some brief excerpts from this article about Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
Born in Somalia, her family lived in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Kenya. As a young Muslim girl, she was forced to undergo the cruel practice of female genitalmutilation (AKA "FGM", or "female circumcision").
Later, following Saddam's invasion of the fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran, she sympathised with Iran and the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, and also wore a hijab. She supported the fatwa against British writer Salman Rushdie following the publication of his controversial novel The Satanic Verses.
She moved to the Netherlands in 1992, where she worked as an interpreter and translator for Somali women in asylum centers and hostels for battered women. She saw firsthand the way certain practices she thought she had left behind in Africa continued in the West, as well as the workings of the Dutch immigration system, and became severely critical of the way it handled asylum seekers.
Inspired by The Atheist Manifesto she renounced Islam and became an atheist writing a book called De Zoontjesfabriek (The Son Factory) that criticized Islamic culture, which is a dangerous thing to do. Not surprisingly, after its publication she received death threats for the first time. (cont'd)
