‘Moderate’ Muslims and Western Dupes
The ongoing saga of radical Islamist Uthman Badar continues to make the news. And as to be expected, the only thing more repulsive than the man himself are all the Western dhimmis who are falling over themselves to defend the guy and his appearance at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas.
Those unfamiliar with the mind-numbing case of creeping sharia in action can see my two earlier articles:
A public outcry rightly resulted in this sharia apologist being given the flick. Of course in response this West-hater is throwing a hissy fit now (as well as soaking up all the free publicity)! As he whines on his FB page: “Hysteria wins out. Opera house cancels my session at #FODI. Welcome to the free world, where freedom of expression is a cherished value.”
Um yeah, I get hysterical too when someone wants to kill a woman who has been raped. Get out of my country now you loser. Go to the Sudan or Saudi Arabia where you can feel right at home.
I have in my earlier article documented how uber-radical Badar and Hizb ut-Tahrir are. Yet we have plenty of Western MSM dupes waxing eloquent in his defence. Consider for example the sheer foolishness of Susie “Dhimmi” O’Brien: “Extreme elements of the Islamic faith certainly have no place in Australia. But that should not stop moderate, law-abiding Australian Muslims from exercising their cultural and religious beliefs.”
Moderate? Law abiding? By this howler she makes it perfectly plain that she does not know the first thing about this guy and his organization. Willful and shameful ignorance like this will mean only one thing: if and when Islam comes fully to power here, clueless wonders like her will be the first to lose their heads.
And of course the Dhimmi of the week award must go to the St James “Ethics” Centre which is a sponsor of all this – what a joke. Dhimmi ethics more like it. Here is what Simon Longstaff of the centre said: “The session to explore ‘honour killing’ has been cancelled. Alas, people read the session title – and no further. Just too dangerous.”
To which Tim Blair rightly replied: “It was about killing women, you idiot. You really want to ‘explore’ that idea? Where do you go after working out that killing innocent women is wrong?” His piece is well worth reading. He also said,
Joint founder and co-curator of the festival Simon Longstaff said the idea is one he had consistently nominated for six years, because the point of the event is to push boundaries “to the point where you become extremely uncomfortable”. If making people “extremely uncomfortable” is the aim, Simon, why not just pelt rocks at the Opera House audience? It’d be less expensive than presenting speakers, and would also provide an authentic “honour killing” experience for your customers.
When are these Western dupes going to get it. There is nothing at all honourable about honour killings. Even the leftist Guardian got that right:
A term like “honour killing” clouds culpability. It cloaks acts of gender violence with one of highest human aspirations – honour. It risks falsely dignifying these deplorable acts with an undeserved varnish of higher motive.
In this struggle, words are indeed weapons. We need to find the right words – the right weapons – to fight this violation. “Honour killing” is not it. There is no honour in murder.
And it is time we stopped being absolutely stupid about Badar and the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir. There is nothing in the slightest moderate about this bunch: they are working for the complete implementation of sharia law. If all these Western dolts would stop pontificating on this, and actually do a bit of research, they just might learn something.
For starters, they could try going to its website. Now that would be an eye-opener. Let’s just take one of their pet loves: child marriage. Here in part is what they have to say about this:
A clear distinction need be drawn between the secular ‘law of the land’ and Islamic Law (Sharia). The former is not a basis for moral judgments. Something being illegal according to western law does not make it immoral. Further, the secular law does not stand, in any way, in judgment of Islamic Law. It does not, in any way, qualify or change it. It cannot permit what Allah prohibits or prohibit what Allah permits. Sovereignty is for Allah, not the law of any land….
We should be clear that western secular liberal values do not represent a higher morality and the West is in no position to lecture Muslims on morals or values. On the contrary, the laws in modern secular democracies like Australia are riddled with subjective provisions that are patently wrong. Sexual relationships among ‘minors’ (as young as 10 in some states) are legally sanctioned whilst marriage is not. Extra-marital relations among adults are legally accepted, but polygamy is a crime. The minimum age of marriage is subjectively determined and differs from country to country and even state to state.
Um, can I remind you that we are talking about Australia here. Does that sound like moderate to you? ‘To hell with your laws – we will stick with sharia, whether you like it or not.’ And clueless wonders like O’Brien and far too many under-informed Christians are calling these guys moderates!
And let me also remind you what this was all about to begin with: “Honour killings are morally justified”. He and his organisation of course fully support this – they have to: they are devout Koran-believing Muslims. Remember what he said: “Our view is that we adopt the Islamic positions on all these issues.”
All of them. So let’s get back to reality here. Just what does an honour killing look like? Well, you need to go to my last link for a start and actually see the victims of honour killings. And I am not talking Pakistan here, but in the West, where this is taking place with growing frequency. Pam Geller has assembled some of these horrific cases, complete with photos.
I dare you to go to the site and look for yourself. This is exactly what Badar and Hizb ut-Tahrir are on about. Take just one example: “Noor Almaleki is dead. Run over by her Muslim father for being too ‘westernized’, she lingered for days.” Yet the lefty clowns in Sydney think that this is an idea which can be chatted about and ‘justified’.
So which is worse: murderous Islamists, or duped dhimmi Western leftists? I think they are both evil, because they both end up basically promoting much the same thing.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read More