Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

The Strange Journey of Ayaan Hirsi Ali: From Devout Muslim to Outspoken "Feminist" Critic of Islam

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted November 12, 2007.


American conservatives embrace Dutch firebrand's calls for destruction of Islam.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The former "liberal" who becomes an outspoken right-winger has become an American political archetype. Ronald Reagan and David Horowiz are two prime examples of the breed.

They use the rhetorical tool of claiming to be just as caring and compassionate as their previous political incarnation, but the left's irrationality and hatred of (you pick it) the West, America, Christianity, capitalism, etc. caused them to wake up one morning and see the light. And having transformed from lefty caterpillar into a right-leaning butterfly, they present themselves as qualified to comment on liberalism's moral and intellectual failures.

Recently, a related version of this turncoat persona -- former Dutch Member of Parliament Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- has emerged: a "reformed" Muslim woman who favors crushing Islam under the boot of Western militarism. Once very devout in her Muslim beliefs, Ali has gained a great deal of media attention -- including horrific tales of her abuse at the hands of Muslim men -- and has transformed into an outspoken critic who bases her calls for the destruction of Islam on feminist and human rights principles.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a proud Somali woman raised in a devout Muslim family. She is poised to become the most recognizable face of naked Islamophobia in America. Expect to see her as a ubiquitous guest on cable news channels and frequent contributor of op-eds reinforcing the worst stereotypes about the Muslim world. She'll validate already disturbingly common narratives about the perfidy of Islam, and she'll tout the vast superiority of Western thinking in stark terms that would be shocking coming from a more traditional (read: white, Christian) right-wing commentator.

It's a criticism of Islam, coming from the left, which has the potential to unite the Islamophobic right with an increasingly vocal secular movement. It also provides cover for extremist views, bringing hateful rhetoric that's typically been confined to the margins into the mainstream and broadening the already frighteningly large constituency that exists in the U.S. for a series of "preventive" wars in the Middle East, Central Asia and elsewhere.

She has been called an "enlightenment fundamentalist" in Europe and is a hated apostate in much of the Muslim world. She lives under a flurry of death threats and needs round-the-clock security.

Because she's an intelligent and articulate woman who has suffered horrific abuses in a Muslim family, her generalizations about the entire Islalmic world are imbued with an unwarranted authority. There's a real danger that people like Hirsi Ali -- the tiny percentage of the Muslim world who believe that Islam really is "the problem" will skew the debate about U.S. relations with the Muslim world.

Thank God for the Enlightenment

Hirsi Ali has become a darling of those who believe in the benevolence of Western hegemony; The Economist described her as a "cultural ideologue of the new right." But she's more than that; Hirsi Ali occupies a unique space in the political landscape. Her outspoken advocacy on feminist ethical issues -- roundly condemning "honor killings" and female circumcision -- has also made her a poster-girl for the aggressive brand of atheism typified by figures like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, all three of whom have held her life-story up as an example of the harms caused by religion in general, and Islam in particular. For them, she's a living testament to the idea that rational liberal interventionists in the post-Enlightenment West have a moral duty to wage a new crusade against the Muslim world. Harris and Salman Rushdie penned an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times calling Hirsi Ali a "unique and indispensable witness to both the strength and weakness of the West: to the splendor of open society and to the boundless energy of its antagonists."

Neely Tucker wrote in the Washington Post that "Neoconservative, middle-aged white men … tend to swoon when she walks into the room." Hirsi Ali is indeed charming and articulate, possessed of a rare intelligence and gifted with exceptional language and political skills. But she's also an extremist, by any measure. She goes beyond others who embrace the idea of a "Clash of Civilizations" -- people like Tony Blankley and Michael Ledeen -- in her insistence that all of Islam is extreme. "There is no moderate Islam," she told Reason. There can only be peace between East and West, she said, "if Islam is defeated." When asked if she meant radical Islam, she replied: "No. Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace."

She calls the religion, with 1.3 billion adherents worldwide, a "death cult."

That's a popular claim in the post-9/11 era, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali is no doubt set for life. Her long journey has taken her from Africa to Europe and now, finally, to the right-wing American Enterprise Institute (she's currently working out of Holland because the Dutch government refused to pay for her body-guards in DC). As long as the concept of a broken and dysfunctional Muslim world is used to justify Western militarism in the Middle East and Central Asia, Hirsi Ali will have a cushy sinecure somewhere within the right-wing media establishment, ready to be rolled out as exhibit A in the case against whatever country is that day's enemy-du-jour and, perhaps more importantly, against anyone who views the Muslim world as anything other than a uniform bunch of blood-thirsty maniacs.

While Hirsi Ali is loved by some and loathed by others, what gets lost is that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is as genuine in her beliefs as she is wrong on the facts. She suffered a cruel upbringing in a stringent Muslim household -- she describes the horrors of undergoing female genital mutilation at age five and claims she was forced into an arranged marriage in her teens (a claim her family and former husband dispute), so the issue is not whether she is sincere, but whether the victim of an abusive childhood should be viewed as an impartial and credible analyst. It's the equivalent of a Catholic choirboy who, having been the victim of sexual abuse at the hands of pedophile priests, is asked for an impartial view of the church. That would never happen, but Hirsi Ali will be called upon to explain the dangers of Islam to an eager West as if she's a knowledgeable but detached observer. That's problematic in that she's a woman whose views are colored by an upbringing that is: A) anything but universal within Islam and B) in no way exclusive to that culture.

Who is Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a household name in Europe. Her story would seem far-fetched if it were fiction. Born in Somalia to a critic of the dictatorship of Siad Barré, her family fled when she was six -- first to Saudi Arabia and then to Ethiopia before finally settling in Kenya. There she attended a Saudi-funded religious school and was, in her words, "indoctrinated" into a traditionalist form of Islam. She recalls that she wore a hijab, supported the fatwa calling for the death of Salman Rushdie and had a knee-jerk hatred of Jews. Until, that is, she started reading Nancy Drew mysteries. Fascinated by a female character who operated freely in society, Hirsi Ali would later say that the stories played a major role in changing her attitudes towards the West.

From there, things get a bit sketchy. According to Ali, she was forced into a marriage with a distant cousin and was so repelled by the idea of having to submit to him sexually that she bolted for Europe, ultimately settling in Holland. The circumstances surrounding her application for asylum would become a controversy that would later bring down the Dutch government.

After arriving in Europe it was menial work for Hirsi Ali at first. She worked her way through college in the Netherlands, ending up with a master's in political science and a position with a think-tank linked to the center-left Dutch Labor Party. Hirsi Ali became a favorite in the European press, commenting on the nature of Islam and getting deeply involved in the Holland's immigration debates.

Like the right-wingers who lionize her, "everything changed" for Hirsi Ali on 9/11. The following year, she renounced Islam and became an aggressively outspoken atheist. A number of controversial statements about Islam, immigrants and multiculturalism put her on the outs with her party, and she was asked to jump to the right-wing People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and run for Parliament. She won a seat, becoming the immigrant voice of a tough-on-immigration party.

In 2003, a discrimination complaint was filed against her (but not pursued) for saying that the prophet Muhammed was a pedophile. She had arrived. But it would be a film, and a brutal murder that followed its release, that would make Hirsi Ali one of the most recognizable personalities on the European political scene.

The film, written by Hirsi Ali, was Submission, an amateurish and clunky art flick whose attack on Islamic culture was overarching and anything but subtle. Like the Danish cartoons that would cause such controversy a few years later, the film, directed by Theo Van Gogh -- a distant relative of Vincent -- was an intentional provocation. Van Gogh was a close associate of Pym Fortuyn, a rabidly anti-immigrant right-wing politician who would later be assassinated by an animal rights fanatic, and his constant references to Muslims as "goat fuckers" had already outraged the Muslim community. In 2004, Van Gogh was riding his bicycle in Amsterdam when Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch-born extremist of North-African descent slashed his throat and shot him eight times. A note addressed to Hirsi Ali was found on the body, and she went into hiding soon after.

She became a well-known and fiery critic of Islam, immigration policy, liberalism and the multiculturalism so integral to Dutch society. Hirsi Ali's transformation came at an opportune time; in the post-9/11 climate, the European Right has undergone a revival, and ideas that were once relegated to the fringe of European discourse -- the same ideas of cultural superiority and white supremacy that had fueled the continent's bloody colonial period and the rise of fascism in the early 20th century -- were coming to the fore once again.

Hirsi Ali was saying exactly what they wanted to hear. But the mis-matched pairing would not last; she was ousted by the VDD when it was revealed that she had lied on her application for asylum. Hirsi Ali hadn't come from refugee camps on the Somali border as she had claimed, but from Kenya, a country that was safe and stable and whose residents weren't eligible for asylum under Dutch law. She had lied about her age, her name and questions were raised about her motivations for leaving. Her family and husband denied that hers had been a forced marriage. Despite the fact that Hirsi Ali had come clean about all of those issues previously and they were considered to be matters of public knowledge, she was a member of a party that ran on a hard-line approach to immigration and called for sharp limits on asylum-seekers, and the contradiction became too great. She was forced to step down and her citizenship was temporarily revoked (but later restored by an act of Parliament). It was then that she headed for Washington and the American Enterprise Institute.

Entitled to her opinion, but wrong on the facts

Hirsi Ali's arguments about Islam and the West are essentialist in nature, and like all essentialist arguments, they're ahistorical and lacking in context. For her, Islamic radicals truly do "hate us for our freedom." She minimizes or denies the existence of the political, cultural, economic or other factors that fuel various conflicts in the Muslim world - for her, they all arise from Islam's demand that its followers yield themselves unquestioningly to its teachings. This, Hirsi Ali argues, separates it from other Abrahamic religions, and renders the Islamic world especially ripe for totalitarian systems of governance.

That narrative, perhaps more than anything else, is what makes her such a star in hawkish circles in Europe and the U.S.: Hirsi Ali consistently validates the inherent superiority of the West, morally and otherwise, and the perfidy of Islam, and for her, this dichotomy provides the analytic framework for much of what's going on in the world. Of the World Trade Center attacks, she told the Washington Post, "This was not just Islam, this was the core of Islam . . . [this was] not frustration, poverty, colonialism, or Israel: it was about religious belief, a one way ticket to Heaven." She says Islam is too "backward" to be "compatible with democracy."

On a fundamental level, these claims confuse correlation with causality. There is no doubt that many (but not all) predominantly Muslim countries have serious political and social problems, but there's no evidence of a direct relationship between those problems and Islam. The plain fact is that much of the Islamic world is plagued by poor governance -- little or no democracy, insufficient respect for human rights and the rule of law, and a failure of governments to address the needs of their citizens -- and those issues are in no way limited to the Islamic world. In fact, there are no problems in the Muslim world that are not also common in countries that are dominated by Christians, Hindus or any other religion and that share similar governance problems. That's especially true of countries with analogous political and economic circumstances. Across Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, countries that are not predominantly Muslim but which gained their independence from colonial rule in the last century and which rely on extractive industries (like many of the less functional states in the Middle East) face identical problems.

Speaking of terrorism specifically, research into what motivates suicide bombers shows that religion plays at most a minor role. The University of Chicago's Robert Pape studied every suicide attack committed world-wide over an almost 25-year period and concluded:

The data show that there is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions. In fact, the leading instigators of suicide attacks are the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a Marxist-Leninist group whose members are from Hindu families but who are adamantly opposed to religion…
Rather, what nearly all suicide terrorist attacks have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider to be their homeland. Religion is rarely the root cause, although it is often used as a tool by terrorist organizations in recruiting and in other efforts in service of the broader strategic objective.
Hirsi Ali also furthers the narrative of imminent threat -- the plainly ridiculous idea that the West -- dominant militarily, politically and economically -- is fighting for its very existence. She told the Evening Standard that in the UK, because of its liberal Western governance, "We risk a reverse takeover. In 50 years, a majority Muslim society could democratically vote for Sharia law, and then what you face is that Britain will slowly start to look like Saudi Arabia. Women will be veiled, driven away from the public sphere, polygamy will be rife." "Islam," she says, "is the new fascism. Just like Nazism started with Hitler's vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate - a society ruled by Sharia law - in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to death, homosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killed." The only reason Western liberals are blind to the danger, according to Hirsi Ali, is because they are too wracked by "white guilt" to see the situation clearly.

That Islamic fundamentalists threaten to expand their reach to the West -- to take over -- is a theme echoed throughout the eliminationist right, in books like Mark Steyn's America Alone, Norman Podhoretz' World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism and Tony Blankley's The West's Last Chance: Winning the Clash of Civilizations. It's impossible to overstate how divorced from reality the idea is -- Muslims represent 4 percent of the European population and in many countries remain a disenfranchised, poorly-integrated minority -- but it persists nonetheless.

Women in Islam

The influence Hirsi Ali and like-minded "women of Islam" are likely to have on the discourse over East/ West relations is profound, and a great deal of that arises from their personal testimonial to the repression millions of women face in the Islamic world. It's impossible to disagree with her call for the emancipation of women from subservience -- sexual and otherwise.

The power of this argument for Western feminists and others on the left is undeniable. But Hirsi Ali's focus (at least publicly) is not about the plight of women; it's specifically on the plight of women in Islam, and here, again, the implication at least is that women don't face identical abuses in other cultures. The research shows that to be false; domestic violence by intimates is a phenomenon that cuts across all cultures and all socio-economic strata.

The role of women in Islamic societies is complex (and a fascinating topic for serious exploration), but unfortunately Western perceptions about the issue have only a tenuous connection with reality. Anne Mayer, a Wharton University legal scholar who's studied Western and Islamic law, wrote: "It is certainly a gross overgeneralization to say that an Islamic ethos correlates with a pattern of devaluing and mistreating women":
Western misunderstandings about the lives of women in the Muslim Middle East are legion. Westerners are still influenced by Orientalist stereotypes -- like harem-bound odalisques overseen by eunuchs who languidly await the summons of a lecherous Sheik. The assumption is made that a monolithic and exotic Islamic ethos pervades Muslim societies, shaping the attitudes of their inhabitants and setting them apart from the West.
So while we see an intense new interest in issues like "honor killings," on the Right these days, they are often discussed as distinct from similar acts of violence in the West. As Katha Pollitt put it, "the focus on Muslim women [on the Right] is entirely cynical--a clever quadruple play to simultaneously promote Euro-American cultural chauvinism, defuse antiwar sentiment, attack Middle Eastern studies departments as hotbeds of jihad and discredit American feminists as a bunch of princessy complainers."

The lack of seriousness in these circles is evident from the choice of issues that they ascribe to the Muslim world. Female genital mutilation, for example, is a custom practiced in sub-Saharan Africa and not in most of the Muslim world. In fact, it's practice predates Islam. The procedure, abhorrent to Western eyes, is practiced by Muslims, Christians and animists alike. A UN study on the practice concluded that "looking at religion independently, it is not possible to establish a general association" with the practice of female genital mutilation (PDF).

There's a similar picture with "honor killings." In 2000, the UN estimated that there were as many as 5,000 such murders worldwide; that same year 1,232 women were murdered by intimates in the U.S., a country with about one twentieth of the world's population. Honor killings are also committed by Christians (as reported here and here), but this fact is rarely pointed out in media accounts.

It's worth noting that Hirsi Ali's advocacy on the part of Muslim women appears to be far more welcome among conservative men in the West than it is by Muslim women themselves -- people one would assume would represent a natural audience for her views. The Washington Post's Neely Tucker wrote that "Muslim women of her complexion, whom she says she wants to rescue from Islamic oppression, tend to recoil" from her message. Neely quotes a report by Dutch author Ian Buruma about a screening of Submission for a group of abused Muslim women at a Dutch shelter:
When one of the women stressed her objections, Hirsi Ali dismissed her with a wave of her hand and, "So long, then."
"It was this wave, this gentle gesture of disdain, this almost aristocratic dismissal of a noisome inferior, that upset her critics more than anything," he writes.
In her review of Hirsi Ali's The Caged Virgin, Fareena Alam offered her take, from the perspective of a Muslim woman:
It's obviously what I've been waiting for all my life: a secular crusader - armed with Enlightenment philosophy, the stamp of the liberal establishment and the promise of sexual freedom - swooping into my harem and liberating me from my "ignorant", "uncritical", "dishonest" and "oppressed" Muslim existence. At least that is what Ayaan Hirsi Ali thinks I've been waiting for. [The book claims to] unveil the sexual terrorism she says is inherent in Islam. In reality, it is a smash-and-grab aggregation of inconsistencies, platitudes and poor scholarship.
The Right's favorite liberal

Hirsi Ali claims that she, rather than her ostensibly more tolerant, multi-culturally-minded critics on the left, is the true liberal. She told New York Magazine, "I'm a liberal-not in the American sense, because Americans seem to refer to communists as liberals."

The political transformation that brought her from left to right is implied in her criticism of the West. It is the West's supposedly self-destructive tolerance of other, presumably inferior cultures that will ultimately spell its destruction unless hard-bitten anti-Muslim crusaders get their way. While she extolls the West's liberal values, it is those same values, according to Hirsi Ali, that puts Western Civilization in danger of being taken over by the hordes of fanatical Muslims who are just waiting for their opening. She told David Cohen that the "problem with liberals is that we believe other people are as reasonable and tolerant as we are":
How naive is the self-deception of the West to continue to talk of moderate Islam? We're trying to appease Islam, but we are headed for a terrible confrontation between fascist Islam and Right-wing fascists who will step in when liberals fail to do so.
On this issue, she's in perfect lock-step with the most hard-line of neoconservative thinkers. She told the New York Sun -- the house organ for the Jewish far-right -- that liberals "have lost the instinct to recognize that there can be such a thing as an enemy or a threat to freedom… [There is] a pacifist ideology that violence should never be used in any circumstances, and so we should talk and talk and talk." To Reason, she added: "I completely and utterly agree with John Bolton that talking to Iran is a sheer waste of time."

But her criticism goes beyond liberalism's supposed vulnerability to Muslim aggression; despite claiming a continuing affinity with the left, Hirsi Ali decries the welfare state and associates it directly with the Islamic 'menace' facing the West. "What we see in Europe," she says, "because of the welfare state, is government pretending to provide all sorts of services they shouldn't be providing." When asked why American Muslims appear to be better integrated than their European brethren, she replied: "America doesn't really have a welfare system. Mohammed Bouyeri had all day long to plot the murder of Theo van Gogh. American Muslims have to get a job."

Twisting the discourse

It's important to stress that Hirsi Ali and other Muslim women who have found a niche as vocal critics of Islam in the West -- people like Nonie Darwish, founder of "Arabs for Israel" -- have earned the right to their opinions by hard experience, and that while they may have significant incentives to share their views to the wider public, there's no reason to doubt that those views are heartfelt.

The problem is that while only a tiny minority of the Muslim world shares their opinions, they'll get an airing totally out of proportion to their prevalence. Hirsi Ali and others like her create an impression that there exists a significant sub-set of the Islamic community that shares her view that Islam is to blame for complex social and political problems, and that these people are waiting, helplessly, and looking to the West for rescue.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: feminism, racism, women, islam, ayaan hirsi ali

Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I can't imagine why anyone would take her seriously.
Posted by: pig on Nov 12, 2007 12:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She's a perjurer, ran around with neofascists and now is a paid propagandist for the AEI, who are just as evil and less honest.

Not worth the electrons.

Oink.

Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
A pathological liar
Posted by: Fiorenzo on Nov 12, 2007 1:14 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Update from Holland...Actually this woman has never been a muslim, she lied about everything, she did not originate in Somalia, but in Kenya...she is one of the new breed of minority politician who makes money by smearing minorities and being "threatened"....beware of this woman before she ruins life for US muslim women like she did here in Holland

» never been a muslim? Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: never been a muslim? Posted by: Fiorenzo
» RE: A pathological liar Posted by: Centavo
» What on earth do you mean? Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: A pathological liar Posted by: Lector
» RE: A pathological liar Posted by: theou
The holy Ayaan/Theo van Gogh
Posted by: igancedo on Nov 12, 2007 1:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can watch here http://zembla.vara.nl/About_ZEMBLA.2200.0.html a Dutch program, with English subtitles, where Hirsi Ali tells about her life in Africa and how she got to The Netherlands.

Theo van Gogh shared with Pim Fortuyn his contempt for certain aspects of Muslim culture -if that is the correct expression-, but he was in no way an associate of Fortuyn's.

AYAAN HIRSI ALI - SELF-SERVING OPPORTUNIST
Posted by: JustHarry on Nov 12, 2007 4:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ayaan Hirsi Ali - wherever she actually comes from - is certainly a very crafty and ambitious woman! At every stage of her life, she capitalized on opportunities, drags herself to the next level, seeks more opportunities - accordingly adjusts her stance to suit the moment - promotes herself further.

That's her formula for success. Pure and simple. Make use of people and circumstances, create controversy but making sure that she's on the right side of 'might'.

Aayan is courageous and speaks the truth
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 12, 2007 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
people should read her books and see what a fascinating personal journey she has undergone and how articulate and intelligent she is. she tells the truth that some some don't want to hear: that islam is badly in need of reform. in its current form it is a violent, misogynistic, reactionary belief system. she is not calling for its destruction. she wants an islamic enlightenment and reformation to end the stranglehold that conservative islam has on 1 billion people. in other words, she wants the same reform process to take place in islam that happened in europe and that broke the hold of the catholic clerics and ushered in the modern world. it's sad to see how the beneficiaries of the enlightenment turn on aayan. there's something downright racist about the attitude that the enlightenment is okay for westerners but not for muslims, like the "natives" can't handle the freedom.

» RE: Cultural relativism Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Aayan is courageous and speaks the truth Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Aayan is courageous and speaks the truth Posted by: anonymous black writer
» Mis-guided anger Posted by: Lesha
» RE: Aayan is courageous and speaks the truth Posted by: anonymous black writer
Fox News' New Poster Girl
Posted by: herronsmith on Nov 12, 2007 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am sure Fox news will "adopt" her wholeheartedly. She may even wed (not against her will I hope) Bill O'Reilley. Oh happy day! A match made in Off-Kilterville.

pathetic distortions by joshua
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 12, 2007 5:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
come on. joshua tries to conflate honor killings in islam with "violence by intimates" in the West.

honor killing are RARELY committed by husbands or boyfriends, they are committed by the woman's family: brothers, uncles, cousins, sometimes the father himself murders his OWN daughter because of some perceived insult to family honor. if you can't see the difference between an abusive husband murdering his wife and her OWN FAMILY doing it, then you totally discredit yourself joshua. of course there is violence everywhere, but the specific forms of violence in islam seem aimed at controlling women in the same way that lynchings in the american south were used to control blacks. one of the MANY critical difference that joshua glosses over is that in america society does not condone a man murdering his wife. that man will be arrested, sent to jail for life. in many muslim countries honor killers get off scott free or with token punishments. but i guess those pesky facts need not get in the way of The Muslim Apologist, AKA Joshua Holland.

» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: Chickensh*tEagle
» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: EasterBunny
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: pathetic distortions Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: pathetic distortions Posted by: hms2004
» RE: pathetic distortions Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: "Ring any bells?" Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Islam isn't all about hitting women Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Islam isn't all about hitting women Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: pathetic distortions by joshua Posted by: anonymous black writer
'Embraced by the Right' sounds apt.....
Posted by: Aureantes on Nov 12, 2007 5:53 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....because, at least the way I've heard it recounted more dispassionately over a year ago, the multiculturalism of the Netherlands preferred to abandon her rather than listen to what she was actually saying -- and whether or not her background is true, the things that she talks about are. The fact that we now have a Muslim spokeperson in the UK calling for modified sharia law to be introduced and cultural integration to "go both ways" certainly does highlight that, wherever they go, some Muslims -- though they may consider themselves to be moderate -- nonethless maintain a fundamental religious arrogance, one that is not exclusive to Islam by any means but has been significantly untempered by cultural evolution and religious self-challenging. One may accurately say that the "Left" that Hirsi Ali knew betrayed her, in refusing to see that cultural extremism can easily lurk in the most enlightened and pluralistic of societies -- if they refuse to see it as a actual problem when it is. The fact that the American Enterprise Institute jumped on the chance to claim her for the Right represents a failure of common sense on the part of those who claim to want a society where no religion claims dominance over others nor attempts to conquer every culture it meets. Whether or not Islam will find itself in a position to be destroyed, it certainly (like many self-assured religious and anti-religious factions) does need to be humbled.

Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
Thanks Josh...but...you bum me out...
Posted by: sausage on Nov 12, 2007 5:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for the exposé, Josh. But now the features of my favorite Somolia atheist, dreamgirl are morphing into the hideous Gorgon-mask of Ann Coulter!!

» *yawn* Posted by: sausage
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: Enigma
» RE: *yawn* Posted by: anonymous black writer
lots of generalizations
Posted by: ladyoracle on Nov 12, 2007 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't see anything useful about criticizing Ali's feminist critique of Islam--in terms of it not considering that women in other groups also face oppression and abuse. Taking that line makes it impossible to object to sexism; one thing feminism has learned is that articulating for specific groups of women is a way to get our ideals to become policy. Of course many Christian women face different kinds of oppression and sexism, but why does that make it irrational to discuss oppression of Islamic women? Ali bases her critique on Western feminist PRINCIPLES, which like any other principles, including democratic ones in the U.S., are not always universally materialized. What I find interesting is that the right so heartily welcomes an outspoken FEMINIST, which would create a cat fight between Ali and Coulter, for instance, and most certainly means that the right doesn't endorse all of Ali's feminist views, but suffers through them for her zenophobic reaction to Islam.

I was brought up as a fundamentalist christian, which means for myself, my childhood was miserable, and I am still badly damaged by that upbringing and my family's continued use of emotional manipulation to try and rein me back into the fold. So, yes, I see Christians as uncompromising hate-mongerers who oppress women and do no honor democratic principles when they do not support their religious views.

Unlike Ali, I know that there are moderate and tolerant Christians, but it just happens that wasn't the group I was raised within. But I do not blame her for her feelings or what she has to say, not even that she wants to get rid of Islam totally. That is a result of her going from one side of extreme to another, which is a psychological conditioning of an extremist upbringing; one can only break out by going into the other extreme.

If left to her own devices and not put into the limelight, I think in time she would read and listen to others enough to come into her own more moderate view. I hope she gets that chance.

» Yes - this alliance won't last! Posted by: war_on_tara
» RE: lots of generalizations Posted by: SatanicJamboree
A media Savvy power prostitue
Posted by: farhada on Nov 12, 2007 6:25 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She is nothing but a power prostitute, she will do anything, say anything to be on the spot light. She is like your own Ann Coulter who would not think twice before making up a story to achieve her own goals.

the fact that she is a woman, and a muslim, makes her like a goddess among the westerners who are dying to have a muslim Ann Coulter to be able to justify their hate and racism.

She is from a rich family with little or no connection with the reality of life among those she supposedly represents. Her books and views can be looked at Cheney's daughter's book about the poor people in south America.

» RE: A media Savvy power prostitue Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Michael Moore Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Michael Moore Posted by: farhada
» have you read her books? Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: have you read her books? Posted by: farhada
» RE: Michael Moore Posted by: davmills
» RE: A media Savvy power prostitue Posted by: anonymous black writer
She's a canny con
Posted by: DesertStone on Nov 12, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is very possible that she very purposefully formulated her story as a way to political stardom. Whether she originated in Somalia or Kenya is irrelevant as anyone knows that white supremacists of western societies will always foster a minority who speaks out against their tribe. Michelle Malkin, Bill Cosby etc in the sense that if you reaffirm what the white man believes about people of color you have earned an instant ticket to adoration and fame amongst the masses of western societies.

» RE: She's a canny con Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Reading Comprehension Posted by: DesertStone
» RE: She's a canny con Posted by: Enigma
» RE: She's a canny con Posted by: anonymous black writer
whay ayaan really believes
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 12, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Full text: Writers' statement on cartoons
A group of 12 writers have put their names to a statement in French weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo warning against Islamic "totalitarianism". Here is the text in full:


"After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global totalitarian threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

Recent events, prompted by the publication of drawings of Muhammad in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values.

This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field.

It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism between West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarian ideologies, Islamism is nurtured by fear and frustration.

Preachers of hatred play on these feelings to build the forces with which they can impose a world where liberty is crushed and inequality reigns.

But we say this, loud and clear: nothing, not even despair, justifies choosing darkness, totalitarianism and hatred.

Islamism is a reactionary ideology that kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present.

Its victory can only lead to a world of injustice and domination: men over women, fundamentalists over others.

On the contrary, we must ensure access to universal rights for the oppressed or those discriminated against.

We reject the "cultural relativism" which implies an acceptance that men and women of Muslim culture are deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secularism in the name of the respect for certain cultures and traditions.

We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of "Islamophobia", a wretched concept that confuses criticism of Islam as a religion and stigmatisation of those who believe in it.

We defend the universality of the freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit can exist in every continent, towards each and every maltreatment and dogma.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits in every country that our century may be one of light and not dark. "

Signed by:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Chahla Chafiq

Caroline Fourest

Bernard-Henri Levy

Irshad Manji

Mehdi Mozaffari

Maryam Namazie

Taslima Nasreen

Salman Rushdie

Antoine Sfeir

Philippe Val

Ibn Warraq

» Multicultural appologists Posted by: moflard
» Women and Genital mutilation Posted by: moflard
» RE: whay ayaan really believes Posted by: anonymous black writer
» EB and anyone else... Posted by: Enigma
What is Wrong With Thinking Critically
Posted by: Maya on Nov 12, 2007 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can this author have a problem with critical analysis? What is wrong with saying that it is unjust to force women in to marriage, commit honor killings, condone domestic violence, and murder women because they demand equality and respect for themselves as full human beings?

» This is not the point Posted by: JusticeForAll
» RE: This is not the point Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: This is not the point Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: This is not the point Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: What is Wrong With Thinking Critically Posted by: anonymous black writer
Ayan Hirsi Ali = Michelle Malkin = Ann Coulter = Dinesh D'Souza
Posted by: PakiBoy on Nov 12, 2007 7:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ayan Hirsi Ali is a paid stooge for neocon AEI. She is, just another stooge in a long line of minorities that are hired by conservatives "think-tanks" to trash fellow minority. Michelle Malkin is darling of the right. Her claim to fame is calling for muslim internment & getting rid of immigrants & their anchor babies. Turns out, she herself was an anchor-baby.
Dinesh D'Souza is another one of the minority hired gun. These uncle-tom minorities provide a cover for the conservatives to trash minorities without getting labeled xenophobes or racists.

No objective person would ever quote Malkin as a credible source of criticism on immigranst, or D'Souza on minority rights. Or Ann Coulter on feminist rights for obvious reasons. or Alan Keys on blacks.

White supremacy, sensing the need of repackaging itself for consumption in polite company, partially fills the demand for racist bile by outsourcing to mercenary writers of color. Michelle Malkin and Dinesh D'Souza--of Filipino and Indian descent, respectively--are top guns of the genre, ever eager to slander non-whites, especially Blacks, as threats to Euro-American white "civilization." For premium fees, Malkin and D'Souza act as trusted Gunga Dins and shock troops for fascism.

The corporate media makes advocates of racism and white American supremacy very rich. American racism also gives certain non-white people advantages. They are able to escape the indignity that black Americans face. They are then able to disassociate themselves and become allies with the very worst and most dangerous aspects of political life in this country.

Islamophobia is a big hit these days, so in comes Hirsi Ali the mercenary, playing the same role as Malkin, Coulter, D'Souza et al.

And finally, anybody associated with AEI (yes the same 'think-tank' that brought Eye-Rak war-crimes) has no credibility.

Hirsi Ali's credibility (or lack thereof)
Posted by: PakiBoy on Nov 12, 2007 7:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As we witness the rise of Islamophobia, another phenomenon is simultaneously occurring: the emergence of self-proclaimed "experts" on Islam and the Muslim world who are mostly either ex-Muslims or non-Muslims. Coincidence? Perhaps not. Indeed, it would be difficult to determine which phenomenon is the cause and which is the effect; it is more likely that both exert reciprocal influence.
One such "expert" figure is Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Dutch parliamentarian and now a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank. A self-confessed atheist who has no academic or scholarly background in Qur’anic or Islamic Studies, Hirsi Ali claims she is seeking to reform the Muslim world, while at the same time identifying Islam itself as the source of all trouble.

Skepticism, anyone?

In fact, Hirsi Ali’s background can be termed dubious at best.

In 1992, she arrived in the Netherlands seeking asylum.

Claming she was running away from Somalia’s civil war, she gave a false name and age to Dutch authorities. She had actually arrived from Kenya, where she had been a refugee for 10 years.

She later justified the fabrications by saying she was escaping an arranged marriage and feared revenge from her tribe.

A review in The Economist notes, however, that "last May a Dutch television documentary suggested that while Ms Hirsi Ali did run away from a marriage, her life was in no danger. The subsequent uproar nearly cost Ms Hirsi Ali her Dutch citizenship, which may be the reason why she is careful here to re-state how much she feared her family when she first arrived in the Netherlands. But the facts as she tells them about the many chances she passed up to get out of the marriage how her father and his clan disapproved of violence against women; how relatives already in the Netherlands helped her to gain asylum; and how her ex-husband peaceably agreed to a divorce hardly seem to bear her out."

Jytte Klausen, a professor at Brandeis University who knows Ali and has followed her case, has said, "She wasn’t forced into a marriage. She had an amicable relationship with her husband, as well as with the rest of the family. It was not true that she had to hide from her family for years."

One may ignore or even forgive her false pretenses but for the fact that "she has built a career out of portraying herself as the lifelong victim of fanatical Muslims" and, thus, her questionable background has critical implications for her credibility and, by the same token, for her arguments.

The insincerity of Hirsi Ali’s case is further exacerbated when, on one hand, she claims to want to reform Islam and Muslims, and, on the other, she utters alienating and divisive statements such as "Islam is backward" or "The Prophet is a tyrant and a pervert."

First, one who holds in sheer contempt the very religion or philosophy that one professes to reform is hardly qualified to do so.

» ad hominen attacks Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Easterbunny Posted by: DesertStone
» RE: ad hominen attacks Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Hirsi Ali's credibility (or lack thereof) Posted by: anonymous black writer
As an Arab woman and a feminist, I can tell you that
Posted by: JusticeForAll on Nov 12, 2007 7:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
this woman delays the "liberation" of women in the Arab and Muslim world and destroys any chance that we might have as natives to make a difference. It is known that she is a lair, who lacks credibility, who is willing to say ANYTHING to get what she wants. Instead of embracing her, embrace women who identify with Arab and/or Muslim culture and are progressive!! these women can relate and debate with their countrymen and women. There are tons of us out there (Progressive Arab and/or Muslim women), but we are denied access to the public, we have no voice...because it is anti-imperialists to be Muslim and/or Arab and a feminist at the same time... it is anti-colonialist to be Arab and queer at the same time... Only Arab and Muslim haters are welcome on mainstream media, only those who are willing to justify aggression against Arabs and Muslims are embraced by neo-cons and their mouthpieces.

And please, please, let us not ignore the hundreds of American women killed and raped every year in crimes of passion here in America, or that gays and lesbian do not have the same rights as straight people... let us not forget the poor and the hungry.. or that African Americans and Latinos and are not given an equal chance.. So before spreading "democracy" and "human rights" abroad, let's fix it here in the land of the free.

» Agreed Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Agreed Posted by: JusticeForAll
» RE: Agreed Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Agreed Posted by: JusticeForAll
» RE: Agreed Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Agreed Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Agreed Posted by: EasterBunny
» And now speaking as a queer arab... Posted by: JusticeForAll
» RE: And now speaking as a queer arab... Posted by: anonymous black writer
» High horse? Posted by: counterpoint
No surprise
Posted by: particle on Nov 12, 2007 7:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that an article like this would get the Muslim bashers frothing at the mouth.

Why is it so hard to treat culture in its complexity without casting whole groups of people as hateful cartoon caricatures?

Honor killing has been practiced in different cultures to different degrees at different periods in history. "Crimes of honor" used to go unpunished in some western countries, and it is rarer in Muslim Indonesia than in rural Pakistan. If it tends to happen in more rural regions of a country does that mean farming makes people evil? It's an expression of ignorance.

You abhor honor killing? Well you should, in all its forms. For many in America, Shock & Awe(TM) was just one big celebratory orgy of honor killing without regard for age or gender.

» RE: "Shock and Awe" still shocking Posted by: DesertStone
Hmmm!
Posted by: BazookaTooth on Nov 12, 2007 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's see how you'd talk about Islam after experiencing it at its very worst, including FGM and the deahs of people you dearly love. Have you ever been involved in any kind of fundamentalism at *all*? If you were, you would know better.

I wonder if you think Christopher Hitchens' attacks on religion are any better?

» RE: Hmmm! Posted by: anonymous black writer
Where Hirsii Ali is lying most!
Posted by: salamah on Nov 12, 2007 8:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Female circumcision has nothing to do with Islam. In Egypt and Ethiopia, the Christian Copts have been carrying out female circumcision from time immemorial, before Islam set its foot in these two countries.
2. Child marriage in Hindu India goes back 10 milleniums.
3. Arranged marriages are endemic throughout the World. Remember, arranged marriages of kings, queens and royalty in Europe?
Why single out Islam on these three unpalatable but age hold customs?
Finally, for 1400 years, Islam has been spreading because of what its core messages are. For the same reason, it will keep on spreading, whether the likes of Hirsii, Salman Rushdie and Pat Robertson like it or not and despite the membership of parliaments, knighthood and millions of dollars for those who hate Islam and want it crushed by GI boots or nukes. I know the Penatagon will never release the figures but Hirsii should ask for the number of GI's that converted to Islam during the First Gulf War of Pappy Bush! may be this shrew will get into a noisier tantrum.

» Trite platitudes... Posted by: pig
» RE: Where Hirsii Ali is lying most! Posted by: anonymous black writer
acid attacks in pakistan
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 12, 2007 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
yes, it is worse in islam. how many acid attacks take place in the west? they are almost unheard of, but in south asian muslim communities, they are common. please go to the link and view the horrible photo of this poor woman Bushra Hali.

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1908/
context/archive



MULTAN, Pakistan (WOMENSENEWS)--Almost two years after relatives of a disgruntled suitor attacked his family with acid and killed two of his children, Daud Aziz Siddiqi is still in deep grief.

"I watched her melt away day by day . . . one day I woke up and her ear was gone," Siddiqi says of his hospital stay with 18-year-old daughter Rabia.

As he speaks, his wife Tahira sobs beside him. "If someone is shot with a bullet, most times there is surgery and then it is gone. With acid the pain just goes on and on and on."

The attack occurred early in the morning of July 23, 2002, as the Siddiqis, their daughter Rabia, and granddaughter, 4-year old Khola, slept in the courtyard of their Multan home. A father of a suitor the Siddiqis had declined as a mate for Rabia scaled the wall and splashed acid on the sleeping figures.

From within the house another family member heard their screams and ran out to witness the attacker, Zafar Siyal, fleeing.

When the Siddiqis reached the hospital, the skin had melted from Tahira's back and right arm. Rabia and Khola were more severely disfigured.

In an attempt to channel their agony the Siddiqis are pursuing the case in Pakistan courts and speaking out in the national media against a form of violence that disfigures hundreds of women every year in this South Asian nation.

'Sharp Water' in Urdu

They call it "tezab," sharp water in Urdu. Normally used for agricultural purposes, nitric and hydrochloric acid are easily obtainable and all too often turned into weapons for men against women and their families.

After confessing, Siyal was found guilty in December 2003 and assigned punishment under Pakistan's "Qisas" law which calls for a perpetrator to suffer the same fate as a victim. The case is now under appeals as Siyal attempts to avoid the judge's assigned punishment of having drops of acid placed in his eyes.

Hundreds of women every year fall victim to acid attacks usually at the hands of their husbands, jilted suitors or other family members. In 2002, 280 Pakistani women died and 750 were left disfigured by acid attacks according to a Human Rights Watch report issued last summer.

The majority of attacks occur in rural areas where tribal law dominates and violence is common way to settle disputes. In central and southern Punjab province, where Multan is located, cases of reported acid attacks have been steadily rising, from nine in 2001, to 56 in 2002, to 74 in 2003.

Sometimes the attacked women are seeking a divorce or the husband is seeking a second wife over the first's objections. Sometimes the triggering event can be as trivial as an argument over grocery money.

Many Cases Unreported

"Many cases go unreported as most women do not know their rights, or the culprits take the victim for medical treatment, claiming it was an accident, and threaten the victim or her children if she speaks out" says Wasim Muntizar, deputy coordinator for the Centre for Legal Aid and Settlement, a nongovernmental organization in Pakistan that helps defend and care for impoverished people.

"Lawyers usually have only the story told by the victim, rarely do any witnesses step forward . . . thus the conviction rate is well below 5 percent," Muntizar says. "Few cases ever even get to the courts."

see link above for full story....

» RE: Violence Against Women in US&A Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» RE: Violence Against Women in US&A Posted by: anonymous black writer
What If Ali, Reagan and Horowitz Were Spies All Along?
Posted by: Nuuon on Nov 12, 2007 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was an interesting piece posted about Hirsi Ali
back in May of 2006 that already covered most of the
issues addressed in the above article. One wonders
if people like Ronald Reagan and David Horowitz were
"seeded" among the left to act as spies and eventual
"turncoats" as a means of discrediting the left.

The post is on Hirsi Ali is titled:

"Case History: Black Women 'Pimped' by White Power."

FEMALE CIRCUMCISION
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit on Nov 12, 2007 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can people please stop referring to Female Circumcision by the emotive term Female Genital Mutilation.
The latter phrase is one created by people in the west (Germain Greer - Female Eunuch, et al) as a phrase deliberately calculated to stigmatize entire cultures and make it impossible to defend it or argue for/against it rationally. It's akin to the phrase "sexual abuse" when talking of sex with children: it closes down debate by allowing people only to discuss things within a certain paradigm, instantly and automatically disadvantaging those who would rather prefer to take a more objective and relativist approach to things.
We westerners should stop interfering in other people's cultures, giving them lectures on our morality. Other people's cultures should be accepted as they are, in their entirety, and without value-judgements passed into law by what amounts to a 'soft' form of moral/cultural imperialism by ourselves.
If non-western peoples should wish to change aspects of their culture then they are free to do so; but not if it's because of exposure to western values, or driven by western values, or foisted on them by a small westernized elite (a la Pakistan) who are possessed of a value-system not of their own making and not necessarily shared by the majority of its people.

» Stop cutting BOYS too- Posted by: WitchyNy
» RE: FEMALE CIRCUMCISION Posted by: Gisele
You dare criticize a woman of color who calls herself a "feminist"?
Posted by: Q30 on Nov 12, 2007 9:52 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MISOGYNIST!!1!!11!!!

RACIST!!!!111!!!

» RE: No Posted by: oregoncharles
Ayaan
Posted by: jjray on Nov 12, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ayaan has a compelling story. I found her book Infidel to be heart wrenching. My problem with Ayaan is not that she condemns Islam for it's treatment of women. The religion needs to be condemned and doing so does not IMHO amount to Islamofascism. But where does Ayaan get off thinking the answer to the problem with Islam is a western crusade against the Islamic world? Stupid. That just polarizes the situation and entrenches the Islamic fundamentalist. The people rally around the fundamentalist when under attack from the west. Iraq was a fairly secular society by middle east standards. Our regime change will ultimately leave the country in the hands of the fundamentalists. No doubt about it. How does Ayaan think the women of Iraq will fair under Sadr? Much worse than Saddam for sure.

» RE: Iraq Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Ayaan Posted by: hms2004
Great Article Joshua
Posted by: jbur816 on Nov 12, 2007 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't have time to comment right now other than to say that this article needed to be written and I am glad that you did it. (This chick has bugged me from day one.)

Disgusting rhetoric by Joshua Holland
Posted by: pzbrawl on Nov 12, 2007 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Holland calls Ayaan Hirsi Ali a "turncoat", i.e. a deserter, apostate, renegade, quitter. Turning from the left merits such spite? It's appalling.

To mount his smear, Holland tells lies.

Holland lie #1. Dawkins & Harris calls on us to "wage a new crusade against the Muslim world.". They do not.

Holland lie #2: She is working in Washington DC because because "the Dutch government refused to pay for her body-guards in DC". False. She works there because AEI gave her a job and because she needed to get out of Holland. Indeed the Dutch government paid for protection of her in Washington for a considerable time.

Holland lie #3: Hirsi Ali's views "confuse correlation with causality." False. Islam's support for male suppression of Islamic women is causal, not correlational. Islam's refusal to recognise separate realms for government and religion is causal, not correlational. Islam's support for fatwas against its opponents (Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and many others) is causal, not correlational. Islam's support for murdering apostates is causal, not correlational.

Holland lie #4: Domestic violence is equivalent to honour killing. That is absurd.

Holland lie #5: The right's concern with honour killings is a cynical ploy to promote pro-Western chauvinism. If you are on the right, you cannot have empathic concern for the victims of religious abuse? Demagogic nonsense.

The right's "twisting of discourse" is shameful. So is Holland's. No matter how wrong the right is on so many issues, we should never stoop this low. Alter.Net ought not to publish rubbish like Holland's hit piece.

» Facts Posted by: pzbrawl
» RE: Facts Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: OK - again Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: OK - again Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Facts Posted by: pzbrawl
» RE: Facts Posted by: Joshua Holland
A lot of ignorance and prejudice masquerading as information and analysis
Posted by: CJC on Nov 12, 2007 10:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think most of the comments here are written by people with little real knowledge of Islam or Aayan Hirsi Ali. I'm not much different myself. I lived in a Muslim country for a couple of years and lived among Turks in Germany. However, I don't have a firm take on Ali myself. I heard her talk once at Harvard, on her first foray to the American Enterprise Institute. The Muslims in the audience, both young women and young men, were skeptical or even hostile. I couldn't determine whether they were mostly defensive or whether they knew enough about her to have well considered and informed opinions.

I thank Josh Holland for his piece, but I'm a little uneasy with casting the whole discussion in "left" versus "right" terms. For the rest, the more adamant the posters often I think the less they know.

Before everyone goes blowing round and round they should at least read Aayan Hirsi Ali's books. Then think. Then write.

» Turkish guest workers in Germany Posted by: counterpoint
I think I should start a 'crusade' of my own...
Posted by: mjglow on Nov 12, 2007 10:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Aayan based her Islam-bashing crusade on personal experience...so I will do the same. I grew up in a country where Islam was (is) the predominant religion. My grandpa was Muslim. In the real sense...he prayed 5 times a day, went to the mosque, abstained from pork and alcohol (for the most part) and observed the Ramadan fast every single year.

He married a Catholic girl and *gasp* neither of them converted. He went to the mosque on Fridays and she went to church on Sundays. They were happily married until his death 10 years ago...and I always got the sense that my grandma was the boss of him and not the other way around. When my mom was born, they sent her off to live with my grandma’s family (because they both worked for the railways and moved around a lot) and she was raised Catholic. When she was 18, she returned home and two years later married my dad, a Muslim.

I learned a lot about Islam from my grandpa...when I asked him why he occassionaly indulges in a glass of wine, he told me that in god’s eyes...what comes out of your mouth is more important than what you put in it. Spewing hatred and disrespect for fellow human beings (including women) is the real sin, not an occassional glass of wine. When I asked him why he married a Catholic girl, he told me that it was because he loved her. He didn’t feel like he was ‘dissin’ god by loving someone.

The point, boys and girls, is that he wasn’t the only Muslim who interpreted Islam in this way. Countless Muslims live like this. There are many different interpretations, just like with Christianity. Don’t believe me? Go to Istanbul during Ramadan. I was there two years ago and all I saw was loads of good food (after sundown) being eaten in parks and mosque courtyards by joyous people, including scantly dressed women. Or go to the Sufi festival in Pakistan. Study the Sufis and their message...see if you still think Islam is inherently evil.

Now...do you think I can get some airtime in the good ol’ US of A like Ms. Aayan? To spread my personal experience with Islam...

Voices of Arab women-website and blogs...
Posted by: JusticeForAll on Nov 12, 2007 10:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been asked to provide some alternative information to that offered by Hirsi.

I am an advocate for resistance from within. Arabs speaking out. Muslims speaking out. And NOT Arab and Muslim haters using human rights to justify occupation, oppression and injustice against my people.

Arab feminist speaking out against honor killings:
http://www.ranahusseini.com/

A blog by a progressive Arab Muslim woman
http://arabwomanprogressivevoice.blogspot.com/

Queer Palestinian women group
http://www.aswatgroup.org/english/

queer Lebanese women group
http://www.meemgroup.org/about.php

An Egyptian Activist, writer, feminist
http://www.nawalsaadawi.net/

Women organization in Jordan
http://www.awo.org.jo/

Arab and Iranian GLBTQ group
http://www.assaleastcoast.com/

GLBT group in lebanon
www.helem.net

And many many others. So there is no excuse for the media to ignore all these dissidents and glorify Ayaan Hiris.

» RE: Get off your high horse Posted by: DesertStone
» RE: Get off your high horse Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Get off your high horse Posted by: DesertStone
» RE: You didn't answer the question Posted by: DesertStone
the truth about Ayaan-her own words
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 12, 2007 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(excerpts) "First of all I wanted to put the oppression of immigrant women -- especially Muslim women - squarely on the Dutch political agenda. Second, I wanted Holland to pay attention to the specific cultural and religious issues that were holding back many ethnic minorities, instead of always taking a one-sided approach that focused only on their socio-economic circumstances. Lastly, I wanted politicians to grasp the fact that major aspects of Islamic doctrine and tradition, as practiced today, are incompatible with the open society.

Now I have to ask myself, have I accomplished that task?

I have stumbled often in my political career. It has sometimes been frustrating and slow. However, I am completely certain that I have, in my own way, succeeded in contributing to the debate. Issues related to Islam - such as impediments to free speech; refusal of the separation of Church and State; widespread domestic violence; honor killings; the repudiation of wives; and Islam's failure to condemn genital mutilation -- these subjects can no longer be swept under the carpet in our country's capital. Some of the measures that this government has begun taking give me satisfaction. Many illusions of how easy it will be to establish a multicultural society have disappeared forever. We are now more realistic and more open in this debate, and I am proud to have contributed to that process.

...I have been very open about the fact that when I applied for asylum in the Netherlands in 1992, I did so under a false name and with a fabricated story. In 2002, I spoke on national television about the conditions of my arrival, and I said then that I fabricated a story in order to be able to receive asylum here. Since that TV program I have repeated this dozens of times, in Dutch and international media.

I have said many times that I am not proud that I lied when I sought asylum in the Netherlands. It was wrong to do so. I did it because I felt I had no choice. I was frightened that if I simply said I was fleeing a forced marriage, I would be sent back to my family. And I was frightened that if I gave my real name, my clan would hunt me down and find me. So I chose a name that I thought I could disappear with - the real name of my grandfather, who was given the birth-name Ali. I claimed that my name was Ayaan Hirsi Ali, although I should have said it was Ayaan Hirsi Magan.


Now for the questions about my forced marriage. Last week's TV program cast doubt on my credibility in that respect, and the final conclusion of the documentary is that all this is terribly complicated. Let me tell you, it's not so complex. The allegations that I willingly married my distant cousin, and was present at the wedding ceremony, are simply untrue. This man arrived in Nairobi from Canada, asked my father for one of his five daughters, and my father gave him me. I can assure you my father is not a man who takes no for an answer. Still, I refused to attend the formal ceremony, and I was married regardless. Then, on my way to Canada -- during a stopover in Germany -- I traveled to the Netherlands and asked for asylum here.

I am therefore preparing to leave Holland. But the questions for our society remain. The future of Islam in our country; the subjugation of women in Islamic culture; the integration of the many Muslims in the West: it is self-deceit to imagine that these issues will disappear.

I will continue to ask uncomfortable questions, despite the obvious resistance that they elicit. I feel that I should help other people to live in freedom, as many people have helped me. I personally have gone through a long and sometimes painful process of personal growth in this country. It began with learning to tell the truth to myself, and then the truth about myself: I strive now to also tell the truth about society as I see it."

» RE: Thank you, Easterbunny. Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Thank you, Easterbunny. Posted by: EasterBunny
It's a tragedy...
Posted by: oregoncharles on Nov 12, 2007 11:28 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that someone like Hirsi Ali has to turn to the Right for support of fundamentally progresive ideas. Evidently that has influenced her views on other subjects, like welfare. She is speaking up for the most disadvantaged within her society (immigrant women), for feminism, secularism, and the Enlightenment in general.

I am reminded of the Left's non-reaction after the FBI slaughtered dozens of people at Waco. They weren't ours, so we didn't respond. But abuse of police power is a left-wing issue, and we could easily be next; why did we leave it for the Right to claim?

Some of Hirsi Ali's positions are unfortunate, and she shouldn't be calling for war against the Islamic world, if she is (Joshua's piece doesn't establish that). But in the quote from her on the first page, near the bottom, she is calling for exactly what happened in the West: the defeat of religious power and its replacement with secularism.

She exaggerates the danger Islam poses to the West, because it looms so large in her own experience (2 murders? in fear of her life? You can't really exaggerate that.). Personally, I'm much more worried about Christian fundamentalism. But Europe went through a long, bloody process to break the power of the churches and end the religious wars. The result is the Enlightenment values that underlie liberal democracy and progressivism.

You can't say that those values aren't superior and still call yourself a progressive. Cultural relativism has its limits - I defined those in a post above. Western societies are better run in large part because of those values. So she's right: the Muslim world, and especially the women in it, would be better off if they could incorporate those values. That would be a big change, just as it was in Europe. There is no religion historically bloodier or less tolerant than Christianity. Yet today we can live with it because the mainstream churches adopted Enlightenment values. And we have to fear the churches that didn't.

Islam is no different.

» RE: It's a tragedy... Posted by: mjglow
» RE: That isn't what Joshua said. Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: It's a tragedy... Posted by: Thucy
» RE: It's a tragedy... Posted by: anonymous black writer
Calling Islam itself the problem
Posted by: jbur816 on Nov 12, 2007 11:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and calling it a "death cult" sounds familiar to me... like the rumblings of anti-semitism that came to a head in early 20th century Europe, and we know how well that turned out. This sort of talk can and will lead to violence, to calls for what amounts to an ethnic cleansing. Again, I want to thank Josh for writing this and hopefully bringing more awareness to the alternet community. Calling attention to this could help to avoid problems in the future. Maybe history won't have to be repeated.

» RE: Calling Islam itself the problem Posted by: JusticeForAll
How On Earth Can Anyone Defend A Religion Like Islam
Posted by: bcgirl125 on Nov 12, 2007 12:24 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
which promotes female genital mutilation? And why would anyone who calls themselves "progressive" attack any person who brings such atrocities to light? What a worthless hit piece by a male (of course!) apologist for islam.

Please don't give me that tired old line, "Well Christianity does bad things to women too." Nothing is as awful as slicing off a young girl's genitals. Comparing any other religions to Islam is like comparing a gang of shoplifters to an axe murderer. Shame on you, Josh.

» RE:Convenient theories Posted by: DesertStone
Atheist Secular Humanist values are satanic, says Islam
Posted by: counterpoint on Nov 12, 2007 12:28 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A humanist perspective:

I'm coming from a secular humanist and atheist perspective, and the lessons we see clearly from ancient through recent history is that monotheistic religions, in conjunction with state power, become very unpleasant beasts.

In other words, as long as they're in a minority position they tend to appear nice and cuddly, but wait until they can impose their own (arbitrary) rules.

Islam posits that atheist secular humanism is satanic (and their Christian Fundamentalist counterparts agree).

Do we really want to let that stand?

Personally, I deplore that anti-Muslim writers in the US seem to have nowhere to go but the Right, but people with a cause will seek support where they can get it. Just look at the Kurds and their unholy (and often betrayed) alliances.

I'm adding a quote from Islam critic Ibn Warraq below which addresses the frequent claim by Muslim apologists who will say opponents are quoting them out of context. He shows here how that argument can simply be turned against them:

"...after September 11, 2001, many Muslims and apologists of Islam glibly came out with the following Koranic quote to show that Islam and the Koran disapproved of violence and killing:
Sura V.32: “Whoever killed a human being shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind ”.

Unfortunately, these wonderful sounding words are being quoted out of context. Here is the entire quote:

V.32: “That was why We laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being, except as a punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as though he had saved all mankind. Our apostles brought them veritable proofs: yet it was not long before many of them committed great evils in the land. Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country.”
The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. Behave or else is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated and banished!" "

Don't forget that we're not talking philosophy class here. We are talking about nations imposing mandatory religious rules on everybody.

» RE: Reminiscent of Bible verse Posted by: DesertStone
You are right to some extent
Posted by: thepinkbunnymafia on Nov 12, 2007 12:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but lets remember that honor killing, FGM, freedom of speech, freedom of press, ect are not just in the Muslim regions. Rather they are prevalent in third world countries. FGM has no basis in Islam, people of different countries, fatih, beliefs, and culture practice it. People justify FGM through their faith. Be it the Abrahamic relgions or animalistic. FGM is practiced by Falasha, Coptic Christianity,Mungiki sect and so on.

» why don't muslim leaders stop FGM Posted by: EasterBunny
Riding the Wave to War
Posted by: writerman on Nov 12, 2007 1:43 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've followed her career for years, and I've always been very, very, sceptical about her story. The story she's telling, about herself, her background, and the threat from Islam, is a fabrication, which she knows will find a ready market in the West.

First she gained sympathy by inventing a story about her past. She wasn't a persecuted refugee, she was an illegal immigrant who thought she'd find a better life in Holland. There's nothing really wrong with wanting a better life in a rich country like Holland, but she started out dishonest and carried on.

It's extraordinary how she panders to the most rabiate anti-islamic sentiments we have. Whilst her lies about her past are merely irritating, her lies and distortions about Islam, in the current climate, are actually very dangerous and inflamatory, more grist to the mill of the warmongers.

Then she got involved in a reckless and calculated provocation aimed at Muslims and Islam, and it worked! She succeeded in pissing on Islam and pissing a lot of Muslims off. In very volatile circumstances how wise or sensible is that? Sure one has the right to say what one likes, but what about the consequences and common sense?

She's a professional victim and is playing a role for all she's worth, there's real money in this role, especially now, when were involved in a crusade against Islam, which is the only religion/ideology which still has a residual oposition to "capitalism/materialism" woven into it's structure. It's the presence of this residual oposition that makes Islam a "threat", and oposition to Irael, and the fact that they control our oil.

» Counterpoint, and ignorance Posted by: JusticeForAll
Islamism vs. Islam
Posted by: dudelette on Nov 12, 2007 2:03 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the commentors seem to be missing the point. Ali is protesting against Islamism, the attempt by Islamic extremists to take over the world, transforming it into a backward-looking, Sharia law based, tribal society, with torture, violence and death for those who refuse to conform to this society.

Just as in the U.S. we are fighting against the Christian fundamentalist attempt to control society, which has been backed by the neocon fascists as a way to impose a totalitarian regime, we need to recognize the legitimacy of the struggles of others to prevent the same abuses in their countries, and the spread of them around the world.

Any society that does not allow freedom of religion choice is not free.

» RE: Islamism vs. Islam Posted by: jbur816
To those who call Hirsan Ali a "liar"
Posted by: CJC on Nov 12, 2007 2:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What are the facts?

What are your sources of information?

Does anyone writing here read Dutch and hence capable of following her public career in The Netherlands since the beginning?

Facts are essential. Opinions are NOT facts. Rumors are not facts.

Calling Hirsi Ali a "liar"
Posted by: CJC on Nov 12, 2007 3:57 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A "liar" suggests to me someone who lies so much that no one can trust much that the liar says.

In the case of Hirsi Ali here are the "lies" I found information on.

1. When she applied for asylum in the Netherlands she gave her birth year as 1969 rather than 1967, when she was born.
2. She said she came from a refugee camp on the Kenya-Somalia border when she actually had lived in Kenya for many years. (According to Wikipedia she made this claim on the advice of an aunt.)
3. She gave her family name as "Ali" rather than the name of "Magan" that her father used.
(BBC 6/29/06)
She says these lies were because she was afraid of her family, did not want to be found, and was eager to qualify for asylum in the Netherlands.

Now whether these statements reveal her to be an untrustworthy attention-seeker or someone in fear of being traced and at least harassed, if not killed, by her family or forced to marry a man not of her choosing is just a matter of our own interpretations. Hyberbolic statements by any of us writing here are just that.
"Pakiboy" quoted a Brandeis professor as saying she had an "amicable" relationship with her husband. No one here is qualified to even have an informed opinion on whether that's true or not.

I'm sorry that the tone of much of this discussion is not above what Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and numerous right wing blowhards have foisted on our political discourse over the past several years.

For Josh Holland etc etc etc to lambaste Ayaan Hirsi Ali because she has a position with the American Enterprise Institute is the worst kind of name calling and guilt by association. If her remarks and writings on Islam strike many as outrageous and irresponsible that's something else. She's articulate and outspoken. Let's stick with what she says and writes and abandon the character assassination. And we should be very careful about attacking anyone for the company she keeps, especially if it's the case that the right-wing neocon extremists are seeking her out and not the other way around.

More Misguided Multicultural Ideology and Ignorance of Islam
Posted by: fotografx on Nov 12, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your criticism of Ayaan Hirsi Ali is on the same misguided basis as the multiculturalists in Europe and Canada, equating all "religions" to be the same. Unfortunately we in the west are extend tolerance to Muslims, both their faith and the Quran does not allow them to reciprocate. Islam and western liberal democratic values are mutually exclusive and incompatible,and Ayaan Hirsi Ali's positions saying that the only solution is the defeat is realistically based. However there is an option, and that is for the western liberal democracies and Islam to come to agreement to disagree and then to disengage. There is no option or we must continue to live with conflict and hostility on both sides because there is no basis for accommodation.

The author of this piece writes well and argues effectively but unfortunately he does not know his subject and therefore comes to wrong conclusions.

Some (hopefully) reasonable assertions
Posted by: mark on Nov 12, 2007 4:33 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What might have been overlooked is that people like Sam Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens, and by extension I assume Hirsi as well, in fact oppose dogmatism as a whole, and not exclusively Islam. It is the blind subservience to any irrational belief or system of beliefs that ultimately lends a society to a chauvinistic despotism.
Religion happens to be the best example of dogmatism.
Islam happens to be, at this time in history, the best example of a chauvinistic, despotic, dogmatic religion.

When you criticize these people for their criticism of Islam, remember that they spread it around. It happens that they think Islam deserves a double portion.

So, that said, perhaps the following comments will find less opposition among Alternet users than those directed at Islam alone:

1. Women in Western countries have a better quality of life than those in officially religious countries.

2. Homosexuals in Western countries have a better quality of life than those in officially religious countries.

3. Countries with chauvinistic, dogmatic, officially religious leadership are incompatible with the kind of democracy (read secular and enlightened) that we practice in the west.

When I say "officially religious" I do not include countries like England, where the membership in and practice of the Church of England has become nominal and procedural.

interesting
Posted by: daniel1982 on Nov 12, 2007 5:19 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am in awe at the venom shown towards Ayaan Hirsi Ali in postings and replies to this piece. Most of you are no better than Fox News attack dogs.

» RE: interesting Posted by: EasterBunny
Hirsi Ali claims to be concerned with Muslim women
Posted by: chief of okeefe on Nov 12, 2007 5:56 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But nearly half of the one million Iraqis who died and more than half of the 2 million who have fled their homes after Bush's "liberation" were women. And what made it possible, and will make future such atrocities possible, is the filth that comes from her mouth, and people like her.

I am utterly unconcerned about HER safety. She has earned the hatred she has worked so hard to attract.

» threats and curses Posted by: counterpoint
EasterBunny et al refuses to discuss violence against women in US
Posted by: PakiBoy on Nov 12, 2007 6:15 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but is there any article/book by Ayan Hirsi Ali where she discusses such horrible statistics of violence against women in US&A:

MURDER. Every day four women die in this country as a result of domestic violence, the euphemism for murders and assaults by husbands and boyfriends. That's approximately 1,400 women a year, according to the FBI. The number of women who have been murdered by their intimate partners is greater than the number of soldiers killed in the Vietnam War.

BATTERING. Although only 572,000 reports of assault by intimates are officially reported to federal officials each year, the most conservative estimates indicate two to four million women of all races and classes are battered each year. At least 170,000 of those violent incidents are serious enough to require hospitalization, emergency room care or a doctor's attention.

SEXUAL ASSAULT. Every year approximately 132,000 women report that they have been victims of rape or attempted rape, and more than half of them knew their attackers. It's estimated that two to six times that many women are raped, but do not report it. Every year 1.2 million women are forcibly raped by their current or former male partners, some more than once.

Hey EasterBunny -
Shouldn't you be spending your time and energy on fighting your misogynist culture (although, given the stats, it is very likely that you commit 'domestic violence')?

It seems like your culture not only encourages 'domestic violence' but also pedophilia. So tell me how come your religion and its leaders support, encourage, and protect pedophiles? Why was Bernard Law not prosecuted after decades of providing safe heaven for pedophiles? What kind of culture allows sexual exploitation of children?

Come now EasterBunny be honest for once - Have you ever committed pedophilia? 'Cause given the magnitude of the pedophilia practiced in your churches it seems most Amerikans are either pedophiles, misogynist or both ;)

Do you think Hirsi Ali will be writing on Amerikan misogyny any time soon?

Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
» The prophet of pedophilia Posted by: EasterBunny
» Western crimes are Moslem norms Posted by: scheherezade
» apologists give it up Posted by: EasterBunny
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
Fact or Fiction?
Posted by: writerman on Nov 13, 2007 1:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll admit it. I've always been sceptical about Hirshi Ali from the very first time I saw her on television. I just didn't believe her story. It didn't ring true. It seemed like fiction to me. Since then nothing has changed my mind, on the contrary, the more I learn about her, the more I read and hear her say, the more sceptical I become.

I think she's exaggerated how bad her personal story was, and has grossly exaggerated some of the negative aspects of Islam. She's guilty of over-simplification and parody. And she has a very clear right-wing political agenda. She is violently, almost pathelogically anti-Islam. I don't trust her and I don't believe she tells the truth. It's an unpleasant mix of lies and distortion and propaganda, in the service of her political agenda.

There are powerful forces in the West who want to destroy Islam, or at the very least, transform it radically into a version that we are comfortable with, and which doesn't threaten our interests, both political and economic.

Iran, for example, is a stumbling block for our plan to dominate the Middle East and control its energy reserves, therefore, we want to force regime change on Iran, and topple its government, after all, Iran is the last country in the region with the ability to opose the United States. Not surprisingly Hirshi Ali is very anti-Iranian. She is allowing herself to be used as a pawn in right-wing conspiracy to promote war with Iran, and she is being paid handsomely for it!

I don't believe she's genuine. I don't believe she is honest. I don't believe she's sincere. But I do believe she likes the attention and the rewards involved.

» RE: Fact or Fiction? Posted by: fork
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
» RE: ayaan is not right wing Posted by: farhada
final word on genital mutilation (Islam the Teflon Religion)
Posted by: EasterBunny on Nov 13, 2007 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the arguments on female genital mutilation exemplify the dishonesty of the muslim apologists. there are parts of the world where FGM is widespread and that have been under muslim rule for a 1,000 years. all these apologists keep saying that genital mutilation predates islam, it's not islam, don't blame islam, blah, blah, blah. but if it has coexisted with islam for more than 1,000 years, why haven't muslim leaders put a stop to it?

The standard apologist excuse is always this: nothing bad is from islam. it may occur in islamic countries, people may believe it's part of the religion (many muslims think FGM is a religious duty), it may have the sanction of at least some religious authorities, the authorities may have tolerated it for 1,000 years, BUT IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM. does anyone else find that denial credible?

they try the same lame trick with honor killings, forced marriages, beatings of wives and children, veils and hijabs, etc. it's always NOT ISLAM. Islam is the TEFLON RELIGION cause nothing bad sticks to it.

we are not dealing with rational people interested in the truth. they have an agenda, the agenda is to defend islam against any and all criticisms and to slander anyone from Ayaan to little old me who dares to raise legitimate criticisms. all these dishonest tactics prove Ayaan's point: that Islam is badly in need of reform, muslims need to start getting used to hearing the truth, to facing honest criticisms and to engaging in intellectual debates without slanders and threats of violence. based on my experiences here, i'd say it's gonna be a long journey for a lot of them.

More Reasonableness
Posted by: mark on Nov 13, 2007 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suppose that since no one critical of Hirsi responded to my last post (Some [hopefully] reasonable assertions) they either agree with me, or they didn't read it. I'll take some leverage and assume the former.
And I'll follow myself up with a few more statements that I see as plainly true.

1. There is generally greater individual freedom in the West than in Middle Eastern countries.

2. Rulers of Middle Eastern countries use Islam, in the force of oppressive laws and secret police (mujahideen) to enforce limitations of freedom.

3. Limitations of freedom hit women and other minorities (homosexuals, sunnis, shiites, kurds) the hardest.

4. In order to improve the lives of women and other minorities in Middle Eastern countries, Islam must reform.

It is possible to agree emphatically with these statements without at all even tacitly endorsing any kind of violent action against middle eastern countries. Why is it that so many here refuse to do so?

» RE: More Reasonableness Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: More Reasonableness Posted by: farhada
UNICEF tells us both Hirsi Ali and EasterBunny are liars on FGM
Posted by: PakiBoy on Nov 13, 2007 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So Hirsi Ali, AEI's prominent scholar on Islam, claims FGM is an Islamic problem.
EasterBunny et al, have been regurgitating the same nonsense.

If Ali's assertion is true, there must be evidence that an absolute majority of muslims practice FGM.

Since EasterBunny/Ali won't provide data, so I did some digging and found a study conducted by UNICEF on FGM.

Here are some telling points made by UNICEF study (unlike Hirsi's 'scholarship'):

1. FGM is not tied to religion:
While religion can help explain FGM/C distribution in many countries, the relationship is not consistent. In six of the countries where data on religion are available – Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya and Senegal – Muslim population groups are more likely to practise FGM/C than Christian groups (see Figure 10, page 11). In five countries there seems to be no significant differences, while in Niger, Nigeria and the United Republic of Tanzania the prevalence is greater among Christian groups.
Looking at religion independently, it is not possible to establish a general association with FGM/C status. The most marked differences can be observed in Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Senegal. In Côte d’Ivoire, for example, 79 per cent of Muslim women have undergone FGM/C, compared with 16 per cent of Christian women.
This trend is reinforced in the analysis of FGM/C status of daughters (see Table 2C, page 37). In four countries, Muslim women are more likely to have circumcised daughters than women of other religious affiliations. In Ethiopia, Kenya, Niger and the United Republic of Tanzania, prevalence of FGM/C is higher among daughters of Christian women than among daughters of Muslim women.
This could be attributed, however, to other factors such as ethnicity and the overall distribution of the various religious groups within these countries.

2. FGM is tied to Ethnicity:
Among all socio-economic variables, ethnicity appears to have the most determining influence over FGM/C distribution within a country. As stated by Dara Carr in an analysis of DHS data, “This finding is not surprising, because many researchers have noted that FGC prevalence varies with ethnicity or that FGC serves as an ethnic marker.”18 In discussing the role of ethnicity, Ellen Gruenbaum writes: “Female circumcision practices are deeply entwined with ethnic identity wherever they are found. Understanding this should provide an important insight into the tenacity of the practice and people’s resistance to change efforts, and it can help to explain why the practice may even spread in certain situations.”19

Ethnicity is the culprit i.e. cultural practices of the indigenous population is behind FGM and not Islam. Majority of muslims are neither African nor Arabs, but are Indo-Chinese (Indonesia, Malaysia) and South Asians (Indian Subcontinent), and FGM is not practiced in these regions.

So all you Islamophobes, Easter-I-support-rape-of-women-Bunny et al go find some more 'facts' from shady Islam hate sites run by Daniel Pipes ;)

» Two wrongs still don't make a right Posted by: scheherezade
the author seems insensitive to muslim women's plight
Posted by: Aysecan on Nov 13, 2007 10:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
as a turkish woman i found this article and some of the comments a little disturbing. the author seems to brush off systemic misogyny and violence in (some) muslim countries. I think of honor killings, for example, as a means of social oppression of women in (primarilly) poor and/or rural areas.
it's similar to how lynchings were used in the south of the united states to control and oppress blacks. If you klll one person it sends a very strong message to the whole group and keeps everyone inn a state of terror. but the author compares this social oppression to the random murders of women in america. it's totally different. things like that make me question whether the author knows anything about the reality of islamic countries.

i've lived both in western countries and in several muslim countries. i can vouch for the fact that although there is sexism in the west, it is nothing like the systematic social oppression of women found in the more traditional parts of the muslim world.

perhaps as a white male the author doesn't relate to how violence can be used to control and dominate an entire group of people but it can be used that way and it's very effective.

Why
Posted by: opeluboy on Nov 13, 2007 6:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Love the Irony
Posted by: opeluboy on Nov 13, 2007 6:17 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While reading this, there is an ad (it may be a rotating one and soon disappear) on each page for Single Muslim.com, which has a picture of two very lovely (and strangely Anglo) Muslims who hardly look like they wish to impose a world caliphate, do not appear interested in cutting off anyone (least of all her's) clitoris and do seem remotely likely to blow themselves, or anyone else, up any time soon.

Shame on AlterNet for attempting to paint Muslims as humans.

» RE: Love the Irony Posted by: mark
Sorry, this comment has been removed from the system.
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement