The New Yorker carried last week an attack on freedom fighter Ayaan Hirsi Ali that borders on the obscene in its extenuation of evil and denigration of those fighting against it: “Islamismism: How should Western intellectuals respond to Muslim scholars?,” by Pankaj Mishra.
Mishra begins by asking some questions, to which he clearly believes that Hirsi Ali has supplied the wrong answers:
Was the prophet Muhammad a pervert and a tyrant? Does Islam promote terrorism and enslave women? Does Islam oblige its followers to wage jihad on Westerners whose roots lie in the secular Enlightenment? Should Muslims consider converting to Christianity? For the Somali-born writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the answer to all these questions is a resounding “Yes!” Hirsi Ali, who renounced Islam in her thirties, speaks from experience of bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists: she was genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia, briefly radicalized by a preacher of jihad in Kenya, nearly forced into a marriage, threatened with death in the Netherlands by the Muslim assassin of her collaborator, the filmmaker Theo van Gogh, and is still hounded by murderous fanatics in her new home, America….
There is a great deal wrong with this right at the outset. Pankaj Mishra is suggesting that Ayaan Hirsi Ali believes “Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant,” and that Islam promotes terrorism and enslaves women, and all the rest of the charges above, because she experienced “bigotry and intolerance among her former co-religionists,” was “genitally mutilated as a child in Somalia,” was “briefly radicalized,” and so on. In other words, if she hadn’t had such terrible personal experiences with Islam, she wouldn’t regard it with such a gimlet eye today.
But actually, the question of whether or not Muhammad was a pervert and a tyrant has nothing whatsoever to do with Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s experiences, whatever they may have been. The question of whether Muhammad was this or that can only be answered by consulting the most trustworthy sources about Muhammad — although one will get two different answers depending on whether one is searching for what Muhammad actually said and did, or for what Muslims believe he said and did, as they are not the same thing. Even the question of whether Islam enslaves women cannot be answered by Hirsi Ali’s personal experience, as illuminating as it may be of the condition of women in Islam; it has to be answered by reference to Islamic texts and teachings about women, and by a look at how those texts and teachings are put into practice in various parts of the Islamic world.
By making it all about Hirsi Ali’s negative experiences, Pankaj Mishra abuses her again, by devaluing her judgment and implying that if she had been born into different circumstances, she would think something different about Islam. Of course, in some ways we all would think differently if we were born into different circumstances. But to make one’s judgments entirely the result of one’s experiences, rather than one’s reasoned reflection, is to render them worthless as guides for anyone else. And that, apparently, is exactly what Pankaj Mishra is trying to do to Ayaan Hirsi Ali here.
And it gets worse. Mishra compares Hirsi Ali’s critique of Islam to European anti-Semitism: “Hirsi Ali, recording her horror of ghettoized Muslim life in Whitechapel, seems unaware of the similarly contemptuous accounts of Jewish refugees who made the East End of London their home after fleeing the pogroms.”
Or in short, as the new saying goes, “Muslims are the new Jews.” There is just one problem with this ghastly equation, which trivializes the mass-murders of Jews in Europe and defames Hirsi Ali: Jews never carried out terrorist attacks in Europe, and never boasted about how they were one day going to take over (in contrast to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s boast that Muslims would soon conquer Rome and all of Europe — a boast that other Islamic leaders have echoed). The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forgery, and there was no factual basis for all the conspiracy theories about Jews scheming to control the world, any more than there is today.
There is no open-ended, universal imperative in Jewish Scripture calling upon Jews to wage war against non-Jews and subjugate them under their rule (and the verses from Deuteronomy and Joshua that are always invoked to claim that there is such an imperative have never been understood that way by Jewish or Christian exegetes). But there is such an imperative in the Qur’an, and throughout Islamic history the mainstream understanding of that imperative has been that it is something incumbent upon the Islamic community as a whole.
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad, in his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: “Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book…is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.” Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation” of non-Muslims.
I suppose Nyazee is an “Islamophobe”?
What’s more, neither Ayaan Hirsi Ali nor anyone else is talking about rounding up Muslims and gassing them to death, or deporting them wholesale, or any such. It is a peculiar leap of logic to say that because one group was falsely accused of supremacist designs and was persecuted as a result, therefore any other group accused of supremacist designs must be falsely accused, with the accusers nursing genocidal aspirations.
The implied slur on Hirsi Ali’s character, and that of all anti-jihadists, is unconscionable — and then Pankaj Mishra compounds it by condescendingly suggesting that he understands her family better than she does, and that jihad terrorism is a consequence of bigotry and poverty: “Whitechapel has much in its past–oppression, bigotry, poverty, radicalism–that would have helped Hirsi Ali understand not only the neighborhood’s newest inhabitants but also her own family.” That common assumption brushes aside the many studies that show that jihadis are generally better educated and wealthier than their peers. And it manifests an abysmal ignorance of the “sense of history” Mishra scolds Hirsi Ali for not having: Mishra shows no sign of being aware of the demonstrable fact that today’s jihad terrorists are motivated by the same Islamic teachings that have motivated jihad warriors throughout history, and that are based on statements in the Qur’an and Sunnah about Infidels and the Muslim’s responsibility to fight them, not on the relative poverty or lack thereof of the Islamic world.
Mishra then asserts that “the problems she blames on Islam–fear of sexuality, oppression of women, militant millenarianism–are to be found wherever traditionalist peoples confront the transition to an individualistic urban culture of modernity.” This amateurish sociology is disproven by even the most casual glance around the globe at wherever non-Muslim “traditionalist peoples confront the transition to an individualistic urban culture of modernity.” One wonders how Pankaj Mishra would explain why Muslim Pakistani immigrants have caused so much trouble in Britain, and Indian Hindu immigrants so little, when their ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds are so similar.
But Mishra does make one comparison between Hindus and Muslims: “Many more young women,” he claims, “are killed in India for failing to bring sufficient dowry than perish in ‘honor killings’ across the Muslim world. Such social pathologies no more reveal the barbaric core of Hinduism or Islam than domestic violence in Europe and America defines the moral essence of Christianity or the Enlightenment.”
No culture or group has a monopoly on evil. Neither Ayaan Hirsi Ali nor anyone else is saying that only Muslims perform evil acts. I have no idea if Mishra’s assertion about the number of murders of Hindu girls with insufficient dowry is correct, but the problem with honor killing is sanctioned by Islamic law and custom, thus making it very difficult to stamp out in Islamic communities. Hindu dowry-killing is not sanctioned by Hindu teaching. It is against the law in India. In Islam, however, the situation is quite different: Syria recently scrapped a law limiting the length of sentences for honor killings, but “the new law says a man can still benefit from extenuating circumstances in crimes of passion or honour ‘provided he serves a prison term of no less than two years in the case of killing.’”
That’s right: two years for murder. And in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that “Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values.”
What’s more, a manual of Islamic law certified as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy by Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).
In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law.
That’s why these honor killings keep happening — because they are broadly tolerated, even encouraged, by Islamic teachings and attitudes. Yet no authorities are calling Islamic leaders to account for this. And Mishra, instead of at least granting Hirsi Ali her due for speaking about this problem, obfuscates the issue with tu quoque arguments about Hindu practices.
“Islamic fundamentalist groups,” Mishra continues, “have long terrorized many Muslim countries, especially those, such as Pakistan and Afghanistan, that were ravaged by blowback from the Cold War and the war on terror. These extremists, who now assault the West as well, have always lacked popular support within their own countries.”
I guess that’s why Hamas won the election in Gaza, and why Sharia was enshrined as the highest law of the land in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and why Pakistan has been playing a double game of aiding the Taliban on one hand while pretending to fight it on the other. It is why we see such a broad-based global Islamic movement dedicated to teaching against the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism, preventing Muslims from joining jihad groups, and inducing those who are in jihad groups to leave them.
Of course, there is no such global movement. The programs in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and elsewhere to “de-radicalize” jihadis have been shown to be useless and/or shams again and again, with high levels of recidivism. Mishra, you’ll note, offers no evidence to back up his assertion that jihadis “have always lacked popular support within their own countries,” and there is a reason for that: there is no such evidence.
Nonetheless, Mishra finds reasons for hope in, with a fine turn of phrase, he dubs the Islamic world’s “anarchic vivacity”:
The anarchic vivacity of contemporary Muslim societies–featuring such figures as Ali Saleem, Pakistan’s cross-dressing television host, and Cairo’s hijab-wearing sex therapist Heba Kotb, whose talk show is beamed across the Arab world–does not quite match Hirsi Ali’s description of an incurably medieval people busy devising ever-harsher laws for themselves while plotting mayhem for the infidels.
This kind of shoddy analysis is sadly widespread. Mishra seems to assume that if one points out that there are jihadis and Islamic supremacists in Islamic countries, then there are only jihadis and Islamic supremacists in those countries. Obviously that is absurd, but the existence of cross-dressing TV hosts and hijab-wearing sex therapists is irrelevant, because it does nothing to militate against the activity of those jihadis. In Russia, the Bolsheviks were never a majority, but they were an organized, energetic, ideologically motivated vanguard. And that’s all they needed to be in order to gain control of the country.
Mishra finds more “anarchic vivacity” among Muslim warriors for the rights of women: “In recent years, Islamist movements, led or assisted by women activists, have helped democratize Indonesia and Turkey; innumerable Muslims, such as Asma Jahangir, in Pakistan, and Shirin Ebadi, in Iran, fight to defend the rights of women against both Islamic fundamentalists and secular autocrats.”
Yes, and Indonesia and Turkey are both teetering on the edge of deep-sixing democracy and returning to Sharia rule. And while women’s rights activists in Pakistan and Iran are to be applauded, we can’t kid ourselves that they have made much headway against the institutionalized oppression of women, sanctioned by Islam, in either country.
Then Mishra turns to Muslims in Europe. He asserts that “Hirsi Ali’s simple oppositions–traditional societies versus democracy, Islam versus Western secularism” do not “sum up the experiences of Muslims in Europe, who are the Continent’s most globalized minority, with multilayered identities that are usually influenced less by the Koran or Sharia than by the politics, culture, and economy of various nations and transnational networks.”
Here again, a blanket assertion is made without evidence. Among the evidence of what Muslims in Europe really value that Mishra ignores is the fact that Sharia enclaves have already been established all over Europe. In them, Sharia is enforced and the law of the land flouted. These can be found in Malmo in Sweden, the Molenbeek area of Brussels, and elsewhere. Again, all one needs is an organized, energized minority to affect radical change.
But the minorities that Mishra is concerned about are quite different. He says that Hirsi Ali’s “praise for the United States, her new home, shows a growing familiarity with right-wing touchstones (self-reliance, distrust of government, family values, gun ownership, Christianity).” Horror of horrors! Of course, all this is semaphoring to New Yorker readers that Hirsi Ali does not merit their enlightened liberal support.
Then Mishtra turns to another foil:
If Hirsi Ali’s rhetoric has earned her critics among Western liberals, she has a fierce defender in Paul Berman, whose new polemic, “The Flight of the Intellectuals” (Melville House; $26), hails her as a “classic example of a persecuted dissident intellectual.” He upbraids such writers as the Anglo-Dutch journalist Ian Buruma and the British academic Timothy Garton Ash, who, he says, “sneered at Ayaan Hirsi Ali for having taken up the ideas of Western liberalism.”
Now Berman can add Pankaj Mishra to that list. Mishra notes, with an air of disapproval, that in his critique of Islamic pseudo-moderate Tariq Ramadan, Berman asserts that “the modern Islamic thinkers whom Ramadan is related to or admires turn out to be promoters of jihadi violence against Israel and the West.” Mishra offers no refutation of this assertion. He just presents it in a context of skepticism. And then oddly, Mishra concedes that Ramadan’s influence in Europe and the Middle East doesn’t rival that of “a figure like Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a Qatar-based theologian who justifies suicide attacks on Israel and whose program on Al Jazeera reaches tens of millions of people.” Yet Hirsi Ali is overstating the threat of Islamic supremacism?
Mishra soon after that embarks upon an even more fantastic flight of fancy:
Certainly, this malignity does still fester in the proclamations of Hamas and Hezbollah; and Berman deftly summarizes a revisionist history that emphasizes “centuries of Muslim cruelty toward the Jews,” challenging the conventional view that European-style anti-Semitism was unknown under the Ottoman Empire. But he misses an opportunity to enrich his genealogy of hate by setting it within the modern history of the Middle East and Asia. For instance, he makes a passing reference to Rashid Rida, a prominent Islamist thinker at the turn of the twentieth century and al-Banna’s revered teacher, expressing curiosity about his praise for early Zionist settlers, but doesn’t explore the matter further. Although, ultimately, Rida turned against Zionism as Jewish immigration to Palestine surged in the wake of the Balfour Declaration, he had been an outspoken critic of European anti-Semitism during the Dreyfus trial and made early attempts, including an exchange with Chaim Weizmann, regarding an agreement between “the Arabs and their Hebrew cousins.” Berman rightly points out that the mufti of Jerusalem showed an obscene eagerness to help extend the Final Solution to the Middle East, and hatred of British colonialists and Zionist settlers certainly provoked Naziphilia among many Arabs of the nineteen-thirties and forties. But it is worth noting that, by 1941, when the mufti sidled up to Hitler and, soon afterward, began to air his anti-Semitic rants on the radio, reactionary pan-Islamists like him had to contend with overlapping groups of liberal Westernizers, Marxists, and secular Arab nationalists; far from being representative of the larger Arab world, the mufti was a fast-diminishing figure even in his own small sphere of influence–forced out of Palestine by the British in 1937 and blamed for a series of political debacles there. Berman himself relates that Arabs comprehensively failed to respond to the mufti’s exhortations to kill the Jews.
Could Mishra possibly be serious in writing this? Is he not aware that the Arab states surrounding Israel rejected a UN-mandated “two-state solution” and embarked on a war to annihilate Israel in 1948 — a scant few years after the Mufti had saturated the Arabic-speaking world with Jew-hatred broadcast from Berlin?
This blandly asserted unreality is emblematic of the whole piece. What is ultimately the bitterest irony is that if Pankaj Mishra himself is saved from the violence, degradation and horror of Islamic supremacism, it will be due to the efforts of the very people he sneers at, people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Thanks to Hirsi Ali. I read her first book….Infidel, and it was very powerful….please read this book. I look forward to her second, Nomad. She is a very brave and intelligent woman, coming from a culture where oppression of women is commonplace….her choice to educate herself, free herself from the dogma and coercive conformism of her former life, makes her a model for third world women…..Hirsi Ali, we send our sincere hopes for your health and happiness.
Hirsi Ali does not want to be a model for third world women,she is in her mind a model for the women belonging to first world.Please don't insult her.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, I have a deepest admiration for you. Natali from Australia
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a lighthouse in the western world, who – unluckily – seems to have forgotten, that it's an obligation to stand up for freedom.
Lives of slavery are assured for every man, woman and child in the world if the
Islamic threat is not dealt with. Israel will be attacked and broad death and
destruction will ensue. There will be three types of people, victims, murderers
and resistors, those who are forewarned, forearmed, prepared for battle…………..William
I worked with Ayaan Hirsi Ali before the creation of "Submission" and can say absolutely that this profile in the New Yorker could only have been written by someone who does not understand her beliefs or her commitment to freedom and humanity, and refuses to acknowledge the truth about jihad. These are the people I talk about in my new book, Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy In the West (which includes my work with Ayaan –and interviews with her from 2003 — as well as insights from Robert Spencer). The book is available through Amazon and Barnes & Noble or your local bookseller, if interested http://www.amazon.com/Radical-State-Democracy-Sec…
"if she hadn’t had such terrible personal experiences with Islam, she wouldn’t regard it with such a gimlet eye today"
Funny argument, that..
Apparently muslim-apologetics feel that the victims of violent crime should be excluded from bearing witness against their abusers because they are n't objective enough?
Someone who has experienced the consequences of an ideology is necessarily 'biased' and is not a reliable witness??
So that's the reason the testimonials of people defecting from communist Russia were not heeded in the west? They had been emprisoned in the Gulag for their dissident poltical convictions and tehrefore they could not be deemed reliable witnesses about communism?
It goes to show that you cannot reason with believers – religious or not; believers are impervious against facts and reason
Paardestaart, you are so right.
I came to the U.S. in 1977, together with a whole bunch of other former Soviets. There were all sorts on people, even some nuts, but there were also brilliant and knowledgeable people who should've been the pride of any college. Of them all, only one became a sovietologist: Dmitry Simes.
Everyone else was told, "You emigrated from Soviet Union, so you must be biased against it, so you won't tell the truth, so we don't want you." This is how they were greeted at the gate of every university.
At first I was flabergasted, but later I understood what was going on: American sovietologists who really didn't know much, and knew that they didn't know much, saw these people as a threat to their personal welfare and to the reputations they managed to build up among those like them or their students whom they led by the nose. It was all about jobs, salaries and reputation. Soviet emigres were told to go away BECAUSE they were so good.
(cont.)
Much later, when I was writing a paper on the class structure of the Soviet Union, I looked at what had been written on that subject in the West. I was totally disgusted. They didn't know a thing.
This is how "experts" just weeks before the fall of Berlin Wall "determined" that the standard of living in East Germany was higher than in West Germany.
You are absolutely right. Except it is not belief that stands at the root of it, it is protecting one's employment. People like Pankaj Mishra never let truth bog down a good salary.
Nonie Darwish ,Wafa Sultan and Hirsi Ali are the three super models for freedom and justice.It,literally,makes me weep to see how shabbily they have been treated by the women's lib hypocrites .
Don't forget Brigitte Gabriel: http://www.actforamerica.org/
And this brave lady, too – Ghada Jamshir: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nR3L4vY7EU&NR… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghada_Jamshir
And don't forget Dr. Phyllis Chesler either!
I'm halfway though "Infidel" and have ordered "Nomad." Her words have made my skin crawl more than once. There is not another device on earth in mankind's history to capture and annihilate the human spirit as Islam. It is from the pit of hell.
Here's another book whose title says it all. Free downloadable 295 page pdf.
"Unmasking Muhammed: The Malignant Narcissist and his Grand Delusion Allah" by Sujit Das. https://acrobat.com/#d=WsvZBY1sY0pLKbrDQmGZyA
loseyateefa; always a hungry seeker of truth, had to download to my computer your free download. read, stop, think; read, read, stop think. Thanks. Mike M. SFC, USA, Ret.
"Jews never carried out terrorist attacks in Europe" – Jews may not have done, but Israelis most certainly have. Tzipi Livni was a member of an assassination team in France and similar teams have killed dozens. Letter bombs were sent to London, a suitcase bombs exploded in Rome and a bomb sent to Konrad Adenauer by Menachem Begin killed a policeman. Then there's the moutain of terrorist killings they've perpetrated in the Middle East, latest in Abu Dhabi and on the high seas.
Why are we talking about Israel in a debate about Radical islam? This obsession with Israel and the Jews is not normal.
It shouyld be mentioned that, while Israel does not have a legal right to carry out assassinations outside of the Middle East, there may be a moral right. That is not exactly the same.
However, to characterize Israel as a 'terrorist state' for such actions is silly. Killing your enemies in the middle of a war is not terrorism – it is fighting a war. There is a difference. killing the leaders of your enemy is 100% a legal part of war and always has been.
Please see sir Gerald Kaufman's speech in the British parliament (February 2009) on the U tube. Israel is loosing its legitimacy even in the eyes of its most ardent supporters.
While the state of Israel may have done such things out of national defense, Jews have not killed Europeans in the name of YHWH, the Torah or Moses. Muslim terrorists kill others because they believe their religion and their god mandate it. I can think of no other religion that does.
you're deluded!
William Smart you say your name is?
Actually, extrajudicial killings or "assassinations" is perfectly legal under international law. "It does not violate international law to kill a [enemy] combatant, regardless of where the combatant is found, whether he is awake or asleep and whether or not he is engaged in active combat at the moment of his demise." Hamas (and before them PLO) and other Palestinian terror groups are in an ongoing war with Israel. Therefore, they are considered enemy combatants and are legal targets of extrajudicial assassinations.
Interestingly, the international community constantly complains that Israel is too heavy handed with fighting terrorists when it raids or attacks terrorist enclaves in the W. Bank and Gaza. Richard Goldstone himself has suggested that Israel should protect itself through "proportionate retaliation" such as targeted killings. Israel has done just that and engaged in a more "proportionate response" and the Israel haters still bitch and moan. I guess for them, any defense of Israel is "disproportionate."
And no one says boo when Obama fires predators at all sorts of assination targets in Pakistan, killing along with them innocent family and friends.
You forgot to spell out the US president's full muslim name. Full muslim name.
Would that help you if he did, "Special Bus Mike?"
Mishra is right that many Hindu women are killed for having insufficent dowry but his conclusion is wrong. First of all their may be a connection to the Hindu practice of Sati in which a widow is sacrificed on her husbands funeral pyre. Secondly Honor killings are generally the killing of a Muslim relative who converted from Islam to another religion or who practices a non-Islamic life style effectively making that person an infidel. Murdering such people is commanded in the Koran.
Sati only practiced in a small region of India by a few ethnic groups and is certainly not a "Hindu" practice otherwise it would have been seen everywhere in India and by Hindus all around the world.
Also the reason for it was the Muslim invaders would rape and enslave the women after killing the male warrior. There are 100 times more people killed by Christian exorcists or human sacrifice by Satan worshippers in the U.S. than people killed by Sati. The cases where it happens the perpetrators have been tried and convicted for murder as they should be.
Excuse me, did you say Christian exorcists and Satanic human sacrifice in the US? Big Oil, somebody's been telling you stories.
"There are 100 times more people killed by Christian exorcists or human sacrifice by Satan worshippers in the U.S. than people killed by Sati."
What is your source for this information. I live in the USA and never heard of somebody died as a result of a Christian performing an exorcism and very rarely has been people murder in satanic rituals.
Excuse me, but in the past sati was widely practiced all over India and beyond. It was practiced in Hindy Javanese empire before it was overrun by Muslims. It was practiced long before Muslims invaded India and has nothing to do with them.
Of course, now it is illegal and probably not very widespread any more.
Marrying a woman for her dowry, killing her, then marrying someone else is not sati. Unfortunately, it has become more widespread in India over the past 3 decades, although I don't know how widespread.
Just contrast the rapid economic development of India with it's Muslim neighbor Pakistan, in the next 10-20 years, the wealth and education difference will become huge (it already has to a large degree). BTW if poverty was making people commit terrorism then we would have seen Hindus blowing bombs in the West, but we don't , why is that? How come poor Non-Muslim people from Africa are not waging Jihad? All Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslim.
The New Yorker writer Pankaj Mishra is a fool of a writer. But dont take my word for it. Islam is a religion of peace, understanding, love, faith and all the loving of humanity.
Now image letting the brave women Ayaan Hirsi Ali an intellectual, writer, politician walk the street of Saudia Arabia or Pakistan or any other majority muslim country and come out alive.
Thats speaks a volume about Islam and the fake writer from the new yorker.
Outstanding point, Sita! I have no doubt that if Ayaan walked down the street in a Muslim country, she would be recognized and lynched immediately. Pankaj Mishra is a professional dissembler. People like him have no moral compass, and as a result, have no ability to conduct critical thinking. Since his mind has not evolved up to the Age of Reason, he can only assume that people who agree with him are good, and people who disagree with him are bad. The idea that your opponent's argument may be right, and that you may adopt his views if they seem right to you, is a thousand years away for a chap like Pankaj Mishra.
I am looking forward to the next book by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Also she is a beautiful woman.
I have a lot of admiration for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and none for Pankaj Mishra, a member of the marching morons.
Ayaab Hirsi Ali is an inspiration and a true person through and through….her detractors and critics have no sense of what her life has been like…….they are usually the same leftist ivory tower puppet people from the NY Times etc etc….living in their own smug, self satisfied manner; how casually and foolishly they pontificate about experiences they have never had, places they have never been etc etc.
"There is no open-ended, universal imperative in Jewish Scripture calling upon Jews to wage war against non-Jews and subjugate them under their rule (and the verses from Deuteronomy and Joshua that are always invoked to claim that there is such an imperative have never been understood that way by Jewish or Christian exegetes)."
There are very clear passages where God tells his Chosen People they have a Promised Land and thus can and should drive the other people off of it.
"But there is such an imperative in the Qur’an, and throughout Islamic history the mainstream understanding of that imperative has been that it is something incumbent upon the Islamic community as a whole."
Not for a given people, but just to try to bring "The Good News" to others, as Muslim is a universal religion with one god for everyone and no race of chosen people.
"There are very clear passages where God tells his Chosen People they have a Promised Land and thus can and should drive the other people off of it."
Actually, those passages describe a historical event, when the Israelites conquered the land of Israel and drove out the warring Canannite tribes. The commandments you reference are meant only for a specific time in history (biblical times). Those commandments are not legally applicable under modern Jewish law (Halakah). So unless Doc Brown rolls up in a DeLorean the commandment is moot. Even still, some biblical scholars have suggested that this isn't even a factual retelling but merely an allegory to teach a lesson to followers of the Torah. Nice try though.
"Not for a given people, but just to try to bring "The Good News" to others, as Muslim is a universal religion with one god for everyone and no race of chosen people."
That's a complete non-sequitur to what the article was talking about, and seems to suggest that you agree with the use of violence and subversion to bring the "good news" of islam to other countries, in which case you are a bastard.
The answer to all the above questions by Pankaj Mishra, who ever he is,is yes.
As far as comparing women killed in India with ‘honor killings’ across the Muslim world, how does he know?
The "honor killings" in the Muslim world are so otten not registered, ignored, forgiven. Even if registered as crimes, they are often not registered as honor killings. Not just in the Muslim world. The same thing is happening in Europe now, at least within Muslim enclaves where Shariah is enforced.
I am sure that if the real count of honor killings were kept, it would be many times higher.
8. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs. Like videoing the stoning of women and gays.
9. You have nothing against women, if barefoot, pregnant and shrouded, and think every man should own at least two.
10. You've always had a crush on your neighbor’s goat, camel and child.
11. You believe world civilization reached its peak of perfection in 632 CE, and plan to soon bring it back to that level.
12. You've heard of books besides the Quran, and hope someday to burn some.
13. You think the Holocaust is a lie told by Jews in their evil plot to take over the world, but you long to make it true, after you succeed in your divine plot to take over the world.
14. You long, and fight, for a pure Muslim homeland, besides the 57 you already have. But the Jews don't get even one.
15. You say "there is no compulsion in religion", but only when all other religions admit your superiority, or when there is only one religion.
I would also like to know what are your 1-8 points so that I can answer all of them one by one.
More wisdom than spoken you can walk on water, the lake is not frozen.
Wonderfully spoken. Truth is glorious.
Why are you denying people like ancient sage the first eight pearls of wisdom?
16. You say that a few Jews and Christians (at best) will be saved from Hell, but only those who have who have followed the True Religion, i.e. Islam.
17. When questioned you always point to the ONE verse in the Quran that recommends peace, and ignore the 500 that recommended war. But not in practice.
18. Your God is merciful and good, but He spends 50% of His Holy Book drooling over the brutal suffering of non-Muslims in Hell, and the punishment He claims you will give US in this life.
19. Your God is forgiving and kind, but killing for Islam is the Only Sure Way to AVOID Hell. Like helping Humankind is for Jews (who don't believe in hell), or giving your life to Jesus is for Christians.
20. "Slavery is Freedom", "War is Peace" and "Backwards is Forwards" make perfect sense to you.
21. You believe movies, music and unveiled women are snares of Satan, but violence is commanded by Allah for a higher place in Heaven.
22. You believe the Quran is for all mankind (whether they want it or not) but can only be read in medieval Arabic.
23. You claim Switzerland's vote to ban new minarets (but not new Mosques) is "racist", but banning all Churches, Synagogues and Hindu/Buddhist/Shinto/Other Temples from even existing in Saudi Arabia, and most other Muslim countries, is the Divine Will of Allah.
24. You demand that Muslims be allowed unrestricted immigration to all Western Countries, but non-Muslims are forbidden to even enter the City of Mecca.
25. You know that everything that happens is Predestined by Allah, but that you must learn and follow a million pointless rules for every action of the day to avoid offending Him. And you don't want to offend Him!!
26. You believe that Muhammad's "Overnight-Flight" from Mecca to Jerusalem on his Magical Flying Horse (I am not making this up) gives you the right to appropriate the 3000 yr. old Jewish Temple for yourselves. (yes, they really believe this).
27. You can recite from memory the entire Quran in Arabic, and someday hope to read a translation in your own language so you can find out what it says. (Until then you'll take your Imams' word it's all good).
28. A few satirical Dutch cartoons drive you into a worldwide burning/killing rage, yet many weeks-long Muslim State-produced miniseries of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are "educational". Yet there are no worldwide (or any) Jewish riots over them.
29. You think the separation of Church and State is a Satanic plot, yet separation of adult men and women is ordained by Allah, and if you disagree you must be killed. (An actual recent Saudi Arabian Religious Authority fatwa). And yet gays are killed too.
30. You think Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Solomon, Moses, Jesus (and Muhammad) were all actually Muslims, just like the Mormons know that they were all actually Mormons (except Muhammad). And they also kill gays.
31. You know the Devil is not really hiding under your bed – you're not children! You just believe He is hiding in your bathroom so He can see your pee pee. (A Muslim Imam told me this personally)
32. To you a central "spiritual" debate by "religious" authorities is whether all men will have permanent erections in Heaven, or whether they will get erect at will. Also whether women will be virgins perpetually or will be re-virgined after each use.
33. You believe that Moses (Jew-liberating, 10 Commandments giving), was a pious dolt, and that Jesus (loving your neighbor as yourself, giving up your life for a friend) was a fraud, who was never actually crucified, was not the Son of God, but gave a sermon immediately after being born. (It's in the Quran)
34. And yet you believe Muhammad: a mass murdering, woman raping, slave trading, caravan raiding, Jew hating, narcissistic, genocidal, pedophile Warlord is a perfect role model for all time. And Islam is the most peaceful of Religions.
35. Blowing up two 2000 yr old Buddhist statues is…. I can't even think of a way to make this funny. Muslims.
An Islamophobe is a non-Muslim who wants to stay that way.
A Muslim Militant is the one killing you, a Muslim Extremist is the one issuing the death threats, a Muslim Moderate is the one explaining why, unfortunately, you deserve it.
Actually. thne devil hides in your nose. Which is whny it is very important to clean your nose every morning.
The prophet said, "If anyone of you rouses from sleep and performs the ablution, he should wash his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out thrice, because Satan has stayed in the upper part of his nose all the night."
Hadith Sahih Bukhari 4:54. 516. Narrated by Abu Huraira
(also in Sahih Muslim Book 002 Number 0462)
Lol, Muhammad was a loon!
36. Blowing up Buddhist statues is a lot of fun and pain-free. The Buddhists are all dead or Muslims now, those that were in Afghanistan, so they had nothing to say about it. The Buddhas themselves were non-violent and appeared to understand Islam's very important religious needs. We thanks them. We give thanks to all of those we have massacred, converted, terrified and subdued in the name of the Prophet and Allah.
It is really the least thing we can do…
I often wonder what would prophet Moses (PBUH)say to Jewish people who have en-caged a whole nation and imposed an embargo on essential items like medicine and food .
I wonder how blessed prophet Moses (PBUH) would react to cold blooded murder of seven humanitarians on an aid flotilla on independent waters carried out by his followers
I wonder what would prophet Jesus(PBUH) say to Christian soldiers for killing half a million Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq in a small span of ten years.
I wonder what would be his reaction if he found out that the Serb Christians massacred 1300 Bosnian Muslims with the help of good Christian Dutch soldiers who left the UN safe heaven and thus allowed this cold blooded slaughter of innocent lives
Similarly I wonder What would prophet Muhammad (PBUH) say to these Jihadis who are killing Muslims and non Muslims alike.
I am pretty sure that those responsible for these actions are not doing it for the greater glory of the great prophets PBUT,but are doing them for their own convoluted claim of being the CHOSEN ONES.
"I often wonder what would prophet Moses (PBUH)say to Jewish people who have en-caged a whole nation and imposed an embargo on essential items like medicine and food ."
Asma, for a student of History you don't seem to know even the basic facts of the blockade of Gaza. The blockade only prevents certain items such as weapons and cement (to build bunkers for Hamas terrorists). Israel still allows the movement of persons, merchandise, fuel, medical supplies, humanitarian aid and food. Israel has maintained an open corridor for Palestinians to seek medical treatment in Israeli hospitals. In fact, Israel sent over 1 million tons of aid to Gaza in the past 18 months. The Washington Post reported in the first week of June that "Gaza is not cut off from the outside world,” and “pharmacies look as well-supplied as a typical Rite Aid.”
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/…
"I wonder how blessed prophet Moses (PBUH) would react to cold blooded murder of seven humanitarians on an aid flotilla on independent waters carried out by his followers"
Wow, you can't even get the basic facts straight. The NINE activists on the flotilla were not humanitarians, they were members of the IHH terrorist organization that has ties to Hamas and other radical pan-Islamic movements. The IHH terrorists planned a preemptive assault on Israeli soldiers. There wasn't even any humanitarian aid on the ship, just stacks of cash for Hamas officials and cement to build tunnels to smuggle weapons in from Egypt. Israel offered the Mavi Marmara to dock at Ashdod and transfer the goods to Gaza, instead they were told to "go back to Auschwitz." The soldiers entered with paintball guns and were nearly beaten to death by the "activists." Israel engaged in self-defense, whereas the IHH attempted "cold blooded murder" of Israeli soldiers.
"I am pretty sure that those responsible for these actions are not doing it for the greater glory of the great prophets PBUT,but are doing them for their own convoluted claim of being the CHOSEN ONES."
http://honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/crit…
"I am pretty sure that those responsible for these actions are not doing it for the greater glory of the great prophets PBUT,but are doing them for their own convoluted claim of being the CHOSEN ONES."
Just so you are clear, the term "Chosen Ones" for Jews is not a declaration of supreme awesomeness, it merely means that Jews are to follow ALL of gods 600+ laws to be considered "righteous," whereas non-Jews (Christians, Muslims, whomever) only need to follow 7 Noahide laws (part of the 10 commandments). Some scholars have suggested the term "Chosen" for Jews is really meant as a burden more so than anything else (I'm not necessarily agreeing with this take).
Asma, I wonder what the prophets would say about the fact that you have a very loose knowledge of history at best, and that you continually seek to villainize an entire nation and several religions?
I hear you loud and clear and you tell the same story as the Israeli government's spokesman whom I heard on my TV.
I would like to ask only one question from you. If 1.5 million Jews are confined in one place encircled from all sides, enjoying all the liberties and humanitarian aid being provided to the Gazans, would you consider that a satisfactory arrangement.? If your answer is in affirmative,then I will take my words back and wish all the Israelites such a happy and carefree existence.
I sympathize with the ordeal of the Israelite commandos.who were forced to kill these terrorists with their high velocity automatic weapons sometimes from a distance of 32 cm and some times even repeatedly. I wonder what happened to the mobiles,laptops,credit cards and 3.7million dollars belonging to these terrorists.
"If 1.5 million Jews are confined in one place encircled from all sides, enjoying all the liberties and humanitarian aid being provided to the Gazans, would you consider that a satisfactory arrangement.?"
Again you need to become a better student at history since you cannot grasp even basic facts and events. Gaza is not encircled from all sides on lockdown. Israel allows movement in and out of the territory for the Palestinians. As previously mentioned, Israel maintains an open corridor for medical transport. In fact before Hamas came to power and fired thousands of rockets at Israel, there were plans to build a highway between Gaza and the W. Bank for Palestinians. By the way, did you learn in your history class that Egypt has the other border with Gaza and also enforced the blockade? I guess its only fair to put blame on the Jews and not other Muslims, huh?
As for your hypothetical (and its just that a hypothetical, since the facts do not support your position at all), if Israel acted at all like the Palestinians by being xenophobic, murderous, constantly making war with its neighbors and generally genocidial, then they should be confined to one place. I doubt the Arabs would be so kind as to provide them with constant humanitarian aid and attempt to make peace with them whenever possible (as the Israelis do).
That said, currently approximately 6 million Jews IN ISRAEL are confined from all sides by hostile Arab neighbors.
You are now free to take your words back.
"I sympathize with the ordeal of the Israelite commandos.who were forced to kill these terrorists with their high velocity automatic weapons sometimes from a distance of 32 cm and some times even repeatedly."
The Israeli commandos were attacked and being beaten (and stabbed) nearly to death. The "activists" used stun grenades and threw an Israel commando overboard. The "activists" wrestled away some of the automatic weapons that the Israelis had. The Israelis were justified in self-defense by firing on and killing their attackers before they were killed themselves. The attack took place in close quarters on the deck of a ship, so of course shots were at close range and multiple to ensure they killed their attacker. Quit complaining because a Jew defended his life against a Muslim murderer.
Fact of the matter is, had the IHH terrorists not preemptively planned an attack on the Israeli soldiers, this would have never happened. They had multiple chances to dock peacefully, but instead told the Israelis to "go back to Auschwitz." Although, perhaps you didn't learn what happened at Auschwitz as a student of history?
"I wonder what happened to the mobiles,laptops,credit cards and 3.7million dollars belonging to these terrorists. "
Hopefully the money was confiscated by the Israelis since it was being transported to Hamas, a known terrorist organization that calls fro the destruction of world Jewry in its charter, to use for terrorists attacks against Israel. The flotilla trying to break the blockade was illegal under international law, therefore any items on board can be legally confiscated by Israel. Perhaps you should become a student of international law too?
The Nazis also used similar arguments in favour of their atrocities.People in Warsaw ghettos were also called terrorists attacking the German because they were supposedly throwing bricks and Molotov cocktail. It is ironic that some of the children of the Warsaw ghettos are confining another people to a similar fate.It was atrocious then and it is atrocious today. As a child I always struggled to understand,how a whole German nation could stand by and let these atrocities take place. Your defence of the Israeli behaviour goes some way towards explaining that kind of inhuman mindset.
why is Israel objecting to an impartial UN inquiry? Would the world have accepted Germany holding it own inquiries at Nuremberg ?
The murderous Nazis while committing all those heinous crimes against the Jews,the gypsies and the Russians did so because they believed in their superiority and wanted a bigger living space for themselves.Any people inflicted with such criminal arrogance are bound to come unstuck on the anvil of history and history has a strange way of presenting sudden and dramatic change of scene.Who in Germany would have thought in 1943 that it will be all over for them by 1945. Zionist friends of Israel do her no favour by supporting all her atrocities.
Hamas does not recognize Israel because Israel itself does not define its borders, to be recognized or not recognized. Hamas merely aspires to destroy Israel, Israel has already destroyed Palestine.
I am a Muslim and a friend of Palestine Don't take my word for it, and go and listen to the MP Gerald Kaufman's speech to the parliament of February 2009 on the U tube.
Asma,
I have come to the conclusion that all I can do is pray that God will soften your heart and open your eyes to truth. I have never communicated with someone who blamed the victim for the attackers action as you do. May the Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on you and open your eyes and heart. He is the only one that can do that. The destruction of your believes by facts and reason just push you farther into the darkness.
Asma, I noticed you didn't reply to any of my facts but merely changed the argument to a comparison between Israel and Nazi Germany. I can play and beat you at your own game.
"People in Warsaw ghettos were also called terrorists attacking the German because they were supposedly throwing bricks and Molotov cocktail."
The Palestinians are not comparable to the JEWS (not people as stated above) in the Warsaw ghettos. The Jews of Europe during WWII never blew up kindergartens full of German children, or gunned down German mothers with their children or intentionally fired rockets into German civilian areas – this is what the Palestinians do to the Israelis. The Warsaw Jews were fighting for their lives against systematic extermination. The Palestinians are xenophobic and are fighting to for Islamic and Arab imperialism, to destroy Israel because it is a "Jewish state" and to exterminate the Jews from "Jordan to the sea."
The facts are clear, the Nazis' sought the systematic extermination of every Jew in Europe. Israel only seeks peace with its Palestinian neighbors and allows 1.5 million Arabs to live as free and equal citizens in Israel. Second,
"It is ironic that some of the children of the Warsaw ghettos are confining another people to a similar fate."
Asma, I already proved you wrong with your confinement charge, try another lie.
"Your defence of the Israeli behaviour goes some way towards explaining that kind of inhuman mindset. "
My defense (with an s) of Israel is based in the fact that Israel is a SECULAR DEMOCRATIC country that provides civil rights to its citizens and treats Jews, Arabs, Christians, Muslims and people of all race and all religions equally.
Not surprisingly, your defense of the Palestinian behavior: xenophobia, racism, hatred, death, war and terrorism is the perfect explanation for the inhumane mindset of the Nazis. Its not surprise that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was a personal friend of Hitler and BEGGED him to build death camps for Jews in Israel and Jordan. Its also no surprise that anti-semitism is rampant in the Islamic world, Mein Kempf is a best seller in Turkey.
"why is Israel objecting to an impartial UN inquiry?"
Because the UN has already proven that it is a body biased against Israel. The Arab and Third World bloc joined together in the 1970s to form what a pro-Palestinian lobby at the United Nations. These countries were nearly all dictatorships or autocracies and frequently vote together to pass resolutions attacking Israel and supporting the Palestinians.
Don't forget, Israel was the only UN member excluded from a regional group, the Asian Group (the Arab states have barred its membership).
It is comparable to an African American being subjected to Jim Crow courts in America's south in the first part of the 20th century and expecting to be treated fairly by a white Jury.
"Would the world have accepted Germany holding it own inquiries at Nuremberg ?"
Nazi Germany was a non-democratic facist nation that didn't have civil or equal rights for many of its citizens. Israel is a democracy that has a civil system where Palestinians can equally assert their rights along with Jews and any other citizen. Israel has its own internal justice system that can perform the inquiry. Would we expect America or Britain to require an inquiry for every count-terror action it engages in Iraq, Afghanistan or any where else in the world?
"Hamas does not recognize Israel because Israel itself does not define its borders, to be recognized or not recognized."
No Hamas does not except Israel because Hamas hates Jews. Hamas calls for the destruction of World Jewry in its charter (try actually reading it oh great student of history). Hamas officials have made public proclamations that they seek to kill the Jews of the world – its no secret.
"Hamas merely aspires to destroy Israel, Israel has already destroyed Palestine."
As proved above, Hamas aspires to destroy all Jews. Israel never destroyed Palestine. Israel provides tons of aid and economic opportunity to the Palestinians. Don't forget, the Palestinians receive billions in aid from the EU and Arab states. Of course, they piss it away and use the money for terrorism because their main objective is not to create a Palestinian state but to destroy the Jewish one. Don't believe me, just read Khalid Abu Tomah – he is a Palestinian that reports the corruption in the PA and Hamas.
I am happy that Israel has partially lifted off its embargo on Palestinians in Gaza. Israel was allowing selected items to Gaza to provide minimum sustenance to the Palestinians over there.I agree with you there ,but this was necessary to keep them alive and Israel cannot afford to have them dead.
Well the UN has the mandate from the world community to investigate all such irregularities and I was pleased to know that its going ahead on this matter.
It is only Hamas which is keeping the Palestinian cause alive , otherwise for all practical purposes Israel has destroyed Palestine.
The Jews hate all Arabs including the Palestinians and are bent on annihilating the status of Palestinians as a nation and if it were not for Hamas it would have gone unnoticed given the support that Israel gets from its friends.
"Israel was allowing selected items to Gaza to provide minimum sustenance to the Palestinians over there."
Israel had allowed MUCH more than minimum sustenance. Israel allowed merchandise, fuel, medical supplies, humanitarian aid and food. The Washington Post reported in the first week of June that "Gaza is not cut off from the outside world,” and “grocery stores are stocked wall-to-wall with everything from fresh Israeli yogurts and hummus to Cocoa Puffs smuggled in from Egypt. Pharmacies look as well-supplied as a typical Rite Aid in the United States.”
"Well the UN has the mandate from the world community to investigate all such irregularities and I was pleased to know that its going ahead on this matter."
You are ignorant of international law. The UN can only get involved where there are alleged violations of international law. Here there is no prima facie case for a violation of international law. Whether you feel Israel's boarding of the flotilla was badly executed or not, it was legal under international law. Thus the UN is not within its right or jurisdiction to investigate the flotilla incident.
"It is only Hamas which is keeping the Palestinian cause alive , otherwise for all practical purposes Israel has destroyed Palestine."
Um, what about Islamic Jihad, the PLO, billions of dollars from the World (UN, Arab Bloc, US and EU), Hezbollah, Al Aqsa Martyrs brigade… need I really go on? The Palestinian voice has been heard loud and clear and has been drowning out the voices of Israel on the world stage since the 1970s.
"The Jews hate all Arabs including the Palestinians and are bent on annihilating the status of Palestinians as a nation and if it were not for Hamas it would have gone unnoticed given the support that Israel gets from its friends."
What a great way to completely stereotype about JEWS and Israelis. You are truly a hate-filled individual. Unlike you, Jews are not filled with hate and do not hate Arabs, some of the most prominent voices for human rights for Palestinians and Arabs worldwide are Jews and Israelis. Overall, the Palestinians receive more attention and more aid than Israel from the World community.
Israel is not in the business of trying to destroy the Palestinians as a nation. The fact of the matter is Israel has actually helped facilitate statehood for the Palestinians by leaving Gaza and allowing the W. Bank to remain mostly autonomous. Don't forget nearly 1.5 million Arabs are citizens of Israel and given full and equal rights under the laws and more civil rights than any Arab/Islamic nation in the world. From 1994-2004 the Palestinian population in Gaza and W. Bank increased exponentially! Israeli provides food, electricity, water and medical supplies to Palestinians. Israeli technology has contributed to building the infastructure for Palestinians in the W. Bank.
Care to try some more lies?
".Some of the most prominent voices for human rights for Palestinians and Arabs worldwide are Jews and Israelis"
This is indeed the single most important development in recent times as criticism coming from Muslims and other non Jews like me is not going to break ice with Israel. It has to be criticism from within Israel and the wider Jewish community which will, if at all bring about the much needed reform in its present 'suffocate Palestinians' policies of Israel.
"Unlike you Jews are not filled with hate and do not hate Arabs"
Actions speak louder than words. I will agree with this statement if the Jews stop the settlements and vacate the Palestinian and Lebanese lands. The fate of the present day Gazans testify to my original statement.
"I will agree with this statement if the Jews stop the settlements and vacate the Palestinian and Lebanese lands."
Um, Israel completely withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000 and completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Learn your facts.
While your at it, learn international law… the settlements are completely legal. A country acting in "self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself," and a "state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory." The settlements serve as important buffers to prevent
"The fate of the present day Gazans testify to my original statement. "
Present day Gazans receive approximately one ton in aid per resident from Israel. Sounds like a pretty good fate to mooch off of another state while not bothering to build your own infrastructure.
It seems that history is how people like yourself perceive it.
How dare you call IHH of Turkey a terrorist organization.Which legal body of the world other than Zionist International call it a terrorist organization. It is a known humanitarian organization working for over 80 causes.
About Jews not blowing up innocent civilians,who blew up King David Hotel?
What was STERN GANG?
Poor Zionist Israeli commandos being attacked by broomsticks and kitchen knives. Go back too your own propaganda movies and you will see Jewish resistance attacking Germans ,quite rightly during the Warsaw uprising.
please give me the name of one international organization which considers West Bank settlements legal?
Why is Israel not a signatory to International criminal court in the Hague?
Why is Pasta and chocolates not allowed to Palestinians?
How does one make a bomb with lead pencils and colouring books for children?
why cant Gazans fish in their own sea?
At the beginning of last century there were just 70000 Jews in Palestine.Today they are six million.
A night club bouncer from Moldova, is your foreign minister who arrived in Palestine 15 years ago.How is his right to be in Palestine superior to that of Palestinians driven out of their lands in the past 62 .years?
Israel is an apartheid settler state and will be swept away by the tide of history if it insists upon its present policies.
You jump up and down for one captured soldier,Shalit.What about tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians ?
The UN is partial,The human rights commission is partial, the international community is partial.Any one who questions your Zionist policies is anti-Semitic. You have built an intellectual prison for yourself.You cannot think straight.From your point of view it was good while it lasted,but the tide may be turning.
As a Muslim,I have nothing against Jews and do you know every time I say my prayers,I send peace to the children of prophet Abraham pbuh which includes you if you are Jewish.
"How dare you call IHH of Turkey a terrorist organization."
How dare you… The US has formally designated the IHH as a terrorist organization. The IHH has clear ties to Hamas (a known terrorist organization) and other pan-Islamic terror organizations.
"About Jews not blowing up innocent civilians,who blew up King David Hotel? What was STERN GANG?"
The Jewish organizations that committed these acts of violence were officially outlawed by Israel. The Palestinians on the other hand still have tons of terrorist organizations actively trying to kill Jews and any infidel. Heck, Hamas and Fatah, both known terrorist organizations, are the government bodies for the Palestinians!
"Poor Zionist Israeli commandos being attacked by broomsticks and kitchen knives."
They were attacked by a lot more than that, try stun grenades, crowbars, bats, military knives and automatic weapons stolen from Israeli soldiers. It is clear the IHH tried to murder the Israeli soldiers, you're just upset because they were unsuccessful in their murder attempts.
"please give me the name of one international organization which considers West Bank settlements legal?"
Stephen Schwebel, formerly President of the International Court of Justice, stated "that a country acting in self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself." And that "a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory."
Also, UN Resolution 242 gives Israel a legal right to be in the West Bank. The resolution, "allows Israel to administer the territories it won in 1967 until a just and lasting peace in the Middle East is achieved."
"Why is Israel not a signatory to International criminal court in the Hague?"
The ICC is a treaty that Israel does not have to sign. Israel knows that the ICC is just another "kangaroo court" created by the UN that will treat it disproportionately.
"Why is Pasta and chocolates not allowed to Palestinians?"
Despite providing Palestinians with nearly 1 ton per resident in aid, Israel has also eased the restrictions of the Gaza blockade. Move on to your next gripe.
"How does one make a bomb with lead pencils and colouring books for children?"
Um, there were no books and pencils on the Mavi Marmara. There was no aid at all! It was another Karine A, carrying material support to Hamas terrorists only. By the way, would these coloring books be the ones that teach Palestinians to hate Jews (not necessarily Israelis) and that Jews are the descendants of pigs and monkeys?
"why cant Gazans fish in their own sea?"
Thats funny, I didn't know anyone can own a sea, that said Gazan fisherman are allowed to fish in the sea. Both Egypt and Israel patrol the sea in case the fisherman are used to smuggle weapons (which is very common).
"At the beginning of last century there were just 70000 Jews in Palestine.Today they are six million."
I can tell you that 800,000+ came to Israel after they were kicked out of Arab/Muslim countries. Israel is a Jewish state and Jews are free to immigrate and prosper (reproduce) there. The Arab population inside Israel and Gaza and the W. Bank have exploded exponentially as well! I forgot that according to Islamic supremacists such as yourself it is illegal for Jews to reproduce and have strong birth rates.
"A night club bouncer from Moldova, is your foreign minister who arrived in Palestine 15 years ago.How is his right to be in Palestine superior to that of Palestinians driven out of their lands in the past 62 .years?"
He legally immigrated to Israel and became a citizen. His right to be in ISRAEL is superior to that of any Palestinian that wants to destroy the Jewish state from within or without.
"You jump up and down for one captured soldier,Shalit.What about tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians ?"
You are ignorant of International Law. Gilad Shalit was not captured in combat. The Palestinians illegally entered Israel and kidnapped him while he was patrolling inside Israel.
On the other hand, The Hezbollah terrorists from Lebanon were legally captured as POWs during armed combat with Israel.
"The UN is partial,The human rights commission is partial, the international community is partial."
This is laughable and shows how completely ignorant you are. The UN through the influence of the Arab/Islamic Bloc is biased against Israel. Far worse human rights offenders like Russia, China, Cuba, Egypt, Syria, Iran and N. Korea don't get scrutinized nearly as much as the secular democracy, Israel. Get a clue!
"Any one who questions your Zionist policies is anti-Semitic."
No, but those that call into question the state of Israel are mostly anti-semetic.
"As a Muslim,I have nothing against Jews and do you know every time I say my prayers,I send peace to the children of prophet Abraham pbuh which includes you if you are Jewish."
I have nothing against Muslims. I do have something against Palestinian terrorists. I also have something against Islamic supremacists that try to push Sharia law on dhimmi populations.
Wikipedia: German Jews.
…On November 7, 1938, a young Polish Jew, Herschel Grynszpan, attacked and shot two German officials in the Nazi German embassy in Paris. (Grynszpan was angry about the treatment of his parents by the Nazi Germans.) On 9 November the German Attache, vom Rath, died…
What is the definition of terrorist attacks that makes them different from other actions, in war, declared or undeclared, and what if definitions are not shared by all on a global scale, and diffrent values do excist that makes co-excistence difficult between even small groups of people of different values?
Its pretty simple, terrorism is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce for political purposes."
Monthly Jihad Report ( http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ )
May, 2010
Jihad Attacks: 150
Countries: 14
Religions: 5
Dead Bodies: 729
Critically Injured: 1591