Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

And Dhimmitude For All

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • And Dhimmitude For All

    FrontPageMagazine.com, CA
    April 11 2005

    And Dhimmitude For All
    By Alyssa A. Lappen
    FrontPageMagazine.com | April 11, 2005

    Review: The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats
    non-Muslims

    Edited by Robert Spencer
    Prometheus Books (2005)


    `A thing without a name escapes understanding,' warns preeminent
    Islamic scholar Bat Ye'or of jihad and dhimmitude - the Islamic
    institutions of, respectively, war and perpetual servitude imposed on
    conquered non-Muslim peoples. Both, Ye'or notes in an essay entitled
    `Historical Amnesia,' are in the process of globalization.

    This is not the benign economic globalization that most Westerners
    laud. Islamic jihad and dhimmitude trade in every available
    means - military, political, technological and intellectual. And if the
    towering collection of 63 essays (including Ye'or's) contained in the
    new book The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats
    Non-Muslims is to be believed, these specific Islamic processes are
    globalizing at a disturbingly rapid pace. The book, courageously
    assembled by JihadWatch director and FrontPage columnist Robert
    Spencer, provides historical and contemporary profiles of jihad and
    dhimmitude.

    In six sections, the book delineates how Islamic ideology has
    affected non-Muslims both historically and in the contemporary world.
    The first three sections cover the myth vs. historical realities and
    Islamic law and practice regarding non-Muslims. The last three
    sections cover how the myth of Islamic tolerance has affected
    contemporary geopolitics, power politics at the United Nations and,
    finally, academic and public discourse. It is Ibn Warraq's forward
    and the latter 400 pages in which this book really shines. He
    explains:

    Islam is a totalitarian ideology that aims to control the religious,
    social and political life of mankind in all its aspects; the life of
    its followers without qualification; and the life of those who follow
    the so-called tolerated religions to a degree that prevents their
    activities from getting in the way of Islam in any way. And I mean
    Islam, I do not accept some spurious distinction between Islam and
    'Islamic fundamentalism' or Islamic terrorism'.

    The September 11, 2001 murderers acted canonically. They followed
    Sharia, a collection of theoretical laws and ideals `that apply in
    any ideal Muslim community.' This body of regulations, based on
    divine authority, according to devout Muslims `must be accepted
    without criticism, without doubts and questions.' It sacrifices the
    individual's desires and good to those of the community.

    `Expressing one's opinion or changing one's religion' are punishable
    by death. That apostasy is not today mentioned in the legal codes of
    most Islamic countries, Warraq notes, hardly implies freedom of
    religion for Muslims in those states; their penal codes are filled
    with Islamic laws. The myth of Islamic tolerance is defied by the
    massacre and extermination of the Zoroastrians in Iran; the million
    Armenians in Turkey; the Buddhists and Hindus in India; the more than
    six thousand Jews in Fez, Morocco, in 1033; hundreds of Jews killed
    in Cordoba between 1010 and 1013; the entire Jewish community of
    Granada in 1066; the Jews in Marrakesh in 1232; the Jews of Tetuan,
    Morocco in 1790; the Jews of Baghdad in 1828; and so on ad nauseum.

    Ironically, despite Islam's immutability, the myth evolved through
    the Western propensity to criticize its civilization. In 98 CE, Roman
    historian Tacitus in Germania compared the noble simplicity of the
    Germans with the vices of contemporary Rome. Michele do Montaigne
    (1533-1592) in circa 1580 painted noble savages based on dubious
    secondhand information in order to condemn his own civilization.

    Later writers substituted Islam for savages to condemn Christendom
    and materialism. In 1686-89, for example, Huguenot pastor Pierre
    Jurieu exclaimed that Christians had spilt more blood on St.
    Bartholemew's Day than had the Saracens in all their persecutions of
    Christians. Of course, Islam had claimed millions of lives - in 1399,
    Taimur killed 100,000 Hindus in a single day. But during the 17th
    century, and later the Enlightenment, writers perpetuated the `two
    ideal prototypes, the noble savage and the wise and urbane Oriental,'
    substituting Turks for Muslims, and Islamic tolerance for Turkish
    tolerance.

    Actually, 18th century Turkey was no interfaith utopia. In 1758, a
    British ambassador noted that Sultan Mustafa III had non-Muslim
    Christians and Jews executed for wearing banned clothing. In 1770,
    another ambassador reported that Greeks, Armenians and Jews seen
    outside their homes after dark were hanged. In 1785, a third noted
    that Muslim mobs had dismantled churches after Christians had
    secretly repaired them.

    `The golden age of equal rights was a myth, and belief in it was a
    result, more than a cause, of Jewish sympathy for Islam,' Bernard
    Lewis wrote in 1968 in the Encyclopedia of Islam. `The myth was
    invented in 19th century Europe as a reproach to Christians - and taken
    up by Muslims in our own time as a reproach to Jews....'

    Until the late 19th century, Jews in North Africa, Yemen and other
    oriental Muslim lands, were obliged to live isolated, in special
    quarters, and `were constrained to wear distinctive clothing.' They
    could not carry arms (including canes), and could not give sworn
    testimony in Muslim jurisdictions. Even in 1968, an Egyptian sheikh
    explained at Cairo's preeminent Islamic University of al-Azhar, `we
    say to those who patronize the Jews that the latter are dhimmis,
    people of obligation, who have betrayed the covenant in conformity
    with which they have been accorded protection.' The late president
    Anwar el-Sadat declared in 1972, `They shall return and be as the
    Koran said of them: 'condemned to humiliation and misery'.'

    Western failure to recognize this subservient condition, much less
    its historical or contemporary results, has put democratic
    civilization in danger. Organizations have been founded to promote
    jihad and dhimmitude through the imposition of the Sharia. The
    International Institute of Islamic Thought, for example, was
    established in 1981 to Islamify Western history and thought.
    Similarly, the Organization of Islamic Conference ruled in 1990 that
    the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam - implementing the
    Sharia - supersedes the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    Even Arabist calls for universal mobilization of non-governmental
    organizations (NGOs) are a form of jihad, as was Egyptian attorney
    Fouad Abdel-Moneim Riad's call to treat all Israeli civilians as war
    criminals. The notion here - categorization and demonization of all
    infidels - is fundamental to jihad. Thus when church spokesman
    Archbishop Desmond Tutu supports Riad's pronouncement, he too
    supports jihad.

    In this context, `Servile flattery is the ransom [paid to avoid]
    economic and terrorist reprisals.' Thus Western thinkers succumb to
    jihad and dhimmitude when we refuse to identify the Turkish
    perpetration of Armenian genocide, or (conversely) present
    Andalusia - complete with harems, eunuchs, and Christian slaves - `as a
    perfect model of multicultural societies for the West' to emulate in
    the 21st century.

    The West has built historical negationism as the `cornerstone of its
    economic, strategic, and security relationships with Muslim
    countries.' One sign is the increasingly hostile international
    attitude towards Israel. Failing to recognize the Muslim jihad
    against Israel, which `symbolizes the liberation of the Jewish people
    from dhimmitude in their homeland,' also adversely affects remnant
    indigenous Christian communities throughout the Middle East. Their
    dhimmitude has deteriorated since the Armenian genocide and the 1933
    massacres of Christians in Iraq. Historical amnesia, Bat Ye'or warns,
    allowed the decolonization of Arab Muslim nations to be accompanied
    by re-introduction of jihad, dhimmitude and sharia.

    Only testimony can counter the pathological trends. Thus, Walid
    Phares and Bat Ye'or tackle the forgotten tragedy of the Middle
    Eastern Christians - 10 to 12 million Egyptian Copts; 1.5 Lebanese
    Maronites, Orthodox, Melkites and others; 7 million Anglican,
    Protestant and Catholic southern Sudanese Africans; 1 million
    Christian Syrians; 1 million Iraqi Assyrians, Nestorians, Chaldeans,
    and Jacobites; 500,000 Iranian Persian, Armenian and Assyrian
    Christians; and perhaps 100,000 Christian Arab Palestinians. Patrick
    Sookhdeo and Mark Durie also cover the alarming rise of
    anti-Christian persecutions in Nigeria, Sudan, Pakistan and
    Indonesia. After September 11, 2001, attacks on Christians increased
    precipitously.

    Ironically, what caused obfuscation of minority Christians' situation
    was 19th and 20th century Christian involvement in the Arab-Islamic
    jihad - against Zionism and Israel. Whereas Christian oppression in the
    East is `rooted in the doctrine of jihad' and dhimmitude, projecting
    all evil onto Israel and Zionism prevented testimony and hid Eastern
    Christian history and suffering.

    But for decades, secretly or openly, Middle Eastern Christians have
    praised the Israeli liberation model, and hoped to emulate it. The
    Arab reaction has been to falsely claim the Middle East as an Arab
    and Muslim region, denying the rights of all non-Arab, non-Muslim
    populations, to isolate these minorities from one another and somehow
    eliminate them within predominantly Arab and Muslim states.

    Another arena requiring testimony is dhimmitude in Western
    institutions. This is `epitomized,' writes Mark Durie, `in the
    slavish attitude adopted by Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for
    Human Rights,' in a 2002 statement to the Organization of the Islamic
    Conference Symposium on Human Rights in Islam in Geneva. Like a
    dhimmi, she affirmed the greatness and moral superiority of Islam,
    implying inferiority of non-Muslim infidels, and denied any possible
    voice of protest against Islamic abuses of human rights.

    Not surprisingly, Islamism is growing at the UN, too. On August 5,
    1990, explains David Littman, the 19 members of the Islamic
    Conference of Foreign Ministers adopted the Cairo Declaration on
    Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI). This document very specifically
    subjugates all human rights to those accorded by Islam. [1] The CDHRI
    totally contradicts the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    (UDHR). Yet the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in
    December 1997 published it, establishing its authority as a quotable
    UN source. For example, the 26-member Sub-Commission on Human Rights
    referred to it in the preamble of a resolution adopted on August 21,
    1998. [2] That Islamic human rights is gaining ascendancy and
    credence at the UN should be of concern to all Human Rights activists
    and organizations.

    Dhimmitude is also developing at universities and in governments
    worldwide. This owes to the nearly ubiquitous influence of Edward
    Said, according to Ibn Warraq, despite his `third world intellectual
    terrorism.' The tautology-filled Orientalism accuses orientalists of
    somehow preparing the ground for western imperialism, but haughtily
    dismisses `books and journals in Arabic (and doubtless in Japanese,
    various Indian dialects, and other Oriental languages)' revealing
    `contempt for the non-European, negative attitudes toward the Orient
    far greater than that of some imperialists he constantly condemns.'
    Worse, Said ignores innumerable orientalists - including the German
    school that created the Middle Eastern, Islamic and Arabic Studies
    field - and hailed from a nation with zero imperial interests.

    To break the disastrous logjam created by this trend, it is essential
    to discuss the heretofore taboo subjects of jihad dhimmitude in
    policy and educational forums. This book can help to turn the tide,
    if only significant numbers read it.

    [1]Articles 24 and 25 of the CDHRI state`All the rights and freedoms
    stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'a'
    and `This Islamic Shari'a is the only source of reference for the
    explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this
    Declaration.'

    [2] The preamble expressed dismay and concern were over women's
    rights in Afghanistan, but nevertheless, stated that it was `fully
    aware that the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam...
    guarantees the rights of women in all fields.'

    http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17637
Working...
X