-
Who’s Politicizing Benghazi?
May 9, 2013 | 6 comments
-
A Tale of Two Teams and Two Stars
January 10, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Mitt Romney Just Got Himself Elected President
October 3, 2012 | 17 comments
-
Obama to Gays and Hollywood: Show Me the Money!
May 9, 2012 | 13 comments
-
Ruinous Obama Austerity
May 9, 2012 | 2 comments
The Spectacle Blog
I’m glad that Aaron Goldstein has drawn
attention to the unconscionable savagery and sexual violence
that pro-Mubarak thugs masquerading as protesters inflicted upon
60 Minutes correspondent Lara Logan.
It’s important to note, as Aaron does, that the angry and
sadistic mob which perpetrated this crime was in no way reflective
of the thousands of Egyptian protesters who descended upon Tahrir
or Liberation Square.
Yet some on the Right are trying to discredit the protesters with unfair and unwarranted charges of misogyny and anti-Semitism.
But in fact, we can say with near certainty that the thugs who violently abused and violated Logan were anti-protesters sent into the streets by Mubarak precisely in order to disrupt and discredit the Egyptian uprising.
How do we know this? Simple: by following the sequence of events and listening to independent and fair-minded journalists who were on the scene at the time, and who thus can speak authoritatively about what happened.
Here is the sequence of events:
1. The initial protests are peaceful. Independent journalists move about Tahrir Square without fear, incident or problem. They report, live and in real-time, what they see. The protesters, reporters note, do not conform to the stereotype of the angry Islamic radical. In fact, quite the opposite, writes New York Times’ columnist Nicholas D. Kristof on Feb. 5, 2011:
After spending last week here on Tahrir Square talking to protesters — even as President Mubarak’s thugs attacked our perimeter with bricks, Molotov cocktails, machetes and occasional gunfire — I emerge struck by the moderation and tolerance of most protesters.
Kristof’s New York Times colleague, Thomas L. Friedman, also goes to Tahrir Square and, on Feb. 8, reports the same thing:
Egyptians are not asking for Palestine or for Allah. They are asking for the keys to their own future, which this regime took away from them. They are not inspired by “down with” America or Israel. They are inspired by “Up with Egypt” and “Up with me.”
2. Recognizing that international media coverage is
sustaining the Egyptian uprising, the Mubarak regime acts to incite
violence against independent journalists.
Thus, as I reported here at AmSpec, and as Kristof referenced, the regime unleashes into the streets of Cairo “pro-Mubarak thugs, with Molotov cocktails and a thirst for autocratic revenge.”
Nonetheless, in spite of — or perhaps because of — the violence perpetrated against them, Egypt’s pro-democracy protesters gain renewed strength and moral clarity. They are subjected to violent attacks, and some are even killed; however, the violence appears to be sporadic and minimal.
3. The regime grows increasingly desperate. And so again, as I reported here at AmSpec, Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman goes on Egyptian state television to denounce the free media and to incite greater violence against journalists, especially foreign journalists such as Logan.
“I actually blame certain friendly nations who have television channels,” said Egyptian Vice President, Omar Suleiman, on Egyptian state television. “They are not friendly at all. [They] have intensified the youth against the nation and the state…
“There are countless poisonous thoughts that are entering the thoughts of these youths,” Suleiman warned…
“Well, that’s the government’s line,” says CNN’s Anderson] Cooper… “Their list of culprits also seems to include Hezbollah, Shiites, agents of Israel [emphasis added], and other sinister foreign elements.”
4. On Friday, Feb. 11, the day Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak relinquishes power, Logan is attacked, savagely beaten and sexually violated by a vicious, anti-Semitic mob. She is later saved by a group of Egyptian women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers.
In short, this attack was not the offspring of the “new Egypt”; it was the rabid reaction of the “old Egypt.”
And these were not “Muslims” who did this (chapter 5, verse 2 of the Qur’an says: “do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression”). These were barbarians.
And it is important for us to make this distinction, because despite what you hear in some conservative circles, our struggle is not against Muslims and the Islamic religion; it is against Islamists and Jihadists who pervert Islam for their own depraved and illicit purposes.
View all comments (77) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by John R. Guardiano
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/02/16/pro-mubarak-barbarians-not-egy
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
John - TMF| 2.17.11 @ 12:02AM
"And it is important for us to make this distinction, because despite what you hear in some conservative circles, our struggle is not against Muslims and the Islamic religion; it is against Islamists and Jihadists who pervert Islam for their own depraved and illicit purposes."
Therein lies the rub, doesn't it?
IF I accept this rather sanguine conclusion, the bulk of your blog entry might or might not be entirely accurate. It would be an issue for honest debate.
IF I go with my instincts and historical knowledge, then your final set of statements is desperate afactual projection. You are pushing your hopes and desires on the situation.
I would have to say that you have swallowed the bait whole. The hook is to follow. The results after it being set... well.. I guess it all depends on the skill of the angler, either way it is brutally painful to the fish.
We are at war. It is a war that we did not choose. People bearing a 7th Century religious, social, and political ethos have repeatedly attacked us and our friends. Their justification for this aggression is religious.
I find myself rocked back by a commentary from someone usually quite observant, that seems naive.
As to your final assertion that the Islamist Jihadists are "perverting" a religion; if you are a Muslim then you might have the editorial standing to speak of perversion. Though you might be putting your life in danger for saying it.
I am also almost positive that the people of which you speak would bridle greatly at the assertion of an infidel over what is considered a perversion of Islam.
Egypt will slip into a chaotic disorganized mess, from which will arise an organized Muslim Brotherhood sporting Sharia Law. They will ascend to power with the promise of a renewed Caliphate dedicated to reconquering Muslim lands, and spreading their brand of theocracy across the Arab world.
In a strict sense, I suppose that we aren't at war with Islam; however, it strongest adherents certainly putting it to war with us.
Islam means SUBMISSION, not peace.
Regards,
John - TMF
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 11:36AM
How can you say that Islam means "submission" not peace? The Koran plainly speaks of peace, and it plainly states that they CAN NOT kill other Muslim's. A jihadist has no problem killing other Muslim's so they in fact are not "true" believers of their faith. How can you not see this? With this logic, any Christian who kills in the name of Christ (ie, abortion dr murders) is by then telling us that Christianity is about murder when in fact it's not.
and before you come back with passages in the Koran that says murdering is ok, look no further than of own Bible that very similiar passages about killing non believers (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 3:51PM
No Christians or Jews flew those airliners into the Trade Towers on 9/11, moron. Nice try though.
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 4:29PM
no sh*t Patty, If you can grasp this little tidbit of fact....they may call themselves "muslims" but a true Muslim would NOT have done this act of terrorism, just as a true Christian wouldn't murder in the name of Christ. Why can't you undertand this? these people view Islam is a very perverted way. They are hijacking their faith, and people like you are very confused and can't seem to parse this difference for some reason....
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 4:51PM
Name all those "Christian" terrorists rampaging all over the globe, braintrust. Put up or shut up.
There's no confusion here except for the deliberate BS you're trying to spread, fool.
Carmen Gindi| 2.17.11 @ 12:20AM
Thank you, Mr. Gardiano, for making clear distinctions between the pro-Mubarak thugs and the generally peaceful protestors.
I really hope you're right about those who attacked Ms. Logan. It makes sense that her attackers belong to the same pro-Mubarak bullies who attacked journalists and peaceful demonstrators during the uprising and who were taught to hate foreign journalists. Suleiman's speech was a signal to the secret security thugs to hunt and attack journalists; the organized, planned sexual assault committed by 200 (?) men sounds like the work of the old Mubarak thugocracy.
There is no question which side was purposely inflamed with the notion that all journalists reporting on the revolution were foreign agitators and spies. I wish I could be sure, though. Not knowing means that the seemingly pure joy of the celebrants is marred.
As an Egyptian woman, I'm so sorry to learn about what happened, and I wish Ms. Logan a quick recovery. Perhaps she will become the new symbol of a much-needed cultural and moral revolution in Egypt, one that condemns such acts as animalistic and barbaric.
John Guardiano | 2.17.11 @ 1:30AM
Dear Ms. Gindi,
Thanks for your kind words. I share your deep disappointment and outrage about what happened to Lara Logan and hope and pray for her speedy, effortless and uncomplicated recovery.
But really, I wouldn't interpret this savage act of violence as a reflection of the Egyptian uprising or even of Egyptian society: Because what the Egyptian revolution will be remembered for, I think, is how well and responsibly the Egyptian people acquitted themselves at a very difficult and trying time.
The Russians can't say that (1917); nor can the French (1793-1794). Indeed, their revolutions were far more savage and violent than anything we've seen thus far in Egypt.
Let's hope it stays that way and that a new Egypt is born. I'm cautiously optimistic.
One very positive and encouraging sign: after the uprising, the Egyptian people went back into Tahrir Square to clean up their mess. No one told them to do this; it was a spontaneous act of civic responsibility and civic pride and commitment.
This type of behavior speaks very well of the Egyptian people, and it bodes very well for Egypt. You have real reason, then, it seems to me to be proud of your country and proud to be an Egyptian.
Regards,
John
Carmen Gindi| 2.17.11 @ 1:38AM
Thank you for your encouraging words.
Floyd Looney | 2.17.11 @ 12:43AM
I think that it is irresponsible to try to say one side or the other is responsible. I'm sorry to see something so stupid being posted in this matter.
We know they were Egyptians and we know they were Muslims chanting "Jew! Jew!". We also know that there are reports of many rapes being perpetrated the night in question.
Other than that, it sounds like speculation. Who the hell cares what side they were on? If they had chopped her head off, would that be evidence of the Muslim Brotherhood?
kingsmill| 2.17.11 @ 12:44AM
Your faith that the uprising in Egypt will result in a Jeffersonian democracy and a repudiation of Islamic supremacy is pure unadulterated ideology.
"In short, this attack was not the offspring of the “new Egypt”; it was the rabid reaction of the “old Egypt.”--- besides your wish projection, where is the proof of this? You present a meaningless time line and a statement of the V.P. as ironclad proof.
The outcome in Egypt has not been determined but your naive "end of history" buncombe is utterly unconvincing.
Niall Ferguson, surprisingly on MSNBC, shot down these sort of ideological projections that came from lightweight Mika Brzezinski. I expect more from the American Spectator.
John Guardiano | 2.17.11 @ 1:04AM
kingsmill,
I never said that the outcome in Egypt has been determined. In fact, quite the opposite: If you read any of the myriad articles and posts that I've written over the past three weeks, you'll see always my caution that the revolution is still very much a work in progress.
That's why, I've observed, it's important that the United States work to shape events there, so that Egypt moves in a more liberal democratic direction.
No one expects Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries to become perfect and pristine Jeffersonian democracies. Our aim is for them to become developing, even if imperfect, democracies.
Of course, you can choose to ignore the evidence of the peaceful Egyptian protests; that's your prerogative. Just don't pretend that doing so is illustrative of sweet reason backed up by empirical evidence, because that's simply not true.
Regards,
John
kingsmill| 2.17.11 @ 1:16PM
I stated in my comment that the "outcome was not determined". Of course it isn't. However, your fervor to ignore the influence of Islamic extremism that will occur even if some kind of democracy takes hold in Egypt is what I find disturbing.
The demonstrators who flocked to the streets (initially) during the French Revolution were superficially peaceful and moving. However, they were quickly subsumed by forces that represented extremism, terror and eventually left way for the Caesar-ism of Napoleon. The underlying cultural factors, in this case, Islamic fundamentalism, can not be wished away, by asserting that -"the bad old days and ways are about to be washed clean."
John Guardiano | 2.17.11 @ 1:04AM
kingsmill,
I never said that the outcome in Egypt has been determined. In fact, quite the opposite: If you read any of the myriad articles and posts that I've written over the past three weeks, you'll see always my caution that the revolution is still very much a work in progress.
That's why, I've observed, it's important that the United States work to shape events there, so that Egypt moves in a more liberal democratic direction.
No one expects Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries to become perfect and pristine Jeffersonian democracies. Our aim is for them to become developing, even if imperfect, democracies.
Of course, you can choose to ignore the evidence of the peaceful Egyptian protests; that's your prerogative. Just don't pretend that doing so is illustrative of sweet reason backed up by empirical evidence, because that's simply not true.
Regards,
John
Occam's Tool| 2.17.11 @ 1:13PM
Dear John,
respectfully, may I suggest that you read about Prigogine systems, the work that won Ilya Prigogine his Nobel prize. In a hard science.
I doubt that the Egyptian people have the background or energy to put into an entropy reducing political system. Nothing good will come of this.
kingsmill| 2.17.11 @ 1:17PM
I stated in my comment that the "outcome was not determined". Of course it isn't. However, your fervor to ignore the influence of Islamic extremism that will occur even if some kind of democracy takes hold in Egypt is what I find disturbing.
The demonstrators who flocked to the streets (initially) during the French Revolution were superficially peaceful and moving. However, they were quickly subsumed by forces that represented extremism, terror and eventually left way for the Caesar-ism of Napoleon. The underlying cultural factors, in this case, Islamic fundamentalism, can not be wished away, by asserting that -"the bad old days and ways are about to be washed clean."
beebop| 2.17.11 @ 5:59AM
'That's why, I've observed, it's important that the United States work to shape events there ...'
And how can they be seen as understanding much less shaping the situation when they are by fits both silent on the turmoil in the region and chastened by the King of Saud?
Why don't you grasp the flailing in DC?
And. As far as the Logan incident, CBS was fully prepred to quash this and only released the story because the AP reached out for confirmation. If you honestly believe that there is going to be a light of day examination of what happened and who is responsible your willful naivete is astonishing, disingenous and/or dangerous.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.17.11 @ 6:06AM
If a Muslim meets a non-believer they have one of three options:
Convert them.
Enslave them.
Destroy them.
That sounds like a political movement.
Mitchell Owens| 2.17.11 @ 11:13AM
That's strange; I lived in Morocco for years and nobody tried to convert me, enslave me, or destroy me.
nitpicker| 2.17.11 @ 11:27AM
Um...no. "Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine." - Surah 109:1-5
Bob K.| 2.17.11 @ 6:59AM
Mr Guardiano,
This isn't a revolution. It is still mob rule and will be until an authoritarian or worse government takes control.
In the French and Russian revolutions societies changed. Society will not change in Egypt. Islam will still rule in some form or other and the hoped for "democracy" they will practice will be another form of tyranny of the majority. That is Islam's history in the Near East and Middle East.
I suggest that you spend less time writing those "myriads of blogs and articles" and spend more time in the study of history and revolutions. You are too young to be so confident in the correctness of your ideas.
Remember, Nazi Germany was a democracy and the German people loved it! They continued to fight on for a week after Hitler committed suicide.
Democracy does not always bring freedom.
Conservative Bob| 2.17.11 @ 9:46AM
John
How can you make such a claim? Beyond the fact that the attackers were Egyptian how can you say which group they were from, this took place during the 'celebration' period after the announcement that Mubarak stepping down. She was saved by a group of Egyptian women and about 20 soldiers.
Other than hopeful wild eyed guessing what evidence do you have as to the identity of a single one of the estimated 200 attackers?
As long as we are posting wild ass guesses, in the many thousands of jubilant Egyptians in the square how is it possible that 200 of the "pro-regime thugs" could avoid being torn to pieces by their vastly more numerous victims (protesters who had previously been attacked)?
Mitchell Owens| 2.17.11 @ 11:14AM
Perhaps because the "thugs" weren't wearing identification?
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 9:55AM
Hey thar John, couple questions:
1 - How come you didn't answer John - TMF?
2 - How come you left out about 60% of Surah 5 verse 2 from this article?
3 - How come you changed the original "transgression" in Surah 5 verse 2 (at least that's how it is written in MY koran) to "aggression" in your article?
4 - Where do you hide the compromising emails and/or pics that you MUST have of the Amspec editors-in-chief?
And lastly just a suggestion but your recent series of naivete masquerading as enlightened editorialisms have me thinking you should change your byline. How does "John 'Dhimmi' Guardiano" sound? Or we could roll your surname into it and just go with "John Dhimmidiano." Know what? I kinda like that one best.
Yer welcome.
(In all seriousness to the Amspec Editors, what the flip??? How does this stuff pass muster???)
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 10:03AM
Hey John, are the muslims raping all those blonde-haired Swdish girls in Malmo muslim? Just curious.
Were the muslims who rampaged after the cartoons of the "prophet" were published and killed priests and burnt churches muslim?
Were the muslims who hijacked planes on 9/11 and flew them into the WTC muslim?
Was the muslim who opened fire on his fellow soldiers at Ft Hood muslim? Was the muslim soldier who rolled a grenade into the tent of his superior officers and then opened fire on THEM when they attempted escape muslim?
When the first muslim, mohammed, pillaged a Jewish tribe, killed its leader while making the man's wife watch, then raped her, was mohammed muslim?
I'm just so confused. :(
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 1:46PM
All American American
you are missing the point entirely, a "true" believer of Islam would NOT have committed these crimes. The jihadists are NOT true believers of their faith just as Christians who kill are NOT true believers of the word of Christ. Why do you and a lot of other people refuse to accept that fact? With your logic, should we condemn Christianity because of a few crazies who have a perverted view of their faith?
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 3:44PM
Sorry, gerald; not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim. You can't say the same about Christians.
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 4:49PM
What kind of logic is that? So if there are billions of Muslims in this world and US intelligence figures say there are roughly 200,000 Muslims who actively view Islam the way they do, you are willing to condemn their entire faith principle? That is less then 1% , so I guess the other 99% should be our enemies?
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 4:54PM
So, you think it's logical to defend the 200, 000 Muslims who are terrorists? 200,000 terrorists can do a lot of damage, moron.
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 6:47PM
does it make you feel better to call me a moron?
and I wasn't trying to defend terrorist, I'm defending the smear of a faith based on illogical premises.
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 10:18PM
Only a moron would think 200,000 Muslim terrorists aren't a danger to our security.
Where are the 200,000 Christian terrorists?
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 4:15PM
Gerald, I'm going to guess there's a good probability you haven't actually, you know, READ the koran and traditions. Cuz if you HAD, you'd be able to tell me exactly how islam is being "perverted" and why we should readily believe islam is peaceful. I'm willing to listen to your argument if you can come up with something other than just saying its being perverted. Give me, you know, FACTS or examples.
Again, consider Jesus and mohammed as purely historical figures and do not ascribe any divinity to Jesus. I can make a very convincing argument that the killing of an abortion doctor, rare as it is, is a true perversion of Christ's words and deeds. You simply can NOT make the same argument (well other than to just repeat "terrorists are perverting islam") about a suicide bomber or plane hijacker or in simple terms, "jihadist." Pillage, rape, rob, murder, deceive--these were all things mohammed did and his god approved.
Again typical lib drivel--spout a platitude, call it fact, and try to condemn me for not "accepting the fact."
Hey gerald, the sky is orange, why can't you accept that fact?
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 5:06PM
maybe you should read the Bible and tell me what these mean before you can curse someones elses faith as being murderous.
Judges 21:10-24 NLT
Numbers 31:7-18 NLT
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT
2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB
if you would like more passages condoning rape murder and pillage I can provide more...my point being is that we can all find horrific passages in our scared texts, to selectively point to text in the Koran and calling it evil is not fair to their faith. the same can be said about our Bible. I understand that you have to view their faith evil so you can have the views you do. I personally don't subscribe to such generalities. Just as the author of this great article was trying to do! Yes by your standards I'm a liberal, so you can demean me if you wish, you can't say the same about Guardiano.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 5:39PM
Gerald, so I take it you HAVEN'T read the koran and the traditions? I see you CAN NOT answer my questions so like a good lib you change the conversation. Sorry, not gonna work. I asked you to compare Jesus and mohammed and you refused. Your lack of answers speak volumes. The problem for libs like you, Gerald, is you can play useful idiot for islam all you want, but Gerald, you and your ilk are gonna be first to get the ol' head lopped off.
And please don't insult my intelligence by referring to "our" Bible. Number one, you don't sound very Christian to me. Number 2, why do you assume I read those Bibles? Number 3, if you indeed were a Christian you would know that Jesus came to fulfill the law and create a new covenant between man and God.
You are woefully ignorant of islam and unfortunately ignorance (or denial) of islam isn't going to save you from it.
gerald| 2.17.11 @ 7:10PM
Though Shall Not Judge! Is that not a Christian tennent? How dare you attack me for sticking up to such vile comments about people who you probably have never been around. I don't judge other peoples' faith based on the acts of some crazies! PERIOD! And yes I have traveled to the Middle East on many occasions and thus I don't fear people who are different than I, and I still have my head, no boggymen Muslim "lopped it off" How many times have you been there? Do you even know people who practice Islam? Do you? your tone in attacking me is thuggish at best. I'm not woefully ignorant of Islam, I choose not to listen to people such as yourself who are so limited in their thought process.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 7:34PM
Ummm, no Gerald, it is not. Careful you're blowing your alleged "Understanding Christian" cover. Haha!
I will say your whiny little lib hand is showing. I don't agree with you so you think I'm attacking you. What a prissy little lady you are, Gerald.
(And by the way, how dare you call me thuggish! You haven't lived where I've lived Gerald. You don't know me Gerald, and you don't know anyone I know, so you can't "judge" me. Isn't that about right?)
Still refusing to answer the questions huh Gerald? I imagine its hard to be a lib nowadays. For decades you had a stranglehold on media, and now, well now us common folk can actually, gulp, go look stuff up! We can decide for ourselves without listening to the Barbrady/Geralds of the world telling us "nothing to see here, move along."
Have I been to a muslim country? Why yes Gerald, unfortunately I have. Had to serve in two. That really is beside the point though isn't it? More importantly Gerald I've read their "holy" books. I've read their traditions and read about their "prophet's" words and deeds. I've seen them in action Gerald. Which kinda brings me to a real "Christian tenet" (one "n," son). That is "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit" Matthew 7, 15-17.
But you being a good, understanding Christian, you knew that already, huh Gerald?
gerald| 2.18.11 @ 1:07PM
there are 5 traditional tenets (1 n, how mature of you to correct a typo) or pillars of faith in Islam
Shahada- the act of professing monotheisim
Salat- the call to prayer
Sawm- the ritual of fasting
Zakat-the act of alms-giving
Hajj- their prilgrimage to Mecca
BUT there is 6th pillar that the overwhelming majority of Muslim's DON'T believe in BUT the Shi'a does, and that's the act of jihad
So may question to you....please explain how the traditional 5 pillars of their faith is that of violence?
your comment to someone else about there being16,818 terrorist attacks since 9/11...how many of those attacks were directed at Westerners and how many were directed towards other Muslims who don't believe in the 6th pillar?
Extremist Muslims are fighting moderate Muslims, so to broadly paint Islam as a faith of violence is just ignorant of the facts. jihadist want to kill other Muslims as well as westerners....so we can bebate on how to fight the extremists...
so in your very narrow worldview, what do you suppose we should do with the 1.6 billion followers of Islam? defeat them? What does that mean to you?? to kill them?
In other posts to people on this thread you ask about where are the Christian terrorist, are you so naive as to believe there isn't an element of fundmentalist Christians who are helping ultra conservative Jews in Israel build their illegal settlements so the prophecy of the 2nd coming happens on Jewish soil in the disputed land where armageddon lays? Fundamentalists Christians may not blow up people in publics squares, but supporting regimes in the Middle east who keep their people or other people down is in fact a form of terrorism. look how the far right is railing against the people who took down Mubarak, a dictator that we propped up for 30 yrs. It's astonishing that we speak of "freedom'' until we don't like the outcome.
you sir are no different than the extremist who are intolernat of others beliefs.
All American American| 2.21.11 @ 6:29PM
Poor, poor, ignorant Gerald. Gerald I will tell you again what I tell all dhimmis:
Ignorance of islam is not going to save you from it.
Read a koran bro. Better yet, listen to THEIR OWN words. Funny you mention the muslims who won't wage jihad. Ya know what mohammed called them Gerald? He called them hypocrites. Ya know what the kook muslim imam said in Tahrir Square the other day Gerald? "Don't let the hypocrites hijack the revolution."
You really need to get educated on islam. Seriously. Again, ignorance is not going to save you from it, but some education, prayer, and a .308 might.
(Kill all the muslims? Only if it comes down to that Gerald. I pray for them that their eyes may be opened to the One True God. A lot of our problems would be solved if they would accept Christ as their savior instead of their pedophile prophet).
Dixie Pixie| 2.17.11 @ 10:10AM
There is more evidence that the "Mind Spiders of the Arachnid Nebula" were behind the Logan assault and gang rape.
Guardiano's core argument is a logic train based on three dubious tenets.
1...The "Protesters were peaceful, law-abiding and motivated only by the purest motives.
2...It was the Mubarak supporters that brought "Violence" to the "Peaceful and Moral" protesters.
3...Western reporters are always reliability unbiased interpreters of events and always tell the "Truth".
The third is so far from reality as to be laughable on its assertion.
The reporters were obviously stating their biases and prejudices as facts and thus can not be trusted.
The second assertion that it was only the Mubarak supporters that were "Violent" and thus the only ones that could be responsible for the Logan assault is contraindicated by the observable facts.
It is true Mubarak sent his supporters into the streets to protest the protesters.
But observably the "Protesters" gave violence as good as they got.
Nether side hesitated to fight the other.
The first assertion was obviously a pure moral projection on the part of the western reporters.
When the "Protesters" first went into the streets it was obvious they were nether peaceful nor law-abiding.
The mass break-ins into the National Museum and other governmental offices were proof of that.
The repeated massed rock-throwing by the "Protesters" at the police and Army was proof the "Protesters" were violent from the start.
And that was before Mubarak sent his supporters into the streets.
In short John Guardiano would have better luck claiming Space Aliens were the cause of the Logan Assault as there would be no evidence to counter the logic.
In Guardiano's argument there is plenty of counter evidence available.
As for Lara Logan::::
Lady, When you run with the Wolves of Humanity, expect to be bitten and often!!!!
Islam is not renowned for Mercy or the Western Humanities.
You were lucky to get out alive.
Thomas| 2.17.11 @ 10:18AM
Mr. Guardiano,
Interesting piece. But, exactly what is your evidence to support your contention that the people responsible for the attack on Ms. Logan were, in fact, a group of pro-Mubarak thugs acting on behalf of the former administration? If you have specific information identifying the people responsible and evidence linking them to the Mubarak government, please share it with the rest of us.
To date, I have seen nothing to indicate that the group was even organized, let alone affiliated with any group involved in the conflict. To my knowledge, none of those involved has even been identified. so, exactly what is the source of your information?
Thank you.
Nate| 2.17.11 @ 10:21AM
I think Mr. Guardiano brings a guarded optimism to the situation in Egypt that is much needed--would that people on both "sides" took a similarly measured outlook.
The left is far too dismissive of the brutal attack on Ms. Logan, some even going so far as to blame her for dressing provocatively. And the attack (rape?) has provided an unfortunate, unbecoming sense of vindication for some on the far right, for whom this revolution had thus far been perplexing; it didn't fit with their (and my, admittedly) preconceived notion of what an Arab uprising should look like. Where are the burning American flags, the Death to America and Israel signs? It's as if they've been waiting to say "see, they ARE savages!"
Ron Bruce| 2.17.11 @ 10:23AM
So selective quotes from the NY Times that reinforce the popular MSM spin that this was a peaceful protest by an oppressed people yearning for democracy prove what exactly? How many times have we heard this same drivel from the clowns at the Times? Cuba, VietNam, Iran... just to name a few instances where the Times were shown to be a bunch of fools that project their own biases and beliefs into their so-called coverage. You also probably think this protest of 200,000 people in a country of 80 million brought down Mubarak! This entire episode was far more likely a clever way for the military to depose Mubarak in a relatively bloodless coup. The prospect of Gamal Mubarak succeeding his daddy was completely unacceptable to them. This whole "Old Egypt" / "New Egypt" premise is silly and naive, nothing has changed at all. Three weeks ago the Egyptian Military was in charge, today the Egyptian Military is still in charge. I won't even dignify the moronic quote from the Koran, it is as relevant as a quote from "Green Eggs and Ham." These rapists were your typical muslim retards acting completely in accordance with what they have been taught their entire lives and to believe otherwise is delusional.
Mistral| 2.17.11 @ 11:53AM
Looks and reads like a lot of hearsay evidence to me. Reading the Q'uran tells me that as a non-believing infidel, I had better watch my back. Fortunately, Christ came and corrected the hateful tilt the Israelites gave the law. Christianity is about love of neighbour while the Q'uran has nothing to say on that score. While most mahomatens such as in Morocco and in SE Asian countries (where I lived for many years) are tolerant and peaceful just wait until the jihadist mob arrive on the scene and give the orders - non-believers should get out as quickly as possible.
tanstaafl| 2.17.11 @ 12:04PM
I don't think we know who the attackers were, but it is 100% certain that they do not represent all Egyptians or all Muslims. It seems to me that a larger percentage of Muslims are inclined to violence compared to the violent percentages of other religions, but I do not think that the majority of Muslims have this inclination.
I wonder about the vitriolic anti-Muslim commenters--whether they are friends with any Muslims. I have a number of Muslim friends, including two who are from Egypt. These folks are not demons, for heaven's sakes.
Témoris Grecko | 2.17.11 @ 12:58PM
I don't agree with this perception, tanstaafl. Muslim violence receives a lot of media attention, but it'd be interesting to see how many people have been killed by Christian hands and how many by Muslim hands in the last... 100 years? 50? 5?
I travel a lot by developing countries and Muslim ones tend to be comparatively crime free. Any other traveller can confirm this, I think.
What are the most dangerous cities in Africa, for instance: Nairobi, Johannesburg, Lagos... mostly-Christian cities. Not Bamako or Niamey or even Dakar.
But I agree with your argument, I was only trying to point this out. cheers!
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 1:08PM
I can help. Since 9/11/01, there have been 16,818 terrorist attacks carried out by muslims in islam's name.
For the week of Feb 5th, there were 31 jihad attacks, 117 dead bodies and 255 critically injured.
Please go ahead and post numbers for all those Christian terrorist attacks being carried out by Christians in Christ's name. In the meantime consider:
Jesus came not to change the law but to fulfill it. Mohammed instructs his followers in the art of terror, war, torture, and taquiyya. I always ask folks to consider Jesus and Mohammed as purely historical figures without ascribing any divinity to Jesus (mohammed never claimed to be divine). Compare their works and their message, and then tell me how islam is being "perverted" by the terrorist. Then tell me why mohammed hisself called early muslim who refused jihad "hypocrites."
Anyway how's that search of "Christian terror attacks" going? You can find them right next to the "moderate muslim." Haha!
Témoris Grecko | 2.17.11 @ 1:18PM
He didn't say terrorism. He said violence. I do hope you can understand the difference.
And violence includes war. So you have some groups claiming to make Jihad and killing many people. And you have some countries claiming to launch pre-emptive war and killing a lot more people. So include wars in your numbers and then you tell me.
Oh! But you are not here to share thoughts. You are here to try to look clever and say haha! Then I'll leave you alone with your clever humour. Enjoy.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 1:47PM
OK then please list for me all the "wars" since 9/11/01 that have been inspired by Christ's words and deeds. Man you split hairs like a regular lib. Are you saying there's a difference between violence and terrorism? Between terrorism and war? Tell it to the 3000 who died (non-violently??) at the hands of muslim (hmmm, 4 were Egyptian, right?) terrorists on 9/11.
I know you can't be saying that America launched its wars in the ME because of Christ, can you? Is that REALLY what you are implying? Cuz then it becomes are you really THAT dumb or are you just another in a long line of dhimmis, like the author?
Ya know something funny, if you'd every read my stuff you know that, shhh don't tell anyone and all cuz I'm just a muslim-hatin' redneck warmonger, but I think Iraq and Afghanistan are 2 of the biggest boondoggles and wastes of time, money, and manpower that the world has ever seen. But don't tell anyone or they'll kick me out of the Dumb Warmonger Redneck 'Merican club, OK?
Nice try, but I'm still laughing at you. HAHA!
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 1:23PM
We don't know if the attackers were pro or anti-Mubarek, but we can be 100% certain they were Egyptian. That pretty much destroys half of Dhimmidiano's argument. We can also be about 99.9999999999999% certain they were muslim.
To say they weren't Egyptian muslims is kinda, I dunno, dumb I guess.
Occam's Tool| 2.17.11 @ 1:16PM
Yes, but you don't live in a Islamic country, do you?
Témoris Grecko | 2.17.11 @ 12:52PM
Hi John
Your whole argument lies on one assumption: "the thugs who violently abused and violated Logan were anti-protesters sent into the streets by Mubarak precisely in order to disrupt and discredit the Egyptian uprising". And you try to prove it in a "simple" way: the sequence of events.
But it actually proves nothing. It's just speculation without evidence, and that is dangerous in journalism.
I don't know who these people were. And I saw them directly. I was there buying tea with a US American friend (I'm Mexican) and I saw Lara (whom I'd never heard of before) being dragged and pushed by the mob. I couldn't do anything because other Egyptians prevented me. They knew it was impossible and I'd put myself in the same situation.
They were calling her "agent! agent". Two days later, exactly the same thing happened to an Arte channel crew, whom I did know for they were staying at my hotel.
I saw the mob and they seemed to me no different from the celebrating crowd in Tahrir, nor from the people I'd seen for many days in the square. The situation was not strange to me either: journalists and foreigners were at risk of this happening to us, for self-appointed spy- and Israeli- hunters would come to us many times in a day to question us and demand to check our passports. You would obey with a smile because you'd seen other people mobbed in the square before and once a multitude goes crazy, there is no argument you can use.
This does not represent Egyptian people, of course, nor Muslim. But crowds are crowds, masses are masses, and these things tend to happen.
My annoyance with the activists is that this was happening before (you guys know it now because Lara is well known and the CBS has international leverage, but it was already happening) and only the lucky intervention of Egyptian individuals helped us. They had to reject the accusations (of the crime of being Israeli) and once they even got a guy to apologise and present a female friend with a sepha (a Muslim rosary).
I think the activists could have prevented this by taking it to explain daily from the main stage that the lies told by State TV (for instance, that every demonstrator was paid to be there 200 euros and a KFC chicken box) were also false in the case of the foreign plots, which many people did believe.
That's why they were on the hunt, to protect their revolution from foreign manipulation. Someone they trusted should have told them but no one did.
Most people --I want to make this clear-- were nice and welcoming, and there were a lot of kind gestures there. I was once shaking under my sleeping bag and this unknown guy didn't ask, he just covered me with a blanket and I never saw him again. They also presented me with a camping tent. Or food and beverages. Or the most beautiful smiles.
Still, pointing at their faults or short-comings is not anti-revolutionary. And showing sympathy for their revolution doesn't mean that you have to demonstrate its immaculate purity with any available argument.
Revolutions are what they are, with the good and the bad.
Read my post on this here, if you want to know more of what I saw: http://temorisblog.wordpress.c.....17/tahrir/
Smirking Weasel| 2.17.11 @ 1:13PM
Pro-Mubarak anything=disgusting ignorant Muslim, of whatever nation is irrelevant.
And the final paragraph of the original blog post
is simply craven ignorant cowardice. Apparently, even the PM of England is willing to appear to know better.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 1:17PM
As an aside, are we still comparing gang-rapists to the Tea Party, John?
mstakem| 2.17.11 @ 3:38PM
You sir, are a fucking idiot! Religion of peace, my ass! Thugs and rapists, all.
Témoris Grecko | 2.17.11 @ 3:53PM
Ugggh! You got some ugly readers here.
But I suscribe that last paragraph: "our struggle is not against Muslims and the Islamic religion; it is against Islamists and Jihadists who pervert Islam for their own depraved and illicit purposes."
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 4:07PM
T. Grecko,
Can you please explain to me how a jihadist/islamist "perverts" islam when they carry out a terrorist attack? In my reading of the koran and the traditions this is pretty much just following mohammed's example and the alleged words of allah as passed down in the koran. If I'm missing something please explain.
While you're at it please explain as a non-muslim--I'm assuming here, pardon if you are a muslim, but either way--how your interpretation of this "perversion" is correct and the 1400+ year history of violent, terroristic islam is all wrong.
When it comes to islam and its apologists, I am reminded of the old adage "who am I going to believe, you or my lyin' eyes?"
Patriot| 2.17.11 @ 4:15PM
According to a 2006 Times online poll taken among British Muslim University students : 32% of Muslim students in Britain believed that killing in the name of Islam could be justified, 40% supported sharia law for Muslims in Britain and 33% supported a global Caliphate based on sharia law. 40% of these same respondents also believed it was unacceptable for men and women to mix freely.
Are these British Muslim University students also "extremists who are perverting Islam for their own depraved and illicit purposes?"
Occam's Tool| 2.17.11 @ 3:59PM
You know, all I have seen so far is that Mubarak has been replaced by the Army, so far. Mr. G, when there are two elections that have been held, and they haven't declared war on Israel (and gotten nuked with hundreds of thousands of casualties for their impudence), then I will cheer developments in Egypt. Until then, I see nothing to cheer about, as Mubarak has a high probability of being replaced by something both more tyrannical AND less friendly to US interests.
Now, you will note that until the use of the word "Jew" in this sentence, other than my concern about an Israeli-Egyptian war that could go nuclear, I haven't mentioned the word in commentary. Nor have I mentioned the regrettable rape of Mrs. Logan. Frankly, in the long term, what matters are US interests. I am not sure this "revolution" is serving them.
Zilla | 2.17.11 @ 5:34PM
So the "pro-Mubarak" supporters are the rapists you say, and I guess you mean to imply that they are Quakers or Lutherans or something because no violent muslim would ever attack while screaming rage about "Jews"? Yeah and the muslim Brotherhood is largely secular and water is largely dry. And "Allah Akbar" when screamed by murderers is a Hebrew expression.
Mazi| 2.17.11 @ 5:58PM
Actually, a lot of Hebrew and Arabic expressions sound very similar, and have the same semitic roots. So that is not out of the question!
Also, keep in mind that the word "Allah" translates directly to God, and the word "Allahu Akbar" simply means God is Greater, and this phrase is used throughout the Arab World, by members of all faiths in the region.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 6:14PM
Actually "allah" is the name of the islamic god. The Arabic word for God is "ilah."
Mazi| 2.17.11 @ 6:21PM
No, as a Lebanese-American who speaks fluent Arabic (I was born in Lebanon, I emigrated when I was 10), I assure you that "Allah" is the Arabic word for God; unless somehow, you know more than me about the language my ancestors have been speaking for at least 2,000 years.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 7:21PM
Obviously I do. Look it up, I did.
Hey though if "allah" simply means god, why did your fellow muslims in Malaysia get all rioty and church-burny-downy when the Chrisitans there used the term to refer to God?
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 10:20PM
Crickets....
Mazi| 2.18.11 @ 12:48AM
First of all, Malaysians don't speak Arabic, and however they reacted to whatever incident your talking about (which I, and 99.9% of normal people, am unawre of) does not take away from the fact that the strict translation of Allah from Arabic to English is "God"
it's a simple wikipedia search, read the first paragraph than get at me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
I honestly hope that your responses are a joke, otherwise I actually cannot comprehend how blissfully ignorant you are. I just told you that I am fluent in Arabic, and you, as someone who barely knows English, are trying to tell me that the word I've been using for "God" my entire life, and the word I know Christians in Lebanon use for "God" does not mean so. I mean if there was a world record for sheer stupidity, you have just broken it. SMH
All American American| 2.18.11 @ 11:59AM
You're the joke, muslim. Just like your false prophet and false religion is a joke.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilah
Like a good muslim you deny what your brothers-in-Satan did in Malaysia by claiming they don't speak Arabic? So then it didn't happen? What a tool you are. The problem (for you) is I am aware of your taquiyya and can see right through it.
Hey, maybe next you can deny Theo Van Gogh was killed by a muslim? Or how about the looting, burning, and killing after cartoons of your allah's pirate, oops, "prophet" were published? Did that not happen as well?
Mazi why don't you tell us where the name "allah" came from? Does al-ilyah ring a bell? How about Raab? Care to expound on that?
The Arabic word for "God" is ilah. The name of the false god of islam is allah.
Game.
Set.
Match.
All American American| 2.18.11 @ 12:17PM
Hey thar Mazi if "allah" means "god" can you please explain this:
Shahada:
Shahadah is a saying professing monotheism and accepting Muhammad as God's messenger. The shahadah is a set statement normally recited in Arabic: (ašhadu an) lā ilāha illá l-Lāhi wa (ashhadu 'anna) Muḥammadan rasūlu l-Lāhi "(I profess that) there is no god but God and Muhammad is the messenger of God." Also, it is said that when dying one should recite this declaration of faith. In Azaan (call to prayer) it is recited. When a person wishes to convert religions they should recite this affirmation and believe in it.
Yeah cuz in YOUR OWN Shahadah I see a couple, three "ilahs" but no "allahs."
Did I say game, set match? Oh yeah I did.
Wow, an infidel knows more about your beliefs than you. Kinda sad for you. Mebbe you should re-read your koran.
Beantown Sister| 2.22.11 @ 6:47PM
Mazi, You ARE correct. Elhumdillah! I am an educated revert muslimah and my husband is educated Eygptian as well. Though I don't have YOUR or my husband's knowledge of Arabic of course, as a revert, I make attempts to excel in hadith and Qu'ran whenever I can. He tells me I amaze him at my knowledge of these...if only I could be like lady Aisha :) in knowledge. But to what you say it is most certainly truth.
Mazi| 2.17.11 @ 5:56PM
1 in 6 American women will be, or have been, “sexually assaulted” by American “animals”. The rate of rape in the United States, predominately Christian, is 29.3 per 100,000 people. The rate of rape in Egypt, predominately Muslim” is 0.1 per 100,000 people. Both of these numbers may be higher, as sexual assaults in both countries are underreported out of fear, however, Egypt would have to have an astronomical number of unofficial rapes in order for it to reach even a rate of 10 rapes per 100,000. The rate would have to increase by 29,200 % in order for Egypt to match the United State’s rape count per capita. These statistics are compiled by the United Nations.
The mob mentality of the Egyptians, who just witnessed the overthrow of a dictator, was the only proven factor in this crime. Many of the protesters were also Christian, and there is a good possibility that among the crowd of 200 men who attacked Lara, a Christian was among them. Probability states that in a country with a 10% Christian population, there is a very high chance that at least 20 of these men who participated could have been Christians. Depending on the circumstances, this number could be higher or lower.
Of course these types of incidents are not limited to Egypt. You may remember that in June of 2000, during the Puerto Rican Day Parade in Central Park, N.Y., “A total of 47 women – including a French newlywed, two British tourists and girls as young as 14 – have come forward to report being groped” by teenage and adult New Yorkers, with the chance of any of these assailants being Muslim at close to 0. Of course, groping is considered a sexual assault, and Lara Logan was probably the victim of this kind of attack, rather than an all out gang rape, which would not have been called a sexual assault but rather a flat out gang rape.
I'm using facts, not rhetoric to justify my arguments. I am not going to repeat myself. I want to see hard evidence that Muslims are predisposed to rape and murder, as I could also provide you all a list of the countries with the highest murder rate, each of which are predominately Christian/ Catholic countries. Am I saying that Christianity is a violent/oppressive religion? No. I'm only insinuating that the arguments many Islamophobes make lack evidence, other than incidents that make the news, as well as leave room for a variety of counter arguments based on actual facts.
Patty| 2.17.11 @ 10:25PM
Do you deny that Muslim men mistreat their women? I hope not because you'd be laughed off this blog.
All I can say is I thank God every day that I was born in a Christian nation. Keep your filthy female mutilations, honor killings and burkas away from us.
Muslim women are treated worse than animals in Muslim countries.
Mazi| 2.18.11 @ 1:01AM
No, I don't deny this but I want to see hard evidence that would show that Muslims are more likely to abuse women than members of other religious denominations. If it is truly a fact that there religion facilitates this type of behavior, there should be facts that validate your argument. Your statement "Muslim women are treated worse than animals in Muslim countries" is quite powerful, however, you provide nothing to back this statement up. If you are trying to make an argument, think clearly.
However, in terms of treatment of women, I know that in the U.S., women were not granted the right to vote until 1920, 150 years after the founding of this great country. I know that 4 Muslim countries have elected female heads of state, including Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Turkey (all predominately Muslim countries, in fact Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the World); while the U.S. has never had a women hold the highest office. Even Iran had a female Vice President in the 1990s. Does this refute your statement? You be the judge, but i'll tell you one thing, domestic violence against women is unacceptable. However, it is not limited to the Middle East. As you may know, 1 in 4 American women experience some form of domestic abuse. If you are one of those women, don't be afraid to call the national hotline and pour out all those pent up emotions.
Patty| 2.18.11 @ 2:18AM
What happened to that female leader in Pakistan? Hmmm? She was assassinated wasn't she? How convenient that you omitted that small detail.
Besides, the possibility of a rare female leader in the Muslim world hardly makes up for female mutilation, honor killings, being forced to wear a burka, not being allowed to drive or walk down the street without a male relative, stoning to death for adultery and punishment by death for being raped. And I've just scratched the surface of the horrific nightmare that describes the lives of Muslim women in Muslim countries.
Provide proof for your ridiculous assertion that 1 in 4 American women are abused. I don't expect a response because we both know you're lying.
"Violence toward women is unacceptable" tell that to your Muslim buddies; they are obviously unaware of your platitude.
Beantown Sister| 2.22.11 @ 7:53PM
There have been male leader HERE in the US, yes? And when one assumes a position of power that is a risks one takes I think, esp in a country that doesnt have the same amount of security. My recollection is that Bennito was advised she needed MORE security but refused it by the way. As for the rare female leader, there are many many female judges, as well other higher standing positions within the government for women in other countries than there are in the US. Women have long played a much stronger role in the Asian govt than here. Do I personally think it is the most ideal place for a woman, No. Perhaps if she has a way to balance her homelife with that of her professional as well. Yet that is MY feelings that MY family should come first. It was prior to reverting to Islam as well. AND this has nothing to do with what my husband wants--although he is happy with my decision as well. He likes having a homemaker around.
Yes the statics ARE indeed high for abuse for American women. " The Justice Department estimates that one in five women will experience rape or attempted rape during their college years, and that less than five percent of these rapes will be reported. Income is also a factor: the poorer the household, the higher the rate of domestic violence -- with women in the lowest income category experiencing more than six times the rate of nonfatal intimate partner violence as compared to women in the highest income category. When we consider race, we see that African-American women face higher rates of domestic violence than white women, and American-Indian women are victimized at a rate more than double that of women of other races."(Now.org)"Nearly one in every three adult women experiences at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood. Approximately four million American women experience a serious assault by an intimate partner during a 12-month period." (American Psychological Association)
Abuse is something that isn't a 'Muslim' thing. SORRY. I have been married before. It was the one who claimed to be a Christian....lied, cheated and was abusive to me and my children. My Muslim husband won't lie to even HELP himself, won't even look at a woman wrong, and is never abusive to us. He goes out of his way for all of us...even my kids from before. He is a true Muslim. Elhumdillah!
Abuse is very common in our country sadly. If it was a religious/race thing I would never have embraced Islam though. :) It is certainly not reported just as it isn't here based on the shame factor.
In as far as the genital mutilation that occurs in some countries, such as Eygpt, it is generally lower class people who engage in this...and get this WOMEN who go crazy!!! demanding that it be done to the infant daughters or a great shame will come to the house should anyone find out. She goes to the phsycian, pays them quietly to come to the home and it is secretly done since it is illegal. Sad that though hadith says NOT to do it they still it. Instead of teaching them just the law, more needs to be done to teach the ladies the hadith so they discontinue this hateful practise.
As for honor killings and such, that again goes more to the culture and NOT to the hadith and Quran. If we are to live by Shariah, sure, for fornifician and adultry there are certain statues that must be met such as 4 witnesses just not a he said she said thing. But it all has its merits. How they are put into effect in places like Iran isnt truly Islamic though. They tend to do some crazy things.
Burka-that is Afghanistan. The ladies there--some want to wear them and them forced on them by families. In Saudi the abaya is mandatory--it's just a
black coat you wear over your clothes. Easy to get dressed. I wear it wear in a rush...but in blue demin (makes getting ready in a hurry 2 easy) For them its just about having modesty for all women & its light honestly. In as far as just life in Muslim countries, Muslim women as a lot have far greater freedoms and respect than people seem to credit us for. This has always baffled me when I hear how suppressed I am wearing hijab and being so covered. As a former clinical researcher who later started wearing hijab, I feel more empowered and frankly a stronger woman NOW. Its nice to have people around me take me more seriously for me and not just as a pretty face...has me thinking seriously about niqab now. Its a change I should have made sooner. So not all women wear hijab, burka, abaya or anything else by force.
I don't walk behind my husband. There is no Sunnah for that. Duh. Most women let the hubby drive in most any country and it doesn't matter your religion...I am no exception. I prefer it. Chauffer me please. And if you have that sort of income in say Saudi...wouldn't you? Common'...please. I
I am very sorry for what happened to the reporter. I understood for reports that she has frequently put herself into dangerous situations but no woman deserves rape no matter the situation. And I am sorry....that isn't what the Qu'ran says exactly. There was NO war here. War is hand to hand combat between males not what happened in the square and certainly not with the journalists. She wasn't the only female raped there. My husband was sick about the crimes commited just as he is of those against the Libyan people now.
All American American| 2.17.11 @ 7:13PM
Are you saying that America is a Christian nation? Cuz our own president told your people it wasn't. Mebbe you're just skewing "facts" to attempt to make a point?
A majority of Americans are Christian, but is every rapist in America a Christian? You are leaving out the very important point that islam is the law/govt in islamic countries. Christianity or Catholic Catechism is not the supremem law of the land like sharia is in muslim countries.
Beantown Sister| 2.22.11 @ 8:14PM
Very few govts in so to speak Islamic countries are Islamic. And there are no true Shariah laws really. They can claim to be but in fact they are a far cry from what the Holy Qu'ran set up. Iran, which I do not truly find Shia to be Muslim, has what they call Shariah but they constantly abuse the system they set-up with crimes against the people it is meant to guard. Eygpt will be secular most likely as it is unlikely that 80 million people will rise up together to find to form a govt that will be Islamic and go against both the US and poor defenseless Israel. Then who? are we talking? Turkey?? It is secular. And who Lebanon? Well...that is a bit of a wild card...perhaps Hezbellah but not likely...it is still Shia though mainly with some Christian there. Only one that is at all Palestine...but well...that is a bit divided. The elections may not be even be honored by half the country shortly. And Libya doesnt even have a president...it is a dictatorship...so there is no real law. And Moaroco...Kingdom. The father disolved the parliment years ago. It is just whatever he says goes. How about Jordan? Oh yeah...another Kingdom.....hmmm. Pakistan, Yeah--wait...i think they have actual laws that arent totally Shariah. Women go out without covering hair there too! and no burka etc...unless you are in the foothills near Afghanistan area. India is a mix so that doesnt count. Bangladesh is mainly Muslim but they are fairly liberal from my past experience. (I have too too many close friends) Where else...Malayasia? They are kool...can vary widely in din...and have awesome hijab....but not extreme on laws really. Conservative but not too scary. Afghanistan, rural Pakistan and Yemen would be the worst I can think of...only because of the tribal areas. Ignorance goes a long way. It would be worst than simple Shariah. I support Shariah and believe the world in general would be a better place with that in place provided it was always acted upon appropriately.
All American American| 3.24.11 @ 12:03PM
Yeah. You're an idiot.
Just a Thought| 2.18.11 @ 3:58AM
Any article that uses Kristof or Friedman as if they were reliable sources, deserves contempt.
There will be little peace in the world, and little progress towards development in the Muslim world, until such apologists as Guardiano and Mazi acknowledge that
- the problem is Islam itself, which is sorely in need of a Reformation
- that there exists not a single true secular democracy in the Muslim world, with full and equal rights for minorities and women
- that the problem for US policy is the stark choice between secular dictatorships and anti-Western, anti-Semitic Islamist "democracy".
The only positive indication is the fact that the military has intervened, preventing the same descent into Islamist "democracy" as occurred in Iran and almost occurred in Algeria.