A Muslim’s idea of tolerance is that unbelievers respect his religion, while he can insult yours….
by sheikyermami on October 24, 2010
Sufi saint Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624), letter #163
“The honour of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs . One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims… The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain terrified and trembling. It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honour and might of Islam.”
And that is what Muslims really believe, especially when it comes to Jews:
Egyptian Cleric Muhammad Al-Zoghbi: Pharaoh Would Ride the Jews Like the Donkeys They Are
Following are experts from a religious program featuring Egyptian cleric Muhammad Al-Zoghbi, which aired on Al-Rahma TV on March 9, 2010: (MEMRI)
Muhammad Al-Zoghbi: When [the Israelites] came to Egypt and lived with the Egyptians, they did not assimilate with them. There was no assimilation, no interaction, no intermarriage. There was nothing. Why not? Because of their condescension, their arrogance, and their conceit. We are all familiar with the Jews.
There is more from the same A-sole:
Egyptian Cleric Muhammad Al-Zoghbi: The Accursed Jews are Masters of Terrorism Who Wallow in Mud and Spread Corruption Wherever They are
If an Egyptian had sex with an Israeli woman, and she became pregnant, she would rip open her belly so as not to bear his child. Why? Because she believes that she belongs to the Chosen People.
[...]
[Pharaoh] would ride a Jew as one might ride a donkey. Let me show you how. Pharaoh would say: “Bring me a Jew, an Israeli.” The he would say to him: “Over here. Bend over and make like a donkey.” The Jew would crouch like a donkey, and Pharaoh would ride on his back, his legs dangling on either side. Sometimes, he would ride him sidesaddle. He would grab him by the collar, and lead him: Giddyup… He would ride him like a donkey because a donkey he is.
We do not encourage such a thing, (yeah, right) but I must say that it is due to their sins, arrogance, and conceit that Allah sent enemies to rule them and turn them into donkey underfoot.
[...]
Nice article about the Tolerance Gestapo among us:
Just who is intolerant, anyway?
By DAVID HARSANYI
No question. We’re surrendering to religious intolerance. Just not the imaginary religious intolerance many would have us believe.
After 9/11, we stressed the distinction between Muslims and extremist Muslims who were driven by an ideological strain of orthodoxy that prioritizes atomizing the infidel. But we all conceded that those terrorists were Muslims, nonetheless. It’s a fact.
Today, even broaching the topic of religious affiliation can send (almost all) the dolts on “The View” scattering for cover. To some folks, any whiff of critical discussion on the religious angle is tantamount to narrow-mindedness. And now, apparently, religious bigotry includes the dissemination of truth.
Surely by now you’ve heard the tale of liberal commentator Juan Williams, fired by National Public Radio after conceding to Bill O’Reilly that Muslims dressed in traditional garb on a airplane make him kind of “nervous” and “worried.”
“Now, I remember also that when the Times Square bomber was at court, I think this was just last week,” as Williams went on to assert during a broader conversation about more tolerance. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts.”
Of course there is. Ask some of the “tolerance” — pimping left-wing groups like Think Progress for their instruction manual. Just throw around the word bigotry. Chill conversation. Watch NPR capitulate and then watch journalists who value their careers become increasingly uneasy about covering or discussing Islamic radicalism, peaceful Islam — any Islam.
This isn’t exactly new. There are many books — a genre actually — that expound on the profound stupidity of religion and its followers. Though I enjoy some of these works, I can’t help but marvel at how the most severe accusations are reserved for modern Catholicism or Evangelicalism while, if we’re lucky, some tepid criticism will gently fall on the faith featuring the most fundamentalism in the world.
I get it. We pride ourselves as being an open society. And we can stay that way by greeting fundamentalism with modernity not allowing radicalism to influence our enlightenment.
Or so you’d think.
If you can ever find the Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris ask her about religion tolerance. Norris has reportedly gone “ghost” after finding herself on an Islamic terror hit list for her insulting cartoon. (Let me know when a journalist makes an atheist, Mormon or papal hit list.)
Free speech didn’t exactly work out that well for Molly. There was only a faint outcry about her predicament. The tolerance crowd was busy smearing anyone who didn’t like idea of a mosque near ground zero a bigot.
That’s OK, most cartoonists understand that nearly every topic is open to them. Nearly.
And since most of us still enjoy nearly unlimited free expression, perhaps NPR will explain its reverence to open dialogue at some point during the next 600 hours of shilling for charity.
Perhaps NPR can even take a few moments to explain to American Muslims why they’re thought of as children who can’t handle the slightest perceived politically incorrect comment.
And maybe they can carve out a few minutes for groups that instigated and rationalize shutting down journalists. Perhaps they can explain how they perceive themselves “liberal.” It seems to be a misnomer for the ages.
– David Harsanyi is a columnist for the Denver Post, a MediaNews Group newspaper. Write him at dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment