Torog
02-10-2006, 12:13 AM
Western dhimmitude
Posted: February 9, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Hal Lindsey
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The global reaction to the uproar over the "12 Satanic Cartoons" demonstrates a growing Western embrace of the mentality of Islamic "dhimmitude" subtly disguised as political correctness.
Under Islam, a "dhimmi" is a non-Muslim living in conquered Muslim lands. "Dhimmis" are permitted limited freedom of religion, provided there is no conflict with Islamic laws governing such things as religious symbols and images. However, a dhimmi has virtually no rights in actual practice. The word of one "offended Muslim" can send a dhimmi to death.
Historically, Jews living as dhimmis in Muslim countries have been subjected to daily humiliations that reduced life to a perilous uncertainty. They are required to pay a very high tax called the "jizra" for the "privilege of living among Muslims."
This latest example of Muslim intolerance and violence over any hint of insult to their religion displays clearly for all to see that their core beliefs inspire hatred and violence.
The behavior of the vast majority of Muslims puts the lie to "the political correct image of Islam as inherently peaceful and tolerant." Yet, the continuing advance of this patently false idea by Western leaders, despite the total lack of evidence to support it, is an admission that we're all dhimmis now.
It is evidence that we've voluntarily submitted most of our culture to "Islamic dhimmitude," by censoring those who dare to point out the inherent contradictions evident in the continually repeated myth that Islam is basically tolerant and peaceful. It is a myth driven by fear of Muslim violence and terrorism.
A Christian fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Christianity. A Jewish fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Judaism. There is no other logical understanding of the terms.
If an Islamic fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Islam, then a "moderate" Islamic majority means a majority of Muslims reject Islam's fundamental teachings. This is so self-evidently circular that it makes one dizzy to contemplate.
There was a scene in the old '60's series "Star Trek" in which an evil android was defeated by Mr. Spock's circular logic. Mr. Spock told the android that he (Mr. Spock) was lying when he said he was lying. Sorting it all out made the android's head explode.
Figuring out how a religion's fundamentals can inspire terror while arguing it is fundamentally "peaceful and tolerant" makes me feel like that android.
Denmark submitted to Islam when it apologized on behalf of its press for publishing cartoons that violated Islamic law. Some members of the European press establishment, unaware of the rules of dhimmitude, republished the cartoons as an exercise of journalism's religious defense of freedom of the press. Soon, their various national leaders also submitted to Islamic dhimmitude, apologizing to Islam on behalf of their citizens for violating Islamic religious prohibitions.
Former president Clinton, speaking from Qatar, called the publication of the cartoons "appalling" and "outrageous." In true dhimmi fashion, his outrage was reserved for the cartoonists, not the raging sea of formerly "moderate Islamists" calling for their execution.
The imam at the Islamic Center in Brussels denounced the cartoons. "Where are the human-rights organizations? Why are they silent?" he demanded. And the Muslim World League called on U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan to implement international laws against insolence of religions.
Seventeen foreign ministers from the Arabian League demanded the editors responsible for publishing the cartoons to be "punished."
Iranian President Ahmadinajad, not to be out done, announced that the cartoonists should be killed.
As for the cartoonists themselves? They are reportedly all in hiding, in fear for their lives. As Daniel Pipes accurately noted in a recent column, "the deeper issue here, however, is not Muslim hypocrisy, but Islamic supremacism." To back up his point, Pipes quoted Flemming Rose, the Danish editor who published the cartoons: "[I]f I, as a non-Muslim, should submit to their taboos ... they're asking for my submission." Indeed, Islam has not only demanded submission, they've gotten it.
Said U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbor, "I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others. This kind of thing is unacceptable." (Then she announced an investigation into racism and Islamophobia. Harrumphhh!)
In the United States, the mainstream media, which have already allied themselves with the political dhimmis on the left, knew better. With the exception of CNN â?? which pixelated the images the first time (suppressing them altogether thereafter) â?? the U.S. mainstream media devoted hours of coverage to the story without daring to show the Satanic Cartoons themselves.
Dhimmis know their place.
Posted: February 9, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Hal Lindsey
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The global reaction to the uproar over the "12 Satanic Cartoons" demonstrates a growing Western embrace of the mentality of Islamic "dhimmitude" subtly disguised as political correctness.
Under Islam, a "dhimmi" is a non-Muslim living in conquered Muslim lands. "Dhimmis" are permitted limited freedom of religion, provided there is no conflict with Islamic laws governing such things as religious symbols and images. However, a dhimmi has virtually no rights in actual practice. The word of one "offended Muslim" can send a dhimmi to death.
Historically, Jews living as dhimmis in Muslim countries have been subjected to daily humiliations that reduced life to a perilous uncertainty. They are required to pay a very high tax called the "jizra" for the "privilege of living among Muslims."
This latest example of Muslim intolerance and violence over any hint of insult to their religion displays clearly for all to see that their core beliefs inspire hatred and violence.
The behavior of the vast majority of Muslims puts the lie to "the political correct image of Islam as inherently peaceful and tolerant." Yet, the continuing advance of this patently false idea by Western leaders, despite the total lack of evidence to support it, is an admission that we're all dhimmis now.
It is evidence that we've voluntarily submitted most of our culture to "Islamic dhimmitude," by censoring those who dare to point out the inherent contradictions evident in the continually repeated myth that Islam is basically tolerant and peaceful. It is a myth driven by fear of Muslim violence and terrorism.
A Christian fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Christianity. A Jewish fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Judaism. There is no other logical understanding of the terms.
If an Islamic fundamentalist is one who adheres to the fundamentals of Islam, then a "moderate" Islamic majority means a majority of Muslims reject Islam's fundamental teachings. This is so self-evidently circular that it makes one dizzy to contemplate.
There was a scene in the old '60's series "Star Trek" in which an evil android was defeated by Mr. Spock's circular logic. Mr. Spock told the android that he (Mr. Spock) was lying when he said he was lying. Sorting it all out made the android's head explode.
Figuring out how a religion's fundamentals can inspire terror while arguing it is fundamentally "peaceful and tolerant" makes me feel like that android.
Denmark submitted to Islam when it apologized on behalf of its press for publishing cartoons that violated Islamic law. Some members of the European press establishment, unaware of the rules of dhimmitude, republished the cartoons as an exercise of journalism's religious defense of freedom of the press. Soon, their various national leaders also submitted to Islamic dhimmitude, apologizing to Islam on behalf of their citizens for violating Islamic religious prohibitions.
Former president Clinton, speaking from Qatar, called the publication of the cartoons "appalling" and "outrageous." In true dhimmi fashion, his outrage was reserved for the cartoonists, not the raging sea of formerly "moderate Islamists" calling for their execution.
The imam at the Islamic Center in Brussels denounced the cartoons. "Where are the human-rights organizations? Why are they silent?" he demanded. And the Muslim World League called on U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan to implement international laws against insolence of religions.
Seventeen foreign ministers from the Arabian League demanded the editors responsible for publishing the cartoons to be "punished."
Iranian President Ahmadinajad, not to be out done, announced that the cartoonists should be killed.
As for the cartoonists themselves? They are reportedly all in hiding, in fear for their lives. As Daniel Pipes accurately noted in a recent column, "the deeper issue here, however, is not Muslim hypocrisy, but Islamic supremacism." To back up his point, Pipes quoted Flemming Rose, the Danish editor who published the cartoons: "[I]f I, as a non-Muslim, should submit to their taboos ... they're asking for my submission." Indeed, Islam has not only demanded submission, they've gotten it.
Said U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbor, "I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others. This kind of thing is unacceptable." (Then she announced an investigation into racism and Islamophobia. Harrumphhh!)
In the United States, the mainstream media, which have already allied themselves with the political dhimmis on the left, knew better. With the exception of CNN â?? which pixelated the images the first time (suppressing them altogether thereafter) â?? the U.S. mainstream media devoted hours of coverage to the story without daring to show the Satanic Cartoons themselves.
Dhimmis know their place.