Azzam Tamimi insists on telling the truth: of course there is no such thing as "European Islam." There is no different text of Qur'an and Hadith and Sira stamped "European edition." Islam does not offer different versions of its immutable texts, the texts that inhibit free and skeptical inquiry, or any possible interpretive escape, a thousand years after the Gates of Ijtihad swung shut with a thud.
How Tariq Ramadan, with his phony but plausible to some (some, such as Olivier Roy and Gilles "Always Wrong" Kepel, the boys who just want to have fun, and want to be fooled about Islam), must be tearing at his hair. For this business of creating a "European Islam" -- carefully undefined, as it must be -- is the shtick of Tariq Ramadan.
And now along comes Tamimi, and queers the pitch.
Oh well, Tariq Ramadan can still try to get into the United States, where he really wants to be in any case. After all, it's the hardest nut to crack in one sense, but then there are all those sweet scott applebys to supply grants, and to defend you against the know-nothings of the CIA and FBI (not to mention all those people -- chomskys and zinns and the usual suspects, rounding up themselves to sign the indignant and impassioned letter of support for Tariq Ramadan -- who will make him as welcome as they possibly can).
Yes, that's it. Forget about that "European Islam" stuff. It won't wash. Light out for the territories. Go west, young Ramadan. Go to America, where so many are waiting to give you grants. Start with the Kroc Center, but don't end there. Knock up the Carnegie Foundation, now handing out money left and right to anyone who can put the words "Islam" and "Reform" together in a sentence, thanks to Vartan Gregorian's nostalgia for his childhood in Tabriz and his own failure to understand Islam through the glow of his memories. The new man coming aboard is if anything even worse, heading some damn program on Islam and its self-amelioration, all music to the ears of Infidels who don't want to believe, can't bear to believe, the evidence not only of their senses but of their minds -- if only they allowed those minds of theirs to study Islam, its doctrine and its 1350 years of practice.
Yes, here it is: American Islam. The brand new kind of Islam, so different from Islam in the Middle East, and in Pakistan, and in Bangladesh, and in Malaysia, and in Indonesia. So different from the Islam in Algeria, and the Sudan, and northern Nigeria. So different too from the Islam in Europe, the Islam practiced by Muslims in Bradford and London, in Madrid and Amsterdam, in Hamburg and Cologne, in Marseille and Paris, and in so many places.
American Islam is so very different. Isn't that the theme of so many articles in The New Duranty Times and in The Boston Globe these days, with smiling faces of young people, so normal, so attractive, at Dearborn High, and with all those impressive statistics about their educational level, and their income level? Oh yes, only the undereducated, only the poorer Muslims, we are now told despite all the contrary evidence, are the danger -- and anyway that just doesn't happen in America. The American "melting pot" is so very different from the European countries that have apparently done everything they can, and for decades, to make the lives of Muslims hard, to reject them, to make them feel "humiliated" despite the fantastic benefits -- the free health care, the free education, the nearly-free housing, the constant solicitude for Muslim sensibilities at every level of government and in the press. Somehow it hasn't worked.
So we will be hearing a lot more about "American Islam" as the savior of Islam and of those Infidels from here on out. The farce of "European Islam" will come to an end, and as the curtain comes slowly down on Europe, it will rise on a new farce, just booked, here in the United States.
Of course there is no "American Islam" as there is no "European Islam." There is for America and Europe no special magic or immunity from Jihad and the tenets of Islam that prompt Jihad and that inculcate hostility toward Infidels. Because Islam itself is so clearly based on the division of the world between Believer and Infidel, that division will be found arising from the teachings of Islam in Dearborn, or in Bay Ridge in Brooklyn, or in Falls Church, Virginia, or in Houston, or in Columbus, Ohio. No, it will be the same Islam, the Islam of Shi'a and Sunni, and within Sunni Islam of all four schools of jurisprudence -- the Islam in which Jihad is a duty, sometimes collective and sometimes individual, to remove all obstacles to the spread of Islam, to ensure that Islam does spread, using all of the instruments of Jihad (of which combat, or qital, is only one, and at present not the most effective), so that Islam dominates everywhere, and everywhere Muslims rule. It will take time. Muslims are patient.
Are Infidels capable of the same patience in throwing back the menace of Islam? This is a menace not only to the physical security, even the lives, of Infidels, but also to the civilizational legacy that they inherited and to which further contributions might be made, but could never have been made, and will never be made, within an Islam-dominated society.
"European Islam."
"American Islam."
A farce, but not by Feydeau.
Actually, we already have an "American Islam," no thanks to Tariq Ramadan: Namely, the Black Muslim movement. Guys like Mohammed Ali, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam, and the Million Man March. We've had Black Muslims now in America for 50 years. Mostly jihad free.
Because they were primarily pan-African nationalists, maybe like Nasser was a pan-Arab nationalist; rather than Islamists.
The above article represents the view that I've been taking of Islam more and more, since my relatively recent cure from the non-Muslim denial ("its just a few Muslim exremists") syndrome. I hope my history proves that there is hope for those who become aware of the facts. I suggest everyone out there becomes as well read in the Koran, as well as the works of people like Andrew Bostom and Bat Ye'or, as they possibly can, and start talking about what they learn in these writings to everyone they know who'll listen. I don't see any other way to unmask all the slippery religious double talk that Islam promotes about everything from the roots of terrorism to the identity of Jesus so that people, including politicians (who need to be RELENTLESSLY hounded about this) finally start to "get it".
they were primarily pan-African nationalists, maybe like Nasser was a pan-Arab nationalist; rather than Islamists.
Posted by: Steven L. at August 22, 2006 11:04 AM
Forgive me Steven, if I'm not very reassured at the mention of names like Louis Farrakhan and Malcolm X. The record of figures like these is ambiguous at best.
I feel some guilty comfort in that the US has the luxury of time and future case-studies. If my math is right, the numbers are still 300:1, and we are protected by an ocean and some limited immigration controls. We will be able to watch the consequences of the fall of democratic France, Israel’s fight, and an increasingly bitter struggle in other European Countries. Like our Muslim friends, we too can ‘adapt’.
My mother-in-law is the most bleeding-heart, liberal Democrat that you can find and she’s starting to get worried about it. And we’ve got NASCAR.
Limes:
I wouldn't be too comfortable if I were you. You have a little problem in the US called the First Amendment, about which I had some discussion in another thread with someone using the name susanp. Islamic militants hide behind this to protect their viscious cries of DEATH TO AMERICA! and everything else that they cite as part of their "religious belief". What are you going to do about this?
Meanwhile, correct me if I'm mistake but the non-Muslim birthrate is relatively low in the U.S. whereas that of Muslims is, as in Europe, much higher. These kind of trends do not take very long (historically speaking) to have their effect. I fear that you may have less time than you think.
Good one Hugh. Needed to be said.
Even conservative pundits are constantly citing the difference between American Muslims and their European counterparts. The story seems to be that American Muslims are much more integrated. There may be an element of truth to it, but my guess is that the average friday sermon at an American mosque is none too different than one in Europe.
Templar; Concur with your sentiments. My hope springs from the fact that we came really close to passing a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage recently. When the 'next one' comes, watch for a weakening of the 1st Amendment and mechanisms for deportation. Ninety some percent already favor profiling.
Along with the fact that we hold the moral high ground. With the help of our host, those like him, and this wonderful internet, I retain 'some' guilty comfort.
TEMPLAR: "Meanwhile, correct me if I'm mistake but the non-Muslim birthrate is relatively low in the U.S. whereas that of Muslims is, as in Europe, much higher. These kind of trends do not take very long (historically speaking) to have their effect. I fear that you may have less time than you think."
You are overlooking one very important fact. America has an endless reservior of Christian, Latin immigrants from which to draw....something Europe lacks.
Geography was kind to America. Our future is Latin. Europe's is Islamic.
Thanks for your responses, Limes and Cornelius.
May God speed the day of victory, then!
I watched a rather gloomy programme on modern-day Russia last night and discovered the Cossacks are very unhappy indeed about the presence of Meskhetian Turks in the south of the country. Lots of grumbling about overbreeding Muslims. And follow-up action.
But there was a happy ending to this tale of a persecuted minority. It seems the Turks won't have to endure persecution much longer as they're being resettled under a refugee programme. Not to Turkey, as I assumed, but the United States. All 18,000 of them.
http://www.churchworldservice.org/Immigration/archives/2005/09/74.html
And so the richness of 'American Islam' was increased!
I see someone has mentioned the phrase "holding the moral high ground" a phrase which I've encountered several times before.
I can just see it now. A half dozen battered, wounded knights on a hilltop, "moral high ground" pennants flapping in the breeze as they watch the Muslim warriors headed their way, who are forging a path towards through the piles of slaughtered "moral highgrounders" who have been chopped into dog meat by the main Muslim army.
This is what "holding the moral high ground" is going to get us when dealing with Muslim fanatics. As for me, I'd much rather be a mean, low-down, cunning, positively un-honorable warrior who was victorious. You can also hold the fancy "Moral High Ground" uniform with all those shiney medals for giving the opponent a fair shake, gentlemanly conduct, courtesy and Kumbaya singing too.
It could not be more clear that our Muslim enemies want Infidels dead, converted, or as slaves. I see no reason at all to give somone who wants me and mine dead a break.
Following the development of this essay, it would seem that a misapprehension persists in the West, continues to arise, one that is based upon projections and expectations. There was to be a "European Islam," presumably assimilating the fruits of the European enlightenment and transplanting them to the rocky soil of "Old Islam," providing it with its own Renaissance. Then, there was to be an "American Islam" because it was in America that the fruits of the Enlightenment, the political and social theories of Montesquieu, Voltaire, Rousseau and others, were implemented and made to work. Anything that the Europeans may have overlooked would surely be remedied in the Can-Do New World.
In both cases there was the conceit that "We can make it better." It is the same conceit that Arthur Koestler recounts when, as a young Communist in Weimar Germany and already becoming aware that the Great Socialist Experiment in the Soviet Union was going wrong, he and his comrades knew that somehow, in Germany, in the West, they could make this philosophy work. Koestler was wrong, as he later came to recognize and admit, as he later came to warn all who would listen. There are some belief systems that are not amenable to the preservation of human dignity and the development of mankind's potential. These belief systems are the ones in which Free Will plays little or no role. The concepts of conscience and personal responsibility are predicated upon the concept of Free Will. Free Speech is a manifestation of Free Will. All of these concepts appear to be antithetical to Islam and other totalitarian belief systems.
There is neither "European" nor "American" Islam. There can be neither "European" nor "America" Islam until there is also exists an Islam in which Free Will, conscience and personal responsibility are foundational. Unfortunately for Islam, it cannot look forward to a Renaissance such as Europe enjoyed, when Europe's rich Greco-Roman heritage was rediscovered --and in some instances repatriated from Dar al Islam. If reason is to take its place next to faith in Islam, it must either take Europe's precedent as a model or work out its own template. The will to do so must be in place either way. And individuals like Tamimi are working hard to make sure that doesn't happen.
Holding the 'moral high ground' is a valuable weapon when crafting public policy to defend the common interest. Public policy can be mean, cunning, and low-down. We're still in that arena, and at least in America, will be for a while. The First Amendment is what it is, and will probably be weakened in the foreseeable future.
If public policy fails, and hopefully it won't, there's a lot more than a half-dozen folks who exercise the freedoms granted by the fail-safe mechanism called the Second Amendment.
GaryK:
Sorry, but I believe you are in a relativist fog regarding your ideas of a happily victorious yet rudderless infidel army triumphing over Islam. Lacking ‘a moral high ground’ – basic ideas of right and wrong – good from evil - is precisely why our once great Western Civilization lies wounded with its throat exposed to the hateful scimitars of the advancing Muslim hordes. It was this unquestioned clear thinking that inspired the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the greatness of America. You cannot fight something without perspective whilst standing confidently upon ‘the moral high ground’. The proverbial ‘Good’ does defiantly triumph over ‘Darkness’ – a distinction we must once again grasp before our ‘relativist stupor’ dooms us all to the 'trash heap of history'. Blind hatred is a ‘ship without a rudder’ a ‘Lighthouse without a beacon’.
The Israelis have been "holding the moral high ground" for years, with all that "purity-of-arms" stuff, and the use of reservists to go door-to-door in Jenin and elsewhere instead of flattening the damn neighborhood, and men lose their lives with a sickening and quite unnecessary prodigality, all because the Israelis must "hold the" goddam "moral high ground." And what does it earn them? What points do they win in the world, for being so scrupulous with the lives of those who hate them, and so willing to create far greater dangers for their officers, their men, their civilians?
Neither the Israelis, nor the Americans, nor any other group of Infidels, need be quite so solicitous of this malevolent and murderous enemy. I don't want to hold the "moral high ground." I don't give a damn about this business of "losing my soul" in the process of trying to "save myself." I want us, at the lowest possible cost to ourselves, to stay alive, to prevail, to constrain if not clearly triumph over, the primitive forces of darkness.
Seize the high ground -- in the Golan Heights or Bint Jbail, and do not relinquish control of the first, ever, or of the second, until that "robust" force comes along, and the Americans must do the same, must seize the highest high ground of all, the airpace over certain parts of Teheran and its suburbs. That's the kind of high ground that General Mark Clark or Omar Bradley would want to seize.
Go with them, and not with anguished Michael Lerner of "Tikkun," perennially clutching his forehead.
We've had quite enough of this "moral high ground" stuff from people who do not live in the real world. Those of us who do live in that real world, and wish to continue living in that real world, have a duty to ignore or if not to ignore, then to mock them, the moral highlanders who are alive because others, thank god, do not always listen to them.
Hugh,
Is there not a "European Christianity?" Consider the Anglican/Epis. church schism of late as a result of strong opposition to certain social progressive norms by the more "conservative" groups in the "developing" nations. Is there not a difference between the church in England and that of Uganda?
I await your answer with anticipation.
Ouch. There’s no place for moral anything on the battlefield. But I maintain that the more we trumpet things like:
When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. - 47:4
The easier it will be to deport people who are marching with ‘Death to America’ signs in Dearborn. Perhaps I walked into something.
"Is there not a 'European Christianity?'
-- from a posting above
Muslims who attempt to delay the recognition of the essential sameness of all of Islam, whatever its differences, on the subject of Muslim tenets and attitudes related to Infidels -- that, after all, is the thing that most counts for Infidels, and not differences in schools of jurisprudence, nor in dress or food or even treatment of Muslm women or the punishment of Muslims according to a criminal code which may vary from the Shari'a ideal by a little or a lot -- like to suggest that somehow the presene of Muslims in Europe will create a "European" Islam, and now that that seems more and more absurd (and how nice it is to have Tamimi stating its absurdity, for he is an hairy man, and Tariq Ramadan is a smooth man, and the smooth man has been one of the slyest promoters of this "European Islam" slogan that, upon inspection, can be seen to be entirely devoid of meaningful content).
As for Christianity, you know perfectly well that there are differences in, for example, a few Protestant denominations, chiefly the Anglicans, in the willingness of some within Europe to endorse, for example, homosexual marriage, and the unwillingness of some, for example black African Anglicans, to follow suit. There are differences such as that. But that kind of difference, while it might conceivably lead to splits in, say, the community of Anglicans world-wide, simply reflects differences in mores and attitudes. This is not a question of "European Christianity" becuase, no doubt, there are those Anglicans in England who openly or secretly share the views, say, of the Nigerian anglican clergy. Similarly, within the Episcopal Church (the name by which Anglicans are known in this country), there are those who applaud, and those who deplore, the open avowal of his homosexuality by a high clergyman in New Hampshire, and those who neither deplore nor applaud. What does that mean? Does that mean that the "American" church is divided between a "European Anglicanism" and an "African Anglicanism"? Those adjectives do not fit the case.
When it comes to Islam, the use of the terms "European Islam" (or the "American Islam" that I offered) are deliberate in their attempt to mislead Infidels. These phrases suggest that the presence of Muslims in this or that part of the world will inevitably lead to the development of a different, presumably softened and much less threatening Islam. Now it is one thing to argue that at least some -- 5%? 10%? 15%?--of those who are born into Islam, and who are raised in such Infidel nation-states as France and Italy and England and Holland , might in fact come to jettison Islam altogether. But they have not been transformed into "European Musllims" but rather into apostates, into those who have rejected Islam. The rest, as the evidence suggests, not only remain Muslims, devoted to that totalitarian belief-system Islam, the same Islam as that which one can find in Iran, or Egypt, or Saudi Arabia or Iraq (where there are differences about the hudud, or criminal punishment, and differences in the severity of the mistreatment of women, but no differences when it comes to the attitude toward Infidels, and that is what matters). It is disingenuous, or perhaps merely mental laziness, to pretend that the phrase "European Islam" is not really a description, but rather an element in the taqiyya with which we are all, at this website, by now so very familiar, and so very immune.
"European Christianity" is a misnomer because it purports to identify with a geographic region the split, among believers of this or that denomination or congregation of Christians, on various matters that might far better be described as between "conservatives" and "liberals." For example, those who deplore the ending of the Latin liturgy (I deplore it) might be followers of some French bishop, or might be Catholics in West Africa. Those who deplore the acceptance, or perhaps even seeming endorsement, of sexual behavior of a certain kind may be found both in Europe and in Africa and Asia, even if the "conservatives" are stronger, say, among Black African Anglicans than they are among those in England.
This should all be obvious.
Isn't it, really?
"Islam itself is so clearly based on the division of the world between Believer and Infidel..."
The West also has developed a division of the world -- of the Western world, that is (which, however, is in certain respects "the World"). Although this subject is unusually complex, for brevity's sake it can be put this way: the Western world has become divided (by Western neo-Gnostics) into an evil West, and an ideal West.
These Western neo-Gnostics come in a variety of flavors, some more virulent with a more purist vision; others more wishy-wishy and semi-incoherent, subscribing to a "Gnosticism Lite" (whose guiding light (or, rather, skotosis) is the PC Multiculturalist template), and many others straddling various fences in between.
For a little theoretical analysis of how the symbolization the West is on one level a symbolization equivalent with the symbolization Cosmos (which itself is on one level equivalent with the symbolization World), see my essay The West as equivalent to the Cosmos on my blog:
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/06/west-as-equivalent-to-cosmos.html
P.S.: I've decided to retain the typo "wishy-wishy" as rather felicitous.
Cornelius:
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there's a lot of da'wa going on in Latin America and you are also overlooking the red-black alliance. Hugo Chavez is more than happy to be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Useful Idiot.
Ignoring what Khomeini did to the Iranian Left who assisted in the overthrow of the Shah, the global "left", by and large, is setting itself up for one hell of a rude awakening when they discover that an Islamic utopia (homophobic, myscogenistic, and, er, extremely "religious") is rather different from a "socialist" utopia (egalitarian and secular).
The argument about 'becoming the thing we fight against' is pure contrivance.
Did our Grandfathers become genocidal Nazis and did they take on the traits of the Japanese, with their own versions of Korean 'comfort women' concubines and Bataan Death March atrocities. Not really. Not really at all.
Indeed they decimated the enemy and laid waste to his lands. But then they came home and went to school on the GI Bill, married and had lots of beautiful babies. They returned to 9 to 5 jobs and grew the country into something even better than it was before, extending rights to groups unknown before the destruction and death of the war.
They were not 'turned into the thing they fought' by fighting it savagely. They destroyed the thing and came back home and sat in their shiny new cars waiting for the light to change to green.
The argument that we dare not destroy an enemy because we become the thing we kill should be reserved for late night college bullshit sessions and only when drunk and after the bars close.
Bullshit.
My Grandfather fought up the Italian Penninsula and killed a bunch of mother@#$%3e4 and then he came home and lived a life any of us would be proud to claim. We owe him something - at the very least the promise that we'd do the same damned thing when it comes our turn.
I just had a brainstorm.... why don't we get some island and fix it up like a Devil's Island, as France used to have, and then take all the individuals from Gitmo and give them a new home. No cells, no wires - total freedom of movement... okay.. it gets even better...
use this place as a dumping ground for all the jihadis we capture. Round up the mullahs, imams and ayatollas in Iran and put them there.
'Hook' Hamsa? done...
Omar Bakri - gone...
Abu Abullah - gone...
snatch that example of pure Islam belief out of Indonesia - the Bali Bombing cleric - Abu Bakar Bashir drop him onto the island. Clean everyone out of every infidel prison cell -- all the Hamas and Hizbullah in Israeli jails and Moussaui and the rest from ours... take them all and put them on the same island with no fences.
Give them plenty of guns and knives and other weapons and nothing else. Have cameras everywhere.
Charge pay-per-view.
We solve problems, clean up neighborhoods and make obscene amounts of money at the same time.
Call it 'allah in the family' 24 X 7....
http://www.douglasfarah.com/article/92/europe-remains-center-of-islamist-focus
All this debate about the "moral highground" and different "forms of Islam", etc remind me of some thoughts about the Second World War. After all, its generally agreed that the Allies were on the "moral highground" in that conflict. With that thought in mind I offer the following thoughts, which I first posted on another thread in Jihadwatch.
The whole world has its problems with Islam. I decided to do some checking up on the recent history of the Muslims in China and, lo and behold, what did I find but the following statements, courtesy of the Islamic website "everymuslim.com" and Al-Islaah Publications!
"[The Chinese Muslims] actively struggled against communists before and after the revolution. In fact, in 1953, the Muslims revolted twice in an effort to establish an independent Islamic state [in regions where Muslims were an overwhelming majority]. These revolts were brutally suppressed by Chinese military force followed by the liberal use of anti-Muslim propaganda"
and
"Since religious freedom was declared in 1978, the Chinese Muslims have not wasted time in expressing their convictions. There are now some 28,000 mosques in the entire People's Republic of China, with 12,000 in the province of Xinjiang. In addition, there is a large number of imams available to lead the Muslim community (in Xinjiang alone there are over 2,800).
There has been an increased upsurge in Islamic expression in China, and many nationwide Islamic associations have been organized to coordinate inter-ethnic activities among Muslims"
and, finally
"As always, the Muslims have refused to be silenced. Several large demonstrations have been staged by Muslims to protest intrusions on Muslim life. Last year, for instance, Muslims staged a massive protest rally in Beijing to demand the removal of anti-Islamic literature from China's bookstores"
Now its possible that the Communist leadership will be willing to cut off its nose to spite its face", by continuning to indulge this population as another weapon in its ideological war with the West, but on the other hand, given that regime's paranoia about the growth of groups that could threaten its power and the repressive measures it was willing to take even against the Falun Gong sect (!), I wonder if there isn't a weakness here that the West should exploit.
What I know for sure is that China is not the only Asian nation facing an Islamic threat. Even the Phillipians has had its own insurgency by the 5% of its population that wants to set up their own Shari'a state. Surely the Russians' troubles with the Chechen's and others is another case in point.
Now that the August 22 threat seems to be winding down, we should not let down our guard, nor cease to prepare for the future that may be coming. In another thread, I waged a heated battle with the poster using the name August22 over the issue of whether to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran, in which I argued for a calm, "wait and see" approach before doing anything, even using some arguments that I would not normally have relied on. I was motivated here by a sense of desparation of my own to cool the enthusiasm of August22 and others for the deployment of our nukes, simply because one has to recognize that if these weapons are ever used on any significant scale the damage to the world could be so immense, that life itself could cease to exist. So on that page I argued for calm, pointing out that the date could have some other significance, such as the end of the Persian calendar month of Mordad and the end of the year on that calendar. Now it appears that I was probably right about that (touch wood), but August22 made a number of valid points that I've since considered, among the best of which, was his observation that it was only by inflicting a massive and unconditional defeat on Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan that we were able to turn them into the model citizens that these countries are today.
That said, the next thing for us to do is to force our Western governments to finally and definitively recognize the threat for what it is and stop speaking of the "war on terror" to call it what it really must be if its going to succeed: a "War on Islam!" From there, they've got to be willing to take two further steps.
1. Change the permissive laws that have allowed the terrorist threat to emerge from the permanently and innately alienated Islamic immigrants communities in Western countries to end this stupidity, and institute a massive campaign of repression against their Islamic communities, not because we hate all Moslems and want to wipe them out (since I doubt that this is true of most of us - I for one do not feel that way), but because if there really is such a thing as a "moderate" and "peaceful" Moslem, this type of measure is the ONLY thing that will allow them to hold their ground against the innate violence of their own Islamic societies. If this is successful, it may not be necesary to take step 2 because this in itself may be a convincing enough demonstration to the Islamic world that we mean business. However, just in case, here it is.
2. Pressure nations such as Russia and China, as well as Japan and all of Latin America, to recognize where there own best interests lie, break any defence pacts and alliances they may have with Islamic nations, and prepare to launch a massive, global crusade like the one that defeated Germany and Japan in the last century, targetting all the Islamic nations that sponsor terror attacks or that have links to threats within our borders. The ones that come to mind are Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, possibly Pakistan, and perhaps before long, Iraq. "Moderate nations" such as Jordan and Egypt could be left out as long as they behave themselves, but we have to let them know that if they involve themselves, or if they don't get their own militants under control within their own borders, we will step in there too, and do it for them.
Even if the threat of an Iranian attack against Israel appears to have passed for the moment, Iran is almost certain to have nuclear weapons in a few years, and meanwhile, terrorist threats to airliners, subways - even parliaments if the charges in the recent Canadian case are true - continue, and these attacks give us all the reason we need to target these countries, especially the Saudis for an open and clear declaration of war fought according to the classic western traditions of warfare going back to Hoplite Greece - the shortest campaign possible defeating the most massive damage possible on the enemy.
The objective of this war must be nothing less than the total defeat of these nations, and an occupation that entirely breaks the will of the people who have adopted this monstrous ideology (here's where we'll be able to tell at last whether proposals for a "reform of Islam" can really succeed as we'll then be able to force this on them as one of the conditons for reconstruction and enforce it on the ground) and, that accomplished, their rebuilding and rehabilitation as respectable global citizens.
Posted by: Kafir Nonbeliever
"Is there not a "European Christianity?"
Kafir -
You are dead wrong... and ignorant too.
You need to study the development of Christianity in the whole world from the point of Jesus’ death to the death of Joan of Arc! The Church of England spent untold years at war with the Catholics, over doctrine and authority. Then there are the schisms of Luther, the Methodists, etc., etc. In some countries the Christian faith is very strongly rooted in the fabric of life; but they aren't murdering anyone who think differently!
Muslims slaughter other Muslims, because they aren't Muslim enough!
On the subject of the Episcopal Church of the United States and The Anglican Communion; this is in a very real and very healthy dialogue over “what would Jesus Christ do?”
I am of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer schism! ECUSA has ALWAYS been a protestant faith! We deeply believe that God gave us the ability to think and reason on our own. To question and explore the truth and not just accept the dogma of doctrine!
Nuf said, my blood is boiling
KnightHawk
A Norman Descendant and 10th Generation American
I watched a rather gloomy programme on modern-day Russia last night and discovered the Cossacks are very unhappy indeed about the presence of Meskhetian Turks in the south of the country. Lots of grumbling about overbreeding Muslims.
"[The Chinese Muslims] actively struggled against communists before and after the revolution. In fact, in 1953, the Muslims revolted twice in an effort to establish an independent Islamic state [in regions where Muslims were an overwhelming majority]. These revolts were brutally suppressed by Chinese military force followed by the liberal use of anti-Muslim propaganda"
-----------------------
what can we learn from this? that nobody can stand muslims and russia and china know how to deal with their muslim problem.
Assalamau-Laikum all,
Over the past month you have been getting "growing pains of paranoia" and this is not good for the health of any nation. Peoples in the Amerekie and Britain have been particularly jumpy.
The problem is that ministers/councillors in important positions make remarks and/or decisions that make your life uncomfortable and expensive. They need to be removed and replaced.
What is needed in this situation is calmness and peoples who have an understanding of Islam.
Make a test...get some muslims in "relative" power...get them to make decisions on e.g. on threat levels ..they will exude a feelng of calmness ...get the muslim society to think about what they are doing (e.g. the deputy police chief of the Met Police) ...they CARE about your safety.
Having muslim superiors is not that bad you know. I know that you peoples worry...but really there is no need.
You feel that this struggle is between "barbarians" who will rule your once "civilised" country. Note however that the Kafur is dirty and unruly, and really civilisation is what you make it...what you get used to..this is where the Islamic seniors come in.
Why go through the pain of learning the koran, that's what we muslims are here for. All difficulties can be smoothed and cleared by having faith in Allah, let US explain your parnoia to you in simple peaceful terms.
For example, so many of your problems can be solved through Islam...like the obese of the west...Islam has answers for them...fast everyday during the holy month ..and no cheating...the religious police will be
sticking to their duty.
Ugly womens curves...and "love handles" ...no problem...burkhas come in all shapes and sizes.
alcoholics...no problem, Islamic drying out centres.
Unruly childrens...no problem ..the korans teaches them patience...better that they learn it.
In Pak I have seen the Islamisation of the towns and cities...the only real problem here was that it was done too fast...some teething problems there.
So let's get these infuential muslims to talk to government officals and Islamic scholars on some of the safeguards that can be taken to have a smooth transition (for you) to Islam.
You can help too...join in the process, let your voice be heard.
Your brothers and sisters of the Ummah from Rumania and Bulguria are waiting patiently to come and join you in France and the UK. Not so skilled as the peoples from Poland (in fact poles apart) but they WILL help you understand Islam, thousands and thousand of them.
Thank you peoples of the EU for helping to bring in the brothers of the Ummah with such little pain...Any other way than your tacit EU agreement would have been very hard....what jolly understanding peoples you are ..always thinking of the mussalman.
So, give it just a little time, let the tide of Islam slowly "waaaaash over you, that's it wash over you, geting sleepy...yeeees"...it is just like an anaesthetic before your operation.
"Lie back...let it wash through you"...fall asleep...enjoy the ride...after you wake up ...you are muslim.
This is what the doctors and the stalwarts of Islam will do for you....so please lie still, and Inshallah the good muslim doctor is coming your way with the anaesthetic...."no crying now...it's just a tiny prick".
Re: above
Pink Floyd just called. They want royalties for "Comfortably Numb."
"Your brothers and sisters of the Ummah from Rumania and Bulguria (Sic) are waiting patiently to come and join you in France and the UK. Not so skilled as the peoples from Poland (in fact poles apart) but they WILL help you understand Islam, thousands and thousand of them. "
-above
There are almost no Moslems in Romania. Romania may be relatively poor, but it is extremely well skilled; it's multilingual persons are so skilled that the nation is rivaling (and even at times surpassing) Bangalore in IT. It produces cars and all sorts of consumer goods and services. What the devil are you talking about? What do you even know about those countries?
As for Bulgaria, it unfortunately has Turks. But they are European Turks. One would hope that they are modern. Indeed many are it seems. They are hardly like those in Pakistan. I don’t think a Muslima from Varna who goes topless while on holiday is anything like what you have in Lahore.
There is no need for political correctness on a most crucial issue, the survival of our Europe as we knew and loved it. Europe was where we Europeans developed civilization with science, technology and the philosophies of humanism and liberalism and secularism.
We had everything to be proud of until a criminal fool and fanatic,obsessed with his crazy vision for the world destroyed Europe almost totally.
We know him as Adolf Hitler, the architect of the Second World War and of the Holocaust which killed, among others like Gypsies, 70% of European Jewish adults living in 1939 and 92% of the Jewish children. Again, LET US HAVE NO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS! The Jewish people of Europe were one of our greatest human assets - more than half of all nobel prizes awarded to europeans before 1939 were won by Jews. With 92% of the children living in 1939 tortured, brutalised and murdered like cockroaches when they should in fact have been given the best of opportunities and Europe would have continued its march leading the World, a huge decline in the number of prizes given to Europeans is seen after 1945.
But Hitler the wrecker of Europe achieved something more than this. He destroyed our confidence. Any group promoting nationalistic interests or European interests is seen as Nazi like. (and yes, there shamefully still are Hitler fans in Europe, blind to his deeds and evil legacy that continues to weaken us)
This condemns us to weakly left wing and socialistic politics and denies us the pride we once had in our Europe.
Today we have a new enemy - the fanatical Muslim immigrant who hates liberty, freedom and the scientific, rational outlook. He wants his murderous, hateful, cruel, destructive religion to be the dominant ideology across Europe. What are his means? While we, in our liberalism, remain single, he marries and remarries and breeds like a rat. He brainwashes his children into believing the repulsive ideology described above. He preys on the socialism of our leaders and our horror of racism - racism like Hitler's - and here, you see, Hitler prevents us from defending ourselves by reminding us of the horrific consequences of his racism! But his racism was false, founded on falsehoods. A majority of European Muslims want Sharia law, where hands are amputated, heads are cut off, eyes are gouged, people are flogged and killed by throwing stones at them. The crimes that merit these wonderful punishments? "Blaspheming" against Islam. Homosexuality. Not going to the mosque daily. In the case of women, not wearing a veil so as to cover their sinful hair, their sinful face, their sinful arms and legs. These are not falsehoods. This will kill European civilization through the higher birth rate of Muslims unless we COMPEL MUSLIMS TO ADOPT THE VALUES OF FREEDOM, LIBERTY AND DEMOCRATIC DECENCY IN THEIR INTEREST AND OURS. OUR CULTURE IS SUPERIOR TO THEIRS!
(Are you a Nazi, saying we are the Master race? - I hear someone ask. Well done, Adolf! your legacy is eternal!)
We can choose to act or not. The choice is ours.
But as I see Oriana Fallaci on trial, as I see how prayer leaders of mosques across Europe say "kill those who insult Islam" "the infidels are going to hell"
and as none of them ever go on trial, and anyone questioning them is asked if he is a Nazi to be so racist, i feel a chill run down my spine.
And somewhere in the hellholes of Auschwitz-Birkenau
where Europe was nearly finished, where our best and brightest were cruelly murdered, their talent and hopes destroyed, i hear the laugh of a devil from 1945. I see the Fuehrer laughing at us in glee for all the damage he did and continues to do today.
Arise, o Europe! Arise from the ashes of Hitler's legacy, in which you still lie!
Chinubhai -- "[Hitler] destroyed our confidence. Any group promoting nationalistic interests ... is seen as Nazi..." This does seem to be a major problem. What is needed here is some analysis spelling out the distinction between decent nationalism and the Nazi kind. One writer who may provide useful material here is the German conservative Hermann Rauschning, whom I've been writing about recently at my blog. Can anyone recommend other theorists of moderate nationalism?
Chinubhai -- "[Hitler] destroyed our confidence. Any group promoting nationalistic interests ... is seen as Nazi..." This does seem to be a major problem. What is needed here is some analysis spelling out the distinction between decent nationalism and the Nazi kind. One writer who may provide useful material here is the German conservative Hermann Rauschning, whom I've been writing about recently at my blog. Can anyone recommend other theorists of moderate nationalism?
Posted by: Mr. Spog
Are those who advocate that Muslims be profiled seen as moderate nationalists?
Are those who advocate strict state control of views expressed and literature distributed at mosques seen as moderate nationalists?
Are those who express serious concern over how European states might, with the abnormally high Muslim birthrate, end up with a Muslim majority, and question whether that is a future that we wish for our children seen as moderate nationalists?
Are those who advocate immediate deportation of all extremist clerics and all those who participate in Islamist rallies holding signs saying "BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT ISLAM"
"THE REAL HOLOCAUST IS ON ITS WAY" "KILL THOSE WHO INSULT THE HOLY PROPHET" seen as moderate nationalists?
No. But they should be. Soon, too.
Chinubhai: Whether the people you are referring to are moderates or extremists depends not so much on their use of methods such as ethnic profiling etc., but on the purposes behind those methods. Are they in favour of the exercise of power for its own sake, or is this strictly a necessary means to some higher end. The lesson of Nazism, which at first attracted support from moderates of various stripes, is that it can be difficult to tell the difference.
Chinubhai: Whether the people you are referring to are moderates or extremists depends not so much on their use of methods such as ethnic profiling etc., but on the purposes behind those methods. Are they in favour of the exercise of power for its own sake, or is this strictly a necessary means to some higher end. The lesson of Nazism, which at first attracted support from moderates of various stripes, is that it can be difficult to tell the difference.
Posted by: Mr. Spog
True.
And regrettable that here in Britain, a police offical(Hindu) living next door to me should have to have his plans on this area of concern(profiling) rejected by his seniors.
This was brought about by two lobbies:
Racism Monitor
Tablighi Jamaat(Muslim "Evangelical" group)
He was rudely served a notice and a letter which included the question, "Are you affiliated with the BNP?"
Only two months back, his wife and two daughters were jeered at in a park by teenage BNP supporters : "F***ING BROWNASS WHORES GO TO AFRICA!"
Hugh mentioned grants being given to anyone who can get islam and reform into the same sentence. How about someone going the whole reformation hog? Write out 95 propositions of things that are wrong, and need changing, in Islam, then nail them to a moasque door. It would be a good publicity stunt for drawing attention to the shortcomings of Islam although it may have more appeal for protestants than catholics. Safety considerations might make it necessary to use thumb-tacks in the middle of the night rather than a hammer and nail in broad daylight.
Hugh mentioned grants being given to anyone who can get islam and reform into the same sentence. How about someone going the whole reformation hog? Write out 95 propositions of things that are wrong, and need changing, in Islam, then nail them to a moasque door. It would be a good publicity stunt for drawing attention to the shortcomings of Islam although it may have more appeal for protestants than catholics. Safety considerations might make it necessary to use thumb-tacks in the middle of the night rather than a hammer and nail in broad daylight.
Posted by: wallyUK
The only reform that takes place takes placewith force.
Compulsion is all they ( 75%+ OF Muslims ) understand.
Fear rules their lives - an overriding fear that most of us never experience.
The fear of Allah, the fear of Hell and its inventive tortures.
It insulates them from easy reform or adaptation.
Progress will be slow and rough.
We are at war. The enemy does not wear a uniform and attempts to hide within the very rights and privileges that he seeks to take from us. We need a way of exposing the enemy. One way is contrasting who we are with who they are. In my view, this means having a defineable "moral high ground." In the past I have personally found the expression smarmy and pretentious, but upon further reflection can see that we have much to be proud of, that is worth defending and that distinguishes us from our enemies. I believe the West is situated on the moral high ground.
As I recall, during the Second World War, the American public was reminded of the moral high ground that needed defending through a series of films produced by Frank Capra entitled "Why We Fight." An equivalent effort is needed today, but with differences relevant to the type of struggle in which we are engaged. It may be that we need to remind ourselves of the difference between tolerance and political correctness. We need to remind ourselves --and particularly our leadership-- that no degree of cultural relativism can excuse evil without making us culpable. We need to remind ourselves that, as defined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, freedom of speech is the first weapon in the arsenal of democracy. We need to speak up and challenge the equivocations and slippery/slimey insinuations that occur at large or in teh media or that occasionally pop up even on this site.
The notion of moral high ground is indispensible. If we must descend into the trenches, either literally or figuratively, it's to destroy the enemy in his lair, not to take up permanent residence there.
Moral high ground.. essential, yes.
But filmmakers don't want to make a movie that will have no market in Muslim nations or that might invite scenes and boycotts reminiscent of the cartoons.
What we need is a group - is there already such? -that understands deeply how Islamic Jihad threatens us, to raise funds and lobby to get good talent to make a film or a documentary.
This is one area where we cannot leave the task to the free market, a market with 1.2 billion Muslims in it!
Moral High Ground:
Unless someone here feels that the West lost the moral high ground when it fire-bombed and A-bombed millions of innocent people in order to fight a metastatically megalomaniac evil movement called the Axis Powers during World War II, then we have plenty more appropriate and moral reserves up our sleeve to fight Islam before losing that fastidious "moral high ground" whose goalpost markers have been unfairly moved upfield over the past 50-odd years.
Naseem.
Now there's an interesting person.
I first encountered her on another thread. Am I using the right pronoun? - many other posters seemed to have the impression it was so.
Well it really doesn't matter. Either way I'm having the feeling this annoying pest juuust isn't quuuite who she says comes across as... .
Something ... about that last post ....
Was it the overly melodramtic anaesthetist?
Well, one thing's for sure. Even if she doesn't know it, she really IS on our side, you know. A more effective propagandist for the war against the Umma there just could never be.
Well done, Naseem and thanks for the entertainment.
Here's another one you'll definitely be able to appreciate. (Since Muslims are experts on Christianity and Judaism, you'll understand the Biblical references).
So enjoy this one, courtesy of Sansantiago on another thread.
It astounds me that Mooslims, including educated ones, espouse the idea that Jesus, Moses, et al. were mooslims.
Do they think that the insidious Christians and Jews snuck into the Qumran caves over the centuries and edited the dead sea scrolls?
...
Or perhaps the forerunner of modern Christian ecumenism was when the Catholics and Protestants in 16th century England got together to edit out all of the Mophammedanisms from the Gospels.
Now, if King David the Psalmist believed in Islam, perhaps the 23rd psalm would read "The Lord is my Shepherd...He maketh me to lie down in ambush in green pastures. ..." And, Jesus being a Mooslim probably preached "Blessed are the poor in spirit for, if they blow thermselves up in a marketplace filled with women and children, they shall see God." And perhaps Moses' tablets of the 10 commandments actually read: "I am the Lord thy God....thou shalt not have strange Gods before me because I, being a Black Moon Rock am the strangest of all!"
WATERCRAGON: "Sorry to burst your bubble, but there's a lot of da'wa going on in Latin America and you are also overlooking the red-black alliance. Hugo Chavez is more than happy to be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Useful Idiot."
RESPONSE: I'm well aware of the Dawa going on in Latin America, particularly among the indigenous peoples of Chiapas, Mexico. It is a concern, but no more so than the conversions of both white and black Americans to Islam that has been occurring over the last few decades. The fact is, the overwhelming majority of Latins are Christians and I wouldn't exchange America's immigration problems with Europe for all the tea in China.
I'm also well aware of the problems posed by a man like Hugo Chavez. I have no illusions that as long as he's in possession of his oil billions, he won't remain a danger to America and the region. I am particularly concerned about his support for FARC in neighboring Colombia.
My hope is that he's a temporary phenomenon and won't succeed in communizing Venezuala.
WATERDRAGON: "Ignoring what Khomeini did to the Iranian Left who assisted in the overthrow of the Shah, the global "left", by and large, is setting itself up for one hell of a rude awakening when they discover that an Islamic utopia (homophobic, myscogenistic, and, er, extremely "religious") is rather different from a "socialist" utopia (egalitarian and secular)."
RESPONSE: I have posted scores of comments here at Jihadwatch over the years. If you are at all familiar with my views, you'll know that I am a man of the Center-Right, have nothing but contempt for the Liberal/Left, and have made the same point about Iran in numerous posts here and elsewhere on the Net.
I distinctly remember the show-trials in Tehran of the leaders of the communist Tudeh in the early 80s, when they publicly confessed their treason in a production that would have impressed Stalin himself.
"the show-trials in Tehran of the leaders of the communist Tudeh in the early 80s, when they publicly confessed their treason in a production that would have impressed Stalin himself."
-- from a posting just above
Almost all of the Tudeh leaders were in exile in the Soviet Union. The Soviet government gathered them together, and put them on a plane for Teheran. All but one, I recall, complied. As soon as the plane landed, and the Tudeh leaders left the plane, they were taken, and murdered right on the tarmac, by Khomeini's Muslim executioners. I can't recall exactly when, but think it was in the third week of August, 1979.
That was most of the Tudeh party in exile. There was, I believe, one man who did not go, who remained in Moscow, and lived to find out from eyewitnesses what had happened.
That was what happened to those in exile -- no trials, just death on the tarmac within minutes of debarking. Those who were rounded up in Iran itself apparently were given show trials and then executed. So they had a few more days of agony before being murdered.
"One writer who may provide useful material here is the German conservative Hermann Rauschning, whom I've been writing about recently at my blog. Can anyone recommend other theorists of moderate nationalism?"
-- from a posting above
One German, or rather Prussian conservative, certainly a nationalist, but also a hater of the Nazis and of Hitler, was Friedrich Reck-Malleczewen. You can read his "Diary of a Man in Despair" not so much for theories of moderate nationalism, but to have a good example of how nationalism, intelligently understood, is quite different from, and can be opposed to, the likes of Nazis, Communists, and come to think of it, those who pay no attention to the nation-state because all that matters, for them, are the Dar al-Islam and its steady swallowing up of the Dar al-Harb.
I distinctly remember the show-trials in Tehran of the leaders of the communist Tudeh in the early 80s, when they publicly confessed their treason in a production that would have impressed Stalin himself. from Cornelius
The link below will show the state of mind in the leader of Iran at the time.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/KhomeiniSpeech.htm
an excerpt from the speech:
If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe that was justice.
( vicitims deserve what they get - sociopathic )
The lives of people must be secured through punishment.
( I'm hurting some and killing others because I care. )
Because, the protection of the masses lies beneath these very punitive executions. ( sounds like what a wife beater or a child abuser would say )
With just a few years of imprisonment things don’t get fixed.
You must put aside these childish sentimentalism.
We believe that the accused essentially does not have to be tried. He or she must just be killed.
( this coming from from a renowed Islamic scholar and distopian 'spiritual' leader )
also - to sum it up:
Mercy is against God
No, I don't think so. You're wrong. Islam is the negative image of just aboutn everything that's good about this world.
The link given in the posting above, with the speech of Khomeini from 1981 translated into English, and the photographs following, is well worth clicking on:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/KhomeiniSpeech.htm
Chinubhai says And regrettable that here in Britain, a police offical(Hindu) living next door to me should have to have his plans on this area of concern(profiling) rejected by his seniors.
This was brought about by two lobbies:
Racism Monitor
Tablighi Jamaat(Muslim "Evangelical" group)
He was rudely served a notice and a letter which included the question, "Are you affiliated with the BNP?"
Only two months back, his wife and two daughters were jeered at in a park by teenage BNP supporters : "F***ING BROWNASS WHORES GO TO AFRICA!"
And this is why the racist BNP with its feeble-minded membership cannot be allowed to become part of the fight to save our civilization. Through their blanket hatred of non-whites and Jews, they will only serve to alienate much-needed allies. And BNP supporters are a feckless bunch of neer-do-wells who are only brave when its a six onto one punch-up. They'd run a mile at the sight of a real jihadi.
The recommendation that Hollywood do a new "Why We Fight" series would be just swell if Hollywood were the Hollywood of WWII, communists and all. Unfortunately, most of today's Hollywood producers, writers and actors are rooting for the other side and getting such a script written, funded, produced and filmed would be practically impossible; John Woods films, yes, slasher films, yes, Blaxsploitation, oh, yes, in fact, any piece of shit imaginable, yes, but a patrotic, Capra type film? Dream on.
Since WWII the "entertainment industry" has had a key role in subverting the existing social order and was instrumental in spreading the ideas and viewpoints that have been so effective in placing us in exactly the multiculti, morally equivalent, non-judgmental, politically correct and mostly confused, splintered and ineffective position we find ourselves in today. For details see Antonio Gramsci's playbook for subverting a society by destroying its norms, ideals and morality and its key social institutions--the family, the church, schools and civic organizations.
Finaly, on the question of "the moral high ground."--
War is,indeed, Hell. Wars evolve over time and the winner learns to adapt to the enemy. Our enemy is implacable, totally untrustworthy and diabolical--sounds melodramatic but consider the school children of Beslan, the beheading of Daniel Perle, 9/11, the Muslim couple in England who were going to use liquid explosives in baby formula bottles to kill their 6 month old along with themselves and a planeload of people, the tens of thousands of children Iran sent out into Iraqi minefields to clear them by detonating them with their bodies; each child was given a cheap plastic key to wear around his neck to ease his entry into the Islamic paradise.
The stiff upper lip, give the other chap a chance approach is not going to work against such an enemy, who correctly believes his religion sanctions killing, converting or enslaving non-Muslims and who even indoctrinates his children into the Jihadis' death cult, but pounding such an enemy into a bloody pulp, might.
you have to really be sorry for nasheem.
after her husband died, she is probably forced to prostutite herself on the street of pakistan, because without a man she is nothing. (well she was nothing even with a man but I digress)
"Make a test...get some muslims in "relative" power..."
been there done that and muslims in power brought poverty and misery
"Having muslim superiors is not that bad you know"
if there is one thing that muslims are not is "superiors".
"Note however that the Kafur is dirty and unruly"
really if someone ever passes by the typical muslim (especially pakistanis) one thing he notices is the totally lack of use of soap.
And the bad smell is enhanced also by the several frequancy with goats...
"like the obese of the west...Islam has answers for them..."
the typical musim woman passes from undersize starving to fat like a cow, so what are you teaching about nutrition?
Every nutritionist on the planet knows that starving is the worst way to lose weight. That is for brains with intelligence. Not for muslims of coursen.
"Your brothers and sisters of the Ummah from Rumania and Bulguria are waiting patiently to come and join you in France and the UK"
an ignorant cow like nasheem doesn't even know where rumania and bulgaria are so no problem about it.
Oh and if someone wants to ban me saying that I wrongly claim nasheem is a prostitute, I merely read the news
http://www.aegis.com/news/ips/2003/IP030405.html
ISLAMABAD, Apr 9 (IPS) - Najma says she does not like her work, but that circumstances compel her to continue being a sex worker.
The 30-year-old mother of a seven-year-old daughter, was forced into prostitution 15 years ago. "There's no way out," said Najma, who lives in Heera Mandi, the red light area in the eastern town of Lahore, Pakistan's second largest city.
also
"Najma's story must not be different from 800,000 sex workers in the country, people that many in this religiously conservative society often pretends does not exist. But the sex trade is thriving although it is illegal, according to the International Human Rights Monitoring (IHRM) group. "
wow, 800000 professional prostitutes in pakistan. More than holland.