This post is a reply to a guest post over at Pommygranate’s blog, by Kizzie, a Sudanese Muslim woman, who currently resides in Cairo. In her post Kizzie tries to show that Female Genital Mutilation is not an Islamic practice, but rather a cultural one, partly basing her argument on the premise that the two are mutually exclusive. However, although FGM is a certainly a cultural practice that predates Islam, it is also an Islamic practice, which is what I am going to show below.

The reason that a Sudanese Muslim woman came to be guest-blogging on Pommygranate’s site, by the way, is the debate that has raged this week across the Australian blogosphere in the wake of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s visit here last week. Ironically Ali barely mentioned FGM when she spoke on Sunday night.
The first bone in the debate was thrown by Kim at Larvatus Prodeo. Tim Blair then pulled her up on her smug insensitivity , while in the meantime the fireworks really started flying in the comments to Kim’s post. Blair followed up and Kim attempted to fire back, only to get blasted to pieces by Blair (see the Update in last TB link). Far back along the way FGM became the focus of the debate, as it rippled out through the blogosphere and finally here we are. Phew.

Now to answering Kizzie’s post. She starts off explaining where FGM is practiced (many African countries and some Arab countries in the Middle East, like, you may be surprised to learn, in Kurdistan, where most women are “circumcised”) and describes the four classifications of FGM, which disfigure the female genitalia to various degrees. No argument so far. Except the part where she uses the term Female Genital Circumcision, but than refers to it as FGM thereafter, which actually stands for Female Genital Mutilation. A telling manifestation of double-think right there, I’d say.

Kizzie’s argument is divided into two parts and in the first she attempts to argue that FGM is not an Islamic practice, giving three arguments to support her view. Looking at them one by one:

1. FGM predates both Christianity and Islam since it is believed to date back to time of the Pharaohs.

Well, noone is going to argue with that. A lot of Islamic practices predate Islam, and some predate Christianity also. Thats hardly an argument that all those practices are not Islamic. The Islamic practice of not eating pork was a Judaic one before Islam, the Islamic practice of five prayers a day was practices by Zoroastrians before Islam, the Islamic symbol of star and crescent was a symbol of a number of Moon-Gods before Islam, and so on and so forth. The covering of the female body, polygamy, the washing of extremities before prayer and meals, fasting, all these have been cultural practices somewhere before becoming Islamic ones.
Here’s how Sheikh Muhammad Al-Mussayar from Al-Azhar University put it (full quote and source further down):

”Female circumcision is no less valid just because it was practiced in Pharaonic times and in the Jahiliya. Islam accepted some customs, which were harmonious with human nature, and rejected others, which contradicted human nature.”

Anyway, what is important is how a person justifies their actions – is it because “thats just how we do things round here” (ie. a cultural practice, like shaking hands in the West or rubbing noses amongst the Eskimos), or is it because the practice is made compulsory or recommended by their religious belief system? I’ll get to the Islamic justifications (and recommendations) for FGM shortly.

2. FGM is found in non-Muslim societies example: Christians in Ghana and other non-Muslim societies in India and South America.

See my answer to one. If every Islamic practice was disowned because it was practiced by adherents of other religions there wouldn’t be much left thats Islamic. The question is does Islam give justification for the practice? When I get to the scriptural and scholarly references below it should be clear that it does. The distinction of Islam being a “complete way of life”, rather than merely a religion, as Muslims like to point out, gives extra weight to this argument, as virtually any act can be determined to be allowed, disallowed, recommended etc from the Sunnah (the tradition and example of the Prophet and his companions as recorded in the Hadiths). For the Islamic Ummah the lines between culture and religion are virtually non-existent, with an overriding Islamic culture superseding any local one. Anyhow, are there any Christian priests in Ghana giving religious justification for FGM or does it exist despite the opposition of the Church? Because there most certainly are plenty of Muslim Sheikhs giving religious justification for FGM.

3. If FGM was obligatory in Islam then Muslim scholars from all over the world wouldn’t be working together to ban its practice.

Here Kizzie tries to confuse the issue by using the word “obligatory”. FGM is certainly “obligatory” in most schools of Islam. In most schools it is seen as “noble”, “honorable” and “recommended”, but not obligatory. The distinction is much the same as that between the wearing of the hijab and the wearing of the niqab (which covers the face) in most Islamic schools. The niqab is deemed obligatory only in the more severe Islamic schools (the Wahhabi, Deobandi etc), by others it is viewed as kind “going the extra mile” to please Allah, a noble act of piety. Is wearing the niqab not an Islamic practice because most schools do not deem it “obligatory”?

Anyhow, Kizzie sites three example here, two of conferences and one of a “meeting” of Muslim scholars where FGM was denounced. Note that all three events are from the last 2 years. One conference was organized by a German human rights group and held in Cairo and involved scholars from Al-Azhar. The “meeting” was also held in Cairo’s Al Azhar university. The other conference was held in Nigeria and news reports again feature quotes from scholars from Al Azhar, which is the foremost Sunni institution in the world, so certainly has authority. It does appear that the issue has been seriously debated at Al-Azhar (links below). I do wonder though whether these denouncement draw a distinction between “female circumcision” and FGM, by which some Muslims only refer to infibulation.

I also wonder why it took 14 centuries for these denouncements to come out. Where are the Fatwas banning the practice, other than those against Infibulation, the most severe of the four forms, prior to the the 21st century? Why did the scholars not try to rid of the Islamic world of this barbaric practice before Western influence shamed them into doing so? Why was a German human rights group needed to start the conference in the first place?

As for “Muslim scholars from all over the world [..] working together to ban its practice” (I am only seeing scholars from Al-Azhar), well, what about all the Muslim scholars all over the world encouraging it and using the Sunnah to justify it? They certainly seem to have the superior numbers.

Before I start quoting some of these scholars, here are some quotations from the Hadiths that are commonly used to justify the practice:

Although there is no mention of it in the Quran itself, there are several hadiths, where Female Genital Mutilation is encouraged by Mohammad.

The first hadith is from Abu Dawud (Book 41, Number 5251): Um ‘Atiyyah is reported as an exciser of female slaves who had immigrated with Mohammad.
On one occasion Mohammad allegedly asked her if she kept practicing her profession, to which she responded in the affirmative. Then she added: “unless it is forbidden and you order me to stop doing it.” Mohammad replied: “yes, it is allowed.”
Mohammad then gave Um ‘Atiyyah specific instructions on the methodology for female circumcision (Aldeeb, 1994, p. 6), explaining to her that his method of “female circumcision” would bring radiance to the face of the woman.
This hadith is also quoted by al-Hakim and al-Baihaqi on the authority of al-Dhaahhak ibn Qais (al-Sabbagh, 1998, p. 17).

Another well-known hadith is that of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. He relates in his Musnad (5:75) from Abu al-Malih ibn, Usama’s father, that Mohammad said:
“Circumcision is sunna (tradition) for men and an honorable quality for women”

A third hadith states: “If the two circumcision organs (khitanan) meet, ritual ablution (gusl), becomes obligatory.” This is cited in Malik, Muslim, al-Tirmithi and Ibn Majah in their respective hadith collections and can also be found in other collections (al-Sabbagh, 1998, p. 38).

There are many documented justifications by Islamic scholars through the ages, based on these Hadiths. And many of them, coincidentally, are from the same aforementioned Al-Azhar university. Possibly because Egypt is pretty much FGM-central, with 97% of women there having been subjected to it. You’d think if the practice contradicted Sharia it would have become less prevalent, if not stamped out by now. Islamic countries don’t seem to have much trouble minimising alcohol consumption, for example. Anyway, lets hear from the Sheikhs:

In Reliance of the Traveler, a classical manual of Islamic law, endorsed by Al-Azhar in 1991 as conforming ‘to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community,’ we find the following, with notes from several scholars and the translator:

e4.3 Circumcision is obligatory (commentary of Sheikh ‘Umar Barakat: “for both men and women”). For men it consists of removing the prepuce from the penis, and for women, removing the prepuce (Arabic: Bazr) of the clitoris (remark by the translator: “not the clitoris itself, as some mistakenly assert”). (comment by Sheikh ‘Abd al-Wakil Durubi: Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna, while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband.)”

A look at the original Arabic show the text to actually say:

Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female)
by cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male,
but circumcision of the female is by cutting out the clitoris
(this is called HufaaD).

Further commentary (from a non-Muslim):

The deceptive translation by Nuh Hah Mim Keller, made for Western consumption, obscures the Shafi’i law, given by ‘Umdat al-Salik, that circumcision of girls by excision of the clitoris is mandatory. This particular form of female circumcision is widely practiced in Egypt, where the Shafi’i school of Sunni law is followed.

Some years ago Pamela Bone asked Sheik Fehmi al-Imam of the Preston Mosque about FGM and his reply was “You probably don’t need it but women in hot countries do”. (The Age, 21/7/01 p7) (same link)

In 1981 the Great Sheikh of the same aforementioned Al-Azhar University “stated that parents must follow the lessons of Mohammed and not listen to medical authorities because the latter often change their minds. Parents must do their duty and have their daughters circumcised.”. (same link)

How things have changed after 20 years of Western influence!

Again from the same link:

Sheikh Yussef Al-Qaradhawi, one of Sunni Islam’s most influential clerics and a spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood favors partial circumcision for women as a moderate, just, and reasonable solution best suited to reality. In a Fatwa on this issue, he wrote, “Anyone who thinks that circumcision is the best way to protect his daughters should do it. I support this, particularly in the period in which we live.”

And still more the learned men of Al-Azhar:

On 12/2/2007 Al-Arabiya TV aired ‘Al-Azhar University Scholars Argue over the Legitimacy of Female Circumcision Practiced in Egypt.’ The debate was between Egyptian Al-Azhar University scholars Sheikh Muhammad Al-Mussayar and Sheikh Mahmoud Ashur.

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: notes “All the jurisprudents, since the advent of Islam and for 14 centuries or more, are in consensus that female circumcision is permitted by Islam. But they were divided with regard to its status in shari’a. Some said that female circumcision is required by shari’a, just like male circumcision. Some said this is the mainstream practice, while others said it is a noble act. But throughout the history of Islam, nobody has ever said that performing female circumcision is a crime. There has been a religious ruling on this for 14 centuries.” “First of all, there are reliable hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim which support female circumcision. The Prophet Muhammad said: ‘If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.’ Unreliable hadiths do not cancel out the reliable ones. We have unreliable hadiths regarding prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Should we abolish prayer and charity just because some hadiths are unreliable?..”Female circumcision is no less valid just because it was practiced in Pharaonic times and in the Jahiliya. Islam accepted some customs, which were harmonious with human nature, and rejected others, which contradicted human nature.” (reported by MEMRI.org 27/2/2007 and http://fgmnetwork.org) (same link)

So for 1400 years the scholars have been divided on whether it is an obligation (the Shafi’i school), sunna (the Hanbali school) or a “noble act”, an “honorable quality”, while in the Hanafi school it is apparently “a mere courtesy to the husband”. All a sudden in the last 3 years the final word comes out declaring the the practice neither obligatory or sunna, but suddenly Unislamic? Give me a break.

For more evidence still, see also this fascinating and shocking recent debate (and it is at least good to see they have plenty of those) involving a male lecturer from, once again, Al-Azhar university, debating a female lecturer (not sure from which institution) on the subject of FGM. The male sheikh again argues that milder forms of FGM are sunna, while total removal of the clitoris is forbidden, while the female lecturer argues against all forms of FGM. Dr. Muhammad Wahdan concludes:

In Egypt we have four and a half million spinsters. The definition of a spinster is a woman who has reached 30, without ever receiving a marriage proposal. We have a spinster problem in the Arab world, and the last thing we want is for them to be sexually aroused. Circumcision of the girls who need it makes them chaste, dignified, and pure.

But back to Kizzie’s post, and in part two of her essay, having apparently show FGM is not an Islamic practice, she tries to show that FGM is actually a social/cultural practice. Firstly Kizzie states that the less severe forms are practiced in Indonesia. I would have thought that only goes to prove my point? Then she goes on to point out some age-old cultural justifications for the ancient FGM tradition in Africa, which only serves to moot the waters, as ancient cultural reasoning does not trump modern Islamic reasoning, so I’ll simply leave that part alone. But as Indonesia has been brought up, I will follow up with that example. It is true that the type of FGM practiced in Indonesia is almost always not as severe as that of North Africa. And here I can agree that we are seeing “cultural differences”. FGM is a part of Islamic culture, it is an Islamic practice, which came to Indonesia with Islam and did not exist there prior. However the differences between how it is done there as opposed to say Egypt, can be put down to “cultural practice”. Lets not be confused by that distinction, however.

Here are some extracts from an article that appeared in The Age, in 2004 about FGM in Indonesia:

The practice of female circumcision in Indonesia has moved into hospitals. Greater genital mutilation is the likely result. Matthew Moore and Karuni Rompies report.

Hospitals across Indonesia are offering new parents a one-price surgical package for their just-born girls — as well as piercing their ears, they’ll circumcise them.

At Jakarta’s Hermina Hospital the price for the two procedures is 95,000 rupiah (about $A16), at IDI hospital in Surabaya in East Java it’s only 15,000 rupiah, while in Makassar’s Khadijah Hospital in Sulawesi, hospital staff quote 25,000 to 30,000 rupiah.

[..] While hospitals might be more hygienic, health care experts are worried by strong evidence that the move has led to more of the child’s genital tissue being cut because medical practitioners use different implements and techniques.

Village-based midwives and traditional healers have been circumcising girls in Indonesia for centuries, although the extent and details of the practice are only now emerging.

[..]

In an attempt to find out more about female circumcision, the US AID-funded study by the Population Council surveyed 1694 households in eight separate regions and found all the boys and 97.5 per cent of girls had been circumcised.

[..]

The concern now relates to changes due to circumcisions in hospitals, where health care professionals use scissors in more than 75 per cent of cases, which invariably means cutting flesh.

[..]
It’s not only babies who are circumcised, with one-third of those surveyed circumcised between the ages of five and nine, and some even older.

Several hours out of Jakarta in Bandung, the Assalaam Foundation has been holding free mass circumcisions for males and females for almost 50 years, with as many as 400 people turning up at a time. Syarief Hamid, treasurer with the foundation, which runs several schools, said the circumcisions were timed to honor the Prophet’s birthday, and were growing in popularity each year.

While religion is the main reason for circumcising girls, he says there are also health reasons. “I understand that a girl who is not circumcised would not have clean genitals after she urinates and sometimes that can cause cervical cancer,” he says. “The religious view is, if you are not circumcised you won’t have clean genitals after urinating. If then you pray, your prayer won’t be legal.”

[..]

Religion was the reason cited by 55 per cent of mothers surveyed for circumcising their daughters, although none could identify parts of the Koran or the Prophet Muhammad’s guidance, called Hadith, where it is stipulated. While 32 per cent nominated health and hygiene as the perceived benefit, 9 per cent said they did not know what benefit it would bring.

Masitoh Chusnan, from the women’s wing of Muhammadiyah, one of Indonesia’s two biggest Muslim organizations, says circumcision of girls is regarded in Islam as an honorable practice.

“The Hadith did not say it’s obligatory, but it is recommended to have it done,” she says. “There is the Prophet’s words saying girls must be circumcised, but you should not cut too much.”

[..] current practice shows no signs of a decline in popularity, with more than 90 per cent of mothers questioned supporting the practice continuing.

And one in five mothers even suggested social sanctions should be imposed on girls who were uncircumcised.

The above dove-tails perfectly with what the religious arguments above – it is not an obligation, but an “honourable practice”. But far disturbing still are stories about the hundreds, if not thousands of Christian women from Indonesia’s Molucca Islands who were forcibly converted to Islam and in the process forcibly circumcised:

Christian woman recalls horror of forced conversion to Islam

Posted on May 1, 2001 | by Brittany Jarvis

AMBON, Indonesia (BP)–”My scar healed quite fast, but the sad, humiliated feeling stayed. I feel like I’m no longer complete, both as a person and a woman.”

That is the testimony of Christina Sagat, a 32-year-old Christian from Kasiui, Indonesia, who was forcibly circumcised by her Muslim neighbors. Unfortunately, as traumatic as her story sounds, hundreds of women have endured similar oppression.

“My niece, Cecilia, who at that time was eight months pregnant, was also circumcised,” Sagat said. “My mother, who was in her 70s, was also circumcised. Teenagers, and even infants, were circumcised. I don’t understand these people.”

[..]

More details on whats been happening on Ambon Island and other Molucca Islands, where thousands of people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands displaced here. Hundreds of Christian families have been given the choice – convert or die. The women and children are then separated from the men and “converted”. Men and children are circumcised using the same dirty razor blade and then told to go and wash in the sea to disinfect the heavily bleeding wounds. Many of the ‘holy warriors’ perpetrating these crimes are members of Laskar Jihad, a Salafi-Jihadist group whose leader studied in Pakistan and considers himself more “fundamentalist” than Osama bin Laden, who he says is ignorant of true Islam. That doesn’t seem to stop his followers from wearing Osama t-shirts though. Laskar Jihad has between 3000 and 10000 fighters, who have been receiving training and assistance from the Indonesian Army. Strange that having studying in some madrassah in Pakistan this douche-bag has decided that circumcising women should go hand-in-hand with their conversion to Islam. This may be a somewhat extreme example, but it goes to show that there is at least a significant number of Muslims, even in Pakistan and Indonesia, who believe in the religious justification for FGM as a very Islamic practice indeed.

Kizzie says resents that when a Muslim kills a Christian man, in a post-9/11 world, his religion is invariably mentioned, whereas when, say, a Christian kills a Christian religion is not mentioned. Well, Kizzie, in a post-9/11 world Westerners have begun to take greater note of the fact that many Muslims use religion as justification for murder. Perhaps if the common occurence was that a Muslim and a Christian fought to the death over a donkey in the marketplace there would be no need to mention religion. However when the Muslim shouts ‘God is Great!’ in the act of murder and kills in the process of waging Jihad on the Kuffar, there most certainly is reason to mention his religion, because clearly religion was at least in part a motivating factor. Likewise when a child’s sexual organs are disfigured because it is supposed to be a “noble” act in the eyes of Allah, you bet we are going to take notice of the religious motivation behind the act. Because take away the religious justification, without a doubt the incidence of the practice would decrease and be easier to eradicate, when only the cultural motivations are left, no longer multiplied by the powerful force of religiosity.

Kizzie concludes by voicing her resentment that FGM has begun to be viewed in a religious rather than a cultural context and continues to assert the mutual exclusivity between the description of the practice of FGM as either cultural or religious. But clearly, as shown above, it is a cultural practice, that many Muslims view as religious and observe for religious reasons, thus it is a religious Islamic practice also. There is clear justification for that viewpoint in Islamic scripture, with there merely being a disagreement between various schools and scholars on whether the practice is obligatory or merely a “noble” or “honorable” act. And only in recent years certain Islamic scholars, mainly from Egypt, have began voicing an opinion that all forms of FGM are haram, ie forbidden, but this view goes against 1400 years of Islamic jurisprudence.

Ultimately, according to some Islamic schools FGM is obligatory (a minority position), and according to most others it is “noble”/”honourable” or sunna (tradition), which clearly serves as a powerful motivator based on religion. In both cases it can thus be described as an Islamic practice and will continue to be so until Muslims stop practicing it, Skeikhs stop using the Sunnah to justify it and its practitioners stop citing the Islamic religion as a motivating factor.

UPDATE (10/6): Kizzie has posted a reply. Not much there I disagree with, really, and don’t have time to comment further just now. Perhaps on Tuesday. Thank you for the debate, Kizzie.

That page of course only has room for one… But thats later.

The geopolitical gurus at Stratfor make the following analysis of the ongoing negotiations between the US and Iran (subscription only):

Iran handed over a proposal to [U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan] Crocker during a brief encounter at the May 5-6 Sharm el-Sheikh summit in Egypt, but also chose to unofficially publicize its terms for Iraq through the Saudi-owned, British-based daily Al Hayat. The Iranian Foreign Ministry likely chose Al Hayat, a major Arab news outlet, to make a back-channel broadcast of what concessions it is prepared to make to allay Sunni concerns in the region.

In sum, this Iranian proposal called for a non-rushed withdrawal and relocation of U.S. troops to bases inside Iraq, a rejection of all attempts to partition Iraq, a commitment by the Sunni bloc to root out the jihadists and acknowledgement by Washington that the Iranian nuclear file cannot be uncoupled from the Iraq negotiations. In return, Iran would rein in the armed Shiite militias, revise the de-Baathification law and Iraqi Constitution to double Sunni political representation, create a policy to allow for the fair distribution of oil revenues (particularly to the Sunnis) and use its regional influence to quell crises in areas such as Lebanon, Syria and the Palestinian territories.

The terms put forth by the Iranians are so close to the U.S. position on Iraq that, with little exception, they could have been printed on State Department stationary and no one would have noticed the difference. If these are the terms Washington and Tehran are in fact discussing, then we are witnessing an extraordinary turn in the Iraq war in which the U.S. and Iranian blueprints for Iraq are finally aligning. It does not surprise us, then, that Crocker said after his meeting in Baghdad that the Iranian position “was very close to our own” at the level of policy and principle.

Extraordinary indeed. So is this finally a light at the end of tunnel? Maybe, except for a few small problems. Stratfor lists the problems as follows:

• The transnational Sunni Jihadists with their dreams of an Islamic State of Iraq
• the severely and perhaps irreconcilably split Iraqi Shia who are likely to a little rough on each other sooner rather than later
• the much less splintered Iraqi Sunnis, who, although by and large online with these negotiations must be satisfied of their future safety and a slice of the pie in the Shia dominated Iraq (these guarantees are already part of the deal)
• the Iraqi Kurds, who are the Iraqi faction that stands to lose most out of the above settlement and are not about to give up what they’ve worked so hard to finally achieve in Kurdistan
• Ultraconservatives in Washington and Tehran who “can’t negotiate with those people”
• Sunni Regional Powers with that whole Shia Crescent thing on their mind
• Syria, who is feeling pretty important, if not immune right now while the Great Satan is all tied up elsewhere and they are useful to Iran
• Russia, which has really been making the best of the US and Iranian preoccupation in Iraq and would be quite unhappy to have to start caring what the Americans (and even the much closer Iranians) think again

How is that light looking now?

MEMRI has extensive quotes from three liberal Arab authors who have criticized the support for terrorism in Arab and Muslim society. Here’s what two of the them had to say.

Iraqi Author Riyadh ‘Abd compares the reaction of Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung-Hui’s family to that of families of suicide bombers in Iraq:

“What caught my attention was a report… that the criminal’s family… offered its apologies and expressed grief, embarrassment, and shame, as well as consternation and incomprehension of their son Cho Seung-Hui’s atrocious crime… This Korean family expressed a sense of sadness and grief, profound remorse, and a sense of partial responsibility for what their son did.

“Let’s compare this natural, human, civilized behavior that places value on human life with [that of] the families of Arabs in Islamic lands who lost their sons in Iraq in criminal suicide operations whose victims number tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians.

“Instead of the Iraqis receiving apologies and feelings of grief and consolation for these filthy criminals’ killing and slaughtering of innocents and their demolishing and destroying of property, we see the families of these killers holding mourning ceremonies and bragging of the ‘martyrdom’ of their sons the mujahideen – [and at these ceremonies] they receive congratulations instead of condolences.

“This strange behavior and sick pride in criminal acts can only be explained as a conclusive sign of the moral decline and deterioration of contemporary Islamic and Arab civilization.”

“Don’t the Iraqi People Deserve an Apology From the Family” of Abu Mus’ab Al-Zarqawi?

“There are hundreds of examples of this barbaric and disgraceful behavior, from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and other Arab countries. Where is the apology from the family of the barbaric criminal, the beheader known as Abu Mus’ab Al-Zarqawi, to the Iraqi people for the crimes of mass murder, destruction of property, and cutting off [people's] livelihoods? Don’t the Iraqis deserve an apology from the family, tribe, and village of this dirty scoundrel?

“Where is the apology from the family of the Jordanian criminal who caused the deaths of 200 innocent civilians in Al-Hilla, in a suicide bombing in a popular market in 2005? It is known that there was a large mourning ceremony after the death of this criminal, that was attended by a number of important Jordanian statesmen…

“I read an article from a few years ago about an attempt by CNN… to interview, in Cairo, the father of the criminal Muhammad ‘Atta, the commander of the group responsible for [9/11]… It is known that this individual had at first spread made-up stories about the Mossad kidnapping his son, stories snatched up at the time by the Egyptian media, which is known for its addiction to invented stories and raving analyses…

“Later he began to brag about what his son did, calling his abominable criminal act ‘jihad.’ When CNN asked him for an interview, he made it contingent upon them paying him $5,000 for it. When they told him that it is station policy not to pay interviewees, Muhammad ‘Atta’s father turned down the interview, claiming that a Muslim is not allowed to aid the infidels without remuneration. Did the Muslims disapprove of this disgraceful position?… I don’t think so.

Saudi author Rim Al-Salih wrote about the differences between the Virginia Tech killer and the culture of Islamic terrorism:

[..] without lying to ourselves, can we compare the crime committed by an individual due to madness, mental illness, depression, or even due to the desire to kill and avenge, and the death supported by organizations, fatwas, [TV] stations, websites, funding by the millions, and pledges of allegiance taken in front of the holy Ka’ba?…

“The sanctification of death for death’s sake is a distinctly Islamic-Arabic specialization. Coveting death, suicide, and the killing of innocents as a shortcut to Paradise is not shared by anyone else among Allah’s creation. Is there any non-Arab who cuts the throat of journalists and peace workers – [people] who left their homes to do a true service or to aid our causes – for the crime of being fair-skinned and because of their eye color?…

“Some even go so far as to accuse the news channels of treason if they use the words ‘killing’ or ‘killed’ [instead of 'martyrdom' and 'martyr'], despite the fact that these terms are more accurate. Our vulgarization of the term ‘martyrdom’ (shahada) has made it lose its meaning, and death has lost its value and awe. The martyrdom-seeking (istishhad) of the Arabs has become like a reward for them, instead of a disaster or a calamity…

“The exaggeration in sanctifying death has made many youth prefer taking a shortcut to Paradise, instead of obeying the will of the Creator, who considers whoever kills one soul without justification as though he has killed all humanity, and considers whoever saves one life as though he has saved all humanity. [The Creator] wants [this youth] to strive to work, to live, to use the great energies he granted him in order to make the world flourish, and to leave his human imprint on existence…”

MEMRI also has quotes from Kuwaiti columnist Khalil ‘Ali Haydar who gives 10 differences between Islamist terrorism and other forms of extremism and terrorism in the non-Muslim world.

Yet another Muslim Arab author who has been bitterly speaking out about the decline of his culture is the Syrian poet Adonis (Ali Ahmad Said):

“I don’t understand what is happening in Arab society today. I don’t know how to interpret this situation, except by making the following hypothesis: When I look at the Arab world, with all its resources, the capacities of Arab individuals, especially abroad–you will find among them great philosophers, scientists, engineers, and doctors. In other words, the Arab individual is no less smart, no less a genius, than anyone else in the world. He can excel–but only outside his society. I have nothing against the individuals–only against the institutions and the regimes.

“If I look at the Arabs, with all their resources and great capacities, and I compare what they have achieved over the past century with what others have achieved in that period, I would have to say that we Arabs are in a phase of extinction, in the sense that we have no creative presence in the world.”

Interviewer: “Are we on the brink of extinction, or are we already extinct?”

Adonis: “We have become extinct. We have the quantity. We have the masses of people, but a people becomes extinct when it no longer has a creative capacity, and the capacity to change its world.”

[. . .]

“The great Sumerians became extinct, the great Greeks became extinct, and the Pharaohs became extinct. The clearest sign of this extinction is when we intellectuals continue to think in the context of this extinction.”

Interviewer: “That is very dangerous.”

Adonis: “That is our real intellectual crisis. We are facing a new world with ideas that no longer exist, and in a context that is obsolete. We must sever ourselves completely from that context, on all levels, and think of a new Arab identity, a new culture, and a new Arab society.”

[. . .]

“Imagine that Arab societies had no Western influence. What would be left? The Muslims must . . .”

Interviewer: “What would be left?”

Adonis: “Nothing. Nothing would be left except for the mosque, the church, and commerce, of course.”

[. . .]

“The Muslims today–forgive me for saying this–with their accepted interpretation [of the religious text], are the first to destroy Islam, whereas those who criticize the Muslims–the non-believers, the infidels, as they call them–are the ones who perceive in Islam the vitality that could adapt it to life. These infidels serve Islam better than the believers.”

Edward Luttwak on the anti-democratic goals of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), which grew from the ashes of an Islamist party banned for extremism:

Since coming to power, the AKP has done nothing revolutionary, but it does have a revolutionary agenda. For all their suavity, its leaders seek to transform the country into a Sunni Muslim republic. This collides with institutions and laws strictly limiting Islam’s role in public life, and with a long-standing security alliance with Israel.

It also collides with democracy itself, for no Koranic state can have a sovereign parliament free to legalise such abominations as equal rights for women and homosexuals or the drinking of alcohol.

A sinister slogan attributed to the AKP is that democracy is ‘a bus we can ride until we reach our station’. Under Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his foreign secretary Abdullah Gul, the party has been cautious until now.

But abroad the AKP has been more strident. Turkey has stepped up relations with Muslim countries and cooled them with Israel. They have capitalised on public suspicion of the Western war on terror and yet have pursued Turkey’s application to join the EU.

There is no inconsistency. The AKP’s apparent ambitions in Europe are its most strategic deceptions. Ostensibly, the aim is simply to accelerate Turkey’s climb to prosperity.

However, a key condition imposed by the EU is the army’s abrogation of political authority – which suits the AKP just fine, for the military is the greatest barrier to Islamization. Moreover, the party shares the Islamist belief that Europe will inevitably be conquered by the high birthrates of its Muslim inhabitants – and Turkey’s entry would immediately add some 70 million.

There is also some essential Luttwak reading in this month’s Prospect too, on why the Middle East is “less relevant than ever” and the rest of the world should learn to ignore it. Interesting theory, if only that were possible and “it” hadn’t gotten so damn good at drawing attention to itself. Any ideas on how to distract all the Christians, Muslims and Jews of the world?

If thats not enough Luttwak controversy for you in one post, check out “Give War a Chance” and “Civil war: the only way to bring peace to Iraq”. Although the titles sound like they could be for same article they were in fact written seven years apart.

A great three part essay on slavery in the Islamic world, entitled “Should The Islamic World Apologize For Slavery?” has been posted at Western Resistance. Extract:

[..] Modern Western nations’ involvement in the black slave trade lasted little more than 350 years, yet Islam has been involved in the black slave trade for more than 14 centuries, from the time of its founder. Mohammed owned black slaves, and in countries like the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, the black slave trade continues. According to Murray Gordon, the amount of black slaves taken by Muslims amounted to 11 million, though this figure is probably an underestimate. While white (and Arab) slave merchants bought and sold black people from the west coast of Africa, Muslim slavers in north Africa also engaged in a trade of white Christians, a trade that politically correct history books conveniently ignore. [TOD: some two million European Christians were enslaved by some accounts]

[..]
According to Bernard Lewis, author of Race and Slavery in the Middle East: “Black slaves were brought into the Islamic world by a number of routes – from West Africa across the Sahara to Morocco and Tunisia, from Chad across the desert to Libya, from East Africa down the Nile to Egypt, and across the Red Sea and Indian Ocean to Arabia and the Persian Gulf. Turkish slaves from the steppe-lands were marketed in Samarkand and other Muslim Central Asian cities and from there exported to Iran, the Fertile Crescent, and beyond. Caucasians, of increasing importance in the later centuries, were brought from the land bridge between the Black Sea and the Caspian and were marketed mainly in Aleppo and Mosul.”

Slavery is advocated in the Koran. Though Mohammed states that freeing slaves gains merit, he made no prohibitions against acquiring slaves. Women and girl slaves could be gained as “booty” in raids. Sura 33, verse 50 states: “Prophet, we have made lawful for you…. the slave-girls whom God has given you as booty.” These could be raped at will by Muslims who in no way contradicted the Koran – Suras 23:1 and 70:22 state that it is lawful to have sex with slave girls. The Hadiths are filled with references to slaves owned by Mohammed and his associates. In one Hadith Mohammed intervened to reverse one man’s emancipation of six slaves. By casting lots, Mohammed denied freedom to four of them.

[..] According to Bernard Lewis (page 38) the Arab philosopher Ibn Khaldun (1332 – 1406) wrote: “The only people who accept slavery are the Negroes, owing to their low degree of humanity and their proximity to the animal stage.”

Such attitudes still exist in Mauritania and also Sudan, where Arab elites enslave black people from the Dinka and the Shilluk tribes who live in southern Sudan. Since 1983 when the northern government of Simon Deng had been a Shilluk child slave, abducted to live in northern Sudan by an Arab. In May 2006 he went on a fact-finding mission to southern Sudan. He said that “villages are still being burnt, women are still being raped, and people are being sold into slavery.” Mr Deng now lives as a US citizen in New York.

Another Sudanese-born black man who is now a US citizen is Francis Bok. He came from a Catholic family in a Dinka village. In 1986, when aged seven, he was abducted by Arabs from the north who decapitated adults at a local market and stole the children. For ten years Mr Bok was a slave in a Muslim household – forced to convert to Islam – until he ran away. Some Dinka slaves who do not convert to Islam have had their Achilles tendons cut.

In 2000, a UNICEF representative estimated that 5,000 to 10,000 children were still slaves in Sudan. The Dinka Committee in 2001 claimed that 14,000 children have been abducted since 1983. In Sudan, as elsewhere, child slaves are subjected to cruel punishments.

[..] In 2003, it was revealed that a Saudi Sheik, Saleh Al-Fawzan, said: “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.”

Part 1.
Part 2.
Part 3.

If you only read one part, read the third, which describes how slavery continues to this day in some Muslim cultures.

“A Mauritanian woman and child stand inside a makeshift shelter in the Keube slum in the capital Nouakchott in this March 13, 2007 file picture. Herding camels or goats out in the sun-blasted dunes of the Sahara, or serving hot mint tea to guests in the richly carpeted villas of Nouakchott, Mauritanian slaves serve their masters and are passed on as family chattels from generation to generation. Reuters correspondent Ed Stoddard reports that U.S. evangelical Christians are united behind a new campaign to end modern slavery around the world. (Finbarr O’Reilly/Reuters)”

But there is a bit of surprisingly good news coming out of Mauritania – their recent elections have been deemed free and fair by observers, showing promise of a real transition to democracy, following a military coup in 2005. Also the UN Economic Commission for Africa has just released a report ranking Mauritania as the best economically performing country in Africa in 2006.

Further to this post a couple of days ago, here’s a must read article on the spread of the now-inextractable Wahhabi cancer in Bosnia.

Extract from “Emissaries of Militant Islam Make Headway in Bosnia”:

[Ex-Wahhabi] Nermina said the Wahhabi sect had infiltrated schools, universities and the media. They know most of the population dislikes them and have therefore adapted their outward appearance in order to enter public institutions, she claimed.

Nermina also told Balkan Insight she had been trapped in her house for almost three of the five years she wore a hijab. The men and women in the house were separated and all visitors had to comply with the rules.

“I believed that men were preordained to run public life while it was our duty to stay in the house,” she said. “Rare gatherings were our only contact with the outside world. Over the summer, we took trips to special camps near Lake Jablanica where women were also separated from men.

“We had a parallel world that others may not have noticed. We had our own public transport and grocery stores. We migrated inwards into our own closed sphere.”

Polygamy, which is illegal in Bosnia, was encouraged, she went on. “I know women whose husbands have several other wives,” she said. “They told us we would be rewarded in the next world if we put up with this hardship and refrained from being jealous. They keep talking about the next world to scare you, and promise you’ll go to heaven if you obey.”

At the same time, Nermina realised she increasingly disliked Wahhabism. She started getting out of the house and communicating with people. But when wearing the hijab, it was difficult to reach out. “People in Sarajevo are hostile towards Wahhabis and veiled women. It is impossible to get a job or even talk to anybody,” she said.

Eventually, her plight forced her to reconsider her beliefs and whole way of life. “I met a fellow Muslim woman who studied Islamic sciences,” she recalled.

“At first I treated her as an infidel, as she veiled only her hair while leaving her neck and ears exposed, which Wahhabism regards as a deadly sin,” she went on.

“But watching her and learning what a beautiful religion Islam is, I realised that everything I had learnt from the Wahhabi was wrong. My conversations with this woman brought up many crucial questions in my head. One of them was about polygamy, which I believed in wholeheartedly.

“She asked me why men shouldn’t put up with being cheated on to get their reward in the other world if women were being asked to do the same. It was a logical question but one I had never heard before.”

Professor Hafizovic believes the authorities ought to take immediate action. “I keep getting calls from parents whose children have been taken away by the Wahhabi; they are begging me to help them,” he said.

“The Wahhabi train these young people to break their own families into pieces and introduce their propaganda through literature and camps. There is nothing I can do to stop it but I hereby appeal to the authorities in this country to speak out,” Hafizovic told Balkan Insight.

Jasmin Merdan also said immediate steps were needed. “Decisive action needs to be taken, primarily by the Islamic Community and the authorities through cooperation with international institutions,” he said. “But it should rest on the Islamic Community first and foremost because destroying traditional Islam in Bosnia is the basic Wahhabi objective, just as it would be in any other country,” he added.

Read the whole thing.

While I’m at it, some articles on the developing Kosovo situation too:

“Creating a state of denial”

“Europe’s approaching train wreck”

“Report damns West’s revival of Kosovo”

This interview with a ‘Doctor’ who performs ‘circumcision’ on women in Saudi Arabia was linked to by Ruth Gledhill, who is The Times Religion Correspondent. It is so sickening I am having trouble believing this is not some kind of sick hoax or fantasy. If anyone knows whether this is authentic feel free to leave a comment.

I also found a longer version on the site of Debra Kamza, an ex-Muslim who wrote “Lost in Foreign Passions”.

Considering other stories of how women, especially foreign women, are treated in Saudi Arabia, the land of public execution, Religious Police and punitive amputation, whats described below is not outside the realm of the possible.

Doctor Muzaffar-I have a medical practice in Jizan, Saudi Arabia which I practice female circumcision. I am a Egyptian and still spend much time there, but spend much time at my clinic in the Kingdom. My husband travels with me. Female circumcision is well established in Egypt and is now spreading in the Kingdom from the Tihama region of the Arabian peninsula. The locals have practiced in for many years and now the Saudi religious police have encouraged its spread in the Kingdom.

RZ-Why did you pick there to set up your practice if female Circumcision is easily available.

Doctor Muzaffar- I was recruited in my homeland, Egypt by the religious police as circumcising the young may be done by midwives, there was few trained female Doctors in the kingdom that Had experience in circumcising grown women.

RZ- Religious police?

Doctor Muzaffar- Yes, this is the new more tolerant religious police, where in the past Prostitution or Adultery was punishable by stoning, now sometimes they simply have the accused circumcised and/or infibulated. They bring them to my clinic and they are my guest for a day or two. I also Train nurses for the religious police to preform female circumcision. after a training period they are moved to female hospitals in other Kingdom cities. Clitoridectomy is not not a hard thing to learn for the average nurse.The religious police feel that female circumcision has many positive benefits. It calms women, ends lesbian activities, discourages adultery and prostitution. It allows women to concentrate on being good wives and mothers.
[#M_Expand inpost|Hide|
RZ- I thought that female circumcision was limited in Saudi Arabia.

Doctor Muzaffar-that was true for the most part in the past, it has always been present along the red sea and the areas that boarder Yemen. In the last few years it has grown allot spreading throughout the Kingdom. The west would have no way of knowing as women and women's issues are kept private. And the foreign women that are guest in the harems are kept out of sight. With modern security. There is little chance that once they are here that anyone will hear from them again. Even if they managed to escape the harem it would be all but impossible for them to escape Saudi Arabia. The religious police would return them to their masters. Currently I would say that at least 25% of all women in Saudi Arabia are circumcised. It is growing popularity and with the growing number of trained midwives within a generation all women who have bore a child should have had the tip of their clitoris removed.

RZ- What is your clinic like?

Doctor Muzaffar-State of the art. An all female staff as this is women's business. My husband handles the dealings with the authorities and various male clients but he is not allowed into the secure treatment wing. The facility has no windows but is air conditioned which is a benefit as it is very hot and humid here in Jizan. For security there is only one entrance, a electric garage door. When a patient arrives the auto or van enters the garage door after putting a security code into electronic box.The inter door wont open till the outer one closes. Much of my 12 person female staff lives on site as well as all nurse trainees. There are food preparation facilities as well as 36 patient rooms and three treatment rooms. Everything we need under one roof.

RZ- What are the patient rooms like?

Doctor Muzaffar- Very spartan, Small shower and toilet area, a bed. No window, no door knob on inside, remember some of our guests are wards of the Religious police. They would be hard to deal with if we lost one. Each room has a video monitor that feeds to a central control center for monitoring.

RZ- What are the the treatment rooms like?

Doctor Muzaffar- Tiled in white floors, ceilings, walls. Kept spotlessly clean. Very bright and well lit. there is various medical equipment and supplies. And of course the treatment table.

RZ- What are the the treatment tables like?

Doctor Muzaffar- Again state of the art. It is very important that the patient not move during the operation and my table sees to that. It has a stainless steel frame and black leather padding. Unactivated it looks more like a lounge chair. The patient is led into the treatment room in a white gown and asked to sit. Once seated my assistance's secures their charge to the treatment chair. Strapes above and below the knee as well as across the instep of each foot. Wide leather straps across the belly above and below the breast. Another wide quite tight strap across the lower belly. The the wrist are placed in leather cuffs back against the chair even with the shoulders. Then the chair tips back and the legs spread into the classical Gyno chair. There are metal curves under the knees.The patient finds herself on her back Head down, legs spread. The activation of the chair tightens all the straps very securely. She will find she is totally immobilized. Once secured we shave the pubic hair, the area is cleaned with soap, then we treat the entire area with an antiseptic. At this point she is ready for me to circumcise her. If allowed by the authorities I take a needle and deaden the nerves around and leading to the clitoris. I start giving injections in a radial configuration. The last I give an injection under the clitoris into the main nerve. In most cases they will tense and grown a little at this point as the nerve is deaden.

RZ- What about a gag?

Doctor Muzaffar- No I don't see that as needed as we pay little attention to anything the patient says. If she is being cut on orders of the Religious police then one of my nurses places a rubber tongue depressant into the patients mouth and holds it into place. Also a strap across the forehead is put into place and tightened. This gives her something to bite on as she is cut. The religious police dont allow us to use pain killers. The patients from other sources I give injections into the local areas and they feel nothing .Most go to the table without much fuss, but some we have to drag kicking and screaming.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Doctor Muzaffar- Some young brides are brought in and we simply clip the tip of their clitoris off. Its pretty minor but very effective at controlling female behavior. Also I have a growing demand from the estates of the ruling class. In the Kingdom men can have up to four wives and many concubines. Some of the princes have many more than four wives. We have many very rich men and they have palaces where their women are kept out of site.It has become quite fashionable for a wealthy man to have his concubines circumcised. This also makes the religious leaders happy in knowing that many of these concubines are circumcised and their sexuality is controlled. Many religious leaders fell that it is a woman's place to provide pleasure to the male and bear children without receiving pleasure themselves, especially if they are infidel women.

RZ- Infidel women?

Doctor Muzaffar-Yes from many places, like the Balkins, Russia, Greece, France, Ireland and much of Europe. A few from America and other nations. Scandinavia is very popular. The young, the pretty, the stupid, Many college girls. They are easy to acquire. Some of the rich will go on hunting trips as they are called. They simply seduce a bird that they fancy, fly her to the Kingdom where she simply disappears into a harem to never be heard from again. Many of the older Princes will hire a recruiter to find him the right candidate. Once here she is turned over to the old man to do with as he pleases. Several of the recruiters bring the candidates here for circumcision to calm them down before going onto their final destination. It is surprising how few western women know what female circumcision is. As a general rule when they arrive here they have no idea what we plan to do to them. You can imagine their surprise when they discover that we have removed their clitoris.

RZ- Are these women not looked for? What about their governments?

Doctor Muzaffar- Their governments dint care, they only want oil, a few of their women ending up in harems, they could care less. The women will never be heard from again. They are kept locked away where they please their master and bear his children. The circumcision calms them and prevents them from masturbating and dreaming of their past life and old boyfriends.

RZ- tell me about the circumcision procedure?

Doctor Muzaffar- Its about the clitoris. There are variation but the removal of the clitoris is central. The majority of circumcisions are simply snipping it off. This is most effective in controlling female behavior. 90% of the pleasure nerves are in the very tip. By just snipping off the tip will have the desired effect on female behavior. Masturbation will no longer be an option, they will find it just doesn't work anymore and will loose interest in trying to climax through masturbation. I have been training a steady stream of midwives who duties in the Kingdom outside of assisting with births is to see that no new mother leaves the maternity ward with her clitoris. This is a good time to circumcise women. With all the trauma from the birth the snipping the tip of the clitoris is hardly noticed, many women wont even notice its gone till the return to regular relations with their husbands. This makes her a better mother and wife. The religious police insist on clitoridectomy,.excision of the labia minora, incision of the labia majora and resewing it, leaving only a tiny hole to urinate out of. Also the clitoridectomy is far more in depth than just snipping the tip, the entire root is cut out. This is done to prostitutes and women taken in adultery.

I first take a hand clamp tool and grasp the clitoris and pull it out from the body and I make a oval incision around the base of the clitoris.With a scalpel I cut the surrounding flesh till the clitoris is held by the root. Below the clitoris head the main clitoris nerve I pull on the clitoris as hard as possible, pulling it by the attached nerve as far from the body as possible and make a clean cut as deep as possible. There is allot of the clitoris that is removed that is not in the simple procedure. I then excision the labia minora followed by the incision of the labia majora and then I sew the mouth of the Vagina closed connecting the raw edges. There is a small hole to urinate out and pass menstrual blood. Not being able to use pain killers as defined by the religious police the woman are screaming and struggling but my special chair doesn't allow any movement. I always use pain killers if allowed by law.
My signature treatment is called the harem cut. Many of the western women that are bound for harems I do a full deep circumcision followed by a modified infibulation. Not the sealing of the mouth of the vagina but once the clitoris is removed I tighten the top of the vagina with a couple of stitches after an incision at the top of the labia majora. My clients like this effect as it makes it tighter for her master.unless requested so I don't excision the labia minora. I don't think it matters as there isn't enough nerves to allow masturbation or climax during sex, though the labia minora may add to the pleasure of the male. The males seem to like my harem cut over the snip or the infibulation. Of course I can do lots of variations.

_M#]

Well worth watching, if you haven’t already.

The following is an extract from an essay by Dr John Lewis, associate professor of history at Ashland University. It was entitled “No Substitute for Victory – The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism”. The whole thing is rather long, but worth the read. There is also a clarification letter from Dr Lewis that answers some questions he received following this essay, over at JihadWatch. (h/t JihadWatch)

[..] The Japanese were motivated by a politicized religious ideology—Shintoism—that posited an all-powerful deity, indoctrinated their children, infected every aspect of their culture, and drove them to suicidal military actions that killed millions. An educational rescript of 1890—an Imperial decree, and one of the most influential documents in Japanese history—built this “mytho-religious ideology” into the classroom, making worship of the Emperor and duty to the State into the primary goals of education.11 Japanese people memorized its tenets, and were inculcated with what one Japanese scholar called “socialization for death.”12 A Japanese civilian remarked how, when she heard that the Emperor was going to address his people—an unprecedented event—the words she had memorized as a child rose in her mind: “Should any emergency arise, offer yourself courageously to the State.” Such ideas, deeply internalized and mandated by law, motivated suicide bombers—kamikaze—to throw themselves fanatically against superior U.S. forces, and gave them hope for a final battle over weak-willed Americans. This kamikaze fire was extinguished by the crushing American offensive of 1945.

The Islamic Totalitarian movement has a similar fire burning at its core—an authoritarian, state-centered religion, replete with state-funded educational indoctrination, a massive suicide cult on behalf of the deity and state, and hope for a final battle over the Americans. The key to extinguishing this fire, I submit—the sine qua non required to end the spiral of indoctrination, jihad, and suicidal attacks on the West—is to do what was done against Japan: to break the political power of the state religion. State Islam—Totalitarian Islam—rule by Islamic Law—must be obliterated.

[..] To begin to enshrine the inviolability of individual rights as the central principle of government, clerics of all kinds must be stripped of political power. There can be no freedom of thought and speech if those with claims to mystically derived ideas can enforce them coercively. Only by breaking the link between state power and religious belief can the state become a protector of each person’s right to worship or not worship as he wishes; only complete separation of religion and government can enable the government to serve its proper function: to protect each person’s right to think, speak, and act as he chooses.
Given this understanding of the issue, how should we begin to confront Totalitarian Islam? Again, there is precedent in history. The basic principles of a rational policy towards Islamic Totalitarianism—with clear strategic implications—were revealed in a striking telegram sent by the U.S. Secretary of State James Byrnes to General Douglas MacArthur, the American commander in Japan, in October, 1945. The telegram established the basic U.S. policy goals towards Shintoism, and laid out, for MacArthur and his subordinates, the basic principles by which those goals were to be achieved

Shintoism, insofar as it is a religion of individual Japanese, is not to be interfered with. Shintoism, however, insofar as it is directed by the Japanese government, and as a measure enforced from above by the government, is to be done away with. People would not be taxed to support National Shinto and there will be no place for Shintoism in the schools. Shintoism as a state religion—National Shinto, that is—will go . . . Our policy on this goes beyond Shinto . . . The dissemination of Japanese militaristic and ultra-nationalistic ideology in any form will be completely suppressed. And the Japanese Government will be required to cease financial and other support of Shinto establishments.

The telegram is clear about the need for separation between religion and state—between an individual’s right to follow Shinto and the government’s power to enforce it. This requirement applies to Islam today (and to Christianity and Judaism) as strongly as it did to Shinto. In regard to Japan, the job involved breaking the link between Shinto and state; in regard to Islamic Totalitarianism the task involves breaking the link between Islam and state. This is the central political issue we face: the complete lack of any conceptual or institutional separation between church and state in Islam, both historically and in the totalitarian movement today.

As for what we should do about this, the 1945 telegram is direct. Here is its opening, rewritten to substitute Islam for Shinto:

Islam, as it is a religion of individuals, is not to be interfered with. Islam, however, insofar as it is directed by governments, and as a measure enforced from above by any government, is to be done away with

There is no question here about religious freedom. Individual religious belief is to be left alone—as is all freedom to think and to speak by one’s own judgment—but state religion must be eliminated. It is vital that this principle be understood, stated clearly, and enforced—for this is a precondition of the thorough and permanent defeat of America’s current enemy.

Totalitarian Islam, an ideology that merges state power with religious belief, must go.

But proponents of Islamic Totalitarianism have political power, to some extent, in dozens of nations. Should we attack them all, immediately? No. We need to aim for the political, economic, and ideological center of this movement—the core that embodies its naked essence and that fuels it worldwide. This does not mean finding the particular people who organized the 9/11 attacks. The question is: In which state is Islam most solidly linked with political power, dedicated to the violent spread of Islamic rule, and infused with hatred of America? What state is founded on these ideas, and their practice, as a matter of principle? There is a clear answer, which is known, admittedly or not, by almost everyone today. The political centerpiece of Islamic Totalitarianism today—the state in which Islam is most militantly welded to political power and contempt for America and the West—the world leader in the violent spread of Islam—is Iran.

The Iranian Islamic State was born in an act of war against America—the seizure of the American embassy in 1979—and has chanted “Death to America” ever since. Even Muslims at odds with Iran for sectarian reasons, such as many followers of Osama Bin Laden, draw inspiration from it as they engage in their own jihads against the West. Bin Laden’s most important effect in this regard has been to energize and empower radical Muslims to rise above the petty squabbles between Persian and Arab, and between Sunni and Shiite, to join Iran against the “Great Satan”: America. Hezbollah, Hamas, and company are dependent on Iran for ideological, political, and economic strength. It is Iran that addresses the U.N. as a world leader; it is Iran that is openly committed to acquiring the weapons needed to take control of the Middle East; it is Iran that poses as the defender of Muslims against the West (for instance, through loyal clerics in Iraq); and it is Iran that has gained power since the U.S. removed its strongest regional opponent in Iraq.

The conclusion is inescapable. The road to the defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism begins in Tehran. America, acting alone and with overwhelming force, must destroy the Iranian Islamic State now. It must do so openly, and indeed spectacularly, for the entire world to see, for this is the only way to demonstrate the spectacular failure and incompetence of the Islamic fundamentalist movement as a whole

[..] One of the strongest parallels between Japanese Shintoism and Islamic Totalitarianism is the deep inculcation of theological militarism in children—a philosophical ideology centered on military service to a divinely sanctioned state—and the suicidal “socialization for death” that results. In each case, the central purpose of the educational system is to train children to obey a divine presence by inculcating in them a sense of submission and insignificance married to violence. Japanese children memorized the calls to duty by the Emperor; indoctrinated Islamic children memorize sword verses in the Koran. Japanese children bowed to the Emperor and obeyed his generals; Islamic children bow to Allah and obey his clerics. The grip of Islam over education has to be broken, as was the grip of Shinto over the schools in Japan.

After the regime in Iran is destroyed, the leadership in countries sponsoring such state training in Islamic jihad—especially Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—must choose: Close the state-funded schools, or face the Iranian alternative. Until the U.S. demonstrates the nature of that choice, by serious retaliation against Iran, unambiguously connecting principled words to practical actions, there is no reason for any Middle Eastern leader to expect serious consequences. Until then, they are right to regard us as a paper tiger. Only the forthright destruction of the Iranian Islamic State can demonstrate the resolve needed for this task.

[..]
This is not a clash between civilizations; it is a clash between civilization and barbarism. Until civilized people assert themselves with a depth of moral confidence exceeding that projected by those who submit to the “will of Allah,” America will remain permanently on the defensive, in a state of moral dhimmitude, and the war will continue to its logical conclusion: a mushroom cloud over America.

Is it possible for a “moderate” form of Islam to become an alternative to the totalitarian world-view infecting so many Muslims? Perhaps, but let us be clear about what this would mean. This would mean an Islam that is explicitly separated from political power. It would mean an Islam whose clerics renounce all attempts to impose its law by force. It would mean an Islam that (like modern Christianity) is open to critical self-reflection, whose thinkers examine the Koran as a set of stories, compiled and interpreted by men—and not the infallible word of God to be spread by the sword. It would mean an Islam that allows apostates to make their own decisions, and that tolerates no death threats against them. It would mean the explicit rejection—by Muslims—of State Islam, Islamic Law, and the pursuit of jihad. Such “moderate” Muslims will support the obliteration of Totalitarian Islam. The rest must witness the defeat of this poisonous ideology, and grasp the hopelessness of supporting it.

And from Dr Lewis’ clarification letter:

In the long run, however, this is an intellectual battle. My stress on integrity means that we must understand the issues, and talk the talk as well as walking the walk. We have not properly stated our own goodness, and why we have a right to defend ourselves. It is the job of the intellectuals to state and defend these truths philosophically. If we do not present an alternative to the Qu’ran, and are unwilling to destroy those building nuclear bombs in order to impose it, then why should anyone re-write it? This may take five generations — but it will never happen if the political success of Islamic Totalitarianism is allowed to continue.

Or not.

(h/t Ryan Northcott)

In non-Hajj-related news, I am going on vacation mid next week for a couple of weeks, and will not be near a computer for most of that time. I won’t have time for much posting in the next week either, so its looking like this blog won’t be back in full force for another three weeks or so.

Anyone looking for something to read, I’ve recently been enjoying Michael Totten’s posts on the developing situation in Lebanon, where he visitted in December. Bill Roggio’s recent coverage of the war in Somalia as well as other global Jihad hotspots has been great also.

For a list of some fantastic blogs you should be reading, have a read of this interview, where Hugh Hewitt hammers to pieces Joseph Rago for his article in the Opinion Journal, in which Rago lamely attempted to write off the whole blogosphere as somehow irrelevant. In the interview, which is quite entertaining in itself, Hugh presents a lists of worthy blogs to set the stage for their discussion. Take a look, you’re bound to come across a couple of new gems.

And check out the new 910 Group movement, of which this blog is now a part. Blogs to read, forum to chat in, projects to be a part of it. Get into it.