WintonsWeek Civilised World Recoils At Another Cold Blooded Killing. Muslim reaction restrained; a little more shame would be appropriate Islam must make clear killing of innocent means hell, not paradise Civilised people would die of shame if they killed an innocent with a knife. But not these barbarians. It’s so much worse if you force yourself to think about the killing process. Lining up someone and shooting them from a safe distance, is bad enough. You can pretend that it’s not really happening. The blood isn’t likely to soil your clothes. The death throes of the innocent won’t be too obvious. Presumably even the German SS had squeamish members, who felt deep shame after mowing down innocents with machine guns. To kill, up close and personal, with blood and gore everywhere, and not to be consumed with guilt, or overcome with compassion for the innocent victim, just defies the imagination of a civilised person. But these barbarians do it again and again and ended the lives of Americans Eugene Armstrong and Jack Hensley, and now British hostage Kenneth Bigley. OK By Allah These sub-humans recite what they are taught by Islam to be the correct incantation which the Koran has laid down for the killing of the innocent, and they use the approved equipment. What drives them to do it? For a start, they believe their actions are OK by Allah, and they will be guaranteed a place in heaven, with the proverbial 72 virgins (which, in fact turn out to be 72 white raisins, the promised “virgins” is a mistranslation). And because of this warped belief that their actions are somehow right by their religion, there is a way that this barbarity of beheadings and suicide bombings can be stopped. If the leaders of Islam said loud and clear that this behaviour was wrong, repulsive and guaranteed the perpetrators would rot in hell for eternity, then this callous evil might be stopped. As long as some extreme Muslims think that their behaviour will lead to “honour” for their families, and an after-life in paradise, it will continue But judging by the reaction of Muslims, change doesn’t seem likely. Where Is The Rage? If this was a genuinely civilised and compassionate religion, as we are constantly asked to believe, wouldn’t ordinary Muslims be hyperventilating with rage? Where is this clamour to cease and desist? Where is the crescendo of voices demanding that these awful acts of barbarity stop? Where is the shame and humiliation that these beheadings of the innocent were taking place in the name of Allah? I have heard some half-hearted expressions of regret. The Muslim Council of (Great) Britain has collectively wrung its hands, but it couches its disapproval in tepid, political terms. If the MCB said these beasts shamed the Islamic religion and they and suicide bombers should be excommunicated from Islam (or whatever the appropriate action would be), that would be convincing. MCB’s Weasel Words But instead, according to Amir Taheri, an Iranian political commentator based in Paris, the MCB representatives argued that although Britain participated in toppling Saddam Hussein, a majority of the British were opposed to the war. Thus Bigley should be spared, not because hostage taking and murdering is wrong, but because mercy would strengthen anti-war sentiment in Britain. That is simply cowardly and mean spirited. Taheri, writing in the Wall Street Journal, says this attitude is likely to cause us in the West serious trouble. “By refusing to come out with a categorical rejection of terrorism, Muslim leaders and opinion-makers are helping perpetuate a situation in which no one is safe. The 9/11 attacks against the United States were based on the claim, made by al Qaeda’s number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, that all citizens of democratic countries could be murdered because, being actual or potential voters, they have a share of responsibility for the policies of their governments,” Taheri said. Mujahed Gets You Carte Blanche “Today, it is enough for anyone to designate himself as an Islamic “Mujahed”, fighting for Palestine and opposing the “occupation” in Iraq, to get carte blanche from millions of Muslims, including many in authority, for kidnapping and “exhibition killing”, Taheri said. We are told that Islam is a religion of tolerance, peace and piety. But extreme Islam is not a religion at all. It is a fascist, political creed which brainwashes its fanatical adherents into justifying despicable, criminal behaviour. If there were some warped band of extremist Christians (or Buddhists, or Hindhus, or Jews) who were trying to make political capital out of an act of sheer barbarity, people would be on the streets protesting. The airwaves would be full of Christians and their leaders demanding that the action stop. The perpetrators would be in no doubt that demented acts like this bought shame on the religion. They would be saying “Not in my name. Cease and desist you cowards.” Onward Christian Soldiers Charles Moore in the Daily Telegraph put it superbly, commenting on the fact that the murders were carried out to the accompaniment of Koranic chants. “Imagine if we saw film of ”Christian” terrorists playing Onward Christian soldiers as they beheaded their victims. Is there a bishop in the west that would not condemn them without equivocation?” But British Muslim leaders, and Muslims around the world stay silent, or couch their criticisms in tepid terms. They should be leading a clamour for reform of a religion that allows fanatics to justify their disgusting actions. For a start, they might take leave out of the Bible by saying “Thou shalt not kill.” Period. Not “You may not kill, but if the circumstances justify it, you can go ahead.” Moon Shadow, Moon Shadow Cat Stevens reminded us of this contradiction when he’d been returned to Britain by the U.S. He quoted the Koran as saying “to kill one innocent is like killing all the world”. In fact the Koran goes on to equivocate about the possibility of a just execution, and justifies the ultimately cruelty. As Irshad Manji puts it in her book The Trouble with Islam: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith, “the Koran verse that's cited as "unequivocal" actually bestows wiggle room. Here's how it fully reads: "We laid it down for the Israelites," meaning those who believe in one God, "that whoever killed a human being, except as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind." Sadly, the clause starting with "except" can be deployed by militant Muslims to fuel their jihads.” The Koran is full of advice like this. It says that Moslems shouldn’t eat meat, but if you are a bit hungry, then it’s ok. It says you mustn’t pay interest (what’s wrong with interest?), but if you fiddle around with the language a bit so that it doesn’t appear as though you are, then that’s alright. You mustn’t kill animals, but if you hang them upside down, slit their throats, point them towards Mecca, and mumble some idiotic words from the Koran over them, that’s ok. “Honour” Killing An Oxymoron To The Civilised Muslims despoil the language with concepts like so-called “honour killings” – an oxymoron to a civilised religion - which occurs when some Islamists decide that it’s alright to murder in cold blood one’s sister because she has bought “shame” on the family, whatever that means. What kind of religion is it that seeks to justify an act of merciless, ultimate violence against a female member of your own family, in the name of some warped and outdated religious idea? Flatearthism Recently on BBC Radio 4, there was discussion programme about modern Islam. One of the women on the programme, who had converted to Islam, proudly told how good it was that Muslim women led lives of sheltered exploitation. They have their marriages arranged for them. They walked behind their men with their eyes lowered. The covered their bodies from head to toe. Obviously, men would be overcome with lust otherwise. This convert also admitted that the radio interviewer couldn’t talk to her without a chaperone. These people do live in another world, a world that thankfully, the west managed to wriggle free from at least 500 years ago. It did occur to me, when I heard that this woman had converted to Islam, that moving to such a medieval, contradictory, childish religion was a bit like converting to Flatearthism. Totally without reason, a truly stupid, counterproductive thing to do. And yet we are asked to treat Islam with respect, just like other religions. Of course proper religions should be treated with respect, faiths that raise mankind’s levels of respect for one another and animals who share this world with us. But Islam is not like this. Speak Out Why are Muslims in Britain who are aware of our values, not speaking out? Are they afraid to do this? Will they face action from other Muslims? If Islamic terror is going to continue, we in Britain need to hear from our Muslim fellow citizens, that it is not in their name. Is it possible to bypass the mullahs and hear their voices? Islam continues to enslave and impoverish billions of people, who lead hopeless, ambition-free lives. It is currently a running sore for the rest of the civilised world. The only way that the problem is going to be solved is if Muslims themselves take the initiative to modernise and reform. Can British Muslims take the initiative? They at least can lead the need for change without fear of reprisal, can’t they? Neil Winton – October 11, 2004 Top