Although Europe is not part of the Muslim world, many European authorities nevertheless seem to feel obliged to submit to Islam in more or less subtle ways. This voluntary submission appears to be unprecedented: Dhimmi, historically speaking, is the Arabic term for the conquered non-Muslim, who agrees to live as a second-rate, "tolerated" citizen, under Islamic rule, submitting to a separate, demeaning set of laws and the demands of his Islamic masters.
In Europe, submitting to the demands of Islam, in the name of "diversity" and "human rights", has also been happening voluntarily. This submission to Islam is, of course, highly ironic, as the Western concepts of "diversity" and "human rights" do not exist within the foundational texts of Islam. On the contrary, these texts denounce in the strongest – and supremacist - terms those who refuse to submit to the Islamic concept of divinity, Allah, as infidels who must either convert, pay the jizya ["protection"] tax or die.
One of the most troubling aspects of this rapidly spreading dhimmitude, is the de-facto enforcement of Islamic blasphemy laws within European jurisdictions. Local European authorities have been utilizing "hate speech" laws to prohibit criticism of Islam, even though Islam represents an idea – a religion and ideology - not a nationality or an ethnicity.
The conventional purpose of most "hate-speech" laws is to protect people from hatred, not ideas. It would therefore appear that European authorities are under no legal obligation to prosecute people for criticizing Islam, especially as Islamic law, Sharia, is not part of European law; yet they do so only too willingly.
The most recent example of this kind of dhimmitude comes from Sweden, where a pensioner has been indicted for calling Islam a 'fascist' ideology on Facebook. The legal provision under which he is being charged, (Brottsbalken chapter 16, § 8,1 st), explicitly talks of "incitement" (Swedish: "hets mot folkgrupp") against groups of people defined by their 'race, skin color, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual preference'. However, the provision does not criminalize criticism of religion, ideology or ideas, because Western democracies, back when they were genuine democracies, did not criminalize the free exchange of ideas.
Dhimmitude in Europe is manifested in many other respects, as well. On World Hijab Day a yearly recurring February event founded in 2013 by a Bangladeshi immigrant to the US, Nazma Khan, "to fight discrimination against Muslim women through awareness and education", several British MPs chose to don the hijab. These included MP Anne McLaughlin and Labour's former shadow Equalities Minister Dawn Butler and MP Naseem Shah. Furthermore, the British Foreign Office, which appears to ignore Iranian women's desperate fight for freedom, and which stayed comparatively quiet during the Iranian people's recent protests against the Iranian regime[1], unbelievably handed out free headscarves to its staff. According to the Evening Standard, an email reportedly sent to staff said:
"Would you like to try on a hijab or learn why Muslim women wear the headscarf? Come along to our walk-in event. Free scarves for all those that choose to wear it for the day or part of the day. Muslim women, along with followers of many other religions, choose to wear the hijab. Many find liberation, respect and security through wearing it. #StrongInHijab. Join us for #WorldHijabDay."
Meanwhile, at least 29 Iranian women were arrested for shedding the hijab, and were likely subjected to rape and other torture, as is common in Iranian prisons. Yet British MPs and Foreign Office employees were perversely celebrating the hijab as some sort of twisted tool of "female empowerment".
The above incident is hardly surprising: Britain is rife with some of the most jarring examples of dhimmitude. Mass rapes of children by Muslim gangs in many British cities, went on for years with the knowledge of the British authorities, who did not stop these crimes for fear of appearing "racist" or "Islamophobic"
The dhimmitude is also apparent in the lengths to which British authorities will go to excuse or explain away customs that are practiced by British Muslim communities. The police commander responsible for tackling honor crimes, female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage, Ivan Balchatchet, recently wrote a letter in which he said that the reason there have not yet been any convictions for FGM (which was criminalized in 1985), despite an estimate that 137,000 women and girls are affected by FGM in England and Wales, is that the crime has "many nuances". He later apologized for the statement:
Similarly, according to new figures, hundreds of "honor" violence and forced marriage crimes go unpunished in London. Data shows that between 2015 and 2017, police recorded 759 "honor" crimes and 265 forced marriages in London alone -- but only 138 people were charged with offenses. Diana Nammi, executive director of the Iranian & Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation, which provides refuge for victims, said
"What makes it so alarming is that figures that we obtained through freedom of information requests show that, at the same time, since the criminalisation of forced marriage in 2014, many more people at risk than ever before are coming forward for help".
Dhimmitude, however, leads not "only" to child rape, female genital mutilation and "honor" killings, all spreading under the willfully blind eyes of national authorities, but also to the obstruction of counterterrorism efforts. In a recent interview for SVT public television, Peder Hyllengren, a researcher at the Swedish Defense College, said:
"You risk being identified as racist in a way that you have not seen in other European countries. There, this question has been as uncontroversial as the importance of combating Nazism and right wing extremism. But in Sweden it took a long time before it was acceptable to discuss jihadism in the same way that we have been discussing Nazism".
No comments:
Post a Comment