9 Comments

1. EGW:

He’s a not uncommon specimen of Judaeus Putrido, attracted by chaos, which kind often rears it’s unbalanced head, to add it’s scrambled pearls of wisdom to an already disorderly situation.

Scientific studies have unerringly shown that these specimens are always the products of serious inbreeding, a practice thought to have been left behind in the ghettos. Apparently not.

Feb 8, 2008 - 4:40 pm 2. M. Levy:

Why you ask?. It is because this Feldman fellow, himself never lived in an Islamic country, to witness how his wife would be treated like a walking faceless object. When he sees her with that ugly black Burkkh, then he will understand Muslim liberality first hand.

Feb 8, 2008 - 9:24 pm 3. Tom:

Everyone should read Dr. Tawfik Hamid’s article on this. (article and link below, from his site) He states the West can never stop Islamism unless we ban the Hijab. He says it is in reality a potent rallying symbol of Islamic pathological feelings of superiority and entitlement: “Our women wear the Hijab; western women are degraded whores because they don’t…and their men are disgusting weaklings for allowing their women to dress as whores. That is why we are superior and must and will conquer them”.
It is a sickening sign of these twisted times that we must now agonize over whether we must consider limiting yet another freedom in order to protect ourselves. But maybe the real question is PC and government confusion. We restrict OUR freedoms because we are too unwise, cowardly and confused to restrict THEIRS. I’d rather see every extremist Mosque in the US raided and shut down by SWAT teams than see a single one of our freedoms infringed upon because THEY are being given free reign. It’s a wonderful, historically unprecedented cultural development that a world dominating nation is so full of love that it truly desires to embrace all others as equals and is doing so to the point of near national suicide. Our life or death Darwinian challenge is too realize that we must balance the goals of love and respect for others with the understanding that Evil really does exist and that we have a right and a duty to look for it, point it out, AND STOP IT, before this amazing civilization is ground into the dust of history.

http://www.rootsofjihad.com/comments.php#scarf

Dr. Tawfik’s article:
Hejab; The Islamic head-scarf and its contribution to the development of the terrorist mind.
By Dr. Tawfik Hamid

In the last few decades the phenomenon of Islamist terrorism has spread through many parts of the world. As a Muslim who contemplates about this growing trend, I recognize that current Islamic teachings have contributed to its development. This violence has not emerged out of a vacuum, but is deeply rooted in the developmental stages of the mind of many Muslims in Islamic societies. Sadly, the current teaching of Islam in many far-flung areas of the world creates a personality profile in young Muslims that contributes to their becoming involved in terror acts later on in life.

The shaping of the mind of a terrorist is familiar to me: Within few months of coming under the influence of fundamentalist Islamic teachings as an impressionable young student, I changed from a peaceful, tolerant individual to an Islamic extremist who was prepared to kill others and die for Allah. Passing through the stages of innocent to extremist, I became a beast – ready to kill non-Muslims, infidels, or those who didn’t practise Islam as I understood it.

That happened in three traceable stages:

Stage I (or Stage of hate): The creation of hatred towards non-Muslims or those who do not practice Islam.

Stage II (or Stage of killing one’s consciences): The murder of empathy or sympathy toward the pain and suffering of others.

Stage III (or Stage of violence): Accepting or even using violence against others.

Once a young Muslim has reached stage 3, as was the case with me like with thousands of others in my Muslim community, he is ready to convert this level of aggression into different forms – abuse at an interpersonal level, in public such as violent street riots, or acts of terrorism.

The violent attitude of Stage 3 personality, may or may not manifest itself in action, depending on the circumstances which either allow it to be externalized (active terrorism) or not (i.e. suppress violence and thus stop at the conceptual level). The latter condition (passive terrorism) contributes to the silence of many Muslims; tacitly praising, justifying or accepting terror attacks or denouncing those acts in a weak manner. In their minds they support the violent acts, but circumstances do not encourage them to translate their violent thoughts (Stage III) into active levels of terrorism.

I have observed a link between the position of women in current Islamic teachings and the development of the above 3 stages that lead to pro-terrorism violent personalities among many young Muslims. The proliferation of the Islamic head scarf (Hejab) in the last few decades has created insular Muslim societies in which observant Muslims consider women who do not put on the Hejab as sinful or evil, irrespective of how they lead their lives in all other ways. This stereotyping of women breeds hatred towards them, their partner, and towards societies that offer women free choice. That type of religious indignation gave license to Algerian Muslims to throw acid on the faces of women who refused to wear the Islamic head scarf.

I admit that I and my wife who used to wear the Hejab in the past and other Muslims in our circle of friends and acquaintances took pleasure when tragedy befell women who didn’t wear the Hejab as we considered them “the people of Hell.” When I belonged to Jammaa Islameia, the Salafi teaching made me believe that I could declare Jihad or war on Non Muslims. At that time, I thought that it was permissible for me to declare war on women who did not wear the Hejab and justify raping them based on the Salafi law relating to war. I used to consider those women as “the enemies of Allah”. These sentiments were the origin of many violent thoughts against women. Fortunately, my thoughts did not evolve into acts as I started to reform before reaching this level of hatred toward others.

Encouraging hatred against individuals or societies that allow women to wear “non-Islamic” clothes is one first step toward terrorism, as the element of ‘Hate’ has been created.

The acceptance of polygamy in current Islamic teachings is an important contributing factor to desensitizing our conscience. Many Muslims feel sympathy towards a woman in the community who may be suffering because her husband married another woman. Yet, the teaching that allows polygamy cultivates killing such human feelings. We were able to squelch our initial empathy towards these women by telling ourselves “Allah Almighty himself accepts polygamy and our role model prophet Mohammed practiced it.”

This process of suppressing the natural feelings of empathy/sympathy toward others in their suffering fulfils the Islamist’s second step toward terrorism, ‘killing one’s conscience.’

The third step toward terrorism, which is engaging in and condoning ‘violence,’ is a natural outcome to accepting the teaching that recommends beating women to discipline them. A person who justifies the use of violence against women can handily justify the use of violence also against other human beings. Furthermore, there is an actual teaching that encourages and supports domestic violence, thereby providing the preparation for later practice of violence on a larger scale.

The sequential relationship between the proliferation of the Islamic headscarf or Hejab and Islamists’ terrorist attacks is striking. This sequential correlation between Islamist terrorism and the proliferation of the Hejab is obvious; not only in the Islamic world, but even in Western countries that suffer from home-grown terrorism such as the UK – where Hejab has appeared increasingly among Muslim women within few decades. Before the relatively recent rise of Islamic head scarves among Muslim women, terrorism aimed at civilians was virtually unknown among Muslims. The Hejab is the spark of religiously based hatred toward others which ignites the fire of terrorism.

In Iraq the Northern parts, mainly Kurdish are the least to suffer from religious based violence compared to other areas of Iraq. Even though the Kurds are mainly Sunni Muslims, they do not contribute to terrorism and sectarian violence like the other Sunni Muslims in areas like Al-Anbar do. By a simple observation of women dress in Iraq in the last 10-15 years one can clearly examine the fact that the majority of women in Kurdish areas do not wear the Hejab while the majority of women in areas like Al-Anbar, one of the most violent areas, wear it. This observation is undeniable.

While the Islamic teaching in the educational systems of Iraq and in the traditional Islamic books have been nearly the same in Kurdish areas and in Al-Anbar, the presence of Hejab have-in my view- had a strong influential effect on proliferating a violent style of Islam. Other factors could have contributed to such a difference in the development of sectarian violence, but the Hejab among women in Iraq have been much more prevalent in the violent areas and is minimal in the non-violent areas. This fact should not be overlooked.

The importance of Hejab in controlling the mind of Muslims is apparent when we recognize that nearly all Salafi Islamic organizations focus on it as the first step toward Islamizing Muslim societies. These organizations know very well that once the women wear the Hejab, it will work as a catalyst to promote Islamism in its entirety. Women who wear the Hejab are not necessarily violent, but by wearing it, they transmit the Salafi Islamic teachings and initiate Islamizing the rest of their families and their environment.

In typical Salafi Islamic culture, the purpose of the Hejab is to cover free women as they are sexually attractive and since they are free or “superior,” their “flesh” has to be covered to prevent sexual attraction for men. Some Muslim women who wear the Hejab are trying to defend it, claiming that the Hejab is aimed at making men focus on their brain/thinking rather than their bodies. This does neither explain the phenomenon of forcing Muslim children on wearing it, nor does it fit with the approved Islamist teachings. The Hadith that justified Hejab (allowing only face and hands to be exposed) relates it to the set up of menstruation or beginning of sexual maturity. It does not discuss the mind of the female but her body.

It is important to distinguish between the traditional dress of head scarf that allows the neck and part of the hair of a woman to be exposed, which exists in some Muslim societies. On the other hand, the recent phenomenon of Hejab allows only the face and hands to be exposed. The former is mainly a cultural dress code, especially of the elders, as a matter of modesty, while the latter is the key symbol of current Islamism phenomenon and the “revival of Islamic victory”. The latter is an setup that transmits superiority and is based on fanatical religious teaching.

Since the proliferation of Hejab in moderate countries like Egypt in the late seventies, women have been classified by many Muslims as Muhajabat (wearing the Hejab) or Non Muhajabat (Not wearing the Hejab). This has lead to lack of respect to the latter and encouraged sexual harassment by many youth in the Arab society.

Wearing the Hejab was the first step my wife took in the path of Islamism. When she was wearing it, she used to advice male members of our family and friends to beat their women who refused to wear the Hejab. The change in her personality was the direct result of being brainwashed by Islamist teachings. While she wore it, she felt “above” all other women who rejected it. She viewed them as inferior and evil, describing them as “Cheap meat” (as the Mufti of Australia recently described women who do not wear the Hejab).

The Australian example, demonstrates the lack of respect to women who do not wear the Hejab which had been the first step to encourage young Australian Muslims to rape young girls and women. The sense of superiority can be the first step toward violence. The young Muslims who committed such heinous crime stood with pride in the court claiming that it is permissible according to their religion. Their view is based on deep Islamist thought that women who do not wear the Hejab are Infidels and it is thus permitted to take them as concubines “Ma Malakat Aimanikum” to rape them. This distorted way of thinking had been supported even by the grand Mufti of Australia when he blamed the women victims instead of blaming the person committing the crime.

While many Muslims claim that Islamic Hejab is a sign of Modesty, the reality of Salafi teaching is quite the opposite. According to the Salafi teaching, (Tafseer Ibn Katheir for the Quran) Hejab is only allowed for free women, however, not for slaves; it’s a sign of superiority above slave women. Another approved Salafi teaching, is related to the second Caliphate Umar Ibn Alkhatab, which used to beat slave women if they imitated the free Muslim women by wearing the Hejab. Through this form of teaching, slave girls are only allowed to cover the area between umbilicus (belly button) and knees (i.e. topless)!

My recommendations are the following:

1- Conduct research a study on the percentage of women who wear the Islamic Hejab (Head scarf or dress that allows ONLY the face and hands to be exposed) in Muslim societies between 1940 till now. This could be done by comparing the photos of graduation or passport photos of Muslim women during these periods of time.

2- Conduct a parallel research of the Islamist violence in the same societies during the same period of time. This should include both terrorist plots plus attacks. Find the statistical correlation between both 1 & 2

3- If the statistical correlation is significantly positive; i.e. the number of terror attacks and plots is directly correlated with the prevalence of Hejab in the Muslim societies, then every effort has to be taken to deal with this phenomenon (Hejab).

4- Another supportive research would be to compare the prevalence of wearing the Hejab among the mothers of the Islamist terrorists; both who plot and those who succeeded in conducting the attacks and the mothers of liberal Muslims. (The latter have to be carefully selected via certain parameters). If the percentage of mothers who wear the Hejab among the formers (Islamic Extremists) is significantly higher than the percentage of mothers who wear the Hejab among the latter (Liberal Muslims) then the relationship between the Hejab and violent Islamism could be further supported.

The Hejab has become a most powerful symbol of arrogance in the Muslim society that keeps the phenomenon of Islamism surviving. It is both a manifestation and a potentiating catalyst for the phenomenon of Islamism itself. Without ending it, Islamism will continue to grow. It will affect the future of our civilization and will drag it to a destructive clash of civilizations.

In my personal view ending the phenomenon of Hejab is one factor that would have a dramatic impact on ending violent Islamism. However, it will need the integration of legislative, political, media, intelligence, and few other essential components.

References:

Sahih Muslim (a well known book for accurate Hadith): narrated by Abu Huraira that Prophet Mohammed stated: two types of people in hell… women who are covered and naked at the same time “Kasiat Areat” (i.e. do not cover their bodies completely). They walked in a sexy manner and men followed them, their heads show their hair exposed like the Camels humps… these women will never go to paradise or even smell it… [Allfiqh Allwadeh by Mohammed Bakr Ismail Part 2 page 447 Dar AlManar]

Abu Dawood Book 2, Hadith # 0641: Narrated Aisha, Prophet Mohammed stated “Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil.”

Reference 1: Quran {33:59}: O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters (not the concubines), and the believing (Free) women, that they should cast their outer garments over their bodies, that they should be known (as free women) and thus not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

[According to Tfseer Ibn Kathir (one of the most reputable authorities in explaining the Quran) the reason this verse is quoted is that (Asbab Alnuzul): Some people from Medina, (a city), looked at Muslim women, and if they saw a complete veil or cover they recognized they are free, so they did not sexually harass them, but if a woman was without a veil they recognized that she is a slave girl, so they “jumped on her to have sex”. The verse was stated to differentiate between the free women and the concubines so that the free Muslim women are not molested (Ibn Katheer 855/3)]. Most Islamic authorities and scholars have been supporting this explanation for the Hejab which is to differentiate between the free women and female slaves (see: Tafseer Altabary for Sura Ahzab 45/22, Tafseer Al-Baidawy 386/4, and many others).

Reference 2: Sahih Al-Buchary Volume 7, Book 62, Number 22: Narrated Anas: The Prophet stayed for three days between Khaibar (place) and Medina (a city), and there he consummated his marriage to Safiyya bint Huyai (after taking her as a prisoner of war). I invited the Muslims to the wedding banquet in which neither meat nor bread was offered. He ordered for leather dining-sheets to be spread, and dates, dried yoghurt and butter were laid on it, and that was the Prophet’s wedding banquet. The Muslims wondered, “Is she (Saffiyya) considered as his wife or his slave girl?” Then they said, “If he orders her to veil herself, she will be one of the mothers of the Believers (the wives of Prophet Mohammed are called mothers of the believers); but if he does not order her to veil herself, she will be a slave girl. So when the Prophet proceeded from there, he spared her a space behind him (on his she-camel) and put a screening veil between her and the people (accordingly they understood she became his wife not just his slave girl).

Reference 3: The Truth about the Hejab and The Evidence of the Hadith (a book by Mohammed Saiid Al-ashmawi): “… Umar Ibn Al-khatab (one of the disciples of Mohammed and the second Khalifa (Ruler) for the Islamic Khelafa) used to beat any slave girl if she dared to cover her body as the free Muslim women did, so that free Muslim women became distinctive from the slave girls (Ibn Taimeia – Woman, Hejab and her dress during prayer – analysis by Naser Al-deen Al-Albany)”.

Reference 4: When Umar Ibn Alkhatab traveled in Medina (a city)… If he saw “Ama” or a slave girl, he would beat her with his Durra (a special type of stick) until the Hejab would fall off and he would say: “How come the slave girls are trying to emulate the free women by wearing the Hejab)!” (Tabakat Ibn Saad 127/7).

Sahih Muslim (a well known book for accurate Hadith): narrated by Abu Huraira that Prophet Mohammed said: two types of people in hell… women who are covered and naked at the same time “Kasiat Areat” (i.e. do not cover their bodies completely). They walked in a sexy manner and men followed them, their heads show their hair exposed like the Camels humps… these women will NEVER go to paradise or even smell it… [Allfiqh Allwadeh by Mohammed Bakr Ismail Part 2 page 447 Dar AlManar]

Quran {23:6}: Those (males) who protect their sex organs except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame

Quran {4:3}: “…marry women of your choice who seem beautiful to you, two or three or four” Tabari IX:126 “The Messenger of Allah married fifteen women. He combined eleven at a time and left behind nine.”

Quran {4:34}: Men are superior to women because Allah has given them more preference than to women, and because they financially support them. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part you fear that they do not obey you, admonish them, avoid making sex with them (as a form of punishment), and beat them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

Feb 8, 2008 - 9:51 pm 4. Mama Palama:

To EGW

What exactly is that arrow you shoot at Jews in “ghettos left behind” – “inbreeding?” While excoriating (I hope that’s the right word) of an apparent nut job Noah Feldman whose platform in the world rests on anti-Semitism – and, my guess, for whom visibility in the world at any cost rules, demands he be seen as he is without adding to it by such odd comments in and of themselves doing a disservice to the Jews “in ghettos” whose survival and adherence to the Jewish faith guaranteed our people’s continuity.

America’s nationhood begun with families settling on what was to be American soil – indeed – mainly from England “bundled” with cousins during lengthy visits with relations resulting in many offspring fully accepted and constituting in measure the early pioneers of our great country of America! To wit – Franklin D. Roosevelt and Eleanor were, glory hallelujah, cousins. And it can hardly be said they lived in “ghettos”.

Feb 9, 2008 - 6:55 am 5. Jack:

The difference is that in Turkey there is a legal prejudice against a woman’s right to wear a head scarf in certain public places, it is a government infringement on an individual’s right. Noah Feldman’s point about Orthodox Jews is that they practice discrimination, which they do, and which is similar to certain Muslims practices, also discriminatory in nature.
The right to practice religious beliefs is not the same as pointing out the prejudices of certain religions.

Feb 9, 2008 - 2:18 pm 6. David Thomson:

“What is wrong with Noah Feldman?”

Noah Feldman represents the mindset of today’s “elites” that naively believes if they are not interested in war—then war will not be interested in them. The Islamic nihilists merely need our understanding and an apology for neverendingly crapping on them. Who are we to tell them that our values are superior to their’s? There is also something else one had better realize about Professor Feldman: he is not a statistical anomaly! Feldman is merely more brutally frank than a lot his friends and allies.

Feb 9, 2008 - 9:23 pm 7. Otto - American Interests:

What too, is wrong with the NY Times?

Feb 10, 2008 - 4:08 am 8. Anonymous:

I just saw today that this archbishop who advocates for sharia law in some aspects of the legal system in the UK was asked to resign and refused to do so. Chesler says above in her post “By the way: Rest assured, Shari’a law has already been hard at work in settling many disputes in the UK, ranging from violent crimes to divorces.”

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE? DO YOU MEAN LEGALLY? Or are you talking about honor killings, which are not accepted by non-muslim society in Britain?

Canada has rejected Sharia family courts and I think it is the same in Britain. I know France silences Islamic critiques by its hate speech laws which has convinced me to oppose hate speech laws in this country. But I have not heard of any formal acceptance of Sharia law outside of a Muslim country.

Feb 11, 2008 - 12:13 pm 9. Chesler Chronicles » A Day in the Life of the New York Islamic Times: The Subject is Anti-Semitism.:

[...] have written about Feldman before HERE and HERE. This time, Feldman argues that Muslims are, regrettably, becoming “pariahs” [...]

Jun 23, 2008 - 9:36 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: