CHUA SOILED LEK SAYS BURN THAT HOLY QURAN WHAT IS SO GREAT ABOUT THAT ISLAM’S HUDUD LAW ?
Chua Soiled Lek says Burn that Holy Quran WHAT IS SO GREAT ABOUT THAT ISLAM’S HUDUD LAW ?
– If “politics is the art of the possible,” as Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898) is reported to have once said, then one is tempted to retort that it is actually the politics of the impossible. ”Religion can be a source of tranquil hearts and inspiration for fight against tyranny, inequality and injustice.”
SHARIAH BILLS FEED FEAR IN UMNO WOMANISER NAJIB AND ADULTEROUS MCA PRESIDENT CHUA SOI LEK
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
In the name of Allah; most Merciful, most Compassionate.
Who is Ayaan Hirsi Ali?
According to reporters and her own words (in chronological order): “She renounced Islam and became an atheist in 2002 … She claims that her personal views are for the most part inspired by her change from Islam to atheism”; “I am a Muslim woman saying these things, and it has provoked a lot of hatred”; “I came to the conclusion [that] I do not believe in the existence of a god or in the hereafter”; “All I say is that being a Muslim…”; “the fact that I’m an atheist”; “[Do you regard yourself as a Muslim?] A Muslim atheist … I’m no longer a Muslim but I was a Muslim woman”; “Hirsi Ali, an atheist”; “’I’m not a Muslim!’ Hirsi Ali responds. ‘I have become an infidel!’”
Perhaps ‘a feminist counterpart to Salman Rushdie’ or a new Wafa Sultan is more suiting.
There are many terms that Ayaan Hirsi uses that she ought to define, because the meaning of these words and/or their interpretation can make for differing understandings. Let me give one example, in the Preface of her first book (The Caged Virgin, 2002) she said her parents brought her up to be a “good Muslim.” Does that mean that her father, who promoted education, Islamic rights, and forbid female genital mutilation (Type III, see footnote) to be a good Muslim example, her mother who relentlessly beat her, or her grandmother who secretly had Ayaan mutilated when her mother was away? As such, one is left wondering what Ayaan Hirsi Ali means by “good Muslim,” and readers unfamiliar with Islam are also unjustly left wondering.
Ali uses the term “extremist religion” but does not allow her readers know what that means in her usage. Does she refer to “extremist religion” as those people who misuse and vilify Islam, those who disregard Islam but claim to be Muslims by birth, or those who live according to the guidance in the Qur’an and Sunna? Which ever definition is the case her readers deserve to know what it is that she means within her writing.
It is important that a person distinguish opinion from fact. Within her first novel Ayaan Hirsi Ali integrates people’s opinion, such as her grandmother, but does not clarify for her readers that such opinions are actually against the teachings of Islam. This leaves an incorrect impression that the ideas presented are actually those of Islam. Whether this was intended or not, I’d like to point just a couple of these out so that readers are aware of this backhanded tactic to attach teachings to Islam, which has no basis in the religion.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali would probably state that these are fact, that they did happen, and some people do believe them. This is not in disagreement. However, if Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants to join with other Muslims in “reforming” Islam (she says that she is a Muslim reformer), she ought to, at least, represent Islam in a proper light.  Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants to start a dialogue for change, however in presenting Islam in a skewed, misrepresented, and incorrect way is a hypocritical and self-defeating, thus calling into question the authenticity of these so-called aims in the first place.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali quotes and refers to leaders, scholars, and others however does not provide any bibliographic information when doing so. I collected only a few of these problems, which is a form of plagiarism, to demonstrate this. Due note, that in all the below examples no citations, references, or even names are given to support her claims:
“Some Western critics disapprove …;” “Some intellectuals criticize …;” “cultural experts fail to notice …;” “their numbers [Muslim women who have been successful in the West], incidentally, are not very large;”  “many of whom have an Islamic background;” “even first-generation Muslims mothers in the West have no more than elementary education;” “Most mullahs advise Muslims …;” “a large number of Muslims …;” “there are three kinds of Muslims in the West …;” “Muslim men rarely tell their wives how they spend the day.”
Ayaan Hirsi Ali quotes “experts” in making these claims, but makes no reference of where she found these quotes and materials, nor does she even give the name of the person whom the quote is from (for example, the preface to her first book page xviii).
Other statements made by Ayaan Hirsi Ali clearly rest in the fanciful realm of opinion as she neglects to develop or prove any of her statements. Such as: “Western culture is superior to Islamic culture … Islam as a body of ideas is not compatible with human rights, it is bad for women, it is bad for the human being, it is bad for the imagination, bad for science and therefore bad for progress.” Further, she says that “Islam is a culture that has been outlived.” Again, Ayaan Hirsi Ali makes claims without any justification and bases her evidence on mere opinion. Since she provides no factual evidence for these claims, they will not be refuted here, but simple research demonstrates the incorrectness of her statements, such as the human rights within Islam in the Universal Islamic Declaration of Human rights, which describes human rights as: the rights to life, rights to freedom, rights to equality, rights to justice, rights of protection, rights of minorities, freedom of religion, rights to education, and so on.
One wonders sometimes which religion Ayaan Hirsi Ali is talking about and if she has created her own religion, since she has given new laws and introduced instructions not found within Islamic law. For example she writes, “Like the fact that Muslim women at home are kept locked up, are raped and are married off against their will.” She fails to mention any religious justification for this – a glaring generalization of the Muslim world that certainly requires one. While it is the case that these horrid acts do occur, they are not done by only one specific group of people. However, almost all groups of people agree that such people are criminals, and certainly Islamic law does. Maria Golia, an Egyptian-based academic, writes: ‘Hirsi Ali seems far more interested in indicting Islam than helping damaged women, whose horror stories she conveniently trots out whenever she needs to bludgeon home a point.' In this case she clearly contradicts the Islamic legal system, which demonstrates her complete lack of knowledge of Islam.
A large component of Ali’s first book deals with the sexual morality in Islam. One of these points refers to the idea of abstinence until marriage. Ali describes this as being “enchained by the doctrine of virginity.” However, if her case against the moral regulation regarding sexuality in Islam is one of prime concern, which she says, then Christianity and Judaism also fall under this banner. Ayaan Hirsi Ali states that the sexual morality of Islam is one of three factors that have resulted in Muslims are “lagging behind the West.” But, interestingly, the religions practiced within the West also value these moral principles. In Islam marriage is sacred. It must be agreed upon by both parties in full commitment. Muslims marry in a voluntary union, according to the Qur’an. In her book The Caged Virgin, Ayaan says that Muslim marriages are “prearranged by the family when the daughter is very young” and are in essence an “arranged rape.” She is blatantly incorrect.
In her first book Ayaan Hirsi Ali explains that Christians no longer believe in hell. There may be some Christians that hold this view, but it is surely in the minority. This is not the case in the Catholic and Protestant belief, and these two sects account for almost 1.4 billion Christians. Below are some Christian sources which disprove her claims: “Hell, in Christian beliefs, is a place in which the souls of the unsaved will suffer the consequences of sin.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell.” In the Protestant view, Hell is “where they will be punished for their sins. People will be consigned to hell after the last judgment.”
Ayaan Hirsi Ali also states that Islam is bad for science, progress, and the imagination. However, it was Muslim scholars, following the direction of Islam to study the world and learn of Allah’s wonders that lead to the emergence out of the dark ages in Europe. There is no need to list the accomplishments of Muslims, following the Islamic direction of the sciences, from the past to the present as they permeate society, if Ayaan only cared to look.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke of the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and described him in vile terms which will not be reprinted here. The Qur’an states that “We know of best what they say; and you (O Muhammad) are not a tyrant over them (to force them to Belief). But warn by the Qur’an, him who fears My Threat (50:45).” The prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) made peace treaties with neighboring groups (including those of other faiths) and encouraged patience when facing adversity:
“How wonderful is the case of a believer; there is good for him in everything and this applies only to a believer. If prosperity attends him, he expresses gratitude to Allah and that is good for him; and if adversity befalls him, he endures it patiently and that is better for him.” (Sahih Muslim)
The Holy Qur’an explains: “O you who believe! Endure and be more patient” (3:200)
Islamic law, the Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace) outright banned the practice of infanticide and maltreatment of women. His teachings declared that the poor, orphaned, and elderly need to be cared for by the Muslim community. If the Prophet (peace be upon him) sought fame, as Ayaan claims, he would have promoted himself and his images. However, we find the opposite. It fact he forbade it. Ali makes illogical, incorrect and disrespectful comparisons to modern figures, all of which are baseless.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali claims to understand the difference between culture and religion, but her arguments utilize this faulty logic throughout her books. For example, she writes that non-Muslims practice the tradition of female genital mutilation (FGM here refers to Type III as defined by the WHO, which is the type Ayaan Hirsi Ali refers to her books); a practice does not come from the Middle East. Female circumcision in general is a tradition that is practiced by Christians, Jews, Muslims and animists. A comprehensive study done by the United Nations covering fourteen African nations found no correlation between Islam and female genital mutilation. In regards to religion and culture, FGM is not Islamic. Ayaan Hirsi Ali falsely claims that “Muslim scholars have never condemned the ritual.” However, the Mufti of Egypt, the Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar Masjid, a statement made from the 2006 International Conference in Egypt, and scholars from around the world are also in agreement. Again, Ali’s lack of research leads her to errors and incorrect statements.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali writes that: “the Quran is not a holy document. It is a historical record, written by humans. It is one version of events, as perceived by the men who wrote it 150 years after the Prophet Muhammad died.” Again, she cites no reference for this statement and it is false. During the time of the Prophet (upon whom be peace) the suras of the Qur’an were written and during the caliphate of Abu Bakr (632-634) the Qur’an was written, and copies were made and sent to the capitals of the Islamic world. And, two copies of these originals still exist in Istanbul and Tashkent.
Certainly not all non-Muslims have been jumping on the Ali bandwagon as Infidel has received criticism from all walks of life. Andrew Anthony, of the Observer, noted that, “of course in voicing her opinion in the style she does, she risks lumping together over a billion people from different nations, cultures and traditions as a single ‘problem.” The Economist book review wrote that “much as she tries, the kind of problems that Ms Hirsi Ali describes in Infidel are all too human to be blamed entirely on Islam. Her book shows that her life, like those of other Muslims, is more complex than many people in the West may have realised. But the West’s tendency to seek simplistic explanations is a weakness that Ms Hirsi Ali also shows she has been happy to exploit.” Newsweek magazine felt the book “manipulated” its readers and that “Hirsi Ali is more a hero among Islamophobes than Islamic women.” Newsweek says that Hirsi sounds as “single-minded and reactionary as the zealots she’s worked so hard to oppose.” “The Dutch sociologist and publicist Dick Pels describes her as an exponent of what he refers to as liberal fundamentalism, claiming “This ideology is similar to orthodox Islam in the sense that it thinks its perspective is superior and all people should be forced to have it.”” The March 15th edition of the Guardian concluded that “she’s definitely right about the shameful, unacceptable oppression of women in some Muslim families and communities in Europe. But I don’t think she’s right about Islam.”
The Washington Post reported the contradiction of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, which is that she claims to want to help Muslim women but time after time she has only insulted and degraded them. The newspaper writes, “The film she scripted, Submission, showed … When it was screened for a small audience of Islamic women at a Dutch shelter for abused women — and you’d have to figure this would be her core audience — they were appalled, not inspired.”
To demonstrate this foundational contradiction of claiming to help Muslim women while in fact she is harming them we can look at her work in the field of social work in the Netherlands. The Washington Post reports,
“She began to scorn her fellow immigrants. She said Muslims needed to adopt Western values; if necessary, the Netherlands should amend its Constitution to ban faith-based schools in order to keep Muslim parents from sending their children to Muslim schools. She stood for office on the Liberal ticket, one of a slate of candidates, and made it into parliament — an immigrant elected on a current of anti- immigrant sentiment.”
Although she no longer is involved in the Dutch government Ayaan Hirsi Ali continues to voice her opinion on restricting immigration policies, while this seems counter-intuitive for someone who herself came to Europe on false pretenses. Halleh Ghorashi writes, “I soon realized that Ayaan had become part of the dominant “rightist” discourse on Islam in the Netherlands that pictures Islamic migrants as problems and enemies of the nation.”
In Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s first book she says that she is “optimistic,” for reform in Islam and that it is her “mission to help Muslim women.” However she also said, in that same book, “September 11, mark my words, was the beginning of the end of Islam as we know it.” The author is optimistic for the future while at the same time the positions and “reformations” she advocates for have thus far done the opposite: to offend Muslim women, rather then empower or ‘free’ them.
Ali lavishes praise on the Western countries and their legal systems of rights, however she hypocritically does not allow such rights (such as the freedom to practice ones religion and the freedom of choice) to be extended to Muslims. It is a bizarre contradiction to promote these Western values while not allowing Muslims to be given those rights. She hypocritically subscribes to a western secular value system while at the same time denies them.
One is left wondering, how the woman with a “mission to help Muslim women” expects to help Muslim women by defiling the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), stating that Islam is the new Nazism, and telling Muslims not to follow the Qur’an? Clearly, this is not her mission at all and she has aims altogether different that those she claims to aspire for. The one thing readers do know is that she presents a faulty, weak, and incorrect opinion.