Embracing dhimmihood

According to Muslim law (sharia) a non Muslim who refuses to convert to Islam but is still tolerated in Muslim society is considered a dhimmi, a lower being.  Accepting their diminished outcast status, dhimmis are not to mock their superiors--the Muslims--but rather unquestioningly obey them. 

And judging by the outrage heaped on Pamela Geller many Americans have quietly evolved into good little dhimmis.   How dare the seemingly white, skin privileged middle aged Jewish former housewife from middle class suburban Long Island, New York bypass the cultural and media gatekeepers, exercise her free speech rights and expose the murderous intent of Islam and many of its followers  in her own words and her own style.  And so the media and the seemingly cultural decisors condemn her.  Independent wrong thinking by the wrong type of the wrong sort cannot go uncensored these good little dhimmis obediently say and do. 

As the AP put it in its backwards--but oh so politically correct style 

Pamela Geller says she has no regrets about Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in 2 deaths: http://apne.ws/1IkVUKN

Bosch Fawstin is another wrong sort.  A self described "recovered  Muslim. That is, if Muslims don’t kill me for leaving Islam, which it requires them to do.," - he won Geller's American Freedom Defense Initiative's Mohammad Cartoon Contest last week end.  

Therefore he must be punished.  And he is.  As Fawstin summed up in a tweet 

1 more time, media: I won't go on any TV show that won't show my prize-winning Mohammad cartoon.

He's not going on many TV shows because that pesky prize-winning Mohammed cartoon is such a hindrance to free speech. Or something.

And now add Facebook, that 21st century communications medium created by media darling, t-shirt clad, under 30 college drop out Mark Zuckerberg and helmed by another media darling, the tragically recently widowed Lean In Sheryl Sandberg, to the new dhimmis.  Tweeting again, Fawstin announced Thursday morning "I have been removed from Facebook."  Whoops!  Uproar!  By afternoon he triumphantly announced  "I'm back." 

But his victory is fragile.  How many more American dhimmis are out there, disguised as tolerant, multi culturals accepting anything and everything that they agree with and won't harm them?  Too many I'm afraid.   As Geller herself explains

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.

Putting up with being offended is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not stand for being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed, while everyone else lives in fear.

Islamic law as it’s interpreted by extremists forbids criticism of Islam, the Quran, and Muhammad. If they cannot be criticized in the United States, we are in effect accepting Islamic law as overriding the freedom of speech. This would establish Muslims as a protected class and prevent honest discussion of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.

Some say that “hate speech” should be censored. But what constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment that is unavoidably influenced by the political perspective of the one doing the judging.

Allowing this sort of censorship would mean nothing less civilizational suicide. Many in the media and academic elite assign no blame to an ideology that calls for death to blasphemers — i.e., those who criticize or offend Islam. Instead, they target and blame those who expose this fanaticism. If the cultural elites directed their barbs and attacks at the extremist doctrine of jihad, the world would be a vastly safer place.

Take that cowardly American dhimmis; a middle aged woman is speaking the (politically correct) truth.  Deal with it.

hat tip: Weasel Zippers 

 

According to Muslim law (sharia) a non Muslim who refuses to convert to Islam but is still tolerated in Muslim society is considered a dhimmi, a lower being.  Accepting their diminished outcast status, dhimmis are not to mock their superiors--the Muslims--but rather unquestioningly obey them. 

And judging by the outrage heaped on Pamela Geller many Americans have quietly evolved into good little dhimmis.   How dare the seemingly white, skin privileged middle aged Jewish former housewife from middle class suburban Long Island, New York bypass the cultural and media gatekeepers, exercise her free speech rights and expose the murderous intent of Islam and many of its followers  in her own words and her own style.  And so the media and the seemingly cultural decisors condemn her.  Independent wrong thinking by the wrong type of the wrong sort cannot go uncensored these good little dhimmis obediently say and do. 

As the AP put it in its backwards--but oh so politically correct style 

Pamela Geller says she has no regrets about Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in 2 deaths: http://apne.ws/1IkVUKN

Bosch Fawstin is another wrong sort.  A self described "recovered  Muslim. That is, if Muslims don’t kill me for leaving Islam, which it requires them to do.," - he won Geller's American Freedom Defense Initiative's Mohammad Cartoon Contest last week end.  

Therefore he must be punished.  And he is.  As Fawstin summed up in a tweet 

1 more time, media: I won't go on any TV show that won't show my prize-winning Mohammad cartoon.

He's not going on many TV shows because that pesky prize-winning Mohammed cartoon is such a hindrance to free speech. Or something.

And now add Facebook, that 21st century communications medium created by media darling, t-shirt clad, under 30 college drop out Mark Zuckerberg and helmed by another media darling, the tragically recently widowed Lean In Sheryl Sandberg, to the new dhimmis.  Tweeting again, Fawstin announced Thursday morning "I have been removed from Facebook."  Whoops!  Uproar!  By afternoon he triumphantly announced  "I'm back." 

But his victory is fragile.  How many more American dhimmis are out there, disguised as tolerant, multi culturals accepting anything and everything that they agree with and won't harm them?  Too many I'm afraid.   As Geller herself explains

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.

Putting up with being offended is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not stand for being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed, while everyone else lives in fear.

Islamic law as it’s interpreted by extremists forbids criticism of Islam, the Quran, and Muhammad. If they cannot be criticized in the United States, we are in effect accepting Islamic law as overriding the freedom of speech. This would establish Muslims as a protected class and prevent honest discussion of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.

Some say that “hate speech” should be censored. But what constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment that is unavoidably influenced by the political perspective of the one doing the judging.

Allowing this sort of censorship would mean nothing less civilizational suicide. Many in the media and academic elite assign no blame to an ideology that calls for death to blasphemers — i.e., those who criticize or offend Islam. Instead, they target and blame those who expose this fanaticism. If the cultural elites directed their barbs and attacks at the extremist doctrine of jihad, the world would be a vastly safer place.

Take that cowardly American dhimmis; a middle aged woman is speaking the (politically correct) truth.  Deal with it.

hat tip: Weasel Zippers