Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Wednesday, 16 March 2016

Veiling Islam's Sexism: What the BBC tells the kids

That true and outspoken feminist, the American Professor Phyllis Chesler, who knows from personal experience the misogynist nature of Islam, has recently returned from a visit to London.

 'England,' she writes inter alia:
'The country of William Wilberforce, who successfully fought to abolish the slave trade; the land of the bravest suffrage movement anywhere; Churchill's own country--that fair and glorious Kingdom is still there but it is also fraying, fading away.
....The streets are filled with women in heavy hijab, in Niqab, (face masks), and in black, burqa-like body bags. As I have written many times before: I have no quarrel with head coverings but suggest that the West must draw the line at face masks and sensory deprivation isolation chambers which burqas truly are. These "covered" women are flying the flag of Jihad, of a barbaric version of patriarchy--which is now increasingly ensconced within Britain's gates.
The West's dependence on Big Oil together with its own blind commitment to cultural sensitivity, an allegedly anti-racist tolerance for the barbarian "other," and fearfulness about the consequences of speaking out--have together brought this about.
Dhimmified for Oil: Ffion Jenkins (Mrs William Hague)
Some say that just as England once colonized the Middle East, the Indian sub-continent, Central Asia, and the Far East that now, the favor is being returned; the Islamic world is giving the colonizing Mother Country a taste of its own well deserved medicine.
Tragically, this means that infidel women are sexual prey; that their rape, sexual harassment, and sexual slavery is being done quite openly, publicly--just as it is done in the Muslim world....
Will Britain, will all Europe, fight to remain Western countries? Or, hoisted on their own petard of political correctness, will they simply become vassal states of Islam?'
From BBC hack Paul Danahar's Twitter page
And in Britain no entity is more politically correct, more ready to bang the drum for Islam, than the national broadcaster, dear old "Auntie", the BBC.

Among the various non-broadcasting initiatives that the feather-bedded BBC provides with all the money it accrues from hapless licence-payers is a "service" called BBC Bitesize, in which it provides teenagers with information connected with exams.

Among these Bitesize portions are topics related to "Religious Studies". And within that range, the attitudes of Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, and Buddhism (in that order) towards "Prejudice and Discrimination" are described.

Under the heading "Inequality in the Christian Church", the British national broadcaster has absolutely no qualms about telling the kids (emphasis added):
Many people think that the Christian Church is sexist. It does not treat men and women equally.
The teaching of St Paul is often quoted to support the way some churches today treat women. From the extracts below, it would seem that he believed that the role of women was different to that of men, and secondary to it.
St Paul said:
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to enquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35
 Now I want you to realise that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 1 Corinthians 11:3-7
Jesus, however, always showed by his actions that he respected and valued women. He included them among his closest companions, and sometimes went against the conventions of his time which kept men and women apart. Jesus made it clear in the Parable of the Good Samaritan how his followers should treat people – he made no distinction between men and women.
Some Christian denominations have recently begun to allow women to be priests or ministers (eg, Church of England and the Methodist church). Some remain opposed to this (eg, the Roman Catholic Church). Some Christians believe that women are second to men, that men should lead and women should follow (see 1 Timothy 2:8–15).
So although Christianity teaches that everyone should be equal and should be treated the same, this doesn't always happen.
"Fair enough," I hear you say. "That's an accurate and objective summary."

How about this, regarding  "Attitudes to women in Judaism" (emphasis added)?:
"The Tenakh (Jewish Bible) and the Talmud (Mishnah and Gemara collected together) describe different roles for men and women.
Traditionally women have a sacred role - they bear children, run the home and take responsibility for their children’s Jewish upbringing. The woman passes on Jewish values and it is because of the mother’s Jewish faith (not the father’s) that a child is born Jewish.
While Jewish law excuses women from some religious duties (eg, they don’t have to wear the tzizit and tefillin) there are some duties that women are obliged to carry out like the lighting the Shabbat candles. (Shabbat is the day of spiritual renewal and rest commencing at sunset on Friday, terminating at nightfall on Saturday.)
Some people say that Judaism is sexist. Men and women sit separately in Orthodox services and women cannot take an active part in this worship. Some Jewish women today accept these limitations, but they are as well-educated as men and choose to combine a career with family responsibilities.
Progressive Jews (which includes Jews of both liberal and reform traditions) think that this attitude is wrong and treat women equally in all respects, so they too can become rabbis (Jewish teacher) if they choose to do so."
 Okay so far?

On the basis of the above, we are entitled to expect that BBC Bitesize will tell the kids a little of the sexism inherent in Islam.

However, in sections such as Marriage and Divorce it avoids the sexist bits, and this is what we find, in the section "Islam: prejudice and discrimination" under the heading "Attitudes towards women":
 "Islam also teaches that men and women are equal in the sight of Allah. They are individually accountable for their actions, and will be judged equally by Allah.
However, although men and women are equal, they are not the same. They have different purposes. It is part of Allah’s design and purpose for men and women to have different physical characteristics; likewise it is the duty of a man to provide for the financial needs of his family, and for a woman to look after the home and family.
Some of these differences and responsibilities are mentioned in the following words from the Qur’an:
O Prophet, direct thy wives and daughters and the women of the believers that they should pull down their outer cloaks from their heads over their faces. This will make it possible for them to be distinguished so that they will not be molested. Surah 33:59
Wives have rights corresponding to those which the husbands have, in equitable reciprocity, though, in certain situations men would have the final word and would thus enjoy a preference. Surah 2:229
Men are appointed guardians over women, because of that in respect of which Allah has made some of them excel others, and because men spend of their wealth. Surah 4:35
Although the rights of women are different to those of men, they do have the right to choose whom they marry, to divorce, to study, to own property, to conduct business and to take part in politics.
The Prophet Muhammad stressed the importance of women and the respect that should be shown to them when he said: Paradise lies at the feet of your mother. (Sunan An-Nasa’i)"
Nice little bit of propaganda there, huh?  Not one honest mention of Islam's sexism, let alone the misogyny that that infuses it and makes Saul of Tarsus/St Paul look like a Sensitive New Age guy in comparison.

In reality, this is what UK Islam's attitude to women looks like (as set out in this important British document of 2012, of which the BBC, if it's worth its salt the enormous amount of public money it gathers via a compulsory poll tax cannot be ignorant).

Note the testimony regarding the oppression of women in Islamic law as set out by female victims of sharia courts operating in Britain and by conultants including such scholars of Islam as the Australian Dr Mark Durie.

See, for instance, this:
"Women’s rights are compromised by the operation of Sharia law in the UK. Sharia Councils often permit polygamy. Men have multiple Nikahs (Muslim marriages) and have multiple wives to gain sex and/or money. Polygamy is not about protecting women.
If women marry through an Imam and they eventually have a problem with their marriage, they will be forced to go back to an Imam and discuss the problem; these women feel intimidated. Many women are unable to discuss their personal issues with an Imam; they feel embarrassed and do not feel comfortable talking to a total stranger about personal issues.
I am in contact with large numbers of women who have a language barrier. They are not in contact with the wider community and they have no understanding of the laws available to them. Instead they believe the lies that their husbands tell them. These women, unable to speak English, are tied to unhappy marriages and have no way of accessing their rights.
If a legal dispute arises they go to a Sharia Council and consult an Imam, they are not aware of the English legal system, nor are they ever informed of their rights under English laws.
Like me, many Muslim women are asylum seekers. They have fled their home country to live a safe life, they are running away from oppression and persecution that they suffered in their home country. They should not arrive in the UK to be met with further oppression through the operation of Sharia law. The Government should ensure that everyone in the UK abides by the English legal system.
For these reasons I am totally against Sharia law in the UK. The law should not be left to religious men to manipulate women in a democratic state. It is the responsibility of the Government to make sure that everyone in the UK submits to the law equally. I am worried because the Government and people outside the Muslim community are frightened to address sensitive issues like Sharia law, when the wellbeing of the majority is more important that the sensitivity of the minority....
 Shaikh Haitham al-Haddad is a member of the Islamic Sharia Council and a Sharia Council ‘judge’ in London. In a speech entitled "Why Marriages Fail" Shaikh a-Haddad made the following observation: "A man should not be questioned why he hit his wife because this is something between them. Leave them alone. They can sort out their matters among themselves. Even the father of the daughter who is married to the man, he should not ask his daughter why you have been beaten or hit by your husband".
 (Note also this statement:  "People argue that Sharia Councils should be allowed to operate in Britain because Britain allows Beth Din systems, but Jewish Law does not affect mainstream life as much as Sharia Law which aims to control rather than simply affect mainstream life".  Emphasis added)

As Professor Dennis MacEoin, another very respected expert, points out in "Sharia Law or One Law for All?", a paper for the Civitas thinktank in 2009:
"a Muslim woman may not marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam (such a woman's children will be separated from her until she marries a Muslim man);  polygamous marriage (two to four wives) is legal: a man may divorce his wife without telling her about it, provided he does not seek to sleep with her; a husband has conjugal rights over his wife, and she should normally answer his summons to have sex (but she cannot summon him for that); a woman may not stay with her husband if he leaves Islam; non-Muslims may be deprived of their share in an inheritance; a divorce does not require witnesses (a man may divorce his wife and send her away even if no one else knows about it); re-marriage requires the wife to marry, have sex with, and be divorced by another man; a wife has no property rights in the event of divorce (which may be initiated arbitrarily by her husband); sharia law must override the judgements of British courts; rights of child custody may differ from those in UK law; taking up residence in a non-Muslim country except for limited reasons is forbidden;  taking out insurance is prohibited, even if required by law; there is no requirement to register a marriage according to the law of the country; it is undesirable to rent an apartment belonging to a Christian church; a Muslim lawyer has to act contrary to UK law where it contradicts sharia; employment by driving a taxi is prohibited; it is allowable to be a police officer, provided one is not called upon to do anything contrary to the sharia; women are restricted in leaving their homes and driving cars; an adult woman may not marry anyone she chooses; sharia law of legitimacy contradicts the Legitimacy Act 1976;  a woman may not leave her home without her husband's consent (a restriction that may constitute false imprisonment); legal adoption is forbidden;  a man may coerce his wife to have sex; a woman may not retain custody of her child after seven (for a boy) or nine (for a girl);  a civil marriage may be considered invalid;  sharia law takes priority over secular law (for example, a wife may not divorce her husband in a civil court); fighting the Americans and British is a religious duty;  recommendation of severe punishments for homosexuals;  a woman's recourse to fertility treatment is discouraged;  a woman cannot marry without the presence and permission of a male guardian (wali); if a woman's 'idda (three months, to determine whether or not she is pregnant) has expired and she no longer has marital relations with her husband, he is excused alimony payments;  an illegitimate child may not inherit from his/her father."
It would be unreasonable to expect a megillah on the BBC Bitesize website regarding Islam's sexist attitude to women, but we are entitled to honesty, to at least some indication of how Islam disadvantages females.

So how is the BBC's whitewashing of Islam in its attitude towards women to be explained?

Might it have something to do with the fact that a Muslim, Aaquil Ahmed, is the BBC's Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion and Ethics?

 Or is it because the left-liberals who dominate Al Beeb despise the Judeo-Christian heritage and save their barbs for that?

 Or is it due to a combination of both?

 Here, by the way, is what some American Muslims replied when asked whether Sharia should  supersede the US Constitution:


(hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog)

Meanwhile, in a must-read article in the current Quadrant, Australia's conservative intellectual magazine, regarding the secularised and myopic West's facilitation of Islamic dreams of hegemony, Jim Campbell notes:

"Perhaps the most dangerous misconception that has gained some traction is the notion that Islamic and Christian values, and by default secular democratic values, are similar. This was suggested recently by a professor of religious studies no less, and on the ABC’s Q&A program [analogous to the BBC's Question Time] by a Muslim guest.
 The most astonishing aspect was not the theological invalidity of the statements, but that no member of the panel or of the audience sought to take issue with the assertion. That silence said a lot about Australia’s spiritual immaturity, as nothing could be further from the truth, as the precepts of Islam and Christianity are diametric opposites. Islam pits Muslims against non-Muslims; Christianity instructs followers to love their neighbors as themselves
 Islam’s aim is the subjugation of all to the God of the Qur’an; Christianity asks people to consider the claims of the God of the Bible and make personal decisions. Islam offers salvation through the coercive performance of “good deeds”; Christianity’s salvation comes through faith in promises of the God of the Bible.
 Are these differences important? They should be for the West, whose secular democracy is founded on the precepts of the Bible. On this issue the West is myopic behind its rose-coloured glasses."
Goes quite a way to explaining Al Beeb's stance, I reckon.

5 comments:

  1. What surprise the UK's top provider of terrorists, the LSE Islamic Society is also misogynist.

    LSE criticised after Islamic Society holds segregated gala dinner
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/12194943/LSE-criticised-after-Islamic-Society-holds-segregated-gala-dinner.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I noticed this too, Ian, and how the "feminist" non-Muslim became an apologist for it.

      Delete
  2. More Islamic propaganda.
    What can they be telling about the Invasion of Banu Qurayza specifically cited in these sessions plugged by the ABC?
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rnafternoons/muslim-women-speed-dating-breaks-down-intolerance/7253656

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let them explain this: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/17/integrated-migrant-girl-publicly-executed-for-refusing-to-marry-cousin/

      Delete
    2. ABC shilling for Islam and "asylum:
      http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rnafternoons/an-afternoon-of-muslim-speed-dating/7255460

      Delete