Herald Sun columnist, Andrew Bolt, has delivered another powerful article in today’s paper: Backing a Bigot.
And excerpt …
Excuses over. The disgraced mufti of Australia set Muslims a test last month and they failed.
That test couldn’t have been easier: make Sheik Taj el-Din al-Hilaly pay for preaching that unveiled women invited rape.
Prove that Muslims can’t be led by a man who says raped women must be “jailed for life”.
Prove we have nothing to fear from your faith.
Yet yesterday 34 Muslim groups signed a petition backing this bigot, while others were planning a big rally for Sydney tomorrow, denouncing not Hilaly but the non-Muslims who criticise him.
The results are in: Islam here – as represented by many of its leaders – is now a threat.
What’s more: our culture of self-hate makes us too weak to properly resist.
Last week when I read the various reactions from Muslim leaders and spokespeople, I mentioned to colleagues that the manner of their seeming disapproval of Hilaly was not an actual condemnation of the Sheik’s ideas, but merely embarassment that what he’d been preaching and they had been accepting for a couple of decades had just been exposed.
It’s not enough for Muslims to say they don’t like what Al Hilaly said or to merely state they disagree with it or even to say that “in Australia” such things don’t apply. Muslims need to rebutt the Sheik using Islam. They need to show that what Al Hilali has said contradicts Islam.
Al Hilali’s later clarification about rape – attempting to prove to the world he couldn’t possibly believe that rape could be blamed on the woman or that the rapist could be excused in any way just demonstrates further how far removed this man is from civilised principles and common law:
Islam does not instruct rape … I will say it briefly and very clearly. As one would say, first of all: Let me clearly state for the record, for the history, that rape in our religion … is considered a crime whose punishment is execution. News.com.au archive
Execution? Why is rape a capital crime?
It’s also interesting how Hilali’s statement reveals that Islam is not just a religion – leaving ultimate judgement to Allah.
It apparently also does the work of law and government, prescribing specific punishments for specific offences.
And another bit of Sheik Speak:
This does not condone rape, I condemn rape … Women in our Australian society have the freedom and right to dress as they choose, the duty of man is to avert his glance or walk away.
Why should a man avert his glance or walk away? What would happen if he didn’t do this?
If a man looks at a sexy-looking woman or approaches her does this increase the chance that he will rape her?
What kind of an unthinking, animal-savage view of males, females, sexuality, and sex does this reveal?
And what sort of ignorance does Islam have about rape? Since there are LOTS of sexy-looking women around where I am, here in Melbourne’s inner suburbs, why aren’t lots of them all being forcibly ravaged?
When the Grand Mufti of Australia tells us that a moral man should not gaze upon a sexy woman, he’s just told us yet again that women are meat and men are animals – that the raw meat/animal combination had better be kept apart … or else!
The Sheik hasn’t rebutted any “misapprehsions” about his original point. He’s reinforced his barbaric viewpoint!
And how does Hilaly explain the inclusion of the following statement from his Raw Meat Speech ?
In his literature, scholar al-Rafihi says: ‘If I came across a rape crime â€” kidnap and violation of honour â€” I would discipline the man and order that the woman be arrested and jailed for life.’
It’s hard to reconcile this scholarly Islamic reference from within Al-Hilaly’s speech with the Sheik’s later coments.
Report This Post