why would they kill someone for drawing a picture of the prophet muhammed
"Why would they kill someone for drawing the prophet Muhammed?" wondered Bill.
I thought for a moment.
"Muslims have a whole host of red lines that they arbitrarily impose on each other and on anyone who comes in contact with them," I mused. "Remember that the word 'Islam' itself means 'submission.' The name of their religion is submission. Muslims choose to believe that they are told by the Prophet Muhammed in their Quran to impose submission on all other human beings. The arbitrary challenges for which Muslims kill are therefore simply an indirect way of demanding submission, even from people who are not Muslim. Instead of saying 'Surrender or I kill you,' a Muslim in the west prefers for the moment to say 'do not draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammed or I kill you.' These constantly growing and evolving cultural challenges are pretexts for demanding submission. They are also a way for Muslims to probe what the west will stand for. That is why Muslims pretend to believe that none of us have the right to draw pictures of whatever we want. At one level they are genuinely offended, I'll admit, but it's an offence (and offence taking) curiously likenable to a western lagar lout picking a fight with you in a pub by demanding: 'Are you staring at my pint!' This type of murderous aggression is a way for Muslims to dominate in any culture that permits them to enter. Muslims' own cultures have been dominated since their inception by what amounts to a Cult Of The Assassins. So in Arabia you get a veritable cornucopia of what are essentially excuses to kill, masquerading as principles. These are what I call the red lines of Muslim culture. Muslims more or less dare anyone to step over them on pain of death. The red lines are fairly extensive and impossible to predict unless you are familiar with Muslim culture. Even then some of the red lines, in tandem with being arbitrary, are also shall we say, quite recent, such as the imposition of head scarves for women, and indeed, the ban on images of the Prophet Muhammed. One commentator maintains that the imposition of head scarves began as recently as the 1970's. Never mind the rest of us, Muslims themselves live in terror of stepping over such red lines. For instance if a Muslim wishes to cease being Muslim, say to change his religion or to admit he's an atheist, he can be fairly sure of being murdered by other Muslims. I assure you there are many millions of Muslims including the Jihadis who do not believe Allah exists but would never dare say it for fear of being murdered immediately. The red lines, are a way of fostering fear and control, in a culture that has never known freedom. Girl Muslims who break arbitrarily imposed dress codes often end up being murdered by their own family members. Women who are rather arbitrarily deemed to have offended Muslim conceptions of family honour, say by being unfortunate enough to get raped, often end up being unfortunate enough to get murdered by their fathers, uncles and brothers when the woman tells of the rape. Societies where Islam prevails are ferociously violent and ferociously cowed societies. The red lines are everywhere. If anyone insults the prophet Muhammed, there's a similar willingness to commit murder. Drawing pictures of the prophet Muhammed is yet another comparatively recently imposed and thoroughly arbitrary red line. A few years ago the Southpark television cartoon featured the Prophet Muhammed and nobody noticed. They tried it again more recently when Muslims had started insisting such representations were blasphemy and all hell broke loose. As such, the Muslim prohibition on images of the Prophet Muhammed should now be seen as a deliberate challenge, and an arbitrary one, to our countries and our cultures. Effectively Muslim Jihadis are saying: "We just thought up this rule. And if you break it, we'll kill you." In that sense I would contend it's a confrontation Muslims have contrived purely for the purposes of promoting confrontation. I tell you it's about power as much as anything else. The news broadcaster CNN is today wrongly claiming that the Muslim prohibition on pictures of the Prophet Mohammed is a way of preventing worship of the Prophet Mohammed. This is a nice romantic CNN misreading of a fairly clearcut, fairly random, fairly recent, but now fairly murderously enforced Muslim prohibition on discourse. What CNN doesn't realise and hasn't bothered to find out, is that Muslims will more readily commit murder when they randomly deem someone to have insulted the Prophet Muhammed than they will if they randomly decide a person has insulted God. To all intents and purposes Muslims who murder human beings on this pretext, worship the Prophet Muhammed as a being greater than God. Now that's what I call blasphemy."
I thought for a moment.
"Muslims have a whole host of red lines that they arbitrarily impose on each other and on anyone who comes in contact with them," I mused. "Remember that the word 'Islam' itself means 'submission.' The name of their religion is submission. Muslims choose to believe that they are told by the Prophet Muhammed in their Quran to impose submission on all other human beings. The arbitrary challenges for which Muslims kill are therefore simply an indirect way of demanding submission, even from people who are not Muslim. Instead of saying 'Surrender or I kill you,' a Muslim in the west prefers for the moment to say 'do not draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammed or I kill you.' These constantly growing and evolving cultural challenges are pretexts for demanding submission. They are also a way for Muslims to probe what the west will stand for. That is why Muslims pretend to believe that none of us have the right to draw pictures of whatever we want. At one level they are genuinely offended, I'll admit, but it's an offence (and offence taking) curiously likenable to a western lagar lout picking a fight with you in a pub by demanding: 'Are you staring at my pint!' This type of murderous aggression is a way for Muslims to dominate in any culture that permits them to enter. Muslims' own cultures have been dominated since their inception by what amounts to a Cult Of The Assassins. So in Arabia you get a veritable cornucopia of what are essentially excuses to kill, masquerading as principles. These are what I call the red lines of Muslim culture. Muslims more or less dare anyone to step over them on pain of death. The red lines are fairly extensive and impossible to predict unless you are familiar with Muslim culture. Even then some of the red lines, in tandem with being arbitrary, are also shall we say, quite recent, such as the imposition of head scarves for women, and indeed, the ban on images of the Prophet Muhammed. One commentator maintains that the imposition of head scarves began as recently as the 1970's. Never mind the rest of us, Muslims themselves live in terror of stepping over such red lines. For instance if a Muslim wishes to cease being Muslim, say to change his religion or to admit he's an atheist, he can be fairly sure of being murdered by other Muslims. I assure you there are many millions of Muslims including the Jihadis who do not believe Allah exists but would never dare say it for fear of being murdered immediately. The red lines, are a way of fostering fear and control, in a culture that has never known freedom. Girl Muslims who break arbitrarily imposed dress codes often end up being murdered by their own family members. Women who are rather arbitrarily deemed to have offended Muslim conceptions of family honour, say by being unfortunate enough to get raped, often end up being unfortunate enough to get murdered by their fathers, uncles and brothers when the woman tells of the rape. Societies where Islam prevails are ferociously violent and ferociously cowed societies. The red lines are everywhere. If anyone insults the prophet Muhammed, there's a similar willingness to commit murder. Drawing pictures of the prophet Muhammed is yet another comparatively recently imposed and thoroughly arbitrary red line. A few years ago the Southpark television cartoon featured the Prophet Muhammed and nobody noticed. They tried it again more recently when Muslims had started insisting such representations were blasphemy and all hell broke loose. As such, the Muslim prohibition on images of the Prophet Muhammed should now be seen as a deliberate challenge, and an arbitrary one, to our countries and our cultures. Effectively Muslim Jihadis are saying: "We just thought up this rule. And if you break it, we'll kill you." In that sense I would contend it's a confrontation Muslims have contrived purely for the purposes of promoting confrontation. I tell you it's about power as much as anything else. The news broadcaster CNN is today wrongly claiming that the Muslim prohibition on pictures of the Prophet Mohammed is a way of preventing worship of the Prophet Mohammed. This is a nice romantic CNN misreading of a fairly clearcut, fairly random, fairly recent, but now fairly murderously enforced Muslim prohibition on discourse. What CNN doesn't realise and hasn't bothered to find out, is that Muslims will more readily commit murder when they randomly deem someone to have insulted the Prophet Muhammed than they will if they randomly decide a person has insulted God. To all intents and purposes Muslims who murder human beings on this pretext, worship the Prophet Muhammed as a being greater than God. Now that's what I call blasphemy."
posted by heelers | 1:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home