It was a hard read, not because her writing is difficult which it isn’t, but because what she has to say about the plight of women under Jihadist Muslim oppression is almost too much to bear. Her insights into the minds of Jihadist men are terrifying. These men actually believe the promise in the Koran that the quickest way to Paradise is murderous martyrdom (killing as many ‘infidels’ as possible whilst killing yourself) and that Paradise consists of having 72 virgins who they can rape at will. As she points out, Jihadist men who think this are as likely to be doctors and lawyers as peasants.
Here are some extracts from a Guardian review of her book.
Confronted by the tribal, patriarchal and religious confines of her upbringing in east Africa, where she suffered female genital mutilation, and the liberty of the Netherlands, where she sought asylum from an arranged marriage, she chose the cultural values of her adopted home over those she had inherited. Not only did she turn her back on her native religion, she became one of its most articulate and vehement critics.
Her views about the violence and misogyny she sees as inherent in Islamic culture have seen her denounced as an “enlightenment fundamentalist”.
She divides followers of the faith into three distinct groups: the Mecca Muslims, the large majority who represent the more tolerant side of the religion, as articulated during Muhammad’s early Mecca period; the Medina Muslims (or the jihadist wing) who are inspired by the harsher aspects of the Qur’an that Muhammad is thought to have expressed during his later consolidation in Medina; and the Modifying Muslims – those dissidents and reformists who actively challenge religious dogma.
Even her fiercest detractors would struggle to deny much of what Hirsi Ali states about the current predicament within Islam. Unfortunately that doesn’t make it any more palatable, particularly in an era dominated by the modern commandment not to offend anyone.
I am daily reminded Hirst Ali’s book when I encounter the unwillingness of 'western liberals' to understand the nature of Jihadist Islam. One of the most abiding images I have imprinted in my mind from my recent trip to the UK is a trail of Muslim men making their way through the Channel tunnel. They carry nothing. Behind them, about ten paces behind, is an old woman, or at least she looks old, because she is bowed down by the weight of the luggage she is carrying for them. The men are young, fit and laughing.
It is a part of our western culture that our menfolk protect the weakest and most vulnerable in a life threatening situation. “Women and children first’ is the cry that goes out when the lifeboats are being lowered from a sinking ship. As a society we do not consider the ‘man’ who jumps on board ahead of women and children to be a man at all: he is a coward, the very worst example of the ‘manhood’.
Yet in this present immigration and refugee crisis we are rejecting our western cultural values in favour of saving the menfolk and rejecting the women. This is immoral. I agree with Winston Peters
Winston Peters: Tell male refugees to go back and fight
New Zealand should take only women and children refugees from Syria and tell the men to return home and fight, NZ First leader Winston Peters says.
Asked about the Government's decision to bring in an emergency intake of 600 Syrian refugees over three years, Mr Peters reiterated his position that more refugees should be settled - but only if immigration levels were significantly reduced.
"I think we can do better, but we can't do that while we've got mass immigration. And if we're going to do it, let's bring the women and children and tell some of the men to go back and fight for their own country's freedom, like we are," Mr Peters said.
Fear of being called racist leads to appalling race based crime
Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice