Why Did They Do It?
Way back in my first post on Political Islam’s ascension I said:
For anyone unfamiliar with the elite Progressive Left’s ideology this turn of events seems absurd, if not impossible. How could they possibly justify such an (apparently) illogical and (apparently) treacherous act?
I’ll provide an answer, but first would like to discuss a couple more examples of where the elite Progressive Left’s elevation of Political Islam has led. This is being done to (hopefully) increase the likelihood that the eventual answer will be somewhat less shocking.
Slavery Was Terrible in the West, But was Not So Bad in Muslim Countries
If there’s one thing that everyone (except for a tiny and powerless lunatic fringe) in Western Civilization could agree upon, it’s that the institution of slavery was fundamentally, completely and deeply evil. This conclusion spanned history and culture, and thus constituted one of the few remaining areas of civilizational moral agreement.
I’m sorry to have to tell you that this consensus is being openly challenged by a a tenured Georgetown University (yes, the big one in Washington D.C.) professor and holder of the Al-Waleed bin Talal Chair in Islamic Civilization, Jonathan Brown.
The lecture in question was held on February 7, 2017 at the International Institute of Islamic Thought in Herndon, Virginia. One attendee, Umar Lee, was particularly incensed by its content. He had quite a bit to say about it, providing a summary of good Professor Brown’s (of the highly respected Georgetown University, home to the Al-Waleed bin Talal Chair in Islamic Civilization) position.
While the lecture was supposed to be about slavery in Islam Brown spent the majority of the lecture talking about slavery in the United States, the United Kingdom and China. When discussing slavery in these societies Brown painted slavery as brutal and violent (which it certainly was). When the conversation would briefly flip to historic slavery in the Arab and Turkish world slavery was described by Brown in glowing terms. Indeed, according to Brown, slaves in the Muslim World lived a pretty good life.
Professor Brown’s lecture included the following statements, which are excerpted from a detailed post that includes an audio recording of the entire event.
When the questioner persists in his challenge to Brown’s take on slavery in Islam, Brown goes on to say that it’s an undeniable fact that Muhammad held slaves.
“Are you more morally mature than the Prophet of God?” Brown says. “No, you’re not.”
So, there you have it. If Muhammad held slaves, how bad could slavery really be?
“I don’t think it is morally evil to own somebody because we own lots of people all around us, and we are owned by people,” says Prof. Brown of Georgetown University — which last year announced plans to repent for its own profiting from the US slave trade.
On the matter of concubines — in Muslim society, female sex slaves imprisoned in a harem — Brown says that we can’t judge past civilizations by our own sexual standards, because “we think of people as autonomous agents, and the consent of those autonomous agents is what makes a sexual act acceptable.” He goes on:
“For most of human history, human beings have not thought of consent as the essential feature of morally correct sexual activity. And second, we fetishize the idea of autonomy to where we forget, who is really free? … What does autonomy mean?”
Please, don’t quickly look away and try to forget that this happened at highly respected Georgetown University, home to the Al-Waleed bin Talal Chair in Islamic Civilization. This is something that only those who securely sit atop the Progressive Pyramid, and know it, would feel empowered to say.
Rotherham Child Sex Scandal
The fact that Professor Brown, at Georgetown University, home to the Al-Waleed bin Talal Chair in Islamic Civilization, provides philosophical justification for Islamic slavery and sexual predation may seem troubling but not particularly relevant. However, a gang of Islamists in the United Kingdom has turned these ideas into brutal, practical reality.
In the United Kingdom the poison of Progressive Left multiculturalism has been present for longer and at much higher doses than we have experienced in the United States. As a practical consequence, Political Islam has sat atop the pyramid for much longer there. Thus, it has been emboldened and enabled to the extent that an unprecedented child sex scandal has occurred – and may well still be underway.
An article in The Federalist provides a good summary.
A new investigation by the Daily Express has found that the massive Rotherham child sex exploitation ring whose discovery rocked England two years ago is not only still in operation, but is as strong as ever. Reports from social workers, police, residents, and abuse victims all said the same thing: It’s still happening on an “industrial scale.”
In 2014, an independent inquiry led by Alexis Jay, a former senior social worker, found that men of Pakistani origin had groomed at least 1,400 young girls for sexual exploitation over the previous 16 years. These girls, as young as 12, were variously raped, abducted, tortured, and forced into prostitution. Keep in mind, this happened—and is still happening—in the heart of England, not some far-flung banana republic.
The report, known as the Jay Report, found “blatant” failure by city officials and police who didn’t prosecute the well-known and well-documented crime ring out of fear of being accused of racism. So they hushed it up, ignored it, and blamed the victims themselves.
This long-standing, active, remorseless ring of sexual predators was predominantly comprised by Muslim men from Pakistan. It is for this reason that local authorities, including law enforcement, shirked their responsibilities. Let’s be clear, in the United Kingdom so powerful was the position of Political Islam that authorities would rather allow 1,400 young girls to be sexually preyed upon than do anything to stop this vile crime.
A very recent report on this situation covered the conviction of some of the perpetrators. Here’s how The Sun article of February 2, 2017 began.
A report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham said more than 1,400 children had been groomed, trafficked and raped in the town over a 16-year period
VILE members of a Rotherham sex gang shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’ today as the group were handed sentences totalling more than 80 years for their crimes.
Six men were given sentences between 10 years and 20 after the court heard details of how two young girls were groomed and sexually abused in the South Yorkshire town between 1999 and 2001.
There were emotional and chaotic scenes at Sheffield Crown Court after two of the defendants shouted “Allahu Akbar” as they were led from the dock.
As their supporters began shouting down into the court, one of the victims shouted back “justice is served” as police moved into the public gallery.
Let this sink in…the criminals shouted “Allahu Akbar” as they were led from the dock and they had vocal supporters in the courtroom. Yes, after decades of inaction these men were finally brought to justice. But the fact that this outrage lasted so long, and may well still be occurring, speaks volumes to the power associated with sitting atop the putrid Progressive pyramid.
How Do You Respond?
So, which of the following three statements more accurately describes your response to the above information:
- Complete and utter outrage, and full willingness to say so to anyone
- A guilty inner sense of surprise and disapproval, but also an understanding that no-one but your most trusted confidant (if even them) can know
- Anger and disgust that an irredeemable deplorable who is certainly an Islamophobe and so also must be a Homophobe, Racist, Sexist, and many other evil things would dare to pass judgement on one of Western Civilization’s victim cultures (you know, that weakling civilization that, but for their defeat in 1683 at the Gates of Vienna, would have conquered all of Western Civilization, but I digress).
Where you fall in this continuum will strongly impact how you respond to my finally answering the question at hand.