The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Infidel > Comments

Infidel : Comments

By Shakira Hussein, published 1/6/2007

Hirsi Ali's statements that Islam allows violence against women do not help her cause.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All
I can never understand why more people don’t see a connection between the Eastern cultural preoccupation with covering women up, and the Western cultural preoccupation of keeping women as scantily clad as possible.

They are simply two sides of the one patriarchal coin.

Nor can I understand why we fail to see the connection between the under-sexualising of women in Eastern cultures (sometimes through surgery) and the oversexualising of women in Western cultures (sometimes through surgery).

Both cultures want to maintain the myth that all women are sluts at heart - that way, we never have to treat them as the equals of men.
Posted by MLK, Saturday, 2 June 2007 1:11:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shakira,

** Former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali **
Caught up in a row over her Dutch citizenship, Somali-born former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali has left the Netherlands.
< http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_5160000/newsid_5167300?redirect=5167376.stm&news=1&nbwm=1&nbram=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1 >

Her TV interview on the BBC which is self explanatory: Ayaan was discredited and proven dishonest who lied about everything in her life. She was dumped as an intellect and MP in the Netherlands, UK and Europe.

Here is an interesting comment from another Somali female living in the UK (on the BBC website)
“Even though Miss Ali is entitled to the opinions she holds, I was amazed to see someone who claims to be so educated fail to distinguish between religion and cultural practices. There is no denying the problems that do exist, but being the Muslim (Somalian) daughter of a Muslim mother and father, I do not agree with her view that my religion can somehow stop me from getting an education or having freewill. Furthermore, the facts surrounding Ayaan Hirsi Ali's reason to seek asylum are awfully similar to the claims of many fellow Somalian asylum seekers”

I guess my question is why do Australian media promote the discredited and the leftovers of European intellects? Don’t Australians deserve better than another fatwa best seller?
Posted by Fellow_Human, Saturday, 2 June 2007 1:48:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is more accurately described as an Apostate rather than an Infidel.
She is a source of annoyance, pain, anguish and anger to those of the Old Faith who lack unconditional compassion for all human beings.
Posted by fdixit, Saturday, 2 June 2007 2:08:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fellow_Human
I watched the BBC interview that you presented on your previous post.
My first comment is that the BBC is well known for its sympathy towards the Muslim population of UK, against the interests of the indigenous i.e. British, population. The BBC is infested with left wing multi-culturalists. Therefore it is disposed to try to discredit anyone which might have, shall we say, an embarrassing story and point of view for the Muslims.
As far as Ali's lies are concerned, if you put yourself in her place trying to escape the oppression of an arranged marriage, and a fundamentalist Islamic State, with its 7th century retrograde culture, wouldn't you do whatever was necessary? (Maybe you wouldn't, as you seem to prefer this type of culture)
In any case, these so-called lies are very small beer compared to the utter barbarity of Islamic fundamentalism.
I am an agnostic, and proud to be so, when I see the results of your stupid religion. As I said before, religion is rubbish and Islam is toxic rubbish.
Posted by Froggie, Saturday, 2 June 2007 2:21:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder if stevenlmeyer would have been so forgiving of Hirsi Ali had she not abandoned her ancestral faith and made a movie attacking the status of women in Judaism. Perhaps a film showing Hebrew letters superimposed on the heads of women who have shaved them in apparent obedience to their husbands and the alleged dictates of Jewish sacred law.

Nothing can justify the murder of Van Gogh. Yet the way some make Van Gogh out to be some kind of hero of free speech just shocks me. If someone assassinated David irving, would you regard him as a victim of free speech? Yet Irving arguably shows far more reverence to Judaism and the Holocaust than Van Gogh.

Hirsi Ali must have known all this about Van Gogh. She could have worked with another film maker. Was Van Gogh the only documentary maker in the Netherlands? Why choose him, given the enormous resentment he has earned from Jewish, homosexual and women's groups in the Netherlands?
Posted by Irfan, Saturday, 2 June 2007 3:31:46 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More red herrings from Irfan.

I'm not "forgiving" Hirsan Ali anything. I don't know whether there is anything to forgive.

Why did she choose van Gogh as her collaborator?

I don't know.

Maybe the other documentary film makers in The Netherlands remembered the fatwa placed on Salman Rushdie and decided they did not want to take the risks inherent in making such a film. As it is van Gogh paid with his life and Hirsan Ali practically had to go into hiding. My understanding is that Hirsan Ali needs round the clock protection from angry Muslims to this day

Irfan wrote:

>>If someone assassinated David irving, would you regard him as a victim of free speech?>>

What on Earth does this mean?

Van Gogh was not a "victim of free speech." He was a victim of a Muslim fanatic called Mohammed Bouyeri.

I hope no one takes it into their head to assassinate David Irving. If someone did I would not regard Irving as a "victim of free speech." I would regard him as the victim of whoever did the deed.

For the record I think the Australian government should have granted David Irving a visa. Even holocaust denying scumbags should be allowed to have their say WITHOUT FEAR OF BEING MURDERED.

Irfan wrote:

>>Why choose him [van Gogh], given the enormous resentment he has earned from Jewish, homosexual and women's groups in the Netherlands?>>

However it wasn't a Jew, homosexual or woman who assassinated van Gogh.

So far as I know Hirsan Ali does not required protection from Jews, homosexuals or women. The prime threat against her emanates from Muslims.

On the other hand homosexuals in Muslim majority societies do have a great deal to fear.

Irfan, you have not answered my question.

Do you think the Australian government should deny Hirsi Ali a visa?
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Saturday, 2 June 2007 4:44:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy