Flat White

Yassmin’s Islamic amnesia

16 February 2018

11:03 AM

16 February 2018

11:03 AM

Like so many Australians, I have come to the conclusion that Yassmin Abdel-Magied is maybe not quite in touch with reality. I mean, how else do you explain her comment that Islam is “the most feminist religion”? Or then there was the time when she sanctimoniously berated everyone in the country who didn’t embrace identity politics, tweeting:

Recently it was revealed that Abdel-Magied “is the subject of a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission over her tweets.” And while I haven’t read all of them, does that come as any real surprise? After all, this was the woman who, on ANZAC day, wrote on social media: “Lest We Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine …)” As a mate said to me once, “That puts the ‘twit’ back into Twitter!”

Abdel-Magied’s lack of cultural, and in particular self, awareness is truly gobsmacking. Of all the major religions on earth, Islam has done more “colonising” and “enslaving”, than any other. Don’t expect to find any ‘diversity quotas’ when a Caliphate has been established! As one Twitter follower was quick to point out:

In keeping with Abdel-Magied’s claim that Islam is “the most feminist religion”, Muslim apologists declare that their faith is, in fact, a religion of peace. This is because, as explained so brilliantly by Dr Mark Durie in his book, The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom (Deror, 2010) the definition of “peace” in classical Islamic ideology, meant that those who had been conquered were given one of three choices: convert to the Islamic faith; face immediate execution with the sword; or surrender to a life of “dhimmitude” where one experienced restricted human rights and economic sanctions. Sounds a lot like “colonizing and enslaving” doesn’t it?

Durie gives the following example of what happened when the Ayatollah Khomeini ushered in the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979. Durie says, Muslims all over the world greeted this event with enthusiasm. At last, so it was thought, Islam would be implemented rigorously to reinstitute an Islamic utopia on earth. Yet along with the Islamization of Iran came the return of the laws of the dhimma. The Iranian democracy activist Frank Nikbakht describes what happened:

Non-Muslims had become “Dhimmis”, second class citizens with limited rights, or non-citizens with absolutely no rights, just based on their beliefs. The Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians were given certain rights but their lives were legally valued as less than a half or an eighth of a Muslim’s life (depending on which source of Shari’a a judge decided to use in cases of compensations for loss of life or limb). They lost their right to testify in court against Muslims and they lost all sorts of imaginable rights to material and social status which might demonstrate any semblance of superiority or power over Muslims.

There will be those who will object to someone, like myself, pointing this out because didn’t Christians do exactly the same thing to Muslims during the infamous crusades? However, as Rodney Stark, the Distinguished Professor of the Social Sciences at Baylor University, points out in his book God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades (HarperOne, 2009), it is “unrealistic and probably insincere” to suggest that Christians should “have been made to turn the other cheek” to Muslims conquering a “major portion of Christendom.” As Stark explains:

Not only had the Byzantines lost most of their empire; the enemy was at their gates. And the loss of Spain, Sicily, and southern Italy, as well as a host of Mediterranean islands, was bitterly resented in Europe. Hence, as British historian Derek Lomax (1933-1992) explained, “The popes, like most Christians, believed war against the Muslims to be justified partly because the latter had usurped by force lands which once belonged to Christians and partly because they abused the Christians over whom they ruled and such Christian lands as they could raid for slaves, plunder and the joys of destruction.” It was time to strike back.

What Yassmin Abdel-Magied conveniently forgets, or overlooks, is the imperialistic colonising and enslavement that followers of her own religion perpetrated upon those they conquered. Ironically, her approach is in many ways just like communism, in that it denounced imperialism while at the very same time as practicing it.

Someone needs to remind Ms Abdel-Magied that Islam doesn’t operate under the same Leftist ideology as they do at her previous employer, the ABC. And the fact that she can even appear before such a thing as a Human Rights Commission—or even as a woman have a job, drive a car, appear in public with her face not fully covered and without a chaperone—is all a product of the very system of which she is so critical.

What Abdel-Magied “shoulda thought of” before passing judgment on the country that has generously welcomed her as its own, is irrefutable historical evidence of “colonizing and enslaving” that her own religion has unleashed upon the world.


Mark Powell is the Associate Pastor of Cornerstone Presbyterian Church, Strathfield.

Illustration: ABC Television/YouTube.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Show comments