|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Accusing Amy Mek of Islamophobia, Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman brandishes a dangerous weapon that threatens her safety and aims to stifle free speech.
In a startling turn of events, former GOP candidate Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman has launched a scathing attack on Amy Mek, the founder of RAIR Foundation USA, with potential life-threatening implications. This deliberate assault highlights the grave dangers of weaponizing accusations and threats within the political landscape, leaving Amy Mek and her organization at risk.
The incident began when Amy Mek shared a video featuring a French imam’s statements on the conquest of France through jihad. Responding to the tweet, Elon Musk made a statement that seemingly endorsed the imam’s views, sparking controversy. However, the subsequent actions of the GOP candidate escalated the situation to a dangerous level.
Allahu Akbar France!
Imam brags: "France WILL become an Islamic country through Jihad; The entire world WILL be subject to Islamic Rule"
The French will: "Convert to Islam, be Forced to pay Jizya poll tax, or be fought against for the sake of Allah"
In 2017, France… pic.twitter.com/aBVT90V8gV
— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) July 1, 2023
Amy Mek expressed gratitude to Musk for bringing attention to her work. It is important to note that Amy’s Twitter account has faced censorship from the German and French governments since 2017, adding further context to the situation.
Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman’s Dangerous Criticism
However, this exchange did not go without criticism from an Islamic supremacist. Shukri Abdullahi Abdirahman, a former controversial Republican House candidate who vied for the party nomination in Minnesota’s 5th District, took issue with Musk’s comment on one of Amy’s tweets. Accusing her of Islamophobia, Shukri, a sharia-adherent Somali migrant, unleashed a torrent of incendiary and potentially harmful accusations. With what appears to be a deliberate intent to fuel anger, she potentially incited her more fanatical followers to consider enacting a Sharia punishment on Amy Mek.
The Dangerous Power of Accusations
The concept of freedom of speech has long served as a safeguard against tyrannical authority, allowing individuals to question and criticize both religious and political institutions. Throughout history, from Galileo challenging the cosmology of the Church to modern-day debates, the right to critique has played a crucial role in maintaining a balance of power, especially in the face of religious and political authorities that often seek to exert control. However, a relatively new term, “Islamophobia,” has emerged, rooted in neo-Marxist ideology, which aims to stifle religious criticism and ultimately curtail dissent against political authority and its policies.
In today’s world, the accusation of Islamophobia carries deeply alarming significance, especially when made by an accuser with standing in the Islamic community. It has become a potential death sentence as more and more individuals across the Western world live under constant threats of violence or have already paid the ultimate price for daring to express critical views about Islam. Journalists, politicians, authors, artists, cartoonists, and teachers all face the specter of death or live under police protection due to the dangers associated with speaking out against how Islam demands itself to be represented. The weight of these accusations can be immense and often is tantamount to pointing a loaded gun at the accused.
Accusing someone of Islamophobia has become a powerful weapon capable of inciting violence and even murder. The term holds immense sway, igniting anger, intimidation, and physical harm. It also provides justification for any fanatic seeking personal gain by “defending the faith.” An accusation of Islamophobia is akin to a “Wanted dead or alive” poster from the Old West, inviting anyone to seek retribution for material or spiritual rewards.
It is crucial to note that in countries such as Pakistan, from which many migrants in the West originate, accusations of blasphemy can lead to brutal public executions without fair trials. This culture of vigilantism, deeply rooted in religious beliefs, has extended its influence into Western societies, further exacerbating the risks associated with accusations of Islamophobia. These risks should not be underestimated, as they have the potential to destroy lives and tear communities apart.
Manipulation by Political Figures
The danger intensifies when political figures, candidates, or activist journalists exploit the accusation of Islamophobia for their own agendas. By labeling individuals as Islamophobes, these figures knowingly manipulate public sentiment, fueling anger and inciting a mentality of seeking retribution against the accused. This becomes particularly troubling when the accuser is a self-proclaimed Sharia-adherent GOP candidate. The consequences of such actions cannot be understated, as they directly threaten the lives and well-being of those targeted.
Living Under Constant Threat
Those accused of Islamophobia must live in constant fear, often requiring police protection and altering their daily routines to ensure their safety. They face the grim reality of death threats, forced anonymity, and the loss of their freedom to openly express their opinions. Their lives are characterized by the need to constantly watch their backs, anticipating potential attacks or acts of violence by extremists who perceive any criticism of Islam as an affront to their beliefs and a threat to Islamic primacy. The toll on their mental and emotional well-being is immeasurable as they navigate a world filled with uncertainty and the constant threat of harm.
The Tragic Losses and the Role of Migration
Countless lives have been tragically lost due to accusations of Islamophobia. From Lars Vilks, the Swedish cartoonist who perished in a car accident alongside his police guards, to the targeted killings of Charlie Hebdo staff and the attempted assassination of Salman Rushdie, the repercussions of these accusations are devastating. Writers, journalists, activists, poets, clergy, secular thinkers, cartoonists, teachers, students, politicians, and artists who dared to challenge the boundaries imposed by Islamic supremacists have paid the ultimate price. Their deaths serve as a haunting reminder of the dangers faced by those who refuse to be silenced. It is crucial to acknowledge that migration from countries where accusations of blasphemy carry severe consequences plays a role in importing the cultural dynamics that perpetuate violence and intolerance.
I have a dog in this fight. Onward Christian soldiers.
Amy is Jewish. Daniel should get her to write an essay for FPM.
So, it is Judeophobia then.
Partially, yes.
Yes,,,much older by thousands of years than ” islamophobia”. By the way “islamophobia “is always mixed up with telling the truth about a political cult hell bent on death.
It is also Islamomania.
We all have a dog in this fight, Christians and Jews alike. Even our Randian atheist friend shares our foxhole, whether he likes it or not. Nobody is immune.
Judaism and Christianity are as dangerous to reason and rationality as Islam and modern totalitarianism. Judaism prepared the ground for Christianity and both prepared the ground for Islam, Marxism, and Nazism.
“All three major religions have had to confront the ideas of the great Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Averroes tried to integrate Aristotle with Islam. Maimonides tried to integrate Aristotle with Judaism. Aquinas tried to integrate Aristotle with Christianity. All necessarily failed.
Rationality cannot be integrated with faith; nor reason with anti-reason; nor, in philosophy, fact with fantasy….
History reveals a two-thousand-year death struggle of faith versus reason; and though it is true that religion is not the only form of irrationalism plaguing the modern world, it remains one central form of it—most obviously in the case of Islam, the least-reformed of the three Middle-Eastern religions. The religious “method” of faith is irredeemably irrational and, as such, antithetical to human life. Conversely, Aristotle’s method of observation-based rationality is essential to human life. For any individuals genuinely concerned to promote man’s earthly life, the takeaway lesson from this monumental struggle is that they must support reason over faith—which means: Aristotle over religion.
The death struggle of reason versus anti-reason continues. Everyone must choose a side.” – Objectivist philosopher Andrew Bernstein
“The Enduring Positive Legacy of Aristotle – Aristotle Versus Religion (7 of 7)” – Andrew Bernstein
Didn’t you post this stupid screed last week? Did anyone read it including the homework lesson from Bernstein. Do you ever have anything relevant to say re: an article? Or are you out of anything resembling an idea?
Basically your Objectivism For Dummies course consists of the following:
Altruism…bad.
Jesus…..bad
Christianity…………bad
Judaism…….bad
Judeo-Christianity is Leftism……bad
Judaism and Christianity are oriental…..bad
Christianity prepared the ground for modern totalitarianism….bad
Medieval Christianity was a totalitarian system…..bad
God and magical thinking…….bad
Atheism….good
Greeks……good
Christian Dark Age….bad
Renaissance and enlightenment …..good
Greek philosophers……good
Christian philosophers…….bad
selfishness “properly defined”, rational selfishness….good
Objectivist reason and reality….good
Altruism…bad.
Repeat ad infinitum. The Big Lie in practice.
And there we have the simplistic world according to our rezidentura fraud…..THX
Oh, knock it off, will you? I just said above that you share our foxhole whether you like it or not, but I wouldn’t be above asking you to leave.
Islamophobia is a badge of honor. Anybody who stand up to islamist savages is a hero.
Defending all of humanity from the islamic invasion and dictatorship is a noble cause.
Savages should stay in savage lands, they have no place in the civilized and free nations.
Exactly. Whoever coined the term “Islamophobia” must have gotten a million dollars from somebody for coining this term. A “phobia” is defined as “a persistent, excessive, unrealistic fear of an object, person, animal, activity or situation.” It generally considered to be an irrational fear. Someone considering the doctrines and history of Islam for the past 1400 years and fearing its spead in their country is not acting in an unrealistic or irrational manner. The basic premise of Islam is that it has been commanded by God (“Allah”) to bring the entire world under sharia law by conversion or conquest. The word “Islamophobia” is just intended to suppress any accurate discussion of Islam. In the face of such a supremacist and violent doctrine it is simply Orwellian to call fear of it a phobia and use of the word “Islamophobia” should be completely ended.
Very well articulated, and 100 per cent accurate. Thanks.
One of the first rule of all tyrants is to disarm the people Hitler, Stalin Castro and Mao did
a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.
Christopher Hitchens