| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Dr. Wafa Sultan Renews Islam Critique — in English |
| 2006-05-12 |
| Psychiatrist, writer and activist Dr. Wafa Sultan, a Syrian expatriate and “American-by-choice,” has become one of the most famous Muslim heretics in modern times. And she did it in a thoroughly modern way condeming Islam during two television apperances, the most recent on Feb. 21, on Arab television network al-Jazeera. In her televised comments, in Arabic, she called the “clash” between Islam and the West “a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality.” Last week, in Los Angeles, she spoke in a public forum for the first time in English, at an appearance hosted by the conservative-leaning Center for the Study of Popular Culture. “I have lost hope for Islam and I think it’s the duty of all thinkers to be blunt and straightforward to change the minds of Muslims,” she said confidently, flanked by two bodyguards, to a receptive audience of about 150 at the Luxe Hotel on Sunset Boulevard. Time magazine counted Sultan, 47, as among the world’s 100 most influential people for pioneering public criticism of Islam by Muslims. That she is a woman makes her voice almost unique in the Muslim world, which she characterizes as routinely suppressing women. This outspokenness has resulted in frequent death threats against Sultan, who lives in a suburb of Los Angeles. Some Muslims reformers, on the other hand, have praised her. The daughter of devout Muslims, Sultan first began to question Islam as a medical student at the University of Aleppo, where she witnessed members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood political group shoot dead her professor while shouting “Allah is great.” She and her husband immigrated to the United States in 1989. She describes her mission as educating the world about what she calls the dangers of Islam and fostering an intellectual rebellion among “oppressed” and “brainwashed” Muslims. “There is no moderate Islam at all because Islam is different from any other religion,” Sultan said. “They believe the Quran is the absolute word of God and we’re not supposed to play with it or change it.” In addition, she said, in Islam religion and politics are intertwined, making state enforcement of Islam a religious goal among devout Muslims in any country. Islam, she said, “shouldn’t be classified as just a religion but a policy which applies its teachings violently.” Sultan didn’t reserve her criticism for Islam alone. She faulted President George W. Bush for referring to Islam as a religion of peace. She said that America has the responsibility and right to lead the ideological change that needs to occur among Muslims, to liberate them, but through “books — not only tanks.” “We don’t only need [Donald] Rumsfeld, but we need Dr. Phil and Oprah,” she remarked, to applause and laughter. She’s working on her third book, “The Escaped Prisoner: When God Is a Monster,” which, she said, will examine the ideology of Islam from a scientific perspective. Tammy Bruce, feminist and conservative radio host on KABC, moderated the question-and-answer period at the May 3 event. The subject of Israel and its future in West Bank came up in a question. “The problem is not the land,” she said, “it’s deeply rooted in the hatred [of the Jews] in the Islamic teachings.” |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #11 If God supports Islam, he wouldn't have invented machine guns. This woman, Dr. Wafa Sultan is one cool babe. She has a clear view of the caveman culture and is alarmed by the lack of alarm about Islam. Islam is a caveman's attempt to control the population. Control of the population, itself is a stupid, backward idea. Life is much more involved than how can I benefit materially from my neighbors loss. That kind of shit is childish. Yet, that's what most of the world's governments are all about. Parties and individuals in power living off the fat of the masses. There is a higher calling, but eliminating the Islamic caveman violently on the way toward that calling is not a criticism, rather a duty. Carry on. |
| Posted by: wxjames 2006-05-12 19:22 |
| #10 Shireen (or Shireen or even Sdhireen) Ebadi not Erin |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-05-12 19:12 |
| #9 “There is no moderate Islam at all because Islam is different from any other religion,” Sultan said. Boy howdy! "[N]o moderate Islam", you say? That might explain all these problems we're having with the Moderate Muslim™ thingy. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-05-12 17:26 |
| #8 They should revoke Erin Ebadi's Nobel prize and give it to Wafa Sultan instead. But then the Nobel peace prize ppl have long debased the value of it and it's long been given out for PC Piss rather than related to the truth rcognisable by the measure of the Golden Rule of Mankind. Without truth and common decency in reciprocity how can peace be attained? |
| Posted by: Duh! 2006-05-12 14:28 |
| #7 I'm going to disagree with those (including I think the Pope) who say the Koran is not subject to interpretation. The Koran absolutely needs to be interpreted (or possibly explained is a better term). There are numerous phrases which contradict other phrases (either partially or wholely) or ambiguities (not to mention many sentences which seem to be nonsense and many sentences with words missing). For example, the Koranic verses having to do with alcohol are filled with these ambiguities, etc. It took several hundred years after the reign of the 'rightly guided' caliphs for alcohol to be placed on the harem list. The problems, are, as I see it, (1) that the interpretations, at least as done by the mainline moslem jurists and scholars make the nasty Koranic verses take precedence over the nicer verses (and there aren't that many nice verses to start with) (2) there are a whole lot of nasty verses and a whole lot of verses about heaven and hell which motivate moslems to take the nasty verses very, very seriously (3) even the ambiguous verses have been interpreted to give extra emphasis to violence and (4) the hadiths and sunna add even more momentum to the violence means. (5) The culture of many moslem countries adds even more nastiness (e.g., honor killings) (6) the history of Islamic thought gives enormous comfort to people who seek to declare other people heretics or infidels or apostates and then kill them. It also gives enormous comfort to people who want to expand Islam to other countries. Unfortunately, the 6 points are far more complicated to go through than saying "no interpretation" |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-05-12 12:51 |
| #6 The difference between the Quran and the other books is that the latter are the words of G*d through His chosen authors, while the former was given to Mohammed by an angel (as were Joseph Smith's tomes). Thus the Quran is "inviolate" and not to be subjected to interpretation. |
| Posted by: Fordesque 2006-05-12 11:21 |
| #5 MHW, I don't mean literal interpretation so much as message. Of course the Torah is held to be of a higher order of inspiration than the Psalms, because of it's Mosaic authorship, antiquity, etc. In the NT, the Pauline writings are generally considered to have more authority than others, for various reasons. What's the overall message of both the Jewish scriptures and the New Testament? Compare that with the overall message of the Koran. Again, a content problem. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-05-12 11:02 |
| #4 msegeek1 1. While orthodox jews do believe the Torah is the word of God,the psalms and prophets are accorded a lower standing because the composers have a lower level of prophesy than Moses. 2. even in the Torah, there are some nuances, e.g., Deutoronomy has essentially no direct quotes from God and in the previous books there are direct quotes from many not so nice people, for example, Pharoah or Baalam 3. The Torah is interpreted in a less than literal way. The phrase, "eye for an eye" (more literally translated eye-under-eye) was, long before the Talmudic era, considered as a requirement for monetary compensation. |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-05-12 10:44 |
| #3 She's right, except for one thing. The problem is not that Muslims believe the Koran "is the absolute word of God and we're not supposed to play with it or change it". Fundamental Christians believe that the Bible is the absolute word of God as well. Orthodox Jews believe that the Torah, Prophets and Psalms are the word of God as well. No, it's not that they believe it, but WHAT IT SAYS. If I absolutely believe and am devoted to a book that says to love my enemies and live at peace with all men, no problem. If I absolutely believe and am devoted to a book that instructs me to murder all infidels, the problem is obvious. The problem is simply one of content. The Koran's content is poisonous to a free and peaceful world. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2006-05-12 10:05 |
| #2 I like what she's saying ,but I'm sure she is simply dismissed as a lunatic in the ME, and by liberals here. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2006-05-12 08:24 |
| #1 I do like this woman, her speeches can be found it MEMRI |
| Posted by: pihkalbadger 2006-05-12 06:15 |