(Most Brilliant!) A Muslim's response to anti-Islam protesters in Germany

[AUz]

How nice, that once in a while, the Muslims treat a few of their women with real respect. Now let us see if they can do it to at leash half their women half the time.

lol, Muslims do respect their women all the time.

We don't see our women as sex objects and call them "b!tches" to refer to them in our pop culture, expect them to have big "asses and boobs" and to "take cum in their mouth" and so on.

Understand this: The worst part of our culture (honor killings for example of women) are an out liers in our cultures. Honor killing is not done by mainstream societies...but sexualization, disrespect, "whorization" of common girls/women is mainstream in American culture...American songs, pop culture, and media portray women as slaves of men..overly sexualized objects that must be gauged by their butts, titts, and what not.

I have seen life in United States and in Muslim lands.

There are some aspects that I really respect U.S and women in U.S..but there are other aspects in Muslim lands where women get much more respect than western women.

What you REALLY need to understand is that U.S has better 'rule of law' than say Pakistan--hence women have it better here BECAUSE the law is working. In Pakistan, forget women--even men doesn't have respect because powerful violate the rights of common men and law doesn't come into play.

So please, when someone like you comes to Muslims and talk about "women rights" and how Muslims "dont respect" their women---to us, it looks as ironic and hilarious as some african going to Steve jobs and telling him "you don't know how to make technolgy products" ...

You see, THAT is how you, rather innocent, westerners look to Islamic World when you try to teach us about "respect of women".

We just laugh at you. And that includes women in the Islamic World as well.

 

[gambit]

lol, Muslims do respect their women all the time.

We don't see our women as sex objects and call them "b!tches" to refer to them in our pop culture, expect them to have big "asses and boobs" and to "take cum in their mouth" and so on.

Understand this: The worst part of our culture (honor killings for example of women) are an out liers in our cultures. Honor killing is not done by mainstream societies...but sexualization, disrespect, "whorization" of common girls/women is mainstream in American culture...American songs, pop culture, and media portray women as slaves of men..overly sexualized objects that must be gauged by their butts, titts, and what not.

I have seen life in United States and in Muslim lands.

There are some aspects that I really respect U.S and women in U.S..but there are other aspects in Muslim lands where women get much more respect than western women.

What you REALLY need to understand is that U.S has better 'rule of law' than say Pakistan--hence women have it better here BECAUSE the law is working. In Pakistan, forget women--even men doesn't have respect because powerful violate the rights of common men and law doesn't come into play.

So please, when someone like you comes to Muslims and talk about "women rights" and how Muslims "dont respect" their women---to us, it looks as ironic and hilarious as some african going to Steve jobs and telling him "you don't know how to make technolgy products" ...

You see, THAT is how you, rather innocent, westerners look to Islamic World when you try to teach us about "respect of women".

We just laugh at you. And that includes women in the Islamic World as well.

Using how many women were elected in Muslim countries is a laughable comparison. When a candidate petitions the electorate for votes, he/she would be committing political suicide if he/she present a clear bias towards a particular demographic. Do you think it is possible for a US President hopeful to say he/she will enact policies that favors Latinos over whites, Asians, and blacks, if not outright at their expense ? Do you really believe that if a Muslim woman say upon elected Prime Minister she will favor women-friendly policies over traditions, that she will get elected ? No. She will talk and do about what her every male predecessors done: economy, education, defense, etc.

And please do not talk to me as if I have never been to Muslim dominated countries...

 

[AUz]

Using how many women were elected in Muslim countries is a laughable comparison. When a candidate petitions the electorate for votes, he/she would be committing political suicide if he/she present a clear bias towards a particular demographic. Do you think it is possible for a US President hopeful to say he/she will enact policies that favors Latinos over whites, Asians, and blacks, if not outright at their expense ? Do you really believe that if a Muslim woman say upon elected Prime Minister she will favor women-friendly policies over traditions, that she will get elected ? No. She will talk and do about what her every male predecessors done: economy, education, defense, etc.

..........But I didn't use Muslim elected officials to make my point @gambit

You have clearly read my post and you didn't see any mention of "Oh Muslims elected more women hence Muslims treat women better" argument. This argument isn't valid. And we both know it.

But...I have discussed some other points in my posts, to which you haven't responded. Because deep down in your heart as well, you know that I am correct.

And please do not talk to me as if I have never been to Muslim dominated countries...

I never denied that you have been to Muslim nations.

But that's the difference between you and me.

I lived in Muslim nations and West. I studied with Muslim girls and Western girls. I interacted with wider society of Muslim countries and Western countries I lived in as a normal, everyday citizen--not a foreigner deployed on a mission.

You see, I know what I am talking about. You, on the other hand, not so much.

So let me say it again: When Westerners like you or hilary clinton try to lecture Islamic people about how to respect our women---we, in the collective privacy of our homes---laugh at that. Hysterically.

We just laugh at you. And that includes women in the Islamic World as well.

Just a smaller point though: I remember when ex-Pakistani prime minister, Benzir Bhutto, ran her campaigns of elections--she openly announced that she will take revolutionary steps for women empowerment in Pakistan. Will break feudal hold over women's labor and earnings, and would come hard on domestic violence.

She was elected as Prime-minister of Pakistan with millions of votes in lead over her center-right opponents. And she repeated this victory within the same decade again..with similar pro-women message.

You see, that's what I mean by when I said that the difference between me and you is that I know what I am talking about, you on the other hand.....as I said....not so much.

You know why Islamic people globally...billions in number and stretching from Morocco to Indonesia--with presence in every corner of globe...do not listen to West and never adapts any western ideals when it comes to women? Because we know for a fact, despite all our shortcomings (and there's infinite amount of them!), we still hold superior moral and cultural standards/respect for our women than today's West.

Even in the Western world, more (Muslim) women have adapted Islamic ideals/values than Muslim women leaving them and becoming completely westernized in their identity. Infact, more women have gone "Hijabis" from being non-hijabis than vice versa. Women/girls in Hijab are at the forefront of defending Islam in media, leading Muslim students across university campuses, and discussing hard social issues within thriving Muslim communities across Western World.

Have you ever wondered Why is that?

One of my earlier sentence might give you a hint.

Ponder on this: Because we Muslims know for a fact that, despite all our shortcomings (and there's infinite amount of them!), we still hold superior moral, ethical, and cultural standards/respect for our women than today's West.

We might be wrong, but you will have to show us that. You'll have to give us concrete/undeniable evidence. Having lived and grown up in contemporary Western mainstream culture, I have yet to see any evidence.

 

[gambit]

..........But I didn't use Muslim elected officials to make my point @gambit

Never said YOU did.

I only pointed out how absurd it is regardless of who tried to use it.

Just a smaller point though: I remember when ex-Pakistani prime minister, Benzir Bhutto, ran her campaigns of elections--she openly announced that she will take revolutionary steps for women empowerment in Pakistan. Will break feudal hold over women's labor and earnings, and would come hard on domestic violence.

She was elected as Prime-minister of Pakistan with millions of votes in lead over her center-right opponents. And she repeated this victory within the same decade again..with similar pro-women message.

How well did it worked for women in Pakistan ?

Economy and defense affects men and women. Women-centric issues affects -- only women. Peripherally, women-centric issues may affects men but if the goal is to target specifically women, and if they are at the expense of men, it will be tough for men to vote for that candidate.

Look at US, for example. When the US government decided to remove slavery as a part of US social fabric, we targeted blacks in specific but does that meant we did it at the expense of whites ? No. Despite popular perception, slavery was largely confined to a few states and the vast majority of imported African blacks went to the Central and South Americas. So while we targeted all blacks and did it at the expense of whites in principle, it was at the expense of a few whites at the practical level.

The old saying applies: Women make up half of the country and are mothers of the other half.

For a highly patriarchal society, like your Pakistan where women are actually given away in arranged marriages without their consent instead of the act being ceremonial in the West, how easy is it to actually make women-centric policies without affecting men ? Can Bhutto unilaterally abolish arranged marriages without the women's consent and actually enforces that policy ? No, and she did not because she knew she could not.

You may say that there are Muslim women who actually laughs at US, but until I see Western women lamenting their status plus using Muslim cultures as a guide on how to achieve gender equality...

Ponder on this: Because we Muslims know for a fact that, despite all our shortcomings (and there's infinite amount of them!), we still hold superior moral, ethical, and cultural standards/respect for our women than today's West.

We might be wrong, but you will have to show us that. You'll have to give us concrete/undeniable evidence. Having lived and grown up in contemporary Western mainstream culture, I have yet to see any evidence.

The ultimate moral, ethical, and cultural standard/respect for both men and women is -- freedom.

Not just legal but in the moral and ethical realms. Let the woman chose her way in life, whether it is in her mode of dress or conduct to men. Let her chose personal degradation if she so desired. The reality is that it is the Muslims who are the most chauvinistic when you hide behind your purported 'superior' moral and ethical standards to physically control women.

In the US, any man who says: "That's women's work." and if he does it in a work environment, he says so at his peril. Even in a personal relationship, it will be the woman's generosity and tolerance that she will not leave him. But in your society, there are plenty of things that are "women's work" and women have no choice but to accept their lot in life.

You cannot even see the flaw in your argument when you admitted that the shortcomings in your society is 'infinite amount' that renders next to worthless the few supposedly 'superior' moral, ethical, and cultural standards/respect you have for women. Ponder THAT.

Yeah...You been in the West ? Try go to Starbucks and say service is the proper place for a woman to the gal behind the counter and see if you will get your coffee.

 

[syedali73]

How nice, that once in a while, the Muslims treat a few of their women with real respect. Now let us see if they can do it to at leash half their women half the time.

You are a racist moron whose every single comment is pointed towards belittling Muslims and Islam. You moron is saying that tens of millions Muslims mistreat their women? In how many Muslims counties have you been? Because your racist eyes have seen isolated incidents and your bias ears have heard isolated episodes, you believe that an overwhelming majority of Muslims mistreat their women? I am truly amazed by your ignorance and extreme level of hate, as well as racism. In-fact I should not be amazed too much because what to be expected from a traitor who has killed his own countrymen alongside invading troops and rounded up his own women and girls for the pleasure of occupation forces.

The following is an excerpt from Nick Turse's new book, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam (Metropolitan Books, 2013).

...By 1966, as the feminist scholar Susan Brownmiller observed, the 1st Cavalry Division, the 1st Infantry Division, and the 4th Infantry Division had all already “established official military brothels within the perimeter of their basecamps.” At the 1st Infantry Division base at Lai Khe, refugee women—recruited by the South Vietnamese province chief and channeled into their jobs by the mayor of the town—worked in sixty curtained cubicles kept under military police guard. Jim Soular of the 1st Cavalry Division recalled the setup at his unit’s compound, known as Sin City.

You had to go through a checkpoint gate, but once you were in there you could do anything. There were all kinds of prostitutes and booze. The [U.S.] army was definitely in control of this thing. The bars had little rooms in the back where you could go with the prostitutes. I know they were checked by the doctors once a week for venereal diseases.

At Dong Tam, the 9th Infantry Division camp, the sign on a large building next to the headquarters read “Steam Bath and Massage.” The troops knew it by a different name: “Steam ’n Cream.” The building boasted approximately 140 cubicles filled with Vietnamese women and girls. At another U.S. compound, the prices of sex acts were announced at an official briefing, and, for a time, “little tickets had been printed up . . . blue ones for blow jobs, and white ones for inter-course,” recalled one patron to an army investigator. GIs paid a dollar or so for the former and around two for the latter.

Everywhere, every kind of sex was for sale. “At the entrance to the MACV compound in Qui Nhon, a six-year-old girl is offering blow jobs,” wrote one journalist sizing up the sex-work scene. “One night early on in my stay,” he reported,

I found myself with a thirteen-year-old girl on my lap insisting “we go make lub now” in the bordello her mother had thrown up opposite an American construction site. The bordello is made of sheets of aluminum somehow extricated from a factory just before attaining canhood. You can read the walls of the structure from a distance. They say “Schlitz, Schlitz,” in rows and columns, over and over again.

The girl wants $1.25. With some difficulty I refuse.

Later in the war, even walking as far as the camp entrance would become unnecessary, as certain bases began allowing prostitutes directly into the barracks.

“Hootch maids,” who washed and ironed clothes and cleaned living quarters for U.S. servicemen, were also sometimes sexually exploited. As one maid put it, “American soldiers have much money and it seems that they are sexually hungry all the time. Our poor girls. With money and a little patience, the Americans can get them very easily.” And other women working on bases fell victim to sexual blackmail. One such case was revealed in an army investigation of Mickey Carcille, who ran a camp mess hall that employed Vietnamese women. By threatening to fire them if they did not comply, Carcille forced some of the women to pose for nude photographs and coerced others into having intercourse with him or performing other sex acts.

In addition to sexual exploitation, sexual violence was an every-day feature of the American War -- hardly surprising since, as Christian Appy observed, “the model of male sexuality offered as a military ideal in boot camp was directly linked to violence.” From their earliest days in the military, men were bombarded with the language of sexism and misogyny. Male recruits who showed weakness or fatigue were labeled ladies, girls, pussies, or cunts. In basic training, as army draftee Tim O’Brien later wrote in his autobiographical account of the Vietnam War, the message was: “Women are dinks. Women are villains. They are creatures akin to Communists and yellow-skinned people."

While it’s often assumed that all sexual assaults took place in the countryside, evidence suggests that men based in rear areas also had ample opportunity to abuse and rape women. For example, on December 27, 1969, Refugio Longoria and James Peterson, who served in the 580th Telephone Operations Company, and one other soldier picked up a nineteen-year-old Vietnamese hootch maid hitching a ride home after a day of work on the gigantic base at Long Binh. They drove her to a secluded spot behind the recreation center and forced her into the back of the truck -- holding her down, gagging, and blindfolding her. They then gang-raped her and dumped her on the side of the road. A doctor’s examination shortly afterward recorded that “her hymen was recently torn. There was fresh blood in her vagina.”

On March 19, 1970, a GI at the base at Chu Lai, in Quang Tin Province, drove a jeep in circles while Private First Class Ernest Stepp manhandled and slapped a Vietnamese woman who had rebuffed his sexual advances. According to army documents, with the help of a fellow soldier Stepp tore off the woman’s pants and assaulted her. The driver apparently slowed down the jeep to give the woman’s attackers more time to carry out the assault, and offered his own advice to her: “If you don’t fight so much it won’t be so bad for you.”

Again and again, allegations of crimes against women surfaced at U.S. bases and in other rear echelon areas. “Boy did I beat the shit out of a whore. It was really fun,” one GI mused about his trip to the beach resort at Vung Tau. The sheer physical size of American troops -- on average five inches taller and forty-three pounds heavier than Vietnamese soldiers, and even more imposing in comparison to Vietnamese women -- meant that their assaults often inflicted serious injuries. Sometimes, Vietnamese women were simply murdered by angry GIs. One sex worker at a base in Kontum, known as “Linda” to the soldiers there, was gunned down after she laughed at a customer who, according to legal documents, “thought she was going to go out with another G.I.” On March 27, 1970, in Vung Tau, several Vietnamese prostitutes became embroiled in an argument with a soldier over payment. He assaulted a number of them and stabbed one to death.

Most rapes and other crimes against Vietnamese women, however, did take place in the field -- in hamlets and villages populated mainly by women and children when the Americans arrived. Rape was a way of asserting dominance, and sometimes a weapon of war, employed in field interrogations of women captives to gain information about enemy troops. Aside from any such considerations, rural women were generally assumed by Americans to be secret saboteurs or the wives and girlfriends of Viet Cong guerrillas, and thus fair game.

The reports of sexual assault implicated units up and down the country. A veteran who served with 198th Light Infantry Brigade testified that he knew of ten to fifteen incidents, within a span of just six or seven months, in which soldiers from his unit raped young girls. A soldier who served with the 25th Infantry Division admitted that, in his unit, rape was virtually standard operating procedure. One member of the Americal Division remembered fellow soldiers on patrol through a village suddenly singling out a girl to be raped. “All three grunts grabbed the gook chick and began dragging her into the hootch. I didn’t know what to do,” he recalled. “As a result of this one experience I learned to recognize the sounds of rape at a great distance . . . Over the next two months I would hear this sound on the average of once every third day.”

In November 1966, soldiers from the 1st Cavalry Division brazenly kidnapped a young Vietnamese woman named Phan Thi Mao to use as a sexual slave. One unit member testified that, prior to the mission, his patrol leader had explicitly stated, “We would get the woman for the purpose of boom boom, or sexual intercourse, and at the end of five days we would kill her.” The sergeant was true to his word. The woman was kidnapped, raped by four of the patrol members in turn, and murdered the following day.

Gang rapes were a horrifyingly common occurrence. One army report detailed the allegations of a Vietnamese woman who said that she was detained by troops from the 173rd Airborne Brigade and then raped by approximately ten soldiers. In another incident, eleven members of one squad from the 23rd Infantry Division raped a Vietnamese girl. As word spread, another squad traveled to the scene to join in. In a third incident, an Americal GI recalled seeing a Vietnamese woman who was hardly able to walk after she had been gang-raped by thirteen soldiers.139 And on Christmas Day 1969, an army criminal investigation revealed, four warrant officers in a helicopter noticed several Vietnamese women in a rice paddy, landed, kidnapped one of them, and committed “lewd and lascivious acts” against her. The traumatic nature of such sexual assaults remains vivid even when they are couched in the formal, bureaucratic language of mili tary records. Court-martial documents indicate, for instance, that after he led his patrol into one village, marine lance corporal Hugh Quigley personally detained a young Vietnamese woman -- because “her age, between 20 and 25, suggested that she was a Vietcong.” The documents tell the story.

After burning one hut and the killing of various animals, the accused with members of the patrol entered a hut where the alleged victim was. The accused, seeing the victim, grabbed for her breast and at the same time attempted to unbutton her blouse. As the victim held her child between the accused and herself, she pulled away. At this time, the accused pulled out his knife and threatened to cut the victim’s throat. The baby was taken from the victim and then the accused took the victim by the shoulders, laid her on the floor and then pulled her blouse above her breast and lowered her pants below her knees. The accused then knelt by the head of the victim, took his penis out of his pants and made the victim commit forced oral copulation on him. After a few minutes of this act the accused then proceeded to have non-consensual intercourse with her . . . The same witnesses who saw the accused commit these alleged acts will testify that the victim was scared and trembling.

Quigley was found guilty of having committed forcible sodomy and rape.

Some commanders, like an army colonel who investigated allegations of rape in an infantry battalion, nevertheless sought to cast Vietnamese women as willing participants. Writing about the heavily populated coastal regions of I and II Corps, he conjectured that in those areas “the number of young women far exceeds the number of military age males,” so the local women undoubtedly welcomed the attentions of American troops as a means to “satisfy needs long denied.” Assuming that all Vietnamese women longed for intercourse with armed foreigners marching through their villages, the colonel blithely concluded, “The circumstances are such that rape in contacts between soldiers . . . and village women is unlikely.”

The colonel’s theory about universally willing partners becomes even more preposterous when we consider the shockingly violent and sadistic nature of some of the sexual assaults. One marine remembered finding a Vietnamese woman who had been shot and wounded. Severely injured, she begged for water. Instead, her clothes were ripped off. She was stabbed in both breasts, then forced into a spread-eagle position, after which the handle of an entrenching tool -- essentially a short-handled shovel -- was thrust into her vagina. Other women were violated with objects ranging from soda bottles to rifles...

This is what Mr. Gambit your troops have done in Vietnam, and Vietnamese like you were helping them. You never had respect or love for your own motherland, your own people, it should not be difficult to see what you think about others. This is an Ex-servicemen and a PhD who has learnt not an iota of civility and manners of discussion while serving for so long in the US Airforce (if at all).

This is how women are treated in USA:

164,240 women were victims of rape, attempted rape, or sexual assault in 2008 alone.
21.8% of rapes of women and 16.7% of rapes of men in the United States are gang rapes.
83% of girls have been sexually harassed.
38% of the students were harassed by teachers or school employees.
62% of female college students and 61% of male college students report having been sexually harassed at their university.
10% or fewer of student sexual harassment victims attempt to report their experiences to a university employee.

Get yourself a life moron and and think twice before generalizing because I'll rip your half cooked and fabricated allegations apart.

@WebMaster @Horus @Jango Please note gross generalization by this moron. There should be limit of everything and this moron seems not to know any limit.

 

[captainvancouver]

Wow, Muslims make up 5% of the German population. In another 100 years there will be an annexation of Germany just like India, but before that France and Belgium will split.... and then an eventual second partition of India.

 

[Jay12345]

Wow, Muslims make up 5% of the German population. In another 100 years there will be an annexation of Germany just like India, but before that France and Belgium will split.... and then an eventual second partition of India.

Think you need to google the definition of annexation before you make retarded comments

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Get me the french president ...what he is attending friday prayers ok I will call back later

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Pen is mightier then sword.This for sure is the best way to counter propaganda and Media biased..

Not intending to troll, but how is pen mightier than sword if you end up using the sword to kill those using pen -- a la Charlie Hebdo style?

For all those applauding the this "brilliant muslim response to anti-islam protesters in Germany", where were you when terrorism was being used against those using pen in France and other places? Are your counter-protests only reserved for anti-islam protests?

And suddenly Muslims are pen-wielding non-violent victims now?

 

[Black Widow]

Rule is simple west will hit Muslims Muslims have order to hit back but can't target civilians

Are u sure about it? Because I can't see the same from Peshawar to syria...