by Robert Spencer
All part of the Left’s advancing authoritarian agenda.
Critics of the “Islamophobia” bill sponsored by the winsome and patriotic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Mogadishu) say that it will be used not just to combat vigilante attacks against innocent Muslims, which are never justified, but to stifle any criticism of Islam at all, including opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. Omar’s latest husband, the amply remunerated political consultant Tim Mynett, has just proven this concern to be abundantly justified by accusing a U.S.-based Iranian dissident of opposing the bill just because she dislikes Muslims. It’s an ugly false charge, and it reveals that the foes of Omar’s “Islamophobia” bill were right all along.
It all started last Tuesday, when human rights activist Masih Alinejad took to the Washington Post, of all places, to point out some of the risks involved in Omar’s “Islamophobia” bill. Alinejad, who was recently the target of a kidnapping plot launched by the Islamic Republic of Iran, wrote: “I should make clear: I have nothing against Omar personally. Like her, I have many relatives who are pious Muslims I love and respect.” Alinejad added: “My mother is a devout Muslim who wears hijab all the time. I, on the other hand, challenged clerical rule with my journalism until I was thrown out of Iran. I launched a campaign against compulsory hijab, demanding that Iranian women be given the freedom of choice to decide their own destiny. Will such criticism of compulsory hijab be labeled as Islamophobia?”
The answer, of course, is a resounding yes. While witless Western feminists, oblivious to the fact that the hijab has been and remains the instrument of oppression for untold numbers of women, have made Hijab Day an annual event, standing in solidarity with hijab-wearing women in their struggle against imaginary impression from fictional MAGA-hatted yahoos and ignoring the fact that women have been brutalized and even killed for not wearing the thing. The fatuous non-Muslim hijabs have been celebrated as multicultural, tolerant, and everything that is good, while those who have dared to call attention to the plight of women in the Islamic world have been derided as “racists” and “Islamophobes.”
Accordingly, Alinejad writes: “Creating a mandate to monitor Islamophobia comes with its own risks. The legislation does not provide a clear definition of Islamophobia, nor does it make any clear effort to exempt the crimes of Islamist states against their own people. Is criticism of the Taliban a form of Islamophobia? What about criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran? Can one criticize Hamas or Hezbollah as terrorist organizations?” Yes, yes, and no. “Islamophobia” neatly bottles up even the slightest negative word about jihad or Sharia-inspired oppression and consigns it all to the dustbin of bigotry.
Alinejad herself gives a hint of this in her op-ed when she notes: “Contacted for comment, Omar’s office responded by accusing me of ‘rehashing … bigoted Republican talking points.’ The statement went on: ‘It’s the definition of bad faith to assume that a State Department envoy charged with monitoring and combating acts of official Islamophobia, which has amounted to genocide in some cases, would also condemn countries for their criticisms of oppressive regimes or terrorists.’”
But is it really? Omar’s husband, heedless of charges that he was manifesting the “white savior” complex that all Western Leftists now know to eschew at all costs, rushed to his wife’s defense, tweeting in response to Alinejad’s article: “So this lady doesn’t want to combat Islamophobia because she doesn’t like Muslims. Understood!”
Doesn’t like Muslims? Where did Mynett get that idea? Does he really think that Masih Alinejad hates her own mother and her other Muslim relatives in Iran? Does Mynett really believe that Alinejad’s opposition to Omar’s “Islamophobia” bill is simply a manifestation of some animus against Muslims and that all of the good reasons that this courageous human rights activist adduced for her stance are just some sort of smokescreen?
Can Tim Mynett really believe what he is saying? Can he really be that uncharitable and, frankly, stupid? Of course, he can, and it is even more likely that he does believe his charge against Alinejad in light of the fact that he, like other Leftists, has been conditioned for years now to see any and all criticism of Islam, jihad, and Sharia as “Islamophobic” and “bigoted.” When someone who is clearly not bigoted engages in such criticism, all that Tim Mynett and his ilk know to do is to claim they’re bigoted anyway; Leftist “analysis” has given them no other tools they can use to evaluate the situation.
Tim Mynett, in other words, not only bears out Masih Alinejad’s concerns over the “Islamophobia” bill but demonstrates the hollowness of the entire “Islamophobia” enterprise. The word is simply a tool to stifle criticism of Islam and smear its critics. If his wife’s bill is approved in the Senate and signed by Old Joe Biden, we may not see critics of Islam writing in the Washington Post, or at PJ Media, anymore: it’s all part of the Left’s advancing authoritarian agenda.
Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/ilhan-omars-husband-accuses-iranian-dissident-robert-spencer/
No comments:
Post a Comment