|
|
|
|
Islam According to Oprah
Is Oprah Winfrey a threat
to national security? By Rod Dreher, columnist
for the New York Post October 8, 2001 11:45 a.m. Is
Oprah Winfrey a threat to national security? No, but now that the war has begun, I worry
about her, and here's why. The nation cannot afford
the naive illusions that have given many Americans comfort in peacetime. Chief
among them is the notion, repeated ad nauseam by our leaders and the media, that
Islam is a religion of peace. This may not be an outright lie, but it is so far
from the full truth as to approach falsehood. Americans have been told
that they shouldn't attack the Muslims among us, and only the lowest of the low
would disagree. The American people, with very few exceptions, have risen to the
challenge to be humane, decent, and loving toward Muslims in this country. Well
and good. Americans by nature want to
think the best of those from other cultures. But we run the risk of blinding
ourselves to the nature of the threat facing our country and our civilization.
In his 1996 book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,
Harvard's Samuel P. Huntington warned us of deluding ourselves about the true
nature of the Islamic threat. "Some Westerners,
including President Bill Clinton, have argued that the West does not have
problems with Islam but only with violent Islamist extremists," Huntington
wrote. "Fourteen hundred years of history demonstrate otherwise." We can sit around making
diversity quilts and thinking happy thoughts, or we can, with charity, commit
ourselves to soberly assessing the historical and present-day reality of
"peaceful" Islam, and its relations with non-Muslims. Which brings us to Oprah.
Last Friday, she devoted her program to "Islam 101," purportedly a
crash course in the Mohammedan faith for her vast television audience of
clueless Americans. It was grossly imbalanced and extremely dishonest. In fact,
given how many Christians and other non-Muslims are horrifically persecuted
today by Muslims in the name of Islam, it amounted to offensive propaganda. Oprah called Islam
"the most misunderstood of the three major religions" — yet did her
best to add to the confusion by candy-coating the complicated truth about the
Muslim faith. If you were to take Oprah's show as your guide to Islam, you would
think Muslims were basically Episcopalians in veils and turbans. Take her interview with
Queen Rania of Jordan, a lovely, modern young woman who looks more at home in
the pages of Vogue than in a hijab. The queen said that Islam "doesn't
impose anything" on people — an absurd lie. Oprah asked her about the
so-called "honor killings" of women in Jordan, murders committed by
men against women in their families who are believed to have shamed the clan.
For example, some young women who have been raped are in turn murdered by their
male relatives for having stained the family's honor. Progressive forces,
supported by the palace and Jordan's Islamic religious establishment, tried to
outlaw these killings in 1999, but were thwarted by the conservative Islamist
party in Parliament. Queen Rania, reflecting establishment opinion, told Oprah
that honor killings were a "cultural" phenomenon. If that's true, then why
have pre-Islamic Arabic tribal customs been taken up and spread throughout the
Muslim world? Moreover, many Islamic religious leaders endorse them, or lesser
violent punishment of women for the same dubious offenses. Anyway, if one grants, for
the sake of argument, the queen's contention that the Koran doesn't endorse
honor killings, so what? Clearly very many Muslims believe honor killings are
Islamic doctrine, and act on those beliefs — and we must be aware of that, and
let that reality inform our judgment. If one were a Jew in Torquemada's Spain,
it would be useless to be told that the Inquisition was a betrayal of
Christianity. Theological disputes would be ancillary to the question of
survival: what would matter would be how the local Christians interpreted their
faith. Queen Rania's dismissal of
Muslim behavior that brings discredit upon Islam as un-Islamic brings to mind
the bankrupt apologies leftists made during the Cold War for Communism. When the
wickedness of the Soviets, or other Communist forces, could not be denied, it
was claimed that these people did not represent "true" Communism. They
may have actually believed that, but those who would be victims of real
Communists, not theoretical Communists, didn't have that luxury. Dr. Maleeha Lodhi, the
Pakistani ambassador to the United States, turned up to say that "There is
nothing in Islam that does not accord women equal rights." Oprah did not
ask her to name one Muslim society in which women enjoy equal rights in the
Western sense, because the ambassador would have had to remain silent. Or
perhaps not: she had no trouble lying when she asserted that it was
"absolutely untrue" that some people in her nation had taken to the
streets to celebrate the September 11 attack. Other quotes, from the
program (available at www.oprah.com): — "Muslims do not
think that there is a non-Islamic world out there that we have to conquer. That
is not the concept in Islam. Our job is to get to know one another, and the more
we do that the better off we are." — "The main thing we
would like non-Muslims to know about our religion is that we're not so different
from them." — "I would like to
reassure the American public that Islam does not preach violence." — "Islam and
Christianity and Judaism, and all the world's religions share a common heritage.
We come from the same root. And our prophets and the characters in our holy
books are the same. In Islam, all the religions are permitted to exist in peace
with these others until Judgement Day." That Oprah let these
statements be broadcast unchallenged is appalling, an absurd fantasy that
ignores the enormous suffering actual Muslims are inflicting on non-Muslim
populations worldwide. "Wherever one looks along the perimeter of Islam,
Muslims have problems living peaceably with their neighbors," Harvard's
Huntington wrote. "Muslims make up about one-fifth of the world's
population but in the 1990s they have been far more involved in intergroup
violence than the people of any other civilization. The evidence is
overwhelming." In Sudan, the Muslim
government in Khartoum imposed Islamic law nationwide in 1993, and has killed 2
million Sudanese Christians and animists, and enslaved countless more, in an
attempt to Islamize the country. Coptic Christians in Egypt, whose presence in
that country predates the arrival of Islam, have been slaughtered by
fundamentalist Muslims, with authorities doing little or nothing to stop them. In the Philippines and East
Timor, Christians are being massacred by Muslims. Churches and Christian homes
in Nigeria are being burned, and Christians murdered, by Muslim extremists. Arab
Christians are oppressed by Muslims in the Holy Land, too. In Nazareth, Muslims
are building a mosque just steps from the Basilica of the Annunciation, and make
no secret of their intent to provoke and intimidate Christians. An imam in Gaza
earlier this year broadcast a sermon over Palestinian Authority radio calling on
Muslims to murder Christians and Jews as their Islamic duty. The ancient
Christian presence in many Arab lands — Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, among others —
has been decimated in the last century by Muslim persecution. The list goes on and on.
While it is true that there are relatively peaceful Muslims who wish us no harm
— the Sufis of Turkey come to mind, but there are others — it is unarguable
that very many Muslims and their leaders despise non-Muslims, attack us
rhetorically in religious terms, and wish to see us die for our infidelity to
Allah. To these Muslims, many of
whom are Wahhabi (the Muslim sect that, according to Islam scholar Stephen
Schwartz, accounts for 80 percent of the imams in the United States today),
there are two worlds: that of Islam, and that of war. No compromise is possible
between them. What can possibly be gained
from ignoring this ugly reality? Nothing — and a great deal to be lost. As
Andrew Sullivan notes in Sunday's New York Times Magazine, our leaders'
"laudable" post-9/11 efforts to discourage seeing the conflict in
religious terms "doesn't hold up under inspection." "The religious
dimension of this conflict is central to its meaning," Sullivan writes,
adding that it would be "naive to ignore in Islam a deep thread of
intolerance toward unbelievers, especially if those unbelievers are believed to
be a threat to the Islamic world." It's naive to ignore it on
a macro level, and it's naive to ignore it on a micro level, too. We know that
the Muslims who carried out the 9/11 attacks lived for years peacefully among
other Americans. We also know that they couldn't have carried out their
operations without the support of others. Further, we know that some mosques and
Islamic institutions in this country have been helpful to the jihadists. Believing that
the threat to America comes simply from foreign Islamic extremists may make
Oprah viewers feel better, but it's dangerous — and it lets moderate,
patriotic American Muslims evade their responsibility to repudiate and root out
fundamentalists among them. In Sunday's New York Times, a reporter wrote of
interviews she had with Muslim American students right here in my own Brooklyn
neighborhood. One of the male students said, on the record, that he would
abandon the United States and give his own life to back an "observant
Muslim who is fighting for an Islamic cause." Oprah honey, this is called
sedition, and if there is an Islamic fifth column in this country, the American
public needs to know about it. American Muslims
understandably feel pressured now to show the non-Muslim majority that they are
no threat, and well-meaning dolts like Oprah are key to this effort. Watching
Oprah's "Islam 101" program, I thought of the Lebanese Catholics at my
church, who stopped me after a prayer service for the World Trade Center dead to
talk, on the record, about the anti-Arab persecution they feared coming. They all said they knew
plenty of Muslims here in New York who were peace-loving people, and that it
would be wrong to think ill of them. I asked these Arab Christians if these
Muslims supported terrorist organizations, monetarily or otherwise. Every one of
them said yes, sheepishly. After the interview was over, the group asked me not
to use their last names. They were afraid of being physically attacked by
Muslims in their neighborhoods — this, for standing up for America in print. "That's amazing,"
I said to them. "You are all Christians living in the United States of
America, yet you are afraid to have your names attached to patriotic statements,
out of fear that your Muslim neighbors, the same people you are defending to me,
will attack you. What does that say about the reality of Islam in America?"
|