Is Rape ‘Legal’ in the West?

I know the title will cause offence to some, but perhaps it’s time that they learn to swallow their own medicine of ‘free’ speech, that is frequently used to insult Islam and Muslims; and in the spirit of free speech, I am going to elaborate on the title, rather than throw crass insults at an entire group of people. Thus, based on the example of some or even many, I won’t be tempted to class all white males as rapists or serial killers and make the tenuous link to their religious or racial identity. Those who are committed to free speech would be expected to persevere and remain, whereas the bigots and the nasty foulmouthed Islamophobes have probably already exited the room. Anyway, without further ado, let us proceed.  

Everyone knows the bifurcation of, the Muslim terrorists versus the West; just the choice of words implies the latter is the ‘innocent victim’ fighting terrorism. Similarly another division exists, the Muslims as oppressors of women, and the West as the flag bearer of women’s rights. Remember, this women issue was one of the pretexts for the Afghan invasion. However, ironically, the US armed forces are filled with rapists, as their statistics and conduct shows. Who in their right mind would even trust the sick soldiers of Abu-Ghraib to guard their daughters and mothers for a few hours? When you see the behavior and the mindset of these soldiers in the numerous YouTube videos, it makes you cringe with disgust!

Therefore, consider, how many rapists have been found in Al-Qaeda or in any major Islamic movement, against the numerous rapists that fills the US armed forces? Yet, paradoxically the former stands accused of being oppressors of women, and the latter as liberators. The thought is amusing, because no matter how much you verbally demonise or promote, a group or an individual, the deeds will speak louder and expose the paradox. Who remembers the ‘fanatical’ Osama Bin Laden of the media, whose speeches and interviews shows a very calm and a rational person?

Osama Bin Laden and the Moral Paradox

“Despite the religious rhetoric and the bloody means, Bin Laden is a rational man. There is a simple reason why he attacked the US: American Imperialism. As long as America seeks to control the Middle-East, he and people like him will be its enemy”

– (Michael Mann, Incoherent Empire)

The conflict between Osama Bin Laden and the US President, reminds me of the parable of Alexander the Great and a captured pirate, narrated by St Augustine in the “City of God”. The Emperor places the pirate on trial and angrily demanded of him, “How dare you molest the seas?” To which the pirate replied, “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a small boat, I am called a pirate and a thief. You, with a great navy, molest the world and are called an emperor”. 

If Osama the Pirate was captured and put on trial, one can imagine the eloquent and rational Osama retorting to the simplistic allegations of terrorism, by pointing out that it is a small reaction to the greater terrorism of the state (state-terrorism), which is euphemistically termed as “foreign policy”. The pirate effectively turns the table and puts the emperor on trial, and asks: I kill 3000 in response to your orgy of killing hundreds of thousands, and that makes me a terrorist, whilst your act is somehow moral and lawful, how can that be the case, it is you who should be on trial, but the world is governed by might is right; thus, leaving the emperor speechless.

Death of Usamah Bin Laden: Freedom Fighter or Terrorist?

The reaction says it all, there is celebration in the streets of New York, whilst silence in the streets of the Islamic world; freedom fighter or terrorist depends on whose perspective. There is no doubt many in the Islamic world and the non-Islamic world (e.g. Latin America), are privately mourning the death of Usamah Bin Laden, seen as a symbol of resistance to Western imperialism. Unlike Saddam Hussein and his ilk, Usamah Bin Laden died fighting like a Mujahid, as the old proverb says, he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.      

It is disgusting the way the media constantly highlights the 3000 that perished in 9/11, as if the American and western lives are more valuable than others. The message construed is simple, its Bin Laden and 9/11, there are no other casualties and no other factors. Indeed, the entire narrative is false. They say 9/11 marks the beginning of the conflict, whereas the conflict started from the end of the First World War; the Arabs seeking independence were betrayed (Sykes-Picot treaty) for their support to the Allied forces. Their lands were carved up to suit the interests of the colonialists, who facilitated the migration of the Zionists to Palestine, paving the way for the creation of Israel. Eventually, the Arabs were ‘rewarded’ with Israel and the Palestinian Diaspora (nakba) for their cooperation and service to the colonialists.