I pose the following rhetorical questions to promote better understanding of radical Muslims.
Question No. 1: What would liberals say to women who are stoned to death for adultery, to gays facing capital punishment, and to Muslims beheaded for converting from Islam to another faith, all according to Islamic law? Will liberals say that they must show “tolerance” and accept this barbarism as a matter of respect for religious values or stand against inhumane laws?
No. 2: Where can we find Shariah books that clearly stand against the above violence? Instead of trying to convince the world that Shariah is peaceful and that it is all a matter of different interpretations, it would be much better if the liberals asked the leading Islamic scholars to declare unambiguously that stoning women, killing gays, and beheading apostates are unacceptable.
No. 3: Why do the liberal thinkers try to find justifications for terrorism such as poverty, lack of education, and the historical “feeling of injustice” among Muslims at the hands of the West? The Jews were exposed to some of the worst forms of suffering and torture in human history at the hands of the Nazis, yet they have not performed terrorist acts against German civilians.
No. 4: Muslims in the West enjoy rights as equal citizens. However, leading Islamic scholars call Jews in the Muslim world pigs and monkeys, Christians are not allowed easy access to build churches, and the Baha’i community is discriminated against in many parts of the Muslim world. Who really should feel angry?
No. 5: Why are socioeconomic conditions and political circumstances often used to justify acts of terrorism committed by Muslims? Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus live under the same circumstances and do not instigate such a level of violence. What is the reason for this selectivity?
No. 6: Why do liberals demonstrate against Israel for killing Palestinian civilians, which is unintentional and happens because Palestinian terrorists hide among the victims, yet do not use their passion to demonstrate against Hamas, which has killed "Palestinian" civilians intentionally? Note: Hamas assassinated three children of its opponent Dahlan, who was the head of Intelligence of the Palestinian Authority.
No. 7: The Arab-Israeli conflict often is viewed as a historical source of modern-day terrorism, yet how could this possibly explain why Muslims have killed and mutilated the dead bodies of fellow Muslims in areas such as Iraq and Algeria?
No. 8: If non-Muslims were to begin promoting the idea that “Muslims are pigs and monkeys,” would the liberals stand against this or would they remain silent, as they usually do when Muslims call Jews by these names?
No. 9: If a Muslim decided to follow in the “footsteps” of the Prophet Muhammad by marrying and having sex with a 9-year-old girl, would liberal thinkers stand against this or allow it to happen out of respect for religious freedom? Note: This story is mentioned in Al-Buchary, the most authentic hadith book in the Sunni world, but it is not in the Quran and the age of marriage is different in Shia books.
No. 10: How would liberals respond if radical Muslims declared war on them and used the standard Shariah rule to offer the three choices of conversion to Islam, paying a humiliating tax called the jizya, or be killed? Would liberals respect these religious values by accepting one of these options OR stand against such barbarism in order to protect human civilization?
Dr. Tawfik Hamid is the author of "Inside Jihad." He is a former associate of Dr. al-Zawahiri (second in command of al-Qaida) who now is a reformer of Islam. For more information, visit www.tawfikhamid.com. Hamid's writings in this blog represent only his thoughts and not the views of the institute where he works.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.