Yesterday (1.11.07) he appeared in a segment on the “45 Minutes” program on Finnish MTV3. The program’s host introduced the segment in the following way:
“The founding of the Finnish Islamic Party has been met with mixture of feelings inside the Islamic community in Finland. The party has stated that it represents all of the Muslims interests, but it mostly represents just the views of Finns that have converted to Islam. The party speaks about democracy but the party leader (Tammi) supports sharia law and stoning verdicts.”
The FIP head repeats the same mantra as in other reports, that there is a need for an Islamic party in Finland, so there is no “new” news there. What is of interest to me is the sound pronouncements from those interviewed that “this party’s background and much of their goals have nothing constructive to do with Islam in society.”
There is however room for worry, one (Muslim) interviewee states that “it’s good that an Islamic party drives the interests of the Islamic community, while a Finnish non-Muslim passerby interviewed states “it’s no big deal, democracy for everyone”.
The MTV3 host goes on further to state: “Democracy or theocracy, homegrown Finnish organization or chiefly Saudi Arabian?”
Regardless of the few comments from average Finns that haven’t a clue about Islam and the extremist agenda, parties like the FIP have, what’s important is that the Finnish news media, in this case MTV3, are asking the right questions and stating the obvious contradictions such a party is to Finnish/western liberal pluralistic democracy.
In short, the more he is interviewed, the more of a laughing stock this guy and his party is becoming. I must say that the Finnish media as a whole, have been doing a wonderful job in highlighting and debunking the anti-western liberal foundations that Tammi and the FIP represents.
The Finnish Lutheran Church’s highly influential weekly news paper, Kotimaa (Homeland), recently published an article (1.11.07) about the Tammi/FIP phenomenon (not online). Interviewing a Muslim from the Resalat Islamilaisen Yhdyskunta, spokesman, Paula Bahmanpour, rejects the need for such a party. Bahmanpour also (rightly) observes that the FIP will project a wrong image of most Muslims in Finland, who care little for any such fanaticism.
Bahmanpour also believes that the FIP will not succeed in gathering the needed 5000 signatures needed to run for local elections. Of course all this could change, so there is a need to keep an eye on the development of the FIP in the future.
But for right now, the FIP is a joke for the overwhelming majority of Finns, as well as an unwanted phenomenon for the majority of Muslims. But it is also worth noting that, though a minority, many Muslims in Finland do in fact wish to live under sharia law, so there is danger of the FIP growing in strength, in spite of Bahmanpour’s opinion to the contrary.
What is also worrysome is the fact that when Finnish law contradicts Islamic law, a majority would choose sharia law over Finnish law. Troublesome indeed. Hope in defeating the FIP’s agenda rests mostly within the Islamic community in Finland, and people such as Bahmanpour need to be vigiliant in discrediting the FIP every chance they get. *L* KGS
Update: Here is more about Muslims balancing Islamic and Finnish law.
“Last week, the Finnish League for Human Rights released a study pertaining to Islamic beliefs on family law. Kristiina Kouros, the head of the organisation, said the study was launched after they noted some Muslim women were unable to get an Islamic divorce, even though they had been divorced according to Finnish law.”This is a great problem for these women because if they travel to Muslim country they may have problems to get out of the country,” said Kouros.”
Observation: Something else worth noting. The lack of response by Paula Bahmanpour concerning Abdullah Tammi’s very literal interpretation of the Qur’an and the Hadiths. The reason for this is due to the fact the few Muslims can mount a credible defense against the strict interpretation of the Qur’an, and the strict enforcement of Islamic jurisprudence, sharia law.
In the Kotimaa interview, she didn’t point out from the Qur’an where Finnish convert to Islam, Abdullah Tammi “got it wrong”, just that they needed time to “mellow out”. That is the problem with the Qur’an and Mohamed’s open ended dictates to the faithful believers in Allah.
As Robert Spencer so adroitly puts it, those Muslim apologists who maintain that the Jewish religion contain troubling passages, like for example in the book of Joshua in the Torah, these passages are nonetheless, “descriptive” not proscriptive” of the events being told. In other words, the events in the Torah are being described as they happened, not as a model for future generations to pattern themselves from in dealing with other non-believers.
In Islam, there is no general interpretation available to help describe the events during their prophet’s lifetime as something belonging to that time period only, and that his (Mohamed’s) brutal waging of war against the non-believer and his strict, brutal law system (called sharia) as not being applicable in the modern age.
Not only Paula Bahmanpour, but many other Imams in Finland would have a hard time convincing the extremists that their version of Mohamed…was indeed not the correct one, while not being labeled an apostate in the process.