Ayaan Hirsi Ali's Security Trust Fund

by Bill Creasy

There's a lot of discussion on the internet with regard to solicitation of donations for a private fund to pay for security for Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and others are asking that atheists, and supporters for first amendment rights, donate to a fund to pay for Hirsi Ali's security while she is in the U.S. For information, see www.samharris.org and its links.

Hirsi Ali is the Somali-born writer and critic of Islam. She became a naturalized Dutch citizen and has a green card to work in the U.S. Her autobiography, Infidel, was previously reviewed in WASHline. After making a short film, Submission Part 1 in Holland, her collaborator on the film, Theo van Gogh, was violently murdered in the street, and she has received death threats from fundamentalists Muslims. (The film can be viewed on youtube.com.) The Dutch government was paying for full-time bodyguards. For the past year, she has been in the U.S. working for the American Enterprise Institute, so the Dutch are withdrawing the funding for her protection.

In case you're wondering, a search on Google for "Ayaan Hirsi Ali" gets 1.3 million hits. That's a lot of hits. By comparison, "Richard Dawkins" gets 0.2 million hits, "Brad Pitt" gets 0.9 million, "Britney Spears" gets 2.5 million, and "George W. Bush" gets 4 million. It is safe to say that Hirsi Ali is well known.

It is worth asking whether one private citizen deserves the extraordinary protection that Hirsi Ali has received. Especially in the U.S., one would hope that this kind of security wouldn't be necessary on a routine basis. However, all accounts indicate that the threats to her are credible. After the attack of 9/11, it isn't possible to assume that the U.S. is safe from terroristic acts within our borders.

Hirsi Ali has become a symbol and a central figure in the conflict between Western societies and fundamentalist Islam, on two fronts. She is a critic of Islamic law and morality as a former devout believer, making her an apostate deserving a death sentence under Islamic law. She is also a critic of the Islamic and Arabic treatment of women, as one who has suffered from it. Her autobiography is ample testimony to her personal experiences in both of these issues. Discussions by and about her can be found in her blog and many other websites.

Although WASH can't donate to Hirsi Ali's protection, I encourage individual WASH members to donate, for the following reasons:

1. Our federal leadership has declared a war on terrorism. This war includes convincing fundamentalist Muslims to refrain from violence. But our leadership has not asked for any sacrifice by Americans to fight it. Even the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are being funded by borrowed money. Hirsi Ali is clearly on the front line of the war on terrorism. Her criticism of Islam indicates its main flaw and its danger: the inability of many radical Muslims to accept criticism without resorting to violence. Hirsi Ali has repeatedly said that some Muslim men expect that they can use fear, intimidation, and bullying tactics to get their enemies, particularly women, to desist. This approach may not be used by most Muslims. But until it is openly denounced by all Muslims as being uncivilized and inappropriate behavior, then individuals who are inclined to be terrorists will be able to rationalize that they are sanctioned by their faith. Changing the minds of Muslims on this issue might do as much to defeat terrorism as trillions of dollars spent in Iraq. It is time for American citizens to start making a war effort by helping Hirsi Ali.

2. It is impossible not to respect the courage that Hirsi Ali has shown. In her pursuit of freedom, she fled from an arranged marriage, alienating her father, family, and clan, and risked poverty as a refugee in a new country. She was so successful at adopting Dutch culture that she earned a university degree and ran for office in the Dutch parliament within ten years of arriving. She sounded a warning about Muslims who were not attempting to integrate into Dutch society. She gave interviews and made appearances to communicate her ideas. She expressed her gratitude for Dutch freedoms that even native Dutch people didn't seem to appreciation (and most Americans probably don't, either). At any point, she could have decided to be quiet, be passive, and go along with the crowd, as she was often encouraged to do by anyone who was "sensible."

3. As WASH members, many of us live in or around Washington, D.C., or often travel here. No one should face death threats here for criticizing religion. We may have to be worried about normal crime associated with gangs or drug trade. Perhaps African Americans have more worries about racism than religious violence. But as WASH members, we are critics of religion. If we don't help insure the safety of someone like Hirsi Ali, who is an outspoken critic, who can we expect to help us?

Perhaps there is a inconsistency for us to say that Hirsi Ali is free to do what she wants, but not be responsible for her own safety. If she chooses to be outspoken, she must accept that she will be threatened. Perhaps it is also inconsistent that we criticize Arabs for treating women as their property to be guarded, but then contribute to guarding a free woman.

But the Constitution says we have freedom of religion. If a religious group can circumvent that freedom by making death threats or by complaining that their culture isn't being respected, then what good is the freedom? If Hirsi Ali chooses to speak out against Islam according to her conscience, then she should be free to do so in safety, fearing only that she will be demonstrated to be wrong. If Muslims want to show she is wrong, the best thing that they can do is to let her speak without threats of violence. Muslims should denounce anyone who kills in the name of Islam. Until that happens, if Hirsi Ali needs physical protection, she should have it.

As a question of trust, we secular humanists have to squarely face this problem. If Muslims say they will use violence on non-believers, should we take them seriously? Obviously, many Muslims are not violent, and they seem to be nice enough people. But how can we trust them not to use violence in the name of Islam if they won't even say openly that it is wrong to do so? And if they aren't trustworthy, how can we tell someone who is threatened that she shouldn't worry about it?

Donations can be made to: Ayaan Hirsi Ali Security Trust, Bank of Georgetown, 1054 31st St. NW, Suite 18, Washington, DC, 20007.