Unadulterated poison.
erroneous post, full version is below.
https://twitter.com/iheu/status/598028776296062976
.
Only one atheist (from Afghanistan) has ever been granted asylum in Europe based on religious persecution. This was done by a UK court. The CEAS countries, bowing to pressure from the anti-Islamophobia crowd, do not recognize the concept of Muslim persecution of atheists/secularists.
This is the tangible effect of the armchair ideological warriors among “moderate Islam” and the left. They keep their hands clean from the violence but lay important precedents down by claiming that Islam does not persecute and “atheism” is interchangeable with “blasphemy” is identical to racism. As a result of the work of these propagandists, the victims of the front-liners are served up to them and prevented from escaping to civilized Europe.
Isn’t that everything you post?
This is not just wrong, it’s fractally and recursively wrong and verging into not even wrong. Are you posting from a parallel universe ?
You have to read Haberdash’s posts with the understanding that reality frightens him, and so he has invented a simpler world divided into the good, kind, patriotic people who agree with him and the evil, nasty, conniving villains who don’t. It’s no use trying to prise him out of this fantasy - he’s too far gone. All we can do is send in the occasional care package of cookies and warm milk and try to keep him from hurting himself too badly.
Some courageous feminists in Kabul.
Afghan clerics uneasy as civil rights movement gains momentum
yes hypocritical religious bigotry is indeed the pure unadulaterated poison, whether it is these bands trying to impose their views oryour badly disguised and hypocritical bigotryor the mentally ill one’s. The commonality of the hatred is obvious to the non bigots.
Since there seems to be some confusion on this point, I just want to go on record that I am firmly against the hacking (the blade kind) of atheist bloggers, whether in Bangladesh or elsewhere. While I would not presume to speak for the rest of the board, I’m guessing this viewpoint is shared by at least a few others.
it is insufficient and shows your lack of commitment.
I am of course against the hacking death of all bloggers.
I’m kind of “anti-hacking up everyone”, outside of a combat/self-defense situation. There is no religion whose members I deem worthy of hacking up purely on the basis of their membership in that religion.
Okay, maybe Scientologists.
Okay, not Scientologists either. But they should get such a pinch.
You fucking bigot.
I salute you for taking such a bold and uncompromising stance, and will defend to the death your right to free Scientologist pinches.
Is Haberdash actually a JihadWatch bot or something? I was only gone for a few days, and he’s posted seven of his stupid links. Though I note that he’s really scraping the bottom of the barrel now, and his “look how evil Muslims are!” links include things like the repeal of a Christian-passed blasphemy law whose repeal was protested by Christian groups, a growing antifundamentalist movement in Afghanistan led by the very people whose existence he not only complete discounts but was utterly ignorant of until I pointed them out to him, and one outright lie (scroll down to Article 10).
So, since seven is a lot, today’s edition will be a special all-journal-article one, focusing on Wael Hallaq (whose book on the origins and evolution of Islamic law I recommended earlier). These are all articles that Professor Hallaq has graciously made available for free on academia.edu.
First up, The Authenticity of prophetic Hadith: A Pseudo-Problem. This addresses what classical Muslim scholars actually thought about the authenticity of the hadith they referenced in their works. Be warned that Hallaq uses a lot of technical Islamic juridprudential terms that he doesn’t explain in this article…it might help to know that a mutawatir hadith means one that has been passed down by so many reliable transmitters that to doubt its authenticity would be foolish (there are less than a dozen of these, and possible as few as four depending on the scholar), and ahad hadith means hadith where there is some reasonable doubt as to their authenticity (which consist of every other hadith).
Second, Was the Gate of Ijtihad Closed? one of the most common arguments made by Islamophobes is that Islam (and therefore Muslims) are backwards because they reject reason and the intellect in favor of mindless disobedience to religion (e.g Robert Reilly’s The Closing of the Muslim Mind). In this article, Hallaq demonstrates that, contrary to that argument, the “gate” of ijtihad (independent reasoning) was not closed either in theory or in practice.
Third, What is Sharī’a? Although written as an introduction to sharī’ah in general, it’s still an academic article, so it’s not exactly light reading for beginners. Nevertheless, if you wanted a good starting point for understanding just what sharī’ah actually is (rather than what people like Haberdash hyperventilate about), I recommend reading this.
Fourth, Islamic law: history and transformation. A chapter from an academic anthology rather than a stand-alone article, this isn’t as in-depth as the above article, but it is a bit less dense. The way Hallaq interweaves a description of how sharī’ah works with the history of when and how its elements developed is quite readable, and the sections on how sharī’ah changed when faced with modernity and especially the Western colonial empires, may help with understanding the how and why of those conflicts that still resonate today.
Fifth, Quranic Magna Carta: On the Origins of the Rule of Law in Islamdom. As the title of the article indicates, Hallaq here argues the framework of Islamic law is based on the Qurʾān in much the same way that the framework of modern Western law is based on the Magna Carta, and serves the same purpose: to provide for a defined “rule of law” and a system of separation of powers within that law rather than permitting the authoritarian absolute rule of a monarch.
Sixth, Groundwork of the Moral Law: A New Look at the Qurʾān and the Genesis of Sharīʿa. This is essentially an expansion on his thesis above, explaining how the Qurʾān, and not hadith, formed the benchmark of early development of the sharī’ah
And lastly, On Orientalism, Self-Consciousness and History, in which Hallaq responds (at some length) to a review of his book that I recommended earlier, The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law. However, his specific responses to the criticisms in the review are just a small part of the article, with the bulk of it being Hallaq addressing what he calls the problem of “legal Orientalism” in scholarship on Islamic Law, and the article is definitely worth reading for that.
The machete continues to incise, and the OP gloweth anew.
But, of course, this has nothing to do with Islam. Cultural history, dictators, etc.
It has something to do with a particular brand of Islam. It has something to do with some aspects of Bangladeshi culture, and some part of Islam in Bangladesh.
It has nothing to do with Islam in Detroit, or Islam in most of Indonesia and Malaysia, or Islam in most of Turkey, or Islam in many other places. Saying it has “something to do with Islam” is so vague and imprecise as to be useless – only slightly less vague and imprecise than that it has “something to do with people”.
“Sunni extremists accounted for the greatest number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for the third consecutive year,” the report says. “More than 5,700 incidents were attributed to Sunni extremists, accounting for nearly 56 percent of all attacks and about 70 percent of all fatalities.”
The report says that in 2011, a total of 10,283 terrorism attacks across the world killed 12,533 people. Terrorism also is blamed for 25,903 injuries and 5,554 kidnappings.
According to NCTC, of the 12,533 terrorism-related deaths worldwide, 8,886 were perpetrated by “Sunni extremists,” 1,926 by “secular/political/anarchist” groups, 1,519 by “unknown” factions, 170 by a category described as “other”, and 77 by “Neo-Nazi/Fascist/White Supremacist” groups.
These are also not exact numbers IMO. Few days back, 5 non-muslims(happened to be hindus) were killed by some Muslim group in Indian state of west Bengal. Absolutely zero coverage given deliberately by our so-called secular and liberal main-stream media. There might be several such incidents that would not be captured in the numbers above.
Right, it has more to do with secular bloggers being targeted by Islamists because the Islamists blame those bloggers for the Shahbag protests which resulted in the conviction of several leaders of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party for war crimes for their actions during the war of independence from Pakistan.
But hey, why learn anything about what you’re talking about, when you can just blame “Muslims”, right?
And if you actually read the NCTC report, you’ll see that the vast majority of those Sunni attacks and deaths were in Afghanistan and Iraq (5137 of the 5700 Sunni extremist attacks, and 6416 of the 8886 Sunni extremist deaths).
It’s almost like areas that have been subject to invasions by outside nations which destabilized them and led to decades-long civil wars have lots of violence in them or something. But no, I’m sure it’s just because they’re all Muslims.
EDIT: It also notes “Muslims continued to bear the brunt of terrorism, while attacks targeting Christians dropped nearly 45 percent from a five-year high in 2010”, so your Hinduvta cherry-picking of the report is blatantly obvious.
India: 600 violent attacks on Christians and Muslims since May
VHP warns of more church attacks, says conspiracy behind nun’s rape
EDIT: Swami Laxmanada was murdered by Maoist (ie, secular) terrorists, and his death sparked massive riots and attacks by Hindus against Christians.