First person to get any sort of backlash over this event was Trump for calling it a bomb :hehe:
Everyone knows they were 'devices' and explosions'
First person to get any sort of backlash over this event was Trump for calling it a bomb :hehe:
Everyone knows they were 'devices' and explosions'
It's always alarming to find oneself agreeing with a Katie Hopkins article in the Mail, but there you goQuote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ed-T-word.html
Of course The Guardian went its usual route and immediately worried about the statistically insignificant 'backlash' rather than - y'know - the people who are trying to kill innocent people:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...icans-backlash
Yeah, can't imagine why violence committed by Muslims might lead people to think that there is a fundamental problem with intolerance and violence within our Muslim communities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
From the Times:
A popular imam and broadcaster was accused yesterday of inflaming divisions among Muslims after he condemned a murdered religious leader for his use of “voodoo” witchcraft.
Ajmal Masroor declared that Jalal Uddin was guilty of practices that were “totally forbidden in Islam”. Mr Uddin, an elderly Sufi scholar, was beaten to death after hardline religious students labelled him a sorcerer.
Sufis claimed that Mr Masroor’s criticism of the 71-year-old imam provided “a theological justification” for murder. The broadcaster claimed that Mr Uddin’s “grave sin” was a form of faith healing whose use is widespread among traditional south Asian Muslims. It involves the wearing of amulets, known as taweez, that contain Koranic verses to bring protection and good fortune.
Ajmal Masroor accused Mr Uddin of practising black magic and committing a grave sin
Sang Tan/AP
The young killers, from Rochdale, Greater Manchester, were disciples of the conservative Salafi tradition whose strict interpretation of Islamic law is used by terrorists to justify the slaying of those they deem to be non-Muslim.
Users of taweez have been beheaded in Saudi Arabia and in Isis-controlled territory in Iraq and Syria. After one of Mr Uddin’s murderers was sentenced to life imprisonment last week, commentators warned that the killing was evidence that a Sunni “civil war” in Britain was turning violent. Mr Masroor, 44, an imam at four London mosques who was a Liberal Democrat candidate in the 2010 general election, presents a show on two Islamic satellite channels and has written regularly for The Guardian.
He is generally regarded as a moderate voice within Islam and says he is under police protection after being named on an Islamic State hit list.
On Friday, Mr Masroor described Mr Uddin’s murder as barbaric but proceeded to equate the “evil” of Isis ideology with the “evil” of taweez. He accused Mr Uddin of practising black magic and committing a grave sin.
His comments on a Facebook blog provoked hostility among Muslims. Supporters condemned Sufis for following a warped ideology more in common with Hindu traditions. Critics accused Mr Masroor of promoting sectarianism and exploiting an “innocent person’s murder”. Mohammed Shafiq, of the Rochdale-based Ramadhan Foundation, described Mr Uddin as “a kind and thoughtful man”.
Haras Rafiq, of the counterextremism Quilliam Foundation, said Mr Masroor had provided theological justification for Mr Uddin’s murder.
Mr Masroor last night defended his comments but rejected claims that he was encouraging sectarianism.
He said: “There’s no room in my understanding of Islam for taweez and all such superstitious mumbo-jumbo.”
:clap: The man's a comedy genius!Quote:
Originally Posted by World's End Stella
:clap: :clap: :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I like this bit:
'He is generally regarded as a moderate voice within Islam'
So a moderate voice within our Muslim communities is comfortable qualifying an elderly man being beaten to death with a theological justification. Which sort of illuminates the rather enormous elephant in the room in this whole Islam/Terrorism debate.
Specifically, to what extent is there a correlation between a general culture of intolerance and violence within our Muslim communities, and the more extreme forms of intolerance and violence that we see with ISIS and Al Qaeda? Or to put it in practical terms, do men and women within our Muslim communities who hold homophobic beliefs, who think that women should cover up and not leave the home without a male relative and who support forced marriages (to use but three examples), in some way contribute to the radicalisation of members of their communities? And if so, isn't true that we will only solve this problem when our Muslim communities understand this relationship and work with us to address it?
That or we could just go down the Guardian route and blame Western imperialism, racism and capitalism until we turn blue in the face.
Well the whole idea of 'moderate Islam' is a total fiction, I'm afraid. It just means muslims who haven't actively killed anyone yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by World's End Stella
But taking the "all muslims are murderers" line is like the "all men are rapists" line - hyperbolic, divisive and unhelpful. If you haven't known and befriended secular muslims then, well, I'm surprised and a little disappoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
By 'moderate Islam' I mean Muslims who practice a moderate form of Islam. There is no shortage of people who consider themselves Muslims but who are quite happy to keep their religious and social/political views separate. And many if not most of those people hold social/political views consistent with a secular democracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
It is the silence of this particular part of our Muslim communities when it comes to Islamic terrorism which is the issue, I think.
I see some benefit in not creating a city-wide panic. And, additionally, in lynch mobs not killing every Moslem in sight. The latter which tends to happen in low-information countries in Central Europe or wherever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas