The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
A tenured Wheaton College professor who, as part of her Christian Advent devotion, donned a traditional headscarf to show solidarity with Muslims has been placed on administrative leave.
Larycia Hawkins, a political science professor at the private evangelical Christian college in Chicago's west suburbs, announced last week that she would wear the veil to show support for Muslims who have been under greater scrutiny since mass shootings in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.
"I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book," she posted on Facebook.
The Council on American-Islamic relations (CAIR) filed a lawsuit against the shop owner, but a federal judge threw it out last month.
CAIR argued calling the store a Muslim free zone amounted to religious discrimination. And what does CAIR have to say for places in Britain, France and other European countries where "visitors" are warned that they are entering areas where strict "Sharia Law" is enforced (no ham, bacon, pork, no niteclubs, hijab, burqa only attire !)
The judge ruled the store’s policy “did not present an imminent and concrete threat to Muslim people.”
“Can I buy a home [in Saudi Arabia] and bring my family? Will my wife and daughters be entitled to drive to the grocery to buy food? … Why should my family have to abide by Saudi Arabia’s strict Muslim rules? Why don’t they respect me and my family, and allow us to live as we please?”
Sorry, Bill, but women aren’t allowed to drive in the kingdom. And you and your family would certainly have to abide by Saudi Arabia’s rigid laws. For example, there are no churches there for you to pray in; even possessing a copy of the Bible is against the law. Muslims, on the other hand, can pray at hundreds of mosques across the West, mostly paid for by Saudi cash, and spreading their literalist version of Islam known as Wahabism.
Bill goes on: “Does Pakistan accord non-Muslims all the fundamental rights that it gives Muslims? Would I be allowed to cook up my favourite breakfast sandwich of bacon, eggs and cheese? … Could I serve my favourite beer?”
You could have our excellent Murree beer, Bill, but strictly no bacon, ham or pork. And while non-Muslims enjoy equal rights in theory, it’s a different story in real life.
Next, Bill comes to his central point: “Why do Muslims expect westerners to provide them every courtesy and right while, in their own countries, they do not give those same rights and respect to westerners? Because they look down on us?”
These questions go to the heart of the problem. While Muslims in the West think they have every right to pray at mosques, spread their faith, buy and eat halal food, cover their faces and bodies in burqas, and follow what they consider Islamic injunctions, they are generally unwilling to accord non-Muslims in their midst these same rights.
...
f Muslim migrants behave in obnoxious ways, claiming their actions are sanctioned by their faith, and are punished or criticised, a howl of ‘Islamophobia’ goes up. While non-Muslims and their faiths are described in the most objectionable way in many of our textbooks, perceived criticism of the way of life of Muslim migrants in the West is seen as racist.
In reality, most westerners bend over backwards to avoid giving any offence to the millions of Muslim migrants who have made homes for themselves in the West. Many of them have migrated to avail themselves and their children of the free educational and medical facilities there, as well as the many social benefits available to them and their families. All too often, this generous social security system is abused by migrants.
Many friends abroad have asked me why, if Muslim migrants insist on bringing their faith, culture and way of life with them, didn’t they just stay at home where it would be easier to live by the tenets of their religion? And this issue is especially relevant when so many Muslim migrants are openly contemptuous of Western values and lifestyles.
These questions demand answers in the wake of growing anti-Western sentiments among Muslims around the world, combined with terrorist attacks and increased violence in the Middle East. Muslims born and brought up in the West who have resorted to terrorist attacks recently raise suspicions about the entire Muslim community that has put down roots in Europe and America.
...
The mantra of ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ is no longer believed by most people in the West. When they witness the mayhem in large swathes of the Muslim world, and fall victims to acts of jihadist terror within their own countries, who can blame them?
In line with the sentiments expressed in this piece, YAWN has closed the comments for this article after only 5 readers responding!!
Saudi millionaire cleared of raping teenager after claiming he accidentally fell on top of her
Property developer accused of forcing himself on 18-year-old is acquitted of rape after telling jury he accidentally fell on her as she tried to seduce him
wig wrote:Saudi millionaire cleared of raping teenager after claiming he accidentally fell on top of her
Property developer accused of forcing himself on 18-year-old is acquitted of rape after telling jury he accidentally fell on her as she tried to seduce him
I wonder how many times this poor, vertical stability challenged, unsteady millionaire has "accidentally fallen" on other girls??
UK "sharia" courts seem very gullible cooperative very cooperative only .
A Saudi millionaire has been cleared of raping a teenager after claiming he might have accidentally penetrated the 18-year-old when he tripped and fell on her
As a Christian liberal arts institution, Wheaton College embodies a distinctive Protestant evangelical identity, represented in our Statement of Faith, which guides the leadership, faculty and students of Wheaton at the core of our institution’s identity. Upon entering into a contractual employment agreement, each of our faculty and staff members voluntarily commits to accept and model the Statement of Faith with integrity, compassion and theological clarity.
Contrary to some media reports, social media activity and subsequent public perception, Dr. Hawkins’ administrative leave resulted from theological statements that seemed inconsistent with Wheaton College’s doctrinal convictions, and is in no way related to her race, gender or commitment to wear a hijab during Advent.
Wheaton College believes the freedom to express one’s religion and live out one’s faith is vital to maintaining a pluralistic society and is central to the very reason our nation was founded, enabling us to live together despite our deepest differences. Equally important is the freedom of religious organizations to embody their deeply held -convictions.
Wheaton College rejects religious prejudice and unequivocally condemns acts of aggression and intimidation against anyone. Our Community Covenant upholds our obligations as Christ-followers to treat and speak about our neighbors with love and respect, as Jesus commanded us to do. But our compassion must be infused with theological clarity.
The freedom to wear a head scarf as a gesture of care and compassion for individuals in Muslim or other religious communities that may face discrimination or persecution is afforded to Dr. Hawkins as a faculty member of Wheaton College. Yet her recently expressed views, including that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, appear to be in conflict with the College’s Statement of Faith.
The doctrinal statement of Wheaton College, reaffirmed annually by its Board of Trustees, faculty, and staff, provides a summary of biblical doctrine that is consonant with evangelical Christianity. The statement accordingly reaffirms salient features of the historic Christian creeds, thereby identifying the College not only with the Scriptures but also with the reformers and the evangelical movement of recent years. The statement also defines the biblical perspective which informs a Wheaton education. These doctrines of the church cast light on the study of nature and man, as well as on man's culture.
WE BELIEVE in one sovereign God, eternally existing in three persons: the everlasting Father, His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, and the Holy Spirit, the giver of life; and we believe that God created the Heavens and the earth out of nothing by His spoken word, and for His own glory.
WE BELIEVE that God has revealed Himself and His truth in the created order, in the Scriptures, and supremely in Jesus Christ; and that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are verbally inspired by God and inerrant in the original writing, so that they are fully trustworthy and of supreme and final authority in all they say.
WE BELIEVE that Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, was true God and true man, existing in one person and without sin; and we believe in the resurrection of the crucified body of our Lord, in His ascension into heaven, and in His present life there for us as Lord of all, High Priest, and Advocate.
WE BELIEVE that God directly created Adam and Eve, the historical parents of the entire human race; and that they were created in His own image, distinct from all other living creatures, and in a state of original righteousness.
WE BELIEVE that our first parents sinned by rebelling against God’s revealed will and thereby incurred both physical and spiritual death, and that as a result all human beings are born with a sinful nature that leads them to sin in thought, word, and deed.
WE BELIEVE in the existence of Satan, sin, and evil powers, and that all these have been defeated by God in the cross of Christ.
WE BELIEVE that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, as a representative and substitutionary sacrifice, triumphing over all evil; and that all who believe in Him are justified by His shed blood and forgiven of all their sins.
WE BELIEVE that all who receive the Lord Jesus Christ by faith are born again of the Holy Spirit and thereby become children of God and are enabled to offer spiritual worship acceptable to God.
WE BELIEVE that the Holy Spirit indwells and gives life to believers, enables them to understand the Scriptures, empowers them for godly living, and equips them for service and witness.
WE BELIEVE that the one, holy, universal Church is the body of Christ and is composed of the communities of Christ’s people. The task of Christ’s people in this world is to be God’s redeemed community, embodying His love by worshipping God with confession, prayer, and praise; by proclaiming the gospel of God’s redemptive love through our Lord Jesus Christ to the ends of the earth by word and deed; by caring for all of God’s creation and actively seeking the good of everyone, especially the poor and needy.
WE BELIEVE in the blessed hope that Jesus Christ will soon return to this earth, personally, visibly, and unexpectedly, in power and great glory, to gather His elect, to raise the dead, to judge the nations, and to bring His Kingdom to fulfillment.
WE BELIEVE in the bodily resurrection of the just and unjust, the everlasting punishment of the lost, and the everlasting blessedness of the saved.
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia’s first Islamic-compliant airline Rayani Air began operations on Sunday with its maiden flight taking off from the capital to the resort island of Langkawi, local media reported.
In-flight meals served on board its flights are completely halal, with alcohol consumption strictly prohibited. (will an exception be made for the Gulf and Saudi Princes and Princesses who like to indulge themselves with a "bit" of haram sharab
Muslim flight crew must don the hijab while non-Muslim crew are to be decently dressed, managing director Jaafar Zamhari told reporters. There will also be prayer recitals before take-off.
“We are the first Malaysian airline to be shariah-compliant based on guidelines by relevant authorities. We are proud of this,” Jaffar was quoted as saying by The Star newspaper.
“The shariah-compliant aspects will be refined as time goes by,” he added using the Arabic word for Islamic law.
Just like the "interest free" Islamic banking that is currently in fashion!
...Under the concept of halal — meaning “permissible” in Arabic — pork and its by-products, alcohol and animals not slaughtered according to Islamic procedures are all “haram” or forbidden.
Since the Book "recommends" that Muslims cannot peacefully "co-exist" in Darul-Harb, is it plausible that this " Sharia Compliant Airline" will cater only to the "Ummah crowd" and will they find "qualified practicing Muslim Pilots" who do not indulge in the haram pleasure, like the recent incident of the PIA pilot, who tested above the limit at London Airport
The word translates literally as “postponing.” It was a theological principle put forward by some Muslim scholars during the very first century of Islam. At the time, the Muslim world was going through a major civil war, as proto-Sunnis and proto-Shiites fought for power, and a third group called Khawarij (dissenters) were excommunicating and slaughtering both sides. In the face of this bloody chaos, the proponents of irja said that the burning question of who is a true Muslim should be “postponed” until the afterlife. Even a Muslim who abandoned all religious practice and committed many sins, they reasoned, could not be denounced as an “apostate.” Faith was a matter of the heart, something only God — not other human beings — could evaluate.
ISIS' English language magazine, Dabiq:
One of the most striking pieces I have seen in it was an 18-page article in March titled “Irja’: The Most Dangerous Bid’ah,” or heresy.
ISIS doesn't like the irja doctrine because it goes against what they do, which is to send all non-{true Muslims} to the afterlife.
In the comments, readers point out that the article itself informs us that irja was obsolete within the first century of Islam itself, so resurrecting the doctrine today might be a little difficult. And secondly, readers point out, e.g.,
it does nothing to address the issue that affects non-Muslims: Muhammed's death-bed directive that Muslims must fight non-Muslims until they either convert, pay protection (an option allowed only to the People of the Book) or are murdered, so that Islam may rule the World. How to nullify the Islamic worldview that divides the World into the irreconcilable House of Islam and House of War?
Meanwhile over the Washington Post, Asra Q. Nomani and Hala Arafa write: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act ... olidarity/
"As Muslim women, we actually ask you not to wear the ‘hijab’ in the name of interfaith solidarity"
Some dhimmis in the great American state of Utah organized a "Wear a Hijab Day".
They write:
For us, as mainstream Muslim women, born in Egypt and India, the spectacle at the mosque was a painful joke and reminder of the well-financed effort by conservatives to dominate modern Muslim societies. This modern-day movement spreads an ideology of political Islam, called “Islamism,” enlisting unsuspecting well-intentioned do-gooders, while promoting the headscarf for women as a virtual “sixth pillar” of Islam, after the traditional “five pillars,” the shahada (or proclamation of faith), prayer, fasting, charity and pilgrimage. We reject this interpretation. We are not too sexy for our hair.
and, after a long explanation, they conclude
In the name of “interfaith,” well-intentioned Americans are getting duped by the agenda of Muslims who argue that a woman’s honor lies in her “chastity,” pushing a platform to put a headscarf on every woman.
Please do this instead: Do not wear a headscarf in “solidarity” with the ideology that most silences us, equating our bodies with “honor.” Stand with us instead with moral courage against the ideology of Islamism that demands we cover our hair.
Muslims seem unable to take no or rejection. Its their way or the high way even on personal issues, let alone issues relating to community. Can we tie this behavior directly to what is or what is not in Quran or the hadiths or any other Islamic practice?
HYDERABAD: A 30-year-old software professional was confined and assaulted, both physically and sexually, by her former boyfriend at the latter's flat at Tolichowki for the past five days. Her SOS to a friend on a social networking site on Sunday helped police zero in on the location and finally free her from the clutches of her tormentor on Monday.
Special teams of Hyderabad police set up to check harassment of women in public places, rescued the software engineer, a native of Karnataka, and took her former partner, Syed Imad Hasan, also a software professional and a native of Aligarh, into custody. The survivor and the culprit knew each other from the days they were working at Dell software at Gachibowli. The survivor, in the past, had reportedly worked with the Union ministry of information and technology in Delhi.
While working at Dell, the two became intimate and decided to get married. The survivor refused to marry him later, citing that her family members would not allow an inter-religious marriage, police said.
Since then, Hasan was pestering her to change her mind. In September, she left for Dubai to work there. Hasan continued to harass her. "Hasan used to force the survivor to video-chat with him every day. If she failed to do so, he used to blackmail her saying that he will meet her father directly and explain about their relationship," deputy superintendent of police Kavita told TOI.
Due to the threats, the survivor used to video-chat with him and Hasan even threatened to expose the videos and photos of her in a compromising position with him. Finally, unable to put up with his threats, the survivor agreed to meet him in person on her visit to Hyderabad for her US visa interview.
"The culprit picked up the victim at the RGI Airport five days ago and took her to his flat and confined her there. He threatened to kill her by showing a knife, a can of petrol and a rope," the DSP added.
After switching off her cell phone, he forced her to log in to her Gmail and Facebook accounts to monitor what her colleagues, family and friends were thinking about her sudden disappearance.
The culprit sexually assaulted the survivor at his flat and also manhandled her while forcing her to convert to Islam to marry him. He even showed her a photograph of a pistol in his cell phone saying that he had the weapon to kill her.
To save herself, the survivor pretended to be nice to him for the past two days and messaged her former colleague in Dell - Hyderabad about what was happening on Facebook after turning the browser into incognito mode. She also messaged him the address of Hasan's flat. Finally, when Hasan was out of the house for an hour on Sunday evening, her colleague met her at the flat.
"The survivor's friend then alerted her brother in Karnataka. Her brother came to Hyderabad on Monday morning. He along with the survivor's friend approached us. We immediately dispatched a team and rescued her," Hyderabad additional commissioner of police (crime) Swati Lakra said.When police reached the flat, Hasan claimed he was alone at the dwelling. Police found the survivor confined in one of the bathrooms with a bruised eye and several injuries.
Hasan was arrested and handed over to the Humayun Nagar police.
Muslims seem unable to take no or rejection. Its their way or the high way even on personal issues, let alone issues relating to community. Can we tie this behavior directly to what is or what is not in Quran or the hadiths or any other Islamic practice?
HYDERABAD: A 30-year-old software professional was confined and assaulted, both physically and sexually, by her former boyfriend at the latter's flat at Tolichowki for the past five days. Her SOS to a friend on a social networking site on Sunday helped police zero in on the location and finally free her from the clutches of her tormentor on Monday.
Special teams of Hyderabad police set up to check harassment of women in public places, rescued the software engineer, a native of Karnataka, and took her former partner, Syed Imad Hasan, also a software professional and a native of Aligarh, into custody. The survivor and the culprit knew each other from the days they were working at Dell software at Gachibowli. The survivor, in the past, had reportedly worked with the Union ministry of information and technology in Delhi.
While working at Dell, the two became intimate and decided to get married. The survivor refused to marry him later, citing that her family members would not allow an inter-religious marriage, police said.
Since then, Hasan was pestering her to change her mind. In September, she left for Dubai to work there. Hasan continued to harass her. "Hasan used to force the survivor to video-chat with him every day. If she failed to do so, he used to blackmail her saying that he will meet her father directly and explain about their relationship," deputy superintendent of police Kavita told TOI.
Due to the threats, the survivor used to video-chat with him and Hasan even threatened to expose the videos and photos of her in a compromising position with him. Finally, unable to put up with his threats, the survivor agreed to meet him in person on her visit to Hyderabad for her US visa interview.
"The culprit picked up the victim at the RGI Airport five days ago and took her to his flat and confined her there. He threatened to kill her by showing a knife, a can of petrol and a rope," the DSP added.
After switching off her cell phone, he forced her to log in to her Gmail and Facebook accounts to monitor what her colleagues, family and friends were thinking about her sudden disappearance.
The culprit sexually assaulted the survivor at his flat and also manhandled her while forcing her to convert to Islam to marry him. He even showed her a photograph of a pistol in his cell phone saying that he had the weapon to kill her.
To save herself, the survivor pretended to be nice to him for the past two days and messaged her former colleague in Dell - Hyderabad about what was happening on Facebook after turning the browser into incognito mode. She also messaged him the address of Hasan's flat. Finally, when Hasan was out of the house for an hour on Sunday evening, her colleague met her at the flat.
"The survivor's friend then alerted her brother in Karnataka. Her brother came to Hyderabad on Monday morning. He along with the survivor's friend approached us. We immediately dispatched a team and rescued her," Hyderabad additional commissioner of police (crime) Swati Lakra said.When police reached the flat, Hasan claimed he was alone at the dwelling. Police found the survivor confined in one of the bathrooms with a bruised eye and several injuries.
Hasan was arrested and handed over to the Humayun Nagar police.
Despite countless examples of this, things are going to get worse from here on for Hindu girls. As Hindus in cities become more 'liberal' and insular, the lesser will be the hesitation by Hindu girls in getting in an inter-religious relation. Hindu parents, as usual of all Hindus, simply sleep until its too late. I can personally can count at least 5 girls I know who are going out with Muslim guys. A childhood friend of mine is one of those. I am not in touch with her, but her FB feed is a simple enough indicator of who she is in love with. Hindu girls simply fail to see the difference between being friendly/in relation with a Hindu guy and a Muslim guy. To see her ogling and falling over his every pic is pukeworthy. Whats more interesting, I havent seen a single Muslim girl posting anything on this guy's picture, while there are 2-3 Hindu girls posting comments on every pic of his, with pictures of hearts and what not. Boils my blood. Stupidity now, regret later. There is no teaching these girls. And the parents, who are probably sleeping till now, will be in a world of surprise when they get the news that their girl is in love with a Muslim. Oh my, how could that happen? lol
And wonder of wonder, these girls' FB feeds are full of pictures of Bollywood Khans, big-boss and what not. The subconscious impact of Bollywood Khans on Hindu girls cant be denied.
I would judge that the accusation of "Islamophobia" makes us victims.
The term Islamophobia is a "grievance". It is an accusation against people who are said to be against islam. As such it is a self goal to have a thread bearing the word "islamophobia" - when we are ourselves victims of Islamism. What is being achieved - some sort of pseudosecular "balance of views" where we speak a bit about Islamism and then slap ourselves and talk about Islamophobia on this thread?
This thread needs a name change. Please give suggestions. I suggest "Islamism, faith and ex-Mulsims News and Analysis". Why am I saying it now? No special reason - but if you look at the content it is all about Islamism, not Islamophobia. Anything a kafir says about Islam that some Muslim may not like is dubbed Islamophobia. Is this what the thread is intended to be?
I've been accused yet again by a moderate U.S. Muslim of South Asian heritage of "cozying up" to the "imperialist agenda" of the "colonialists."
I have the same response every time:
What IS the "imperialist agenda"? And what does "cozying up" to it look like?
Does it mean "brown-skinned-person-who-rejects-his-ancestors'-religion-and-embraces-secularism-and-liberal-values"?
What would you call the dissidents of Christian Europe centuries ago who wrote, fought, and died for the same secular values and liberty that today allow you to call dissidents from the Muslim world -- trying to do the exact same thing in THEIR societies -- "sellouts"?
Must all good brown boys think alike and have the same opinions as you? Lest they be "sellouts" to that well-oiled imperialist machine? Look up "racism" in the dictionary.
Not a day goes by where I don't hear this kind of thing. And I don't buy it for a minute. It makes me smile. Why? Because it sounds like an argument, but it's not. It's a lazy substitute for the LACK of a good counter-argument. This means something's getting through. They're on the defensive.
Now let's talk about "imperialism."
You are a man of Indian heritage who:
(i) follows an Arab religion,
(ii) reads from an Arabic holy book,
(iii) prays in Arabic,
(iv) greets others in Arabic,
(v) reveres an Arabic prophet; and
(vi) faces Arabia five times a day to pray.
How can you possibly accuse OTHERS of being part of an "imperialist agenda" with a straight face?
You see, Western imperialism isn't the only imperialism there is. Read the history of your religion and how it was spread. You oppose Western imperialism, but not the Arab/Islamic imperialism of 7th century Mecca that still has an intractable chokehold on your mind. This means you're not anti-imperialism. You're just anti-West.
Imagine if Flavor Flav came by to lecture you on quantum physics. It would be immensely entertaining, but utterly useless. That's exactly what it's like to hear you lecture me about "imperialism" and "agendas."
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia’s first Islamic-compliant airline Rayani Air began operations on Sunday with its maiden flight taking off from the capital to the resort island of Langkawi, local media reported.
In-flight meals served on board its flights are completely halal, with alcohol consumption strictly prohibited. (will an exception be made for the Gulf and Saudi Princes and Princesses who like to indulge themselves with a "bit" of haram sharab
Muslim flight crew must don the hijab while non-Muslim crew are to be decently dressed, managing director Jaafar Zamhari told reporters. There will also be prayer recitals before take-off.
“We are the first Malaysian airline to be shariah-compliant based on guidelines by relevant authorities. We are proud of this,” Jaffar was quoted as saying by The Star newspaper.
“The shariah-compliant aspects will be refined as time goes by,” he added using the Arabic word for Islamic law.
Just like the "interest free" Islamic banking that is currently in fashion!
...Under the concept of halal — meaning “permissible” in Arabic — pork and its by-products, alcohol and animals not slaughtered according to Islamic procedures are all “haram” or forbidden.
Since the Book "recommends" that Muslims cannot peacefully "co-exist" in Darul-Harb, is it plausible that this " Sharia Compliant Airline" will cater only to the "Ummah crowd" and will they find "qualified practicing Muslim Pilots" who do not indulge in the haram pleasure, like the recent incident of the PIA pilot, who tested above the limit at London Airport
Interesting!!
Will their sharia compliant aircraft compass also point toward mecca instead of north??
Religious leaders in the oil-rich sultanate warned this month that a ban on Christmas would be strictly enforced, for fear that Muslims could be led astray.
“Using religious symbols like crosses, lighting candles, putting up Christmas trees, singing religious songs, sending Christmas greetings… are against Islamic faith,” imams said in sermons published in the local press.
Punishment for violating the ban is a five-year jail sentence, and the government warned last year that Muslims would be committing an offence if they so much as wore “hats or clothes that resemble Santa Claus”.
However,every Indian Non-Muslim Prime Minister and President as also ALL INDIAN AMBASSADORS-HIGH COMMISSIONERS (that I know of) are expected to Perform IFTAAR, which I suppose 90% or more do perform!
Cheers
Religious leaders in the oil-rich sultanate warned this month that a ban on Christmas would be strictly enforced, for fear that Muslims could be led astray.
“Using religious symbols like crosses, lighting candles, putting up Christmas trees, singing religious songs, sending Christmas greetings… are against Islamic faith,” imams said in sermons published in the local press.
Punishment for violating the ban is a five-year jail sentence, and the government warned last year that Muslims would be committing an offence if they so much as wore “hats or clothes that resemble Santa Claus”.
However,every Indian Non-Muslim Prime Minister and President as also ALL INDIAN AMBASSADORS-HIGH COMMISSIONERS (that I know of) are expected to Perform IFTAAR, which I suppose 90% or more do perform!
Cheers
Peregrine-ji: The House Of Brunei is" right up there" with the Saudi Royals for competition to win the World Prize For Hypocrisy; if I recall correctly his brother "belongs to the jet set crowd" and often in the news for conspicuous consumption. And if I am not mistaken the Hon Sultan himself, has a "preference" for indulging in more than one spouse ( four are allowed under the Book!), specially "younger girls"- if you know what I mean!
Falijee wrote:
Peregrine-ji: The House Of Brunei is" right up there" with the Saudi Royals for competition to win the World Prize For Hypocrisy; if I recall correctly his brother "belongs to the jet set crowd" and often in the news for conspicuous consumption. And if I am not mistaken the Hon Sultan himself, has a "preference" for indulging in more than one spouse ( four are allowed under the Book!), specially "younger girls"- if you know what I mean!
In one way, the brothers adhere to Islamic law: As prescribed, each has several wives and families. But everything else they do is in defiance of the Koran and the law they’ve just imposed.
“It’s a radical double standard,” says Jillian Lauren, who wrote about her life as a member of Jefri’s harem in her memoir, “Some Girls.” “They have more money than anyone else. I know that they both have been married and divorced multiple times. It’s really hypocritical.”
It wasn’t until 2001, when Jefri was forced to auction off personal possessions after using the country as a piggy bank — spending an average of $747,000 a day for 10 years, on top of $17 billion in gifts to friends and family — that the sultanate’s true vulgarity was exposed. (His brother also treats the country as an ATM, and it remains a crime in Brunei for anyone to ever discuss how the royals spend their money.)
Indeed, the Sharia model as a sales channel is nothing new. French banks minted properly in the 80s and 90s I think from Mediterranean rim countries with these facilities as far as I am aware. May still be doing so. Many non Muslim banks have a sharia solution for customers.
This is a rather abstract note, but as I learn more, I will elucidate it.
Just as we have learned not to accept Pakistanis' self-description as a correct description of themselves, the Muslim self-description is not a correct description of themselves.
A_Gupta wrote:This is a rather abstract note, but as I learn more, I will elucidate it.
Just as we have learned not to accept Pakistanis' self-description as a correct description of themselves, the Muslim self-description is not a correct description of themselves.
That is as succinct an exposition of reality as I have ever seen. I have, from time to time. alluded to this fact in a more verbose fashion.
For example - certain "catch phrases" are used to portray an image that does not reflect reality - and the ones that comes to mind first are "Religion of peace", "Islam means peace", "There is no compulsion in Islam". In one word, all are lies.
One more confounding factor is the word-play that is used in distinguishing between Islam and Muslim. When something good happens, both Islam and Muslims get credit. When something shameful occurs - Islam is first removed from the area by saying "Islam does not allow this". Next the disclaimer is "A Muslim would not do this". Normally this hypocrisy would be laughed at, but in practice anyone who doesn't agree is at risk of capital punishment.
In the past year, 300 Bosnians have left to fight with the group Syria, according to France 24.
With a population of fewer than 4 million people, that reportedly gives Bosnia the highest per-capita ratio of foreign ISIS fighters of any European country. And experts estimate that several dozen of those fighters have returned to Bosnia, posing a security risk to the fragile country.
Police have conducted raids across the country targeting suspected Islamic jihadists, and one town in particular has emerged as a hotbed of recruitment - Gornja Maoca, which is home to followers of Wahhabism, a strict branch of Sunni Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia.
Reuters visited the town earlier this year and found ISIS flags painted on a shed and hung outside homes. The flags disappeared the day after Reuters photographed them....
Muslims make up about 45% of the Bosnian population, but most of them are secular or practice a moderate form of Islam, according to Reuters. western dream
Still, extremism has reportedly taken root in some rural areas as unemployment and poverty have swept the country. Recruiters have reportedly targeted young Bosnians who might be particularly vulnerable to radicalization. The Guardian reported earlier this year that Bosnia has the world's highest youth-unemployment rate - at about 63% as of 2012...
The GlobalPost delved into this crisis last year. The news outlet reported that "shadows of doubt and malaise hang over life" in Bosnia as young people struggle to find work.
A sense of hopelessness and grim future prospects provide targets for recruitment.
ISIS released a recruitment video earlier this year targeting Bosnians, called "Honor is in Jihad," according to The Guardian. The 20-minute long video calls for Bosnians to come fight in Syria as well as mount attacks at home. And it's not just online recruitment - "pop-up" radical mosques operating outside of the country's official network can be found in Bosnia's major cities, and communities that follow a very strict interpretation of Islam are present in rural areas.
The Guardian pointed to a report from a Bosnian professor and theologian that determined that there are two sets of motives for two different generations of foreign fighters who have left Bosnia to fight in Syria and Iraq.
Some of the foreign fighters are former members of the El-Mujahid Unit, which fought for Muslims in the Bosnian war in the 1990s. same old, same old process Others are younger Muslim converts who see the conflicts in Syria and Iraq "as continuation of the jihad they felt was ended prematurely in 1995" and are "driven mostly be adrenaline and a quest for self-validation, self-respect, group belonging, and purpose."
May be a coincidence or may be not, but all the past sins of the western powers are coming back to bite them. First in Middle-East and Libya, now in the Balkans.
A_Gupta wrote:This is a rather abstract note, but as I learn more, I will elucidate it.
Just as we have learned not to accept Pakistanis' self-description as a correct description of themselves, the Muslim self-description is not a correct description of themselves.
That is as succinct an exposition of reality as I have ever seen. I have, from time to time. alluded to this fact in a more verbose fashion.
For example - certain "catch phrases" are used to portray an image that does not reflect reality - and the ones that comes to mind first are "Religion of peace", "Islam means peace", "There is no compulsion in Islam". In one word, all are lies.
One more confounding factor is the word-play that is used in distinguishing between Islam and Muslim. When something good happens, both Islam and Muslims get credit. When something shameful occurs - Islam is first removed from the area by saying "Islam does not allow this". Next the disclaimer is "A Muslim would not do this". Normally this hypocrisy would be laughed at, but in practice anyone who doesn't agree is at risk of capital punishment.
Excellent.
The No True Scotsman fallacy should be changed to being called the No True Muslim fallacy due to the sheer scale of its usage in the muslim world. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman
I am not sure if this is the right thread for this link and also not sure if it has been posted before. But this animated map depicts the growth of different religions around the world from about 3000 BC. What is striking is the rapid growth of Islam.
shiv wrote:
That is as succinct an exposition of reality as I have ever seen. I have, from time to time. alluded to this fact in a more verbose fashion.
For example - certain "catch phrases" are used to portray an image that does not reflect reality - and the ones that comes to mind first are "Religion of peace", "Islam means peace", "There is no compulsion in Islam". In one word, all are lies.
One more confounding factor is the word-play that is used in distinguishing between Islam and Muslim. When something good happens, both Islam and Muslims get credit. When something shameful occurs - Islam is first removed from the area by saying "Islam does not allow this". Next the disclaimer is "A Muslim would not do this". Normally this hypocrisy would be laughed at, but in practice anyone who doesn't agree is at risk of capital punishment.
Shiv,
Yes.
But I am seeking something more - maybe it is not there to be found. That is, let us start by granting that we all practice some amount of self-deception to keep our self-image. E.g., we each probably somewhat overestimate how we look, how intelligent we are, and how interesting we are.
But suppose there is something more than that - a self-taqqiya - that is part of the Muslim psyche; and can it help explain the phenomena that we see?
Islam has understood that it is facing and confronting another predatory religion. Both are predatory par excellence. One relies more on sophistry while Islam relies on time-tested brute force techniques. It is a big business funded heavily on both sides. The only question who has bigger and deeper pockets and also who has better tactical and strategic advantages defines how it pans out. Every tool is on the table - deception, coercion, taqqia - you name it.
Both the predatory religions have reached a detente. This is not a permanent solution. And every member is expected to be a solider to do their part and for most part most of them oblige in multitude of ways. But both understand that they are playing zero-sum game and hence all the hypocrisy is just another tactic.
This taqqiya business is used heavily by both, except one indulges in more sophistry.
A brilliant article that explains it all from foreignpolicy.Posting the article in full. A must read. Why Islam is not a religion of peace. But a religion of war.
In the past few weeks, both Russia and the United States have escalated their military campaigns against the Islamic State. As the brutal jihadist group continues to wreak havoc in Syria and Iraq, Foreign Policy’s Peace Channel, a partnership with the United States Institute of Peace, asked Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now, and United States Institute of Peace acting Vice President Manal Omar, one of the foremost voices on peace and Islam, to debate what is behind this newest breed of extremism and how can it be defeated. In the age of al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and Boko Haram, is there a link between the violence these groups perpetrate and the faith they profess? (Read Manal Omar’s piece here.)
In the 14 years since the attacks of 9/11 brought Islamic terrorism to the forefront of American and Western awareness and then-President George W. Bush launched the “Global War on Terror,” the violent strain of Islam appears to have metastasized. With tracts of Syria and Iraq in the hands of the self-styled Islamic State, Libya and Somalia engulfed in anarchy, Yemen being torn apart by civil war, the Taliban resurging in Afghanistan, and Boko Haram terrorizing Nigeria, policymakers are farther away from eliminating the threat of violent Islamism than they were when they began the effort. In fact, Western countries are increasingly witnessing domestic attacks such as the murder of British military drummer Lee Rigby and the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, the shootings at Parliament Hill in Canada in 2014, the attacks at satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and at a Jewish supermarket in Paris this past January, and most recently the terrorist attack in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on a military recruiting center and naval compound.
But does this violent extremism stem from Islam’s sacred texts? Or is it the product of circumstance, which has twisted and contorted Islam’s foundations?
To answer this, it’s worth first drawing the important distinction between Islam as a set of ideas and Muslims as adherents. The socioeconomic, political, and cultural circumstances of Muslims are varied across the globe, but I believe that we can distinguish three different groups of Muslims in the world today based on how they envision and practice their faith.
The first group is the most problematic — the fundamentalists who envision a regime based on sharia, Islamic religious law. They argue for an Islam largely or completely unchanged from its original seventh-century version and take it as a requirement of their faith that they impose it on everyone else. I call them “Medina Muslims,” in that they see the forcible imposition of sharia as their religious duty, following the example of the Prophet Mohammed when he was based in Medina. They exploit their fellow Muslims’ respect for sharia law as a divine code that takes precedence over civil laws. It is only after they have laid this foundation that they are able to persuade their recruits to engage in jihad.
The second group — and the clear majority throughout the Muslim world — consists of Muslims who are loyal to the core creed and worship devoutly but are not inclined to practice violence or even intolerance towards non-Muslims. I call this group “mecca Muslims.” The fundamental problem is that the majority of otherwise peaceful and law-abiding Muslims are unwilling to acknowledge, much less to repudiate, the theological warrant for intolerance and violence embedded in their own religious texts.
More recently, and corresponding with the rise of Islamic terrorism, a third group is emerging within Islam — Muslim reformers or, as I call them, “modifying Muslims” — who promote the separation of religion from politics and other reforms. Although some are apostates, the majority of dissidents are believers, among them clerics who have come to realize that their religion must change if its followers are not to be condemned to an interminable cycle of political violence.
The future of Islam and the world’s relationship with Muslims will be decided by which of the two minority groups — the Medina Muslims and the reformers — wins the support of the meccan majority. That is why focusing on “violent extremism” is to focus on a symptom of a much more profound ideological epidemic that has its root causes in Islamic doctrine.
To understand whether violence is inherent in the doctrine of Islam, it is important to look at the example of the founding father of Islam, Mohammed, and the passages in the Quran and Islamic jurisprudence used to justify the violence we currently see in so many parts of the Muslim world. In Mecca, Mohammed preached to his fellow tribesmen to abandon their gods and accept his. He preached about charity and the conditions of widows and orphans. (This method of proselytizing or persuasion, called dawa in Arabic, remains an important component of Islam to this day.) However, during his time in Mecca, Mohammed and his small band of believers had little success in converting others to this new religion. So, a decade after Mohammed first began preaching, he fled to Medina. Over time he cobbled together a militia and began to wage wars.
Anyone seeking support for armed jihad in the name of Allah will find ample support in the passages in the Quran and Hadith that relate to Mohammed’s Medina period. For example, Q4:95 states, “Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home).” Q8:60 advises Muslims “to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know.” Finally, Q9:29 instructs Muslims: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Mainstream Islamic jurisprudence continues to maintain that the so-called “sword verses” (9:5 and 9:29) have “abrogated, canceled, and replaced” those verses in the Quran that call for “tolerance, compassion, and peace.”
As for the example of Mohammed, Sahih Muslim, one of the six major authoritative Hadith collections, claims the Prophet Mohammed undertook no fewer than 19 military expeditions, personally fighting in eight of them. In the aftermath of the 627 Battle of the Trench, “Mohammed felt free to deal harshly with the Banu Qurayza, executing their men and selling their women and children into slavery,” according to Yale Professor of Religious Studies Gerhard Bowering in his book Islamic Political Thought. As the Princeton scholar Michael Cook observed in his book Ancient Religions, Modern Politics, “the historical salience of warfare against unbelievers … was thus written into the foundational texts” of Islam.
There lies the duality within Islam. It’s possible to claim, following Mohammed’s example in Mecca, that Islam is a religion of peace. But it’s also possible to claim, as the Islamic State does, that a revelation was sent to Mohammed commanding Muslims to wage jihad until every human being on the planet accepts Islam or a state of subservience, on the basis of his legacy in Medina. The key question is not whether Islam is a religion of peace, but rather, whether Muslims follow the Mohammed of Medina, regardless of whether they are Sunni or Shiite.The key question is not whether Islam is a religion of peace, but rather, whether Muslims follow the Mohammed of Medina, regardless of whether they are Sunni or Shiite.
Today, the West is still struggling to understand the religious justification for the Medina ideology, which is growing, and the links between nonviolence and violence within it. Two main viewpoints have emerged in the debate on the causes of violent extremism in Islam. The difference between them is reflected in the different terminology used by proponents of the rival views.
Popular academics such as John Esposito at Georgetown and author Karen Armstrong believe that religion — Islam, in this case — is the “circumstantial” bit and that the real causes of Islamist violence are poverty, political marginalization, cultural isolation, and other forms of alienation, including real or perceived discrimination against Muslims. These apologists for Islam use words such as “radicalism,” “violent extremism,” and “terrorism” to describe the various attacks around the world committed in the name of Islam. If Islam is mentioned at all, it is to say that Islam is being perverted, or hijacked. They are quick to assert that Islam is no different from any other religion, that there are terrible aspects to other religions, and that Islam is in no way unique. That view is more or less the “official” view of policymakers, not only of the U.S. government, but also of most Western countries (though policy changes are beginning to appear on this front in some countries such as the U.K., Canada, and Australia).
But the apologists’ position has been a complete policy failure because it denies the religious justifications the Quran and the Hadith provide for violence, gender inequality, and discrimination against other religions.
Proponents of the alternative view, such as the late academic Patricia Crone and author Paul Berman, rely on different terms such as “political Islam,” Islamism, Salafism, Wahhabism, and Jihadism. All of these terms are designed to convey the religious basis of the phenomenon. The argument is that an ideological movement to impose sharia law, by force if necessary, is gaining ground across the Middle East, North Africa, Southeast Asia, and even in Europe. In a speech this past July, British Prime Minister David Cameron said: “[S]imply denying any connection between the religion of Islam and the extremists doesn’t work, because these extremists are self-identifying as Muslims. The fact is from Woolwich to Tunisia, from Ottawa to Bali, these murderers all spout the same twisted narrative, one that claims to be based on a particular faith. Now it is an exercise in futility to deny that.” I agree.
The view that the ideology of radical Islam is rooted in Islamic scripture understands fully the cause of terrorism; it takes religious arguments seriously, and does not view them as a mere smokescreen for underlying “real” motivations, such as socio-economic grievances. This school of thought understands that the problem of radicalization begins long before a suicide bomber straps on his vest or a militant picks up his machine gun; it begins in mosques and schools where imams preach hate, intolerance, and adherence to Medina Islam.
Western governments have tried to engage with “moderate Muslims”: imams and community leaders who denounce terrorist attacks and claim to represent the true, peaceful Islam. But this has not amounted to meaningful ideological engagement. These so-called moderate representatives of Islam insist that violence has nothing to do with Islam and as a result the intolerant and violent aspects of the Quran and the Hadith are never acknowledged or rejected. There is never any discussion about change within Islam to bring the morally outdated parts of the religion in line with modernity or genuine tolerance for those who believe differently.
Despotic governments, civil war, anarchy, economic despair — all of these factors doubtless contribute to the spread of the Islamist movement. But it is only after the West and, more importantly, Muslims themselves recognize and defeat the religious ideology on which this movement rests that its spread will be arrested. And if we are to defeat the ideology we cannot focus only on violent extremism. We need to confront the nonviolent preaching of sharia and martyrdom that precedes all acts of jihad.
We will not win against the Medina ideology by stopping the suicide bomber just before he detonates himself, wherever he may be; another will soon take his (or her) place. We will not win by stamping out the Islamic State or al Qaeda or Boko Haram or al-Shabab; a new radical group will just pop up somewhere else. We will win only if we engage with the ideology of Islamist extremism, and counter the message of death, intolerance, and the pursuit of the afterlife with our own far preferable message of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
How is political Islam different from political Christianity, in terms of end goals? Western nations are uniquely disqualified to deal with any ideological aspects of predatory ideology. What is mostly stated in the above article also applies equally to western behavior.
For example, how many "moderate christians" actually condemn evangelical fervor displayed and intense necessity to fill the vacuum bereft of predatory ideologies. In fact, predatory religion is extensively used as front to impose policy on others. In such circumstances, how does one expect to impose extraordinary burden on "moderate muslims" to reform, while not imposing similar burden on "modern christians" to refrain the others from the superset to stop evangelisation. Both are predatory, one brutal other mentally devastating.
It is true that the ideas of Islam are based on primary sources - the Quran, the Hadith and the Sira, and behind the three, the supposedly unifying figure of the Prophet.
However the claim that "Islam is a coherent and consistent set of doctrines" is a theological claim, not an empirical claim. Even the rose-colored spectacles of the Prophethood does not render it so.
We kafirs often take the fact that Islam has a small set of primary sources from which everything else is "derived" as implying that "Islam is a coherent and consistent set of doctrines". But these primary set of sources are not Euclid's axioms of geometry or ZFC axioms of set theory. The primary sources have various inconsistencies -- even theologically, which we need not go into here.
a. Empirically, the debate of "who is a Muslim", "who should lead the Ummah", and all the meaning of the doctrine, etc., descended into bloody battle very soon after the passing of the Prophet.
b. Empirically, we see the "Meccan face" and the "Medinian face" of Islam (the foreign policy article above, for example) and they are not consistent.
When Muslims talk of "Islam" we should remember that all it means is something from the lineage of the Quran, the Hadith and the Sira. Any Muslim who claims it is a coherent system is being misleading. I don't know yet how we use that knowledge; but I'm sure the kafir, in figuring the way forward, must reject everything that is a theological claim with no empirical support.
.
