I've stumbled across a blog called Terrorism News that seems to be promoting the idea that terrorism is all the fault of the west and the Jews. I have taken particular interest in a discussion about the persecution of Muslims in the UK. I've already been warned simply for disagreeing with them so I thought some of my readers and fellow bloggers may enjoy entering the discussion and setting them straight.
So far they have come up with such gems as how non-Muslims can live with religious freedom in Saudi Arabia, how Jews are so well represented in Iran, and how Kurds lived so happily under Saddam. These fact dodgers deserve a little attention.
I suspect my comments will be deleted very shortly as they don't seem to like being challenged.
Update: Since they are threatening to delete my comments as "hate speech" I have decided to post my latest reply to the blogger known as _H_ here.
“I can assure you that you are simply coming across as a bigot. It is illegal for anyone to be found in a public place in the United Kingdom without having any money on them. The crime is vagrancy and the sentence is severe.... your point ? in the context of Muslims who live in the UK is ?”
You can call me a bigot if you wish. It does not alter the facts. If Saudi is not relevant to UK Muslims would you please explain how vagrancy is relevant? Or is this one rule for you and one for those that disagree with you? It doesn’t matter.
“People of many different religions live in Saudi Arabia and have done so for centuries. This article is not about Saudi Arabia. It is about the persecution of British Muslims. I will give you a chance to find your way back on topic and apply yourself to the comment rules. If you persist in your xenophobic rant then I will simply delete your hard work.”
People of many different religions are severely persecuted in Saudi Arabia, as in fact they are in absolutely every Muslim majority country and such persecution is defined in law within each and every one of those countries. You’re post makes one very large and unproven assumption and that is that Muslims in the UK are persecuted. Your justification for this assumption is the criticism levelled at Muslims in the UK. I am answering this by pointing out that criticism is valid as it is a fact that Islam is intolerant of other religions as it has been since Muhammad first attained some degree of power within his own life time. This is demonstrable within the historical records as it is within the Qur’an and ahadith.
“I don't see Muslims launching cruise missiles in to populated areas. I don't see Muslim clerics molesting young children... We could debate for weeks on the morality of western society in comparison to a Muslim society. But you fail to notice that your obsession and your narcissism is preventing you from remaining on the topic of this article.”
I don’t see them launching cruise missile either, but I have seen them launching Katyusha missiles into populated areas, packed with explosives and ball barings. Over 4000 of these missiles were launched during the recent war and even Amnesty International condemned Hizbullah for this behaviour and their actions of using forced human shields. But of course you will simply come back with how this was justified because of the evils of Israel. Good luck with that one when you decide to use it.
“I have worked in Saudi and right across the middle east.. please cease making foolish remarks by assuming that you alone have access to facts. You are living right on the borderline of courtesy ,decency and respect. Ironic considering that these are things you are desperate to attack others for but somehow you fail to notice the ignorance of such aspects within your own comments.”
I don’t assume I alone have access to the facts. You also have access to them, such as the link I previously posted. The difference is simply that I have made use of that access prior to forming an opinion. You having worked in Saudi does not change their law and neither does it discredit the thousands of reports by victims, international human rights organisations, religious organisations, independent witnesses and foreign governments regarding wide spread persecution of non-Muslims and the persecution against the Shi’a minority. My ignorance is irrelevant. Dispute my assertions with reference. If you can dispute the report I linked you to then I will be happy to come back to you with further evidence, but I very much doubt you have read it yet. It is not compatible with your opinion.
“I am aware of the political landscape of the middle east. We can all pick and choose which points to highlight... How about the Jews in the Iranian parliament ? How about the Kurds who lived happily in Baghdad during the time of Saddam ?”
I think you mean “Jew (singular) in the Iranian parliament”. You will find that information in the report I referred you to previously and you will also find it along with other interesting facts here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Jews#Current_status_in_IranWith regards to the Kurds I have decided to invite
Roya, a Kurdish blogger, to respond to you. She is extremely well informed on the subject.
“Why I wonder are you selecting Saudi Arabia as a model and not for example Israel.”
To demonstrate that Muslims are not innocent victims of persecution as you like to paint them as, but rather their entire history and present circumstance demonstrates a hard-line intolerance towards other faiths and cultures - a valid point for criticism. In the UK this is revealed by the Islamic assault on free speech and the demands to be treated differently under law. My argument is that Muslims are in fact guilty of incitement to hatred and not as you assume solely the victims of it. The foundation for this hatred is found throughout the Qur’an, which we shall come to in a moment, and is manifested in observable reality of Muslim treatment of and relationship with other faiths across the entire globe.
“Israel has no constitution, No Bill of Rights, No guarantees of free speech, No freedom of assembly and questionable due process in law. It is legally defined as a 'Jewish nation' with special privileges for 'Jews'. Anyone who wishes to argue that the Israel should be a nation with equal rights for all, and not a 'Jewish nation' are not allowed to hold office, or even run for election. It is impossible to acquire land or property in most areas unless you are Jewish, They torture ,use subversion and allow the detainment of suspects without trial. It also developed nuclear weapons behind the back of the world and refuses to even sign the NPT... So why not Israel ?”
I will be pleased to discuss Israel with you whenever you chose. But now it is you who is certainly straying off topic and I have already answered this question above. We can also discuss the USA if you wish, feel free to start a thread for both of the above.
“What makes you so high and mighty ? Apart from your misplaced ego that is.”
Ego is not relevant to the facts. I do not consider myself to be high and mighty but I am quite well read on this and many other relevant subjects including having studied Islamic history, the Qur’an, and ahadith. It is not ego that I suspect that I am far better informed than are you. It is experience and the numerous clues you provide in your statements that you really don’t know a great deal of what you are talking about.
“As for your source , your correct , I would not trust anything that came out of the US Department of State... Sorry , just a sign of the times. The US government has ceased to represent a source that can be trusted. I never used too feel that way.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_religious_freedom_in_Saudi_Arabia#Status_of_religious_freedomhttp://wwwc.house.gov/international_relations/109/mal111505.pdf - Human rights Watch report that explicitly states the following:
“Saudi Arabia
This year's State Department report accurately describes the situation in Saudi Arabia. It says: "Freedom of religion does not exist." Only the officially sanctioned version of Islam is permitted. The public practice of other religions is forbidden.
Though the Saudi government claims that people in the country are free to practice non-sanctioned religions privately in their homes, it often does not respect this right in practice. The Saudi religious police have continued to arrest and deport Christians for conducting private religious services. Saudi religious police continue to raid private homes where they suspect such services are taking place. They also continue to brutally enforce the country's overall policy of religious persecution, harassing, detaining, and beating people who they believe are straying from the officially sanctioned path.
Ironically, in terms of numbers, most victims of religious persecution in Saudi Arabia are Muslims. The Shi'a and Isma'ili Muslim communities suffer officially sanctioned political and economic discrimination. Even in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province, where Shi'a Muslims constitute a majority of the population, virtually no Shi'as are allowed to serve in positions of authority in government, judicial or educational institutions.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/status-of-religious-freedom-in-saudi-arabiaKnock yourself out. If you don’t like these let me know and I’ll post you hundreds more links that all confirm every word I have previously said.
“That much is clear though I am sure we would disagree on the reason. I tend to ignore off topic, xenophobic and narcissistic comments (I have simply read so many , usually from right wing Americans... ) and you have somehow decided that you do not have to apply to the site rules like every other reader and can instead dribble away about your opinions on Saudi Arabia.”
There are two reasons why I said “don’t argue with me, it’s a waste of your time”. The first is that I believe that instead of defending your opinion it would be more beneficial to you to research it first and save me the effort of having to correct you on everything and send you links which I have little confidence you will even read. The second is that if you research instead of argue I consider it likely that you will be faced by so many mutually corroboratory facts that you will be unlikely to maintain your current opinion and thus feel little desire to waste your time arguing it.
“This will be a single polite warning.”
If you don’t want to debate those that do not agree with you then delete my comments. Otherwise, the fact that you have a blog and are posting articles that invite comment I shall take as an invitation to debate your assertions. I will do so with reference and fact. If that is objectionable to you then it is a far greater statement regarding your arrogance than my own.
I consider that in discussing the persecution of Muslims in the UK, your unproven assumption, it is perfectly valid to use as evidence the relationship, both historical and current, between Islam and other faiths. This is relevant because I am first challenging your assumption of Muslim persecution in the UK and attempting to point out to you that Islam is historically intolerant of all other faiths and demands supremacy and unique rights. I therefore argue that what you call persecution is in fact valid criticism of Muslim demand for unique treatment both socially and under law and Muslim refusal to demonstrate tolerance of others beliefs. And before you say it, no I do not suggest that this includes all Muslims or that no case of persecution has occurred. However the conflict is an integral part of the religion and that is entirely relevant to your original article.
“I have zero tolerance of such ignorance.”
Demonstrate my ignorance.
PS.
Qur’an 2:256 is an abrogated verse. It has been abrogated by amongst others:
8:39
And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.
9:5
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
9:29
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.
9:73O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.
9:123
O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.
25:52
Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Qur'an).
47:4
Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.
You will also find numerous references in hadith regarding compulsion and historically you may wish to research Muhammad’s own actions when it came to conversion by the sword.
“I am no Muslim and I can easily find examples that show how Muhammad spoke of peace and understanding of other faiths.... I have also read many quotes from the quran that when taken out of context attempt to present a religion of hate.. We can do that with any religous text and I will not permit such attacks against Muslims or any other religion. As a fully signed up atheist I care little for debates on 'faith' but I care a great deal that people show respect for the worlds different religions.”
Yes he did speak of peace, but he changed his tune. A central concept of Islam is the principle of abrogation. The Qur’an is not written in a chronological order. In Islam that which Muhammad “revealed” later chronologically is said to abrogate earlier verse when there is overlap of subject matter. Even direct contradictions are taken to be clarifications. You will find that the vast majority regarding peace was either abrogated by later non-peaceful verses or within context is speaking solely with regards to Dar al-Islam and so is not applicable to relationships with non-Muslims. Feel free to do some research on that and ask some Imams. Again, I would be more than willing to debate this topic with you and the rest of your contributors.
“Debating selective parts from the quran is pointless ,ignorant and lacking in respect for the worlds one billion Muslims. I have no doubt that your above ramblings can clearly be defined as hate speech and it currently remains out of the (misplaced) hope that your will retract your attack against a billion people and show some respect to them.
I doubt that you will and there is a fair chance that my fellow moderator will judge your comments as being hate speech and will simply remove them.
If he does not .. be assured that you are wasting your time here.. you will not find any tolerance for your views and I would suggest that you do not type in anything that you do not expect to lose....”
So you are not a great fan of open debate then? If someone disagrees with you then it is regarded as hate speech. Before you delete my comments would you mind explaining to me exactly how anything I have said is hateful? I put it to you that you will delete my comments not because they are hateful, because they are not, but because you are insufficiently prepared for the discussion. My comments are simply statements regarding referencable facts, directly supported by evidence from Human Rights Watch, UN reports, governmental reports , Amnesty International and many other sources of evidence that report the same facts. But I guess you classify anything as hate speech that doesn’t support your existing opinion.
If you enjoyed this article please feel free to digg it down below.
