We have previously discussed violence and legal measures targeting dogs by some Muslims who view canines as “unclean.” Even postcards with dogs and service dogs (and here) have raised the ire of some Muslim groups. Now this issue is getting some long-needed attention in Iran after a short film that showed stray dogs being tortured and killed by having acid injected into them.
The video was taken an industrial area of Shiraz, 900 kilometres south of Tehran. The animal activists claimed that those responsible paid $4 for each dog. As with environmentalists in China, I have always had overwhelming respect and admiration for secularists and animal (particularly dog) advocates in Muslim countries. This is more than an impressive commitment to principle but putting your actual life on the line for those principles.
The good news is that the Iranian government is acting on the video. While there was an effort to criminalize the ownership of dogs under Sharia law (and subject dog owners to up to 74 lashed last year), Vice President Masoumeh Ebtekar has called for an investigation into the video. While she referred rather mildly to the practice as “an immediate end to unconventional population control method[] for stray dogs,” she did call upon the interior ministry to “deal with the criminals responsible”.
Some Iranian celebrities like Ali Karimi, once a star on Iran’s national football team, posted a picture with his two dogs on Instagram and the message “Dogs are the kindest domestic animals. I hope those who, under any excuse, did this to these animals get what they deserve.”
Bob
po lacks the mental capacity to comprehend what you write. It’s lost on him. He still thinks that he can interchange the words kill and murder. I love his pompous defiance, even when he is faced with an obvious mistake. I’ll bet he was some teacher. I pity the kids.
Okay, Bob. I give up.
Just show me where to sign and I will.
Yes, legally, Darren Wilson is not a murderer, emotionally though and personally, I still think he is a murderer, just as OJ is a murderer in my book though not according to the law.
Is that it? Can I go home now?
By the way my shoe size is 150, to match my iq 🙂
Po: “Who is lying?”
You are. And unless you have an IQ lower than your shoe size, you’re doing it again right here:
Po: “By the way, the dictionary shows murder/murderer exactly as I used it, and as most people use it, as synonymous with killer
murderer: person who kills
assassin
Synonyms for murderer
person who kills
assassin criminal executioner perpetrator …
murder
n. the killing of a human being by a sane person, with intent, malice aforethought (prior intention to kill the particular victim or anyone who gets in the way) and with no legal excuse or authority.
http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=1303
Murder is the killing of another person without justification or valid excuse, and it is especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder
SELF DEFENSE IS NOT MURDER (And it’s a LIE to suggest otherwise)
“The evidence establishes that the shots fired by Wilson after Brown turned around were in self-defense”
“Wilson’s version is further supported by disinterested eyewitnesses Witness 102, Witness 104, Witness 105, Witness 108, and Witness 109, among others. These witnesses all agree that Brown ran or charged toward Wilson and that Wilson shot at Brown only as Brown moved toward him.”
“Furthermore, there are no witnesses who could testify credibly that Wilson shot Brown while Brown was clearly attempting to surrender.”
“When the shootings are viewed, as they must be, in light of all the surrounding
circumstances and what Wilson knew at the time, as established by the credible physical evidence and eyewitness testimony, it was not unreasonable for Wilson to fire on Brown until he stopped moving forward and was clearly subdued. Although, with hindsight, we know that Brown was not armed with a gun or other weapon, this fact does not render Wilson’s use of deadly force objectively unreasonable.”
“Again, the key question is whether Brown could reasonably have been perceived to pose a deadly threat to Wilson at the time he shot him regardless of whether Brown was armed. Sufficient credible evidence supports Wilson’s claim that he reasonably perceived Brown to be posing a deadly threat. First, Wilson did not know that Brown was not armed at the time he shot him, and had reason to suspect that he might be when Brown reached into the waistband of his pants as he advanced toward Wilson. See Loch v. City of Litchfield, 689 F.3d 961, 966 (8th Cir. 2012) (holding that “[e]ven if a suspect is ultimately
‘found to be unarmed, a police officer can still employ deadly force if objectively reasonable.’”) (quoting Billingsley v. City of Omaha, 277 F.3d 990, 995 (8th Cir. 2002)); Reese v. Anderson, 926 F.2d 494, 501 (5th Cir. 1991) (“Also irrelevant is the fact that [the suspect] was actually unarmed. [The officer] did not and could not have known this.”); Smith v. Freland, 954 F.2d 343, 347 (noting that “unarmed” does not mean “harmless) (6th Cir. 1992). While Brown did not use a gun on Wilson at the SUV, his aggressive actions would have given Wilson reason to at least question whether he might be armed, as would his subsequent forward advance and reach toward his waistband. This is especially so in light of the rapidly-evolving nature of the incident. Wilson did not have time to determine whether Brown had a gun and was not required to risk
being shot himself in order to make a more definitive assessment.”
“Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his
perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat.”
Paul, really? Still on CAIR after the previous smackdowns? You are that boxer who’d take 10 power punches just to land one rabbit punch…! Keep it up…punch drunk they call it.
po – CAIR prevented Ayaan Hirsi Ali from getting an honorary degree from Brandeis University. BTW, I have yet to see a smackdown.
bam, are you tired yet of getting smacked around like this?
How come we know exactly who issued a fatwa against salman rushdie but not against ali? Could it be possible that the source of that claim is Ali herself? based on her past as a liar should we trust this claim?
Did you do your homework so we can discuss this intelligently?
No?
Sigh! I gotta do everything for you! sheeshh!
“What is a Fatwa?
SHAYKH MUHAMMAD HISHAM KABBANI E-mail Print PDF
In recent years, the term “fatwā” has been widely used throughout the media, usually to indicate that a death sentence has been dealt to someone or some group of people. The limited use of this term has resulted in a limited understanding of its meaning. ISCA therefore offers the following statement to elucidate the true significance of the term “fatwā.”
Most importantly, a fatwā is not by definition a pronouncement of death or a declaration of war. A fatwā is an Islamic legal pronouncement, issued by an expert in religious law (mufti), pertaining to a specific issue, usually at the request of an individual or judge to resolve an issue where Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), is unclear. Typically, such uncertainty arises as Muslim society works to address new issues – issues that develop as technology and society advance. “Can a Muslim be involved in cloning?” for instance.
We might compare a fatwā to the legal ruling of a high court or the Supreme Court, depending on the authority of the mufti behind it. However, a fatwā is not binding as is the verdict of the secular courts; while correct and applicable to all members of the Muslim faith, the fatwā is optional for the individual to respect or not.
A qaļā, on the other hand, is a legal ruling made by a judge (qādī) that, issued in a nation where Islamic law is observed, is binding on those to whom it is dealt. Usually issued to resolve a legal dispute, a qaļā may be based on a fatwā, yet it applies only to the individuals or groups named in the ruling and no one else. A ruler can impose a qaļā on his entire nation.
Although there is no central Islamic governing authority today – the last having been dismantled with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, there are generally accepted standards for granting anyone the authority to issue a fatwā. This is an extremely rigorous standard requiring many years of training and study. The fatwā is not based upon the mufti’s own will and ideas, but rendered in accordance with fixed precedents from the sources of Islamic law.
In order to issue an authorized fatwā using his individual skills of reasoning, the mufti or scholar must meet the standards of ijtihād. This is the highest standard in issuing a juristic ruling. In general, this means he must be able to distinguish between the other scholars’ positions and their supporting evidence, and judge one stronger according to the strength or weakness of the evidence.
Imam Shāfi¿ī, founder of one of the four great schools of jurisprudence, said:
It is not allowed for anyone to give a Shari¿ah explanation (fatwā), except one who knows the Holy Qur’ān completely including what verses are abrogated and by which verses they were abrogated, and which verses resemble each other in the Qur’ān and whether a chapter was revealed in Makkah or Madina. He must know the entire corpus of the Hadith of the Prophet (s), both those which are authentic and those which are false. He must know the Arabic language of the time of the Prophet (s) with its grammar and eloquence as well as know the poetry of the Arabs. Additionally, he must know the culture of the various peoples who live in each different nation of the community. If a person has all such attributes combined in himself, he may speak on what is permitted (ħalāl) and what is forbidden (ħarām). Otherwise he has no right to issue a fatwā.
While in the distant past there were many scholars with the knowledge required to make independent legal conclusions, there are none of that caliber today. Someone who attained this level of qualification was known as the Imam of a school of law. Today, scholars build their reasoning on that of their predecessors, as in US case law. In practice, this limitation is not as restrictive as it sounds, for the inordinate amount of Islamic case law greatly facilitates such research, except in the most abstruse issues.
While not as rigorous as those required for independent legal reasoning, the qualifications for a scholar to issue a fatwā based on legal precedent are nonetheless extremely taxing. He must:
Know the verses of Qur’ān pertaining to the ruling at hand;
Know the reason behind the verses of Qur’ān related to the ruling – when each was revealed and why;
Distinguish the supportive and oppositional verses of the Qur’ān;
Know all the hadith pertaining to the ruling and the soundness of their chain of transmission;
Be familiar with the legal precedents of the issue before him, including the arguments or consensus reached by earlier scholars; and
Be well-versed in the syntax, grammar, pronunciation, idioms, special linguistic uses, customs and culture prevalent at the time of the Prophet (s) and succeeding two generations.
It often happens that different Islamic clerics issue contradictory, or competing, fatwās. This divergence of opinion is not considered an issue in Islam; in fact, a well-known saying states that such differences among scholars are God’s mercy, for they allow for different conditions and temperaments among people.
In nations that observe Islamic law, fatwās are debated before being issued publicly. They are affirmed only by consensus, which is determined by the supreme religious council of that nation. In such cases, fatwās are rarely contradictory, and carry the power of enforceable law. If two fatwās do contradict one another, the ruling bodies (which often combine civil and religious law) establish a compromise. This differs in the Shi¿a tradition, which demands that each individual Muslim choose one mufti (marja¿) to follow exclusively in all aspects of religious law.
In nations that do not recognize Islamic law, Muslims confronted with competing fatwās would follow the ruling of the scholar observing their same religious tradition. If two muftis of the same tradition issue conflicting fatwās, a Muslim may choose between them. In practice however, following a particular school is not strictly observed.
These are the requirements for a scholar or religious leader to issue a fatwā that is recognized under Islamic law. Having established this, we may now consider whether fatwās issued by militants, including the many we have read in the past five years, have any authority. Again, the worldwide media has repeatedly presented cases in which known Muslim militants use a fatwā to either declare war or announce another violent action.
However, unless he who makes the declaration is extremely well-educated and trained in Islamic jurisprudence according to the requirements mentioned above, he has no authority to issue a fatwā. The Prophet Muhammad (s) said, “Whoever gives fatwā without knowledge, the angels of the heaven and the earth curse him.” Second, if he is so qualified, the fatwā remains non-binding, applying only to those choose to accept and wish to enforce it.
To issue a new fatwā as an unqualified and unauthorized individual is impermissible and forbidden in Islam. Of course to relate the rulings of qualified scholars is permitted, provided it is transmitted without changing the context or wording. The fatwās of unqualified individuals are considered “null and void,” according to ¿Umar, second caliph of the Prophet (s).”
As best I can tell there are plenty of death threats and CAIR is after Ayaan Hirsi Ali. An American imam said she should get the death penalty but didn’t call a fatwa or however you do it. I get the impression that she is not afraid of him.
She has gone from Islam to atheism. She evolved.
List of fatwas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of a series on
Islam
“Allah” in Arabic calligraphy
Beliefs[show]
·
·
Practices[show]
·
·
·
Texts and laws[show]
·
·
·
History[show]
·
·
·
·
Denominations[show]
·
·
·
·
Culture and society[show]
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Related topics[show]
·
·
Portal icon Islam portal
v·
t·
e
A fatwa (Arabic: فتوى), is a legal pronouncement in Islam, issued by a religious law specialist on a specific issue.
This is an incomplete list that may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by expanding it with reliably sourced entries.
Contents
[hide] 1 Fatwa against Man sa yarbah al malyoon
2 Fatwa regarding theology
3 The Fatwa against production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons
4 Fatwa against illegal hunting and wildlife trade
5 Fatwas against terrorism, Al-Qaeda and ISIS 5.1 Fatwa on terrorism
5.2 Fatwa on ISIS membership
6 Fatwas promoting violence against a particular individual 6.1 Shahin Najafi
6.2 Muammar al-Gaddafi
6.3 Geert Wilders
6.4 Jerry Falwell
6.5 Salman Rushdie
6.6 Taslima Nasreen
6.7 Isioma Daniel
6.8 Raheel Raza
6.9 Mariwan Halabjaee
6.10 Ulil Abshar Abdalla
6.11 Farag Foda
7 References
8 External links
Fatwa against Man sa yarbah al malyoon[edit]
In 2001, Egypt’s Grand Mufti issued a fatwa stating that the show “من سيربح المليون؟” (Man sa yarbah al malyoon? – literally “Who will Win the Million?”), modelled on the British show Who Wants to be a Millionaire?, was un-Islamic.[1] The Sheikh of Cairo’s Al-Azhar University later rejected the fatwa, finding that there was no objection to such shows since they spread general knowledge.
Fatwa regarding theology[edit]
al-Azhar Shia Fatwa on July 6, 1959:
“The Jafari fiqh of the Shi’a is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.”
The Fatwa against production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons[edit]
An official Iranian statement released on August 9, 2005 at the Vienna meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had issued a fatwa forbidding the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons.[2] An article on U.S. News and World Report indicated however that whereas all other Khameini’s fatwas has been published, this particular one has not.[3] The Washington Post published an article entitled: “Did Iran’s supreme leader issue a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons?”[4]
Fatwa against illegal hunting and wildlife trade[edit]
In March 2014 the Indonesian Council of Ulama (Indonesia’s highest Islamic clerical body) issued a fatwa against illegal hunting and wildlife trafficking. The fatwa instructed Muslims to protect endangered species by conserving their habitat and stopping illegal trade. The World Wide Fund for Nature described the fatwa as a positive step.[5]
Fatwas against terrorism, Al-Qaeda and ISIS[edit]
Spanish Muslims proclaimed a fatwa against Osama Bin Laden in March 2005[6] issued by Mansur Escudero Bedate, Secretary General of the Islamic Commission of Spain. The ruling says that Bin Laden and “his” al-Qaeda had abandoned their religion and should thus be called “al-Qaeda terrorists” without using the adjective “Islamic”. The fatwa urges other Muslims to make similar proclamations. They were followed in July 2005 by the Fiqh Council of North America, a ruling council that issued a fatwa against providing support to “terrorist” groups that make up their own rules by unjustifiably referring to Islam (see Istihlal).
Fatwa on terrorism[edit]
The Fatwa on Terrorism is a 600-page Islamic decree against terrorism and suicide bombings released in March 2010. This fatwa is a direct refutation of the ideology of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. It is one of the most extensive rulings, an “absolute” condemnation of terrorism without “any excuses or pretexts” which goes further than ever and declares terrorism as kufr under Islamic law.[7] It was produced in Canada[8] by an influential Muslim scholar Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri and was launched in London on March 2, 2010. Dr Qadri said during the launch “Terrorism is terrorism, violence is violence and it has no place in Islamic teaching and no justification can be provided for it, or any kind of excuses or ifs or buts.” According to CNN, experts see the fatwa as a significant blow to terrorist recruiting.[9]
On July 2, 2013 at Lahore (Pakistan) 50 Muslim Scholars of the Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) issued a collective fatwa against suicide bombings, the killing of innocent people, bomb attacks, and targeted killings declaring them as Haram or forbidden.[10]
Fatwa on ISIS membership[edit]
On March 11, 2015, Syed Soharwardy, the founder of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, and 37 other Muslim leaders of various Islamic sects from across Canada gathered in Calgary and issued a fatwa condemning followers of the Islamic State (ISIS) as non-Muslims. Soharwardy cited capturing opponents and beheading them, killing Muslims who disagree with ISIS’s actions, destroying mosques, burning enemy soldiers alive and encouraging Muslim girls to join ISIS, among others, as acts by ISIS that violate Islamic law. Under this fatwa, anybody who even wishes to join the group will be “excommunicated from the Muslim community” and no longer considered Muslim.[11][12]
Fatwas promoting violence against a particular individual[edit]
Fatwas involving violence are more likely to be well known than other fatwas, especially to non-Muslims. One possible reason is that non-Muslims regard most fatwas as not affecting them, but fatwas involving violence can potentially affect them. Fatwas do not only affect non-Muslims. It is important to note that a Fatwa is meant to be issued by a legal scholar, not by any political entity. Generally, any given case may have many fatwas (legal opinions) written by the scholars of the region and time. The fatwa backed by the State is the one with legal power.[citation needed]
Shahin Najafi[edit]
An Iranian rapper who raps in Persian language has been forced into hiding after hardline clerics offered a $100,000 reward for his murder, incensed by his song Naghi which satirises the Tehran regime and makes allegedly irreverent remarks about the tenth Islamic imam (Naghi).[13]
Muammar al-Gaddafi[edit]
An Egyptian Muslim cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, issued a fatwa that urged soldiers to kill Muammar al-Gaddafi, the leader of Libya, if they were able to do so.[13]
Geert Wilders[edit]
An Australian imam named Feiz Mohammad has issued a fatwa calling for the beheading of the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, as of 2010.[14]
Jerry Falwell[edit]
In an interview given on September 30, 2002, for the October 6 edition of 60 Minutes, American Southern Baptist pastor and televangelist Jerry Falwell said: “I think Muhammad was a terrorist. I read enough by both Muslims and non-Muslims, [to decide] that he was a violent man, a man of war.”
The following Friday, Mohsen Mojtahed Shabestari, an Iranian cleric, issued a fatwa calling for Falwell’s death, saying Falwell was a “mercenary and must be killed.” He added, “The death of that man is a religious duty, but his case should not be tied to the Christian community.”[15]
Salman Rushdie[edit]
Main article: The Satanic Verses controversy
One of the first well-known fatwas was proclaimed in 1989 by the Iranian Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, against Salman Rushdie over his novel The Satanic Verses. The reason was an allegedly blasphemous statement taken from an early biography of Muhammad, regarding the incorporation of pagan goddesses into Islam’s strongly monotheistic structure. Khomeini died shortly after issuing the fatwa. In 1998 Iran stated it is no longer pursuing Rushdie’s death; however, that decree was again reversed in early 2005 by the present theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
In 1991, Rushdie’s Japanese translator, Hitoshi Igarashi, was stabbed to death in Tokyo, and his Italian translator was beaten and stabbed in Milan. In 1993, Rushdie’s Norwegian publisher William Nygaard was shot and severely injured in an attack outside his house in Oslo. Thirty-seven guests died when their hotel in Sivas, Turkey was torched by locals protesting against Aziz Nesin, Rushdie’s Turkish translator.
Taslima Nasreen[edit]
Fundamentalists in Bangladesh proclaimed a fatwa against Taslima Nasreen in 1993, against a series of newspaper columns in which she was critical of the treatment of women under Islam. The next year she wrote Lajja (Shame) which described the abuse of women and minorities. Again there were calls for her death, and her passport was confiscated. Within the legal system, she felt that she might have faced a jail term of up to two years, where she was likely to be murdered. She managed to escape the country via Calcutta, was granted asylum in Sweden, and then lived in Paris, and finally went to India. Even in India, she had to flee the city of Kolkata and move to Delhi under the Indian government’s strict orders following riots in Kolkata.
Isioma Daniel[edit]
Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi, the deputy governor of Zamfara state in Nigeria, issued a fatwa in November 2002 calling for the death of journalist Isioma Daniel for comments suggesting that Muhammad may have chosen a wife from one of the Miss World contest.[16] Other Muslim authorities have questioned the validity of the fatwa.[17]
Raheel Raza[edit]
Raheel Raza, a Muslim human rights activist who has advocated for gender equality, especially for Muslim women, became the first woman to lead mixed-gender Muslim prayers in Canada, in 2005, and said: “I already have a fatwa against me”.[18][19][20][21][22][23]
Mariwan Halabjaee[edit]
Main article: Mariwan Halabjaee
In an audio file published on the Kurdish website Renesans.nu during September 2008, Mullah Krekar allegedly threatened to kill Mariwan Halabjaee, the Iraqi Kurdish author of Sex, Sharia and Women in the History of Islam, who also resided in Norway. “I swear that we will not live if you live. Either you go before us, or we go before you,” said Krekar.[24] Krekar compared Halabjaee with Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.[25]
In February 2012, Krekar confirmed in the Oslo District Court that he had issued a twenty-page fatwa against Halabjaee.[26] The fatwa was sent to several hundred Islamic scholars around the world. While Krekar said he thought he might be able to “guarantee the safety” of Halabjaee, Krekar confirmed that his fatwa “implies” that it is “permissible” to kill Halabjaee in Oslo or anywhere else.[27] Krekar compared Halabjaee to Theo van Gogh, the film director who was killed by an Islamist in the Netherlands in 2004.[28]
Ulil Abshar Abdalla[edit]
Main article: Ulil Abshar Abdalla
In 2003, a group of Indonesian Islamic clerics from Forum Ulama Umat Islam issued a death fatwa against Ulil[29] for an article that Ulil wrote in Kompas in 2002, “Menyegarkan Kembali Pemahaman Islam” (Rejuvenating the Islamic Understanding) [30][31] that is considered heretical by the clerics. In March 2011, a letter bomb addressed to Ulil at Komunitas Utan Kayu exploded, injuring a police officer.
Farag Foda[edit]
In June 1992, Egyptian writer Farag Foda was assassinated following a fatwa issued by ulamas from Al-Azhar who had adopted a previous fatwa by Sheikh al-Azhar, Jadd al-Haqq, accusing Foda and other secularist writers of being “enemies of Islam”.[32] The jihadist group Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya claimed responsibility for the murder.[33]
______________________________________________________________
Lol! With regard to Ulil Abshar Abdalla, the Indonesian Islamic CLERICS are referenced, which was supposed to be a terrible error on my part, when I called some individuals CLERICS in Islam.
Hysterical!
Bon Stone, Must feel good to comment on a blog and not be called a troll! Hope you comment here more often. You are one of the best commenters here.
The Times of India
Living under fatwa for speaking her mind
Meenakshi Sinha, TNN | Jan 25, 2010, 02.42AM IST
NEW DELHI: For many years now, Dutch writer, activist and politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been living under the shadow of a fatwa issued by Islamic fundamentalists and has received many death threats. Much to the surprise of many book lovers, the 40-year-old Somalia-born writer appeared for a special session at the Jaipur literature festival on Sunday.
Ayaan wrote the screenplay of Dutch director Theo Van Gogh’s movie, ‘Submission’, which was critical of Islam’s treatment of women. Van Gogh was consequently killed by a Muslim extremist in 2004. A letter pinned to his body with a knife contained death threats against her. ”The murder of Theo made me realize how dangerous Islamic fundamentalism is,” she said.
The feminist writer discussed her memoirs, ‘Infidel’ (2006), offering a scathing critique of Islamic fundamentalism. She also spoke about her growing-up years and recalled the influence of 19th century writer Charles Dickens and narrated how the fictional character Nancy Drew shaped her formative years.
4:18 pm
Reading is fundamental, po.
HAHAHAHA LMAO
Nice to see you back, bam, I was about to set an APB on you, fearful that perhaps you were kidnapped or something.
Have you found the fatwa yet?
No? Dommage! Am sure it is out there somewhere. Let us just keep looking. If Ayaan ali herself says it is out there then it must be out there. We all know how honest she is, right? It’s not like she has been caught in a few lies regarding her past and experience, right?
So now it is no longer about the fatwa, it is about Theo van Gogh?
Does that mean I no longer have to denounce the um…yet to be found fatwa?
I thought I was pretty fair, bam. I said, (with righteous voice) GIVE ME THE FATWA AND I’LL DENOUNCE IT!!!!!! But before that I have said: ” … I ALWAYS and FULLY support everyone’s right to speak ill of Islam, whether Ayaan ALi, Charlie hebdo, Salman Rushdie, Pogo, you bam bam or karen.”
So since the latter wasn’t enough, I offered the former…which you could not find,,,so you are resorting to the usual of the intellectually and morally bankrupt, red herrings, ad hominem attacks and the like. hahahaha not surprising at all!
And since you said this:
and I wholeheartedly condemn death threats made against anyone, especially in the name of religion. I have no problem stating that.
then why don’t you condemn the threats against the abortionist doctors and their subsequent murders? This is only my 4th request for such denunciation? Why don’t you? perhaps because you support them?
Po said: You are pretty incredible. I said based on my experience with cops and what I have seen them do, I do not believe that Darren Wilson’s account of what happened was truthful.
Bob says: That’s not even close to what you said about Wilson. You called him a murderer and you projected the problem of race into the issue; not because there were facts that warranted it, but because your narrative would have it that way.
bob, either I called Darren Wilson a racist murderer or I did not. You claim I did, i say I didn’t…prove your words or stop lying!
Do you even know what the sin of bearing false witness means? Do you know what it means to encourage the wrongful prosecution of a man based not on fact but on a narrative completely divorced from the facts?
Encourage? I gave my opinion like every one on that blog and all around the world. I made the point I did not know what happened by my opinion, but based on the facts as I understood them at the time, and my experience with cops, Darren Wilson was lying. What, did I have a say in what would happen to him?
Po: “I was no witness of the events nor do I know what happened but offered my opinion just as you did.”
I offered an analysis of the law and the facts; not an off the cuff opinion based on mere supposition. And if you had any moral courage at all, you’d read the DOJ report and see just how accurate my analysis was.
your “legal” opinion started with the following
By BOB STONE
For the cop who paid it forward back in the summer of 1977 by taking the time to track down a 10 year-old boy’s brand-new Ross Apollo 3 speed that was stolen. I’ll never forget how he convinced me that the kids who stole it and raised the seat and stripped off a lot of the paint before leaving it in the woods somehow made it ‘faster.’ I thought it was the coolest bike in the world after that.
And for my friends in college who went on to become cops.
Let me begin by saying that in my own personal mythology I consider all cops and members of the military as my dogs. For anyone that has ever experienced the unconditional love of a dog the metaphor is quite obvious. After all, I do feed the dogs. Sorry, I meant to say “I pay their salary.” And it’s their job to love me unconditionally, or “serve and protect me” — during weekends, birthdays, anniversaries, holidays, graveyard shifts, hurricanes, floods, tornadoes and other natural disasters, and to otherwise risk their lives — just to make me feel cozy. Considering all cops and members of the military as my dogs is the highest form of compliment I can pay them. No offense to Cesar Millan, but no room or piece of furniture is off limits to my dogs. They’re family and as family they are my equals. Accordingly, unlike those who take the dogs for granted—e.g., only claiming ownership when arrested (“I pay your salary….”)—as my dogs protect me I know it’s my job, when necessary, to have my dogs’ backs.
I suppose that’s the best explanation I have for this protective streak I feel for one dog in particular; Officer Darren Wilson. There’s a mob that’s set on kicking my dog; and if possible putting him down. The mob says my dog attacked and killed an unarmed man without justification. They have him traumatized, fearing for his life and genuinely terrified that they’ll convince a grand jury to offer him up as some sort of sacrifice. So I tell the mob that if my dog attacked and killed a man without legal justification, then my dog should be held accountable. But if it turns out that my dog attacked and killed because he was justified in doing so—i.e., he did what he was trained to do—then you’ll have to pack up your torches and pitchforks and apologize to my dog.
Who is lying?
By the way, the dictionary shows murder/murderer exactly as I used it, and as most people use it, as synonymous with killer
murderer: person who kills
assassin
Synonyms for murderer
person who kills
assassin criminal executioner perpetrator …
po
I suppose that we’ll both have to wait until one of the adherents, to the religion of peace, gets his hands on her, like what happened to Theo van Gogh, shooting her six times, slitting her throat and then stabbing a five-page letter into her chest, for you to openly admit there may have been a fatwa against her. I do hope and pray that no harm ever comes to Ms. Ali, and I wholeheartedly condemn death threats made against anyone, especially in the name of religion. I have no problem stating that. You, apparently, do, unless I can provide the fatwa in your hand.
You ask for proof of a fatwa, promising to condemn such, yet despite my willingness to provide the existence of such, in the form of articles, where the victim, herself, declares the existence of this fatwa, you still remain mute regarding the condemnation of such. Since you are an apologist for this behavior, you have revealed yourself to be a double-talking, disingenuous being.
I will ignore any subsequent requests from you, as they are no longer worthy of a response.
Po: “Did your initial post deem Dorian Johnson a liar, Mike Brown a thug and a cop-mugger and the protesters “mob” yes or no?”
No Po, my initial post barely touched on Dorian Johnson other than to show his his assertion that Brown was shot in the back was not supported by the evidence and that he had a prior conviction for lying to the police.
I didn’t call Brown a thug, that’s your deflection word of choice. I called him Honey Badger based on his actions in his robbery video — which I also explained was relevant and admissible evidence in determining how Brown acted with Wilson.
I’m not going to bother chasing down all your misrepresentations.
Let me just say that bearing false witness against an innocent man and then attempting to cover your tracks rather than admit you were wrong has been giving a certain scribe on your left shoulder quite the case of writer’s cramp.
=====
Po: You are pretty incredible. I said based on my experience with cops and what I have seen them do, I do not believe that Darren Wilson’s account of what happened was truthful.
That’s not even close to what you said about Wilson. You called him a murderer and you projected the problem of race into the issue; not because there were facts that warranted it, but because your narrative would have it that way.
Do you even know what the sin of bearing false witness means? Do you know what it means to encourage the wrongful prosecution of a man based not on fact but on a narrative completely divorced from the facts?
Po: “I was no witness of the events nor do I know what happened but offered my opinion just as you did.”
I offered an analysis of the law and the facts; not an off the cuff opinion based on mere supposition. And if you had any moral courage at all, you’d read the DOJ report and see just how accurate my analysis was.
Po: “Whatever the scribe writes down on me, yours wrote down for you the same exact thing, for we both assumed something without knowing the facts.
Again, I analyzed the facts and the law; relying on specific forms of evidence because of its inherent reliability while noting the absurdity of the alternative narrative offered by Johnson.
Po: “Your sin is worst however because while the only thing I said was that Darren Wilson is a murderer (he murdered someone), you accused Dorian of lying, Mike of being a thug, the mob of being made up of thugs and libeling me and others claiming we said something we did not say.
First of all, you’re lying again.
Murder is the killing of another person without justification or valid excuse.
To call Darren Wilson a murderer after the DOJ exonerated him is inexcusable.
To continue to lie — to continue to falsely accuse a man of murder when the DOJ completely exonerated him as acting in defense of his life — is an act as bereft of conscience and sinful as an Israeli deeming Palestinians mere blades of grass that need to be “mowed” occasionally.
“Above all, don’t lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others.”
— Dostoyevsky
Since we are still on the topic of all things islam, I offer this interview with Bernard Haykel, one of the foremost scholars of islamic things, the one quoted in the Atlantic article that many used as bible on all things islam.
Interesting:
http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/contemporary-islam-considered-a-deep-look-into-isis/
Bam
I perused the same links earlier while looking for the fatwa against Ali. I perused them again and still did not see the actual fatwa (who made it and where) though I saw mention of the fatwa against slaman rushdie and its origin. Perhaps I missed it both times.
Would you please be a dear and just offer the exact quote verifying the fatwa?
Appreciated!
Meanwhile, back to my previous request:
“And since you claim to be straightforward, what faith do you practice?
Meanwhile, I am waiting for your condemnation of racism, of misogyny and of Timothy McVeigh…and of all the evils the US has ever done to anyone else, including the native americans, blacks, Puerto Ricans, South Americans, slavery, Tuskegee experiments…the droning of civilians in the Middle east…black sites…rendering…torture…
po – get away from the moral relativism. She does a great condemnation of Islam which you did not comment on. Just stick to the subject. Back to fatwas. It only takes one person to carry out the fatwa which is what happened in the Netherlands.
po
In response to your SHOW ME A FATWA AGAINST AYAAN AND I’LL DENOUNCE IT. . .
Facts are a b#%@h!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/ayaan-hirsi-ali-my-life-under-a-fatwa-760666.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/7877616/Ayaan-Hirsi-Ali-the-fatwa-victim-who-refuses-to-keep-quiet.html
bam bam, you could learn from Paul…2 minutes online mighta saved you from a lifelong of ignorance and ridicule… just type fatwa on your search box and click enter… skip over every entry that features together islam and violence or evil, then click on the ones that are islamic…those would be the best to speak on what you are inquiring about… you know, something about the horse’s mouth…
You know, I wouldn’t learn of the Likud party through Hamas.com!
Bam
it is less about what you call them and more about your tendency, when talking about Islam, to make the few speak for the whole.
Do you even know that the imam who issued a fatwa against salman rushdie was Iranian? What does it matter you wonder…well…being Iranian makes him shia, which makes him not sunni, which makes it so IF anyone found himself bound to respecting that fatwa, it would not be a sunni Muslim, it would be a shia muslim.
What does that mean, you wonder…? Well, if there are about 150 to 200 million shia in the world today…and let’s assume only half are practicing muslims (I have yet to meet a practicing Iranian, and the 2 I met were Christian)… which makes it 100 millions…and of that we count half being women (they don’t tend to carry out fatwas)…which makes it 50 millions…of that let’s say half is composed of children and the elderly, bringing it down to 25 millions men who might be physically able to carry out a fatwa…
Among those, let’s remove the ones who belong to shia sects…the ones who don’t agree with the imam…the ones who are too busy working…the ones in prison…the ones in love…the ones who could not care less who salman rushdie is… leaving us with maybe 10 millions?
Now let’s just assume all of them are similarly religious fanatics and are similarly offended by the book and similarly agree with the fatwa and similarly (mis)understand their religion and are similarly willing to take a life and similarly bound to their leader more so than to their holy book and Prophet… that leaves us with, at the greatest most, 10 million men who are both willing and able to carry out a fatwa (which is a ridiculous number, I know, but just play along with me), that makes it 10 million people out of 2 billion.
SO in the worst case scenario, the fatwa of one cleric would spur 10 millions people to act (again an impossible number, I know)…yet, in your highly idiotic (said that with love) scenario, the words of that one cleric bind 2 billion people!!!!!
Have you ever been in a mosque? Have you ever listened to a sermon? Have you ever read an islamic themed book…perused a website….spoken to a muslim….gotten your info about islam in a place other than an islamophobic website…?
I suggest you do, so you, at least know that asking me to denounce a fatwa that I have no part of is akin to me asking you to denounce racism or to denounce misogyny or even to denounce Timothy MC veigh. It would be silly at best and idiotic at most.
And since you claim to be straightforward, what faith do you practice?
Are you really serious? Are you asking me to provide you with the fatwa you claim exists and which you use to attack me and demanding that I denounce?
SO I am now responsible for not only addressing your delusions but also providing you with the means to enforce those demands?
How silly??!!!!!
But, as I said before, which you musta missed, show me a fatwa agaisnt ali, or anyone else for that matter (including the one against Paul) and I’ll gladly denounce it.
Meanwhile, I am waiting for your condemnation of racism, of misogyny and of Timothy McVeigh…and of all the evils the US has ever done to anyone else, including the native americans, blacks, Puerto Ricans, South Americans, slavery, Tuskegee experiments…the droning of civilians in the Middle east…black sites…rendering…torture…
po
Would you like me to call them the priests of Islam or the rabbis of Islam? The person, who believes that the terms murder and kill are synonymous, is not the person to be ridiculing my wording regarding the title of spiritual leaders in Islam. Would you prefer sheikhs or imams? Unlike you, I am open to legitimate criticism.
As for those that murder, yes, murder, not just kill, abortionists, I find their actions despicable. While you may hallucinate that you know who and what I am, I happen to be pro-choice. Always have been, always will be. I have also never been associated, in any way, shape or form, with the Klan. I find them to be despicable, as well. Surprising?
Now, where do I find a book on fatwas? Is there one out there, or does one just rely on word of mouth? Is there a Fatwa for Dummies that I can find at Barnes and Noble? Unlike you, I am capable of directly answering a question. You still have not denounced the fatwa against Ms. Ali. I never expected it anyway.
bam bam – a fatwa is not legal binding on anyone. However, it does give you legal cover if you need it.
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.org/understanding-islam/legal-rulings/44-what-is-a-fatwa.html
show me a fatwa against ayaan and I’ll denounce it. Meanwhile still waiting for your denouncing of the murders of abortionists.