Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Today at 06:39 PM

France Muslims were in d...
Yesterday at 06:14 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
Yesterday at 01:05 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 12:23 AM

The essence of the facts
by akay
November 30, 2021, 05:43 AM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 26, 2021, 01:52 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
November 26, 2021, 11:02 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 25, 2021, 01:57 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 24, 2021, 12:57 PM

Muhammad's illiteracy, po...
November 23, 2021, 03:09 PM

Coronavirus crisis
November 22, 2021, 03:06 PM

Apostasy in the UK with I...
November 20, 2021, 12:39 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"

 (Read 6369 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     OP - June 19, 2013, 12:43 PM


    A new report from One Law For All

    ++++++++

    The politics of the pro-Islamist Left is a politics of betrayal.

    It’s a betrayal of the dissenters and victims of Islamism but also of the very principles that the Left has historically defended (from social justice, egalitarianism, secularism, universalism, and human liberation, including from religion).
    This Left uses multiculturalism, charges of racism and Islamophobia, and anti-imperialism, amongst others to defend the far-Right political Islamic movement.

    Multiculturalism and Cultural Relativism

    The Pro-Islamist Left relies on multiculturalism (not as a positive lived experience but as a social policy and political point of view) to deny the existence of dissent by pigeonholing innumerable individuals with innumerable characteristics into one imagined homogeneous grouping: ‘the Muslim community’ or ‘the Muslim world’. And since it is those in power that determine the dominant culture, this point of view sees Islamist values and sensibilities as that of ‘authentic Muslims’.

    In fact, ‘Muslims’ or those labelled as such include secularists, ex-Muslims, atheists, free thinkers, women’s rights activists, LGBT campaigners and socialists.

    Conflating Islamism with Muslim is a narrative peddled by Islamists in an attempt to feign representation.

    Contrary to how it’s viewed, regressive Islamists are given authority as ‘community leaders’ not because they actually represent the ‘Muslim Community’ but because of their access to the state, political power and their links with the political Islamic movement. Multiculturalism is a cheap way for the state to outsource social control.
    Clearly, the ‘Muslim community’ is not synonymous with Islamism any more than English is synonymous with the English Defence League or Christian with the Christian-Right.

    Ironically, like the far-Right which ‘despises’ multiculturalism yet benefits from its idea of difference to scapegoat the ‘other’ and promote its own form of white identity politics, the post-modernist Left also uses multiculturalism to defend cultural and moral relativism and side with the oppressor.

    To accept the Islamist narrative that Muslim equates Islamist is to hand over countless individuals to the political Islamic movement and to ignore the dissent, political, social and civil struggles and class politics.

    This conflation means that those who challenge Islamism are accused of cultural imperialism and orientalism because the pro-Islamist Left has bought into the culturally-relativist notion that societies in the Middle East and North Africa (and the ‘Muslim community’ in the west) are ‘Islamic’ and ‘conservative’. Whilst those in power determine the dominant culture, there is no one homogeneous culture anywhere. Those who consider opposition to the veil or Sharia law as ‘foreign’ and ‘culturally inappropriate’ are only considering Islamism’s sensibilities and values, not that of the many who resist.

    Only those who see their rights and lives as separate and different from those deemed ‘other’ and who have bought into (or are selling) Islamism’s narrative can see solidarity and the demand for equality in this warped way.
    In fact, this politics doesn’t merely ignore dissent, in many ways it forbids it. The likes of StWC, Socialist Workers Party, Unite against Fascism, Islamophobia Watch, and Respect Party or Ken Livingstone and George Galloway are there as prefects to silence dissenters and defend Islamism as a defence of ‘Muslims’. There are many examples to show that they equate Muslim with Islamist.

    In responding to those opposing its alliance with the Muslim Association of Britain (which is understood to be a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood), the StWC’s leadership Andrew Murray and Lindsey German have written:
    Anyone remotely acquainted with the British trade union movement will be aware that neither sexism nor homophobia are uncommon in its ranks. […] woman can be subjected to more crude sexist behaviour than they might be likely to encounter within the Muslim Association of Britain. No one would suggest that an anti-war movement should have no truck with trade unionism until its ranks are 100 percent cleansed of such behaviour. Yet this is good enough as a stick to beat Muslims. Such attitudes indicate a form of racism, a desire to hold their organisations at arm’s length for the flaws which are, in some measure, tolerable in ours.

    The comparison is absurd. The difference of course is that the ethos of the trade union is not anti-woman, its ethos does not say that apostates should be killed or as the head of the MAB said recently at a debate with One Law for All that women should be stoned to death. StWC’s alliance with the MAB is akin to aligning with the EDL and then saying that racism exists in the ranks of the trade unions too so why single out the English!?

    Racism and Islamophobia

    This pro-Islamist Left deems any criticism of Islam or Islamism as racism or Islamophobia. However, criticising a religion, ideology or political movement – far-Right or otherwise – has nothing to do with racism. In fact, Islamophobia is a political term used to scaremonger people into silence.

    In some ways, these bogus accusations serve Islamism in the same way that Sharia law serves them where they are in power. It helps to threaten, intimidate and silence criticism and dissent. Charges of offence and Islamophobia are the equivalent of ‘secular’ fatwas. It is a warning by the powers that be of what is acceptable and what is not; of what is sacred and cannot and must not be challenged.

    This is of course not to ignore that racism exists. Of course it does. But racism cannot be stopped by silencing much needed criticism of Islam and Islamism. Also as campaigner Rahila Gupta says: ‘Recent anti-racist alliances… reveal the capitulation of the left to the fascists within while organising against the fascists without. We should be sophisticated enough by now to construct a politics that is simultaneously anti-racist and anti-fundamentalist so that vulnerable groups like women, lesbians and gays and religious minorities do not get hung out to dry. As feminists we have been abandoned by those who should have been supporting our right to make ‘legitimate criticism’. They feel now, during the War on Terror, is not the right time. In a racist society, it is never the right time. When we expose the underbelly of our communities we are told that we are providing ammunition for racists. For us it isn’t a choice. We can’t hide one evil to fight another.’

    Anti-imperialism and force of resistance

    Fundamentally, this Left’s support of Islamism comes down to its affinity with Islamism, which it sees as a force of
    resistance against imperialism. If racism was its real concern, it wouldn’t support the blatantly racist notion of different and lesser standards and rights for those deemed ‘different’.

    This Left is part of an anti-colonial movement whose perspectives coincide with that of the ruling classes in the so-called Third World. It is on the side of the ‘colonies’ no matter what goes on there. And their understanding of the ‘colonies’ is Eurocentric, patronising and even racist. To them the people in these countries (and the ‘Muslim minority in the West’) are one and the same with the Islamists they are struggling against. This is why StWC manhandles and expels anti-Iranian regime activists from its demonstrations and rejects resolutions that simultaneously opposes a war on Iran and the regime’s attacks on the working class and population at large. It sees Islamism as a force for resistance whilst it is nothing more than a regressive force for repression. But an enemy’s enemy is not necessarily an ally.

    As Women Living Under Muslim Laws says:

    Fundamentalist terror is by no means a tool of the poor against the rich, of the Third World against the West, of people against capitalism. It is not a legitimate response that can be supported by the progressive forces of the world. Its main target is the internal democratic opposition to their theocratic project and to their project of controlling all aspects of society in the name of religion, including education, the legal system, youth services, etc. When fundamentalists come to power, they silence the people, they physically eliminate dissidents, writers, journalists, poets, musicians, painters – like fascists do. Like fascists, they physically eliminate the ‘untermensch’ – the subhumans –, among them ‘inferior races’, gays, mentally or physically disabled people. And they lock women ‘in their place’, which as we know from experience ends up being a straight jacket…

    What’s most ironic is that Islamism is a force that came into existence as a far-Right, anti-Left movement, supported by Western powers. It’s only after 9/11 that their relationship has changed and only to some extent. It’s still a close ally in helping to manage revolutions and rebellions in the Middle East and North Africa.
    This politics of betrayal supports a far-Right movement that has slaughtered an entire generation in a place like Iran, that just recently assassinated socialist leader Chokri Belaid in Tunisia, and that shot 15 year old Malala Yousefzai in Pakistan for wanting education for girls…

    Clearly, the Pro-Islamist Left’s politics of betrayal is just as inhuman as that of the far-Right. It’s particularly dangerous given that unlike the far-Right it has managed to gain portrayal in mainstream discourse as ‘progressive politics’.
    Any principled position must oppose the far-Right of all varieties but also this pro-Islamist Left and rather side with universalism, equality for all, secularism as well as citizens and human beings, irrespective of beliefs.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/maryamnamazie/2013/06/19/siding-with-the-oppressor-the-pro-islamist-left/




    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #1 - June 19, 2013, 01:10 PM

    As always Billy, thank you for sharing the goods when you find them.

    Against the ruin of the world, there
    is only one defense: the creative act.

    -- Kenneth Rexroth
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #2 - June 19, 2013, 01:37 PM

    Interesting things discussed here. I guess I'll try and give my two pennies on some of this as a Left Liberal (LL).

    I guess the misrepresentation is something I spoke of before - there is no one Muslim community. I spoke of this in relation to society not the left part of the political spectrum. However, whilst the article makes a valid point, it falls into the same trap by suggesting that all LLs follow the some paths of conflating Islamism with all Muslims. This is something I find right-wingers suggest about all LLs. This is not true for me and others, and for those organisations (political and non-political) who have promoted this narrative of giving dodgy Islamists representation of Muslims for various reasons, they have also seen many criticisms - from LLs primary. I think we should acknowledge that.

    I support multiculturalism. Why? Culture is there for all to seek, experience and practice. It is food, language, architecture, entertainment, sport, innovations, fashion and yes, religion too. I believe in a global-thinking and global-orientated society. Yes, Globalization has brought about some of that anyway but multiculturalism has helped in a socio-cultural aspect rather than just on economical and political terms. This is the way forward for the whole world in my opinion.

    The reason why multiculturalism is criticized in relation to Islam is for two reasons. A) People tend to confuse mass immigration (particularly from Muslim countries) and multiculturalism as one and the same when they're not - you don't need to import 500,000 Muslims for you to understand and experience what their culture is like. B) lack of integration in the U.K. has allowed 'cultural bubbles/ghettos' to form causing all kinds of tensions, suspicions and natural segregation. This has not been enforced by Muslims communities or the LL. This is just a natural consequence of mass immigration and how a lack of integration coupled with that will cause damage to community cohesion.

    I believe one way to focus on integration would be to ban Sharia Law as that is the only way for Muslim communities who do have members who rely on that system to understand you are in a 1st world, democratic and mostly secular country and therefore must drop some of the baggage that you have brought with you/have been raised with and understand there is only ever meant to be one legal system for everyone. However, another form of integration would be to have a multi-faith national calendar. Why not have Eid, Diwali, etc. as holidays alongside Xmas and Easter? This to me would help people understand about how similar Islam and Christianity are. What about facial veils? I prefer to see them allowed simply because its not for the government to state what piece of clothing goes onto a persons body in an everyday normal environment. But if say a shopkeeper bans facial veils for security purposes in his/her shop I would defend that as they should have the liberty to do that if they so wish.

    Where does that put me? Am I siding with the oppressor? If so how?

    As for racism I agree that there is no racism in criticism of a religion and sadly some people do use the word too easily however some people pretend that the word is used too causally when it actually isn't. They feel that if they keep banging on about how the "cant criticize Islam" because someone might call them racist then they might get sympathy when really they probably do go around criticizing Islam regularly and if they don't they can do so and tell people the actual dictionary definition of racism before anyone jumps up to complain:

    RACISM:

    "a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering a doctrine of  discrimination, hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."

    RELIGION:

    "Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to the supernatural, and to spirituality."

    With all the main Abrahamic religions having believers of many various "races" (I only believe in one race - the human race) then which ones are critics being racist to? You can't be racist to all races when you haven't even mentioned race in your criticisms in the first place! So as far as I see it, if you're criticism is constructive, factual and equally applied then it can neither be racist nor Islamophobic as if it is equally applied then you would also be criticizing the other Abrahamic religions which means you're generally criticizing groups of religions in general rather than isolating and targeting Islam unfairly.

    Islamophobia does exist it is just the task of finding the criticism that is constructive, factual and equally applied rather than the noise, gossip and hate that can come out of a lot of peoples mouths in relation to Islam, thanks to radicalism, terrorism and yes parts of the media too.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #3 - June 19, 2013, 05:17 PM

    Good stuff, billy, and your addition too, BreakerOfVows - excellent!

    As a liberal free-thinking socialist I have experienced that people (not someone who knew me IRL) blacklist me when I criticise or just try to explain the origin of certain Muslim-ish practices (like rejecting to shake hand with the opposite sex - I know it is the same with orthodox Jews, but I have never heard of it as an issue here in Denmark with that minority). I guess they think I'm another right-wing xenophobic Muslim-basher so they just block without even listening to what I say. And the (ex-)Muslims will not nor dare to speak up.

    However I also sometimes (actually quite often) feel that people I like who label themselves as "Muslim" feel like they have to defend every other person who might claim that same label. While they from a theological viewpoint clearly are not "Muslim" and would be labeled as apostates by some of the people they defend :( The label "Cultural Muslim" is simply not used. It is very binary.

    I guess that is what the constant attacks from the right-wing on-line mob of xenophobic haters do to you... :( Must defend your own identity as a "Muslim" at all costs.

    Hmmm... Which actually make me think that it is the right-wing xenophobic haters roaming freely on teh Interwebs that is a major obstacle to set free the individual...

    Hope it makes snese. I'm a bit feverish tonight with a cold.

    Cheers,
    Nikolaj

    EDIT: Got to think of it - "xenophobic" isn't really the right word to use for people who really have no reason to fear, but just use hate to strengthen their own self-esteem and feeling of belonging to some self-righteous tribal entity by bashing "foreigners". Don't know the right word to use though. Classic Greek weren't really my thing :p

    Danish Never-Moose adopted by the kind people on the CEMB-forum
    Ex-Muslim chat (Unaffliated with CEMB). Safari users: Use "#ex-muslims" as the channel name. CEMB chat thread.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #4 - June 21, 2013, 04:31 PM

     In America the melting pot has been a lot more successful (not perfect) because everyone has opportunities to share their culture with one another and also the host country. When immigrants (I'm not just talking about Muslims) seclude themselves in a certain area or neighborhood then we begin to see the development of something of a klan like mentality. This is my area with my people and that's your area with your people. You can't have/encourage that within a country because the country is supposed to be unified and mixed up not broken down and segregated by religion or race and this ultimately gives rise to tension.
    However, I feel Europe has mis-understood multiculturalism as allowing people to create their own space where they are comfortable in and caters to their needs to keep the happy.  You can't please everyone first of all let's get that out of the way. But, what needs to happen is more inter-mingling so everyone can be more comfortable with each other and their lifestyle. More Muslim and non-Muslims kids NEED to an opportunity to go to school together.  If this was done properly then there would be no need for non-Muslims to feel like the niqab had to be banned, or for some Muslims to get uppity  when women aren't covered enough to their liking. Two-way street, not one.
    I'm just speculating here based on what I've been hearing since I have only been to Europe once.

    ***~Church is where bad people go to hide~***
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #5 - June 21, 2013, 06:39 PM

    It's not really a fair comparison Crunchy, because most immigrants to the USA come from Western countries and share the same broad culture and religion and even language family as mainstream America. It is much easier for a Catholic Spanish speaker from Mexico to assimilate into the culture in the USA. The small number of Muslims that do come to live in the USA tend to be from wealthier classes so they are less likely to become "ghettoized".
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #6 - June 21, 2013, 06:57 PM

    Not sure about this really. As a Turk living in London I cannot seem to identify with any of the cultural ghettos created by muslim communities; we're seen as white by most muslims!

    I mean, sure, if your father owns a kebab shop and you live in East London, and probably don't attend an academic institution after the age of 16, you'll acclimatise with aplomb. But I'm living in North London, I go to university, I speak with a petty-bourgeois accent (I'm a lefty, honest) and my murtad status isn't helping matters.

    That's not to say that cultural ghettos don't exist but they're generally drawn along class/socioeconomic lines as opposed to religious ones.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #7 - June 21, 2013, 11:22 PM

    I remember loosing all faith in my local socialist party after reading some article in their monthly rag about how the Taliban were just a bunch of impoverished farmers fighting a western imperialist regime which is hell bent only on occupying their lands.
    This should have been a major face pam moment for anyone in their party with half a brain. Their memories are so short they forget how their commrades in muslim lands have been betrayed time and time again whenever they temporarily unite with the Islamists to over throw some autocratic regime. Then the Islamists usually grab power, turn on them, outlaw their ideas and or ironically even brand them terrorists and throw them in jail if they're lucky.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #8 - June 21, 2013, 11:33 PM

    This wasn't the SWP in the UK was it? Never really heard good things about them... although I must concede I haven't had time to scrutinise them meticulously.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #9 - June 22, 2013, 12:51 PM

    What an excellent thread, thanks Billy.

    Arthur.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #10 - June 22, 2013, 01:15 PM

    Its a sister report to One Law For All's earlier report about the shithouses of the EDL and the far right, Arthur

    http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/new-report-enemies-not-allies-the-far-right/

    Please read and enjoy that ^^^


    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #11 - June 22, 2013, 03:01 PM

    Quote
    However, I feel Europe has mis-understood multiculturalism as allowing people to create their own space where they are comfortable in and caters to their needs to keep the happy.


    When Europeans think of multiculturalism they often confuse it with mass immigration as happens in the U.K. Unlike America and Canada, Europeans expect immigrants to integrate whilst not actually explaining to them what they define as integration in the first place. First you must know what you want before you ask to receive it right?

    America and Canada have more relaxed attitudes to integration as far as I can tell. Its more socially-liberal in that sense. Probably one of the few brights spots in USA's questionable social policies.

    Also European countries tend not to be fully secular (apart from a few like France) most of them still have legally embedded ties to the state churches such as how the Church of England is still a part of British political life, we are not secular. Same for Germany, Denmark still has blasphemy laws!

    Quote
    I remember loosing all faith in my local socialist party after reading some article in their monthly rag about how the Taliban were just a bunch of impoverished farmers fighting a western imperialist regime which is hell bent only on occupying their lands.


    Ugh - when Socialists do this, they cannot be socialist! They are just using that as a way to describe the economic policies but apart from that these groups, particularly Socialist Workers Party (SWP) are generally based upon Soviet-Union style ways of working (Stalinist/Leninist/Trotskyist) and they use Islamism to express their hate towards the USA to pretend there is some global anti-USA (perhaps even anti-capitalist movement as well) when really they should stop doing so. You don't have to be anti-USA to have a credible, independent way of doing things, particularly in terms of foreign policy (e.g. Switzerland).
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #12 - June 23, 2013, 08:58 PM

    ^
    Think you might have just put your finger on the true driving force behind the SWP mindset.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #13 - June 24, 2013, 10:20 AM

    A thread on this has been started on the urban75 forum, in case anyone here feels like an argument with apologists for the pro-islamist left.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #14 - June 24, 2013, 11:17 AM

    A thread on this has been started on the urban75 forum, in case anyone here feels like an argument with apologists for the pro-islamist left.

    Thanks for the link. Interesting.

    And no, I didn't sign up and have an argument with them. They were arguing quite enough among themselves. All good healthy stuff.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #15 - June 24, 2013, 01:42 PM

    ^
    Think you might have just put your finger on the true driving force behind the SWP mindset.


    I heard they're on the verge of collapse anyway from a rape scandal, thank goodness for that and hopefully the poor woman is safe and recovering with all the support she needs.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #16 - July 06, 2013, 02:08 AM

    Thanks for the link. Interesting.

    And no, I didn't sign up and have an argument with them. They were arguing quite enough among themselves. All good healthy stuff.


    Wait what how is urban75 a forum for liberal left apologists? Thought they were anarcho-comrades :(
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #17 - July 06, 2013, 02:09 AM

    If it's the same forum I'm thinking of, for crusties and free party folk and the like.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #18 - July 06, 2013, 10:49 AM

    Wait what how is urban75 a forum for liberal left apologists? Thought they were anarcho-comrades :(


    Or a bit of both? Anyway I was probably being unfair to them.
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #19 - February 08, 2015, 05:36 PM

    Another thread on the urban75 forum discussing Islam and ex-muslims, in case anyone feels like jumping in.

    http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-anti-imperialism-of-fools-a-general-thread.331948/page-2

    Quote
    It is not possible to "hate" Islam and be anti-racist, because Islam is a culture as well as a religion. I have pointed this out to you before, many times.

    Quote
    And yet you will find ex-Muslims who will tell you different.

    Quote
    You won't find any current Muslims who tell you different though.

    Quote
    Zineb el-Rhazoui is my current go-to on this. I advise you to read the whole of this article. You should pay particular attention to what she says about women's status in Morocco, presumably one of the countries you were referring to on another thread regarding women's position in Muslim countries. Unlike you, she was born and brought up there.

    Hard to pick out a single section, but let's start with this (she's addressing a secular, non-Muslim French man, so it feels appropriate for you to read it as addressing you):

    Quote
    You see, Olivier, as a blédarde born in the Maghreb, assigned against my will to a religious pigeonhole, not only by you, but above all by a theocratic state that does not allow me to choose my faith and which governs my personal status by religious laws, I have always wondered why guys like you lie down before Islamist propaganda. The laws of my country do not grant me a quarter of the rights you acquired at birth, and if I were to be attacked or raped in the streets of Casablanca by a barbu, as has been promised in hundreds of emails — never taken seriously by the Morroccan police — the websites that posted your article will definitely say I was asking for it because I don’t respect Islam. And you here in France, in a secularist state, you rehash, without grasping its implications, this whole moralizing discourse about how one must “respect Islam,” as demanded by the Islamists, who do not ask whether Islam respects other religions, or other people. Why the hell should I respect Islam? Does it respect me? The day Islam shows the slightest bit of consideration to women, first of all, and secondly toward free-thinkers, I promise you I will rethink my positions.


    Quote
    "Ex -Muslims"

    Why do we always have to hear about "ex-Muslims" and not "ex-Jews", "ex-Christians", "ex- Hindus" and so on?

    Because of a bunch of racist fucking bigots that's why.

    Quote
    Is Zineb el-Rhazoui a racist fucking bigot?

    No, she is not.

    But she makes a very important point in that article - she was assigned a religion by law in Morocco. This also happens in many other countries. Her 'apostasy' (a disgusting concept) would get her into trouble in her native country. Apostasy laws exist across a large number of majority-Muslim countries. So yes, you very much do have to hear about 'ex-Muslims', including the ones in prison across the world for daring to disown the religion their state has assigned to them.

     
  • new report: "Siding with the Oppressor: The Pro-Islamist Left"
     Reply #20 - February 09, 2015, 02:42 PM

    Quote
    "Ex -Muslims"

    Why do we always have to hear about "ex-Muslims" and not "ex-Jews", "ex-Christians", "ex- Hindus" and so on?

    Because of a bunch of racist fucking bigots that's why.

    It makes me sad to hear stuff like this. Do they think that we strongly identify with the label "ex-muslim" is because we are self hating racists? Why didn't it occur to them that the act of leaving islam will cause you to face harassment, assault and social ostracism in non muslims countries, and inprisonment and the death penalty in muslim ones, and that we identify ourselves with the label as a form of solidarity as a persecuted group?

    Anyone who claims to a "progressive" or a "liberal" should hand over their liberal cards the moment they support the barbaric ideology known as islam.

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »