Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'imam of peace', 'shaykh tawhidi', 'towhidi', 'sheikh', 'shaikh tawhidi', 'islamophobia', 'tawhidi', 'sheikh tawhidi', 'brother', 'australia', 'fake imam', 'sheikh towhidi', 'the imam of peace', 'shaikh towhidi', 'imam towhidi', 'imam tawhidi', 'brother tawhidi', 'opportunist', 'brother towhidi' or 'shaykh towhidi'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome to ShiaChat!
    • Guest Lounge
    • Site Tech Support/Feedback
    • Site FAQs
  • Main Forums
    • Theology and General Religion
    • Personalities in Islam
    • Prophets and Ahlul-Bayt
    • Jurisprudence/Laws
    • Politics/Current Events
    • Social/Family/Personal Issues
    • Science/Tech/Economics
    • Education and Careers
    • Medicine, Health, and Fitness
    • Off-Topic
    • Poetry and Art
    • Polls
  • Interfaith Dialogue
    • Shia/Sunni Dialogue
    • Christianity/Judaism Dialogue
    • Atheism/Philosophy/Others
    • Research into Other Sects
  • Other Forums
    • Other Languages
    • Local Community Forums
    • Seasonal Forums (Archive)
  • The Hadith Club's Topics
  • University Students Club's Academic Questions
  • Food Club's Topics
  • University Students Club's Advice and Counseling
  • Food Club's Restaurants
  • Reverts to Islam's Topics
  • Sports Club's Football (Soccer)
  • Sports Club's Basketball
  • Sports Club's Cricket/Baseball
  • Sports Club's American Football
  • Travel Club's Ziyarat, Hajj, Umrah
  • University Students Club's Housekeeping
  • Travel Club's General Travel Discussion
  • Mental Health/Psychology Club's Topics
  • Myths & Misconceptions Debunked's Topics
  • Myths & Misconceptions Debunked's Accusations and Myths/Rumors Forum
  • Sports Club's Boxing/Wrestling/MMA
  • Sports Club's Other Sports
  • Travel Club's Vacations/Business Trips
  • Arts, Crafts, DIY Club's Topics

Calendars

  • Community Calendar

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Found 51 results

  1. Australia Day. Change the date?

    Salam Aleykum Brothers and Sisters in religion and my Equals in humanity. Do you think Australia should change the date of its national holiday? Here are a couple of videos on the history and debate on the issue for those who are not familiar with the issue or are not Australian. Let me know what you all think below!
  2. Charlie Hebdo May Now Be Criticized Because It Mocked White Texans Rather Than Muslims by Glenn Greenwald THE NEWFOUND FREE SPEECH crusaders borne of the January 2015 murders of 10 Charlie Hebdo cartoonists in Paris sought to promulgate a new and quite dangerous standard. It was no longer enough to defend someone’s right to express their ideas while being free to condemn those ideas themselves — long the central tenet of the free speech movement (I defend their right to free speech even while finding them and their ideas repugnant). In the wake of the Hebdo killings, one had to go much further than that: It was a moral imperative to embrace and celebrate the ideas under attack and to glorify those who were expressing them, even to declare ourselves to be them (#JeSuisCharlie). As a result, criticizing the content of Charlie Hebdo’s often-vile cartoons became virtually blasphemous. It became common to demand that one not only defend the right of the cartoonists to publish them but also, to show “solidarity,” one had to republish those cartoons no matter how much one objected to their content — thus adopting that speech as one’s own. Opposition to lavishing these cartoonists with honors and prizes was depicted as some sort of moral failure or at least insufficient commitment to free speech rights, as evidenced by the widespread, intense scornheaped on the writers who spoke out in opposition to bestowing Charlie Hebdo with an award at a PEN America gala. A dangerous conflation was thus imposed between the right to express Idea X and one’s opinion of Idea X. Of all the articles I’ve written in the last several years, perhaps the most polarizing and anger-generating were the ones I wrote in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo killings: one article that rejected the demand that one must celebrate and even republish Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons by criticizing those cartoons and illustrating the results of applying this new, dangerous standard (celebrate offensive and blasphemous cartoons by republishing them) universally; and then a series of articles defending the PEN America writers who objected to the Charlie Hebdo award on the ground that one could simultaneously defend free speech while refusing to praise, honor, and glorify those whose speech rights were under attack. The most dishonest and confused commentators distorted my critique (and others) of the content of Charlie Hebdo’s speech into an opposition to free speech itself. “When Glenn Greenwald castigates the dead Charlie Hebdo cartoonists for racism,” decreed the anti-Islam high priest of New Atheism, Sam Harris, “he’s not only proving that he’s a moral imbecile; he’s participating in a global war of ideas over free speech — and he’s on the wrong side of it.” Similarly confusing these distinct concepts was Quillette’s Jamie Palmer, who, after surveying my years of work defending free speech rights for everyone both as a lawyer and a journalist, somehow concluded that “it would seem logical to suppose that Greenwald’s solidarity with the staff of Charlie Hebdo could be taken for granted.” What was clear all along, and what I argued repeatedly, was that it was not a belief in free speech that was driving these demands that Charlie Hebdo cartoonists be honored and revered and their cartoons be celebrated. Free speech was just the pretense, the costume. Indeed, most of the political leaders who led the “free speech parade” in Paris (pictured above) had long records of suppressing free speech, and few of these new free speech crusaders uttered a word as the free speech rights of Muslims have been assaulted and eroded throughout the West in the name of the war on terror. What was driving this love of Charlie Hebdo was approval of the content of its cartoons: specifically, glee that it was attacking, mocking, and angering Muslims, one of the most marginalized, vulnerable, and despised groups in the West. THE PROOF OF THIS was delivered yesterday. Charlie Hebdo published a characteristically vile cartoon depicting drowning victims of Hurricane Harvey in Houston as being neo-Nazis, with the banner that declared “God Exists”: because, needless to say, white people in Texas love Hitler, and it’s thus a form of divine justice if they drown. That led to a virtually unanimous tidal wave of condemnation of Charlie Hebdo, including from many quarters that, just two years ago, were sanctifying the same magazine for its identical mockery of Muslims. Yesterday’s assault on white sensibilities also led many people to suddenly rediscover the principle that one can simultaneously defend a person’s free speech rights while expressing revulsion for the content of their speech. The examples are far too numerous to comprehensively cite; some representative samplings will have to suffice. Here was Piers Morgan in January 2015, with a beloved tweet that was re-tweeted by almost 24,000 people: View image on Twitter Twitter Ads info and privacy Here was the same Piers Morgan yesterday: View image on Twitter Twitter Ads info and privacy For the crime of mocking white Americans, vehement scorn for Charlie Hedbo was commonplace yesterday. “An evil, despicable cover,” opinedNational Review’s Tiana Lowe, who nonetheless added that “the losers at Charlie Hebdo have a God-given right to publish it.” Infowars’ Paul Joseph Watson, long a fan of Charlie Hebdo’s anti-Muslim cartoons and an advocate of the duty to republish its content, yesterday announced that, actually, one may hate and denounce the cartoons while still supporting the cartoonists’ free speech rights: “The Charlie Hebdo cover is offensive & dumb, and I fully support their right to be as offensive & dumb as they like.” The right-wing actor James Woods announced: “So much for ‘Je Suis Charlie,’ I guess,” calling the cartoonists “French traitors” in a hastag he added. National Review’s Byron York, showing a picture of the new cover, was similarly candid: “Today, we are not all Charlie Hebdo.” One popular tweet, from journalist Jason Howerton of the conservative Independent Journal Review — who previously mocked news outlets for not showingthe full Charlie Hebdo anti-Islam cartoons — declared that one should not, after all, share Charlie Hebdo cartoons that one finds objectionable: “Was going to go off on Charlie Hebdo for that sick Texas cover. But then I realized that’s what they want. [Edited Out] you. I’m not sharing it.” It’s almost as if the glorification and praise for Charlie Hebdo that became morally mandatory in 2015 had nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with love of the anti-Islam content of Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons. This new rule that one must not only defend Charlie Hebdo’s free speech rights but also honor and praise its work seems to have disappeared rather instantly, violently even, as soon as its targets stopped being Muslims and began being white Americans. This person put it best: Twitter Ads info and privacy What happened here is beyond obvious: Charlie Hebdo was fun, delightfully provocative, bold, and deserving of awards when it was publishing mockery of Muslims. When its cartoonists began publishing exactly the same sort of thing aimed at white Americans, they became “vile,” “evil,” “despicable,” “losers,” and “traitors.” As the author Robert Wright put it this morning: “I’m guessing PEN won’t be giving Charlie Hebdo an award this time around.” The viral 2015 Twitter hashtag campaign would have been much more honest had it read: “#JeSuisCharlie (*pour les bandes dessinées sur les musulmans”): “#IAmCharlie (*for cartoons about Muslims).” Whatever else is true, let this episode bring about the full and permanent death to the new, warped principle that to defend free speech, one must celebrate the ideas under attack and honor those expressing them. It should have never been difficult to grasp the basic yet vital distinction between defending the right of ideas to be expressed and celebrating those ideas. Now that a Charlie Hebdo cartoon has been aimed at white Americans, offending white Westerners, it seems the wisdom of this principle has been rediscovered. Top photo: Prime Minister David Cameron joined other world leaders at the start of the defiant march through Paris, France, in the wake of the terror attacks at the offices of Charlie Hebdo. Glenn Greenwaldglenn.greenwald@theintercept.com@ggreenwald
  3. Australian Senator Wears Burqa in Parliament to Push for Ban By JACQUELINE WILLIAMSAUG. 17, 2017 Photo Senator Pauline Hanson wore a burqa in the Senate at Parliament House in Canberra, the capital, on Thursday. She said that she wanted to draw attention to her party’s push to ban full-face coverings in public.CreditEuropean Pressphoto Agency SYDNEY, Australia — Australia’s Senate is rowdy and raucous, and often compared to a schoolyard. But after the leader of the anti-immigrant One Nation party walked into the chamber on Thursday wearing a burqa, the room went silent. Then came the stunned responses: “oh” and “what on earth.” The party leader, Pauline Hanson, took her seat as political rivals watched astounded. Senators from her party laughed. Removing the garment, Ms. Hanson, who is not Muslim, said that the burqa, a full-body and face covering, should be banned in Australia. She said that she wore the veil to draw attention to her party’s push to ban full-face coverings in public. “I’m quite happy to remove this because this is not what should belong in this Parliament,” she said as the Senate met during parliamentary sitting week, in which lawmakers debate legislation and other matters. Photo Ms. Hanson. CreditReuters In a speech in the chamber last year, Ms. Hanson said that Australia was “in danger of being swamped by Muslims.” A recent report from the Trump administration referred to Ms. Hanson in listing her party as a threat to religious freedom. Critics say that Ms. Hanson, who represents Queensland, seeks to make Australia a country where only English is spoken and where non-Christian religions are invisible. Ms. Hanson said in a statement that she wore the burqa because she thought that banning full-face coverings in public “was an important issue facing modern Australia that needed to be discussed.” Such coverings, she said, were “oppressive, presented barriers to assimilation, disadvantaged women from finding employment” and “had no place in modern Western society.” Ms. Hanson’s actions drew strong criticism in the Senate. Attorney General George Brandis, a member of the conservative Liberal Party, denounced the move in an emotional speech in which his voice broke. He said that Australia would not ban burqas. “To ridicule that community, to drive it into a corner, to mock its religious garments is an appalling thing to do, and I would ask you to reflect on what you have done,” he said, referring to Muslims. Photo Senators applauding after Attorney General George Brandis, not pictured, criticized Ms. Hanson for wearing a burqa. CreditLukas Coch/European Pressphoto Agency His response elicited a standing ovation from one side of the floor. “I would caution and counsel you with respect to be very, very careful of the offense you may do to the religious sensibilities of other Australians,” he said. Mr. Brandis said that about half a million people practice Islam in Australia, the vast majority of whom are law-abiding “good Australians.” Ms. Hanson used her speech on Thursday to address terrorism. She said that the police had uncovered 13 significant threats since Australia raised its terrorist threat level to probable in 2014, calling terrorism “a true threat to our country” and saying that “many Australians are very much in fear of it.” Clive Bean, a political-science professor at Queensland University of Technology, said he “was not aware of a stunt quite like this happening in Parliament before.” He said that he was surprised that the president of the Senate, Stephen Parry, let it occur. “The danger of such a strong stunt as that is that it has the opposite of the desired effect,” he said. “The fallout is stronger against than in favor.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/world/australia/pauline-hanson-burqa-australia-senate.html
  4. Canadian Sheikhs

    السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته Does anyone know of a Sheikh who lives in Canada that Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlullah's Association (مكتب القضاء الشرعي لسماحة العلامة المرجع السيد محمد حسين فضل الله) would recognise and know of so that I may contact him about a very important question and issue I have?! Jazakum Allah Kheir
  5. Book: A closer look at Islam

    Dear Brothers and Sisters Salams In the thread titled “Who is Syed B Ali,” in the General Discussions forum, a SC member by the name of “Digital Ummah” has asked for some more information on my book. So I have decided to explain a few things here. As the SC ad says, the book is essentially a response to critics of Islam. If you read some anti-Islam books, of which there has been a deluge in the last 40 years, there are two weapons in the critic's arsenal: Quran- they distort the meanings of the verses and Hadith- where they endlessly quote the same offensive hadiths. I came to realize that I had to do two things for my message to be effective. I had to disavow the common acceptance by our Muslim brothers and sisters of those hadiths and historical accounts, which help critics slander Islam and our Holy Prophet (pbuh). And I had to demonstrate that their arguments were based mainly on malice. But I have not emphasised the word ‘malice.’ Instead, I have given them the benefit of doubt and called it ‘misinformation’. Since I am not a graduate of a hawza school and therefore cannot technically claim to be a scholar, I had to develop my strategy very carefully. And after careful examination of the pros and cons, I decided on the following: Distancing myself from the hadith books that are the cause of so much strife. I have argued that they need to be reviewed and revised. But I have not done this in the very beginning as it may put off some of my non-Shia Muslim readers. Explaining why the Quran is not a literal book. And explain the teachings of Islam in the examples of three of our Imams. Now please let me tell you what the different chapters do: The introductory chapter clearly tells the reader what the book is all about, that being, a response to criticisms of Islam. In chapter I, I have picked two specific anti-Islam books and tried to show how irrationally they arrive at their conclusions. In chapter II, I respond to a specific book that tries to show that Muhammad did not exist and at the same time tries to slander him. Double game! Chapter III is intended to be a rebuttal to atheism. Chapter IV consists of two parts. The first part explains the drift of the Quran without going into the details and the second why it is so difficult to understand it. Chapter V is a thematic collection of verses of the Quran. In chapter VI, I discuss the problems with hadith and history, which critics of Islam so avidly use to slander Islam. Chapter VII – IX show the high ideals of Islam in the example of three of our Imams. Chapter X is the closing chapter following by the Appendices, with some more Islamic teachings. Before you decide to buy, it might be a good idea to go through the preview which is given in the link to the ad I have placed. And should you decide to buy, I would also request you to buy through www.amazon.com. The reason is that if you write a review, which I would very much encourage you to do, Amazon reviews have a very high market effect. If you buy the book through another retailer, you can also write reviews but it does not have the same value as an Amazon review. Please note that I am not asking that you necessarily praise the book in your reviews but I am sure that whatever you write will help counter the effect of negative reviews If you have any questions, I will try to answer them to the best of my ability, for the next few days, after which I will be away for a while. I must again thank brother Ali, for his kind help in creating the ad that you see on the SC home page. It is an exquisite banner and it was indeed very kind of him. Thank you all kindly. Was Salam
  6. Salam, Please check out http://shiadirectory.com.au you can create an account and put your mosque/centre/group on the map. help your few shia find a place of worship or even help you in your cause. Salam
  7. The man correcting stories about Muslims By Catrin NyeVictoria Derbyshire programme 19 January 2017 From the sectionUK Share Image captionEvery day, Miqdaad Versi searches newspapers looking for errors concerning Muslims and Islam When one newspaper reported last year that "enclaves of Islam see UK as 75% Muslim" last year, Miqdaad Versi's instinct was to challenge it. He believes errors in the reporting of Muslims have become all too common, and has made it his mission to fight for corrections. Miqdaad Versi sits in front of a rather geeky-looking spreadsheet at the offices of the Muslim Council of Britain in east London. He is the organisation's assistant secretary general, but the task in front of him is a personal project. The spreadsheet has on it every story published concerning Muslims and Islam that day in the British media - and he is going through them looking for inaccuracies. If he finds one, he will put in a complaint or a request for a correction with the news organisation, the press regulator Ipso, or both. Mr Versi has been doing this thoroughly since November, and before that on a more casual basis. He has so far complained more than 50 times, and the results are visible. He was personally behind eight corrections in December and another four so far this month. Image captionMiqdaad Versi tweets diagrams showing corrections and apologies made following his complaints In the past, corrections to stories were mostly printed when individuals were the victims of inaccurate reporting, but Mr Versi is looking at a whole topic. "Nobody else was doing this," he tells the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme. "There have been so many articles about Muslims overall that have been entirely inaccurate, and they create this idea within many Muslim communities that the media is out to get them. "The reason that's the case is because nobody is challenging these newspapers and saying, 'That's not true.'" Find out more Watch the Victoria Derbyshire programme on weekdays between 09:00 and 11:00 on BBC Two and the BBC News channel. See Catrin Nye's full film on this issue here. Mr Versi goes through some of the corrections from December. Five of them concerned a review into integration by Dame Louise Casey. The Sunday Times reported that "Enclaves of Islam see UK as 75% Muslim" in a preview of the review. This was incorrect, with the review actually citing a survey of pupils in one largely Asian school who thought 50-90% of the population in Britain were Asian. The paper corrected the article, and later apologised. As the same story was reported in other publications, it led to five corrections. Mr Versi highlights another article, concerning the Muslim president of the National Union of Students (NUS). She was accused on Mail Online of refusing to condemn so-called Islamic State, when she had openly done so. Also in December, he points out a report in the Sun on Sunday confused the identities of two Muslim individuals - one fighting against extremism and one accused of extremism. "Quite a mix-up," says Mr Versi. He has met several newspaper editors and has been pleased with the quick corrections he has received in some cases. But he is concerned that these revisions are not obvious enough to the reader. "Sometimes the corrections lack a clear acknowledgement of the error they made and often do not include an apology. In addition, they are rarely given the prominence of the original article," he says. He adds that while he is concerned with "significant failings" in the reporting of Muslims, the same issues "might also be replicated for refugee, migrant or other groups". 'No middle ground' One particularly high-profile correction in December last year - that Mr Versi was not behind - involved a 2015 article in which Mail Online columnist Katie Hopkins wrongly suggested Zahid Mahmood and his brother were extremists with links to al-Qaeda, after they had not been allowed to board a plane to the US. The paper and Ms Hopkins apologised and paid £150,000 in damages. At his home in Walthamstow, north-east London, Mr Mahmood says he has forgiven her. He now says it is not her original false accusations that he finds the most upsetting, but the public reaction. "First they were all against us when Katie Hopkins published the article, and then when she made the apology a year later - then they all turn against her. "There's no middle ground. It's not just about Katie Hopkins, it's the mindset of people - how they can very easily be led against somebody, or in favour of somebody." Image captionZahid Mahmood says he holds "no grudge" against Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins Mr Mahmood says he feels this kind of reaction is causing divisions in society, and - keen to do his bit for unity - tells the BBC he is formally inviting Katie Hopkins to his home for tea and coffee. "We have no grudge against her, and we would like her to learn and know that we are as British as she is. "In fact, my wife's grandfather and great-grandfather both fought in World War One and World War Two. They fought for the very freedom of this country." Mr Versi says he wants to improve community relations too. He thinks inaccurate reporting has far-reaching consequences, especially because negative stories are often widely circulated by far-right groups and then the corrections are not. Some free speech campaigners, however, are concerned about this kind of work. Tom Slater, deputy editor of Spiked Online, says these complaints could create a fear of reporting certain issues. "I, like anyone else, want a press that's going to be accurate... but what we're seeing here is quite concerted attempts to try and often ring-fence Islam from criticism." Mr Slater says he found a recent correction to a story about a suspected "honour killing" particularly problematic. Image captionTom Slater worries such complaints are attempts to "ring-fence Islam from criticism." In May 2016, the Mail Online and the Sun used the phrase "Islamic honour killing" in their headline. Mr Versi successfully complained to Ipso that Islam does not condone honour killings and that the phrase incorrectly suggested it was motivated by religion. The word "Islamic" was removed from the papers' headlines, and at the bottom of the articles they wrote: "We are happy to make clear that Islam as a religion does not support so-called 'honour killings.'" Mr Slater says he found that statement added by the papers "absolutely staggering". "We all know a religion is just an assortment of ideas and principles. What these papers were effectively asked to do, and what they did do, was to print one accepted interpretation of a religion - and to me this was just like backdoor blasphemy law." Mr Versi, however, insists his work is about ensuring the facts are right - not silencing critics. He says there are many examples where Muslims can be rightly criticised and he is not complaining about those. "All I'm asking for is responsible reporting." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38655760
  8. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/upfront/2016/10/islam-myth-french-secularism-161007131555990.html [video]
  9. The Land Of Karbala

    Karbala, Karbala Karbala, Karbala Hussain was slain His family in pain No soldiers had remained Women in chains Children in pain Yazid is to be blamed But this is not what remains From the land of Karbala The knight in flames The charging man No child slept The women all wept The sound of cries The orphans’ sighs Blood shed from the ones who died But this is not what remains From the land of Karbala Karbala, Karbala Karbala, Karbala Hossein wrote with his blood On the sand of Karbala La ilaaha illa Allah Muhammad rasul Allah This is all that remains From the land of Karbala La ilaaha illa Allah Muhammad rasul Allah Karbala, Karbala Karbala, Karbala
  10. Zendegi and apology

    Hi all, As you may have noticed, our dear and beloved brother @Zendegi unregistered his account and has forever left us. He will be missed, and his contributions to ShiaChat were amazing. The reason why Zendegi left this forum is clear. He did not want to be here as long as I was present. He did not like my posts about Iran and Iranians in general. While he enjoyed the company of all of you, he was hurt by my actions. After he left ShiaChat, I had a great feeling of guilt and sadness that a ShiaChat member left because of me. I never intended for this to happen. I did not mean to chase off a fellow ShiaChat user, and now I regret it. This is it from me, this will be my last post. I would like to apologize to all ShiaChatters for my actions, as I am deeply sorry. I would like to thank the ShiaChat moderators for the respect they gave me, even though I did not deserve it. MuhammadXII
  11. Family/Brother quotes

    So basically my older brother and younger brother i feel are starting to detach from each other and me. They're really religious but just need a push does anyone have any islamic brother quotes that i could tell them that would help? every answer will mean a lot to me. may Allah reward you
  12. Follow Ahmed Shihab-EldinVerified account‏@ASE #France's women's rights minister said Muslim women who wear the headscarf are like "negroes who accepted slavery" I can't load the video, here is the link:
  13. Salam, Does anybody here know about Sayed Sistani's brother? All i can find on the internet is these pictures; Someone says that he is killed by Iranian regime. Is this true?
  14. Ever since, Graeme Wood, well known Islamophobe and anti theist, published his article "What ISIS Really Wants", the Western Media has been raving like mad dogs of how inherently violent Muslims are and have based their assumptions on this article. In this post I will examine the error filled logic behind this theory and how the Western Media seeks to delegitimize the voices of 1.6 billion Muslims while subsequently promoting their own "scholars on Islam" to a general audience that is ignorant ,lacks critical thinking and is uninformed on Islam. Additionally, before this article came out there was a tension in the air in which various organizations critical of religion and conservatives who hate Islam were awaiting for such a theory to arise so they could come to the occasion and have their own sentiments fulfilled hence confirming their own confirmation-bias. Additionally, this article came at a time when sensationalism and reactionary sentiments towards Muslims were at an all time high, and hence sought to reinforce these views. In this post I will be dissecting such arguments, disproving them with my own thoughts on the matter, providing links to scholars who provide a unique and informed view to the conversation, and showing how these types of arguments have no real substance but rely upon the ignorance of their audience, and sensationalism and reactionary like opinions to validate themselves. Also, I will be exposing the agenda of Graeme Wood against all religions, as he posted an article criticizing Buddhists in Myanmar who were perpetuating violence against Muslims, while subsequently instead of coming to the defense of Muslims, reinforcing negative stereotypes and also criticizing Islam and Muslims in the same article, all the while assuming that Buddhism promotes such violence which we all know is untrue, however, sell it to the right audience and they will believe it. As the great propagandist Adolf Hitler once said: “But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.” ― Adolf Hitler As also was emphasized in George Orwell's novel, 1984, say a lie enough times and it will become true.
  15. Salam, I hope you're all well. I have started to look for places to do my final year medical electives in 2018, as recommended by previous medical students. It is a 8 week block, however we only need to attend a clinical placement for 6 weeks within the block. I'm currently studying in the UK. My major concerns regarding choice of elective placement is safety and discrimination (both islamophobia and anti-shia hate). Plus I'm aware some hospitals may hold a no-hijab policy, so I hope to avoid applying to those. Currently I hope to find a hospital in dearborn or (west of) sydney to apply to, mostly because they hold the largest shia populations. Malaysia and indonesia interest me also, although to a much lesser extent (due to the language barrier). My university has ties to two german universities, so I hope to fall back on those if my application to any of the locations mentioned previously does not succeed. But again, I'm not unsure about hijab policies in Munster unversity and moritz university (greifswald). I understand german completely and with a little jog of the memory I probably will remember how to speak it fluently too. I was wondering wether you could help steer me away from discriminating places/cities and direct me towards safer locations. My choices are not limited to the countries/cities I listed. For instance, I have considered zanzibar too. I have been told it's quite the rewarding experience and sets a strong contrast between medical care in MEDCs and LEDCs. My university has ties to other locations like lisbon (portugal), madrid, cordoba, paris, tokyo, rome, beijing, hong kong etc. The reason why I'm not listing these is due to the lack of interest in the culture AND the language barrier. Although, and to be fair, I do like the japanese culture. But I have been told they don't take kindly to foreigners, or at least don't enjoy seeing them. I hope you can help and thanks for reading =D jazakum Allah kheiran!
  16. When Marco Rubio delivered his response to Donald Trump's comments saying "Islam hates us", he responded by saying his comments were outrageous, however, he delivered a purposely weakened defense of Muslims. Which was hardly even a defense considering he said "Islam has a problem" as I have written in my previous post. For anyone needing to catch up to speed here is a link to my previous post in which I fact check the debate: He only came to defend Muslims when in Bangladesh Christian Missionaries experienced hostility when trying to convert Muslims to Christianity, and gleefully remarked there were many Muslims interested in converting to Christianity in Bangladesh. As if he couldn't give a defense for the basic human dignity Muslims deserve he only chimes in his defense when it was advantageous to him. For instance, he said we need to build a coalition of Sunni Arabs against ISIS in other words if it wasn't for the support he needed from Sunni Arabs or if there were no Christian missionaries in Muslim countries he wouldn't have came to the defense of Muslims. In sum, on certain issues it seems the scathing hypocrisy from the Republican side is too much.
  17. My Brother

    First off, I should explain I do not come from a Muslim family. While my father and mother are christian, my brother does not seem to be religious in any way (at least not outwardly). This story starts in December of last year, a few weeks after he started dating this girl. He told us that she was 18 and that she was about to graduate high school and all that. However, I started getting messages from some of his former friends, telling me that she was actually 16 years old. I was, at first, shocked but also not convinced. After all, these were his former friends, and I didn't know if they were just trying to start trouble. Still, I confronted him, and he assured me they were lying. Still, I couldn't let it rest (while I love my brother dearly, I am sad to say he is not very trustworthy.) Turns out they were right. Some snooping on instagram revealed she was, indeed, only 16. And newly turned 16 at that. My first fear was the law, but where I live in the US the age of consent is 16. Next, my fears went to family. Legal or otherwise, if my parents found out they would be furious. He just got off probation and I didn't want to see him fall down again. So I confronted him again, and we had a deep, rather heated, discussion. Long story short, I told him that as family I'd always have his back, but that I did not necessarily approve of the relationship. I thought that was the end of that. However, today, one of his former friends started messaging me again, talking about how I was an "a-lister" and my brother a pedophile, and began posting things on Facebook. He didn't name any one, but it's very obvious. I'm not sure what to do, especially if this blows up in his face. I personally do not feel threatened by this guy, but I worry about my family back home.
  18. Islamophobia: Cause & Effect

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEXl_sYwW8U
  19. Danger Meter?

    I've had to deal with racial issues aplenty, but I've never been Muslim and we've never had Muslims around " in the family" before. My husband has had his ears out since San Bernardino and is worried. He doesn't know how to judge the possible danger to SG and,by extension, our daughter. He is still uneasy since the past threatened shenanigans a couple of months ago. I heard him giving our daughter a talk on staying safe " you can't forget you walk around with a middle eastern Muslim man. I don't want anything to happen to either of you. Please be extra-careful and I think you might want to stay out of certain situations for a while."He really worried about them attending, even with her brothers, some of the gatherings on campus and that a lot of the Muslim guys hang out together very conspicuously. He thinks DD and SG are still at the age where they think they are pretty indestructible. DD , for her part, is sympathetic to our concerns but still thinks that we are over-protective. If anybody has any wisdom on this, I'd be grateful.
  20. Salams all, MashAllah, i'm so glad there are people willing to stand up to this sort of thing! http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/train-passengers-stand-up-against-racial-abuse-muslim-woman-newcastle-metro I know it doesnt always turn out like that, so well done the Geordies!
  21. Australia school criticised for letting Muslim students walk out during national anthem Scott Morrison, Australia’s treasurer, attacks school’s “pathetic” decision to allow Muslim students to skip singing of the national anthem during a religious mourning periodScott Morrison, a senior Australian government minister, has criticised a school which allowed Muslim students to leave an assembly for the singing of the national anthem during a religious period of mourning. The head of Cranbourne Carlisle primary school allowed about 30 to 40 Shia Muslim students aged eight to ten to leave the assembly, saying it was the Muharram period for the children, a sacred month when Shia Muslims observe a period of mourning, and they should not be required to take part in “joyous” events. “It wasn’t a pre-thought-out action,” Cheryl Irving, the school principal, told Channel 10. “When they came to the assembly, they were caught in a dilemma. They knew that they should not be taking part in music. They also knew that the national anthem had music, so they were caught in a dilemma and didn’t know what to do. Some stood to leave, so the teacher intervened and gave them the opportunity to move out quietly, so they weren’t confused and they weren’t upset.” The decision angered parents, while Muslim schools said it was standard for all Muslim students to sing Advance Australia Fair, the national anthem. Mr Morrison, the national treasurer, equivalent to Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer, said he was offended by the school’s actions and believed it deserved the “muppet of the year award”. “I know people of Muslim faith [who] would be just as offended about this as you or I would,” he told Radio 3AW. “I just shook my head and went ‘that’s just doing nobody any favours’. Some do-gooder’s tried to make a point and they’ve ended up damaging the whole show. So look, they get the muppet of the year award from me for that.” The education department in the state of Victoria reportedly backed the school, saying it was important to respect religious observances of all students. Kuranda Seyit, from the Islamic Council of Victoria, said the situation was a “storm in a teacup”. "I think that it is important that we don't blow this out of proportion, and understand that the national anthem is something that Muslims take great pride in singing,” he told The Age. “In this particular incident it happened at a time when they were not allowed to sing and I think we should respect that choice." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/11959894/Australia-school-criticised-for-letting-Muslim-students-walk-out-during-national-anthem.html --------------- I don't know what to think of this. I mean I thought patriotic songs were allowed anyway. Also, the fact that they're saying it's the music the students may have had a problem with means they should have a problem with it the rest of the year too. I'd imagine if whoever is having trouble understanding this part of the children's religion, wouldn't be too pleased after learning that they'd have (or should have) a problem with it at other times too. I don't think anyone's annoyance over this is unjustified. National anthems are usually a matter of a country's respect. Most people are required to stand up for it as long as it's playing. What does everyone else think?
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×