Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Hannibal

Mehdi Hasan: A conscience for hire

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Hannibal said:

See the following link on his controversy: http://worldshiaforum.org/2017/03/mehdi-hasan-conscience-hire/

Didn't read it all. But the analogies of Palestinians-Isrealis and 'abused wife' are weak and downright silly.

We can't expect Mehdi Hassan to become a spokesman for official Iranian-Shia political position or support the Bashar regime like some Shias on SC do. He has done a lot of good work to highlight Western imperial wars and puppet regimes in the Middle East and continues to do so.

To give an example, no Al Jazeera journalist has ever grilled a Qatari govt official on Syria as Mehdi has done. He almost enbarrassed the foreign minister (maybe some other high up) for Qatari support of the Jihadists in Syria. Look it up on YouTube. 

In principle I agree with the quoted statement which apparently riled the writers of this piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the articles, the author claim that he/Mehdi Hassan are:

1. False equivalences

2. Victim-blaming

3. False-framing

4. Refusing the name the culprits

It is now depending on the inferred knowledge of factual happenning that the author and Mehdi H. about the situation of the world.

For me, it seems Mehdi H. do not know what is happening to entire of each group of Muslim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mehdi Hassan has some very good qualities (like debating) and some not so great qualities (like fawning over milliband). he is a journalist, not a global authority or representative of muslims. there are always gonna be things he does well, and things he does not so well. his views are far from infallible but hes pretty good generally. 

also bear in mind he works for the huff post, so we can pretty much guarantee that he is forced to "tow the party line" on certain issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He also claimed he was no fan of Hezbollah once, I don't really understand if he thought the Shias in South Lebanon should've just submitted to Zionist aggression and agreed to be humiliated. You can't really condemn Israeli actions and then oppose groups that resist them too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

He also claimed he was no fan of Hezbollah once, I don't really understand if he thought the Shias in South Lebanon should've just submitted to Zionist aggression and agreed to be humiliated. You can't really condemn Israeli actions and then oppose groups that resist them too. 

thats a bit strange, do you have a video so we can see context?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

thats a bit strange, do you have a video so we can see context?

Wasn't a video, it was a twitter post. Something like I'm no fan of Hamas (whom I dislike but for their sectarian biases) and Hezbollah, but I wouldn't compare them to crazy nihilists like Al Qaeda. Frankly, I think that post is rather misleading, he's saying basically that even though he wouldn't compare the two, by mentioning them in the same sentence shows there is somehow a moral equivalence that can be made between the two. I can't imagine him saying the same thing but replacing Hezbollah with the IDF.

58c001b01d077_ScreenShot2017-03-08at08_05_23.png.e5f404eca051c06e36e4f843f9dbcdc3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check this out. It seems he refers to Ayatollah Khamenei as a mullah, a derogatory term western officials use in their demonization campaign against Iran. I don't particularly care if you're a fan of Sayed Ali Khamenei or not, using the term mullah to refer to him as a Shia is quite disgraceful, at least in my opinion.

58c0066521a91_ScreenShot2017-03-08at08_25_03.png.6fbb5899d1994dce8d3cef15f5ca22a4.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DigitalUmmah said:

thats a bit strange, do you have a video so we can see context?

He can't openly voice support for "terrorist organizations". It's not illegal in the US, but he doesn't want to be put on watchlists and his work blacklisted. When people say they "don't support, but", don't take it at face value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, notme said:

He can't openly voice support for "terrorist organizations". It's not illegal in the US, but he doesn't want to be put on watchlists and his work blacklisted. When people say they "don't support, but", don't take it at face value. 

I suppose, though there are brave non-Shia journalists that have called out the hypocrisy of the US on this. Check this out; 

And people like Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein have met Nasrallah and praised him frequently. In fact Finkelstein lost his job over his stance on Israel, I think that's incredibly brave of him. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

In fact Finkelstein lost his job over his stance on Israel, I think that's incredibly brave of him. 

Yep. Not everyone will do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, notme said:

Yep. Not everyone will do that. 

Incidentally do we have Shias in the West that have gone all out without a care in the world about what it might mean for their career and reputation? I always feel like apart from the career thing, the anti-Muslim sentiment in the West makes people keep their opinions on certain issues to themselves for appeasing those who might get turned off if you voiced these opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not worried about my career, but I keep my opinions to myself for the most part. I have found that if I express them openly, people who might otherwise have listened close their minds. I use subtlety and example to try to make others think and come to conclusions on their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mehdi Hassan is a pioneer in the Shia community. We always complain about the media bias but are seldom willing to do anything about it.

Then here comes Mehdi Hasan who could have been an engineer or a doctor (typical) but chose a profession with insurmountable challenges.

He is the perfect shia? No
Is he the best journalist? No

But he is pioneer and will only improve with time. Sure enough there will be times when we disagree with him but that does not mean we should discredit him. It could just mean that his understanding and our understanding of an issue are different.

I think he is paving the way for future Muslim and shia journalists and should be respected for it even if we disagree with his some of his stances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a silly article and I am not a fan of Mehdi Hasan.  The author should find something more constructive to do with his time.  It would also help if he actually bothered to proof read what he wrote once since there are basic grammar mistakes.

Edited by King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, notme said:

He can't openly voice support for "terrorist organizations". It's not illegal in the US, but he doesn't want to be put on watchlists and his work blacklisted. When people say they "don't support, but", don't take it at face value. 

 

He can be a bit more tactful though.

 

If he is saying something he flat out doesn't believe, then he's just a shill. If he actually believes it, then he's also a shill. If he is trying to be tactful, then he's failing miserably.

 

Look at Seyyed Hossein Nasr. He has even praised Imam Khomeini, but tactfully (and Nasr is someone who actually lost in the revolution).

 

 

Re: the false equivalence thing, he also did this with respect to Iran and Saudi (which we all damn well know are not analogous in any way)

 

You can't work for al jazeera and not be a shill. That's the basic message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, baradar_jackson said:

 

He can be a bit more tactful though.

 

If he is saying something he flat out doesn't believe, then he's just a shill. If he actually believes it, then he's also a shill. If he is trying to be tactful, then he's failing miserably.

 

Look at Seyyed Hossein Nasr. He has even praised Imam Khomeini, but tactfully (and Nasr is someone who actually lost in the revolution).

 

 

Re: the false equivalence thing, he also did this with respect to Iran and Saudi (which we all damn well know are not analogous in any way)

 

You can't work for al jazeera and not be a shill. That's the basic message.

Was/is Nasr against the revolution? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Pearl178 said:

Was/is Nasr against the revolution? 

 

I would say not.

 

The reason why he left the country was because a certain overzealous revolutionary (who, by the way: now the pendelum has turned the other way and he is an overzealous "Islamic reformist") targeted him.

 

He is a traditionalist; he respects Imam Khomeini as a traditionalist but I am not sure if he necessarily agrees with the whole political program of WF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...