Robert Spencer

|

Pamela Geller

|

Bat Ye'or

|

Brigitte Gabriel

|

Daniel Pipes

|

Debbie Schlussel

|

Walid Shoebat

|

Joe Kaufman

|

Wafa Sultan

|

Geert Wilders

|

The Nuclear Card

Daily Star Reporter Quits Over Fictional Anti-Muslim Stories

Posted on 31 March 2011 by Emperor

This is pretty bad even for a tabloid.

Daily Star reporter quits in protest at tabloid’s ‘anti-Muslim’ coverage

The Daily Star has been accused of printing fictional stories by a disgruntled reporter who has resigned over its “hatemongering” anti-Muslim propaganda.

In a resignation letter, Richard Peppiatt said he was leaving after the Star gave sympathetic coverage to the far-right English Defence League last month.

Peppiatt admits producing a number of fictional stories about celebrities during his two years at the tabloid, a practice he implies was sanctioned by his seniors.

The reporter, who was once made to dress up in a burqa, now accuses the paper of inciting racial tensions and Islamaphobia. “You may have heard the phrase ‘the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil sets off a tornado in Texas’,” Peppiatt wrote to the proprietor, Richard Desmond, in a letter seen by the Guardian.

“Well, try this: ‘The lies of a newspaper in London can get a bloke’s head caved-in down an alley in Bradford.’ If you can’t see that words matter, you should go back to running porn magazines.”

Desmond’s media empire has included pornographic magazines and adult TV channels as well as Express newspapers, Channel 5 and celebrity magazines. Desmond has said he was not consulted before the decision to publish the front-page story and editorial about the EDL.

Peppiatt tells him in his letter: “The weight of your ownership rests heavy on the shoulders of everyone, from the editor to the bloke who empties the bins.”

Peppiatt, who handed in his resignation this week, said the “incendiary” suggestion the EDL was planning to field election candidates was known to be an exaggeration. “But further up the newsprint chain it appears a story, too good to allow the mere spectre of reality to restrain, was spotted,” he wrote.

The EDL story is one of a number of prominent articles published by the Star that Peppiatt claims were made up, including some of his own. The reporter was recently involved in stories claiming Rochdale council had spent taxypayers’ money on “Muslim-only squat-hole loos”. In fact, the toilets were neither paid for by the local authority or “Muslim-only”.

“I was tasked with writing a gloating follow-up declaring our post-modern victory in ‘blocking’ the non-existent Islamic cisterns of evil,” Peppiatt wrote. The Press Complaints Commission later ruled the story was inaccurate and misleading.

The reporter also quotes Kelly Brook, who recently complained about the number of fabricated stories she reads about herself on the internet. She said: “There was a story that I’d seen a hypnotherapist to help me cut down on the time I take to get ready to go out. Where do they [journalists] get it from?”

Peppiatt wrote: “Maybe I should answer that one. I made it up. Not that it was my choice: I was told to.” He said he had “plucked” the story about Brook’s experimentation with hypnotherapy from his imagination, adding: “Not that it was all bad. I pocketed a £150 bonus.”

In a list of “my other earth-shattering exclusives” for the Star, Peppiatt recalls producing articles about Michael Jackson, the pop star Robbie Williams and Katie Price which he said had no factual basis.

He also admits making up a story suggesting that Matt Lucas was on suicide watch following the death of the comedian’s former civil partner. Lucas won substantial damages in court. Peppiatt criticises the Star’s editorial judgment in his letter, accusing it of hypocrisy, and “arranging the day’s news based on the size of the subjects’ breasts”.

He adds: “On the awe-inspiring day millions took to the streets of Egypt to demand freedom, your paper splashed on: JORDAN … THE MOVIE. A snub to history? Certainly,” he writes. “An affront to Journalism? Most definitely.”

As a young reporter desperate to make his name in Fleet Street, Peppiatt concedes he took to his commissions “with gusto”, but now questions the ethics of what he was required to do, suggesting he was at times promoting an anti-Muslim agenda.

“On order I dressed up as John Lennon, a vampire, a Mexican, Noel Gallagher, St George (twice), Santa Claus, Aleksandr the Meerkat, the Stig, a transvestite, Alex Reid. When I was ordered to wear a burqa in public for the day, I asked: ‘Just a head scarf or full veil?’ Even after being ambushed by anti-terror cops when panicked Londoners reported ‘a bloke pretending to be a Muslim woman’, I didn’t complain.

“Mercifully, I’d discovered some backbone by the time I was told to find some burqa-clad shoppers (spot the trend?) to pose with for a picture [with me] dressed in just a pair of skin-tight M&S underpants.”

Peppiatt’s letter concludes by criticising Desmond for not providing greater resources. “When you assign budgets thinner than your employee-issue loo roll there’s little option but for Daily Star editors to build a newspaper from cut-and-paste jobs off the Daily Mail website, all tied together with gormless press releases.

“But when that cheap-and-cheerful journalism gives the oxygen of publicity to corrosive groups like the EDL … it’s time to lay down my pen.”

The Daily Star rejected Peppiatt’s claims, implying he may hold a grudge against his employer after being “passed over” for several staff positions. It said: “Regarding the paper’s coverage of Islam, he never voiced any disquiet over the tone. For the record, the Daily Star editorial policy does not hold any negativity towards Islam and the paper has never, and does not endorse, the EDL.”[Peppiatt] refers to a Kelly Brook story – in fact he approached and offered the newspaper that story, vouched for its accuracy, and then asked for and received an extra freelance fee for doing so,” the statement said.

The Star also claimed that Peppiatt had been warned by senior reporters after suggesting he would make up quotes.

66 Comments For This Post

  1. mindy1 Says:

    Ugh, this is why I hate trash magazines. They make up their own crap and get away with it DX

  2. Mosizzle Says:

    Haha! JihadWatch used the toilet story.

    But it gets worse. The guy’s full letter is worth the read.

    “Not that my involvement in stirring up a bit of light-hearted Islamaphobia stopped there. Many a morning I’ve hit my speed dial button to Muslim rent-a-rant Anjem Choudary to see if he fancied pulling together a few lines about whipping drunks or stoning homosexuals.”

    Didn’t we say that Anjem Choudary is exploited by the media to spread anti-Muslim hatred?

  3. muhammad 'abd-al haqq Says:

    “Didn’t we say that Anjem Choudary is exploited by the media to spread anti-Muslim hatred?”

    LOL. We sure did Mosizzle!

    Allahu A’lam
    ———————————

    “This sacred knowledge shall be borne by reliable authorities from each generation, who will preserve it from the distortions of extremists, the plans of the corrupt and the false explanations of the ignorant.” (Narrated mursal by Al-Bayhaqi in Kitab al-Madkhal on the authority of Ibrahim bin ‘Abd al-Rahman al-’Udhri.)

  4. Disillusioned Citizen Says:

    Once again, my point being proven: Islamophobes using women as objects in their own lives and turning around and accusing Muslims of mistreating women. This guy, Desmond, clearly supports the EDL (an organization that claims to be supportive of women’s rights in opposition to Muslims) but at the same time runs porn magazines?

    Have I beaten this to death yet?

  5. Anj Says:

    It’s funny how the media muddle the information.
    Reporter to Muslim on the street: what do you think of anjem choudry
    Muslim on the street: who? Never heard of him!
    Reporter: does this photo ring a bell?
    Muslim: that guy! He is a maniac, thankfully there are only a handful! They spout off but are not dangerous!

    News the same night: ” the voice of British Muslims, mr anjem choudry!”

    It happens all the time.

  6. RDS Says:

    Lol @ old news. Try the similarly-themed TabloidWatch or its blogroll links (like MailWatch or Enemies of Reason) for blogs exposing the dirt on UK tabloids. Been reading up on them for some time and I have to say, UK tabloids are a nasty bunch.

  7. AD Says:

    I just saw a show on link tv called Orwell tolled in his grave about the media if you all can watch this I would advised to watch this program I wont even watch CNN anymore .

  8. Slevdi Davoteca Says:

    @Mosizzle – I followed your link to jw and they seem to have covered the accurate story as published by the BBC and Telegraph, not the made up version by the Star.

  9. Mosizzle Says:

    They used the same story with the added Islamophobia courtesy of the Daily Mail instead. The shopping centre added two squat toilets — one for men and one for women. That was the accurate story. Often, old fashioned South Asians are used to these rather than the usual toilets so the shopping centre bosses decided to add them in. The story wasn’t made up, it was covered in a sane and rational manner in the BBC and the Telegraph as well as other respected newspapers.

    The Daily Mail, in true tabloid fashion, sensationalised the story and made it seem like all the toilets had been replaced and everyone is going to have to use them, in the same way as the Daily Star. Needless to say, that was total BS.

    But JW used the Daily Mail version (as bad as the Daily Star — both lame and often Islamophobic tabloids) probably for this reason, because all of the common sense had been filtered out of the story. The Daily Star writer has confessed that he twisted the story. Daily Mail hasn’t but it did exactly the same.

    Don’t believe me? First sentence:

    “For centuries, the great British loo has been a matter of envy to the rest of the world…Now, however, that could be about to change.”

    Yup. You heard it, we pesky Mooslims have somehow destroyed centuries of British culture by having 2 squat toilets alongside the conventional ones in one shopping centre, a fact that both the Mail and JW conveniently forgot to emphasise.

    So yes, JW used a distorted version of the story to maximise the shockingness of the “Dhimmitude”. It just so happened that they used one tabloid over another.

  10. Khushboo Says:

    Wow! the lengths JW would stoop to literally..Squat toilets..*shakes head*

  11. NassirH Says:

    Spencer’s “reporting” is inherently biased and inaccurate, because his only goal is to connect the story with Islam negatively. The end result is absurd claims that his credulous cult-like fans take for fact, like the following:

    “I have nothing against you guys. I’m religious, too. I’m Muslim.” He doesn’t seem to have mentioned the Qur’an’s designation of the Jews as the worst enemies of the Muslims (5:82). However, the thugs’ retailing of the antisemitic caricature that “Jews have money” indicates that he has been drinking from the poisoned wells of antisemitism, and given the one attacker’s proud self-identification as a Muslim, probably the antisemitism of his acquaintance has been Islamic. “‘Jews have $’: Yeshiva thugs,” by Jamie Schram and Chuck Bennett in the New York Post, September 17:

  12. Cynic Says:

    Yeah, because all Muslims have secret head-chopping fetishes…turned on by the burning of Quarts. Right.

  13. Cynic Says:

    Qurans*

  14. Mosizzle Says:

    “you don’t need to make up anti Muslim stories”

    Then why do you make them up? Obviously, Islamophobes are so desperate that they have to resort to outright lying.

  15. corey Says:

    then there is anti muslim paranoia that often comes with islamaphobia http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT4BLboZT38

  16. muhammad 'abd-al haqq Says:

    John: “you don’t need to make up anti Muslim stories. READ ALL ABOUT IT “Muslims chop peoples heads off because somebody else burns a book” There’s one a day. Come on Pastor Jones burn more korans show these people up for what they are.”

    Mosizzle: “Then why do you make them up? Obviously, Islamophobes are so desperate that they have to resort to outright lying.”

    Contrary to what John believes about “JihadWatch” and their “accurate reporting”, and despite the daily police blotter propaganda making it seem as though that is the only thing going on in the world. And despite trying to link all this to Islam and the Qur’an those of us in the real world see through these obvious underhanded tactics. Case and point:

    Translating Jihad is at it again. He has declared, per his translation that some American Muslim jurists have issued a fatwa against democracy, using a very misleading title. In actuality the text of the fatwas, which he posted shows that the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America is merely highlighting the differences between Shura and democracy, in effect highlighting the differences between Islamic democracy and Western secular democracy. it is not a condemnation of democracy itself as this quote demonstrates:

    “But democracy gives free reign to the authority of the Ummah, and puts no ceiling on it. The law is the expression of its will, and if the law says it, the conscience must be silent! A constitutionalist even said: “We have departed from the divine right to rule for kings, and replaced it with the divine right to rule for parliaments!” The shari’a, on the other hand, differentiates between the source of the legal system and the source of the political authority. The source of the legal system is the shari’a, while the source of the political authority is the Ummah. Meanwhile democracy makes the Ummah the source of both. On my website there is a book named “Political Pluralism.” If you review it, it will you benefit you in regards to this topic, Allah-willing. Allah Almighty is all-powerful, all-knowing.”

    The people are the source of the political authority.

    Allahu A’lam
    ———————————

    “This sacred knowledge shall be borne by reliable authorities from each generation, who will preserve it from the distortions of extremists, the plans of the corrupt and the false explanations of the ignorant.” (Narrated mursal by Al-Bayhaqi in Kitab al-Madkhal on the authority of Ibrahim bin ‘Abd al-Rahman al-’Udhri.)

  17. Khushboo Says:

    John, you do realize that your idol crazy Terry is indirectly responsible for deaths right? He’s been warned by the State Dept. and higher ups what would happen and yet he still did it. He can hide behind his Freedom of Speech card, but what he did was evil and deliberate. He’s no different from a terrorist. Shame on him and shame on you for backing him up!

  18. Mosizzle Says:

    Khushboo, sometimes the extremists who do these kind of things are absolutely stupid. The Quran was ‘executed’ for inciting murder. And to protest that they commit murder? Seriously, wth?

    And no, John, that is not an invitation for you to jump in, blame this on Islam and “uncivilised Moslems”.

    When Terry Jones knew this would happen, why do it? I mean, we can’t blame him for the killings, but seriously Jones, why? He knows that some people will not respond well to this news. Shouting fire in a crowded theatre– or is that shouting “Allahu Akbar” in a busy airport?

    Still, in the history of over-actions, the actions of the Afghan protestors is minor. France invaded Algeria simply because their ambassador was hit by a fly whisk. :D

  19. NassirH Says:

    John:

    “you don’t need to make up anti Muslim stories.”

    Best tell that to the loons. Remember the time they were exposed en masse after fabricating a story? They claimed that there was a mass child wedding in Gaza, which of course was a completely made up claim. When ordinary people started noticing, they either quietly deleted it from their websites (e.g. Robert Spencer of JihadWatch), or they went into conspiracy mode, claiming that the dastardly ibrul media was covering up for the “Gaza pedophiles.” It was embarrassing for the Islamophobes, but they simply shrugged it off and continued to misrepresent or completely fabricate stories relating to Islam or Muslims. The story about a Christian man who prayed a plane is a recent example (Spencer also quietly deleted that one from his website). There’s also “al-Mutarjim” of Translating Jihad, who lies about the content of fatwas. You would think if Muslims are so undeniably evil then Islamophobes wouldn’t feel the need to lie about them.

  20. Suleyman Says:

    Mosizzle and Khusboo, I don’t think the actions of the Afghans can be blamed on Pastor Terry, because the moral code of a Muslim does not depend on what his/her adversary is doing. Massacring innocent UN workers for the actions of an evil man, is no justification. Indirectly you are supporting their actions, by saying, don’t burn the Quran or this is what you will get.

    This is the line that Al Qaeda use. Their low down evil moral code depends on twisting Islam and pandering to their enemies.

    What the Afghani’s did was wrong. What Pastor Terry did was wrong, but he is not a Muslim, so don’t judge him as you would them.

    Sometimes, I think Dan is right, there is too much apologising for Muslim crimes by Muslims instead of condeming the crimes, we excuse them.

    Dan, my sympathies. I don’t agree with all you say, but you’re absolutely right about Muslims pandering to extremists and excusing their behaviour, even if it’s done indirectly.

  21. Suleyman Says:

    Dan you are right. Dont’ stop condemning evil Muslims, just because Christians and others are doing evil too. Our moral code is supposed to trump all others, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for what Afghan extremists did. They should be rounded up and beheaded for slaughtering innocent people. Khushboo and Mosizzle should hang their heads in shame.

  22. Mosizzle Says:

    Suleyman,

    “Mosizzle and Khusboo, I don’t think the actions of the Afghans can be blamed on Pastor Terry”

    I made that quite clear. We can’t blame Terry Jones for the actions of stupid Muslim protestors worldwide who think they can defend the Quran by killing people. I was merely agreeing with Khushboo that Terry Jones is also stupid, as he was well aware that this would be the reaction of some people. Obviously, his actions in no way justify the extreme reaction of Afghan protestors who have murdered innocent people. I did say that they were “absolutely stupid” and unaware that they’re actions are actually confirming Terry Jones’ conclusion at his trial. I don’t know what happened while you were reading my comment, but you seemed to have ignored pretty much everything I said.

    “Khushboo and Mosizzle should hang their heads in shame”

    So quick to pass judgement on your fellow Muslims for something they did not even say? Perhaps you should hang your head in shame! In shame!

  23. Suleyman Says:

    and Loon Watch, I think you had better start a separate website that exposes how Muslims cover up, sanitise, shift blame for the crimes of Muslims, instead of condemning them. Whether you like it or not, this is a serious problem. We cannot admit the the crimes of a Muslim without blaming someone else for provoking them. Yeah right! As if we were not blessed WITH THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE. Muslims are not supposed to judge non Muslims by our standards. Muslims laws are for Muslims only. How many American Muslims have publicly demanded that the perpetrators of these massacres be brought to justice? NONE I bet. How many have attempted to shift the blame to Pastor Terry? Oh plenty!

  24. Mosizzle Says:

    *Yawn* I hereby condemn the actions of the Afghan protestors. Happy? See my above comment about how badly you misrepresented my comment.

    I was actually reading Jihadwatch and somehow they seem to have made exactly the same points you have. I’m not disagreeing with what you said but it seems suspicious… ;)

  25. Suleyman Says:

    I was merely agreeing with Khushboo that Terry Jones is also stupid, as he was well aware that this would be the reaction of some people.

    Well lookee, Khushboo has a pretty low opinion of Afghans it seems. Were they not blessed with a brain? can they not judge right from wrong? This sounds insidiously like those men who say, uncovered women are asking for rape, Yeah right! as if they have no prohibitions on looking at uncovered women. They conveniently forget that.

    she was justifying thuggish behaviour, the same behaviour that leads to them, ENFORCING their misogynistic interpretation of Islam on those who do want it. Just as they should not impose their interpretation on those who do not want to follow it, they should not impose it on Christians who want to provoke a reaction from extremists as fodder for their own cause.

    Maybe Khushboo should be asking, Why did the Afghan extremists respond to the provokation by playing into Pastor Terry’s hands. Had they kept quiet, and thought, “oh well, he is a kaffir, they don’t know better”

  26. Khushboo Says:

    WTH! Sillyman, you must be new here. We’ve condemned terrorists many times. No way have I ever ever ever supported what terrorists have done. In fact I was comparing Terry Jones to a Terrorist b/c he was WARNED, not by me, but by GOV’T. and the GENERAL Petraeus not to burn Quran because it would only provoke the crazies. Despite that, crazy Terry burned it and LOOK WHAT HAPPENED! Reread my post or perhaps you deliberately needed an excuse to jump on me.

    It was easy to understand what Mosizzle said. How could you misinterpret that?

    You owe us an apology!

  27. Mosizzle Says:

    No comment on how you misrepresented my comment? No? Thought not.

    Do we have a repeat of what “Harry Guggen” tried on the other thread? I don’t know.

  28. Suleyman Says:

    If Jihad Watch agree with what I said it doesn’t necessarily mean they are wrong. And just because they think Muslims should condemn the Afghani’s isn’t a license for Spencer haters (of which I am one) to do the opposite and blame Pastor whatever. Jihad Watch is right about that. For different reasons though. My reasons is that Muslim moral code is superior to all, just because Pastor whatever burns a religious text doesn’t mean we comit a murder. We do what we are supposed to do, when confronted by ignorant kuffar. (try to reason with them, then remain silent)

    Stop pandering to Jihad Watch. I aint’ gonna change what I say, even if Spencer agrees with me.

  29. Mosizzle Says:

    “just because Pastor whatever burns a religious text doesn’t mean we comit a murder”

    I said that! Please stop playing childish games.

    You misrepresented my comment. And now you are evading the topic. I have condemned the actions of the protestors. If you were genuine, you would have accepted your mistake and apologised by now.

    If you can offer this thread nothing but baseless accusations, then go away.

  30. Mosizzle Says:

    Me: “We can’t blame Terry Jones for the actions of stupid Muslim protestors worldwide who think they can defend the Quran by killing people.”

    Somehow, newbie Suleyman got the idea that I think Terry Jones is to blame for the violence. Looks like someone forgot his reading glasses…

  31. Farlowe Says:

    I am going to put Terry Jones moustache on trial for crimes against fashion.
    Same goes for Trump’s haircut. I wish these guys photos would stop appearing on news reports.

  32. Mosizzle Says:

    Lol. Sentence the thing to “death by Gillette”.

  33. Khushboo Says:

    Suley, you’re assuming that these extremists have a Muslim moral code? For real?! Isn’t it obvious that they’re not going by what Muslim moral code?? These guys are terrorists! They’re not religious!

    and yes, I still blame Terry Jones for provoking these terrorists into INDIRECTLY killing UN staffers. The terrorists are pissed and needed an excuse to kill and Terry Jones happily provided them with one. I’m sure he got what he wanted: to prove his so-called point but he doesn’t understand that majority of Muslims would condemn this act and this act is unIslamic. I don’t know how he can live with himself.

    and yes the Muslim extremists are definitely to blame for killing…happy now? Was that clear enough?

  34. Khushboo Says:

    correction: blame Terry for Indirectly killing UN staffers.

  35. Suleyman Says:

    Khushboo said Suley, you’re assuming that these extremists have a Muslim moral code? For real?! Isn’t it obvious that they’re not going by what Muslim moral code?? These guys are terrorists! They’re not religious! Typical apologist cover up. Why did Mohammed (PBUH) warn the Ummah against extremism if extremists do not have a Muslim moral code? Could it be because he didn’t want his followers to apologise for them? Or did he want us to pretend they were non Muslims?

    Another problem we have with apologists is that when a Muslim does something wrong he becomes “not religious”. Whether they are not religious by Khushboo’s standards is not the point and really very irrelevant. What is relevant is they do it in the name of Islam, which obligates every Muslim to either stand with them or disavow them and call for justice. Silence is not an option when a crime is done in the name of Islam. Apologists will never call Muslims criminals, they will either say they are “non Muslims”, “non religious” or they will call tools of something or other, Thus, the criminals like the Afghanis know their legion of apologists will cover their crimes worldwide, or look for a way to blame someone else (they become agents of Crusaders or pseudo Zionists).

    The Afghan Taliban are Muslims whether Khushboo likes it or not. They comitted this crime in the name of Islam which makes their moral code Muslim, this obligates Muslims worldwide to either stand with them, or call it an abuse of Islam. Otherwise they will continue to abuse Islam knowing Khushboo and her worldwide family of iresponsible apologists will apologise for them

  36. Sam Seed Says:

    @Suleyman, I didn’t want to butt in but you are clearly wrong in your assertion that Mosizzle and Khushboo are apologists for the crimes of some Taliban Muslims.You do realise these Afghan Taliban are tribal people and have that sort of mentality (because they are at war).

    Show me in the Quran where this action of the Afghans is justified. No one is pretending that they were not Muslims or that the killings were justified in any way. But you have to agree that the media’s coverage of the Quran burning event by Pastor Terry Jones did provoke the killings of these innocent people. If the Afghans didn’t know about this event there wouldn’t be this grudge.

    And this bit at the end of your last comment “..Apologists will never call Muslims criminals…” Exactly which apologist are you referring to?Where is the evidence to to suggest your claim?

    And you agree with a guy who hates all things Pakistan? Marvellous, this could the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

  37. Dan Says:

    Tonight, the governor of Balkh province, of which Mazar-i-Sharif is the capital, is telling the international media that the men who sacked the UN compound were Taliban infiltrators. That’s rubbish. Local clerics drove around the city with megaphones yesterday, calling residents to protest the actions of a small group of attention-seeking, bigoted Americans. Then, during today’s protest, someone announced that not just one, but hundreds of Korans had been burned in America. A throng of enraged men rushed the gates of the UN compound, determined to draw blood. Had the attackers been gunmen, they would likely have been killed before they could breach the compound.

    Anyone else here think the clerics who incited the provocation should also be executed? After all, they seem to have no problem calling for the execution of rape victims, so why not give them a taste of their own medicine?

    @Suleyman: Mosizzle and Khushboo are far from Taliban sympathizers bro.

  38. Mosizzle Says:

    Suleyman, we agree with you that these criminals were wrong to do so and that they should be punished for their crime. You’re the one who has misrepresented our comments and made wild accusations, so you should apologise.

    Your obsession with attacking people on his thread, rather than making a general point is worrying…

  39. Mosizzle Says:

    Dan, I heard one of the clerics at the Blue Mosque called a mob of 4000 to violence. But when he was asked by the media, he said that it was some other Taliban cleric…

    Sure. We believe you. ;)

    “Anyone else here think the clerics who incited the provocation should also be executed?”

    I think it’s about time Muslim countries made laws against inciting violence. At the moment, anyone can announce someone to be “Wajib-Ul-Qatl” during a Khutba and the mob just go on a frenzy. It may not happen all the time, but it shoudn’t ever happen. Khutbas aren’t even supposed to be about announcing some hit list or making a political speech…

    It’s impractical to punish the crowd, so the government can only punish the Imam who made the speech. From an Islamic perspective, he has no authority to say stuff like that.

  40. Dan Says:

    Honestly Mosizzle, I can understand why Arab countries only allow state-appointed imams and khutbahs. If Pakistan and Afghanistan had state-appointed imams and khutbahs, perhaps such fanaticism would not be widespread.

    Out of all the Muslim countries in the world, only Afghanistan and Pakistan and their leaders brought up Terry Jones, while the rest of the world ignored him. Why do we like to make ourselves look like barbarians? I said this before and I’ll say it again: the greatest threat to Islam does come from within.

  41. RDS Says:

    Imagine this scenario.

    Your country has been torn in sectarian violence for long, and then a group of foreigners, led by United States came in and waged war, on the pretext to free you from oppression. For some time, you hoped that finally, there would be justice and there would be water and electricity running. Instead, they made the most corrupt of men into leaders, the sectarian divide grew larger, and the foreign forces gradually impose harsher and harsher measure. Your parents were searched at gunpoint nightly, your cousin has disappeared, your friend found shot dead, and your sister’s family killed in an airstrike. You try to cling into the faintest hope that maybe, maybe only the soldiers of these foreign forces were “bad”, but their country is not.

    And then, news spread that someone from the US has burned the Holy Book you sincerely believe.

    Anger does not flare up without a cause. Keep this in mind: it’s always easy to blame when you look from the outside. Although the reason for these killings were understandable, this does not, I repeat, does not make them acceptable.

    May God forgive them, for they have acted in error.

  42. Mosizzle Says:

    I think it’s part of a wider anti-American trend. With the recent civilian deaths in drone attacks, the Raymond Davis issue, Iraq & Afghanistan, and general hatred of all things ‘Western’, this was kind of like the ‘final straw’ for some people. Of course, they don’t know that the government condemned Terry Jones. Let’s not forget that the “Islamic” parties in the region can offer people nothing, so they have to emphasise a war between Islam and the West so they can get elected and rescue the Muslims from the “Crusaders”. Most of the Pakistsn protests seem to have been organised by the JUI.

    Many Islamic scholars have actually left such parties because they are far too political. Their focus is now on improving the people themselves, and God will change the rest.

  43. RDS Says:

    Ah yes, third parties shamelessly exploiting on the anger and insecurities that the people have.

    But you don’t have to look far in the nooks and crannies of the internet for all the “see, I told you Islam is barbaric” comments to come out of the woodwork.

    *sigh*, it’s gonna be Jyllands-Posten all over again.

  44. Mosizzle Says:

    “If Pakistan and Afghanistan had state-appointed imams and khutbahs, perhaps such fanaticism would not be widespread.”

    Well, they like to talk about a Khilafah and ironically that was how things worked back then. Only a qualified judge (Qazi) could give a death sentence, rather than some random Maulvis on street corners spraying Takfir all over the place. They know this, but they don’t practice what they preach.

  45. RDS Says:

    That’s assuming a clean, transparent government acting on the interest of the people. A corrupt government worry of dissidence would simply appoint imams and khatibs who are government sycophants.

    So on one hand we have suppression of free speech, and the other extreme, an unchecked extremism. Could there be a good middle ground? A coalition of nongovernmental, but influential board of clerics and imams that issue semi-binding fatwas for local use?

  46. Mosizzle Says:

    In a recent debate on Pakistani TV about the murder of Shahbaz Bhatti, an Islamic scholar reminded everyone that during the time of Caliph Umar, only ~6 people offered fatwas, despite the fact that all the Sahabas had the knowledge that was required. His point was that there should be a central authority, which is independent of the government, that has the power to dish out fatwas and that all other fatwas in the country should be illegal. This would prevent cases like the murder of Salman Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti.

    Sounds good to me. If this council was similar to Pakistan’s existing (but useless) Council of Islamic Ideology where there is a good mix of traditional scholars, former judges as well as more reform-minded Imams. If it’s going to get hijacked by the corrupt government or illiterate extremists, then forget it.

  47. RDS Says:

    The last thing to remember is for the clerics to never forget the situation on the ground, as not to be the stereotypical out-of-touch scholars that does not understand the reality on the ground. Add a checks-and-balances system that make it stand independent from the judicial system (yet also a contributing body) would make it a working model.

    But eh, what do I know. I’m just a lay person here. Allahu A’lam Bish-shawaab.

  48. Khushboo Says:

    Suley, you sound like a typical Islamophobe calling me an “apologist”. I don’t think you’re comprehending what I posted. Did I apologize for what these extremists did?! Did I not say “Muslim extremists”? Was that not good enough for you?? Do you want me to lie and say that they’re religious? Seriously?? Where in the Quran does it say to kill innocent people? They’re not following any moral code! They might think it’s justified in their twisted minds but most of us sane ones know it’s unIslamic.

    I simply explained that they’re ticked off enough already, with so many innocent civilians dying and with what happened recently with the American Kill Team killing civilians for fun, that they just needed an excuse to kill Americans after what crazy extremist Terry did. I was explaining it, not excusing it! I blamed them for murder! How it that being an apologist? You sound like uncle Tom Zuhdi Jasser!

  49. Khushboo Says:

    correction: Did I defend what these extremists did? not apologize UGH

  50. Solid Snake Says:

    “They comitted this crime in the name of Islam which makes their moral code Muslim,”

    Wow, either you do not know the concept of moral code or you are ignorant of the Muslim moral code. Those are the only two reasons I can think of tht would prompt u to make such a baseless statement. It’s actually really an embarressing fallacy, what your saying in a nutshell is that since these people did it in the name of Islam, however that would maybe twisting Hadith/ayat or just yelling Allahu Akbar, that what they are doing is in compliance with Islamic moral code. That’s what u are basically saying. “it makes their moral code Muslim” wow….

  51. Solid Snake Says:

    And no I am not an apologist nor do I sympathize with any form of extermisim or extremists. No man is above the law whether he is a Muslim or Non Muslim. I condem all forms of extermisim and extremists.

    It sure is a pity that we have to throw out such disclaimers on a site dedicated to stopping extremisim, It should be obvious, I guess The loons are out in full force on the threads here.

  52. jacque Says:

    Dan states, “I can understand why Arab countries only allow state-appointed imams and khutbahs. If Pakistan and Afghanistan had state-appointed imams and khutbahs, perhaps such fanaticism would not be widespread.”

    Most Arab countries allow state-appointed imams so that those religious leaders will not say anything bad about the regime. Dictatorships have to be concerned about their image. In Saudi, you can be jailed for making or writing critical comments about the royal family. Saudi uses Islam to control its population.

    Look at one state that did not have state-appointed Mullahs. That would be Iran. The movement against the Shah began by Imams criticizing the regime in the mosques and then it grew from there. The Arabs probably saw this and realized they needed to control the religious leaders in their respective countries.

    As for Afghanistan, how is appointing Imams going to help? Most of the educated class left the country almost fourty years ago. The only religious leaders left are the ones who combine Islam with tribal law that is embedded in the region.

    Though I disagree completely with you on that topic, I fully agree with you on the subject of Terry Jones. I will use the Salman Rushdie angle. By putting a fatwa on his head, Rushdie received a ton of publicity and became famous. That fame made him very wealthy and put him on a pedestal where he did not belong. It would have been better if nothing had been said against him. The Satanic Verses probably would not have sold well and he would have faded into oblivion. The same can be said of Jones. If you don’t give him any attention, he’s nobody, so why make him into a somebody.

  53. Mosizzle Says:

    Wow, that’s 7 commenters so far on this thread that agree that the behaviour of the Afghan protestors was totally unacceptable. Some of the above commenters are completely hostile to the idea that Islam encourages such uncivilised behaviour. How does this go with Robert Spencer’s belief that this is a “Leftist pro-jihad site” made up of “Islamic Supremacists” and “Stealth Jihadis”? Yeah, thanks for bringing this up John.

    A lot of people throw around the extremist label willy-nilly. Let’s reserve it for the true Muslim extremists that pose a threat to Islam in general as well as the countries in which they live.

  54. corey Says:

    besides haven’t heard news of muslims in america rioting in the streets because of what Yosemite sams older cousin did.

  55. corey Says:

    besides I haven’t heard news of muslims in america rioting in the streets because of what Yosemite sams older cousin did.

  56. Suleyman Says:

    Solid Snake Wow, either you do not know the concept of moral code or you are ignorant of the Muslim moral code. Those are the only two reasons I can think of tht would prompt u to make such a baseless statement. It’s actually really an embarressing fallacy, what your saying in a nutshell is that since these people did it in the name of Islam, however that would maybe twisting Hadith/ayat or just yelling Allahu Akbar, that what they are doing is in compliance with Islamic moral code. That’s what u are basically saying. “it makes their moral code Muslim” wow….

    No, I did not say that their actions are within the limits prescribed for Muslims. I said;If they do it in the the name of Islam, it obligates us to either correct them (after giving them a trial and punishment, which in this case merits the death penalty unless the victims family forgives them) or to applaud them.

    Now we can sympathise with Afghani’s because of the occupation, (Russian, then American) and their suffering because of drone attacks, American criminal army tactics, but not their misognyistic tribal ways, expecially if they do it in the name of Islam. It isn’t Islam of course, that is not what I said, but where are the riots condemning them abusing Islam?

    Are you suggesting we should keep quiet, with the byline, “oh they’re tribals, and they are occupied?” To hell with their tribal ways, which are actually forbidden. Wasn’t tribalism outlawed by Al Rasool (PBUH)? I think it is about time we raised armies ourselves against miscreants like these.

    Just pretending that that their moral code is bankrupt, and giving them a sly pat on the side for their “tribal” ways, with a wink like Sam Seed just did, is not an option.

    KhushbooSuley, you sound like a typical Islamophobe calling me an “apologist”. I don’t think you’re comprehending what I posted. Lookee, Khushboo really does suffer from a bad case of pretending and insisting on what others are what he wants them to be, rather than what they are. I am no more an Islamophobe than Afghan extremists are non Muslims.

  57. Mosizzle Says:

    Let it go, Suleyman, we all agree that what the Afghan protestors did was wrong. We may have different opinions as to what is responsible (personally I blame the people who were inciting the violence in Afghanistan), but that is less important.

    We, as Muslims, are outraged that such atrocities are being committed in the name of our religion.

  58. Suleyman Says:

    What makes the Afghan attacks particulary heinous, Sam Seed, is that the government actually saw fit to publish pastor terry Jones video on the news. Something the MSM in the west did not do. The Aghan govt itself is responsible for this if the media is state controlled. Hamid Karzai should be in the dock if Afghan media is state controlled., along with the men who comitted this crime, and all those who were inciting it. The strictest punishments should go to those who were doing it in the name of Islam to deter Islam being abused. Let them comit their crimes in the name of their ugly, misogynistic worse than animal like tribal culture.Not in the name of Islam.

  59. Solid Snake Says:

    “If they do it in the the name of Islam, it obligates us to either correct them (after giving them a trial and punishment, which in this case merits the death penalty unless the victims family forgives them) or to applaud them.”

    yes I completely agree that we should punish them. As for your classifying Muslims into two groups I disagree: there are those who cannot act for many reasons, those who can act but do not, those who do act, those who ignore it, and those who applaud it. As for those who cannot act, they should make dua for the Muslims to be guided. Those who can act but do not we should advise them and encourage them to fight extremism. We should pray for the safety for those that do combat extremism.

    Again I disagree with you on another point. We all know that there are certain actions that can cause you to leave the fold of Islam. And killing inoccent Muslims and non Muslims is one of those actions. So yes we can label them as kuffaar they have spilt the blood and took the lives that Allah has prohibited from being take .

    As for ” It isn’t Islam of course, that is not what I said, but where are the riots condemning them abusing Islam?”
    Riots are forbidden in Islam due to the destruction, chaos, and injuries that occur as a result. If you mean where are the voices speaking out against extremist Muslims then for a start you have the writers and readers of loonwatch, scholars worldwide from Saudi Arabia to North America. I mean it’s obvious no one is applauding them or making excuses for them. Understanding the particulars of their situation as some readers have commented is another thing entirely.

  60. muhammad 'abd-al haqq Says:

    “Just pretending that that their moral code is bankrupt,”

    Sometimes I wish this site had a Private Message feature so that people could deal with their personal beefs.

    Suleyman I am sure you understand takfir. Because we are very reluctant to declare someone who says “La ilaha il Allah, Muhammad rasul Allah”, and “I am Muslim”, out of the fold of Islam for their behavior, some Muslims don’t like to hear the extremists being labeled “not religious” or even “non-Muslim”. It brings up the ancient debate of whether major sins take one out of the fold of Islam. However, we must be very careful to scrutinize if what we say makes it seem like ghuluw(extremism) is legitimately within the limits of Islamically permissible behavior. Ghuluw is a clear indication of moral degradation leading to moral bankruptcy, so we must be careful never to link ghuluw to Islam in any way.

    “Silence is not an option when a crime is done in the name of Islam”

    I agree with you on this, but this is a site dedicated to Islamophobia. As I told Dan, constantly bringing up Muslim crimes on a site like this is counterproductive and it looks like tu quouque deflection.

    Remember two things:

    (1)Explanation is not the same as justification. None of the Muslim posters here has ever justified the crimes committed by Muslims, committed in the name of Islam or not.Just because we give reasons for a behavior in order to bring about an understanding of the cause of that behavior does not mean we support the behavior itself.

    (2)Apologetics is not whitewashing, covering up or lying. The popular vernacular has turned the colloquial meaning of “myth” into “falsehood”, and now “apologetic” is equated with “lie”, both of which are inaccurate. Apologetics is the intellectual defense of a position. Calling someone an apologist, with the negative connotation intended, is the usual smear tactic of the Islamophobes, who rely on negative, differential meanings since the majority of their audiences are average people. Please be careful what we call fellow Muslims just because they disagree with our position. Calling someone a non-Muslim because of their behavior is a bit extreme, but calling their behavior irreligious is not, so labeling someone an apologist because of the latter is a bit inappropriate.

    Allahu A’lam
    ———————————

    “This sacred knowledge shall be borne by reliable authorities from each generation, who will preserve it from the distortions of extremists, the plans of the corrupt and the false explanations of the ignorant.” (Narrated mursal by Al-Bayhaqi in Kitab al-Madkhal on the authority of Ibrahim bin ‘Abd al-Rahman al-’Udhri.)

  61. Slevdi Davoteca Says:

    He is responsible for these murders. Directly.

    He knew that his action of burning the Koran would wind up a percentage of Muslims in the world who would go bonkers and kill people. Yet he still did it. I find that unforgivable, especially in the name of free speech. All rights come with responsibilities.

    We can argue until the cows come home about whether these Muslims should know better or not, but the fact is we all know they don’t. That is why we shouldn’t play with fire like this. The consequences were totally predictable. This man has incited people to violence and people died as a result. He should be arrested and tried for that crime.

  62. Khushboo Says:

    @ Suley, errr…I’m confused. Am I pretending that these MUSLIM extremists were wrong to kill UN staffers?? why don’t you tell me what I’m thinkin since you’re such an expert that you know me better than I know myself. You’re so thick headed that it’s not worth my time arguing with you so I GIVE UP! I would like to move on to other issues please Thank you very much! I can never get my time back. *sigh*

  63. Ahlam Says:

    Terry Jones response.. if there is any… to the murders he is responsible for will probably be along the lines of “Waah Waah Wahh… I’m so depressed by what I did.. I am going to go jump off my wallet!” *facepalm*

  64. jacque Says:

    Muslim tries to help out Jews against Christian fundamentalists.

  65. corey Says:

    chances of this story being on jihad watch would be very slim unless they can somehow spin it as being somehow a “stealth jihad” tactic.

  66. Khushboo Says:

    ^thanks for the info. I’m glad CNN covered this atleast.

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here
Advertise Here