<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guardian blogger picks up on &#8220;takfir&#8221; where we left off</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/</link>
	<description>Religion, faith and ethics</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 05:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Guardian praises Hizballah supporter as &#8220;moderate&#8221; because he condemned attacks on Muslims; Reuters jumps on the bandwagon &#124; Islamic Alert - Islamic Alert: Islam and Terrorism In The Daily News. Islamic Jihad, Islamic Terrorism, Islamic Blogs,</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2111</link>
		<dc:creator>Guardian praises Hizballah supporter as &#8220;moderate&#8221; because he condemned attacks on Muslims; Reuters jumps on the bandwagon &#124; Islamic Alert - Islamic Alert: Islam and Terrorism In The Daily News. Islamic Jihad, Islamic Terrorism, Islamic Blogs,</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2111</guid>
		<description>[...] We mentioned your post and linked to the Deoband case on the Reuters religion blog FaithWorld at http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-bl-left-off/ For information on the equally inadequate, if not downright deceptive, Deobandi statement, see [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] We mentioned your post and linked to the Deoband case on the Reuters religion blog FaithWorld at <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-bl-left-off/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008 &nbsp;/03/03/guardian-bl-left-off/</a> For information on the equally inadequate, if not downright deceptive, Deobandi statement, see [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DBooth</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2110</link>
		<dc:creator>DBooth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2110</guid>
		<description>So let me get this straight ... the standard for being a "moderate" in your eyes is so low that it includes a "cleric" who calls terrorist attacks on Israel the "new battle of Khaibar" (after which Muslims massacred, tortured, and sold into slavery the remaining Jews)?

Oh, that's right, he said the opposing sect shouldn't commit mass murder for sectarian reasons.  Wow!  You're right!  What better model is there to hold up to the world?

These transparent attempts to obscure and whitewash true evil have become disgusting.  Mohamed Hilout's comments were right on target.  A true "moderate" would not even need to make such a statement.  Denouncing jihad would preclude takfir.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So let me get this straight &#8230; the standard for being a &#8220;moderate&#8221; in your eyes is so low that it includes a &#8220;cleric&#8221; who calls terrorist attacks on Israel the &#8220;new battle of Khaibar&#8221; (after which Muslims massacred, tortured, and sold into slavery the remaining Jews)?</p>
<p>Oh, that&#8217;s right, he said the opposing sect shouldn&#8217;t commit mass murder for sectarian reasons.  Wow!  You&#8217;re right!  What better model is there to hold up to the world?</p>
<p>These transparent attempts to obscure and whitewash true evil have become disgusting.  Mohamed Hilout&#8217;s comments were right on target.  A true &#8220;moderate&#8221; would not even need to make such a statement.  Denouncing jihad would preclude takfir.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David T</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2107</link>
		<dc:creator>David T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 09:40:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2107</guid>
		<description>Oh right.

Anybody who thinks that the majority of muslims (and even Islamists) aren't opposed to the takfiris, just has no understanding of Muslim politics.

I think that the point that is more often made is that Islamists manage to get extremely hot and bothered about trivialities such as cartoons, but seem to avoid demonstrations, direct action, and public displays of anger over the slaughter of muslims by other muslims: in Hama in Syria, or Darfur, or elsewhere. 

But Haroon's basic point is a foolish one. He thinks it is remarkable that a Shi'ite Islamist condemns Sunni takfris. That's about as noteworthy as - say - the Rev Iain Paisley condemning the IRA because "hey, they're both Christian organisations".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh right.</p>
<p>Anybody who thinks that the majority of muslims (and even Islamists) aren&#8217;t opposed to the takfiris, just has no understanding of Muslim politics.</p>
<p>I think that the point that is more often made is that Islamists manage to get extremely hot and bothered about trivialities such as cartoons, but seem to avoid demonstrations, direct action, and public displays of anger over the slaughter of muslims by other muslims: in Hama in Syria, or Darfur, or elsewhere. </p>
<p>But Haroon&#8217;s basic point is a foolish one. He thinks it is remarkable that a Shi&#8217;ite Islamist condemns Sunni takfris. That&#8217;s about as noteworthy as - say - the Rev Iain Paisley condemning the IRA because &#8220;hey, they&#8217;re both Christian organisations&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Heneghan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2102</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Heneghan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2102</guid>
		<description>David T, you seem to have missed the point of this post and Haroon's. The issue is not whether condemning takfir is remarkable, unusual, expected or anything else. The point is that media, politicians and commentators outside the Muslim world often say Muslim leaders don't denounce Islamist violence. But many do, and when they do, the story does not get media play outside the region. In this case, we had two such denunciations in as many days, from a leading Sunni seminary in India and a grand ayatollah (therefore Shi'ite) in Lebanon. They were noticed in the Muslim world but not outside.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David T, you seem to have missed the point of this post and Haroon&#8217;s. The issue is not whether condemning takfir is remarkable, unusual, expected or anything else. The point is that media, politicians and commentators outside the Muslim world often say Muslim leaders don&#8217;t denounce Islamist violence. But many do, and when they do, the story does not get media play outside the region. In this case, we had two such denunciations in as many days, from a leading Sunni seminary in India and a grand ayatollah (therefore Shi&#8217;ite) in Lebanon. They were noticed in the Muslim world but not outside.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mohamed Pascal Hilout</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2100</link>
		<dc:creator>Mohamed Pascal Hilout</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2100</guid>
		<description>Dear Mr Heneghan,

I think there is another simple reason : the history !

My Prophet Muhammad and his successors (Califas)left me, the moslem, a big Empire conquered by jihad.

The truth should be to condemn jihad as a mean to convert and do war since the early islam (year 1)until today and also for tomorow

It is the same think with takfir : if you declare jihad to persons who don't believe in Allah, you are ready to kill persons who don't belive in Allah like you do !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mr Heneghan,</p>
<p>I think there is another simple reason : the history !</p>
<p>My Prophet Muhammad and his successors (Califas)left me, the moslem, a big Empire conquered by jihad.</p>
<p>The truth should be to condemn jihad as a mean to convert and do war since the early islam (year 1)until today and also for tomorow</p>
<p>It is the same think with takfir : if you declare jihad to persons who don&#8217;t believe in Allah, you are ready to kill persons who don&#8217;t belive in Allah like you do !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David T</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2098</link>
		<dc:creator>David T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2098</guid>
		<description>You are suggesting that there is something remarkable about condemning takfiris!

Takfirism is very much an aberation within traditional Islamic practice. Schismatic groups of jihadist murderers - from FIS to Al Qaeda - have been keen on it: particularly because it allows you to kill your (Muslim) neighbours who don't want to be ruled by you. 

But there's absolutely nothing remarkable about muslims, or even Islamists, repudiating takfirism. 

Similarly, I don't understand why you, or Haroon, are heartened by Hizbollah's spiritual leader deciding that it is wrong for Sunni Takfiris to murder Shias. What else do you think he would say?

I can think no senior, establishment Muslim clerics who have explicitly sanctioned the murder of other Muslims: even across the sectarian divide. There are certainly mainstream clerics who have encouraged sectarianism, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are suggesting that there is something remarkable about condemning takfiris!</p>
<p>Takfirism is very much an aberation within traditional Islamic practice. Schismatic groups of jihadist murderers - from FIS to Al Qaeda - have been keen on it: particularly because it allows you to kill your (Muslim) neighbours who don&#8217;t want to be ruled by you. </p>
<p>But there&#8217;s absolutely nothing remarkable about muslims, or even Islamists, repudiating takfirism. </p>
<p>Similarly, I don&#8217;t understand why you, or Haroon, are heartened by Hizbollah&#8217;s spiritual leader deciding that it is wrong for Sunni Takfiris to murder Shias. What else do you think he would say?</p>
<p>I can think no senior, establishment Muslim clerics who have explicitly sanctioned the murder of other Muslims: even across the sectarian divide. There are certainly mainstream clerics who have encouraged sectarianism, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fern</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2093</link>
		<dc:creator>fern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:43:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/03/03/guardian-blogger-picks-up-on-takfir-where-we-left-off/#comment-2093</guid>
		<description>Sadly, all the reasons you offered for lack of media play are true. But also items like this don't highlight conflict and drive "eyeballs" and thus are useless to the sensationalist and profit-driven media.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sadly, all the reasons you offered for lack of media play are true. But also items like this don&#8217;t highlight conflict and drive &#8220;eyeballs&#8221; and thus are useless to the sensationalist and profit-driven media.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
