Slashdot Mirror


Fourth Bangladeshi Blogger Murdered

An anonymous reader writes: In May we discussed news that three bloggers in Bangladesh had been targeted for brutal killings in recent months over what they wrote online. Now, the local branch of Al-Qaeda is claiming responsibility for a new victim, blogger Niloy Chakrabarti. "The journalist had contributed to the humanist blogging platform Mukto-Mona. His posts often were critical of Islam. Mukto-Mona was established by another blogger—Avijit Roy, who was murdered in Bangladesh in February." His murder was as ghastly as the previous three — six men broke into his apartment with machetes. Rights groups are condemning the killings and demanding that the government put a stop to them. "There is little doubt that these especially brutal killings are designed to sow fear and to have a chilling effect on free speech. This is unacceptable."

14 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Justifiable under ISLAM by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Depending upon how one reads the first commandment " take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If a life manual needs to be interpreted, and if interpretations range from peace to brutal killings, then I think we can all agree that the manual is very poorly written. Why doesn't this ring alarm bells in muslims' minds? Aren't they one bit open to the possibility that they got tricked into believing in a book full of made up stuff?

    2. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      Try not treating "murder" and "kill" as synonyms and things will become clearer.

      I'm not arguing from some arcane theological perspective, but from the simple fact that words have meanings, and in this case they aren't the same.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry mods but this is NOT insightful as the poster does not understand how the Koran works.

      The Koran is NOT the bible, it does not have any conflicting passages, why? Because Muhammad had the benefit of seeing how the other religions worked and came up with a frankly brilliant little fix for all the conflicts. Its really very simple...if a rule comes later that conflicts with a rule that comes earlier then the latter one supersedes the earlier one which takes care of conflicting passages.

      Of course this also blows the whole "religion of peace" BS as the Hadiths that have come for the last 200 years have been "jihad jihad jihad" and since they came later they supersede the earlier peaceful passages and since Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers to help spread the reach of Sharia this works to their advantage, simply quote the old passages and never mention they were replaced centuries ago by the jihad Hadiths.

      Have you not wondered why these Islam apology groups can say they "condemn terrorism " or a specific terrorist but never come out and say this terrorism has broken the laws of Islam and should treat those that commit terrorism as not a follower of Islam? Its simple, its because they can lie to unbelievers but NOT about fellow Muslims and since they know the little rule about latter superseding they would be bearing false witness against groups that was in reality doing exactly what the faith tells them to, waging jihad.

      I would urge everybody who has any doubts read up a little on Wahhabism, a good place to start would be this this frontline article and then read up about the Sunni and Shia, they all do the same thing and all follow the supersedes rule which means you can really only look at the last 200 years worth of hadiths as everything else is treated as history, and what are all the new hadiths? Jihad jihad jihad.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Lacking such faith/trust, you're left with the options of being the doomed moral victor or seeking to be the biggest bully around.

      Religion, is so damn awesome, because it allows you to perform crimes against humaniy in the name of religion - which is somehow good - which would just be crimes against humanity if not done in the name of religion - which is bad.

      Obligitory song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by unixisc · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is also the big contrast in the way the founders of most religions lived and what they taught - whether it was Abraham, Moses, Christ, Zarathustra, Buddha, Confucious et al - vs Mohammed. All of the first group were essentially philosophers/preachers who came up w/ a set of rules reining in their followers. Mohammed, by contrast, was the most extreme of everyone. He had several critics of himself murdered, including a 90+ year old man and a pregnant woman, forced his son to divorce his wife so that he could have her for himself, married a 6 year old and thighed her at 9, broke agreements after 10 years...

      All this might be merely history, except that Mohammed is held high in Islam as 'al Insan al Kamil' - the perfect man, or 'uswa hasana' - a model of conduct FOR ALL TIME, not just the 7th century AD. In fact, even what ISIS does today is less deranged than what he used to do. That's why the attempts of everybody - Democrat OR Republican - to insulate any opposition to Jihad from the charges of opposing Islam itself - is not only doomed to failure, but counter productive.

      TFA, these bloggers who get murdered are idiots for doing their work in Bangladesh itself, when that country is a major hub of Jihadists. Avijit Roy, for instance, was an Australian resident who visited Dacca and got murdered there. I don't think those idiots are much different from the journalists who went to Syria or Iraq to cover the civil wars there, and got beheaded by ISIS.

    6. Re:Justifiable under ISLAM by Mal-2 · · Score: 2

      It's unfortunate that many people won't listen to "outsiders", necessitating a physical presence for these bloggers if their word is to carry any weight whatsoever. Their credibility is predicated on being there. Telling them to just "be somewhere else" is tantamount to saying "just shut up, you can't win".

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  2. Re:Confusion by dskoll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    atheism is really just the name for their hate of christians

    Nonsense. I'm atheist and dislike all religions, though I confess I have a special hatred for Islam in particular, given the disgusting behavior of a small minority of its adherents and the silence and blame-deflecting of most of its adherents.

    Unfortunately, it's true that a lot of leftists cry about "Islamophobia" and that's too bad. Islam is a fascist ideology diametrically opposed to everything leftists say they hold dear, so I really can't understand how they can maintain the cognitive dissonance.

  3. Re: Justifiable under CHRISTIANITY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If a life manual needs to be interpreted, and if interpretations range from peace to burning in hell for eternity, then I think we can all agree that the manual is very poorly written. Why doesn't this ring alarm bells in Christians' minds? Aren't they one bit open to the possibility that they got tricked into believing in a book full of made up stuff?

  4. Re:A rush to judgement by Carcass666 · · Score: 2

    Thanks for that out of context quote. You can read the entire speech here, which includes the following:

    True democracy demands that citizens cannot be thrown in jail because of what they believe, and that businesses can be opened without paying a bribe. It depends on the freedom of citizens to speak their minds and assemble without fear, and on the rule of law and due process that guarantees the rights of all people.

    And passage that has you concerned...

    The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.

    Doesn't quite read like the call for the worldwide caliphate you imply.

  5. Re:Confusion by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    An interesting choice of word: "islamophobia", i.e. an irrational fear of Islam. Personally that belief leaves me with a mix of disdain and rational fear. Read the qur'an. Read what Islam's prominent and well respected scholars have to say about the right interpretation of its laws. Look at what is going on in every country where Islam is a mainstream religion. Listen to what so-called moderate preachers teach followers in western mosques. We should not fear, judge or condemn every muslim for their faith; like us, most of them are decent folk who just want to get on with their lives. But looking at it as a religious and political system, there's plenty to fear from Islam.

    Starting with fear of erosion of our freedoms. Here in Europe, it is no longer safe to criticize Islam; those who do need fear retribution from fanatics as well as legal prosecution. There's even talk of blasphemy laws, in national as well as the European parliaments.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  6. Re:Confusion by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Republicans who want to ban evolution from schools, kill abortus doctors and who will never allow an atheist to become the President are closer to liberals than Sharia lovers? Give me a break...

    Right, because they are representative of "Republicans" enough for someone like you to say that's what that party is all about are just like people who vote Democrat, but who are espouse pure, confiscatory communism or burning down medical research facilities are representative of "Democrats" enough to say that's what that party is all about. Right? Right. Sure.

    The difference is that, unlike ISIS, there aren't tens of thousands of insane anti-vaccine lefties (or righties, whatever - they both exist) rounding up school nurses and lopping their heads off for YouTube videos. There aren't squads of militant atheists burning Unitarians (or Buddhists or anyone else) alive in cages in Ohio. There aren't fiscal conservatives planting IEDs along school bus routes to kill dozens of people at a time to show how upset they are that some school districts have officials who write contracts with corrupt public employee unions. There aren't "occupy" groups with enough gumption to do much more than be persistently annoying about the fact they want to shut down businesses of which they disapprove (as opposed to shooting RPGs into the windows of those office buildings).

    No, there's a huge, huge difference between they way people debate and go about resolving their differences in the US, than in places like much of the middle east. And the theocratic thugs who want to run the whole world in that model would be happy to kill you for disagreeing with them. See the difference? I think you're wrong, but I'd buy you a beer to talk about it. They'd kill you for having a beer because Allah doesn't like beer.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  7. Re:Confusion by Barsteward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems like you are lumping all muslims into the "mad nutters of ISIS" category. the majority of muslims are just like the majority of christians and jews whose religion is Abrahamic based, just fine and reasonable. Even though anyone who believes in gods etc are deluded, they can still be reasonable human beings.

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  8. Re:Confusion by scsirob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, sorry, that no longer flies. The 'but there are so many good ones' argument is invalid.

    When a wacko Christian does something wrong and claims his faith, Christians stand up and condemn that person. Just a week ago a nutcase Jew stabbed people at random at the gay parade. His community condemned that act and explicitly mentioned that their own fate was to blame.

    No such thing happens with islam. Every day atrocities are committed in name of islam. There's a billion muslims out there who could stand up and show disgust for the atrocities. Doesn't happen. In fact, a disturbing number of young muslims agree with what IS does and are looking for ways to support or even join them. Until that big majority of silent muslims stand up and condemn their extremists, I lump them all together as followers of a very dangerous ideology that should be fought.

    --
    To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB