Of course one reason for Ramadan is to give one a sense of sympathy for those less fortunate. Unless, of course, they piss you off, in which case Ramadan puts you into such a bad mood that you kick their teeth in.

Posted by: Karl Pov at September 24, 2008 10:06 AM

Was the homeless man himself a Muslim?

If not, that should send an even louder warning to all of Europe: do you want all of your restaurants and food stores closed between UNTIL sundown? That would seem a very real possibility.

Britain is instituting sharia law, so they might as well say good-bye to afternoon tea, at least during Ramadan.

Posted by: PMK at September 24, 2008 10:07 AM

It's rage displacement again. Like good bloodthirsty fascists, they envied him his freedom, his individualism, in spite of his destitution, and dumped their own self loathing and utter existential failure on him. The lethal dangers of a ginormous inferiority complex masquerading as self righteousness. These people are monstrous and their ideology must be fought and destroyed. The world is in the midst of yet another struggle against pure evil so it's once more into the breach my friends.

Posted by: johndoe at September 24, 2008 10:17 AM

Odd, 'cause Awake posted a link (on another thread) whereby one Muqtader Khan posited that during Ramadan 'One is not allowed to get angry, speak rudely or even think of bad things. The purpose of the month is to take a break from deep entanglements in mundane affairs and make a systematic and concerted effort to reconnect with the divine and work on improving one's personal moral character.'

Islam is so confusing.

Posted by: Vee at September 24, 2008 10:19 AM

PMK: Yes. And in Denmark, people are now told by the "experts" that sharia legislation similar to Britain is inevitable:

http://www.information.dk/166174

Nobody seems to inform the general public that sharia law is supposed to regulate all of society and relegate non-Muslims to a status as second-rate citizens in their own country:

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/07/camel-economics.html

Two men have been killed in street shootings in a row involving a group of second generation immigrants in Copenhagen. An injured gang leader was subsequently freed by a group of masked men from the State Hospital, where he was under police surveillance. Integration Minister Hvilshøj rejected a proposal from Imam Abu Laban that blood money be paid to the family of a man who was killed. Since the shooting of a 24 year old and the wounding of his older brother, there has been much speculation about when revenge would be taken. But according to the Imam, the thirst for revenge could be cooled if 200,000 kroner were paid either by the family of the doorman who fired the shots or by the Islamic community. He said the practice of paying blood money to the family of a deceased person was normal in Muslim societies. Hvilshøj said such action could harm the entire integration process in Denmark. With the Islamic religious community as mediator, the family of the doorman, who fired the killing shot and who is now in prison, is being pressured to move from Copenhagen by the family of the dead man. But the agreement has been met with sharp criticism by experts in criminal law who say it is unlawful coercion and in contravention of the Danish sense of democracy. Only the courts of law can resolve murder cases in Denmark. Meanwhile there is growing fear amongst politicians that the immigrant environment in the Nørrebro area in Copenhagen, which has been unofficially declared an “Islamic state” by some of its residents, is developing into a parallel society where ancient traditions threaten Danish law.

200,000 Danish kroner is approximately the value of 100 camels. Some baffled commentators at first thought it was said tongue-in-cheek when Imam Abu Laban wanted the equivalent of 100 camels to be paid for a man’s life. That’s probably not the case. Ahmad Abu Laban is involved in an international group of Muslims who are known for supporting the anti-Western Islamist struggle of the school of global Jihad. He also tried to block the re-election of the right-wing government in Denmark in the previous election.

The idea of blood money originates from the Koran, 2.178:

O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.

This principle of qisas, “an eye for an eye” in the case of homicide or injury, is taken very literally. A man in Iran was recently sentenced to have his eyes gouged out, after he had destroyed another man’s eyes by throwing acid in his face. However, in accordance with Sharia the family and relatives of a murder victim can choose to claim diyya, blood money, from the murderer, or pardon them, instead of allowing the execution to go ahead. In the case of homicide, the diyya for an adult Muslim man is valued at 100 camels. This is provided the victim's kins agree to accept the blood money. Indemnity (diya) is the payment of blood-money to the next-of-kin or the injured party, as opposed to retaliation (qisas), in which the killer is put to death or has a like injury inflicted on him/her. It depends upon what the family of the deceased or the injured party wants.

The number of 100 camels is based on the example of Muhammad himself, as recorded in sound hadith:

Allah's Apostle did not like that the Blood-money of the killed one be lost without compensation, so he paid one-hundred camels out of the camels of Zakat (to the relatives of the deceased) as Diya (Blood-money).

According to Imam Malik, founder of one of the four law schools of Sunni Islam, diyya is:

one hundred camels for a life, one hundred camels for a nose if completely removed, a third of the blood-money for a wound in the brain, the same as that for a belly wound, fifty for an eye, fifty for a hand, fifty for a foot, ten camels for each finger, and five for teeth, and five for a head wound which laid bare the bone.

Even though camels are the basic unit for calculating blood money, many jurists stipulate that you can pay an amount equal to the worth of 100 camels in other livestock, silver, gold or even cash:

According to Abu Hanifa, Malik, and one of the two views held by Ash-Shafi`i, Diyyah has three equal options; i.e. camels, gold or silver. Ahmad and the two disciples of Abu Hanifa added two more options; i.e. cows and sheep. The texts of the Sunnah clarified that the amount of Diyyah is one thousand dinars. Every dinar now weighs 4. 25 grams and thus the total calculation of the Diyyah would be 4250 grams paid in gold for the blood heirs of the victim. This amount can also be paid in cash according to the gold price.

Imam Abu Laban in Denmark is thus on perfectly sound Islamic grounds in claiming that 200.000 Danish kroner, equal to 100 camels, should be paid to the family of the deceased. Politiken, a left-leaning, intellectual newspaper championing multiculturalism in Denmark, argued that the principle of blood money wasn’t that stupid, and might be worth considering. Several legal experts and University professors claimed that the Islamic concept of blood money wasn’t too different from the Western notion of paying compensation to victims, and shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. Luckily, they were met by an outcry from angry citizens. The ruling Liberal party foreign spokesperson Troels Lund Poulsen urged politicians not to waste time but to boycott discussions with Abu Laban or any other Imams who hold similar opinions. Many wondered what kind of primitive culture had been allowed to settle in their land, and mocked the “camel economics” where a person’s life was equated with a certain number of camels. Apart from the apparent 7th century time warp Muslims seemed stuck in, many commentators missed out on the worst part of the blood money concept: The compensation to be paid is not the same for all people.

The only full members of the Islamic community are Muslim men. All others have fewer rights, due to their religion, sex or slave status. The rates for blood money mirror this apartheid system. A Saudi court ruled that the value of one woman’s life is equal to that of one man’s leg. The court ordered a Saudi to pay a Syrian expatriate blood money after he killed the man’s wife and severed both his legs in a car accident six months earlier. The court ordered $13,300 compensation for the man’s wife, and the same amount for each of his legs.

The fact that a Muslim woman is valued the same as a Muslim man’s leg is appalling. What’s even worse is that the life of an ex-Muslim is worth nothing at all. He is a traitor and can be killed with impunity:

Muhammad is reported to have said: "The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah is not lawful to shed unless he be one of three: a married adulterer, someone killed in retaliation for killing another, or someone who abandons his religion and the Muslim community.'' There is no blood money for killing an apostate.

Ali Sina puts it this way in his essay "Is Political Islam Fascism?":

In the April 9, 2002 issue, The Wall Street Journal published the concept of blood money in Saudi Arabia. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follow.

100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
50,000 riyals if a Christian man
25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman

According to this hierarchy, a Muslim man's life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This hierarchy is based on the Islamic definition of human rights and is rooted in the Quran and Sharia (Islamic law). How can we talk of democracy when the concept of equality in Islam is non-existent?

Ali Sina is right: This kind of thinking is alien to Western notions of individual freedom and equality before the law. The two systems are completely incompatible and cannot coexist.

Posted by: Fjordman at September 24, 2008 10:31 AM

Just a thought: Hey, let's invite several tens (or hundreds) of thousands more of these muslims to live amongst us, in the West, and ratchet our culture back to the 7th century. Perhaps, we could institute public beheadings in the meantime - I don't know; it just seems like a good idea.

(memo to President Bush)

Posted by: HotSpur at September 24, 2008 10:35 AM

Terrific analysis fjordman. I think it ought to have its own posting, IMO.

Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at September 24, 2008 10:43 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:47 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:47 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:48 AM

Eve_anne_gelical: Thank you, but the post is more than three years old. I actually wonder whether Robert linked to it in 2005. I'm not 100% sure.

Posted by: Fjordman at September 24, 2008 10:49 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:49 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:50 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:50 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:51 AM

Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. It has been proved again and again. Muslims need to be more tolerent to other communities for their own good before it is too late. Most memebers of their community do not condemn as slience means that they are actually supporting such dangerous activities. Not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims that is something worth noting.

Posted by: Paulsub at September 24, 2008 10:52 AM

"..both fanatics have explained that they feel their aggression was the self-defense"

there ya go...Muslims claiming to be the victim while they pulverize innocent civilians..

Posted by: pulsar182 at September 24, 2008 11:05 AM

Pulsar: Yes. From a straightforward reading of Islamic texts, Muhammad comes off as an appalling human being. This is what the Iranian ex-Muslim Ali Sina has done in his latest book, Understanding Muhammad, which I hope to publish a review of whenever I have time. Sina demonstrates convincingly that Islam is indeed Muhammadanism, and that Islamic fanaticism comes straight from the example of Muhammad as contained in traditional sources. Everything Muhammad did or didn't do constitutes law.

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Muhammad-Ali-Sina/dp/0980994802/

Understanding Muhammad, by Ali Sina

Page 166:
"He was entitled to marry or have sex out of marriage with as many women as he wished. He could raid civilians, kill unarmed men, loot their properties and take their women and children as slaves and even rape them. He could assassinate his critics and torture them to make them reveal where they hid their treasures. He could have sex with children. He could lie and deceive his opponents. He could massacre his prisoners of war coldbloodedly. None of that bothers his followers. At first they deny all of the above charges vehemently, accusing you of maligning their prophet, but once the evidence is presented, they suddenly change tactics and defend him, justifying the very evil deeds they had outrageously denied. For Muslims, Muhammad's actions are not measured by what we humans know as right and wrong. Rather he is the standard, the measure of right and wrong. As the result, if a crime was committed by Muhammad, that crime becomes a holy deed and is emulated by his followers unquestioningly. Muslims are capable of committing the most atrocious acts of indecency and savagery with a clear conscience, because it is sunnah (performed by Muhammad)."

Also from Islamic texts, it is clear that Muslims were not persecuted in Mecca, but started persecuting others themselves as soon as they were strong enough to do so. In other words: Muhammad and his followers were intolerant even by seventh century Arab standards.

Page 17-18:
"Muhammad's call in Mecca was received with indifference. The Meccans, like most non-Muslims of today, were tolerant of all religions. Religious persecution in those lands was unheard of. Polytheistic societies are generally tolerant by nature. They were offended when Muhammad insulted their gods. Despite that, they did not harm him. Muhammad encouraged his followers to leave Mecca. Naturally the Meccans did not like that idea. The Muslim families were upset, as were the masters of slaves who had converted to Islam. Some of the slaves were caught while trying to escape and were beaten. That was not, of course, religious persecution. The Meccans were simply trying to protect what they considered to be their property. For example, when Bilal was caught, his master, Umaiyah, beat him and put him in chains. Abu Bakr paid his price and he was set free. He was being punished for trying to escape, causing a financial loss to his owner and not for his beliefs."

"A hadith narrates that Omar, prior to his own conversion, had tied up his sister forcing her to leave Islam. Omar was an intolerant and strict man, both before and after his conversion. These stories can hardly be classified as religious persecution. In the Middle East individualism is an alien concept. Women in particular cannot make their own decisions. Even today, Muslim women can be honor-killed if they decide to marry a man of their choice without the consent of their families."

Page 19:
"There is no evidence of any persecution against Muhammad and Muslims in Mecca. Nonetheless, Muslims make such claims because Muhammad has made that claim. Muslims will not doubt anything Muhammad has said. Astonishingly, even some non-Muslim historians who are not sympathetic to Islam have fallen into that trap and have echoed this untruth. Muhammad claimed victimhood, when in reality he was the victimizer. Muslims do the same. Everywhere it is Muslims who are killing, oppressing and persecuting, and yet they are the ones who cry loudest claiming to be victims and oppressed."

Posted by: Fjordman at September 24, 2008 11:22 AM

Gee I hope your blogging about this doesn't place you in a bad light with the PJ overlord.

Thanks for risking your reputation, I hope you won't be punished like some others have.

Posted by: syn at September 24, 2008 11:45 AM

Fjordman,
Thanks for the post.
Do you know if the man who was attacked was a Muslim? (I took Yes to be an answer to the second question about sharia.)

Posted by: PMK at September 24, 2008 11:47 AM

It’s just another Ramadan low blood sugar emotionally agitated outburst of Islamic rage.
Nothing to see here… move along.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at September 24, 2008 11:48 AM

From a Jihad Watch article two years ago:

Beheaded girls were Ramadan 'trophies'

"THREE Christian high school girls were beheaded as a Ramadan "trophy" by Indonesian militants who conceived the idea after a visit to Philippines jihadists, a court heard yesterday.

"[one of the beheaders, named Hasanuddin] allegedly returned from a visit to members of Philippines Islamist group the Moro Islamic Liberation Front with tales of how that organisation regularly staged bombings to coincide with Lebaran, the festival that ends the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

"He later spoke with a preacher in Poso, Central Sulawesi, about whether such a plan could work in Indonesia, but expressed doubt about whether it was appropriate.

?However, after further discussion with friends, he decided that beheading Christians could qualify as an act of Muslim charity.

[so bombings were a little too much, but beheading girls was fine]

PS: The beheaders attached a note to the dead girls -- "The note read: "Wanted: 100 more Christian heads, teenaged or adult, male or female; blood shall be answered with blood, soul with soul, head with head.""

http://jihadwatch.org/archives/013978.php

Posted by: DenverRodeo at September 24, 2008 12:20 PM

They are just beating people to further their movement of "World Peace". After all what good is a "Peace Movement" or a "Religion of Peace" without a few beatings, bombings and beheadings to help them along their path to World Domination.

Posted by: AllahSnackbar at September 24, 2008 12:25 PM

Paulsub, whoever said Islam is the best of religions is ignorant or lying. Everything Islam's followers do is sanctioned by the religion.

Islam is the worst of religions, so it makes sense it's followers are the worst. Cause and effect.

Posted by: Proud Infidel at September 24, 2008 1:04 PM

Robert, the story was reported in one flemish newspaper "het nieuwsblad" and not taken over in the other papers: it is in this link.
http://www.nieuwsblad.be/Article/Detail.aspx?ArticleID=0G20L7K6

The story goes as follows: a homeless person goes to a clinic but he is early so he decides to have a beer. An elderly muslim man living upstairs from the clinic comes down and starts to abuse the man. His son joins in and they beat him up. They throw him on a pile of garbage bags. On the garbage bags the son finds a piece of wood with nails sticking out. Het beats the man with th wood. The homeless man protects his face but the nails make deep wounds and he looses 2 liters of blood. Meanwhile a group of courageous "youth" joins in to beat the helpless man. A bystander calls an ambulance and the police comes to arrest the son only.

Cheers,
Jan

Posted by: Jan at September 24, 2008 1:40 PM

Jan - Thanks for the story. I would call the behavior savage, but that would be a disservice to savages everywhere.

Posted by: tanstaafl at September 24, 2008 2:44 PM

"Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. "Paulsub at 10:52 AM

Never heard that. The correct version be -
"Often said that Islam is the worst and most evil religion in human history and has the worst followers anywhere."

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at September 24, 2008 4:34 PM

"Often said that Islam is the best religion but has the worst followers. "Paulsub at 10:52 AM

Never heard that. The correct version be -
"Often said that Islam is the worst and most evil sect in human history and has the worst followers anywhere."

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at September 24, 2008 4:34 PM

Jan - yes. I followed the links back to an English translation of the original news report.

The victim - given that his name was 'Serge' - was non-Muslim.

Here's the English account that I read.

"The tramp tried to protect his face with his arms {he was being beaten with "an iron bar studded with nails" - dda}, but could not prevent the bully from hitting an artery on his legs.

"Blood poured from the wound.
"An eye-witness called the police.
"Meantime a group of youths {one assumes, Muslim youths} had joined in beating up Serge.

"The victim was immediately taken to hospital.
"He had lost two liters of blood.
"The doctors confirm that it is a miracle that Serge survived his ordeal."

This story is absolutely appalling.

Once tried and sentenced, ALL the Muslims responsible for this vicious attack upon an unarmed non-Muslim Belgian citizen, which can only be described as a lynching with intent to murder, should be stripped of their citizenship (if they have Belgian citizenship) and deported, with their families. Any mosque or Islamic organisation with which they are associated should, ideally, be shut down.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at September 24, 2008 6:28 PM

So, are the Belgians going to adjust their restaurant operating hours for ramadan in deference to their muslim overlords this year?

Muslims must have a different meaning for "peace" compared to the rest of the civilized world.

Posted by: PorkFatRules at September 24, 2008 8:07 PM

Merry Ramadan.... errr... no doesn't sound right.

Happy Ramadan... errr... nope.

Peaceful Ramadan... Dang.

I know.. I know...

Raging Ramadan.

Posted by: senor doeboy at September 24, 2008 8:52 PM

There was also this fron Brussells:

http://www.rtlinfo.be/rtl/news/article/167453/--Il+poignarde+son+fr%C3%A8re+qui+fume+pendant+le+ramadan

This is a babelfish translation from the French:

He stabs his brother who smokes during the Ramadan
VARIOUS FACTS lun Sep 8

The Ramadan is synonymous with fast for the Moslems. But it is not all! There are other abstinences to respect between the rising and the sunset, of which that to smoke. It is to have enfreint this rule that Yassin (17 years) received a stab in the abdomen as a punishment of his/her big brother, Hicham (22 years).

The facts occurred Friday midday. In the family home, in Anderlecht, Hicham surprises his/her little brother with a cigarette with the hand. Its reaction is immediate. It sinks in the kitchen, out of spring with a kitchen knife and plants it in the belly of his/her brother.

The police force was advised facts by a witness who had taken refuge in the house of the neighbors. The victim was hospitalized urgently but its days are not in danger.

When with the “benevolent” big brother, it completes its Ramadan behind the bars. Let us specify however that if it is true that it is interdict to smoke during the Ramadan, all ill deed or violent gesture is not more tolerated by Islam.

Posted by: skevin at September 24, 2008 9:24 PM

Ramadan is the nastiest month in the Middle East. Many Muslims have bombed restaurants for serving food during the ramadan month. They killed the restaurant owners and the customers who all happened to be Christians. The victim’s crime was that they were non Muslims. Many restaurants close during ramadan because they are terrified by the examples they have witnessed and by the threats they receive directly from the Muslim neighbors. This problem is even worse in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Iraq where there is still some minority pockets of Christen remnants.

Posted by: American at September 25, 2008 10:06 AM

Cowards! Two Muslim men look for easy prey. A down and out, drinking homeless man. Most likely in a dark alley. They will never pick a fair fight, say two same size, sober regular human males eating lunch. Dispicable!

Posted by: SonofIsaac at September 25, 2008 12:04 PM

Paulsub,

Yep, you sure said it often..

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at September 26, 2008 12:00 AM