World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
What an absurd story. Another nutjob the Palestinians now have to deal with. Will never understand right winger‘s obsession with the hijab.
Like I guess we all agree that it’s terrible to force women to wear something they don’t wanna wear. First of all, how do her actions fix the problem in Iran? This is just anti-Muslim racism.
Then, in the west where stuff like this happens there’s this constant allegation that women would be forced to wear it, which is in most cases wrong and just another angle on anti-Muslim racism. So these anti-hijab people want to then ban hijabs in order to „free“ the women.
It makes no sense to tell women what to wear and what not in order to free them from people allegedly telling them what to wear and what not. No one could ever come up with a coherent explanation when I raised this concern, always just a lot of mental gymnastics. I will never understand why people just don’t let other people be.
Apart from that, being against the Iranian regime is a reasonable take, but wanting back a monarchy instead? Wtf
The old Iranian monarchy were basically Western puppets. Iran tried to break loose in the 1950s. So in 1953 America and Britain overthrew the Iranian government when it tried to claim ownership over its own oil. They also strengthened the power of the Iranian monarchy which was loyal to them.
The Iranian monarchy were some of the first to recognize israel and do anything else the West asked them to. Not much of a surprise israelis loved them.
There is no reason to believe that this woman is not herself a Muslim. Not all Muslims are in favor of head scarves. Iran was a Muslim country while the Shah ruled it too despite head scarves not being required in Tehran at the time. Is she a horrible person? Did she do something unconscionable? Absolutely. But I think calling her a racist for what she did when she could be Muslim herself is going a bit too far.
Rasicm does appear to be her motivation
Yeah I mean she seems to be frequently on pro-Israel protests, is a right wing supporter and an Iranian monarchist. Exiled Iranians are usually hardcore atheists and combining this with her political views and her ripping off hijabs off women’s heads I think this paints a pretty clear picture.
I'm honestly asking this- are they? I've never heard this before. Where did you get that information from?
Edit: I should add that I was fairly active in the atheist community in Los Angeles, which does have a large Iranian/Persian population, and I don't remember them being prominent members of the community, but it's been a long time now, so I might just be forgetting.
I grew up in Europe in a place with a lot of exiled Iranians and have a lot of colleagues/ university buddies from there. Have a friend still living in Iran as well. This is of course kind of anecdotal but I think in general it wouldn’t be a controversial take in European countries.
I think it’s also kind of implied because they were the losers of the revolution and more conservative/religious people just tried to keep their heads down. The Iranian regime sucks even by middle eastern standards but if you’re not opposing them you can kind of get by.
I’m not at all familiar with the American-Iranian community so it may be very different over there.
The same applies btw to the new wave of Turkish immigrants. Again very anecdotal but alone in my last workplace I had like 20-30 Turkish colleagues who came to the EU from Istanbul recently and I didn’t know a single of them who was religious. Not that it matters in this post but what I’m trying to say is that societies and migration are more diverse than how it’s portrayed in the media.
It's definitely far more diverse. I'm sure there are very religious people who left Iran and also atheists. There is also a small but significant Armenian Christian community in Los Angeles that emigrated from Iran. Wikipedia tells me there are still Armenian Christians in Iran, which surprises me.
Ah you’re quick, edited something in still sorry about that.
Yeah I was also surprised, there’s also still Arab and Kurdish speaking people and a huge percentage of people actually are Azerbaijani not Persian.
It’s a cool country and I’d love to visit some day, just seems more difficult every year.
I've spent a good 60 seconds looking at this picture trying to figure out what it is supposed to mean and I still don't know.
It's a reference to Redditors circlejerking about the same picture of an Iranian woman wearing a bikini in the 1960s. The rest of the country was not dressed like that at all but it makes for a good propaganda story about how the west liberated Iran by overthrowing their government.
For more information https://www.reddit.com/r/Izlam/comments/8tpg4l/imagine_thinking_you_understand_the_history_of_a/
And no Muslim that practices the faith will tell you wearing a Hijab is optional for Muslim women. It is not a contested opinion among any scholar either.
Cool, I wasn't doing that. I was explaining why she might be a Muslim and still be against them.
I look forward to seeing you tell all those millions of religious Turkish women who do not wear anything on their head that they are not Muslims. I hope you forward me their responses when you let them know you have decided what their religion is.
Edit: South Asian women too.
Even if they don't wear hijab, they'll acknowledge that it's obligatory and what they're doing is, in fact, haram. If you say hijab isn't obligatory without an excuse like not knowing the correct ruling you do, in fact, cease to be a Muslim according to Sunni Islam consensus.
Ah, you speak for these women do you? Are you even a woman yourself?
Your interpretation of Islam is not the only interpretation of Islam.
There is no scholar disputing this. Turkey is heavily secularized you might have heard of a guy called Atatürk.
If a woman doesn't want to wear a Hijab that's up to her. But you don't claim this is a contested subject among any Islamic scholars or part of Islam. It's stated extremely clear.
It is extremely clear based on your interpretation of Islam. Clearly not the case in South Asia or in Turkey. Let me guess- In Pakistan, the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, women are unIslamic.
This is some hardcore misogyny you have going on.
Uh... I think you're mixing up the concept of sinning and not being a Muslim. You can, in fact, be a Muslim while still committing sins. And again, almost no Muslim, scholar or not, considers hijab to be optional. It's just not a thing.
An Arab person or person living in an Islamic country is not by definition a Muslim.
Calling all Arabs Muslims is just racism.
You do know that Iranians aren't Arabs, right?
There's no mention of Hijabs in the Quran and "dress modestly" is very much relative. You also may or may not see Turks drinking plum wine but they're definitely drinking beer and most definitely Raki.
Yes alcohol is now halal too. Everything is halal if a Turkish person does it. That is what I have learned today.
As I said, there is no debate about this among scholars whatsoever. Every scholar except sheikh barsoap agrees that covering the hair is obligatory.
https://blog.hautehijab.com/post/10399809-ask-haute-hijab-is-hijab-really-mandatory-fard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab#Alternative_views
"Clear and decisive scholarly consensus" my ass. There might be if you're ignoring everyone who disagrees.
My bad I did not know about sheikh Karen. These Christian Europeans know so much more about Islam.
So you picked out one non-Muslim (a scholar of comparative religion) among the many Muslims, with doctorates in Islamic Law from Arab universities and everything, to dismiss all of it.
I tried not to but I have to start to doubt your intellectual honesty. Not towards me, I don't care, but towards yourself.
The first paragraph contained no reasoning. Only statements. The second with the supposed reasoning is written by Karen.
I read your link. You did not.
All three paragraphs are written by wikipedia authors summing up longer texts by various scholars. If you want to actually engage with the topic on a deeper level, read those scholars, not just the summary. It's all linked (those numbers in brackets). Ignore the Christian if you please, noone will blame you.
I already read your article my previous link already debunked everything in it.
You should consider reading and be intellectually honest instead.
There is, in fact, a clear mention of hijab in the Quran. More than one in fact.
I can’t believe I’m getting involved in this but then you can surely show where it’s mentioned clearly?
Surah al nur, verse 31.
It then explicitly assumes that they're wearing a headcover. The main debate around this verse and similar ones is whether the face and hands must be covered or not, and not whether everything else must be covered.
Aha and which translation did you choose?
Do you speak Arabic? More explicitly, to an extent that would allow you to understand the nuances in a verse like that?
I’m asking because I still don’t see any proof that it is clearly written anywhere.
I don't remember, but the Arabic word used means "head covering".
I'm a native speaker so yes.
طب وأنا عربي كمان بس ولا عمري رح احكيلك انو فاهم اشي من القران لانو لغة القران مش لغتنا وحتى العربي الي بدو يدرس الدين لازم سنة وهو بدرس عربي بس عشان عن جد يفهم وأنا مش فاهم عربي لهالدرج وإذا أنا مش شيخ مش عارف كيف انت بدك تفهم هيك منيح لتعمل فتوى للناس
If you follow the madhhab of YouTube and you rely too much on Sheikh Wikipedia, you may draw this conclusion but it’s really more nuanced than this and I thought we’re past this kind of radicalism where only one opinion is valid and everyone else goes to hell since ISIS got busted more or less.
It's a bit tortured, I think. Tourist is visiting a scenic vista which we might call reality, and chooses to take a photograph of a photograph of that same vista, preferring the curated and potentially slanted view that it presents.
What is Muslim to you? This is a prime example for how western people see Islam as a race, and therefore people from Iran are automatically classified as muslim.
There's a very good reason to believe that this woman is not a muslim, and that's the whole purpose of the article: she's harassing Muslim women for the sole reason that they wear a piece of clothing showing that they're Muslim. That you are unable to recognize this as what it clearly is, anti Muslim bigotry, is revealing your own bias against Muslims.
I was going to write a substantive response to this, but since you've already decided that I think Islam is a race when I told someone else below that they were mistaking Iranians for Arabs just shows you don't really care and want to berate someone.
Do you have any other reason than the woman being Iranian for your remark that there's no reason to believe she's not a muslim? You don't, so my comment stands. You decided that she being Iranian is a good reason to assume she's Muslim, despite the article saying she was attacking Muslim women. We both know why, so stop clutching your pearls and have look at your own assumptions.
Sorry, I'm not going to have a legitimate conversation with someone who called me a racist when I said nothing racist.
Also, we have a civility rule here and you have broken it twice now. Please do not continue.
What's the relevance of this?
Did you like read the article? It’s even in the summary of the original post. She filmed herself ripping off hijabs of women’s heads and then the police was investigating it and then she fucked off to Tel Aviv. I don’t get this thing where people comment without reading the OP, let alone the actual article.
Yes, I did; what is she planning to do to Palestinians if she's going to Israel?
I don't get this thing where someone makes a comment, you respond that you don't think they read it, then asks you a question about the relevance and you ignore it and moan instead. But hey, as you were.
I think the implication is that an anti Muslim radical going to Israel is likely to support the current Israeli genocide of the Palestinian people.
Yeah absolutely this. I don’t know how this is confusing to anyone.