IslamicLawBlog

Sloganeers, propagandists and politicians often use the word "genocide" in ways that the law does not permit. But rarely is the crime of genocide invoked when Western militaries murder Muslim groups. This essay argues that the internationally recognized crime of genocide applies to the intentional killings that NATO troops commit on a weekly basis in the poor villages and mute mountains of Afghanistan to destroy the Taliban, a puritanical Islamic group. NATO combat troops bombard and kill people in Taliban enclaves and meeting places. They also murder defenseless Afghan civilians. The dehumanized label of "Taliban" is used to cloak the nameless victims of NATO operations. Some political opposition to this practice is building in NATO countries, such as Canada, where calls are heard to withdraw troops from Afghanistan or divert them to non-combat tasks. Read the complete essay

The Hollywood has turned the novel, The Kite Runner , written by an Afghan-American into a movie. The picturesque movie, more than the prosaic novel, strives hard to sow the seeds of ethnic hatred, sectarian hostility, and possibly violence between diverse national groups of Afghanistan. According to the story, the Sunni bully rapes the Shia boy. The Sunni rapist belongs to the dominant ethnic group, called Pushtuns. The sodomized boy is the member of a minority ethnic group, known as Hazarajat. When the Taliban come to power, the Sunni rapist joins the puritanical movement and becomes a state official---but continues to rape boys. To perhaps make the story attractive to Hollywood filmmakers, the Sunni rapist bully---blond and blue-eyed---is shown to be the son of Afghan father and German mother—a crude suggestion that when Muslims marry Germans, demons are born. The movie is presumably hate speech, allowed under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It is unclear whet

Tuesday, September 25, 2007 Ali Khan [Washburn University School of Law]: Lee C. Bollinger is what you may call crème de la crème. His credentials as a law professor, a legal scholar of the First Amendment, the former dean of the University of Michigan Law School, and now the President of Columbia University have been incredible. With these many feathers in his cap, one would bet Bollinger has mastered the art of dignified advocacy. His indecorous manners in challenging the Iranian President at his Monday appearance at Columbia, however, caught many by surprise. Ignoring the calls that Ahmadinejad, whose views on the holocaust are hurtful, should not be invited to a prestigious American university, Bollinger invoked the First Amendment to defend the invitation. But once the Iranian President was captive on campus at Columbia, Bollinger turned on the guest. With well-prepared ill-will and rehearsed abusive language, Bollinger squirted a barrage of curses, calling the Iranian President &