Sunday, July 31, 2005

Omid Safi declares takfir on Irshad Manji!

Omid Safi, along with Pamela Taylor, is the Chair of the "Progressive Muslim Union North America."

In a recent Cyber Fatwa - he has declared that Irshad Manji is not a Progressive Muslim!


I think to most of us it is obvious why Irshad is not a progressive Muslim.
Well no, actually it is not obvious at all - since it was Omid Safi himself who wrote the Progressive Muslim Union Shahdah:

"We affirm that a Muslim is anyone who identifies herself or himself as "Muslim," including those whose identification is based on social commitments and cultural heritage."
(An expanded version of the PMUNA shahdah can viewed here).
So, according to Omid Safi's definition of a Muslim - an athiest (they got a couple of those on the PMUNA board) can be a "Muslim" --- he has no limitations at all on who can identify her/himself as a Muslim.

HOWEVER, it now appears that Omid Safi does have some limitations on who can identify her/himself as a "Progressive."

Why? Well, because Omid Safi holds the word "Progressive" more sacred than he does "Muslim." If he were to be consistent in his views - he should welcome Irshad Manji to his fold - on the basis of:

"We affirm that a Progressive Muslim is anyone who identifies herself or himself as "Progressive Muslim."


And the fact is, they do have a lot more in common than meets the eye.

Omid Safi says in his cyber fatwa:

I am quite fed up with her, and frustrated by the way that she pitches herself to everyone from Fox News (which is quite infatuated with her) to very right wing Zionist organizations.

As usual, Safi exposes his double standards: he has no problems at all, and infact encourages the appearnces of his own people on FOX news, and right wing anti-Palestinian organizations.

Along with having a board member who has been strongly condemned by dozens of grass roots Palestinian organizations.

It is like this: if Omid Safi is doing it, that's all OK - but if someone else is doing the exact same crap, suddenly the person is no longer worthy of the title "Progressive Muslim."

Lets not forget that, with all of his rethoric about "Bush and empire" - Omid Safi has no problem cozying up, and inviting people such as Muslims for Bush to his board.

This is the "Progressive Muslims Union of North America."

5 comments:

DrMaxtor said...

Excellent post. Manji herself is not a Muslim, so I dont know what Safi is babbling about. Infact I dont think either Safi or Taylor are Muslims given their "alternative shahada."

freestuff2 said...

Hey I just love your blog. I also have a american megafriends military single
blog/site. I mostly deals with american megafriends military single
Please come and check it out if you get the time!

Anonymous said...

Newsflash: Safi learned and moved on, and left the PMU. it's been some time now. wakey wakey.
Nice how you criticize people who are "too tolerant" as well as people who are critical. clearly you're purely reactionary in your agenda rather than principle-driven. As long as someone once used the word "progressive", you will be sure to attack them, regardless of what else they do/are. Your crowing and gloating are not pleasant to observe. WHo is a MUSLIM and who is not is not for you to decide. As for who is progressive or not, now that is not "takfeer" so your title is misleading at best and untruthful and slanderous at worst. I'm sure drmaxtor will attack me in response, but then that's what he does.

publicdebate said...

wakey wakey - see the date on this post? it was written b/4 Omid Safi resigned from the PMU - at that time he was very much the Chairman of the PMU. wakey wakey.

T. S. said...

"Lets not forget that, with all of his rethoric about "Bush and empire" - Omid Safi has no problem cozying up, and inviting people such as Muslims for Bush to his board"Um... Well who else is he going to invite to rethorical debates and policy settings, people that already agree with him? That would make for pretty borring debates. As for "Cyber Fatwa" c'mon. The man is entitled to his opinions same as you or me.. and if you read his post-modern analysis of the word "progressive" at the begining of his book, you would get the impression (along with a minor headache) that the word is so restrictive that even he doesn't fit into it. It's not a double standard.. it's a typical liberalist unreachable standard.