You ask me why I keep returning to this topic, like a broken record, skipping on the same track over and over again. It is because of posts like this, just shared with his 27,000 Facebook followers and 7,200 followers on Twitter, its impact soon to be multiplied by the multitudinous shares and likes:
Over and over, this is the propaganda we are subjected to from the leaders of opinion in our midst, with their great influence and reach on social media.
I have always said that I pray that whoever has been wronged is granted justice and compensated in full. Throughout, I have tried my best to be fair and balanced. I have acknowledged the mischief of the conspiring paparazzi, just as much as I have delved into the competing claims of opposing sides.
For what it’s worth, I think it is unlikely that Dr Ramadan will ultimately be convicted for the specific crime of rape. That is partly because only about 5% of rape cases in France ever end in a conviction, but more because the plaintiffs are going to have difficulty proving the absence of consent in their acknowledged relationships. But time will tell.
In truth, I have absolutely no issue with people defending Dr Ramadan and advocating on his behalf. My objection is, and has always been, to the widespread use of spurious information to make that defence. My contention in everything that I have written is not that he is guilty as charged, but that the skewed advocacy of our activists flies in the face of divine justice. For the past year without relent, they have allowed themselves to lie and adulterate facts in their defence of a respected figure, and continue to do so even now.
If this author was true to his own thesis, he would apply his reasoning to both friend and foe — to his opponents and allies alike. He would maintain husn al-dhann for all parties, instead of deciding that the prohibitions on the honour of a Muslim apply only to those he defends.
Just a month ago, the same author explained to his followers in a post liked by 1000 people that the acknowledged relationships were most likely Islamically sound and had been mischaracterised merely because polygamy is illegal in France. Today he begins his post by skewering the character of each of the women engaged in those relationships, reminding us of their unsavoury conduct.
He follows up with an attack on two others, the comedian Aman Ali and attorney Rabia Chaudry. The latter, he neglects to tell us, is the lawyer representing a woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted by the accused in the United States. His quotation of her report omits the first crucial sentence: “Today I referred a Muslim victim of Tariq Ramadan to a federal prosecutor in the US.”
Husn al-dhann, as can be seen, does not apply to any of these people, or to anyone who thought the benefit of the doubt should apply to all parties.
I don’t think I would have arrived here and taken the stance I have had I not encountered so much blatant propaganda and bias. If the leaders of opinion in our midst would cease their pursuit of partisan justice, I think I might get my record player fixed.