Sunday, February 28, 2010

Egyptian Sheikh: "The (Anti-Christ) Will Come Forth from a Jewish Woman of (Iran) Followed by Seventy Thousand Jews"

In this article Egyptian Sheikh Mahmoud al-Masry quotes copiously from the sayings of the Prophet relative to the last days and the coming of the Dajjal, or the anti-Christ.  We see through this that he will be born of a Jew, will have a large Jewish following, and will go to Jerusalem, where the Muslim Jesus will descend and slay him.  In other words, the Jews are the bad guys.  This is a recurring theme in Islam, as it was the Jews that led the revolt against Muhammad in Medina (which ended with Muhammad beheading upwards of 600 of them), it was a Jewish woman who possibly caused Muhammad's death, and we see here that the anti-Christ will be a Jew surrounded by mostly Jewish followers.  It's no wonder that Muslims today still tend to blame everything on the "Zionists" or Jews.  This comes from the online Arabic magazine Moheet, which has headquarters in both Dubai and Cairo.  Link to the original Arabic.
Mahmoud al-Masry: Out of Mercy the Prophet Warned Us of the "Anti-Christ"

by Iman al-Khashab
Moheet, 18 February 2010

During his series "Travel to the Afterlife," Sheikh Mahmoud al-Masry spoke on the program "Life Problems" on the television station al-Nas (the People) the day before yesterday of the appearance of the anti-Christ, which is considered one of the greatest signs of the times. The mercy of the Prophet towards his people was made clear by his warning us, slaves of Allah by his mercy, that Allah has made the form of the Dajjal (anti-Christ) a proof of the falsehood of his calling. For his form is disfigured and his judgment is written between his eyes. Allah has ensured that even the illiterate believers will be able to read what is written on the forehead of the Dajjal.

Sheikh Mahmoud al-Masry said: The name "Dajjal" is taken from the word al-dajl, which means falsehood, and it is the name of the person that will appear in the last days claiming to be divine. He will work miracles to maximize the fitna (i.e. sedition, discord) among men. His emergence causes men to tremble and doubt their beliefs, and men will be divided...

* * * 
..."infidel" is written between his eyes, and every believer, literate or illiterate, will be able to read it.
 * * *
...the evidence shows that he (the anti-Christ) will emerge from the east, specifically from the province of Khurasan, which today is the country of Iran.

Anas said: The Prophet of Allah said: "The Dajjal will come forth from a Jewish woman of Esfahan (Iran), followed by seventy thousand Jews wearing Persian shawls." From 'A'isha is transmitted the saying of the Prophet: "He will come forth from a Jewish woman of Esfahan."

Then is come this fitna (sedition) which is the largest fitna since the creation of Adam until that hour, unto the ends of the Earth, and it will appear to permeate the land. For the time will come that no city will remain but that the Dajjal will enter it except Mecca and Medina and the al-Aqsa mosque and the mosque of Sinai.

Abu Huraira transmitted from the Prophet: "The one-eyed Dajjal, the false messiah, will come from the east in a time of discord and factions among the people, and will remain in the land forty days, Allah-willing, Allah knows the number, Allah knows the number, twice."

Hafiz ibn Hajar said: "When will he be destroyed and who will kill him? He will be destroyed after he has appeared in all the earth except Mecca and Medina, then he will go to the holy house (Jerusalem) and 'Isa (Muslim name for Jesus) will descend and kill him." This was also narrated by Muslim.

Then Sheikh Mahmoud al-Masry spoke clearly about who are the followers of the anti-Christ:

We find that the kuffar (infidels) generally are the people most led astray by him and by the miracles Allah shows by his hand, and the Jews especially, for seventy thousand Jews will follow him.  Also many Muslims will be led astray by the miracles which are done by his hand, and especially the Muslim masses and the ignorant among the bedouin, the women and the young.

* * *

Then comes the descent of 'Isa (Jesus) son of Mary, the Messiah, in the days of the anti-Christ, the false messiah. 'Isa will meet the believers, and envelop the dutiful servants of Allah, and 'Isa son of Mary will go with them straight to the Dajjal who has gone towards the holy house (Jerusalem), and he will reach him and kill him with a spear, for his death is of Allah, as has been evidenced by these ahadith (sayings of the Prophet).

Saturday, February 27, 2010

"A Moderate Muslim Can Change into an Extremist Muslim or Terrorist in a Single Night"

This is a great article from al-Watan Voice, in which the author makes a passionate plea for a turn to secularism in the Islamic world.  He concludes that a moderate Muslim and an extremist Muslim are not really very different from each other, as a moderate can transform into an extremist or terrorist "in a single night" of studying the Qur'an or attending studies at the mosque.  He also challenges his readers to think of any good inventions or scientific discoveries to come from the Muslim world in the past few hundred years.  He's right on with almost all of this, but of course bringing this up in the West will result in you being branded an Islamophobe or put on trial for hate speech.  Link to original Arabic.

"Yes" to Secularism

by Dr. Majid al-Balushi
al-Watan Voice, 25 February 2010
...the extremist Muslims [say] "I require you to comply with my demand, which is that you believe in my God, or pay me money (the jizyah), or I cut off your head." They resort to Qur'anic verses such as "the verse of the sword," which is the twenty-ninth verse from Surat "al-Tauba" (the 9th sura): "Kill those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, from among the peole of the book, until they pay the jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

This is also called the verse of the "jizyah" by some commentators. It is also the verse which abrogates all the verses which call for peace and understanding with others i.e. non-Muslims. In their view, it is a requirement to apply the command of Allah, which is what our brother, Sheikh Osama bin Laden, may Allah lengthen his life, is trying to do. Also not only the Taliban and al-Qa'ida and other groups, but this is indeed the hope of every Muslim faithful to his religion, whether he be a moderate or an extremist Muslim.

The truth is that the difference between the moderate Muslim and the extremist Muslim is quantitative and not qualitative. In other words, a moderate Muslim can change into an extremist Muslim or terrorist in a single night, provided he delve deeper into Qur'anic verses, especially the verse of the sword, and the prophetic ahadith (sayings) calling for fighting and jihad in the path of "establishing the word of truth." Or by attending the "principles of fiqh" or "studies of fiqh" which are held in mosques normally after the evening prayers. It is here that attendees are brainwashed with a list of Qur'anic verses and prophetic ahadith and books of Islamic jurisprudence, and more, related to what is halal and haram, to apostasy and jihad... and the torment of the grave and the horrors of the hell-fire...and the Houris (wide-eyed women of paradise that will be given to the believers). A good example of what we speak of is one of our grandchildren and his father. For this grandchild, whom I loved dearly, was a moderate Muslim. However he was also a devout Muslim, believing in Allah and praying the five daily prayers, and fasting during the month of Ramadan. He didn't enter into politics or the state at all initially, but then he joined the group "principles of fiqh" and drank in their extremist religious ideas. He grew a beard and shortened his clothes, and he got to where he didn't think about anything except what was halal and what was haram, and gaining Allah's pleasure by struggling (jihad) in his path. Not only that, but he traveled to Afghanistan to join the mujahideen of the Taliban to establish the word of truth and the Islamic caliphate which will take over the world. But his father, much to his dismay, greatly disapproved of this and lamented the loss of his young son, especially when this son was transported from Afghanistan to Guantanamo Bay. However, when this father joined the principles of fiqh which we mentioned previously, and when the brainwashing operations were performed on him, his opinions and his thoughts changed, for he began to be proud of his son whom Allah had guided well, causing him to walk in the straight path, and struggle (jihad) in the path of Allah. How much then did this father hope that his other son would walk in the same path. And that is not all, for he himself changed from a handsome man with a trimmed beard of comely appearance into a great sheikh with a long beard, unkempt hair, and a short robe and pants. (I ask that he please not be angered by my words, for he knows how much love and respect I have for him.) There are many other examples, but I don't have the space to mention them all in this short article.

* * *

...the Islamists claim that Islam fosters science, and forcibly call attention to Qur'anic verses that mention science. They resort to these Qur'anic verses and prophetic ahadith which repeat in them the word "science" and its derivatives, as if this "science" is the science of chemistry or physics or engineering, etc. The "science" which these Qur'anic verses and prophetic ahadith support is the science of the knowledge of Allah and his power and nothing else. For thus is the saying of the Prophet: "Who knows a knowledge of something other than Allah, or desired a knowledge of something other than Allah, let him take his place in hell," and also the saying, "The scientists are the heirs of the prophets." So where is the science of chemistry and physics and astronomy and engineering and others? Where is the worldly knowledge, purely connected to this world on which we live? What do we want to say? We want to say: Be secularists, or concern yourselves with your material world on which you live for the short span of between 70 to 80 years on average, barring any accident or emergency cases, and make religion -- whatever religion -- a matter between a person and his Lord, between the person and what he believes in, for this is good for you and for all mankind.

* * *
(Author goes on to praise Western secularism and many of the scientists and inventors that it produced...)

And many of those scientists were devout and religious, but they did not make their religion their principal concern, as we do in our Arab-Islamic nations, and they did not attempt to intervene in the religious affairs of others. The question that arises is this: "Why is there not found in our religion any scientist or inventor which has benefited mankind with his inventions and discoveries, except a few of the theories of ancient scientists which remained preserved in books?" Do we consider the story of 'Abbas bin Firnas' attempt to fly in the air with wings made of birds' feathers a true story and a great scientific experiment, or the sand hourglass which the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid offered to Charlegmane, the King of France at the time, a great invention? You may say that Muslim-Arab scientists were the ones who founded the sciences of algebra and astronomy, and blood circulation, and that may be true, but where are the products of their inventions and scientific discoveries? Why did the Arab and non-Arab Muslims not continue in their development and progress for mankind? Why must we import and consume what is made and produced by secular nations, when we have sat on the source of the largest energy reserves in the world, namely oil, for hundreds of years? Why must we use these secular nations to perform the exploration of the oil in our own lands, and refining it, and using it in our cars which are manufactured in their own secular nations?

This is not all, for why do we find that everything around us is invented and manufactured in secular nations? Take as an example the machinery for printing the Qur'an and its pages, and its ink in various colors, does this not come from the inventions and manufacturing of secular nations? And also the loudspeakers which we use to announce and read the Qur'an, weren't these invented and manufactured in secular nations? ...

"Racist Extremist Wilders Attacks Muslims Again"

While browsing through Arabic news sites looking for responses to Wilders' recent call for a headscarf ban, I came across this article, which was a response to Wilders' call in September of last year to impose a tax on Muslim women who want to wear the hijab.  This one caught my eye because it specifically referenced my buddies over at Jihad Watch, and also because of how often it employed the phrase "racist extremist Wilders" or some variant thereof.  The article also included an unflattering picture of Wilders with the caption "The moron Wilders."  You can sense the anger towards Wilders from the author when you read this, but since he can't refute Wilders' remarks, all he can do is call him "racist extremist Wilders" every time he gets a chance.  This is from al-Haqiqa al-Dawlia (Fact International), one of whose stated goals is to "reflect the values and aspirations of [our] Arab-Islamic heritage."  You can feel that here (link to original Arabic): 
Racist Extremist Wilders, Director of the Film "Fitna," Attacks Muslims Again and Demands the Imposition of a Tax on Those Who Wear the Veil, Describing it as Polluting Dutch Streets

Al-Haqiqa Al-Dawlia (Fact International), 20 September 2009

It appears that the daily private affairs of Muslims in the Netherlands have caught the eye of right-wing racist lawmaker Geert Wilders, who has previously been known for the tumult provoked by his film "Fitna" as well as his insults of the Qur'an and Islamic doctrine. Now he has returned today to tackle an issue no less controversial, by calling for the imposing of a tax on women wearing the veil in the country.

The racist extremist Wilders is requesting that Muslim women who want to wear the hijab obtain a permit from authorities, along with paying a financial sum as high as $1,500 a year, describing the Islamic dress as sight which is "polluting Dutch streets." This matter has met with many angry reactions from the large Muslim community in the country, along with the leaders of liberal and leftist parties.

The racist Wilders said during a parliament session: "Any Muslim woman who wants to wear the headscarf must first obtain an official permit, and pay the annual sum of 1,000 euros in exchange for this. The money obtained from the "headscarf tax" can go towards financing programs for the empowerment and protection of women."

The Dutch lawmaker, who leads the Dutch Freedom Party, added that "Previously we have offered legislation to ban the hijab, and our current proposal is particularly for the headscarf, which really only disfigure the view of the Dutch street. Its form is unacceptable, but the important thing is that it is a sign of the abuse of women. We must stand and face this," according to his lies.

One of the responses came from the Dutch Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende, who said that Wilders' proposal: "Is not appropriate in a country which welcomes everyone and treats people with respect."

* * *

On the site "Jihad Watch," many comments appeared supporting [Wilders]. One participant said: "Wilders is magnificent. As I read his speech I had the feeling that here is a man who will go down in history, just as Churchill did, for daring to say what must be said..."

However, on the online forum "Islamic Awakening," which is used by Muslims in Europe, one member posted on the topic by saying: "I ask that Allah leave him blind as long as he lives, and curse him and humiliate him in this world and the next."

It is notable that the racist extremist Wilders produced the 15-minute film titled "Fitna," which included "offensive" images of the Prophet Muhammad, and released it on the internet in March of 2008, despite warnings from the government in Amsterdam that showing the film may damage Dutch interests abroad...

Friday, February 26, 2010

"This Is a Religious and Cultural War against Islam and Muslims"

Muslims are ever the victim, never the perpetrator.  This article actually begins with a legitimate question: "Why are Islam and Muslims hated in Europe?"  There certainly are valid reasons for hating Islam, for example its mission to deny all mankind the freedom to choose by yoking us under a totalitarian system of repression which it terms the "shari'ah."  But, as you might guess, this article is really not about Muslim soul-searching.  For as we all know it is never the Muslims' fault, for they are, "The best of peoples, evolved for mankind..."  This time, the blame is placed on the European press and state institutions which are using the pretext of "freedom of expression" to defame Islam.  The author obviously thinks that Muslim anger should trounce free speech, and so far it looks like at least the Dutch courts may agree with them.

This is from Qatar-based al-Watan (not to be confused with Gaza-based al-Watan Voice).  Link to the original Arabic.
Why Are Islam and Muslims Hated in Europe?
by Ahmad 'Amrabi
al-Watan (Qatar), 7 Dec 2009
The referendum which was held in Switzerland prohibiting the building of new minarets should not be seen as an isolated incident. For the incident had predecessors, and will likely cause yet more repercussions throughout Europe. 
Do you remember Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Freedom Party which called for the banning of the Noble Qur'an and described it as a "fascist book" along the lines of the book "Mein Kampf" of German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler?
Now, just a day or two after the announcement of the Swiss referendum to ban the building of minarets, Wilders stood and called for the holding of a similar referendum in the Netherlands. We should not be surprised if the actions of the Swiss echo in other European countries.
The Swiss referendum appears to be only the most recent in a series of European maneuvers.
A few years ago newspapers in Denmark proceeded to publish caricatures denigrating the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad. Despite the general outrage in the Islamic world, the Danish government refused to intervene, based on claims of "freedom of expression."  (Comment: This really highlights the problem--Muslims believe that they should have the power to shut down any speech that angers them.)
And in France, you'll remember, the authorities banned Muslim immigrant girls from wearing the hijab in schools and public institutions in order to preserve the secular nature of the French Repubic.
This is a religious and cultural war against Islam and Muslims advanced by right-wing European parties and secretly sponsored by state institutions under the pretext of preserving freedom of expression and secularism.
Although the official and semi-official institutions continue to reiterate that they have no agenda for defaming Islam and the Muslim minority in Europe, their agenda is exposed by the European Union's objections -- foremost France and Germany -- to granting Turkey membership in the Union. For the Union is a purely Christian club, while Turkey does not enjoy this Christian "advantage," as it possesses a population of 70 million Muslims.
This is not just my conclusion. French President Nikolas Sarkozy himself once openly declared that all European leaders share this opinion, even if they prefer not to say it.
So the greater question remains: Why all of the European hatred against Islam and Muslims in countries which boast about their freedom of religion and tolerance? (Comment:  Maybe because Islam and Muslims do not respect that freedom of religion and tolerance?  Just a thought...)
There is a case of general fear in the European street of everything connected to Islam and Muslims. This is a fear fabricated and provoked and nurtured by the media on the backdrop of the Arab-Israeli conflict which is reflected in the context of a doomsday conflict between the Islamic tide and the Jewish world.  (Comment: I'm sure the Europeans' fear has nothing to do with constant threat of jihadist violence, which resulted in almost 15,000 documented attacks since 9/11).

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Evil Zionists Manufacture Super Mini-Gun to Kill Arabs

Another great article from Gaza-based al-Watan Voice.  This Arab writer reveals a sinister plot by Israeli Mossad to use super mini-guns to hunt down Arab leaders and citizens all over the world, like they just did with that poor innocent Palestinian terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.  The paranoia in the Arab world truly knows no bounds.  Link to the original Arabic.

A Call to All Arab Intelligence Services to Kill the Head of Mossad Meir Dagan
As'ad Ambeh
al-Watan Voice, 25 Feb 2010 
I begin by saying that I have disclosed to the Arab readers a message from the Zionist Mossad calling for the killing of Arabs. But before I finish the rest of the message in this article I want to thank the newspapers Khaleej Times, al-Quds al-Arabi, and al-Arab al-Qataria, as well as the websites of the al-Manar TV station and The View from Syria for publishing my article in full. I also thank a great number of internet sites which have published the article, I don't have the space here to mention all of them by name. I am, however, perplexed by the Palestinian newspapers not publishing my article under the pretext of it being a call for murder (terrorism). But I don't want to further delay this message from the Zionist Mossad.
  • Zionist arms are for sale on the internet to kill Arab leaders, presidents, kings, emirs and citizens
  • A call for all Arab intelligence services to kill the head of Mossad, Meir Dagan, the Arab agents of Mossad, and to track down and kill Israeli authorities and not Arab citizens
  • The smallest gun in the world for terrorists and the killing of Arab citizens
  • The Zionist Mossad has transmitted this information through e-mail and published it on websites, particularly regarding the making of the smallest gun in the world 
Details of the Article
The question which is left now and has been made urgent by the slaying of al-Mabhouh is, "How will we respond to this terrorist crime?" For there are other murders now being directed by Mossad and its Arab agents in all Arab lands, according to spokesmen from all Arab intelligence agencies. I also ask Arab intelligence agencies to hunt down and kill all Israeli authorities in any Arab or foreign nation to respond to the crimes of the Mossad terrorists. To be frank with the Arab intelligence services and Arab citizens, rulers, and officials, I reveal unto you in the following article some of the plans of the Mossad to make the smallest pistol in the world to kill Arabs. I do this with the knowledge that I published this article on more than one Arab website and especially the website of London-based newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi just a short time before the slaying of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh by the Zionist Mossad. 
The manufacturer and specialists say that it is considered the smallest pistol in the world, for it's slightly longer than two inches. However if used for the purpose of killing the answer will be, "Yes, it is a pistol," for it can kill if fired directly at its target... (author goes into tremendous detail about this incredible mini-gun)
* * *
I ask, if (the gun) was prohibited, how did it enter the United Kingdom or the United States, the source of terrorism in the world? Generally the resistance in Palestine and Iraq does not need such weapons, but I call on Arab nations to make or smuggle such weapons to hunt down the traitors and agents of colonialism in European capitals and in America. For Europe and America have made such weapons to kill the leaders of the resistance and all the honest people in the world. We can spend money to buy better weapons for us from the billions that we spend buying American and English cake. (Comment: I don't think he means cake literally, but more like 'junk.') Before closing, I counsel the intelligence agencies in all Arab nations to buy this gun and hunt down the head of Mossad, Meir Daghan, and all Mossad agents and the CIA and kill them, rather than (allow them to) hunt down simple Arab citizens... In closing I say that there are many sites that sell weapons on the internet, especially after the invasion of Iraq, to terrorize the free Arab citizens. But the weapons of the Arab citizens are still the strongest, and they are faith in God and country.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Is Obama a Muslim or an Apostate?

Certainly a valid question, if you understand Islamic law at all.  The author makes a couple of good points:  first, according to Islamic doctrine, all children are naturally born Muslim; second, Muslims are not held culpable for straying from Islam until they reach puberty.  Since Obama was born Muslim, as apparently all of us are, he then only has three options:  stay Muslim, apostatize before puberty (not a capital crime) or after puberty (capital crime).  The author seems to believe that Obama was a Muslim too long to have the third option (the article points that he went to Jakarta when he was at least 11, and then studied in an Islamic madrasa for two more years after that), leaving him only the first two options, i.e. he is either a Muslim or an apostate.  Makes sense to me.  To be honest, I would respect the President a lot more if he were a committed apostate, who could stand up and tell us proudly that he did leave Islam and explain to us why he chose Christianity over Islam.  But unfortunately, he doesn't seem to be much of a Christian either.  Link to the original Arabic.
Is President Obama a Muslim or an Apostate?

by Mu'ammar Ahmad 'Abd-al-Latif Rajeh, for the Watan Voice
30 January 2010

* * *
... [Obama] was born in Hawaii to a Kenyan father and a white American mother from the state of Kansas.  His parents separated when he was in his twelfth year, when his father left his mother and returned to Kenya, thus leaving his mother responsible for raising him.  Young Obama went to Jakarta after his mother married an Indonesian student, from which his mother bore Obama's half-sister Maya.  The author Scott Toro, one of Obama's friends at the time, remembers that Obama was enrolled in an Islamic madrasa for two years, then later joined a Catholic school.

Obama converted to Christianity in the United Christian Church. ... Within this introduction, certain aspects of President Obama's introduction to his autobiography beg the following question:  What is the position of Islamic law concerning this biography?

Islamic law stipulates that if a child is born with either one or both of his parents being Muslim, then the child's religion will also be Muslim.  This applies if the father is Muslim and the mother is non-Muslim, such as in President Obama's case.  Al-Hassan, Shurayh, Ibrahim, and Qatada said:  "If one of (the parents) has submitted (to Islam), then the child is with the Muslim," for Islam dominates, but is not (itself) dominated (comment: This is a famous phrase from either the Qur'an or the hadith, but I'm not sure exactly how it's worded in English; it basically means Islam is superior to everything, and submits to nothing).  And also according to the word of the prophet of God (PBUH):  "No child is born except on nature (i.e. Islam), and then his parents make him Jewish, Christian, or Magian (Zoroastrian), as an animal produces a perfect young animal: do you see any part of its body amputated?" (Sahih al-Bukhari, V 2, Bk 23, No 441).  Although Islamic law does not oblige those who have not reached puberty to practice Islam, the father of such a child is required to pay zakat and pray the funeral prayer if the child dies before reaching puberty.  This shows that the child is Muslim from birth.  Through these Islamic judgments, in comparison with the autobiography of President Barack Hussein Obama, we find that this president is either a Muslim or an apostate from Islam according to the strongest viewpoints of Islamic jurisprudence.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Known American Zionist News Station Spies on Egyptian Police (i.e. Fox News Exposes Persecution of Copts)

The Arab world turns out a typical response to a great story put out by Fox News a couple of weeks ago. I urge everyone to read the Fox News piece, if you haven't already. A buddy of mine told me pretty much the same story about his experience growing up Coptic in Egypt.

The article which I translated below is from al-'Ankabout (literally "The Spider"), which according to its website was started in Australia by a Lebanese man, and publishes viewpoints from all over the political spectrum. This one, however, is just the typical Arab response when there is no good response: blame it on the Jews. Rather than actually debate the issue at hand, the author simply slanders Fox News by accusing it of being an arm of the "New Zionist Movement," and further impugns it by associating it with the likes of such shadowy Islamophobes as Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, and Robert Spencer, who we all know are part of a sinister plot to revive Protestantism in America. For the original Arabic, click here.
Fox News Claims to Have Deceived Egyptian Police and Planted Cameras to Spy on the "Persecution" of Coptic Christians

From al-Ankabout, 11 Feb 2010

An American television station accused Egyptian police of provoking citizens to conduct attacks against Copts, and of turning a blind eye to some of the attacks.

The news agency America in Arabic transmitted from Fox News, known for its affiliation with the New Zionist Movement and for promoting military interventions in Arab and Islamic lands, what it conveyed in a report broadcast this week. In the report, Fox News claimed it concealed recording devices in order to deceive Egyptian police, and used them to record Egyptian authorities turning a blind eye to attacks on Christians. It confirmed that it had some evidence condemning Egyptian police for provoking the latest attacks against Copts in the Nag Hammadi incident.

The American television station continued in its report...(quotes directly from Fox News piece)

Fox News also said...(again quotes directly from the Fox News piece)

Fox News is considered a part of the media empire of known American Zionist Rupert Murdoch, and normally takes right-wing and pro-Israel positions, and supports military interventions in Arab and Islamic nations.

Fox News also played a chief role in promoting the Iraq invasion of 2003, and often hosts guests on its programs who write books which attack Islam, considering them "experts" on Islam, such as Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, and Robert Spencer, as it attempts to promote a wave of Protestant revival in the United States.

Monday, February 22, 2010

From Jordan: "The Repugnant Image of the Jews"

This is a short editorial from a Dr. Ahmad 'Abdallah al-Maghrebi, writing for, an online Jordanian newspaper. In this article al-Maghrebi bemoans the recent killing of al-Mabhouh, a Palestinian jihadist recently killed in Dubai allegedly by the "despicable" Zionists, and even more pointedly laments the lack of reaction in the Arab world to the repeated "criminal" actions of the Israelis. I thought it was interesting that the editorial begins by bemoaning the fact that the exposure of Arabs to Israelis in modern press has softened their hatred of them. If only they could keep the average Arab from seeing that Israeli Jews are people just like them, then they could preserve their hatred of them! This even though Arab press, as this editorial testifies, is almost universally anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish. For the original Arabic, click here.

The Action Has Been Done, Now What Is the Reaction?

By Dr. Ahmad ‘Abdallah al-Maghrebi,, 22 Feb 2010

One of the negative consequences of the Second Gulf War for the Arab media was that it changed our perception of the Zionist personality. For this cursed personality previously had a face of extreme hatred in the perception of the average man, exemplified by revolting and ugly depictions of Zionism, far different from the typical image of the other sons of Adam.

Then came the satellite channels, and from there the Arab channels, followed by numerous meetings with the Zionist personality. After seeing this Zionist personality for himself, the average man almost could not believe that this was the same Zionist personality that was said to be an occupying usurper. But after seeing him with such regularity, he became a commonplace site. Thus the role of the satellite channels was to break the repugnant image of the Jews and make him seem less repulsive. This was followed by official Arab meetings, designed to create a Zionism which could be accepted by us. By this the old image was painted over with a luxurious modern image, one that surpassed even the image of Arabs themselves.

In the same way, we see and hear the murder of al-Mabhouh in Dubai on Arab land. And on all local satellite stations, both Arab and foreign, and in all news releases, we see the Zionist pursue the martyr and lock him up in his cell, or kill him. The faces of the (Zionist) criminals are continually before our eyes and are imprinted in our brains. We guard the image, and our appetite is preserved--what next?

I ask every Arab, every Muslim, every man who has a conscience: “How did you feel when you saw the tape the first time? And how do you feel now after seeing it for the thousandth time?”

The first time the blood was boiling in the veins, and revenge was brewing in all of us. …

* * *

The crime has been committed, and thus the action—for the natural law which God created for this life is that for every action there is a reaction. So then what is the necessary reaction to this crime, and to these criminals?

For thirty years the Zionists have declared that they will hunt down anyone who kills a despicable Zionist, and that the blood of a Zionist will never go to waste, regardless of the time or place or method. And they remind us of what they said with their actions. But they are a foolish people, and we are the companions of truth.

In exchange, how many of our innocent have died at their hands, of our women and our children and our old people? This was done before the eyes of us all. What was our reaction in the face of this bloodshed?

Al-Mabhouh wagered his life, for he was a son of the al-Qassam Brigades, and he was born of the shout: “Jihad, for victory or martyrdom.” However, for he whose heart, mind, and conscience has become desensitized to all this, this has become his reaction: the determination not to react.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

A Saudi Princess Appeals to the Mufti to Intervene to Prohibit the Marriage of Minors

Another article about the sad fate of young child brides in Saudi Arabia. The real problem here is that Muhammad, who is of course the perfect pattern for all Muslims to follow, married 'A'isha when she was only six or seven years old (the article says he married her at nine, but most Islamic sources put the marriage contract at six or seven, then consummation at nine). Childrens' rights advocates in Saudi try to put some spin on some other hadiths of the Prophet to put a stop to this, but it's really hard to get around that example of the Prophet. This article is by Yousuf al-Hazza'a, writing for London-based Arabic online magazine Elaph (link):


A statement was released from the Assembly for Charitable Divorce Cases, in the name of Princess Sarah, justifying the request to the Mufti (i.e. the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Shaykh ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin ‘Abdullah Al al-Shaykh) by saying that “Once news began to come out that the incidences of child marriages of minors were increasing, this provoked strong feelings and anger from society for those young girls who, while still dressed in the robes of childhood, suffer from oppression and shameless exploitation. Sometimes they are trafficked for personal benefit or financial gain, while other times they are used as a weapon of revenge and for the settling of scores. All this destroys the innocence of the young girls and violates their humanity. This is heard and seen by a society which feels unable to help them due to the absence of a system which protects the girls.”

The statement included historical statements from Islamic history, hoping that a review of jurisprudence within the shari’ah of Islam would prompt decisive action. The statement mentioned a decision of the second caliph of Islam, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, when he prohibited (Muslims) from marrying the ‘people of the Book’ (Jews and Christians), when he saw an interest in restricting what was otherwise permissible. The statement also cited contemporary rulings, such as when the Saudi government restricted the marriage of Saudi youth, especially women, to citizens of other nations, which was considered to be for the public interest.

The statement is expected to enjoy a wide reaction, especially since cases of child marriages currently are not prohibited by law, but are usually settled through dialogue or through the payment of money in return for breaking the marriage contract.

Saudi law students and activists have called for the enactment of a law stipulating that persons must be of at least 18 years of age to be married, in order to prevent the exploitation of children in marriages which are performed for money or honor. In these cases, the young girls are too young to be able to consent to the marriage.

On the contrary, the proposal has met opposition from the (Islamic) religious community, seeing as the Prophet (Muhammad) married ‘A’isha when she was nine years old, which, as far as they’re concerned, is sufficient evidence against prohibiting this type of marriage.

On the flipside of this view are many arguments, the majority of which are centered on the inaccuracy of this hadith. Some of them also confirm that this was one of those special cases which was only permissible for the Prophet and should not be replicated by other Muslims, as also Muhammad married 11 women. (Comment: The problem with this argument is that in the case of the number of women to marry, the Qur'an explicitly states that Muslim men (excepting Muhammad) were only to marry four. There is no such stipulation against marrying young girls, so unfortunately the example of Muhammad becomes the supreme law.)

A member of the Saudi Islamic Fiqh Assembly, Muhammad al-Najimi, had previously said in comments to the press that it was not permissible to marry a girl under 15 years of age. He inferred this from the saying of the Prophet: “The virgin (shall not be married until) her consent is obtained, and the widowed or divorced (shall not be married until) her order is obtained.” He reasoned that a young girl cannot speak as an adult, therefore this does not apply to those who have not reached 15 years of age.

Al-Najimi indicated that her guardian is entitled to prohibit her marriage, saying: “As a matter of legitimate politics, a guardian is entitled to issue a decision prohibiting the marriage of the minor. Therefore a minor cannot be married except by agreement of the judge and guardian with the formation of a medical council indicating that she is fit for marriage and that marriage is in her best interest.” (Comment: This is exactly the problem described earlier in the article, namely that guardians are selling off their young girls as brides, so this doesn't really help the girls, now does it?)

He added: “The marriage of minors was authorized on the grounds that the Prophet (blessings and peace of God be upon him) married the Mother of the Believers, ‘A’isha, when she was in her ninth year. That is not valid, for the marriage of the Prophet (blessings and peace of God be upon him) to ‘A’isha was one of the special privileges (only for the Prophet). It was also before his saying (peace be upon him) ‘The virgin (shall not be married until) her consent is obtained, and the widowed or divorced (shall not be married until) her order is obtained’.”

The final move comes after the case of the “Aniza girl” ended unexpectedly with the girl declaring before the judge that she accepted staying with her octogenarian husband. This after her mother withdrew her petition for their divorce, in which she stipulated three conditions, the most important being that the child continue her education, especially in middle school, and that her husband inform her often regarding her schooling. There was much speculation about how the case, which occupied Saudi public opinion for a long time, would end.

Al-Qaradawi to BBC: "Freedom Is Produced by the Application of the Shari'ah"

This is from a BBC interview with Shaykh al-Qaradawi, which was published on BBC Arabic on 6 Feb, entitled "Al-Qaradawi to BBC: Freedom Is Produced by the Application of the Shari'ah." I saw bits and pieces of this translated to English on other news sites, but I never found the entire article, so here you go. I found the last two paragraphs to be the most interesting, where on one hand he compares the lack of freedom of religion in the Hijaz to the fact that the Vatican doesn't allow proselyting in its territory, but then on the other hand he goes on to say that there should be no proselyting of other faiths at all among Muslims. So why even waste the time with the Vatican comparison, if there's no freedom of religion in Islam at all?

The president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars Yousuf al-Qaradawi said that his opposition to building the wall (i.e. the wall between Egypt and Gaza) is rooted in his application of the principle of fiqh which prohibits the doing of something halal (permissible) when its end result is haram (forbidden).

Al-Qaradawi, in a meeting held with his colleague Hassan Mouawad aired on the BBC television program "At the Heart Of", added that the issue of building the steel wall between Egypt and the Gaza Strip is not just connected to Egypt's national security. He explained that Egypt also has an Arab and Islamic responsibility to defend the Gaza Strip, which it governed for a time, confirming that he does not want Egypt to withdraw from its Arab, national, and Islamic role.

Concerning the controversy which was caused after he called for the stoning of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, al-Qaradawi said that he was responding to a question about his opinion on "Abbas's invitation to the Israelis to raid Gaza," which occurred several months ago and was brought up recently by Abbas.

He clarified that his response was predicated on Abbas's remarks, and that it was not simply to rule that Abbas should be executed, but that he specifically should be stoned. For he is the president of all of Palestine, and "the president that calls for his own people to be attacked is not worthy to live, but must be stoned by his people."

Al-Qaradawi also responded to a question about the distribution of posters in the West Bank which showed him shaking hands with rabbis, saying that he does not deny the fact, for "the Jews are People of the Book, and we recognize them together with the Nazarenes (i.e. Christians)."

He added that he welcomes the Jews that stand against Zionism, but he is against dealing with Jewish rabbis if they are Israelis, for he rejects all Jews that accept Israel. On that vein, he refused to attended a Jewish-Christian-Islamic dialogue forum because he does not accept sitting on the same stage with Jews that recognize Israel.

"A Necessary Act"

Regarding suicide operations which some Palestinian factions have carried out, al-Qaradawi said that he sees them as a necessary act. He added that this is necessary because the Palestinians are unable to obtain effective weapons. He indicated that those that carried out these operations were trying to target Israeli soldiers and not civilians. However, concerning the suicide operations carried out in public markets, his response was that "they (i.e. the suicide bombers) are not flawless, and they may make mistakes."

The president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars said that he has evidence of what he describes as Shi'a raids. Al-Qaradawi explained that the Shi'a have not complied with what they agreed to in meetings between "leaders of the two sects" (i.e. Sunni and Shi'a) to not attempt to propagate their doctrine in a land that is purely of the other sect (i.e. Shi'a and Sunni leaders apparently agreed to not preach their doctrines in countries controlled by the other sect).

However, he confirmed that he sees no contradiction in this position and his invitation to get together with them, "for we call for a coming together with other religions, both those of the Book and those not of the Book, so therefore how can we not extend this same invitation to Muslims in whom we see some 'innovation' (i.e. Islamic term referring to apostasy)."

Regarding the contradiction between his call to support Hezbollah and his description of its general secretary Hassan Nasrallah as a Shi'a extremist, al-Qaradawi said that it was a response to "Nasrallah's failure to respond to the attacks on al-Qaradawi from the Shi'ites," when he accused them of not fulfilling their agreement in the reconciliation forums "Between the Two Sects." However, he acknowledged that Nasrallah was not among those extremists.

On issues of freedom, al-Qaradawi said that he does not see a contradiction between his faith in freedom of belief and religion, and his rejection of building (non-Muslim) churches in the Hijaz, "For the Hijaz is Islamic private property, and this property cannot be violated, just as mosques cannot be built in the Vatican."

He also confirmed that there is no contradication, in his opinion, between his faith that "freedom is produced by the application of the shari'ah," and his rejection of any proselytizing of other religions among Muslims, "and this should be the position of every Muslim." However, he does not oppose the conversion of a Muslim to another religion, but only after his being called to repent.
Inside the Jihad: My Life with Al Qaeda