6.7.09
Friedman Wrong About Muslims Again
Tom Friedman is a Middle East expert who knows a lot about Islam. Why, then, does he keep saying misleading things? He wrote in his latest column, "To this day - to this day - no major Muslim cleric or religious body has ever issued a fatwa condemning Osama bin Laden."
A "fatwa" is simply a considered opinion of a Muslim jurisconsult. Such opinions are numerous. First of all, almost all the major Shiite Grand Ayatollahs have condemned Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. You could say that is easy, since Shiites don't generally like Wahhabis. But they are the leaders of 120 million Muslims (some ten percent of the 1.2 billion). So that is one. Tracking these things down is time-consuming, but this should do:
Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah of Lebanon condemns Osama Bin Laden.
So then what about the Sunni world? The leading moral authority for Sunnis is the rector or Grand Imam of the al-Azhar Seminary/ University in Cairo, Egypt. Al-Azhar is perhaps the world's oldest continuous university and has been since the time of Saladin a major center of Sunni religious authority. The current incumbent is Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi. So what about Tantawi and Bin Laden?
Grand Imam of Al-Azhar seminary, Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, condemns Osamah Bin Laden. And:
The Grand Imam of al-Azhar Seminary, Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, condemns Osamah Bin Laden.
What about Pakistan? Admittedly, it has some clerics who are fans of Bin Laden, or at least who would avoid condemning him. But the allegation Friedman is making is that no major cleric has condemned him. Try this: Prominent Pakistani Cleric Tahir ul Qadri condemns Bin Laden.
I don't personally care for Yusuf al-Qaradawi. He is an old-time Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood preacher who fled to Qatar and now has a perch at al-Jazeera. But he does have some virtues. He is enormously popular among Muslim fundamentalists. And, he absolutely despises Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Al-Qaradawi has repeatedly condemned the latter. He even gave a fatwa that it was a duty of Muslims to fight alongside the US in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda! See also:
Yusuf al-Qaradawi condemns al-Qaeda.
There are also substantial Muslim communities in Europe with leaderships that have explicitly condemned Bin Laden. E.g.:
Spanish Muslim Clerical authorities Issue Fatwa against Osamah Bin Laden. There are on the order of 250,000 Muslims in Spain.
High Mufti of Russian Muslims calls for Extradition of Bin Laden. The Russian Muslim community is about 20 million strong, or 15 percent of Russia's 143 million population, and is growing rapidly, so that in a century Russia may be 50 percent Muslim. So this is not a pro forma thing here.
A good round-up on this sort of issue has been put up by al-Muhajabah.
See also Charles Kurzman's page.
Friedman also does refer to a major conference of Muslim clerics, thinkers and notables wound up just Wednesday that made a powerful statement about religious tolerance and condemned everything Osama Bin Laden stands for. But he seems oddly unaware of the significance of having Grand Ayatollah Sistani, Grand Imam of al-Azhar Seminary Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, and many other great Muslim authorities sign off on this epochal statement of Muslim ecumenism.
The statement forbids one Muslim to declare another "not a Muslim" if the believer adheres to any of the mainstream legal rites of Sunnism and Shiism. The whole basis of al-Qaeda is to call the Muslim leaders of countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, as well as Shiites, "not Muslims." The statement also demands that engineers should please stop pretending to issue fatwas, which should be left to trained clerical jurisconsults. This para. is also a slam at Bin Laden.
PS As for Friedman's main point, that Muslims haven't done a good job of fighting jihadi ideology and terrorism, it is bizarre. The Algerian government fought a virtual civil war to put down political Islam, in which over 100,000 persons died. The Egyptians jailed 20,000 or 30,000 radicals for thought crimes and killed 1500 in running street battles in the 1990s and early zeroes. Al-Qaeda can't easily strike in the Middle East precisely because Syria, Egypt, Algeria, etc. have their number and have undertaken massive actions against them. What does Friedman want? And, besides, he is wrong that this is only a Muslim problem. In the global age all problems are everybody's. That's part of flat world, too, Tom. SourceInformed Comment
A "fatwa" is simply a considered opinion of a Muslim jurisconsult. Such opinions are numerous. First of all, almost all the major Shiite Grand Ayatollahs have condemned Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. You could say that is easy, since Shiites don't generally like Wahhabis. But they are the leaders of 120 million Muslims (some ten percent of the 1.2 billion). So that is one. Tracking these things down is time-consuming, but this should do:
Ayatollah Muhammad Husain Fadlallah of Lebanon condemns Osama Bin Laden.
So then what about the Sunni world? The leading moral authority for Sunnis is the rector or Grand Imam of the al-Azhar Seminary/ University in Cairo, Egypt. Al-Azhar is perhaps the world's oldest continuous university and has been since the time of Saladin a major center of Sunni religious authority. The current incumbent is Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi. So what about Tantawi and Bin Laden?
Grand Imam of Al-Azhar seminary, Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, condemns Osamah Bin Laden. And:
The Grand Imam of al-Azhar Seminary, Shaikh Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, condemns Osamah Bin Laden.
What about Pakistan? Admittedly, it has some clerics who are fans of Bin Laden, or at least who would avoid condemning him. But the allegation Friedman is making is that no major cleric has condemned him. Try this: Prominent Pakistani Cleric Tahir ul Qadri condemns Bin Laden.
I don't personally care for Yusuf al-Qaradawi. He is an old-time Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood preacher who fled to Qatar and now has a perch at al-Jazeera. But he does have some virtues. He is enormously popular among Muslim fundamentalists. And, he absolutely despises Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Al-Qaradawi has repeatedly condemned the latter. He even gave a fatwa that it was a duty of Muslims to fight alongside the US in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda! See also:
Yusuf al-Qaradawi condemns al-Qaeda.
There are also substantial Muslim communities in Europe with leaderships that have explicitly condemned Bin Laden. E.g.:
Spanish Muslim Clerical authorities Issue Fatwa against Osamah Bin Laden. There are on the order of 250,000 Muslims in Spain.
High Mufti of Russian Muslims calls for Extradition of Bin Laden. The Russian Muslim community is about 20 million strong, or 15 percent of Russia's 143 million population, and is growing rapidly, so that in a century Russia may be 50 percent Muslim. So this is not a pro forma thing here.
A good round-up on this sort of issue has been put up by al-Muhajabah.
See also Charles Kurzman's page.
Friedman also does refer to a major conference of Muslim clerics, thinkers and notables wound up just Wednesday that made a powerful statement about religious tolerance and condemned everything Osama Bin Laden stands for. But he seems oddly unaware of the significance of having Grand Ayatollah Sistani, Grand Imam of al-Azhar Seminary Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, and many other great Muslim authorities sign off on this epochal statement of Muslim ecumenism.
The statement forbids one Muslim to declare another "not a Muslim" if the believer adheres to any of the mainstream legal rites of Sunnism and Shiism. The whole basis of al-Qaeda is to call the Muslim leaders of countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, as well as Shiites, "not Muslims." The statement also demands that engineers should please stop pretending to issue fatwas, which should be left to trained clerical jurisconsults. This para. is also a slam at Bin Laden.
PS As for Friedman's main point, that Muslims haven't done a good job of fighting jihadi ideology and terrorism, it is bizarre. The Algerian government fought a virtual civil war to put down political Islam, in which over 100,000 persons died. The Egyptians jailed 20,000 or 30,000 radicals for thought crimes and killed 1500 in running street battles in the 1990s and early zeroes. Al-Qaeda can't easily strike in the Middle East precisely because Syria, Egypt, Algeria, etc. have their number and have undertaken massive actions against them. What does Friedman want? And, besides, he is wrong that this is only a Muslim problem. In the global age all problems are everybody's. That's part of flat world, too, Tom. SourceInformed Comment
3.7.09
Islam, Europe and the Political Elite
The European elections draw closer, but we have very few real political choices. It seems to me that Islam, Europe and extreme left all share the same warped values and are determined to force them upon us — whether we want them or not. And whatever party we vote for, citizens seem to get the very same soul-destroying policies with only a slightly different wrapper!
Take the issue of democracy, for example. Islam, the European Union and our political elite all declare their support for freedom of speech — but what they really mean is they support leftist speech. What they really mean is that anything they don’t agree with is not “free speech” but “hate speech” — and this subterfuge allows them to act claiming they are “protecting society” from racism, xenophobia or hate-mongers. So whether we vote Labour, Liberal, Conservative, Green or UKIP we will always get the same! More immigration, more Islamization, more European interference and less and less freedom to decide what we really want.
Islam, the European Union and our political elite all share the same values — they all despise fairness, democracy and justice. Today, Tories as well as Labour, Liberal and the other mainstream parties claim they are “centrist” parties, but this thin wrapper of respectability covers a dangerous neo-Marxist core which lies at the centre of mainstream politics today. Our political elites, whatever the colour of their political wrapper, truly believe that only they are worthy to be the true judges of fairness, justice and law. So when such “liberals” (of whatever party) win an election it is declared “fair”; yet if they lose one it must be due to “xenophobic elements”, “racists”, “fascists” or similar antisocial types sabotaging their rightful inheritance.
Muslims, the European Union and our political elites all wrap themselves in the cloak of liberalism, equality and fairness — but underneath, they all share the same contempt for citizens, abhorrence of duty to their constituents and loathing for the democratic process; they all hate anyone who disagrees with them. The EU, for example, learning in a poll that 60 percent of European citizens (as well as 60 percent of Turks) were against Turkey joining the EU — decided to speed up the process and keep it quiet so as not to attract the attention of citizens. And as you know, this is only one example in many ongoing acts of contempt by the EU for its own citizens.
Muslims, the European Union and modern, left-wing elitist politicians have indoctrinated themselves to believe in their own superiority. They think of themselves so much, and so often, that the idea anyone could hold opposing views seems somehow ridiculous. Likewise, Islam believes, and has always believed, it is above all other religions and openly says so in the Qur’an. And such supremicism easily leads to the justification of violence and hatred for non-Muslims as European political elitism has led to an institutionalized contempt for EU citizens.
The EU believes it has a destiny to implement its vision of a united, federal Europe where the leftist elite sit at the helm dispensing equality, freedom and justice for all. They must do this irrespective of “wrong” referendum results and “meaningless” opinion polls because European citizens are too short-sighted to “see the big picture”, and benefits which will clearly be reaped by all!
Our elitist leaders believe that only they have “nuanced” beliefs and the “insight” necessary to see the true value of a “cosmopolitan society”. They alone have the vision to move beyond outdated ideas like nationalism, patriotism, and religious conflicts. In other words, only the European Union, the United Nations and the leftist elite are intellectual enough to hold objective truths. And that is why the mainstream media is right to accept their truth whilst rejecting “divisive” and “inflammatory” talk and ideas which differ from their utopian ideals.
Today, criticism of Islam, the EU and the leftist dream is treated as heresy — an attack on the very identity of the listener. And our political elites treat any such criticism with the contempt it deserves.
Anyone who challenges them, the EU or Islam does not even warrant a well argued counterargument since such ideas are so “obviously false”. There is clearly “something wrong” with the people who criticize them… so they must be xenophobic, hate-mongers or perhaps just ignorant.
I hope people will learn that a vote for Labour, Liberal Greens or Conservatives is simply a vote for the very same rotten policies in a different coloured wrapper.
Now is the time to use your vote to cause an impact, to send shudders down the spines of the political elitists and Islam-appeasing parties currently ruling over us — treating us as mindless, powerless pawns.
Source:
Take the issue of democracy, for example. Islam, the European Union and our political elite all declare their support for freedom of speech — but what they really mean is they support leftist speech. What they really mean is that anything they don’t agree with is not “free speech” but “hate speech” — and this subterfuge allows them to act claiming they are “protecting society” from racism, xenophobia or hate-mongers. So whether we vote Labour, Liberal, Conservative, Green or UKIP we will always get the same! More immigration, more Islamization, more European interference and less and less freedom to decide what we really want.
Islam, the European Union and our political elite all share the same values — they all despise fairness, democracy and justice. Today, Tories as well as Labour, Liberal and the other mainstream parties claim they are “centrist” parties, but this thin wrapper of respectability covers a dangerous neo-Marxist core which lies at the centre of mainstream politics today. Our political elites, whatever the colour of their political wrapper, truly believe that only they are worthy to be the true judges of fairness, justice and law. So when such “liberals” (of whatever party) win an election it is declared “fair”; yet if they lose one it must be due to “xenophobic elements”, “racists”, “fascists” or similar antisocial types sabotaging their rightful inheritance.
Muslims, the European Union and our political elites all wrap themselves in the cloak of liberalism, equality and fairness — but underneath, they all share the same contempt for citizens, abhorrence of duty to their constituents and loathing for the democratic process; they all hate anyone who disagrees with them. The EU, for example, learning in a poll that 60 percent of European citizens (as well as 60 percent of Turks) were against Turkey joining the EU — decided to speed up the process and keep it quiet so as not to attract the attention of citizens. And as you know, this is only one example in many ongoing acts of contempt by the EU for its own citizens.
Muslims, the European Union and modern, left-wing elitist politicians have indoctrinated themselves to believe in their own superiority. They think of themselves so much, and so often, that the idea anyone could hold opposing views seems somehow ridiculous. Likewise, Islam believes, and has always believed, it is above all other religions and openly says so in the Qur’an. And such supremicism easily leads to the justification of violence and hatred for non-Muslims as European political elitism has led to an institutionalized contempt for EU citizens.
The EU believes it has a destiny to implement its vision of a united, federal Europe where the leftist elite sit at the helm dispensing equality, freedom and justice for all. They must do this irrespective of “wrong” referendum results and “meaningless” opinion polls because European citizens are too short-sighted to “see the big picture”, and benefits which will clearly be reaped by all!
Our elitist leaders believe that only they have “nuanced” beliefs and the “insight” necessary to see the true value of a “cosmopolitan society”. They alone have the vision to move beyond outdated ideas like nationalism, patriotism, and religious conflicts. In other words, only the European Union, the United Nations and the leftist elite are intellectual enough to hold objective truths. And that is why the mainstream media is right to accept their truth whilst rejecting “divisive” and “inflammatory” talk and ideas which differ from their utopian ideals.
Today, criticism of Islam, the EU and the leftist dream is treated as heresy — an attack on the very identity of the listener. And our political elites treat any such criticism with the contempt it deserves.
Anyone who challenges them, the EU or Islam does not even warrant a well argued counterargument since such ideas are so “obviously false”. There is clearly “something wrong” with the people who criticize them… so they must be xenophobic, hate-mongers or perhaps just ignorant.
I hope people will learn that a vote for Labour, Liberal Greens or Conservatives is simply a vote for the very same rotten policies in a different coloured wrapper.
Now is the time to use your vote to cause an impact, to send shudders down the spines of the political elitists and Islam-appeasing parties currently ruling over us — treating us as mindless, powerless pawns.
Source:
13.6.09
Leading Muslim cleric killed in suicide bomb attack in Lahore
A prominent Pakistani Muslim cleric who founded a religious alliance against the Taleban was killed today in a suicide bomb attack on his Islamic college in the eastern city of Lahore.
Sarfraz Ahmed Naeemi appeared to have been the target of the blast in his office at the Jamia Naeemia madrassa, which he headed and where he had just conducted Friday prayers.
Dr Naeemi — whose father founded the madrassa and who was well known and respected in Lahore and across Pakistan — died on the way to hospital, according to his son, Waqar.
“I was still in the mosque when I heard a big bang. We rushed towards the office and there was a smell of explosives in the air. There was blood and several people were crying in pain,” Waqar said.
Geo TV showed Dr Naeemi’s body lying on a stretcher, his beard and hair covered in dust and blood stains around his nostrils.
Tariq Saleem Dogar, the Punjab provincial police chief, denounced the attack on the madrassa — which taught maths and computer science as well as Islamic studies — as un-Islamic.
“It could not be an act of a Muslim to carry out an attack in a mosque,” he said.
In another blast at around the same time, a suicide car bomber struck near a mosque in the northwestern town of Nowshera, killing at least three people, police said.
The attacks are the latest in a spate of bombings which local officials say are revenge for Pakistan’s army launching an offensive against the Taleban in and around the northwestern region of Swat last month.
They came the day after the army opened a new front against the Taleban near the tribal region of Waziristan, and the US House of Representatives approved tripling aid to Pakistan to about $1.5 billion a year for the next five years.
Dr Naeemi appears to have been targeted because he had been integral in helping to generate political, religious and public support for the army’s campaign in Swat over the last few weeks.
Last month, he established the Sunni Itehad Council, an alliance of more than 22 Islamic groups and political parties with the explicit goal of opposing the Taleban.
The council claims to represent about 85 million Pakistani followers of the moderate Barelvi school of Sunni Islam, which incorporates music and mysticism and venerates saints and their shrines.
“The Taleban is a stigma on Islam,” Dr Naeemi told The Times in an interview at his madressah last month.
“That is why we will support our Government and our army and their right to destroy the Taleban. We will save Pakistan.” The Taleban preaches an extreme version of the Deobandi school of Sunni Islam, which maintains that many Barelvi practices are un-Islamic and advocates the use of violence against Barelvis and Shia Muslims.
Militants have destroyed several Barelvi shrines in the northwest in recent months.
There are no precise statistics but experts believe that at least half of Pakistan’s 173 million people are Barelvi, and about 20 to 25 per cent Deobandi. Another 20 per cent are Shia. Source
Sarfraz Ahmed Naeemi appeared to have been the target of the blast in his office at the Jamia Naeemia madrassa, which he headed and where he had just conducted Friday prayers.
Dr Naeemi — whose father founded the madrassa and who was well known and respected in Lahore and across Pakistan — died on the way to hospital, according to his son, Waqar.
“I was still in the mosque when I heard a big bang. We rushed towards the office and there was a smell of explosives in the air. There was blood and several people were crying in pain,” Waqar said.
Geo TV showed Dr Naeemi’s body lying on a stretcher, his beard and hair covered in dust and blood stains around his nostrils.
Tariq Saleem Dogar, the Punjab provincial police chief, denounced the attack on the madrassa — which taught maths and computer science as well as Islamic studies — as un-Islamic.
“It could not be an act of a Muslim to carry out an attack in a mosque,” he said.
In another blast at around the same time, a suicide car bomber struck near a mosque in the northwestern town of Nowshera, killing at least three people, police said.
The attacks are the latest in a spate of bombings which local officials say are revenge for Pakistan’s army launching an offensive against the Taleban in and around the northwestern region of Swat last month.
They came the day after the army opened a new front against the Taleban near the tribal region of Waziristan, and the US House of Representatives approved tripling aid to Pakistan to about $1.5 billion a year for the next five years.
Dr Naeemi appears to have been targeted because he had been integral in helping to generate political, religious and public support for the army’s campaign in Swat over the last few weeks.
Last month, he established the Sunni Itehad Council, an alliance of more than 22 Islamic groups and political parties with the explicit goal of opposing the Taleban.
The council claims to represent about 85 million Pakistani followers of the moderate Barelvi school of Sunni Islam, which incorporates music and mysticism and venerates saints and their shrines.
“The Taleban is a stigma on Islam,” Dr Naeemi told The Times in an interview at his madressah last month.
“That is why we will support our Government and our army and their right to destroy the Taleban. We will save Pakistan.” The Taleban preaches an extreme version of the Deobandi school of Sunni Islam, which maintains that many Barelvi practices are un-Islamic and advocates the use of violence against Barelvis and Shia Muslims.
Militants have destroyed several Barelvi shrines in the northwest in recent months.
There are no precise statistics but experts believe that at least half of Pakistan’s 173 million people are Barelvi, and about 20 to 25 per cent Deobandi. Another 20 per cent are Shia. Source
28.5.09
From Darkness into Light. Why we choose Islam
Many people explain why they chose islam as the only right Path to the Truth...
22.5.09
Mohammad (pbuh) the Praise worthy
Mohammad, the seal of all of God's Messengers and Prophets.
He preached the religion of Adam, Noah, Abraham, moses, Jesus (pbut),
He founded a state
He built a nation
He laid down a moral code
He applies social and political reforms
He established a powerful dynamic society
He helped reform society
His teachings are practice and represented by a billion and half people world wide
He completely revolutionized the arab culture.
He gave of human thought and behavior for all times to come.
"His Name is MUHAMMAD" which translates to the Praise worthy.
May Peace of God Be Upon Him (pbuh) Source
He preached the religion of Adam, Noah, Abraham, moses, Jesus (pbut),
He founded a state
He built a nation
He laid down a moral code
He applies social and political reforms
He established a powerful dynamic society
He helped reform society
His teachings are practice and represented by a billion and half people world wide
He completely revolutionized the arab culture.
He gave of human thought and behavior for all times to come.
"His Name is MUHAMMAD" which translates to the Praise worthy.
May Peace of God Be Upon Him (pbuh) Source
15.5.09
QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE -CONFLICT OR CONCILIATION?
Islamic Research Foundation An International Resource Centre For Understanding And Clarification, On Islam And Comparative Religion. Islamic Research Foundation Provides For Free Hire And Sale, Video And Audio Cassettes, On Islam And Comparative Religion. This Being, The Largest And Best Collection Internationally. It Includes Films, Television Programmes, Documentaries, Qur’anic And Islamic Studies Programmes As Well As Interviews, Lectures, Symposia, Debates, Etc., Of World Renowned Speakers Like Shaikh Ahmed Deedat – South Africa, Dr. Zakir Naik – India, Dr. Jamal Badawi – Canada, Dr. Khalid Al-Mansoor – U.S.A., Brother Yusuf Islam – U.K., Brother Gary Miller – Canada, Dr. Israr Ahmed -Pakistan, Maulana Abdul Karim Parekh- India, And Many Others. Islamic Research Foundation Also Provides On Request, Free Literature on Islam And Comparative Religion. Please Phone, Call, Or Write To Islamic Research Foundation, 56/58, Tandel Street (North), Dongri, Mumbai 400 009.
QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE -CONFLICT OR CONCILIATION? – PART I
QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE -CONFLICT OR CONCILIATION? PART II
QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE -CONFLICT OR CONCILIATION? – PART I
QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE -CONFLICT OR CONCILIATION? PART II
12.5.09
Who will stand up for Noah(pbuh) on Judgment day?
No 549: Narrated Abu Said: Allah's Apostle said, "Noah and his nation will come (on the Day of Resurrection and Allah will ask (Noah), "Did you convey (the Message)?' He will reply, 'Yes, O my Lord!' Then Allah will ask Noah's nation, 'Did Noah convey My Message to you?' They will reply, 'No, no prophet came to us.' Then Allah will ask Noah, 'Who will stand a witness for you?' He will reply, 'Muhammad and his followers (will stand witness for me).' So, I and my followers will stand as witnesses for him (that he conveyed Allah's Message)." That is, (the interpretation) of the Statement of Allah: "Thus we have made you a just and the best nation that you might be witnesses Over mankind .." (2.143)
It's rather intresting that I cam across this Hadith by an email and thought it was very uniqe, yet very truthful because in the Quran it speaks of Noah-pbuh, as a righteous man, who served God and delivered the message to his people, but they rejected and mocked him, that some of them were so arrogant, as it began raining as he told them, it says he was still inviting them to listen and come a board, they were still arrogant to say no his being untruthful and that it will stop. They mostly rejected because of arrogance and Noah-pbuh according to the Quran is not quilty of anything and is one of God's prophets.
It's rather intresting that I cam across this Hadith by an email and thought it was very uniqe, yet very truthful because in the Quran it speaks of Noah-pbuh, as a righteous man, who served God and delivered the message to his people, but they rejected and mocked him, that some of them were so arrogant, as it began raining as he told them, it says he was still inviting them to listen and come a board, they were still arrogant to say no his being untruthful and that it will stop. They mostly rejected because of arrogance and Noah-pbuh according to the Quran is not quilty of anything and is one of God's prophets.
In Malta Tourists are welcome (but not them Muslims)
a couple of scores of Muslim men gathered on the Sliema front. They were not being rowdy, they weren't drinking and they weren't swearing. All they had as props were some prayer rugs. Because, in fact, they were only interested in praying together. And they had a police permit to do so.
You would think, Malta being a free democratic country, that this would be a totally non-news event. Bzzz. Wrong answer - not with the racist hysteria gripping the island. For this whole week it's been the most read, most commented and most e-mailed article. Some of the comments to this simple gathering are truly alarming, chilling almost:
"Malta is a Catholic country. They have no right to come here and pray in front of us. I don't care what they do in the privacy of their own home, but not here."
"They should go to a mosque. That is where they belong. Or in some hole somewhere. But not here where I get my children to eat and have a good time."
"I would have had no problem if they were Catholics praying... in Malta we are all Catholics, so it's not a problem, but not them."
"If this happens again there will be trouble."
"I bet that their next step will be to make us remove our icons/crosses and statues from our streets or from schools."
"The authorities should never have given permission, much less protection, at the cost of the Maltese taxpayer."
"This is clear case of arrogance by a small group of men."
I'm sorry? Arrogance? Arrogant was the woman who insisted on walking her dog in front of them, twice. The comments get harsher and harsher. You would think that these men were planning a coup d'etat rather than reciting their Qur'an, or that their prayer beads were weapons of mass destruction.
The reaction, were it not in the context of our society's dark skin paranoia, would have been perplexing. These men simply prayed and then went their way: "We are not here to protest or threaten violence but to express our fundamental human right to gather in prayer," one of the leaders, Bader Zina, said.
They resorted to the Sliema front because the Planning Authority sealed off the Sliema flat where they normally gathered as it did not have a licence to be used as a place of worship. Fair enough. But then, they have every right to get a permit and hit the front.
It's not as if it's never been done before by religious groups. Didn't that touchy-feely, hand-clappy charismatic Edward Spiteri guy and his followers hog the Birzebbuga front for summer weekends on end?
Religion is being used as a poor excuse, a cover-up if you want, for racism. Yet again, the Catholic leaders have chosen to remain silent on the matter. They who should be encouraging the embracing of different religions, they who should be at the forefront of promoting tolerance and acceptance, they who should be reminding all and sundry that Christ after all said 'Love your neighbour as yourself.'
Where is the Church when it needs to voice its disapproval of this unacceptable prejudice? More on this
You would think, Malta being a free democratic country, that this would be a totally non-news event. Bzzz. Wrong answer - not with the racist hysteria gripping the island. For this whole week it's been the most read, most commented and most e-mailed article. Some of the comments to this simple gathering are truly alarming, chilling almost:
"Malta is a Catholic country. They have no right to come here and pray in front of us. I don't care what they do in the privacy of their own home, but not here."
"They should go to a mosque. That is where they belong. Or in some hole somewhere. But not here where I get my children to eat and have a good time."
"I would have had no problem if they were Catholics praying... in Malta we are all Catholics, so it's not a problem, but not them."
"If this happens again there will be trouble."
"I bet that their next step will be to make us remove our icons/crosses and statues from our streets or from schools."
"The authorities should never have given permission, much less protection, at the cost of the Maltese taxpayer."
"This is clear case of arrogance by a small group of men."
I'm sorry? Arrogance? Arrogant was the woman who insisted on walking her dog in front of them, twice. The comments get harsher and harsher. You would think that these men were planning a coup d'etat rather than reciting their Qur'an, or that their prayer beads were weapons of mass destruction.
The reaction, were it not in the context of our society's dark skin paranoia, would have been perplexing. These men simply prayed and then went their way: "We are not here to protest or threaten violence but to express our fundamental human right to gather in prayer," one of the leaders, Bader Zina, said.
They resorted to the Sliema front because the Planning Authority sealed off the Sliema flat where they normally gathered as it did not have a licence to be used as a place of worship. Fair enough. But then, they have every right to get a permit and hit the front.
It's not as if it's never been done before by religious groups. Didn't that touchy-feely, hand-clappy charismatic Edward Spiteri guy and his followers hog the Birzebbuga front for summer weekends on end?
Religion is being used as a poor excuse, a cover-up if you want, for racism. Yet again, the Catholic leaders have chosen to remain silent on the matter. They who should be encouraging the embracing of different religions, they who should be at the forefront of promoting tolerance and acceptance, they who should be reminding all and sundry that Christ after all said 'Love your neighbour as yourself.'
Where is the Church when it needs to voice its disapproval of this unacceptable prejudice? More on this
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
