veiled4allah

the truth about jihad

Top Pakistani clerics explain the actual rules of jihad in Islam:

According to three top scholars interviewed by the BBC News website, jihad can only be called in the following circumstances: *If a Muslim community comes under attack, then jihad becomes an obligation for all Muslims, male and female, in that community *If that particular community feels it cannot fight off attackers on its own, then jihad becomes incumbent on Muslims living in nearby communities *If a Muslim ruler of a country calls for jihad, then it is incumbent upon the Muslims living under that ruler to join the jihad. Mufti Usmani says that even in such circumstances, jihad is obligatory only on as many Muslims as are required to defend the community under attack. "If Pakistan is attacked but its army is sufficient to deal with the threat, then Pakistani civilians are under no obligation to join jihad," he said. The second principle relates to the conduct of the jihadis. Under no circumstances are Muslims allowed to attack women, children, the old and the meek, the sick, those that are praying and civilians, say these ulema. Muslim militants argue that if innocent Muslims are killed in enemy action then Muslims are allowed to kill innocent people in retaliation. But clerics strongly disagree with this line of thinking, arguing that Islam does not allow Muslims to respond to "a mistake" by another mistake. "Islam is absolutely clear on this issue. Two wrongs do not make a right," Mufti Usmani said. "If they feel that the US or the UK are killing innocent civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan, it does not give them the right to kill innocent citizens in London or New York," he said. Dr Sikander, who heads Jamia Binoria in Karachi, says the Muslims have their options clearly cut out under Islam if they do not agree with the foreign policy of those countries where they are living... ...Dr Sikander says that should Muslims feel that their country of residence is doing something terribly wrong, then all they can do is to leave the country. "If an Iraqi living in London is outraged over Britain's role in what is happening in Iraq, then he should go to Iraq and fight the coalition forces there," he said. "Nothing gives him the right to hit back at innocent civilians living in the UK." Pakistani clerics say that the doctrine evolves from the fundamental Islamic principle of honouring commitments. "When a Muslim visits a Western country or if he is living there, then he is under a kind of a contractual obligation to abide by the law of that land," explains Mufti Usmani. "Islam is so strict about honouring commitments that a commitment cannot be revoked unilaterally even in times of battle."

See also Some Quranic Verses on Jihad and What Islam Really Says about Killing the Innocent

millions may be facing starvation in Niger

The situation in Niger:

The aid agency Oxfam warned last week that about 3.6 million people, about a third of them children, face starvation in this West African nation devastated by locusts and drought. The U.N.'s humanitarian agency estimates some 800,000 children under 5 are suffering from hunger, including 150,000 faced with severe malnutrition.

Read the whole story. Then, please give.

culture clash

So I'm reading all the stories about the furor in the UK over the police shooting and killing a man. There should be a furor because rather than being a Muslim suicide bomber, the victim was an unarmed Brazilian. But then I saw this story in the local newspaper: Kent police fatally shoot man fleeing in stolen car (Kent is a small city near Seattle). It's the kind of thing that only appears on an inside page of the paper and isn't even worth commentary. And Kent, Washington, is just an average American community. I couldn't help but think that Britain really must be a very different country than the U.S. Would the shooting in London have even been news if it occurred in the U.S.? It's just too common here and happens too often for it to have the shock value it does in Britain.

I cry for what America is becoming

Hunter at Daily Kos notes the sickening combination of two stories, Bush Administration Files 11th Hour Papers Blocking the Release of Darby CD Photos and Video Of Abu Ghraib Torture and White House Aims to Block Legislation On Detainees. The first story, the new Abu Ghraib photos and videos, is about rape and murder allegedly committed by American soldiers. Some of the victims may have been children (1, 2, 3). And, not satisfied to cover up this depravity that resulted from its policies, the Bush Administration wants the right to continue using torture:

The Bush administration in recent days has been lobbying to block legislation supported by Republican senators that would bar the U.S. military from engaging in "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" of detainees, from hiding prisoners from the Red Cross, and from using interrogation methods not authorized by a new Army field manual.

There are many things Bush has done or overseen that I oppose and even hate, but Abu Ghraib is something I don't think I'll ever be able to forgive, it is a perversion of everything that this country is supposed to stand for. This is the face of America for many around the world now: torture and rape, even of children, and demanding the right to do it with impunity. We're destroying everything that we had built up before. May God have mercy on us.

terrorist attacks in Egypt

Multiple car bomb attacks kill dozens at the Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh. Juan Cole and Billmon discuss who may be responsible and what their motivations may be. The most likely suspects are Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which was founded by Ayman al-Zawahiri, now famous as Bin Laden's "number two". For background see Egyptian Jihad? and some additional notes in Wahhabis condemning terrorism Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un (a Muslim prayer for those who have died). Note: For my views on terrorism, see here most recently and much more like that is here

carnival!

Maryam is starting a "blog carnival" for Muslims bloggers called The State of the Ummah. Muslim bloggers choose the best of their posts from a recent period and submit them the Maryam will post up all the submissions. It sounds like fun! Unfortunately, I don't have many posts since the start of the month :p But I'll think of one to nominate!

yet another moderate Muslim leader banned from U.S.

Having already banned Tariq Ramadan and Yusuf Islam, the U.S. has now banned senior British Muslim cleric Zaki Badawi. Maybe the government was afraid he would do things like this:

Dr Badawi appeared with fellow British faith leaders, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, on Sunday to deliver a joint statement condemning last week's "evil terrorist" attacks on London.

Update 7/19: The U.S government has apologized to Badawi and promised a visa, but has no explanation for what happened.

about extremism and British Muslims

Last Sunday, London's Sunday Times had yet another leaked memo. This wasn't more of the Downing Street Memo saga, but instead a memo called Young Muslims and Extremism (1, 2, 3, 4, all PDF). Although the Times's companion article plays up the angle about extremists recruiting young Muslims in colleges and universities, this isn't the main focus of the memo and in fact is only mentioned in passing. The main focus of the memo is to look at factors that may contribute to extremism among young British Muslims, including the high levels of economic disadvantagement among British Muslims, anger over British foreign policy, alienation caused by Islamophobia and racism, and the need for greater engagement between the government and society on the one hand and the Muslim community on the other hand. And the memo also outlines proposed ways to deal with these issues. As Milan Rai notes, this isn't exactly the official line coming out of London these days. A group called Justice Not Vengeance has launched a campaign to pressurize the media to give more attention to this leaked memo and its conclusions. Later: As reported by the Scotsman, Herald, Guardian, Independent, Mail, and Telegraph (basically, almost every major UK paper - oh, and the BBC too), a leading British think tank on foreign affairs, Chatham House, issued a report (PDF) on Security, Terrorism, and the UK. The newspapers draw particular attention to the following passage from the report:

A key problem with regard to implementing 'Prevention' and 'Pursuit' is that the UK government has been conducting counter-terrorism policy 'shoulder to shoulder' with the US, not in the sense of being an equal decision-maker, but rather as pillion passenger compelled to leave the steering to the ally in the driving seat. There is no doubt that the situation over Iraq has imposed particular difficulties for the UK, and for the wider coalition against terrorism. It gave a boost to the Al-Qaeda network's propaganda, recruitment and fundraising, caused a major split in the coalition, provided an ideal targeting and training area for Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists, and deflected resources and assistance that could have been deployed to assist the Karzai government and to bring bin Laden to justice. Riding pillion with a powerful ally has proved costly in terms of British and US military lives, Iraqi lives, military expenditure, and the damage caused to the counter-terrorism campaign.

Yes, Iraq does have something to do with it, and Blair's tendency to act like Bush's poodle is putting his country at risk. The Washington Post picks this one up too. Update 8/28: The British Foreign Office now gets into the act.

refuting suicide bombings

Thabet points to a site called Ihsanic Intelligence, which has published a document called The Hijacked Caravan: Refuting Suicide Bombings as Martyrdom Operations in Contemporary Jihad Strategy (PDF). The document examines and refutes the specific claims made by those who say that suicide bombings are Islamically legitimate, and presents clear evidence that both suicide and murder (much less the two combined together) are forbidden in Islam. Their conclusion:

The technique of suicide bombing is anathema, antithetical and abhorrent to Sunni Islam. It is considered legally forbidden, constituting a reprehensible innovation in the Islamic tradition, morally an enormity of sin combining suicide and murder and theologically an act which has consequences of eternal damnation.

They plan to present this document to the United Nations Social and Economic Council and to ask Muslim scholars worldwide to sign it.

not silent

Sometimes people say, why don't Muslims march in the streets to protest against terrorism? Well they will be:

Muslims are to take to the streets of some of Britain's major cities to protest against the terror attacks on London, it emerged yesterday. The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) is hopeful that hundreds of thousands will take part in a series of marches to make clear their opposition to the terrorists. Sheik Ibrahim Mogra of the MCB said it was important that ordinary Britons realised that the terrorists were not representative of Muslims as a whole. He said: "The idea is to show we are united in condemning this murderous act. "It would send a very strong message to the terrorists and to the British public that we are against violence and want to live in peace. The terrorists will not drive a wedge between us." It is understood that members of Britain's 1.5 million-strong Muslim community would march in cities including London, Manchester, Birmingham, Leicester, Bradford and Leeds, while the demonstration may also include prayer meetings and vigils.

Update: I'm not sure if this is still in the works, but in the meantime, in Egypt:

More than 1,000 Egyptian hotel workers, Bedouin sheikhs and foreign dive-school instructors marched through Sharm el-Sheikh yesterday to condemn the bombings. "There is no God but God, and terrorism is the enemy of God," chanted the Egyptian protesters, who included hotel chefs, technicians and road sweepers, as they marched along the main road of Sharm el-Sheikh, hit on Saturday by three bombs.