Tag: Islam

Ustazah: Allah Gave Permission For Girls To Hug K-Pop Idols

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 15 — The three Muslims girls who have been vilified for hugging K-pop stars during a concert last week actually had “Allah’s permission”, a Muslim religious teacher claimed.

The young woman, who did not provide her name and was identified by some YouTube accounts as an “ustazah” or religious teacher, said that the three girls would have been stopped by God from going onstage if there was no divine permission.

“They were onstage with Allah’s permission because in this life, Allah gives us one thing—that is choice. Allah gives us the choice. Allah gave us the choice whether we want to go or not, do something consciously or not,” the tudung-clad woman explained in a YouTube video that is 5:42 minutes long.

“And they chose to go and Allah permitted them to go; they chose to stand up there and Allah permitted them to be onstage,” she added in the video carried by YouTube users like Pen Merah Dot Com and Siakap Keli.

In the same video that surfaced yesterday, she also trained her guns on “keyboard warriors”, calling them out for their alleged holier-than-thou attitude and abusive words.

“But behind Allah’s permission for this to become viral, Allah actually wants to test us who are so good in becoming keyboard warriors to abuse, to speak ill; as if you are all so good since you were born until now,” she said.

She also pointed out that the three Muslim girls could end up being far better than their critics by learning from this incident, also saying that the girls and their families and friends were already suffering shame from this controversy.

She said love should be shown to the three girls instead, and sounded exasperated when noting how Muslims and Malays have been squabbling online over this incident.

The controversy erupted after a video of the meet-the-fans session here for K-pop band B1A4 on Saturday was uploaded online, prompting thousands of angry Facebook users to share and comment on a three-minute viral video of the artists hugging and embracing the tudung-clad Malay girls on stage.

The clip, which was posted on the Sukan Star TV Facebook page, was suggestively titled “Perempuan melayu dicabul atas pentas oleh mat kpop semalam” (Malay girls molested on stage by K-Pop artists last night).

But B1A4’s management firm WM Entertainment has since then denied claims that its artistes “molested” the three Malay girls, saying that they were mindful of local Muslim sensitivities and said the consent of the three had been obtained.

The mini-concert’s organisers TGM Events have also denied the molest claim, pointing out that the event company was run mostly by women and were against “molestation or sexual harassment.”

The organiser also said the fans were told beforehand not to “touch” or “get too close” to the B1A4 members, adding that the selected fans had given their full consent to appear on stage.

On Monday, JAWI said it is investigating the girls for public indecency and outraging Muslims, and would probe the matter under Section 29 of Shariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997.

Section 29 of the Act allows for a fine of up to RM1,000 and imprisonment of no more than six months upon conviction.

Yesterday, Utusan Malaysia reported that JAWI said it will apply for an arrest warrant if the Malay girls refuse to turn themselves in for investigation within a week, but the department’s official told Malay Mail Online that they may be spared prosecution and sent for rehabilitation instead if they are underage.

Source: https://sg.news.yahoo.com

January 16, 2015
Charlie Hebdo’s Muslim Tragedy

There is a self-inflicted tragedy in the Muslim response to Charlie Hebdo.

In the discussions of Charlie Hebdo and the events surrounding it, one divide between the west and Islam was clear.

While the cultural west (those who identify culturally and/ideologically with values that grew out of the West) cry out the attack on Charlie Hebdo as an affront to freedom of speech, Muslims reiterate the demand that the Prophet not be depicted in any form.

The issue is not about violence. It is not about response to the cartoon. Any attempt to refer to the issue as though it is about violence is akin to saying the Christian response to abortions is to bomb its clinics. That violence have occurred is a secondary event. It resulted from other concerns that have not been sufficiently explored.

What need to be investigated is the difference in values. It is this difference that determined our action and reaction.

While the west claim freedom of speech as an absolute right, Islam does not confer a similar position to speech.

Instead, in Islam, freedom is qualified to only what is good. We have the freedom to do what is good, not to participate in conduct that are evil or criminal.

The west however, has struggled in framing the discussion within a coherent discourse. It claims to grant absolute freedom to speech. But it admits that freedom to speech cannot impinge on another person’s rights or represent public menace.

The concept of “shouting fire in a crowded theatre” is traditionally seen as a limit to speech. To falsely shout fire in the theatre may cause a panic resulting in stampede, death and destruction. The person’s right to speech then, does not include his right to be a menace.

But that is not where the limits are now. While France and its cultural allies claim to believe unequivocally in freedom of speech, to deny the holocaust, performing the quenelle and other expressions deemed to be anti-Semitic lay outside of this freedom.

The limit to freedom is therefore not only in relation to public menace but also on who it applies to.

While Islam provides an objective and clear standard, the west’s limit is subjective. It demands some groups to be protected while denying others of that right.

But what is interesting in the discussion the last week is how Muslims are internalising western cultural values. Muslim leaders have come out in support and promotion of freedom of speech as though it is an absolute. And this support is subsequently promoted and universalised.

Tony Abbott’s response to Keysar Trad’s comments is a case in point. Trad, an Australian Muslim community leader claimed to reject Charlie Hebdo’s caricature of the Prophet but recognise their right to offend. This was promoted by the media and the Prime Minister with the added demand that Muslims who took umbrage should emulate Trad’s stance.

Western values are not theirs. It is ours.

The right to offend and insult is now a given. It does not merit further discussion. It is universalised and we are to adopt it as our values.

Islamic values do not exist independently anymore. It only exists if it is compatible with the west.

That is the self-inflicted tragedy of the Muslim response to Charlie Hebdo.

Source: www.almakhazin.com

January 16, 2015
Al Qaeda Claim Of Responsibility In Charlie Hebdo Attack Serves As Reminder Of Danger It Still Poses

WASHINGTON — The younger of the two brothers who killed 12 people in Paris last week most likely used his older brother’s passport in 2011 to travel to Yemen, where he received training and US$20,000 (S$26,600) from Al Qaeda’s affiliate there, presumably to finance attacks when he returned home to France.

American counterterrorism officials said on Wednesday that they now believed Cherif Kouachi was the aggressor in the attacks — not his elder brother Said Kouachi, as they had first thought — but that Said might also have travelled to Yemen, as the American and French authorities have said.

A fuller portrait of the brothers has emerged as an international effort is focused on determining who might have been behind the attack on the French newspaper Charlie Hebdo, and what direct role, if any, that Al Qaeda, its affiliates or their bitter rival, the Islamic State, had in planning and ordering the assault.

In a video and written statement, the Al Qaeda branch in Yemen on Wednesday formally claimed responsibility for the deadly assault. It said the target had been chosen by the Al Qaeda leadership, but did not specify which leaders.

If the claim of direct responsibility holds up, it would make the attacks in France the deadliest planned and financed by Al Qaeda on Western soil since the transit bombings in London in 2005 that killed 52 people. It would also serve as a reminder of the continued danger from the group at a time when much of the attention of Europe and the United States has shifted to the Islamic State, the militant organisation that controls large swathes of Syria and Iraq and has become notorious for beheading hostages.

The new information about the Kouachi brothers could help explain what Cherif Kouachi had told a French television station before his death last week; that he had gone to Yemen in 2011, probably through Oman, and was financed by Anwar Awlaki, the American-born cleric who oversaw attacks against the West by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, also known as AQAP.

The American authorities now believe Cherif most likely had contact with Awlaki in Yemen, possibly in person.

But it is still unclear what specific guidance the Al Qaeda branch gave the Kouachis about carrying out an attack, though it is believed that the satirical magazine was one of the targets discussed, an American counterterrorism official said.

“I suspect that Cherif Kouachi did engage AQAP members in Yemen, but that he was not fully brought into the organisation,” said Mr Brian Fishman, a counterterrorism researcher at the New America Foundation in Washington. “Perhaps concerned about infiltration by Western agents, AQAP might have offered minimal training, directed the group towards publicly-announced target lists and sent him on his way.”

Mr Fisher added that if that had happened, “AQAP did not exactly direct the attack, but it had some knowledge of the Kouachis and could plausibly try to claim credit”.

The statement by the Al Qaeda branch in Yemen called the Kouachi brothers, who were killed by the police last Friday, “two heroes of Islam”.

But it referred to the actions of Amedy Coulibaly, who attacked a police officer and was killed by the police after holding hostages in a kosher supermarket, as a coincidence and did not take responsibility for them.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the US said it had determined that the video clip claiming responsibility was genuine, but that it had not reached a conclusion on whether or not the claims being made in the video were valid.

“The big question that investigators need to look at is, how much of a role did AQAP play in the actual planning in the final stages of this process?” said Mr J M Berger, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. “They could have given these guys money and training three or four years ago, but when they executed it, it could have been done with money (from other sources).”

Source: www.todayonline.com

January 16, 2015
How Would Prophet Muhammad Have Reacted To Charlie Hebdo Caricatures?

The level of freedom of expression in the early centuries of Islam would put much of the current Muslim world to shame.

After the brutal assassination of two visitors and eight of its staff members, the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has vowed to continue its trademark irreverence and secular iconoclasm, which critics have accused of being Islamophobic, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian.

Its first issue since the tragic massacre features a cartoon of a tearful Prophet Muhammad holding a sign showing the famous twitter hashtag “Je Suis Charlie.” The turbaned figure stands under the slogan “All is forgiven.”

As a staunch advocate of freedom of expression, I believe the publication has every right to run such a cartoon, even if their decision would upset the religious sensibilities of some Muslims such as Egypt’s grand mufti, Shawqi Allam, who blasted the cartoon as racist.

The caricature drove me to consider some hypothetical questions: What would Muhammad make of this? Would the prophet forgive Charlie Hebdo’s lampooning of him and his religion? If he were alive today, would he tweet his solidarity with the slain cartoonists?

My own reading of Muhammad’s life and history leads me to conclude that although the prophet may not have tweeted “#JeSuisCharlie,” he would have condemned these savage murders and even forgiven French satirists no matter what insult was directed his way.

While some might find my assertion hard to believe, it is backed up by Muhammad’s own actions and convictions. Although the prophet’s contemporary self-appointed defenders take offence on his behalf and believe they are doing his will by protesting perceived insults or punishing those who commit them, their actions could not be further from the truth.

During the vulnerable early years of Islam, the Islamic prophet endured and tolerated mockery and disdain. Even in victory, Muhammad wisely advised to exercise tolerance. Upon his triumphant return to Mecca, he forgave the inhabitants of the city which had been home to his fiercest enemies. He even pardoned a member of his inner circle, Abdullah Ibn Saad, who denounced the prophet as a charlatan.

More importantly, the Islam Muhammad preached recognised the pluralistic nature of society and guaranteed freedom of belief. Surat al-Baqara of the Quran reminds Muslims: “There shall be no compulsion in religion.”

Significantly, the constitution Muhammad drew up in Medina included in its definition of the “umma” all the oasis’ inhabitants, not just its Muslims. These included both the “people of the book”, ie: Christians and Jews, but also, perhaps surprisingly, pagans – all of whom were granted equal political, cultural and religious rights as Muslims.

There was so much freedom of thought and expression in the early centuries of Islam that it would put much of the current Muslim world to shame. Although many contemporary Muslims are convinced that ridiculing Islam and rejecting religion are western innovations, this is closer to wishful thinking than historical fact.

In Christendom, Muhammad and Islam was derided from a rival religious vantage point; that the prophet of Islam was believed to be the false prophet of a fake religion. He was even condemned to the ninth circle of Dante’s inferno where he supposedly stands “rent from the chin to where one breaketh wind”.

Within the Islamic world itself, Muhammad and Islam were criticised and mocked from a secular, rationalist, anti-religious perspective.

One example is the religious sceptic and scholar Ibn al-Rawandi (827-911) who, despite his rejection of religion and Islam, lived a long life in the 8th-9th centuries.

Rawandi, who spent a significant part of his life in Baghdad, believed that intellect and science supersede all else, that prophets were unnecessary, that religion was irrational, that Islamic tradition was illogical and that miracles were a hoax.

In neighbouring Syria, a few decades later, the Richard Dawkins of the Abbasid era was born. Abu al-Ala’ al-Maarri (973-1058) was so contemptuous of religion that he divided the world into two types of people: “Those with brains, but no religion, and those with religion, but no brains.”

Maarri also lived to a ripe age. Rather than being visited by assassins, he attracted many students and engaged with scholars of various persuasions, even when he decided to return to his hometown of Maarra to live ascetically in seclusion.

Although this tradition of free thought and scepticism has shrunk over the centuries, it still exists. It even witnessed resurgence in the 20th century – and included the “Dean of Arab Literature”, Taha Hussein – until the conservative Islamist current started to block it in the late 1970s/1980s.

The years since the revolutionary wave in 2011 have seen secularists, sceptics and atheists mounting a comeback. But with some countries equating non-belief to terrorism and arresting atheists, theirs is a risky venture.

But these efforts are essential. Freedom of thought and expression were vital components of Islam’s golden age and lifting Arab and Muslim countries out of their current plight will require a return to that era of free inquiry.

Khaled Diab is an award-winning Egyptian-Belgian journalist, writer and blogger. He is the author of Intimate Enemies: Living with Israelis and Palestinians in the Holy Land. He blogs at www.chronikler.com

Source: www.aljazeera.com

January 16, 2015
Muslims Protest Against Charlie Hebdo’s Renewed Insult Of Islam

Charlie Hebdo’s decision to depict the Prophet Mohammed on its front cover today has angered Muslims around the world who called it a renewed insult to their religion.

Around three million copies of the French satirical newspaper hit the stands this morning for the first since the terror attack on its office which killed 12 people.

The front cover showed a weeping Mohammed, holding a sign reading ‘I am Charlie’ with the words ‘All is forgiven’ above him.

Such was its immediate popularity, the print run has since been increased to five million after issues sold out within minutes.

Copies have since been changing hands on eBay for three-figure sums as customers rush to get their hands on the edition.

But many Muslims believe their faith forbids depictions of the prophet and reacted with dismay – and occasionally anger – to the latest cover image.

Some felt their expressions of solidarity with Charlie Hebdo after last week’s attack had been rebuffed, while others feared the cartoon would trigger yet more violence.

‘You’re putting the lives of others at risk when you’re taunting bloodthirsty and mad terrorists,’ said Hamad Alfarhan, a 29-year old Kuwaiti doctor.

In the Philippines, there were angry protests at the front cover and also the perceived double standards by the West.

Placards by demonstrators in Marawi were held aloft which accused the West of remaining silent over the deaths of Muslims and that said ‘You are Charlie, I love Mohammed’.

In one rally a picture of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was set on fire and banners waved that declared there would be no apology from the Islamic world for the Paris massacre.

Mr Netanyahu became a central figure in the response to the attacks after four Jewish shoppers were killed by one of the Islamic fanatics at a kosher deli the day after the Charlie Hebdo shootings.

It came as Nigerian extremist group Boko Haram hailed the Paris massacres.

‘We are indeed happy with what happened in France,’ the group’s leader Abubakar Shekau said in a video posted online.

‘We are happy over what befell the people of France… as their blood was shed inside their country as they (try to) safeguard their blood,’ he said.

Meanwhile, Abbas Shumann, deputy to the Grand Sheik of Cairo’s influential Al-Azhar mosque, said the new image was ‘a blatant challenge to the feelings of Muslims who had sympathised with this newspaper.’

But he said Muslims should ignore the cover and respond by ‘showing tolerance, forgiveness and shedding light on the story of the prophet.’

An angry reaction, he said, will ‘not solve the problem but will instead add to the tension and the offense to Islam.’

In Jordan, the Muslim Brotherhood said it would stage a protest after Friday prayers in Amman in response to the paper’s Mohammed cartoon.

Spokesman Murad Adaileh said the brotherhood strongly condemned both the killings and the ‘offensive’ against the prophet.

That was a widely expressed sentiment.

Ghassan Nhouli, a grocer in the Lebanese port city of Sidon, said the magazine and the killers ‘are both wrong.’

‘It is not permitted to kill and also it is not permitted to humiliate a billion Muslims,’ he said.

The Iranian government has strongly condemned the killings, but Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif said that in a world of widely differing cultures, ‘sanctities need to be respected.’

He said: ‘I think we would have a much safer, much more prudent world if we were to engage in serious dialogue, serious debate about our differences and then what we will find out that what binds us together is far greater than what divides us.’

Egyptian cartoonist Makhlouf appealed for peace with his own spin on the Charlie Hebdo cover, replacing Mohammed with an ordinary Middle Eastern man carrying a placard reading ‘I am an artist’ in French.

‘I am for art and against killing,’ he added in Arabic. ‘May God forgive everyone.’

The image was widely circulated on social media. Turkey was rare among Muslim-majority nations to have publications running Charlie Hebdo images. But the decision has raised tensions in the officially secular country.

Police stopped trucks leaving the printing plant of newspaper Cumhuriyet after it said it would reprint some of the cartoons.

The vehicles were allowed to distribute the paper once officials had determined that the image of the Prophet Mohammed was not shown.

The paper printed a four-page selection of cartoons and articles – including caricatures of Pope Francis and French President Francois Hollande – but left out cartoons likely to offend Muslims.

However, two Cumhuriyet columnists used small, black-and-white images of the new Charlie Hebdo cover as their column headers.

A small group of pro-Islamic students staged a protest outside the paper’s office in Ankara, the state-run Anadolu Agency reported.

The police intensified security outside Cumhuriyet’s headquarters and printing center as a precaution.

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda in Yemen claimed responsibility for the deadly attack on Charlie Hebdo, saying it was ordered by the jihadist network’s global chief to avenge the French magazine’s cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

In a video entitled ‘A message regarding the blessed battle of Paris’, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) said that it had financed and plotted the assault on the weekly that left 12 people dead and shocked France.

But it said the orders had come from the very top of the global jihadist network – Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian doctor who succeeded Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden after his death in 2011.

‘We, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, claim responsibility for this operation as vengeance for the messenger of Allah,’ Nasser al-Ansi, one of AQAP’s chiefs, said in the video.

Leading Algerian militant Mokhtar Belmokhtar, formerly a member of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), praised the ‘heroic and rare attack’ in France, hailing the Kouachi brothers as ‘two soldiers of Islam… who humiliated France.’

France ‘thought that it was immune to the strikes of the mujahedeen,’ he said in a statement.

Across Europe, there was high demand for scarce copies of the latest edition and several newspapers ran extracts from Charlie Hebdo.

Spain’s El Pais published two pages of the cartoons with Spanish translation, though it did not include any images of the prophet.

A small Italian newspaper, Il Fatto Quotidiano (The Daily Fact), published Charlie Hebdo as a 16-page supplement, in French with Italian translations of the captions.

`’Why are we doing it?’ editor Antonio Padellaro wrote in a front-page column.

‘Because last Friday, when we called the surviving top editor of Charlie Hebdo, we heard him say: ‘Thanks, you’re the only Italian newspaper who asked us’.’

Physical copies of the paper were hard to find, although newsagents in several countries said they hoped to have some in stock by the end of the week.

In Sweden, the 320-strong Pressbyran chain of newsagents said it would sell the issue, but only online, not in stores.

Spokesman Fredrik Klein said the decision was ‘as a security measure and out of concern for our staff.’

There was brisk bidding for copies of Charlie Hebdo on Internet auction sites.

On the Irish version of eBay, emailed electronic copies were selling at prices starting around 6.50 euros ($8), while hard copies attracted bids over 200 euros ($240).

On British eBay, bidding on one copy went above 95,000 ($145,000), though it was unclear whether the bids were genuine or an attempt to make mischief.

Michael Collingwood of Sgel, Charlie Hebdo’s Spanish distributor, said he normally received 40 copies but had been promised 1,000 this time by the paper’s French distributor.

He figured he could sell eight times that number.

‘I don’t know why they only printed 3 million,’ he said. ‘Everyone wants it.’

Source: www.dailymail.co.uk

January 15, 2015