REMEMBER DR. AAFIYA SIDDIQI AND OTHER OPPRESED MUSLIMS

Posted on by alfaida

There is a saying that “Time Heals”. This is indeed a mercy from Allah Ta’aala as with the passage of time we heal and forget unpleasant and hurtful episodes in our life. So to forget is a natural human trait. However, there are things that we just must not and should not forget. This reminder is in keeping with the above.

We as Muslims have spoken about and cried for Dr Aafiya, demanded for her release and so on. We have similarly cried for and spoken about various oppressions against Ulama in various countries, whose only crime was to proclaim the Haq, the oppressions against Muslims of China “The Uyghur”, the Muslims of Myanmar “The Rohingya”, the Muslims of India and Kashmir, the Muslims in occupied Palestine, the Muslims in miserable condition in Yemen, Syria and in many other countries.
But as time goes on and their suffering continues, with the passage of time, we have forgotten about many if not all of them.

Dr. Aafiya was kidnapped 20 years ago and this poor Muslimah has been suffering and languishing in prison while our lives continued. We have economic crisis, loadshedding, corrupt leaders and many other issues, and indeed these are difficult on us. But what is this compared to this innocent lady and her plight?

What is our “hardships” compared to our suffering brethren around the world!
So we remind ourselves and our brothers and sisters to please remember the innocent detainees and prisoners around the world and make Dua for them daily. To remember the oppressed Muslims around the world and our brothers and sisters who suffer in the deepest of oppression and difficulty and make Dua for them. To make Dua for those in difficult circumstances and where possible to assist in whatever capacity we can.

May Allah help them and relieve them from their suffering, grant them aafiyat and grant them and grand reward, Ameen.

We are taught in the Hadith Shareef:
Whoever among you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand (by taking action); if he cannot, then with his tongue (by speaking out); and if he cannot, then with his heart (by at least hating it and believing that it is wrong), and that is the weakest of faith.

Everyone has different capabilities when it comes to making a change. Some have the ability to change it with their hands. or tongue (or pen), whilst other do not have these abilities. If we do not have the ability, we are not sinful due to this shortcoming. However, there is one level concerning which everyone has the ability, and that is changing an evil with your heart. ‘Changing it with the heart’ means that you hate the evil in your heart, and if you had the ability to change it with your hand or tongue, you would. And one of the most basic yet powerful actions we can take is to make Dua.

The supplication of a Muslim for his (Muslim) brother in his absence will certainly be answered. Every time he makes a supplication for good for his brother, the angel appointed for this particular task says: `Ameen! May it be for you, too‘.” (Muslim).

The Muslim Ummah (nation) is like one body. If the eye is in pain then the whole body is in pain and if the head is in pain then the whole body is in pain. (Muslim)

(Issued by Qalamul Haq)
panel@qalamulhaq.co.za

MUFTI TAQI’S HARAAM ADVICE TO THE TALIBAN

Posted on by alfaida

Posted on 

TAQI’S BUNKUM HARAAM ADVICE TO THE TALIBAN

Pertaining to secular education for girls, Mufti Taqi Usmani proffered the following advice to the Taliban of Afghanistan:

“Currently, the issue of education for girls is of great importance. The enemies have made this issue a propaganda campaign against Imaarat-e-Islaamiyah (i.e. the Afghanistan Taliban government). Alhamdulillah, we appreciate the wise steps which Imaarat-e-Islaamiyah has hitherto instituted. However, in our opinion it is of utmost importance to make arrangements for the education of girls within the limits of the Shariah.

Firstly, this is important because of female masaa-il (issues), and for education and prosperity, educated females are an imperative need for the country so that the fitnah of intermingling of men and women could be ended.

Secondly, it is necessary to rebut the baseless impression that Islam or Imaarate-e-Islaamiyah is anti-female.

For the education of girls, separate facilities should be arranged. I have heard that separate facilities for the education of girls and boys are not available (in Afghanistan). However, its solution is to teach boys and girls in the same building but at different times. Or, the teaching may be in the same building but in separate sections. Such plans could be instituted by mutual co-operation Insha-Allah.

(End of Mufti Taqi’s advice to the Taliban)

The advice of Mufti Taqi is pure bunkum. It displays his lack of understanding of the Deen as well as of the situation in Afghanistan. His advice regarding separate times of teaching in the same building or teaching during the same time in separate sections of the same building, is indeed puerile, insipid and stupid. With this ludicrous advice, Mufti Taqi has made himself ludicrous. His advice is devoid of Islamic substance.

The advice of Mufti Taqi is the effect of his mental inferiority. His advice is for the Taliban to take heed of the stupid propaganda of the western kuffaar by reacting in ways which are in total conflict with the Shariah. When Islam prohibits females from even the Musjid for Salaat, by what stretch of Imaani logic can luring girls out of their homes for worldly education be justified? The Qur’aan Majeed commands females to remain glued within their homes.

Females emerging from their homes to attend secular institutions are of the ways of the kuffaar. Woman is Aurah, and has to remain at home to fulfil the role for which Allah Ta’ala has created her. It is haraam for girls to follow and emulate the example of western females. The pursuit of secular education at all levels is the practice of the western kuffaar females. Now Mufti Taqi advises Muslim purdah nasheen girls to unshackle themselves from Qur’aanic Hijaab and to enter the public domain in the manner of their kuffaar counterparts in the western world.

Donning abayas and burqahs are not the be-all of Hijaab. The very first and fundamental requisite of valid Qur’aanic Hijaab is for females to remain at home. Their duties and roles are at home, not in public educational institutions.

Download booklet

YOUR DEEDS ARE YOUR RULERS

Posted on by alfaida

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: 

*      “Just as you are, so too will rulers be appointed over you.”

*      Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) supplicated to Allah Ta’ala: “O my Rabb! What is the sign to indicate that you are pleased with Your creation?” Allah Ta’ala said: “I cause the rains to descend when it is time for sowing the seeds, and I withhold the rains when it is time to harvest the crop. I appoint benevolent men to rule over them. I assign their monetary affairs to generous persons.”

Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) said: “O my Rabb! What is the sign of your wrath on your creation?” Allah Ta’ala said: “I send the rains when they harvest the crops, and I withhold the rains when they sow the seeds. I appoint ignoramuses to rule them, and I assign their monetary affairs to their niggardly ones.”

* Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Allah Ta’ala says: ‘I am Allah. There is no deity except Me. I am the King of kings. The hearts of kings are in My Hands when the people obey Me, I turn the hearts of the rulers with benevolence and mercy towards them.

Verily, when the people disobey Me. I turn the hearts of the rulers with wrath and vengeance towards them. Then they (the rulers) inflict severe punishment on them. Therefore do not become involved with cursing the rulers. On the contrary engage yourself with thikr and humility so that I protect you against the tyranny of your rulers.”

* Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “Verily, when Allah Ta’ala becomes wrathful  on  a nation whose destruction He has not ordained by means of earthquakes and disfigurement, then He causes prices to soar; He withholds rain, and He appoints the worst of people to be their rulers.”

* Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘Verily, Allah Azza Wa Jal says: ‘I extract vengeance from those on whom is My Wrath with others on whom is My Wrath. Then ultimately I shall cast them all (both groups) into Jahannum”

* “Don’t revile the rulers. Supplicate to Allah for their rectitude, for verily, their rectitude is linked to your rectitude.” (i.e. if you reform yourselves, the rulers will become reformed.)

* “I take oath by Him in whose control is my life!  Command righteous and prohibit evil. (If you do not) then the vilest among you will be appointed rulers over you. Your pious people will then supplicate, but their duas will not be accepted.”

Rulers are the reflections of the deeds of the masses. The rulers are mirrors in which the citizens can view their own deeds.  A corrupt people will be saddled with tyrannical and corrupt rulers.

Thus Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Your deeds are your rulers”. Since the rulers are our reflections in the mirror, it is unintelligent to revile our own ugly reflection we see in the mirror. If a beautiful image is desired to be reflected in the mirror, it is necessary for the object in front of the mirror to be beautiful.

A very ugly ignorant man who had never seen a mirror in his life once picked up a broken mirror. When he looked in it, he saw his own ugly face. In disgust he threw the mirror to the ground and exclaimed: “No wonder you have been thrown away!” This buffoon reviled the mirror for his own ugliness which was reflected in it. This is the condition of people who revile the rulers. They in fact revile themselves in the same way that the buffoon had thrown away the mirror and reviled it.

In the Hadith Qudsi, we are instructed to reform ourselves and become obedient servants of Allah Ta’ala. He will then either reform and tenderize the hearts of the tyrannical rulers or replace them with kind, benevolent rulers. It is quite obvious from the many Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as well as stemming from the Qur’aan-e-Hakeem that in general cruel and oppressive rulers are the consequences of the evils of the masses, and that the solution for the oppression and tyranny is not vilification of the tyrants. On the contrary, it is self-vilification, soul-searching, regret and repentance. Moral reformation and submission to the Shariah of Allah Azza Wa Jal will bring about a peaceful revolution which will see either the change of heart of the rulers or their replacement by benevolent rulers.

It is also quite clear that the basic theme of all the Ahaadith on this subject is self-reformation, for only such reformation is the enduring solution for the tyranny of oppressors. However, shaitaan has succeeded in casting the Ummah into the massive deception of believing that the problem is for example Hosni Mubarak, Gadhaafi, Asad and the host of other kuffaar and munaafiqs who are today at the helm of affairs in the lands of Islam.

These tyrants are merely the reflections of the moral degradation, bid’ah, fisq, fujoor and kufr in which the Ummah is today wallowing in a drunken stupor. Removal and killing of the tyrants without moral reformation and submission to the Sunnah is simply the substitution of one system of tyranny for another system of tyranny.

The scenario of substitution of tyrannies comes within the scope of the Hadith Qudsi (mentioned above) in which Allah Azza Wa Jal says that both groups – the oppressors and the oppressed who replace the former oppressors – are  Mabghoodh Alayhim, i.e. the Wrath of Allah Ta’ala has settled on them. Both groups of scum will be swept into Jahannum. This is the situation prevailing currently in the Arab lands in the aftermath of the so-called stupid ‘Arab Spring’. Both groups are Mabgoodh Alayhim.

The other form of punishment mentioned in the Ahaadith for a flagrantly transgressing and rebellious Ummah when their final destruction has not yet been ordained, but is divinely schemed to be gradual and incremental, is drought, scarcity of essential foodstuff, soaring  prices, pestilence, infighting, etc. Then when the hour dawns for the ultimate decree of annihilation, no respite will be granted.

“And, when We decide to destroy a place (town/city, i.e. its people), We command its affluent ones (that is, We grant them leeway to transgress recklessly). Then they indulge in transgression. Thus the decree (of punishment) is ordained for them. Then We utterly destroy them.”

“And, when their appointed time (of annihilation) arrives, it will not be delayed a moment nor advanced.”    (Qur’aan)

As long as Muslims fail to understand that every particle moves by the direct intervention and command of Allah Azza Wa Jal and that the oppression which rulers inflict on the populace is the decree of Allah Ta’ala, and the solution for such tyranny is Inaabat ilallaah (Turning to Allah with Repentance), they will remain sinking in an abyss of moral degradation and humiliation to remain the slaves of the western kuffaar.

“And not a leaf falls (from a tree) but He is aware of it….”

AL-HAQ BULLETIN 66

Shocking: Major New Findings on the Extent of US Crimes in Afghanistan

Posted on by alfaida

The more that emerges regarding America’s twenty-year stint in Afghanistan (you can review some here, here, here and here), the more tragic it just gets.

A reporter, Lynzy Billing, whose mother and sister were killed in Afghanistan thirty years ago, went back to the country to investigate what exactly had happened (Billing was orphaned and then adopted by a British couple), only to be overcome by the stories and eye-witness accounts she heard about special operations, CIA-backed units that went on night raids—“brutal operations designed to have resounding psychological impacts while ostensibly removing [i.e., killing] high-priority enemy targets.”

Here is one of the stories that compelled her to investigate these crimes:

“Mahzala watched as the gunmen questioned Safiullah, 28, and 20-year-old Sabir, before roughly pinning them against a courtyard wall. Then, ignoring their frantic protests of innocence, the masked men put guns to the back of her sons’ heads. One shot. Two. Then a third. Her youngest, ‘the quiet, gentle one,’ was still alive after the first bullet, Mahzala told me, so they shot him again.

Her story finished, Mahzala stared at me intently as if I could somehow explain the loss of her only family. We were in the dim confines of her home, a sliver of light leaking in from the lone window above her. She rubbed at the corner of her eyes; her forehead creased by a pulsing vein. The voices of her sons used to fill their home, she told me. She had no photos of them. No money. And there was no one who would tell her, a widow in her 50s, why these men dropped out of the sky and killed her family or acknowledge what she insisted was a terrible mistake.”

Haunted by Mahzala’s story, the reporter embarked on an investigation into these crimes (there are more heart-breaking stories in her piece)—this was an investigation that took years—culminating in a new report, documenting her findings.

Below are some highlights from the report along with my own two cents.

These special CIA-backed units were called “Zero Units.” There were four of these units in total, and the report focuses on the operations of just one of them, known as “02,” spanning over a four-year period.

The units, or at least the one that the reported focused on, comprised Afghan soldiers accompanied by “US special operations soldiers working with the CIA.” Here is what one Afghan soldier from the unit described about his experience in these raids:

“‘These deaths happened at our hands. I have participated in many raids…and there have been hundreds of raids where someone is killed and they are not Taliban or ISIS, and where no militants are present at all.’”

During the four years investigated, “at least 452 civilians were killed in 107 raids. This number is almost certainly an undercount.” This is in part because of the way in which militaries are allowed to count and categorize kills. In places like Afghanistan, where villagers and actual combatants may live side-by-side, the military can be quite lazy in their categorization of civilians versus combatants killed. Others killed, Billing notes, are often just “written off as collateral.” A’udhu Billah!

Another reason for the likely too-low civilian count is this:

“One coroner in Jalalabad described how, at times, 02 soldiers had brought bodies to the morgue themselves, dismissing the staff and using the facilities before leaving with the dead. These deaths were not allowed to be recorded by him or other staff.”

RELATED: A Step-By-Step Guide to Avoid Accountability for War Crimes: Afghanistan Edition

Shooting in the Dark

A significant number of raids were carried out based on “faulty intelligence by the CIA and other US intelligence-gathering services.”

Subhan Allah. This always gets me—one would think that with all of the money and resources the US has at their disposal, they would be able to get the story straight. But far too often, they seem to stumble through their “freedom wars,” rarely winning yet astonishingly still eager to undertake wars, both declared and undeclared, time and time again. I’ve discussed this problem before and, once again, it seems relevant. As Billing reports:

“Lisa Ling spent 20 years in the military and built technology that was ultimately used to process intelligence that targeted Afghans. ‘I understand very viscerally how this tech works and how people are using it,’ she said. The counterterrorism mission is essentially: “Who am I fighting, and where will I find them,” she said. But the U.S. struggled to differentiate combatants from civilians, she said, because it never understood Afghanistan.”

This time, I think I’m closer to understanding why exactly this is the case, closer to understanding why the US almost always fails to ‘get’ the people they are fighting. I think the reason is arrogance. Why even bother trying to understand those that are beneath you?

Indeed, Billing also discusses America’s history of sloppy, carnage-filled raids, dating it back to the Phoenix Program of the Vietnam War. The raids under that program killed only 3% of “full or probationary” Viet Cong members. Nonetheless, the program, she describes, served as a “blueprint” for future raids (you can read about that here, especially in Chapter Four).

It will come as little surprise to you then that “[former US Air Force intelligence analyst Daniel] Hale was convicted for disclosing classified information that nearly 90% of the people killed by U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan were not the intended targets.” We commend Hale for his bravery in speaking out.

The US’s twenty-year foray into Afghanistan created a vicious cycle of destruction. Whether the US was busy installing corrupt leaders, figuring out how to brand the war in an attempt to legitimize it (a war for women, a war [not] against opium), this new report reaffirms that seemingly every action taken by the US in Afghanistan led to deeper entrenchment and, by default, more harm for civilians. In the words of one US Army Ranger:

“You go on night raids, make more enemies, then you gotta go on more night raids for the more enemies you now have to kill.”

RELATED: US Evacuates Elite Killing Squad that Murdered Countless Muslims

The Leahy Law: Convenience Human Rights

The Zero Units have been kept under wraps thanks to a legal loophole—the Leahy Law. With this law, the US military is prohibited from “providing training and equipment to foreign security forces that commit human rights abuses, but it does not apply to US intelligence agencies.”

This law plus bogus bureaucracy and nonchalance makes for a terribly grim combination which allows for selective ‘human rights.’

Despite all of this, what do we typically hear from the US?

The TaLiBAnS iS HarMINg WoMYN!

Go and tell that to all those women whose children and husbands you killed, to whom you offered little or no support after the fact. It simply makes my blood boil.

Let us never forget that so many innocent people have perished from these heinous actions; that so many lives and families were destroyed.

May Allah reward the people of Afghanistan for their steadfastness through all that they have suffered, and may He preclude us from being among the arrogant. Amin.

RELATED: Lessons from the Arrogance of Iblis

MuslimSkeptic

Respect for Marriage Act: Will LGBT Be Forced on Muslims?

Posted on by alfaida

There seems to be a lot of talk surrounding the “Respect for Marriage Act” these days. There’s talk that it will, for example, force private institutions into accepting gay “marriage” or otherwise pay the price.

As the bill is at the moment though, such a claim cannot really be made with utmost certainty. This is because what the bill deals with is government actors or officials rather than even government-funded bodies.

According to the AP:

“[the Act] would not affect private businesses or entities including churches, it would only apply to the government and government officials, according to Volokh and Dale Carpenter, a constitutional law professor at Southern Methodist University.

Carpenter pointed to amendments to the bill added in the Senate to make this clear, including one that specifies nothing in the act can be interpreted to affect, alter or deny tax-exempt status from ‘an otherwise eligible entity or person’…

Another section in the recent amendment specifies that nonprofit religious organizations are not required to provide ‘services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.’

The bill also specifies that it only applies to “those acting under color of State law,” a phrase meaning that only actual government officials are subject to its non-discrimination requirement, according to Carpenter. That means that even an adoption agency that receives government funding, but is not acting on behalf of the state, would not be subject to the bill.”

Yes, the AP leans to the left. Nonetheless, in terms of the wording of the bill and the proposed amendments (take a look at Article 7, Sections 6 and 7), their reporting does seem somewhat fair here.

According to The Daily Wire though, the bill falls short in terms of truly protecting religious freedom.

While it’s extremely difficult to surmise as to the exact type of problems this is going to cause for religious individuals in the future (it certainly seems sure to), the basic question that many of us are asking is this:

If “homosexual marriage” is already legal, why exactly do we need this act anyways?

Enter the redefinition of “marriage.” This is something that many religious people on the right (e.g., the folks at The Daily Wire) are honing in on. They argue that by definition, marriage is between a man and woman, as was outlined in the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act.

Changing this definition marriage to mean…well anything (soon enough!)…will most definitely have repercussions in the future, be it near or far.

I tend to agree with them on this point. However, the backflips and somersaults they are making in order to try and make this clear demonstrates the limits of a secular society in respecting religion.

Check this out:

Ben Shapiro: “It is now apparently the law of the land and societal rule that the only rationale that you could possibly have for saying that marriage is between a man and a woman is because you’re a Christian, or Jew, or a Muslim…[he says mockingly:] ‘We’ll allow you to have these crazy beliefs so long as you acknowledge they’re crazy beliefs’…I’m highly annoyed by the constant derogation of nonreligious arguments into religious arguments…The argument for marriage has literally nothing to do with religion. You could be a visitor from mars and you could see that all of human procreation relies on man-woman-child…”

Matt Walsh: “Yeah…listen to the argument between a conservative and a liberal, and what you’re gonna find is that religion almost always comes into play—someone’s gonna mention the Bible—but, but almost always, it’s the person on the left who’s bringing that into the conversation, because as you point out, that’s the framework they want us to adopt for the argument…They want to pretend that the only reason that we would believe the things that we believe, and say what we’re saying is because we’ve been told by our religion, and we have no reasons outside of that. That of course, that’s totally illogical and it doesn’t make any sense…”

Wait, what?

Either your politics aren’t informed by your religion, which you believe in, or you’re performing some kind of mental gymnastics right now.

Pretty much everyone reading this could easily respond to Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro, saying:

If you have chosen to believe in your faith, then it should be because you have found it to be correct and because it makes sense to you. It should be correct and it should make sense beyond the confines of your religious communities. You should be able to make political arguments that are grounded within the dogma of your faith, even if you don’t quote the Torah or New Testament when making those arguments.

Perhaps they know this but cannot say it because they want to prove the left wrong. Well then, just make better arguments! Explain the benefits of a child having a mother and a father over having two mothers or two fathers; explain the harms of indulging in every sexual desire, etc.

The US system allows for change, for re-definitions. While I am against the current trend of rendering all words somehow both meaningful and meaningless at the same time (e.g., as Walsh has pointed out, the “gender category,” “non-binary,” is a great example of that, as is, being a man, saying you’re a woman, and then having no definition for the term), unlike “woman” and “man,” the term “marriage” is not a biological one. It is sociological.

If you live in a society that allows for societal change based on the will of the majority, then you may have to accept a change in the definition and usage of the term, and a lot of Republicans are doing just that.

This is yet another example of the bounds of the US system. The only reason it took this long to manifest is because people are becoming increasingly less religious.

MuslimSkeptic

2022 FIFA World Cup: Deception and Distraction

Posted on by alfaida

By Mufti Abdullah Moolla -November 22, 2022

Misdirection is a word used commonly by lay people. In relation to art and magic it is a term used by entertainers, tricksters, magicians, and sorcerers. The common person mistakenly assumes this word ‘misdirection’ to imply ‘distraction.’

For example, a common person will shout out ‘hey’ on the street, and while their target is distracted, the very same person who shouted ‘hey’ snatches the wallet, bag, money, purse, or phone off their distracted target. Then you have the entertainer, who will distract their audience and carry out their trick or act of entertainment while the attention of the onlookers is focused elsewhere.

One of the potent methods employed by entertainers, magicians, tricksters, storytellers, and media houses is to tell the audience a story that they can tell themselves, pacify their consciences and promote to others, without really knowing that they were distracted. The entertainers and magicians offer some sort of explanation to their thrilled audiences, but the tricks are played upon the minds of the audiences and not the objects themselves. If the evidence according to the senses is believed, then the ‘magic’ in the mind is made real.

‘Misdirection is the cornerstone of nearly all successful magic’ – TA Waters

In the same way, within this modern and refined age, non-Muslims whose religions frown upon magic and sorcery, are now embracing magic and sorcery wholeheartedly as part of the package of misdirection employed by scientists. The scientists narrate their stories in light of scientific ‘evidence,’ whilst the reality lies somewhere else. An example of the misdirection offered to the world is the Theory of Evolution. While millions (including misdirected Muslims) believe in the scientific ‘evidence’ presented to them, it is a far cry from the truth. In fact, it is simply a lie against Allah Ta’ala, the Noble Qur’an, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and the religion of Islam.

In essence, the refined society of the twenty-first century has fallen for more refined sorcery and magic.

As we write this, the entire world seems to be engulfed in pacifying their consciences, telling themselves that everything is well and good while they are kept entertained by a ball being kicked around a pitch. What makes matters worse is when highly educated people and scholars fail to recognize the misdirection that they have fallen prey to.

The misdirection being offered to Muslims is of the host country (Qatar) providing various means and methods to propagate Islam and calling to the faith. This is nothing but misdirection. We are told that the Ahadith will be displayed in all corners, Muezzins have been employed to call the Adhan beautifully, and it will be relayed and heard in stadiums and so on.

RELATED: Why is US National Soccer Antagonizing Qatar with Pro-LGBT Crest?

Let us look at a few basic examples of the misdirection being explained. Firstly, it is not permissible for the Adhan to be called out and for the Noble Qur’an to be recited in the restroom, or in a sewage facility. This is severe disrespect to the words of Allah Ta’ala and His blessed name. A ring that has the name of Allah Ta’ala engraved upon it cannot be taken into the toilet, and books of Islam and the Sirah cannot be distributed inside a nightclub. In the same way, it is utter and gross disrespect to the entire religion of Islam for the Adhan to be relayed in stadiums, where every vice is perpetrated.

No Muslim in his right sense of mind can imagine justifying the sorts of vices that are done during major sporting tournaments such as the World Cup. Yet, we find misdirected Muslims and misdirected Muslim scholars who feel the need to appreciate the da’wah work being done during the course of the World Cup. We find it difficult to understand how Qatar saw the need to provide this misdirection service to the millions of people who have come to their country for entertainment, drinking and adultery.

We do not appreciate this kind of da’wah work, as it is not a call to pure and pristine Islam, but it is simply a ruse to pacify the suffering Muslim Ummah. Qatar has fallen to the pressure and has bent over backwards to entertain the vices of the entire non-Muslim world. This is while Muslims look on in horror as they see their homes being torn down; their mothers and sisters raped; and their sons slaughtered by the very same visitors they want to please. Qatar is only promoting the Liberalized version of Islam that the football body will be pleased with. This is the misdirection that Qatar is responsible for. For this reason, Qatar does not deserve any du’a or sympathy from the Muslim Ummah.

RELATED: Qatar: How the World Cup Is Being Used to Spread Liberalism to Muslims

We rue the immense wastage of money on a tournament that brings nothing but destruction in its wake.

Think for a moment before an outburst upon what you have just read. Reflect. Have you not been misdirected by all the hype around the World Cup too?

Our du’a and plea is to Allah Ta’ala, we beg Him for His aid and help. And we call for one and all to look deeper into the misdirection that they have been fed, and to refrain from promoting this misdirection any further.

RELATED: Western World Cup Fans Demand Beer: Are They More Astray Than Animals?

Follow Mufti Abdullah on Twitter: @MuftiAMoolla

MuslimSkeptic 

Islam and the Folly of Women in Politics

Posted on by alfaida

By Hud Lesprit -November 1, 2022

The Prophet ﷺ said in an authentic hadith:

“Never will succeed a nation that makes a woman their ruler.” [Bukhari]

Consider Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi. If you’re unfamiliar with American Politics, consider Angela Merkel, Margaret Thatcher, and Queen Elizabeth II of England—who passed away just last month.

What do all of these political women have in common?

They all have short hair and try to look like boys.

Isn’t it surprising how all of these ‘women in politics’ role models adopt the look of masculine tomboys and look nothing like the average female?

If you feel like the examples I’ve given above are anecdotal, please consider the following list:

  • Jennifer Granholm
  • Christine Todd Whitman
  • Madeleine Albright
  • Janet Reno
  • Barbara Boxer
  • Dianne Feinstein
  • Geraldine Ferarro
  • Sandra Day
  • Madeleine Junin
  • Patricia Harris
  • Theresa May

The list just goes on and on. 

Within the contemporary political sphere, long-haired feminine women being in vital positions is something of an anomaly. The most notable exceptions are Melania Trump and Michelle Obama, and they only became famous due to their relationships with important men. It had nothing to do with their own personal accomplishments.

This fascinating observation regarding women in politics raises some interesting questions such as:

“Why is it that all of these women try so hard to embody masculine features?”

Feminists claim that it is due to the rampant misogyny within the political sphere. They say that women feel pressured into adopting a masculine code of conduct so they will be accepted by their peers. Politics is somewhat misogynistic. Earlier this year for example, elected official Cécile Duflot (French housing minister) decided to attend the French National Assembly wearing a floral dress. How did the male ministers react?

The Guardian reports:

It wasn’t Duflot causing the commotion, but rather the male ministers who wolf-whistled and shouted: “Phwoarr!“

(…)

It comes as no surprise that both these men, and many others who wolf-whistled, leered and phwoarred, are in the opposing Union for a Popular Movement party. What they did wasn’t appreciation, or even a joke, it was cold political strategy – using a woman’s gender against her.

RELATED: What Muslim Feminists Fail to Understand About Feminism

Feminists however, have this unfortunate habit of seeing patriarchy as the cause of every evil. Their analysis of short hair and pants in politics might be a little convincing, but it is also somewhat victimizing and naïve. Another commonsensical explanation is that these masculine qualities are actually essential for exercising power and leadership.

Masculinizing politics is therefore a necessity. And stating this is not being misogynistic.

Negotiation, persuasion, leadership, delegation and loyalty require a person to have qualities such as high stature, confidence, charisma and sometimes even aggressiveness. Likewise, handling the affairs of millions of people is an extremely stressful ordeal. Enduring this level of pressure, while effectively making the best decisions, requires stress management and cold thinking. In relation to all of these points, women are generally inferior to men.

Women in politics act masculine because politics itself makes you manly. They try to look like men because they wish to be imposing like men. This simple explanation is the most evident, but it will never be a satisfactory answer for modern feminists. Acknowledging this simple fact undermines the West’s policy over the past seventy years of integrating women.

If you consider all of this from an economic standpoint, the Western policy of parity and positive discrimination is one of the most absurd decisions that one could make in appointing a leader within any community.

RELATED: Hijab Burnings in Iran and the Liberal Muslim’s Hatred for Islam

Some might argue that women are only generally inferior in terms of political qualities, and the fact that some women can be better leaders than some men is sufficient to argue in favor of giving women a chance in politics—since some elected women will be capable of doing a better job than some elected men.

This is completely fallacious. Nobody cares about who may or may not be potentially better on average. It is an undeniable fact that the top 100 best leaders are all men. Nobody grants political power to the average citizen. It just makes sense to take the best of the nation and to elect him as the leader.

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to political qualities, all the elites of the nation are men.

Why then take the risk of assigning such roles to women?

The inevitable consequence of forcing women into politics is the bringing about of a less efficient parliament and a less effective government for matters that are crucial and vital for everyone.

Alhamdulillah, Islam does not fall into this bottomless pit because it prohibits women from being given positions of leadership.

RELATED: How To Be a Good Muslim Wife

MuslimSkeptic