Hanania throws his toys as Proggie circus hits Barcelona
Umm Zaid ([1], [2], [3]) and Izzy Mo have had some correspondence with Ray Hanania, one of the advisory board for the so-called Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism despite being a Christian (albeit an Arab one), who penned a piece in the Chicago-based Southwest News Herald condemning Muslim organisations for telling their audiences not to participate in Hallowe'en due to its pagan origins. Hanania has replied to both with a bit of mud-flinging.
That Hanania is a Christian on the board of one of the most notoriously anti-Islamic "Muslim organisations" shouldn't surprise anyone. They have, to put it mildly, a shortage of Muslim supporters. One recalls that, during a "March against terrorism" in May, Nawash's cabal managed to secure the support of a local Young Republican chapter, anti-Muslim Maronite Christian organisations, commercial organisations, and an "organisation" whose name included the words "Nawash sucks" backwards. The march, of course, with its lack of Muslim support, allowed Islamophobes to gloat, which may have been its purpose.
Anyway, UZ has done an admirable job, ma sha Allah, of explaining why Muslims have no need of Halowe'en. Since I started writing this, she's posted yet another one, concerning the festivals that Muslims have that actually have meaning: the two Eids, Milad, Mi'raj, Ashura and the six days in Shawwal. She also makes the point that there's a big difference between secular holidays like Thanksgiving and this meaningless, pagan-derived, commercialised event. And to reiterate (although I'm not going to bother writing him), most religions consider themselves superior to others - if people believed otherwise, they would most likely join the group they preferred. It's nothing to do with bigotry; Muslims simply do not join in other religious groups' commemorations.
Meanwhile, the pseudo-progressive circus has come to Europe this week, with a "gender jihad" event in Barcelona in which the usual suspects (Amina, Raheel) were in attendance along with an unknown local "Islamic" organisation. Yesterday's Guardian had a write-up of the event, in which it was reportedly claimed that "many of the fundamental concepts of equality embraced by feminism could also be found in the Qur'an". I'm not sure what "fundamental concepts" these are, given what a sect-ridden movement feminism is.
They mouthed some of the usual platitudes ("horrific things were being done in the name of religion," said Wadud) and made the standard accusations against the scholars:
"Gender jihad is the struggle against male chauvinistic, homophobic or sexist readings of the Islamic sacred texts," said Abdennur Prado, one of the meeting's Spanish organisers.
Those readings had been provided by Muslim scholars who, over the centuries, have been almost exclusively male. "Male chauvinism is the destruction of Islam as a well-balanced way of life," Mr Prado said.
And now for the really staggering part:
The greatest danger was the spread of the radically conservative, Saudi-backed schools of Islam. "They don't want to go forward, they want to go back," said Prof Wadud, who also led mixed prayers at the Barcelona meeting.
As if the Saudis haven't been influential enough already over the past twenty years? As if people don't already think that what goes on in Saudi really does represent Islam just because they control the Haramain? As if their followers aren't to be found in every western ghetto? Like, is she blind, stupid or dishonest? (Or all three?)
The Guardian's man observes that "British Muslims were strikingly absent from the conference", which really shouldn't surprise anyone as we never heard of it until it was mentioned on the BBC's news site and at Harry's Place. Perhaps they didn't bother inviting us because they didn't want us spoiling the party? Islam is, after all, considerably better-established here than it is in Spain, and the wolf doesn't go for a whole flock of sheep.
Comments
Yusuf,
"As if their followers aren't to be found in every western ghetto?"
What the hell is the above supposed to mean? I resent your characterization of the salafis.
"As if people don't already think that what goes on in Saudi really does represent Islam just because they control the Haramain?"
Can anyone tell me what the heck goes on in Saudi Arabia that is so horrible? I mean unlike almost all of the socalled Islamic countries, Saudi hasnt killed its people by the thousands, hasnt invaded another country, minorities are treated better there than in any other Muslim country ( I do wonder why since its so "fundamentalist") and at the very least you have people there, scholars there, who can actually speak, albiet oftentimes rhetorically, about how women are treated. At least the scholars of ahlul sunnah wa jumah know that "honor" killings are haram since power there is in the center, albiet theoritically, and not with every jahil father, brother or husband.
You people make me sick. I'm gonna return to my Saudi loving ghetto.
Posted by: bikhair | November 1, 2005 6:57 PM
Salaam alaikum,
Man, I get tired of Saudi-bashing or basically any Arab-bashing as if the Salafi-Wahhabis are the SOLE problem for Muslims in the world. But as far as for Mr. Hanania, does he know that Arab Christians discourage Holloween celebrations? Why doesn't he question their patriotism?
Posted by: Izzy Mo | November 1, 2005 7:28 PM
The greatest danger was the spread of the radically conservative, Saudi-backed schools of Islam. "They don't want to go forward, they want to go back," said Prof Wadud, who also led mixed prayers at the Barcelona meeting.
Câmon bruv, get real! Youâre more âstaggeredâ by this comment than the idea that scholars are somehow wrongly advancing a âhomophobicâ reading of the Qurâan!?!? This has to rate as one of the cheaper shots at the Saudi/Salafis. In fairness, it is not in keeping with the generally high standards of this blog. For the record, Iâm not affiliated with any particular group.
Bikhair - your efforts at providing some balance are not unappreciated.
Posted by: Atticus | November 1, 2005 7:37 PM
Can anyone tell me what the heck goes on in Saudi Arabia that is so horrible?
Howzabout this then?
Posted by: George Carty
|
November 1, 2005 7:46 PM
Assalaamu alaikum,
I'm not one for Saudi-bashing; in fact, I often defend them to correct the ridiculous, false stereotypes that people have about Saudi. There are a lot of positives, and I enjoy visiting there.
But I try to be accurate... bikhair, you have a very unrealistic view of Saudi as some kind of a perfect Islamic state (a view that's certainly not shared by all Salafis). In fact, the Saudi royal family is corrupt and resented, the financial system is based on riba, innocent people are arrested without evidence and tortured. And I don't know what you mean by "minorities are treated better there than in any other Muslim country".
Posted by: Ann | November 1, 2005 9:47 PM
Ann talks sense, in the last paragraph anyway.
Posted by: Old Pickler | November 1, 2005 10:28 PM
Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim
I don't like Muslims bashing each other any more than the next man. This does not mean, however, that one should forgo any critical examination of Muslims when it is warranted, as, many scholars have pointed out, is the case with KSA. While it is true that other Muslim countries have serious social and political problems, none of them export the kind of fitna that Saudi Arabia has. In fact, many people far more qualified than me, have indicated that much of what is wrong with Muslims today (the absence of good adab, the lack of knowledge of even the basics of the deen, the lack of respect for the Ulama, the emphasis on outward piety over inward states, the neglect of our Beloved -Allah bless him and give him peace, the fomentation of a takfiri culture and the concomitant violence that this creates, the obsession with women's as the (sometimes sole) marker of a community's piety, all this and much more) is directly attributable to the sea change brought about, in no small part, by the spread of 'Salafism' in our Ummah. Not every individual salafi brother or sister is at fault, but, as a whole, the neo-wahabist movement funded by Saudi pertro-dollars is. And Allah knows best.
Posted by: alexlahoz | November 2, 2005 12:00 AM
the aonve should read "the obsession with women's dress"
Posted by: alexlahoz | November 2, 2005 12:02 AM
Atticus,
"Bikhair - your efforts at providing some balance are not unappreciated."
Jazakallah khair.
Ann,
"bikhair, you have a very unrealistic view of Saudi as some kind of a perfect Islamic state (a view that's certainly not shared by all Salafis)."
Did I ever, ever say that? No, I defend Saudi Arabia when she derserves to be defended. If Islam, Tawheed (the forgotten everything of Islam) is to be preserved than it is more preserved in that country than any other. Yes, its imperfect, but there are scholars there, who can teach, its place where Muslims can practice thier religion, and it is a place where Muslims can learn alot. Yes, it is imperfect.
Why is it that the Saudi Royal family is always brought up as if Saudi Arabia begins and ends with them? If that is your only beef with Saudi Arabia, dig deeper because you are grasping at straws.
You ever consider that the good deeds they perform my be more than thier bad? Their affair is with Allah (azawajal). BTW so is yours.
Posted by: bikhair | November 2, 2005 1:54 AM
I also hate how anytime something bad happens in the ummah, concerning Muslims we all like to blame the wahhabis or the Saudis as if our own plates are clean. I wonder if that will work out on Al Qiyamah.
Posted by: bikhair | November 2, 2005 1:57 AM
Alexahos, your Jâaccuse beggars belief, it is so incredible that its almost funny. The only thing you haven't pinned on those pesky petrol-soaked towel-heads is global warming. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to drive to work.
Posted by: Atticus | November 2, 2005 5:48 AM
I too have been dismayed by the constant attack on our salafi brothers.While I do not subscribe to any particular group, I feel most comfortable with the salafis for they are the only ones who are making an effort to strictly adhere to the Quran and the Sunnah. I find that most of their detractors constantly revile them without adducing any proof from the Quran and the Sunnah to bolster their case. Saudi Arabia is not perfect but then which country is.Atleast the religious authorities have made a concerted attempt to preserve Islam in its pristine form;the alternative would have been the grave/saint worshipping,biddat ridden version of the faith that many of us in the Indian sub continent have to endure.Similar to what Saudi Arabia was before that great Mujtahid Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab(May Allah be pleased with him)rid it of the unislamic practices that had become the norm.A visceral hatred of the House of Saud is really of no use to Islam and Muslims in general and Yusuf I find many of your postings on Salafis extemely offensive. Granted that you have a Sufi bent of mind, but that does not give you the licence to indulge in these sorts of attacks.
Posted by: ajsuhail | November 2, 2005 7:01 AM
Bikhair,
I too resent Saudi bashing but being part Somalilander, I have some serious issues with the way Saudis treated my people during the civil war in Somaliland and continue to treat them to this day.
The biggest of these issues is that to me the Saudi Tawheed and general religiosity is all pure theory.
I'll give you the example of a family of Somalilanders living in Saudi at the time the war broke out and who had 7 young children, all of the children were, to the best of my knowledge born in the country. Their father had been working in the country for a long time too. Unfortunately, he fell ill and passed away. Almost immediately, the govn served mother and children with a deportation order. She tried to plead her case and was after some effort granted an interview with some big govn cheese.
He didn't give her a chance to say a thing...he ordered her and the kids out of the country, didn't care where they went as long as they left on the next available flight out. She said: Haram Alaik! Sheikh, the children are orphans, does that not mean anything to you? And his reply was: Haram Alaik yourself, you want to stay in a country that is not yours?. Anyway, to cut a long story short, the U.K govn gave the family asylum. Based on this case alone, I'd say the U.K is a lot more Islamic with regards to the treatment of orphans as per the Qur'an.
Now I'd be the first to say the Somali people only have themselves to blame for what they did to their country so making themselves stateless in the process...but wrt the Saudi authorities, my question is: where is the Islam that they keep preaching to the rest of the world? Is islam just theory? Is it just Salah?
Posted by: Saggal | November 2, 2005 7:27 AM
As-Salaamu 'alaikum br. Saggal,
I used to know a family of Somali origin who had lived in the country since Ottoman times and were kicked out when the Horn of Satan rose from the Najd. They also now live in the UK (I think they are of Arab tribal origin, btw). By the way, just about everyone who has worked in the Gulf region has a few stories about arrogant, nasty locals and the contemptuous way workers from Muslim countries are treated. You can read one here about how a piously veiled Saudi woman treated an Indian Muslim in a shop, and got away with it. What motivates this? It's not the "we're the Saved Sect and they're just grave-worshipping lumpen proletariat who we're paying" thing, surely?
Posted by: Yusuf Smith | November 2, 2005 8:37 AM
Have an entry on Hanania's foolishness at my blog. Almost as silly as the one trick proggies in Spain.
Posted by: DrM | November 2, 2005 10:31 AM
waalaikum salam br. Yusuf,
The people that you know are likely to belong to the Is-haq clan of Somaliland, whose genealogy is said to go back to Arabia, not certain exactly where though but most likely Yemen. They make the majority of the Republic of Somaliland; a small break-away republic proclaimed in 1991, it has a consultative assembly and relative peace. My father is an Is-haqi, which I guess makes me one too.
The Saudi Wahhabism is a particularly heartless and cruel reductive version of Islam that doesn't give two hoots about the welfare of struggling Muslims elsewhere. Below is an excerpt from Al-Ahram which demonstrates my point.
Saudi Arabia poses a huge dilemma for Somaliland. A major financial backer of the TNG and supporter within the Arab League, Saudi Arabia was traditionally the major importer of Somaliland livestock. For the better part of the last five years, Saudi Arabia has banned livestock from Somaliland on the grounds that it might be infected with Rift Valley Fever. Somaliland denies the charges and there does not appear to be any current scientific evidence to support the claim. Recent investigations by the Food and Agricultural Organization and World Health Organization found no evidence of Rift Valley Fever in Somaliland. Several Gulf States that import small quantities of Somaliland livestock have lifted the ban. Some observers suspect that the ban is linked to Saudi business interests involved in the importation of livestock from other countries. In the meantime, the Saudi ban is doing grievous harm to the Somaliland economy. The ban has hit nearly every kind of employment in the country-pastoralists, truck drivers, livestock traders, animal health staff, brokers, port employees and private business people. The impact is especially great in the port of Berbera. The town is not prosperous, and the large international airport, built during the Soviet interlude in Somalia, is effectively shut down. Berbera is lucky to have one or two ships in the harbor on any given day. The problem is aggravated because the government of Somaliland does not have any access to the Saudi royal family and has been unable to make its case directly to the Saudi government. Governments with close ties to Saudi Arabia, including the United States, appear to have little interest in making Somaliland's case.
Yemen, located across the Gulf of Aden from Somaliland, has a long history of links to Somaliland and has served periodically as a refuge for Somalis fleeing unrest. Somaliland was improving relations with Yemen until the Arta process in Djibouti stopped the initiative. Yemen subsequently accepted the Arab League position on the recognition of the TNG in Mogadishu, and relations with Somaliland soured.
Posted by: Saggal | November 2, 2005 11:04 AM
You guys!
There are always people who think they are better than others for whatever reason. It is a good thing Yusuf that you are a white brother and you will probably never expirience the bigotry of some Muslims but I bet that if there were blacks or African immigrants in the sub-continent Muslim countries they wouldnt be treated any better than a Indo-Pak would be treated in Saudi. There are some things from Jahiliyah that we will never rid ourselves from. You should note that I have never seen as many interacial marriages among any other Muslims than I have among the salafis. I happen to be one of those marriages, Alhumdililah.
Posted by: bikhair | November 2, 2005 6:11 PM
Saggal,
Asalamualaikum wa rahmatullah. When it comes to issues of aqeedah I cant be satisfied with that it is wrong, I have to be convinced of why it is wrong, in this case the "Saudi tawheed."
You know we imitate the kafirs so much we call each other names and we cant even make sense of those names.
Posted by: bikhair | November 2, 2005 6:17 PM
Waalaikum salaam and Eid Mubarak Sr. bikhair! (sorry if you are not a sister)
I have to be convinced of why it is wrong, in this case the "Saudi tawheed.
I was wrong to question the Tawheed, only Allah Subhana wataallah can judge that, astagfirullah. But it will always be beyond me how someone displaying so much outward appearance of compliance in the observance of the Qur'an and Sunnah can also be so VERY cruel, so devoid of compassion. And the Saudis are nothing if not CRUEL and HEARTLESS. Their treatment of Muslims from the developing world working in that country is despicable, ...I could list about a hundred harrowing stories but I won't.
You know we imitate the kafirs so much we call each other names and we cant even make sense of those names.
To the best of my knowledge, the Saudis are the only ones calling everyone else Kufr. YOU have even questioned the Islam of the average Turk, something I find offensive as some of my friends are Turk and are also the best of Muslims.
It maybe true that there is a bit of jahiliyah in all societies but the Saudis are beyond jahiliyah, in my opinion.
w/s.
Posted by: Saggal | November 2, 2005 8:25 PM
The biggest of these issues is that to me the Saudi Tawheed and general religiosity is all pure theory.
I donât know what you mean by âSaudi Tawheedâ but on the general point about the gap between what Islam says and what people practice, that isnât a struggle that is unique to Saudi Arabia. This is my problem with some of the comments posted here, they seem to be based on the assumption that Saudi should be held to a different standard compared with the rest of the Muslim world; Iâm yet to come across a good reason why.
Based on this case alone, I'd say the U.K is a lot more Islamic with regards to the treatment of orphans as per the Qur'an.
Even the UK has a policy of forced deportation for those it deems to be illegal immigrants, a policy that has been criticized by the UN. If you donât believe me, take a look at this; some of the cases relate to families with children who have lived here for a while. This is not to excuse what happened to the family you mention, but such policies are practiced beyond Saudi.
the Horn of Satan rose from the Najd.
Groan!
just about everyone who has worked in the Gulf region has a few stories about arrogant, nasty locals and the contemptuous way workers from Muslim countries are treated.
And yet you only see fit to mention the case of what you bizarrely refer to as a âpiously veiledâ Saudi woman. There will always be those who don a Hijab/Nikaab, or grow a beard or indeed pray Eid Salah out of custom while being ignorant. Why their existence in Saudi warrants a hissy fit, I donât quite understand.
What motivates this? It's not the "we're the Saved Sect and they're just grave-worshipping lumpen proletariat who we're paying" thing, surely?
The question is so contrived it doesnât deserve a response.
The Saudi Wahhabism is a particularly heartless and cruel reductive version of Islam that doesn't give two hoots about the welfare of struggling Muslims elsewhere.
The only reductivistm I see is coming from you. As for not giving âtwo hootsâ about the welfare of struggling Muslims elsewhere, how do you explain this?
Eid Mubarak all. Taqabal Allah minna wa minkum.
Posted by: Atticus | November 2, 2005 8:33 PM
Even the UK has a policy of forced deportation for those it deems to be illegal immigrants
The Somali lady and her kids were not illegal immigrants, there is a huge difference, I think.
And yet you only see fit to mention the case of what you bizarrely refer to as a âpiously veiledâ Saudi woman. There will always be those who don a Hijab/Nikaab, or grow a beard or indeed pray Eid Salah out of custom while being ignorant. Why their existence in Saudi warrants a hissy fit, I donât quite understand.
How about the case of the Filipino house girl who had a hot iron pressed to her cheek?
Or the Somali girl locked away in the bathroom every supper time for the unforgivable crime of being "too beautiful and willowy"! According to her employer i.e. the lady of the house, the girl had to be locked away whenever the husband was around so he could never see her! ...why, when the common view is that Arab men don't like skinny women anyway.
And then of course your countrymen, or rather your govn, is perfectly happy to strangulate the meagre economy of a very poor muslim country, somaliland, for no other reason than they can of course do it.
These are the cases you never get to hear about. The forgotten victims, -too poor for anyone to care about. And of course the poor are always wrong.
I regret getting involved in this Saudi business, it's ruined Eid for me, my favourite day of the year. I'm now in bad mood and feeling guilty for the bad things I have written about the Saudis...
I agree with Izzy Mo that the Saudis are not the biggest problem facing the umma.
Posted by: Saggal | November 2, 2005 9:35 PM
The Somali lady and her kids were not illegal immigrants, there is a huge difference, I think.
Not really. You say that an official dismissed her case, saying she wanted to stay in a country that was not hers. He was declaring her to be an alien, no longer wanted in the country. Of course the decision is contemptible on compassionate grounds, but as I have pointed out, itâs not unprecedented. Many states, including the UK, take take similar actions.
How about the case of the Filipino house girl who had a hot iron pressed to her cheek? Or the Somali girl locked away in the bathroom every supper time for the unforgivable crime of being "too beautiful and willowy"! According to her employer i.e. the lady of the house, the girl had to be locked away whenever the husband was around so he could never see her! ...why, when the common view is that Arab men don't like skinny women anyway.
Whether Arab men like âem chubby or not is beside the point, abuse is abuse and should be condemned as such. What I object to is the way such social ills, which are NOT by any means unique to Saudi society, are blamed on or used to attack Salafism/Wahabism or whatever the heck you want to call it. Here is a story about maid abuse from Malaysia, I warn you that the pictures are just as disturbing and harrowing as the ones you paint. This is also an increasing problem in Singapore and China, as recent controversies in those countries have shown. On the back of such awful cases, is it just, for instance, to dismiss the whole of Malaysian society and/or their practice of Islam as âCRUEL and HEARLESSâ?
And then of course your countrymen, or rather your govn, is perfectly happy to strangulate the meagre economy of a very poor muslim country, somaliland, for no other reason than they can of course do it.
Actually, Iâm of Pakistani origin. Thatâs the country in which a council of âeldersâ ordered the gang rape of a woman as punishment for a dispute involving her brother. Currently, I reside and pay taxes in a country that was party to an act of aggression against a sovereign Muslim state, resulting in a situation that is now claiming (on average) the lives of 63 of my brothers and sisters, daily.
I regret getting involved in this Saudi business, it's ruined Eid for me, my favourite day of the year. I'm now in bad mood and feeling guilty for the bad things I have written about the Saudis...
Iâm sorry you feel that way. You made some very strong and sweeping statements that I felt were unjust and needed a response. Donât take any of it too personally, it wasnât meant that way. From one brother to another, chin up and enjoy the celebrations.
Posted by: Atticus | November 3, 2005 1:47 AM
The link to the Malaysian story in the previous comment didn't work. Here it is: http://www.asianlabour.org/archives/001644.php
Posted by: Atticus | November 3, 2005 1:49 AM
Atticus said:
Not really. You say that an official dismissed her case, saying she wanted to stay in a country that was not hers. He was declaring her to be an alien, no longer wanted in the country. Of course the decision is contemptible on compassionate grounds, but as I have pointed out, it's not unprecedented. Many states, including the UK, take take similar actions.
You are unbelievable but I wouldn't expect otherwise from a Saudi Wahhabi who has his/her ears and eyes shut and sealed.
You totally discount the fact they were legal residents in the country right from day one, had continued to be so for at least 7 years when the husband passed away after a short illness, that all the children were born in the country. How could you even imply the same might have happened in the U.K when you know it not to be true? You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Am I to assume you're unaware anyone coming to work in the U.K, doing so legally, and residing here continuously for 4 years is entitled to citizenship through naturalisation, so compassionate grounds wouldn't even have come into the picture? But I forget, non-Saudis can never become citizens can they? Haram Alaik that anyone should even have the dreams of their offspring staying on in peace in the country after they (the parents) have broken their back through hard labour for the Saudis.
You say that an official dismissed her case.
You took this out of context please read the whole post. Just because I said "case" it doesn't mean she was illegal. Perhaps my command of the English language is not good enough for you. I have only been speaking/learning it for 8 years now. If you prefer, I am fluent in these other languages and don't mind repeating myself in any one of them.
Arabic, Somali, Swahili, Tigrinya, Italian and Serbo-Croat.
Posted by: Saggal | November 3, 2005 7:10 AM
Atticus,
I'm not a brother, I'm a girl.
Have only just noticed you are not from Saudi Arabia.
Social ills maybe prevalent in other countries too but at least they don't exhibit the level of religious hypocrisy that exists in Saudi Arabia. If the Saudis didn't try to be so holier than thou they wouldn't be getting the bulk of the criticism.
Posted by: Saggal | November 3, 2005 2:03 PM
Atticus wrote: "On the back of such awful cases, is it just, for instance, to dismiss the whole of Malaysian society and/or their practice of Islam as 'CRUEL and HEARLESS'?"
Just to let you know, regarding the case of maid abuse of which you speak, the perpetrator of the abuse was a non-Muslim Malaysian woman of Chinese ethnicity. (This was a rather big case when it was first announced.)
Posted by: JD
|
November 3, 2005 3:37 PM