Arab News reports that an unnamed Saudi writer has been charged with blasphemy for comments he made about a hadith on a television program. The complaint was filed, not by the government, but by individuals who believed the writer went too far. The paper, naturally, doesn’t reprint what the writer said in order to avoid the same complaint being leveled against itself.
The issue raises an interesting question, though. According to Wikipedia, Blasphemy is irreverence[1] toward holy personages, religious artifacts, customs, and beliefs. So, how does criticizing what someone said about the Prophet on the basis of hearsay, scores if not hundreds of years after His death, add up to defaming religion? At most, it calls into question the accuracy of what someone was told by someone else. To me, this comes very close to the Islamic concept of shirk, in that it raises the writer of the hadith and the hadith itself to the level of an inerrant God.
The facts of the article go a long way to explaining how and why reforming Islam is going to be a difficult task: People will allege blasphemy whenever a criticism or even critique is made. In many Islamic countries, blasphemy is a very serious allegation with very serious consequences.
Saudi writer charged with blasphemy
MUHAMMAD HUMAIDAN | ARAB NEWSJEDDAH: The Summary Court in Jeddah is expected to look into complaints raised by a number of people against a Saudi writer for allegedly insulting Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Saudi writer had allegedly described a Hadith of the Prophet as barbaric, during a program on Al-Hurra Channel, which is presented by Nadeen Al-Badr.
Sources told Arab News that the court had sent a copy of the lawsuit filed against the man to Justice Minister Muhammad Al-Eissa in order to seek his opinion on the issue.
The plaintiffs have presented audio and visual evidence to prove their argument. They want the court to give the writer a strong punishment in accordance with the Shariah law.
The Saudi plaintiffs said the writer’s action would not be accepted by any Muslim who is proud of his religion. They said such actions would not be tolerated in the land of the Two Holy Mosques.
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
March:19:2010 - 10:29
The charges may not have been ostensibly by the government, but the individuals filing the charges may have been prompted by the government officials to do so. This sometimes happens in dictatorships. On the other hand, this may have been genuinely done from the private individuals.
I am not convinced by your argument about blasphemy vs shirk and whether the Hadith may be seen as equal to a divine power. I think it’s clear to Muslims that the Sahi Hadiths are the guiding force for them after the Quran – whether they should be treated as such or not is another argument. But most devout Muslims look upon the sahi Hadiths as the right guiding force for themselves. This is especially true for the sahi Hadiths that cite the Prophet. If a person goes on TV to denounce a sahi hadith citing the Prophet, then as far as the orthodox religion is concerned, he is being blasphemous.
Of course there is always the argument that even believing people should look at their religion with a rational eye – but such an argument doesn’t hold much water in an orthodox society like the Saudi Arabia. In fact, it doesn’t hold much water in most Islamic societies – remember the Satanic Verses.
If only the religious people of the world could be more rational, this world would be a different place.
March:19:2010 - 11:25
I agree John.
I would say instead Daisy, that “If only the IRRATIONAL people of the world could be more rational, this world would be a different place.”
Irreligious people are quite capable of wreaking havoc with irrationality, and religious people are quite capable of being rational.
March:19:2010 - 11:36
This is ’1984′ before our eyes. The fact is that, to most Muslims, words mean nothing in certain cases. The hadith have many (thousands?) of horrible stories of things if done by anybody except Mohammed and Muslims would be universally condemned. However, since the hadith are about Mohammed, then the deeds are not bad, much to the contrary. This is moral corruption and intellectual dishonesty of the first magnitude.
I see this all the time. I have tried to get Muslims to simple tell me what a verse says but they cannot do it. I have asked them to pretend it is not about Islam’s prophet but somebody named “Joe”… they cannot even do that. It is amazing.
Here is a comment from the Arab News: “If he is guilty, and did what is being said in the news, he MUST be punished in public to make all aware that we love our beloved Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu-’alaihe-wasallam) and we will never compromise on any westernized interpretation of the Islamic text. One may better educate him/her self about the text first, before coming into public and represent his/her think set.”
What is a Westernized interpretation of text? How is one ‘educated’ about text?
What the commenter means is that if a text is about Islam’s prophet then it is a good no matter what the words actually say or the deeds described and it is better not to think about this.
As you kindof say, this is why reforming islam is not just difficult, but impossible. How can one remain a Muslim if they accept the texts for what they say? This mental barrier is necessary for belief in islam. This is also why I say that Muslim values are different from the rest of the world. If Mohammad did horrible things and Muslims not only refuse to talk about them but even consider him a great example to emulate, well tells you all you need to know.
March:19:2010 - 12:20
Not all Muslims accept all the texts for what they say- which is precisely why this guy is in trouble.
March:19:2010 - 13:10
As Sandy points out, this guy is exactly a counter-example of what Jay is pointing to: Muslims who challenge the status quo interpretations.
For the complainants in the article, ‘Westernized interpretation’ means not taking a hadith as the word of God. And that is where logic leads. No commentator on the Quran or writer of ahadith suggests that he is speaking for God, only offering a (human) opinion. Which is my point that in doing so, they come close to creating other Gods!
March:19:2010 - 14:42
Yes, but. Why cant somebody tell us what was said? or what texts he referred to? or even maybe educate us as to the proper understanding of the text?
Maybe this isn’t just 1984, but Alice in Wonderland living on an Amical Farm in 1984. This personality cult towards Mohammed amkes Kim Jong-il seem like an amateur. Never doubt, never question. Believe.
March:19:2010 - 14:51
I agree and disagree with this statement:
“People will allege blasphemy whenever a criticism or even critique is made. In many Islamic countries, blasphemy is a very serious allegation with very serious consequences.”
Yes, people will and do allege blasphemy in certain countries quite frequently, and with legal consequences for such allegations if proven to be true.
Yet, I disagree with the statement that this is done within Islamic countries. I would assert that there are no Islamic countries. There are Muslims, but the countries are all (including those in the West) dominated by those with a lust for power, wealth, and so forth.
There are, rather, countries ruled partially or totally by clerical establishments — so called “theocratic” rule.
What is a problem is that free enquiry as to theology is criminalised. The UN Charter of Human Rights stands for freedom of conscience. As such, a follower of Ahmadiyya-inspired Islam or any other ideology should be able to describe his ideology and why he believes that ideology to be correct and based on the teachings of the Rasulullah.
Critocal textual analysis, the “higher criticism”, should be freely available. If a scholar comes to an intellectual conclusion about a hadith, he should not be stifled by governmental edict.
Such stoppages of enquiry are contrary to human rights and intellectual rights.
And, without intellectual freedom and intellectual rights, the results for our society will be not positive in many areas, including those well separate from religion.
Finally, I would add that in our conservative society, the ability to discuss a topic is exceedingly unlikely to cause young people to stray far from the path of their fathers.
March:19:2010 - 16:04
I do agree that there are countries with majority Muslim populations that are not ‘Islamic’ per se. But when a country–say Pakistan or Iran–has the name ‘Islamic Republic of …’, I’m inclined to take them at their word. I’ll also consider the KSA ‘Islamic’ as it says its constitution is the Quran.
I also agree that if it wishes to be taken seriously among world religions–other than as a bogeyman, that is–then Islam should be open to ‘higher criticism’. Otherwise, it will be open to being seen as a closed-minded, reactionary cult, no matter how many billion followers it might have.
March:19:2010 - 16:07
Because to quote his blasphemy would be to put the newspaper in jeopardy of being accused of blasphemy! Newspaper already get enough crap from religious conservatives that I sympathize with the media’s wish to avoid bringing more trouble into their houses.
On the other hand, the paper could have told us–obliquely–what the issue was.
But Alice in Wonderland isn’t a bad metaphor for Saudis and Saudi Arabia. Alice found herself in a place abounding in paradoxes and, protest as she might, had little or no power to effect change on her environment. She did wake up, however…
March:19:2010 - 16:13
It’s just like Soviet Union in the thirties : you are guilty, and if you want to know why, you are guilty twice.
March:19:2010 - 16:26
That’s about right. Except the Soviets didn’t also condemn one to Hell as they didn’t believe in it. Too, they usually just shot people, not cut off their heads. That’s not necessarily an important distinction (especially for the one dying), but…
March:19:2010 - 16:42
I’m not sure thats an accurate comparison. The Saudi guy in question has been told what he’s done wrong. WE are the ones who have not been given the details.
March:19:2010 - 17:25
That’s true, but the fact remains that he’s being charged with criticizing what somebody said about the Prophet, not the Prophet and not what the Prophet said. On what basis is this being done? Is the hadith a sound one? Who says? Even if it’s the most sound hadith ever, it’s still just a hadith.
March:19:2010 - 17:36
#Ok, Sandy, but what I meant, is that if he’s going to defend himself, then !
Just like many of the communist leaders, which Stalin got rid off.
And John, with Gulag in mind, one would wonder what is worse, Hell below or Hell above.
Could be I’have mentioned it before, but Simon Sebag Montefiore ‘Stalin The Court of the red Tzar’
is really worth reading .
March:20:2010 - 03:53
Yes, the world has just finished dealing with the irrationality of the non-religious people that is the communists. Now it is the irrationality of the religious people that the world has to deal with – primarily that is.
March:20:2010 - 06:02
John, I agree with you. Personally I have a lot of issues regarding hadith.
March:22:2010 - 05:43
Sometimes I’m just happy to get ANY news like this out of the KSA, considering the tight restrictions on speech. Even with few details, the story has apparently made a splash. Consider how many are now involved:
I hope it gets transferred to the Ministry of Culture and Information, they then bump it to a third ministry and then a fourth … Let the thing bounce around and reverberate within a system that has no protections of speech set up. Maybe, just maybe, somebody will get an idea that speech like this helps rather than harms society.
March:23:2010 - 02:10
There are a lot of barbaric statements in all three books of the “divine faiths” (LOL!). Just as Deuteronomy is filled with orders to commit war crimes against non-believers, the Qur’an, too, has similar orders. Muslims should have an honest conversation about these passages without some of them going ballistic every time somebody suggest — God forbid — that maybe not everything in the Qur’an is peaceful and loving toward all mankind.
March:23:2010 - 02:24
Anonymous,
You are right that Muslims should have an honest discussion about it. In fact, the rational Muslims do have discussions about it. It’s the orthodox variety who try to defend these passages and unfortunately it’s the small number of the orthodox Mudslims that the West knows about, because KSA is promoting this orthodox version of Islam and this is what the West knows about. The vast majority of Muslims in the world who don’t follow the orthodox Islam are ignored by the West by this vicious strategy of Saudi Arabia.
March:23:2010 - 06:27
Unfortunately I see many misconceptions and bias in this thread. “Freedom of speech” some may call it in their defense, but some arguments explicitly condemn their owners and prove them of equal irrationality as Islamic fundamentalists. One should be objective when talking about rationality and irrationality.
Islam urged people to use their brains to accept faith with conviction and not just pigheadedness. Muslims are encouraged to learn to distinguish between right and wrong based on individual judgment. The prophet Muhammad stated that “time is the master of all rules”, that is a change in circumstances inevitably means a change in rules. He also said in a succinct Hadith (Sahih Hadith, one strongly proven and confirmed in the literature of Hadiths) that “the Halal is obvious and the Haram (taboo) is obvious” two very strong statements he said to encourage people to think for themselves rather than consult Sheikhs on every single detail in their life. But a lot of Muslims in Salafi societies like Saudi, don’t do that, not anymore.
FYI, hundreds and maybe thousands or Hadiths and stories have been maliciously invented by people in different times throughout history to this day to fulfill political agendas, it would be wise to verify your sources before claiming that Prophet Mohammad did horrible things. Your interpretation of a piece of text that you researched out of its context is also not an adequately valid argument. Talking to some muslims in the streets is not a reference either for anything of value. Out of being rationale and decent and academic honesty and ethics, it is expected from intellectual and educated individuals to know their sources and be aware of the biases out there, whether for or against any cause, religion or group of people.
As a Muslim I’m obliged to respect other people from all faiths, and I willingly and rationally submit myself to this obligation, in today’s norms, no one will punish me if I don’t especially in today’s conflict of cultures. This is not a guilt trip I’m aiming at here, but we, the inhabitants of earth are here to know each other not to discriminate against each other. (a principle taken from a verse in Qu’ran)but again who cares to read the good things and who cares to skim for the bad or horrible. You shall see what you preset yourself to look for.
March:23:2010 - 10:19
This is not spam. I just want to drive that’s all.
IS that blashemy or shirk?
Peace OUT
Um oh yes, can we say that those who are opposed to women driving are both blashemous and shirkous.
March:23:2010 - 13:37
Mishy
I take issue with about 90% of what you say. Not only that, I find little support for independent judgement, change and moderation that you see in the Quran. Muslim doctrine makes a big thing out of the Quran being the eternal, complete and unchanging word of Allah, yet you seem to thing it is flexible depending on time, place and condition. Contrary to what you say, the quran says it details what Allah considers haram (6:119). I also have no idea where you got your quote about “time and its masters.”
As to the hadith, first of all it is not “people” who wrote them. The word “Muslims” would be more appropriate and be aware that I am not implying that Muslims aren’t people, only that they were written by a specific group of people, friends and early followers of your prophet, no less.
As to verifying my sources before I make claims about the actions of Mohammed, well perhaps you should actually read your sources – the ones you consider sahih – before you make statements about certain “horrible things”. Of course, that also depends on the definition of “horrible things.” Maybe, just maybe, attacks, raids, plunder, murder, torture, enslavement, rape and wife abuse are not “horrible” in your opinion. Note that I can easily find multiple accounts these in the sound hadith and as well as justification for them in the Quran. Words like decency, rationale, ethics and honesty are meaningless unless are applied according to facts, not sweet dreams of what one would like to believe.
In simple terms, Mishy, you are a typical Muslim. You say that as a Muslim you are supposed to respect everybody and not discriminate. End of story. You pat yourself on the back and smile, content in knowing that you are a good followers of an eternal, all powerful diety and that you know the truth.
The only problem, a small problem to you, is that Muslims constantly preach hatred and violence hate against infidels, Muslims openly discriminate against non-Muslims everywhere they dominate, your holy book is full of hate and abuse against non-Muslims, and the traditions about the life and words of your prophet are full of evil deeds committed against others and yet he is considered to be a noble example.
Your words have absolutely no relation to reality. You dismiss any evidence you do not like as being falsifications, a product of ignorance and/or due to the evil actions of non-Muslims or Muslims that are not “real Muslims”.
The story about the blasphemy charge would be amusing if it were a joke. You are the kind of person that makes this possible. By your actions, ignorance and self-deceit, you contribute to the evil that is done to others in the name of your religion. Note that in the comments, Muslims are already calling for the death of the accused, even without any idea of the facts or knowledge of what hadith it is about. Why are people afraid?
This is why Islam doesn’t change – because you don’t see any problem. When a non-Muslim dares raise an issue, you dismiss it as hate, ignorance or a mere misunderstanding. You constantly blame others for any problem and/or insist that anything you don’t like is “out of context”. I see no honest discussions of difficult issues among Muslims anywhere.
March:23:2010 - 17:03
Kacatuz!! pat on your back for this elaborated response and the enraging expression of hatred. I hope you didn’t hurt yourself while expressing your intense emotions.
Allow me to take issue with 100% of your blabber above coz you clearly made it all personal. . You address me like you know all about me, my evil actions and what I think and believe. You’re trying to teach me about myself, my culture and my religion! How impertinent!!
You think all what you said is absolute truth and mere reality, don’t you?
you are a living manifestation of the 1984 plot Kacatuz! Big brother fed you all that hatred very well.
Whose ignorance and self-deceit is clear here? All your accusations evidently apply to you, in person and I throw your argument back in your face. I will not argue with people like you, cause you’re a waste of time, I’ll let you indulge yourself in your abhorrence.
March:23:2010 - 17:31
What Religion preaches, is in many way uninteresting. What’s important is how people behave.
Experiences from my part of the world have learned us, that overly religious people in no way is better humans than people who believes less.
March:23:2010 - 21:28
Ahmad Mishly,
Thanks for your very rational argument and for taking the stand that you believe in respecting all religions and don’t discriminate between people. I do wish more people like you come to this site. That will make the discussion here much more meaningful.
Jay,
In your literal interpretation of those passages, you are overlooking the fact that people like Ahmad Mishly are genuinely interested in respecting all religions and all people, without bringing in the negative connotations of their religion that we so often see Muslims of extremist viewpoint propagating. I feel you need to focus on the positive aspects of his argument. We do need more Muslims – and people from all other religions – to think like Ahmad Mishly.
March:24:2010 - 02:06
Thanks Daisy for your word. It is indeed important to keep any prejudice aside in order to have a meaningful discussion. Suggesting that the other side in a dialogue is “Evil” is not a healthy premise to proceed in any discussion.
Hatred and loathing are everywhere on the web and they’re never meaningful or productive, cause they just perpetuate bias and preconceptions and blindfold us from viewing things from any other perspective.
I’m not here to argue, I’m here like all of you to discuss what’s happening in Saudi because I think it’s total madness. I live in Saudi, and lived here most of my life, and I assert that Saudis (normal average people) despise the lunacy and tyranny of religious fundamentalists and they’re stunned by the insane stories they find in the news every other day as much as any of you do. The majority of Muslims around the world are as appalled by this insanity as westerners; we believe Islam and the Muslim world are the first line of victims of this rigid mentality and the terrorism coming from it.
The media coverage you see in the Arab world about these insane stories are part of continuous and conscious efforts to expose the systemic problem, induce action and cure a sick community (a minority of extremists, who are themselves the victims of certain circumstances).
To understand any culture, one should learn from interacting with its people. You can’t learn objectively about a country, say like Japan, by dwelling on Chinese CCP books, and you can’t learn about countries like Cuba or Venezuela these days by only listening to abc or Fox news or Huffington post.
Likewise, It’s not sane to assume that 2 billion people are totally evil, or that some countries are “axes of evil” based on what you were specifically told to believe. This mentality is as rigid and as primitive as that of terrorists, and lead to blind hatred and terrorism that is no different from Al Qaeda’s approach.
What I’m saying, is we should be careful of the lies and bias in the media, online and offline. There are premeditated and continuous efforts to deepen the gap between cultures and to perpetuate world conflicts and instabilities for political and economic agendas. I’m not saying that it’s a conspiracy plotted by a bunch of people, no, but that there is systemic defect in today’s globalization that we should collaborate to fix.
I’m thankful I found this blog to share my thoughts with other people seeking reason and perspective on Saudi issues, and I assure you that my thoughts are not exceptional nor a rare commodity in where I come from and whom I allow myself represent.
March:24:2010 - 06:12
Ahmad Mishly,
I agree with what you say. It’s refreshing to hear all this from someone who has lived in Saudi Arabia for a long time. It also shows as you say, the average Saudi is not a part of the controlling and divisive policies of the State. It’s heartening to know that the common Saudis think differently from the way the political and religious power-groups think in Saudi Arabia.
You sound very convincing in your words – What I’m saying, is we should be careful of the lies and bias in the media, online and offline. There are premeditated and continuous efforts to deepen the gap between cultures and to perpetuate world conflicts and instabilities for political and economic agendas. It’s important that the people speak against the divisive agendas of the political powers.
I do feel that the US is not being fair to the common Saudis by supporting the controlling regime in Saudi Arabia, which works in collaboration with the religious extremist groups. This is creating a problem not only for the common people in Saudi Arabia but for the world as a whole.
I hope to hear more from you about Saudi Arabia. And I hope more people like you come to this blog.
March:24:2010 - 07:00
Mishly–I appreciate your comments on this blog. You seem to be experienced at commenting and hopefully as wise about bias in commenting online as in the media. It seems so from your inclusion of online as well as offline in your remark about bias.
As a non-Saudi who has lived in Saudi all your life you do have a particular insider-outsider perspective which is valuable. In my experience of blogs, sometimes the Saudi or Saudi-based commentators give up commenting due to a major skew in commenting by people who have no experience of Saudi or Arab culture including religion, but have very firm convictions none the less, usually negative ones, needless to say.
Those Saudi commentators either stick to blogs in Arabic or restrict their commenting to where they feel they will be heard legitimately. More than one has told me in an email that they were commenting on certain blogs because they hoped to let others know what Saudis were really like only to have their contributions mocked or trounced in some way. Some experienced real pain about this, and have turned their energies to other activities than commenting on blogs, like their studies, research, or work.
Thanks for your contributions here.
March:24:2010 - 10:56
Hi Chiara,
let me tell u I do not blame those Saudi commentators u mentioned who are trying to connect with the world and fail under the aggression they face. It’s not easy I assure u, to b hailed with endless accusations, even though most of the usual accusations are either debatable, refutable or simply agreeable. However the level of aggression is very often overwhelming and disturbing that the humiliation becomes too painful to endure and as a consequqnce any further discussion becomes a fight until one side gives up, usually the minority. Being a Muslim today is not easy at all I confirm it. Whether religious or not, We’re alll born with the sins of a terrorist until proven innocent. Insulting and offending Muslims is acceptable, but saying anything against a state of war like Israel is not only frowned at but increasingly punishable by law and international organizations for allegations of antisemitism. Whereas on the other hand invading Muslim countries and attacking and cursing every sacred symbol in Islam just for the fun of it, is enouraged in the name of freedom and democracy.…can anyone else see the double standards? Something is obviously wrong.
I choose to endure and stay calm and fight with words and reason cause I believe that we are rationale beings, all of us. It’s just a matter of circumstances that influence our personalities and judgement.
I commit myself to positive contribution to dialogues with different ideologies, and I always believe that some people will listen and exchange thoughts on an equal wave.
March:24:2010 - 14:37
Mishly–thank you for your comment addressed to me.
Yes, the Saudis I was mentioning were among my favourite commentators, because they share your balanced view, are educated and articulate. Some lasted years on the same blogs, and others were more recent arrivals to a particular blog or blogging. I noticed a pattern of some leaving a comment that was uncharacteristically angry or turning tables to show the bias in reverse (which of course got vile accusations of misogyny, Islamocentrism, extremism, racism, whatever) and then would either announce they were stopping commenting on a blog, or just disappeared. Invariably in private emails the ones I was in contact with were hurt and often felt betrayed having been welcomed to a blog and contributing a lot of information and resources with links in their comments. As I said, some become disenchanted enough to stop commenting on blogs at all.
I did 2 posts on my own blog about Blogging and Ethics, in part inspired by that phenomenon, and a 3rd one on the absence of male Saudi voices, particularly those of the Saudi husbands of Western wives in Saudi: Blogging & Ethics Part I: ELSI; Part II:Tall Tales, Truthiness, and Big Hits!; The Saudi Husband of the Western Wife In Saudi–A Great Silence.
As you mentioned Israel you might be interested in the current debates on the Israel/Palestine situation, inspired by Israel Apartheid Week: Calling on Obama: Get Tough On Israel, Maybe–The Doha Debates Chez Chiara.
These are interspersed currently with the situation of niqab wearers in Quebec, and Muslims and family pet dog. So although Saudi themed my blog touches on themes of broader intercultural and interfaith relevance.
If you are a South Asian based in Saudi, or even if not, you may be particularly interested in the 2 part personal essay by blogger NidalM (Pakistani in Saudi since age 1 month, now on his own work iqama)who touches on the conundrum of being raised in Saudi but a non-Saudi, and only there by the grace of an iqama: Desis, Multiculturalism, Saudization, and Marriage Part I–From Birth to Career and Part II From Career to Courtship. Others have addressed a similar phenomenon of being a non-Saudi Saudi (sometimes for generations) either because of being non-tribal, or seeking marriage permission with a person of their same origin but one has Saudi citizenship and the other doesn’t. Somali Saudi Aziz did this successfully and shared his personal story in 2 parts: the process and the success story.
In short, I appreciate your comments here on John’s blog, and hope you will read and comment on anything you find interesting on mine.
Thanks again.
[Chiara: I found and re-instated your comment. My spam filter found too many links for its liking! Sorry about that.]
March:24:2010 - 14:45
Mishly–thank you for your comment.
I left you a long lovely linked reply and the commenting jinn ate it, after I reminded myself to copy it for safe keeping and then forgot to do it. If I can stop crying I may try to reconstruct it.
For now, I will just say that I agree that it is sad that those who have tried, sometimes for years have felt betrayed even on blogs they were welcomed on and lost the energy to keep commenting even though they are normally calm, balanced,articulate and generous in their comments.
I wrote 2 posts on my blog on the topic of Blogging and Ethics in part inspired by this, and another on the silence of Saudis particularly the husbands of Western wives based in Saudi. There are other posts on my blog you may find of interest, about Israel, or being non-Saudi in Saudi (ie no citizenship) or a non-tribal Saudi etc. Please feel free to read and comment on anything you find of interest including the recent debates (very civilized) on Israel.
Thanks again for your reply. And now I must go and grieve the lovely linked version of this comment.
Comment was found and re-instated. Too many links in it to please the spam filter!
March:24:2010 - 15:40
I’m really sorry you lost your comment Chiara.
Thanks for your warm welcome.
March:24:2010 - 17:31
Mishly–thank you, and as if by a miracle, there it is #30. I can stop crying now! LOL
March:24:2010 - 22:40
Mishly (got the name right this time).
As I said, you are typical of most of the Muslims I meet:
1. I make serious accusations and I affirmed that your facts are wrong. You don’t respond. You don’t deny. You don’t care.
2. You accuse me of blabber and hate. I, who have never killed, attacked or beaten anybody, never called for others to be murdered for their opinions and beliefs, yet I am evil according to you. Your dear prophet who was directly responsible for dozens of raids, plunder, murders, enslavement, rape, female abuse and discrimination in his life and for the indirect murder of millions, is a great moral man. You don’t even deny my accusations or ask for references and links. Obviously you don’t care, or you know that I can do it, as I have many times.
3. I asked about a hadith you quoted because I don’t recognize it. I do like to learn. The trouble is that it doesn’t even sound like a statement from your traditions (more like a 19th century Jules Verne novel). Please tell me its source.
4. I have noticed over the years that Muslims aren’t very good at quoting their scriptures. Their ignorance is only surpassed by their blindness and willingness to overlook anything negative about Islam, particularly in the Quran and ahadeeth..
5. 1984 was a good book. George Orwelll was a great writer. He saw and did everything, from the Spanish civil war to the cold war. The guy was cynical but honest. This report about “blasphemy and the hadith” is pure thoughtcrime and doublespeak.
6. Mishly, I don’t believe that moderate, nice, kind, Muslims like you are “genuinely interested in respecting all religions and all people”. You and people like you let the radicals operate. You give them cover. You are an enabler. Let me put it in other terms, why should a non-Muslim believe that you are a good person when you say “praise be upon him” after the name of a man that did so many evil things to us, and consider him to be a great moral example.
7. The hate and discrimination we see in Islamic societies are not the work of a few radicals but the result of the indifference of a billion Muslims that don’t care about human rights and equality.
8. Once again, the preceding statement (#6, about the deeds of your prophet) is serious. Either the facts are true or they are not. You have quoted Bukhari above, yet the same writer has many stories that you would relentlessly condemn if an American soldier or crusader did them. If my accusations are not true and I made the whole thing up, then I would think you would say “a-ha,” call me out and say “prove it! Show me where it says that Mohammad did those terrible things!”
9. The majority of Muslims are just like you. They may be appalled by this insanity but they refuse to consider their part in it. One thing I agree with you is that Muslims are the first victims of Islamic hate and violence, but that has always been the case since the first time that your prophet attacked a mosque and then throughout the era of the caliphs, when Muslims killed Muslims by the tens of thousands. Please ask me for references if you don’t know Islamic history. I once wrote a hundred pages of it for my own edification, but never finished the texts (stopped at the 16th century!). It is complicated but interesting.
10. Here is one paragraph from that text: “By the beginning of the 10th Century (900ad) the Abassid Empire was disintegrating. As decade after decade went by more and more areas broke off and formed independent kingdoms, each ruled by a dynasty that was either conquered by other breakaway dynasties or overthrown and replaced by a new rulers which established new dynasties until these were conquered or overthrown. There are dozens and dozens of these, some large, some small, some important, most not. All were Muslim. Historians have names for these Aghlabid, Annazid, Almoravids, Ayyubid, Barmakid, Buyid or Buwayhid, Danishmendid, Ghaznavid, Ghurid, Hamdanid, Hasanuyid, Idrisid, Ikshidid, Ilkhanid, Marwanid, Mazyadid, Midrarid, Saffarid, Rustamid, Samanid, Sassanid, Shaddadid, Rawwadid, Safavid, Tahirid, Timurid, Tulunid, Uqaylid, Zangid, Ziyarid, etceterid and a many more namids.” Why am I telling you this?
11. .I was trying to make sense of 11th century Islam after the demise of the Abbasids. Of course the easy way would be to just concentrate on the Fatimids and Seljuk Turks, but the details are the interesting part.
Got to go. Chiara, you never cried over any of my posts, missing or not.
March:24:2010 - 22:56
Jay–NB I cry only over my own that the jinn eats. I trust Mishly can see through this over detailed uh you know thing that you do with new commentators…
March:24:2010 - 23:00
Jeeze, Jay. The guy is agreeing with you, at least 90% of the way. So you won’t recognize his position until you beat him into submission for the last 10%? Does that 10% represent the ‘insanity’? I don’t see it, I’m afraid. In fact, I’m seeing a lot of sanity.
March:25:2010 - 09:10
The only typical person here is you Mr kactus. I hope one day you will realize this. That’s all.
Chiara I’m very glad u could retrieve your comment. I will check all your links, I’m looking forward to echnaging our thoughts.
All the best
March:25:2010 - 09:51
Mishly–you are very wise in your reply to Jay as I thought you would be.
I am looking forward to more exchanges here and on my blog. Thanks!
March:25:2010 - 10:41
#Mishy
Now I don’t really know what you mean, when you are writing :
‘Whereas on the other hand invading Muslim countries and attacking and cursing every sacred symbol in Islam just for the fun of it, is enouraged in the name of freedom and democracy.…can anyone else see the double standards? ‘
Because it’s standard arguments.
But you are right we shouldn’t have helped Kuwait in the first Gulf War, and we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq, we shouldn’t have protected the Kurds. We shouldn’t have forced the turkish government to treat the kurds better. India should never have helped East Pakistan.
And the west shouldn’t have accepted millions and millions of fugitives and immigrants from muslim countries.
Because muslims er capable of solving their problems peacefully.
March:25:2010 - 12:02
No one can deny the kindness and altruism of the US governments and its allies in the past century and till today, they’re so humanitarian in all their peaceful wars and their sincere care and endeavors to solve conflicts around the world by all political, economic and military means necessary. I can’t but admire their devotion to spread freedom and democracy, at any cost and any number of collateral damages as long as at the expense of those who don’t matter, those who are not “capable of solving their problems” as peacefully at least.
Please excuse my sarcasm, but I don’t really know what you are talking about either NielsC!! I live in the hot zone and know what’s happening here, the US does nothing for free. It is mostly a central part of every armed and unarmed conflict here. It’s a game of chess in the middle east, every move is to prepare for the following one/s, in a chain of long term political / economic maneuvers to maintain control on world resources.
I appreciate that you didn’t attack me in person to disagree with what I said! I’m sure you have the good faith to believe in the good causes of the US involvement in every global issue and every independent state around the world, but it’s not as bright on the other side I must tell you.
March:25:2010 - 14:50
There’s no need to attack you personally, because your opinion is of the standard type. It’s not possible to discuss this opinion, because the concept ‘muslim world’ which you and many others use is geographically static ( although were is its borders). The people who lives inside this border is looked upon as homogeny group. Let us accept this.
I do firmly think, that the west should concentrate on Africa. Many more people have died i Africa the last 10 years, than in the middle east.
But as I wrote, this will also mean, that we don’t accept any fugitives or immigrants from the muslim world. They have to care of themselves. The muslim world have to figure themselves how they want to live.
If the muslim world will be more peaceful or not, I simply don’t care.
March:25:2010 - 15:40
NielsC–it is as if you think that the interventions you mentioned were about good governance and human rights, not about oil or using the Kurds to destabilize Saddam Hussein. Geopolitically the ME benefits from the attention of the US and the West because of the oil and the shipping lanes. Africa hangs down below the Mediterranean as a giant land mass to be bypassed. While there are natural resources there they don’t seem to draw the attention that oil does and the ongoing disasters natural and man-made make exploitation of those resources more of a bother than they are worth. Most Middle Easterners in Europe are hardly refugees. Most North Africans are economic immigrants, some initially illegal, most legal.
I really am surprised by your statements here, even allowing for sarcasm.
March:25:2010 - 17:40
NielsC, The border is not a physical one, rather ideological and moral. Portraying
any group of people constantly as violent, ignorant and evil monsters is not exactly an enlightened way to show care for achieving world peace or even pretend to support that direction, let alone provide any actual help or suggest balanced roadmaps to solve regional conflicts.
The image of Arabs and Muslims in general has been systematically distorted in the western media, and this is not but a deliberate tactic for propagating war.
As depicted in Orwell’s 1984, Kactus’s favorite book, the Ministry of Truth systemically alters facts and history to perpetuate the war against the enemies of the Party, Eurasia and Eastasia. Dehumanizing the enemy, stripping them of all what makes human and degrading them to the level of beasts and monsters, is the secret ingredient of all war cookbooks. Two minutes hate sessions, and hate weeks and the like are all what Big Brother needs to do to have all the support he needs to destroy enemies of state. Orwell described exactly what is happening and has been happening in real life. The concept of doublethink, thoughtcrime, memory hole, are all in practice today. Orwell summarized the threefold rules of the game: you control the present you control the past, and if you control the past you control the future.
The mass brainwash techniques are all in effect today against the enemy of the decade, Arabs and Muslims this time.
I read a very interesting article once that amazed me and sickened me at the same time, it described how Porn and Heavy Metal music are used in preparing soldiers psychologically to commit the crimes they perpetrate against the enemy whether militants or civilians, and not have trouble sleep at night to carry on the next day with more and more of whatever they’re commanded to do. How is that? Degrading the image of women in their psychs and demoralizing them, making them disconnect with any human attachment with the female element in their lives (Mother, daughter sister, wife) they wouldn’t have much trouble in committing any mass murder crimes and enjoy it like a video game. Sick stuff.
March:25:2010 - 17:43
‘using the Kurds to destabilize Saddam Hussein’ ?
‘using the Kurds to destabilize Turkey’?
‘using the Kurds to destabilize Syria’?
Looking like paranoia has hit you too.
The argument about invading ‘muslim countries’ is just to easy, then you don’t have to discuss the contrafactual ‘IF’ question, or discuss the power balance question internal in the middle east.
It’s just muslim countries ( they mean Arab countries) as an singular identity.
But I do believe, that the western world after the east west conflict ended, should have stopped engaging in the middle east, just like USA changed their behavior in Latin America. We are supporting regimes which are disgusting.
And the oil, of course one of the reasons of the invasion of Iraq was oil.But not really in the sense of conquering the oil. Some people tend to forget that we aren’t in the fifties or sixties anymore. The biggest oil companies in the world are Chinese, Saudi Arabic and so on. The seven sisters are the past. ( and thank … ).
March:25:2010 - 17:59
NielsC–even the US is open about fostering and supporting a Kurdish revolt in Iraq to destabilize and hopefully overthrow Saddam Hussein after the war in Kuwait in 1991. They are also open about funding/backing it insufficiently, and so it failed, with of course disastrous reprisals by Saddam. Canada is the biggest supplier of oil to the US and has the world’s biggest reserves after Saudi Arabia. This doesn’t change the fact that the historical events in the ME that you were being sarcastic about were motivated by oil wealth, oil access and shipping lanes.
I assume your use of the term paranoia is a broad socio-political lay use of the term, because surely you wouldn’t be engaging in a a personal attack.
March:25:2010 - 18:05
I don’t know anyone of significance who portray arabs as monsters in the western public sphere.
It’s a myth.
And about the porn and heavy metal, one of the main part of the curriculum in western school systems, is that you learn not believe everything you read.
But that young men ( and soldiers often are) listen to heavy metal and watch porn isn’t a surprise.
My main argument is that muslim or arabs should concentrate on their own world, their own countries.
March:25:2010 - 18:18
What happened after the first gulf war, was that USA and England declared part of Iraq/kurdish territory as a no go area for Saddam Hussein. If they haven’t done that, the kurds destiny would have been like the marsh arabs.
The good thing about this period was that the conflicting kurdish groups made peace ( and divided the power between them), and now the kurdish parts of Iraq are going rather well.
Somehow the kurds have a really bad press in the arab world.
And the kurds wish for independence has a long history.
March:25:2010 - 18:19
Can’t agree with you more! each people should concentrate on their own problems, their own world and their own countries.
March:25:2010 - 18:43
I’d just point out that while music choices aren’t monitored in the US military, access to porn is. Even Playboy magazine is banned from sale in the military PX. Internet use through military systems is also monitored. I had a military connection in my office in Riyadh and I’d get a monthly report telling me if that workstation had been used to access porn, what site, and the time/date of the access. Porn is certainly not a part of military training–or ‘preparation’. The US-as-a-whole is far too prudish to permit that anyway!
March:25:2010 - 18:56
The problems come when one country can’t take care of its own problems and ends up ‘exporting’ them so that they affect other countries.
March:25:2010 - 21:17
NielsC #47–you are skipping as step in the post 1991 Kurdish fiasco. As he was ending the war George HW Bush announced that the intent hadn’t been to overthrow Saddam and that he hoped/expected the Iraqi peoples to do that in the name of the “homeland”. Military experts had assessed that taking Baghdad would be difficult, the Arab countries in the coalition would balk, and in fact the UN mandate for the coalition was to secure Kuwait from Iraqi forces only. Hence the ceasefire. Nonetheless most books on the period now state that the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs expected, were led to expect, and received US aid to foster nationalist movements to overthrow Saddam. However the US backed out when it realized how far that would destabilize Iraq and the region. The reprisals against the now pitiably ill-resource, unequipped rebellious groups let to the establishment of the no fly zones.
This sequence has been well established an well-discussed in large part because of the George W Bush administration’s plan even prior to taking office to make war on Iraq. Cheney and Rumsfeld both were eager to do the job they felt had earlier been left undone. Not to mention of course, that Iraq still had oil, and is geopolitically in a hot spot.
Most books and articles from across the political spectrum that I have read agree that Bush Sr had the brains not to try to occupy Iraq, and listened to his advisors telling him not to, whereas Bush Jr didn’t have either the brains or the independance of thought. And then there are the Oedipal theorists who may or may not be right on the psychological motivations in attacking Iraq for Bush Jr.
However, all including the CIA are open about aid given to the Kurds to rebel–initially, then withheld, then no-fly zone to prevent a genocide.
March:26:2010 - 00:48
after having read through all these comments I feel nothing other than the strong urge to burp…
I had totally forgotten the subject we were talking about. F man. LOL Oh yeah that is right people who are not allowed to use logic in their thinking processes. K
March:26:2010 - 01:12
Consider it a right of passage, Chiara – a new Muslim leaves a few comments here, makes a few statements I don’t like, and I get out my baseball bat and work him/her over. Nothing personal – just good clean fun.
Mishly, this may surprise you but I am against the American presence in Iraq, Afghanistan and pretty much everywhere else. These efforts are a waste of time, money and human lives. There is no way they will become stable, respectful democracies. As soon as the US pulls out, the taliban will be back, shooting women in stadiums. I did support the fight against the Taliban after 911, but not the occupation of that country. Attacking Iraq was a big mistake because it did Iran a big big favor. Reagan played it right with the Iran-contra thing – play one against the other, maintain the balance of power.
FYI, large powerful countries have always sought to dominate or influence their neighbors. It has been that way throughout human history and so you cannot criticize one country without condemning others. Your prophet though it OK to threaten and attack others:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17575789/The-Letters-Prophet-Muhammad
Mishly, as you have no doubt have noticed, there are some nice and well informed individuals that comment here. These people bring a wealth of information and personal experiences to this blog — under the careful, moderate and eclectic eye of its owner — experiences that enrich all our lives. There is also one mean old guy here that sometimes leaves comments that have little purpose except to bug (1960s slang) adepts of a certain religion.
I like to follow Crossroads Arabia because of the variety of topics that John B. covers concerning a very important part of our world – that and all the pictures of naked ladies, of course. I hope you stay around. I can see the ladies already like you more than me – that is the story of my life. Oh well.
I have to go. I am dog tired today.
One last thing…. You made up that “master of time” quote, didn’t you? Maybe tomorrow I’ll run it through Google and see what comes up.
K, o malvado
March:26:2010 - 01:25
#Chiara
‘you are skipping as step in the post 1991 Kurdish fiasco’
What do you exactly mean with Kurdish fiasco ?
March:26:2010 - 05:30
Kactuz, it’s actually becoming amusing to read your comments, honestly!! what are you, an undercover Taliban Sheikh?? lol @ “right of passage”.
Regarding the quote I mentioned and which you’re referring to, up-side-down, > time is the master of rules, not rules master of time.
You really think I invented this quote in an attempt to win your approval!
Anyway, I remember the quote from the general rules I studied in school long time ago in Saudi and among many other general rules that are supposed to guide personal judgement on different things in life, it’s a known rule that I strongly believe in and apply in my life, but it’s not much entrenched in the masses in Saudi, not surprisingly.
I went to look up the source online but honestly Googling in Arabic is not as easy as in English. But I will ask some of the specialized Demons who may have the answer for you, even though I know that it is useless to argue with you, malvado
March:26:2010 - 06:29
what about
you are the master of rules
no one is the master of time;
don’t let anyone master you
Time is your enemy
It always seems to work against you
Don’t look back; Don’t look forward;
Look straight
Time doesn’t exist
The Now is your strength
March:26:2010 - 08:00
Burp Sparky. You’re very funny! say more…
March:26:2010 - 09:35
Thanks Mishly. I’ve been burping all day
You are funny too esp. bcuz of u i’m imagining kactuz as an undercover taliban sheik now. OMG LOL
March:26:2010 - 09:45
NielsC–the fiasco of encouraging revolt, then cutting off aid, leaving the Kurds to further reprisal by Saddam
Jay–we obviously differ on whether you should be in charge of rites of passage, what those rites should be, and the definition of “good clean fun”. I assume by “new Muslim” you meant a Muslim who is a new commentator on John’s blog.
March:26:2010 - 10:26
Chiara
‘NielsC–the fiasco of encouraging revolt, then cutting off aid, leaving the Kurds to further reprisal by Saddam’
I don’t think the kurds agree.
As I wrote above, in the years following the first Gulf war the kurds consolidated their presence in the northern provinces, there was UN personnel guarding the borders, and the two main kurdish parties PDK and PUK agreed on power sharing.
Thats the reason why the kurdish provinces are among the provinces in Iraq, where the development is on the right track, and PDK has nearly stopped their terror in Turkey.
March:26:2010 - 11:13
NielsC–right about the end of the story. But between the cease-fire and the end, there was a middle which included the fiasco I described, and which is well documented, just google it.
March:26:2010 - 12:36
M, I asked you about the saying (“The prophet Muhammad stated that “time is the master of all rules””) because I am familiar with most ahadith. Muslims tend to use a very narrow range of quotes from the Quran and ahadith in online discussions with evil infidels, or when explaining islam to non-evil infidels. I didn’t recognize it so I asked. Lets just say that a Muslim would never quote Quran 9:111 to a non-Muslim.
Of course I suspected that it was a misquote, because Muslims have been known to misquote, take out of context, twist or even make up verses. They also have been known to change , add or delete words to “improve” the text. I guess they are just trying to help Allah says what he intended to say but wasn’t able. I know you are shocked that Muslims, the best of all people, would do things like that. So am I. What is the world coming to?
Also, about the quote, it didn’t sound like something from a hadith. The style is not right. Note that looking up a quote in Google, or any search engine, is tricky because of the vocabulary and people often do a free quote, rather than a literal one. So I agree with you on that.
It was also a “gotcha” thing!
As to memory failures and lapses and “long ago” things, you don’t have to tell me about them. I am experiencing the joys of “old age”. Notice how I mutilate the English language, particularly with spelling and silly typos.
No, it is not useless to argue with me. If you find the quote in a hadith and it is attributed to your prophet, you will get an apology but no flowers.
K
March:26:2010 - 13:08
Jay–there is an M who comments here, a Me,a Michel,and Mishly…Please help us keep your dialogues with each of them straight. Thanks!
March:26:2010 - 16:06
Kactuz, you’re offering me an incentive to keep arguing with you? so that you can keep indulging your ego: have the “gotcha” chance to justify your hatred and intolerance and reinforce your bigoted attitude based on what you believe are undeniable universal facts!
However, coming from you I must say: it’s a generous offer
although I would have asked for a bigger reward than an apology!! let me think….mmm…” what would a devil like me want from a stubborn infidel?! … a free lunch! 
I declared my disinterest in arguing with you because you think I’m typical and I think you’re typical. We established this already, what’s the purpose of insisting to argue with someone who is pure evil?
I’m very far from religion, but I studied it intensively in school and remember this quote very well cause it stayed with me among many others. I also rejected many things they taught us and just erased the nonsense. I used the brain which my God addressed in the Quran in many verses, I’m sure you came across some. But unfortunately the masses in my world don’t use their brains anymore…
As for the style, the quote is my interpretation / translation from the Arabic text, which I remember very well, “?????? ???? ???????” reading “atthorouf sayidat al ahkam”
“Thorouf” (Circumstances) is the plural of “Tharf”, and “Tharf” is a word that may refer to time and may refer to place, depending on the context. In the quote it refers to time. > Time the master of rules.
As I said, I will consult someone who is more knowledgeable in Ahadiths than me cause I’m not a theologist nor an islamic scholar. Maybe you are the expert you claim to be, maybe you know most Hadiths and Quran verses and their correct context and interpretation, and you know all Muslims’ arguments and misquotes etc….maybe I should learn from you then!
I will check who can help me find the proper references. just be patient. Assaber Jamil > Patience is Beautiful.
Since you took the freedom to name the terms unilaterally, I must ask what are the ramifications if I fail to support my quote? I’m wondering. will I be deemed to hell? or will you hit me with your baseball bat?!
will I still be considered for a “Rite de passage”?
I’m really looking forward to having the time to “discuss” other topics in this blog.
regards,
Ahmad