Saturday, April 27, 2024
Home Blog Page 230

'It is okay to be a racist in Israel'

0

An Israeli conscientious objector speaks out about racism and subjugation as the occupation enters its 51st year.

Supporters of an Israeli soldier, Elor Azaria, charged with manslaughter after he shot a wounded Palestinian alleged attacker as he lay on the ground in Hebron in 2016 [Reuters]

Occupied East Jerusalem – This year, Israel’s 1967 occupation of the Palestinian territories entered its 51st year.

In the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, the Israeli army is responsible for controlling the lives of more than three million Palestinians through hundreds of checkpoints, raids of villages and homes, trial of civilians in military courts, demolition of homes, suppression of protests, and the killing and injuring of civilians, to name a few.

To sustain the occupation industry, Israel makes it mandatory by law for Israeli citizens, excluding Palestinians and Orthodox Jews, to enter the military at 18. Men have to serve just under three years while women serve two years.

Yet, there are Israeli citizens who refuse to serve in the military for several reasons, including opposition to the army’s policies in the Palestinian territories it occupies.

Sahar Vardi, 27, is one of such refusers. She is an Israeli activist who was sentenced to prison and detention eight times consecutively for her defiance in 2008. Vardi also faced other repercussions for her decision; she said she would get very late phone calls for periods up to a year at a time with people cursing at her.

Her home was also graffitied with profanity directed at her.

exempted.Those who outwardly state their opposition to the occupation are sentenced to repeated terms of imprisonment until they are declared unfit to serve by the Israeli army.

Al Jazeera spoke to Vardi, who was released in 2009, about her experience and her views on Israeli society after 50 years of occupation.

Al Jazeera: Can you tell us about the process of getting out of military service in Israel?

Sahar Vardi: There are two legal ways to be exempt from military service in Israel. The first is being recognised as a conscientious objector. It’s difficult to do so, but it is possible.

Every year, some 54,000 people are drafted into the Israeli military. Out of the 54,000, about 100-200 request conscientious objector (CO) status*. A military committee assesses each case, but grants CO status to only a few dozen youths.

 

The committee only allows pacifists to be exempt from military service, but the committee has a very narrow definition of what pacifism is. To be granted CO status, you have to tell the committee that you are against any form of violence under any circumstance and that your refusal is not political. Mainly, if you say the word “occupation”, you fail. That’s kind of the game.

A lot of it is also avoiding the committee’s questions because they’re absurd – you cannot answer them – at least not honestly. We’ve had people being asked: “You’re standing with a gun in front of Hitler, what do you do?”

The second way to be legally exempt from military service is to cite mental health problems, which is the easier way out.

Al Jazeera: How did you decide to go about it?

Vardi: I did go to the conscientious objectors’ committee, but decided in advance that I will say the real reasons why I did not want to be in the military and use the word “occupation” in my explanation. And I failed the committee’s test.

I got a letter saying that I was not recognised as a conscientious objector, and therefore must serve in the military. Once you are classified as fit for service, you cannot refuse to join the military in Israel – there’s no legal way to do that.

You are tried as a soldier refusing an order, which means that you will go to court, be sentenced, and go to prison. When you eventually get out of prison, you will get an order saying you have to go back to your military base to continue your service. If you continue to refuse, you will repeat these steps for a while.

The most anyone has ever sat in prison for refusing to serve was two years.

I refused eight times consecutively, but I wasn’t sentenced to prison each time. Sometimes I was put in detention because they didn’t have room for me in prisons. In those instances, we were kept in a military base instead. I’ve spent a total of five months in prison and detention.

Al Jazeera: Why didn’t you try to get out based on mental health?

Vardi: Getting out on mental health is pretty easy. Today about 12 percent of the Israeli population that’s supposed to be conscripted – Jewish and Druze – either don’t start or don’t complete their military service based on mental health issues. That’s huge. I’m going to assume that not 12 percent of Israeli society is mentally ill.

Everyone knows that this is the easiest way out of the military. Many people who do not want to serve in the military because of economic reasons will get out by citing mental health issues.

Also, some people who are ideologically opposed to being in the military, but who do not want to go to prison, choose the mental health route to avoid military service.

For me, it was kind of an opportunity to make a political stand. I knew I could get out in whatever way – I could have said the right things to the conscientious objectors’ committee. I know the answers they wanted to hear. But the idea is that it’s an opportunity to talk about the occupation. There are other people like me, so we had a voice – we came out with a campaign, we made statements to the media, and so on.

Once you go to prison, you can talk about the realities of the occupation. This is not merely about avoiding military service, which is easy. It is also about putting out a message.

Al Jazeera: Do you think Israelis are ignorant of the occupation of the Palestinian territories?

Vardi: Israelis do know that something is happening in the West Bank. Some of them won’t call it occupation because they like to hide behind the legal discourse of it being disputed territory.

But there aren’t Israelis that don’t know there’s military control on a civilian population at least in the West Bank – in Gaza, it’s different.

People have no idea about what that means though. We have this idea that everyone was in the military so everyone knows what occupation looks like right? That’s not the case.

You dehumanise them just so you can say no at a checkpoint. But the next time you’re in a situation where you have to push them it’ll be easy enough for you to push them. And then when you have to shoot them, it’ll be easy enough for you to shoot them.

Sahar Vardi, Israeli activist

Between 10-15 percent of the military are combat – meaning will actually be stationed in the occupied territories.

Even then, what they know is a very specific narrow reality. You speak to soldiers in a protest and they’ll tell you this is Area A of the West Bank, you’re not supposed to be here when we’re not actually in Area A. [Under the 1993 Oslo Accords, Israeli citizens are forbidden from entering Area A of the West Bank, under Palestinian control]

They don’t even know what’s happening around them.

Even the fact that you’re there doesn’t mean you understand the reality. Understanding what is actually going on requires a lot of knowledge and the priority of the military is not to educate soldiers. The military’s priority is to teach soldiers that they need to follow orders. So, Israelis don’t really know what occupation is.

Most Israeli Jerusalemites that you stop in the street in West Jerusalem don’t know that Palestinian Jerusalemites are residents and not citizens – they literally have no idea that they are not citizens of the state.

Al Jazeera: Who’s responsibility do you think it is?

Vardi: Of course, it is their responsibility to know, but it’s the responsibility of Israeli activists to make sure Israeli citizens know these things. For most people, the occupation is not relevant to their lives. It’s also important to understand the dynamics within the Israeli society.

Israel today, within the Organisation for Economic, Co-operation and Development (OECD), is a country with one of the biggest gaps between the rich and the poor. This means a huge part of Israeli society is struggling for existence – and really couldn’t care less why East Jerusalemites are only residents, and why close to 80 percent of them live in poverty. It’s not really their priority.

I think for us as activists, part of the responsibility is to figure out how to make this an issue – and make people understand that it is their responsibility to care about this. But we need to make sure that we do this from a place that also acknowledges other issues that they care about.

Al Jazeera: Why do you think the discussion on 1948 in Israel, even among leftists, is non-existent?

Vardi: There’s a difference between the Zionist and the non-Zionist left. But mainly, it’s because there’s an easy solution for 1967 – the two states. I don’t think it’s realistic, but at least at the discourse level, the Israeli left have a solution for the problems born out of the 1967 war.

But 1948 – what do you do with it? The one thing you can do with it – if you actually want to talk about it and recognise the Right of Return – is to give up the Jewish state. There’s a lot of solutions that will still allow Israeli Jews to be here – that’s not the issue. The issue is that if you acknowledge the problem with 1948, your only option is to give up on the Jewish state.

 

It’s a question of tackling something far deeper and far more rooted within Israeli existence. Most Israelis don’t have a reason to do it. Their life is fine – it’s comfortable – why should they question these things?

There’s actually been more discussion in the last few years about the “Nakba” – surprisingly because of the right wing. For example, the Nakba law [a law that criminalises commemorating the Palestinian catastrophe of 1948] meant that you have to explain what the Nakba is.

Al Jazeera: How do you think regular Israelis justify what is happening in the occupied Palestinian territories?

Vardi: For the ideological right, it’s about taking over the Holy Land. From a more mainstream political perspective, a lot of it is about resources – cheap land, water, man power, that allows for a successful economy.

Most settlers don’t move to a settlement for ideological reasons – they move because it’s far cheaper. For example, people who move into the Maale Adumim settlement move there because that is the only place they can afford to live.

Others justify all this with the need for security. They think occupation keeps them safe. This has a lot to do with how Israelis are educated and how fear is a huge part of our identity. And there’s a lot of political interest in keeping it that way. You can’t continue such a level of militarisation in a society without fear. You can’t ignore what happened in 1948 without it. You can’t continue maintaining an occupation without it. Our education system is built to make sure that we’re terrified. Even our media and political campaigns – [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu is an expert at making sure that we’re terrified.

I have a friend who, during her military service, worked at the biggest radio station in the country, which is military run. She was part of the news desk. They were ordered to start the broadcast with a news story about Iran whenever they had to report something that is critical of the military or something bad that happened – like a Palestinian being killed at a checkpoint.

They were told to go to Reuters and find something about Iran. It’s like: “We do bad things sometimes at a checkpoint but there’s an existential threat – a nuclear bomb, right?”

People are genuinely afraid.

Al Jazeera: How do you explain the Israeli military’s use of psychological abuse in the occupied territories?

Vardi: That’s how militaries work. If you choose to maintain an occupation and if you choose to maintain military control on a civilian population, it’s going to be violent – there’s no nice way to do it.

Of course, racism is an inherent part of it. This is rooted in the fact that these people are told that they have to control this civilian population as if they are an enemy. To achieve this, they have to become racist. You can’t stand in a checkpoint and stop people from going where they need to go without either going crazy or becoming racist.

 

So you dehumanise them and once you dehumanise a group of people there is no turning back. You dehumanise them just so you can say “no” at a checkpoint. But the next time you’re in a situation where you have to push them, it’ll be easy enough for you to push them. And then, when you have to shoot them, it’ll be easy enough for you to shoot them.

After a few months, you lose all touch with humanity.

Al Jazeera: Is this part of the military training?

Vardi: The military is made up of officers who are used to dehumanising people. It is full of people who used to beat people to the ground. That’s already inherent in who they are and how they see things. So, obviously, it’s part of the entire culture. This culture stems from the military and eventually becomes part of civil society – and today – racism is a legitimate part of the Israeli discourse.

It’s okay to be racist in Israel today. It’s okay to say, “Yes, Jews are better.” It’s okay to think, “Yes, when we are thinking of security, the security of Jews is more important than the security of Arabs” – that’s not even a question.

The legitimacy of racism is partially based on what Zionism is. It’s a nationalist movement of the Jewish people – it’s by definition preferring Jews over non-Jews – that’s what Zionism is. People believe that this is a logical way of thinking in light of the way we have been treated through history.

There’s a fundamental difference between protecting the Jewish identity as a minority and what happens when Jews become the majority and still pursue the ideology of protecting the Jewish identity at any cost.

Once, I witnessed a family having a serious conversation about what would be worse – their Jewish son bringing home a Palestinian girl or [an Israeli] man. A Palestinian friend of mine, who speaks fluent Hebrew, also witnessed this conversation. And we just sat there, thinking that this is a legitimate conversation that can be had in public.

Al Jazeera: What do you think needs to happen for things to change?

Vardi: I think one of the things that Israel has done very well is to maintain a level of oppression, which means you will always have to deal with certain issues, but you also still have something to lose because, when people don’t have anything to lose, they revolt.

Israel is pretty good at keeping that balance, although it is beginning to break slightly. The fact that Israeli society is becoming more right-wing and that Israeli politicians are responding to that and are becoming more aggressive means that at some point that balance will break – at some point Palestinians will not have as much to lose – but I hate to see that as the optimism.

*The Israeli military did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request to confirm the figures. 

 

 

By Zena Tahhan

 

Source : Al Jazeera

Trump Muslim Ban : Strict rules set for Visa applicants by the US

0

After partial enforcement of Muslim ban comes into effect, analysts warn of “massive confusion” over new leaked guidelines.

Refugee advocacy groups have slammed the the Supreme Court ruling that partially reinstates the Muslim ban [Charles Mostoller/Reuters]
Refugee advocacy groups have slammed the the Supreme Court ruling that partially reinstates the Muslim ban [Charles Mostoller/Reuters]

A leaked state department cable has outlined new criteria for visa applicants from six mainly Muslim countries as partial enforcement of Donald Trump’s travel ban is set to come into force on Thursday.

Under the new guidelines, which were leaked to the press and have yet to be confirmed, new visa applicants from Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Iran and Yemen and all refugees must prove a relationship to a “close” relative already in the US to be eligible for a US visa.

A close relative is defined as a parent, spouse, child, adult son or daughter, son or daughter-in-law or sibling.

 The new guidelines excludes categories that had previously been laid out by Monday’s Supreme Court decision that partially reinstated Trump’s March 6 executive order.

Grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, fiancees or other extended family members are not considered to be close relationships, according to the guidelines that were issued in a cable sent to all US embassies and consulates late on Wednesday.

The same requirements, with some exceptions, hold for all refugees that are still awaiting approval for admission to the US.

 

As far as business or professional links are concerned, the state department said a legitimate relationship must be “formal, documented and formed in the ordinary course rather than for the purpose of evading” the ban.

The cable said “a worker who accepted an offer of employment from a company in the United States or a lecturer invited to address an audience in the United States would be exempt” from the travel ban, but someone who simply made a hotel reservation would not count as someone with a bona fide relationship, according to Reuters news agency.

Consular officers may grant other exemptions to applicants from the six countries if they have “previously established significant contacts with the United States” or “significant business or professional obligations” in the US.

Exemptions may also be granted if the applicant is an infant, adopted child, in need of urgent medical care, if they are travelling for business with a recognised international organisation or the US government, or if they are a legal resident of Canada who applies for a visa in Canada, according to the cable.

The new rules take effect at 00:00 GMT on Friday, or 8pm EDT in the US, according to the cable.

 

The administration would seem to be “in defiance of at least a minimal scope for the bona fide relationship that required the department to continue grant visas”, which would mean “respondents in the case could return to court, ask for an immediate emergency hearing and ask for an injunction or a finding that the state department or Trump be held in contempt”.

Fein added that “there isn’t any doubt that the two categories listed … is narrower than the expressed terms of the court’s opinion”.

Unchallenged, the new guidance will remain in place until the Supreme Court issues a final ruling on the matter. Arguments before the justices will not be held until at least October, so the interim rules will remain in place at least until the fall.

‘Massive confusion’

Questions over how the new guidelines will be enforced remain.

 

prove they have the needed business ties.

“It’s going to be massive confusion and why the state department would issue the cable without having clarifying these issues is mystifying,” Fein said.

“It’s simply going to invite more confusion, more anger and more frustration.”

Groups vow to fight ban

Shortly after taking office, Trump ordered the refugee ban and a travel ban affecting the six countries, plus Iraq. He said it was needed to protect the US from “terrorists”, but opponents said it was unfairly harsh and was intended to meet his campaign promise to keep Muslims out of the US.

After a federal judge struck down the bans, Trump signed a revised order intended to overcome legal hurdles.

The revised order excluded visa applicants from Iraq. The new order was also struck down by lower courts, but the Supreme Court’s action on Monday partially reinstated it.

Shortly after the court issued its opinion, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said on Twitter it would “head back into court to fight the fundamentally unconstitutional Muslim ban this October”.

Omar Jadwat, the director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project who had argued the case in court, said in a statement that the travel ban “violates the fundamental constitutional principle that government cannot favour or disfavour any one religion”.

“Courts have repeatedly blocked this indefensible and discriminatory ban. The Supreme Court now has a chance to permanently strike it down,” he said.

Refugee advocacy groups have slammed the the Supreme Court ruling that partially reinstates the Muslim ban [Reuters]

Lara Finkbeiner, from the International Refugee Assistance Project, which also sued the administration over the ban, said she was “incredibly disappointed with the decision”.

“We are a nation that values acceptance and diversity, and in making this decision and putting this executive order back into effect, the Supreme Court is sending a very clear message and it’s putting the executive’s discriminatory policy back into effect.”

But Trump praised the decision, saying in a statement it allowed his travel ban “to become largely effective”.

“Today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision is a clear victory for our national security,” Trump said on Monday, adding that the ruling allowed him “to use an important tool for protecting our nation’s homeland”.

Source: Al Jazeera and news agencies

 

BEING A PIOUS MUSLIMAH

0

BEING A PIOUS MUSLIMAH

As- Salam alaykum waramatullahi wabarakatuh

Dear sisters in Islam, I love you for the sake of Allah!

What do we understand by being a pious Muslimah? Ma shaa Allah!!! Allah (SWT) asked us to conceal ourselves. Some of us know that and we’ve heard so many lectures from scholars but still we do not practice the deen as expected of us.

Did you say you wear a socks and that means you have followed the word of Allah? Oh Muslimah in socks! You keep posting seductive pictures on social media. In surah Nisaa, Allah commanded the believing women to “lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments,” and also that they “should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments”[an-Nur:31].

Most of us keep saying we are not lucky getting a pious Habeebi, did you check yourself to realise how pious you are? Most times, the words we utter keep good man away from us,at times our piety does not only lie in the way we do or dress but talk.

Alhamdulilah, you dress modestly but do you check your connection with others, how good are you with them? A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side.

Do we even know if perhaps the creator will not judge us by our appearance?“You may not be a fairytale princess but you are always a princess of ISLAM.

Your meditations may be as profound, as exalted, as devout as you like; you may practise every pious exercise you can manage, but all this is as nothing in comparison with the Blessed Sacrament. What we do may be godly, but this sacrament is God Himself!

We often say every muslimah is a princess but that doesn’t give you the ability of being proud, thinking you are more perfect than others only the creator is perfect. In every loving woman there is a priestess of the past – a pious guardian of some affection, of which the object has disappeared.

I am calling attention just to the main points of these tremendously important matters, which can be understood better by pious meditation than explained by human language.
Some persons think that they have to look like a hedgehog to be pious.Volumes might be written upon the impiety of the pious.

Some of our men did not just think of practising the Sunnah by getting a mathna but at times our behaviour/ your behaviour move them out,that also part of being pious.

The hijab is the veil that has to be drawn over our body, our behavior and speech inclusive. Do you check your speech dear Muslimah? The utterances you make, your behavior, how does it go with your hijab in defining piety. “Hijab includes the way a person walk, talks, looks and thinks, all of it should be done modestly and applies to both Men and Women.”

Nafysah @.Knowislam.com.ng

Indians protest against killing of Muslims : Not In My Name.

0

Demonstrators stage silent protests in at least 10 Indian cities against wave of attacks on Muslims by ‘cow vigilantes’.​

Twenty-eight Indians have been killed and 124 injured since 2010 in cow-related violence, according to a report [AFP] Thousands of people have turned out in protests across India against a wave of attacks on Muslims by mobs that accuse them of killing cows or eating beef.

Waving “Not in My Name” banners and “Stop Cow Terrorism” placards on Wednesday, protesters braved monsoon rains in at least 10 cities including Mumbai, Kolkata and Delhi where a cast of intellectuals and activists were joined by relatives of recent lynching victims.

Many Hindus worship the cow as sacred to their religion.

Critics accuse right-wing Hindu groups, some linked to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of fomenting or not doing enough to stop violence against Muslims and lower-caste Hindus who eat beef or work in the meat and leather industries.
Modi denies the accusation and has publicly criticised so-called cow vigilantes.

Last Friday, about 20 men attacked four Muslims on a train in the outskirts of New Delhi, fatally stabbing a teenager and seriously injuring two others.

“I feel afraid. I don’t even know if I will be able to reach home safely,” Bashruddin Khandawali, a 24-year-old cousin of Junaid Khan, who was killed on the train, told the Reuters news agency next to a huge “Lynch Map of India” banner.

In Mumbai, protesters refrained from shouting slogans but held up banners reading “stand up to Hindu terrorism” and “say no to Brahminism”.

“I am a Hindu. I consider the cow my mother. But killing people is not right,” Narendra Bhandari, a businessman in his 20s, told Scroll.in.

In Kolkata, singer-music composer Anjan Dutta said “the rising trend of Hindutva is dangerous”.

“I am afraid of the situation in my country now. We need to speak against this monstrosity. India is a place for everyone,” Dutta said.

The protests follow the stabbing to death last week of a 16-year-old boy accused of possessing beef on a train.

​
Protesters turned out in at least 10 Indian cities on Wednesday [AFP]

On Tuesday, a man was beaten and his house set on fire by a mob that accused him of slaughtering a cow in eastern Jharkhand state.

Rights groups say government officials, including the prime minister, have been slow to strongly condemn the attacks and that police action against perpetrators has been inadequate.

Five of the killings, almost all of them in broad daylight and in busy public areas, have taken place in the last three months.

Almost all of the 63 attacks since 2010 involving cow-related violence were recorded after Modi and his Hindu nationalist government came to power in 2014, IndiaSpend, a data journalism website, said in a report.

Twenty-eight Indians – 24 of them Muslims – have been killed and 124 injured since 2010 in cow-related violence, IndiaSpend said.​

Anjali Arondekar, a professor visiting from the US state of California, said she had attended the Mumbai protest because “nobody seems to care any more that a young Muslim man is being killed”.

Community leaders called on Modi to do more to protect the 14 percent of India’s 1.3 billion people who are Muslims.

Although the protest was originally planned to be held just in the heart of the Indian capital, the #NotInMyName hashtag quickly started trending on Twitter and generated a great deal of response.​

​

​

Scenes from #NotInMyName citizens protests against mob violence at Jantar Mantar, Delhi.​

Venezuela's army puts on alert by Nicolas Madura

0

Venezuela’s leader vows ‘to defend peace’ as he brands a grenade helicopter attack on the Supreme Court as coup attempt.​

Maduro has for months been fending off calls for elections [Fernando Llano/AP]

 

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro has put the military on alert, stepping up security after a rogue police detective claimed responsibility for a grenade and gunfire attack on state institutions.

Authorities in the capital, Caracas, said several grenades were been thrown  at the Supreme Court from a helicopter and 15 bullets were fired at the interior ministry at sunset on Tuesday.

The attack was claimed in a video released online by a man identified by media and the government as 36-year-old Oscar Perez.

On Wednesday, Venezuela Vice President Tareck El Aissami said the helicopter was found near the coast in Vargas state.

During an interview with state television VTV, El Aissami said “despite the adverse climate conditions our Bolivarian National Army have found the helicopter used yesterday in two terrorist attacks against institutions”.

“Until now, nobody has been arrested,” he said. “We are deploying special forces in all the area, and we ask the support of the people.

Maduro, who has faced months of violent anti-government protests, said the “terrorist attack” was part of an “escalation” by right-wing “coup” plotters against the ruling Socialists. Yet, opponents suspected the raid might had been a hoax to justify repression amid a worsening economic and political crisis.

“I have activated the entire armed forces to defend the peace,” Maduro said on Wednesday in remarks broadcast from the Miraflores presidential palace.

No one was injured in the incident.

Beyond his police work, the alleged pilot of the helicopter Perez acted in a Venezuelan action film called “Suspended Death”, and has posted photographs on social media of himself posing with weapons.

“We are a coalition of military, police and civilian public servants … opposed to this transitional, criminal government,” Perez said in the video, flanked by four masked figures in black, two of them holding rifles.

Al Jazeera’s Teresa Bo, reporting from Caracas, said the opposition members were worried about whether the government was going to use the attack as an excuse for further crackdown on dissent.

“We have heard the government and the president accusing students protesters and those who attacked military bases last weekend of terrorism. So nobody really knows what the government’s response is going to be to this latest incident,” she said.

Julio Borges, opposition legislative speaker, said: “Some people say it is a hoax, some say it is real, some say that it was police personnel who really are fed up.”

“Whatever it is, it is very serious. It all points to one conclusion: that the situation in Venezuela is unsustainable,” he said.

Another senior opposition lawmaker, Freddy Guevara, urged people to take part in anti-government rallies on Wednesday – the latest in nearly three months of daily streets protests that have left 76 people dead.

Maduro has for months been fending off calls for elections to replace him from opponents who blame him for the country’s worsening crisis.

But the president has so far retained the public backing of the military high command – a factor that analysts say is decisive if he is to remain in power.

Venezuela has seen three attempted military coups since 1992.

"Satan is dead, I killed him", says Pastor Mboro

0

 

Pastor MBORO has claimed on his Facebook page that he went to hell and killed satan.

On a post that was later deleted when people started asking questions, the pastor claims God sent him to hell to get rid of world’s number one enemy.

He wrote “when I got to hell there was a queue of millions of people waiting to be braai’d by Satan. I even saw some prominent South African politicians. I was so shocked because they lived like angels here on earth. I thought they went to heaven. When Satan saw me he panicked and directed his army to kill me. Like Samson in the Bible, I defeated them. Satan was my last victim”

His received a moria of insults and condemnation from people who told him to stop misleading people. The post went down after an hour. It is not clear whether he will post it again or not. His claims comes months after another equally controversial pastor claimed he went to heaven and took pictures with Jesus.

 

Below is the video of a Pastor that claimed to have talked to God on phone…

 

Epic Bible fail…

0

 

Yes!… You are here to see the epic Bible fail!!!

 

Last year, the Academy of Islamic propagation (ACADIP) crew went to Portharcourt, Rivers state for a lecture.

 

Some Christians that came for questions ended up being embarrassed by their own Bible after Sheikh Yusuf Adepoju answered their questions then turned the tables…

 

While one couldn’t find where Jesus said he is “OUR LORD AND PERSONAL SAVIOUR”, the other was shocked to know that there are other sons of God in the Bible.

 

Here is the deal… ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

 

 

Any Christian that thinks he/she can show us where the Bible says Jesus is Our Lord and Personal Saviour is invited ????

Sayyidah Aisha's (RA) Age When She Got Married to Prophet Mohammed (pbuh)

0

By Funsho Animashaun @ knowislam.com.ng

 

Salam alaekum everyone.

While I was researching for resource materials for this article, I was careful to go through each source at my disposal to ascertain the authenticity of every claim and in-fact I had to scrutinize every author and every book so as to get the TRUTH.

The age of Aisha (Mother of the faithfuls) has been a topic of discuss that most Muslims tend to shy away from if raised by propagandists and most Apologetic missionaries. They tend to label Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) insulting names just to demean his character.

The Prophet (pbuh) married Aisha (RA) after he married Sawdah bint Zam’ah (RA). She – Aisha (RA) – was the only virgin whom Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) married.

The definition of the age of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) when the Prophet (pbuh) did the marriage contract with her as being six years, and of the age when he consummated the marriage with her as being nine years, is not a matter of ijtihaad (individual opinion) on the part of the scholars, such that we could argue whether it is right or wrong; rather this is a historical narration which is proven by evidence that confirms its soundness and the necessity of accepting it.

The question of Holy Prophet’s (pbuh) marriage with Sayyidah Aisha is the one hurled against Muslims in almost every discussion. And it takes much time for people to understand the whole issue only because they fail to understand historical things in their right perspective considering the situation in those particular times. Agreed that a Prophet’s deeds should be above any question in all times and this is true indeed, but there are certain things in which change is inevitable subject to valid reasons and Holy Prophet’s (pbuh) marriage with Sayyidah Aisha is one such case. One who fails to understand the times and all the factors related to issue in hand can never understand the happenings through the history.

Islamic Law regarding age of marriage:

In Islam there is no fixed age of marriage, whenever a person reaches the age of puberty he or she is fit for marriage. Nikah, the marital contract, may be made earlier but consummation of marriage can take place only after puberty is attained.

The age of maturity through the ages and over the regions:

The wisdom behind Islam not fixing an age is evident, different people reach the age of puberty at different times. And the general trend also varies over the time and across the regions with variant climate conditions. For instance, people living in regions of low altitudes attain puberty earlier then those in high altitudes regions. Similarly people in warm climates attain puberty earlier then those in cold climates. Now keeping all this in mind consider that when Holy Prophet (pbuh) married Sayyidah Aisha while she was nine it was some 1400 years back and it happened in Arabia, a region with relatively lower altitude and hot climate as one of its most salient features.

Leaving all the history aside, even now puberty at nine is no wonderful a phenomenon. Experts now suggest that age 7 (even 6 for some races) and not 8 should be considered precocious (i.e. early) for puberty among girls. Below is a reference that a nine year old Thai girl even became a mother.

Sayyidah Aisha was fit for the marriage, considering the puberty factor and physical bearing:

It is rather erroneous to say that Sayyidah Aisha (RA) was a child bride. She was a grown up girl.

Sayyidah Aisha herself narrates; ‘Holy Prophet (pbuh) married her when she was six years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine years old…’ (Bukhari, Hadith 4738)

Having known this, let me draw your attention to another saying of Sayyidah Aisha which Al-Tirmidhi has narrated under a Hadith in his collection’s Book of Marriage, Chapter 18. It goes as:

Sayyidah Aisha said: ‘When a girl is nine years old, she is a woman (meaning, she has attained puberty).’ (Tirmidhi, Hadith 1109)

Moreover, through certain narrations we come to know of the fact she was going through her puberty. Modern science testifies that puberty causes hair loss and this is exactly what we read in a Hadith:

Narrated Sayyidah Aisha: “The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj then I got ill and my hair fell down…” (Bukhari Hadith 3605)

So this makes it absolutely clear that Sayyidah Aisha’s marriage was consummated at an age, she herself says was that of puberty. The general tone of her statement also conveys that it was normal in those times and in that environment.

It also needs to be mentioned that even before the Holy Prophet (pbuh) , she was engaged with Jubair bin Mut’am whose parents dissolved the engagement when her family embraced Islam.
All these details kill the argument that Holy Prophet (pbuh) had intimate marital relations with a child, for in that particular sense she was no more a child and she herself testifies that being a nine year old she was a woman then having attained puberty.

Moreover, she was quite healthy and fit. She herself says:

‘My mother intended to make me fat to send me to the (house of) the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) . But nothing which he desired benefited me till she gave me cucumber with fresh dates to eat. Then I became fat as good (as she desired).’ (Abu Dawud, Hadith 3903. Albani classified it as Sahih)

About Sayyidah Aisha playing with dolls etc:

Another issue concerning this marriage is the fact of Sayyidah Aisha playing with dolls and other toys. The question raised is that playing with toys is an innocent child act, and it proves that she was a child when she was married to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) . This much is true but the point missed is that Holy Prophet (PBUH) did have an understanding of this fact and he did not expect or force her to behave like his other wives e.g. like aged Sayyidah Sawda (RA). Infact we find that Holy Prophet (pbuh) gave her ample chances to fulfill her desire of playing with her friends and made her feel comfortable.

Sayyidah Aisha narrates: ‘I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.’ (Bukhari, Hadith 5665)

Sayyidah Aisha reported: ‘By Allah, I remember the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) standing on the door of my apartment screening me with his mantle enabling me to see the sport of the Abyssinians as they played with their daggers in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) . He (the Holy Prophet) kept standing for my sake till I was satiated and then I went back; and thus you can well imagine how long a girl tender of age who is fond of sports (could have watched it).’ (Muslim, Hadith 1481)

These two narrations show that Holy Prophet (pbuh) did care for the natural urge of his young wife for amusement. And this is also a proof that her marriage at the age of nine did not bar her from the enjoyment craved for at that age.

Holy Prophet (pbuh) consummated the marriage with Sayyidah Aisha when she was nine as she had attained puberty and, as she herself said that at nine a girl is rather a woman, but he did not burden her with tough responsibilities of a wife and provided her ample opportunities to enjoy her age.

This infact shows the wisdom of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) that he did present a role model for all the people to come to care for all the needs of a wife. She married women of all age groups, elder to him like Sayyidah Khadija (RA), of his own age like Sauda (RA), younger but mature of age like Zainab (RA) and much younger like Sayyidah Aisha (RA).

Sayyidah Aisha’s marriage and consent issue:

Next comes the issue of her consent. Her nikah, the marital contract, was made when she was six but the marriage was consummated when she was nine. Now had she showed her displeasure about this marriage when she was nine, and thus a woman according to her own testimony, then marriage would haven been null and void, but it never turned up like that. She did not show any such notion and similarly never in her later life did she ever give any such impression. She rather always showed her love for the Holy Prophet (pbuh) .

Wisdom behind this marriage:

We know that Sayyidah Aisha (RA) was considered the most learned among the all the Companions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) . The following testifies to this.

Abu Musa al-Ashari says: “Never had we (the companions) any difficulty for the solution of which we approached Aisha and did not get some useful information from her”. (Tirmidhi, Hadith 3883. Albani classified it as Sahih)

She narrated some 2210 Ahadith from the Prophet (pbuh) and this was possible only because she lived with him for nine years and that too at a young age when people have a sharp memory and great sense of observation. Then she lived for about 46 years after the death of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and continued to teach the people matters of religion especially those related to household affairs and marital life. No other wife of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) did the similar job that may be compared with her blessed endeavors. This shows the Divine Wisdom for it was not the Prophet himself but Allah that ordained this marriage. She herself reports;

Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) said to me, ‘You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘Uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you.’ (Bukhari, Hadith 6495)

It may be noted that among his wives were those who were young and old, the daughter of his sworn enemy, the daughter of his closest friend. One of them occupied herself with raising orphans, another distinguished herself  from others by fasting and praying qiyaam a great deal… They represented all kinds of people, through whom the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was able to set out a way for the Muslims showing how to deal properly with all kinds of people. [See al-Seerah al-Nabawiyyah fi Daw’ al-Masaadir al-Asliyyah, p. 711].

If you think – may Allah guide you – that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not marry any virgin other than Aisha (RA), and that all his other wives had been previously married, this will refute the notion spread by many hostile sources, that the basic motive behind the Prophet’s marriages was physical desire and enjoyment of women, because if that was his intention he would have chosen only those who were virgins and beautiful etc.

Such slanders against the Prophet of Mercy (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) by kaafirs and others of their ilk, are indicative of their inability to find fault with the law and religion that he brought from Allah, so they try to find ways to criticize Islam with regard to issues that are not related to shariah.

 

LET US TURN THE TABLES AROUND

The Catholic Encyclopaedia reports regarding Mary, mother of Jesus:

… the priests announced through Judea that they wished to find in Juda a respectable man to espouse Mary, then twelve to fourteen years of age. Joseph, who was at the time ninety years old, went up to Jerusalem among the candidates; a miracle manifested the choice of God had made of Joseph, and two years later the Annunciation took place.

[The Catholic Encyclopedia: An International Reference of Work on the Constitution, Doctrine, Dicipline, and History of the Catholic Church, New York Robert Appleton Company, Vol. VIII, Pg. 505.]

Likewise, the Talmud states, “Marrying off one’s daughter as soon after she reaches adulthood as possible, even to one’s Slave”[Talmud, Pesachim 113a].  In fact, the Talmud presents some shocking guidance on marriage, also stating, “A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.”[Talmud, Sanhedrin 55b].

So while the Catholic Encyclopedia tells us that Mary and Joseph were married at the ages of 12-14 and 90, respectively, the Talmud permits marrying girls as young as three years and one day. Lest this seem like an attack on Christianity and Judaism—which it is not—we present marriage laws in the West.

For centuries in Scotland, the age of consent for girls was 12—and parental consent was unnecessary [G T Bisset-Smith. 1st edition. Edinburgh: William Green & Sons, (1902)]. Only in 1929 was the age raised to 16 for girls [Id]. But in America even today, Aisha’s consenting marriage to Prophet Muhammad would be considered valid. For example, in New Hampshire, the legal age for girls is 13 with parental consent [New Hampshire Title 53, Chapter 457, available at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage#g]. In Massachusetts, the legal age for girls is 12 with parental consent [Massachusetts Title III, Chapter 207, available at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage#g]. In Mississippi, there is no age minimum for girls, as long as there is parental consent [Mississippi Title 93, Chapter 1, available at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage#g]. In California, there is no age minimum for girls, as long as there is parental consent [California Family Code §§ 300-500, available at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage#g.]. Granted, the American state laws were passed in the 19th and 20th centuries—not today. And granted, American’s aged 12 or 13 do not typically get married today. The point still stands, however, that even in recent American history, American’s found value—not objection—in marrying at 12 or 13, or even younger, and passed laws through their state legislatures to affirm their value.

This exercise in no way argues for a return to such marrying ages. Rather, it merely establishes the point that “appropriate” marriage age is based on social construct—not some supposed objective, advanced contemporary standard. Therefore, if we are to accuse Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of any impropriety in marrying Aisha even if she was 6-9, then we must also condemn the Old Testament, New Testament, the Europe, and numerous American states. Above discussion demonstrates that Aisha’s marriage to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), even if she was 6, was not by any means unusual when compared across time and culture—even to contemporary standards

And Allah Knows Best

The Second World For Most Humanitarian Aid Country Is Turkey

0

According to the Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2017, Turkey has been ranked second in the world for humanitarian aid, ahead of EU institutions Germany and the United Kingdom. Turkey spent a staggering $6 billion on humanitarian aid in 2016, which is an increase of 119% on 2015. This is more than double what the UK (ranked 3 rd ) spent in the same year.

In the last few years, millions of people have had to forcibly flee their homes as a result of conflict and persecution, which have destroyed families, communities, countries and regions. The report moves on to state that due to ‘ongoing and new crises’ those in need of international humanitarian assistance in 2016 were an astounding 164.2 million people in 47 countries across the world. It states that in just three countries – Yemen, Syria and Iraq – over a quarter of the 164.2 million people are in need.

65.3 million people, of which more than half are children, have been displaced as a result of violence and conflict according to the Global Opportunity Report 2017.The UN Global Trends report states that if these 65.3 million displaced people were to be a nation, it would make up the 21st largest nation in the entire world.

This shocking figure is the highest recorded total to date.
The Global Humanitarian Assistance Report reveals that, as well as being the provider of the second largest amount of humanitarian assistance, Turkey provides the most humanitarian assistance as percentage of gross national income (GNI). Turkey increased its GNI humanitarian assistance by 0.35% from 2015 to contributing 0.75% of its GNI in the year 2016.

The report also makes mention of a number of states who have the largest decrease of international humanitarian assistance. In the Middle East region several neighbouring countries such as the Gulf states have significantly decreased their humanitarian assistance. The report states that Kuwait decreased its funding by 50% whilst Saudi Arabia decreased it by 26% in 2016, totaling a substantial decrease of $614 million solely between the two Gulf states.

The report, which is published yearly by the UK-based Development Initiative Organisation, sheds some interesting light onto the world’s most generous and caring states.
Turkey’s contributions make up one-fifth of the total amount of aid given internationally ($27.3 billion in 2016) and has nearly doubled its own humanitarian budget to $6 billion. Between the years 2013 to 2016 Turkey upheld its stance on humanitarian aid and was placed on the list of the world’s most generous countries as either ‘third or second place’.

Currently, Turkey hosts the most Syrian refugees as compared to any other country. The international community has contributed around $525 million for those who have fled within the borders of Turkey, however Turkey has spent a generous and considerable amount of around $25 billion.

Refugees camps for fleeing Syrians were constructed in Turkey from as early as the year 2011.In just two years those camps accommodated nearly half a million Syrian refugees while many western governments rushed to build walls to prevent their movement and burned and demolished their camps.

The latest statistics show that Turkey now accommodates nearly three million refugees.
In late May, at a meeting of the ruling Justice and Development Party, President Erdogan said,
“By helping three million refugees from Iraq and Syria, Turkey has taught a lesson of humanity to the countries which only observe humanitarian tragedies in various parts of the world,”

Another region which Turkey has heavily supported is the Gaza Strip. A Turkish aid ship named “Sefkat” carrying approximately 10,000 tons of supplies to the blockaded Gaza Strip arrived on Wednesday at the Ashdod port in “Israel”. The supplies consist of food packages, biscuits, cakes and chocolates. It also carries bicycles, toys, stationery and clothes as Eid gifts for the children in Palestine who are under a severe and illegal blockade which is suffocating Gaza.

The state-run Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD) transmitted the supplies and an official Cengiz Akin told the Anadolu Agency:
“In line with instructions of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year, we made our Gazan brothers and sisters happy [with the aid ship] before the Eid al-Fitr,”

The above shows that there is a great influence of humanitarian aid and charity in Turkey.

Humanitarianism is a crucial component to the Islamic way of life. It is a major principle in Islam and there are several Quranic and prophetic texts which encourage humanitarian acts. There are numerous examples of these within the two-main sacred texts; they are either defined as being obligatory or highly recommended and encouraged. Charity is one of the most important manifestations of an Islamic country. Many people do not relate the application of the Shariah to also include humanitarianism.

Abdullah bin Salam (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:
The Prophet (saw) said, “O people, promote the greetings, feed (the poor and needy) and perform Salat when others are asleep so that you will enter Jannah safely.”
This was the founding statement of the Prophetic Islamic state, and shows the great emphasis and direct command the Prophet of Allah made to the Muslims with regards to humanitarianism and charity. It is something which should be applied by any Islamic country wishing to adhere to Islamic principles and the values taught and encouraged by the Prophet.

Moreover, a sincere Muslim government is one that has a positive rippling impact across the globe. The first to suffer from the repression of Muslim parties and governments are the poorest in the world, including non-Muslims. Humanitarian actions and the responsibility to help those in need is seen as a religious obligation in Islam that does not go unpaid or unnoticed in the hereafter.

Allah swt says:
“So, whoever does an atom´s weight of good shall see it” Q 99:7.

This “atom”, whether good or bad, will be carried forth and shown to its doer, who will then receive this recompense.

Commenting on this, Prominent Islamist thinker Syed Qutb says,
“But there are some hearts in this world which are unmoved even by mountains of sin and crime. They remain unaffected while suppressing fountains of goodness which are far firmer than mountains. These hearts are conceited on this earth but on the Day of Judgement they are crushed under their own burdens”.

Several other verses emphasise the importance of giving including,
“They are those who, if We firmly establish them on earth, attend regularly to their prayers, give in charity, enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid the doing of what is wrong. With God rests the final outcome of all events.”

Syed Qutb comments on this saying,
“God’s true promise which will never fail is that He supports those who support Him. The question that arises here is who are these people that support God and thus deserve His support which means certain victory? Their qualities are outlined in this verse. They are those who, when given victory by God and are established in a position of authority, “attend regularly to their prayers.” They worship God alone, submitting themselves to Him willingly and strengthening their bonds with Him. They “give in charity”, thus they meet the liability imposed on their property.

By so doing, they demonstrate their ability to overcome greed and self-interest, and they help their community to provide help to the poor and needy”
“…they “enjoin the doing of what is right.” They advocate every good thing and encourage people to practice it. By contrast, they also “forbid the doing of what is wrong.” They resist evil and corruption. In this way, they demonstrate a very important characteristic of the Muslim community which does not tolerate any wrong if it can change it, and does not hesitate to do any right thing if it is within its ability.”

Likewise, there are also many remarkable statements from the Sunnah found in authentic hadiths which highly encourage charitable and humanitarian works.
Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari:
“The Prophet (saw) said, “Feed the hungry, visit the sick, and set free the captives.”

The Turkish government and Turkish people have clearly shown its concern for humanity across the world in accordance to the humanitarian acts which Islam has emphasised. As a result, Turkey has become an example for other countries which have the ability to have a similar, if not far more effective, impact.

The entire Muslim world should learn from the actions of Turkey and ultimately those prescribed and commanded by Allah (swt) and His messenger. Muslims should act and live as though we are one body and if one of us is in need then the whole Muslim community should strive to get them back on their feet. In doing so we would be acting in line with the following Hadith which demonstrates a practical example of the Prophet’s description of the Muslim community,
“The believers in their mutual kindness, compassion and sympathy are just like one body. When one of the limbs suffers, the whole body responds to it with wakefulness and fever”.

Latest Qatar crisis update : New sanctions on Qatar considered by Gulf states.

0

Saudi-led bloc could take further action against Qatar by ‘imposing conditions on trade partners’, UAE envoy says.

Envoy Omar Ghobash said trade partners could be asked to make a commercial choice [Naseem Zeitoon/Reuters]

A Saudi-led bloc is considering fresh sanctions against Qatar that may include asking trading partners to choose between them or Doha, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) ambassador to Russia said.

 

In an interview with The Guardian newspaper, envoy Omar Ghobash said the expulsion of Qatar from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) was “not the only sanction available” for the UAE and its allies.

“There are certain economic sanctions that we can take which are being considered right now,” Ghobash said in the interview, which was published on Wednesday.

“One possibility would be to impose conditions on our own trading partners and say; you want to work with us then you have got to make a commercial choice,” he added.

 

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt cut diplomatic ties with Qatar and imposed sanctions on the country on June 5, accusing it of supporting “terrorism”.

The four countries have not provided any evidence for their claim, while Qatar has repeatedly rejected the allegation.

Ghobash said that if Qatar “was not willing to accept the demands, it is a case of ‘Goodbye Qatar’ we do not need you in our tent any more”.

‘We don’t claim to have press freedom’

On Thursday, the Saudi-led bloc issued a 13-point demand list in exchange for the end of the anti-Qatar measures and gave a 10-day deadline.

 

The demands included, among others, that Qatar shut down the Al Jazeera media network, close a Turkish military base and scale down ties with Iran.

When asked if the closure of Al Jazeera was a valid demand, Ghobash told The Guardian that the UAE does not “claim to have press freedom”.

“We do not promote the idea of press freedom. What we talk about is responsibility in speech,” he said.

He added that speech in the Gulf “has particular context, and that context can go from peaceful to violent in no time simply because of the words that are spoken”.

 

Ghobash also said that the UAE is willing to hold itself to the same standards it is asking of Qatar.

He echoed previous statements by UAE officials that the Gulf states do not wish to escalate the conflict with military action.

“We can escalate with more information, because we are not going to escalate militarily. That is not the way we are looking at things.”

Source: Al Jazeera and news agencies

1...229230231...272Page 230 of 272

FAVORITES

Knowislam.com.ng is an online platform solely for affairs about Islam. Its Da’wah-minded members strive daily in propagating Islam and most importantly, correcting the many misleading broadcast contents about the Deen around the world.
Contact us: [email protected]
© Designed By Tes Sal Powered By Knowislam.com.ng
en_USEnglish
en_USEnglish