Of Faith and Fannies – Female Genital Mutilation and Islam

Of Faith and Fannies – Female Genital Mutilation and Islam

 ‎Posted by Avicenna

Female Circumcision (Genital Mutilation) is one of the major problems facing women in large parts of the world. The practice is seen from parts of Indonesia through some areas of the Middle East to (it is thankfully rarer but it still occurs) to Africa where the practice is widespread due to a long history and the lack of a concerted effort to stamp it out. I will write a warning and say that this article is NSFW and not suitable for those of a nervous disposition as the subject matter is deeply uncomfortable. In addition due to the use of anatomical drawings I will suggest that this article be treated as not safe for children unless you as a parent wish for them to learn about a darker side of the world. This is ludicrously uncomfortable for pretty much everyone. Hence this ludicrously long disclaimer.

What triggered me to write this? Well my girlfriend is a Malaysian Tamil. Malaysian readers saw that and sent me this. I figured a lot of the issues (like pretty much every form of quackery) are tarnished by misinformation. It’s an issue that we rarely properly deal with in western society because we go “It’s bad! KAY! LALALALLALALALA! PUPPIES AND KITTENS!”. But we don’t have that luxury. Most people don’t know the first thing about the practice so it’s very easy for the supporters to just dismiss them. So first a short primer on FGM and even a little look into “the most common FGM” in the west and medical procedures that can be classified under FGM. Yes, sometimes there is a reason to do this and we shall touch on a few examples, but I repeat this throughout because I know people often forget that a medical reason for doing something is not a sensible reason for doing something if you are healthy. Just because Steve Jobs was benefited from having large chunks of his intestines removed doesn’t mean it’s a sensible plan for you.

To begin with, let’s discuss what constitutes FGM.

The fourth type isn’t depicted because it’s mostly voluntary or medical… Mostly

There are four classifications of FGM according to the WHO.

Type I – Clitirodectomy. It is the removal of the clitoris and the clitoral hood. Normally? There is only one indication for this procedure medically. Metastasis of cancer to the region may require removal of the clitoris.

Type II – Includes the type I procedure and removal of the inner labia.

Type III – Is called infibulations. It involves removal of the clitoris, labia and fusion of wound leaving a small hole for passage of urine and blood which is reopened for childbirth and intercourse.

Type IV – Miscellaneous acts such as symbolic pricking, piercing of clitoris and labia, cauterisation and cutting into the vagina to widen it or usage of corrosives to tighten the vagina. These are mainly considered medical practices and are done for a variety of conditions ranging from body piercing and fashion to disorders like sexual dysfunction due to a narrow vagina, vaginismus due to damage during childbirth, cancer and some plastic surgery. It is generally voluntary though some exceptions exist.

Type I and II are the most common. Type III is predominant in Sudan, Somalia and Djibouti. Type IV is seen across the world including voluntary FGM as seen in body modification and piercing circles in the west.Now I know I am going to get a lot of flak for pointing out that body modification and piercing circles undergo Type IV FGM, but this is the WHO classification of the act rather than mine. It’s also important to point out the difference between body modification and piercings where an individual volunteers to have the piercing when compared to someone who is forced or coerced into having it done. I have no issue with volunteers, it’s your body and if your happiness lies in putting metal through your genitals then godspeed you fancy bastards! The reason for it’s utilisation in this context is that NORMALLY in the context of the west Type IV is voluntary but there are some cultures where the practice is compulsory and is not as radical as Type I, II or III. In Malaysia for example Type IV is more involuntary than in the west.

But for these women it isn’t a choice.

And the defence of the practice is frankly reprehensible.

Not only does it defend a practice steeped in superstition and culture as a good thing, it also does so by invoking a divine mandate followed by a billion people across the world that isn’t prone to criticism and honest debate.Let’s face it, Islam does not like debate. When Christians complain that Muslims get a free ride from atheists, it’s mainly because muslims do have a small but significant minority who don’t listen to reason and who are quite happy to kill someone for their perceived involvement in an attack on their faith. It’s extremely hard to criticise someone who threatens you with death and acts on it. We see here a marriage of the worst attitudes of faith and woo. The perceived medical benefit married to the blind faith in a book written by someone who could not fathom our knowledge and understanding. This is deadly beyond comparison and it shows. The 1997 figure for FGM states that roughly 135 million women had undergone the procedure. The number certainly hasn’t gone down since there isn’t a big drive to halt the procedure.We can say a lot of things about the British Colonial period. A lot of horrible things were done by Great Britain across the world. But as most Indians will realise (even if they don’t like admitting it) Great Britain created India as a solid unified body. Without them? India would be a balkanised series of tiny countries and not the rising giant it is today. The erstwhile masters unknowingly created nationalism, they gave India the tools to set itself free from all masters be they gods or men even if Indians do forget that sometime. And one of the things the British did in India that I am sure most Indians are thankful for was to give a legal impetus to the Hindu anti-sati reforms. A coalition of Indian reformers and British lawmakers helped stamp out the practice. However, we see a similar move in Africa where in Kenya the British attempted to stamp out the practice through the church and law resulting in revolutions as many kenyans perceived a british plot to destroy local culture  to the point where the practice was actively defended as a Kenyan cultural issue. So what we see here is a genuinely destructive practice that people do consider unnecessary and bad but still do because it’s a symbol of culture.

The real argument lies not in the defense of the general surgical operation or its details, but in the understanding of a very important fact in the tribal psychology of the Kikuyu—namely, that this operation is still regarded as the essence of an institution which has enormous educational, social, moral and religious implications, quite apart from the operation itself. For the present it is impossible for a member of the tribe to imagine an initiation without clitoridoctomy [sic]. Therefore the … abolition of the surgical element in this custom means … the abolition of the whole institution.

The above quote came from the first prime minister of Kenya who resigned himself to the idea that fighting the practice somehow removed from the culture of Kenya and that somehow cutting the bits off another woman (the practice is strangely enforced by other women rather than men) was what you needed to be part of a society. That it was unfathomable to turn the practice into a symbolic one in much the same way as the modern Kali worshipper offers up a red liquid and cuts up pumpkins rather than the traditional offering of blood and human sacrifice. Granted this may turn into something like the practice now currently seen in Indonesia where the clitoris is pricked to draw blood but not removed, but it’s a step forwards and it’s a step that can be further progressed to a purely symbolic ceremony where the perceived benefits until it is completely stopped as an actual practice. I know a lot of people who read this will say “STAHP NAO” but there is something you should learn. And it is a harsh fact of life and working in such places. Sometimes principles don’t save lives. If 1000 people who would have done FGM and 50% agree to do the pricking malarky and only 1% agree to not do it then you have stopped 500 people from getting FGM in exchange for something not as bad. Eventually you will go from “not as bad” to sensible. Now even this is not indicated for every place FGM is being fought, some places are conducive to open bans.

Superstition when directly challenged will only fall if you can completely undermine it. In order to completely undermine FGM in large parts of Asia you will have to run the risk of death by angry fanatic. You have to fight the status quo of Islam and that is just terrifying to most doctors and the like who have families who just want to make a living without some idiot getting the idea that the doctor is being unislamic and encouraging people who listen to his idiocy to kill him. It’s not a fight you can demand others to participate in while being comfortable and removed from the risk. It’s not a game of football. In addition you either have to brutally destroy that part of culture (the hanging of people who encouraged sati) or you have to undermine it and slowly change it. And that is slow and steady and has to be done through things like this. It’s not ideal but it’s what works in this situation. You need to create a situation where people realise why they should change. And the way to do it is sadly slower than what most people want.

Islam may enjoin or forbid something and the people – or most of them – may not be able to see the wisdom behind this command or prohibition. In that case we are obliged to obey the command or heed the prohibition and to have certain faith that the laws of Allaah are all good, even if we cannot see the wisdom behind them.

Circumcision is one of the Sunnahs of the fitrah, as is indicated by the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “The fitrah is five things – or five things are part of the fitrah – circumcision, shaving the pubes, plucking the armpit hairs, cutting the nails, and trimming the moustache.” narrated by al-Bukhaari (5889) and Muslim (257)…Circumcision is prescribed for both males and females. The correct view is that circumcision is obligatory for males and that it is one of the symbols of Islam, and that circumcision of women is mustahabb but not obligatory. 

Great! The defence of female circumcision is that we cannot understand why it’s being proscribed by Islam. We should blindly obey because we cannot wrap our tiny minds over what some (more) middle eastern  guys in 500 AD thought about the world but we can build the Large Hadron Collider.

So circumcision is mentioned in Islam and proscribed, mainly for men; but it doesn’t explicitly state that women shouldn’t be circumcised and so people use the vague language in the Koran to imply that it’s a good thing.

That’s where Dr. Hamid al-Ghawaabi comes in to provide his expert medical advice as to why it’s a great idea.

The secretions of the labia minora accumulate in uncircumcised women and turn rancid, so they develop an unpleasant odour which may lead to infections of the vagina or urethra. I have seen many cases of sickness caused by the lack of circumcision.

Rancid secretions? It is indicative of a bacterial or a yeast infection. Roughly 75% of women will have one in their lifetime. It’s a fact of life. The correct answer is proper hygiene and cleaning your genitals.And I haven’t noticed any woman whose vagina smelt so bad that I had to lop bits off. Maybe if she has gangrene but that’s it! (Yes, that’s the actual medical indication for female circumcision. Your choices are clitiroidectomy or death by sepsis. It’s an emergency procedure and rather rare) And that’s a very specific case! But a normal healthy vagina?

Circumcision reduces excessive sensitivity of the clitoris which may cause it to increase in size to 3 centimeters when aroused, which is very annoying to the husband, especially at the time of intercourse.

And there in lies the crux of this of the argument. The same reason why male circumcision occurs is applied to women. It’s because it reduces the sexual drive of individuals. And I fail to see how a normal clitoris during the act of sex somehow is irritating. If a clitoris is so massively irritating during coitus then Rx – Doggy Style if you are a selfish wanker. You clearly don’t care about the sexual pleasure of others if that’s the biggest problem you have during sex and if you use that excuse to deny others pleasure. Because face it, that’s why it’s done. It’s to stop women having fun.

Another benefit of circumcision is that it prevents stimulation of the clitoris which makes it grow large in such a manner that it causes pain.

Pain? I don’t think the clitoris grows so much that it causes pain! Then again it’s been a long time since I had sex and I may have forgotten that bit where women feel pain during sex. Although… it may explain why the women I sleep with scream in bed… Good Grief! I AM SUCH A MONSTER!!!

Circumcision prevents spasms of the clitoris which are a kind of inflammation. 

No it isn’t! Inflammation consists of the classical signs of redness, heat, swelling and pain (rubor, calor, tumor et dolor… I can science in latin) as a generalised tissue response to an infection or a foreign object. Not what happens when a clitoris is stimulated. Ironically pricking and other forms of FGM would cause inflammation.

Circumcision reduces excessive sexual desire. 

Why is this even a problem? Oh right? Because all abrahamic faith is fascinated and repulsed by human sexuality and thinks that the first sin is the acquisition of knowledge and the greatest is the idea that humans can enjoy sex. Well emasculation reduces excessive sexual desire too but I don’t see the good doctor suggest we lop off the meat and two veg…

Then Dr al-Ghawaabi refutes those who claim that female circumcision leads to frigidity by noting: Frigidity has many causes, and this claim is not based on any sound statistics comparing circumcised women with uncircumcised women, except in the case of Pharaonic circumcision which is where the clitoris is excised completely.

Does Al-Ghawaabi seriously think women have any say in whether or not sex occurs or if there is any onus on providing sexual pleasure to a woman when one of the reasons given for cutting off the clitoris is that it is irritating to her husband? It doesn’t lead to frigidity, it leads to a loss of enjoyment of sex since by definition the procedure is done to reduce the female enjoyment of sex.

The female gynaecologist Sitt al-Banaat Khaalid says in an article entitled Khitaan al-Banaat Ru’yah Sihhiyyah (Female circumcision from a health point of view): For us in the Muslim world female circumcision is, above all else, obedience to Islam, which means acting in accordance with the fitrah and following the Sunnah which encourages it. We all know the dimensions of Islam, and that everything in it must be good in all aspects, including health aspects. If the benefits are not apparent now, they will become known in the future, as has happened with regard to male circumcision – the world now knows its benefits and it has become widespread among all nations despite the opposition of some groups. 

Some groups? It’s because women are held down and have their genitals cut off. The nations where it is widespread are mainly really poor nations where the practice occurs mainly due to tribal nonsense and because women have few rights and are unable to stand against the practice. The idea that Islam is somehow more knowledgeable than actual healthcare experts and that healthcare practitioners are willing to trade their own knowledge for a belief in the writings of someone from the 5th century AD rather than modern science is frankly insane. Fitrah, Sunnah and Koran do not dictate medical science. As for male circumcision (a completely different topic due to the relatively benign status of the procedure), it’s actually dropping in levels across the world since there isn’t any actual benefit from removal of the foreskin that cannot be attained from condom. And the practice of circumcision in women is illegal in many parts of the world with the UK’s government going as far as making it illegal to perform on it’s citizens rather than just in it’s jurisdiction meaning that going abroad to get your female child circumcised is also illegal. This is a movement that’s growing across the world and it’s rising in importance.Instead we have a list of frankly stupid reasons to mutilate someone’s genitals.

To point out the crux of the problem with Islam and FGM is the word Fitrah. It means “Nature”, that any action prescribed or proscribed by the Quran regarding health and that if it is a practice that isn’t immediately understandable now will reveal itself in the future to be the right act. Sunan al Fitrah is the “customs of nature”. The notion is that FGM is a divinely inscribed practice on humanity. That we cannot help but do this because god made us.

Then she mentioned some of the health benefits of female circumcision and said: It takes away excessive libido from women It prevents unpleasant odours which result from foul secretions beneath the prepuce. It reduces the incidence of urinary tract infections It reduces the incidence of infections of the reproductive system. In the book on Traditions that affect the health of women and children, which was published by the World Health Organization in 1979 it says: With regard to the type of female circumcision which involves removal of the prepuce of the clitoris, which is similar to male circumcision, no harmful health effects have been noted.

I already went over the stupidity of the other points. With regards to harmful health effects?

1. Recurrent bladder and urinary tract infections 2. Cysts 3. Infertility 4. Marked increase in both maternal and child deaths 5. Type III FGM is prone for infections and gangrenous infection of the labia majora 6. Marked pain 7. Loss of pleasure during sex

The WHO in 2011 says that there are no health benefits, only harm that comes out of FGM. FGM is illegal in many parts of the world. In most of the west the only removal or damage to the female genitalia that can be done is either voluntarily in the case of piercings or in the case of medical conditions that require removal. In every single instance of the FGM seen it is not done for the sake of the girl but for the perceived notion of culture, purity of women, religion and reduction of sexual libido. There is no medical reason to do so, and the practice is forced or coerced upon young girls.

This is an extremely prevalent practice in many parts of the world with little to no statistics. It’s often the “norm” so people don’t see what the problem is. While you understandably feel rage, rage doesn’t make people change. It’s very easy to call someone a bastard, it’s very hard however to make them stop doing the thing. Condemnation should be mixed in with a logical method of causing the problem to stop. Otherwise it is just words.

So how to make a stand? Well you yourselves can raise awareness in a way that isn’t just based on blind anger. Yes it is nice to get people to come from the UK to help out but frankly most of us don’t have the skills to fight this fight. Any job you can do, someone here already can do and in a better way. What we require is awareness and common sense. Support your secular charities. Medicin Sans Frontier, The WHO and Red Cross all stand against the practice and actively try and stop it from occurring in regions where they are active. You may not accept the softly softly approach but that actually gets results rather than outright fisticuffs with a practice that many people consider to be a vital part of their identity. Amnesty International as well has a very strong campaign against it on the activism side. It can be done, it’s just that we have to do it right now.

There is no excuse for this, not culture and definitely not belief in any god.

Related articles

• UN committee calls for ban on female genital mutilation (guardian.co.uk)
• The day I saw 248 girls suffering genital mutilation (guardian.co.uk)
• UN panel calls for ban on female genital mutilation (todayonline.com)
• CPS to crack down on female genital mutilation (guardian.co.uk)
• Fight against Female Genital Mutilation wins UN backing. (zedie.wordpress.com)
• Guest Post by Jason Tucker – Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) At Home And Abroad (judithhaire.com)
• Ladies, Be Proud of your Labia! (aarhusblog.com)
• emma batha: senegal will be first country to end female genital cutting (blkcowrie.wordpress.com)
• United Nations speaks out against female genital mutilation (FGM) (secularnewsdaily.com)

Islamic Fanatics’ War on Freedom of Speech | Salman Rushdie

Photo: Salman Rushdie talks to students  about his life and writings

Michael Johnson

PARIS — Twenty-three years after an  Iranian fatwa authorized his murder, Salman Rushdie is alive and well  but still on the radar of fanatical Muslims.

The price on his head has reached $3.3 million and the faithful are being  urged again to take up arms. Rushdie is trying to dismiss this latest threat as  a nuisance, not a new fatwa. He may be overly optimistic.

His crime was a book he dared to publish in 1988, “The Satanic Verses,” which  included imaginary scenes of Muhammad’s life. Although the original  fatwa was lifted in 1998, the worst of the would-be killers remained  incensed. A semi-official Iranian group upped its bounty by $500,000 in  September and hopes to re-ignite the old Rushdie affair.

“Joseph Anton” Is Rushdie’s Memoir 

This disturbing development rather spoils the happy ending of Rushdie’s new  book, “Joseph Anton,” a gripping account of his nine years on the run from the  hot-heads. The book concludes as he steps onto a Notting Hill street in London  and hails a taxi – his first free act in Britain since the Ayatollah Khomeini  condemned him to death.

Khomeini wanted more than Rushdie’s blood. “All those involved in its [“The  Satanic Verses”] publication are sentenced to death. I ask all Muslims to  execute them wherever they find them,” the text reads.

Rushdie, never quite losing his cool, quotes a BBC journalist as telling him  early in the affair not to worry too much: “Khomeini sentences the president of  the United States to death every Friday afternoon.”

Protestors against Rushdie, September 2012   AP

The Salman Rushdie story bears retelling, not only for its personal cruelties  but also as a reminder that bloodthirsty, intolerant forces are abroad in the  land and quite willing to kill those who disagree with them.

In an interview last month, a self-effacing Rushdie told the New York  Times he felt he had been caught up in a “world historical event…the  battle against radical Islam, of which this was one skirmish.”

In response to the original death sentence in 1989, a rash of book burnings,  fire-bombings and mass marches broke out in Britain, where he was a naturalized  citizen, and throughout the Islamic world. In Teheran, excited marchers carried  posters of him with his eyes dug out and signs such as “Kill the dog.”

Murders on the margins of the affair were actually carried out or attempted.  His Japanese translator was killed, his Italian translator was stabbed in the  neck but survived and his Norwegian publishing house was bombed. The killers  never got near him, thanks mainly to the efficiency of the British police  spiriting him from house to house at the slightest sign of trouble.

Protestors Took to the Streets Against Rushdie

In London, where I was living during this saga, I found the atmosphere deeply  unsettling for such a peaceful capital. Thousands of bearded fanatics, most of  them Pakistanis and other Middle East immigrants, protested against Rushdie by  marching down Park Lane under police protection, shouting, chanting and shaking  their fists — exercising their right to free expression. The irony of the  situation was lost on them. No one was prosecuted for incitement to  violence.

During his years in hiding, Rushdie tells of how the tables were turned and  he became the villain. A large majority of the British public told pollsters  that they wanted him to apologize for writing the book. And he came under attack  from the best of Britain’s intellectual coterie.

I had forgotten that he was bashed by such luminaries as George Steiner, John  Le Carre, Germaine Greer, Auberon Waugh, Gerald Kaufman, Richard Ingrams,  Geoffrey Howe, Douglas Hurd, and even John Major. To his eternal credit, Rushdie  stood fast on his right to free speech.

Caricature of Salman Rushdie by Michael  Johnson

To this day, he seems perplexed by the craven attitudes around him and the  eagerness of prominent figures to appease the fanatics merely to maintain their  cozy lives. Very few chose to focus on the larger issue at stake, the freedom of  expression that is at the basis of Western values.

Rushdie Credits U.S. Commitment to Freedom

He wrote his latest book in third person, using his police code name as the  protagonist. The officers guarding him agreed to call him “Joseph Anton” from  the Christian names of his favorite writers, Joseph Conrad and Anton Chekhov. He  became known to the police as “Joe.” He decided to write this book in the third  person to avoid using the more egotistical “I“ and “me” throughout.

For me, the heart of the book is not the detail of his scuttling from house  to house to confuse the hit squads, fascinating as that is, but the over-arching  issue of freedom to speak and write one’s opinions without fear of getting  stabbed or shot by paid assassins.

He maintains he did nothing wrong. “When did it become irrational to dislike  religion, any religion, and to dislike it vehemently?” Rushdie asks. “When did  reason get re-described as unreason?”

In the past two decades, militants in Europe have been emboldened by the lack  of resistance to their actions. Rushdie has been keeping track. “There were  Islamist attacks on socialists and unionists, cartoonists and journalists,  prostitutes and homosexuals, women in skirts and beardless men, and also,  surreally, on such evils as frozen chickens and samosas,” he writes.

Tracing the rise of violence, he cites extremist ideologies including  Wahhabi, Salafi, Khomeiniite, Deobandi, and Islamic schools funded by Saudi oil  as producing “generations of narrow-eyed men with hairy chins and easily  clenched fists,” taking Islam far from its origins while claiming to be  returning to its roots.

This book is something of a diary in narrative form with many unexpected  digressions. He describes his life as a writer before and during his death  sentence, even detailing how he came to write The Satanic Verses and other books  that have brought him acclaim. He says his first major book, “Midnight’s  Children,” was the result of 13 years of rumination during which he made many  false starts and wrote “enormous” quantities of “garbage.

He never quite loses his sense of humor. The police allowed him to take a  short stroll in public one day if he agreed to wear a wig. He acquiesced and on  the street overheard a passerby say, “There goes that bastard Salman Rushdie in  a wig.” He recalls one joke making the rounds in London during his invisible  years: “Who is tall, blond, has big tits and is living in Tasmania? Salman  Rushdie.” Despite all, he seemed to relish the lighter side.

He credits the U.S. commitment to freedom as his salvation during the darkest  days of British ambivalence. Police protection might have been withdrawn but for  a hero’s welcome in Washington when he managed a secret flight into the country.  “America had made it impossible for the British to walk away from (my) defense,”  he writes.

Salman Rushdie continues his prolific output, of which this book is a  valuable example. He has exorcized his demons that remained from his traumatic  years on the run but has given us a stark reminder that his case was a mere  skirmish in a much longer and deeper conflict between rational forces in the  West and the fanatical wing of a badly distorted religion.

Related articles

• Rushdie discusses books, life under fatwa (kansascity.com)
• Salman Rushdie and David Remnick Discuss ‘Joseph Anton’ (fora.tv)
• The Salman Rushdie Case (nybooks.com)
• WHAT RELIGIONS HAVE IN COMMON | Salman Rushdie (theageofblasphemy.wordpress.com)
• Salman Rushdie Retreats From The Politics Of Literature (thinkprogress.org)
• Rushdie’s outside-in look at the fatwa experience (seattletimes.com)
• Rushdie discusses books, life under fatwa (metronews.ca)
• Rushdie discusses books, life under fatwa (seattletimes.com)

ISLAMIC SUNNIS AGAINST EXTREMISM | “The extremist fanatics are doomed”

SUNNIS AGAINST EXTREMISM

About the author Darulfatwa is an endeavour of a group of committed and highly educated Muslims who collaborated with diverse community officials to establish what is the final frontier to bridge the gap between the needs of Muslims and their productive co-existence in the wider Australian community. Darulfatwa is a non-partisan and independent institution, lobbying for the right of all Muslims to a better living standard without prejudice and discrimination and defending the civil liberties and privileges of those at risk. It set forth in its endeavor to produce this text to empower the reader with knowledge to discriminate between moderation and extremism and expel the latter. Preface Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said: “The extremist fanatics are doomed.” Although extremism is not a new phenomenon, the rebel exacerbations witnessed today requires prompt action and a strong resolve. The global extremist movement driving this form of anarchy is manifested in groups known by a multitude of names hiding behind Islam to roam among the Islamic communities without drawing suspicion. Extremism does exist. Admitting this and recognising it as a dangerous force we can better plan to weed it from society. Islamic practice is a true following of the rules of Islam and extremism is a perverted view that deviates from the meanings of the merciful and moderate Islamic shari`ah. This elucidation is presented along this backdrop.   Abstract This elucidation explores the type of extremism and terrorism practiced under the pretext of Islam. It draws on the Quran, the sayings of Prophet Muhammad and the sayings of Muslim scholars to expose the roots of extremism and assert the just position of Islam. It also discloses revealing statements of deviant men/groups to add to the case against them. First the historical place of Islam in society is explored, then how deviations from orthodox Islam occurred and lead to the emergence of extremist ideologies manifesting historically in groups like the khawarij (dissenters) and in modern times in groups including the named al-Jama`ah al-Islamiyyah, the Wahhabis and Hizbut-Tahrir. Their actions and methodology are identified. Today, extremist movements have killed many people in Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Saudi, Iraq and other places. Based on misleading reasoning, they have killed innocents. Daring to masquerade as Muslims, these extremists have attempted to destroy the reputation of Islam and Muslims. To refute them we quote a series of statements from moderate Sunni scholars; clarifying the Sunni stand against terrorism and extremism. Finally, this paper delivers solutions and warnings including, a need for Islamic scholars, Sheikhs and Islamic religious workers to remain at the forefront of the line of defence against extremists and prevent access to the extremist books. It is recognised that this work requires qualified and diligent individuals trained in deflating the calls of the named terrorist groups and activists of today. The Beginnings of Extremism Historically, many people embraced Islam freeing their hearts from the odious practices of ignorance and tribalism. Those true Muslims whose hearts pacified to the call of the Prophet were a people of middle ground, fairness and justice. Others, whose hearts did not pacify with peace of mind, had ulterior motives and emerged to spread envious gossip by attempting to split the line. They constitute the fringe sects of destruction and diseased ideologies who had to conceal themselves with the cloak of Islam to spread their evil, disrupting the harmony of Islam. The khawarij (dissenters) are among those who appeared in the first century on the Islamic calendar and whom the Prophet peace be upon him warned against in his hadith: “There will be those that come after me who will read the Qur’an but it does not go past their throats. They leave Islam like a spear leaves a prey, and they never return to it. They are the worst of the creations.” Extremism in Modern Times The majority of Muslims do not subscribe to extremist ideologies and theological perversions, which is why extremists find themselves constantly challenged, striving in every era to increase their small number and expand on their fringe positioning. Consequently, extremists have always tended to overtly gather to protect and pass their distorted views to the next generation built on youth. Today the khawarij still exist despite appearing under different names. Like their elders, they pass group-blasphemy to all those outside their sects. They continue to assault, to shed blood and to extort the properties of all those who defy them, the same way their elders did with the sons of the companions of the Prophet. Except today their threat is greater especially when they are not being faced with a unified and prompt ideological counter-offensive. The khawarij of today follow the same concepts of their elders resulting in copycat acts of terror shedding the blood of the rulers; peoples of states; Imams; contractors; journalists; ambassadors; engineers; doctors; farmers; craftsman, and old and young males and females. They call upon peoples to dissent against the leaders by way of revolutionary coup d’états and armed revolts, to hit at the infrastructure of governments and to kill its soldiers and police officers. If people refuse their calls, they apostatize them and shed their blood and extort their properties; leading to the bombing of civilian buses and to planting explosives at airports, trains, public roads. Previously they have even destroyed mosque minarets with the praise of some locals. One of their speakers here in Sydney said on a local radio station about such killing that includes the likes of people in the police force: “It’s as permissible to us as drinking water”. Let us not forget the killing and slaughtering of the kids in East Jordan on the hands of these extremists. Their activist was caught saying: “Do not prevent us from its blessing”, implying he too wanted to contribute to the cowardice slaughtering. Clearly, these and the killing of the innocent are attempts to destroy the reputation of Islam and Muslims. The extremists have killed many people in Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Saudi, Iraq and other places thinking that their killing of those who oppose them is a means of seeking reward from God. Amongst those they’ve killed are: • Sheikh Muhammad ash-Shami:  the Mufti of a village near Aleppo called `Ifrin, • Sheikh Dr. Hussayn adh-Dhahabi: the Minister for Islamic Endowments and an academic at an Islamic College in Egypt. • Sheikh Nizar al-Halabi: the chairman of the Islamic Charity Projects Association in Lebanon. To plainly discover their deviant ideology and unjust reasoning underpinning their acts of terror, one needs only to observe extremists’ books.   Quotes from extremists’ books: • In their book fi dhilal al-Qur’an (In the Shades of the Qur’an) [vol. 3/G8/p.1198] they say: “He who obeys a human in a secular law even if it were partial obedience then this person is a mushrik (idolater) and a blasphemer no matter how emphatically he utters the testifications of faith”. • In the same book [vol. 2/G7/p.1057]: “All humankind in the East and the West inclusive of those who repeat the testifications of faith on the minarets with no indicator or factual happening are deeper in sin and worse in punishment on the Day of Judgment because they have blasphemed for the worship of creations”. • In the same book [vol 3/p.1449] is written: “It is required upon those who are called the Jama`ah al-Islamiyya or the brotherhood group to snatch the reigns of power from the rulers and to destroy their systems and to revolt against them by way of coups throughout the states”. However, historic and contemporary Islamic literature abounds with refutations against deviant sects. Islamic scholars fought and debated them including the great Prophetic companion `Abdullah Ibn `Abbas and the fourth Khalif (successor) Master `Aliy Ibn Abi Talib, followed by the four Sunni schools of thought and their orthodox followers. The four Sunni schools of thought are the highest authority for the Sunnis in refuting this global extremist movement and its aligned groups who falsely claim to be part of the Sunni populace.   Quotes from the four Sunni schools: • The Mufti of the Hanbalis in Mecca Sheikh Muhammad bin `Abdullah bin Hamid (d. 1295 H.) said in his book as-suhub al-wabilah (The Downpouring Clouds) page 276 about the leader of the extremist Wahhabi movement: “If he was contested and refuted and could not overtly kill his contester, he sends a hit man to murder him on his bed or at night in the market place, because he believed in the blasphemy of those who opposed him and the shedding of their blood”. • The Mufti of the Shafi`is in Mecca Sheikh Ahmad Zayni Dahlan (d. 1304 H.) wrote in his book ad-durar as-sunniyyah (The Sunni Gems) about the leader of the extremist Wahhabi movement that he used to say: “And all that is under the seven skies is a mushrik (idolater) fully, and he who kills a mushrik is rewarded with Paradise”. • He (Mufti) also relayed about the Wahhabi leader his statement: “He who enters our way shares our rights and obligations, and he who doesn’t is a blasphemer whose blood is shed and wealth is squandered”. • He also mentioned in his book ‘umara’ al-balad al-haram (The Princes of the Holy Land) that when the Wahhabis entered at-Ta’if they killed the people en mass including the elderly and the children, the honourables, the princes and the layman. They even slaughtered the suckling infants by their mothers’ breasts. They also assaulted the pilgrims to Mecca through extortion and murder. • The Maliki Sheikh Ahmad as-Sawi (d. 1241 H.) mentioned in his commentary on al-Jalalayn [vol.3 p.307-308] about the khawarij who misinterpret the true meanings of the Qur’an and the Prophetic traditions shedding in that the blood of the Muslims as is witnessed today in their localities. They are a sect in the Hijaz region (East Arabia) who are called the Wahhabis, they think they have a legitimate authority but in deed they are the liars who have been deceived by the devil who has made them forget the remembrance of their Lord. Those are the evil satanic sect; in fact the sect of Satan is defeated.”. • Dr Muhammad al-Ghazali (d. 1996) and who was a disciple of Sheikh Hasan al-Banna may Allah have mercy on him mentioned in his book min ma`alim al-haqq (From the Characteristics of Truth) [p.264]: “Those underground youth were later on a major threat to the group, as they started turning against each other in assassinations until they became a destructive tool for terror in the hands of those who had no true knowledge of Islam and could not be relied upon for the common interest of society”. Hasan al-Banna also said about them before he died that they were not brothers and they were not Muslims. Today, the threat of extremists is escalating and reaching new fronts beyond New York, Madrid, Bali, London and Sharm El-sheikh. They kill unjustly on one hand and call themselves ‘the Salafy Group’ on the other hand. But, no two concepts can be more polarised. They hide behind the banner of Jihad and martyrdom and under the veil of Islam. The fact of the matter remains that Islam is against them and against their evil acts. Refuting them is an Islamic obligation and diffusing them should be a way of life for the true Muslim.   Remedies and Solutions The war against extremism is a systematic war which has to be accompanied with preventative measures which include: • Satisfying the need for Islamic scholars, Sheikhs and Islamic religious workers who remain at the forefront of the line of defence against them. • To continue training new religious workers and Sheikhs with the know hows and the rebuttal documents enabling them to expose extremism and its proponents. • To expose those in the public arena so that they cannot continue to find access to the general public. • To maintain a media, broadcast and print, that supports rebutting and curtailing extremist acts and undressing their disguise and motives • To encourage Islamic leaders of today to speak out against the modern version of the khawarij in order to prevent them from teaching their ideology through pulpits, mosques, radio stations, satellite channels, schools, public lectures. • To protect the Muslim youth from their danger by preventing access to the extremist books Curtailing extremism should not be limited to security measures, which sometimes defeats the aim. Security measures may sometimes bloat the motives of extremists who act upon a recursive chain of actions and reactions in order to expand their sphere of conflict from one generation to another. Alone it could also attract the attention of some oblivious youth who might grant their sympathy to these extremist groups. Some people have even put a spin on hypocrisy, disguising it as public relation and promotion; thus luring the passive. Such deviant people compete for air time and coverage, while concealing their true identity and motives behind void utterances of peace and moderation. Their private sessions contain the same rants that they distribute in their bookstores claiming to advise the youth towards the right path for salvation. It is also behind doors that they accuse those calling against extremism to be mere agents or informers. It was only recently, when one of them was extolling extremists by saying that if it weren’t for them “Allah would have sunk the Earth from underneath us” and he called those carrying out suicidal attacks “martyrs”. Consequently, continued learning about Islam and application becomes a necessity for differentiation.   The conclusion is framed in what the trustworthy Prophet peace be upon him said: “Allah rewards for gentleness what He does not reward for violence” [related by Muslim and others]. Clearly, the onus is upon all Muslims to resolve this phenomenon, each through his informed area of expertise and with as much capacity as one could bear. Muslims in Australia and abroad following the orthodox teachings of Islam condemn all forms of terrorism, extremism and social destruction. Thus, it is essential to conquer terrorism and its kin, that governments, nations and the media differentiate between Muslims and terrorists and to further promote that there is no relation between Islam, terrorism and extremism. To execute this objective Muslims throughout the world and particularly in Australia should assert their moderate stand loudly, empowered by textual and logical proofs. They must restate that they are not the ones who exchange conviction for positions, and are not those who disregard the true Islamic fatwa for any agenda or program. Counselling against extremists cannot be achieved only by statements and words, but has to be accompanied with a continuous effort in order to eradicate this social dilemma and save nations and its peoples from its danger. This work requires qualified and diligent individuals trained in deflating the calls of the named al-Jama`ah al-Islamiyyah, the Wahhabis and Hizbut-Tahrir.

Related articles

• Saudis say No to the Prophet Muhammad, Yes to Paris Hilton – Blog: What Would Muhammad Do? (religionnews.com)
• Innocence of Muslims participants sentenced to death in Egypt (guardian.co.uk)
• Op-ed | Ignorance breeds hatred: I am not a terrorist (tuftsdaily.com)
• Top 10 Misconceptions in Islam (islamolife.wordpress.com)

The Silence of Feminists as Islamic Women Suffer and Die

Feminists dally as Islamic women die

• by: Ida Lichter

LAST Wednesday, Afghan girl Mah Gulwas beheaded on the instruction of family because she rejected prostitution. Fifteen-year-old Malala Yousufzai, was shot in the head by Pakistani Taliban gunmen in the Swat Valley because she campaigned for women’s secular education. Absence of outrage by Muslim leaders is shameful but why are so many Western feminists silent?

In Swat, the Pakistani Taliban systematically restricted girls’ education. During 2008, they destroyed about 150 private schools and converted others into madrassas, or religious seminaries. Government schools were closed down, teachers murdered, acid was thrown on to the faces of schoolgirls, and several officials were beheaded.

A local Islamist leader explained: “Female education is against Islamic teachings and spreads vulgarity in society.”

The attack on Malala and two companions on a school bus has shocked Pakistan, especially in view of the bloody war in Swat fought by the army in 2009 to unseat the Taliban and enforce national law. In Pakistan, more than half the adult population is illiterate and in rural Sindh and Balochistan, female literacy rates are less than 2 per cent. Honour killings, bartering of women for land and animals, domestic violence and rape are endemic.

Female politicians have not always supported women’s rights. When prime minister, Benazir Bhutto appointed women to the High Court but made no significant changes to discriminatory laws and assisted the Taliban. In Afghanistan, women have made great strides over the past 10 years; education was established, and three million girls now attend school. International women’s rights groups helped expose Afghan Taliban abuse and develop the new constitution for the transitional Afghan government; but the mainstream movement, with some exceptions such as the Feminist Majority Foundation, has not fought consistently for the rights of Afghan women.

Many intellectual feminists value cultural practice but as Afghan women’s rights activist Sima Samar asserted, this respect does not apply to traditions that oppress women and violate human rights. Some feminists have joined an unholy alliance with political Islam, disregarding the oppression of women and homosexuals in favour of overarching aims to rid the world of colonialism, neo-colonialism and capitalism.

Today, support of the international feminist movement is particularly urgent. In Tunisia, a woman who was allegedly raped is facing an “immorality” charge and possible prison sentence.

Salafist leaders in Egypt are calling for changes to the draft constitution, so that Article 2 will affirm Islamic sharia as the main source of legislation rather than the principle of state law. Moreover, article 36 prescribes gender equality only if it does not contravene sharia. Egyptian women activists are campaigning for removal of sharia references in the draft constitution, as well as extreme demands from Salafists.

Pressing for basic women’s rights in Pakistan and Afghanistan is part of a regional challenge and should be a priority for Western feminists. Instead, many tolerate sexist violence in the area and subjugation of women through customary law and religious legislation mandated by the state. While they continue to ignore Islamist misogyny, feminists are dallying while their Muslim sisters burn.

Ida Lichter is the author of Muslim Women Reformers: Inspiring Voices Against Oppression

Related articles

• Malala Yousufzai: Pakistani schoolgirl had defied threats from Taliban for years (+video) (csmonitor.com)
• Attack on Malala Yousafzai strengthens resolve of Pakistani schoolgirls- #VAW #gender #justice #taliban (kractivist.wordpress.com)
• As world helps shot Pakistani girl, Afghans ask “what about us?” (vancouverdesi.com)
• Girl’s courage, Taliban’s cowardice (cnn.com)
• Sen. Dianne Feinstein: Malala Tragedy Reveals Plight of AfPak Girls (huffingtonpost.com)
• Friends of Pakistani girl shot by Taliban vow ‘never to be subdued by militants’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• Pakistan is caught between two evils – US drones and the Taliban they help prop up (mondoweiss.net)

Conservative Islamist Fanatic Seeks Death of Crippled Girl

Rao Abdur Raheem: The Militant Lawyer Who Wants Disabled Christian Girl Dead

‎Via:-| Richard Bartholomew

From the Guardian:

A lawyer representing the man who accused a Pakistani Christian girl of blasphemy has said that if she is not convicted, Muslims could “take the law into their own hands”.

Rao Abdur Raheem cited the example of Mumtaz Qadri, the man who last year shot dead a politician who had called for reform of the much-abused blasphemy law.

…Raheem said he had taken on the case for free because he was convinced that Masih should be punished. “This girl is guilty. If the state overrides the court, then God will get a person to do the job,” he said.

I’ve written about Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, and their baleful consequences, previously. The current case, however, is particularly egregious; the accused girl, Rimsha Masih, reportedly has a learning disability. Raheem, however, is unconcerned about this: her medical assessement, he claims, was “illegal” and should not be taken into consideration.

In December 2010, Raheem created a self-described “lawyers’ forum”, called the Movement to Protect the Dignity of the Prophet; according to the New York Times, the group produced a petition in support of Qadri which was signed by a 1,000 lawyers in Islamabad and Rawalpindi. Members of the group also reportedly ”greeted Mr. Qadri’s… court appearances by throwing rose petals”. The NY Times noted:

…The lawyers’ stance is perhaps just the most glaring expression of what has become a deep generational divide tearing at the fabric of Pakistani society, and of the broad influence of religious conservatism — and even militancy — that now exists among the educated middle class.

They are often described as the Zia generation: Pakistanis who have come of age since the 1980s, when the military dictator, Gen. Mohammad Zia ul-Haq, began to promote Islam in public education and to use it as a political tool to unify this young and insecure nation.

Raheem has also turned his attention to the internet and the US embassy; the Express Tribune reported in May that:

Margalla police station registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Facebook and three other websites under sections 295-A and 298-A of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) on the directions of Additional Sessions Judge Kamran Basharat Mufti. The application had been submitted by the Namoos-e-Risalat Lawyers Forum (NRLF).

One of the complainants, Advocate Rao Abdur Rahim, told The Express Tribune that they had been informed in July 2011 that Facebook and a few other websites had been posting ‘blasphemous’ posts on their websites and the material was being uploaded from inside Pakistan.

…”We gave three applications: one against Payam TV for telecasting a movie ‘Yousaf’, one against Facebook and three other websites and one against the US embassy in Islamabad for organising a gathering of gays and lesbians,” the petitioner said.

Yousaf is actually an Urdu television serial, telling the Koranic version of the story of the Biblical Joseph. Episodes can be found on YouTube.

Raheem has a Facebook page, consisting for the most part of jpegs of urdu documents. His group also has a Facebook page, under the spelling “Namos E Risalat Lawyers“, where a booklet in support of Pakistan’s blasphemy law has been posted. Hypocritically, both pages carry material condemning the violence of militant Buddhist monks in Burma (a subject I looked at here).

There’s also a YouTube channel related to the group, under the name “nrlfp50″ (The booklet on the group’s Facebook page includes a reference to a website, “nrlfp.com”, which is currently defunct). One of the videos posted is footage of a rally in support of the murderer Qadri:

UPDATE (2 September): Rimsha had been handed over to the police by a local imam; the AFP reported on 24 August:

Hafiz Mohammed Khalid Chishti, the imam of the mosque in the Islamabad suburb of Mehrabad, insisted he had saved the girl, Rimsha, from mob violence by handing her to police but said the incident arose because Muslims had not stopped local Christians’ “anti-Islam activities” earlier.

Yesterday, it was reported that Chishti “has called for the law to be followed to its conclusion, even if that means the girl is executed”. However, his enthusiasm for having alleged blasphemers executed may perhaps now have cooled somewhat:

Hafiz Mohammed Khalid Chishti appeared in court on Sunday after witnesses claimed to have seen him adding pages of the Qur’an to a bag of ashes Rimsha Masih had been carrying away for disposal last month in order to strengthen the case against her.

…Tahir Naveed Chaudhry from the All Pakistan Minority Committee said it had always maintained that evidence was planted on her.

“And now it is proved that the whole story was only designed to dislocate the Christian people,” he said. “He must be prosecuted under the blasphemy law as it will set a precedent against anyone else who tries to misuse that law.”

Rao’s bloodlust, though, remains undiminished:

“Our case is totally separate from the case against Chishti,” he said. “The man who accused him of adding pages from the Qur’an also confirmed that Rimsha burned a book containing verses from the Qur’an.”

Related articles

• Rao Abdur Raheem: The Militant Lawyer Who Wants Disabled Christian Girl Dead (barthsnotes.com)
• Pakistan blasphemy case: ‘Muslims could take law into their own hands’ (guardian.co.uk)
• Pakistani mullah accused of trying to frame girl in blasphemy case (guardian.co.uk)
• Cleric held in blasphemy case – iAfrica.com (news.iafrica.com)
• Blasphemy case: Pak imam held for ‘implicating’ Christian girl- #Rimshacase (kractivist.wordpress.com)
• Delay in Pakistan blasphemy case (edition.cnn.com)
• Pakistani mullah ‘planted charred texts’ on girl accused of blasphemy (guardian.co.uk)
• Pakistani Imam Faces Blasphemy Charge – Sky News (news.sky.com)
• Pakistani cleric Chisti may face blasphemy charges (arabtimesonline.com)
• Talk of violence against Rimsha worries her lawyer (hopeforthisworld.wordpress.com)

Iran: Female Blogger Receives 50 Lashes

Iran: Female Blogger Receives 50 Lashes

Posted 15 September 2011 23:41 GMT

Written byFred Petrossian

These are the words Iranian blogger Somayeh Tohidloo wrote [fa] in her blog after receiving 50 whip lashes in Evin Prison on September 14, 2011:

Be happy, for if you wanted to humiliate me, I confess that I feel my entire body is suffering with degradation.

Somayeh Tohidloo

Somayeh was active during the 2009 presidential election in the campaign for Mir Hussein Mousavi, and she was jailed for 70 days in 2009, after a mass protest movement erupted in Iran. She was released after paying bail, but the flogging sentence was eventually upheld.

Green City writes [fa]:

Here is Iran, where Somayeh Tohidloo, a PhD-graduate is lashed while a $3 billion dollar fraud [over a Lake Urmia] happens, and nothing is done to punish the fraudulent acts.

Related articles

• Female Blogger Receives 50 Lashes (sandmaxprime.wordpress.com)
• 10 Questions for Ahmadinejad (thedailybeast.com)