Tag Archives: fatwa

Gimme Boob!

Don’t laugh, this is serious:

احتدم جدل بين علماء دين في مصر ووصل إلى البرلمان بعد فتوى لرئيس قسم الحديث بجامعة الأزهر، تبيح ‘’إرضاع الكبير’’، في وقت انتقدت صحف عدة تدريس كتاب في هذا القسم يؤكد أن الإرضاع يحلل الخلوة بين رجل وامرأة غريبة عنه في مكاتب العمل المغلقة، بحسب موقع ‘’العربية.نت’’.
الوقت – ١٨ مايو ٢٠٠٧

What that little gem above states that a brainfartist at Al-Azhar, that “islamic university” which has imprisoned Kareem due to what they categorise as blasphemous comments on his blog which scorned the greatest and last religion on Earth, has done much more to completely insult our religion – you know, the one they are sworn to protect? – by a brainfart of a fatwa (or as we say in colloquial Bahraini – and this is a literal translation of the “fart” part of the phrase: faswa) – which is supposed to help women who share offices with male colleagues. This is in the same stream of “elevating women and putting them on a pedestal” of course.

What the right dishonourable twat issued his fatwa that should a woman share an office with a male colleague, which is haram (verboten, forgetaboutit, nowayjosé, gostraighttohellanddonotpassgo), as unmarried males and females should not mix, she must be accompanied with a chaperon, or she should breast feed that adult male five times in order for their unchaperoned existence together be Islamically lawful, halal!

How about that for flexibility? Who said that Islam was a rigid religion?

Now. I would not be surprised that men all over the Muslim world standing erect while a queue of women pass by, boobs hanging out and breast feeding the line in order to protect their rights and allow them to live in a halal environment with men.

Islam – according to the respected Al-Azhar, that edifice of education and protector of our religion and spreader of blaspheming law suits, not only condones this sort of behavior, but encourages heads of departments to research and produce this sort of edict!

The lesser of two evils

Yousif Al-Qardawi“What should citizens do if they are ruled by a dictator, who ruled with an iron fist, fire, prisons, torture, and death, when a foreigner comes and removes that dictator for them… should the citizens stand with the dictator and fight the foreigner, or should they welcome the foreigner who rid them of the despot?”

Yousif Qardawi’s answer: “Their duty is to fight the foreigner and be patient with rule of the dictator as that is the lesser of the two evils”

The question and answer was in Monday’s Al-Jazeera program “The Shari’ah and Life[arabic, link broken] which is a live on-air program. There is no doubt in my mind that this question has been prepared and discussed prior to going on air.

One might ask the question: What has this question got to do with such a religious program in the first place? Isn’t this question more of a political one? What has a self-professed religious scholar has to do with politics here? And as Saeed Al-Hamad asks in this morning’s Al-Ayam Newspaper: how would the simpletons who watch these religious programs get out of it other than they are listening to the gospel truth, considering that the words come from one of the “leaders” of Islamic thought? Would they be able to question the distinction between Islam the religion, and Islam the politics?


What they would understand from these wise words however is that they’ve got to pack their bag and hitch a ride to Iraq to wreak even more havoc in that turbulent country. Thus, shedding their blood as well as goodness knows how many other hapless souls.

I am at a loss in trying to reconcile his effective edict, for a very renowned scholar, a supposedly learned person, how can things be so black and white in his mind? Even more important how can he simply stand with someone like Saddam Hussain simply because that dictator has always professed his Islam as a means and an excuse to stay in power? How can Qardawi forgive Saddam’s (and his ilk, of which we have many in these environs) atrocious sins against man and beast?

Is Islam that simple that it requires oppressed people to stand with their oppressor simply because he professes Islam? And resolutely refuse any helping hand when extended simply because it belongs to a non-muslim?

To me taking such a stance is simply outrageous. And this principle espoused by someone who owns the ears of millions of muslims is not only troubling, but outright criminal.

The only way to avert more brainfarts like Qardawis, is for our governments – if they are serious about fighting terrorism – is to ban any and all such “religious” programs, especially if they call for direct, instant and unthought of edicts being aired, live, to unsuspecting and believing ears.

shaikhs of death

The signatories describe those who use religion for inciting violence as “the sheikhs of death�. Among those mentioned by name is Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian preacher working in Qatar. The signatories accuse him of “providing a religious cover for terrorism.� Last year Qaradawi raised a storm when he issued a fatwa allowing the killing of Israeli pregnant women and their unborn babies on the ground that the babies could grow up to join the Israeli Army. Last September, Qaradawi in a fatwa in response to a question from the Egyptian Union of Journalists said killing “all Americans, civilian or military� in Iraq was allowed.

via PM’s World

It’s clear that there is a huge backlash against extremists in the Arab and Muslim worlds. This sort of denunciation would never have happened in the 80s and 90s, but now I think finally people are fed up with these bozos and about time too.