| Africa North | |
| Azhar scholars support handshake with Perez | |
| 2008-12-20 | |
Members of The Islamic Research Center at al-Azhar University issued a statement in support of the Grand Imam's handshake with Israeli president Shimon Peres in a U.N. sponsored religious dialogue, which stirred outrage in Egypt and triggered calls for the Imam's dismissal.
"His irresponsible stance violated all al-Azhar laws, which criminalize dealing with Israel," he said. "And his appearance in a TV interview declaring that he does not care about an issue as important as the siege of Gaza proves his indifference towards what's happening in the Muslim world." | |
| Link |
| Olde Tyme Religion |
| Media Uproar Mohammeds (Pee Be Upon You) followers drank his urine. |
| 2007-06-19 |
| from MEMRI.. EFL The uproar is not because its false information, but because its true and embarrassing apparently in "this day and age" -unlike pedaeophilia. An uproar in the Egyptian media followed the recent publication of a book by Egyptian Mufti Dr. Ali Gum'a in which he claimed that the companions of the Prophet Muhammad would drink his urine to be blessed. The fatwa provoked strong objections on the part of the Egyptian religious establishment. Leading Al-Azhar and Religious Endowments Ministry officials stated that Gum'a's conclusions were mistaken even though they were based on Islamic sources. They added that his claims were inappropriate for the modern era and that they only caused embarrassment in the Egyptian street and did damage to the Prophet and to Islam. There was an outcry against the fatwa from the Egyptian public, and a complaint was filed against Gum'a demanding that he stand trial for harming Islam, the Prophet, and the Companions of the Prophet. Columnists in the Egyptian papers ridiculed the fatwa and protested against it: While some argued that there was no point in raising such issues from the past that had nothing to do with public life today, others stated that the fatwa was for Islamic scholars, not for the masses, and still others said that it was a tool for those who sought to harm Islam. Some also called on Gum'a to resign from his post as the Mufti of Egypt. While according to some reports Gum'a had apologized for the fatwa, in actuality he clarified that he had not apologized, but had only decided to remove the book from the market and to refrain from appearing in the media until the uproar subsided. The following are a summary of the fatwa and excerpts from responses to it in the Egyptian press: Egyptian Mufti: The Companions of the Prophet Blessed Themselves with His Urine, Sweat and Saliva In his book Religion and Life - Modern Everyday Fatwas, Egyptian Mufti Dr. Ali Gum'a wrote that the companions of the Prophet Muhammad would bless themselves by drinking his urine, and described an incident of urine-drinking from a hadith: "Umm Ayman drank the urine of the Prophet, and the prophet told her: 'This stomach will not be dragged through the fire of Hell, because it contains something of our Lord the Messenger of Allah...' [1] "This blessing," Al-Gum'a added, "[can also] be done with the honorable saliva, sweat, hair, urine or blood of the Prophet. This is because anyone who knows the love of the Messenger of Allah is not repulsed [by these]; just as a mother is not repulsed by the feces of her son, this is even more so [in the case of] our Lord the Messenger of Allah, whom we love more than our fathers, sons, and wives. Anyone who was or is repulsed by the Messenger of Allah must recant his faith." [2] Following the ensuing uproar, Gum'a came to the defense of his fatwa, saying: "The entire body of the Prophet, whether exposed or hidden, is pure, and there is nothing in it- including his secretions - that [can] repulse anyone. His sweat smelled better than perfume. Umm Haram would collect this sweat and distribute it to the people of Al-Madina." [3] Dr. Gum'a added: "The hadith of Suhail bin Omar at Al-Hudaybiya says: 'Oh Lord, I was with Kisra [the ruler of Persia] and with Kaisar [the ruler of Byzantium] and I saw no instance in which the leader was glorified like the Companions of the Prophet glorified Muhammad. The second Muhammad spat, one of them would immediately hasten [to grab his saliva] and smear it upon his face.' Hence, the ulema, including Ibn Hajar Al-Askalani, Al-Baihaqi, Al-Daraqutni and Al-Haythami, determined that the Prophet's entire body was pure." [4] Several weeks later, the Egyptian press reported that Gum'a had apologized following objections to the fatwa voiced by the Academy of Islamic Research at Al-Azhar, and that he had promised, at the request of Al-Azhar Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, to have all copies of the book containing the fatwa taken off the market. [5] Later on, he explained that he had not apologized, but had only decided to refrain from appearing on the satellite television channels until the uproar died down. ... see article for more on the developing scandal of the century. This cult justs gets sicker and sicker the more ya learn. |
| Link |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Karen Hughes Plays Sorority Sister On Middle East "Listening Tour" |
| 2005-09-30 |
| The president's confidante has been on a "listening tour" to "start a conversation with the rest of the world" â namely, the Muslim world, beginning with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey â but there were too many times when she just didn't know what to say. The poor gal appears to be in way over her head. Is there another Bolton on the bench? A Washington Post anecdote from day one captures the disconnect. Asked in Egypt whether she was going to meet with the Muslim Brotherhood, the opposition party banned by Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak with deep roots in terrorism and a catchy motto ("Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope"), Hughes "turned to an aide and indicated she was not sure of the answer. The aide whispered back, and Hughes replied, 'We are respectful of Egypt's laws.'" I guess that means no, but the non-denial denial is open to interpretation. Maybe she wanted to meet with the Muslim Brotherhood, but couldn't. Or maybe she didn't want to say something as harshly non-conversational as "no" because the popular MB might be elected one of these days. Or maybe she just didn't know. But worse than not knowing what to say is saying too much. Or saying the wrong thing. Or even saying anything at all. Hughes committed all of the above, a faux-pas trifecta, after meeting with Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University, the academic center of Sunni Islam. It was a "wonderful meeting," she explained, because the two of them were able to talk "about the common language of the heart." Oh, brother. Is this an Under Secretary of State or a sorority sister? Hughes burbled on about the leadership of Al-Azhar "in speaking out against extremism, against terrorism, (which) is not in keeping with the tenets of Islam" â natch. The sheikh "made the point that all divine religions are built on a spirit of love," she said, "and (that) it is important that all of us work together to fight extremism, to fight terrorism." What a guy. Hearing Hughes talk about Sheikh Tantawi, you could almost forget what he said in 2002, as translated from a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), when he called on Palestinian Muslims to "intensify the martyrdom operations against the Zionist enemy" â men, women and children â and described the barbarous slaughter as "the highest form of Jihad operations" and "a legitimate act according to (Islamic) law." Maybe that's the "spirit of love" Hughes was gushing about. Then there was what Sheikh Tantawi said in 2003, also reported by MEMRI, when he called for jihad against U.S. forces in Iraq. "Jihad is an obligation for every Muslim when Muslim countries are subject to aggression," he explained. "The gates of Jihad are open until the Day of Judgment, and he who denies this is an infidel or one who abandons his religion." This he said during a sermon at â where else? â Al-Azhar. I juxtapose Hughes' hearts-and-flowers assessment with the hate-and-fanaticism reality for a reason. Obviously, the resources available to me â the invaluable MEMRI Web site â are available to the State Department. I find it difficult to believe that Hughes or her advisors were unaware of the jihadist incitement Sheikh Tantawi is prone to, even though he's also on record with contradictory statements. Why did the Bush administration determine that this meeting was in the best interests of our nation? If the war on terror â always a PC punch-pulling moniker â is turning into the accommodation of terror, maybe it makes sense to make nice. There is, actually, a long tradition of such accommodation between the non-Muslim world and the Muslim world, and it is contained within the blighted history of "dhimmitude." This is the term coined by historian Bat Ye'or to describe the institutionalized inferiority of non-Muslims (dhimmi) under Muslim rule. Hughes' paying tribute to the likes of Sheikh Tantawi is dhimmi behavior. As is, frankly, the whole "listening tour" â an ill-conceived campaign to improve Uncle Sam's "image" with a Muslim world whose opposition to a viable Israel and a free Iraq is hardly skin deep. Personally, I'd like to see a "like it or lump it tour." But that, of course, would mean keeping up the fight. |
| Link |