In an article posted on Bakkah.net, the Salafi scholar Richardson said, “In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo incident in Paris, France, a number of self-appointed spokesmen for Islam have appeared in Western media. From the most deviant and ignorant of them is a UK-based supporter of the beliefs and practices of the Khawaarij Cult, Anjem Choudary. In his interviews and writings, he has attributed the following fabrication to the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace): ‘Whoever insults a Prophet, kill him'”.

The scholar technically explained why the narration is fabricated.

He said, “With the wording, ‘Whoever insults the prophets…’ it was collected by at-Tabaraanee in his al-Mu’jam al-Awsat and al-Mu’jam as-Sagheer, with Ubaydullaah ibn Muhammad al-Umaree in the chain, a man whom the scholars of hadeeth identify as a liar”.

“Ibn Hajr referred to this narration specifically as one of his contradictions to what is authentic. Al-Albaanee in research Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth ad-Dha’eefah graded it ‘Mawdoo’ which means fabricated”, he added. “With the wording, ‘Whoever insults a prophet…’ it was also collected by Tammaam ar-Raazee in his Fawaa’id (no.740), with Husayn ibn Humayd in the chain, another known liar”.

Richardson said that it’s punishable offense in the Muslim countries to disrespect the Prophet which can even lead to capital punishment in some cases, however this does not mean that Muslims have the right to defend those who violate the law by acting as judges, juries, and executioners without following the proper procedures.

It is also significant to note that it is impossible to uphold the Prophet’s honor by attributing lies to him. And how absolutely ironic it is that those who support and defend the deviant Khawaarij Cult’s doctrine would fabricate hadith about the Prophet, he wrote.

Richardson is a graduate from Saudi Arabia’s Umm al-Qura University in Makkah. He received his degree from the Da’wah Faculty. His teachers (outside of his academic education at university) are, Shaykh Rabee Ibn Hadee al-Madkhalee, Shaykh Muhammad Bazmool, and others. Currently, Richardson lives in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where he works as an Imam at al-Masjid al-Awwal (The First Muslim Mosque).

As the matter of fact, the Jewish people are cousins to Muslims, but the base of this vile propaganda is to incite Muslims in general, that those who aren’t even Arabs and those who don’t belong to the family of Prophet Mohammed, have taken control of their two holy places.

However, it’s as clear as a day that Al-Saud family and Prophet Mohammed belong to the same great grand father Adnan who was the descendent of Prophet Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hager.

The family tree of Prophet Mohammed is: Mohammed son of Abdullah, son of Abdul-Mutallib, son of Hashim, son of Abdulmanaf, son of Qusay, son of Kilab, son of Murrah, son of Kaab, son of Fihr, son of Kinanah, son of Khuzaimah, son of Mudrikah, son of Ilyas, son of Mudar, son of Nizar, son of Maad, son of Adnan.

The ancestor of Al-Saud family was Mani Bin Rabiah Al-Muraydi who settled in Diriyah in 1446–1447 with his clan. Al-Muraydi belongs to the tribal confederates of children of Hanifah. Hanifah was son of Afsa, son of Dumiyy, son of Jadilah, son of Anazah, son of Asad, son of Rabiah, son of Nizar, son of Maad, son of Adnan.

On the other hand, the 18th century revivalist Imam Mohammed bin Abdulwahab bin Sulaiman At-Tamimi, who helped Mohammed bin Saud establish a Kingdom based on unitarian Islamic beliefs, belonged to the Tamim tribe which eventually confluences with Banu Adnan.

In short, whether its the ruling Aal-e-Saud family or the religious Aal-e-Sheikh family of Saudi Arabia. They are pure Arabs from the progeny of Ishmael son of Abraham.

Guests

1 – Irina Tsukerman. She is a New York-based Human Rights Lawyer and National Security Analyst. She is also a Media and Security consultant. Irina writes and speaks on human rights voilations of the Iran-backed Houthi militias in Yemen. She extensively speaks on Iranian mullah regime’s catasrophic agenda in the MiddleEast.

2 – Sharon Collins. She is a Florida-based Independent Political Analyst and Researcher, mainly focused on Middle East Affairs. She also visited Saudi Arabia and stayed in the Kingdom.

3 – Rabbi Enchanan Poupko. He is a New York-based Jewish Rabbi or Scholar. He is also a TEDx speaker. He participates in interfaith discussions to bride gap between the Muslims and Jews.

4 – Mohammed Abbasi. He is a London-based coach, speaker and writer. He is director of Association of British Muslims. He works for Football for Peace. He is a great fan of Sun Tzu, and in fact he teaches the art of war.

Moderator

Zahack is a Saudi-based Non Resident Indian (NRI). He founded The Milli Chronicle in September 2018, which mainly focuses on MENA affairs. Zahack has been working on a non-commercial basis to publish the works of notable researchers and Think-Tank groups.

YouTube Link.

Vilks, 75, who had been living under police protection since the drawings were published, was travelling in a police vehicle which collided with a truck. Two police officers were also killed.

“This is a very tragic incident. It is now important to all of us that we do everything we can to investigate what happened and what caused the collision,” Swedish police said in a statement on Monday.

“Initially, there is nothing that points to anyone else being involved.”

Most Muslims consider any depiction of the founder of Islam as offensive.

Riyadh Police’s spokesperson Major Khaled Al-Kraidis said, “Someone posted a video clip on social media containing content insulting the Mother of the Believers, Aisha, and offensive towards the Prophet.”

“Security forces arrested the man who is in his 30s”, Major Kuraidis added. “The arrested citizen was referred to the Public Prosecution for completing the legal procedures against them”.

Insulting the Islamic faith, its symbols, and its figures is deemed as one of the red lines in the Kingdom.

Anyone found guilty of committing such crimes will be subjected to a fine of 3 Million Saudi Riyals or jail term for 5 years.

Entrusting one’s affairs to Allah, may He be exalted, means relying on Allah alone.

Allah, may He be exalted, tells us the story of the believer of the household of Pharaoh and what he said to his people: “‘And you will remember what I [now] say to you, and I entrust my affair to Allah. Indeed, Allah is Seeing of [His] servants.’ So Allah protected him from the evils they plotted, and the people of Pharaoh were enveloped by the worst of punishment”. [Quran 40:44-45].

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The words of Allah, may He be exalted, in this passage: “ ‘…and I entrust my affair to Allah. Indeed, Allah is Seeing of [His] servants.’ So Allah protected him from the evils they plotted” clearly indicate that sincerely relying on Allah and entrusting one’s affairs to Him are a means of being protected from all ills.

This verse indicates that Pharaoh and his people wanted to plot against this believer, and that Allah protected him and saved him from the harm of their plotting and scheming to cause trouble to him, because of his reliance upon Allah and his entrusting his affairs to Him. [Reference Adwa’ al-Bayaan (7/96-97)].

This verse is like another verse (interpretation of the meaning): “Those to whom hypocrites said, ‘Indeed, the people have gathered against you, so fear them.’ But it [merely] increased them in faith, and they said, ‘Sufficient for us is Allah , and [He is] the best Disposer of affairs.’ So they returned with favor from Allah and bounty, no harm having touched them. And they pursued the pleasure of Allah , and Allah is the possessor of great bounty”. [Quran 3:173-174].

Entrusting one’s affairs to Allah, may He be exalted, means relying on Allah alone.

At-Tabari (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The words “and I entrust my affair to Allah” mean: I submit my affairs to Allah and leave them to Him, and I rely on Him, for He will suffice the one who puts his trust in Him. [Reference Tafseer at-Tabari (20/335)].

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “and I entrust my affair to Allah” means: and I rely on Allah and seek His help”. [Reference Tafseer Ibn Katheer (7/146)].

Secondly

Entrusting one’s affairs to Allah, may He be exalted, and relying on Him is something that is required in all one’s affairs, both religious and worldly. This is enjoined in many texts, such as the following: “And upon Allah rely, if you should be believers”. [Quran 5:23]

“…and rely upon Allah. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs”. [Quran 4:81]

“And to Allah belong the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth and to Him will be returned the matter, all of it, so worship Him and rely upon Him. And your Lord is not unaware of that which you do”. [Quran 11:123]

“And rely upon the Ever-Living who does not die”. [Quran 25:58].

The point is that entrusting one’s affairs to Allah with regard to raising children means relying on Allah, may He be exalted, and turning to Him to achieve this goal. Entrusting all one’s affairs to Him is something good and is something that one is required to do. Relying on Allah is one of the most important acts of worship.

But relying on Allah and entrusting one’s affairs to Him in the correct sense must be accompanied by taking permissible measures, as is indicated in the hadith of Anas ibn Maalik, who said: A man said: O Messenger of Allah, should I tie up [my camel] and rely on Allah, or should I leave it loose and rely on Him? He said: “Tie it up and rely [on Allah].” [Reference: at-Tirmidhi (2517); classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan at-Tirmidhi (2/610)].

Al-Mubaarakfoori (may Allah have mercy on him) said: With regard to the words “Tie it up”, it says in al-Qaamoos that tying up a camel means hobbling it by tying its foreleg up.

“Rely” means rely on Allah after tying up the camel. “or leave it loose” means leaving it untied.

“He said: ‘Tie it up…’” – al-Minnaawi said: That is, tie up your camel’s foreleg with a rope. “And rely” that is, depend on Allah. That is because tying it up is not contrary to relying on Allah. [Reference Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi (7/186)].

The one who truly relies on Allah takes the prescribed measures, especially if they are obligatory.

Ibn Rajab (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It should be understood that truly relying on Allah does not cancel out taking the measures by means of which Allah, may He be glorified, causes to happen what He has decreed; this is the way that Allah has ordained for His creation, for Allah, may He be exalted, has enjoined us to take measures, yet he has also enjoined us to rely on Him. So striving to take measures is an act of obedience to Him, and relying in our hearts on Him is an act of faith in Him.

Moreover, the deeds that a person does are of three types, one of which is: Acts of obedience that Allah has enjoined upon His slaves and has made the means of salvation from hell and admittance to paradise. These deeds must be done whilst relying on Allah and seeking His help to do them, for there is no power and no strength except in Him; whatever He wills happens and whatever He does not will does not happen.

Whoever falls short in anything that Allah has enjoined upon him is deserving of punishment in this world and in the hereafter. [Reference: Jaami‘ al-‘Uloom wa’l-Hikam (2/498-499)].

Upbringing of children must combine reliance upon Allah, may He be exalted, with taking of appropriate measures and using different valid approaches in child-rearing, as Allah has enjoined. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “O you who have believed, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones, over which are [appointed] angels, harsh and severe; they do not disobey Allah in what He commands them but do what they are commanded”. [Quran 66:6].

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The man is enjoined to instruct his family – such as his wife, children and so on – to do what is right and proper and forbid them to do what is wrong and evil, because Allah, may He be exalted, says “O you who have believed, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire…” And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Each of you is a shepherd, and each of you is responsible for his flock…”. [Reference: Adwa’ al-Bayaan (2/209)].

Who created the Earth, the Sun and the Moon?
Who has given life to a butterfly from the cocoon?

Who has made the seas blue and the fields so green?
Who knows what is apparent and what is unseen?

Who commands the planets to stay firm in their course?
Who strengthens every atom with its unwavering force?

Who transforms a flower from a bud to a bloom?
Who begins life through a heartbeat in the womb?

Who defines the colors of a rainbow in the sky?
Who brings forth life from the earth even when it’s dry?

Who has the power over a leaf before it falls?
Who hears the voice of the servant when he calls?

He is Allah, The One, The Mighty, The Supreme!
Who has made the world for us, nothing but a mere dream.

It is He who we beseech and unto Him is our return.
Only then will we know what we lose and what we earn!

Asma Sadia is a student of Islamic studies based in Sharjah — UAE.

The principle of laïcité, as expressed by Charlie Hebdo’s editor, is not compatible with a human rights approach that respects individual freedoms, including freedom of religion…

Once again, the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo republish controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. The aim to mark the start of a trial of suspected accomplices of the terrorist gunman who attacked Charlie Hebdo offices in January 2015 but turns out its sparking anger across the Islamic world. 

Charlie Hebdo is a satirical weekly magazine that is published in France, which is self-defining as a “secular, political and jubilant” periodical that “draws, writes, interviews, ponders and laughs at everything on this earth, which is ridiculous, giggles at all that is absurd or preposterous in life”. The cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were first published in the Danish daily Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005. These were reprinted by Charlie Hebdo in 2006. 

Widely reported across global media, Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons have been variously interpreted as contentious provocations toward Islam which disregard iconographic norms and thereby ride roughshod over Muslim cultural sensitivities, and/or for depicting Islam in crude, stereotypical, and offensive style. In contrast, other commentators have applauded the magazine, by viewing these cartoons as the expression of universal civic rights of free speech, secularism, and equality.

Laïcité is France’s principle of secularism which means the State and religious organizations are separate. In France, freedom of expression is considered a universal right, while in some countries, even in Israel does not allow offending religious sentiments. The law prohibits illustrating Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed in a way that would hurt the feelings of believers. To the French, this also seems strange because laws limiting freedom of speech were taken off the books at the end of the 18th century.

President Emmanuel Macron said, “There is in France a freedom to blaspheme which is attached to the freedom of conscience. I am here to protect all these freedoms. In France, one can criticize a president and governors”.

The response to the Charlie Hebdo attack has raised the need to better define and articulate what we mean by freedom of expression. Several fundamental misconceptions and blind spots in the discussion on freedom of speech and its limitations have been exposed and require clarification or refutation.

The idea of extending anti-vilification laws to cover religious groups runs into conflict with an extremist view of laïcité. This view sees the principle of laïcité not as a separation between religion and state, but as state-endorsed secularism. Previously, Gérard Biard as Charlie Hebdo’s editor-in-chief, said in 2012 that Charlie Hebdo was an atheist paper, a secularist paper”. He argues that people should recognize that laïcité is perhaps the prime moral value of our Republic and without it, Liberté, Égalité, and Fraternité isn’t possible.

French sociologist and political scientist, Vincent Geisser, explained that Charlie Hebdo is only looking to impose its secular purity by treating everyone else as fanatics”. Charlie Hebdo’s satirizing of Islam in the name of their view of laïcité is, thus, a part of a very real attack not only on religion as an institution but also on people’s right to religious freedom. 

Geisser’s argument can understand that laïcité stands in direct contradiction to the idea of freedom of religion expressed in The United Nations which is recognized under the importance of freedom of religion or belief in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Universal Declaration), Article 18 which states that “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his [her] choice”.

Qur’an strictly prohibits images of Prophet Mohammed. However, Mohammed is a venerated figure among Muslims, who often perceive cartoons and other material critical of him as an attack on their Muslim identity. Hence, the principle of laïcité, as expressed by Charlie Hebdo’s editor, is not compatible with a human rights approach that respects individual freedoms, including freedom of religion. The incompatibility should be more obvious; the fact that it is not pointing to a shortcoming in approach to anti-vilification principles.

The purpose of laws against vilification is to protect the human dignity of individuals. On this basis, criticism of a religious belief must be permitted, but interference with an individual’s right to hold a belief, or to practice their religion, can be prohibited. The distinction can be seen by considering its application to cartoons of Mohammed in more detail.

In general, Freedom of speech is presented as the most significant Western value and the heart of democracy. To sum up, it is a reminder that secular Europeans have their own identity politics, and that these play out in controversies over cartoons, as well. However, insulting Muslims, offending their religious feelings, and vilifying Islam are not just words; it might trigger emotions of extreme dislike, which eventually leads to another conflict. The key is to respect others to get respected. Treat people with respect if you want to be respected.

Try Ananto Wicaksono is a student with two master’s degrees programs in Business Law and Public Policy from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) and School of Government and Public Policy (SGPP) – Indonesia respectively. He also Alumni of Institute for Development of Economics and Finance (INDEF) School of Political Economy (ISPE) Batch 2020. His interest in International Political Economy, International Economic Law and Human Rights.

Islam is above all these imposters and their goal to mislead public sentiments.

Tensions have been mounting between France, led by President Emmanuel Macron, and Turkey, led by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, long before the beheading of the French teacher Samuel Paty by a Chechen teen after discussing offensive Prophet Mohammed cartoons.

France and Turkey have been in conflict over almost all international political matters, most notably they have disputed over the Libyan crisis, and recently the dispute carried over to the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

Last August, France dispatched ships to the Eastern Mediterranean to help Greek warships that were sent to counter Turkish military maneuvers in the Mediterranean waters.

Recently, we have witnessed raging clashes between Macron and Erdogan over maritime rights in the eastern Mediterranean, as well as over crises in Libya and Syria, not to mention the recent dispute over the Nagorno Karabakh region between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

These disagreements between the two countries have turned into a frivolous personal quarrel between Macron and Erdogan. For instance, the Turkish president remarked that Macron needed a mental health check, prompting Macron to respond with an official diplomatic protest.

Erdogan also stated, in a televised interview from the city of Kayseri (located in Central Anatolia), that Macron’s chances in the 2022 presidential elections are not promising.

The French president, who, by the way, is against France’s far-right National Front led by Marine Le Pen and is considered one of the advocates of “coexistence” and liberal values, has made a risky decision to confront the ideology of extremism and terrorism within the French Muslim community, which represents a large percentage of the population in France, including ministers, politicians, athletes and artists.

Before Macron’s era, France has witnessed multiple terrorist attacks by ISIS and al-Qaeda operatives or enthusiasts, including attacks like vehicles plowing into crowds, bombing of streets, civilians, trains and buses, as well as terror attacks in theaters and beaches, long before the Charlie Hebdo magazine incident, and the beheading of the teacher.

There is no denying that France has been suffering from internal crises due to national integration policies, decades before Erdogan and his AK party came to power. We can safely assume that the root of these crises can be traced back to the first waves of immigrants from the French African colonies in particular, such as Algeria, Morocco and Senegal.

While this may be true, it is not the subject of our discussion today. As the lead supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, and an ardent advocate of a new Ottoman Empire, Erdogan’s actions can be interpreted as crude populist political exploitation aimed at mass mobilization. The Turkish president seems to be riding the wave along with those voicing their outrage over Macron’s remarks, as he attempts to appeal to the emotions of Muslim communities by masquerades as a defender of Islam.

What I mean to say, let us consider what would happen if France suddenly agreed to Turkey’s expansionist intervention in Libya, Syria, and the tactical war in Armenia. In my opinion, in this case, I foresee Erdogan going back on his words, and all this hostility towards France will fade away as if nothing had happened!

Allow me to be clearer, defending the cultural image of Islam is a commendable act and a moral duty; however, this defense should be more than mere remarks repeated to the media. Defending Islam begins by presenting the world with a positive view of Muslims and highlighting the true message of Islam as a religion of mercy, tolerance, and noble moral values.

Let us remember that the true defender of Islam, is not the Chechen terrorist, ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Erdogan and Khamenei and their followers.

Islam is above all these imposters and their goal to mislead public sentiments.

Moshari Al-Thaidi is a Saudi-based journalist and writer.

Article first published in Arabic on Asharq Al-Awsat, and translated in English by Al Arabiya Newsagency.

Saudi Press Agency (SPA) quoted Kingdom’s Foreign Ministry as stating, “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia rejects any attempts to link Islam with terrorism and condemns the offensive cartoons of the Prophet of Guidance and the Messenger of Peace Mohammed bin Abdullah, may God bless him and grant him peace, or any of the messengers, peace be upon them”.

“Saudi Arabia condemns all terrorist attacks and rejects all practices and actions that lead to hatred and violence”, the source said.

Kingdom’s stance has come out amidst the growing anger worldwide over French President Emmanuel Macron’s controversial statements about Prophet Mohammed’s caricatures.

A French teacher was beheaded last week by an Islamist after he had shown the cartoons of the Prophet during a class on free speech.

Meanwhile, Saudi social media users on Sunday have called for a boycott of French products. They argue that free speech does not mean to hurt the sentiments of people and incite hatred. They term such free-speech as hate-speech when it does not care the sensitivity of millions of people.

However, the foreign ministry source has not called to boycott the products.