Friday, May 15, 2009

Hilaal Qirat sabotaged by Jamiat molvis

Author of letter unknown

Salaams to all those at Jamiat ul Ulama KZN.

As you know already, On Sunday evening, a Qirat programme was supposed to
take place at Musjid Al Hilaal after Esha. It has come to the attention of the public that Ml Olgar and Ml Mohammedy, both members of Jamiat KZN, sent out sms's to the public asking people t boycott the event as the Egyptian reader did not have a beard.

Ml Olgar also claimed that, had Jamiat offices been open that day, he
would have sent out bulk sms's to everyone on Jamiats database to boycott the
Qirat recital. In their sms, they referred to Sheikh as a faasik. They also threatened to disrupt the event if the organisers at Hilaal didn't cancel the programme.

During a discussion last night, it was mentioned that it is illegal for any public figure to wear a beard in Egypt and Turkey.

Firstly, I would like to know, since when did Ml mohamedy and Ml olgar become The Judge? What right do they have to do such UnIslamic acts. Are they both perfect?
From the day they reached puberty, did they never ever shave or trim their
beards? Have they never missed a single salaat with jamaat in the musjid?
The Egyptians have a gift given to them by our creator and This Sheikh in
particular has a special voice and breath control that Ml olgar and Ml mohammedy put together cant even come close to..

It is very easy to be tough behind an sms, but if these to moulana's have guts, then I challenge them to go to the Host Mr Jadwat and tell him face to face what they felt about Sunday nights programme. The notice for this programme was put up weeks ago, so why did these two moulana's wait till the last minute to disrupt the Qiraat. End of the day, it was meant to happen, and the walls of Musjid al Hilaal heard a spectular recital that will never be heard in Durban for a long time to come.

Finally, I think that Jamiat KZN needs to appologise on behalf of Ml olgar and Ml mohamedy to the untire public of KZN about what took place on Sunday. People came from far and wide to listen to this great reader immediately after Esha. Please make sure that an incident like this never happens again.

Remember that when our Jamaats go out to other countries, we are welcomed by beardless people. We have to go out there and face up to them even though they dont have beards. The TOP BRASS of KZN Jamiat must take action against their employees for their stupid action otherwise any Aalim will do and say whatever he wants in public on behalf of Jamiat KZN.

Moulana's supposed to promote peace, happiness, love and togetherness, yet,your actions are totally opposite. It would be nice to see an appology on the musjid boards of KZN as
everyone is talking about it and false stories are going around. Both these aalims should also publicly apologise.

This message will be sent to various islamic organisations for comments and also to the Dar ul Ulooms for their input. I would also like a response from Jamiat KZN


Author unknown

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Taking On The Wrong Enemy

Taking On The Wrong Enemy
Feb 07, 2006
By Ramzy Baroud

We remind our viewers that the opinions and points of view expressed in this article are those of the author and shall not be deemed to mean that they are necessarily those of Jihad Unspun, the publisher, editor, writers, contributors or staff.

Only an irresponsible and intellectually inept individual would sketch such insulting images as those depicting Prophet Mohamed by a cartoonist in the Danish Jyllands-Posten newspaper. And no self-respecting newspaper would allow itself to run such filth. However, the backlash in the Muslim world highlights a much more serious issue.

Jyllands-Posten - and another newspaper in Norway that re-ran the offensive cartoons - is obviously neither self-respecting nor serious. What good will it do to depict a prophet revered by hundreds of millions all around the globe as a terrorist, carrying a bomb under his turban? Nothing at all. What it will do though, is intensify and cement the feelings of bitterness and humiliation experienced by millions of Muslims as they endure the wrath of US-led Western wars, with all of their tragedies and endless bloodshed.

Not even the handy excuse of freedom of the press is so reasonable a defence to the mockery. Such freedom should not be the kind of versatile pretext unleashed only to widen the divide between the West and the Muslim world. Moreover, why not admit that in most Western societies, there are many unquestionable values, ancient and recent, that are taboo, which few dare to approach, the Holocaust being one of them.

But it's not the Western media's inconsistencies that I wish to focus on here. What I wish to examine are the inconsistencies of the Arab and Muslim collective response to aggression, tangible or otherwise.

The anti-Danish movement managed to build up across Muslim countries at such an impressive speed: grassroots collective action and decisive political moves led by various governments -- with Libya and Saudi Arabia on the helm -- quickly turned into determined diplomatic efforts. Arab League missions in Denmark and across Europe united in one of the most coordinated campaigns organized by Arabs since the 1973 War, heaping even more pressure on both Denmark and Norway. Meanwhile, a serious economic boycott campaign is rapidly translating into empty shelves in grocery stores that once offered Danish products across Saudi Arabia and other countries.

The Danish prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, although he didn't apologize personally, commended Jyllands-Posten for offering a clear apology for offending Muslims and Muslim nations for its editorial decision to publish the cartoons. But that would not suffice in the face of the gathering storm, as Arab League representatives are surely taking the matter to the United Nations, with the hope of passing a UN resolution, backed by sanctions that would protect religion from insults, according to the BBC.

While one must commend such a unified Arab and Muslim stance -- hoping that it would remain confined to legitimate forms of protest -- one cannot help but wonder where was such collectiveness when it was needed the most?

This is not to suggest that transgression on a people's beliefs -- any people and any belief -- should be taken lightly. However, if Arabs can be so efficient in organizing such popular (and effective) campaigns that utilize economic, political and diplomatic leverage to extract concessions, then why the utter failure to carry out such campaigns protesting against the US war on Iraq, its unconditional support of Israel and its condescending foreign policy and grand democracy charades it wishes to impose on everyone?

Isn't it rather strange that cheap Israeli products are penetrating Arab markets from Morocco to Qatar in the most blatant of ways, despite the fact that Israel occupies land belonging to three Arab nations?

Isn't it peculiar that Muslim countries are shrewdly paving their way towards normalization with Israel -- some overtly like Pakistan, others sneakily like Malaysia -- despite the fact that Israel unabashedly moves forward with its policy of targeted assassination, killing hundreds of Palestinians?

And how belligerent could the Danish media be if compared to its counterparts in the United States and Britain? Nonetheless, is there one Arab household that lacks access to CNN, HBO and Fox?

It's rather ironic that many in the Arabic media discovered by total chance that 530 Danish soldiers are taking part in the illegitimate US war on Iraq, by way of the Danish newspaper controversy. Thus, it cannot even be claimed that popular response to the insulting comics was the culmination of years of resentment harbored towards Danish foreign policy, whether in Iraq or towards any other Arab or Muslim related issue.

This is neither an attempt to defend Denmark (or Norway) or its apparently selective "freedom of the press", but to highlight the misconstrued priorities inundating the Arab world today. During a decade of US-led UN sanctions in Iraq, neighboring Muslim and Arab countries were commended by the US, saying that their cooperation was vital to the success of the sanctions imposed on the stricken nation. According to the most modest and outdated UN reports, over 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of the lack of medicine. Where was the popular uproar then, the diplomatic fury and the boycott campaign?

I am afraid that the Muslim and Arab-led anti- Danish campaign will widen a chasm separating both worlds, bolstering the Arabs' reputation of being intolerant while providing an unimportant cartoonist with the opportunity of a lifetime: a chance for martyrdom on behalf of freedom of the press and perhaps a book deal, and if lucky, a spot on the Oprah Winfrey show. But that's all that one should expect.

Prophet Mohamed is revered because of his daily-felt contribution to Muslim life everywhere. He needs not a Danish cartoonist to validate or nullify his relevance in the lives of millions. Of that Muslims are to be sure. However, it is discouraging that the collective energy of the Muslim world is consumed punishing a small European country over a drawing, while US military bases infest the heart of the Arab world, and American fast food restaurants crowd every street corner, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Gulf, while few seem to notice or even care.

Ramzy Baroud is a veteran Arab-American journalist and the editor in chief of the Palestine Chronicle. He currently teaches mass communication at Australia's Curtin University of Technology, Malaysia Campus. He is the author of the forthcoming book: Writings on the Second Palestinian Uprising: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press, London).

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Exploitation of the Hujjaaj

For the Ummah

The Hajj business in South Africa is worth about R210-million per year, assuming an average hajj package of R30,000.00 per hujjaaj, and 7000 hujjaaj leaving the shores of South Africa.

The sale of air tickets is controlled by the Association of South Africa Travel Agents (ASATA)-affiliated Travel Agents of which Travel Unlimited, Sure Flywell Travel and Wembley Travel are members. Therefore, the air ticket monopoly for the hajj is controlled by these three organisations.

In 2005, Sure Flywell Travel amassed a net profit (i.e. after expenses were deducted) of R10-million for air ticket sales alone i.e. this figure excludes accomodation package profits.

If Sure Flywell Travel can achieve this level of profit, the chances are good that the other two companies are achieving similar profit margins. This is not unrealistic considering the R210-million value of Hajj packages.

This type of exploitation of the poor is unacceptable and must be rectified immediately. The question is: What is the Ummah going to do about it?

It is obvious that this type of problem cannot be left to the so-called "leaders" of the Ummah, as they themselves have proved that they are not capable of resolving problems or even setting direction for the Ummah. Many of them (not all) are part of the problem. The founding member organizations of SAHUC and the Executive's of SAHUC is as responsible as the Travel Agents for allowing the exploitation.

For as long as the Ummah remains ignorant and apathetic, they will always be lead astray. The time has come to mobilise and educate one another of how we are being mislead by prominent individuals in order to enrich themselves.

Why are we not marching to the SAHUC and Travel Agent's offices to demand lower Hajj Package prices? Because we allow ourselves to be used and we are quite content with it.

Muhammad al-Haq

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Proud Muslim, Stupid Muslim

Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

Just recently, while in Pakistan and Jordan, I was boasting about what a great place South Africa is- we have almost total freedom of speech, freedom of expression and most importantly freedom of religion. Freedoms that many others in so-called ‘Islamic Countries’ can only dream of! There are almost no obstacles to us in terms of religious practices, beliefs, etc.

But I almost found myself having to eat my words. News on the internet was that there was troubling brewing back home- internal conflict in our wonderful community: Camperdown had made public statements that upset Al-Ansaar, who retaliated with lawyers’ letters. The finer details can be found at and I really wouldn’t want to get into that.

The reason I bring up this issue, which some would rather have swept under the carpet, is an institution called The Rand Corporation- a non-profit research organization based in the US. It is a well established and influential think tank that has the reputation of being objective in its approach. It publishes occasional papers on Islam and Muslims that have been thoughtful and provocative. (

Over a year ago, Cheryl Benard published a paper entitled Civil Democratic Islam. The paper opens with ‘There is no question that contemporary Islam is in a volatile state, engaged in an internal and external struggle over its values, its identity, and its place in the world. Rival versions are contending for spiritual and political dominance…’ Following along the same lines, it goes on to discuss how, if not dealt with strategically, Muslim communities around the world, will provide endless problems. (

Now frankly, I believe that the entire report is highly disappointing and of poor quality. But there is an interesting strategy that is presented, which I believe is important for Muslims to be aware of. It suggests identifying different groups of Muslims and then, how to play one against the other to further a particular agenda. Now while only the foolish would suggest that sinister forces can be working locally in our fairly well organised community, we should not be naïve to think that there is no possibility of external interferences. (See: )

According to the report, Muslims are broken down into four categories: Fundamentalists, Traditionalists, Modernists and Secularists. This alone indicates the failure of the author to correctly analyse Muslim communities. It then goes on to describe the groups as follows:

·Fundamentalists want to impose and expand the strict observance of Islam- which they often interpret in eccentric ways not always supported by orthodox texts and sources- through force, violence, terrorism, and any other means necessary, the report says.

·Traditionalists tend not to challenge the state, but oppose terrorism and violence. However, they are often uncomfortable with modernity, and many of them lack education, even about the essence of their own religion, relying instead on superstitions and local tradition. In many places, they have contributed to stagnation and inertia, and have not helped their societies prosper and progress.

·Modernists and secularists are more closely aligned with the West in their values and policies, though the more extreme secularists can hold radical views that place them beyond the bounds of democracy. Modernists support reform in the hope that the Islamic world becomes part of contemporary global society.

·Secularists go even further, urging Muslims to accept the Western idea of a separation between religion and the state, relegating religion to a private matter.

Few Muslims around the world will fit into only a single one of these categories. More so in the South African context: we have some ‘traditionalists’ now becoming actively involved in the political arena while others are still condemning television and media. We also have ‘modernists’ who are achieving remarkable results in their efforts while others seem to be merely serving their own agendas under an Islamic banner.

But while the report is riddled with misconceptions and inconsistencies, it does teach us an important lesson- without unity in the Muslim community, we expose ourselves to the influences of external forces.

But unity does also not always achieve desired or optimum results- Muslim economists cite the current banking developments as proof of this. In Britain, some ‘traditionalist’ and ‘modernists’ have come together to endorse products of a major conventional bank. Some Muslim scholars call this unlikely marriage ‘the beginning of the end of any truly Islamic economic system.’ (Muslim Council of Britain with Mufti Taqi Usmani and others have sanctioned HSBC bank in the UK. )

Looking back in history, we find that there have always been conflicting differences of opinion in the Muslim Ummah- the challenge is to deal with these challenges in the appropriate Islamic manner. Those who disagree need to engage in constructive dialogue and debate in the proper Islamic manner. The same for us in South Africa- transparent, polite, open and constructive discussion whenever a difference in opinion exists.

Achieving unity in our community will not be an easy task- the youth of today need to swallow their pride and learn from the mistakes of those before them. By doing this they can strive for a united Muslim community. The calibre of the next generation in all the different institutions, organisations, and groups gives us hope that we can achieve this and take Islam and Muslims to the heights once enjoyed. As history has showed us time and time again- a Proud Muslim is most definitely a Stupid Muslim…