Tag Archives: Islam

Moussa el Sader is Dead. Officially?


For years, supporters of Shiite imam Moussa el Sader had hoped he’d still be alive more than thirty three years after he went missing in Libya on August 31st, 1978.
Al Akhbar is reporting today that documents received by Lebanese government from Libya confirm that Moussa el Sader had died at the beginning of the previous decade due to diabetes complications.

In more details, the imam was taken to the Abou Slim prison in 1997 where he was put in solitary confinement. He started experiencing ailments because of his diabetes but his guards refused to give him treatment. As a result, the imam died soon after.

Al Qaddafi refused to have him buried. So he turned his cell into a fridge, akin to the one used in morgues, and guards were set up for the cell for more than a decade – until the recent Libyan revolution started.
On August 22nd, 2011 when Tripoli fell to the rebels, the Abou Slim prison was heavily bombarded. Moussa el Sader’s cell was destroyed as a result of the bombing and his body was subsequently taken out, along with the other dead people.
Some had reported seeing a man’s body with a cloak and turban being taken out of the premises.

Current efforts to search for the body are underway. The most plausible of scenarios is that the bodies taken out of the Abou Slim prison were buried at known locations due to their rapid decomposition. These sites will be soon excavated to maybe find the body of the imam and return it to Lebanon.

Moussa el Sader founded the political movement “Amal.” He was known for his calls for interfaith dialogue and his constant championing for co-existence among all Lebanese factions.
It’s sad to see his ideology so distorted by the current form of the political movement he started.

Many of us were more than certain the imam was dead. But it is only natural for people to seek closure. Hopefully the certainty of his death brings that to those who need it.

A New “Fatwa”: Girls Cannot Sit With Their Fathers Unless Their Mothers Are Present

This is a picture of a newspaper article in Arabic that I saw circulating today.

The article translates to: “Muslim sheikh Mohammad Al Aarifi warned girls saying that some young girls sit in front of their fathers with a nice body, wearing tight outfits, showing cleavage such as when short blouses and tight pants are worn. She is young, her father is young and he might, therefore, hit on her if he saluted her or kissed her or hugged her…”

Simply put… What did I just read?

Some people need to be neutered. Or perhaps some regulation as to how can actually analyze any form of religious scripture needs to be enforced.

And I thought the “banana fatwa” was stupid enough. In case you didn’t know, another “sheikh” decided that girls shouldn’t consume bananas or cucumbers because of their sexually provocative nature as vegetables and fruits. Where do these people come from again?

Egypt’s Parliamentary Elections: The Delusion of the Islamists, Salafists and their Sharia

No, I’m not following up with anything Egypt-related. Partly because it’s not my cause to be part of but mainly because I’m disgusted by what’s happening to the Copts there. It sort of puts a damper on what could have been had the Egyptians saw their revolution to the end and didn’t slack off the moment Mubarak was overthrown.

No, this post is not my own analysis on an election I have no idea of nor will it attempt to be one. This is simply me ridiculing any person who thinks the way of ruling any country in the world today, especially a country like Egypt, is by way of Islamic Sharia.

No, I’m not berating Islam. And no, I’m not being anti-semitic. I’m just being realistic. Whoever thinks the ways of 600AD still apply in 2011 is not only delusional but should probably get their brains checked. Whoever thinks a theocracy where one religion’s rule is enforced on everyone else is still living in the Dark Ages of their corresponding religion, be it Islam or Christianity or Judaism.

Israel, the country these Islamists perceive (along with the United States and possibly Iran) as the ultimate devil, has a neo-theocratic ruling system. And look where that’s leading us.

But no matter, this is not a post for overanalysis. This is a post to present this picture that a friend was outraged enough to share on Facebook with me.

In order to showcase their point about the validity of their view of Islamic Sharia, this picture was made out to show people who would be damaged by applying the Sharia. You have, starting from right to left: the homosexuals, the alcoholics, the prostitutes, the corrupt politicians and killers: what they consider as the scumbags of society. The picture serves to paint a picture where these people would be eradicated from Egyptian society if the Muslim Brotherhood (and those with whom they have an alliance) win the elections.

But naturally I beg to differ. Not only is this picture non-sensical, it’s also demeaning, ridiculous and unfounded. I wouldn’t be addressing it hadn’t it had tons of Facebook likes and an immense amount of shares. This picture has basically gone viral. But I digress. To suggest that the existence of these people would cease upon applying the Islamic Sharia is, simply put, stupid. Or aren’t those Islamists the same people who are horny enough to pursue the prostitutes or the closeted homosexuals who are afraid to come out? Being a staunch religious person with an infested three-foot long beard does not mean that person is holy.

Besides, who says it’s up to the Islamists to judge these people for what they do? What will their punishments be in case Sharia is applied? Whiplashes and cutting hands? How is that humane? Some might say there’s a process to follow when it comes to these types of punishment, that it’s not a haphazard process. But simply put: this is year 2011. Corporal punishment enforced by the State should not exist. What gives the state the right to cut off a thief’s hands or whip a person’s back until they can’t walk anymore? There’s a reason the charter of Human Rights was adopted by almost all countries around the world: it’s because basic human rights, even when people mess up, should be respected. Some even say such punishment would teach others. Then why is prostitution the world’s oldest profession? And why are thieves a part of every society? Why would I get punished for drinking alcohol? Who has the right to dictate what food and drinks I want to consume?

And how does a Sharia-run society work for those who do not want sharia to govern them in the first place?

So let me paint a picture of Egypt with Islamists ruling:

1) Increasing persuction of religious minorities in Egypt, only this time the state would turn an even blinder eye to them. If whatever type of ruling Egypt has today were to change to Islamic Sharia, who’s to say the Coptic minorities in Egypt won’t be decimated worse than they are being persecuted today? I understand Islam does not preach this. But there’s a drastic difference between Islam as a religion and what people understand of Islam. After all, the Islamic Sharia is some man’s interpretation of Islam, whether you like it or not. And it is these men that will believe that these Copts (and other minorities) are not suited for living under their ruling. The mentality that it’s okay to dispose of these Copts will grow. One only needs to remember how many Egyptians, including Egypt’s National TV, commented on the Maspero murdering of Copts to know that fertile ground for hate is there. Moreover, according to a Pew Poll, half of the Egyptian population has negative views of Christians in their country. Couple all of that with Islamic sharia and you get the picture.

2) Increasing censorship and decreasing free speech: I cannot begin to fathom Islamists allowing liberals to express their opinions now, would they? It’s the way things are with most parties that get to power in countries that are struggling to achieve democracy. Even in countries that we consider democratic models, media has never been unbiased. Fox News is pro-Republicans in the United States, ABC and CBS are pro-Democrats. So it will only be rational for many Egyptian TV Stations, newspapers and other media outlets to be coerced into diffusing one type of news only: the one approved by the political majority, run by Islamic Sharia.

3) Worse oppression than the one SCAF is now implementing: Many may want Islamic Sharia to be applied. But if it is applied, how would the atheists be treated? How would the Muslims who want a civil non-theocratic state to rule them be handled? The premise is not religious; it’s humanitarian. Islamic Sharia is being applied in many countries around the world, most notably Saudi Arabia. And if you look at Saudi Arabia from a non-economical point of view, the idea of living there is dismally depressing. Women cannot drive, they need to be veiled all the time. No movie theaters for you to spend time at, punishment laws that date back to the dark ages, patriarchal supremacy, very high disregard to basic human rights of free speech and freedom of religion, etc…. So to those who champion the idea of Islamic Sharia being the solution for all, this is definitely not the case. And there will come a time when drastic compromises in the basic foundation in that Sharia have to be given in order to accomodate the views of those who are different. Odds are those compromises will not happen and this is where oppression starts.

4) Worse economic situation as many of the world’s countries lose their faith in dealing with Egypt. It’s not very hard to imagine this really. Tourists will start coming less and less to Egypt. If the Mubarak regime had them fooled into thinking Egypt was somewhat liberal and understanding, I’m sure any delusion will be washed away by Islamists winning. Investments by major businesses will start decreasing as investment laws dictated by the Sharia will start getting implemented. And the ball gets rolling until the poor get poorer and with Egypt that’s a lot of people getting poorer.

5) Finally, all of the aforementioned points coupled together would mean Egypt back to pre-Mubarak days. The revolution dead.

No, the picture I’m painting is not grim. It’s one that can be easily evaded. And no, it’s not delusional like that picture being circulated among Facebook’s Islamist Egyptian populace. It might as well happen (with a higher probability that is than Islamists eradicating the people portrayed in that picture). Perhaps the youth who actually care about being who they are in Egypt should stop caring more about their country’s political situation and vote?

You know what they say: if you don’t vote, you can’t nag.

And sometimes the choice is so obvious that you can’t even begin to fathom another choice. Just look at this electoral poster from Egypt:

These people are calling for a modern Egypt. What’s modern about having the eyes of the only woman on their list hidden from everyone? The woman even looks like she was drawn there, not given the decency of having a proper photograph taken of her (even if that photograph won’t show anything). Who’s to say under Salafi and Islamists ruling such a thing won’t be forced on all women of Egypt? Who’s to say whatever rights women in Egypt have today won’t be taken away by these men who see themselves as superior?

And at the end of the day, as a Lebanese, an Islamist Egypt has the least effect on my political system. The only country getting the bad side of the deal will be Egypt itself. Good luck with that, I guess.

In the meantime, my heart goes out to the Copts. Again.

Respecting Religions in Lebanon: The Flip-Flop Issue

I’ve only been back to Lebanon about a week and the drama with the country’s religious diversity is back. This time, however, it has taken the form of a flip-flop.

This flip-flop in question had not one, not two, but even more than three Crosses on it. The attention to the issue was first brought by LFTV, the internet television of the Lebanese Forces, and soon enough the people of the concerned areas got the store selling these shoes, managed by Ali Fakih, to close.

I wouldn’t be writing this post if it hadn’t been for this article by Now Lebanon, brought to my attention via a retweet by someone who thought the reaction of the Christians was ridiculous.

Let’s get a few things straight.

1) Why was the store, managed by Mr. Fakih, selling such flip flops in the first place? Has it become fashionable to sell shoes where you step on a religious symbol all the time?

2) How is the Christian reaction to this in any way ridiculous? Did they vandalize the place? No. Did they beat the hell out of the manager? No. What did they do? They protested and got the shop to close. When will the shop re-open again? Monday.

3) It is sad, sometimes, that people who feel the need to talk about anything have a widespread platform like Now Lebanon to talk about it. How is it, miss Nassar, that forcing the man to close shop for a few days insulting? I’m not the most religious of people but I don’t want to see people stepping on Crosses as they walk. In my humble opinion, Mr. Fakih not caring enough to go through the merchandise that he sells is insulting. I’m pretty sure that if his store had received shipments of the same flip-flops, except with the Crescent on them, he wouldn’t have sold them.

4) To suggest that the same reaction wouldn’t have taken place against a Christian man is a deeply disturbing – and sectarian – idea on Now Lebanon’s part. Saying that the whole protest was fueled by people who only protested because the man selling the flip-flops is a Shiite Muslim is not only unfounded, but it’s also entirely in the realms of speculation. In fact, there’s little to back that point up. People, when offended, will act out – regardless of who’s offending them.

5) The article also suggests that us Lebanese have nothing to do but take offense to clothing items. I wonder, when did a clothing item make headline news? Not recently, right? Well, this is the first time that I hear of something “fashionable” cause up a stir. And if you think about it, it’s not really a huge stir. Christians of the area are now standing in front of the store, chanting.

6) Before Now Lebanon, in the form of Angie Nassar, apologize from Ali Fakih for this “sick charade,” how about they look at this “idiotic spectacle” from the perspective of someone who doesn’t want to write just for the sake of writing something controversial and actually notice that the response of the Christians of the area has been nothing short of civilized. They’re not “akin to dictators gunning down innocent men, women and children.” How this comparison was even conceived, I have no idea.

Every group in the world is allowed to express themselves when they feel offended and threatened. The fact that one of Lebanon’s major religious groups was offended by a clothing item and did something non-violent about it does not warrant people to call said people ridiculous, to write articles saying that closing down the man’s store for a few days is an insult and to ask for an apology from a tasteless individual who, probably, knew exactly what he was selling.

I wonder, however, and I do not mean to come off as sectarian, if anyone remembers the clashes that took place when LBC’s Charbel Khalil had someone impersonate Hassan Nasrallah on his show Basmet Watan. Shiites from Dahye swept into Beirut’s Christian areas and caused a riot. Is Hassan Nasrallah more important than the symbol that represents Christians? Was he even offended on LBC show? Nope. What was the cause of the riot? LBC isn’t allowed to portray someone of Nasrallah’s grandeur like that.

Do you also remember when some Danish newspaper published pictures of the prophet Mohammad and the Tabaris 802 Building in Achrafieh, home of the Danish Embassy, was vandalized? How are those pictures any different from having a Cross on the bottom of a shoe? If anything, I find the Cross even more offensive.

How is a civilized reaction from Christians of the area, that only led to the closing of a store, an “idiotic spectacle”? How is this spectacle driven by “willful ignorance, unreasonable attitudes and discrimination?”

Are people unreasonable when they ask for their symbols and convictions to be respected? Is it discriminatory if someone stands up for their rights? And in this case, I’m pretty sure willful ignorance does not apply – it would have applied had they known and decided not to do something about it, making it another example of Christians resigning to the status quo of the country.

And what better way to end this than with the same way Now Lebanon’s original article did: pro tip, fools: taking offense isn’t always a choice. Also, stop being so clueless. It’s offensive to your readers.

A little confession miss Nassar, this event barely registered on my relevance radar – until I read your article. Good job.