Following the success of the Viva Palestina led aid convoy to Gaza in February 2009, a second convoy left for Gaza in late November of the same year, approximately a year after the bombardment of defenceless and innocent peoples in the densely populated strip. Millions across the world were angered by the belligerence of the Israeli government and the apathy of the International community. Israel was given carte blanche to perpetrate some of the heaviest bombardment seen in recent history under the false pretext that its security was threatened. After the bombing finally halted Israel left behind scorched earth, devastated services and thousands dead and injured.
The Hittin Institute was vocal during the Gaza onslaught by participating in debates and discussion with many academics including Tony Benn, Brenden O’Neill, Tariq Ramadan and several others, and put forward the case for the necessity of Shari’ah law in Palestine, and highlighted the history of progressive and harmonious La Convivencia under Islamic rule in the Holy Land. The institute also authored articles that put forward the same case – ‘One State Solution: A Jewish Dream’ and ‘The Gaza Massacre and Neo-Conservatism.’ It further delivered dozens of lectures in universities highlighting the plight of the Palestinians and the progressive way forward.
On the 6th December 2009, Adnan Rashid, a senior researcher of the Hittin Institute accompanied the Viva Palestina aid convoy to Gaza. The route the convoy is taking begins at Calais and will pass through Brussels, Luxembourg, Stuttgart, Munich, Bologna, Ancona, Igoumenitsa, Ankara, Gaziantep, through Syria to Amman, to Aqabah, Nuweiba and then crossing the northern length of Egypt to the Rafah crossing point and then onto Gaza. Many of these cities were of course influenced by the Islamic medieval renaissance and the institute seeks to draw attention to Islam’s pivotal contribution to civilisation and highlight the vibrancy of cohesive coexistence under Islamic governance. It is hoped that Adnan Rashid will be an asset to the many others who have made the very commendable and necessary journey. Complementing the crucial task of distributing aid, Adnan Rashid’s vast knowledge of the Muslim world and European history will allow him to develop a much needed insight about the work that lies ahead. We wish him and all the others on the convoy a safe and successful journey.
The government has recently demonstrated its will to take extreme measures to gather information on innocent British Muslim citizens living peacefully in this country. This is clearly evident from a report published by the Guardian news paper: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/16/anti-terrorism-strategy-spies-innocents. Although the home office is denying any such actions or intentions, the Guardian team insists that it has seen documents which indicate that the government is "trying to find" information about any given Muslim individuals pertaining to their religious views, mental health, sexual activity, association and other "sensitive issues". The report also sates that the information can be held by the government until the individual in question reaches the age of 100. Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, is reported to have declared this recent inquisitorial government endeavour "an affront to civil liberties". an affront it is indeed.
This government hysteria reminds one of the medieval persecution of the Jews or Early Modern European witch-hunts or inquisitorial trials. During 3 centuries (1450-1750 CE) of "European Witch Craze", almost every woman accused of witchcraft was considered to be guilty until proven innocent. Torture was one of the ways to extract confession and many innocent women confessed to crimes they never committed, which in consequence caused over one hundred thousand (100,000) to be burnt at steak during 3 centuries. It seems that the government is now suffering from a "Muslim Craze" so much so that there are ready made mental torture chambers (i.e. 28 days detention) available in case anyone shows any signs of "Muslim-craft". The report suggests that the information is being gathered to strengthen the government endeavour known as "Preventing Violent Extremism", which would enable the government to "prevent" Muslims from being lured into Al-Qaida mindset. This indicates that the people spyed upon haven't yet committed any act of terrorism rather they are "potential terrorists". If this endeavour is thought to be fair then it would also be fair to gather information on all German youth in case there may be a potential Hitler there. The rational of such an endeavour would be absurd. The report goes on to suggest, by some case studies, who these potential violent extremists may be.
A student attending a meeting about Gaza atrocities was reported by a lecturer to be a potential extremist; a nine years old boy (child) from East London was "deprogrammed" by the authorities, as he was thought to have been suffering from the fever of "Violent Extremism"; a youth project in London alleged, according to the report, that the Metropolitan Police demanded the names of Muslims youngsters (who had no links with extremism) as a condition of funding and many more cases of innocent Muslims being reported to the authorities as potential extremists are mentioned by the report. During the Spanish inquisition many Muslims perished due to similar measures taken by the Catholic monarchs. Innocent Muslims were looked upon with suspicion and this suspicion caused Phillip II to carry out one of the biggest expulsion (1609) of Muslims in the Spanish history. The Muslims were suspected of being Ottoman sympathisers and were thus seen as a threat. Likewise similar suspicion of the Muslims is being recklessly fostered today and due to this suspicion a storm of Islamophobia is emerging very fast.
Part of the problem is Muslim incompetence and lack of unity among the Islamic representative organisations. This suspicion of the Muslims can be demystified if the Muslims themselves take a firm stance against such erroneous measures by working with sympathetic human rights organisations. The main body of Muslims in this country would not, and they do not, contribute to such unfair and medieval style spying programmes. Muslims should not be treated as suspicious criminals in their own country and the government must insure that the Justice is done. The rule of "innocent until proven guilty" should reign rather than the other way around. The mere fact of the government gathering information on innocent Muslims suggests that the rule of "guilty until proven innocent" is being applied in this case. The invasion of innocent people's privacy, especially when dealing with a minority, can lead to further misunderstandings and mistrust. Thousands of innocent humans suffered and were killed during the centuries of witch craze due to similar, far from perfect, measures of information gathering. The Muslims are not alone in raising questions about this endeavour, rather there are others, such as Shami Chakrabarti, who believe that this is unfair targeting of a vulnerable community. She is reported to have remarked:
"It is information-gathering directed at the innocent and the spying is directed at people because of their religion, and not because of there behaviour".
Finally, it would be appropriate to draw Labour government's attention to the advice of a learned British litterateur, Major Arthur Glyn Leonard:
‘…the attitude of Europe towards Islam should be one of eternal gratitude, instead of base ingratitude and forgetfulness. Never to this day has Europe acknowledged in an honest and whole-hearted manner the great and everlasting debt she owes to Islamic culture and civilization. Only in a lukewarm and perfunctory way has she recognized that when, during the Dark Ages, her people were sunk in feudalism and ignorance, Moslem civilization under the Arabs reached a high standard of social and scientific splendour, that kept alive the flickering embers of European society from utter decadence.
Do not we, who now consider ourselves on the topmost pinnacle ever reached by culture and civilization, recognize that had it not been for the high culture, the civilization and intellectual as well as social splendour of the Arabs, and to the soundness of their school system, Europe to this day have remained sunk in the darkness of ignorance?...' (Major Arthur Glyn Leonard, Islam-Her Moral and Spiritual Value, London, 1909, p. 147).
On the 30th July 2009 Debbie Purdy, a lady who is suffering from Multiple Sclerosis, won a case which persuaded the law lords to put an end to the legal ‘grey area’. Individuals faced with this predicament were uncertain whether or not they could face jail for assisting in the death of a loved one in a country where assisted suicide is legal.
Euthanasia
This has re-opened the debate about euthanasia. Euthanasia defined as “the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition” is favoured by some people and rejected as an immoral practice by others. Those against euthanasia argue that:
Most of the arguments against euthanasia seem persuasive and many may argue that they represent what people believe to be ‘common sense’. However why is euthanasia gaining more support? One of the reasons is that, in a secular society morality changes. This is because God is removed as a basis for our social practices and norms.
What has secularism got to do with this?
In a secular society morals can never be objective. This is because secularism can be defined as the idea not to refer to God for morality, especially when it concerns public or political concerns.
The implications of this are huge, because someone adopting a secular worldview cannot claim to have objective, and therefore binding and unchanging, morals. Humanist philosopher Paul Kurtz aptly puts it,
“The central question about moral and ethical principles concerns this ontological foundation. If they are neither derived from God nor anchored in some transcendent ground, are they purely ephemeral?”
Social Pressures & Evolution
God is the only conceptual anchor that transcends human subjectivity, so without God there is no rational basis for objective morality. Therefore if in a secular society God is divorced from these issues then, in His absence, there are only two possible alternative conceptual foundations.
1. Social pressures
2. Evolution
Evolution is problematic, in that it dictates that we are just accidental by products of a lengthy evolutionary process, and that we acquire moral understanding gradually. In other words we are just animals, and animals have no moral paradigm. Evolution as a basis for objective morals is without foundation because according to this perspective we change our morality as we change in nature.
Social pressures provide no basis for objective morality as they change with time and place. Any reader in social science and social constructionism will easily conclude the relative nature of social pressures.
So without God there can be no rational basis for morality. God as a concept is not subjective therefore having God as basis for morality makes them binding and objective.
Islam & Euthanasia
In Islam morals do not change because they are grounded in God. Concerning euthanasia and suicide they are described as immoral. They always have been, and this will not change.
According to various UK media outlets, non-Muslims are increasingly going to Shari’ah (Islamic law) courts for justice. The fact that non-Muslims are willfully using Shari’ah courts in the UK for adjudication in disputes should not be entirely surprising [1]. There are two reasons for this. The first is that the UK justice system is failing its people:
The second reason is that the Shari’ah is based upon a unique set of values. For example the Qur’an (the divine scripture upon which the Shari’ah law code is founded) resonates with teachings of justice,
“O You who believe! Be upholders of justice, bearing witness for God alone, even against yourselves or your parents and relatives. Whether they are rich or poor, God is well able to look after them. Do not follow your own desires and deviate from the truth. If you twist or turn away, God is aware of what you do.”[3]
“O You who believe! Show integrity for the sake of God, bearing witness with justice. Do not let hatred for a people incite you into not being just. Be just. That is closer to faith. Heed God [alone]. God is aware of what you do.” [4]
The two main terms used in the Qur’an for justice are ‘Adl and Qist. The literal meaning of ‘Adl is to divide into exactly equal parts so that there is no disparity between them. Qist means to be equal. Of course it would be difficult to apply these terms to the current situation in the Muslim world due to an absence of true political governance. Although ‘Adl and Qist are not witnessed in any considerable measure in the Muslim world today, Islamic history paints a different picture, one offers a better alternative to the gross corruption and abuse that we see today.
In Islamic history, where the unique values of Islam such as justice were propagated and implemented, the conclusions made by some historians are unparalleled. The Jewish historian Amnon Cohen states that the Jewish minorities sought justice from the Islamic courts rather than their own,
“The Jews went to the Muslim court for a variety of reasons, but the overwhelming fact was their ongoing and almost permanent presence there. This indicates that they went there not only in search of justice, but did so hoping, or rather knowing, that more often than not they would attain redress when wronged…”[5]
So it is no wonder that today there are a growing number of non-Muslims seeking justice via Islamic courts. It is difficult to think of a time in history when the host community of a population sought redress and justice from the courts of the minority. One can only imagine what it would be like if true Islamic governance was implemented in the Muslim world.
[1] http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6721158.ece [2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/aug/17/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation [3] Qur'an Chapter 4 Verse 135 [4] Qur'an Chapter 5 Verse 8 [5] A World Within: Jewish Life as Reflected in Muslim Court Documents from the Sijill of Jerusalem (XVIth Century). Part One, 1994, Pennsylvania, p. 17.
On the 22nd June 2009 French President Sarkozy announced that the Burqa is incongruous with French values. He said "In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity," Sarkozy continued: "The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience."[1] Despite Sarkozy’s political opportunism, his ideological contradictions expose his conscious ignorance, and some may say outright hatred for the Islamic way of life. Sarkozy who advocates and propagates liberal secularism has forgotten his intellectual heritage. Liberal secularism rests upon the premise of individualism, in other words, viewing the self – the human being – as an abstract entity divorced from social attachments. Two key values are built from this premise, individual freedom and individual rights. According to individual freedom, also explained as freedom of choice, the Burqa shouldn’t be a problem and should be tolerated under French liberal values. So why the contradiction? Sarkozy is a liberal secular ideologue who doesn’t want to understand or discuss the Islamic way of life. The Islamic way of life is not based upon the false premise of individualism; rather it views the human being as an entity with social links and obligations. This correct view on mankind develops and builds sublime values, which include honouring and protecting women. In the Sarkozy paradigm these values do not exist, hence he wants to fight against their emergence, even if it means contradicting his own ideological beliefs. For example in a liberal secular context, individual freedom allows, and in the case of Sarkozy (his wife is an ex-nudist model), promotes pornography. However pornography has been shown to facilitate rape. According to academic research by Diana E. Russell in her publication ‘Pornography & Rape: A causal model’ she states, “ My theory about how pornography – violent and non-violent – can cause rape…drawn on the findings of recent research….I believe there are many factors that play a causal role in this crime. I have not attempted here to evaluate the relative importance of these different causal factors, but merely to show the overwhelming evidence that pornography is a major one of them”[2] In this study, academic research was cited which concluded that 56% of rapists implicated pornography in the commission of their offences, 66% of rapists claimed they were incited by pornography and 30 % of college students would rape if they could get away with it.[3] Sarkozy’s world view would not ban or criminalise pornography. This is because society itself is not considered or taken into account due to the core value of ‘individual freedom’. As a result Sarkozy’s values have contributed to the increase in sexual crimes in France. There are more than 25,000 rapes a year in France alone, and before Sarkozy points the finger at the Muslims or immigrants, 91% of those convicted are of French nationality.[4] France is not alone in failing to protect and honour women either, in the UK 167 women are raped everyday[5] and in the US a woman is raped every 6 minutes and battered every 15 seconds. [6] However in Islam pornography is banned and is viewed as a dishonour to women. Islam protects women by honouring and providing mechanisms in its social model to protect them. The noble Qur'an highlights the immense responsibility men have towards women. The Qur'an says "Men are qawwamoona over women"[7]. The key word here is qawwamoona, which is derived from various words that denote ‘means of support, protect and honour’. Therefore the Qur'an tells society to look after, protect and honour women.
But Sarkozy would rather flaunt that his wife was an ex-nudist model. References [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8112821.stm [2] Diana Russell. Pornography and Rape: A Causal Model, in Feminism and Pornography. Oxford Readings in Feminism. 2000. [3] Ibid. [4] http://www.sosfemmes.com/english_rape/rape_statistics.htm [5] http://www.amnesty.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=10309 [6] Broken Bodies, Shattered Minds: Torture and Ill Treatment of Women, Amnesty International, 2001 [7] Qur'an 4:34