Skip to main content

Woolwich: Islamophobic Media Feigns Concern about Violence, Continues Demonising Islam

Islamophobic media feigns concern about violence, continues demonising Islam

The mainstream media has gone into overdrive, in the wake of the murder in Woolwich, in demonising Islam and Muslims with its usual characterisation of Islam as backward and violent. All sorts of spurious arguments have been made and links drawn to assert that the roots of Muslim violence are in Islam and the Qur’an, that Muslim leaders now need to go beyond just condemning and take responsibility for the problem and that Muslims need to face the history of Islam and get rid of its problematic parts.


On its part, the tabloid trash went further in propagating purposefully alarmist messages about “generation jihad” being homegrown, suburbs in Western Sydney being hotbeds of “extremism” and pushing for “extremist” groups in the Muslim community to be exposed and disbanded.

Our response to this disgraceful barrage of irresponsible commentary is to emphasise that:

1. The real problem facing the world is western violence: violence perpetrated by states using full military force. Violence that destroys entire nations and ruins the lives of entire peoples. Violence, in comparison to which, any violence committed by individuals, Muslim or otherwise, is like a drop in the ocean. This is where our focus should be if we are indeed sincere about dealing with the problem of violence. To scapegoat disempowered individuals whilst ignoring the far worse violence of powerful institutions is disingenuous and hypocritical.

2. Given the ubiquitous reality of western violence and its magnitude the “sacred” texts and ideals of secular liberalism, not of Islam, should be placed under examination to ascertain what makes the west so violent. What pushes states to such depravity that they kill half a million children in Iraq through sanctions and deem it a worthy price? Or kill hundreds of innocent children in Yemen and Pakistan with the guiltless surgery of drone strikes? Or support dictators who make life hell on earth for millions in return for personal material gain? The US constitution, the UDHR and the like should be put under the telescope of inquiry, not the Qur’an.

3. The mainstream media but feigns concern about violence and extremism as a cover to propel its ingrained hatred of Islam and Muslims. This is clear from the fact that it ignores, indeed justifies, the far worse violence of western states whilst creating alarmist suspicion and distrust about Muslims and presenting Muslim violence as an existential threat.

4. Just as the demonisation continues, so too does the imposition of values, intimidation and exceptional treatment of Muslims. The recent case of Mohammed Issaka shows that whilst on the one hand we are told that Australia is a tolerant secular society where people are allowed to practice their religious beliefs and values so long as they do not entail violence, on the other when someone goes against a customary tradition in practicing his beliefs he is shunned and demanded to step in line. The more recent case of Milad al-Ahmedzai shows the continuation of the application of a different set of laws for Muslims as mere (alleged) threats to officials have been prosecuted as “terrorism-related” offences.

5. We advise the Muslim community not to fall for the media’s and politicians’ cheap tactic of playing good Muslim v bad Muslim as a means of dividing the community into “extremists” and “moderates”. Rather, the community must reject the discourse on terrorism outright, expose its fallacies and continue to account the state’s oppressive foreign and domestic policies, which are the root of the problem. We should also be clear that if an attack occurs on Australian soil the media and politicians will be squarely responsible and should not in that instance come to the Muslim community for condemnations, apologies or demands to take responsibility. It is their policies that create the original grievances, and it is their subsequent policies that further alienate the youth.

Ends.

Note: for a more detailed response to the arguments made by the likes of Paul Sheehan, Alan How and Clive Kesslar see the following opinion piece by Uthman Badar: The elephant in the room: western violence

Media Office
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
30 May 2013

Contact: Uthman Badar, Media Representative, on  media@hizb-australia.org or 0438 000 465.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran