One desperately wants to give credit where credit is due. The British Muslim Forum has issued a fatwa against fanaticism and terrorism. That is a good start; it is the second such fatwa by British Muslims in the past few days, and thus a significant advance on the silence that came before.

But...

The text of this fatwa is slippery. It unequivocally condemns suicide bombings in London but does not unequivocally condemn them elsewhere, for example in Iraq or Israel:

‘Islam strictly, strongly and severely condemns the use of violence and the destruction of innocent lives. There is neither place nor justification in Islam for extremism, fanaticism or terrorism. Suicide bombings, which killed and injured innocent people in London, are HARAAM - vehemently prohibited in Islam, and those who committed these barbaric acts in London are criminals not martyrs. Such acts, as perpetrated in London, are crimes against all of humanity and contrary to the teachings of Islam.’

This leaves wide open the question of whether suicide bombings elsewhere are permitted. And if the religion does permit them elsewhere, then obviously it is not true that ‘There is neither place nor justification in Islam for extremism, fanaticism or terrorism. ‘

It condemns the ’destruction of innocent lives’ everywhere, but that begs the question of the meaning of ‘innocent’. This suspicion deepens when it adds:

‘The Holy Quran declares: “Whoever kills a human being… then it is as though he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a human life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.“ (Quran, Surah al-Maidah (5), verse 32) Islam’s position is clear and unequivocal: Murder of one soul is the murder of the whole of humanity; he who shows no respect for human life is an enemy of humanity.”’

But it is not unequivocal at all, because the verse that is quoted here contains another, absolutely crucial phrase which has been left out in this fatwa but which changes the meaning altogether:

‘That was why we laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being, except as punishment for murder or other villainy in the land, (my emphasis) shall be regarded as having killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as having saved all mankind.

‘Our apostles brought them veritable proofs; yet many among them, even after that, did prodigious evil in the land. Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land.’ (Sura 5:31)

In other words, where there is ‘villainy’ killing is expressly permitted; and since villainy can mean anything, and since Islamist extremists regard western or democratic influence as villainous, it follows that the slaughter of western or reformnist Muslim innocents is expressly permitted – because they are not regarded as innocent in the first place.

This sinister thinking is presumably why, as the Times reports today, a Muslim teacher in Dewsbury – which is where one of the London bombers came from -- who signed a fatwa against suicide bombings nevertheless advocates armed jihad and hatred and suspicion of the west and the country in which his pupils live:

‘While Tony Blair and leaders of Britain’s Muslims were condemning extremism at their Downing Street summit, Mufti Zubair Dudha explained why British foreign policy led directly to the 7/7 atrocities. Mr Dudha, 29, teaches primary school children, teenagers and young adults at his Islamic Tarbiyah academy in Dewsbury.

‘He condemned the London atrocities and signed the Sunni Muslim fatwa against suicide bombings, but he is also an advocate of jihad. In his foreword to a 1996 translation of a pamphlet by one of his mentors, entitled Jihaad, Mr Dudha wrote: “Today many of us are misled into believing that in our times jihad of the sword is not warranted. Most definitely physical jihad is, and will be needed to a large extent.”

‘Later he added: “Besides the jihad of the pen and tongue, the Muslim ummah [nation] cannot be exempted from physical jihad. No learned person and no true Muslim can deny the benefits, fruits and blessings of physical jihad for the course of Allah.” One chapter title in the book is: “Preparing for Jihad and obtaining warfare equipment is also compulsory...

‘In Dewsbury, students at Mr Dudha’s Islamic Tarbiyah Academy are taught that “the enemies of Allah” have schemed “to poison the thinking and minds of [Muslim] youth and to plant the spirit of unsteadiness and moral depravity in their lives”. Parents are told that they betray their children if they allow them to associate with non-Muslims.’

Does the government realise that these declarations seem not to be worth the paper they are written on?

Posted by melanie at July 20, 2005