Nigerian State Says Miss World Reporter Should Die

What the *@!K is wrong with these people? This has to be some kind of sick joke.

Nigerian State Says Miss World Reporter Should Die

By Tume Ahemba

KADUNA, Nigeria (Reuters) - A Nigerian Muslim state said Tuesday it had issued a “fatwa” urging a death sentence for the author of a newspaper story on the Miss World (news - web sites) pageant that sparked deadly riots in northern Nigeria.

More than 200 people died in the violence in the northern city of Kaduna.

Muslims were enraged by the November 16 article which suggested the Prophet Mohammad would probably have married one of the contestants in the pageant, which has been relocated from Nigeria to London because of the bloodshed.

“What we are saying is that the Holy Koran has clearly stated that whoever insults the Prophet of Islam, Mohammad, should be killed,” Zamfara State Commissioner for Information Umar Dangaladima Magaji told Reuters.

Asked to clarify the government’s pronouncement, Magaji said the state had “passed a fatwa.”

“It’s a fatwa. It is based on the request of the people,” he said, adding that this did not contradict the authority of Islamic clerics who have the powers to decree death sentences.

“Being a leader you can pass a fatwa,” Magaji said.

Magaji said a number of Islamic associations in the state had asked the government to take action. The government had decided a fatwa was appropriate and could defuse anger that might otherwise lead to further bloodshed.

The Kaduna-based New Nigerian newspaper said the “fatwa” was issued by Zamfara’s Deputy Governor Mamuda Aliyu Dallatun Shinkafi, who compared Isioma Daniel with British author Salman Rushdie, sentenced to death by Iranian Muslim clerics.

“Like Salman Rushdie, the blood of the ThisDay writer can be shed,” the paper quoted its reporter, who attended rally at which the Shinkafi made the pronouncement, as saying.

NORTHERN NIGERIA TENSIONS

Zamfara was the first Nigerian state to adopt strict Islamic sharia law, soon after the end of military rule in Nigeria in 1999. Attempts to introduce the sharia code in the neighboring state of Kaduna sparked protests and riots from non-Muslims that killed some 3,000 people in February 2000.

The Kaduna office of ThisDay, which published the article linking the Miss World beauty queens with the Prophet Mohammad, was razed last week by Muslim youths.

ThisDay editors told Reuters that Daniel, the paper’s style editor, had fled to the United States after tendering her resignation in the wake of the crisis.

The editor of the Saturday edition of the paper in which the article appeared was arrested for questioning but has since been released, the editors said.

President Olusegun Obasanjo, speaking from Abuja Monday in an interview with CNN, said “irresponsible journalism” was to blame for Nigeria’s latest communal bloodletting.

Religious leaders have warned the violence could torpedo Nigeria’s presidential elections next year, already overshadowed by the country’s worst cycle of religious and political violence since independence from Britain in 1960.

The Miss World pageant was hastily relocated to London, but there pageant organizers came up against more opposition with media and lobby groups accusing them of having blood on their hands.

Trucks ferried bodies from hospitals in Nigeria’s northern city of Kaduna for mass burials Monday as calm returned after the violence.

Troops enforced a curfew six days after Christian-Muslim riots broke out. The Red Cross said Monday the death toll was 215, while civil rights and hospital sources put the figure at 250.

Re: Nigerian State Says Miss World Reporter Should Die

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Stu: *
"What we are saying is that the Holy Koran has clearly stated that whoever insults the Prophet of Islam, Mohammad, should be **killed
*," Zamfara State Commissioner for Information Umar Dangaladima Magaji told Reuters.
[/QUOTE]

I don't claim to be a scholar of Quran, so I am most definitely interested in seeing where exactly in Quran does it say this. Anyone knows, please provide a reference. Thanks.

Stu, if you were expecting something different, you are in for more surprise.

What? They gonna issue fatwas against the pageant queens now as well? Or wait, no.. they don't have the guts to do that. That's the whole world's women we're talking about. There'd be way too much ruckus over that. Take out the poor local writer instead. Gotta blame someone, he's an easy target.

Loss of life in Nigeria was fuelled by West's hatred for Islam

Loss of life in Nigeria was fuelled by West's hatred for Islam

The relentless campaign by the Western media to vilify Islamic beliefs and practices has indirectly led to more than 200 people losing their lives in the Nigerian city of Kaduna. Given the strong feelings of Muslims towards the Miss World beauty contest, it was widely expected that the West would behave in a responsible manner and promote religious tolerance during its media coverage of the event.

Instead the West chose once again to advocate religious hatred, consistent with its deep hatred of Islam. A central pillar of this vicious campaign was to attempt to turn the pageant into a protest vote against the Sharia death sentence passed on Amina Lawal who was 'convicted' of adultery. Genevieve de Fontenay, head of the Miss France committee said,"The Miss France committee is joining the protests against Nigeria, which condemns women to death for adultery. These sentences are barbaric and unacceptable". Other contestants and their representatives voiced similar opinions and some even boycotted the pageant, demanding that Amina Lawal was freed. Under intense pressure the Nigerian government capitulated and agreed to suspend the sentence at the appropriate time. The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Dubem Onyia said that Muslim punishments like stoning to death will never be carried out. Encouraged by the success of the foreign media, Christians in the media also joined in the defamation of Islam. Simon Kolawole the editor of the 'Thisday' newspaper published a filthy article written by Miss Isioma Daniel, which suggested that prophet of Islam would have chosen one of the contestants as his wife. The article sparked riots and an orgy of violence ensued.

Since September 11, vilification of Islam has become an integral component of the West's war against Islam. Western ideals of 'religious tolerance' and 'coexistence of religions' have given way to religious bigotry and anti-Muslim demagoguery. In America, key leaders of the religious right who are counted among President Bush's closest political allies have embarked on a ferocious campaign to malign Islam. There is the Rev. Franklin Graham, who described Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion". Evangelist Pat Robertson, called Prophet Muhammad "an absolute wild-eyed fanatic . . . a robber and brigand . . . a killer". And, in an appearance on the CBS program 60 Minutes Rev. Jerry Falwell called the prophet of Islam a terrorist. In Europe too, there is strong vitriol directed against Muslims and their beliefs. Oriana Fallaci, the Italian war correspondent wrote a book entitled 'Anger and Pride' in which she describes Muslims as 'vile creatures who urinate in baptisteries' and 'multiply like rats'. To the horror of many people, Italy's Defence Minister, Antonio Martino, praised Fallaci for having the courage to write the book. The book is a runaway bestseller in Italy and Spain and was recently published in France. Rather than taking actions against individuals who make disparaging remarks against Islam, western governments are quick to defend their right to speak by citing freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is a permanent feature of the capitalist ideology. The West claims that individuals are free to express their thoughts on all matters. But in practice this leads to conflict amongst people as a person's point of view may be interpreted as offensive and insulting by another person. Hence, Western governments are compelled to intervene in the disputes and resort to legislation to protect the right of individuals to speak freely at the expense of other people's free speech. So the real benefactors of free speech are those individuals or groups whose thoughts coincide with the interests of the government or possess the ability to exert influence over the government. For example the reason why the religious right in America is allowed to attack Islam in such a flagrant manner is because their fiery rhetoric agrees with President Bush's so called war on terrorism. However, if the same conservative Christians were to insult Jews or the Zionist state of Israel the US government would most probably adopt stern measures to restrict their speech.

On the international front, Western governments use freedom of speech to pry open societies closed to western thoughts and values. Any criticisms from the people towards the imposition of Western values are rarely tolerated by Western governments. For example the West wants the Pakistani society to embrace western culture, but at the same time the West is supportive of President Musharraf's draconian measures to muzzle 'Islamists' from speaking out against western values. Such hypocrisy only serves to underscore the perception amongst Muslims that the West is solely interested in the utter destruction of Islamic values and practices.

Islam does not believe in the fanciful idea of freedom of speech, where a handful of men decide which thoughts are legally beyond reproach and which thoughts are subject to unfettered criticism. Islam stipulates that life, honour, blood, property, belief, race and the mind are to be protected by the Islamic State. All the citizens of the Khilafah are guaranteed these rights, irrespective of whether they are Muslim or non-Muslims. The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

"One who hurts a dhimmi (non-Muslim citizen of the Khilafah), he hurts me and the one who hurts me, hurts Allah"

Therefore it is prohibited for a Muslim to insult the beliefs of a non-Muslim or to damage their places of worship. Islam has even defined the manner of discussing with non-Muslims. Allah (Subhanhu Wa Ta'aala) says,

"Invite to the way of your Lord with Hikma (wisdom) and good advice, and argue with them in a way that is best" [TMQ An-Nahl: 125]

In contrast, Muslims living in the West have to face a barrage of insults and attacks on their places of worship. When Islam was implemented in its entirety Christians, Jews and Hindus flourished in places like Egypt, Palestine and India. Similarly, the rights of the Muslims were protected, until the very last days of the Khilafah State. During the rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, Britain decided to stage a play, which depicted the life of the messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) of Allah in a derogatory manner. On hearing this Sultan Abdul Hamid complained to British government to immediately stop the play. The British government defended its decision to hold the play by citing free speech. When Sultan Abdul Hamid threatened Britain with military action only then did Britain relent.

In comparison, the present regimes in the Muslim world proclaim to uphold Islamic values, but when put to the test these regimes easily forgo Islamic values in preference for western values. In truth these regimes have always implemented capitalist solutions dressed up in Islamic apparel.

As the West's war on terror gains momentum, the slander and lies against Islam multiply and increase in ferocity. Muslims in Britain must take it upon themselves to expose the myth of free speech and other fanciful concepts of western capitalism which are used to defame Islam.

Kosser_M writes: "When Islam was implemented in its entirety Christians, Jews and Hindus flourished in places like Egypt, Palestine and India. Similarly, the rights of the Muslims were protected, until the very last days of the Khilafah State. "

And when was that?

I agree the b*stard deserves to die, he should have known better than to insult our beloved Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam). I wish I could rip him to shreds with my own hands :mad:

but I don’t think it says it in the Quran that whoever insults the Prophet should be killed, but I could be wrong.

An insult to the prophet(saw) is an insult to Allah(swt) under the khilafah state these people if they are not majnoon (mad) they will be killed. for such blasphemy. this so called FREE WORLD really means free to hurl insults at Islam, The khilafah will put a stop to all this plus American terrorism!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by OldLahori: *
Kosser_M writes: "When Islam was implemented in its entirety Christians, Jews and Hindus flourished in places like Egypt, Palestine and India. Similarly, the rights of the Muslims were protected, until the very last days of the Khilafah State. "

And when was that?
[/QUOTE]

This was under the Islamic Khilafah state, before the 3rd of March 1924. When Muslims actually had honour & dignity!

Then why does he deserve to die? Why would you rip him to shreds if it does not say so in the Quran?

Kosser: Assalam O Alaikum!

  1. First, pls always write Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam... 'saw' is not proven from Quran or Sunnah.

  2. We are not talking about Khilafa and your wishful thinking. Sounds interesting, nevertheless

and most importantly

  1. Please provide evidence from Quran where it says that a person who insults Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam) should be killed. No long cut-and-pastes from any website, just a simple ayat which says "kill those who insult the Prophet (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam)" or something like that. Or even prove it from the life of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam).

Thanks.

ps. Your personal thinking and opinions are not required, just a simple evidence from the word of Allah Ta'llah or the actions of Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam).

The journalist who wrote the offending piece is a female style editor. She is not a political or religious commentator.

All things being proportional, the deaths of 200 people seems a bit extreme for an ill advised comment that could be construed as a religious insult.

My personal belief is that a religion cannot be harmed by the insults of man. Any religion worth following should have strength, maturity, wisdom, and tolerance at it's core.

Calling for the death of someone, whom I am quite certain made a glib or flippant comment without sensitivity to the raging conflict in the country is barbaric.

It is just my opinion, but I believe that there are some deep seated religious tribal and ethnic hatreds going on here that have almost nothing to do with a beauty pageant. It is like letting gasoline fumes accumulate in a closed space, the one who creates the spark may be blamed, but is ultimately not the one that created the danger.

Brother Faisal, (Saw) is what we call in ENGLISH (NOT ARABIC) an Abbreviation, and any evidence in the Qur’an refers to Arabic not ENGLISH.

Point 2, Khilafah (Islamic state) is an obligation, so to mock it is a sin or even kufr.

Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Hazim, who said: I accompanied Abu Hurairah for five years and heard him talking of the Prophet’s saying: The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafa and they will number many. They asked: What then do you order us? He said: Fulfil the bay’ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.

Umar said to me that he heard the Prophet (saw) saying: Whoso takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (swt) will meet Him (swt) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no bay?ah (allegiance or a pledge) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of jahilliyah

And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you?. [TMQ 5:48]

And He (swt) said:

?And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you and do not follow their whims, and beware (be on the alert) that they may deviate you away from even some part of what Allah revealed to you?. [TMQ 5:49]

O you who believe obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority amongst you?. [TMQ 4:59]

Ruling by Islamic laws, is the most frequently discussed issue in Qur’an after the belief and creed. As a result, the Khilafah has been discussed by many Muslim scholars, some of them defining the Khilafah as below:

Al-Mawardi: Succession of the Prophethood aimed at protecting the Deen and ruling the world (Dunia).

Taqiudeen al-Nabhani: A total leadership for all the Muslims aimed at implementing the Shariah (Divine Laws) of Islam and carrying the Message of Islam to the world.

Ibn Hisham, the famous narrator of the Sirah of the Prophet (pbuh) says regarding the establishment of the Islamic State in Medina: “When the Prophet (pbuh) was assured and satisfied in Medina and when his brothers from Muhajireen (migrators) were gathered with him in Medina along with his brothers from the Ansar (helpers), Islam was firmly established so the prayer was established, the Zakah and Sawm (fasting) were obligated, the hudud (punishment) were established, halal and haram was obligated and Islam was in power among them.”

It must be understood that “Khilafah” is not merely a label that legitimizes any type of authority, but a Khilafah exists only when the Islamic Shariah, i.e., Islamic Law, is the sole source of legislation in a state and its security is controlled by Muslims. Allah (swt) says, “So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires away from the truth.” [Al-Maidah:48]

http://www.khilafah.org/content/korg/khilafah/bash.htm?sub=khilafah_intro

Kosser!

Either you are offering blessings and durood on the Prophet Muhammad (Sallalh o Alaihai Wassalam) or you are not. So, I presume 'saw' is an English word you are using? If you indeed wish to offer blessings and durood on the Prophet (Sallalh o Alaihai Wassalam), the least you can do is to do it properly.

Secondly, none of the ayats or ahadeeth you quoted deal with the question I asked. All the stuff you posted is to support your opinion about khilafa, and we are not discussing khilafa in this thread.

I asked you, and I repeat: Please provide evidence from Quran where it says that a person who insults Prophet Muhammad (Sallalah o Alaihai Wassalam) should be killed.

Tell me, a single instance, where the Prophet Muhammad (Sallalh o Alaihai Wassalam) killed anyone for insulting him.

And if you don't have any such evidence, you can just admit that this is not an order by Allah Ta'llah or his messanger (Sallalh o Alaihai Wassalam) but is merely your own desire and wish.

Please stick to the topic we are discussing, thank you.

AGAIN I WILL SAY THAT YOUR ARGUMENT ABOUT (SAW) IS BASELESS

Brother Faisal, (Saw) is what we call in ENGLISH (NOT ARABIC) an Abbreviation, and any evidence in the Qur'an refers to ARABIC NOT ENGLISH.

I don't know what you are discussing but i'm always disscusing about khilafah because it is a sin not to!!, so regarding your nitpicking argument please go and try to find the evidence yourself as i will post it for you when i have it.

And just some advice in this blessed month of ramadan, it's not good to accuse a Muslim as you said:

"And if you don't have any such evidence, you can just admit that this is not an order by Allah Ta'llah or his messanger (Sallalh o Alaihai Wassalam) but is merely your own desire and wish"

As i will bring the evidence and you didn't know if i had it or not!!

please only carry on discussing with me if it is in an islamic manner.

Jazzakallah Khair

Lets stop wasting our time.

You said: "An insult to the prophet(saw) is an insult to Allah(swt) under the khilafah state these people if they are not majnoon (mad) they will be killed. for such blasphemy."

I asked you if you have any evidence for such a penalty (death) proven from Quran or Sunnah. And instead of giving a clear evidence you say "but i'm always disscusing about khilafah". And then you say "please go and try to find the evidence yourself as i will post it for you when i have it".

In simple words it means that you made a statement about killing a person when you had no evidence to back it up. Case closed.

Have some evidence before making a claim in religious matters. As regards Khilafa, you have plenty of opportunbitites to present your case about khilafa elsewhere, use those.

I still don't understand one thing. Even if is was written in the Koran. Would people believe it to be contemporarily just?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
I still don't understand one thing. Even if is was written in the Koran. Would people believe it to be contemporarily just?
[/QUOTE]

First things first. Lets not jump to next steps before determining if the claim even has some merit, in the first place. We'll just be wasting a lot of time, otherwise.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *

First things first. Lets not jump to next steps before determining if the claim even has some merit, in the first place. We'll just be wasting a lot of time, otherwise.
[/QUOTE]

Actually my dear savant...this is the basic problem. People using or misusing 1200 yr old books as their basis for forming laws. The degree of punishment (after all that is what's going to the crux of the argument on eihter side. Whether Allah said to gently stroke the blasphemor or whether to drag his body across the pind only after the wild dogs have had their fill) is no tthe issue. It is whether religous scripture should be the basis of common sensical law making.

Chaltahai,

You and I differ on this.

You support molding the laws to go along with present day situations. Because the laws you espouse are man-made in the first place. They need to be kept updated.

Muslims, on the other hand, believe that the only entity which has the power to dictate laws is our Creator. Our Creator gave us a complete set of core laws to live our lives. For newer issues which come up in present times, we can take guidance from the core law and come up with a solution, but we do not re-write the core law just because it is 1200 years old. The reason why it is not time-sensitive, is because it is not written by a man.