Nossa Senhora dos Mártyres, rogai por nós.
Nossa Senhora dos Mártyres, rogai por nós.
«As for poetry and music, most of the great “Islamic” poets (again mostly Persians were considered heretics by Islamic authorities, and music is prohibited in Islam as a vain “useless” activity. Poetry and music survived in civilizations such as Persia DESPITE Islam.»Do historiador Bernard Lewis, citado por Fjordman:
«Muslim musicians devised no standard system of notation, and their compositions are therefore known only by the fallible and variable medium of memory. There is no preserved corpus of classical Islamic music comparable with that of the European musical tradition. All that remains is a quite extensive theoretical literature on music, some descriptions and portrayals of musicians and musical occasions by writers and artists, a number of old instruments in various stages of preservation, and of course the living memory of long-past performances.»De Charles Murray, também citado por Fjordman num outro artigo:
«Just as linear perspective added depth to the length and breadth of painting, polyphony added, metaphorically, a vertical dimension to the horizontal line of melody.»Já agora, a conclusão que nos atrevemos a tecer:
«Em suma: a música no ocidente desenvolveu-se a partir da herança hebraica e da cultura grega; o seu desenvolvimento foi marcado pela invenção de um rigoroso sistema de notação que lhe permitiu alcançar um nível de elaboração harmónica impossível nas tradições puramente orais.»Não deixe de ler Para uma verdadeira compreensão do islão: a proibição da música.
Evidence of prohibition in the Qur’aan and Sunnah:«Allaah says in Soorat Luqmaan (interpretation of the meaning):
“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]
The scholar of the ummah, Ibn ‘Abbaas (...) said: this means singing. Mujaahid (...) said: this means playing the drum (tabl). (Tafseer al-Tabari, 21/40).
Al-Hasan al-Basri (...) said: this aayah was revealed concerning singing and musical instruments (lit. woodwind instruments). (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/451).
Al-Sa’di (...) said: this includes all manner of haraam [n.ed.: proibido] (...) singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit. (Tafseer al-Sa’di, 6/150)
Ibn al-Qayyim (...) said: The interpretation of the Sahaabah [n.ed.: os Companheiros do profeta Mafoma] and Taabi’in [n.ed.: os Seguidores], that ‘idle talk’ refers to singing, is sufficient. This was reported with saheeh isnaads [n.ed.: conhecimento autêntico das ahadith] from Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood. Abu’l-Sahbaa’ said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about the aayah [n.ed.: prodígio, milagre, os versículos do Alcorão por antonomásia] (interpretation of the meaning), ‘“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks’ [Luqmaan 31:6]. He said: By Allaah, besides Whom there is no other god, this means singing – and he repeated it three times. It was also reported with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn ‘Umar (...) that this means singing. There is no contradiction between the interpretation of “idle talk” as meaning singing and the interpretation of it as meaning stories of the Persians and their kings, and the kings of the Romans, and so on, such as al-Nadr ibn al-Haarith used to tell to the people of Makkah to distract them from the Qur’aan. Both of them are idle talk. Hence Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Idle talk” is falsehood and singing. Some of the Sahaabah said one and some said the other, and some said both. Singing is worse and more harmful than stories of kings, because it leads to zinaa and makes hypocrisy grow (in the heart); it is the trap of the Shaytaan, and it clouds the mind. The way in which it blocks people from the Qur’aan is worse than the way in which other kinds of false talk block them, because people are naturally inclined towards it and tend to want to listen to it. The aayah condemn replacing the Qur’aan with idle talk in order to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah without knowledge and taking it as a joke, because when an aayah of the Qur’aan is recited to such a person, he turns his back as if he heard them not, as if there were deafness in his ear. If he hears anything of it, he makes fun of it. All of this happens only in the case of the people who are most stubbornly kaafirs and if some of it happens to singers and those who listen to them, they both have a share of this blame. (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/258-259).»
«Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“[Allaah said to Iblees:] And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice (i.e. songs, music, and any other call for Allaah’s disobedience)…” [al-Israa’ 17:64]
It was narrated that Mujaahid (...) said: “And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice” – his voice [the voice of Iblees/Shaytaan] is singing and falsehood. Ibn al-Qayyim (...) said: This idaafah [possessive or genitive construction, i.e., your voice] serves to make the meaning specific, as with the phrases [translated as] “your cavalry” and “your infantry” [later in the same aayah]. Everyone who speaks in any way that is not obedient to Allaah, everyone who blows into a flute or other woodwind instrument, or who plays any haraam kind of drum, this is the voice of the Shaytaan. (...). (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan).»
«Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):Acompanhemos o autor deste comentário, agora na análise de uma importante hadith:
“Do you then wonder at this recitation (the Qur’aan)?
And you laugh at it and weep not,
Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”
‘Ikrimah (...) said: it was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that al-sumood [verbal noun from saamidoon, translated here as “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”] means “singing”, in the dialect of Himyar; it might be said “Ismidi lanaa” [‘sing for us’ – from the same root as saamidoon/sumood] meaning “ghaniy” [sing]. And he said (...): When they [the kuffaar] heard the Qur’aan, they would sing, then this aayah was revealed.
Ibn Katheer (...) said: Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning) “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)” – Sufyaan al-Thawri said, narrating from his father from Ibn ‘Abbaas: (this means) singing. This is Yemeni (dialect): ismad lana means ghan lana [sing to us]. This was also the view of ‘Ikrimah. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer).»
«The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
This hadeeth indicates in two ways that musical instruments and enjoyment of listening to music are haraam. The first is the fact that the Prophet (...) said: “[they] permit” which clearly indicates that the things mentioned, including musical instruments, are haraam according to sharee’ah, but those people will permit them. The second is the fact that musical instruments are mentioned alongside things which are definitely known to be haraam, i.e., zinaa [n.ed.: fornicação] and alcohol: if they (musical instruments) were not haraam, why would they be mentioned alongside these things? (adapted from al-Silsilah al-Saheehah by al-Albaani, 1/140-141)»
Esta observação é de extrema importância, uma vez que a ignorada proibição da música pelo islão é equiparada nesta hadith à bem conhecida e universalmente aplicada proibição das bebidas alcoólicas no islão.
«Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah) (...) said: This hadeeth indicates that ma’aazif are haraam, and ma’aazif means musical instruments according to the scholars of (Arabic) language. This word includes all such instruments. (al-Majmoo’, 11/535).
Ibn al-Qayyim (...) said: And concerning the same topic similar comments were narrated from Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Saa’idi, ‘Imraan ibn Husayn, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Umaamah al-Baahili, ‘Aa’ishah Umm al-Mu’mineen, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, Anas ibn Maalik, ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Saabit and al-Ghaazi ibn Rabee’ah. Then he mentioned it in Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, and it indicates that they (musical instruments) are haraam.»
Atente-se à quantidade de autoridades invocadas. Adiante:
«The views of the scholars (imaams) of Islam
Al-Qaasim (...) said: Singing is part of falsehood. Al-Hasan (...) said: if there is music involved in a dinner invitation (waleemah), do not accept the invitation (al-Jaami by al-Qayrawaani, p. 262-263).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (...) said: The view of the four Imaams is that all kinds of musical instruments are haraam. It was reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaari and elsewhere that the Prophet (...) said that there would be among his ummah those who would allow zinaa [n.ed.: fornicação] , silk, alcohol and musical instruments, and he said that they would be transformed into monkeys and pigs… None of the followers of the imaams mentioned any dispute concerning the matter of music. (al-Majmoo’, 11/576).
«Ibn al-Qayyim (...) said: The madhhab of Abu Haneefah is the strictest in this regard, and his comments are among the harshest. His companions clearly stated that it is haraam to listen to all musical instruments such as the flute and the drum, even tapping a stick. They stated that it is a sin which implies that a person is a faasiq (rebellious evil doer) whose testimony should be rejected. They went further than that and said that listening to music is fisq (rebellion, evildoing) and enjoying it is kufr (disbelief). This is their words. They narrated in support of that a hadeeth which could not be attributed to the Prophet (...). They said: he should try not to hear it if he passes by it or it is in his vicinity. Abu Yoosuf said, concerning a house from which could be heard the sound of musical instruments: Go in without their permission, because forbidding evil actions is obligatory, and if it were not allowed to enter without permission, people could not have fulfilled the obligatory duty (of enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil). (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/425).»Urge interromper esta explanação para realçar a importância da posição da escola Hanafi a respeito desta matéria: o seu extremismo vai ao ponto de legitimar a invasão de propriedade alheia para impedir que seja tocada música. Presumo que esta obrigação de pôr cobro à grave falta de tocar música e de cantar possa estar na origem da proibição imposta aos dhimmi de cantar nas suas celebrações com tal intensidade que se oiça no exterior (cf. Para uma verdadeira compreensão do islão: os dhimmi: judeus e cristãos sob domínio islâmico); e na tentativa de aplicar a sharia em diversos países ocidentais, como esta:
Esta pretensão muçulmana de fazer calar o culto cristão parece estar longe de ser um caso isolado. Prossigamos com a afirmação de que os rendimentos obtidos como honorários por tocar música são como os rendimentos da prostituição:
«Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (...) said: Among the types of earnings which are haraam by scholarly consensus are ribaa, the fee of a prostitute, anything forbidden, bribes, payment for wailing over the dead and singing, payments to fortune-tellers and those who claim to know the unseen and astrologers, payments for playing flutes, and all kinds of gambling. (al-Kaafi).»
A seguir, afirma-se que a construção e a venda de instrumentos musicais também são proibidas e que a sua destruição, mesmo tratando-se de propriedade alheia, é permitida. Esta posição é defendida pela escola Maliqui:
«Ibn Taymiyah (...) said: It is not permissible to make musical instruments. (al-Majmoo’, 22/140). And he said: According to the majority of fuqahaa’, it is permissible to destroy musical instruments, such as the tanboor [a stringed instrument similar to a mandolin]. This is the view of Maalik and is the more famous of the two views narrated from Ahmad. (al-Majmoo’, 28/113). (...) Abu Thawr, al-Nu’maan – Abu Haneefah (...) – and Ya’qoob and Muhammad, two of the students of Abu Haneefah said: (...) This is our view. And he said: musical instruments are the wine of the soul, and what it does to the soul is worse than what intoxicating drinks do. (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 10/417).
Ibn Abi Shaybah (...) reported that a man broke a mandolin belonging to another man, and the latter took his case to Shurayh. But Shurayh did not award him any compensation – i.e., he did not make the first man pay the cost of the mandolin, because it was haraam and had no value. (al-Musannaf, 5/395).
Al-Baghawi (...) stated in a fatwa that it is haraam to sell all kinds of musical instruments such as mandolins, flutes, etc. (...) (Sharh al-Sunnah, 8/28)»
«Some people even have the nerve to suggest that the Sahaabah [n.ed.: os Companheiros do profeta Mafoma] and Taabi’in [n.ed.: os Seguidores] listened to singing, and that they saw nothing wrong with it!
Al-Fawzaan (...) said: We demand them to show us saheeh isnaads going back to these Sahaabah [n.ed.: os Companheiros do profeta Mafoma] and Taabi’in [n.ed.: os Seguidores], proving what they attribute to them. (...).
Some of them said that the ahaadeeth which forbid music are full of faults. (...) . Ibn Baaz (...) said: The ahaadeeth which were narrated concerning music being haraam are not full of faults as has been claimed. Some of them are in Saheeh al-Bukhaari which is the soundest of books after the Book of Allaah (...).
All the imaams agreed on the soundness of the ahaadeeth which forbid singing and musical instruments, apart from Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali, but al-Ghazzaali did not have knowledge of hadeeth (...).
Some of them said that the scholars forbade singing because it is mentioned alongside gatherings in which alcohol is drunk and where people stay up late at night for evil purposes.Al-Shawkaani (...) said: The response to this is that mentioning these things in conjunction does not only mean that what is haraam is what is joined together in this manner. Otherwise this would mean that zinaa [n.ed.: fornicação], as mentioned in the ahaadeeth, is not haraam unless it is accompanied by alcohol and the use of musical instruments.»
Concluímos esta entrada sobre a proibição da música no islão antecipando a expectável objecção segundo a qual a putativa proibição islâmica da música não é frequente (diga-se de passagem que já lemos diversas notícias dando conta da destruição de bancas de venda de suportes fonográficos no Paquistão, levados a cabo por taliban) e que é improvável que venha a ser aplicada numa Europa islamizada. A nossa intenção com esta entrada é pôr em evidência o facto de que o islão é incompatível com o nosso modo de vida; que o problema não está nas pessoas, nos muçulmanos, mas no seu livro e nas suas tradições exegéticas. E nada nos garante que, caso o islão prevaleça na Europa, esta proibição - como vimos, tão firmemente ancorada no Alcorão, nas ahadith e na jurisprudência islâmica - não venha a ser aplicada.«Perhaps – for fair-minded and objective readers – this summary will make it clear that the view that music is permissible has no firm basis. There are no two views on this matter. So we must advise in the best manner, and then take it step by step and denounce music, if we are able to do so. We should not be deceived by the fame of a man in our own times in which the people who are truly committed to Islam have become strangers. The one who says that singing and musical instruments are permitted is simply supporting the whims of people nowadays, as if the masses were issuing fatwas and he is simply signing them! If a matter arises, they will look at the views of fuqahaa’ on this matter, then they will take the easiest view, as they claim. Then they will look for evidence, or just specious arguments which are worth no more than a lump of dead meat. How often have these people approved things in the name of sharee’ah which in fact have nothing to do with Islam!
Strive to learn your Islam from the Book of your Lord and the Sunnah of your Prophet. Do not say, So-and-so said, for you cannot learn the truth only from men. Learn the truth and then measure people against it. (...) May what we have written above heal the hearts of the believers and dispel the whispers in the hearts of those who are stricken with insinuating whispers. May it expose everyone who is deviating from the path of Revelation and taking the easiest options, thinking that he has come up with something which none of the earlier generations ever achieved, and speaking about Allaah without knowledge. They sought to avoid fisq (evildoing) and ended up committing bid’ah [n.ed.: inovação] – may Allaah not bless them in it. It would have been better for them to follow the path of the believers.And Allaah knows best. (...)»
«THE DHIMMI - JEWS AND CHRISTIANS UNDER ISLAM (...) [T]here is no way to fairly assess today's situation [n.ed.: da relação entre muçulmanos e não-muçulmanos no Médio Oriente, que não diferem substancialmente das que se estabelecem no resto do mundo] without looking back over the last 1,300 years. Then the present tables were turned and Muslims ruled exclusively in the Middle East. The little-known facts of this dark and gruesome history have been well concealed and are only now gradually being brought to light. One excellent source book has become available in English over the last few years. This epic work was written by Bat Ye'or and is entitled, The Dhimmi (this is a term reserved for Jews and Christians under Islam). This work is not just a volume of idle speculation, but reflects the painstaking presentation of nearly 200 documents verifying the condition of both Christians and Jews under the rule of Islam. There are other works, of course, but in this article we will rely heavily upon this fine and comprehensive work of Bat Ye'or. During the first half of the seventh century AD, Islam was becoming entrenched in the desert area which we know today as Saudi Arabia. Islam's ugly side was quickly made apparent as the prophet turned against the Jews at the oasis of Khaybar, near Medina. After much destruction and bloodshed, the Jews surrendered under the terms of a treaty known as the dhimma. Subsequently, all the Jews and Christians of Arabia submitted to the Muslims under the terms of a treaty similar to the one granted at Khaybar. It was during this early period that the concept of jihad, or holy war, began to be developed. The Muslims considered all areas controlled by Islam as the dar al-Islam, or the "territory of Islam," while all areas controlled by infidels were known as the dar al-harb, or the "abode of war." Since Muslims felt Islam was destined to control all the earth, there could be no permanent peace made with infidels. As Islam and its holy war burst from the confines of Arabia, many peoples were forcefully confronted with it. Islam swept across the Holy Land, Syria, Egypt, and North Africa in its early years. Generally, polytheists were given the choice of conversion or death. However, Jews and Christians, or "the people of the Book" as they were known to Muslims, came under special consideration. Based upon the previous treaty at Khaybar they were called dhimmi, people who were allowed to live and even to adhere to their religions, but all this for the benefit of Islam. They were doomed to remain second-class citizens, living, it seemed, for the sole purpose of demonstrating to all, the superiority of Islam over conquered religions. From this point on the dhimmi were always at the mercy of the Muslim rulers, and subject at all times to the whims of Muslim mobs. The dhimmi status seemed to always hang in peril. In fact, in AD 640, the status of the dhimmi was revoked throughout the whole Arabian peninsula and the remaining Jews and Christians were expelled. Soon the dhimmi status, for what it was worth, was applied to Jews and Christians in many conquered lands of the Middle East. The dhimmi began to be more clearly defined by Muslim law and by common practice. There were several things that came to define the dhimmi status in Muslim lands. ASPECTS OF THE DHIMMI STATUS 1. Oppressive taxation In each conquered land, the Jews and Christians were allowed to remain and cultivate the land in exchange for the payment of a tax to the local Muslim ruler. This tax was called the Kharaj. This system was designed to remind the tenants that Islam owned the land. Their national identities and histories were blotted out and soon became virtually nonexistent. They were forbidden to possess arms and thus became totally dependent upon the occupying Muslim power. In some areas, such as Morocco, this system became so oppressive that the Jews of that area were virtual serfs even as late as 1913, and were, literally, the property of their Muslim masters. In addition to the Kharaj tax, the dhimmi were subjected to the poll tax or Jizya. This tax had to be paid in person by each subject, and it had to be paid in a public and humiliating manner. It was common for the dhimmi to be struck on the head or on the nape of the neck as he paid the tax to demonstrate the superiority of Islam. The dhimmi were also victimized by higher commercial and travel taxes. In addition they were often victims of extortion and blackmail at the hand of their own rulers. Often, greedy rulers required them to pay an avania, or protection money. This was simply a sum of money extorted from the Jewish or Christian communities, under the threat of persecution. This practice of having to pay for their own protection soon became the norm for dhimmi communities in Muslim lands. 2. Social and legal discrimination Dhimmi peoples were generally excluded from holding public office; were kept from many professions and high positions; or from being elevated, in any way, over Muslims. The most degrading jobs, such as cleaning the public latrines, fell to the dhimmi. Yemenite Jews, until they immigrated to Israel in 1950, were still required to clean the public latrines and remove dead animals from the city streets. In the courtroom, the evidence of a dhimmi could never be accepted in testimony against a Muslim. Thus it was often necessary for the dhimmi to hire Muslim "witnesses" for his court appearance. The dhimmi was not allowed to raise a hand against his Muslim masters, even if raised in self defense. Such a thoughtless act would often result in the death penalty. In many Muslim lands, Jews were routinely beaten and abused in the streets. They could only beg for mercy and attempt to flee their persecutors. They did not dare defend themselves. To further clarify their inferior status, the dhimmi were required to wear special clothing. The type of clothing varied from country to country, but always it seemed to be designed to make Jews and Christians appear inferior and foolish. In many countries the Jews were even required to go barefoot. They were also required to walk to the left of the Muslims. They were almost universally forbidden to ride horses, and even when riding donkeys, they were required to dismount upon meeting a Muslim. Jews and Christians were often confined to special quarters, and these areas were usually shut up after dark. They were not allowed to enter certain streets of Muslim cities. This practice continued in Persia, Yemen, and North Africa until the nineteenth century. These dhimmi ghettos were frequently the scenes of awful pogroms and persecutions by infuriated Muslim mobs. At the whim of local rulers these pitiful quarters could be confiscated and emptied on short notice. Whether they lived inside or outside of these quarters, the houses of dhimmi could never be taller or more elaborate than the houses of their Muslim neighbors. 3. Religious discrimination In Muslim lands, the construction of new churches and synagogues was generally forbidden. The restoration of certain pre-Islamic structures was permitted so long as they were not enlarged or transformed. Dhimmi places of worship were often ransacked, burned or demolished at the whim of the Muslims. This trend has continued right up through modern times. In Saudi Arabia, the government bulldozed the last Christian church in the kingdom in 1987. It was a unique 12th century structure found near the Yemen border. Liturgical forms were strictly controlled. It was generally prohibited to ring church bells, sound shofars (ram's horns used in Jewish ceremony), publicly display crosses, icons, banners and other religious objects. Early photos taken during the middle of the nineteenth century confirm that even the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem had been stripped of both its cross and belfry. In many Muslim lands, Jews and Christians had to bury their dead without mourning. Dhimmi graves had to be specially marked lest a Muslim should accidentally pray over the grave of an infidel. The cemeteries of the dhimmi were not respected since they were considered as being from the realm of hell. Commonly they were desecrated or even destroyed completely, as occurred in Jerusalem during Jordanian rule (1948-1967). At that time the Jordanian army used Jewish gravestones from the Mount of Olives to line their latrines. The dhimmi had to take great care to show respect to Muslim holy places. In North Africa, if Jews and Christians entered a mosque it was considered a capital offense. It was not even permitted for them to look into a mosque when passing by. Any such accusation, whether true or false, could cost the dhimmi his life. This was especially the case in all charges of blasphemy. The dhimmi communities were religiously harassed and sometimes forced to convert. For instance, in Yemen, it was required that every Jewish orphan child be converted to Islam. Of course, marriage or sexual relations between dhimmi and Muslim women called for the death sentence, although Muslim men could marry a dhimmi woman. To the Muslim, there was something about the dhimmi that was unclean and impure. This concept affected all Muslim relations with dhimmi peoples. Muslim concepts concerning the dhimmi may seem primitive and grossly discriminatory to the modern mind. However, these concepts are still very much alive in Muslim thinking, and are particularly evident in current ideas of jihad. The Islamic idea of world dominion has changed very little since the days of Muhammad. Involved in the Islamic concept is the complete military, religious and political domination of conquered peoples (which should ultimately include the whole world); Arabization of these peoples and nations; the absolute claim to their lands; the suppression of their historical, religious, and political traditions; and the extinguishing of their cultural and social aspirations. It is unthinkable for Muslims that conquered peoples should rise up and throw off the yoke of Islam or that land once in the domain of Islam should ever be lost to that domain. According to Islamic thinking, once a region has been conquered for Islam, it is always Islamic and must be re-conquered from the infidel, regardless of the passage of time. HOW DO THESE CONCEPTS AFFECT ISRAEL? These territorial concepts are best illustrated by the jihad which has raged against Israel. Israel is a tiny island surrounded by a sea of Islam. Not only was Israel once within the domain of Islam(1), but until the current immigration wave, over 60 percent of her inhabitants were descendants of dhimmi, whether they were refugees from Arab countries or indigenous to the land. Israel's declared independence and her subsequent victories over confederated Islamic armies in 1948, 1967 and again in 1973 shook the Islamic world to the core. Egypt's President Nasser well expressed Islamic feeling when he said, "To the disaster of Palestine there is no parallel in human history." Since jihad can be expressed in many ways, including military, economic, political, educational means, etc., it is not surprising that the modern jihad against Israel embodies and promotes many of the age-old dhimmi concepts. The tiny nation of Israel has been oppressed militarily since its birth by surrounding Muslim nations. There have already been five major wars in the Middle East over this matter, and there continues to be a very active campaign of terrorism against Israel even as peace conferences are in session. Israel is also oppressed economically. It has been estimated that the Arab economic boycott of Israel has cost the tiny nation some $45 billion in the past forty years. This does not include an additional $24 billion lost in foreign investments. This boycott also continues despite all the current peace processes. Israel is considered a pariah, an outcast, in the Muslim Middle East. The presence of a sovereign Jewish people on the land is considered a defilement and a sin. Thus, the only solution open to Islam is that the Jews must be pushed into the sea and the land cleansed. As in the ancient days of the dhimmi, the history and culture of Israel is denied and even eradicated whenever possible. Rich Arab nations have exerted considerable pressure in this regard. Airline and even US State Department maps have been known to exclude Israel entirely. Reference books have often presented slanted views. In recent months Hannan Ashwari, spokeswoman for the Palestinians, has boldly stated for the worldwide TV audience that she is a true descendant of the first Christians, and that they were Palestinians. This of course is lie, since her Arab people did not inhabit the land of Israel for almost six hundred years after the New Testament era. By such statements, history is murdered and so is truth. These are just other sophisticated attempts to deny a supposed dhimmi people their own culture and history. Thus the jihad rages on and on, even in this modern day. But for Islam to succeed in its plan of total world domination, there must be a people who are willing to play the part of the dhimmi. There must also be a people who have somehow allowed the love for truth to slip from their hearts.»(1) - A Península Ibérica encontra-se na segunda linha nas pretensões islâmicas à reconquista de território perdido.
«La alarma ha saltado en diversos municipios catalanes: el partido islamista Partido Renacimiento y Unión podría estar ultimando contactos con diversas comunidades islámicas catalanas para irrumpir en las próximas elecciones municipales catalanas.
Por el momento, únicamente Plataforma por Cataluña ha mostrado su rechazo al conocer estos extremos. Más concretamente, la delegación de Badalona del partido liderado por Josep Anglada ha declarado a MD que esta posibilidad “es una provocación islámica auspiciada por la política que han venido desarrollando los diferentes partidos con presencia en los ayuntamientos catalanes”.
El Partido Renacimiento y Unión de España (PRUNE), el primero de inspiración islámica que aspira a presentarse en toda España en los comicios locales de 2011. Unas elecciones donde unos 650.000 inmigrantes extracomunitarios podrán ejercer su derecho al voto gracias a los convenios internacionales firmados por el Gobierno.
Por ahora, el PRUNE no puede contar con los más de 700.000 marroquíes que viven en España, ya que el reino alauí no permite la reciprocidad, es decir, que los españoles puedan votar en Marruecos. Por ello, Mostafa Bakkach (Tánger, 1964), fundador de este partido, reclama a las autoridades de su país de origen que llegue a un acuerdo con el Gobierno de José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. “Marruecos debe hacer un esfuerzo, porque los inmigrantes no pueden ser ciudadanos de segunda, deben poder votar en el municipio donde viven y trabajan”.
«Open displays of faith among Macedonia's rival Christian and Muslim youths are stoking religious tensions that have smouldered since the fall of communist Yugoslavia. The collapse of the communist federation in the early 1990s saw a revival of interest in religion among Macedonia's mainly Slavic Orthodox Christians and predominantly Sunni Islam ethnic Albanians. Nowadays, Christian youths openly attend church services, fast and wear crosses, while Muslim girls are donning headscarves at schools even though the custom is outlawed.»Nada de novo: a queda do regime comunista do marechal Tito - que mantinha a coesão da República Federal da Jugoslávia pela força e através de um complexo equilíbrio de forças entre as diversas etnias e sensibilidades religiosas - fez emergir a religião quer como expressão pura de religiosidade reprimida pela ditadura comunista, quer como elemento de identidade individual e étnica. A história da guerra que eclodiu entre Croatas, Sérvios e Bósnios - os muçulmanos entre estes apoiados pelo internacionalismo islâmico - é notória, embora cada vez mais se note que precisa de ser mais bem contada.
«The use of religious symbols is becoming more obvious at schools, notably in the capital Skopje and the western town of Tetovo, an ethnic Albanian stronghold. The issue came to a head early in 2009, when a Tetovo school principal, Ljatif Ismaili, was sacked after banning a girl from entering class with a headscarf several times. "At high school, other students found it strange at the beginning, but later got used to it," says Shpresa, an ethnic Albanian student from Bogovinje village near Tetovo. "I will wear it until I get married, and if my husband tells me to take it off, I will do so.”»Mesmo num país não islâmico, para esta jovem é claro que, depois de casada, quem manda é o marido. Agora a parte concernente ao efeito de uma população muçulmana numerosa num dado país:
«Macedonia has long been dogged by ethnic tensions related to its Albanian minority, who make up most of the country's Muslim population -- which represents about 30 percent of the country's 2.2 million residents. The others are Turks, Roma and Macedonian Muslims known as Torbeses.»30%. Vejamos o que sucede a um país quando a população muçulmana atinge num dado país os 30%, de acordo com o texto que citámos na entrada Efeitos Corrosivos:
«(...) Tras alcanzar el 20%, las naciones pueden esperar disturbios espeluznantes, formación de milicias jihadistas, asesinatos esporádicos y quema de iglesias [como en] Etiopía: 32,8% de musulmanes. (...)»Será que é mesmo assim? Voltemos à notícia:
«In 2001, an ethnic Albanian rebellion brought Macedonia to the edge of civil war. The seven-month uprising was put to an end with the internationally-brokered peace accord that brought more rights to the ethnic Albanian community.»Parece que sim, mas a trégua (recorde-se, sempre temporária para os muçulmanos e vista como moratória que lhes permite ganhar forças para nova ofensiva) aponta para um equilíbrio de tensões distinto, mais típico dos países (sempre segundo o texto citado supra) onde os muçulmanos não ultrapassam a barreira dos 10% da população (cf. Efeitos Corrosivos)(1).
«Education Minister Pero Stojanovski admits the issue of headscarves in schools is "very sensitive.” (...) But Stojanovski stresses "rules of conduct" should not be interpreted as "discrimination.” Namik Xhaferi of Tetovo's Islamic community says the cross is a religious symbol, while headscarves are not only that, but also a part of expressing respect for Islam. "No-one should exclude young women of Islamic faith (from schools) because of that," he insists. The problem first emerged soon after Macedonia's independence in 1991, when a Muslim girl attended school with her head covered for the first time. It resurfaced when a law on religion at school entered into force in September 2008, sparking a vivid debate before the Supreme Court declared wearing headscarves to class is unconstitutional. But the public attorney's office says "students have constitutional and legal rights for freedom of religious expression," according to spokeswoman Uranija Pirovska. (...) It is estimated that up to three percent of female students wear headscarves or other Islamic apparel at high schools and universities. In Tetovo's Medical High School with around 2,600 students including ethnic Albanians and Turks, classes are held in all three languages and problems have so far been avoided. (...)»A forma encontrada para evitar tensões étnicas nesta escola parece ter sido dar as aulas em três línguas distintas.
«Tetovo's leading Muslim cleric Alifikri Efendi Esati says "a choice to express religious respect is not a problem, but when politics interferes, there's no happiness for anyone."»Como já temos observado, os muçulmanos tentam eximir-se de respeitar as leis da nação onde vivem, ou exigir a sua alteração, invocando o direito à liberdade religiosa, para a qual usam uma definição bastante abrangente.
«In recent years, youngsters have joined hardline Islamist groups like the Wahhabis, who stand out in Macedonia with their trademark beards and shortened pants. The Islamic community is also very active in building mosques in areas populated by Muslims. In Tetovo, eight new mosques have been erected in recent years and two more are under construction, compared to only one Orthodox Christian church in the town.»De acordo com estas tendências, Tetovo rumará, segundo as previsões dos pessimistas, à secessão, não sem derramamento de sangue. (1) - «(...) A partir del 5% de población musulmana, los musulmanes ejercen una influencia desorbitada con respecto al porcentaje de población que representan. Por ejemplo, insistirán en la introducción de los alimentos halal (limpios de acuerdo a los preceptos islámicos), asegurándose de esta manera empleos de manipuladores de alimentos reservados a los musulmanes. Empezarán las presiones sobre las cadenas de supermercados para que muestren alimentos halal en sus estanterías, junto con las correspondientes amenazas si no se cumplen estos requisitos. Esto está ocurriendo en Francia: 8% de musulmanes; Filipinas: 5%; Suecia: 5%; Suiza: 4,3%; Holanda: 5,5%; Trinidad y Tobago: 5,8%. Llegados a este punto, trabajarán para que la autoridad gubernamental les permita que ellos mismos se regulen bajo la Sharia, la Ley Islámica (dentro de sus ghettos). El objetivo último de los islamistas es establecer la Sharia en todo el mundo. Cuando los musulmanes se aproximan al 10% de la población, tienden a aumentar la anarquía como un medio de quejarse sobre sus condiciones de vida en el país. En París ya hemos visto las revueltas imparables con quema de coches y de mobiliario urbano. En esta situación, cualquier acción no musulmana ofende al Islam, y resulta en insurrecciones y amenazas, como las de Amsterdam tras la oposición a las viñetas de Mahoma y películas sobre el Islam. Estas tensiones se ven a diario, particularmente en los sectores musulmanes de Guyana: 10% de musulmanes; India: 13,4%; Israel: 16,0%; Kenia: 10,0%; Rusia: 15,0%. Para hacerse una idea de lo que representan esos porcentajes, digamos que la población negra de los Estados Unidos constituye el 13% del total.] (...)»
«The War Against the Infidels In 2001, the monumental 6th century Buddhas of Bamiyan were dynamited on orders from Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar. The United States and other Western governments issued protests. Afghanistan's Islamist rulers shrugged them off.
In 2010, Al-Kifl, the tomb of the Prophet Ezekiel, near Baghdad, is being desecrated. On the tomb are inscriptions in Hebrew and an ark in which a Torah was displayed centuries ago. Iraq's Antiquities and Heritage Authority, under pressure from Islamists, is erasing the Hebrew words, removing the Hebrew ornaments and planning to build a mosque on top of the grave.
So far, we're hearing protests from almost no one. But this is not just another "Where is the outrage?" story. The larger and more alarming trend is that in a growing number of Muslim-majority countries a war is being waged against non-Muslim minorities.
Where non-Muslim minorities already have been "cleansed" - as in Afghanistan and Iraq -- the attacks are against their memory. Ethnic minorities also are being targeted: The genocidal conflict against the black Muslims of Darfur is only the most infamous example.
Connect these dots: In Nigeria this week, Muslim youths set fire to a church, killing more than two dozen Christian worshippers. In Egypt, Coptic Christians have been suffering increased persecution including, this month, a drive-by shooting outside a church in which 7 people were murdered. In Pakistan, Christian churches were bombed over Christmas. In Turkey, authorities have been closing Christian churches, monasteries and schools, and seizing Christian properties. Recently, churches in Malaysia have been attacked, too, provoked by this grievance: Christians inside the churches were referring to God as "Allah." How dare infidels use the same name for the Almighty as do Muslims!
In response to all this, Western journalists, academics, diplomats and politicians mainly avert their eyes and hold their tongues. They pretend there are no stories to be written, no social pathologies to be documented, no actions to be taken. They focus instead on Switzerland's vote against minarets and anything Israel might be doing to prevent terrorists from claiming additional victims.
Many Muslims, no doubt, disapprove of the persecution of non-Muslims. But in most Muslim-majority countries, any Muslim openly opposing the Islamists and their projects risks being branded an apostate. And under the Islamist interpretation of Sharia, Islamic law, apostates deserve death.
Not so long ago, the Broader Middle East was a diverse region. Lebanon had a Christian majority for centuries but that ended around 1990 - the result of years of civil war among the country's religious and ethnic communities. The Christian population of Turkey has diminished substantially in recent years. Islamists have driven Christians out of Bethlehem and other parts of the West Bank; almost all Christians have fled Gaza since Hamas' takeover.
There were Jewish communities throughout the Middle East for millennia. The Jews of Iran trace their history back more than 2,700 years but about 8 out of 10 Iranian Jews have emigrated since the 1979 Islamist Revolution; only about 40,000 remain.
The Jews of what is now Saudi Arabia were wiped out as Mohammad and his followers established a new religion and began to build a new empire in the 7th century A.D. But Jewish communities survived elsewhere until after World War II when Jews were forced to abandon their homes in Iraq (more than a fourth of Baghdad's population was Jewish), Libya, Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Morocco, Tunisia, Yemen and other countries.
In many cases they were driven out by Muslims furious over the establishment of the modern state of Israel. But how odd is it to protest the creation of a safe haven and homeland for Jews by making your own Jewish citizens homeless and stateless?
In 1947, Pakistan also was founded as a safe haven - for Indian Muslims who did not want to be ruled by Hindus once the British left the subcontinent. The country's founding father, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was determined that while Pakistan would have an Islamic identity, it would be tolerant of Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Parsees and others - as much as 20 percent of the population at independence. It hasn't worked out that way and, as a result, non-Muslim minorities today constitute only about 3 percent of Pakistan's population. By contrast, non-Hindus constitute almost 20 percent of India's population, with Muslims the largest minority at 13 percent.
When the dots are connected, the picture that emerges is not pretty: An "Islamic world" in which terrorists are regarded often with lenience, sometimes with respect and occasionally with reverence, while minority groups face increasing intolerance, persecution and "cleansing," and where even their histories are erased. And we in the West are too polite, too "politically correct," and perhaps too cowardly to say much about it.»