Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 43

Thread: Sh. Riyadh al-Haq - Statement from Fareena Alam

  1. #1
    Senior Member sufisticated's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Maliki
    Posts
    939

    Default Sh. Riyadh al-Haq - Statement from Fareena Alam



    before anyone says anything more about sister fareena alam, they should read this:

    CBC - Riyadhul Haq
    Assalamualaikum!

    Alhamdulillah, I’m back in London after the conference in Istanbul.

    I understand Br Mohammad and Br Naveed posted the e-mails they sent to me while I was away. I’m sorry I was not able to allay your concerns earlier.

    I want to thank you for your concern. I also received 4-5 e-mails from a few other brothers. They were all polite and reasonable, Alhamdulillah.

    I think you’re right. As a Muslim, I could have handled the situation much better. This is the nature of live interviews and at the end of the day, I am a journalist who presented and analysed information that was already in the public domain.

    In this situation, I was the only person interviewed by the Canadian media who gave a two-prong message: Firstly that I disagree with some of what Riyadhul Haq has said in the past but more importantly, I think the media campaign to ban him is shameful and a result of very shoddy journalism.

    Everyone else was in one or the other camp.

    One could rightly contend, who am I to have reservations about someone of his calibre and I accept that. However, his condemnation of Sh Hamza (whether by name or not) after 9/11 and other incidents where he has been publicly judgemental about the intentions of fellow Muslims, make me wary of him.

    Regardless, there is only one reason why I decided to do this CBC interview. I strongly believe that the whole Canadian media circus around Riyadh ul Haq was absolutely shameless. Regardless of how much I disagree with him, I believe he should be defended in this situation because he has been made into a scapegoat for people’s frustrations.

    I went on the radio to condemn what Tarek Fatah was doing. Fatah has abused his connections with the media to perform character assassination in a climate of fear and uncertainty. Fatah would disagree and that’s fine. He is doing what he feels is right.

    The interview I gave to the CBC was almost 11 minutes long. After me, Syed Zain Khan (who invited Sh Riyadh to Canada) was interviewed. Zain said on air that my portrayal of the Shaykh was 'overwhelmingly positive'.

    These are some of the things I said during my interview:

    1. We cannot decide to ban a man from Canada just because some Tom, **** or Harry calling himself a Muslim leader decides he is a hate-monger.

    2. I disagree with some of the messages that Riyadh ul Haq gives to our young people because I believe it feeds the anger and frustration that continues to paralyse us BUT I insisted that he has never incited to violence. I believe this is a battle for hearts and minds and to ban him is to admit people like Tarek Fatah have lost the battle of ideas. In the UK, Riyadhul Haq has joined an ‘alternative roadshow’ to oppose the Radical Middle Way. We can discuss the lack of adab in the way this alternative roadshow was set up on another occasion BUT we did not attack his or Ismail Patel’s effort. We actually said to ourselves, as the RMW team, that BRING IT ON. The best intentions and the best ideas will succeed, Inshallah.

    3. I said on air that we live in an age of terror, a climate of fear created by the authorities, where an upright Muslim leader in Dewsbury had his house raided a few weeks ago because someone tipped off the police against him. It turned out the tip off was false… the same situation with the Forest Gate brothers. That is the environment in which Riyadhul Haq is being attacked and this is wrong.

    4. They played a clip of Riyadhul Haq's speech: "The Taliban are saying there have been many casualties while Donald Rumsfeld is saying, "no, they are lying. There hasn't been a large number of casualties. They are lying." This man, calling the servants of Allah liars?" Something to that effect.

    I said on air that it was the most pathetic clip I have heard. I said, every Muslim, nay everyone who knows what a lie the Iraq war is, is going to AGREE with what Riyadhul Haq has said. The quote merely implicates him for saying the truth that Rumsfeld does not want to hear.

    5. In terms of raising the issue of the murder investigation – let’s be clear: that information had been in all the major Canadian media for weeks and had been mentioned before. I was incorrect in my wording of the incident, which I acknowledge and to be fair the host of the show clarified this and was clear that he (and others who were questioned) was not charged, let alone convicted.

    6. In reference to our concerns about Shaykh Riyadh coming to speak at McMaster University. My husband is a Canadian – an activist, a journalist and teacher – who knows the local scene extremely well and has been a leading voice in the re-emergence of classical Islam in Toronto. We were concerned because we knew the media circus that would follow. We knew that people were preparing to go on the attack and we were incredulous why the students there would invite that kind of criticism at this time. At the end of the day, the MSA could invite anyone they wanted - our advice was to be cautious, especially if they were not ready for the fall out. Our fears were more than justified, especially with the arrests that followed.

    7. The host then mentioned the quote about “Jews and Hindus” and I said, I don't even know if that quote can be traced back to Riyadhul Haq because it's all he-says-she-says which the media is printing and re-printing like puppets. In fact, many Muslims have been going round in circles saying, yes he said it but it was out of context. I insisted I was not going to believe this quote should be attributed to him until I actually see the evidence.

    As a result of this, I got angry e-mails from several directions:

    1. Tarek Fatah who condemned me for defending Riyadhul Haq.
    2. Those who have been previously attacked by Riyadhul Haq

    To conclude, I agree the situation has become very nasty. While I do not regret giving the interview, I think several points could have been better phrased and clarified.

    I think all of us, including our scholars, need to be careful about the language that they use (including myself). If statements can be taken out of context, as you claim Shaykh Riyadh’s statements have been, then they can also be taken out of context by the listeners of those statements. In the atmosphere we live in, clarity is critical. This is an advice first to myself before others.

    In the spirit of openness and clarity and correcting ourselves when a mistake is done, we would like to - in fairness – clarify this matter directly with Shaykh Riyadh and have an opportunity to have him put his position on the record within a respected forum that is read widely. Two brothers who e-mailed me suggested that Q-News do an interview with Sh Riyadh so that we may openly discuss the concerns we have. I think this is a fantastic idea and we would offer to print such an interview in the forthcoming edition as well as online. Fellow editors and I would be happy to interview Shaykh Riyadh if he is amenable.

    If you have any further suggestions, please e-mail me fareena@q-ne...s.com and I will be happy to hear from you.

    Wasalam
    Fareena
    this can also be read here

    she admitted she made mistakes. khalas.



  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Location
    the big TO
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    I wrote and sent this before I read her statement.

    Dear Fareena,

    First I wish you to give you salam, the greeting of the Muslims as well as the fortunate ones in paradise. May Allah cause us to be from amongst them. Amen.

    The purpose of this letter is to express my sadness and disappointment over your interview with the CBC on (insert date). I am a born and bred canadian who follows the efforts of Muslims abroad and especially in the UK, as our Muslim community in Canada is still young, and use the UK as a model of establishing organizations that assist in educating and disseminating knowledge to Muslims. I have held you and your efforts in high regard.

    I felt that the Q-News and the efforts of yourself and your husband are very inspiring and I had a dream to produce the likes of a magazine like Q-News, here in Canada. I feel that and hoped that our diverse scholars whom I admire and respect (including Shaykh Hamza, Imam Zaid, Shaykh Nuh, Shaykh Faraz as well as the likes of Shaykh Riyad ul Haq) would be able to come together and exchange ideas and propel each other forward. I felt the recent RIS conferences here in Toronto were really bringing the diverse scholars that I admire together to produce a cohesive and strong bond. We need individuals such as you, to promote unity amongst the Muslims and the scholars.

    Sadly, I feel that your interview with the CBC has only done the opposite. I have a lot of respect for you and the efforts that you have been able to undertake, and perhaps this is why it is all the more disappointing.

    I believe that had you taken the opportunity to contact Shaykh Riyad to discuss your differences with him or had asked him for clarification this would have been the higher road and very becoming of an individual who plays such a vital role in the Muslim community in the west. Instead you have decided to allow a few sentences of Shaykh Riyad's which were taken out of context from thousands of lectures that he has given to become the basis of your statements. Even if you think he has erred along the way, I expected better adab and class from you. Sadly, you had decided to take your differences to the national Canadian radio, and used that medium to devalue and degrade a scholar.

    My opinion is that one does not have to agree with every scholar on every issue, nor will one agree with one scholar on every issue, but the least of what the sunnah of our beloved Prophet (pbuh) would call for, would be to show adab to all scholars, including those you agree with and to those you don't, for they are indeed the heirs of the Prophets. And as for the ones you don't agree with, there are ethics of disagreement, which include informing the Shaykh privately through the means of a possible letter informing him of your reservations of his views and opinions.

    Sadly due to your interview, I will look at Q-News in a different light and has quite honestly, fallen in my eyes as an ideal to follow, as its leadership seems to be lacking the proper etiquettes that I have come to expect from such an impeccable organization and magazine. I feel very frustrated and saddened that you see your magazine and efforts in stark contrast to the efforts of Shaykh Riyad ul Haq. Where as I see them both as enriching and advancing the Muslim cause in the same direction. I believe you have misunderstood Shaykh Riyadh ul Haq, and I hope that you contact him privately and inform him of your concerns. This would have been the high road and your words would've had greater impact on the Shaykh himself, rather than the mudslinging contest that occurred on CBC radio, which, in my opinion, had little positive value in advancing unity or understanding amongst our diverse Muslim community.

    In sum, I simply expected more adab and akhlaq from you towards our scholars, weather or not you are in agreement with them and I hope that in the future you write letters to the scholars that you disagree with, so that you can have a much more positive impact on the situation.

    I also sincerely hope that your magazine considers interviewing Shaykh Riyadh ul Haq to allow him space to clarify his statements and views. If Q-News were to do that, I would consider that journalistic excellence. You have gone on CBC to criticize him, now if you allow him space in your magazine to clarify his views, that would be the most excellent in akhlaq and it would show me that Q-News as well as yourself, are serious about bringing controversial issues right into the forefront and allowing fair and unbiased discussion.

    As I am sending this, I have just come across your message on Deenport, but have not read the entire message. Although this may be repetitive of previous emails from other brothers, I wish to send it anyway.

    Sincerely Your Brother in Islam,

    Maaz Alam
    Our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: "On the Day of Resurrection, nothing will weigh heavier upon the scales than good character" (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi)


  3. #3
    Senior Member sufisticated's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Maliki
    Posts
    939

    Default



    i saw your letter also. masha'Allah, please keep it all in good adab.

    my query is the regarding the 'alternative roadshow' - what is all that about, and what was objectionable about the Radical Middle Way, which consists of Habib Ali, Shaykh Abdallah bin Bayyah and Sh. Hamza Yusuf amongst others?



  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    2,018

    Default

    Assalaamu Alaikum

    I think this is a good reply from sister Fareena.
    I am not necessarily paristan to ONE shaykh and if i am sitting
    in a gathering and hear people speaking ill of shaykh hamza shaykh nuh etc, i will rebuke them.
    Although scholars differ amongst each other and they have their adab alhamdulillah.

    May Allah bless our sister Fareena, so she may continue her da'wah to Allah with ihsaan (ameen)

    Ma asalama


  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Interesting how Fareena mentions Shaykh Riyadhul Haq's name on the first half of the letter without the affix of "Shaykh".

    Shaykh Nuh has objected to certain things said by Sh Hamza - he even wrote a book "Port in a Storm" about their differences over the fiqh of the qibla on the west coast of the US. Not only that Shaykh Nuh is critical of Sh Hamza on issues of Fiqhul-Aqalliyat among many other things - I wonder if Sr Fareena would become "Wary" of Shaykh Nuh on account of this?


  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Location
    the big TO
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    yea man. phew. mashallah, and May Allah reward all the brothers and sisters including fareena who really dealt with this situation with the best of akhlaq.

    read the signature:
    Our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: "On the Day of Resurrection, nothing will weigh heavier upon the scales than good character" (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi)


  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    107

    Default

    im sick to my stomach with people thinking anything said is suddenly terrorist related/wahabi ideology.

    How do we live in an age of terror?

    More importantly, WHAT IS WRONG with calling the taliban the servant of Allah ?

    I suggest Shaykh Aby Yusuf carry on his propaganda, as we need more of this, NOT less as some people here would like to promote. Whats wrong with going against israel in public

    Blair's OWN admistration went against him on the Iraq issue. !!!1


  8. #8
    Senior Member sufisticated's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Maliki
    Posts
    939

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Journo
    Interesting how Fareena mentions Shaykh Riyadhul Haq's name on the first half of the letter without the affix of "Shaykh".


    i also noticed how she did refer to him as 'shaykh' later in the article. she has referred to shaykh hamza yusuf as 'hamza yusuf' also in other times and places. c'mon - was there any need for this comment?

    Shaykh Nuh has objected to certain things said by Sh Hamza - he even wrote a book "Port in a Storm" about their differences over the fiqh of the qibla on the west coast of the US. Not only that Shaykh Nuh is critical of Sh Hamza on issues of Fiqhul-Aqalliyat among many other things - I wonder if Sr Fareena would become "Wary" of Shaykh Nuh on account of this?
    firstly, Shaykh Nuh also praises Sh. Hamza and speaks very highly of him. Any 'critique' of him is in the highest adab - for goodness sake, he even refers to Albani in the best of ways!

    secondly, what exactly is shaykh nuh critical of sh. hamza with regards to minority fiqh?



  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Location
    the big TO
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    k, lets stay on the issue at hand. we dont need another locked thread. thanks.
    Our beloved Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: "On the Day of Resurrection, nothing will weigh heavier upon the scales than good character" (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi)


  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    107

    Default

    I think we need to "produce" more Shaykh Abu YusufSS so that the propaganda against the zionist does come to a hault. We are people against his comments? We are muslims against his comment?????????

    Whats wrong with critisizing openly the bush(monkey) and blai(swine) admistration?


    It is such a bad thing to propagate against the zionists ? Why is this "cult" (everyone knows what im talking about) like this ? Anything said about the jews... and the usual reply..... "oh brother, you know the wahabis etc etc..... let me give you sunnah.org .... "


Similar Threads

  1. Shaykh Riyadh-ul-Haq in London 29/05
    By Nu'ayman ibn Amr in forum Islamic Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28-05-2010, 11:02 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 23-04-2009, 01:54 PM
  3. Shaykh Riyadh Ul Haq on TV
    By rza in forum Ramadhan
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-10-2005, 10:21 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •