1. It is fortunate that Haneef is in Australia, it is unlikely that this chain of events would occur in India. It is even less likely to occur in a Muslim country, where terrorist suspects are sent to be skinned alive or tortured to death. We would do well to remember that the next time we “demand” that Australia be more welcoming to us.
2. It was specifically a free critical press and an independent judiciary that provided a counterweight to the executive. It is ironic that those wishing a utopian caliphate have never written about these two features of an “ideal” society, in their voluminous hectoring sermons. Whilst Muslims may not always appreciate the reporting of a free press, its value to them outweighs the small harm.
3. Muslims who are caught up in this type of process should give up relying on their “group” to aid them.
4. What is more troubling is that some groups may actually use one’s own plight as a vehicle for their own self promotion.
4. The importance of family has been apparent, especially an educated and erudite spouse. Families, not individuals marry in our culture. The other point to make is that amongst South Asian families like Haneef’s, a son in his position without a father is expected to do his duty and care for his mother and younger siblings. His income is therefore not his own.
5. The thing that made Haneef compelling to the wider community was his obvious piety, his lack of criminality and the complete transparency of his affairs. How many of us could survive 200 federal police going over our affairs for one month? It is this piety rather than Haneef’s (lack of) activism that has obviously helped him. Muslims should be sceptical about the benefit of social or political activism (in preference to developing personal piety).
6. Those people who ply their trade by talking up the discrimination Muslims face in Australia can only be disappointed by the widespread sustained outpouring of support by the Australian public for a immigrant Muslim doctor. This, after the same doctor’s cousin was allegedly involved in a terrorist act in the UK.
7. Where others will see chance or “Karma” in the peculiar sequence of events in the Haneef case, pious Muslims see the unmistakable hand of God, protecting his slave. As Muslims we should remember to rely on this alone to sustain us.
10 comments ↓
A very good post, baybers. There are problems with many of the systems and procedures here. Fortunately in the long run those problems are outweighed by the benefits.
Thank you dear Baybers
Baybars,
You don’t have to be so circumspect about your criticism of HT. We are all mature enough to engage in genuine debate. I will acknowledge though that at least you were respectful in your criticism.
“1. It is fortunate that Haneef is in Australia, it is unlikely that this chain of events would occur in India. It is even less likely to occur in a Muslim country, where terrorist suspects are sent to be skinned alive or tortured to death. We would do well to remember that the next time we “demand” that Australia be more welcoming to us.”
Are you suggesting that rulers in the Muslim world act idependently? And engaging in torture by proxy is more admirable? The true measure of a man is how he acts when nobody is looking!
“2. It was specifically a free critical press and an independent judiciary that provided a counterweight to the executive.”
Yes, independent media can be a potent tool if exercised appropriately, but isn’t this conclusion a little oversimplified?
“It is ironic that those wishing a utopian caliphate have never written about these two features of an “ideal” society, in their voluminous hectoring sermons. Whilst Muslims may not always appreciate the reporting of a free press, its value to them outweighs the small harm.”
For the record, would you care to provide a list of references from which you base your conclusion?
“3. Muslims who are caught up in this type of process should give up relying on their “group” to aid them.”
Yes, the issues confronting the Muslim community transcend any individual or group. That is why it is imperative to respond as a community - exclusively upon an Islamic platform.
But to imply that the interests of the Muslim community can only be secured through the wholesale engagement with ‘mainstream’ processes is a little naive. I would understand this comment though if you do not recognise a fundamental contradiction between Islam and secularism, or you view your Islam in individualistic and not ideological terms.
“4. What is more troubling is that some groups may actually use one’s own plight as a vehicle for their own self promotion.”
To be honest Baybars, this statement reveals more about yourself than it does about HT. But I am not about to reduce this discussion to personalities.
It is particularly dissapointing though, not only because it suggests an implied insight into the hearts and minds of HT members, or an overidding familiarity with the discussions between rally participants, but because it oversteps the boundaries of genuine Islamic critique.
Despite your disagreements with HT, please remember that we still hope to be standing together on the day of judgement. Brothers make at least 70 excuses for each other before thinking ill thoughts. Perhaps you consider such requirements too archaic or naive?
It would be good to remind ourselves about the context in which these discussions are taking place. Members of HT have been imprisoned, tortured and martyred since the party’s inception. Are you going to suggest that the lives of these brothers and sisters have been sacrificied for partisan purposes? Let us please refrain from cheap and uncontested rhetoric.
“4. The importance of family has been apparent, especially an educated and erudite spouse. Families, not individuals marry in our culture. The other point to make is that amongst South Asian families like Haneef, a son in his position without a father is expected to do his duty and care for his mother and younger siblings. His income is therefore not his own.”
Agreed.
“5. The thing that made Haneef compelling to the wider community was his obvious piety, his lack of criminality and the complete transparency of his affairs. How many of us could survive 200 federal police going over our affairs for one month? It is this piety rather than Haneef’s (lack of) activism that has obviously helped him.”
Do you genuinely believe the great uproar over the case of Dr Haneef was about him as an individual? Or has it more to do with the gradual encroachment of centuries old legal principles?
“Muslims should be sceptical about the benefit of social or political activism.”
Mmmm … I will come back to this point at a later stage inshallah.
“6. Those people who ply their trade by talking up the discrimination Muslims face in Australia, can only be disappointed by the widespread sustained outpouring of support by the general Australian public, for a immigrant Muslim doctor. This after the same doctor’s cousin was allegedly involved in a terrorist act in the UK.”
This is the problem when we view matters in individual, and not ideological, terms. There is no inherent contradiction in the matters you highlight. The problem has never been rooted in Australians as individuals. The problem is the political class.
“7. Where others will see chance or “Karma” in the peculiar sequence of events in the Haneef case, pious Muslims see the unmistakable hand of God, protecting his slave. As Muslims we should remember to rely on this alone to sustain us.”
Mmmm … this is a most dissapointing conclusion. As if to imply that piety is measured by one’s passivity. Inshallah, Allah willing, I will come back to this point.
Anyway, apologies for the long post. Forgive me if I have offended anyone.
Jzk for the great post, Baybers.
Thank you
Maybe I missed something, but I did not read a reference to HT in the post.
His interview with Sixty Minutes tonight can be downloaded from here.
i think you must give credit where it is due….
HT had the right intentions in organising a show of support for dr haneef….
i agree with wasim d.
remember the hadith about speaking out againts evil and injustice……. ?
Great post Baybers. Wassim D was unable to deconstruct the essence of your post that the separation of powers and free media intrinsic to a democracy provides a much better safeguard against abuses than the Supreme Leader of HT’s authoritarian ‘State’
Anybody merely has to read HT literature (filled in University MSA’s everywhere) to know that their ideas are completely devoid of practical politics or rationality. HT can’t keep using the trick of using left leaning critiques of flaws within the democratic system (which are a very part of that system) to undermine it.
It annoys me that HT continuously and erroneously justify their ideological aims theologically when there is literally a huge body of contemporary Islamic scholarship on the vast, varied and diverse role and relationship Islam has had (in history and in modern times) with the state and governance in various contexts.
However as a concession to our (slowly corroding) democracy I would of course never support a ban on HT who to my knowledge have not publicly endorsed use of violence to achieve their aims (hmm and the brothas who go through the HT phase at uni are kind of cute in a scary ideological Marxist kind of way…:) hopefully HT will devolve into one of the many wacky groups in the spectrum of political opinion of a free society.
In terms of personal piety I agree- change yourself before you change the world (or impose change on others through supreme world governments.)
What spoke to me was the miscarriage of justice done by Howard Government. That this case was a tissue of false starts and political grandstanding became all too clear. Unable to confess to it’s heavy-handed attempt to railroad the good Dr., the Howard Government’s case became a train wreck. What I saw was good man who had the bad luck to share a flat with possible criminal. He got sucked into investigation that flew off the tracks and landed deep into the weeds. Some very cynical pols decided to use this case to trumpet their Anti-Terrorist Bona Fides. When the whole thing blew up in their faces they still tried to make the good Dr. the villain in the case.
I hope that the good Dr. gets his passport back. Unfortunately this farce is not quite over yet. If Mr. Howard had two brain-cells to rub together he would admit that “mistakes were made” and move on to other things as fast as he can. But Mr. Howard seems to have bit of George W’s mule like stubbornness and won’t admit error. So in the next election, please do treat him like a mule, a rented one, and thrash him soundly in the polls.
Leave a Comment