الخميس، سبتمبر 16، 2010

Muttaqun OnLine - Niqab (Affixed Face Veil): According to Quran and Sunnah

Niqab
According to Quran and Sunnah

WWW.MUTTAQUN.COM

Revelation of Al-Hijab

Hadith - Bukhari 1:148

The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Allah's Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).


The Noble Qur'an - Al-Ahzab 33:59

O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils)* all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.


*the arabic word here is Jalabeeb (plural of Jalbaab), which is the loose outer garment that covers all a woman's body. It says here to use the Jalabeeb to cover all, and scholars say this means to use it to cover her head (agree upon by all scholars) and her face (agreed by many scholars, not all) and one or both eyes, in order for it to be known that she is a free woman and so not to be exposed to any harm.



Hadith - Bukhari 6:282

'Aisha used to say: "When (the Verse): 'They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,' was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces."


Hadith - Abu Dawud, Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu'minin

When the verse "That they should cast their outer garments over their persons" was revealed, the women of Ansar came out as if they had crows over their heads by wearing outer garments.


The lower half of the hijab is a garment that does not show the woman's figure. Jeans and certain obvious garments do not meet this requirement.

Hadith - Abu Dawud, Narrated Dihyah ibn Khalifah al-Kalbi
The Apostle of Allah was brought some pieces of fine Egyptian linen and he gave me one and said: Divide it into two; cut one of the pieces into a shirt and give the other to your wife for veil. Then when he turned away, he said: And order your wife to wear a garment below it and not show her figure.

Prescribed Methods of Covering

Tafseer - Ibn Katheer
"Allah commanded the muslim women to cover this sheet on top of them to cover their bodies except one eye, when it is necessary for them to come out of their homes."

Tafseer - Commentary by Ibn Jarir and Ahkam-ul-Quran, Vol.III, p.457
Imam Muhammad bin Sirin said: "When I asked Ubaida bin Sufyan bin al-Harith (ra) the meaning of this verse and how the jalbaab was to worn, he demonstrated it to me by pulling a sheet of cloth over his head to cover his entire body, leaving the left eye uncovered. This was also the explanation of the word 'Alaihinna in this verse"

Tafseer - Alu'si, Rul-ul-Ma'ani, Vol. 22, p. 89
"Ibn Jarir Tabari and Ibn Al-Mundhir described the method of wearing the jalbaab according to Ibn Abbas (ra) and Qatadah (ra). The sheet should be wrapped around from the top, covering the forehead, then bringing one side of the sheet to cover the face below the eyes so that most of the face and the upper body is covered. This will leave both eyes uncovered (which is allowed in necessity).

Color of Garment

The female companions were known to wear black and dark colors (such as the hadith above, "crows on their heads"), but other colors are also permissible for a woman to wear. She must not wear any color, however, in vanity.


Hadith - Sahih Al-Bukhari 7.715
...'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil ...

Hadith - Sahih Al-Bukhari 7.733
that he had seen Um Kulthum, the daughter of Allah's Apostle (saaws), wearing a red silk garment.

Hadith - Sahih Al-Bukhari 7.713
The Prophet (saaws) was given some clothes including a black Khamisa. The Prophet said, "To whom shall we give this to wear?" The people kept silent whereupon the Prophet said, "Fetch Um Khalid for me." I (Um Khalid) was brought carried (as I was small girl at that time). The Prophet took the Khamisa in his hands and made me wear it and said, "May you live so long that your dress will wear out and you will mend it many times." On the Khamisa there were some green or pale designs (The Prophet saw these designs) and said, "O Um Khalid! This is Sanah." (Sanah in a Ethiopian word meaning beautiful).

Hadith - Sunan of Abu Dawood #4055, Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As
We came down with the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) from a turning of a valley. He turned his attention to me and I was wearing a garment dyed with a reddish yellow dye. He asked: What is this garment over you? I recognised what he disliked. I then came to my family who were burning their oven. I threw it (the garment) in it and came to him the next day. He asked: Abdullah, what have you done with the garment? I informed him about it. He said: Why did you not give it to one of your family to wear, for there is no harm in it for women.


Must a Woman Wear Niqab (Veil)?



The general understanding in Islam regarding Sunnah, is that if the Prophet or any of his wives (RA) or companions (RA) are recorded in authentic hadith to have engaged in an act that is not haram (prohibited) as defined by Qur'an or Sunnah, then the act is declared halal (permissible). If the companions engaged in an act that the Prophet was aware of and did not speak out against, it is halal.

It is well-known that the wives of the Prophet covered their faces any time non-mahram men were near. A woman named Asma, who was not a wife of the Prophet , was also recorded as covering her face. Easily, one can conclude that wearing veil is halal (permissible).

However, Muslims and Muslimahs across the world have been in "hot debate" for centuries, over the issue of whether or not covering the face is obligatory upon a Muslimah. Those who argue that it is not required, point to the use of the word khimar in the Qur'an, and explain that today's modern khimar does not cover the face, and argue that khimar has never referred to the covering of the face, but only to that of the hair, neck, and bosoms. While one cannot deny the support of Hadith that indicate that the Prophet's wives wore khimar, one must realize that they also covered their faces at all times in the presence of non-mahram men.

The group of scholars agree that it is a highly recommended act to cover the face. The scholars also agree that a woman must cover her adornment, yet some scholars argue that this does not include the face.

BASING ON CULTURE VS. QURAN AND SUNNAH. ...Most Muslim men, even in America, would be pleased if their wives veil, but some state that a veil draws too much attention, causing men to look upon her more than normal. However, one must realize that when men 'look', they have nothing of her to see! Regardless, this issue must stick to understanding and implementing Qur'an and Sunnah, and not making excuses based on the current culture. Muslims are ordered not to imitate the dress of any non-Muslim culture, so, surely, we cannot make the choice to wear Niqab based on the pressures of modern day society; instead, we choose, insha'Allah, to fear Allah, swt, and not mankind!

When in a state of ihram, the muslimah cannot wear niqab. However, according to several scholars, such as Sheikh ibn Baz, even when in a state of ihram, "she should lower her headcovering or outer cloak over her face when she is in the presence of non-mahram men." So, it is to say that she should not cover her face around the other women during ihram, but that she should cover it if a non-mahram man approaches. He bases this on the hadith below, narrated by 'Aisha .

  • In Fathul Bari, chapter Hajj, a tradition reported on the authority of Aisha (RA) says:

    • "A woman in a state of Ihram (during Hajj and Umrah) should stretch her head - cloth over to her face to hide it."

  • Hadith - Recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawud and ibn Majah, Narrated 'Aisha. [In his work Jilbab al-Marah al-Muslimah, al-Albani states (p. 108) that it is hasan due to corroborating evidence. Also, in a narration from Asma, Asma also covered her face at all times in front of men.]

    • Narrated 'Aisha (RA) who said, "The riders would pass us while we were with the Messenger of Allah ). When they got close to us, we would draw our outer cloak from our heads over our faces. When they passed by, we would uncover our faces."

According to Shaikh ibn Uthaimin, "she is not required to cover her face during the prayer unless there are non-related men around her. She must then cover her face from them, as it is not allowed for a woman to uncover her face except to her husband and her male relatives i.e., mahram."

If a woman is not around any non-mahram men and does not fear that any will enter her area of salah, she may reveal her face and hands. This is agreed upon by the group of scholars.

So, whether agreeing that niqab is required or not, one must surely acknowledge that it is a desirous sign of piety. What better example of sunnah to follow for a muslimah than that of the Prophet and his wives RA. Every Muslimah is encouraged to cover to the fullest, showing only one or both eyes.

A woman does not have to wear a niqab (affixed veil), but she should emulate the female companions by using her hijab or other items, to lift and cover her face when a non-mahram man approaches, even during ihram (hajj), as this is in accordance with sunnah.

Hadith - Muwatta 20.16
Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa that Fatima bint al-Mundhir said, "We used to veil our faces when we were in ihram in the company of Asma bint Abi Bakr as-Siddiq."

The following Fatawa is from Sheikh Ibn Uthaimin:

"The Islamic hijab is for the women to cover everything that is forbidden for her to expose. That is, she covers everything that she must cover.

"The first of those bodily parts that she must cover is her face. It is the source of temptation and the source of people desiring her. Therefore, the woman must cover her face in front of those men that are not Mahram (i.e. father, huband, etc.).

"As for those who claim that Islamic hijab is to cover the head, shoulders, back, feet, shin and forearms while allowing her to uncover her face and hands, this is a very amazing claim. This is because it is well-known that the source of temptation and looking is the face. How can one say that the Shariah does no allow the exposure of the foot of the woman while it allows her to uncover her face?

"It is not possible that there could be in the Esteemed, Wise and Noble Shariah a contradiction. Yet everyone knows that the temptation from uncovering the face is much greater than the temptation that results from the uncovering of the feet. Everyone also knows that the most sought after aspect of the woman for men is the face. If you told a prospective groom that a woman’s face is ugly but her feet are beautiful, he would not propose to such a woman.

"However, if you told him that her face was beautiful but her hands, palms, or shins were less than beautiful, he would still propose to her. From this one can conclude that the face is the first thing that must be covered.

"There are also evidences from the Book of Allah (SWT) and the Sunnah of our Prophet (SAW). There are also statements from the Companions, the leading Imams and the great scholars of Islam that indicate that it is obligatory for the woman to cover all of her body in the presence of non-Mahram men. This obviously indicates that it is obligatory upon the woman to cover her face in front of such men."

Refutation For those who claim niqaab is not wajib and the face and hands of a woman can be seen by (ghairMahrrum) strange men.


Refutation from Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen

This is taken from the book "Hijaab" by Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen from Saudi Arabia. Printed by Madrasah Arabia Islamia Azaadville- South Africa.

Translated by Hafedh Zaheer Essack, Rajab 1416 (December 1995)

The Ulamah who are of the opinion that it is permissible to look at the face and hands of a strange woman (who is not mahrrum) say so mainly for the following reasons.

The hadeeth of Ayeshah (Radhiallaahu Ánha) when Asmaa (Radhiallaahu Ánha) the daughter of Abu Bakr came to the Rasulullaah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) while wearing thin clothing. He approached her and said: 'O Asmaa! When a girl reaches the menstrual age, it is not proper that anything should remain exposed except this and this. He pointed to the face and hands. But this hadeeth is WEAK because of 2 main weaknesses.

  1. There is no link between Ayeshah (Radhiallaahu Ánha) and Khalid bin Dareek, who narrated the hadith from her. And in every chain of narrators Khalid bin Dareek is mentioned.

  2. In the chain of narrators Sa'eed bin Basheer appears, who is known by most of the Muhaditheen as being a weak narrator.

This has been mentioned by Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal (Rahimahullah), An-Nasai (Rahimahullah), Ibn Madeeni (Rahimahullah) and Ibn Ma'een (Rahimahullah). This is also why Imaam Bukhari (Rahimahullah) and Muslim (Rahimahullah) did not except this hadeeth to be in their books. (From Shaikh Ibn Uthaymeen in the book "Hijaab" pages # 17 and 18.)

We also have to see that the Muhadith Abu Dawood when he quoted this hadeeth put with it that it is Mursal (with a broken chain that does not lead up to the Sahabah).

(From The Book "Hijaab wa Safur" under the fatwaa of Shaikh Abdul Aziz Bin Bazz on Page #61. Also stated as being weak by Shaikh Nasiruddeen Al-Albaani in his Daeef Sunan Abu Dawud in Kitab-ul-Libas under hadeeth number 4092 (which is the original hadeeth number.)

An other thing that shows the weakness of this hadith is that after the ayah for hijab (Surah Al-Ahzaab – Verse #59) was revealed then the women of Sahaba wore a complete veil and covered the faces and hands. This includes Asmaa (Radhiallaahu Ánha) the daughter of Abu Bakr, who is supposed to have narrated this hadeeth. Asmaa (Radhiallaahu Ánha) covered herself completely including the face, this has been narrated in authentic hadeeth in Imaam Malik's "MUWATTA Book 20 Hadeeth # 20.5.16."

What Age Must a Female Wear Niqab?



It is unquestionable that a female must begin covering by the age of puberty. In all situations, Muslims are to use the Prophet's example for guidance. The Prophet married 'Aisha before she had reached puberty and consummated the marriage when she was approximately 9 years old. Getting married at such an age was not uncommon until recent times.

Puberty begins two weeks before the onset of the first menstrual period, i.e. this is the time in which she is capable of becoming pregnant.

May Allah swt guide each parent to adequately prepare the daughter for hijab and their other responsibilities, in time for puberty. Amin.

If a mother or father recently converts to Islam and has a daughter who has reached puberty, s/he should immediately begin covering the daughter. The parents should educate the daughter to understand and appreciate the reasons and advantages for covering as a Muslimah is instructed to. The new revert to Islam should not feel apologetic for covering a daughter who was not previously covering. It is as much of an advantage to her as to the new adult muslimah revert, and children do not always know what is best for them, so, like other decisions you make daily for your children, do not leave the issue of wearing hijab up to your children. Make the transition as a family, not you first, then just hoping the children follow suit on their own.

Some guidelines for preparing a child for hijab.

  • It is encouraged that as soon as the child is able to walk, she does not wear clothes that resemble the kafr, and that she should always have her knees and as much as possible of the arms and legs covered when leaving the house or having guests over.

  • She should be taught modesty in behavior and dress from the cradle.

  • It is ideal to sew small jilbabs (light overcoats) and khimaar (head/neck/chest covering) for the young muslimah, properly preparing her for full coverage at puberty. It is actually less fitnah on the parent to dress her in the simple attire of a muslim, as compared to looking for fashionable clothes in a shopping mall.

  • At the age of 7, the parent should order her to pray salah, and of course, she must be wearing hijab (the entire head and body covering) for the salah.

  • By the age of 10, her parents may and should punish her for missing fard (obligatory) salah, and once again, she must be wearing hijab to perform salah.

  • When she reaches puberty, insha'Allah, she will wear niqab (literally: draw the khimaar over her face).

  • By the age of puberty, she should already be used to wearing hijab (which is in her fitrah [natural state] to be covered).

  • She may have already chosen to veil prior to reaching puberty, and with the proper instruction, she will look forward to and embrace this step in becoming a young woman.

  • Hijab is not something a muslim parent gives as an option to a child. The muslim parent is responsible for seeing that the young muslimah is properly covered according to Qur'an and Sunnah.

  • Parents will have to determine when their daughter has reached puberty, not the child, unless of course, she is a muslim revert with non-Muslim parents, in which case she should seek the counsel of a Muslim wali.

Depending on a woman's environment, she may simply keep her face uncovered and then draw the khimaar up over her face on the rare occasion of a non-mahram's presence; or, if this is too much fitnah to constantly draw it over her face, such as circumstances when men are frequently present, she may choose to affix a screen (i.e. the Niqab) that does this for her without her needing to use a hand to hold it over her face.


Hadith - Bukhari, Narrated Hishams father

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumated that marriage when she was nine years old.


Hadith - Abu Dawud, narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin
[Also recorded al-Tirmidhi, Ahmad, and ibn Majah. Al-Albani says it is sahih. Al-Albani, Sahih al-Jami, vol. 2, p. 1280.]

The Prophet said: Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a khimaar.

Hadith - Dawud, Narrated As-Saburah
[Also recorded by Ahmand and al-Hakim. Al-Syuti has give in a notation signifying that it is authentic. Al-Albani has graded it hasan. Al-Albani, Sahih al-Jami, vol. 2, p. 1021.]

The Prophet said: Order your children to pray at the age of seven. And beat them [lightly] if they do not do so by the age of ten. And separate them in their bedding.



Who Can She Uncover in front of?



A Muslimah should not uncover her adornment in front of any non-Mahrahm male. Muslimahs should especially be careful and remain covered, modest, and quiet around in-laws.

If a gay male is aware of female body parts, he should not be allowed to view a woman uncovered. And, of course, a bi-sexual male should not be allowed to view a woman without proper covering.

In addition, a Muslimah should not uncover that which she normally uncovers, in front of any non-Muslim female whom she fears may describe her to others. She may also choose to remain covered around any Muslim female whom she fears may describe her physical attributes to their husband or others.


The Noble Qur'an - An-Nur 24:30-31

Tell the believing men to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.). That is purer for them. Verily, Allâh is All-Aware of what they do.

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like palms of hands or one eye or both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron, etc.), and to draw their veils* all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms, etc.) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husband's sons, their brothers or their brother's sons, or their sister's sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islâm), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allâh to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful.

* the arabic word here is Khumaar, which is the plural form of Khimaar.


Hadith - Bukhari 7:167

The Prophet said, "A woman should not look at or touch another woman to describe her to her husband in such a way as if he was actually looking at her."


Hadith - Muslim, narrated Aisha

A eunuch used to come to the wives of Allah's Apostle and they did not find anything objectionable in his visit considering him to be a male without any sexual desire. Allah's Apostle one day came as he was sitting with some of his wives and he was busy in describing the bodily characteristics of a lady and saying: As she comes in front four folds appear on her front side and as she turns her back eight folds appear on the back side. Thereupon Allah's Apostle said: I see that he knows these things; do not, therefore, allow him to enter. She (Aisha) said: Then they began to observe veil from him.


Hadith - Al-Tirmidhi #3109, narrated Abdullah ibn Mas'ud [Tirmidhi transmitted it.]

The Prophet said, "A woman should be concealed, for when she goes out the devil looks at her."


Muslimahs should not socialize with non-mahram men, and should only speak out of necessity to non-mahram men. Allah swt knew that mankind would be tempted to let their guard down and their hijab down, around in-laws. Surely Allah swt is all merciful to provide us the guidance we need in every aspect of our lives. In reference to socializing with in-laws, such close relations can easily lead to adultery which has the death penalty.

Hadith - Bukhari and Muslim

The Prophet said, "The in-laws are death."

Shaking Hands



Men and women should not shake hands outside the mahram ties.

Hadith - Recorded by Malik, Ahmad, al-Nasai, al-Tirmidhi and ibn Majah.
[Al-Albani has graded it sahih. Al-Albani, Sahih al-Jami, vol. 1, p. 494.]

The Prophet said, "I do not shake the hands of women."


Hadith - Bukhari 9:321 (& 7:211)

The Prophet used to take the Pledge of allegiance from the women by words only after reciting this Holy Verse: (60.12) "..that they will not associate anything in worship with Allah." (60.12) And the hand of Allah's Apostle did not touch any woman's hand except the hand of that woman his right hand possessed. (i.e. his captives or his lady slaves).


Hadith - Sahih Muslim, narrated 'A'isha

By Allah, the hand of the Messenger of Allah never touched the hand of a woman. By Allah, the Messenger of Allah never took any vow from women except that which Allah had ordered him to take, and his palm never touched the palm of a woman. When he had taken their vow, he would tell that he had taken the oath from them orally.

Speech



Wearing hijab must be accompanied by the proper mannerisms and speech befitting a modest, pious woman. She should not draw attention to her voice or use it in a soft, pleasing manner that may tempt a man.

Similarly, a muslim man should avoid being around women who speak soft (i.e. speak "sweet", flirt, are excessively thankful, etc), should definitely turn his eyes downward his eyes if viewing (even briefly) such a woman on t.v., and should not listen to female singers.

The Noble Qur'an - Al-Ahzab 33:32

O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other women. If you keep your duty (to Allâh), then be not soft in speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease (of hypocrisy, or evil desire for adultery, etc.) should be moved with desire, but speak in an honourable manner.


Muslim men and women should speak calmly and controlled, not raising the voice, except out of necessity, such as yelling 'stop!' to a child who is about to cross a busy intersection without looking, etc.


The Noble Qur'an - Luqman 31:18-19

And turn not your face away from men with pride, nor walk in insolence through the earth. Verily, Allâh likes not each arrogant boaster.

And be moderate (or show no insolence) in your walking, and lower your voice. Verily, the harshest of all voices is the voice (braying) of the ass.

Ridiculing a Woman in Niqab




The Noble Qur'an - At-Taubah 9:64-67

The hypocrites fear lest a Sûrah (chapter of the Qur'ân) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: "(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allâh will bring to light all that you fear."

If you ask them (about this), they declare: "We were only talking idly and joking." Say: "Was it at Allâh (swt), and His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?"

Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you because they were Mujrimûn (disbelievers, polytheists, sinners, criminals, etc.).

The hypocrites, men and women, are from one another, they enjoin (on the people) Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief and polytheism of all kinds and all that Islâm has forbidden), and forbid (people) from Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and they close their hands [from giving (spending in Allâh's Cause) alms, etc.]. They have forgotten Allâh, so He has forgotten them. Verily, the hypocrites are the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).

Women past child-bearing age who do not expect wedlock



The Noble Qur'an - An-Nur 24:60

And as for women past child-bearing who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment. But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


Related Links:
Wajib Niqabi Egroup
Sultaana Freeman vs the Florida DMV
The Veil in Christianity
Can a Woman Wear a Face Veil During Hajj?
The Obligatory Conditions for an Islamic Hijab
The Virtues of Hijab
The Veil (In Christianity)

Action Items for the Muttaqun:

  • Teach the wives and daughters the value of wearing niqab; teach and encourage them in this matter.

  • Teach the male muslim the importance of respecting a muslimah's privacy, that he should not even inquire about the physical appearance of a woman for personal reasons.

  • Fear Allah's commands only... not the criticisms of the kafr.

  • Recognize that wearing niqab is a blessing and protection for the woman, not a stifling command.

  • Do not judge those who do not wear niqab; instead, show them Qur'an and Sunnah on the matter and the rest is, as they say, "on them" to decide. Allah, subhana watala, is the only true Judge.

  • Do not be alone with persons of the opposite sex.

    • Hadith - Bukhari 4.250, Narrated Ibn Abbas

      • That he heard the Prophet saying, "It is not permissible for a man to be alone with a woman, and no lady should travel except with a Muhram (i.e. her husband or a person whom she cannot marry in any case forever; e.g. her father, brother, etc.)." Then a man got up and said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have enlisted in the army for such-and-such Ghazwa and my wife is proceeding for Hajj." Allah's Apostle said, "Go, and perform the Hajj with your wife."

    • Hadith - Recorded Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi. [Al-Albani says it is sahih. Al-Albani, Sahih al-Jami, vol. 1, p. 234.]

      • The Prophet said, "A man is never alone with a woman except that Satan is the third."

  • Do not touch persons of the opposite sex (except for dhu-mahram*).

    • Wear gloves if you are concerned that someone of the opposite sex may touch you, such as when at work.

    • When receiving change from a cashier, you may want to have him/her lay it on the counter, and then pick it up.

    • Only see a doctor or dentist that is the same gender that you are, unless you have no choice after trying to arrange it as such.

    • When in the hospital, or other medical situations, insist that you remain covered at all possible moments. For instance, those hospital gowns are NOT acceptable for walking down the hall in, not even if you wear two of them as they suggest for extra coverage. With modesty, request and insist upon receiving a simple sheet to cover you entirely, or bring your own. Don't worry... they will cooperate, insha'Allah.

    • Do not shake hands with the kufaar. There is a way to do it without being offensive... for instance, look down and state, "My religion does not permit me to do that," and immediately proceed with the conversation. Think about it... that two-second awkward pause will have little to no effect on the business at hand, insha'Allah. Trust Allah, subhana watala, and do not try to adapt to the kaffir ways, and certainly don't do something for their approval. Do not be deceived by shaytan to believe that you cannot survive in the business world if you don't shake hands.

    • Realize that touching a person of the opposite sex shows great disrespect for your spouse.

    • Develop habits that eliminate this form of touch... be adamant about not making exceptions beyond "life or death" or absolutely necessary situations.

  • Do not engage in social conversation with persons of the opposite sex (except for dhu-mahrahm*).

    • This is simple... just don't do it. When a kaffir of the opposite sex asks you, "Did you have a good weekend," look down and say nothing in return, or perhaps only respond with, "Fine, Alhamdulilah". If the person asks what, "Alhamdulilah" means, drop some dawah, but make it very brief for members of the opposite sex. Quickly offer to put them in touch with your husband (or your wife if you are male and being approached by a female), or local imam.

    • You may choose to greet the muslim with "As sala'amu alaikum," but beyond that, limit your conversation with the opposite sex to business, i.e. only that which is necessary. Muslimahs are not required to greet male muslims.

    • Muslim men should not be the first to approach conversation with a Muslimah, except out of necessity, i.e. "As sala'amu alaikum. You dropped your $50 dollar bill; here it is."

    • This includes situations when online... do not engage in "Instant Messages" or Email of a social or personal matter with members of the opposite sex. Make the effort to find out what gender the person is before getting into a personal private discussion.

    • See The Noble Qur'an: al-Ahzab 32.

  • Desire to be known for the qualities of your character, not your looks.

  • Save your internal and external beauty for your husband alone

Remember... Allah, subhana watala, sees everything we do!

* dhu-mahrahm:
A male whom a woman can never marry because of close relationship
(i.e. brother, father, uncle, etc.) or her own husband.

الأربعاء، سبتمبر 15، 2010

Facebook | ~~THE BOOK OF JIHAD~~ Chapter 1- (part 1) ~~

THE BOOK OF JIHAD

ByAbi Zakaryya Al Dimashqi Al Dumyati“Ibn-Nuhaas”(D. 814 Hijri)

Translated By Noor Yamani

CHAPTER 1: ON THE COMMAND OF JIHAD AGAINST THE NON BELIEVERS AND ITS MANDATE, AND THE STERN WARNING AGAINST THOSE WHO DON’T PRACTICE JIHAD:

The Command To Fight:

“Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah knows, while you know not”14“

And fight in the cause of Allah and know that Allah is Hearing and Knowing”15“

And if it were not for Allah checking [some] people by means of others, the earth would have been corrupted, but Allah is full of bounty to the worlds”16“

Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush”17“

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [i.e., Islam] from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah18

willingly while they are humbled”19

Imam Al Haleemi in Suab al Iman:Allah clarified that if it weren’t for Allah checking the nonbelievers through the believers and giving the believers authority to protect Islam and break the armies of disbelief, disbelief would have reigned on earth and the true religion would have been eliminated. This proves that the reason for the survival of religion (i.e., Islam) is Jihad and whatever is in this status deserves to be a pillar of Iman.1. On the authority of Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), the...

14 (al Baqara 216)

15 (al Baqara 244)

16 (al Baqara 251)

17 (al Tawba 5)

18 Jizyah: A tax imposed on the Christian and Jewish subjects of the Muslim Khilafah.

19 (al Tawba 29)

Messenger of Allah () said: “I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish the prayer and give the zakah. Then, if they do that, their blood and wealth will be protected from me – except in accordance with the right of Islam. And their reckoning will be with Allah, the Exalted”20

It was narrated by Ibn Umar, Abu Huraira, Jabir Ibn Abdullah, Anas bin Malik, Jareer ibn Abdullah, Aus ibn Abu Aus, ibn Abbaas, Sahl ibn Saad, al-Numaan ibn Basheer, Tariq ibn Ashyam, Abu Bakrah, Muadh bin Jabal and Samura bin Jundub.Thus, the hadith is Mutawatir, the absolute strongest form of Hadith.Among a few interpretations Ibn Hajjar mentions the strongest is that people are fought to establish the dominance of Allah’s law. This objective can be met through many means. It could be met by fighting them. It can also be met by them accepting the law of Allah and paying the Jizyah. It can also be met by some sort of peace accord between Muslims and others, in which the non-Muslims will not oppose the word of Allah in any way.

2. Abu Muthana Al Abdi said I heard Abu Al Khasasyah say “I came to the Messenger of Allah and said I would pledge allegiance to him. The Messenger of Allah took the pledge from me ‘to testify that there is none worthy of worship other than Allah that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, to pray the five prayers, to fast Ramadan, to pay Zakah, to make Hajj, and to fight in the sake of Allah.’ I said ‘O Messenger of Allah, Two of those I cannot do. The first is Zakah. I only have ten camels. They constitute my entire wealth. The second is Jihad; I heard that whoever runs away from the battlefield has incurred the wrath of Allah. I am afraid if fighting faces me I might fear death and my spirit would fail me.’ Rasulullah grabbed his hand and waved it and said, ‘No sadaqah and no Jihad! How can you then enter into Jannah?’”. Abu al Khasasyah then said: The Messenger of Allah took my pledge on every term he mentioned.” 21...

20 Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmithi, Nasa’i, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Habbaan, al-Darqutni, and Imam Malik.

21 Narrated by Al Hakim and authenticated it.

3. Salamah bin Nufail said: While I was sitting with Rasulullah a man came to him and said, “O Messenger of Allah Horses are being discarded and weapons are been laid down and some are claiming that there is no more fighting” Rasulullah said, “They are lying! Fighting has just begun! And a party of my Ummah will fight for the sake of Allah, and those who oppose them will not harm them. Allah will deviate the hearts of some men to provide for that party from them by fighting them. And they will continue fighting until the final hour starts (the Day of Judgment) and good will remain on the foreheads of horses until the day of Judgment and war will not end until Yagog and Magog come out.”22

A similar hadith was narrated by Imam al Nasa’i and is hasan (agreeable):

4. Salamah bin Nufail said: While I was sitting with Rasulullah a man came to him and said, “O Messenger of Allah Horses are being humiliated (ignored), and weapons are being laid down and people are claiming there is no more Jihad and war has ended” Rasulullah said: “They are lying! Fighting has just begun! Fighting has just begun! And a party of my Ummah will remain fighting on the true path and Allah will deviate the hearts of some men and Allah will provide the fighters from them until the final hour starts and the promise of Allah is fulfilled and good is on the foreheads of horses until the day of Judgment. It is being revealed to me that I will be departing you soon and you would follow me while you are fighting each other and the house of the believers is in al Shaam”23.

In the commentary on Al Nasa’i by al Sindi, he states that:“‘Humiliating horses’ means ignoring them and belittling their importance or not using them for combat.‘Now fighting has started now fighting has started’ The repetition is to reveal the importance of the message and it means that fighting is only increasing and that Allah has just prescribed it so how can it end so soon? Or it means that the real fighting has just begun...

22 Narrated by al Tabarani in Al Mujam al Kabir

23 Al Shaam refers to Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Jordon. It could be used to refer to part or all of these countries. Narrated by Imam al Nasa’i and is hasan

because so far they have been fighting only within their territory, the land of the Arabs, but now is time for them to carry the battle to further lands.‘Allah will deviate the hearts of some’ It means Allah will always provide this party of believers with men to fight even if it means deviating their hearts from Iman to Kufur. That is to bless these believers by providing them with the honor of fighting in his sake and the ultimate pleasure of pleasing Allah.

24‘Good is on the foreheads of horses,’ Means reward and booty, or honor and pride. ‘The house of the believers is al Shaam’ that is referring to the end of time. It will be the stronghold of Islam and the land of Jihad. ”25

5. Anas narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: “Fight the nonbelievers with your wealth, arms, and tongues”

26With your tongues means hurt the non-believers by letting them hear what displeases them.6. The Messenger of Allah said: “I have five commands for you: To Listen, to obey, to fight jihad, to make hijrah, and to stay with the jama’ah”27

7. Ibn Abbaas narrates that the Messenger of Allah said, “There is no Hijrah after the opening of Makkah but there is Jihad and intentions and if you are called to fight then fight”28

Allah says:“Go forth, whether light of heavy, and strive with your wealth and...

24 Trans. Note: [In other words Allah will never deprive the Ummah from the opportunity of Jihad. Even if one were to assume that the whole world would become Muslim, Allah would deviate the hearts of some from Islam to disbelieve so that the Mujahideen can fight them]

25 Trans. Note: [We have a right to ask: Where have these hadiths been? How come our scholars have left us in the dark regarding these hadiths? How come we’ve heard the hadiths on Taharah and the etiquettes of the toilet hundreds of times while one has to dig deep in our classical books to retrieve these treasures?]

26 Sahih, al Nasa’i, Abu Dawud, Ahmad, and al Hakim

27 Tirmithi – Ahmad – AbdulRazaq (Hassan)

28 Bukhari and Muslim

your lives in the cause of Allah. That is better for you, if you only knew”Comments on the meaning of “light and heavy” in this verse:Abi Saleh said: The young and old. Also Qatadah said: Active or inactive, energetic or not .It is narrated that Abu Ayub al Ansari took a rest from Jihad for a year. He then recited this ayah and said, “I do not find for myself an excuse in this ayah” so he resumed his Jihad.Abu Shaybah narrated with an authentic narration to al Hakam: Busy or preoccupied.It is also said the “heavy” is the one who has property which he fears would be lost if he joins Jihad. While the “light” is the one with no property to worry about.Al Qurtubi says, “the ayah is general and applies to everyone whether joining is easy for them or not”Al Zuhri states that Ibn Al Musayab joined the army when he had already lost one of his eyes due to old age. He was told you are ill, he said, “Astaqfirullah (May Allah forgive me) Allah says the light and the heavy. If I am incapable of fighting at least I will increase the number of the army and would guard your luggage” 29

8. Abu Ya’la and al Hakim narrate with an authentic chain: Anas bin Malik said that Abu Talhah recited al Tawbah and passed by this verse “Go forth light or heavy” and said I see that Allah is calling upon me whether I am young or old. So he told his sons to prepare him for combat. They said you have already fought with Rasulullah until he died and then with Abu Bakr until he died and then with Umar. So now let us fight on your behalf. He said, “Prepare me for combat” and they did. He went on an expedition in the sea and died. They didn’t find an island to burry him until seven days latter and his body never changed.

9. AbdulRazaq narrates that Makhool used to face Qiblah and then...

29 Trans. Note: [Subhanallah, some people would use every argument to run away from fighting -when they have no excuse-while some would have a valid excuse but would nevertheless use every argument to join the fighters].

swear ten times in the name of Allah that going out in expeditions is mandatory on you. He would then face his students and say, “If you want be to swear beyond ten times I would do so”

Is Jihad Fard Kifayah Or Fard Ayn?

Realize that attacking the non-believers in their territories is a collective duty (fardh kifayah) with the consensus (ijmaa) of the scholars. However ibn al Musayeb and ibn Shubrumah state that it is a duty (fardh ayn) on each and every individual

.“The minimum participation in Jihad is once a year, and more is always better. It is not allowed to have a year pass you by without any fighting except out of necessity like the weakness of Muslims and the great numbers of the enemy, or fear of extermination if you attack them first, or lack of provisions, or similar excuses. Otherwise, if there is no necessity it is not allowed to delay attacking the non-believers for more than a year.” Imam Shafi’i states that.

The imam of al Haramain says: “I adopt the opinion of the scholars of usool. They stated that Jihad is a mandatory call and must be established according to the ability until none remains in the world but a Muslim or one who has submitted to Muslims. Thus, Jihad is not limited to once a year. It should be done more frequently if possible. What the scholars of fiqh stated is because usually the time spent in preparations for combat limit the ability to wage war to once a year.

”The author of al Mugni from the Hanbali school states: “The minimum jihad is once a year, so it is mandatory every year. If there is a need to fight more than once a year, it becomes mandatory on the Muslims to fulfill that need.

”Al Qurtubi states in his tafseer: “It is mandatory on the Imam to send an army of Muslims to the land of the enemy once every year and the Imam should participate himself in such expeditions. If not, then he should send someone capable whom he trusts, to call them to Islam, keep away their harm, to give victory to the religion of Allah, until they enter Islam or pay jizyah” 30

30 Trans. Note: [Notice that al Qurtubi states that one

of the objectives of sending the armies is to keep the harm of

the enemy away. This is an indication that

Muslims will never taste peace in their lives if they do not.

Jihad is not mandatory on children, the mentally incapable, women, and the ill. It is mandatory however, on the one-eyed, the one who is suffering from a mild illness such as a headache, a sore tooth, or fever, or the one who has a slight limp. This is in the madhab of Imam Ahmad, and I don’t know any disagreement regarding that and Allah knows best.

It is the consensus of scholars that one cannot participate in Qazw31 without the permission of the parents.

This is all regarding the Jihad, which is a collective duty (starting the non believers with war and on their territory). But if the enemy enters the Muslim land, or even approaches it and masses on its borders, even if they do not actually enter it, and there armies are double the size of that of the Muslims or less, then Jihad becomes mandatory on each and every individual. Then, the slave leaves without the permission of the master, the woman without the permission of her husband (if she has the strength to fight according to the stronger opinion), the son without the permission of the parents, and the one indebt without the permission of the lender. All of the above stated is the opinion of Imam Malik, Ahmad, and Abu Hanifah32.

If the enemy ambushes the Muslims in a certain area and they don’t have a chance to assemble together and prepare to fight, then whoever is faced by a nonbeliever, or a group of nonbelievers, and the Muslim knows that if he surrenders he would be killed, then he must fight. There is no difference in this ruling between a freeman, slave, man, woman, blind, limp, or ill. If there is only the possibility of being killed if surrendered, but would defiantly be killed if he refuses to surrender, then it is allowed to either surrender or fight, but fighting is better.

If a woman thinks if she is taken prisoner she would be sexually abused, it is mandatory on her to fight, even if that would lead to her death because if a person is forced to commit adultery or fornication it is not allowed to give in even if to save one’s life.

Now if some of the Muslims in the attacked area go to fight the enemy and they are sufficient in numbers and are capable of fighting the enemy alone,attack the enemies of Allah and on their turf. The consequences of not fulfilling that duty is the price we are paying today. If you don’t keep shaytaan in check he will not leave you alone.]

31 Qazw: Linguistically refers to “pursuit” It is used in Islamic terminology to refer to pursuing the enemy in order to fight him.

32 Trans. Note: [in addition to the madhab of the author which is Shafi’i]

it is still a duty on the rest to help. Al Mawardi states that because it is a Jihad of defense so it remains a duty on every Muslim capable of fighting in that territory.

If the nonbelievers descend on an unpopulated Muslim land that is far away from populated areas there are two opinions in that, and Al Gazali narrates both;

The first is that of the Imam al Haramain. He states that it does not become mandatory on Muslims to fight and put their lives in danger to protect such a secluded, unpopulated land.

The other opinion, which is the position of the madhab, is that it is mandatory for Muslims to fight for that land.

Imam Nawawi says the opinion of the Imam (of al Haramain, al Juwaini) is unacceptable. How can we -the Muslims-allow the non-Muslims to take away part of the Dar al Islam with our ability to protect it?

Al Qurtubi says: If the enemy just comes close to Muslim territory, even without entering it, it becomes mandatory on Muslims to go and meet the enemy in order for the religion of Islam to prevail and gain the upper hand and to humiliate the enemy.

Al Baghawi states that it is mandatory on the Muslims who are closest to the invaded land, and is a collective duty on the Muslims who are far away.

The Punishment Of Those Who Don’t Participate In Jihad:

Allah says:Say [O Muhammad], “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your relatives, wealth which you have obtained, commerce wherein you fear decline, and dwellings with which you are pleased, are more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger and jihad in His cause then wait until Allah executes His command. And Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people”33

In this ayah is a sufficient warning for anyone who leaves jihad with their selves and their wealth Allah says:...

33 (Tawbah 24)

“O you who have believed, what is [the matter] with you that, when you are told to go forth in the cause of Allah, you adhere heavily to the earth? Are you satisfied with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But what is the enjoyment of worldly life compared to the Hereafter except a [very] little.

If you do not go forth, He will punish you with a painful punishment and will replace you with another people, and you will not harm Him at all. And Allah is over all things competent”34“

Those who remained behind rejoiced at their staying [at home] after [the departure of] the Messenger of Allah and disliked to strive with their wealth and their lives in the cause of Allah and said, “Do not go forth in the heat.” Say, “The fire of Hell is more intense in heat”-if they would but understandSo let them laugh a little and [then] weep much as recompense for what they used to earn.”35

10. Ibn Umar narrates: I heard the Messenger of Allah saying, “If you trade in each, and follow the tails of cows, and became content with being farmers, and ignored jihad, Allah will impose on you a humiliation that would not be taken away until you go back to your religion.”36

The meaning of the hadith is that if people ignore jihad because of their involvement in agriculture and similar affairs, Allah will unleash upon them their enemies which would bring them humiliation which cannot be eliminated unless they go back to what is a duty upon them to start with and that is jihad against the non-believers, and being harsh and rough on them, and establishing religion to give Islam and its followers victory and to raise the word of Allah high and to humiliate disbelief and its followers. This hadith shows that leaving jihad is leaving Islam because the Messenger of Allah said: “until you go back to your religion”

11. Abu Bakr states that, “If any people stop jihad Allah will cover them all with punishment” al Tabarani, (agreeable chain)

12. Ibn Asakir narrates that when Abu Bakr became the Khalifah he...

34 (Tawbah 38-39)

35 (Tawba 81-82)

36 (Abu Dawud – Authentic

stood on the pulpit and among what he said was, “ If people do not practice jihad Allah will inflict them with poverty”

One might say that ‘I see some people not practicing jihad nevertheless they are wealthy’. The answer is that wealth is not the amount of money you have, but wealth is a feeling of contentment and satisfaction that exists in the heart. When people stop practicing jihad they miss out on the booty of war. When they do that and instead turn their attention and effort to making wealth from various other means, they get involved in a lot of prohibited methods of making money.You then rarely find anyone among them whose wealth is all pure halal. They became greedy over miser things of this world. That made them humiliated and they became slaves to money.

But the mujahid is free of greed and is depending on Allah for his provisions. Allah provides for him from the booty. He wins it by his sword and it is pure halal.

13. Abu Hurairah narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever dies and has not fought or had the intention of fighting dies on a branch of hypocrisy”37

14. Abu Umamah narrates that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever has not fought or prepared a fighter or taken care of a fighter in his absence, Allah will strike him with a disaster” Abu Dawud (Agreeable)

An Advice To The Ones Who Stay Behind38

Know! Oh abstainer from that which has been obligated of jihaad!Deviator from the ways of success and correctness, that you have been exposed to expulsion and relegation. By Allah! Prevented from happiness by obtaining the objective. addWhat that I knew! The reason for your abstinence from fighting and plunging yourself into the battles of the brave. Your miserliness in the path of Allah with your soul and wealth. All this is due to distant hopes, fear of...

37 Muslim

38 Note: this sub-title is a full translation

from volume 1, page 113-132, of the original Arabic book –inserted by the editor.

an on-slaughting life span and hatred of leaving a beloved from family, wealth, son, servant, or relative. A blood brother of yours, a compassionate relative, a generous supporter, a cherished friend, working extra pious deeds, love of a beautiful wife, a preventative high rank, a lofty position, a raised palace, a long shade, magnificent garments or wholesome food. There is not beside these that hinder you from jihaad and none beside these distant you from the Lord of the worshipers.

By Allah! What is this from you? Oh brother! Did you not hear the words of the Most High?

“Oh you who believe what is the matter with you that when you are asked to march forward in the cause of Allah you cling heavily to the earth are you pleased with the life of this world rather than the hereafter but little is the enjoyment of the life of this world as compared with the hereafter”39

Hearken! To that which I dictate to you of decisive evidences and listen that which I present to you of glaring proofs, so that you may learn, nothing hinders from jihaad, not even the two Holy Mosques40

and there is no reason for your delay except the lower self and the devil.•

“But I fear death!”As for your appease to distant hopes, fear of an on-slaughting life span, vigilance of death which must occur and fear of the path which must be traversed, by Allah! Verily! Bravery does not shorten the life of the brave just as refrainment does not lengthen the life of those who lag behind:

“And every nation has its appointed term when there term is reached neither an hour can they delay nor an hour can they advance.”41“

And Allah grants respite to none when his appointed time comes and Allah is all aware of what you do.”42.....

39 (At-Tauba:38)

40 Sheikhul-Islam, Ibn-Taymia has quoted from the consensus of the scholars: The residing of a man in

the land of ribaat as a muraabit (one who makes ribaat) is better than his residing in Makkah, Medinah or Baitul-Maqdis. See Majmu’a Al Fataawa: 28/5 by Ibn-Taymia.

41 (Al A’raaf:34)42 (Al-Munaafiqoon:11)

t r u t h o u t | Government Report on Drugging of Detainees Is Suppressed

Government Report on Drugging of Detainees Is Suppressed

by: Jeffrey Kaye and Jason Leopold, t r u t h o u t | Report

photo
(Image: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: mike.benedetti, Dirty Bunny)

A major Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General (OIG) investigation on the drugging of detainees held at Guantanamo and other Department of Defense (DoD) facilities was completed almost a year ago and shared with a key Senate committee. According to DoD spokesperson, Maj. Tanya Bradsher, the report is classified. News of the completion of the investigation and the OIG's report came as a surprise to human rights advocates who had been involved in investigating the drugging claims. While the findings of the investigation is unknown, a spokeswoman for the Senate Armed Services Committee said the OIG's investigation did not substantiate allegations of drugging of prisoners for the "purposes of interrogation." The involuntary use of drugs on prisoners would violate a number of domestic and international laws, as well as basic ethical codes of the medical professions.

Truthout filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request last week to gain access to the OIG report. Kelly McHale, a senior FOIA Specialist who works in the Inspector General's office, said Tuesday the Defense Department "may be unable to respond to your request within the FOIA's 20 day statutory time period as there are unusual circumstances which may impact on our ability to quickly process your request.

"These unusual circumstances may be: (a) the need to search for and collect records from a facility geographically separated from this Office; (b) the potential volume of records responsive to your request; and (c) the need for consultation with one or more other agencies or DoD components having a substantial interest in either the determination or the subject matter of the records," McHale wrote in an email in response to Truthout's FOIA request. "For these reasons, we placed your request in our complex processing queue and will process it consistent with the order in which we received your request. Please note that we currently have an administrative workload of 105 cases."

Stephen Soldz, president-elect for Psychologists for Social Responsibility, who also wrote about the drugging controversy in April 2008, told Truthout, "Given that ex-detainees' accounts of other abuses have repeatedly proved reliable when they were independently corroborated by official documents and accounts from guards, there is no reason to doubt detainees' accounts of drugging. Was 'interrogation' defined so narrowly as to exclude drug use designed to make detainees cooperate with interrogators or to instill terror or confusion in detainees?" Soldz asked.

The initial impetus for the OIG investigation was a Washington Post exposé by reporter Joby Warrick in April 2008. A few weeks prior to the Post story, Jeff Stein had written about the drugging of prisoners in an article at Congressional Quarterly, noting that the chief federal defender for supposed al-Qaeda suspect Jose Padilla asserted in a 2007 legal motion that Padilla was "was given drugs against his will, believed to be some form of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) or phencyclidine (PCP), to act as a sort of truth serum during his interrogations." Warrick's story described as an example of possible drugging the case of former Saudi detainee, Adel al-Nusairi. According to his attorney, "[Nusairi] was injected in the arm with something that made him tired - that made his brain cloudy. When he would try to read the Koran, his brain would not focus. He had unusual lethargy and would drool on himself."

More recent accounts of drugging by detainees include charges by Abdul Aziz Naji, who was forcibly repatriated to Algeria from Guantanamo July 2010. Naji told an Algerian newspaper that detainees at Guantanamo were forced "to take some medicines for three months to drive them crazy, loosing [sic] memory and committing suicide." According to an important exposé by Scott Horton at Harpers last winter, at least one of the three Guantanamo prisoners that DoD claimed committed suicide in 2006 had needle marks on both of his arms. According to Horton, the Obama administration has refused to open an investigation into these mysterious deaths, which allegedly took place at a previously unreported black site at Guantanamo, known informally as Camp No.

Warrick's contention that "[a]t least two dozen other former and current detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere say they were given drugs against their will or witnessed other inmates being drugged, based on interviews and court documents," led to movement in the otherwise glacial US Senate. Sens. Carl Levin (D-Michigan), Joe Biden (D-Delaware) and Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska), representing the Senate's Armed Services, Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees, respectively, sent letters to "the CIA and Defense Department inspectors general calling for an investigation." The senators said they were reacting to the March 2008 article in the Post, as well as other public reports, confirming the use of drugs on "detainees," and indicated the controversy "warrant[ed] a thorough investigation."

While it is unknown how the CIA replied, the Inspector General's office at DoD began a probe. The final report, entitled "Investigation of Allegations of the Use of Mind-Altering Drugs to Facilitate Interrogations of Detainees," was finally published September 23, 2009.

Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman at the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Truthout that the Committee received a copy of the September 2009 report, but it was marked as classified and she could not discuss the details. However, she was authorized to say that the OIG investigation "did not substantiate allegations" that mind altering drugs "were used for interrogation purposes" on detainees.

That still leaves a lot of questions. Reports have described the use of drugs for restraint of prisoners, facility control, as a condition of confinement, sedation during transport as well as use in interrogations. The use of drugs in mind control experiments, the purpose of which was to assess the effects of various controlled substances on the physical and psychological functioning of the individual, has been described by numerous authors, investigative journalists, Congressional committees and even (after decades of denial) the DoD.

The use of drugs for sedation or interrogations was raised in the May 10, 2005, Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo from Stephen Bradbury to then-CIA Senior Deputy Legal Council John Rizzo on the "Combined Use of Certain Techniques That May Be Used in the Interrogation of High-Value al-Qaeda Detainees." Bradbury noted that the OLC's advice pertained only to interrogations and not "to conditions of confinement or detention, as distinct from the interrogation of detainees." He notes that the CIA's Office of Medical Services (OMS) rules allow the sedation of detainees during transportation. Even so, Bradbury writes that OMS reported they were "unaware" of the use of sedating drugs in the transport of detainees during the prior two years. This appears to be an admission that they were aware of such practices prior to May 2003. Bradbury told the CIA, "We caution that any use of sedatives should be carefully evaluated," referencing violations of US anti-torture law as an example.

We need a corporate-free zone. Click here to support news and information free from advertising and commercial bias.

Nearly three years before the Bradbury memo, OLC memos written by John Yoo, with assistance from Jay Bybee and David Addington, had allowed for the use of mind-altering drugs in interrogations, maintaining such use was not torture unless it caused "permanent" or "profound" mental harm or damage. In 2006, when the new version of the Army Field Manual (AFM) on human intelligence collection was approved, it allowed an even less stringent ban on the use of drugs than Yoo had envisioned, dropping the OLC prohibition against use of drugs that could cause "profound mental harm," a standard that could be met, according to Yoo, by induction of even a brief psychotic episode. In the version of the AFM in force prior to 2006, any "chemically induced psychosis" was forbidden. In the new AFM, still currently in effect, only drugs used that cause permanent, lasting harm are not allowable for interrogation use.

While the letters from Senators Biden, Hagel and Levin called for both CIA and DoD inspector general investigations, it is not known if the CIA ever initiated such an in-house review. In 2008, the Senate Armed Services Committee undertook a detailed "Inquiry into the treatment of detainees in US custody," with two public hearings and a published report. Nevertheless, the committee's report did not include an investigation of any abuse by involuntary drugging.

Meanwhile, key personnel working in DoD intelligence circles have a history of exploring or advocating the use of drugs in interrogations. In July 2003, the CIA, in conjunction with the Rand Corporation and the American Psychological Association (APA) conducted a workshop entitled "Science of Deception: Integration of Practice and Theory." The proceedings included a discussion on new ways to utilize drugs and sensory bombardment techniques to break down individuals under interrogation. Links to the description of this workshop have recently been scrubbed at APA's web site. The meeting included the participation of DoD personnel and was co-organized by APA's former senior scientist, Susan Brandon. Dr. Brandon is today research chief for the Behavioral Science Program within the Defense Intelligence Agency's Defense Counterintelligence and Human Intelligence Center (DCHC). A recent report by Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic described the DCHC as providing "intelligence operatives and interrogators.... [performing] interrogations for a sub-unit of Task Force 714, an elite counter-terrorism brigade."

When the Washington Post story broke in 2008, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) publicly called for Congressional and Department of Justice investigations of the allegations of drugging detainees, noting that some of these abuses may also have involved forced medication "for therapeutic purposes" without informed consent. As one example of this sort of abuse, Brent Mickum, attorney for Abu Zubaydah, told Truthout that since Zubaydah was transferred to Guantanamo in 2006, he "has suffered upwards of 250 seizures due to the fact that he was treated and overdosed with Haldol. On two occasions I went down there to meet with him he was in no position to talk to me."

Soon after the Post story appeared, then-President of PHR, Leonard Rubenstein (currently a visiting scholar at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) stated, "The forced medication of detainees without their consent, either for interrogation or as a chemical restraint, is an affront to the very foundations of medical ethics.... Even if used for purportedly therapeutic purposes, absent very exceptional circumstances, detainees have a right to consent to modes of treatment, just as others do and the Department of Defense has indeed recognized this right."

"The Man in the Snow White Cell"

Last month, a government panel investigating interrogation techniques - the shadowy Intelligence Science Board, which has been linked to the creation under the Obama administration of the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group, or HIG - had one of their teaching papers posted online at Secrecy News. Entitled "Intelligence Interviewing: Teaching Papers and Case Studies," the April 2009 study, ostensibly discussing the problems with getting good intelligence from coercive interrogations (i.e., torture), had no problem with one scenario that utilized severe isolation and sensory deprivation to loosen up a prisoner. The case is well-known to intelligence professionals and is known as "The Man in the Snow White Cell":

In early 1972, [Nguyen] Tai ["the most senior North Vietnamese officer ever captured during the Vietnam War"] was informed he was being taken to another location to be interrogated by the Americans. After being blindfolded, he was transported by car to an unknown location and placed in a completely sealed cell that was painted all in white, lit by bright lights 24 hours a day and cooled by a powerful air-conditioner (Tai hated air conditioning, believing, like many Vietnamese, that cool breezes could be poisonous). Kept in total isolation, Tai lived in this cell, designed to keep him confused and disoriented, for three years without learning where he was.

Tai's interrogation began anew....

Without doubt, the South Vietnamese torture gave Tai the incentive for the limited cooperation he gave to his American interrogators, but it was the skillful questions and psychological ploys of the Americans and not any physical infliction of pain, that produced the only useful (albeit limited) information that Tai ever provided. [Emphasis added.]

The ISB analysts never mention the deleterious effects that three years of psychological torture may have produced in the prisoner. It is indicative of the way in which psychological forms of torture have been buried in the public's consciousness in lieu of preoccupation with more physical forms of torture, such as waterboarding.

Long ago, the CIA and military discovered that the use of physical methods of torture tended to cause more resistance, or too quickly broke down the prisoner and made him insensible. So, they studied and implemented a more psychological method that relied primarily on isolation, sensory deprivation or overload, sleep deprivation and induction of debility. The introduction of brutal "enhanced interrogation techniques," reverse-engineered from the "Resistance to Interrogation" classes of the SERE schools, were never totally accepted by the intelligence community and may have had more to do with experimental protocols still only dimly understood than with any expected production of operational intelligence.

DoD Review: Guantanamo Medical Records Shared With Interrogators

One intriguing outcome from the DoD drugging investigation was a "Review of the Joint Task Force Guantanamo Inclusion of Detainee Mental Health Information in Intelligence Information Reports," issued May 2010. A short summary of this review appears in Appendix G, "Detailed Summary Agency Oversight" of the July 30, 2010, report to Congress by the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. According to Long, the Senate Armed Services Committee has not been briefed on this report.

The investigation into use of mental health information in intelligence reports at Guantanamo had, as its initial public objective, whether interrogators and analysts were considering detainee mental health as "an indicator of reliability" when determining "reliability and accuracy of information" obtained through interrogations. By the time the investigation was completed in May of this year, the issue had become one of confusion over guidelines and procedures at Guantanamo over the sharing of medical information between health care personnel and interrogators. If nothing else, the recent report demonstrates that interrogations and examinations of detainees remain an ongoing issue at Guantanamo, even as it widely assumed that much of the focus on new intelligence has shifted to the interrogations at Bagram Air Base or DoD black site prisons in Afghanistan.

Controversies over the use of private medical and mental health information and records of detainees by interrogators in the prisons at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere were aired in medical journals going back some years. In the July 7, 2005, article "Doctors and Interrogators at Guantanamo Bay," published in the New England Journal of Medicine, M. Gregg Bloche and Jonathan H. Marks warned against doctors and other medical personnel crossing the line between caregiver and interrogator. Such breaches of privacy would violate the privacy of medical and mental health treatment for the supposed benefit of the interrogator, some of whom use the information to inform their anxiety and fear-based approach to interrogation.

Clinical expertise has a limited place in the planning and oversight of lawful interrogation. Psychologists play such a role in criminal investigations and medical monitoring of detainees is called for by international legal instruments. But proximity of health professionals to interrogation settings, even when they act as caregivers, carries risk. It may invite interrogators to be more aggressive, because they imagine that these professionals will set needed limits. The logic of caregiver involvement as a safeguard also risks pulling health professionals in ever more deeply. Once caregivers share information with interrogators, why should they refrain from giving advice about how to best use the data?

Responding to the controversy around sharing medical records described in the Marks and Bloche article, a few weeks after the NEJM article was published, then-Army Surgeon Gen. Kevin Kiley assured the press that there was a "firewall" between interrogators and members of the Behavioral Science Consultation Teams (BSCTs) that work with the interrogators and medical records. Whatever the practice, the 2005 Standard Operating Procedure for the BSCTs at that time shows that while the BSCTs were to act as liaisons between interrogators and Guantanamo medical personnel, describing "the implications of medical diagnoses and treatment for the interrogation process," it is clearly stated, "Neither BSCT personnel and interrogation teams have access to medical records of detainees." Medical information coming from Guantanamo's Joint Medical Group is limited to physical, medical and functional limitations "required to consider in order to ensure the safety of the detainee and US personnel, e.g. diabetes, heart condition, special diet or contagious condition."

According to a communication from Stephen Soldz, the 2006 BSCT directives, "while establishing controls on use of medical records, made it clear that these records could be accessed for national security purposes. Thus, any firewalls could potentially be breached." So, it is not surprising to hear that the May 2010 inspector general review of Joint Task Force Guantanamo on use of detainee medical records reports that, under the Obama administration, sharing of such records with interrogators is commonplace, the subject of shabby oversight ten years after the opening of the prison site:

Present regulatory guidance authorizes health-care providers to share detainee medical information with interrogators, but does not provide specific guidance on how to do so. As a result execution of these policies at Guantanamo has been inconsistent , resulting in confusion for both health-care providers and interrogation elements. [Emphasis added.]

Such confusion is not accidental. Oversight means that things that aren't supposed to happen are in fact kept under some kind of control. Given the ongoing controversies about medical information being shared, it is important that, as part of a clear and open investigation of procedures at Guantanamo and other detainee prison sites, that the public be given an understanding of exactly what type of information is in those medical records and of what benefit such information might be to interrogators, the better to understand how such information might be abused and whether rules and procedures for the legal and ethical use of medical information are truly followed.

Nathaniel Raymond, director of PHR's Campaign Against Torture, said "the American people will not know whether those standards were enforced properly unless there is complete transparency about what was done or not done in our name."

"One classified Inspector General's report does little to answer the disturbing questions raised by government documents, news reports and the statements of detainees themselves," Raymond told Truthout in an interview.

For all its rules and Standard Operating Procedures, Guantanamo remains a lawless place, where maltreatment of prisoners continues and torture is by no means a banished evil. The continuation of Appendix M interrogations at the facility, steeped in techniques such as isolation, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation and creation of strong fear, guarantees that abuse continues.

Because this is happening under a Democratic Party administration, oversight by former critics of the Bush administration - especially in Congress - is muted, for fear of tarnishing the reputation of the Democratic Party. That's one major reason these stories are not being reported. No one is bothering to look, for fear of what they might find. Hence, no major investigations either, at least not for public consumption.

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

الأحد، سبتمبر 05، 2010

Taliban announce summer offensive

Taliban announce summer offensive

Statement of the Leadership Council of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan on the occasion of the commencement of Al-Faath Operations.

Help from Allah and a speedy victory. So give the good news to the Believers. S.61A.13

After the inception of the legitimate Jihad of the people of Afghanistan against the invading coalition under the leader of America and the vast resistance sprawling on a period of nine years, the invading Americans and their blind coalition followers willy-nilly reached a point that the NATO foreign ministers in a recent gathering had to take a decision that they should withdraw their morale-sagging troops from Afghanistan.

The invaders may paint the disgraceful defeat of their forces at the hands of the Afghan Mujahideen as they like; it is up to their defeatist logic. But the ground realities in Afghanistan show that the retreat is a clear-cut defeat of the non-believing forces versus the forces of belief and Islamic faith.

While believing that with the help of Allah (Swt) and selfless support of the people of Afghanistan, all foreign invading forces will ultimately face defeat, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan meanwhile once again emphasizes on the unconditional and immediate withdrawal of all foreign invading forces from Afghanistan. To achieve this end, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan considers the armed Jihad the only mean to reach that destination. In order to expedite the momentum of the Jihadic activities, the Islamic Emirate announces this spring operation by the name of Alk-Faath (victory) to be launched against Americans, NATO members and their surrogates.

Al-Faath is a prideful word in the history of the Muslims. It has been used in the Holy Quran to mean success, upperhandness and victory. A chapter out of 114 chapters of the Holy Quran is named Al – Faath. Muslims were favored with Al-faath.—victory on the ground of Al-badar battle in the second lunar year of Hijara. In this battle, Muslims killed Abu Jahal, the leader of the non-beleivers. The second Al-Faath came on the eighth years of Hijra. It was the victory of Mecca. This is considered the beginning of establishment of Islamic rule in the world.

So, the Leadership Council of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan chose this name to be the name of this spring operations against the Americans and NAT forces. Like the Badar, the Conferarates battles and the Victory battle of Mecca, we hope these operations will be successful operations against the global invading forces, if Allah willing. The Al-Faath operations will target the invading Americans, the NATO military personnel, foreign advisers, spies who pose as foreign diplomats, members of the Karzai stooge administrations and members of the cabinet, members of the parliament, personnel of the so-called ministry of defense, intelligence department, ministry of justice, ministry of internal affairs, contractors of foreign and domestic private security companies, contractors and personnel of military logistics and military constructions companies and all supporters of foreign invaders who are working for the strengthening of foreign domination.

The Al-Faath Jihadic operations will start in 10th May 2010 this year to include operations against the defeated foreigners and their surrogates all over the country. It will comprise of tactics of successful tips and runs operations, inter-cities operations, and laying siege to cities, blockade of roads of military centers, use of IED, assassination of government officials, detainment of foreign invaders and martyrdom-seeking operations as needs be.

1. Prior to the commencement of Al-faath operation, we urge all military intelligence, judicial and administrative officials to part ways with the surrogate and moribund administration and instead, side with their own people against the invaders in order to force them pull out of the country. If police men or army soldiers surrender to Mujahideen, their work will be appreciated by Mujahideen via bestowing on them material incentives. Those who support the non-believers will be considered as one of them and will be punished for their betrayal.

2. Owners and workers of transportations and construction companies, who transport logistical goods for the foreigners or build their construction facilities, should put an end to these illegitimate activities. Otherwise, Muajhideen will deal with their personnel and technical equipments in the same manner as they deal with the foreign invading troops and their equipments. They will kill their personnel and destroy their equipments. This is because their activities help extend the occupation of the beloved country Afghanistan.

3. Those foreign investors, who make investment in Afghanistan to ensure American interests in Afghanistan and their benefits invariably end up in the pockets of the foreigners instead of the people, should avoid making such investment. Instead, they should make investments in sectors which benefit them and the people rather than the invaders. Nor they should bolster the foreigners. Mujahgideen will destroy and wipe out every thing that is considered supporting the foreign invaders. Then none should have reason to complain

4. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan assures the Muslim Mujahid people that the days of the liberation of the country from the brutal claws of the invaders are around the corner thanks to the help of Allah (SwT) and your unforgettable sacrifices. You are urged to join the ranks of Mujahideen in this historical and critical phase in order to pound, kill and obliterate the invading forces. You are urged to strengthen the lines of resistance with your persons.

5. The leadership of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan earnestly requests the honorable and brave Mujahideen to pay attention to the safety of life and property of people and make every effort to protect them during all operations including the operation Al-Faath. Pleasure of Allah(Swt) and prosperity of people should make your sole goal of Jihad. This is in order to ensure the sanctity of the sacred goals of Jihad.

6. Take people advice and views in all your activities; show strong determination, sagacious approach, comprehensive planning and utilize all successful experiences of the past. Concentrate your thought and efforts on Jihad and oversee that the Mujahideen are not involved in unnecessary activities. Bring mommentum to the strongholds of Jihad with the none-believers so that an Islamic government can be established and seek help and strength from All (Swt) in your Jihadic and charity works.

الخميس، أغسطس 26، 2010

 Obama's US Assassination Program?       Information Clearing House: ICH

Obama's US Assassination Program?

By Chuck Norris

August 26, 2010 "
Human Events" -- Sound too conspiratorial to be true? Like the cover-up ops of spy novels? Well, it's reality. And it is possibly the most bizarre, inhumane and abusive way that the White House is expanding its power over the American people.

It's not an extremist belief or theory of the far right. It's a fact that has been confirmed by The New York Times, The Washington Post and MSNBC and even documented by the far-left online magazine Salon.com.

And it's the gravest nightmare of U.S. citizens and abandonment of our Constitution to date: a presidential assassination program in which U.S. citizens are in the literal scopes of the executive branch based upon nothing more than allegations of terrorism involvement as the branch defines it.

Of course, the CIA has executed covert assassinations of foreigners for decades. But tragically, Obama is expanding this program to include American, non-Islamic, stateside, homegrown terrorists.

It all started in January, when The Washington Post reported: "As part of the operations, Obama approved a Dec. 24 strike against a (Yemeni) compound where a U.S. citizen, Anwar al-Aulaqi, was thought to be meeting with other regional al-Qaeda leaders. Although he was not the focus of the strike and was not killed, he has since been added to a shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing or capture."

"A shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"?

That's right. No arrest. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet.

While the Obama administration continues its Bush-blaming for the economy, it is mega-morphing Bush policy in covert ops overseas, which was, according to the Post, "to kill U.S. citizens abroad if strong evidence existed that an American was involved in organizing or carrying out terrorist actions against the United States or U.S. interests."

Well, in recent weeks, the Obama administration has taken this overseas killing op to a new low: stateside assassinations.

A former director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, confessed before Congress: "We take direct actions against terrorists in the intelligence community. If we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that."

If you are wondering who the "we" are to whom Adm. Blair refers, they are Smith, Wesson and the White House.

Now we know what deputy national security adviser John Brennan meant when he admitted in May, "And under President Obama, we have built upon the work of the previous administration and have accelerated efforts in many areas." (Remember when Bush's eavesdropping on U.S. citizens seemed harsh?)

Brennan further explained then that the problem of homegrown terrorists ranks as a top priority because of the increasing number of U.S. individuals who have become "captivated by extremist ideology or causes." He went on to say, "There are ... dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world and ... are very concerning to us."

Do you think "different parts of the world" doesn't include their country of origin?

Conveniently, the Obama administration also is integrating a pervasive plan to ensure the termination of radicals as the feds deem them abroad and domestic, too, with the resurrection of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, introduced by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif. Also known as H.R. 1955, it was passed in the House by the Democratic majority but was rejected by the Senate.

Everyone thought that legislation was dead until the Obama administration resurrected its tenets in its 52-page "National Security Strategy," released in May. So alarming is the feds' potential abuse of power that officials from London to the Kremlin are recognizing the threat to U.S. citizens.

The European Union Times reported, "Foreign Ministry reports circulating in the Kremlin today are warning that an already explosive situation in the United States is about to get a whole lot worse as a new law put forth by President Obama is said capable of seeing up to 500,000 American citizens jailed for the crime of opposing their government."

Woodrow Wilson, during his reign as president, incarcerated more than 2,000 U.S. citizens for speaking out against the government. And now for the first time since, a U.S. president is highlighting the threats of homegrown terror and literally hunting U.S. citizens as terrorists. One senior administration official said, "For the first time since 9/11, the (national security strategy) integrates homeland security and national security."

And what type of "integration" does that entail?

President Obama explained in an often overlooked statement within the "National Security Strategy": "We are now moving beyond traditional distinctions between homeland and national security. ... This includes a determination to prevent terrorist attacks against the American people by fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home."

Could it be any clearer? Right out of the horse's mouth. Or do I need to spell out what "fully coordinating the actions that we take abroad with the actions and precautions that we take at home" means?

Remember the words "a shortlist of U.S. citizens specifically targeted for killing"?

That's right. No arrest. No Miranda rights. No due process. No trial. Just a bullet.

Copyright © 2010HUMAN EVENTS

الحجر

أرشيف المدونة الإلكترونية