Thanks Vickie,

In the previous post, I challenged you “to read the Mufti’s statement in full and explain how it can in any way support the allegations you have leveled against the Mufti.”

You earlier described the Mufti as "an extremist whose ethics in no way align with most people. ie Jihad against infidels are included in his recommendations.”

Now you are saying that he endorses violent jihad against democratic opposition to ‘missionary activity and an Islamic state.

However, ALL the references you have made to support these accusations are from the book “Islam and Modernism”, are they not? This includes the letter you refer to which appears in the last chapter.

But you are fully aware that the Mufti states categorically that “Islam and Modernism” " is not a book written by me" because "It is an English translation of some of my Urdu articles, and was published without my review."

You have failed to support your accusation with anything that the Mufti has written and in another effective admission of this failure have resorted to words that were NOT authored by the Mufti. You have slandered the Mufti based on this book and have done so repeatedly fully aware that he denies authorship of this book.

You should be apologising for maligning the Mufti’s character with these vile and unconscionable accusations. It is your ‘ethics’ that is out of synch with most people.

Until next week, when we can discuss what David Clark has to say about specific Islamic financial contracts,

salaams

Grateful- it is an English translation of his articles in Urdu. Agreed, he didn't review the translation (which you automatically assume to be fraudulent) but the link you gave me says he is only denying he advocates for 'violent jihad against infidels at every opportunity'. His 'correction' confirms he does support violent jihad...Quote from the 'correction':
'Thus the main substance of my answer was that merely allowing Islamic missionaries entering into a non-Muslim country does not mean that it has no hostile designs against Islam and Muslims. It is possible that despite allowing Islamic missionaries working on its soil, a non-Muslim government is a political danger to the freedom and honor of an Islamic state, in which case jihad is not forbidden.'

On the face of it he is saying being open to Islamic missionary activity is not enough and he doesn't forbid jihad against a non-Muslim government who have 'hostile designs' against Muslims. What would that look like Grateful? Is it considered 'hostile' if a society bans the burqa or denies a mosque application? How is this hostility measured? Usmani is known to have connections to radicals and Taliban - yet you defend him as a great man. Surah 5:32 was quoted to me today ' if anyone kills a person its as if he has killed all mankind' - sounds noble but of course, as usual, the whole translation is omitted. The bit that says 'except in retaliation of murder or committing mischief in the land' is omitted. I'm not sure what 'mischief' is but we wouldn't want to be guilty of it for the next verse says those guilty of mischief should be 'killed, crucified, their hands & feet cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled'. All in the word play Grateful and you seem happy to play with Usmani.

Vickie you have just admitted that the book “Islam and Modernism”, which you originally based you and David Clark originally based your defamatory comments about the Mufti, can no longer be tendered as evidence. Does this mean you will apologise for these remarks. No of course not. The calumny does not stop here. Now you are arguing that an article I supplied you provides the support you need. And if that is not enough: “Usmani is known to have connections to radicals and Taliban - yet you defend him as a great man.”

Let’s examine the Taliban statement first. You do not state what sort of connections nor do you provide an evidence in support of your this accusation. Well i can provide evidence in the form of a recent communique released by the Mufti and other scholars condemning the actions of the Taliban in attacking a church and killing 83 Christians, saying “Attacks like these are in total violation of the teachings of Quran and Sunnah,” and that “Islam advocates protection to the life and property of all the citizens without any discrimination based on dialect, faith or any other aspect.” http://www.pakistantribune.com.pk/5229/ulema-deoband-denounce-suicide-attacks.html#sthash.4ghrjzWe.dpuf

Clearly, the Mufti's statement does NOT support your accusation that he is "an extremist whose ethics in no way align with most people. ie Jihad against infidels are included in his recommendations.”

I will return to the second point tomorrow, because i have probably reached the post limit

cont...

cont..

Returning to your other point. You agree that the “extremist” tag cannot be supported by your original evidence (the book that he did NOT write). However, you assert, based on the Mufti’s ‘correction’ (the link i supplied), that the Mufti "is saying being open to Islamic missionary activity is not enough and he doesn't forbid jihad against a non-Muslim government who have 'hostile designs' against Muslims.”

The first point that can be made is that the Mufti considers violent jihad to be justified when “it is fought to save the country from physical attack of an enemy” and “as a pre-emptive measure though a Muslim state is not physically attacked, yet its freedom and honor is endangered by an alien force.” So the hostility of the non-Muslim government to which the Mufti is referring is hostility by a non-Muslim government towards a “Muslim state”, no “Muslims” per se.

Therefore, when you ask “Is it considered 'hostile' if a society bans the burqa or denies a mosque application? “, clearly these are not examples of the ‘hostility’ that would justify violent jihad against a non-Muslim country. The hostility needs to be directed towards a Muslim state.

Is that clear enough? If there are any more objections please feel free to post them. However, like i said you have no grounds for applying the "extremists" tag to Mufti Taqi Usmani and you should acknowledge this by apologising.

salaams