14 August 2011
Seerah of Muhammed*
*: May the Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an
*: May the Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an
Zayd bin Thabit learns Hebrew in 15 days
"Zayd, learn the writing of the Jews for me," instructed the Prophet. "At your command, Messenger of Allâh," replied Zayd who set about learning Hebrew with enthusiasm. He became quite proficient in the language and wrote it for the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam when he wanted to communicate with the Jews. Zayd also read and translated from Hebrew when the Jews wrote to the Prophet. The Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam instructed him to learn Syriac also and this he did. Zayd thus came to perform the important function of an interpreter for the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam in his dealings with non-Arabic speaking peoples.
The Invasion of Badr, the Second
When the Muslims destroyed the power of the Arab-desert tribes and guarded themselves against their evils, they started preparations to encounter their great enemy. A year elapsed since they fought Quraish at Uhud. So it was due time to meet them and start war again in order to determine which of the two parties was worthy of survival. But it was a year of drought, and Abu Sufyan saw that there would be not a blade of greenery for their camels and horses to eat on the way. All the fodder for the expedition would have to be brought with them from Mecca, and their stores were already depleted. But he shrank from the dishonour of breaking the tryst which he had himself proposed. It was desirable that Muhammad should be the one to break it, but reports had come from Yathrib that he was already making preparations to set out. Could he be induced to change his mind? Abu Sufyan went into consultation with Suhayl and one or two other leaders of Quraysh, and they formed a plan. There happened to be in Mecca at that time a friend of Suhayl's named Nu'ayrn, one of the leading men of the Bani Ashja', a clan of Chatafan. They felt they could trust him, and since he was not of Quraysh he could pose as a neutral and objective onlooker. They offered him twenty camels if he could induce the Muslims to renounce their project of marching out to Badr. Nu'aym agreed and set out at once for the oasis, where he drew an alarming picture of the forces which Abu Sufyan was preparing to lead out to Badr. He spoke to all the different sections of the community, Emigrants, Helpers, Jews and hypocrites, and he would close his assessment of the danger with the urgent counsel: "Therefore stay here and go not out against them. By God, I do not think a single one of you will escape with his life." The Jews and the hypocrites were glad at the news of Meccan preparations for war, and they helped to spread the tidings throughout the city. Nor did Nu'aym fail to make an impression on the Muslims themselves, many of whom were inclined to think that it would indeed be most unwise to go out to Badr. News of this attitude reached the Prophet*, and he began to fear that no one would go out with him. But Abu Bakr and 'Umer urged him on no account to break his tryst with Quraysh. "God will support His religion," they said "and He will give strength to His Messenger." "I will go forth," said the Prophet*, "even if I go alone."
These few words cost Nu'ayrn his camels, making vain all his efforts just when he was beginning to think that he had succeeded. But despite himself, he was impressed by the total failure of his mission: some power was at work in Medina which was altogether beyond his influence, and beyond his experience, and the seeds of Islam were sown in his heart. The Prophet* set out as originally planned with fifteen hundred men on camels and ten horsemen. Many of them took merchandise with them, intending to trade at the fair of Badr.
In Sha‘ban 4 A.H., January 626 A.D., the Messenger of Allah* set out to Badr accompanied by one thousand and five hundred fighters and ten mounted horsemen, and with ‘Ali bin Abi Talib as standard bearer. ‘Abdullah bin Rawahah was given authority over Madina during the Prophet*’s absence. Reaching Badr, the Muslims stayed there waiting for the idolaters to come.
Meantime Abu Sufyan had said to Quraysh: "Let us go out and spend one night or two nights on the road, and then return. If Muhammad go not out he will hear that we set forth and that we then returned because he came not out to meet us. This will be counted against him and in our favour." Abu Sufyan’s forces comprised two thousand footmen and fifty horsemen. They reached Mar Az-Zahran, some distance form Mecca, and camped at a water place called Mijannah. Being reluctant, discouraged and extremely terrified of the consequences of the approaching fight, Abu Sufyan turned to his people and began to introduce cowardice-based flimsy pretexts in order to dissuade his men from going to war, saying: "O tribe of Quraish! Nothing will improve the condition you are in but a fruitful year — a year during which your animals feed on plants and bushes and give you milk to drink. And I see that this is a rainless year, therefore I am returning now and I recommend you to return with me." It seems that his army were also possessed of the same fears and apprehensions, for they readily obeyed him without the least hesitation.
But as it happened, the Prophet* and his Companions spent eight days at the fair of Badr, and those who attended it reported the news far and wide that Quraysh had broken their word but that Muhammad and his followers had kept theirs and had come to fight Quraysh as they had promised. When the news reached Mecca of the great moral victory of their enemy and of their own moral defeat in the eyes of Arabia, Safwan and others bitterly upbraided Abu Sufyan for ever having proposed the second encounter at Badr. But this mortification none the less served to intensify their preparations for the final and lasting revenge which they were planning to inflict on the founder and followers of the' new religion.
The Muslims, who were then at Badr, stayed for eight days waiting for their enemy. They took advantage of their stay by selling goods and earning double as much the price out of it. When the idolaters declined to fight, the balance of powers shifted to rest in favour of the Muslims, who thus regained their military reputation, their dignity and managed to impose their awe-inspiring presence over the whole of Arabia. In brief, they mastered and controlled the whole situation. This invasion had many a name. It is called ‘Badr the Appointment’, ‘Badr, the Second’, ‘Badr, the Latter’, and ‘Badr Minor’.
Salman al-Farsi (Salman the Persian)
This is a story of a seeker of Truth, the story of Salman the Persian, gleaned, to begin with, from his own words: I grew up in the town of Isfahan in Persia in the village of Jayyan. My father was the Dihqan or chief of the village. He was the richest person there and had the biggest house. Since I was a child my father loved me, more than he loved any other. As time went by his love for me became so strong and overpowering that he feared to lose me or have anything happen to me. So he kept me at home, a veritable prisoner, in the same way that young girls were kept. I became devoted to the Magian religion so much so that I attained the position of custodian of the fire which we worshipped. My duty was to see that the flames of the fire remained burning and that it did not go out for a single hour, day or night. My father had a vast estate which yielded an abundant supply of crops. He himself looked after the estate and the harvest. One day he was very busy with his duties as dihqan in the village and he said to me: "My son, as you see, I am too busy to go out to the estate now. Go and look after matters there for me today."
On my way to the estate, I passed a Christian church and the voices at prayer attracted my attention. I did not know anything about Christianity or about the followers of any other religion throughout the time my father kept me in the house away from people. When I heard the voices of the Christians I entered the church to see what they were doing. I was impressed by their manner of praying and felt drawn to their religion. "By God," I said, "this is better than ours. I shall not leave them until the sun sets." I asked and was told that the Christian religion originated in Ash-Sham (Greater Syria). I did not go to my father's estate that day and at night, I returned home. My father met me and asked what I had done. I told him about my meeting with the Christians and how I was impressed by their religion. He was dismayed and said: "My son, there is nothing good in that religion. Your religion and the religion of your forefathers is better."
"No, their religion is better than ours," I insisted.My father became upset and afraid that I would leave our religion. So he kept me locked up in the house and put a chain on my feet. I managed however to send a message to the Christians asking them to inform me of any caravan going to Syria. Before long they got in touch with me and told me that a caravan was headed for Syria. I managed to unfetter myself and in disguise accompanied the caravan to Syria. There, I asked who was the leading person in the Christian religion and was directed to the bishop of the church. I went up to him and said: "I want to become a Christian and would like to attach myself to your service, learn from you and pray with you." The bishop agreed and I entered the church in his service. I soon found out, however, that the man was corrupt. He would order his followers to give money in charity while holding out the promise of blessings to them. When they gave anything to spend in the way of God, however, he would hoard it for himself and not give anything to the poor or needy. In this way he amassed a vast quantity of gold. When the bishop died and the Christians gathered to bury him, I told them of his corrupt practices and, at their request, showed them where he kept their donations. When they saw the large jars filled with gold and silver they said. "By God, we shall not bury him." They nailed him on a cross and threw stones at him. I continued in the service of the person who replaced him. The new bishop was an ascetic who longed for the Hereafter and engaged in worship day and night. I was greatly devoted to him and spent a long time in his company. (After his death, Salman attached himself to various Christian religious figures, in Mosul, Nisibis and elsewhere. The last one had told him about the appearance of a Prophet* in the land of the Arabs who would have a reputation for strict honesty, one who would accept a gift but would never consume charity (sadaqah) for himself. Salman continues his story.)
A group of Arab leaders from the Kalb tribe passed through Ammuriyah and I asked them to take me with them to the land of the Arabs in return for whatever money I had. They agreed and I paid them. When we reached Wadi al-Qura (a place between Madina and Syria), they broke their agreement and sold me to a Jew. I worked as a servant for him but eventually he sold me to a nephew of his belonging to the tribe of Banu Qurayzah. This nephew took me with him to Yathrib, the city of palm groves, which is how the Christian at Ammuriyah had described it. At that time the Prophet* was inviting his people in Mecca to Islam but I did not hear anything about him then because of the harsh duties which slavery imposed upon me. When the Prophet* reached Yathrib after his hijrah from Mecca, I was in fact at the top of a palm tree belonging to my master doing some work. My master was sitting under the tree. A nephew of his came up and said: "May God declare war on the Aws and the Khazraj (the two main Arab tribes of Yathrib). By God, they are now gathering at Quba to meet a man who has today come from Mecca and who claims he is a Prophet."
I felt hot flushes as soon as I heard these words and I began to shiver so violently that I was afraid that I might fall on my master. I quickly got down from the tree and spoke to my master's nephew. "What did you say? Repeat the news for me." My master was very angry and gave me a terrible blow. "What does this matter to you'? Go back to what you were doing," he shouted. When it was evening, I took some food with me and went to the Prophet**. The Prophet* was in Quba at the time. I said, “Word has reached me that you are a very pious man, and that you have some travellers in your company. I had some charity and thought that you would be most deserving of it. This is it; you may have some to eat.” The Prophet* withdrew his own hand, not eating from it, but told his Companions to eat. At the time, I thought, “This is one of the characteristics my Mentor told me of.” On my way back, I saw that the Prophet* was heading to Madinah . Thus, I took the food to him, saying, “I saw that you were not eating from this charity. As a matter of fact, I presented it as a gift and not charity.” This time, the Prophet* ate with his Companions. “That makes two signs,” I thought. Later on, I approached the Prophet* as he was walking behind the corpse in a funeral. I remember that at the time, he was covered in two sheets, and that his Companions were with him. I was trying to steal a look at the Seal on his back, when the Prophet* saw me glancing. Realising that I wanted to verify what someone had told me, he let his cloak drop a little, and I managed to see that the Seal between his shoulder blades was exactly the way my Mentor had described it. I threw myself down before the Prophet* kissing (his blessed hands/feet) and started to cry. The Holy Prophet* said, “O Salman! Reveal your story.” So I sat in front of him, relating my story to him and hoping that his Companions could also hear it. When I had finished, the Prophet* said, “O Salman! Make a deal with your owner to free you.”
Consequently, my master did agree to free me, but in exchange for the following: ‘Three hundred date trees, as well as one thousand, six hundred silver coins.' Hence, the Sahaba helped by providing around twenty to thirty date plants each, and a tenth of every man's land in accordance to how much he owned. The Prophet* said to me, “Dig a hole for each date-plant. When you are finished, let me know so that I can personally fix all the date-plants into place with my own hands.” Thus, with the help of my friends, I dug holes wherever the date-plants were to be put. Later on, the Prophet* came. We stood by his side holding the plants as he fixed them into the ground. I swear by The Being Who sent the Prophet* with the Truth, not a single plant died out. Nevertheless, I still had the silver to pay. A man came to the Prophet* bringing from the mines some gold which was roughly the size of a pigeon's egg. The Prophet* said, “O Salman! Take this and pay off whatever you have to.” I replied, “O Messenger of Allah! How will this be enough for my debt?” He said, “Allah will surely make it sufficient for your debt.”
As a result to this statement, I swear By Allah, it outweighed the one thousand, six hundred coins. I not only paid off my dues, but what I had left with me was equivalent to what I had given them. The strict honesty of the Prophet* was one of the characteristics that led Salman may Allah be pleased with her to believe in him and accept Islam. After accepting Islam, Salman would say when asked whose son he was: "I am Salman, the son of Islam from the children of Adam." Salman was to play an important role in the struggles of the growing Muslim state. At the battle of Khandaq, he proved to be an innovator in military strategy. He suggested digging a ditch or khandaq around Madina to keep the Quraysh army at bay. When Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Makkans, saw the ditch, he said, "This stratagem has not been employed by the Arabs before." Salman became known as "Salman the Good".
Hadith: Not done
News
English Riots:
The moral decay of our society is as bad at the top as the bottom
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100100708/the-moral-decay-of-our-society-is-as-bad-at-the-top-as-the-bottom/#.TkRJmZOIA68.facebook
By Peter Oborne Politics
August 11th, 2011
Peter Oborne is the Daily Telegraph's chief political commentator.
David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the entire British political class came together yesterday to denounce the rioters. They were of course right to say that the actions of these looters, arsonists and muggers were abhorrent and criminal, and that the police should be given more support.
But there was also something very phony and hypocritical about all the shock and outrage expressed in parliament. MPs spoke about the week’s dreadful events as if they were nothing to do with them.
I cannot accept that this is the case. Indeed, I believe that the criminality in our streets cannot be dissociated from the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society. The last two decades have seen a terrifying decline in standards among the British governing elite. It has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat. An almost universal culture of selfishness and greed has grown up.
It is not just the feral youth of Tottenham who have forgotten they have duties as well as rights. So have the feral rich of Chelsea and Kensington. A few years ago, my wife and I went to a dinner party in a large house in west London. A security guard prowled along the street outside, and there was much talk of the “north-south divide”, which I took literally for a while until I realised that my hosts were facetiously referring to the difference between those who lived north and south of Kensington High Street.
Most of the people in this very expensive street were every bit as deracinated and cut off from the rest of Britain as the young, unemployed men and women who have caused such terrible damage over the last few days. For them, the repellent Financial Times magazine How to Spend It is a bible. I’d guess that few of them bother to pay British tax if they can avoid it, and that fewer still feel the sense of obligation to society that only a few decades ago came naturally to the wealthy and better off.
Yet we celebrate people who live empty lives like this. A few weeks ago, I noticed an item in a newspaper saying that the business tycoon Sir Richard Branson was thinking of moving his headquarters to Switzerland. This move was represented as a potential blow to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because it meant less tax revenue.
I couldn’t help thinking that in a sane and decent world such a move would be a blow to Sir Richard, not the Chancellor. People would note that a prominent and wealthy businessman was avoiding British tax and think less of him. Instead, he has a knighthood and is widely feted. The same is true of the brilliant retailer Sir Philip Green. Sir Philip’s businesses could never survive but for Britain’s famous social and political stability, our transport system to shift his goods and our schools to educate his workers.
Yet Sir Philip, who a few years ago sent an extraordinary £1 billion dividend offshore, seems to have little intention of paying for much of this. Why does nobody get angry or hold him culpable? I know that he employs expensive tax lawyers and that everything he does is legal, but he surely faces ethical and moral questions just as much as does a young thug who breaks into one of Sir Philip’s shops and steals from it?
Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low‑paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.
A great deal has been made over the past few days of the greed of the rioters for consumer goods, not least by Rotherham MP Denis MacShane who accurately remarked, “What the looters wanted was for a few minutes to enter the world of Sloane Street consumption.” This from a man who notoriously claimed £5,900 for eight laptops. Of course, as an MP he obtained these laptops legally through his expenses.
Yesterday, the veteran Labour MP Gerald Kaufman asked the Prime Minister to consider how these rioters can be “reclaimed” by society. Yes, this is indeed the same Gerald Kaufman who submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen television.
Or take the Salford MP Hazel Blears, who has been loudly calling for draconian action against the looters. I find it very hard to make any kind of ethical distinction between Blears’s expense cheating and tax avoidance, and the straight robbery carried out by the looters.
The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor: “We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.” He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.
The tragic truth is that Mr Cameron is himself guilty of failing this test. It is scarcely six weeks since he jauntily turned up at the News International summer party, even though the media group was at the time subject to not one but two police investigations. Even more notoriously, he awarded a senior Downing Street job to the former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, even though he knew at the time that Coulson had resigned after criminal acts were committed under his editorship. The Prime Minister excused his wretched judgment by proclaiming that “everybody deserves a second chance”. It was very telling yesterday that he did not talk of second chances as he pledged exemplary punishment for the rioters and looters.
These double standards from Downing Street are symptomatic of widespread double standards at the very top of our society. It should be stressed that most people (including, I know, Telegraph readers) continue to believe in honesty, decency, hard work, and putting back into society at least as much as they take out.
But there are those who do not. Certainly, the so-called feral youth seem oblivious to decency and morality. But so are the venal rich and powerful – too many of our bankers, footballers, wealthy businessmen and politicians.
Of course, most of them are smart and wealthy enough to make sure that they obey the law. That cannot be said of the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days. But the rioters have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society. Let’s bear in mind that many of the youths in our inner cities have never been trained in decent values. All they have ever known is barbarism. Our politicians and bankers, in sharp contrast, tend to have been to good schools and universities and to have been given every opportunity in life.
Something has gone horribly wrong in Britain. If we are ever to confront the problems which have been exposed in the past week, it is essential to bear in mind that they do not only exist in inner-city housing estates.
The culture of greed and impunity we are witnessing on our TV screens stretches right up into corporate boardrooms and the Cabinet. It embraces the police and large parts of our media. It is not just its damaged youth, but Britain itself that needs a moral reformation.
The rioters and bankers have a lot in common
Current Affairs
August 10, 2011
Though apparently worlds apart the driving motivations of the rioters and bankers are more similar than we care to acknowledge.
To dispel the myth that the causes of the riots are racial or part of some class struggle there are similarities between the rioters and the bankers reeking havoc on their respective markets – which therefore points to a more fundamental, underlying cause.
Greed: Whether it’s the latest iphone or the next Porche – pure material greed motivated both the rioters and the bankers
Contagion: The devastation of the rioters just like the bankers spread from one market, one town centre to the next causing millions and billions of economic damage in its wake
Mob rule: Mob rule took over as the markets were attacked in waves by rioting gangs and bankers on mass as soon they felt the vulnerability and weakness in their victims
The thrill of the kill: Common accounts of rioters and bankers getting pleasure from the exhilaration of pushing the limits and going to the extreme
Utter disregard for society: The rioters and bankers both showed utter contempt of society and the impact and consequences of their actions on individuals, families or communities
Failure of policing: The Metropolitan Police failed to control the rioters just as the Bank of England, Financial Services Authority and the UK Treasury were unable to regulate the bankers
The above similarities cut across racial and class boundaries between the rioters and the bankers and illustrates something more deeper underlying the cause of the riots of today and the havoc reeked during the financial crisis of 2008/09.
This deeper underlying cause is the fundamental values system of capitalism founded on individualism and materialism which then “governs” the behaviour of all those who adopt it resulting in the mayhem we’ve seen which seem worlds apart but are more similar than we care to accept.
The moral decay of our society is as bad at the top as the bottom
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100100708/the-moral-decay-of-our-society-is-as-bad-at-the-top-as-the-bottom/#.TkRJmZOIA68.facebook
By Peter Oborne Politics
August 11th, 2011
Peter Oborne is the Daily Telegraph's chief political commentator.
David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the entire British political class came together yesterday to denounce the rioters. They were of course right to say that the actions of these looters, arsonists and muggers were abhorrent and criminal, and that the police should be given more support.
But there was also something very phony and hypocritical about all the shock and outrage expressed in parliament. MPs spoke about the week’s dreadful events as if they were nothing to do with them.
I cannot accept that this is the case. Indeed, I believe that the criminality in our streets cannot be dissociated from the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society. The last two decades have seen a terrifying decline in standards among the British governing elite. It has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat. An almost universal culture of selfishness and greed has grown up.
It is not just the feral youth of Tottenham who have forgotten they have duties as well as rights. So have the feral rich of Chelsea and Kensington. A few years ago, my wife and I went to a dinner party in a large house in west London. A security guard prowled along the street outside, and there was much talk of the “north-south divide”, which I took literally for a while until I realised that my hosts were facetiously referring to the difference between those who lived north and south of Kensington High Street.
Most of the people in this very expensive street were every bit as deracinated and cut off from the rest of Britain as the young, unemployed men and women who have caused such terrible damage over the last few days. For them, the repellent Financial Times magazine How to Spend It is a bible. I’d guess that few of them bother to pay British tax if they can avoid it, and that fewer still feel the sense of obligation to society that only a few decades ago came naturally to the wealthy and better off.
Yet we celebrate people who live empty lives like this. A few weeks ago, I noticed an item in a newspaper saying that the business tycoon Sir Richard Branson was thinking of moving his headquarters to Switzerland. This move was represented as a potential blow to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because it meant less tax revenue.
I couldn’t help thinking that in a sane and decent world such a move would be a blow to Sir Richard, not the Chancellor. People would note that a prominent and wealthy businessman was avoiding British tax and think less of him. Instead, he has a knighthood and is widely feted. The same is true of the brilliant retailer Sir Philip Green. Sir Philip’s businesses could never survive but for Britain’s famous social and political stability, our transport system to shift his goods and our schools to educate his workers.
Yet Sir Philip, who a few years ago sent an extraordinary £1 billion dividend offshore, seems to have little intention of paying for much of this. Why does nobody get angry or hold him culpable? I know that he employs expensive tax lawyers and that everything he does is legal, but he surely faces ethical and moral questions just as much as does a young thug who breaks into one of Sir Philip’s shops and steals from it?
Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low‑paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.
A great deal has been made over the past few days of the greed of the rioters for consumer goods, not least by Rotherham MP Denis MacShane who accurately remarked, “What the looters wanted was for a few minutes to enter the world of Sloane Street consumption.” This from a man who notoriously claimed £5,900 for eight laptops. Of course, as an MP he obtained these laptops legally through his expenses.
Yesterday, the veteran Labour MP Gerald Kaufman asked the Prime Minister to consider how these rioters can be “reclaimed” by society. Yes, this is indeed the same Gerald Kaufman who submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen television.
Or take the Salford MP Hazel Blears, who has been loudly calling for draconian action against the looters. I find it very hard to make any kind of ethical distinction between Blears’s expense cheating and tax avoidance, and the straight robbery carried out by the looters.
The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor: “We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.” He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.
The tragic truth is that Mr Cameron is himself guilty of failing this test. It is scarcely six weeks since he jauntily turned up at the News International summer party, even though the media group was at the time subject to not one but two police investigations. Even more notoriously, he awarded a senior Downing Street job to the former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, even though he knew at the time that Coulson had resigned after criminal acts were committed under his editorship. The Prime Minister excused his wretched judgment by proclaiming that “everybody deserves a second chance”. It was very telling yesterday that he did not talk of second chances as he pledged exemplary punishment for the rioters and looters.
These double standards from Downing Street are symptomatic of widespread double standards at the very top of our society. It should be stressed that most people (including, I know, Telegraph readers) continue to believe in honesty, decency, hard work, and putting back into society at least as much as they take out.
But there are those who do not. Certainly, the so-called feral youth seem oblivious to decency and morality. But so are the venal rich and powerful – too many of our bankers, footballers, wealthy businessmen and politicians.
Of course, most of them are smart and wealthy enough to make sure that they obey the law. That cannot be said of the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days. But the rioters have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society. Let’s bear in mind that many of the youths in our inner cities have never been trained in decent values. All they have ever known is barbarism. Our politicians and bankers, in sharp contrast, tend to have been to good schools and universities and to have been given every opportunity in life.
Something has gone horribly wrong in Britain. If we are ever to confront the problems which have been exposed in the past week, it is essential to bear in mind that they do not only exist in inner-city housing estates.
The culture of greed and impunity we are witnessing on our TV screens stretches right up into corporate boardrooms and the Cabinet. It embraces the police and large parts of our media. It is not just its damaged youth, but Britain itself that needs a moral reformation.
The rioters and bankers have a lot in common
Current Affairs
August 10, 2011
Though apparently worlds apart the driving motivations of the rioters and bankers are more similar than we care to acknowledge.
To dispel the myth that the causes of the riots are racial or part of some class struggle there are similarities between the rioters and the bankers reeking havoc on their respective markets – which therefore points to a more fundamental, underlying cause.
Greed: Whether it’s the latest iphone or the next Porche – pure material greed motivated both the rioters and the bankers
Contagion: The devastation of the rioters just like the bankers spread from one market, one town centre to the next causing millions and billions of economic damage in its wake
Mob rule: Mob rule took over as the markets were attacked in waves by rioting gangs and bankers on mass as soon they felt the vulnerability and weakness in their victims
The thrill of the kill: Common accounts of rioters and bankers getting pleasure from the exhilaration of pushing the limits and going to the extreme
Utter disregard for society: The rioters and bankers both showed utter contempt of society and the impact and consequences of their actions on individuals, families or communities
Failure of policing: The Metropolitan Police failed to control the rioters just as the Bank of England, Financial Services Authority and the UK Treasury were unable to regulate the bankers
The above similarities cut across racial and class boundaries between the rioters and the bankers and illustrates something more deeper underlying the cause of the riots of today and the havoc reeked during the financial crisis of 2008/09.
This deeper underlying cause is the fundamental values system of capitalism founded on individualism and materialism which then “governs” the behaviour of all those who adopt it resulting in the mayhem we’ve seen which seem worlds apart but are more similar than we care to accept.
Feedback
Lailat-ul Qadr
Zakat and Salaam
English Riots
Zakat and Salaam
English Riots
No comments:
Post a Comment