"In it's fullness, a Circle can contain a richness so complete that if all of Wicca were lost except for the way to cast a Circle, and its symbolism, the faith would renew itself from that one seed."
Ivo Dominguez is a true Renaissance Man among modern Pagans, Witches, and Magicians. And the full range of his expertise and experience as a teacher, elder, adept, researcher, writer, and visionary all come together in his book Casting Sacred Space: The Core of all Magickal Work."A strong Magician or Witch fully shoulders her responsibility. This book of castings is not only an amazing compendium of innovative ways to move and shape energy forms; it also serves as a comprehensive primer on how to change the individual in order to better change the world. The work is placed in the context of other systems of magick should one wish to broaden one’s scope of knowledge and mastery, while providing enough information for beginning these unique practices from any level of experience and study. There are many treasures here. I hope that the magick held in this book not only intrigues you with its sheer novelty, but also spurs you onward and inward with its potential. If we read carefully and practice diligently, we will learn to change and be changed, in accordance with our ever-strengthening knowledge and will.And here is how Ivo describes what he sets out to do in the book (from the Introduction):
"Casting Sacred Space is meant to provide a safe and sane introduction to the knowledge and techniques needed to embark upon journeys into magick. The first half of the book supplies some philosophical and theoretical underpinnings in order to make the castings offered in the second half of the book accessible and effective. Hopefully, a balance between theory and practice has been struck that will encourage the development of both understanding and proficiency in the creation of sacred and magickal space . . . .
"This book explores a number of approaches to the creation, delineation, and understanding of ritual that open the way to sacred space. The entry into sacred space is one of the most direct routes to the fountainhead of spiritual and metaphysical experience. For most of us, the thrill of the experience that called us to our paths is heralded by crossing the borderline into a wider universe. When you took your first step onto your path of magickal and spiritual development, did you not long for the strange skies of the otherworlds, conversations with the Shining Ones, keys to the gates, or the smell of flowers in a Faerie glade?"
On September 7, 1960, a full page ad appeared in the New York Times stating that the fact that John F. Kennedy was a Catholic was a "legitimate issue" in the presidential campaign. This add was sponsored by a group of Protestant ministers headed up by Norman Vincent Peale.This was not the first time that Kennedy had tackled the issue. Here is how Dallek describes the way Kennedy responded to reporters who asked about his religion when he first announced his candidacy for the Democratic nomination on January 2, 1960:Religion remained an obstacle. On September 7 [1960], the New York Times carried a front-page article about the ironically named National Conference of Citizens for Religious Freedom, an organization of 150 Protestant ministers led by Dr. Norman Vincent Peale; they said that the Roman Catholic Church, with its dual role as both a church and a temporal state, make Kennedy's faith a legitimate issue in the campaign. Like Kruschev, one member declared, Kennedy was 'a captive of a system.' Although the clergymen were all conservative Republicans eager for Nixon's election (and were guilty of transparent hypocrisy in doing what they said Kennedy's church would do -- interfere in secular politics), their political machinations did not cancel out the effects of their warnings.
Estimates suggested that unless this propaganda was countered and the anti-Catholic bias overcome, Kennedy's religion might cost him as many as 1.5 million votes. The Kennedy campaign quickly organized a Community Relations division to meet the religious problem head-on. James Wine, a staff member at the National Council of Churches, headed the operation. Wine was as busy as any member of Jack's campaign team, answering between six hundred and a thousand letters a week and using lay and clerical Protestants to combat the explicit and implicit anti-Catholicism in so much of the anti-Kennedy rhetoric.
A highly effective and much publicized appearance made before a group of Protestant ministers in Houston, Texas, on September 12 helped. Bobby, Jack's campaign staff, Johnson, and Rayburn all advised against the appearance. 'They're mostly Republicans and they're out to get you,' Rayburn told Kennedy. But Kennedy believed he had to confront the issue sometime, and he wanted to do it early in the campaign so that he could move on to more constructive matters. 'I'm getting tired of people who think I want to replace the gold at Fort Knox with a supply of holy water.' he told O'Donnell and Powers. In fact, his knowledge of Church doctrine and ties to the Church were so limited that he brought in John Cogley, a Catholic scholar, to coach him in preparation for the appearance.Although he saw his speech and response to audience questions, which were to follow his remarks, as a crucial moment in the campaign, Kennedy went before the audience of three hundred in Houston's Rice Hotel Crystal ballroom (and the millions of television viewers across the country) with no hesitation or obvious sign of nervousness. The sincerity of what he had to say armed him against his adversaries and conveyed a degree of inner surety that converted a few opponents and persuaded some undecided voters that he had the maturity and balance to become a fine president.
[pp. 282-283]
As for the likely debate to erupt over his religion, he also gave an unqualified response. He acknowledged that it would be a matter of substantial discussion. But he saw only one concern for voters: 'Does a candidate believe in the Constitution, does he believe in the First Amendment, does he believe in the separation of church and state.' Having said that, he dismissed the issue as one that had been settled 160 years ago and concluded that he saw 'no value in discussing a matter which is that ancient, when there are so many issues in 1960 which are going to be important.'The bigots who were attacking Kennedy for being Catholic were nothing other than the 1960 forerunners of today's Tea Party movement and their ilk. Kennedy succeeded in publicly shaming these bigots in a way that I doubt any 21st century American politician would be capable of pulling off today.
[p. 244]
"We are all Hamza Kashgari"
Although the western mainstream media is doing its best to downplay or even completely ignore the case of the imprisoned 23 year old Saudi writer Hamza Kashgari, the world-wide campaign on his behalf is gathering momentum and shows no sign of losing steam.
A significant highlight of what you'll find there includes an English language translation of the full text of a long poem written by Kashgari last year titled "Out of Time: A dialogue with the Prophet". The three tweets posted by Kashgari that resulted in the accusations against him were excerpts from this longer poem.
Hussein Ibish is well known in progressive circles as a peace activist, an outspoken advocate for the Palestinian cause, and for his many years of work combatting discrimination and stereotyping against Arab-Americans. He is a very popular speaker and has one of the most beautiful voices I've ever heard (here is a clip of him on the Colbert Report where he "helps Stephen determine whether or not Obama is a secret Muslim").It’s hard to know where to begin in cataloging the outrages associated with the arrest of Hamza Kashgari. The 23-year-old Saudi columnist was recently detained on trumped-up “blasphemy” charges, for which he potentially faces execution.
First, Saudi extremists took umbrage at some tweets in which he expressed admiration, disapproval and bewilderment at various aspects of the Prophet Mohammed’s legendary life. This outrage was orchestrated by clerics as part of a campaign to increase their power.
Second, the Saudi state reacted by appeasing the fanatics and ordering Kashgari’s arrest for “blasphemy.” In effect, they confirmed the ability of extremists to dictate the agenda of, if not bully, the government on religious matters.
Third, Kashgari had already left the country to evade persecution, but was apprehended by Malaysian authorities in Kuala Lumpur, possibly with the assistance of Interpol, and returned to Saudi Arabia. So at least one foreign government and possibly a multilateral policing agency have connived in this travesty.
Fourth, the Saudi government says it may seek the death penalty for Kashgari. There can be no freedom of conscience or religion where blasphemy is a crime, but the Saudi state has never respected or acknowledged either of those principles. Yet Kashgari hasn’t committed blasphemy. All he did was express complex religious feelings. And it is shocking that a government would consider executing, or even prosecuting, anyone for either of these “crimes.”
Fifth, while there have been some limited efforts to protest this scandalous injustice and intercede on behalf of Kashgari’s life and liberty, they have thus far been insufficient. Muslim states, governments and individuals have an especial, and urgent, responsibility to categorically oppose this outrage.
Muslims, including Saudi officials and citizens, are properly vociferous in denouncing Islamophobic misrepresentations of Islam as an inherently violent and intolerant religion. Doctrinally and historically, it is clearly not. However, the reputation of Muslims and Islam is also, and far too often, called into severe disrepute by the conduct of some important Muslim-majority states claiming to act in the name or defense of Islam.
The persecution of Kashgari, not by cynical Saudi clerics weeping hysterically on YouTube, but by the state itself, is another disturbing reflection of this phenomenon. One cannot claim to be tolerant or opposed to violence while considering beheading someone for expressing mild religious doubts about a figure who, in his own lifetime, reportedly insisted on his own status as a fallible human being.
The government of Saudi Arabia doesn’t represent the norm or authority for the Muslims of the world. But it is a large and influential Muslim state and is claiming to act on behalf of Islam in this ugly affair.
Silence implies consent. If Muslims don’t want their religion to be misrepresented by such actions, they must openly and loudly repudiate them. And, if there is any virtue or truth in religion, it hardly needs enforcement on pain of death.
The good news is that because he is a relatively prominent Saudi citizen, and the case has become a minor international cause célèbre, Kashgari is unlikely to be executed. The pattern in such cases suggests that if he shows “repentance” or there is an international outcry, or both, Kashgari’s sentence may initially be harsh but will almost certainly be commuted.
The most likely outcome is that Kashgari will end up sometime in the next few years permanently relocated to another country. Kashgari is lucky that he’s not from a remote village or irrelevant family or, worse, a migrant worker. In that case he might really need to start contemplating bearing his neck to the sword.
This scandal is indicative of a broader growth of intolerance in Saudi social and religious rhetoric of late, which also comes in the context of Shia unrest in the Eastern Governorate of Qatif. Extremist clerics have been upping the ante at every stage over the past few months, and clearly believe that they have just won an important victory. They are now demanding the cancellation of cultural and book festivals. At public events, their thuggish, unauthorized and un-uniformed street forces, known as the “Mohtasbeen,” have been reportedly trying to upstage the official religious orthodoxy beadles, the “Muttaween.”
While non-Muslims cannot honestly claim that Saudi Arabia represents Islam, Muslims cannot dismiss the kingdom as irrelevant either. Saudi Arabia’s religious and cultural influence, byproducts of its wealth and custodianship of the two most holy Muslim sites, is undeniable. The extremist shift in Saudi social and religious attitudes therefore has troubling implications.
Nobody can force the Saudi state to behave in a reasonable manner if it doesn’t want to. But all other Muslims can and should make it clear that they strongly disapprove of the persecution of Hamza Kashgari and the mentality that lies behind such actions.
"The traditions of our ancestors, and those which we possess coeval with time itself, no arguments can overthrow, not even if wisdom has been attained by consummate intellect."
"The Christians ignore the good offices of the Dioscori, of Herakles, Asclepios and of Dionysus, and say that these are not Gods because they were humans in the first place. Yet they profess belief in a phantom god who appeared only to members of his little club, and then, so it seems, merely as a kind of ghost."
"It is not by teaching but by nature that humanity possesses its knowledge of the Divine, as can be shown by the common yearning for the Divine that exists in everyone everywhere -- individuals, communities, nations. Without having it taught us, all of us have come to believe in some sort of Divinity, even though it is difficult for all to know what Divinity truly is and far from easy for those who do know to explain it to the rest."
Just a quick update on the Hamza Kashgari case since many people have been asking: The young man is now in detention, his family visited him and he is reportedly in high spirits and being treated respectfully. Several sites and petitions have been set up to support him and call for his release.
Prominent human rights lawyer Abdul-Rahman al-Lahem has announced that he will defend Kashgari, arguing that he will push for this case to be handled by a committee in the information ministry instead of a Sharia court.
Meanwhile, several people on the right are claiming that Hamza is a member what they believe is a “sleeping cell” to spread atheism among Saudi youth. Al-Hayat has a thinly sourced story saying public prosecutors are likely to summon people that supported or agreed with Kashgari, which opened the door widely for something like a witch hunt.
حمزة كاشغري واحد من العشرات من (ضحايا) عبدالله حميد الدين. فهل ستتم محاكمة حميد الدين مع حمزة كاشغري ؟
People like Mohammed al-Hodaif are accusing Abdullah Hamidaddin of being the cell leader but so far they have failed to provide a strong evidence to support their claims.The two men faced off on TV today where al-Hodaif threatened Hamidaddin, who is currently traveling to the US, to return to the Kingdom for a trial in a Saudi court.
The website "Islam in Europe" has just posted the following report (link):British Muslim cleric Haitham al-Haddad participated in a debate in Amsterdam this past Friday. Asked by a member of the audience who left Islam what the cleric thought of him, al-Haddad told him apostates should be killed in an Islamic country.It's all on youtube: here is a direct link to the exchange in question (at 39m4s).
Haitham al-Haddad is a London-based Islamic Scholar and a prominent Muslim community leader. He was born and raised in Saudi Arabia and is of Palestinian origin.Here is the whole debate (over 1 hour and 15 minutes worth):
Shaykh Haitham sits on the board of advisors for a number of key Islamic organisations in the United Kingdom, including the Islamic Sharia Council. He currently holds the position of chair person and operations advisor for the Muslim Research and Development Foundation– a think tank aiming to find solutions based on the original teaching of Islam, for Muslims living in the west (website: www.islam21c.com).
He has studied for a number of decades and gained proficiency in many Islamic sciences under the tutelage of world-renowned scholars.
Shaykh Haitham holds a B Sc (Honours) in Law and Sharia from Omdurman University in Khartoum, Sudan. He also holds a B Sc in Computer Science from the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia. He is currently pursuing his P hD in Islamic Law at SOAS in London.
Shaykh Haitham is qualified to deliver religious verdicts with a specialization in Islamic Jurisprudence and its principles, Islamic Law and Islamic Finance. He had edited a number of Islamic books in Arabic and is in the process of completing four more books in English (to be published soon).
[excerpt:]
As of 6pm (UK time) today, 7,894 people had signed a petition urging the Saudi government to drop all charges of blasphemy against Hamza Kashgari, a columnist for the Jeddah-based daily Al-Bilad. Kashgari, 23, had sparked outrage for detailing an imaginary conversation with the prophet Muhammad on his Twitter account, in which he addressed him as an equal: "I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more."
After generating over 30,000 fevered responses (including a number of death threats), Kashgari deleted the post and issued a formal apology. However, this did not stop the juggernaut. As of 6pm (UK time) today, A Facebook page entitled "The Saudi people want the execution of Hamza Kashgari" had 26,632 members – a figure that sadly dwarfs the number who had signed the petition to save him.
[excerpt:]The case of Hamza Kashgari has entered a new and deeply worrying phase as Malaysian authorities have deported the 23-year-old journalist back to Saudi Arabia, where he currently risks execution. There has been widespread and rightful opprobrium of the Saudi government’s response but few seem to question the official Saudi line that their indignation at alleged blasphemy is behind the call for the death penalty. Specifically, the government claims Hamza’s tweets, in which he appeared to express irreverence for the Prophet, is the source of its vendetta.
by Jalees Rehman[excerpt:]
Last week, the Saudi writer and blogger Hamza Kashgari tweeted about Prophet Muhammad and his tweets caused an unanticipated fire-storm of outrage among many Saudis. They formed an "electronic lynch mob" and responded with hate-filled tweets, Face-book posts, comments, threats and YouTube videos, calling for the arrest and punishment of Kashgari.
[excerpt:]
When I was 23 years old, I drew a hooded white figure on posters that advertised a special lecture at my university. It was to be delivered by an up and coming leader, starting a new federal political party. I had read the leader had ties to racist groups in Alberta.
I defaced the posters wherever I found them on campus.
If I had been caught, would I have been beheaded?
Such may be the fate of 23-year-old Hamza Kashgari, a Saudi writer who messaged via Twitter an imaginary conversation with the Prophet Muhammad a week ago, around the time of Prophet Muhammad's birthday.
[excerpt:]
Sisters in Islam (SIS) is deeply disappointed that the Malaysian government has deported the Saudi blogger Hamza Kashgari without due process. This deportation was carried out despite the absence of an extradition treaty between the two countries and the probability that Hamza might face the death penalty in Saudi Arabia for alleged blasphemy.
Home Minister Dato Seri Hishammudin Hussein’s statement that we have an agreement with other countries to always return their citizens should they ask for them is therefore questionable. In the absence of an extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia, under what legal provision did Hishammudin act in deporting Hamza Kashgari?
[excerpt:]
The BBC, reporting on Hamza Kashgari’s deportation from Kuala Lumpur back to his native Saudi Arabia, said the charge hanging over the young man’s head of insulting the Prophet Muhammad is considered blasphemous in Islam and punishable by death.
Kashgari, 23, fled his country was detained upon his arrival here on Thursday en route to New Zealand where he was planning to seek political asylum. A journalist, Kashgari was recently sacked by Saudi daily al-Bilad where he had a column.
Three allegedly blasphemous tweets were made about Muhammad on the prophet’s birthday (Maulidur Rasul) last week and sparked vociferous calls for the death penalty to be imposed on him.
The climate of fear and caution has been such that – even merely for the purpose of reference – it’s difficult to find Kashgari’s tweets reproduced in reputable websites (although some independent blogs have carried them). One website which initially reproduced them has withdrawn the tweets.
[excerpt:]
The Islamic Renaissance Front strongly condemns the deportation of Hamza Kashgari over his allegedly offensive tweets.
Due to the irresponsible and cowardly actions of the Malaysian government in enabling the deportation, Mr Kashragi now faces the possibility of the death penalty in his home country of Saudi Arabia for the simple act of demanding his right to practice the most basic human rights – freedom of expression and thought.
The case of Hamza Kashgari is one that I think most people in the West simply don’t understand. Even those who are not hostile to Islam find it hard to reconcile European notions of free speech – established after many battles with the religious establishment – with cases like this one, where a Saudi writer and poet has been extradited from Malaysia at the request of the Saudi regime after being accused of insulting the Blessed Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him.
Kashgari appears to have posted the disparaging and offensive remarks on Twitter in a month when Muslims around the world remember his birth.
Thankfully, it’s been reported that Kashgari has retracted them, removed them from the web and apologized for making them, all of which ought mark the end of the matter.
Yet there has been much focus on the remarks of the Saudi ‘king’ calling for his arrest and that he was even extradited by Malaysia to face a possible death sentence. It’s been said that Abdullah al Saud has simply used this case for political reasons, and the outrage he has expressed is little more than hypocrisy by the regime.
It’s a pretty safe allegation to make, given that hypocrisy in this regime is more abundant than oil and sunlight in the ‘kingdom’ they dominate. Other than the fact that the regime doesn’t govern, run its economy or foreign relations according to the standards of God and His Messenger, it is infamous for its ill treatment of pilgrims who spend their life’s savings to visit the Prophet’s mosque out of heartfelt love. The accusation of playing politics may also be true, since the regime has been very concerned about growing disquiet, both from a younger generation and from its Shia community. It’s argued that by arresting Kashgari, Abdullah ibn Saud can send a strong signal to dissident voices.
Yet, this affair does draw a sharp distinction between Islamic standards and secular liberal standards – and it is important not to gloss over this aspect, for various reasons I will discuss.
Islam is a belief system that has encouraged accounting political authority since its earliest days. Even the Prophet faced questions and scrutiny by the people he ruled over. His closest companions, who succeeded him in political authority as Caliphs, faced (sometimes harsh) questioning by citizens in the state – men and women, Muslim and non-Muslim. The accounting of authority is considered not so much a right but a duty in Islam. The questioning of scholars is a norm – since there is no priesthood in Islam. Moreover, Islam – in its so-called golden age encouraged intellectual inquiry, debate and scrutiny.
So how is it, secular commentators may ask, that an insult to the Prophet can be a capital offence.
Yet it is important for people to know that this response is not some fringe or aberrant opinion. According to any orthodox reading of Islam, in an Islamic state (for the record, the Saudi ‘kingdom’ lacks legitimacy as an Islamic state) someone proven to have insulted the blessed Prophet and who did not retract what they said would indeed be punished by execution.
In his beautiful book about the status of the Prophet of Islam, known as ‘Al Shifa’, (the full title translates as ‘Healing by recognition of the Rights of al-Mustafa), Qadi Ayyad ibn Musa (1083-1149) – an Islamic scholar and judge from Granada in Andalusia, Spain – not only addresses characteristics of the Prophet – but also mentions the verdict on those who disparage him in any way.
One may certainly criticise the cynical false allegations of blasphemy in places like Pakistan that we may have come across. Or we can criticise vigilantism, where emotional people might act as judge and executioner without the legal authority to do so – for the rule of law in Islam is extremely important. Indeed, the Prophet explicitly said “Nobody has the right vested in him to establish anything from the Hudood without the Sultan (authority of the State).” [Baihaqi]
So the magnitude of the sin of any insult to the Prophet is without question; and the prescribed punishment from the judicial authority (if proven and the person did not retract and repent) is well established in Islamic law.
So why discuss it.
Firstly, a frank explanation of Islamic values gives a more honest engagement between Muslims and non-Muslims, which is important at a time when some Muslims may feel uncomfortable about responding to these issues for fear of being labelled ‘extremist’. There is, amongst some Muslim commentators, a desire to speak out positively for the Prophet but a reluctance to discuss capital punishment in liberal societies, fearing a backlash on these issues [which rather illustrates how liberal societies can be as supremacist as they sometimes accuse others of being].
Secondly, for a Muslim hearing the orthodox Islamic view on this issue, it is a sobering reminder of the magnitude of the offence according to Islam. Even if we don’t live in a land where there is an Islamic legal authority to try and punish anyone found guilty of the offence, being reminded of the standard laid down for centuries steers us away from the kind of flippant manner of addressing the Prophet’s of Allah that has become so common in secular Europe. Indeed, the Kashgari case shows how secular values, globalised via satellite and internet, have had an affect on individuals in the Muslim world; all the more likely because states like the Saudi state are intellectually arid from an Islamic perspective and tend to deal with people by discipline and not with stronger arguments, when individuals mimic a western discourse.
Thirdly, secularists love to use such issues to twist or erase any Islamic law or value that contradicts secular liberal norms that dominate the world today. Such attempts have been made before, and will be made again, but should not go unchallenged, and the traditional Islamic standard should be presented – and indeed Islamic values as regards respect for the Prophets should be championed.
If people understood the Islamic framework on the limits of speech (and every society and value system has a limit), they might see that it addresses something that secular Europe has lost; and which some people mourn the loss of.
When Western Europe developed its attitudes to ‘free speech’ in response to the hegemony of the Catholic Church, arguments about theology were seen as a challenge to political authority, so defiance of the papal authority became integral to people speaking their mind; and people fought for a right to question beliefs.
But, what started in this way went far beyond what was first envisaged. Over several decades challenging papal authority shifted to denigration of God and His messengers; and eventually to a situation where to insult others is a badge of pride. Humour is built around it; politicians thrive on it; and yet others will argue that disrespect has grown in society – and antisocial behaviour along with it. People in Europe respect the Prophet Esa [Jesus] as the source of their moral viewpoint and legal system on many issues (even if they don’t think of him as a prophet) – but they don’t think twice about ridiculing, parodying and mocking his name and cannot see how it undervalues that morality and legal system that has underpinned social relationships for centuries.
The Islamic Shari’ah welcomes intellectual inquiry and debate, and political accountability. It allows humour, art and cultural expression. But it draws a red line at the sanctity of God and His messengers – all of them, not just the Prophet Muhammad .
Muslims ought to celebrate that a red line separates the legal and moral standard for society, the Lawgiver and His messengers – from those who execute those legal and morals – the citizens and their rulers.
Dr. Abdul Wahid is a regular contributor to New Civilisation. He is currently the Chairman of the UK-Executive Committee of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain. He has been published in The Times Higher Educational Supplement and on the websites of Foreign Affairs, Open Democracy and Prospect magazine. He can be followed on Twitter @abdulwahidht or emailed at abdulwahid@newcivilisation.com
In 1857 Thomas Pooley, a well-digger in the small English village of Duloe, was ordered to appear before the local magistrate after having been formally charged with multiple counts of the crime of blasphemy. The charges against Pooley were based on sworn statements claiming that he had been seen writing blasphemous statements on fences and walls around the village (twitter not having yet been invented). Pooley not only answered the summons voluntarily, but told the magistrate forthrightly that he was of the opinion that "the blackguard Jesus Christ ... was the forerunner of all thievery and whoredom."
more blasphemy at
By Habib Toumi, GulfNews Bureau Chief, 00:00 February 14, 2012
[This GulfNews article directly below by Habib Toumi gives a much more detailed account than the one in the Asia News International article I originally had for this post. Scroll down for the ANI article.]People who encouraged a controversial Saudi columnist facing charges of blasphemy could be summoned by the public prosecutor, a report has said.
"The public prosecutor in Jeddah is filing a lawsuit against Hamza Kashgari on charges of disrespecting God and insulting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in his Twitter account," sources told Al Hayat daily.
The sources said that public prosecutor in the Red Sea city of Jeddah was likely to summon people who expressed support or agreed with him on the social network, the daily reported yesterday.
"The public prosecutor, as the attorney for the society, has the right to summon anyone who encouraged the defendant or who is connected to matters that motivated his action," Abdul Aziz Al Zamel, a legal consultant, said, quoted by Al Hayat.
The prosecutor is based in Jeddah, the city where Hamza Kashgari posted his tweets on Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) birth anniversary before fleeing to Malaysia, the sources said.
According to Saudi daily Arab News, "a number of Saudis have called for the trial of all those who tweeted support for Kashgari, saying they were equally guilty."
"Those who supported the contents of Kashgari's tweets are considered criminal exactly like him," Khalid Abu Rashid, a lawyer and a legal consultant, was quoted as saying. The sentence to be passed on Kashgari should be imposed on his supporters too, he said.
The lawyer, however, said it was important to use the written texts to differentiate between two things in this case.
"If the support was for general principles like freedom of expression, then this is a different matter, but if the support was for the attacks on Allah and His Prophet (PBUH), then the supporters should be tried for apostasy," he said in the report quoting Al Eqtisadiah newspaper.
The Arabic daily said that individual and collective calls were made to the Prosecution and Investigations Commission to try Kashgari and all the bloggers who supported him in his blasphemy.
The 23-year-old columnist was deported on Sunday by the Malaysian authorities who arrested him at Kuala Lumpur International Airport.
On Sunday, a Malaysian daily reported that Kashgari was deported back home hours before his lawyers managed to get a High Court injunction to stop the deportation.
The lawyers, led by R. Kesavan, said that they obtained the injunction at 1:30pm on Sunday, but were told that Kashgari has been put on a plane at 10am.
The injunction was an order to the police, the Home Ministry, as well as the Subang and Kuala Lumpur International Airport immigration authorities to stop Kashgari's deportation, the daily said.
However, Home Minister Hesham Al Deen Hussain yesterday denied the claim, saying that no court order was issued to prevent his repatriation.
"There was no injunction. No court order was given to prevent us from returning him to Saudi," the minister told reporters. "If there was a court order, we would abide by it, but there wasn't, so don't make up stories. We have never failed to obey the justice system," he said, quoted by The Malaysian Insider.
The columnist is a Saudi Arabian national wanted by his home country to be tried in the justice system for his offence, the minister said.
"I will not compromise. Do not look at Malaysia as a safe transit... Do not think you can come in and out of Malaysia. He is a foreign national, he is wanted by his own country of origin," he said.
Hussain said allegations made by several parties that the columnist would be killed if he was deported were "illogical."
"Allegations that he would be executed, abused, do not make sense. The country being accused is a dignified country. These are serious allegations against Saudi Arabia," Hussain said, quoted by the daily. The home minister said that there were no requests made by Interpol for Kashgari to be returned to his country of origin.
Deportation decisions are made on a case-by-case basis and not all those apprehended are sent back, Hussain said.
--------------------------------------------------------
Supporters of Saudi columnist accused of blasphemy, abusing Prophet, may face court summons
Riyadh, Feb 14 (Asian News International): People who have supported a young Saudi Arabia columnist, who was accused of blasphemy and for abusing Prophet Mohammed, could be summoned by the public prosecutor.
"The public prosecutor in Jeddah is filing a lawsuit against Hamza Kashgari on charges of disrespecting God and insulting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in his Twitter account," sources told Al Hayat daily.
Sources revealed that public prosecutor in Jeddah was likely to summon people who expressed support or agreed with him on the social network.
According to Saudi daily Arab News, 'a number of Saudis have called for the trial of all those who tweeted support for Kashgari, saying they were equally guilty.'
"Those who supported the contents of Kashgari's tweets are considered criminal exactly like him," Gulf News quoted Khaled Abu Rashid, a lawyer and a legal consultant, as saying.
The lawyer, however, said it was important to use the written texts to differentiate between two things in this case.
"If the support was for general principles like freedom of expression, then this is a different matter, but if the support was for the attacks on Allah and His Prophet, then the supporters should be tried for apostasy," he added.
Meanwhile, the 23-year-old columnist was recently deported by the Malaysian authorities, despite fears that he may face execution Saudi Arabia. (ANI)
This post contains a short list of links to articles that present the case for Malaysia as an example of moderate Islam. The last article linked to, based on a speech given by the Prime Minister of Malaysia while visiting Turkey in February of 2011, is also repeated here in full.
ISTANBUL, Feb 25 [2011] (Bernama) - Prime Minister Najib Razak said Malaysia has proven that its system of governance, based on moderate Islam, has worked and can be a good model for other countries in the world to emulate, especially Islamic countries.
"These are the things that we have put in place in Malaysia. So, in this regard, I believe we have something to offer to the world." Nevertheless, he said, every nation would have to look at its needs based on its own peculiarities and had to make adjustments to the values, to empower the people to a more prosperous and better future.
