Tawakkal 3ala Allah

as-Salaamu `alaykum wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuhu

I decided to try out Muslimpad.com (wordpress) and I decided to make that my default blog. My new blog is found @ http://ummlayth.muslimpad.com ... A lot of changes have occured since then. Please forgive me if I have harmed any of you and I ask Allaah to forgive me for transgressing ever in this blog, aameen

Jazaakum Allaahu khairan for visiting this blog. I hope you benefited somewhat.

And `Eid Mubaarak to everyone. May you find happiness along with your loved ones, aameen

Please remember us in your ad`iyah, insha'Allaah

Two Marines Admit Killing Iraqi Man
The pair are among eight troops accused in the high-profile case. The defense challenges whether the statements were indeed confessions.
By Tony Perry, Times Staff Writer
August 31, 2006


CAMP PENDLETON — Two Marines have confessed to kidnapping and killing a 52-year-old Iraqi man in Hamandiya, west of Baghdad, a military prosecutor said Wednesday at a preliminary hearing.

Capt. Nicholas L. Gannon said that Sgt. Lawrence G. Hutchins III and Cpl. Trent D. Thomas had admitted to the slaying, one of two high-profile cases in which Marines allegedly killed Iraqi civilians without provocation.

Gannon added that a third defendant, Lance Cpl. Robert Pennington, gave a statement that laid out the alleged conspiracy to cover up the killing by leaving phony evidence and filing a false report.

Seven Marines and a Navy corpsman have been accused in the April 26 incident of dragging Hashim Ibrahim Awad from his home, shooting him and leaving an AK-47 and a shovel near his body to suggest he was an insurgent burying a roadside bomb.

On Wednesday, two so-called Article 32 hearings were held to determine whether two of the Marines should be court-martialed. Similar hearings are set for the other defendants in the next two months.

The defense lawyer for Cpl. Marshall Magincalda, at the hearing for his client, said he planned to argue that the alleged confessions mentioned by the prosecutor were merely statements given to investigators, not admissions of guilt.

Similarly, a defense lawyer for Pfc. John Jodka, at his hearing, said the statements had been obtained through coercion and were untrue.

At both events, defense lawyers said their clients were willing to let the two hearing officers make recommendations once they had read the investigative documents, saying that airing the evidence in public could keep their clients from receiving a fair trial.

Jane Siegel, the civilian attorney for Jodka, told hearing officer Col. Paul L. Pugliese that reading certain parts of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service report aloud in court could "completely pollute the local and national jury pool. Some of it is very inflammatory."

The report includes statements by Iraqis and by the defendants. Any of the cases that go to a court-martial will be heard by a military judge or a jury of Marines.

The Jodka hearing was highlighted by an announcement by the lead prosecutor, Lt. Col. John Baker, that the government would not seek the death penalty on the murder charge. Baker said such a request was inappropriate in Jodka's case but did not elaborate.

A Marine spokesman said the decision involved only Jodka.

The military indictment lists Jodka as one of five troops who fired weapons at Awad.

Jodka's second civilian attorney, Joseph Casas, said the Iraqis who had implicated his client could not be believed.

"Their culture is so different from our own that when they narrate a story, they tell it in first person," he said, suggesting that Iraqis who said they had witnessed something might have only heard about it.

Magincalda and Jodka are the first of the eight defendants to undergo an Article 32, the military's equivalent of a preliminary hearing, named after the relevant section of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Magincalda, 20, who was serving his second tour in Iraq when Awad was killed, replied only "Yes, sir," when asked several questions by the hearing officer, Col. Robert Chester, to determine whether he understood the charges and the legal process.

All eight defendants are from the same platoon in Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 5th Regiment, 1st Marine Division. The battalion was on its third tour in Iraq.

A dozen Marines from a different battalion are suspected of killing 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha in November after a roadside bomb killed one Marine and injured another. Charges in that case are expected to be filed in September.

After reviewing the evidence, each hearing officer will prepare a recommendation to Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis Jr., commanding officer of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force and Marine Forces Central Command.

Neither hearing officer indicated Wednesday when he would submit his report.

The base legal office will also prepare a recommendation.

Mattis will then decide whether the case should proceed to a court-martial, be dismissed or be referred to an administrative proceeding.

Besides Jodka, Magincalda, Hutchins, Pennington and Thomas, the other defendants are Lance Cpl. Tyler Jackson, Lance Cpl. Jerry Shumate Jr. and Navy Corpsman Melson Bacos. Hutchins was the senior enlisted man.

According to the charges, Marines stormed into Awad's home after failing to find a suspected insurgent thought to be living next door.

Awad was allegedly slammed to the ground in front of his family, and then had his feet and hands bound.

Five of the Marines allegedly killed him with blasts from their M-16 and M-249 rifles. An AK-47 and a shovel were left near the body.

Hutchins, the squad leader, allegedly gave a false story to his superiors and urged his squad members to say that Awad had died in a firefight.

The Marines began an investigation after Awad's family protested, saying he had been killed without provocation.

*

(INFOBOX BELOW)

Civilian deaths

The U.S. military is investigating cases in which its forces are accused of killing civilians in Iraq under questionable circumstances. On Wednesday, preliminary hearings were held for two Marines in the Hamandiya incident.

Location: Hamandiya

Date: April 26, 2006

Killed: 1

Incident: After an Iraqi civilian is killed, there are indications that evidence may have been planted to suggest he was an insurgent. Eight servicemen have been charged in the case.

---

Location: Haditha

Date: Nov. 19, 2005

Killed: 24

Incident: Iraqi civilians are slain after a roadside bomb kills a Marine. A dozen Marines are under investigation, but none have been charged.

---

Location: Ishaqi*

Date: March 15, 2006

Killed: 13

Incident: One suspected insurgent and 12 civilians are slain during a U.S. raid. The U.S. military says the civilian deaths were accidental; Iraqi police say they were deliberate. Troops involved in the incident were cleared June 2.

*Troops cleared of charges

Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-marines31aug31,1,319974.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true


So how many more of these "Terrorist Plans" are done by american soldiers themselves? They can kill people without mercy without them doing anything and then act like they were the criminals or rape a sister and then run out and blame it on "islamists" but do they expect us to fall for their filth?

Ya Allaah, destroy these criminals

I am not posting this here for any other reason then to vent. I don't have a way to contact this brother and the one person who sought clarification about what I am about to post, had their post deleted.

When I went to TDC I was in one of Yasir Qadhi's open Q & A's and I asked him a question that he read out loud and answered out loud. That question was about sisters who wear makeup and nose piercings and do not cover their faces and what he believed of that. His answer was pathetic and it hurt me because I looked up to him so much. I heard from a good brother who studies in Madinah that he believed that Yasir believed the face was `awrah but even then that didn't bother me if he didn't. However, his response bothered me. His response (and this isn't a quote word for word either, but it was They should reduce the amount of makeup they wear.

What is wrong with this answer? Well, okay sure he said they should not wear that much but is this what our Ummah has come down to when they say we should give naseeha instead of just laying down the truth upon the Muslims? There were tons of sisters in that hall with makeup and it wasn't something you could escape in the conference this past year. But this was his response. And he rushed through this so quickly as if there was no importance to it. It seems that is how they rush through these women topics anymore, because they are men and well they probably don't think it is "wise" to say it how it is.

Yet, the report of A`yshah (Radhiyallaahu `anha) comes to mind about the woman whom was brought to her, when she grabbed her own khimaar and covered that woman's face with it.

Did our Sahaba play this game of "maybe it isn't wise to say it like it is"? Because I truly feel this is a game. Maybe, I am wrong and if anyone is reading this I would like you to tell me without anything but proof, how I am wrong with examples of this attitude that to me is very well panzy. If I can be shown how I am wrong, I will accept it insha'Allaah but for now I will remain with my mindset that I truly believe the issues of hijaab are put outside as if they are NOTHING at all. Men seem to be the ones discouraging sisters from covering their bodies, more then women. I see sisters' fathers telling them to go to mixed colleges and giving them no choice and then telling them not to cover their faces, some go to the extent of just the hair, neck ears etc... (i.e. with a khimaar).

I see husbands who want their wives to work and have their brothers around their wives all the time without any shame whatsoever (a man like this is definitely a dayyuth and worse!!). But why are these brothers who give classes on `aqeedah so lame when it comes to advising sisters about their deen? If sisters look up to these brothers so much why can't they utilize that and make some lecture about how atleast you gotta wear a khimaar properly and stay in your home when there is no need to go out and if you do you do not wear adornments and speak loudly when around ghayr maharim men?

All this hype seems not to be doing much to our youth except giving them the tools to consider themselves learned. No offense, but 2 weekend seminars on `aqeedah are not sufficient to get someone grounded in their deen! Especially when that teacher admits that the class they teach in 2 weekends was taught in atleast a year!

Anyways, this article was pasted on the Maghrib forums http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0816/p20s01-lire.html along with a question for brother Yasir so that he could clarify. Instead it was removed. I was really hoping there would be a response but nothing. Others believe the woman is lying, but why the heck would she lie about something that Yasir could easily say is not true? If it was a lie, al maghrib would have protected him and explained it. Instead, it seems that there is some valid opinion (what I Heard, and wallaahi that hurts to think is anything less then a shubha!!) that you can touch a woman's hand who isn't mahram to you!

This woman had atleast some respect for him because she didn't even put her hand out due to the fact (that she believed) that he doesn't shake hands.

And now someone on another forum says that he gets rewarded if he had proper ijtihaad for this? Wait wait, since when was he an `alim and a mujtaahid to begin with? I thought he was a taalib? And wait wait, what about all the ahadeeth about touching a woman?

And what about the hadeeth about just sitting alone with a woman? And what about the possibility that the hand is `awrah (because there is definitely shubha in this issue due to all the amounts of proof against them!)?

Or what about,

It was narrated that Umaymah the daughter of Raqeeqah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

إني لا أصافح النساء “I do not shake hands with women.”
(Narrated by al-Nasaa’i, 4181; Ibn Maajah, 2874; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 2513)

What about,

It was narrated that Ma’qil ibn Yassaar said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “For one of you to be stabbed in the head with an iron needle is better for him than that he should touch a woman who is not permissible for him.”

Are the reports of our mother all of a sudden ignored about him never touching a woman's hand? Is it all of a sudden for someone who may have had "ijtihaad", okay to fall into shubha? If one is so knowledgeable and so deening and knows that people take him as their role model, going to forget that YES IT COULD BE COMPLETELY HARAM!

It just gets to me too much at how these "role models" we have do not realize how many people are actually looking up to them.

Here is a read about this, http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=21183&ln=eng&txt=shaking%20hands%20with%20women

Someone please contact yasir qadhi and have him explain this. Because seriously, this woman has no reason to lie in the open about this and based on the times I asked him questions (more then once at TDC) I don't really doubt it.

And whoever wants to ignore the issue at hand because "Oh it is so and so" needs to tell me how I should ignore it. I became Muslim to submit and not to be an idiot. I may not be very knowleadgeable at all but I know what the Prophet (sallAllaahu `alayhi wa sallam) told us, the halal is clear and the haram is clear and between them are doubtful matters... (not the full hadeeth).

Thus, the quote I pasted in my previous entry:

Abu ad-Dardaa' (radhiyAllaahu `anhu) said,

"Complete taqwa (piety) is that the worshipper should fear Allaah until he fears Him in even the most minute of matters, even to the extent that he leaves some of those things which he views to be lawful, fearing that they might be unlawful. In doing so, he makes a veil between himself and what is unlawful."

Al-Faatihah - The Opening

Sometimes, I read this chapter so much, its translation and its tafseer that I become accustomed to saying al-Faatihah which means the Opening without much contemplation. When you really contemplate this Surah, you get a real Iman boost. I will post certain things as I go through the Tafseer insha'Allaah from Ma`arif al-Qur'aan by Shaykh Muhammad Shafi (rahimahullaah).


The First Surah to be Revealed Fully at Once

As is mentioned in Ma`arifal Qur'aan (summarizing), there were certain companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallAllaahu `alayhi wa sallam) who reported that this was the first Surah to be revealed. We know other aayaat from other Suwar had been revealed but most likely they meant this was the first in complete form.

He mentions that perhaps this is why the Surah has been named as Faatihatul-Kitaab - that is, The Opening of the Book.

Mufti Muhammad Shafi (rahimahullaah) said,


Quintessence for those who may not be aware refers to the essence of a thing in its purest and most concentrated form.


He futher states that the entirety of the Qur'aan is in one way or another related to either Imaan or virtuous deeds شnd both have been indicated in this Surah. (See Ruh al Ma`aani and Ruh al Bayaan)

He says,

"That is why ahaadith give to this Surah such titles as "Umm al-Qur'aan", "Umm al-Kitaab," "Al-Qur'aan al-`Adheem".

Special Instruction

Pay close attention to the following and realize the Mercy of Allaah Subhaanahu wa ta`ala that sometimes escapes us right before our eyes.

Shaykh Muhammad Shafi (rahimahullaah) said,

"This Surah gives a special instruction to the man who begins the recitation or the study of the Qur'aan - that he should approach this book with a mind cleansed of all his previous thoughts and opinions, seeking nothing but the Truth and the right path, praying to Allaah for being guided in the right path. The Surah begins with the Praise of Him before whom the request is to be submitted and ends with the request for guidance.

The whole of the Qur'aan is the answer to this Request. The answer begins with the words: "Alif Lam Mim. This is the Book", which is an indication that the guidance man had prayed for has been provided in this Book."

To be continued, bi'ithnillaah