When the recent round of commentary on Dawud Adib started, some people started objecting to the material that was being posted around the web on the grounds that it was bad Islamic etiquette to reveal this information and to criticise Adib so publicly. A friend wrote to me saying that it reminded him of the Usama Hasan saga. He laments…
“For years he[UH] comes out with what he does and not only do brothers fail to condemn him, but they [instead] also condemn those who do. Then, when the fiasco happens at Masjid Tawheed when people do confront him, we get complaints about akhlaq…”
and then he remarks that he didn’t agree with the manner of confrontation at MT but for people to only comment on akhlaq issues and not on what has been coming out of UH, then really all that can be said is Allahul-Musta’an.
I agree with him 100%.
So I was reminded of this email from my friend this morning when I woke to find that all threads related to Dawud Adib have been deleted from IA including the one in which I posted the toned down, longer video, by Umar Lee from a couple of days ago.
Now, if the argument is that the discussion in that thread was crossing acceptable bounds and turning into slander, the obvious question is, why not apply this when it comes to IAs favourite whipping boys Amad and YQ? For example, Amad is referred to as a criminal in a whole thread devoted to him and YQ is referred to as a donkey. Do IA mods believe that such comments fall within the limits of acceptable discussion? Is this not libellous/slanderous?
Dawud Adib devastated lives, communities and da’wah and has a terrible history and reputation. By deleting these threads IA’s response basically amounts to protecting Adib’s reputation under the cloak of it would be bad akhlaq to expose him. And that is the perverse logic whereby, the theory of protecting a person’s reputation is given greater precedent than protecting the community; real lives and real people.
One thing you can be sure of though is that if Dawud Adib had been an MM writer it would have been open season on him on IA.
I admit to being baffled given what a free for all it normally is.
Pictures of yq with a plate of pancakes for goodness sake!
I assume some consistency will be implemented. If not…
I agree with you brother. I’ve been recently getting very concerned about the increasing censorship, deletion of threads and generally inconsistent moderating on IA. I regularly complain about it on there.
I don’t know Dawud Adib so I didn’t bother commenting on him in the relevant threads on IA. However, I don’t see why the mods must delete threads due to bad akhlaq, slandering and rumour spreading on the part of some people. If the mods think some forum rules have been broken, then the culprit(s) should be warned in PM, his/her posts edited as appropriate and the discussion can easily move along general lines of civility.
umm dont accuse of him zina, etc without proof, no one is against exposing him if there is proof
Pingback: Dawud Adib: letting it eat away? | Indigo Jo Blogs
There were a number of threads (not just the ones you alluded to above) temporarily deleted while the mods discuss how to approach an emerging trend that’s been observed.
No deletion decisions were final yet, it’s a work in progress and I’m sure your friend could have told you that as he posted in the thread discussing it.
Sorry that wasn’t meant to be anonymous ^ ^ ^
I must have deleted my cookies, I’m normally signed in. :/
what did you expect? salafis of a feather flock together.
Pingback: An Islamic Spring at IA? | Peace, Bruv