Abedin Family Journal Promoted Muslim Brotherhood Views
Saleha Mahmood Abedin (b. 1940) received her Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania in 1977 for a thesis entitled: “Islam and Muslim Fertility: Sociological Dimensions of a Demographic Dilemma.” Dr. Abedin has been intimately involved with the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) in London since its founding in 1979 by her husband Syed Abedin. She is the current Director and Editor-in-Chief of the Institute’s Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA), a tenure which began after the death of her husband in 1993. Saleha Abedin is also a professor of Sociology at King Abdulaziz University Women’s College, Jeddah, a founding member of Dar Al-Hekma College, Jeddah, and Chairperson of the International Islamic Committee for Women [Woman] and Child (IICWC), in Amman, Jordan.
Regarding the latter, a clearly documented report at Legal Insurrection which simply quotes the IICWC website (in Google translator Arabic-to-English translation of sections from this IICWC post) demonstrates how Dr. Abedin’s organization, as a champion of the Sharia over “manmade law,” vehemently opposes both laws which prohibit child marriage and which ban the misogynistic barbarity of female genital mutilation (FGM) — a horrific scourge in major Muslim countries such as Arab Egypt and far-flung non-Arab Indonesia, where FGM rates exceed 90% because Shafiite Sunni Islamic jurisprudence predominates in these Muslim countries. However, a far more comprehensive elaboration of Dr. Abedin’s traditionalist Islamic Weltanschauung — rigidly compliant with the totalitarian Sharia — can be gleaned from her vigorous efforts to assist in translating into English, editing, and publishing the book Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations.
Saudi academic Fatima Umar Nasseef, the author of Women in Islam, is also a sister of IMMA co-founding Chairman Dr. Abdullah Omar Nasseef. The inner flap of the book cover provides the following erudite discussion of Fatima Umar Naseef’s (b. 1944) bona fides. She is described (quoting verbatim) as:
… An accomlished [sic] and renowned scholaar [sic], speaker, academic, educationist and social worker in contemporary Saudi Arabia. She has made outstanding contribution to the advancement of women’s education in the country. As head of the women’s section of King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah for eight years, and as professor of Islamic Shari’ah, and through her popular public lectures, she has inspired a generation of Saudi women. She has also published a number of books and articles on issues relating to Islamic Shari’ah, the position and status of women in society, and on the subject of their rights and Obligations.
On the back cover, Saleha Abedin, who edited and supervised the translation of Nasseef’s scholarly oeuvre, adds these observations, for context:
The overall objectives of IICWC include the promotion of knowledge regarding women’s issues. It fosters a publication program that is aimed to facilitate the collection as well as dissemination of information on women, family and society. The Committee is, therefore, pleased to launch its Book Series with its very first publication of the translation of the popular and well-received book, Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations, authored by a prominent Saudi scholar, Fatima Umar Nasseef.
This book will be of special interest to students and scholars of Islamic law and women’s studies, as well as to that segment of the general public that is interested in women’s issues. It is a comprehensive study of the rights and obligations of women in society from the Islamic perspective, and also provides a comparison with other cultures, while examining the rights and positions of women in those cultures.
Verbatim quotes from Women in Islam provide res ipsa loquitur, pellucid illustrations of the traditionalist Islamic views being promulgated without any attempt to mollify (i.e., conceal from Western sensibilities) their bellicosity, liberty-crushing supremacism (absence of freedom speech; inequality before the law for non-Muslims), and female subjugating misogyny. Women’s “rights and obligations” to participate in jihad war campaigns are extolled through the prism of Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayid Qutb’s (d. 1966) views on the jihad, which are demonstrated to be in full accord not only with classical Muslim jurists but the assessments of his esteemed contemporary peers at Cairo’s Al Azhar University, including former Grand Imam of Al-Azhar (from 1958-1963) Mahmud Shaltut, (quoted in this section, just before Qutb). These “liberating” views are complemented by insistence upon requisite hijab donning for women, the mandatory acquiescence of women to sexual demands from their husbands, prohibition of social interaction between the sexes, stoning for adultery, and (strongly) recommended female genital mutilation. Nonetheless, Women in Islam concludes this misogynistic litany of discriminations against women by repeating the stock-in-trade mantra of the contemporary apologetic for the traditionalist Muslim Brotherhood worldview:
Islam is the only solution and the only escape … the only religion that affirms their [women’s] humanity, dignity and equality with men.
Two prominent, longstanding members on the Editorial Board of the JMMA accompanying Editor-in-Chief Saleha Abedin, whose tenures both began in 1996, are Zafar Ishaq Ansari (1996 to 2009), and John Esposito (1996 to present). Not surprisingly, these two JMMA Editorial Board members share Saleha Abedin’s — and the Muslim Brotherhood’s — Weltanschauung.
Zafar Ishaq Ansari is a full-throated champion of the 20th century Indo-Pakistani jihadist ideologue (see here, here, and here) Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi (1903-1979). Ansari’s “magnum opus” is a reverent translation of Mawdudi’s Tafhim Al-Quran (“Understanding the Koran”) — one of the most important works of modern Koranic exegesis, or interpretation. Ansari’s Preface notes how Mawdudi’s collective works greatly inspired the mass Muslim phenomenon, “… characterized, mainly by the outside world, as ‘Islamic resurgence.’” Ansari then extols Mawdudi unabashedly for both his personal attributes and authentic — and currently relevant — Islamic vision:
Mawdudi was uniquely gifted for the task he undertook — a systematic exposition of the teachings of Islam. To help him fulfill that task he possessed a clear and penetrating mind as well as a felicitous and vigorous pen … [H]e distinguished himself by arguing and forcefully establishing that the principles prescribed by Islam were intrinsically sound, that they were relevant for, and viable in, every age and clime, that they were conducive to the overall well-being of man.






But don’t anyone hold their breath waiting for John McCain and Marco Rubio to apologize to Michele Bachmann.
Andrew, (and others) please go to my blog – http://www.adinakutnicki.com , it is brimming with supportive evidence to your thesis.
My first commentary re the above, ‘Six Degrees of Separation’ can be found as you scroll down the HOME tab. It is especially important, as it started me on my ‘Huma’ journey.
My most recent commentary ‘Hillary Clinton’s Tap Dance Around Huma Abedin’s Brotherhood/Sisterhood Connection…& Media Matters Request – Show Us Her Security Clearance’ has various attached links of equal import.
The sad part is that Congress is now considering a bill that will LESSEN their responsibility in the vetting process. Sometimes I just don’t think they care.
considering my butt….they passed it
I believe John Boehner should now be investigated for his ties to Muslim Brotherhood. His outrageous attack on Michelle Bachman for asking the obvious sensible national security questions suggests Boehner is determined to thwart any public scrutiny of this important topic. Why would Boehner attack a Congressman, on the Intelligence Committee, who simply asks if normal background checking was done to insure our national security is maintained? Boehner is working against our national security in attacking those who take their jobs seriously. He must be replaced.
John McCain, and also Marco Rubio.
Even at his best, Esposito’s academic presentations suffer from these inappropriate biases, as lucidly described by the scholar Bat Ye’or: 1) historical negationism, consisting of suppressing or sketching in a page or a paragraph, one thousand years of jihad which is presented as a peaceful conquest generally “welcomed” by the vanquished populations; 2) the omission of Christian and in particular Muslim sources describing the actual methods of these conquests and the rule of the conquered peoples as sanctioned by the classical jihad ideology written by numerous Muslim jurists since the 7th Century: pillage, enslavement, deportation, massacres, and the imposition of dhimmitude; 3) the mythical historical conversion of “centuries” of “peaceful coexistence”, masking the processes which transformed majorities (i.e., vast Christian populations, in particular) into minorities constantly at risk of extinction.
Mass delusion as to the reality of Islam, over the centuries and in real time.
For people like al Qaradawi, al Zawahiri, Ayotallah Khamenei, the physiological strain of sustaining such lies must take an enormous toll on their aging bodies.
To neglect prayer is also a criminal act, and to eat in public during Ramadan is a criminal act and so is the refraining from giving alms, taking interest, drinking, selling or transporting wine…
Isn’t one of the major attractions of Paradise to lie down on bejeweled couches beside rivers of wine ?
Living under such a totalitarian system (with so many tiny, niggling and contradictory rules covering every single act & thought) has apparently driven many of these people perfectly nuts.
Only under circumstances of loss of rational thought and Submission to the Insane could a human mind accept and rationalize acts like suicide bombing.
Keep the full court press on Wiener’s Wench….get her out of our government and back to her homeland to pound sand.
Clinton Irrumator’s “Silly Hilly” outta there also.
Thank you for your dedication. I am so discouraged to see conservative bloggers continue to mock Bachmann et. al. for calling for further investigation. I get so tired of the ironic hipster schtick.
I wonder if her family is delighted by weiner – after all they kind of have him by the short hairs now.
Imagine making your daughter marry such a jerk just to get info and put her where she is.
Some of Bachmann’s critics sincerely believe an investigation in a presidential year will do more harm than good. I don’t subscribe to that school of thought, but consider this – President Romney could clean the frickin’ house without all the money spent and media crapstorm.
go ahead Romney – pick another RINO for VP if you dare – and signal to us that you are no different from the enemy within. you want excitement, find a Ted Cruz type. otherwise risk many who voted only because Palin was on the ticket last time, not being fooled again.
someone to be seriously considered.
Huma Abedin and Hillary are a lesbian couple. Weiner was a social climbing “troll” that was OK with marrying Huma to give Hillary cover and him access to the Clinton “inner circle.” There is no other reason for Hillary to have someone with Huma’s radical background being her closest advisor at the State Department. This also explains why Hillary let’s Bill run around like a dog in heat. Hillary goes nowhere without Huma at her side. WHY?
How did Huma Abedin get past the MB to marry a weiner which is prohibited in Islam?
The only reasonable explanation seeing that she is still alive is that he converted.
Moslems waging jee-had are allowed to do pretty much anything….that’s their excuse anyway. They may break all the moslem rules and ‘principles’ to advance their agenda, hey, sounds like democrats, huh? It is ok for moslems to lie, cheat, break any and every moslem rule, whatever, as long as its in the name of jee-had it is permitted. No wonder they all want to wage jee-had, to have a little fun…
For jee-had’s sake it’s OK to be sodomized until there’s room to shove a clyster bomb up there.
that’s a good one! ha ha!
’cause chubby li’l Hilly’s gotta have what to live for being forced to kiss the boss’s butt once Barry sizzled her ass so good she’ll never be no president now. She kissed sweet Suha, she’s chewin’ on Huma, she got it all.
Madam Secretary of State of the United States, Sisterhood Stooge, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Depressing. Welcome to Vichy America.
Quoting Dr. Bostom: “Abul Hasan Ali Hasani Nadwi was a founding member of the Muslim World League, a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference (now Cooperation), a member of the World Supreme Council of Mosques, and a member of the Fiqh Council of Rabita.”. . .”In his final chapter Nadwi calls on the Arab world to assume its traditional leadership of Islam.”
Focus on that second quote, and note how Islam is but a vehicle for ARAB supremacism.
It’s mind boggling how many non-Arab cultures have been sucked into this belief system, abused & discarded as collateral carnage for benefit of Arab supremacist goals veiled in mono-theism.
Not withstanding the probability that hill and Huma are bull and cow the hard left has always thought they could use the muzzies as useful idiots.They will co-opt anyone to promote their commie agenda.Problem is ultimately they get bit in the butt.For hillary this may be in more ways than one.
Looks like Huma vetted her husband as throuroughly as Diplomatic Security vetted her.
We really must have the backs of Michele Bachmann and her followers on this. She was spot on, and it is past time to stop with the incessant political correctness, and allow our government and our country to be further infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood! I followed a link here from http://fundamentalrefounding.ning.com/forum/topics/so-just-how-infiltrated-are-we?commentId=6483638%3AComment%3A34048&xg_source=activity so I could read the entire story. God bless, JG
All this talk about vetting makes me wonder about Mitt Romney. The incredible number of unforced errors – taxes, foreign policy views (Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel?), Bain, MA governor tenure, etc. etc. makes we seriously doubt the vetting which occurred for Romney. We are now stuck with a horribly flawed candidate with no discernible position on anything. Vetting…oi!
It took me a whole afternoon to get through that article. They apparently make no secret of their totalitarian worldwide supremacist objective, though some try to disguise it. It is thick reading.
My quest is to see if I (anyone/everyone) can ignore Islam and Muslims. Will they leave me alone?
and both secularists and a-tea-ists like me who favor individual liberty are special targets:
Defense here sounds more like general license to engage in perpetual violent offense.
I’ll have to try to remember “fiqh al-aqalliyyat” and “Ijtihad”. It would be within a US citizen’s First Amendment rights to argue for the repeal of the First Amendment, even if the private motivation is to pave the way for the implementation of Hillary Clinton’s/Huma Adedin’s Istanbul Process (and more).
A question still unanswered is whether the punishment of death for apostasy is more accurately described as the act of a state to punish treason and that such code alone can transform being Muslim from a purely religious notion to that of renouncing US citizenship in favor of citizenship in a borderless Islamic Ummah nation?
You guys leave Hillary alone. She has plenty of company:
1) Grover Norquist
2) Rick Perry
3) Chris Christie
4) Bill Clinton (took $150 million from the Saudis for a speech)
5) Rory McIlroy (Juremiah)
6) Major Nidal Hassan’s commanders
I could go on. There’s a question I’d like to axe: is there a pattern here?
Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama are not that stupid. Huma Abedin is on Hillary’s staff because of, not despite, her contacts in the Ikwhan, the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary and B. Hussein have looked into the eyes of the Ikwhan’s leaders and have decided they can negotiate with them in good faith. Anyway, Hillary and B. Hussein hate Western civilization almost as much as the Ikwhan does, so they have much in common.