69 million page views

Ibrahim Hooper Statement " in support" of Gibbons.

Reader comment on item: Not Child's Play: The Teddy-Bear Intifada

Submitted by Ynnatchkah (United States), Dec 11, 2007 at 03:06

CAIR's statement "in support" of Gibbons.

1. "…Given the ongoing controversy over the jailing of British teacher Gillian Gibbons in the Sudan for "insulting Islam," perhaps it is time to remind us all how the Prophet himself reacted to insults, both real and perceived."…

2."… Even if Ms. Gibbons had the intent to cause insult, which does not seem to be the case, Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so."…

3. "…The complaint brought against Gillian Gibbons was an inappropriate use of Sudan's legal system to deal with what was in essence a disagreement between parents and a teacher. Ms. Gibbons should never have been charged. She should be released immediately."…

Ibrahim Hooper controversy in his statement about Gibbons.

I read several times Hooper statement about Gibbons at http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1 But did not get it straight.

Hopper released a long statement about that one named muhamad and what he would do in the case of Gibbons, according to what hooper says, not the history shows, but this is not the important point. It is well known that muhamad's kindness was a middle way towards a false hudna and the perpetuation of his Al Taqyia.

In "1" Hooper clearly expresses himself as understanding the situation as an insult to islam with no doubt in his mind.

He emphasizes the controversy over the jailing of Gibbons, not the controversy over whether or not it was intentional. It is very double as if giving is personal Ok for the punishment.

He does not confirm that he is against her jailing.

I read it at least 20 times until it cleared out to me.

Then in "2" he emphasizes unconsciously the existence of the insult in an affirmative way, by placing this hypothesis in the first " plateau", giving minor importance to its otherwise, putting it in commas.

Grammatically speaking, this phrase ("...does not seem to be the case) does not belong to the main line of thought which is the affirmation of the intention of insulting.

The hypothesis of innocence comes in an expletive position.

Note that he never in the article puts in first hand the following for example:

Does not seem that she had an intention of insulting islam, but if it were the case, Islamic tradition….

In "3" he demagogically speaks about the "inapropriation" of Sudan's legal system, again not defining his position at all on how the legal system should be used.

Perhaps, the legal system would have been better used if a sentence of 40 lashes instead of the best prison she was put in, would have been applied.


Perhaps, the fact that the judge wants her out of the country is the inapropriation of Sudan's legal system.

Perhaps the fact that Sudanese ministers had been trying to play down the case, fearing a public uproar that might make a speedy resolution impossible and further diplomatic isolation inevitable is indeed an inapropriation of Sudan's legal system.

Who knows what hooper really intended.

And, by knowing that Gibbons if released on the street would surely be attacked by Muslims, who knows if this delay is the ultimate inapropriation of Sudan's legal system.

Did you see any CAIR's manifestation of support of Gibbons at the Sudanese Consulate in America?

Did you see any fundraising or strong lobby's action by CAIR in support of Gibbons?


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)