News:

France has urged Middle Eastern countries to end calls for a boycott of its goods in protest at President Emmanuel Macron's defence of the right to show cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. In a statement, the French foreign ministry acknowledged the moves, writing: "These calls for boycott are baseless and should stop immediately, as well as all attacks against our country, which are being pushed by a radical minority." (BBC)

Comment:

When the Muslim Ummah has such Ulema who release such lowly statements like the head of the Saudi-based Muslim World League, Sheikh Mohammed al-Issa, told a Saudi news channel that while the caricatures are insulting, the prophet’s influence and status are greater than any impact from such drawings. He said Muslims should not overreact. (Time) Likewise, al-Issa, cautioned that an over-reaction “that is negative and goes beyond what is acceptable” would only benefit “haters.” (Reuters) Is it any surprise that the Saudi regime did not want to take part in the boycott on French products and call for the calm approach?!

The major French exports are aircraft; something that individuals do not purchase but the nations purchase with major international contracts and pacts to the tune of 43 billion USD. This is where the big money lies for the French exports. The Muslim countries that called for the boycott of French products were individuals who owned supermarkets and stores and not the actual government which include Kuwait, Qatar, Turkey and Jordan. However, that is what it was limited to. Also individuals were the ones who took to the streets protesting loudly their condemnation of Macron’s support of the spiteful caricatures again not the actual government.  “Issa’s overreaction” is not overreaction but an obligation to reject any insult against the Messenger of Allah (saw).

The attacks were not on a statue or historical figure that can be justified by a flimsy manipulation of the liberal ideal of free expression …but this attack was on the greatest of creation revered by Muslims from the very start of the Revelation to Muhammad who became the Messenger to guide us on how to worship the Creator, organize and rule our affairs, and protect our sanctities. Thus the attack on the Messenger (saw) is an attack on each and every Muslim worldwide and the response to the French magazine and to the French president who fully supports the attack on the Prophet (saw) must be met with a swift decisive response by the armies of the Muslim countries and the regimes.

If a boycott of products affects the French economy imagine then what will be the effect of a stronger response?

What is needed is not an individual response which of course the Muslim Ummah will most definitely offer what is necessary to defend their Beloved (saw) but individuals act in individual actions within their capacity: boycott French products, protest, write articles, post to social media their outrage, and rally to form public opinion.

But will prevent the French magazine and others who are spiteful against Islam and Muslims from committing a more grievous crime?! Here is the urgency of a nation authority who will take command and uphold the responsibility and not give fiery speeches before the Muslim masses, these masses are not the ones who hate the Prophet. The rhetoric needs to be backed with genuine reaction and further make an example to the entire world that the greatest of creation will not be violated, slandered nor ridiculed under any pretext whatsoever. This is the dignity of authority when used in a manner that commands respect and makes the regimes think more than once what may offend the 1.6 billion Muslim population.

Had the Ruwaibidah rulers of the Ummah fully comprehended Surat Al-Anfal on what type of stance to take from battle, to broken covenants, and the character of Muslim soldiers, today’s situation would not be a repeat of the Charlie Hebdo publication of January 2015.