Muslims ask yourself why am I on Fitna Facebook?

[أحمد]

I guess you missed with people in your life. Facebook allows you to choose who is in your life.

You know what if people choose not to be on facebook then fine. But you have no rights to criticise other people that choose to be on facebook. I choose not to be on facebook but I choose not to look down on those that choose to be on facebook. That is all I have to say.

Every good and bad choice is made by the individual; whether its filling in their credentials on a phishing page, or its to do with facebook.

:wa:

 

[Alpha Dude]

Where did I say he was lying? I said he was giving false information (which BTW i sill stand by) whether he did intentionally or not.

Accusing someone of not having fear of Allah after saying he gives out false information tends to give that impression. Don't you think?

Anyway, here is a direct statement you made: "are we now getting to point where we have lie to prevent people doing to certain website?"

I have used facebook for FIVE YEARS. You are able to restrict your profile to certain people whether they are your friends or not. I have used this several times. Half of the people on my facebook cant see my pictures or information like my family can. Whether the individual chooses to talk to the opposite sex is up to them, but the setting is there to prevent it. I hardly see any advisement on facebook. It is up to the person to restrict their sites.

Do you get male friend recommendations? You know 'users you may know' or something like that. I don't think you have any control over that, do you (spell it out for me please, I am not as familiar with FB as you appear)?

Can you not see a problem (assuming that the above is truly the case, please confirm) if say there is a young teen child, who gets a sexy posing friend recommended to him by Facebook's algorithm?

In any case, here is a plausible case: Say there is a teen who emails someone (perhaps via gmail) on the other side of the world, not knowing who that person is for an entirely legitimate reason (perhaps he met her on a forum and wanted to ask about the best recipe for cake, I dunno) and then after getting what he wants, doesn't think much about her. However, a little while later, he logs into facebook and thinks about importing contacts from his email and lo and behold, sees this sexy lady friend of his. Hmm. Raging hormones.

Can you see how he might be tempted to evil? Do you think any kid these days when there is the general lack of taqwa wouldn't be tempted to become more of a friend?

Are ulema wrong to want to prevent instances like the above?

Secondly, is everyone fully aware of FB settings and how to make their profiles private and further, do people tend to even bother with it? Do our lazy youth care who sees them or not?

So in light of the above, the ulema have a real dilemma. Far from being some old bearded mullahs that are doing ought but restrict the kids from 'having fun', they actually have concern for our imaan and want us to be perfected in adab/taqwa. Hence they need to take steps to ensure the people don't go astray. Hence even if they were to declare FB haram outright, they wouldn't be in the wrong because their intention is to protect us (and people DO need protection, since there has been a stupendous amount of haraam that FB has directly facilitated).

Stop trying make life difficult for the youth. I started as a youth using facebook, I can safety say the setting is there for the youth to use .

Again, the majority of people may not care about privacy/not know how it words so there is
the very real risk of haram happening. If not to the accont holder himself, then to his friends via them being introduced through his list.

so? thousands of youth can easily hook over the telephone....are you going to ban telephone now? Like I say over and over again facebook has a setting, it up to the parents and teenagers themselves to use that setting.

Firstly, the telephone comparison is a silly one. Simply because FB allows youth to hook up with random people and it is much easier with typed words than it is via voice. You ring up a girl telling her you like her and she'll shut the phone in your face but you msg her on FB with a sexy picture of yourself, she'll get tempted. Then of course there is the obvious difference between FB and telephones, pictures that tempt!

I am speaking as a person that used facebook for five years. I should know the inside and out of facebook. Facebook has really good privacy setting, it up the individual to use it.

I suspect you missed the point that was being made.

The intial quote which you deemed 'wrong!':

The website offers a poor security for private material. This has been an administrative concern for Facebook for quite some time now. Moreover their new privacy measures which claims to tackle these security issues suggests that many aspects of ones profile now becomes public information.[6] Focusing on such issues, other people including non Muslims, have been contemplating leaving Facebook.[7][8]

This does not directly allude to what you are most likely assuming (i.e. hidden photos, friends etc) but rather about privacy in terms of what you do not have control over.

Read this for example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...w-Facebook.-Is-this-the-death-of-privacy.html the recent case of someone who “harvested” the names, profile addresses, and unique ID numbers of 100 million Facebook users – a fifth of the network’s total user base.

Indeed, if this kind of privacy was so good, why is there such a big hoo-haa about it in the media!

Yeah I read them so? And you know what those news article contain? stupid teenagers that desperate enough to contact strangers and that hasn't used the privacy setting. What about the thousands of teenagers that do protect themselves like myself. Again Facebook does have a privacy setting, it up to the person to use it. You obviously are not aware of this setting.

You must be 'lying' here because references [9,10] contain no such mention of teenagers or their stories. Here is what you rubbished off the mufti's article:

The website’s structure makes the user incapable to deleting information like pictures and videos permanently. This means that should you want to delete any impermissible picture, it will remain accessible through its direct link even after a month or so, and in some cases up to a year later.[9] [10]

Does this person not fear Allah (swt)....why on earth is this guy giving false information. If you have posted pictures and video on groups and on your profile, you are still able to delete it permanently. The link return the individual back to facebook homepage.

The cause of confusion that you have (i.e. it seems you're assuming he is talking about pics remaining visible to friends/fam after you 'delete' them, when that is not what is being discussed).

I uploaded one picture and one video with restricted permissions so only I could access them through Facebook wherever possible, then deleted them. Even though the user has specifically deleted the content, they are still stored on Facebook’s servers and content delivery network by accessing the direct hotlink.

It is possible that someone who previously had access to a photo on Facebook, and who saved the direct URL from our content delivery network (CDN) partner (this is different from the Facebook URL) might still have access to that photo. We have been working with our CDN partner to reduce the amount of time that these backup copies persist.”

At least till a year ago, the above was a problem (as I've personally read in news articles of the time). Allahu Alaam if they've changed now. For you to call 'lie' on the mufti is out of order especially when there is a body of news articles that corroborate what he said. Instead of reacting emotionally, try to see this with a rational eye. Obviously, the way the web works is that it evolves very fast. Things change in quick periods of time. What may have been true at one point may not be at another. So being wrong (which the mufti wasn't, it seems) does not necessitate deception/lie.

In this partocular case, the issue of the direct link storing pics was true before and it may still be at present (which at least the person in the zdnet linked blog found it true for him (here is his video proof, April 2010!).

His information is still false! Once you deactivate your account, no one , not even your family can see it. so how on earth does that mean it "remains on facebook" when you yourself are the only person to activate your account otherwise no one on facebook can see your profile. It would have disappeared. your profile only returns if you decide to activate before 14 days.

Lol. You obviously misunderstood what is being said. If your account didn't remain on facebook, how else are you able to reactivate it within 14 days?! THAT is what he is talking about (obv it may be invis to others but the account details are still there). So instead of accusing people of lying, please attempt to understand what is being said first.

If you actually followed such groups then you would know that facebook deletes them and does somewhat control them. Like I said the same idiots will create another group. It all depends on whether the masses that report such groups.

Oh really? That's funny, so all that fiasco about the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him a few months ago was all out of nothing? They were quite prompt in their deletion, weren't they? It may be that there are some enlightened souls that do have a moral compass and would delete such things but given the case in question, that did not happen. It did not happen until after it was brought to the attention of the whole world! Pakistan went to the extent of blocking FB completely. Why would they let it reach that far when clearly their rules don't allow such hate talk? Why the double standards?

I still stand by my point. Facebook is a tool, it doesn't make anyone do something like this article states. It is your responsibility to use the setting and if you want to delete your profile again it is your responsibility to follow the procedure. Facebook has the setting and tools for halal uses.

Fair enough and I really don't dispute that.

However, you have to look at it from their perspective. They are ulema and they have a duty of guiding and protecting the common people away from deeni harm. Facebook unfortunately has ruined many a people which really, we can't deny. You or I may be strong enough to resist falling into shaytan's trap but thousands more aren't strong enough. Hence, they are right to be against it in their position as our guiders.

Remember, this isn't about a debate on their part just for the sake of it. They have a duty to complete and erring on the side of caution is always the better option.

It's fine if you disagree but don't rubbish them for doing their duty and rush to condemn them as liars.

 

[Sawdah]

It's like anything else, it depends on how you use it. Besides, it's a great social media tool - with many of our teachers using it such as Suhaib Webb, Muhammad AlShareef, and Abu Eesa and they're doing a lot of good with it, masha'Allaah. I don't see any problem in using it. If someone is going to mention its fitnah, they might as well apply the same ruling on the internet itself. It's not very different. So if you can keep yourself away from the bad stuff on the internet, you can do the same on facebook. There's no need to differentiate between the two. Muslims, especially those in the West need to be in tune with the social media of the day and age. If the individual is spiritually sound, he can keep himself away from whatever fitnah is found in life, not just on facebook.

:wa:

I agree, it's all on how you use it.

Same goes for internet, televison, telephones, etc. It's all on how you use it. All these things are tools. It's not the tool that's haram, it's how you use it that can be.

 

[Alpha Dude]

Facebook is nothing but Fitnah, so it should be avoided completely. For those who say they can control what they do and etc, look at it in this perspective. Why would you even use a website that allowed a disgraceful event against our Prophet:saws1: ? Even though that event never took place but it still has history of dirty pages against Islam. I would not even think about typing facebook on the url.

Exactly! This is the most important reason why any muslim should leave it.

What about you stop using the internet then Ahmed....i mean there loads of anti islamic sites? why would you be on something like the internet that allows disgraceful event against out Prophet peace be upon him and our religion in general? Your argument can be applied to the internet so why are you on it? Just like internet cannot be controlled completely, it is the same with facebook. Thus I don't blame people that are still on it.

Have you been living under a rock lately, sister? For someone so familiar with FB didn't you read about the thing that happened a few months back?

Secondly, your suggestion of leaving the internet altogether is laughable because facebook has owners who have a policy in which it is directly stated that they would delete such offensive content. So when users sign up, they should expect this. They have a right to be upset when they let the whole thing that happened a few months ago go without taking any action and lol don't give that rubbish about people not being able to police it all, given that it was world news, they obviously knew about it!

 

[Alpha Dude]

It's like anything else, it depends on how you use it. Besides, it's a great social media tool - with many of our teachers using it such as Suhaib Webb, Muhammad AlShareef, and Abu Eesa and they're doing a lot of good with it, masha'Allaah. I don't see any problem in using it. If someone is going to mention its fitnah, they might as well apply the same ruling on the internet itself. It's not very different. So if you can keep yourself away from the bad stuff on the internet, you can do the same on facebook. There's no need to differentiate between the two. Muslims, especially those in the West need to be in tune with the social media of the day and age. If the individual is spiritually sound, he can keep himself away from whatever fitnah is found in life, not just on facebook.

Wa alaykum salam,

It may be surprising but I also agree with most of this.

Just because I endorsed the fatwa I pasted, does not mean I am fully against FB.

However, there is a legitimate concern here which cannot be overlooked and some of ulema are right in my opinion to say it is not permissible (or that in the very least, it ought to be heavily monitored by parents).

I think we have to look at this issue through a broader lens. The kind of people that are able to preserve themselves are usually religiously minded. We'll find the majority of the rest are not sound, hence the dilemma for ulema - how far do they go toward protecting (the usual alcohol example can be used here, i.e. some may be able to stay sober but that doesn't mean it is safe for all).

Nevermind the people that can protect themselves, there is a big problem with haram happening with the rest, especially the youth.

Saying something like 'we are able to control ourselves with the correct privacy settings, it's all good' is fine for yourself but we have a duty to care for our brethren and the sad truth is the most aren't able to exercise the same level of control. The shaytan's trap is far too easy to fall into, even for the most religous. So in light of this, those that have a position against FB are not being 'backward'. The concern is legitimate.

Pro FB's can say why not get off the internet then, except the problem is that FB is an outlet that is conducive toward this kind of haram moreso than other social networks and the web at large. Not that it's not possible elsewhere, facebook just makes it easier. Indeed, that's the whole purpose of FB, to connect people. You'll find so many instances of kids adding their 'friends' (who are not really friends but just classmates that they would not otherwise talk to) which in turn would lead into some kind of relationship.

Now, it may be that the same people that would indulge in this kind of haram on FB would do so elsewhere on the web but FB certainly breaks down the barriers and makes it easier.

It's like if a person has the intention to hookup with some girl and so walks into a club where he knows there will be many to talk to. He can do it elsewhere too but being in the club makes it a heck of a lot easier.

I think our young sisters especially need protecting from the FB fitnah. They are so prone to being duped and played with by guys who have less than honourably intentions.

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

I just replied to two posts and it hasn't appeared.

I cant be ask to write another

 

[Soulja Girl]

Facebook this & Facebook that.. Jus cut it out.. How many threads have there been on LI regardin FB? Countless.. & people say the same things again and again, jus go round in circles.. Those who are on FB, if they wanna stay on it, let em, those who aren't, well you can't stop others.. Yea, warn them about the fitnah etc buh if they ain't doin anyfin wrong, what's the big deal eh?? At teh end of the day: "lana a3maluna wa lakum a3malukum.." Having said that, if people know they're weak & don't have control over themselves well then yea, they should stay away.. =)

:wa:

 

[tango92]

i agree with sis sweet106, the argument of facebook being fitna is not true for alot of people.

for one you can choose to have no members of the opposite sex in your freinds list and there are many privacy options. it is no more of a fitna than anything in the dunya.

and shes right, what are you doing browsing the web with all the anti islam/ perverted websites on it? at the end of the day life requires few necessities from the internet.

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

Exactly! This is the most important reason why any muslim should leave it.



Have you been living under a rock lately, sister? For someone so familiar with FB didn't you read about the thing that happened a few months back?

Secondly, your suggestion of leaving the internet altogether is laughable because facebook has owners who have a policy in which it is directly stated that they would delete such offensive content. So when users sign up, they should expect this. They have a right to be upset when they let the whole thing that happened a few months ago go without taking any action and lol don't give that rubbish about people not being able to police it all, given that it was world news, they obviously knew about it!

You know zero about facebook and how many groups facebook has deleted which I know of because I have reported them. Let me give you a cule:

<comments deleted>

You get the idea right, that facebook does deleted group but not all? Just like the internet groups in facebook is out of control even though there are good groups. The only thing facebook is good at is that the person is able to control their profile from others.

 

[أحمد]

Facebook this & Facebook that.. Jus cut it out.. How many threads have there been on LI regardin FB? Countless.. & people say the same things again and again, jus go round in circles.. Those who are on FB, if they wanna stay on it, let em, those who aren't, well you can't stop others.. Yea, warn them about the fitnah etc buh if they ain't doin anyfin wrong, what's the big deal eh?? At teh end of the day: "lana a3maluna wa lakum a3malukum.." Having said that, if people know they're weak & don't have control over themselves well then yea, they should stay away.. =)

:wa:

You are right; this is going around in circles, starting and ending, then repeating on choice.

:wa:

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

Accusing someone of not having fear of Allah after saying he gives out false information tends to give that impression. Don't you think?

Anyway, here is a direct statement you made: "are we now getting to point where we have lie to prevent people doing to certain website?"

Do you get male friend recommendations? You know 'users you may know' or something like that. I don't think you have any control over that, do you (spell it out for me please, I am not as familiar with FB as you appear)?

Can you not see a problem (assuming that the above is truly the case, please confirm) if say there is a young teen child, who gets a sexy posing friend recommended to him by Facebook's algorithm?

In any case, here is a plausible case: Say there is a teen who emails someone (perhaps via gmail) on the other side of the world, not knowing who that person is for an entirely legitimate reason (perhaps he met her on a forum and wanted to ask about the best recipe for cake, I dunno) and then after getting what he wants, doesn't think much about her. However, a little while later, he logs into facebook and thinks about importing contacts from his email and lo and behold, sees this sexy lady friend of his. Hmm. Raging hormones.

Can you see how he might be tempted to evil? Do you think any kid these days when there is the general lack of taqwa wouldn't be tempted to become more of a friend?

Are ulema wrong to want to prevent instances like the above?

Secondly, is everyone fully aware of FB settings and how to make their profiles private and further, do people tend to even bother with it? Do our lazy youth care who sees them or not?

So in light of the above, the ulema have a real dilemma. Far from being some old bearded mullahs that are doing ought but restrict the kids from 'having fun', they actually have concern for our imaan and want us to be perfected in adab/taqwa. Hence they need to take steps to ensure the people don't go astray. Hence even if they were to declare FB haram outright, they wouldn't be in the wrong because their intention is to protect us (and people DO need protection, since there has been a stupendous amount of haraam that FB has directly facilitated).

Again, the majority of people may not care about privacy/not know how it words so there is
the very real risk of haram happening. If not to the accont holder himself, then to his friends via them being introduced through his list.

Firstly, the telephone comparison is a silly one. Simply because FB allows youth to hook up with random people and it is much easier with typed words than it is via voice. You ring up a girl telling her you like her and she'll shut the phone in your face but you msg her on FB with a sexy picture of yourself, she'll get tempted. Then of course there is the obvious difference between FB and telephones, pictures that tempt!

I suspect you missed the point that was being made.

The intial quote which you deemed 'wrong!':

This does not directly allude to what you are most likely assuming (i.e. hidden photos, friends etc) but rather about privacy in terms of what you do not have control over.

Read this for example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...w-Facebook.-Is-this-the-death-of-privacy.html the recent case of someone who “harvested” the names, profile addresses, and unique ID numbers of 100 million Facebook users – a fifth of the network’s total user base.

Indeed, if this kind of privacy was so good, why is there such a big hoo-haa about it in the media!

You must be 'lying' here because references [9,10] contain no such mention of teenagers or their stories. Here is what you rubbished off the mufti's article:

The cause of confusion that you have (i.e. it seems you're assuming he is talking about pics remaining visible to friends/fam after you 'delete' them, when that is not what is being discussed).

​

At least till a year ago, the above was a problem (as I've personally read in news articles of the time). Allahu Alaam if they've changed now. For you to call 'lie' on the mufti is out of order especially when there is a body of news articles that corroborate what he said. Instead of reacting emotionally, try to see this with a rational eye. Obviously, the way the web works is that it evolves very fast. Things change in quick periods of time. What may have been true at one point may not be at another. So being wrong (which the mufti wasn't, it seems) does not necessitate deception/lie.

In this partocular case, the issue of the direct link storing pics was true before and it may still be at present (which at least the person in the zdnet linked blog found it true for him (here is his video proof, April 2010!).

Lol. You obviously misunderstood what is being said. If your account didn't remain on facebook, how else are you able to reactivate it within 14 days?! THAT is what he is talking about (obv it may be invis to others but the account details are still there). So instead of accusing people of lying, please attempt to understand what is being said first.

Oh really? That's funny, so all that fiasco about the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him a few months ago was all out of nothing? They were quite prompt in their deletion, weren't they? It may be that there are some enlightened souls that do have a moral compass and would delete such things but given the case in question, that did not happen. It did not happen until after it was brought to the attention of the whole world! Pakistan went to the extent of blocking FB completely. Why would they let it reach that far when clearly their rules don't allow such hate talk? Why the double standards?

Fair enough and I really don't dispute that.

However, you have to look at it from their perspective. They are ulema and they have a duty of guiding and protecting the common people away from deeni harm. Facebook unfortunately has ruined many a people which really, we can't deny. You or I may be strong enough to resist falling into shaytan's trap but thousands more aren't strong enough. Hence, they are right to be against it in their position as our guiders.

Remember, this isn't about a debate on their part just for the sake of it. They have a duty to complete and erring on the side of caution is always the better option.

It's fine if you disagree but don't rubbish them for doing their duty and rush to condemn them as liars.

The example you have given is so wrong and it can be appiled to the internet in general. Okay let take that example, why not ban gmail? That is how she got in contact with him. And mobile phones have pictures, why not ban that?

I wasnt talking about the article you have provided I was talking about the news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/08/peter-chapman-facebook-killer
The girl had failed to look after herself. I say this so many times, it is up to the individual and their parents to use Facebook safely.

Btw we are not allowed label things haram unless it was written by Allah (swt) or said by the prophet peace be upon him. So we meant to say talking to opposite sex unnecessarily is haram. But you can't say facebook is haram.

 

[Alpha Dude]

You know zero about facebook and how many groups facebook has deleted which I know of because I have reported them. Let me give you a cule:
<comments deleted>

You get the idea right, that facebook does deleted group but not all? Just like the internet groups in facebook is out of control even though there are good groups. I only thing facebook is good at is that the person is able to control their profile from others.

You still fail to explain the fiasco that happened a few months back.

 

[أحمد]

I say this so many times, it is up to the individual and their parents to use Facebook safely.

You have a valid point; internet security software can provide some extra protection in that case (parental controls).

:wa:

 

[Alpha Dude]

The example you have given is so wrong and it can be appiled to the internet in general. Okay let take that example, why not ban gmail? That is how she got in contact with him.

The issue is that Facebook allowed this youth to see what this girl looked like and hence decide to persue her, which he wouldn't otherwise have done.

And mobile phones have pictures, why not ban that?

What soc net is there on mobiles?

Secondly, if I was a parent, I would go out of my way to make sure my kids don't own a phone till they are well into their late teens.

I wasnt talking about the article you have provided I was talking about the news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/08/peter-chapman-facebook-killer
The girl had failed to look after herself. I say this so many times, it is up to the individual and their parents to use Facebook safely.

OK. I don't see the relevence to what you quoted when you replied, though.

Btw we are not allowed label things haram unless it was written by Allah (swt) or said by the prophet peace be upon him. So we meant to say talking to opposite sex unnecessarily is haram. But you can say facebook is haram.

What's your point? Have I done that? We leave that to the ulema.

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

You still fail to explain the fiasco that happened a few months back.

Because it wasn't in their policies. What we consider offensive was not in their policies.

But that doesn't mean the groups above which I mentioned equally as offensive if not MORE has been deleted. Facebook doesn't answer to every call of reports. Some of the groups that I have mentioned are being remade by nutjobs that have no time in their hands.

 

[Alpha Dude]

i agree with sis sweet106, the argument of facebook being fitna is not true for alot of people.

for one you can choose to have no members of the opposite sex in your freinds list and there are many privacy options. it is no more of a fitna than anything in the dunya.

and shes right, what are you doing browsing the web with all the anti islam/ perverted websites on it? at the end of the day life requires few necessities from the internet.

i. it may not be true for you but undoubtedly, many of our youth have been led astray. So in my opinion, those ulema that seek to label it impermissible are not wrong to want to prevent such mass direct haram and desensizitation to inter-gender communication. So when they give their fatwas out opposing it, at the very least, it gives parents (many of whom are clueless about what fb allows and what their kids are up to) a good wake up call.

ii. as mentioned, regarding the issue of hate, this is in response to Facebook's biased handling of the anti-islamic content that was posted. They have an obligation to remove it according to the rules that we agreed to, yet refused to do it. Hence the bias against Islam is clear. Regarding perverted sites on the net, of course that's true and you don't really find porn on facebook. Facebook is more of a hookup medium.

Because it wasn't in their policies. What we consider offensive was not in their policies.

But that doesn't mean the groups above which I mentioned equally as offensive if not MORE has been deleted. Facebook doesn't answer to every call of reports. Some of the groups that I have mentioned are being remade by nutjobs that have no time in their hands.

Are you serious?! wasn't in their policies?

You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.

So they can remove the hitler crap under the same reason ok but not what millions upon millions of muslims find offensive?

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps they only consider offensive stuff that doesn't include islam. Anything that degrades Islam is not offensive, really. Just freedom of speech. <_<

Facebook doesn't answer to every call of reports.

That's the dumbest thing. If they can delete all those that you mentioned then they have every right to delete this one, especially given the outcry. Why they didn't do it, is obvious. They remained stubborn. Gee, I wonder why they deleted it in the end if it wasn't offensive.

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

No it was not on their policies. The group was about drawing, whether the participants within the group drew someone committing a violent act for example then the group is held not responsible unless the groups is overwhelmed by such drawing.

The drawing of the prophet peace be upon him did not break their policies because it (the group not members) did not suggest or claim "hateful, threatening, pornographic; incites violence; or contain nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence".

You obviously don't consider the groups they have removed, you know the examples I have given. And dont care the amount of groups they have already removed? To you facebook hates Muslims, then I dont why they decided to ban the groups I have already mentioned.

Btw not even ulema can make facebook haram, no one can. Who said they can?

Anyway, I want to end this conversation, so agree to disagree.

 

[Alpha Dude]

No it was not on their policies. The group was about drawing, whether the participants within the group drew someone committing a violent act for example then the group is held not responsible unless the groups is overwhelmed by such drawing.

The drawing of the prophet peace be upon him did not break their policies because it (the group not members) did not suggest or claim "hateful, threatening, pornographic; incites violence; or contain nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence".

This is just a wishy washy excuse for their mishandling of it. Millions found it offensive yet no action taken. That's all that matters.

Btw not even ulema can make facebook haram, no one can. You said they can?

You're dead wrong. Of course they can declare something haram. The principle is that if anything goes against Islam, it becomes sinful.

If for whatever wacky reason on facebook it became mandatory for all people to have as a friend and send messages to people of the opposite gender, then obviously, facebook would become haraam. There's something called fiqh. Scholars will take into account the quran/sunnah and deduce from the circumstance whether or not something is permissible.

 

[Soulja Girl]

Btw not even ulema can make facebook haram, no one can. Who said they can?

^They have every right to and neither you nor I can stop them..

:wa:

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

So wait, are people actually saying the ulema can makes haram or halal? what? I thought only Allah (swt) can and prophet peace be upon him?

Goodness, prepare them to make TV and the internet haram. I am sure the same principle would apply there too?