Connect with us


Malala Yousafzai and the Media Frenzy- Exploring Selective Muslim Coverage


In recent days, the incident of Malala Yousafzai shot by the Taliban for promoting education for girls has flowed across all media outlets.  It was the story of a young girl who bravely campaigned for female education under the rule of the Taliban. Charging her for “promoting secularism” the Taliban ordered a gunman to shoot her in the head on the 9th of October, 2012. Now, Malala has been flown to the UK for treatment. Former British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has launched a UN petition in her name using the slogan, “I am Malala” demanding that all children worldwide be in school by 2015.

Our sincere duas are with Malala and her family, and I can safely state that the majority of Muslims will agree on basic female education not being forbidden in Islam and denounce the brutality of the Taliban’s actions. Attempting to murder a young person is not in any shape or form in compliance with the teachings of Islam.

However, while condemning the Taliban’s actions and supporting the UN petition, it is also important to highlight two main issues with the media coverage of this story.

Keep supporting MuslimMatters for the sake of Allah

Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.

The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small. Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.

Media Coverage

The first, and the most obvious, is the high media attention given to Malala’s case as compared to the complete disregard of countless children killed as “collateral damage” in the Global War On Terror (GWOT) under the Bush administration, and the recent deadly drone attacks under the Obama administration. It is estimated that in the first three years after President Obama took office, between 232 and 535 civilians have been killed by drone strikes alone, including more than 60 children. Yet these cases have not received even a fraction of the same media coverage. Only a small minority of media centers have problematized this unbalanced depiction, in particular the New York Times, who have taken an interest in the secrecy surrounding the usage of drones.


Why is Malala’s case different?

Why was she transferred to the UK for special treatment, whilst other children injured by the American forces were left unattended? Why is her name plastered on newspapers and placards and other children’s names not even known? The answer lies in Malala’s case being used to highlight the problems with the Taliban’s regime, thereby boosting the justification on the current GWOT. Ever since the war was announced, the condition for Muslim women has been exploited to serve as a justification for their occupation. Despite this, the public were still outraged and countless demonstrations against the war were undertaken. The financial crisis has raised this issue again, as the cost of keeping troops overseas and the subsequent cuts directly affects the population. Yet the governments still insist on the necessity of keeping armed forces in Muslim lands to weed out insurgents and “liberate” Muslim women shackled by tradition. Thus Malala’s story has been a pertinent case study, which discreetly justifies the past and future war efforts.

By not giving attention or special treatment to the countless children killed and injured in the GWOT, it not only dehumanizes them but it devalues their life. This makes it easier to brush them aside as necessary deaths on the road to peace and liberation in these “uncivilized” countries. However, the attention that Malala received, gives value and worth to her life and her cause. Since female education is in line with what the West deems as “modern” and “liberal”, her cause is instantly worthy of attention and her life is more precious. Whereas the other children are killed in the name of bringing “modernity and liberalism” to these regions. Their life is devalued against these principles and as a result subsumed under the guise of progression.

This brings us to the next broader and subtler issue in the coverage of this story, namely the division of the world into two spheres:  the modern civilized West vs. the rest. As Bush said in his infamous speech after 9/11,

“You are either with us and with nations which embrace freedom, or you are with the enemy.  There is no in between.”

Malala’s story is used to juxtapose these two spheres.  She was the girl campaigning for female education in order to liberate and progress women as a whole, against fundamentalist men enslaving her under the name of Islam. She represented the values of modernity whilst the Taliban represented everything opposed to it.

Polarizing the world with this narrow understanding of modernity and liberty has dangerous implications for Muslims. According to a YouGov poll Britons (43%) and Americans (39%) believe in a fundamental clash of cultures between Islam and the West. The issue is that the bipolar view of the “rational West” and the “erratic Islamic fundamentalist” does not acknowledge the majority of Muslims who want to embrace modernity yet define it using their own terms.

Most Muslims want to weed out cultural accretions accumulated over time and re-establish the essential pillars of Islam, in order to practice the true essence of the faith. It is not a simple case of modern vs. anti-modern; not strictly espousing Western values does not result in a fundamental clash. In this particular case, while we agree to female education – and associate the banning of it to culture rather than religion – we do not share the same long-term vision of liberation for women as a whole. For example, our version of female liberation necessitates education but also hijab, modest behavior and relationships within the confines of marriage. While this does not neatly line up with Western notions of female liberation, it is not a direct contradiction nor a cause for deep clashes or disputes.

However, the constant focus in the media either on extreme Muslims, or those Muslims fighting for causes only deemed progressive in the West, continuously embeds this false polarity. This was why when France banned the veil, the general non-Muslim public found it difficult to understand how a modern Muslim woman can choose to wear the veil; they could not reconcile between liberty and the veil. Similarly in the Egyptian elections, skepticism surrounded Mohammad Morsi and his ability to modernise Egypt due to his Islamic background and his choice in Prime Minister Hisham Kandil as he sports a “salafi beard!”

Therefore, while we condemn the Taliban for their brutal actions and pray for Malala’s recovery and her cause, we also pray for the countless civilians killed in the name of “progression” or “weeding out insurgents”. We also pray for the Muslim women in occupied lands for reports confirm that Afghan women’s condition have become worse after the GWOT. If only these stories received the same media attention, then maybe our cause will be humanized, and this bipolar view will collapse.




Keep supporting MuslimMatters for the sake of Allah

Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.

The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small. Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.

Hira Amin is a British muslimah of Pakistani descent. Despite originally being a mathematics graduate, after a few years inside the corporate world, she decided to change paths drastically to studying history. She completed her Masters in the History of International Relations and is currently undertaking her PhD at the University of Cambridge. Her focus areas are South Asian Muslims and their migration to the UK, Islam’s interaction with Western imperialism and modernity, feminism and 20th century international history.



  1. Dalia

    November 3, 2012 at 12:55 PM

    I agree completely with everything you said. The selective media coverage is something I’ve been suspicious about for a while now.

  2. AmericanConvertMuslimah

    November 3, 2012 at 1:29 PM

    While I agree that Muslim women are exploited by the worst of the West as “weak” figures who need saving, the worst of Muslim men are **not** doing them any favors by ‘defending’ them (and their own patriarchy) against the worst of the West. Who then is really acting in favor of Muslim women…?

    It is important to note that Malala had already been reaching out to the greater public, she had been doing what she could to change things for the better (not for the praise or support of the ‘West,’ as far as I can tell, but for herself, her own values, and her own country). Someone who is a public figure, especially an activist, *NATURALLY* gets more attention than a random citizen, that should not be surprising at all…

    My question is… when Muslims say something like: “Since female education is in line with what the West deems as “modern” and “liberal”, her cause is instantly worthy of attention and her life is more precious.” Are you disagreeing
    that women’s education is important? Are you saying that women’s education does not have a place in Islamic societies? Does it really matter who is saying it if it’s a truly universal value? If the ‘West’ is promoting it does that mean it’s bad? Are Muslims just ashamed of ‘Islamic’ countries where Islamic values are not practiced or protected, especially when they ARE in the ‘West’? Will Muslims really let their own pride get in the way of progress and Islamic values?!

    My question is… why **aren’t** more MUSLIMS placing more value on Malala’s life?! A young girl who is standing up for RIGHTS against tyranny. That kind of apathy, the victim mentality in the face of tyranny, the tendency towards simple-minded conspiracy theories are what the Muslim community should be ashamed of–and work harder to fix inshaAllah.

    • Azmath

      November 3, 2012 at 2:13 PM

      @AmericanConvertMuslimah you are a victim of the american media. What you need to understand is that the west is involved in terrible human rights violations in the muslim world for their interests (none of which is covered in the media, and the very mention of which sounds like a conspiracy theory). From controlling the muslim masses with puppet governments to blatant support for zionism, the west has successfully managed to piss off a lot of people in the muslim world. Do you really think all the flag burning was because of a stupid video? No. It was pent up anger against decade old american policies. The video simply triggered an action. You need to look into afghanistan’s history(not from bbc, cnn and fox) and see how the Taliban united a nation that was reeling into anarchy from continued civil conflicts and the notorious drug mafia. Look at facts. The western media carefully crafts its stories. Take syria for instance, everyone in the media was like anti-Assad when the US was looking forward for a regime change. Now, when the US realized that any democracy in the middle east would be anti american, it backed off and the media is now neutral on the issue despite the fact that many videos exposing Assad’s brutality have surfaced on youtube. I am not saying the Taliban are perfect followers of Islam, i am NOT. Allah knows the truth. The west is making a big deal out of what I would say Taliban’s collateral damage in implementing their law (which I don’t know is islamic). People in the muslim world will continue to sympathize for them unless the international community stops buying western version of events and seeks to bring to end the tyranny of US backed zionism and many others.

    • Hira Amin

      November 4, 2012 at 5:10 AM


      Jazak Allah Khair for your comment.

      Yes, Malala was an activist which is one of the reasons her story hit the headlines. However, the lack of coverage on the hundreds of other civilians killed including children shows the imbalance of the media. Malala’s case should be heard and should hit the headlines, but so should at least some of these other cases to give a balanced depiction of life in those countries. We heard about the Muslim women, before the GWOT, yet we don’t hear about how them after.

      About female education, I clearly stated that female education is not only important but is in line with our Islamic values and we support Malala’s cause. That is the point – there is no major clash with Islam and the West in terms of values. When only these stories hit the media, it creates a false image that Islam does have fundamental clashes.


    • U

      November 4, 2012 at 5:42 AM

      Asalamualaykum wrwb,

      This was a nice article. Just to clarify, the main subject wasn’t a discussion of women’s education in Islam, rather it was a dissection of why certain things are reported, expounded on, and given extensive media coverage, while other comparable things are not discussed at all.

      Two hundred birds die in a white house, and another one bird dies in a red house. Imagine if CNN, BBC, ABC, and all the major political parties are pounding down the door of the red house for interviews and press rights. Naturally, an innocent observer will raise their eyebrows, and a more discerning observer will ask why.

      I am afraid that you are very innocent if you suppose that the reason the red bird got all this media coverage because she was an ‘activist’. How often is the Occupy movement on regular news channels? Do you know about police brutality against citizens in our very own U.S. of A.? Or the Wal-Mart employee activists who are suffering unbelievable work conditions? They recently got some incremental but on the whole pitiful improvements. Or the abuses against illegal immigrants… etc. etc. etc.

      To put it plainly, the reason that the media is showering loving attention on Malala is because the U.S. and it’s allies have been waging a devastating war in the region since 2011, with hundreds of thousands of Afghan casualties (those would be our brothers and sisters in faith), similar numbers in prisons where they are continually subject to torture (Guantanamo was only the beginning), and the problem is that now their own population is waking up – over 2,000 US troops alone have died, many thousands more are coming home with PTSD and shooting up their wife and kids, or just committing suicide, and in order to boost morale and remind the world why they are the “good guys”, they would like to point out that yes, we do massacre indiscriminately all over the globe (literally… read about it), and imprison, torture (remember waterboarding), etc… but The Bad Guys don’t let women go to school!

      Which is why there is hardly a peep about the many, many casualties of civilian drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen. All those white birds.

      • Hira Amin

        November 4, 2012 at 6:12 AM

        Subhanallah yes exactly! I did not stress the point on female education being important in Islam as honestly I thought that was understood. Alhamdolilah you summarised the argument well – it was about why Malala’s case is receiving that much attention as compared to the rest. Malala’s case is important, but so are the others.

        • Absar

          November 9, 2012 at 12:55 PM

          The biggest hypocrites in this whole issue I think is the Pakistani government and Pakistani media. The western media and politicians of course are just playing their usual role.

          They talk about Taliban being anti-woman and anti-education, but none of us bother to look at what the Pakistani government’s efforts (or lack thereof) have been towards improving education for Pakistanis and Pakistani women in particular.

          Till a few years ago no more that 1% of the annual budget was spent on education!!! And only the deviant people in the government know how much of that 1% went into lining their own dirty pockets. There are no Taliban in the Pakistani government mind you! No Taliban dictate to the Pakistani government how much to spend on education.

          Furthermore, most of the high level politicians in Pakistan (including Mr. President himself) are land-lords (called ‘vaderas’ in Urdu). Many of them hold huge plots of land in the interior areas of Pakistan where thousands of peasant families work on their fields in bonded labor. The politicians in order to hold on to their power over these peasants deny them any sort of education and treat them like animals… especially the women folk. Due to their ignorance, many such peasants look at their landlord as no less than God. It is because of this vadera system that over 70% of the Pakistani people cannot even read.

          Now, do you think western politicians and media don’t know this?? Do you think the Pakistani media is unaware of this fact?? Like I mentioned before, there are no Taliban shoving this landlord (vadera) system down the throats of Pakistanis and denying them the basic right to education.

          It is the government itself that is guilty of this crime. And the western media is just doing its job playing the public.

          • Hyde

            April 28, 2013 at 10:12 AM

            Finally somebody differentiated the Pakistani taliban and the afghan taliban. And the hypocrisy you mentioned is so disgusting and obvious. The Pak Fauj has been implicit in killing and resurrecting the taliban in afghanistan for more than a decade, but now when the chickens come to roost, they are crying wolf!

            Pakistan itself is an absurd notion…a secularized muslim country, wasn’t that Jinnah’s dream ? Well Mr. Jinnah it is a nightmare. The idea of partition itself was a nonsensical idea. 1947 is the year of infamy, not independence. And of course the biggest victims of this are the more than 95% citizens of the county who are for the most part are religious muslims.
            (Muslims have tried it all, secularism, communism, army rule, dictatorships, monarchies, socialism, democracy, republics, capitalism…all seem to falter sooner or later. No long term benefits. I wonder why ?)

    • Carlos

      November 4, 2012 at 10:04 AM

      Well said, AmericanConvertMuslimah.

    • KB

      April 6, 2016 at 2:28 AM

      *slow clap* I completely agree. I’m sixteen and was very impressed by Malala’s story when I first heard about it. A teenage Pakistani Muslim women’s right activist in the news headlines??? This is phenomenal!That’s what I thought. And yet, to me it feels as though the Western Muslim community has taken a very cool stance when it comes to Malala. Instead of acknowledging her limitations as a representative for Muslim women- the heavy influence of celebratory media, for example, and all the contradictions that entails, as this article pointed out- and then MOVING ON and seeing what a gem she is, supporting her and speaking in her favor, what do we do? Nothing. Just cast suspicious glances, mumble about her “half-hijab” and how she’s “just a tool” for the US government.

      Even if she is, it doesn’t matter. The image we as Muslims are giving to the rest of the world is that even when there’s someone who ostensibly is championing for our rights and is on our side, we can’t give them the courtesy of thanking them for their efforts. However much of a positive impact those efforts have in the end.

  3. Pingback: Minaret of Freedom Weblog » News and Analysis (11/3/12)

  4. lisa a

    November 3, 2012 at 6:52 PM

    I have the utmost respect for Malala.. And change is good!!

  5. Pingback: Malala Yousafzai and the Media Frenzy- Exploring Selective Muslim ... | Malala Yousafzai |

  6. Aku

    November 4, 2012 at 2:40 AM

    God!!! We people living in this modern but immodest age do a lot of debating………. And y not ?? Bcoz this is all we can do………. We write articles, go for opinion polls , involve ourselves in unending discussions, also in various events, causes and campaigns which consume so much time and money that is enough to eradicate hunger, ignorance and all the problems of the world………. but Knock knock!! Do we even have any idea or understanding about the concepts and phenomenons we lecture and debate about?? ………. No, my dear friends, we dont………. We are all simpletons and serve the Modern state in any nation we are………. Where every citizen born , living or a baby in the mothers womb is a direct or indirect servant of the modern state, the modern state which has become so powerful that every household and every living human on this earth breathes under its heavy and powerful tentacles……….
    Now, Islamophobia has become a timepass snack for most of the people of this world………. And we involve ourselves in unnecessarily .
    If we take a closer look at the immediate history of the world, we may ask some serious questions?? ………. like
    Who created Al -qaeda and Taliban, and for what purpose?
    Was fighting the soviets in afghanistan Jihad which got the whole western support, and fighting for Nato is terrorism now??
    Does the Us have Enough proof that 9/11 was the work of Al – Qaeda or any other organization? If yes, then was it necessary to go for such long scale wars, when a good diplomatic effort may have solved the problem??
    Why did NATO intervene in libya and not in Syria??
    Why does the world turn a blind eye on Palestine, Kashmir, the rohingya muslims, the muslims of caucaisus, about the massacre of muslims in Gujarat and Assam in India ??
    Do we even know about Islam, when we start debating on it??
    Why did the west make Isreal a nuclear power, and it ravaged Iraq, when no Nuclear weapons were found in Iraq??
    What is the problem of Kurds. who supports their nationalistic aspirations?
    Why was the world silent when Moa zi tung buthered muslims in xinjiang?
    And yes who are the Taliban ?? Do we even know anything about them or are we the victims of propaganda?
    What is the MEDIA? Is it really free or the concubine of the Modern state??
    These are things we need to enquire about, and then sit back and analyze things rather than going about recklessly for results

  7. sabirah

    November 4, 2012 at 5:06 AM

    I’m getting confused, who’s using Malala Yousufzai in the media for their cause, is it the western society, liberal muslims, or the conspiracy muslims? this article hasn’t helped clarifying it and I feel it’s totally missed the mark. And by the life of me, I cannot understand how the author can draw a connection between asking for the right of education and what she calls “total liberation of women” in a western sense. Man, that is just the same weird thinking that connects internet trolls to the rest of the ummah in the eyes of islamophobes. Not one of MM’s best articles.

    • U

      November 4, 2012 at 5:45 AM

      Honestly, I think this was one of MM’s best articles. And reading the replies to it makes me wish that there were a whole lot more like it.

    • Hira Amin

      November 4, 2012 at 6:07 AM


      Jazak Allah Khair for your viewpoint. In politics and media everyone has their own opinion and hardly anyone agrees :)

      Just to clarify, the connection between the right to education and the liberation of women as a whole is merely a natural one, which is seen throughout the history of all female emancipation movements. Equal voting rights and education was the first step and then naturally from there employment and active independent social roles followed suit. It is the natural progression of all female movements. Once women are educated, they enter into the workforce and as a result want more of a say in society as a whole. But the first step to this path is education. We are happy that Afghan women are embarking on this struggle and we support them in this. My point was while we agree that women do deserve the right to education and all the other rights given to them in Islam, we do not share the exact end image of female liberation espoused by the West. Neither is our image in direct contradiction with the West or a cause for concern. For example, Western Muslim women get an education, work, and lead active productive lives. However, we choose to cover, pray and observe specific etiquettes with the opposite gender. This is our version of liberation – it is not in direct contradiction but we have a different understanding of freedom. The niqab ban in France, despite Muslim women claiming they are not oppressed, still went ahead due to this seemingly deep polarity between Islamic and Western values. In my opinion, one of the reasons for this polarity is because of the biased focus of the media on cases such as Malala.


      • sabirah

        November 5, 2012 at 6:08 PM

        jazakhillah khair for explaining it

      • Hyde

        April 27, 2013 at 10:15 PM

        Hands down the best and most informative article on the website. Jazakallah for the important reminder.

  8. Islamic universalism

    November 4, 2012 at 7:54 AM

    As long as born-Muslims don’t liberate themselves from patriotic biases, we can’t expect new brothers and sisters to look at geopolitical facts without patriotic insularity.

  9. Hassan

    November 4, 2012 at 9:26 AM

    We cannot defeat the enemy (taliban/taliban ideology) till we do not understand what it is. Misrepresenting them would not help us defeat them. They shot Malala not for women education, but according to them “her co-operation with enemy” (ie West/USA)

  10. Carlos

    November 4, 2012 at 10:00 AM

    The article raises many good and valid points. Thank you.

    Where the article and the photo message at the top fail is where they compare the intentional targeting of a child with collateral damage. They are not morally comparable. Also, the article ignores the fact that the Taliban and other insurgents have also caused collateral damage, and have targeted children before.

    In answer to a question raised in the article, I am assuming part of the reason Malala was flown out of the country for treatment was because the Taliban, despicably, promised to come after her again if she survived.

    • U

      November 6, 2012 at 1:32 AM

      The ‘collateral damage’ as you so delicately put it, is around 70% of those killed, and other reports say that the high-level terrorists for which the drones are employed are less than 2% killed (which would make the ‘collateral damage’… that’s right… 98%) and apart from the deaths, the residents of the villages over which the drones patrol day and night suffer from severe PTSD having had family members killed in front of them and hearing the constant buzzing in the skies knowing that they could be next for no reason at any time.

      Yes… collateral damage.

      All praise is to Allah, who will bring justice for every single wrongdoing (including mine) on the Day of Judgment.

      • U

        November 6, 2012 at 1:40 AM

        And up until now the total dead in Pakistan alone, according to reports which are believed to be very underestimated, (independent groups have followed up the investigations of ten or so drone strikes and found them to be so blatantly overlooking deaths that it would amount to lying, if we took the liberty of being so forthright) something like 2,000 people. I personally believe it is much, much more than that.

        And we haven’t started talking about the ‘collateral damage’ all over Yemen. Indeed, I think all these things are morally comparable.

  11. Ahsan Arshad

    November 4, 2012 at 10:22 AM

    Salaam alaykum,
    A well balanced article on this issue – Being a pakistani, I can state that most people I talked to about this issue see through the “preceptions given by media” except a few. However I must say that the imbalance in the media is supposed to be there…

  12. Kish

    November 4, 2012 at 2:41 PM

    Hey I think if someone who is a celebrity and gets killed in drone attach would have got the same media attention and outrage among the World..

    I think she was not the normal civilian but a Pakistan’s first peace award winner…… can’t compare her with normal child..That way there are thousands of people die everyday they can’t get even media news..but celebrities do..

    • Amad

      November 5, 2012 at 7:42 AM

      By no account, did she fall in the category of celebrities. So, that’s a false premise, leading to an equally false conclusion.

  13. Siraaj

    November 4, 2012 at 4:17 PM

    Read the article and comments, great discussion and points raised.

    A picture can be worth a thousand words, and the meme above does a good job summarizing the problem – why are drone strikes that kill hundreds of civilians justified, children among them?

    The answer is fairly straightforward – when your guy is in the White House, you ignore or gloss over his flaws because either way, you’ve got a child killer in the white house, but at least he’s in the same political party as you are.

    There are only a few Glenn Greenwald’s asking the question, and I wish there were western-educated muslim leaders speaking out more forcefully on the issue, speaking directly at and calling out Barack Obama.

    We have more opportunity and comfort than the rebels of Egypt and Tunisia, yet we also collectively appear to have more fear of speaking out as well.


    • U

      November 5, 2012 at 1:35 AM

      I think there is a LOT of unused potential for Muslim leaders to talk about politics just based on liberal and independent non-Muslim resources. It makes me sad to see non-Muslims swallowing everything they see as they see it on TV, but it is amazing and heartbreaking to see Muslims do the same.

      Noam Chomsky, Peter van Buren, Tom Englehart… all excellent and worth reading to keep up with news.

  14. Zecchetti

    November 4, 2012 at 7:00 PM

    Please stop multiplying false information by labelling the bandits as Taliban. You must be more specific and call then Pakistani Taliban or Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which is a group that is vastly different to the Afghan Taliban who used to rule Afghanistan. They are idealogically and organisationally distinct, and to confuse the two is injustice. I doubt very much that the Afghan Taliban would have shot Malala – so please don’t confuse the two with the wanton use of the term “Taliban”.


  15. Amad

    November 5, 2012 at 12:20 AM

    Solid article.

    The poor, innocent girl has become a victim twice. First, she was the victim of of the wretched, shameless, (pakistani) taliban, and then she became a victim of the propagandists (both Western and “enlightened” Pakistanis) who have used and abused her situation to actually defend the murderous drone attacks and continued dominance of corrupt governments in Pakistan.

    While Malala survived alhamdulilah (may Allah grant her complete recovery as she is a bright hope for the country), many other Malalas die every few days in the remote-controlled attacks guided by god Obama, who as NYTimes described recently, carries a kill-list.

    The double-standards in outrage are not just limited to Malala. We see how Burma is being hailed as the new great hope, yet it brutalizes its citizens. On the other hand, when Morsi was taking over Egypt, the treatment of Copts was the only topic that we would hear about!

  16. Pingback: The Da’awa Never Stops…. — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  17. Hamid

    November 5, 2012 at 6:04 PM

    This is all so trite and predictable. It makes me want to get on my burak and fly away to the peace and quiet of the Arabian desert.

  18. Humaira Khan

    November 14, 2012 at 12:33 PM

    Thank you for your article. All this needed to be said.

  19. Aasiya

    November 16, 2012 at 3:58 AM

    First of all, how are we so sure that Taliban attacked her? Is it because the media says so ?

    • KB

      April 6, 2016 at 2:31 AM

      The media will hide facts and stretch the truth but not OUTRIGHT LIE. Look at the left side of her face. It’s droopy because of damage caused to the nerves. It’s not hard to believe the Taliban did that.

  20. sincer repenter

    November 16, 2012 at 3:00 PM

    A very balanced view on this burning topic

  21. Brother

    November 20, 2012 at 9:27 PM

    I’d like to point out something important here. US forces do not intentionally target civilians especially children even though they have killed many. Pakistani Taliban intentionally target civilians and in Malala’s case children. Remember that it is the intention which makes the world of the difference here.

  22. U

    November 23, 2012 at 5:03 AM

    Yes, they do. They fire indiscriminately at civilians. They don’t care. They have killed children, pregnant women, and babies. Have you not read any Wikileaks articles or watched the footage released? Haven’t you read or watched the confessions of all the Iraqi veterans about what they did and were ordered to do? Check out Iraq Veterans Against the War. Watch John Pilger. SubhanAllah, there is an unbelievable amount of testimony and footage.

  23. Greg Abdul

    November 26, 2012 at 12:42 AM

    in a war, innocent people get killed and common sense says there is a huge difference between “collateral damage” and deliberately walking up to a little girl point blank and trying to assassinate her just because she wants to go to school. I know the West and America do things wrong, but our analogies here are very twisted and as Muslims we know better. In modern warfare you explode bombs and sometimes civilians get killed. Drones are the most sanitary way of conducting modern warfare. They shoot bombs from a device that has a camera and that allows for a minimum of civilian casualties. The Obama goal is an Islamic goal. In Afghanistan there is a legitimate Muslim government. Those who fight that government are in an illegal rebellion (Kharajites). As Muslims who follow the Sharia, we stand with Mr. Karzi. We don’t stand with rebels who kill little girls because they prefer their culture to Islam. Islam is not about bashing and super-critiquing everything non-Muslims do. Islam is about partnerships and the main reason Westerners don’t understand Islam is because too many of us irrationally attack Western governments even when they are engaged in obvious good. Remember, if not for 9/11, the US would still be totally ignoring Afghanistan and even its oppression of women. They tracked the killers to that country and it is normal that they do all they can to see that the situation does not come up again. If we Muslims want the Westerners and the drones out, then we must reject the Taliban’s understanding of Islam and get them to stop their bad cultural ways. If a US solider shoots a girl in face for not going to school, then you will have a point, but now you are only criticizing them because they are not Muslim. In Islam we give credit when it is due, even to non Muslims and we should speak against Munkar, even if it is a Muslim doing it. Be prejudiced for Allah and what is right instead of being prejudiced for people.

    • Aly Balagamwala | DiscoMaulvi

      November 29, 2012 at 1:27 AM

      The Obama goal is an Islamic goal. In Afghanistan there is a legitimate Muslim government. Those who fight that government are in an illegal rebellion (Kharajites).

      Just a point of debate: When you say the current Afghanistan government is “a legitimate Muslim government” the question arises how that government came into being. Wasn’t there a Taliban government before the Americans invaded and installed this “legitimate Muslim government”?

      *Above comment made is in a personal capacity and not as a member of the MM Comments Team*

  24. Dr. Aisha

    December 25, 2012 at 7:20 PM

    you nailed it! a million likesfor your blog sista :-D that’s exactly what i think!

  25. Pingback: Featured articles The Making (and Breaking) of Malala Yousafzai 28 December 2012 By Beenish Ahmed A diarist, an icon, a victim – and above all, still a child. Share alt flickr / UN Women Before she became a world-renowned advocate for girls’ education

  26. Pingback: The Making (and Breaking) of Malala Yousafzai | Forum Against War on People (Punjab)

  27. Muhammad Mushtaq

    May 17, 2014 at 3:12 AM

    Worth reading blog…… Thanks for passion…

  28. miraatu

    October 14, 2014 at 7:47 AM

    I found an interview that shatters the whole “Taliban against girls’ education” facade. A woman who grew up in Swat is interviewed, who was there when Malala was shot, and said that she had studied in Swat with no issues and girls were in fact not being prevented from going to school in the first place, and that she believes the episode was manufactured in order to prevent the implementation of Shariah in Swat. Now that she’s won the Nobel Prize, at exactly the time when U.S. entry to Syria needs more support (under the pretext of fighting the ISIS, the “Islamic Caliphate”), and everyone is hyped up about Malala again, I think it’s imperative we share this:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *