The Suffering of Gaza

It's still not too late 🇵🇸... Imagine how much of your precious energy goes into ignoring, silencing, or even condoning these same horrors, that our hearts naturally want to cry out and scream against.

Be kind to yourself and to others. Feel the pain of the Palestinians 🇵🇸, they are no different than you or I. Like us they want to live free, want dignity and want to love and look after their families, in their own homes and on the same land their ancestors are buried within. Free yourself from the prison imposed by systems, society, and propaganda and Free Palestine 🇵🇸!

Selective Critism

To Christians who criticize the marriage of Prophet Muhammad and Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her

Some Christians criticize the marriage of Prophet Muhammad to Aisha and call it “child marriage.”

But before making that accusation, they should ask themselves:

Are they judging history fairly, or are they applying modern standards only against Islam?

Sahih al-Bukhari records that Prophet Muhammad contracted marriage with Aisha when she was six and began living with her when she was nine. Muslims do not hide this narration.

However, the important point is this:

Seventh-century Arabia cannot be judged only by twenty-first-century standards.

At that time, marriage was not measured by the modern legal age of “18.” It was judged according to physical maturity, guardian approval, social custom, and the ability to enter married life.

Now let us apply the same standard to Christian history.

Traditional Catholic canon law long recognized 12 for females and 14 for males as the minimum age for marriage.

Christian history also contains many examples:

• Saint Augustine wrote in Confessions that when he was around 30, he was engaged to a girl who was two years below the legal Roman age for marriage. Since the Roman legal age for females was 12, she was about 10.

• King Richard II of England married Isabella of Valois when he was 29. She was about 6.

• Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII, married at 12 and gave birth to Henry VII at 13.

• Margaret of Austria was betrothed at 3 to the French dauphin Charles, later Charles VIII, and sent to the French court.

• Anne de Mowbray married Richard of Shrewsbury at 5.

• Princess Mary, later Princess of Orange, married William II when she was 9.

• Catherine of Aragon married Prince Arthur at 15 and later married Henry VIII.

• Margaret Tudor married King James IV of Scotland when she was 13 and he was 29.

• Judith of Flanders married King Æthelwulf of Wessex when she was about 12.

• Eleanor of England married King Alfonso VIII of Castile when she was about 9.

Of course, some of these were political marriages, and in some cases married life began later.

But that is exactly the point.

Marriage in the past was based on standards different from those of modern society. This was not unique to Islam. It was also found in the Christian world.

So if a Christian condemns only the marriage of Prophet Muhammad by using modern standards, while ignoring Christian canon law and the history of Christian royal marriages, that is not objective historical judgment.

It is a double standard.

Muslims are not saying, “Let us practice underage marriage today.”

Muslims today must obey the laws of the countries in which they live, and marriage must take place within the legal and social order of each society.

Our point is simple:

When judging historical figures, we must consider the law, society, culture, and customs of their own time.

If seventh-century Arabia is judged by modern standards, then the same standard must also be applied to Christian history, canon law, and the many royal marriages of the Christian world.

Otherwise, this is not a sincere search for truth.

It is selective criticism used only to attack Islam.

The Synod Report

📍#UK|| UK Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis and several pro-israel groups opposed a planned discussion by the Church of England’s General Synod on a report by Kairos Palestine titled “A Moment of Truth: Faith in a Time of Genocide.”

The report, written by Palestinian Christian groups, describes the situation in Gaza as involving genocide, ethnic cleansing, and forced displacement, and calls on churches worldwide to engage with Palestinian Christian experiences. 

The Church of England’s motion does not seek to endorse the report but to study and discuss its contents.

Has anyone ever even heard of this General Synod report?

Yellow or red card?

FIFA this is disappointing! What is the point of introducing a signal to report racial abuse, if it’s ignored?

During the Argentina vs Egypt match, Argentina fans repeatedly showed the Israeli flags to the Egyptian players and fans. Egypt’s coach made FIFA’s official anti-racism “X” gesture to alert the referee to alleged racist abuse. Under FIFA’s own protocol, that signal is meant to trigger action: a temporary stoppage, followed by suspension, and ultimately abandonment of the match if the abuse continues. Instead, he was shown a yellow card for dissent. The very system designed to protect players and staff from racism failed once again. Anti-racism campaigns cannot simply be slogans printed on banners or hashtags shared during tournaments. They only have meaning when officials have the courage to enforce the rules, regardless of who is playing, who is in the stands, or what political sensitivities may exist. If victims believe reporting abuse will result in punishment for them rather than those responsible, they will stop reporting it altogether. Football has the power to unite millions across every race, religion and nationality. But that unity is undermined when governing bodies appear reluctant to act on their own commitments. FIFA cannot expect people to trust its anti-racism policies if they are not applied when they matter most.

Erdogan'a Surgery

 

Misbah Haroon Khan  3rd+

C.E.O at WISE MAN CONSULTANT PRIVATE LIMITED

5h

BREAKING NEWS: JERUSALEM – July 8, 2026

A dramatic revelation has emerged from Israeli media, with a former hospital spokesman claiming that Israel's Mossad intelligence agency secretly dispatched a physician to Turkey years ago to save President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's life. Avi Shushan, former spokesman for Tel Aviv's Ichilov Hospital, made the remarks during a broadcast on Channel 14. He stated that approximately seven years ago, Erdogan became critically ill with cancer. According to Shushan, the Mossad requested, and then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approved, the deployment of a senior Israeli doctor to provide emergency treatment . An Ichilov doctor, I won't reveal his name saved Erdogan. A doctor from Israel. Israel saved him," Shushan declared . He characterized the physician as acting on behalf of the State of Israel. The former spokesman highlighted the irony of the situation, noting Erdogan's current hostile rhetoric toward Israel. "This man, who today threatens the Jews, is alive and breathing thanks to a Jew, thanks to an Israeli, thanks to Benjamin Netanyahu, and thanks to former Mossad Chief David Barnea," said Shushan. Shushan's account echoes previous reports from 2022 indicating that Erdogan had received medical consultation from an Israeli cardiologist, Professor Itzhak Shapira, then deputy director of Ichilov Hospital . However, those earlier reports did not describe a covert Mossad mission.

Company of the Pious

 Guard Your Heart, Gain the Hereafter

"The person who lives in the world safeguarding himself from the love of the world has benefited himself and others."
— Hazrat Hasan al-Basri (رحمه الله)
This beautiful reminder teaches us that Islam does not ask us to abandon the world—it teaches us not to let the world take over our hearts.
When our love for Allah is greater than our love for wealth , status , or temporary pleasures, we become a source of goodness for ourselves and everyone around us. True success is not measured by what we own, but by how close we are to Allah and how much benefit we bring to His creation.
May Allah purify our hearts from excessive attachment to this
temporary world and make the Hereafter our greatest concern. 

Āmīn.