Відео

I love how they switch between languages with such ease and fluency!

Switching dialects or words is typical Malay characteristics even in Malaysia. Malay has,in thousands of years, been accommodating to others. We speaks pure Malay in our local dialect and then when a chinese joined the conversation we automatically switched to standard Malay or perhaps malay of chinese dialects. Since there are so many races here our Malay language has become a mixture of so many words from Malays, Mandarin, Tamil and English. We can speak like four languages in one sentence. Manglish/Singlish is like Afrikaan. It is our heritage. Even the Brits come here starting to appreciate Manglish and practise it. But if really want to learn Malay language come here and stay for six month and anybody will be fluent. Bismillah.

What a great talk. I also want to know what can be done to SA individuals who buy property or have bought property in the Occupied territories, considering that these settlements are considered illegal. Can the individuals be charged, and can banks and Companies that facilitate these sales be charged?

Excellent work!

Well explaining it in English is a colonialist language.English and Afrikaans are colonialist language.

Ek is baie opgewonde oor die werk wat Meneer doen 🙏 ek hoop om diè Afrikaans, taal in sy eie reg, so sigbaar as Boeretaal te beleef.

MaShaaAllah well said Alhamdulillah

*promosm*

Your sincere efforts deserve this success. Hearty Congrats...!🎉

MashaAllah! this is so much very well good advice for us youth. Please keep this action Jazakallahu khairan.

Aslm, lovely interview ladies, MashaAllah. Very informative and engaging. I learnt alot listening to your guests. The interviewer did an amazing job getting the best of what the two interviewees had to share. I know Shafiqah, personally, wish you ladies increase in your businesses and abilities ameen ya Rabbal aalameen 😊😊😊

How is Afrikaans going to benefit the Muslims of Cape Town in politics and economics! We should focus on inculcating the sunnah ( the lifestyle of our beloved prophet Mohamed …saw) instead of focusing on some “cape Malay “ tradition. Focus on the sunnah and improve the english of the Cape Town Muslims. We must progress and adapt to religious and global politico-economic requirements; not retrogress to tribal traditions which will not benefit the children at all.

How is Afrikaans going to benefit Cape Town Muslim in South Africa and abroad! Many of us are encouraging our children to emigrate to countries which are safer and where they may get better opportunities than in South Africa! It’s like apartheid has never been eradicated!

Awesome.

A good heart always gives love.....and so much good and greatness is born from love.....may we all be inspired to bring love to all creation, Ameen

Wow! Wow! Thanks for your good work done .....love conquers all may Allah continue to bless you

Can you believe it some christians call the new testament "Bible" WTF.

very obviously man made.there have been many thousands of gods proposed by humans over time in hundreds of different languages and in hundreds of different countries.there is not and never has been the slightest evidence that any of them are real.why on earth would anyone accept as fact the anonymous stories told by fearful uneducated superstitious misogynistic bronze age desert tribesmen in the most backward part of the middle east?

It's all plagerised.

❤️🇿🇦 1.2kms away 😭

20:00 Its annoying to keep hearing the same "quran endorses the bible" its a way for them to attempt to trick people. However anyone familiar with Quran will know how absurd the claim is and how they twist the verses. For example just take a look at surah bayyinah verse 1 it talks about christians going hell for rejecting the message of islam. #reflect

*Where* can I buy the book?

Muslim Apologist Jonathan Brown: wrote in "Misquoting Muhammed" "Britain and, to a lesser extent, most of northwest Europe differed from the pre-modern pattern of early marriage. Marriage age tended to be later, in the mid-twenties. In England, available data suggest that this was the case as far back as the fourteenth century." and `"Law was an imperial export. The mission to rescue ‘native’ women from their backward cultures was a prominent theme in British portrayals of the empire’s colonial activities. In the late 1800s and early 1900s Britain moved to bring marriage customs in India into line with her imperial values, and a series of laws introduced age restrictions for Hindu and Muslim girls marrying." The above used fragments are quoted on the wiki of the islam subreddit about child-marriage/consent. Jonathan Brown confirms the European Marriage Pattern as marrying in the mid twentiese since the 1400s and is completely contradicted by Adnan who claims: 31:56 !people before 1900 for them a 10 years old bride was normal a seven years old bride was normal" 39:02 "it was normal for them they could imagine a 10 years old bride they could imagine a nine and eight years old bride they could you cannot if you went to a wedding today as you've all testified right if you ready if you went to a wedding today but if you are alive in the nineteenth century no problem" Adnan is blatantly misrepresenting history. Omitting Reputable historians. John Hajnal , Peter Laslett Omitting known government statistics about marriages and marriage ages.

jazakAllah kheyr:)

Salaam Dr Hendricks you have made a great contribution. You were an activist in Udw Islamic society, MSA.. But you have come a long way. You are a good role model for young women. Alhumdulillah

If Adnan is a historian, is he not bound by integrity statements to present regular historical sources? The integrity of these dubious sources just seems deplorable. Where are governmental statistics? Where are recognised historians that are quoted in most encyclopedias?

Adnan talks about Zulus and Malaawi where he claims young boys and girls supposedly help their fathers and mothers out in the fields and he then claims that this supposedly accelerates their readiness for pregnancy/delivery. His claims are unscientific. The younger the mother, the greater the risk. Childbearing in adolescents aged 12-15 years in low resource countries: a neglected issue. New estimates from demographic and household surveys in 42 countries obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01467.x ""It is frequently cited that girls who give birth aged 15-19 are more than twice as likely to die as those in their 20s (1, 2). However, this fails to capture the fact that risk increases with decreasing age. ......girls aged 15 or under had an odds ratio for maternal death four times higher than women aged 20-24. " It is not just mortality, it's fistulas. Science says it is a problem. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3877393/ "In sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, obstetric fistula is very common, as access to and use of emergency obstetric care is limited ...... Several factors have been linked to the high occurrence of obstetric fistula in sub-Saharan Africa, including the preponderance of early marriage and teenage pregnancy, which in turn mean that the girls do not have pelvises which have sufficiently developed to allow reproduction [10]. This is further compounded by the poor nutritional status of most of the girls who live in these highly deprived settings [11,12]." Aid-workers confirm death and fistulas are the problem: www.livescience.com/19584-10-year-birth.html "The greatest danger, however, is to the pelvic floor. Girls may start ovulating and menstruating as early as age 9, though the average is around 12 to 13. (Some studies suggest that the average age of first menstruation is dropping, but the data is not conclusive.) Just because a girl can get pregnant, though, doesn't mean she can safely deliver a baby. The pelvis does not fully widen until the late teens, meaning that young girls may not be able to push the baby through the birth canal. The results are horrific, said Wall and Thomas, who have both worked in Africa treating women in the aftermath of such labors. Girls may labor for days; many die. Their babies often don't survive labor either. The women and girls who do survive often develop fistulas, which are holes between the vaginal wall and the rectum or bladder. When the baby's head pushes down and gets stuck, it can cut portions of the mother's soft tissue between its skull and her pelvic bones. As a result, the tissue dies, and a hole forms. Feces and urine then leak through the hole and out of the vagina. Women with fistulas are often divorced and shunned. And young girls are at higher risk." His propaganda for early marriage is misplaced. Based on unscientific claims that put little girls at serious risk of harm.

Adnan ignores historians when he starts using Blackstone from the 1860s to claim that the NORM for behavior was ridiculously low. Laws tend to reflect extremes and political compromises, not average behaviour or define what is 'normal'. What was normal behaviour and is it easily available? archive.org/details/annualreportofre171854grea/page/n15/mode/2up Annual report of the Registrar-General of births, deaths and marriages in England. General Register Office. Government publishing marriage-statistics in 1856. "Marriages of minors.-9210 men and 28,797 women, or 38,007 men and women, married under 21 years of age ; so that the proportion of minors in 100 men who married was 5.77, in 100 women 18.03; " 18% of marriages were with women who were considered 'minors' under the age of 21. They had to get parental permission. 82% of marriages involved women who were considered adults at 21 or over. The norm was to wait until one was at least 21 before settling and starting a family. It is a blatant lie that onset of puberty was used as a marker. Science says 25-30 is the age of least risk to mother and child for a first pregnancy. www.pnas.org/content/113/19/5227 "With the onset of puberty, the female developmental trajectory diverges substantially from the childhood trajectory, whereas the male trajectory essentially continues its earlier course (Table S2). As a result, the female pelvis attains its obstetrically most favorable morphology around the age of 25-30 y, i.e., at the age of highest fertility" This has been known by obstetricians and midwives for a long time. archive.org/details/familyphysiciang00hamm/page/592/mode/2up The family physician and guide to health ... Including a treatise on midwifery and the diseases peculiar to women by Hammack, Elijah B Publication date 1869 Topics Medicine, Popular Publisher St. Louis, Southwestern book and publishing co. "It is worthy of remark that marriage at too early an age is not conducive to health or longevity, but, on the contrary, the mortality among young married persons, I mean of married persons under the age of twenty, particularly women, is very great. I do not think that women ought to marry under twenty-two" In the 1860s maybe some lawyers had laws about exceptional events, but midwives recommended to wait until one was at least early twenties. Midwives do not mention onset of puberty because that is bloody dangerous for girls.

Adnan ignores known demographics from historians. Strange because Adnan claims to be a historian and historical figures and statistics have been researched. www.nber.org/papers/h0080 "Long Term Marriage Patterns in the United States from Colonial Times tothe Present", Michael R. Haines, has Mean Age at First Marriage for Women all the way back to 1730. Oh. I see, Adnan neglects to mention regular historians because they disprove the nonsense Adnan is telling. People, on average, married as adults, i.e. when they had passed 21. Younger marriages did occur, but were rare. The NORM was not to marry at the onset of puberty. The NORM was to marry much, much later. As an ADULT.

At around 49:43 Adnan argues that Shakespeares Juliet was 13 and insinuates that this represents accepted and common age at the time (16th/17th century). Adnan omits that English students of history hear about the Cambridge group, John Hajnal, Peter Lazlitt etc, who already disproved this information in 1965. archive.org/details/TheWorldWeHaveLost/page/n97/mode/2up Laslett, Peter. The World We Have Lost (1965). "..... marriage to Romeo, a Montague, would have been wrong at any age. She says to her daughter [Well, think of marriage now; younger than you, Here in Verona, ladies of esteem, Are made already mothers. By my count I was your mother much upon these years That you are now a maid.] So she had been married at twelve, or early thirteen, and all those other ladies of Verona also. Miranda was married in her fifteenth year in the Tempest. It all seems clear and consistent enough. The women in Shakespeare's plays, and so presumably the Englishwomen of Shakespeare's day, might marry in their early teens, or even before that, and very often did. Yet this is not true. We have examined every record we can find to test it and they all declare that, in Elizabethan and Jacobean England, marriage was rare at these early ages and not as common in the late teens as it is now. At twelve marriage as we understand it was virtually unknown. Some of the evidence for these blank statements will have to be presented here and we shall have to discuss the possible ......" How reliable is Peter Laslett as a source? Look at the following page. archive.org/details/TheWorldWeHaveLost/page/n99/mode/2up Laslett, Peter The World We Have Lost (1965) most common marriage age in the records was 22 with an average of 24. "We have examined a thousand licences containing the ages of the applicants, issued by the diocese of Canterbury between 1619 and 1660 to people marrying for the first time. One woman gave her age as 13, four as 15, twelve as 16: all the rest were 17 and over, and 966 of the women got married for the first time after the age of 19, that is nearly 85 per cent. The commonest age of first marriage for women in this sample was 22, and the median age -- the age below which as many got married as got married above it - was about 22.75: the average, mean age was about 24. Bridegrooms were something like three years older than brides, though some of the unions recorded show an extraordinary discrepancy in age. Only ten men married below the age of 20, two of them at 18, and the most common age was 24; the median age was something like 25.5 and the mean age over 27.75" archive.org/details/TheWorldWeHaveLost/page/n101/mode/2up “First of all there is the possibility that Shakespeare was deliberately writing a play about love and marriage amongst boys and girls. Scholars have discovered that he actually reduced Juliet's age; in the poem containing the plot for the play, Arthur Broke's Romeus and Juliet, published in 1562, Juliet was sixteen. Four years later another author who told the story, William Painter in his collection of novels The Palace of Pleasure, made Juliet eighteen years old. When Shakespeare came to adapt it thirty years afterwards he may possibly have had to reduce the heroine's age to suit the boy actor who was to play her part” Peter’s speculation is nice. For our use it is only crucial that the association between ages of the characters in the play and the impression that they were modelled on young ladies of noble families does not wash and is known to be false. Their ages were changed repeatedly: who cares for what purpose. As Peter looks at examples of real child-marriages from other sources than his records: “None of the married children mentioned lived together until late in their teens, and it is hinted that some were not fit to do so even then. Child-marriages of this kind may well have been commoner in the sixteenth century than in the seventeenth. But whatever their nature and purpose they cannot be called representative of the marriages of the great majority” "None of the married children mentioned lived together until late in their teens, and it is hinted that some were not fit to do so even then. Child-marriages of this kind may well have been commoner in the sixteenth century than in the seventeenth. But whatever their nature and purpose they cannot be called representative of the marriages of the great majority who had no land, no houses and no property worth " "The delusion about marriageable age is, perhaps, the most conspicuous of all the errors we seem to want to make about everyday life in the old world, but is not the only one"

Ignoring historians is not the way to go. Falsifying history is not the way to go. www.reddit.com/user/RepliesAndAnswers/comments/ijbx68/age_of_aishah_historical_analysis_adnan_rashid/ Misrepresentations, fabricated history and lies.

The process between an arrest by police and ultimate conviction if guilty is fraught with pitfalls in between if corruption occurs anywhere in the legal chain. Missing files are but one example of this scourge

It's window Dressing someone must take the fall Ramaphosa is a liar and thief whilst he was Vice President he kept quiet whilst they robbed and raped every department 🏬

The Systems have been designed to enhance corruption

It is undoubtedly an obstacle to social justice ⚖

Jazakallah

Jajakallah

What an interesting and informative programme and for hosting such astute thinktanks to allow us to have a deeper view.Hats off to the Academia library team.

amazing video

As Muslims we are duty bound to stand up again

Very good talk. Enjoyed it. Could identify the topics touched. Alhmdllh

Very interesting and allows people to see a different perspective.

Thank you for the positive view on Covid-19 and the blessings we have been granted with it .

Assalaamualaikum. Jazaakallah Khayran Sheikh for a month of beautiful reflection. I have gained so much from it. Alhamdulillah. May Allah SWT bless you and reward you abundantly. Also protect yourself and your loved ones. Eid Mubarak to you and your family.

Shukran for sharing. What an excellent talk & what a great speaker.