Sallams Everyone,
In the last entry for 2009, I would like to recap everything that has gone on this year--at least, the stuff I have talked about and paid attention to. Although we can say "we hope 2010 to be a better year," these hopes are often times false optimism. I do not think things are going to be getting better for Muslims any time soon, but only time can tell.
We start with the very first entry on this blog which was a paper I wrote in 2007 concerning a documentary Fox had done that year. This posting was in March, and it was the birth of "Stop!...Look At It From THIS Perspective." Can you believe it? It's already been ten months! I'll be fair and not round it up. This means the one-year mark will be in March 2010, conveniently the month we all have Spring Break at university. I started this blog mainly to vent about things, in a fun way. However, I quickly realized that this sort of task will be everything but good, happy-go-lucky news.
For instance, we soon had the Free Speech Summit 2009 in April. This was probably the biggest event this year, prompting a seven-page response which was cleverly ignored by the rich corrupt government that is supposed to be serving us. Did anyone hear Obama say "The people have spoken" in his victory speech? I certainly was not speaking when I saw how fake this man turned out to be. At any rate, the paper was posted here in June. Nothing was written between March and June; things were strangely quiet, perhaps because the environment was getting ready for the big storm.
Nonetheless, the Free Speech Summit battle raged on in July, with a co-sponsor of the hate campaign deleting my comment to the paper which I posted on her blog. Now that I think back on it, I'm amazed at how much momentum this whole ordeal gained.
Shortly after, I managed to get a hold of the entire Free Speech Summit video, and I wrote a post concerning it. To this day, I am utterly disgusted with how the so-called "officials" acted in the video. They were like little kids playing "House" on a cold night. I shake my head at the thought that these people are the ones who run my country.
August started off on a good footing, with the first post for that month talking about an in-depth discussion I had with a friend. We talked about the common problem with people and how they apply religious philosophy. In addition, I mentioned an article CNN ran concerning women in hijab. This was the first time in a long while I had heard something positive about Islam from the mainstream media, and it made me happy. Thank you again ladies for representing us so well.
Unfortunately, the smiles did not last long. A day or two before Ramadan, Obama decided to release a Ramadan greeting to "fellow Muslims." Keep in mind, this was after he completely ignored my letter (how can you not see that, it was seven pages!) I have dismissed the argument that he probably never even got it. I want to point out that it is now a long time after, and I still have no response from him. Despite the fact that he is vacationing in Hawaii.
That same day, another shocking piece of news falls into my hands, and thus we begin the saga of Fathima Rifqa Bary. In this first post, Gov. Charlie Crist decides to intervene in the Ohio runaway's case, stating that Florida should keep her here and support his administration's position.
The next month continues the Saga, first with a video taken by pastors of Global Revolution Church coming to light. I started by updating readers on Fathima's case, and then talking about the video. Apparently, this girl has turned in to a Muslim hater, and thinks "halal" means "it is good for them to kill me."
Shortly thereafter, a local news station released a report by Florida Department of Law Enforcement--the investigation into Bary was complete! Prompted by the story the news station ran about the report and an amazing comment on my last entry, I decided to throw in my two cents on the matter. I also discovered that CAIR had stepped up as well, dismissing "honor killings" as mere tribal actions. I would like to add here that since then, Fathima has been sent home to Ohio and is currently staying with a foster family. In addition, the pastor who transported her across state lines, Blake Lorenz, may be charged with criminal activity for transporting a minor and not reporting her whereabouts to FDLE. See how the case has turned on him! At any rate, the Ohio runaway saga is pretty much over. I'm so glad she's out of Florida.
We kick off the next month with an earthquake hitting Iran, and no one blinking an eye. The only agency who ran the story was BBC. However, it's not the earthquake that made November a significant month.
In November, a soldier named Nidal Hasan decides to shoot up Fort Hood, one of the largest military bases in the US. What struck me about this incident is when General George Casey firmly stated that Nidal's actions do not represent the way of the Muslim populus. Yes! It was good news at last! I was absolutely amazed that the General said this; I wasn't expecting a comment like this at all from the military. Thank you again, General.
Once again though, the joyous occasion doesn't last long. In December we're back to the negativity again, this time with Robert Spencer stating his view on honor killings, which, naturally, turned in to a hate statement against Muslims. This isn't surprising though given his track record and his all-famous Jihad Watch site. Nonetheless, I was let down by the fact that Spencer got interviewed by a mainstream media outlet. It was extremely disturbing to see this happen, especially since the article stated that Spencer has "trained FBI authorities on Islam." I can't imagine what he told them about us. No wonder the Patriot Act was enacted!
Also in December, we get another military killing incident--except this time, it's not by a Muslim! This post focused on the next to no media coverage the story got, and I firmly believe the reason no one paid attention to it is because the man who executed this murder didn't have a name like Sheik Abdullah Hasan Noorullah Hakim.
Finally, we close off this year by the first ever historically-based post on this blog: "Who Are The Shia?" This post was just two days before the day of Ashoorah, and I talked about the role the Suni sect had in the corruption we see today in Islam. The post gives an overview of Ashoorah, with background on the time of Islam's birth and the situation after the death of Prophet Muhammad.
With that, we come to the end of the first ten months (though full calendar year) of this blog. Will things change for us in 2010? From what it looks like right now, most likely not. The war in Afghanistan is escalating to a frightening level, and I seriously doubt this president knows what he is doing. Muslims are still being killed worldwide, and the election of Obama hasn't changed a thing; we're still fighting two wars. In fact, I recall a general stating that "the Taliban will kill us, and we will kill them," and that besides that, he doesn't think anything will change. I do not remember which general it was (I'm positive it wasn't Mccrystal,) but I agree with this statement. At least in Iraq the military had sane, educated Iraqis to work with. The general stated that they're dealing with a vastly illiterate, uneducated, and loosely connected country with a weak central government. Basically what he is trying to say is, the US (and now NATO as well) are picking up feathers from the ground on a windy day.
A lot of you may argue "so what should we do, just leave them?" My answer: yes! I'm telling you, if we had the military force here in this country, guarding neighborhoods, providing female business workers with escorts when they leave the building at night, patroling the area to make sure we don't have home invasions, we'd live in a much safer America. But no...they're stopping crime there while our home country rots away, crime escalates, women get raped and beaten, and innocent store owners have to shoot people because some robber broke into their store. Of course--we don't care about that. We're more concerned with stopping the once-a-year terrorist threat than we are with protecting the public from common harm.
While you think about that, what can I say? We're starting a new year but it seems like it will be the most ineffective year yet to come.
There is always hope though (as long as it is not unrealistic hope,) and that is all we have at the moment, so keep hoping inshallah, and one day things will be different.
I would like to thank CAIR for really stepping up this year and fighting back against anti-Islamists, with your statement concerning Adam Hasner where you implored the government to remove him, and later speaking out against Rifqa Bary. Please continue doing what you are already doing.
Next, to everyone who signed the letter in March through June! You took the first step in making sure we have a better world to live in. Now it's time for you to take it to the next step. Be a representative of Islam in every action you do. Never forget what you are representing. The spotlight is on you, so stand up tall and accept it. Run with it. Dive for it. You can make a difference; even someone saying "I never knew Islam was like this" is a difference--in fact, a larger one than changing a government's position, because you set right one person, and that person is genuinely changed, versus the government that half the time releases written apologies that don't mean anything, with their robotic stamping machines and overused scripts.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar Bijani
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Friday, December 25, 2009
Karbala: Injustice Costs Blood; Who Are The Shia?
When many people say "X has been oppressed or Y has been oppressed," they often times forget the cost of being Muslim. Since the beginning of monotheism--from the Prophet Abraham (may peace and blessings be on him) to the death of Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) people who "identify" with a religion of monotheism have been crushed, ridiculed, insulted and tormented. Still, there is one tragedy that no Muslim can ever forget, and that is the tragedy of Karbala, where the blood of the leader of Islam was spilled to save the minority--Shiatul Ali; where the blood of the leader of Islam was spilled to save the very essence of humanity. It is a known fact that Muslims were not the only ones who fought on Yomul Ashoorah; rather, there was a Christian named John and several Hindus who fought alongside Imam Hussein.
They all had a common goal: to stop the oppressive nature of the Abu Bakr-started regime, and this battle ended with 72 martyrs, including Imam Hussein; the leader of the movement. Who was Abu Bakr, you may ask.
During the time of Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) there was no such thing as Shia, Suni, Ismaeli, etc. Islam ([the philosophy of] submission) was just that--Islam. A famous narration by the Prophet says "I have come to reform your manners." This was Islam until the death of the Prophet. Indeed, when a reformer comes to a land, the "reformed" tend to revert back to their old ways after he leaves. Refer to this paper for a discussion on this topic. This is exactly what happened to Islam. Those of you who asked me "who are the Suni," because of the repeated references I made to them in the rebuttal, I will answer you now.
Before the Prophet died, he had made his son in law, Ali, his successor. The first person to accept this decision and acknowledge it was Abu Bakr. Ironically, this was the first man to turn against the Prophet after he died.
After the death of the Prophet, Abu Bakr mentioned that Prophet had not left a successor. Two miles away from the Masjid of Kufa, Abu Bakr gathered his close friends and held elections. Naturally, he was elected to be the successor of Islam. Bare in mind that this position was supposed to be held by Ali, not Abu Bakr.
Meanwhile, back in Kufa, Ali was overseeing the burial of the Prophet (yes, the Prophet hadn't even been buried yet!)
During the reign of Abu Bakr, several things were happening to the religion of Islam. Most notably was the corruption that ensued. Several narrations tell us that Abu Bakr enjoyed drinking to a great extent. We know that Alcohol is forbidden in Islam. Further, Abu Bakr himself has stated on many occasions that "had it not been for Ali, my reign would not have lasted." Whether he liked it or not, Abu Bakr had to accept Ali, in the end, as his adviser. (Ali was eventually given the leadership of Islam, but only after three rulers: Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.) After Ali came Muawiya who started the Umayyad dynasty. Until then, tensions between Suni and Shia escalated. This was because, while Ali was to have the leadership from the beginning, the Suni took it and then proceeded to corrupt Islam. Thus, we can view the Shia as the reformists.
During the reign of Muawiya, Imam Hussein, the third descendant of the Prophet, was told to bow to Yazid--the commander of the army of Muawiya. He was told to either bow or die. Hussein chose death, and that is why, today, we commemorate Ashoorah on the tenth day of Muharram every year. Instead of giving in to the corruption, Imam Hussein stood his ground and said "no" to corruption and tyranny. This is the very reason why people from several different faiths fought alongside him. This is why Suni-Shia conflicts are still ongoing.
A common Suni argument is, "we follow the Prophet, the Shia follow someone else besides the Prophet, which is against Islam's teachings." Not only is this claim logically false, it is also factually false. Remember that Prophet had declared Ali as his successor (at Ghadeer-E-Qum.) Thus, to not accept Ali as the leader of Islam after the Prophet's death is going against the very wishes of the Prophet. Further, to follow someone does not mean to worship them. We follow Ali because the Prophet said " if I am your master, Ali is your master." In another narration he says "I am from Ali, and Ali is from me."
Next, bare in mind that the Suni follow someone who instigated (and later carried out) the killing of the grandson of the Prophet. What better way to say "I love Islam" than to kill the Prophet's grandson?
On Ashoorah, we commemorate the brutal killings of the 72 martyrs in Karbala, Iraq. That night--after all the men had been killed--the ladies of Islam who were in the tents were dragged from the tents, their hijab torn and the tents burned. This, my dear reader, was done by the leader of the Suni sect of Islam! The suni attack us by saying "crying and wailing is against Islam." Show me a narration that supports it. They also say "grieving is against Islam." My dear reader, Prophet Jacob, the father of Prophet Youssef (may peace and blessings be on both of them) cried until he went blind when his son was supposedly killed by a pack of wolves--and the Suni sect is saying the Prophet's actions were forbidden. This statement defies the very logic of the infallibility of the prophethood in Islam.
Today, we find that the suicide bombs are all Suni. We find that Saddam Hussein continued oppressing Shia until his death. We find that women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia because of the way the Suni sect continues to degrade its women. Ashoorah represents the day our Imam (leader) took a bold stand against the Umayyad government to save his Shia people from falling into the hands of corruption. His blood was spilled; his head was cut and speared. Narrations tell us the government rode on horseback carrying the Imam's head on a stick (they did this to the grandson of the Prophet!)
During the day of Ashoorah, the troops of Hussein were cut off from the water supply; Muawiya's army had surrounded the river of Karbala. Hussein's son, Ali Asgar, who was still an infant at the time was dehydrated. Hussein took him to the opposition and begged them to give him water at least, stating "maybe you hate me, but this child has done nothing wrong to you." You know what they gave the infant? An arrow that went in to his right ear and came out of the left. This, my dear reader, is the same exact leader the Suni sect follows. In fact, you will see a lot of them celebrating on Yomul Ashoorah.
Today, history books have misinterpreted history, saying that the Suni sect believes in elections and the Shia sect believes in blood royalty. If Abu Bakr--the elected representative of Islam confessed that his reign was saved because of Ali's advice, who seems more qualified and knowledgeable to you, the Suni Abu Bakr, or the Shia Imam Ali (may peace and blessings be upon him?) When I used to teach at the local Islamic school, one of my students told me she had some Suni friends who were smoking weed. When she confronted them, they claimed that Abu Bakr smoked weed so it was fine for them to do it because he was the leader of Islam. Can you see how corrupt their mentallity is? Today, when you go to Suni gatherings you will notice a lot of their women shedding their hijab; they call it "modernization" of Islam. Suni people have completely thrown their religion away; they have fabricated it to such a great extent that today all Muslims are suffering because of the fabricated narrations to debase the Prophet in order to raise the status of Abu Bakr. Refer to this paper for a discussion on this topic. I asked an instructor a couple years ago why Suni people fabricated the narrations of the Prophet; it brought no favor to Islam. He answered me with logic and said "think about it. Set aside all the Shia Suni stuff. Why would you debase someone like that? Because they stole the leadership position, and needed a way to debase the Prophet--put him below them." This answer made so much sense to me, and I see that debasement today. They blinded their followers.
There is a narration concerning the event of Ashoorah where the fourth descendant of the Prophet (who took over after Imam Hussein was martyred) was shackled to a carriage and lead through the city of Kufa. An old man approached him and started insulting him (the propaganda had begun against the family of the Prophet.) The fourth Imam, Zainul Abi-Deen, stopped him and said "have you read the verse in the Quran that states that a man who gives charity during prostration in prayer will be your [Prophet Muhammad's] successor?" The man said "yes." The imam replied "we are from his family!" The man broke down and cried "I have been lied to!" The man the Quran talks about was Ali. A narration states that he was in prayer while a woman came into the Mosque to ask for assistance. The Imam stuck out his ring finger to signal for her to take the ring he was wearing; she did. He did this while in prostration and this is the very man against whom injustice was done by your fellow Suni suicide bombers!
[ Sallutations Of the Day Of Ashoorah]
You can read more about Abu Bakr at a Web site which is dedicated to him and his reign: www.abubakr.org.
Munawar
They all had a common goal: to stop the oppressive nature of the Abu Bakr-started regime, and this battle ended with 72 martyrs, including Imam Hussein; the leader of the movement. Who was Abu Bakr, you may ask.
During the time of Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) there was no such thing as Shia, Suni, Ismaeli, etc. Islam ([the philosophy of] submission) was just that--Islam. A famous narration by the Prophet says "I have come to reform your manners." This was Islam until the death of the Prophet. Indeed, when a reformer comes to a land, the "reformed" tend to revert back to their old ways after he leaves. Refer to this paper for a discussion on this topic. This is exactly what happened to Islam. Those of you who asked me "who are the Suni," because of the repeated references I made to them in the rebuttal, I will answer you now.
Before the Prophet died, he had made his son in law, Ali, his successor. The first person to accept this decision and acknowledge it was Abu Bakr. Ironically, this was the first man to turn against the Prophet after he died.
After the death of the Prophet, Abu Bakr mentioned that Prophet had not left a successor. Two miles away from the Masjid of Kufa, Abu Bakr gathered his close friends and held elections. Naturally, he was elected to be the successor of Islam. Bare in mind that this position was supposed to be held by Ali, not Abu Bakr.
Meanwhile, back in Kufa, Ali was overseeing the burial of the Prophet (yes, the Prophet hadn't even been buried yet!)
During the reign of Abu Bakr, several things were happening to the religion of Islam. Most notably was the corruption that ensued. Several narrations tell us that Abu Bakr enjoyed drinking to a great extent. We know that Alcohol is forbidden in Islam. Further, Abu Bakr himself has stated on many occasions that "had it not been for Ali, my reign would not have lasted." Whether he liked it or not, Abu Bakr had to accept Ali, in the end, as his adviser. (Ali was eventually given the leadership of Islam, but only after three rulers: Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman.) After Ali came Muawiya who started the Umayyad dynasty. Until then, tensions between Suni and Shia escalated. This was because, while Ali was to have the leadership from the beginning, the Suni took it and then proceeded to corrupt Islam. Thus, we can view the Shia as the reformists.
During the reign of Muawiya, Imam Hussein, the third descendant of the Prophet, was told to bow to Yazid--the commander of the army of Muawiya. He was told to either bow or die. Hussein chose death, and that is why, today, we commemorate Ashoorah on the tenth day of Muharram every year. Instead of giving in to the corruption, Imam Hussein stood his ground and said "no" to corruption and tyranny. This is the very reason why people from several different faiths fought alongside him. This is why Suni-Shia conflicts are still ongoing.
A common Suni argument is, "we follow the Prophet, the Shia follow someone else besides the Prophet, which is against Islam's teachings." Not only is this claim logically false, it is also factually false. Remember that Prophet had declared Ali as his successor (at Ghadeer-E-Qum.) Thus, to not accept Ali as the leader of Islam after the Prophet's death is going against the very wishes of the Prophet. Further, to follow someone does not mean to worship them. We follow Ali because the Prophet said " if I am your master, Ali is your master." In another narration he says "I am from Ali, and Ali is from me."
Next, bare in mind that the Suni follow someone who instigated (and later carried out) the killing of the grandson of the Prophet. What better way to say "I love Islam" than to kill the Prophet's grandson?
On Ashoorah, we commemorate the brutal killings of the 72 martyrs in Karbala, Iraq. That night--after all the men had been killed--the ladies of Islam who were in the tents were dragged from the tents, their hijab torn and the tents burned. This, my dear reader, was done by the leader of the Suni sect of Islam! The suni attack us by saying "crying and wailing is against Islam." Show me a narration that supports it. They also say "grieving is against Islam." My dear reader, Prophet Jacob, the father of Prophet Youssef (may peace and blessings be on both of them) cried until he went blind when his son was supposedly killed by a pack of wolves--and the Suni sect is saying the Prophet's actions were forbidden. This statement defies the very logic of the infallibility of the prophethood in Islam.
Today, we find that the suicide bombs are all Suni. We find that Saddam Hussein continued oppressing Shia until his death. We find that women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia because of the way the Suni sect continues to degrade its women. Ashoorah represents the day our Imam (leader) took a bold stand against the Umayyad government to save his Shia people from falling into the hands of corruption. His blood was spilled; his head was cut and speared. Narrations tell us the government rode on horseback carrying the Imam's head on a stick (they did this to the grandson of the Prophet!)
During the day of Ashoorah, the troops of Hussein were cut off from the water supply; Muawiya's army had surrounded the river of Karbala. Hussein's son, Ali Asgar, who was still an infant at the time was dehydrated. Hussein took him to the opposition and begged them to give him water at least, stating "maybe you hate me, but this child has done nothing wrong to you." You know what they gave the infant? An arrow that went in to his right ear and came out of the left. This, my dear reader, is the same exact leader the Suni sect follows. In fact, you will see a lot of them celebrating on Yomul Ashoorah.
Today, history books have misinterpreted history, saying that the Suni sect believes in elections and the Shia sect believes in blood royalty. If Abu Bakr--the elected representative of Islam confessed that his reign was saved because of Ali's advice, who seems more qualified and knowledgeable to you, the Suni Abu Bakr, or the Shia Imam Ali (may peace and blessings be upon him?) When I used to teach at the local Islamic school, one of my students told me she had some Suni friends who were smoking weed. When she confronted them, they claimed that Abu Bakr smoked weed so it was fine for them to do it because he was the leader of Islam. Can you see how corrupt their mentallity is? Today, when you go to Suni gatherings you will notice a lot of their women shedding their hijab; they call it "modernization" of Islam. Suni people have completely thrown their religion away; they have fabricated it to such a great extent that today all Muslims are suffering because of the fabricated narrations to debase the Prophet in order to raise the status of Abu Bakr. Refer to this paper for a discussion on this topic. I asked an instructor a couple years ago why Suni people fabricated the narrations of the Prophet; it brought no favor to Islam. He answered me with logic and said "think about it. Set aside all the Shia Suni stuff. Why would you debase someone like that? Because they stole the leadership position, and needed a way to debase the Prophet--put him below them." This answer made so much sense to me, and I see that debasement today. They blinded their followers.
There is a narration concerning the event of Ashoorah where the fourth descendant of the Prophet (who took over after Imam Hussein was martyred) was shackled to a carriage and lead through the city of Kufa. An old man approached him and started insulting him (the propaganda had begun against the family of the Prophet.) The fourth Imam, Zainul Abi-Deen, stopped him and said "have you read the verse in the Quran that states that a man who gives charity during prostration in prayer will be your [Prophet Muhammad's] successor?" The man said "yes." The imam replied "we are from his family!" The man broke down and cried "I have been lied to!" The man the Quran talks about was Ali. A narration states that he was in prayer while a woman came into the Mosque to ask for assistance. The Imam stuck out his ring finger to signal for her to take the ring he was wearing; she did. He did this while in prostration and this is the very man against whom injustice was done by your fellow Suni suicide bombers!
Peace be on you, O Abu 'Abdillah
Peace be on you, O son of the Messenger of Allah
Peace be upon you, O the chosen one and the son of the chosen one
Peace be on you, O son of the Commander of the Faithful and the son of the chief of the successors.
Peace be on you, O son of Fatima, the leading lady of the worlds
Peace be on you, O fearless warrior of Allah, the one who was killed, but to whom blood revenge is still denied
Peace be on you, and on the souls who died with you.
I send peace of Allah on all of you forever, so long as I remain alive, and the night and day remains.
O Abu Abdillah,
Great is the loss,
And unbearable and great is your tragedy for us, and for all the Muslims,
And unbearable and great is your tragedy in the heavens, and for all the dwellers of the heavens.
May Allah curse the people, who laid down the basis of oppression and wrongs against you, people of the House
May Allah curse those who removed you from your position, and removed you from the rank in which Allah had placed you.
May Allah curse the people who killed you,
And those who facilitated for them the means for your killing
I turn to Allah and to you, away from them,
And from their adherents, their followers, and their friends
O Abu 'Abdillah,
I am at peace with those who make peace with you,
And I am at war with those who make war with you, till the Day of Judgement.
May Allah curse, the family of Ziyad, and the family of Marwan,
And May Allah curse Bani Umayya entirely,
And May Allah curse Ibn Marjanah
And May Allah curse 'Umar ibne Sa'ad,
And may Allah curse Shimr
And May Allah curse the people who, carried out, saw, and tried to conceal, your killing
My father and mother be sacrificed for you, great is my sorrow for you.
I pray to Allah who has honoured your status, and honoured me through you,
To grant me an opportunity to seek your revenge with a victorious Imam, from the family of Muhammad, blessings of Allah be on him and his family.
O Allah, make me of a worthy status in your eyes, through Hussein, peace be on him, in this world and the Hereafter.
O Abu 'Abdillah,
I seek nearness to Allah,
and to His Messenger,
and to the Commander of the Faithful,
and to Fatima,
and to Hassan,
and to you, through the love and dedication to you,
and through disassociating with those who killed you, and prepared to fight you
and disassociating with those who established the foundations of tyranny, and wrongs against you (O Ahlul Bayt).
I turn to Allah, and His Messenger, away from those who laid grounds for it,
and those who built the house of injustice upon it,
and carried out oppression and cruelty, against you and your followers.
I turn to Allah, and to you, away from them,
and seek nearness to Allah, and then to you through love for you and your friends,
and by disassociating with your enemies, and those who went to war with you,
and by disassociating with their adherents and those who follow them.
I am at peace with those who made peace with you,
and I am at war with those who went to war with you.
I befriend those who befriended you,
and I am the enemy with those who were your enemies.
I pray to Allah, who has honoured me with awareness of you, and my awareness of your friends
and has enabled me to disassociate from your enemies.
(I pray) that He may place me with you in this world and the Hereafter.
And (I Pray) that He may strengthen for me a truthful stance in this world and the Hereafter.
And I pray that He may enable me to reach, your honoured station with Allah
And that He may grant me the opportunity to seek victory, along with a rightly guided Imam from amongst you, who will manifest and speak the, truth.
I ask Allah by your station, and by the honoured position you have with Him,
That He grants me for the grief at your sorrows, more than the personal grief that troubles anyone in tragedy.
What great sorrows (you experienced)! How great was your tragedy, for Islam and in all the Heavens and the earth!
O Allah, make me, at this moment, one who receives from You, blessings, mercy, and forgiveness.
O Allah make me live the life of Muhammad and his family,
and make me die the death of Muhammad and his family.
O Allah, this is a day when Bani Umayya rejoiced, and so too the son of the she who eats the liver of man.
the condemned son of the condemned as said by You, and Your Prophet blessings of Allah be on him and his family,
at every location and occasion in which Your Prophet stood.
O Allah, curse Abu Sufyan, and Muawiya, and Yazid son of Muawiya an everlasting curse
And this is a day when the family of Ziyad was happy, and the family of Marwan because of their murder of Hussein, (blessings of Allah be on him).
O Allah, so increase the curse on them from You, and the painful punishment.
O Allah, I seek nearness to You on this day, and in this position, and for the rest of my life,
through disassociating from them (the enemies) and cursing them,
and though the love of Your Prophet, and his family, peace be on them.
O Allah, curse the first tyrant who oppressed the right of Muhammad and his family,
and the last one who followed him on that.
O Allah, curse the group who fought al-Hussein,
and the group which followed and supported, and joined hands to kill him.
O Allah curse them all.
Peace be on You O Abu Abdillah and on the souls that died with you.
Greetings of Peace of Allah be on you, from me, forever so long as I live and so long as the night and day remain.
May Allah not make this my last pledge of your visitation (ziyarat)
Peace be on Hussein,
and on Ali the son of Hussein,
on the sons of Hussein,
and the companions of Hussein.
O Allah, curse particularly the first tyrant
and begin with him first,
then the second, the third, and the fourth.
O Allah, curse the fifth one, Yazid,
and 'Ubaydullah bin Ziyad,
and Ibne Marjanah,
and 'Umar ibne Sa'ad,
and Shimr,
and the family of Abu Sufyan,
the family of Ziyad,
and the family of Marwan, till the Day of Judgement.
O Allah, for You is Praise, Praise of those who thank You during tragedy.
Praise be to Allah for my intense grief.
O Allah, grant me the intercession of al-Hussein, on the Day of appearance (before You),
and strengthen for me a truthful stand by You, with Hussein and the companions of Hussein,
who sacrificed everything, for Hussein, peace be on him.
[ Sallutations Of the Day Of Ashoorah]
You can read more about Abu Bakr at a Web site which is dedicated to him and his reign: www.abubakr.org.
Munawar
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Non-Muslims Do It Too! Oh Wait... We Couldn't Care Less
Sallams Readers,
I came across this story in Florida Today about a week ago, but just now got time to write about it. A man is accused of killing his two military buddies. You can read the article here. My question: where is the terrorist label? Where is Robert Spencer? Most importantly, where is the wide publicity? Let us consider the headline of this story from a different perspective.
First, change the title from "Soldier charged in Fort Drum murders had dead man's car" to "Muslim Soldier charged in Fort Drum murders had dead man's car." Next, give the man an Arab name--Sheik Abdullah Hakim. What do you think would happen?
Firstly, the media would insert the word "Muslim" into the headline as I have done. Why? Simple: Arab = Muslim, and Muslim-1 = Arab. However, if someone without an Arab name kills his own soldiers, we won't call it "broad acceptance." In fact, we won't even talk about it after the day it happened. When other people do it, we attribute it to psychological disorders; however, when a Muslim does it, we attribute it to "radical Islam," "Jihadist ideology," and "radical Muslim clericks." There was no mention of the man's religion or motive here; it was plain and simple. He killed two soldiers, and that was the end. There was no second thought about it. Do you believe me now when I say Muslims are being hated for no reason just like the Jews just because they owned big businesses and people needed someone to hate?
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
I came across this story in Florida Today about a week ago, but just now got time to write about it. A man is accused of killing his two military buddies. You can read the article here. My question: where is the terrorist label? Where is Robert Spencer? Most importantly, where is the wide publicity? Let us consider the headline of this story from a different perspective.
First, change the title from "Soldier charged in Fort Drum murders had dead man's car" to "Muslim Soldier charged in Fort Drum murders had dead man's car." Next, give the man an Arab name--Sheik Abdullah Hakim. What do you think would happen?
Firstly, the media would insert the word "Muslim" into the headline as I have done. Why? Simple: Arab = Muslim, and Muslim-1 = Arab. However, if someone without an Arab name kills his own soldiers, we won't call it "broad acceptance." In fact, we won't even talk about it after the day it happened. When other people do it, we attribute it to psychological disorders; however, when a Muslim does it, we attribute it to "radical Islam," "Jihadist ideology," and "radical Muslim clericks." There was no mention of the man's religion or motive here; it was plain and simple. He killed two soldiers, and that was the end. There was no second thought about it. Do you believe me now when I say Muslims are being hated for no reason just like the Jews just because they owned big businesses and people needed someone to hate?
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Honor Killings: Robert Spencer Gets Another Chunk Of Meat
Sallams Readers,
A few days ago I found an article in USA Today concerning so-called honor killings. Here is the beginning of this particular article:
There is broad support? Wait, since when did Robert Spencer get media attention? I know he sponsored a memorial recently for another girl who was killed by a so-called honor killing; but right from the start, this reporter seems to be aiming at something: to give only one side of a story. We can see that from their writing below:
"Not all agree?" Let us qualify that statement. "Arabs don't agree."
As far as Muslim communities failing to deal with violent actions. Let me say it like this. If we were to capture those men and stone them for committing crimes against Islam, this same reporter would say "Muslims kill each other for committing violent acts--Muslims are savages!"
The reporter immediately switched away from Salam Al-Marayati, who was explaining that honor killings predate Islam. This action reminds me of the video "Terrorism In Its Own Words" aired on Fox back in 2007. In that video, the interviewer cut off an interviewee who was explaining that suicide bombing is a political action and has no basis in Islam.
I agree that honor killings are a real concern; I'm not arguing against that. Instead, I want to make the distinction between Arabs and Muslims clear, once again, just like I did in a rebuttal to Geert Wilders.
Common fact tells us that before monotheism came to Saudi Arabia, Arabs would bury their daughters alive. If you're going to throw that "Palestine is not Arab" argument at me like they did on this Discover Vancouver thread, stop slamming me with cheap shots.
Finally, Mr. Spencer, let me show you exactly what Islam says concerning justice and women: (I have bolded important words and phrases. Sorry screen reader users, I'll find a way to textually denote this next time.)
Ironically enough, this comes from a chapter called "The Women."
Notice, firstly, the text uses the word "mutual." Here, the Quran doesn't specify "mens' rights" or "womens' rights." Next, the Quran commands Muslims to be "dutiful to your lord." In other words, don't commit injustice. Mind you, I'm taking this directly from the Quran, and you can read it for yourself.
The girl killed in the story I referenced was killed because she brought shame to her family because she had a boyfriend. Indeed, dating without a contract is illegal, hence she may have committed illegal sexual intercourse. Now, apply this verse to all that, and you can easily see that even in this circumstance, killing her is not permissible!
Why, may I ask you, oh Mr. Spencer, is honor killing confined to women only? Clearly, if these so-called Muslims based it from the Quran, they would have killed both men and women who brought shame to their families; not just the women.
Despite the fact that CAIR released a statement some time ago saying exactly what Salam Al-Marayati said: it's a tribal thing, reporters still persist that honor killings are islamic, when in fact they're not. This becomes obvious when we look at the article as a whole:
See? It was a shame issue, not an Islamic issue. I know several parents who are upset over who their daughters are married to--the only difference between us and the Arabs and Middle Easterns is, they kill their daughters for these acts; we don't. Why is it when Japanese school students commit suicide, we're okay with it? "It's amazing how tied they are to family values." Then when an Arab does it, "Muslims are evil!" Do I support honor killings? No--no Muslim who actually studies the Quran will (I've proven that to you above.) I'm only asking you to look inward. Indeed, I'd love to hang this father over fire and watch him burn for committing such an act against his daughter; the same daughter God has commanded him to show mercy towards. Anyway, I don't see how such "shame" as the reporter puts it can lead a father to kill his daughter.
Again--a shame issue, not an Islamic issue.
Leaving all this aside, as I read further and further, I started wishing I'd never even opened the paper that day. Apparently, having boyfriends and girlfriends is "assimilating" with American culture. So you have to "get laid" to assimilate?
This is the exact problem we get when people are Muslim "just because" as I mentioned in an earlier post concerning religious robots. There is a narration from the Prophet Muhammad concerning this very question, where he says that you should raise your children in their time, not yours. A related narration talks about a father who came to Prophet and told him his son doesn't understand the father's native language, and all the lectures are in the father's native language. The Prophet said that because the father brought the son to this land, the father should learn the child's native language and not vice versa. All this shows us that people are allowed to "assimilate" as long as it is in the bounds of Islam. I guarantee you, if you really knew what was going through your so-called boyfriend's mind, you'd be horrified. Islam never said "don't date." All it says is "plan before entering a relationship"--hence the contract.
My honored readers! All these answers are in clear sight! If a woman wants a divorce, based on Islamic law she is entitled to one. I already referenced verses above that talk about sexual acts with a non-mahram (someone who is not in a lawful relationship with you.) Won't you people read your book? When are you going to pick up that thing collecting dust on your book shelf and open it and find answers yourselves instead of looking at your religiously robotic parents for empty, misleading, and culturally influenced answers? Don't you get it? Open your ears!
"Womens' liberation?" That statement made me laugh. This man is a Muslim, and yet he whole-heartedly believes his religion condemns women. Islam doesn't need womens' liberation; Arabs need it. If Islam needed it, Saudi Arabia wouldn't be the only country to ban women from driving. Concerning assimilation again: it seems as if Jasser is implying that American women should shed their hijab and "be free." I still do not see how a Muslim can call himself Muslim and truely believe that total assimilation is the answer to all the problems. I do not see how you define womens' liberation as making them remove their hijab. I seriously doubt Muslim women want to be as disrespected as "assimilated" Western women are--if that were the case, women would not be converting to Islam quicker than men, Jasser.
I seriously think this calls for the birth of a new organization. I've honestly had it with these petty arguments and accusations time and again. I'm so sick of opening the paper and finding an anti-Islam article in there at least once a week; and I'm absolutely annoyed that I'm seeing the godforsaken name Robert Spencer pop up in mainstream media now.
At any rate, this is the newest attack on Islam--once again, thanks to Arabs. You baby killers with your 72 virgin philosophies, drinking, and opium growing. You're messing up the world for the rest of us, and I wish Islam had never come to you idiotic backwards animals in the first place. Go fill your harems and stop spreading your corrupt ideology in our land!
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
A few days ago I found an article in USA Today concerning so-called honor killings. Here is the beginning of this particular article:
Muslim immigrant men have been accused of six "honor killings" in the United States in the past two years, prompting concerns that the Muslim community and police need to do more to stop such crimes.
"There is broad support and acceptance of this idea in Islam, and we're going to see it more and more in the United States," says Robert Spencer, who has trained FBI and military authorities on Islam and founded Jihad Watch, which monitors radical Islam.
There is broad support? Wait, since when did Robert Spencer get media attention? I know he sponsored a memorial recently for another girl who was killed by a so-called honor killing; but right from the start, this reporter seems to be aiming at something: to give only one side of a story. We can see that from their writing below:
Many Muslim leaders in the USA say that Islam does not promote honor killings and that the practice stems from sexism and tribal behavior that predates the religion.
"You're always going to get problems with chauvinism and suppressing vulnerable populations and gender discrimination," says Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim
Public Affairs Council.
Not all agree. Zuhdi Jasser says some Muslim communities have failed to spell out how Islam deals with issues that can lead to violence.
"Not all agree?" Let us qualify that statement. "Arabs don't agree."
As far as Muslim communities failing to deal with violent actions. Let me say it like this. If we were to capture those men and stone them for committing crimes against Islam, this same reporter would say "Muslims kill each other for committing violent acts--Muslims are savages!"
The reporter immediately switched away from Salam Al-Marayati, who was explaining that honor killings predate Islam. This action reminds me of the video "Terrorism In Its Own Words" aired on Fox back in 2007. In that video, the interviewer cut off an interviewee who was explaining that suicide bombing is a political action and has no basis in Islam.
I agree that honor killings are a real concern; I'm not arguing against that. Instead, I want to make the distinction between Arabs and Muslims clear, once again, just like I did in a rebuttal to Geert Wilders.
Common fact tells us that before monotheism came to Saudi Arabia, Arabs would bury their daughters alive. If you're going to throw that "Palestine is not Arab" argument at me like they did on this Discover Vancouver thread, stop slamming me with cheap shots.
Finally, Mr. Spencer, let me show you exactly what Islam says concerning justice and women: (I have bolded important words and phrases. Sorry screen reader users, I'll find a way to textually denote this next time.)
O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (Adam), and from him (Adam) He created his wife [Hawwa (Eve)], and from them both He created many men and women and fear Allâh through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and (do not cut the relations of) the wombs (kinship) . Surely, Allâh is Ever an AllWatcher over you.
Ironically enough, this comes from a chapter called "The Women."
Notice, firstly, the text uses the word "mutual." Here, the Quran doesn't specify "mens' rights" or "womens' rights." Next, the Quran commands Muslims to be "dutiful to your lord." In other words, don't commit injustice. Mind you, I'm taking this directly from the Quran, and you can read it for yourself.
(15)
And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allâh ordains for them some (other) way.
The girl killed in the story I referenced was killed because she brought shame to her family because she had a boyfriend. Indeed, dating without a contract is illegal, hence she may have committed illegal sexual intercourse. Now, apply this verse to all that, and you can easily see that even in this circumstance, killing her is not permissible!
(16)
And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both. And if they repent (promise Allâh that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allâh is Ever the One Who accepts repentance, (and He is) Most Merciful.
Why, may I ask you, oh Mr. Spencer, is honor killing confined to women only? Clearly, if these so-called Muslims based it from the Quran, they would have killed both men and women who brought shame to their families; not just the women.
Despite the fact that CAIR released a statement some time ago saying exactly what Salam Al-Marayati said: it's a tribal thing, reporters still persist that honor killings are islamic, when in fact they're not. This becomes obvious when we look at the article as a whole:
Prosecutors charged Almaleki's father, Faleh Almaleki, with murder, saying the Iraqi immigrant was upset that his daughter rejected a husband she married in Iraq and moved in with an American.
See? It was a shame issue, not an Islamic issue. I know several parents who are upset over who their daughters are married to--the only difference between us and the Arabs and Middle Easterns is, they kill their daughters for these acts; we don't. Why is it when Japanese school students commit suicide, we're okay with it? "It's amazing how tied they are to family values." Then when an Arab does it, "Muslims are evil!" Do I support honor killings? No--no Muslim who actually studies the Quran will (I've proven that to you above.) I'm only asking you to look inward. Indeed, I'd love to hang this father over fire and watch him burn for committing such an act against his daughter; the same daughter God has commanded him to show mercy towards. Anyway, I don't see how such "shame" as the reporter puts it can lead a father to kill his daughter.
"By his own admission, this was an intentional act, and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family," says Maricopa County prosecutor Stephanie Low, according to The Arizona Republic.
Again--a shame issue, not an Islamic issue.
Leaving all this aside, as I read further and further, I started wishing I'd never even opened the paper that day. Apparently, having boyfriends and girlfriends is "assimilating" with American culture. So you have to "get laid" to assimilate?
"How should young adult women be treated who want to assimilate more than their parents want them to assimilate?" asks Jasser, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, which advocates a separation of mosque and state.
This is the exact problem we get when people are Muslim "just because" as I mentioned in an earlier post concerning religious robots. There is a narration from the Prophet Muhammad concerning this very question, where he says that you should raise your children in their time, not yours. A related narration talks about a father who came to Prophet and told him his son doesn't understand the father's native language, and all the lectures are in the father's native language. The Prophet said that because the father brought the son to this land, the father should learn the child's native language and not vice versa. All this shows us that people are allowed to "assimilate" as long as it is in the bounds of Islam. I guarantee you, if you really knew what was going through your so-called boyfriend's mind, you'd be horrified. Islam never said "don't date." All it says is "plan before entering a relationship"--hence the contract.
"How does an imam treat a woman who comes in and says she wants a divorce ... or how to deal with your daughter that got pregnant, and she's in high school?"
...
"The religion has failed to address this as a problem and failed to seriously work to abolish it as un-Islamic."
Jasser says his community needs to address how to treat young women who want to assimilate.
"Until we have women's liberation ... we're going to see these things increase."
My honored readers! All these answers are in clear sight! If a woman wants a divorce, based on Islamic law she is entitled to one. I already referenced verses above that talk about sexual acts with a non-mahram (someone who is not in a lawful relationship with you.) Won't you people read your book? When are you going to pick up that thing collecting dust on your book shelf and open it and find answers yourselves instead of looking at your religiously robotic parents for empty, misleading, and culturally influenced answers? Don't you get it? Open your ears!
"Womens' liberation?" That statement made me laugh. This man is a Muslim, and yet he whole-heartedly believes his religion condemns women. Islam doesn't need womens' liberation; Arabs need it. If Islam needed it, Saudi Arabia wouldn't be the only country to ban women from driving. Concerning assimilation again: it seems as if Jasser is implying that American women should shed their hijab and "be free." I still do not see how a Muslim can call himself Muslim and truely believe that total assimilation is the answer to all the problems. I do not see how you define womens' liberation as making them remove their hijab. I seriously doubt Muslim women want to be as disrespected as "assimilated" Western women are--if that were the case, women would not be converting to Islam quicker than men, Jasser.
I seriously think this calls for the birth of a new organization. I've honestly had it with these petty arguments and accusations time and again. I'm so sick of opening the paper and finding an anti-Islam article in there at least once a week; and I'm absolutely annoyed that I'm seeing the godforsaken name Robert Spencer pop up in mainstream media now.
At any rate, this is the newest attack on Islam--once again, thanks to Arabs. You baby killers with your 72 virgin philosophies, drinking, and opium growing. You're messing up the world for the rest of us, and I wish Islam had never come to you idiotic backwards animals in the first place. Go fill your harems and stop spreading your corrupt ideology in our land!
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Out Of The Darkness: General George Casey Speaks For Islam In Light Of Nidal Hasan's Actions
Sallams Everyone,
It's not often I write about positive news, but I have found this particular event to be most surprising. First, I will summarize the events around the light. On November 5th, a Muslim gunman fired shots in the Fort Hood military base in Killeen, Texas. Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a counsellor for the US military, killed thirteen people after jumping on a table in the Readiness center and shouting "Allahu akbar [God is great]."
I smiled when I read that. An army staffer is warning people about jumping to conclusions about the Islamic faith. You see who you murdered, Malik? Just because they were sending you to Iraq gives you no right to do what you did. I understand you felt disturbed; however, it turns out these servicemen are still your brothers and are protecting Islam from unfair discrimination by their own people.
Amazing. I'm speechless at the moment because of this statement. This is the first piece of good news I've heard in some time concerning Muslims; apparently General George Casey isn't going to fall for anti-Islam rhetoric.
It's not often I write about positive news, but I have found this particular event to be most surprising. First, I will summarize the events around the light. On November 5th, a Muslim gunman fired shots in the Fort Hood military base in Killeen, Texas. Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a counsellor for the US military, killed thirteen people after jumping on a table in the Readiness center and shouting "Allahu akbar [God is great]."
Amazingly though, I found this article today concerning it.
The Army chief of staff says it's important for the country not to get caught up in speculation about the Muslim faith of the alleged Fort Hood gunman.
I smiled when I read that. An army staffer is warning people about jumping to conclusions about the Islamic faith. You see who you murdered, Malik? Just because they were sending you to Iraq gives you no right to do what you did. I understand you felt disturbed; however, it turns out these servicemen are still your brothers and are protecting Islam from unfair discrimination by their own people.
He says focusing on the Islamic roots of the suspected shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, could "heighten the backlash" against all Muslims in the military.
Casey says diversity in the military "gives us strength."
Amazing. I'm speechless at the moment because of this statement. This is the first piece of good news I've heard in some time concerning Muslims; apparently General George Casey isn't going to fall for anti-Islam rhetoric.
Even if the general had said Muslims are messed up in the head, I most likely would have agreed with him. There are probably thousands of soldiers who feel the way you do, Malik, that doesn't mean you go shooting your own brothers. These are the same people who would have gladly jumped in front of you to save your life.
You really took things too far, and go "Allahu akbar" someone else next time. I have no idea what you were trying to prove, but all you did was get media attention and get Arab names back in the media. You also reiterated the misconception that "Allahu akbar" is a war cry; thanks for that.
General George Casey, thank you for being our voice today. That statement meant a lot more to me than Obama's Ramadan speech. Keep it up, and God bless you sir. I hope you are the voice of unity for years to come; we need people like you.
Ma'a Sallamah,
Munawar
Friday, November 6, 2009
Earthquake Hits Iran, World Turns Blind Eye
Sallams All,
A shocking discovery came to me this morning. On November 4th, an earthquake hit southern Iran. You can find the story here. I am not going to reiterate the injury count. Instead, I would like to bring your attention to something which I find to be more than coincidental. CNN--a "world news agency", which brings news from India, US, and several other countries, had no mention of the earthquake. Instead, I found it on BBC news. Someone correct me if I simply missed the article, but I remember checking CNN that day at the university while I was bored in Calculus, and I found no mention of an earthquake.
A shocking discovery came to me this morning. On November 4th, an earthquake hit southern Iran. You can find the story here. I am not going to reiterate the injury count. Instead, I would like to bring your attention to something which I find to be more than coincidental. CNN--a "world news agency", which brings news from India, US, and several other countries, had no mention of the earthquake. Instead, I found it on BBC news. Someone correct me if I simply missed the article, but I remember checking CNN that day at the university while I was bored in Calculus, and I found no mention of an earthquake.
This would not have been a shock to me, if the following were not true: (1) CNN did a "Generation of Islam" series in which they made a clear distinction between terrorists and Islam and (2) CNN did a piece about the real meaning of hijab [cover]--the Muslim modest dresscode. Is it just me, or do they appear to be swinging both ways? Putting CNN aside, I do not even remember reading about the earthquake from USA Today--another paper that carries US and international news. Both papers have, in the past, reported about earthquakes in other (non-Muslim dominant.) countries. I am shocked at how quiet the news was about the earthquake in Iran. You may say "Munawar, earthquakes happen in Iran all the time." I accept this argument. However, "hundreds of people" injured (according to BBC) is not an every day occurrence. Maybe CNN isn't turning around after all.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Fathima Rifqa Bary: Investigative Report; Exaggerated Or True?
Sallams All,
The case on Fathima Rifqa Bary continues. This time, however, the case has taken an interesting turn. Just to make sure we are all on the same page, here is the summary of the case. So far, it has been an ideological battle between Ohio and Florida. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) conducted an investigation into Fathima, and wrote a seven page investigative summary on it. The report was provided by WFTV Eye-Witness News. The investigation suggests that there is no evidence or proof of any abuse having occurred; it goes on to state that Fathima's beliefs of an "honored killing" are influenced by her culture and customs, and FDLE found no factual grounds for these claims. One part of the report reads as follows.
I ran OCR on the report which was originally in a PDF embedded image. Since the report was scanned, parts of the report were handwritten and did not come out correctly. I have replaced these parts with [unintelligible] even though the missing parts may be deduced from the context. This is to avoid "guess-and-replace" and to keep me out of trouble.
Two things could be going on here; either (1) she had a real reason to run away from home and is now, under the influence of her current environment, out to destroy her family; or (2) what happened was a spur of emotions and now she does not know how to handle the situation. Either way, the investigative report broke through her. The most recent report on Fathima as of this writing can be found at WFTV Eye-Witness News here.
In essence, the report indirectly states that Fathima's case is not immediately valid. The report claims that she has named noone besides her father who will conduct the so-called "honored killing" and even goes as far as to include an interview with CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations):
So finally someone is stepping up and saying "hey, she could have been set up." Indeed, the investigation was not even started by Muslims. I'm amazed that non-Muslim investigators--who were not motivated by religious bias have written this report. Thank you CAIR for stepping in as well.
The report also found no evidence of the child abuse Fathima talks about. The lie about the pictures of her cheerleading is what really brought her credibility down. If any of you wish to add to this, just leave a comment. I was not able to touch on everything here (and I do not always find everything as proven by an excellent comment on my last post) so feel free to add to this summary.
One thing of note is that her father did admit to picking up her laptop; but he did not strike her with it as Fathima claimed he did. The report claims that her father was about to throw the laptop but then decided against it because it was expensive. In addition, Fathima's original story of hitch-hiking a ride to the bus station was proven false. As it turns out, Brian Williams--the one who Baptized her--drove her to the station from a residence. In other words, she was not out on the street.
So they interviewed her, and then gave her a ticket to Orlando. Why is she so excited in the video? As one of the authors posted in the comments to the previous entry, "A pastor was filming a 16-year-old girl in her bedroom... I find that very suspicious. If her parents were so strict, how did she sneak a grown man into her room to film her?" I agree, it looks very suspicious, and I think law enforcement is seeing that as well.
For my visually impaired readers (or whoever does not wish to download the PDF version of the report,) you can get the rich text version here. Please note that this is the exact report contained in the PDF image, with no alterations of any kind. The document has not been edited for scanning errors or layout. The document is provided "as is" with no modification except that it has been converted to text. The rich text format was used to preserve all formatting as found in the original report. I make no warrant of any kind concerning this document, and do not claim a copyright on it; the document is only here for those of you who cannot read the original image. I disclaim all misinformation caused by any optical character recognition errors, missing parts, poor formatting, unrecognizable text, etc. Use at your own risk. If you are concerned about downloading the converted version, you may obtain the original version from WFTV. The original document just linked is provided by Eye-Witness News and written by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. All copyrights remain with them.
Ma'a Sallamah,
Munawar
The case on Fathima Rifqa Bary continues. This time, however, the case has taken an interesting turn. Just to make sure we are all on the same page, here is the summary of the case. So far, it has been an ideological battle between Ohio and Florida. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) conducted an investigation into Fathima, and wrote a seven page investigative summary on it. The report was provided by WFTV Eye-Witness News. The investigation suggests that there is no evidence or proof of any abuse having occurred; it goes on to state that Fathima's beliefs of an "honored killing" are influenced by her culture and customs, and FDLE found no factual grounds for these claims. One part of the report reads as follows.
I ran OCR on the report which was originally in a PDF embedded image. Since the report was scanned, parts of the report were handwritten and did not come out correctly. I have replaced these parts with [unintelligible] even though the missing parts may be deduced from the context. This is to avoid "guess-and-replace" and to keep me out of trouble.
[ Unintelligible ] discussed her upbringing and stated that she had been a cheerleader at New Albany High School. When asked if her father approved of her cheerleading she stated that her father had no real idea what the concept or activities involved in cheerleading were, and allowed it. She stated that she always wore sweatpants or other coverings to hide the short skirt of the cheerleading outfit from him. She stated her father had never been to an event in which she performed as a cheerleader. Furthermore, she stated the family had no photos of her cheering or team photos as would appear in a yearbook.
...
When FDLE and other investigators visited the household on August 27, 2009, several photos of dressed in her cheerleading uniform were prominently displayed in the family living room.
Two things could be going on here; either (1) she had a real reason to run away from home and is now, under the influence of her current environment, out to destroy her family; or (2) what happened was a spur of emotions and now she does not know how to handle the situation. Either way, the investigative report broke through her. The most recent report on Fathima as of this writing can be found at WFTV Eye-Witness News here.
In essence, the report indirectly states that Fathima's case is not immediately valid. The report claims that she has named noone besides her father who will conduct the so-called "honored killing" and even goes as far as to include an interview with CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations):
On August 27, 2009, [unintelligible] was asked if there was any Islamic punishment for
conversion from Islam to Christianity. [Unintelligible] answered "absolutely not" and "there is no such thing as honor killing." An attorney present at the time, Mr. Romin Iqbal, characterized the concept as cultural and tribal, not related directly to the Islamic religious practice.
So finally someone is stepping up and saying "hey, she could have been set up." Indeed, the investigation was not even started by Muslims. I'm amazed that non-Muslim investigators--who were not motivated by religious bias have written this report. Thank you CAIR for stepping in as well.
The report also found no evidence of the child abuse Fathima talks about. The lie about the pictures of her cheerleading is what really brought her credibility down. If any of you wish to add to this, just leave a comment. I was not able to touch on everything here (and I do not always find everything as proven by an excellent comment on my last post) so feel free to add to this summary.
One thing of note is that her father did admit to picking up her laptop; but he did not strike her with it as Fathima claimed he did. The report claims that her father was about to throw the laptop but then decided against it because it was expensive. In addition, Fathima's original story of hitch-hiking a ride to the bus station was proven false. As it turns out, Brian Williams--the one who Baptized her--drove her to the station from a residence. In other words, she was not out on the street.
On August 31, 2009,
FDLE's investigation has revealed that the ticket was purchased in
Orlando under a fictitious name and provided to [unintelligible] During her interview, [unintelligible] acknowledged that it was her signature on the ticket. FDLE has maintained a copy of this ticket for this case file.
So they interviewed her, and then gave her a ticket to Orlando. Why is she so excited in the video? As one of the authors posted in the comments to the previous entry, "A pastor was filming a 16-year-old girl in her bedroom... I find that very suspicious. If her parents were so strict, how did she sneak a grown man into her room to film her?" I agree, it looks very suspicious, and I think law enforcement is seeing that as well.
For my visually impaired readers (or whoever does not wish to download the PDF version of the report,) you can get the rich text version here. Please note that this is the exact report contained in the PDF image, with no alterations of any kind. The document has not been edited for scanning errors or layout. The document is provided "as is" with no modification except that it has been converted to text. The rich text format was used to preserve all formatting as found in the original report. I make no warrant of any kind concerning this document, and do not claim a copyright on it; the document is only here for those of you who cannot read the original image. I disclaim all misinformation caused by any optical character recognition errors, missing parts, poor formatting, unrecognizable text, etc. Use at your own risk. If you are concerned about downloading the converted version, you may obtain the original version from WFTV. The original document just linked is provided by Eye-Witness News and written by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. All copyrights remain with them.
Ma'a Sallamah,
Munawar
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Fathima Rifqa Bary: A Suicide Bomber To Our Cause
Sallams All,
In my last entry I wrote about Fathima Rifqa Bary, a runaway Christian convert who is 17-years-old. As the case progresses between her family, who she claims are trying to kill her, and the state of Florida--which has the governor backing it--new stuff is being released daily. This particular piece, I found to be interesting.
An article was posted talking about a video fillmed by a minister before Fathima ran from home:
Great...so now this Fathima has resorted to not only running away from home, but also downtalking Islam. She uses "Muslim" as if it is something horrific, and the church played a big role in it. Way to go Suni parents. As always I will not take sides as to who is correct or wrong in this case--we can debate that for hours. However, it seems as if her Suni parents seem to be misguided themselves. I deduced they were Suni because Fathima's mother's name is Aisha.
I'm glad someone is finally looking at this case from a rational perspective versus a clash of religious ideals.
How interesting. A Muslim girl not knowing who Prophet Jesus is, despite the prophet being one of the greatest and most honored prophets in Islam? Is it becoming obvious who's to blame?
I left some parts out because copy and pasting gets old. Here's what happened. She meets girl, girl meets Fathima. Fathima tells the girl she is Christian and gets invited to church. Fathima has an emotional breakdown.
Now, she believes that Jesus is the only way to God. This, my friends, is what happens when we take kids to Mosques and Islamic Centers without teaching them Islam. "Kids, we're going. Come on. Do homework later." With these parents though, it was probably more like "Come on or you're grounded." Look what they gained from it. Their daughter is now a runaway, supported by a conservative Christian governor. She is a daughter who lived with two pastors for two weeks before Florida took her into their care. She is a daughter who hates Islam, and what will the Suni people do? "We support Abu Bakr." Go on, keep supporting him, and watch your religion crumble. I am sitting here laughing as I write this and read the article. Only one thing goes through my mind: "I told you so."
For centuries you have contaminated, corrupted, slandered, mocked, and ridiculed your own religion. You started by murdering Prophet Muhammad's grandson. Next, you swung to radicalism by the introduction of Wahabiism by the British people. Why do you think Abdul Wahab couldn't corrupt Shia (the real Ithna Asri sect, mind you) and went instead with your corrupted faith? If this girl knew Ehlul Bait, if she knew Prophet Jesus existed in Islam, maybe she wouldn't be in the position she is in today. Maybe, just maybe, she would have tried to unite the three religions instead of tearing them apart. But no, her parents wouldn't let her. And that is why I make this statement:
And here is my flip-side statement:
In my last entry I wrote about Fathima Rifqa Bary, a runaway Christian convert who is 17-years-old. As the case progresses between her family, who she claims are trying to kill her, and the state of Florida--which has the governor backing it--new stuff is being released daily. This particular piece, I found to be interesting.
An article was posted talking about a video fillmed by a minister before Fathima ran from home:
In a newly surfaced online video that was apparently filmed before she ran away from
her Ohio home and ended up in Florida, a passionate and vivacious Fathima Rifqa Bary
shares her testimony and talks about Jesus.
The nearly eight-minute video was posted on YouTube earlier this week. The video
details state it was filmed by "Minister Joe of P4CM in May of 2009 while Rifqa was
in Ohio."
A giddy Rifqa, then 16, starts her testimony: "Crazy how I found the Lord. Be prepared
to be blown away, but my parents are actually Muslim. They're radical, radical Muslims."
Great...so now this Fathima has resorted to not only running away from home, but also downtalking Islam. She uses "Muslim" as if it is something horrific, and the church played a big role in it. Way to go Suni parents. As always I will not take sides as to who is correct or wrong in this case--we can debate that for hours. However, it seems as if her Suni parents seem to be misguided themselves. I deduced they were Suni because Fathima's mother's name is Aisha.
Rifqa made national headlines when she ran away from her Columbus, Ohio, area home
and sought shelter with an Orlando family in July. The teen said she feared her Muslim
family would harm or kill her because of her conversion.
Her family has denied any wrongdoing, and investigators have not found evidence supporting
Rifqa's claims.
I'm glad someone is finally looking at this case from a rational perspective versus a clash of religious ideals.
In the video, Rifqa said she was abused. She said she didn't know who Jesus was.
How interesting. A Muslim girl not knowing who Prophet Jesus is, despite the prophet being one of the greatest and most honored prophets in Islam? Is it becoming obvious who's to blame?
"If you're listening to this .it's the best thing that can ever happen to you. If
there's a hole in your heart that yearns for something more it cannot be filled with
drinking or MTV or any of that stuff. Only Jesus can fill that whole in your heart,"
she said.
"Just come to Jesus and he will set you free."
I left some parts out because copy and pasting gets old. Here's what happened. She meets girl, girl meets Fathima. Fathima tells the girl she is Christian and gets invited to church. Fathima has an emotional breakdown.
Now, she believes that Jesus is the only way to God. This, my friends, is what happens when we take kids to Mosques and Islamic Centers without teaching them Islam. "Kids, we're going. Come on. Do homework later." With these parents though, it was probably more like "Come on or you're grounded." Look what they gained from it. Their daughter is now a runaway, supported by a conservative Christian governor. She is a daughter who lived with two pastors for two weeks before Florida took her into their care. She is a daughter who hates Islam, and what will the Suni people do? "We support Abu Bakr." Go on, keep supporting him, and watch your religion crumble. I am sitting here laughing as I write this and read the article. Only one thing goes through my mind: "I told you so."
For centuries you have contaminated, corrupted, slandered, mocked, and ridiculed your own religion. You started by murdering Prophet Muhammad's grandson. Next, you swung to radicalism by the introduction of Wahabiism by the British people. Why do you think Abdul Wahab couldn't corrupt Shia (the real Ithna Asri sect, mind you) and went instead with your corrupted faith? If this girl knew Ehlul Bait, if she knew Prophet Jesus existed in Islam, maybe she wouldn't be in the position she is in today. Maybe, just maybe, she would have tried to unite the three religions instead of tearing them apart. But no, her parents wouldn't let her. And that is why I make this statement:
Fathima, I am glad for you. I'm glad that you no longer support Abu Bakr and his drinking, and practicing of un-Islamic philosophy. Fathima, I am glad that you were able to find Prophet Jesus--indeed, he deserves to be honored, and I am ashamed that your parents took that away from you. Fathima, I am glad that you found completeness; indeed, I doubt your sect of Islam would have given it to you. Every article I read about you makes me so mad, not because of what happened to you, but because of what radical Christians are doing to steal the opertunity.
And here is my flip-side statement:
Fathima, I despise your actions; you have undone so many rights we have done. Had you been more mature, you would have handled this situation in a better way. Had you but understood, you would have seen things for what they really are. You are a mess of emotions, and your church took advantage of you. I doubt they mean any better for you than your parents did. You have not only upset the political balance, but have also upset the religious peace we were on our way to establishing. Thank you for nothing, and I have no idea why Florida had to be your place of choice to run away. Now, me, and the rest of the Shia Ithna Ashri Muslim community have to start explaining your situation--once again becoming defenders in a war that has been heightened by your deeds; a war that we are losing quickly, thanks to you.
Because of you, we find ourselves, once again, on the receiving end of radical anti-Islam comments; battles that were faught time and again, only to resurface because someone like you has to go parading in the streets. Thank you for making our jobs that much more difficult. I hope you are happy with yourself and the Global Revolution Church.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Selective Responding: "We do what we feel like"
Sallams Everyone,
I know I know, I've never done two posts in one day before, but I guess i'm on a role right now. For this story, I need to fill you in on something that's been going on here in Florida for about a week or two. A 17-year-old girl, Fathima, was raised in a Muslim house in Ohio. She ran away from home after converting to Christianity, and is now here in Orlando. The battle is against childcare agents and her family. The family, naturally, wants her back in Ohio. She ran away because she said her father threatened to kill her. Whether that's true or not, I'm not sure, so I won't comment on that; this isn't a post about "who's right and who's wrong," so all my Christian readers, take a deep breath.
I find it absolutely unbelievable that Crist stepped in here, but when it came to the Free Speech Summit, he didn't even blink an eye. Is it just me, or do Muslims seem to be shoved off again? I give our President some benefit of the doubt (regardless of my last post)--he has quite a bit to deal with. However, Crist has no excuse at all. If he could step in so quickly with this case, why was I ignored? This is the Email he sent back to me when I first contacted him through United Voices to stop the summit from taking place.
Yes, that's right. He blew me off! And now he's releasing statements saying he's "grateful" this girl got to stay in Florida?
I know I know, I've never done two posts in one day before, but I guess i'm on a role right now. For this story, I need to fill you in on something that's been going on here in Florida for about a week or two. A 17-year-old girl, Fathima, was raised in a Muslim house in Ohio. She ran away from home after converting to Christianity, and is now here in Orlando. The battle is against childcare agents and her family. The family, naturally, wants her back in Ohio. She ran away because she said her father threatened to kill her. Whether that's true or not, I'm not sure, so I won't comment on that; this isn't a post about "who's right and who's wrong," so all my Christian readers, take a deep breath.
In the most recent update, John Stemberger is representing the girl--he's her lawyer. For her parents, we have McCarthy as their representative. What got me with this situation was the following portion of the article from the Orlando Sentinel:
In a statement released in the wake of a judge's order to keep 17-year-old Fathima
Rifqa Bary in custody of a foster family in Florida while her family is investigated
by state law enforcement officers, Craig McCarthy accused the governor (Gov. Charlie Crist) of taking
sides before evidence has been submitted.
"The governor's unfortunate decision to make a public statement taking sides in the
Rifqa Bary case before any evidence other than allegations has been presented underscores
the need to return this case to the child's home state of Ohio," McCarthy said in
the statement. "Governor Crist stated that he was 'grateful' that the judge ruled
a specific way and in support of his 'administration's position.'"
I find it absolutely unbelievable that Crist stepped in here, but when it came to the Free Speech Summit, he didn't even blink an eye. Is it just me, or do Muslims seem to be shoved off again? I give our President some benefit of the doubt (regardless of my last post)--he has quite a bit to deal with. However, Crist has no excuse at all. If he could step in so quickly with this case, why was I ignored? This is the Email he sent back to me when I first contacted him through United Voices to stop the summit from taking place.
Thank you for contacting Governor Charlie Crist. The Governor asked
that I respond on his behalf.
Governor Crist wants to know how people feel about the many issues we
face. For assistance with your concerns, you may wish to contact
Representative Hasner's Office directly at the address below:
The Honorable Adam Hasner
Florida House of Representatives
33 Northeast Fourt Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33483-4528
Phone: (561) 279-1616
The Governor believes having access to government is among the most
important rights Floridians and Americans possess, no matter which side
of an issue they are on. Please do not hesitate to write again to share
your concerns and ideas about issues that are important to you.
Yes, that's right. He blew me off! And now he's releasing statements saying he's "grateful" this girl got to stay in Florida?
In a previous article (sorry, I don't have the article off-hand,) Rep Adam Hasner also issued a statement to the effect of "people should not be prosecuted for their beliefs." Dear representative, who sponsored the Free Speech Summit? I can't believe you had the guts to say this when you yourself stood up with your GOP party and prosecuted us!
It's this type of foul play we are seeing today in our government. Leaving religion aside, (although I believe religion has a big part to play in the lawmakers' statements,) we see that they're picking and choosing who they like and dislike...and if you're not on their "okay, I may want to respond to that" list, well, tough luck. Forget the last post, I am angrier with Crist now than I am with our President. This man spent $483,000 to go to Europe on a twelve day trip, effectively ignored my letter, and my rebuttal. Also, he didn't care about the people he is supposed to be serving at all (as you can see from the Email he sent me--which, I may add, he didn't even care enough to send on his own! No, of course not. "I can't be bothered...you send it on my behalf.") So much for your GOP party, Crist!
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
If You Thought It Was Over...Think Again
Dear All,
Sallams to you. First off, I would like to extend my humble and sincere wishes for all of you reading to have a successful Ramadan, not marked by the spike of violence we see in Iraq and Afghanistan, but rather by what Shahru Al-Ramadan is supposed to stand for. In a lot of ways, I count this month as our New Year--a chance to wind down and lay off a bit. Indeed, it has been a difficult year for a lot of us, with the Jihad we are currently performing here as US citizens against our government and the struggles we are facing around the world due largely in part to so-called "Islamist terrorists." At the same time, we are challenged to not ignore the pressure we still face. Just because Ramadan is upon us does not mean everything will go our way. For instance, we still have the face mask worn by our current president. I regret to say that most of you will smile when you watch
this video. It almost made me smile as well, I admit that. Now, let me give you my perspective on it.
As much as I hate to admit it, I know most of you will kiss his feet for wishing us a blessed Ramadan, as stated in the following Email I received from "United Voices Of America"--the organization that sponsored the March lobbying here in Florida. As always, any important Arabic phrases will include my translation in brackets.
"If the President...has enough time..." Yes, he has enough time to make a five minute video, but guess what? our efforts are being completely ignored. It's easy for him to make a five minute video--he has someone else write his script, he just speaks it. As far as Muslims having time to Email him? I have bad news for you, United Voices. They didn't have enough time to sign the letter that was sent to the President (except the few who did, and my gratitude to you is endless.) Of course not. They'd much rather open a page with prefilled text and press the "Send" button versus getting up and signing a letter. Good luck finding support--after all, you do feel the need to kiss up to him, don't you? "Oh my God, Mr. President, thank you for saying Ramadan kareem."
Sallams to you. First off, I would like to extend my humble and sincere wishes for all of you reading to have a successful Ramadan, not marked by the spike of violence we see in Iraq and Afghanistan, but rather by what Shahru Al-Ramadan is supposed to stand for. In a lot of ways, I count this month as our New Year--a chance to wind down and lay off a bit. Indeed, it has been a difficult year for a lot of us, with the Jihad we are currently performing here as US citizens against our government and the struggles we are facing around the world due largely in part to so-called "Islamist terrorists." At the same time, we are challenged to not ignore the pressure we still face. Just because Ramadan is upon us does not mean everything will go our way. For instance, we still have the face mask worn by our current president. I regret to say that most of you will smile when you watch
this video. It almost made me smile as well, I admit that. Now, let me give you my perspective on it.
These words come from a man with the following credentials.
- He converted away from Islam.
- He brags about drinking beer with a black Harvard professor and a police officer.
- He paid no attention to my letter and rebuttal against Geert Wilders, and has done nothing to replace Adam Hasner.
As much as I hate to admit it, I know most of you will kiss his feet for wishing us a blessed Ramadan, as stated in the following Email I received from "United Voices Of America"--the organization that sponsored the March lobbying here in Florida. As always, any important Arabic phrases will include my translation in brackets.
"On behalf of the American people, including Muslim communities in all 50 states,
I want to extend best wishes to Muslims in America and around the world. Ramadan
Kareem [generous / blessed Ramadan]."President Barack Obama 8/20/2009
President Obama just gave a video message to all Muslims wishing them Ramadan Kareem. In a way that only Obama can, he not only gave Muslims his best wishes this Ramadan, but he also demonstrates that he has a respect and understanding for Islam.
Because he said "Ramadan kareem," that shows he is on our side? Let me tell you something, United Voices, under his administration, Adam Hasner was able to speak against Islam, and is still a top GOP leader! To say that his efforts are good for Muslims and the world is outrageous! Does anyone understand that he is taking us for a ride? Diverting our attention? Who do you think we are, Mr. President, Saudi Arabia and Al-Qaeda who need video greetings? What are we, your little pets who you praise, and then put away and spit on; pets who are stared at, mocked, ridiculed, and told "sorry" when you hurt us? And what's worse, United Voices fell for it! You still say he has a "respect and understanding for Islam," when this very man has shoved away women in shcarves during his election campaign. I do not care if he "understands" Islam! He is not doing anything at all to change things! Forget Afghanistan, forget Iraq. If he can go warring in those regions, if he can remove the CEO of General Motors, what's stopping him from removing Adam Hasner? Surely, Mr. Saint President should be taking care of Muslim problems here first--or is his meaning of "mutual interest" translating into "expanded car dealerships, and oil?" For some reason, I have a hard time believing he "respects and understands Islam" just because of a video. What are you trying to prove, Mr. President, that you look handsome on camera and you have an eloquent voice?
As for "In a way only Obama can," anyone can say "Ramadan kareem"; and after that, I know he said "ahh, that's over," just like how he's done in the past.
Speak all you want, Mr. President, but until I get a response from you, I'm not believing a word you're saying. Any bit of respect I still had for you is now gone, with that dumb message of yours.
Show me you actually care, and then tell me "have a blessed Ramadan, I'm here to extend your voice." Until then, don't you dare do this again!
ACT NOW
, If the President of the United States has enough time to produce a Ramadan video
greeting then surely you can make time to thank him for it, especially because we
are going to make it easy for you.
"If the President...has enough time..." Yes, he has enough time to make a five minute video, but guess what? our efforts are being completely ignored. It's easy for him to make a five minute video--he has someone else write his script, he just speaks it. As far as Muslims having time to Email him? I have bad news for you, United Voices. They didn't have enough time to sign the letter that was sent to the President (except the few who did, and my gratitude to you is endless.) Of course not. They'd much rather open a page with prefilled text and press the "Send" button versus getting up and signing a letter. Good luck finding support--after all, you do feel the need to kiss up to him, don't you? "Oh my God, Mr. President, thank you for saying Ramadan kareem."
Keep wasting your time. You know what though? That's exactly what he wants from you. He wants you to be happy and smile like a bunch of idiots who are starved for attention. A bunch of puppets who like pressing submit buttons all day, and then claiming they don't know why they fast.. A bunch of people who like to kiss up to our government and pretend it's doing the right thing...when inside, you know it's not doing the right thing at all. A bunch of religious robots sucked up in the "modernization" and "moderation" of Islam. No, you want to be on good terms with the Ameircans because of "mutual interests" don't you? Well, I'm sorry to say this, O Muslim slaves! but that man has "mutual interests" in mind as well, and when it comes down to it, he's not one of us. In fact, he's far from it. He will never take the time to respond to a mailed in letter, yet he has the time to make a video. I see no sincerity behind his message. As I stated earlier, anyone can say Ramadan kareem, but it's turning that statement in to action that matters to me. Sadly, United Voices doesn't understand that; though, they seem more like a kiss up group than anything else the more I become acquainted with them. They're quick to say "our government is doing the right thing" and then forgetting about what we just went through in March and April. Yes, I know you're saying "forget about the past." My humble readers, with all due respect, I don't forget the past until something has been done about it, and I think it's time you opened your eyes as well.
I know Robert Spencer is hovering over me waiting to label me as a "Islamist Jihadist" and "Islamic terrorist," so go right ahead. You won't stop me from what I have set out to do, Spencer, and your lying government will not either. I'm sick of you guys, I'm sick of the lies, I'm sick of the mixed messages, I'm sick of the struggle, I'm sick of the standoffs, I'm sick of the petting, I'm sick of the pity, I'm sick of the fabrications, I'm sick of the propaganda, I'm sick of the war, I'm sick of the apologies, I'm sick of the misused media terms, I'm sick of the Freedom Party, I'm sick of Hasner, I'm sick of the lack of support, I'm sick of the Arabs, I'm sick of the Jihadists, I'm sick of the suicide bombers, I'm sick of religious robot parents, and I'm utterly sick of this corrupted government.
Mr. President, I see right through those eyes of yours and that eloquent voice of yours. I see right through your statements, your money, your campaign promises, and your actions. I see right through your stupid videos, your mutual interests, your conversion, your plan, and your mask. I see through all of it--and I regret to say that very few Muslims do. Know that you have challengers; know that you have not fooled everyone by your ridiculous video; and, most importantly, know that I am aware of your choice to ignore my letter. Know that this is my personal, humble statement to you saying that I see you for who you really are, and the anger I feel toward you right now cannot be put in to words. I will keep fighting you every step of the way--and although you most likely will win in the end, it will not be an easy battle for you. You cannot flip me on my back and play "Tickle Me Elmo" like you can with millions of Muslims around the world. I think the only country who supports me on this is Iran. I remember President Ahmadinejat saying the true colors of the US have been shown. I agree with you totally, President Ahmadinejat. Indeed their colors have been shown, and by God, what dark colors they are!
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Friday, August 14, 2009
Agree To Disagree: It's Our Only Hope
Dear All,
Today I have a big question to pose: When will it all end? I was speaking to one of my friends over Skype yesterday and had a lengthy discussion about how Muslims today are the scapegoats of the world. I wonder if anyone else is getting this feeling, but as far as I'm concerned--I'm sick of fighting among monotheists. By that I mean I really think it's time for Jews, Christians, and Muslims to band together as one body--"Under God." Several times I get challenged by people from other faiths, and every time I end up walking out thinking, "what did they gain out of it?" Granted, some people ask to understand only; not to debate or debase anyone; however, for the most part, we are still living in frozen time: I'm right, you're wrong.
We discussed the fundamental issue with youths as concerns their faith in the Al-Rahman (The Merciful,) and we came to the conclusion that youths are turning away from religion today faster than ever. Put aside the antitheist views for any specific religion, and you see that this problem exists across the board. Today, more children are Agnostic or Atheist than they are of religion X. When I speak to people about this--namely to Agnostics--they give me one of two reasons. Either they believe religion is causing war, or they do not like being controlled.
So is religion causing war? My answer to that is definitely yes. But does it have to be that way? My real question is, is the religion causing the war, or are the people causing the war? Is it this purified faith that is causing Churches, Synagogues, and Mosques to crumble, or is it our hunger for power, our greed, and our vain desires? I'll let you think about that one.
Most of us who studied Islam know about the fact that the enemies of the Christians who were living under the government of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) were threatened by the Prophet himself because he wrote in a letter to them "These Christians are under my protection, and whosoever attacks them is attacking me. And whosoever attacks me is attacking God." My dear readers, this was said by the same Prophet who today is being labeled by Geert Wilders as a conqueror, warlord, and rapist. If this so-called rapist can agree to disagree to the point where he offers them physical protection, then we, my humble readers, are worse than this so-called rapist!
Why is Atheism prevailing today? I challenge you to observe an interaction between two Atheists. You will notice they appreciate each other's views--they unite under an antitheological philosophy, and they charish it! What is stopping the three monotheistic faiths from doing this? Are we all sitting around waiting for our Savior who will come with the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) or will we get up and start saving ourselves? I vote for the second choice. Yes, I agree--we have some differences. However, in the end, we are all descendants of the Prophet Abraham (may peace and blessings be upon him.) This is what we need to focus on. Otherwise, as much as I hate to admit it, the antireligion conversions will continue, and will even pick up speed--it's inevitable.
Now let us examine the second issue. In our discussion we touched on a cause for this reason. To me it seems as if children do not know why they do certain things. My friend stated that these children are conditioned to be a certain way; follow certain procedures. Is this a bad thing? No. However, it can be a bad thing if by the time the child reaches the age of baligh, it does not understand why it was conditioned before reaching baligh. This situation of not knowing, we concluded, was caused by the parents' lack of understanding of their faith. For instance, if my parents were not educated by their parents, who in turn were not educated by their parents, we have a big problem on our hands. This problem is the issue of what I call "religious robots." You do things "just because," with no reason for doing them. CNN interviewed some Chinese Muslims who were fasting under cover because the government has banned fasting. They asked one Muslim why he fasts, and his response was, with an embarrassed chuckle, "I don't know." This is when the reality of the situation hit home for me, and to this day I am utterly disgusted at the lack of understanding among my Muslim people. My dear readers, this lack of understanding is what is causing these suicide bombs, and terrorist plots. I have praised converts before because they understand more than we do. However, I regret to say that a lot of the terrorists today are Muslim converts who wish to "commit jihad" in the name of Islam. So this light of hope I had once because of the converts is fading quite quickly.
Indeed, if the child does not understand their faith, they will feel like they are being controlled; and they have a right to feel that way. In other words, the issue starts with the parents, but it's not all their fault. according to the Islamic view, what a child does after reaching baligh is their responsibility--they have the ability to reason with themselves, and the parents will not be held accountable. At the same time, before the child reaches baligh, the parents have the responsibility to teach that child as much as they can, and do their best to ensure the child does not stray.
Through all this though, there is still hope. As part of the society is going toward an antitheist view, another part is going toward the theist view--properly this time. A couple days ago, I read an article that CNN published which was an interview with some teenage women in hijab. They said they wore it to preserve their beauty and piety. Alhamdulillah, I hope all of them receive the blessings of God for speaking up. We must demolish these misconceptions one step at a time, and I sincerely feel they have taken one of those steps. The article was the first I've ever read where the reporters had no false information; I didn't disagree with any part of the article. From beginning to end, it was right on, and I think those teenage girls had everything to do with it. I bet Robert Spencer wasn't happy to see that article. Sorry mate, but your visions of opression are out the window. You see, I can lecture all I want about hijab for men and women (yes, men have hijab too.) However, in the end, people will only listen very closely to a woman who actually wears a hijab, because now we move away from theoretical philosophy into practical philosophy, and I applaud those women for representing Islam so well. You truely made my day.
Our discussion lasted for about three hours on the general subject I have written about in this entry, and in the end I saw that there are still some people out there who understand it, and can wade through all the misconceptions and fabrications that are thrown at them.
To all of you who think we as theists are doomed, there is still hope out there, but remember what I have said time and again: if you do not step up, noone will. Stop waiting for "them to do it" and turn it in to "I will do it." You will be amazed by the results. And hey, even if nothing comes of it--even if you are mocked, ridiculed, or just plain ignored, you have done your best, and that is all God wants from you.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Today I have a big question to pose: When will it all end? I was speaking to one of my friends over Skype yesterday and had a lengthy discussion about how Muslims today are the scapegoats of the world. I wonder if anyone else is getting this feeling, but as far as I'm concerned--I'm sick of fighting among monotheists. By that I mean I really think it's time for Jews, Christians, and Muslims to band together as one body--"Under God." Several times I get challenged by people from other faiths, and every time I end up walking out thinking, "what did they gain out of it?" Granted, some people ask to understand only; not to debate or debase anyone; however, for the most part, we are still living in frozen time: I'm right, you're wrong.
We discussed the fundamental issue with youths as concerns their faith in the Al-Rahman (The Merciful,) and we came to the conclusion that youths are turning away from religion today faster than ever. Put aside the antitheist views for any specific religion, and you see that this problem exists across the board. Today, more children are Agnostic or Atheist than they are of religion X. When I speak to people about this--namely to Agnostics--they give me one of two reasons. Either they believe religion is causing war, or they do not like being controlled.
So is religion causing war? My answer to that is definitely yes. But does it have to be that way? My real question is, is the religion causing the war, or are the people causing the war? Is it this purified faith that is causing Churches, Synagogues, and Mosques to crumble, or is it our hunger for power, our greed, and our vain desires? I'll let you think about that one.
Most of us who studied Islam know about the fact that the enemies of the Christians who were living under the government of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) were threatened by the Prophet himself because he wrote in a letter to them "These Christians are under my protection, and whosoever attacks them is attacking me. And whosoever attacks me is attacking God." My dear readers, this was said by the same Prophet who today is being labeled by Geert Wilders as a conqueror, warlord, and rapist. If this so-called rapist can agree to disagree to the point where he offers them physical protection, then we, my humble readers, are worse than this so-called rapist!
Why is Atheism prevailing today? I challenge you to observe an interaction between two Atheists. You will notice they appreciate each other's views--they unite under an antitheological philosophy, and they charish it! What is stopping the three monotheistic faiths from doing this? Are we all sitting around waiting for our Savior who will come with the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) or will we get up and start saving ourselves? I vote for the second choice. Yes, I agree--we have some differences. However, in the end, we are all descendants of the Prophet Abraham (may peace and blessings be upon him.) This is what we need to focus on. Otherwise, as much as I hate to admit it, the antireligion conversions will continue, and will even pick up speed--it's inevitable.
Now let us examine the second issue. In our discussion we touched on a cause for this reason. To me it seems as if children do not know why they do certain things. My friend stated that these children are conditioned to be a certain way; follow certain procedures. Is this a bad thing? No. However, it can be a bad thing if by the time the child reaches the age of baligh, it does not understand why it was conditioned before reaching baligh. This situation of not knowing, we concluded, was caused by the parents' lack of understanding of their faith. For instance, if my parents were not educated by their parents, who in turn were not educated by their parents, we have a big problem on our hands. This problem is the issue of what I call "religious robots." You do things "just because," with no reason for doing them. CNN interviewed some Chinese Muslims who were fasting under cover because the government has banned fasting. They asked one Muslim why he fasts, and his response was, with an embarrassed chuckle, "I don't know." This is when the reality of the situation hit home for me, and to this day I am utterly disgusted at the lack of understanding among my Muslim people. My dear readers, this lack of understanding is what is causing these suicide bombs, and terrorist plots. I have praised converts before because they understand more than we do. However, I regret to say that a lot of the terrorists today are Muslim converts who wish to "commit jihad" in the name of Islam. So this light of hope I had once because of the converts is fading quite quickly.
Indeed, if the child does not understand their faith, they will feel like they are being controlled; and they have a right to feel that way. In other words, the issue starts with the parents, but it's not all their fault. according to the Islamic view, what a child does after reaching baligh is their responsibility--they have the ability to reason with themselves, and the parents will not be held accountable. At the same time, before the child reaches baligh, the parents have the responsibility to teach that child as much as they can, and do their best to ensure the child does not stray.
Through all this though, there is still hope. As part of the society is going toward an antitheist view, another part is going toward the theist view--properly this time. A couple days ago, I read an article that CNN published which was an interview with some teenage women in hijab. They said they wore it to preserve their beauty and piety. Alhamdulillah, I hope all of them receive the blessings of God for speaking up. We must demolish these misconceptions one step at a time, and I sincerely feel they have taken one of those steps. The article was the first I've ever read where the reporters had no false information; I didn't disagree with any part of the article. From beginning to end, it was right on, and I think those teenage girls had everything to do with it. I bet Robert Spencer wasn't happy to see that article. Sorry mate, but your visions of opression are out the window. You see, I can lecture all I want about hijab for men and women (yes, men have hijab too.) However, in the end, people will only listen very closely to a woman who actually wears a hijab, because now we move away from theoretical philosophy into practical philosophy, and I applaud those women for representing Islam so well. You truely made my day.
Our discussion lasted for about three hours on the general subject I have written about in this entry, and in the end I saw that there are still some people out there who understand it, and can wade through all the misconceptions and fabrications that are thrown at them.
To all of you who think we as theists are doomed, there is still hope out there, but remember what I have said time and again: if you do not step up, noone will. Stop waiting for "them to do it" and turn it in to "I will do it." You will be amazed by the results. And hey, even if nothing comes of it--even if you are mocked, ridiculed, or just plain ignored, you have done your best, and that is all God wants from you.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Friday, July 3, 2009
As I crack open the egg...
Readers,
Sallams to you. I have finally located the entire film of the "Free Speech Summit" held in April. You can find the video on YouTube here. Is it just me, or do those so-called "well-respected, well-disciplined" politicians sound like animals to you? With their frequent "boos," exaggerated laughter, and excessively loud applause, they seem to have a lot of energy--or is it too much drinking? I finally got to hear the voice of Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org. Of course, he went in to his usual mockery of the "out-of-context" argument. I wonder who wrote that paper anyway?
Wilders spoke next, and I was amazed at how many applause he got by just saying "they make you think Islam is peace...well, it's not" or something similar (sorry, I didn't catch the exact quote.) That line had no credible information; it seems like everyone there just took his word for it. Just as I predicted earlier, he's a man with no credible information to go by, and I saw that in the convention. Everyone was there for one purpose only--to mock. And wow...did they mock! I felt like they spat right on my religion.
Wilders asked if Mosques would be burned if he released a video condemning Christianity, and then answered his own question by saying "no." Really? What are you, a fortune teller?
After Wilders is done speaking, Pam of Atlas Shrugs, who deleted my comment pointing to the paper I wrote against Wilders, introduces the video "Fitna." So the whole mocking audience gets to see Wilders image of Islam.
Next came the press conference, in which Wilders made it a point to say he admires Israel--which, I may add, got a lot of applause from CNN and all other news stations there. So is this a ploy by Israel, or is it a ploy by my government, or is it a ploy by Wilders, or is it a ploy by Robert Spencer? The deeper I dig, the more of a mess this whole thing becomes. It wasn't just about Wilders' speech, it was about Muslims being mocked, spat on, kicked at, insulted, debased, and alienated. I'm not sure how long the convention lasted, but whoever wrote that paper...nice try. I need to get a hold of it and read it. I think Spencer is guilty of his own ever-hated mistake: taking things out of context. And if you really did write "Wilders' claims are simply wrong...just wrong..." well, join the millions of Muslims who can't even defend their own religion--who won't even stand to sign a letter--and, like one of the speakers stated, won't even bat an eye against the terrorists. They are moved by their own faith, with no real reason to them being Muslim--where are our scholars and our so-called Ayatollahs? But I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and if I do get a hold of your paper and see that it is just statements with no backing...watch for my criticism as well.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Sallams to you. I have finally located the entire film of the "Free Speech Summit" held in April. You can find the video on YouTube here. Is it just me, or do those so-called "well-respected, well-disciplined" politicians sound like animals to you? With their frequent "boos," exaggerated laughter, and excessively loud applause, they seem to have a lot of energy--or is it too much drinking? I finally got to hear the voice of Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org. Of course, he went in to his usual mockery of the "out-of-context" argument. I wonder who wrote that paper anyway?
Wilders spoke next, and I was amazed at how many applause he got by just saying "they make you think Islam is peace...well, it's not" or something similar (sorry, I didn't catch the exact quote.) That line had no credible information; it seems like everyone there just took his word for it. Just as I predicted earlier, he's a man with no credible information to go by, and I saw that in the convention. Everyone was there for one purpose only--to mock. And wow...did they mock! I felt like they spat right on my religion.
Wilders asked if Mosques would be burned if he released a video condemning Christianity, and then answered his own question by saying "no." Really? What are you, a fortune teller?
After Wilders is done speaking, Pam of Atlas Shrugs, who deleted my comment pointing to the paper I wrote against Wilders, introduces the video "Fitna." So the whole mocking audience gets to see Wilders image of Islam.
Next came the press conference, in which Wilders made it a point to say he admires Israel--which, I may add, got a lot of applause from CNN and all other news stations there. So is this a ploy by Israel, or is it a ploy by my government, or is it a ploy by Wilders, or is it a ploy by Robert Spencer? The deeper I dig, the more of a mess this whole thing becomes. It wasn't just about Wilders' speech, it was about Muslims being mocked, spat on, kicked at, insulted, debased, and alienated. I'm not sure how long the convention lasted, but whoever wrote that paper...nice try. I need to get a hold of it and read it. I think Spencer is guilty of his own ever-hated mistake: taking things out of context. And if you really did write "Wilders' claims are simply wrong...just wrong..." well, join the millions of Muslims who can't even defend their own religion--who won't even stand to sign a letter--and, like one of the speakers stated, won't even bat an eye against the terrorists. They are moved by their own faith, with no real reason to them being Muslim--where are our scholars and our so-called Ayatollahs? But I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and if I do get a hold of your paper and see that it is just statements with no backing...watch for my criticism as well.
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Hiding from what you cannot fight
Dear Readers,
Sallamun alaikum. The hate campaign against Muslims is still an ongoing issue, and I want to bring your attention to something that showed me just how low the haters can get when they know their work is being compromised. Atlas Shrugs deleted a comment I had posted on the page where they give the transcript to Wilders' speech, three days after I posted it. I found out because I went back to the page to get some information from the speech, and realized my comment was not there. The comment referenced my blog post containing the rebuttal to Wilders' speech...and it was deleted from their site. Not only that, but the entry was closed to further commenting (I guess they didn't want me to come back and re-post it.) This was the second comment I submitted before I realized the topic had been closed:
"Hi Everyone,
This comment was deleted recently so I'm reposting it. I have written a rebuttal
to this speech which you can find here:
http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/yo...-serves_18.html
. I urge all of you to read it--it will help you understand the difference between
the Islam Wilders talks about, and the real Islam."
I guess Atlas Shrugs doesn't know what to do with the rebuttal--it seems to me that their dream of a "radical Islam" was crushed. I'm sorry, haters, but you do well when you do not get challenged--and when you do, see how you stand? I know you tried to wipe me off the net, but I'm still here, and we will press on!
Sallamun alaikum. The hate campaign against Muslims is still an ongoing issue, and I want to bring your attention to something that showed me just how low the haters can get when they know their work is being compromised. Atlas Shrugs deleted a comment I had posted on the page where they give the transcript to Wilders' speech, three days after I posted it. I found out because I went back to the page to get some information from the speech, and realized my comment was not there. The comment referenced my blog post containing the rebuttal to Wilders' speech...and it was deleted from their site. Not only that, but the entry was closed to further commenting (I guess they didn't want me to come back and re-post it.) This was the second comment I submitted before I realized the topic had been closed:
"Hi Everyone,
This comment was deleted recently so I'm reposting it. I have written a rebuttal
to this speech which you can find here:
http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/yo...-serves_18.html
. I urge all of you to read it--it will help you understand the difference between
the Islam Wilders talks about, and the real Islam."
I guess Atlas Shrugs doesn't know what to do with the rebuttal--it seems to me that their dream of a "radical Islam" was crushed. I'm sorry, haters, but you do well when you do not get challenged--and when you do, see how you stand? I know you tried to wipe me off the net, but I'm still here, and we will press on!
Sunday, June 28, 2009
A Letter to Our Government
Sallams All,
I would like to apologize for not including this letter in my post entitled Your government hates the people it serves. That post was already long, and I did not want to clutter it with more information, so I have split up the posts. Below, I have provided the cover letter which went along with the rebuttal to our government. You will find two things: first, the actual images of the letters which contain the signatures of everyone who signed (thanks to all of you.) Next, for my visually impaired readers, you will find the text version of the letters.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
We recently heard of a summit led by GOP leaders in our Floridian government that invited Wilders--maker of the video Fitna--to speak out against Islam. As the Shia Muslim community of Orlando, Florida, we are appalled at what took place recently. We are ashamed that our government--who is supposed to be representing us--would take such illogical steps to driving out a minority.
Since the Muslim Capitol Day in March of this year, Representative Adam Hasner has been trying time and again to mock us as Muslims; the holding of this summit was just that. The author of this letter is visually impaired, and is writing on behalf of all those who have signed it. He feels that this country has stood by him when he needed the most expensive pieces of technology to be successful in the workplace, and he feels that the government has sincerely let him down. As our representatives, who should be serving us, as the people, we ask that you speak out against Hasner and condemn his actions. We have included a rebuttal to Wilders' claims in this letter; we urge you to read it. Islam is not a religion of terrorism, and war, nor is it a fascist political ideology. Wilder was able to speak in front of the government without any credible information (or, more correctly, information which is purposely misleading, misinterpreted, and fabricated.) He used the Suni ideological thoughts to justify what he was saying, but failed to point out that the real Islam does not support these actions. In other words, he was brought for one purpose: to spread falsehoods.
Our honored representatives, this is an open letter to you urging that you take action against Hasner. We are citizens like yourself, who pay taxes, attend American schools, etc; and most of us were born as American citizens, whose parents migrated to this country to give us better lives than they had. Thus, we have all the same rights that any American citizen has; we are not foreign, aliens, or outcasts; this is our home, and we do not appreciate the government taking actions, openly, to debase us. WE WILL NOT STAND DOWN! We are tired of the propaganda that is taking place against us; we are tired of the lies brought forth against us; and we are ashamed that our government allowed Wilders to speak, even though his ideology is so obviously misconstrued that he is banned from setting foot in the United Kingdom. We as American citizens do not hate America; rather, it is America who hates us, and we are imploring you as our representatives to stop this hate. This country's foundations lie in religious freedom and tolerance, and the spreading of falsehood against Islam is not helping this ideal.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter, and we hope to hear from you.
Sincerely,
Munawar Ali Bijani,
ON BEHALF OF ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED BELOW
Please send response to:
[Deleted to avoid spam]
or:
[Deleted, can be found in image]
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
I would like to apologize for not including this letter in my post entitled Your government hates the people it serves. That post was already long, and I did not want to clutter it with more information, so I have split up the posts. Below, I have provided the cover letter which went along with the rebuttal to our government. You will find two things: first, the actual images of the letters which contain the signatures of everyone who signed (thanks to all of you.) Next, for my visually impaired readers, you will find the text version of the letters.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
We recently heard of a summit led by GOP leaders in our Floridian government that invited Wilders--maker of the video Fitna--to speak out against Islam. As the Shia Muslim community of Orlando, Florida, we are appalled at what took place recently. We are ashamed that our government--who is supposed to be representing us--would take such illogical steps to driving out a minority.
Since the Muslim Capitol Day in March of this year, Representative Adam Hasner has been trying time and again to mock us as Muslims; the holding of this summit was just that. The author of this letter is visually impaired, and is writing on behalf of all those who have signed it. He feels that this country has stood by him when he needed the most expensive pieces of technology to be successful in the workplace, and he feels that the government has sincerely let him down. As our representatives, who should be serving us, as the people, we ask that you speak out against Hasner and condemn his actions. We have included a rebuttal to Wilders' claims in this letter; we urge you to read it. Islam is not a religion of terrorism, and war, nor is it a fascist political ideology. Wilder was able to speak in front of the government without any credible information (or, more correctly, information which is purposely misleading, misinterpreted, and fabricated.) He used the Suni ideological thoughts to justify what he was saying, but failed to point out that the real Islam does not support these actions. In other words, he was brought for one purpose: to spread falsehoods.
Our honored representatives, this is an open letter to you urging that you take action against Hasner. We are citizens like yourself, who pay taxes, attend American schools, etc; and most of us were born as American citizens, whose parents migrated to this country to give us better lives than they had. Thus, we have all the same rights that any American citizen has; we are not foreign, aliens, or outcasts; this is our home, and we do not appreciate the government taking actions, openly, to debase us. WE WILL NOT STAND DOWN! We are tired of the propaganda that is taking place against us; we are tired of the lies brought forth against us; and we are ashamed that our government allowed Wilders to speak, even though his ideology is so obviously misconstrued that he is banned from setting foot in the United Kingdom. We as American citizens do not hate America; rather, it is America who hates us, and we are imploring you as our representatives to stop this hate. This country's foundations lie in religious freedom and tolerance, and the spreading of falsehood against Islam is not helping this ideal.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter, and we hope to hear from you.
Sincerely,
Munawar Ali Bijani,
ON BEHALF OF ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED BELOW
Please send response to:
[Deleted to avoid spam]
or:
[Deleted, can be found in image]
Ma'a sallamah,
Munawar
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Your government hates the people it serves
Recently, our Floridian government sponsored a hate campaign against Muslims. Allowed to speak at the campaign was Geert Wilders, maker of the video Fitna in which he shows the Trade Centers blowing up and Quranic verses in the background that "justify" this action by Muslims. For six minutes he spewed hate against us. This was my response to his speech, found here: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/04/freedom-of-speech-text-of-geert-wilders-speech.html. For those of you who think our government is a saint...think again. Postmarked June 2nd, 2009, this rebuttal was a direct response to the speech Wilders gave, and it's happily on its way to our state government. Once again, the very government who is supposed to be "serving" us is now trying to turn people away from Islam by forging lies...and guess who paid for Wilders' hotel stay, research hours, etc? You and me, the same Muslims he condemned. Bye bye tax dollars.
Against Geert Wilders: A Truth Against Lies
Author: Bijani, Munawar Ali
And co-authored by several other contributors
We begin with the name of God, the most kind, the most merciful.
Recently, Geert Wilders, maker of the video Fitna, spoke at the Florida Senate against Islam. This paper serves as an argument against his claims, which we have found to be purposely misleading; however, it is not our intent to downplay Wilders; on the contrary, we would like to extend our appreciation to him for conducting the amount of research he has conducted. Many of the claims he has made are common, and are simply the result of incorrect information or faulty analysis. On the final page, the reader will find a list of sources used by the authors of this paper.
First off, we would like to begin by stating that it is not Islam's goal to dominate the world; rather, Wilders has fallen into the same trap as so many other leaders have: he has mistaken the terrorists as proper bearers of the Islamic ideology. Somalia stoned a rape victim to death, and only whipped the men who raped her; this is in spite of the fact that the Shariah law does not call for killing rape victims--it does not even allow husbands to kill their wives even if they have been found committing adultery (Hadi al-Hakim, Marriage, Questions and Answers Section).
Next, Wilders calls Islam a "totalitarian political ideology" and claims that the Quran calls for war and violence. He also mentions that the Quran calls Jews "pigs". Islam is not a "totalitarian political ideology." In fact, the Quran states very clearly that "There is no compulsion in religion; the truth has been made clear from error" (Quran 2:256). This verse shows us that Islam holds the following view: do not follow an ideology blindly. Towards the end of the Quran, a chapter states: "I worship not that which you worship, Nor will you worship that which I worship. And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping. Nor will you worship that which I worship. To you be your religion, and to me my religion." (Quran 109:2-6). We can clearly see from these verses that Islam invites people to the religion, but if they choose not to join, it is up to them. As we will see later, the battles fought during the time of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH)[1] were in self-defense, since it is common fact that during the time of Islam, if one did not have physical strength to lead a movement, the movement would be crushed. We can see this clearly from the Crusades of the early Christian Church; they spread their ideology this way, but it was only after the passing away of the blessed Prophet Jesus (may peace and blessings be upon him.) The Prophet Jesus (PBOH) did not start the Crusades. Similarly, we are seeing the same issue with the Muslim people today. Islam does not support oppression, but yet Saudi Arabia oppresses its women. Concerning this, Bihishti and Bahonar point out that although Islam came to Arabia, after the leader--the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) passed away, the government returned to its corrupted ways; it hired scholars and "paid-agents" to help distort Islam to "build the high castle of their [the government's] own power" (245-246), and thus "the system is used to serve the leaders; the leaders render no service to the system" (246).
Concerning Jews, the Quran does not call them pigs; in fact, it praises Christians and Jews: "Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord…" (Quran 2:62).
In the following verses, we see where Wilders may have thought that the Quran calls Jews monkeys. However, we can clearly see that this is something that has been taken out of context. We produce for you the entire passage: "And (O Children of Israel, remember) when We took your covenant and We raised above you the Mount (saying): "Hold fast to that which We have given you, and remember that which is therein so that you may become Al-Muttaqûn (the pious). Then after that you turned away. Had it not been for the Grace and Mercy of Allah upon you, indeed you would have been among the losers.
65. And indeed you knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath (i.e. Saturday). We said to them: "Be you monkeys, despised and rejected."
66. So We made this punishment an example to their own and to succeeding generations and a lesson to those who are Al-Muttaqûn (the pious)." Here, we see that the example of "monkeys" was only put on the people of Israel who betrayed prophet Moses (PBOH) after the parting of the Red Sea. This in no way applies to the people of today, if one looks closely at the verses surrounding it. Therefore, the Quran does not call all Jews monkeys; in fact, we see that they will "have their reward from their lord" as well as Muslims and Christians; thus, this notion is merely a context issue. This argument is further supported by the Quran stating "Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: "Our Lord is Allah." - For had it not been that Allah checks one set of people by means of another, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of Allah is mentioned much would surely have been pulled down…" (Quran 22:40). Here, we see that Islam regards all places of worship as places "wherein the name of Allah is mentioned much", and there is no distinction made between any of them; it recognizes that all monotheistic religions (including Jews) believe in God, and they are to be respected, not hated. Therefore, we see that it then becomes not fit for this same Quran to turn around and call Jews pigs, since this action is logically impossible, and thus we point back to the context issue we mentioned earlier.
Next, wilders says that the "core problem with Islam is two fold," and the first problem being that Islam has no time scope; everything is relevant anywhere. We do agree with Wilders here that the Quran is not limited in one time. However, this is not to say that all verses apply everywhere. For instance, some verses were revealed for a specific battle, that is all (E.G.8:33, the Battle of Badr).
The second problem Wilders identifies is that the Quran has no room for interpretation; this is not true, according to real Islamic ideology, and numerous sources from the Prophet (SAWH) and his descendants. In order to understand our point of view on this, the reader should consider the Islamic history. During the time of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH,) the Prophet served as the guide to the Quran. Notice that we used the word "guide." To say that the Quran leaves no room for interpretation is like saying Calculus must be learned by the book, with no professor. As we stated earlier, some verses of the Quran were revealed during a specific battle, and meant for that battle alone. Thus, it is only natural to have someone who is learned in Islamic knowledge and history to guide the people to understanding the Quran--otherwise, they will use these verses for places in which they are not proper. After the death of the Prophet (SAWH,) his son in law, Ali (PBOH) was the rightful successor to the leadership of Islam. However, Abu Bakr betrayed the Prophet, and took the leadership for himself. This, our dear readers, is why the people of Islam are so corrupted today. Abu Bakr was not fit to lead Islam with knowledge and understanding of the Quran (Bihishti and Bahonar 245), and the Sunni sect follows him. As you probably know, today the Sunni sect holds an 80% majority against a 20% "followers of Ali (Shiah)" people. The Somali government was Sunni, so was Saddam Hussein, and so is Saudi Arabia. The Islam they follow happened because of this "no room for interpretation" ideology--and look where they are today.
Wilders goes on to quote Prime Minister Erdogan from Turkey: "There is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam." The Turkish minister was correct; but Wilders has used his statement in a fabricated manner. When the minister said this, he meant "Islam is Islam everywhere, at every time. You do not pick and choose what you follow and what you do not follow." Of course, to the minister, this meant "Jihad prevails everywhere," but once again this is according to the Sunni traditions of Islam. The real Islam has recorded a narration from the Prophet (SAWH): "A man asked the Prophet once after coming back from a battle, 'Have we completed jihad?' The Prophet replied, 'This was only minor jihad. The major jihad is that jihad [struggle] you do with yourself; staying away from sin, praying, etc.'" In other words, the Prophet was saying that anyone can throw fists or stones or kill someone; it is not difficult, and Islam does not center around this effortless thing, and the slaughter of non-Muslims. Bihishti and Bahonar point out that jihad should be done for "the assistance of the helpless and the oppressed; Jihad for gradual perfection, culture, knowledge and virtue; and lastly Jihad against one's own egoism, which is the most important and according to the holy Prophet of Islam, "Jihad Akbar" ['major jihad']" (355).
Wilders then goes on to "describe" the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) by calling him a pedophile, conqueror, and warlord. We have already quoted a narration from the Prophet above which disproves this claim. Further, if the reader looks into Islamic history, they will find that most of the battles fought were in self-defense (as we have also explained above,) since Islam only allows Muslims to fight back, not to aggress: " Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe" (Quran 9:13).
The reader may now point to verse 9:5 from the Quran, which states: " So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (Quran 9:5). This verse was part of a larger scope, however, and this becomes obvious when the reader turns their attention to verse 9:1: "(This is a declaration of) immunity by Allah and His Messenger towards those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement." This shows us that this chapter (chapter 9) is just that--terms and conditions of an agreement made with the people of that time; it lays down guidelines for the Muslims of that period, and tells them what to do should the disbelievers break their agreement; it does not justify killing of nonbelievers today.
When Wilders refers to the Prophet as a "pedophile," we are assuming he is referring to the marriage of the Prophet to Aisha, the daughter of Abu Bakr. Aisha was given to the Prophet as a gift, which was a common practice during that time in Arabia, to form alliances between tribes; the Prophet did not marry Aisha in the traditional sense, so Wilders' claim is negated. In adition, according to several sources, Aisha was baligh [2]when the Prophet (SAWH) married her, which makes sense since the Prophet (SAWH) would not commit forbidden acts.
Next, Wilders quotes Muhammad as stating that he will conquer until everyone is submissive. Our respected reader, consider the verses we quoted for you above, where the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) says "To you is your religion, and to me is mine." We do not see how Wilders can possibly draw a conclusion that "Muhammad's behavior in the Quran" can "inspire jehadists" to kill people, if this was his behavior. The quote Wilders has brought forth has no Quranic relevance, and we take it as a mere fabrication by the government of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman in trying to debase the Prophet (SAWH) to justify their leaderships, and a further fabrication by Wilders to attempt to prove his point with faulty logic.
Unfortunately, Wilders has used, once again, the Middle Eastern ideology and called it Islam by quoting Ayatollah Khomeini. Islam does not teach to "kill and be killed for Allah" since even this killing can be unjust. In several places in the Quran Allah warns Muslims to "not exceed the bounds."
Next, Wilders makes one of the biggest errors in his analysis. His so-called "Al-Haya doctrine" is apparently a sign of danger. In our research, we discovered that this doctrine can be paraphrased as follows: If a Muslim is being hindered from practicing his or her faith, he or she is advised to migrate to a different land where the practicing of religion is free on him or her. The Prophet Muhammad migrated to Medina for this very reason, and the Puritan Christians migrated to the "New World" for this very reason as well. We have already shown the reader the Quranic view on other religions--"Neither shall any fear come upon them, nor shall they grieve" (Quran 2:62), yet Wilders believes that the migration of a religion that teaches religious tolerance is dangerous. This migration law under Islam is not for conquest, but simply to get away from oppression.
Wilders goes on to "coin" a term: Eurabia. Here, the authors of this paper agree with Wilders; indeed, the "Eurabiation" of a nation is evil. However, although Wilders' claim is correct, his reasons are incorrect. He calls veils "evil phenomena," and claims that Islam likes "honored" killings of women. In reality, the Islamic views are quite different from the Arabian views.
We start off by explaining the veil. Indeed, today it is seen as a sign of oppression and cruelty; however, we stress that this is only, once again, due to Arabia's fabrication of Islam. Our honored reader, consider the following verse from the Quran: "O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be
recognized and not annoyed [harassed]. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful" (Quran 33:59); and "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known; and turn to Allah all of you, O believers! so that you may be successful" (Quran 24:31). Based on these verses, we can deduce that:
- The veil has been prescribed to keep women from being harassed.
- The veil has been prescribed so that women "may be recognized" viz. they are not seen as mere objects of physical pleasure, since their sexual attractions (IE. Breasts, curves, etc) are covered; this allows a person to talk to them and get to know them before making any biased judgments based on their physical attractions.
Considering the points made above, we acknowledge that the so-called "Islamic country of the world"--Saudi Arabia--is not an example of the real Islamic view. The veil is prescribed on women, but for their protection only; the Quran and the Hadith (narrations) by the Prophet (SAWH) and his family do not support publicly beating women for not wearing the veil; in fact, the man who raped the woman or looked at her so as to make her uncomfortable even though she was veiled would be the criminal. This, our dear reader, is the same reason why the actions of the former "Islamic" Somali government are not supported by Islam: they stoned a rape victim to death, while beating the four men who raped her very lightly. As Rizvi points out, most Western books (or theses) "reflect the Arab view of female sexuality and not the Islamic view" (31). In other words, the Arab view--namely the beating of women for not veiling themselves--is not the Islamic view.
Wilders talks about several points in the rest of his speech, but we have reputed most of them already. We will now select the highlights of the rest of his speech and conclude thereafter.
Wilders repeatedly claims that women asking for separate gymnasium hours, opposite genders asking for separate campus housing, etc. is a bad thing. If we consider the reasoning behind this separation from a logical perspective, we see that it is, in fact, a noble thing to do. Firstly, the people themselves are asking for this separation; they are not being forced to do so. Secondly, the reader should recall an argument that we gave above concerning the harassment of women. Women, today, are looking to be respected--not because they are CEOs of corporations--rather, they are looking to be respected in a metaphysical manner viz. elevated beyond objects of physical pleasure. We suspect that the main reason people has a problem with separate gymnasium hours for men and women is because the men would prefer looking at a woman's sexual beauty versus respecting her. We see that gymnasiums allow both genders to walk around showing quite a bit of their bodies viz. there is no modest dress code, and this has become acceptable among today's society. Because of this liberal approach, when a man meets a woman at a gymnasium, the first thing he sees of her--and, we might add, he enjoys seeing of her--is her physical beauty. Already, he has degraded her to a sexual object, and any moves made for a "serious" relationship afterwards will most likely be done with the intentions of getting as close to her as possible. Today, women recognize this, and the only faith that gives them freedom from being sexual objects is Islam: "So that they may be recognized and not annoyed [harassed]," and yet discourages women from being tainted as "evil" because of their sexual beauty, as we discuss below.
Wilders' fear of separation may come from the earlier religious philosophies that run on an "all or nothing" basis: total abstinence. However, it is interesting to note that Islam does not encourage abstinence; in reality, it condemns it. The Islamic view of separation is paraphrased as follows: if one is not in a legal relationship with someone from the opposite gender, both should not display any sexual attractions; however, if they enter a legal relationship (I.E.: a relationship done by Islamic standards,) then they are free to do as they wish (Mutahhari Chapter 1). This is the balance that those who cry out against veils do not understand, and it is this balance that women, of all people, are understanding and enjoying. Rizvi comments on this view by stating that Islam teaches "its followers not to suppress their sexual urges, rather to fulfill them but in a responsible way" (21).
Wilders goes on to call Islam a Totalitarian ideology. We have already shown the balance present in Islam, and we have also shown how Islam is governed by a "give the message and leave" philosophy: " To you be your religion, and to me my religion" (Quran 109:6).
We have also shown to the reader the real purpose of the veil, and how it is made to protect women, and not oppress them, but Saudi Arabia and other so-called Islamic countries are fabricating these elements. Further, we have shown that Islam does not wish to dominate; it wishes to coexist (see Quran 2:62,) and the "Jihadist" political ideology is not supported by Islam.
With respect to jihad, we have shown that the more important jihad is that struggle one does against his or herself, and not physically fighting and killing other people (Bihishti and Bahonar 355); we have quoted a narration from the Prophet (SAWH) concerning this. In addition, we have shown that Islam is not a Totalitarian political ideology, but rather an ideology that wishes to coexist with other religions.
We hope that the reader has gained some insight to Islam, and realizes that Wilders claims are those made by his misunderstanding and fabrication of the real teachings of Islam; it is our hope that the reader has understood the actual Islam, and dismisses Wilders claims. His claims have no credibility against the authentic teachings of Islam, which are those taught by the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH)and his descendants. Wilders' claims are only valid if Arabia and Islam become interchangeable, which is not logically possible. In other words, Wilders' speech should have rightfully been labeled as "speaking out against Arabia and the Middle Eastern Arab tradition," not a speech "against Islam." We hope that this distinction has become clear to the reader. Not all Arabs are Muslims, and not all Muslims are Arabs.
References
Behishti, Ayatullah Dr. Muhammad Hosayni, and Hujjatul-Islam Dr. Javad Bahonar. Philosophy of Islam. Salt Lake City: Islamic Publications, 1982.
Hadi al-Hakim, Hujjatul Islam Sayyid Abdul, et al. A Code Of Practice for Muslims in the West. Trans. Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi. Ed. Najim al-Khafaji, BA. London: Imam Ali Foundation, 1998. 5 May 2009. <http://www.shiamasjid.com/books/Code/index.htm>.
Mutahhari, Murtadha. The Islamic Modest Dress. Qum, Islamic Republic of Iran: Dar us Seqafe, N/A. Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project. 7 May 2009. <http://www.al-islam.org/modestdress/title.htm>.
Rizvi, Sayyid Muhammad. Marriage and Morals in Islam
. British Columbia: Vancouver Islamic Educational Foundation, 1990.
[1]SAWH: Arabic for "O Allah (God), bless Muhammad and his family (I.E. Moses, Jesus, Abraham, etc. and the ones who came after him.)"
[2] Baligh: In Arabic, this refers to "reaching maturity" and in Islamic terms refers to the point at which a male or female matures physically. For women, the age is nine, and for men, the age is fifteen. After these periods the male or females are considered physically mature (I.E. women will begin to develop breasts, and men will begin to grow beards..) In adition, sexual impulses are heightened past this stage (Rizvi 59-61).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)