tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249842972024-03-05T19:17:06.430-05:00Stop!...Look at it from THIS perspectiveThis is a blog from a Shia's perspective about Islam. I write about current events and explain why, as a Muslim, I condemn terrorism and do not support Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-7048397024715639072013-06-07T10:35:00.000-04:002013-06-07T10:48:15.162-04:00A Dam to Block the Islamocaust WaveWith all of the controversy surrounding Muslims today, I often find myself asking the question "What's taking the Islamocaust so long to take hold?" At first, I was under the impression that it actually HAS started, but with the access to information at its all-time high due to instant sharing, stories which were "news" ten years ago are no longer newsworthy. However, I don't think things are as morbid as they seem. For instance, at least for now, Muslims in the U.S. still enjoy their freedoms granted to them by God and guaranteed by the Constitution. If a Muslim woman is harassed, she has several organizations that will yell and throw tantrums until she gets her compensation and is allowed to don her Hijab.
<p />
This realization led me to the only other conclusion I could possibly think of, and that is that there are still sensible people around. When I do a post like this, I purposely don't mention Muslim efforts; this way we can eliminate all bias. You will recall <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/10/out-of-darkness-rabbi-supports-ny.html">the story I did on a Rabbi standing up for the New York multi-purpose center</a> which has a prayer area in it. This time, I bring you a similar story, but from a Christian.
<p />
"Wait, a Christian?" one of my readers is likely to ask disapprovingly. Well, yes, and I want to stop you there. What you will read next is an Email from a good friend of mine. He is active in his church and is a strong believer in God. As Muslims, we are very quick to judge other faiths despite our religion demanding that we not do so (Quran 2:62.) Still, a lot of us are stuck on this idea that Muslims MUST hate Christians just because we are Muslims. I daresay that some schools go as far as to say that having friends from different faiths is unacceptable.
<p />
When I took an Islamic Studies course a while back at university, the majority of people there were Christian or Jewish--not Muslim. The reason a lot of them gave for taking the course is that there was a lot of misinformation going around about Islam and they wanted to find out the truth about the religion. Now let me ask you, O humble "pious" Muslim readers: How many of you would take a Bible studies course simply because you wanted to understand Christianity better? There is still a lot of unfounded hatred in our community for Jewish people as well, but what this has done is allowed us to ignore that Jews and Muslims are, in fact, very similar when it comes to traditions and practices. Ask a Jew about their marriages next time you get the chance, and you'll be thoroughly surprised.
<p />
When I met this man at a convention in 2012, he noticed a prayer rug sitting on my bed in my room. He pulled me aside and told me he had found it ("I noticed a prayer rug on your bed. Are you a Muslim?") My first reaction was "O no, I've lost a friend." But his next question caught me completely off guard. "Would you like me to let you know the phases of the day so you can pray on time?" We were in a different state, and adjusting to time differences is difficult, especially for a blind person since you can't see the changes in lighting well enough to determine accurately when it is time for prayers. I was amazed by this reaction to me being Muslim, and this is why I think the Islamocaust hasn't taken hold. Not everyone is brainwashed by the media and active government propaganda against us. He even approached me in such a way so that there was little chance of someone else eavesdropping on our conversation, since he understood that this might have been a sensitive subject and others would not necessarily take kindly to knowing I am Muslim.
<p />
Here is his Email. I have reproduced it with his permission.
<blockquote>
Subject: from World War Two until now <br />From: Bruce Radtke<br />To: Munawar Bijani
<p />
Dear Munawar,
You are in my thoughts. Yesterday at our public library I attended an event that publicized a community reading of a book about the Japanese-American
experience during World War II. It's a novel by Guterson called SNOW FALLING ON CEDARS, set in our area of the nation. Since you live in Florida, perhaps
you have only a little familiarity with what happened to Japanese-Americans on the West Coast. Soon after Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941, a Presidential
Proclamation uprooted all Japanese-Americans, whether US citizens or not, who lived on the West Coast and required their "internment." In reality, 120,000
women, children and men were placed in concentration camps until the end of the war. Men who refused to sign the loyalty oaths were sent to federal prisons,
but those who pledged allegiance only to the USA were placed in Japanese-American-only army troops that later were recognized for their bravery. I'm of
German descent, but no German-Americans or Italian-Americans were sent to concentration camps just because of their ethnicity. It was a blatant example
of national racism to place all Japanese-Americans in miserable concentration camps. The Supreme Court upheld all these actions.
<p />
Yesterday we listened
to some panel members who lived through that experience and described its effects, mostly negative. Several times these panel members from all over our
state warned the audience that today we Americans are tempted to discriminate and abuse American residents and citizens who are Muslims, not because of
their crimes, but because of their religion and sometimes only their ancestors' origin in the Middle East. I live in a town with a university, so I was
pleased to see the warm welcome these speakers received, but I know that drawing a parallel between how we treated the Japanese-Americans during World
War Two and how we treat Muslims today might not be typical in many places in the USA.
<p />
Guantanamo remains open, with some "detainees" or prisoners who
have never been tried and should be released. I recall seeing your anger displayed on Facebook over treatment of Muslims, and I encourage you to speak
clearly about the bigotry you perceive. There are many examples in our world of how silence can lead to disaster repeatedly, while truth-speaking has
the potential for possible confrontation but ultimately a potential for healing and achieving belated justice. I want to stand beside you.
Your friend, Bruce
</blockquote>
<p />
People who think along these lines are perhaps the only reason Muslims still enjoy their freedoms. As long as there are a few people like Bruce who can put faith differences aside and call things for what they are, I'm not worried about our situation. So thank you Bruce for being open-minded and not being afraid to voice your support despite the heavily anti-Islam public opinion. Your message is like a beacon of light among all the negativity and your efforts will go a long way. You've truly defined what it means to be brothers bound by common Abrahamic roots.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-18964301139538586482012-12-22T12:01:00.001-05:002012-12-22T12:04:01.384-05:00"This is Snake": Another Radical Wahabi Fundamentalist Islamist Is downIn my last post, I wrote about how we need to <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2012/12/cia-foils-another-underwear-bomb-plot.html">realize just how much our government is actively doing to keep us safe</a>. In <a href = "http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/17/feds-arrest-man-who-tried-to-blow-up-federal-reserve-bank-in-nyc-sources-say/">this latest incident</a>, the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) tracked a man from Bangladesh who had come to the U.S. to blow up a federal building. This attack was to be carried out, of all places, in New York.
<blockquote>
The 21-year-old suspect, Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis, attempted to detonate what he thought was a 1,000-pound bomb in front of the Fed building on Liberty Street, but the device was a fake supplied to him by undercover FBI agents who had been tracking his activity, the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force said Wednesday afternoon.
</blockquote>
I've never seen someone with five parts of names before. I wonder when a terrorist will just call himself John Doe, since he'll be one of millions who will blow themselves up.
<p />
Nafis apparently came to the U.S. on a student visa to attend university. What a way to put the spotlight on Bangladeshi people now, Nafis.
<p />
He was also starting to recruit people to form a terrorist cell, and had links to Al-Qaeda. In other words, they were planning to attack us from inside again, but they weren't able to because of our government's excellent counter-terrorism division.
<p />
As a Muslim I'm glad he was tagged when he arrived and a deadly attack was thwarted. The last thing we need is another of these radical Salaf / Wahabi people killing innocent Americans because they're jealous that they can't run their country correctly and we can run ours really well. I've always wanted to say this: "Go suck it, Al-Qaeda, we've gotten smarter than you. Game over."Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-56835855148513410942012-12-19T05:36:00.000-05:002012-12-19T05:49:03.157-05:00Al-Qaeda, We Can See What You're Hiding Down There: Go CrotchlessIt is human nature to focus on negative or undesirable consequences of an event. So often, especially as Americans, we complain about the state of affairs and how nothing the government is doing is helping us.
<p />
Take the Arab Spring, for instance. On the one hand the Muslim Brotherhood, a radical organization, has taken power. On the other hand (the often overlooked one) Egypt is slowly but surely stabalizing.
<p />
Today, in the Age of Information, we have come to expect immediate results, and have become less accepting to letting history take its course. Instead of allowing General Motors to file bankrupcy and fail which would have forced the company to restructure, our president authorized a bailout of the company, later using "General Motors is alive" as his misguided campaign slogan. Prominent Capitalists, including Mitt Romney, were against this approach because, in the words of <a href = "http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/">Nassim Taleb</a>, big, sloppy businesses failing will make other businesses stronger, assuming the businesses are not dependent on each other. In other words, Capitalism should be allowed to run its course--except, of course, in case where not rescuing a business will have catastrophic consequences (E.G. banks.)
<p />
The same philosophy applies to Egypt. For a government to evolve it takes time, but every so often we see an outburst of anger from the West when something goes on in Egypt that appears to move the country away from progress.
<p />
In fact, we are so used to jumping up and down over "the Middle East is this" and "those radical jihadists need to die" that we fail to realize how much our government is doing back home to <a href = "http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/05/08/152295143/cia-informant-posed-as-a-would-be-bomber-to-foil-underwear-bomb-plot">keep us safe</a>.
<blockquote>
A new key detail has emerged in the foiled underwear bomb plot: NPR's Dina Temple-Raston reports that a CIA informant posed as a suicide bomber in order to persuade the al-Qaida branch in Yemen to hand over a new, more sophisticated underwear bomb.
<p />
The operation was a joint effort between the CIA and Saudi Arabian intelligence and once the informant received the bomb, he "arranged to deliver the explosive device to U.S. and other intelligence authorities waiting in another country, officials said Tuesday."
<p />
Officials have said that the bomber had been instructed by al-Qaida to choose a U.S.-bound flight to target but that the bomber, who we now know was a double agent, had not yet bought his tickets.
</blockquote>
Because of the Christmas Day bomber, the CIA got smarter and infiltrated Al-Qaeda's ranks even deeper than they already had. They managed to stop another attempted airplane bombing. This is an example of a success story where possibly hundreds of people who were boarding a plane were saved because of the CIA's work.
<p />
Notice also that this was a "joint effort" with, of all places, Saudi Arabia. I don't know if they're cooperating because they are stakeholders in the U.S. economy or if they genuinely want to stop terrorists; nonetheless, I was glad to see that they actually do work with the CIA.
<p />
Next time you feel like security measures put in place aren't helping, think of this story. It definitely changed my mind.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-48116940041668817412012-12-13T13:04:00.000-05:002012-12-13T13:04:17.496-05:00NYPD Conspires Against MuslimsThe phrase "conspiracy theorist" is widely used in the U.S. today. Usually, people who are dubbed conspiracy theorists are seen as insane, "off the rocker," "thinking too much," or "making a big deal out of nothing." One of the big ones that comes to mind are the 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
<p />
The 9/11 conspiracy theorists argue that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were spearheaded by the U.S. government to provide a populus justification for waging war on Iraq. They even go far enough to argue that Bush Junior carried out the 9/11 attacks under his father's direction so that his father can get revenge for and attain closure with Desert Storm.
<p />
These theories have been dismissed by quite a few people simply because they are just that--theories. Further, they have been disproved time and again by various credible sources including INDEPENDENT investigation teams.
<p />
Another theory that popped up after the attacks was mainly circulated among Muslims. This theory asserts that the government is plotting against Muslims because they fear Islam. At first, I scoffed at it. Recently, though, this has changed.
<p />
I was given an article by a friend of mine that talks about <a href = "http://bigstory.ap.org/article/informant-nypd-paid-me-bait-muslims">informants planted to purposely make Muslims say things that will get them flagged as threats</a>. But wait, why not other people? Simply because this only works with Muslims. You can't take a White man who doesn't even remotely look Arab and get him talking about "violent jihad" and expect people to take him seriously.
<p />
This case deals with the NYPD (New York Police Department.)
<blockquote>
A paid informant for the New York Police Department's intelligence unit was under orders to "bait" Muslims into saying inflammatory things as he lived a double life, snapping pictures inside mosques and collecting the names of innocent people attending study groups on Islam, he told The Associated Press.
<p />
Shamiur Rahman, a 19-year-old American of Bangladeshi descent who has now denounced his work as an informant, said police told him to embrace a strategy called "create and capture." He said it involved creating a conversation about jihad or terrorism, then capturing the response to send to the NYPD. For his work, he earned as much as $1,000 a month and goodwill from the police after a string of minor marijuana arrests.
</blockquote>
Before you start the "well anyone can say that" argument, let me point out that this is from the Associated Press, so it lends itself some credibility.
<p />
I appreciate that Rahman actually came forward and disclosed what he did. I have a lot of respect for him for doing that. It must have been nerve-wracking, to know that what is actually going on in the local government and that his life could be at stake for whistle blowing.
<blockquote>
"We need you to pretend to be one of them," Rahman recalled the police telling him. "It's street theater."
<p />
Rahman said he now believes his work as an informant against Muslims in New York was "detrimental to the Constitution." After he disclosed to friends details about his work for the police — and after he told the police that he had been contacted by the AP — he stopped receiving text messages from his NYPD handler, "Steve," and his handler's NYPD phone number was disconnected.
</blockquote>
Yes, you read that correctly. They actually tasked him with "being one of THEM." The operation is so undercover that he is not even told the name of his "handler."
<blockquote>
Informants ... are a central component of the NYPD's wide-ranging programs to monitor life in Muslim neighborhoods since the 2001 terrorist attacks. Police officers have eavesdropped inside Muslim businesses, trained video cameras on mosques and collected license plates of worshippers. Informants who trawl the mosques ... tell police what the imam says at sermons and provide police lists of attendees, even when there's no evidence they committed a crime.
</blockquote>
Let me break this down for you. Since September 11, 2001, NYPD (and probably other law-enforcement departments as well) are planting actors inside Muslim communities. These actors have a simple mission objective: to put these Muslims in a spot where they will say something that can potentially be viewed as a threat, or they will use words that will raise alarms. For instance, if I say "I'm going to commit radical jihad," it is different from "I don't like radical Arabs." However, to the NYPD they are one and the same. I used the word "radical" so I must be "one of THEM."
<p />
Further, the NYPD will be quick to deny these allegations (of course, "don't mess with our surveillance--we're 'keeping Americans safe.'") That's what disgusts me about this incident. In the name of security, the government is quite literally spying on us and finding any excuse to drag us away. I've often joked with my friends that I'm probably on a watch list for keeping this blog and being open about my religious identity. The article brings this to reality, to where it's no longer a laughing matter. Apparently, going to a Mosque or Islamic center is also an act of terrorism. Thank you Taliban and Hamas for storing your bases under Muslim places of worship, and thank you Americans for being so ignorant and uneducated that you think they represent all of us. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this how the roundup of Japanese-Americans started after Pearl Harbor?Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-25604332217834181492012-10-20T08:22:00.000-04:002012-10-20T08:22:13.498-04:00Anti-Islam AdsGathering support for a lost cause is often a challenging task. Usually, people tend to be smart enough to recognize a lie when they see or hear it. Today, a lot of people understand that Islam is nothing like the violent, demonic religion propagandists have made it out to be in order to swing public opinion in support of the war effort. This is why people like Pamela Geller are now turning to more aggressive means of spreading their propaganda, as if to wave their hands in the air and say "Hey! Remember me? Remember me? I'm still here. Remember..."
<p />
The anti-Islam propaganda campaign has turned to <a href = "http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/08/anti-jihad-ads-make-their-way-to-d-c-subways/">buying advertisement space</a> on subways in Washington D.C. Imagine that. People no longer believe the anti-Islam rhetoric, so Pam Geller will start pushing her ideas onto a new group of people.
<blockquote>
An anti-jihad ad that has caused a stir in other cities now has another destination for its message: the subways of Washington.
<p />
The ad by the American Freedom Defense Initiative states, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”
</blockquote>
If this was an actual government organization, we'd be in the full swing of the Islamocaust by now. But of course this is an independent organization so no one can stop them.
<blockquote>
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is working with the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and Jewish Voice for Peace, knows it can’t get the ads removed. Instead, the groups want the D.C. transit officials to help reduce the negative impact of the posters.
<p />
“With respect to your response in this matter, it is not our desire that (the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority) disallow advertisements that contain any political speech,” the Council on American-Islamic Relations said in a statement. “I do believe there are measures WMATA can take to mitigate the affect hate speech has on the community.”
<p />
These measures include working with organizations representing affected Muslim and Arab communities, placing disclaimers to show that the transit authority does not support the views of the ads, and providing free space for advertisements focused on promoting, understanding and tolerance, the Islamic group says.
</blockquote>
I like CAIR's approach. They're actually working with other organizations to counter the ads, not shouting "Jihad!" and blowing people up. Ironically, anti-Islam propagandists will still point to the Middle East and use the Arab definition of Islam instead of CAIR's definition so that they can further their agenda of ethnic cleansing.
<blockquote>
“The counter-ads are fine from a free speech standpoint,” Geller said. “But where were these groups countering ‘hate’ when the Fogel family was murdered in Israel? Or when the Chabad house was targeted for a bloody jihad attack in Mumbai? Or when Christians are persecuted on an increasingly frequent and violent basis in Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia and elsewhere?”
</blockquote>
Geller, where were you when <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2012/09/rachel-corrie.html">Israel killed Rachel Corrie</a>? Where were you when a <a href = "http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/man-arrested-in-plot-to-blow-up-48-churches-in-oklahoma/">non-Muslim plotted to blow up forty-eight churches</a> in the United States? Where were you when <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2011/07/geert-wilders-politician-turned-murder.html">Anders Breivik killed over seventy people</a> because he hated Muslims? If you want to use that argument against us, I can bring a lot more evidence forward to show you that these same people you are supporting are guilty of acts of terrorism just as bad as Arab terrorist groups, so your argument actually has no ground.
<blockquote>
Authorities in Oklahoma have arrested and charged a 23-year-old man who they say planned to blow up 48 area churches.
<p />
Gregory Arthur Weiler II was arrested last week at a motel in Miami, Oklahoma, according to Ben Loring, first assistant district attorney for Ottawa County.
<p />
Authorities were tipped off to the plot by workers at the motel about 90 miles northeast of Tulsa. One discovered a duffel bag full of Molotov cocktails near the outside trash, while a room service employee reported suspicious items in Weiler's room, said Loring.
</blockquote>
How conveniently these people ignore these other incidents! Instead of the foiled plan to blow up FORTY-EIGHT churches, another terrorist in New York, who has an Arab name, gets all the media attention for <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/17/justice/new-york-federal-reserve-terror-plot/index.html">attempting to blow up a government building</a> with ONE bomb.
<blockquote>
Federal authorities running a sting operation arrested a 21-year-old Bangladeshi man, who came to the U.S. on a student visa and was allegedly planning to blow up the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with what he believed was a 1,000-pound bomb, officials said.
<p />
Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis was detained Wednesday after an alleged attempt to detonate the device, which was inert and part of an elaborate investigation by federal authorities and NYPD detectives.
<p />
Prosecutors say Nafis was apparently motivated by al Qaeda and traveled to the United States in January under the pretext of attending college in Missouri in order [to] carry out "a terrorist attack on U.S. soil" and to recruit members to form a terrorist cell.
<p />
It's not clear whether Nafis maintained al Qaeda ties, but authorities say he apparently claimed that the plot was his own, and that it was his sole motivation for the U.S. trip.
</blockquote>
Practically everyone has heard of this latest attempt to blow up a government building, but almost no one has heard of the other man's plot. Sound familiar? This is an example of the clear bias in media coverage as well as public opinion. Pam Geller will ever so elegantly turn a blind eye to the attempted church bombings and point at one single Arab to call Islam a terrorist's religion, when she's hesitant to call Israel's government terrorism as well for killing Corie and then disclaiming all accountability.
<p />
The good news is, it is becoming clear that Geller's message is starting to fall on deaf ears thanks to CAIR and Muslims in the United States no longer hiding behind shuttered blinds. If she has to go as far as posting ads on subways denouncing Islam, then her message is indeed in a very dire state.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-34966481219219203342012-09-30T09:21:00.001-04:002012-09-30T11:20:20.989-04:00Protesting the Protests: Don't Shoot, I'm InnocentThere used to be one significance about the date September 11th--the day when Wahabi terrorists flew planes into the World Trade Centers and killed over 3,000 people. Since then, a lot of us have laughed or rolled our eyes at the U.S. government when threat alerts go up on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks. We argue that no one would be dumb enough to attack a U.S. government compound on this date again for as long as the United States is around.
<p />
This idea has been realized by the terrorists, and this year, 2012, they took advantage of it.
<p />
It started out as a peaceful protest in the Middle East against a video released which mocks Prophet Muhammad (SAWH.) However, the protest quickly evolved when the Muslim Brotherhood got involved. While there wasn't much destruction even then, terrorists used the protest as an excuse to attack the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya. I have remained quiet on these protests and attacks so far since the facts are still coming in and, unlike Hillary Clinton, I didn't want to make any preemptive judgments.
<p />
The attack on the embassy killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya, causing both presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Obama to give speeches condemning the attacks along with their usual political rhetoric. Both president and presidential candidate used the opportunity to <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/meast/egpyt-us-embassy-protests/index.html">make political moves against the other side</a>, which wasn't taken lightly by Americans.
<blockquote>
(The U.S. embassy in Egypt) said in a statement that it "condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."
<p />
"Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy," the statement said. "We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."
<p />
The embassy statement set off a political spat back in the United States after the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, criticized its message and linked it to his opponent for the White House.
<p />
"It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks," Romney said in a statement released late Tuesday.
<p />
...
<p />
"We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Governor Romney would choose to launch a political attack," Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesman said in an email.
</blockquote>
<p />
Hillary Clinton quite literally condemned Libyans in the hours following the attack, saying that the U.S. helped Libya and that it was a disgrace to kill the U.S. ambassador. I knew we'd hear something like that eventually, now that Libya is tied with assistance-debt and obligation to the U.S. for helping.
<p />
After Hillary burned a critical bridge with Libya, evidence came out that the attack on the embassy was, in fact, a terrorist attack and not part of the protests. <a href = "http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/27/defense-secretary-says-benghazi-assault-was-planned-terror-attack/">U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in this article</a> that it was clear that those "were terrorists who planned that attack." However, by this time it's already too late for Hillary to take back what she said right after the attack. Libyans have already been shown her arrogance, and I doubt they will take her as credible again for rushing to judgment so quickly.
<p />
Even so, the current administration still tried to save face when the evidence was released.
<blockquote>
Panetta's comments are the most definitive to date by an administration official that the Benghazi assault was planned. The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said on September 16th that the attack "began spontaneously" as a protest against an anti-Muslim film that "spun" from there.
</blockquote>
In other words, they finally gave in and admitted that the script they gave Hillary was "jumping the gun." It was an "oops" moment for the administration.
<blockquote>
Last week, testifying to Congress, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center said, at that point, there was no indication of "significant" plotting.
<p />
"What we don't have at this point is specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or coordination for this attack," Matt Olsen said.
</blockquote>
You can see here that at the time Hillary condemned Libya, the investigation was still preliminary. Passing judgment like that was uncalled for and very disappointing. If I was a Libyan, I would not have taken it lightly at all.
<p />
The attackers had rocket launchers and were heavily armed. They knew exactly what they were doing, so even initial reports coming from the area pointed to the fact that these people were prepared, and used the protests as a cover-up. Still, to further our agenda of making Muslims look like terrorists to keep the support of international war crimes up, the administration will blame the attack on all of Libya, when it actually wasn't Libya at all.
<p />
I came across an <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/17/world/africa/libya-benghazi-video/index.html">article that talks about LIBYANS carrying the ambassador to a hospital</a>. Ever wonder who transported him? It wasn't his faithful Americans who, among heightened tensions in the Middle East, slashed the military's budget, leaving the consulate unsecured.
<blockquote>
The chaos is palpable, as a throng of Libyans frantically scramble outside a damaged building. Suddenly, a man's body is carried from inside toward an open window -- and the frenzy and sounds become even more urgent, more emotional.
<p />
"Get him out!" some yell.
<p />
After joyfully discovering the man -- a foreigner, apparently, a voice in the crowd says -- is alive after he's dragged out, fresh screams ring out.
<p />
"Allahu Akbar," which translates from Arabic to "God is great," men in the crowd shout. Others raise fists to the sky, seemingly rejoicing that this man has somehow survived.
</blockquote>
So Allahu akbar doesn't mean "we're going to kill you and your family" anymore? I like how CNN only provides the translation when they're forced to, since their readers are now asking "but wait, didn't you say this was a war cry? Why are they shouting a war cry and celebrating when he's alive?" Then CNN sighs and says "We lied." I'm not surprised.
<p />
At any rate, if you watch the video you will see the celebration. How happy Libyans are that they saved the U.S. ambassador. These are the people Hillary condemned. Unfortunately, the ambassador died from smoke inhalation later on, but he clearly wasn't purposely killed by Libyans. The terrorists got the last laugh because they succeeded in their mission, but Libyans actually tried to thwart the terrorists' efforts. Shouldn't they get credit for that? Yes? So why didn't I hear Hillary apologize for condemning them and then thanking them for trying to save a U.S. diplomat? Because the administration doesn't work that way. We're quick to condemn, but not quick to thank. Think of people you know who are like that. Have you ever done something for someone and they give you hell instead of thanking you? What are your impressions of that person? Now consider this situation from Libya's perspective.
<p />
Today, it's common knowledge that one of the best ways to start protests in the Middle East and anger Muslims abroad is to mock their prophet. Despite credible evidence against claims such as Muhammad being a womanizer, mad man, or murderer, anti-Islam rhetoric continues especially in the U.S. where several groups and individuals use such propaganda to swing the public opinion towards favoring demolishing the Middle East. Politicians such as Geert Wilders and Adam Hasner are also guilty of this as well, so we can't argue the government is innocent in any way.
<p />
If we know that these claims against Prophet Muhammad are false, and that making a video about them like Geert Wilders' video "Fitna" will cause unrest, yet we do it anyway, what could our reasoning possibly be? Only one thing comes to mind--the video was purposely put online and circulated to cause the unrest. Once again, anti-Islam activists have blood on their hands, and those involved can <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2011/07/geert-wilders-politician-turned-murder.html">join Geert Wilders</a>.
<blockquote>
Posted in July on YouTube, (the video) got more notice recently after Egyptian television aired segments and anti-Islam activists promoted it online. Numerous questions surround the film, which includes cartoonish scenes of Mohammed as a womanizer, child molester and ruthless killer.
<p />
According to a FBI/Homeland Security joint statement, the film's producer identified himself to news media as an Israeli -- an assertion Israel's government denies -- and falsely claimed the movie was financed with help from more than 100 Jewish donors.
</blockquote>
He releases a video, and further claims it was funded by Jewish donors. Why would he do such a thing? The only logical answer to this question is that he is familiar with Arab-Israel tensions and knows that if he injects this false claim into the production, it will help add fuel to the fire. Then, he will be able to point to the Arabs and claim "See how they are? I was right!"
<p />
I find it odd that this man can inject a false claim into his production efforts and Islam haters still believe the words that come out of his mouth; it shows how ignorant these groups, individuals and politicians promoting anti-Islam propaganda are.
<p />
Wait, his debasement doesn't stop there.
<blockquote>
While he'd been identified in July 2011 by various names, including Sam Bassiel, federal officials now say they believe the filmmaker's name is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. He was convicted in 2009 of bank fraud, with the indictment from the U.S. Attorney's Office listing seven aliases.
</blockquote>
A criminal made a low-quality film spreading lies about Prophet Muhammad and people actually believe him?
<blockquote>
A production staffer said he believed the filmmaker was a Coptic Christian who also went by the name Abenob Nakoula Bassely.
</blockquote>
Even his own team doesn't know who he really is. Still, anti-Islam propagandists don't care about any of that; to them the content is just as credible. Then again, we can't expect anything more from them if they already believe Geert Wilders' claims and say that everyone who argues against Wilders is going on their own assumptions and has no evidence, despite <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">the contrary</a>.
<p />
The anti-Islam propagandists will also ignore the peaceful protests, or <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/meast/egpyt-us-embassy-protests/index.html">Muslims denouncing the protests</a>.
<blockquote>
"These protests are a bad image for Egypt," said a Cairo street vendor named Ahmed. "Of course I'm against insulting Islam, but it's the undereducated, poor people who are out here causing problems."
<p />
"All I want for Egypt is security and stability," he said. "And as you can see this isn't it."
</blockquote>
Still, to the anti-Islam activists, it's "all Muslims are terrorists."
<p />
Sometimes, the way God does things leaves me speechless. Remember the <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/selective-responding-we-do-what-we-feel.html">Fathima Bary case</a> where eventually the teenage girl was <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/09/fathima-rifqa-bary-investigative-report.html">found to be full of lies</a> and <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/01/fathima-rifqa-bary-truth-has-prevailed.html">Global Revolution church was disbanded</a> because of the evidence leveled against them? Now the evidence is coming out that Mr. Video Creator--whatever his name is--is actually a criminal who just wanted a good laugh.
<p />
As more questions are being answered, we recently found that there was an extremist Coptic church in California that was responsible for the film. Further, Terry Jones, the man responsible for "International Burn the Quran Day" was directly involved in the film's production. Coptic Christians and Egyptians have been at odds going back generations, and even more since the Muslim Brotherhood took power in Egypt after the Arab Spring revolution.
<p />
In addition to the film's producer being a criminal, <a href = "http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/09/13/innocence-muslims-producer-identity-questioned-actors-say-were-duped/">evidence is mounting against the legitimacy of the film</a>. Several actors have claimed they were lied to and had been given a script that was portrayed as anything but debasing Prophet Muhammad. As Fox reports:
<blockquote>
In a statement issued to multiple outlets from the film’s cast and crew, they said (they) were “shocked by the drastic re-writes of the script and lies that were told to all involved.” No specific representative was named in the statement, however. Most of the dialogue that relates to Islam or religion in the trailer looks like it was overdubbed in post-production, with many suggesting that the dialogue was translated with words (from) something completely different to lines delivered.
<p />
One of the film’s actors, Cindy Lee Garcia, 43, from Bakersfield, Calif., who had a small role as a woman who’s daughter is given to Muhammad to marry, said in multiple interviews that she had no idea she was involved in such an offensive movie, and that (she) was simply given a script entitled “Desert Warriors.” Garcia also said that her lines were changed to be far more inflammatory in post-production.
<p />
Another unnamed actress reportedly claimed that the original script did not contain a Prophet Muhammad character, but rather a man named “George,” and several actors reportedly complained that their lines were altered.
</blockquote>
<p />
Also, the producer's original claim that the movie cost $5,000,000.00 to develop has been called into question.
<blockquote>
The supposedly two-hour feature is said to have cost $5 million to make, with “mom and pop” donations coming in from across the world, although many are scratching their heads with regards to how the clearly unprofessional, no-name and no production value film – as projected by the 13-minute trailer – could possibly have cost that much.
<p />
“There is absolutely no way that film could have cost five million,” one independent film producer told FoxNews.com. “More likely, five dollars… It looks like a hoax.”
</blockquote>
<p />
The article also claims that the movie was produced under a fictitious company name, and that there was no permit given for large-scale release although an early version was shown in Vine Theater, and "fewer than ten seats in the theater were filled."
<p />
Can any smart person still believe the video's content after it was made in such a way?
<p />
As we've denounced the filmmakers and those who believe it on the anti-Muslim side, the same applies to people who protest the film. If you're foundation in Islam is so weak that one video created in low quality by a criminal makes you so mad you <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/world/meast/embassy-attacks-main/index.html">go and burn your country</a> and condemn the U.S., I don't know what to tell you.
<blockquote>
Many of them (the protesters) directed their anger, too, at the U.S. government and its Israeli allies. In Cairo, for instance, a photo showed a man standing over chalk-writing, in Arabic, that read, "Remember your black day 11 September."
</blockquote>
The man mentioned in the quote is perfectly okay with standing for prayers and saying "Keep me on the straight path. ... The path of those whom you have blessed" (Quran surah 1), yet he condemns an entire nation and indirectly threatens to wipe out an entire people over a damn video which is false in the first place. Where are this man's priorities, and where are the priorities of the rest of the violent protesters? If one video makes you kill someone without even blinking an eye, I venture to say that you have no idea what religion's prophet you are "fighting jihad for." The only people who had it right were the Libyans who tried to save an innocent American, and the peaceful protesters who wouldn't dream of taking a life or burning down their own country which is trying to make a future for itself after it went through the Arab Spring and removed Hosni from power. Islam is larger than one criminal's video and Terry Jones' burning of the Quran. These anti-Islamic acts are no excuse to go kill an innocent person when that person probably knows more about your religion than you do. It seems like the only thing these violent protesters are good at is releasing a fatwa. Ask them about the philosophical nature about Islam or how Islam has given you inner peace or what Islam says about the blessed Prophet Jesus or what Islam says about the Abrahamic roots and you will leave them stumbling for words. This is the problem with Muslims today. We're shallow-minded when we hold the answer to one of the greatest religions to ever exist, but we throw it all away because someone released a video about the Prophet.
<p />
Did the video change anything? Did anyone who knows the real Islam believe it? No. The only people who even considered its contents to be factual already hate Islam, since no smart person would believe such a blatant fabrication, especially after evidence was released about the producers.
<p />
Last term, I took a course at university called "Islamic Thought and Culture" and the professor asked each of us why we were in his course. Several people said that Terry Jones was burning Qurans and talking trash about Islam, so they wanted to find out what Islam really was instead of what Jones was saying about it. O yes, I forgot to mention, my Arab kill-Americans-over-a-video friends! The people who took the course to get the real side of Islam WERE AMERICANS. So if you're a Muslim and whether you're American or Arab and if you support the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks, you're horribly misguided and you need to step out of your protective bubble.
<blockquote>
Small and large demonstrations have occurred in recent days all around North Africa and the Middle East. While some protesters say they have not seen any of the online film, they were incensed by reports of its depiction of the Prophet Mohammed.
</blockquote>
These are the types of people we are dealing with. Of course, your <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/03/terrorism-negated-by-religious-ideology.html">extremist fundamentalist violent jihadist terrorist</a> media will purposely keep the facts away from you. Essentially, a lot of these people protesting don't even know really what happened and they are so ignorant that one report by state-run media will get them going. The media probably ignored the fact that the group creating the video has criminal ties. All they mentioned is that the group is Coptic, when the Egyptian Coptic Christians had nothing to do with the film and were living with Muslims as brothers before the protests started.
<p />
I'm disgusted by the stupidity of these Muslims. Haven't you heard about the murder of Imam Ali (A.S) when the man stabbed him with the sword and he was dying, how he told the guards who had captured his killer before he died that they should give the murderer milk because he saw the murderer was thirsty? Further, when they asked Ali what they should do with the man, he told them that the man should be struck with the sword just as he struck Ali, but not to hurt him (give him a light blow and minus the poison so as not to kill him) and let him go. By contrast, the Muslim protesters will kill people who haven't even touched them, and are with them in condemning the video.
<p />
These are also the same people who will torture prisoners of war when Prophet Muhammad always treated prisoners well and condemned torturing them. He made sure their women were also taken care of while the men were held prisoner lest someone takes advantage of the women, and when he conquered Mecca he didn't kill any of the civilians; in fact, he brought more just laws to the land.
<p />
These protesters, during the Arab Spring, have been known to torture people who were on the side of the opposition. During the U.S.-led wars, they would capture American JOURNALISTS (not even military personnel) and behead them, when their Prophet wouldn't even let his people so much as strike prisoners of war, let alone kill journalists. Look at how they err!
<p />
But of course, these Muslims don't know the real Islam. From birth they've been conditioned to take America as the common enemy and support September 11th, 2001 because they've been told that America was attacked and are never told (or don't care because they are heartless) that innocent people died--including Muslims. In fact, some of them are so heartless they'll <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/17/world/asia/afghan-children-suicide-blast/index.html">turn an innocent kid into a suicide bomber</a> and make him blow himself up amongst a bunch of other innocent kids. I'd like to take you inside a hospital and introduce you to one of the kids injured in the blast.
<blockquote>
Recovering in one of the wards is 17-year-old Naweed Tanha. He was badly injured on September 8 when a teenage suicide bomber blew himself up outside ISAF Headquarters in Kabul. It was the 55th suicide bombing in Afghanistan this year. "We were all selling bracelets in that place," explains Naweed, quietly sitting on a bench outside, happy to get out of the crammed hospital ward. His right hand is thickly bandaged after the explosion tore a chunk off his palm. His legs and back were also badly injured after being flung ten meters by the force of the blast.
</blockquote>
You're suicide bombing your own countrymen? Why? Who in their right minds would do such a thing?
<blockquote>
"I was with my friends -- we're all poor, innocent people. I was a few meters away getting some water from the nearby water hand pump and as I was returning the bang happened," Naweed says.
<p />
"By the time I opened my eyes I saw myself injured and saw bodies of my other friends laying on the ground. I started crying and running towards them when police stopped me. They put me in a car and brought me here to the hospital. "
</blockquote>
Killing adults, people you hate, military personnel, and government officials is one thing; killing an innocent child is quite another thing. This is the part Western media and propagandists leave out when they start their anti-Islam rhetoric--that even Muslims are a victim of terrorism. So is it logical for a religion that supposedly promotes violence to kill someone who supposedly promotes violence?
<blockquote>
Four were killed in the blast, including 14-year-old Khorshid Hawa and her 10-year-old sister Parwana. "I am so upset for losing my friends," says Naweed, his eyes dark, his pupils bloodshot from crying. But he has no more tears to shed -- just hurt and anger oozes from his body. "What kind of people would do this? Why are they continuing to do this? It is ruining our country and our future."
</blockquote>
Yes, they are, unfortunately, ruining your future. These terrorists won't let you progress, and now they're getting so desperate they took a kid who would have been part of your future and brainwashed him. They are now using child soldiers against child soldiers, and yet they're perfectly ok with claiming to follow Prophet Muhammad. Did Muhammad tell you to go kill kids? On the contrary, he was always making better lives for orphaned kids, to the point where a narration from him says to not even hug your child in front of an orphan kid so you don't entice sadness in the orphan's heart. This is the type of man the Prophet was, and yet his people have gone so astray.
<p />
Observe the anger in Naweed's statements. He's not mad at the U.S., he's mad at the terrorists. So those of you who think these terrorists are Muslim, think of Naweed the next time you find yourselves nodding at something Wilders or Spencer say.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-54411580417036741772012-09-01T05:34:00.003-04:002012-09-01T05:40:23.301-04:00A Modern-Day MartyrBlind love is dangerous. Everyone knows that. It is often the cause for problems later on because one partner refuses to believe the other was not good for him or her. This is despite friends repeatedly telling the soon-to-be victim to get out of the relationship because they are looking at it from the outside in and can see things more clearly that the person actually involved in the relationship.
<p />
Often times, when we hear of partners being shot to death by a stalker who used to be intimately involved with the victim, we ask ourselves "What made them come together in the first place?" We shake our heads at the stupidity of some people to not be able to foresee a brewing explosion.
<p />
One of the biggest victims existing today is the United States. George Washington had given us a very profound piece of knowledge when he told us not to get involved in "entangling alliances." The United States' relationship with Israel is just that--the very thing Washington was against.
<p />
Our alliance with Israel has become so muddled that even when <a href = "http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/28/father-of-corrie-investigation-not-thorough-or-credible/">Israel commits a criminal act</a>, we have to keep our mouths shut. The story talks about Rachel Corrie, an activist who was against Israel bulldozing Palestinian houses in Gaza. She was killed by one of the demolitions, and nine years later Israel has acquitted all persons involved in her death.
<blockquote>
Nine years after an American activist was crushed by an Israeli army bulldozer, an Israeli civil court ruled Tuesday that Rachel Corrie's death was an accident.
<p />
Corrie, 23, was killed in 2003 while trying to block the bulldozer from razing Palestinian homes.
<p />
Her parents filed suit against Israel's Ministry of Defense in a quest for accountability and sought just $1 in damages. But Judge Oded Gershon ruled Tuesday that the family has no right to damages, backing an earlier Israeli investigation that cleared any soldier of wrongdoing.
</blockquote>
A twenty-three-year-old was killed by Israeli forces and Israel's own government says this is all well and good. Still, they have U.S. aircraft landed there and have a U.S. backed military. Consider, for one moment, if Iran, Iraq, or Pakistan did something similar. First, Obama would surely be on the microphone in an instant condemning the acts and saying that these countries should be neutralized or disarmed. Next, Robert Spencer and Geert Wilders would be releasing blog post after blog post mocking Islam and calling these acts proof that Islam loves killing people, not to mention women. These posts would somehow lead into proof that because Arab countries killed a woman, Islam hates women and it advocates for their oppression. These posts would have the words Shariah, Jihadist, and Islamist scattered throughout.
<p />
Yet when Israel commits murder, it's quiet. In fact, I didn't even see this article about Corrie on the front page of CNN; I had to search for it, and I read the news headlines almost daily. I got wind of this incident from Facebook... Go figure. So the article was probably on the front page for a very short while, unlike its radical jihadist Islamist extremist counterpart.
<p />
The family sought only $1.00 in damages. Imagine that. Just one whole dollar, and Israel still didn't give them the respect they deserve. I would love to meet this family because I know now what type of people they are. They didn't go after the money; they wanted, as they put it, "accountability"--nothing more.
<blockquote>
"The more we found out, the more likely that the killing was intentional, or at least incredibly reckless," father Craig Corrie said in 2010. "As a former soldier, I was even in charge of bulldozers in Vietnam. ... You're responsible to know what's in front of that blade, and I believe that they did."
<p />
Craig Corrie said the soldiers, too, are victims. He does not view them with disdain.
<p />
"So I'm not full of hatred for this person, but it was a horrendous act to kill my daughter, and I hope he understands that."
</blockquote>
This man, whose daughter was killed by Israelis, holds no hatred for the people responsible. Still, Israel couldn't do him justice. The worst type of person is one who strikes good people; all major religions condemn this sort of violence. What would Prophet Moses say about this?
<p />
These people call themselves Jews. Excuse me, but your definition of Jewish is certainly not what the Abrahamic religions teach. If you were Jewish, you wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing that you were, at least indirectly, responsible for the death of a young woman who, might I add, was involved in NONVIOLENT protests. You're just like Iran now, the very country with whom you want to war to "protect human rights." Yeah...right.
<p />
Rachel Corrie died protecting Palestinians in a time when the world hates them. She saw through all the propaganda promoted by both the U.S. and Israel, claiming that Palestine is nothing but a terrorist's country. She died while saving Muslims who have been victimized throughout history, and I hope the world never forgets her.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-75062054033914579902012-08-16T10:14:00.000-04:002012-08-16T15:16:22.169-04:00The Islamocaust ContinuesFor a long time now, I've been using the word <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/05/islamocaust.html">Islamocaust</a> to describe the current state of affairs concerning Muslims. From the day a cab driver was stabbed in New York for being Muslim, to <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/10/out-of-darkness-rabbi-supports-ny.html">the Park 51 controversy</a>, from <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">Geert Wilders' assault on Muslims to Adam Hasner's Free Speech Summit</a>, the evidence is mounting in favor of the Islamocaust.
<p />
<a href = "http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/06/missouri-mosque-destroyed-in-second-fire-in-a-month/">This latest incident</a> further confirms the idea that Muslims are headed towards a dangerous period in time, a danger which Al-Assad's murder of Syrian civilians during Ramadhan is doing nothing to prevent.
<blockquote>
A mosque in Joplin, Missouri, was burned to the ground early Monday [August 6th, 2012], just over a month after an attempted arson at the Islamic center, officials said.
<p />
Authorities are investigating the cause of the latest fire. The mosque's security cameras were destroyed in the blaze, according to Sharon Rhine of the Jasper County Sheriff's Office.
</blockquote>
We are all familiar with the Holocaust of the 1940's. In American History courses, the Holocaust is, often times, a central theme for the entire course. We are taught about the mass murder of Jews and what methods were used to kill them (with none of the graphical material held back, regardless of whether the class is early high school or upper-classman university.)
<p />
In these classes, one thing is repeated over and over. Jewish people were used as scapegoats, and because of the intolerance and frustration of Germans, the Holocaust was permitted to happen. The teachers and professors emphasize that we must prevent such an incident from happening again by learning to coexist, not exclusively exist.
<p />
Think back to your late middle school and early high school days when they were teaching you about the Holocaust. Can you still hear your teacher's voice? I can. Now, bring yourself back to today. I'll wait a moment...
<p />
As you read the excerpt below, ask yourself "Did I think this was possible [years] years ago when I was learning about the Holocaust? Did I think history could POSSIBLY repeat itself in TODAY's 'civilized' world?"
<blockquote>
Though investigators haven't determined the cause, [Kimberly] Kester suspects it to be another incident of arson.
<p />
On July 4, surveillance video caught a man approaching the mosque and throwing "an ignited object" on the roof, causing minor exterior damage, according to the FBI.
<p />
The FBI was offering a combined reward of $15,000 for information leading to the suspect arsonist in that incident.
<p />
Kester said the mosque was a target of other acts of vandalism. In September of 2008, a sign at the mosque was set on fire and was also determined to be arson, according to CNN affiliate KODE.
<p />
The Council on American-Islamic Relations has called for increased police protection at other places of worship in the wake of the fire and is offering a $10,000 reward for information on the latest incident.
</blockquote>
Here, the article talks about another incident which occurred on July 4th at the same mosque. So, the mosque was burned on July 4th and then again on August 6th. I bring this point to your attention because this is not a one-shot, once-in-a-lifetime-occurring incident. It has happened before, and it will happen again.
<p />
From Geert Wilders, to Adam Hasner, to the cab driver stabbing, to the Quran burning, to mosque burning. Sound familiar?
<p />
Before some of you start shaking your heads and saying "but you are not scapegoats like the Jews were--this is all your fault anyway," I humbly correct you.
<p />
Remember why Muslims are hated. We are hated because a minority who claims to be Muslim (and whose ideology I have denounced strongly often times) flew planes into the World Trade Centers. These people had political motives, not religious ones, but yet people act as if we, all Muslims everywhere, had some or other part in it; whether it's that we follow the teachings of the Quran and Abrahamic faiths, or that we pray "just like the terrorists do, with your asses in the air to your fucking god Allah who has a machine gun and wants you people to kill us all." In this way, we all become scapegoats for something that wasn't our doing, and we would never even dream of doing.
<p />
Now the problem is becoming a lot more serious. We all know by now that the shooter who went on a shooting spree in a Sikh temple actually wanted to target Muslims, but lacked the brain capacity to know the difference between the two religions. So, it was misfire, but his intents were very clear. Consider that for a minute, even my Muslim readers who don't accept the reality of the Islamocaust. WHAT IF he hadn't misfired, and had ACTUALLY shot up a mosque?Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-44882887735228196882012-08-06T15:03:00.000-04:002012-08-06T15:07:58.888-04:00Innocent ScapegoatsSallams Readers.
<br />
We've known for some time how backwards and deceptive the Taliban are and how they use Islam as a means for their own political gain. However, now they're pushing the bar even further, by using children as metaphorical ransom. The Taliban have always recruited kids as soldiers, but now they're moving to a more subtle approach. <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/17/world/asia/pakistan-taliban-polio-vaccine/index.html">Read the article on the Polio ban here</a>.
<blockquote>
A ban on polio vaccinations imposed by the Taliban could affect about 280,000 children living in tribal areas of northwest Pakistan, according to estimates from the World Health Organization.
<p />
Last month, local Taliban militants prohibited polio vaccines over the United States' use of drone strikes in the region.
<p />
When a three-day nationwide effort to administer polio vaccines began this week,health workers and volunteers weren't able to immunize children in North and South Waziristan.
</blockquote>
So let me see if I understand this correctly. You terrorize the United States, England, and other Western countries. Then, you whine when we retaliate. And then, you say no more retaliation or we'll kill our children. And then, you stand for prayer at the first utterance of "Allahu akbar?" Really? That's absolutely laughable. How can you sleep at night when you very well know that thousands of innocent children will die because of your political motives?
<blockquote>
Under this security situation, they "obviously cannot operate," said Mazhar Nisar, the health education adviser in the Pakistani prime minister's polio program. "We're hoping that the campaign will resume in the near future."
<p />
Throughout the rest of the country, vaccination efforts continued as 180,000 health workers and volunteers fanned throughout communities trying to immunize 34 million children, under the age of 5.
</blockquote>
Let me reiterate that. "under the age of five." First you demand your women to not get an education, directly going against Islamic law. Now you're killing off your children because you have issues with the United States' operation in your country? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you harbor Osama--a man responsible for killing millions of people around the world?
<blockquote>
The vaccine ban began in June after a Taliban commander in northwest Pakistan declared in a statement that the vaccines "would be banned in North Waziristan until the drones strikes are stopped."
<p />
The commander, Hafiz Gul Bahadur said that the drone strikes "are worse than polio," and consulted with other Taliban leaders regarding the decision, according to the statement. Drone strikes are widely unpopular, as the Pakistani government has pressed the U.S. administration to stop the attacks. 20 dead in drone attack in Pakistan
</blockquote>
So killing millions of children is worse than one of your people dying. Right. Your statement makes no logical sense, Mr. Taliban. I don't even know how you can fast during Ramadhan with so much blood on your hands!
<p />
This incident is the very reason why Pakistan has not progressed to this day. I see a lot of wonderings on Muslim-based forums asking the question, "Why do Muslims live in poverty?" My answer, "The Taliban, and all the corrupt dictators who come into power." Every time Arabs try to progress, something happens which holds them back. And the ban on Polio is a prime example. Now, millions of kids who would have grown into your next generation--smarter, stronger, more aware of your deception, will never get that chance because of what you did, O Taliban. You're sentencing kids to death because your ever so precious commander was killed, and I hope Pakistan sentences you to death because these precious children will die.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-65891678831164631862012-07-28T21:18:00.000-04:002012-08-06T15:07:04.438-04:00Life Saver, Or Life Taker?Sallams Everyone, and Ramadhan mubarak to you all.
<br />
Often times, we tend to forget that political motives are not what shapes humanity. Americans, along with the rest of the world, judge countries based on the actions of the government. This would be fine if indeed the governments were true Representative Republics like so many claim to be, but alas--we can argue that even the government of the U.S. does some things against the common moral code.
<p />
Despite what you may think of the United States, I hope <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/17/us/new-york-bus-driver-hero/index.html">this article about a bus driver catching a falling girl</a> gives you a different view of its common citizens.
<blockquote>
A veteran New York City bus driver on Tuesday played down any claims of heroism for snagging a 7-year-old girl who fell three stories from a Brooklyn apartment building a day earlier.
<p />
Steve St. Bernard, 52, says neighborhood children alerted him to the girl standing on top of a window air-conditioning unit, and he positioned himself underneath her.
<br />...<br />
The incident occurred Monday afternoon and was captured on amateur video, which soon surfaced online. It shows the girl, who neighbors said is a special-needs child, standing and apparently dancing on the air-conditioner, losing her balance and falling. One of at least two people standing on the sidewalk beneath her reaches out and catches her before she hits the ground.
</blockquote>
Here's my question. A group who claims to be Muslim can blow people like this man up without blinking an eye just so they'll get their seventy-two male virgins in heaven. How can you call yourselves Muslims when you wouldn't have the heart to do what this man did, and how can you call this country Satan's country when people like this man live here?
<p />
This man was not young. He also risked the possibility of missing her entirely, in which case there would have been very bad publicity for him. But he put all that aside and focused on one thing--trying to save a girl who fell from her window. Imagine if this man hadn't been there. Chances are the girl wouldn't have survived.
<p />
How many times have you thought that, Al-Qaeda? "If I don't blow up this bomb for my own corrupt political views, that mother, that father, that newborn child will live."Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-39532460823702197652012-06-19T07:48:00.002-04:002012-06-19T07:58:37.614-04:00I Have More YouTube Likes Than You DoWhile there is nothing wrong in protecting your personal security and making sure your citizens are safe, there are times when this effort is wasted. In a <a href = "http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/19/the-whack-a-mole-strategy-of-pulling-terrorist-videos-offline/">CNN news article, Google talks about removing hundreds of videos that talk about terrorism</a>, per the request of the United Kingdom.
<blockquote>
From the new head of al Qaeda core, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to terror propagandist Ayman al-Awlaki, using the Internet to spread the jihadist message is a tool of the trade for terrorists.
<p />
In the last six months of 2011, Google agreed to remove some 640 terrorist videos from YouTube at the request of law enforcement officials in the United Kingdom, because the videos violated the company’s guidelines. The disclosure was contained in Google’s biannual Transparency Report, which provides data on government requests from throughout the world to remove content from Google’s YouTube and search websites.
</blockquote>
I really don't see the reasoning behind this effort. After all, this is the Internet we're talking about, not the Gutenburg Printing Press machine. Fine, you removed them from YouTube, but I've seen this before. The same videos will be uploaded again, just under different accounts. It's like applying patches to a severely corroded pipe. The second you patch one hole, another one will spring up to take its place.
<blockquote>
Aaron Zelin, who started monitoring jihadist websites in 2002 in Washington, has seen a myriad of propaganda and do-it-yourself terror tricks posted in the form of videos.
<p />
The problem with trying to take some of the more egregious material off the Internet, said Zelin, is that it has a way of popping right back up again.
</blockquote>
So you're monitoring a "Strugglist's" website? Wait, that makes no grammatical sense. Anyway, Aaron says here exactly what I wrote--just worded differently. But I'd like to take you to other parts of this article and show you why, sometimes, I have no sympathy for these counter-terrorism people.
<blockquote>
From the new head of al Qaeda core, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to terror propagandist Ayman al-Awlaki, using the Internet to spread the jihadist message is a tool of the trade for terrorists.
</blockquote>
Do you mean jihadists, or terrorists?
<blockquote>
With hundreds of videos being posted by some jihadi groups, getting a handle on all of the terrorist information that’s out there can be a challenge.
</blockquote>
Interesting, because the last time I checked, <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2011/02/middle-east-revolution-jihad.html">jihad had nothing to do with blowing people up</a>.
<blockquote>
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Connecticut, credited Google for being responsive to concerns about what he called violent Islamist extremism online.
<p />
“These videos have played a role in the indoctrination, training, and radicalization of violent Islamist extremists, whose warped ideology advocates the killing of innocent people,” Lieberman said in a statement.
</blockquote>
So now it's become a three-word description, not just two? Violent...Islamist...extremists. Sounds like a mouthful. What will the fourth addition be? "Fundamentalist violent Islamist extremists." And the fifth? "White fundamentalist violent Islamist extremists." And the sixth? "Rich white fundamentalist violent Islamist extremists." And the seventh--well, you understand.
<p />
It's sad how even though these countries are complaining about out-of-control debt, they're still wasting money on getting Google to remove videos that someone has probably downloaded already and will upload as soon as they feel like it. Your efforts would be more fruitful if, for starters, you educated your Members of Parliament and Senators (in the case of the United States) so that we Americans wouldn't be mad at you as well.
<p />
Yes, these terrorists claim to follow Islam, and I can't expect everyone to know the distinction between terrorists and Islam, but these are MY lawmakers, people who make laws that WE have to follow. If they're this ignorant, how can we count on what they create to be any better?
<p />
As for the terrorists. I wish they'd stop directing all their hate where it doesn't belong. I'm sorry if they're sexually deprived, but really, we can't help that. All they do is focus on the negative side of the West. If you but worked with us, we could bring you forward. But no, instead you sit there, shouting out your fatwas and condemning everyone who doesn't fold their hands in prayer. Yet you fail to realize that behind the governmental front, there are kind people around. Would you <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/18/us/us-mongolia-skeleton/">return a skeleton that was stolen from Mongolia</a>? I doubt that if Al-Qaeda got hold of it, it would return it. it would more likely sell the skeleton, and use the money to buy more Hashish.
<br />
Ma'a sallamah,
<br />
MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-72479637552662302192012-06-16T10:12:00.002-04:002012-06-16T10:18:47.572-04:00And The Winner Is...We cheered when Tunisia's president fell. We cheered when Egypt's president fell. We cheered when Libya's president fell. We're all wishing for Syria's president to either get killed by a fat man wielding an axe or get blown up by one of his own tanks.
<p />
You would think that through all this, Middle Easterners were actually starting to move forward, to pick up from where they left off after the fall of the Ottomans. This wish may be <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/14/world/meast/egypt-ruling/index.html?iref=allsearch">too much to hope for</a>.
<blockquote>
Egypt's highest court declared the parliament invalid Thursday, and the country's interim military rulers promptly declared full legislative authority, triggering fresh chaos and confusion about the country's leadership.
<p />
The Supreme Constitutional Court found that all articles making up the law that regulated parliamentary elections are invalid, said Showee Elsayed, a constitutional lawyer.
</blockquote>
What does this mean? It means that the military assumes full responsibility for law in the country, doing as it wills with whomsoever it wills, and that the parliament has been invalidated, giving it no more legislative power than a man on a soap box. Yes, dear readers, we've just witnessed a coup in Egypt.
<blockquote>
Parliament has been in session for just over four months. It is dominated by Islamists, a group long viewed with suspicion by the military.
</blockquote>
I would go off on that word, "Islamists," but I think I've exhausted that topic; you get the point.
<p />
So they don't like the party that may win, and therefore they say "hey, you know what? We suddenly decided that you people can't make laws anymore. Bye."
<p />
After all that Egypt has been through, it was that easy to revert everything. Islam suffers from the same thing it has suffered from ever since the death of Prophet Muhammad (SAWH)--power-hungry fat-behinded first-century so-called Muslims who want everything for themselves. Think of Abu Bakr's reign. Didn't he just slide into power like the military coup?
<blockquote>
The Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's largest Islamist party, said SCAF leaders were taking matters into their own hands "against any true democracy they spoke of."
<p />
The court also ruled that former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik, the last prime minister to serve under ousted President Hosni Mubarak, may run in a presidential election runoff this weekend.
</blockquote>
Look at Iraq and you will notice how slowly the country is progressing politically. The reason is that the Baath party, Saddam's political affiliation, still has authority--although it is through insurgency. If Mubarak's people obtain political office, the consequences could be dire.
<blockquote>
Some Freedom and Justice members, including parliamentarian Mohamed el-Beltagy, called the rulings "a complete coup d'etat through which the military council is writing off the most noble stage in the nation's history."
</blockquote>
I couldn't agree more. Egypt has worked so hard to be where it is; with no help from the U.S. They fought their own battle--and won; and now, the military just throws it away, insisting that Mubarak's party will be allowed to run.
<p />
The part that struck me most about the situation were these couple paragraphs.
<blockquote>
Hossam Bahgat of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights decried the court's decisions in a tweet.
<p />
"Egypt just witnessed the smoothest military coup," said Bahgat "We'd be outraged if we weren't so exhausted."
</blockquote>
Egyptians are throwing up their hands and asking, "What else? What more do we have to do just to get freedom from dictatorship, a right explicitly granted to us by the very religion these people in power claim to follow, and a right the West takes so much for granted?"
<p />
By executing this coup, the military also forced a former Mubarak-regime member to participate as a candidate in the elections. Just like Saturday Night Live said so long ago about Mubarak bringing about reform that he'll fire his old cabinet, and then form a new one that will be made up of members from the old one. I think your joke may actually turn into reality, SNL.
<blockquote>
Morsi and Shafik are the most nonrevolutionary of all candidates and represent "two typically tyrannical institutions: the first (Morsi) being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the second (Shafik) a senior official of the former regime," Sonya Farid wrote for Al Arabiya earlier.
</blockquote>
There you have it. Even as elections do take place through Sunday, the revolutionary ideals are nonexistent. I find a striking similarity to their situation compared to that of the U.S. We get to choose between a Socialist, or a businessman, neither of whom have our best interests at heart. Welcome to Democracy, Egypt. I'm sorry if they told you the Democratic system is perfect and the best around, because they lied. Democracy is based on forcing one of two "choices" on people, and it becomes a problem when both choices are everything except for what's right for your country. Here in the United States, it's based on popularity and looks. Over there in Egypt, it's based on a Harem and the military.
<p />
The worst part is that I'm sure Mubarak is sitting in court laughing himself to death, and it's not the Alcohol this time.
<br />
Ma'a sallamah,
<br />
MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-50782450222185600432012-06-15T17:03:00.002-04:002012-06-15T19:35:28.194-04:00Narrow VictoryNow that the war in Iraq has come to an end, we can start evaluating whether or not the results were worth the trillions of dollars spent on it. This evaluation tends to take one of two sides. Either the far left approach, which calls for an end to all wars (which still leaves me wondering whether or not Ron Paul was really a Conservative,) or the far right approach, which says that every invasion is good for America's growth and that America should be everywhere, spreading the will of the American Empire to every corner of the globe. Revolution Muslim calls it American Imperialism.
<p />
The people in the middle--those that I like to see as having at least a little bit more sense than that--do not see things as Black-and-White, cut-down-the-middle. They argue that this is humanity we're talking about, and humans are never that simple.
<p />
Still, a lot of these independent thinkers narrow the effectiveness of the Iraq war down to three things. We spent trillions of dollars, our own country is suffering because of the deficit, and we gained nothing from it. Yes: It's all about "me, me, us."
<p />
Consider the Iraq war from a survivor's perspective. Before Saddam was toppled, thousands of Shias would be killed by his regime just by him giving a command. Shias were not allowed to commemorate <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">Ashoorah</a> without the risk of being killed.
<p />
Now, the government in Iraq is predominantly Shia, and the rules according to Shia Islam are slowly being implemented. For instance, capitol punishment is no longer allowed, and there is a higher tolerance for other faiths existing in Iraq.
<p />
The <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/13/world/meast/iraq-violence/index.html?iref=allsearch">occasional bombings</a> we hear about from the media have their ways of making us forget what the state of Iraq used to be before the invasion. When you consider what Saddam put Shias through, compared to today's relatively low-grade attacks, I find it hard not to support the war. Does this mean it was picture-perfect, and the U.S. acted in a saintlike manner throughout the duration of the war? Certainly not. We do have reports of soldiers raping Iraqi women and committing other war crimes. But one can easily argue that Saddam was just as bad, and the freedom of Shias has greatly increased since his fall.
<p />
Lawrence Kaplan points out in his book "The War Over Iraq: Saddam’s Tyranny and America’s Mission" that there have been numerous records from Human Rights Watch of Saddam cutting off peoples' genitals and applying electric shock to them. There are also records of Saddam torturing prisoners of war during the Kuwaiti conflict by drilling holes in their chests and arms and cutting off their fingernails.
<p />
Saddam also committed mass slaughter of Shia people and made sure his Suni followers ruled with an iron fist. People used to be gassed, and there are records of him using chemical weapons against his citizens.
<p />
Consider all that compared to several people being killed in odd places or while they go on pilgrims. The latter, although not the end that everyone would like to see, is much better than how the country used to be. Further, one can argue the point that while these were Shias who were killed while traveling to the shrine of Imam Moussa Al-Kadhim (S.A,) they had indirectly accepted that sacrifice. They know there will be some possibility of them being killed by Suni insurgents, but they go anyway, driven by faith, standing proudly, and not accepting to bow to the insurgents' threat. Their freedom may not have been possible if it wasn't for the invasion. Granted, today the Arab Spring would have taken hold in Iraq, but who knew that such a thing would occur back then?
<p />
In many ways, the bombing reminds me of Ashoorah, when Imam Hussein (S.A) was killed for not bowing down to the corruption of Yazid. These Shias do the same thing, so although we should mourn them no doubt as our brothers and sisters in Islam, we should also be proud that there are Shias who will stand and go to visit these shrines and accept, with their heads held high, the possibility of being blown to bits on the way. Ask yourself this question: "Would I do it too?"
<br />
Ma'a sallamah,
<br />
MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-19213059880076219042012-06-12T14:10:00.000-04:002012-12-23T09:04:51.026-05:00Who's Right Is It Anyway?It's been almost a year since my last post. During that time, I've taken a step back and looked at the world, specifically the Islamic world, from an outsider's perspective. It has been quite a journey for me, to listen to people debate, debase and stand up for Islam--and not getting involved. I'll dedicate this post to why I decided to suddenly take a break, which I'm sure many of you are curious about.
<p />
I used to write posts quite frequently about anything that came to mind that concerned Muslims. We talked about the Arab Spring, Osama, memorial Day, September 11th, my disgust with the government, and a host of other topics in between. After my September 15th post, I felt like I needed to walk away for a bit.
<p />
I mainly did this because it was time I looked at things from a, shall we say, slightly different angle. Instead of getting involved and jumping on things as soon as something went down, it was quite peaceful to just watch it happen. I learned a lot and really got a chance to observe things both from a Muslim's point of view, and from a non-Muslim's point of view. Suddenly, I was no longer focused on "how can I prove this person wrong?"
<p />
Due to me observing things from the background, I reevaluated the state of Muslims. Is it really as bad as we think? Was I also sucked in by the media propaganda and had I fallen into the same trap that I myself condemned others for falling into? The answer was "yes."
<p />
In order to prove my point, let me ask you, Muslim readers. What is your current view of the state of Muslims. Do you think we're in bad shape? Or do you think there's hope? Chances are you will say "we're in bad shape."
<p />
Why is this? The answer is simple. You, along with everyone else, have bought into the media's portrayal of the world. Do you hear about the Iranians saving a U.S. cargo ship from pirates? No, of course not. In fact, many of you have probably never even heard of the story and are wondering, "well, that's not possible. They hate us!"
<p />
This is exactly how the world wants you to think. They want you and everyone else, ordinary American citizens going about their American lives, to think that Iran and the U.S. are doomed when it comes to peace and mutual respect, as Obama's politically motivated words so elegantly put it long ago.
<p />
I used to think this way as well--that is, until I stopped writing since last year. During my time off, it was this idea that I revisited; and the interesting thing is, it changed my outlook.
<p />
We've always known Arabs aren't terrorists. If you've been reading this blog since it started, you should be well aware of that fact. We know that Arabs are actually kind-hearted people, not bomb-throwing zombies and Opium-addicted suppliers like our government likes us to think. But there's more to it than just terrorism.
<p />
If you look back at history, you will see that Islam gave rise to one of the greatest cultures to ever exist. It's common knowledge that a Muslim invented Algebra when he studied under Imam Jaffer Al-Sadiq. It's also common knowledge that the Muslims brought books to the Europeans when the Crusaders plundered their land; this gave rise to the Age of Enlightenment. Further, it's common knowledge that while the Arabs were exploring arts and other cultures, Europe was still in its Dark Ages. These Arabs were Muslims, and their wealth of knowledge was inspired by Islam.
<p />
Islam existed hand-in-hand with scientific advances (so don't give me that "religion is for idiots, science is for thinkers" stuff.) You will see this especially in the Shia traditions.
<p />
My point is that these people who are known as backwards today were responsible for turning points in history, conveniently wiped out of the record by kings and others with their own agendas, and nothing can make this more evident than the recent succession of events that has taken place in the Middle East.
<p />
They call it the Arab Spring. I call it "it's about time."
<p />
So far, three leaders have fallen because of popular uprising and Syria's leader, Al-Assad, will probably be next. Along with these uprisings, people are going back to their fundamentals: the core of Islam--human rights.
<p />
There are several narrations from Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) in which he says "I've come to perfect your manners," and part of Islam's fundamental principles is the principle of fairness, and human rights. The Meccans did not like the Prophet because he upset their status quo by empowering the poor people, by showing them that they're not dumb like the Quraysh tribe wanted them to believe.
<p />
These revolutions have been just that--freedom from oppression; to get back the right to free will (which Islam is a firm believer in.)
<p />
Along with general human rights, women are slowly regaining their liberty as well. Wait, Munawar, did you say "regaining?" Yes, I did.
<p />
During my observation, there were two issues I saw as being at the forefront of peoples' problems with Islam. One was the idea that Islam oppresses women, and the other was that "Islamists" are anti-progressive and barbaric.
<p />
So why did I write "regaining?" Simple. Womens' rights, after the Prophet's death, went away. Islam introduced an inheritance code for women; no longer did they have to sit by while their male counterparts took all the wealth to supposedly protect the woman (we all know how that used to turn out.) Women also, during the time of the Prophet, gained the right to property ownership.
<p />
Still, there's one event in Islam's early days that stands out. Khadijah's marriage to the Prophet. She was his first wife, and she was a businesswoman. She was involved in the trade business. As if that's not enough, it was Khadija who proposed to the Prophet; not the other way around. Typically, people think of monotheistic religions demanding that the male propose, and proposal by the woman is forbidden. The marriage of Khadija and the Prophet is evidence against that misconception, and this sort of thing only continued once Islam gained a hold.
<p />
Suddenly, men had to get their wives' permission before they could marry more, and if the woman denied them the permission, it was forbidden for them to marry additional wives.
<p />
All this progress slowly went away once the Prophet died and Abu Bakr and his regime gained their iron fist over the Muslims to restore the original status quo.
<p />
A couple days ago, I heard of <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/10/world/meast/sharif-saudi-women-drive/index.html?iref=allsearch">a Saudi Arabian woman driving</a> to defy the government's ban on women driving. Is she doing this to defy Islam? On the contrary, she's doing it to restore Islam.
<p />
I was thrilled to read about this woman, Manal Al-Sharif, for the reason that she has no anger towards Islam. She's not doing this because she thinks Islam is a bad religion. Rather, she's doing it because it's her right under Islamic law. She has drawn a fine line between defying the government and defying Islam, unlike the Irshad Manji clones running around directing all their hatred towards Islam itself.
<p />
We have the Arab Spring and people demanding their rights that were guaranteed to them by Islam. The Muslims in the Middle East are headed towards better days, and maybe in one-hundred years when we look back at this time period and someone cockily types to all the people in the general area "so, no Muslim blew himself up today?" someone else will step in and reply, "Muslims aren't like that."
<p />
Ma'a sallamah,
<br />
MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-26969472400762246692011-09-15T16:27:00.002-04:002011-09-16T08:48:34.601-04:00I Would Die Before You WouldI am surprised many times by how much Americans believe Arabs hate them. While this belief definitely has a basis in truth, the gravity of the reality of the belief is often far-fetched, and is based on mere assumptions generally by people who listen to the media and think they now own the criteria for arguing a doctoral degree in islamic Studies.<br /><br />People who believe that all Arabs hate America have two misconceptions, in general, to drive this notion.<br /><br />The first misconception is that they think all Arabs are Muslims and all Muslims are Arab. A 2009 statistic shows that <a href = "http://islam.about.com/od/muslimcountries/a/population.htm">fifteen percent of Muslims are Arab</a>, and while the majority of Arabs are Muslims, <a href = "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_people">there are other religions in the Middle East as well</a>.<br /><br />The second misconception is that America is the most-hated entity to ever exist. I heard a lecturer state once (I do not remember his name) that if him and a Christian would go to Arabia, they would kill the lecturer first, to which I rolled my eyes until he explained the statement. Why would they kill him first? Because he is Shia. I heard this statement about four years ago.<br /><br />As time passes, I see how obvious the conclusion is, and to show you exactly what I mean, I have provided an excerpt from an <a href = "http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/09/12/iraq.violence/index.html">article</a> I read in CNN a couple days ago.<br /><blockquote><br />Gunmen shot 22 passengers to death after intercepting a bus carrying Shiite pilgrims Monday night in Iraq's Anbar province, police officials said.<br /><br />The bus was en route to Karbala from Damascus, Syria, and was in the al-Nukhaib area when it was stopped by gunmen, said police officials in Ramadi, the provincial capital.<br /></blockquote><br />Twenty-two innocent travelers were shot to death simply because of the fact that they were Shia. If you are not familiar with the Suni-Shia conflict, <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">read my post here</a>.<br /><br />Those of you who think that Arabs only hate America because of its Western philosophy, and America is the number one enemy of the Arab Muslim world, think again.<br /><br />Wait, it gets worse.<br /><blockquote><br />The gunmen then separated the men on the bus -- including the Syrian driver -- from the women and children. They then took the men to another location and shot them, the officials said.<br /><br />Shiite pilgrims from Karbala often travel by bus to Damascus to visit the Syeda Zainab shrine.<br /></blockquote><br />I find it amazing how history repeats itself, over and over again. If you recall the post I did on Ashoorah (linked above,) you will remember how Yazid's army burned the tents of the women, denied the Imam's people any water, and then even took the ladies' hijab. I wonder what happened to these women, now that they, too, were separated from their men--and it also happened in relation to Karbala. So to those of you who think that America is the only target, I encourage you to rethink your philosophy. These terrorists are not just targeting your country, they're even killing fellow Muslims. Don't tell me I'm responsible for September 11, 2001, because, guess what, even Muslims died at the hands of these people.<br /><br />However, it's not just from Suni to Shia. Recently, it's been going the other way too, as is evident from the same article.<br /><blockquote><br />Separately, in Baquba, a Sunni imam was shot and killed by gunmen Monday in the al-Gatoon area, an official with Iraq's interior ministry told CNN on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to media. Ahmed Mahmud al-Jabalawi, the imam of the al-Shuhada mosque, was on his way to the mosque for morning prayers when he was shot by gunmen who used pistols equipped with silencers, the official said.<br /></blockquote><br />Terrorists are even killing Muslims who will lead prayers! I do not care if he is Suni, Shia, or Wahabi / Salaf--that went way too far. How can you rightfully continue to call yourself a Muslim when you just killed someone who will recite the call to <b>your</b> prayer? So what if their call is a bit different from the Shia version because they do not recognize Imam Ali (S.A.) as a direct successor to Prophet Muhammad (SAWH.) In the end they are going to prayer just like you and me. I assume these latter gunmen were Shia. Who gives you the right, o Shia gunmen, to bring judgment on people that harshly? Now you are becoming like the un-Islamic Islamic Arabian courts that stone women to death even though <b>the woman was raped</b>, which is another, completely backwards, illogical action.<br /><br />I have found lately that using the word "illogical" interchangeably with the word "Arab" is becoming easier; still, for fear of generalizing, I won't go that far, because I have met some really nice Arabs who wouldn't even dream of shooting someone, let alone picking up a gun.<br /><br />At any rate, this number, twenty-two, shocks me. These were people minding their own business, doing what Shias do, and they were still killed. Do you understand now when I say even Muslims die due to terrorism? These people have so much hatred in them I don't even know where to begin--especially Salafs. If you listen to their sermons, often times that is all it is--hate. These people are kafir, those people are kafir, etc. Revolution Muslim, an organization I have written about in the past, is a prime example. These terrorists don't just hate america, they hate almost everyone. For Revolution Muslim, though, it's sad because they have some excellent thoughts and are very intellectual, and I have openly stated my agreement with them on some issues. However, they have so much hate to go along with it, including hatred towards Shia Islam, that it bars people from their message.<br /><br />I dread to think what has become of the women who were left on the bus.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-52864412441122845322011-09-11T19:54:00.005-04:002011-09-21T09:26:11.418-04:00Does Age Really Make Us Wiser?As I watched the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of September 11, 2001, several things crossed my mind. At the forefront of all those things was one question: what happened to us?<br /><br />Ten years ago, I remember, quite distinctly, the days following 9/11. They passed in quite a flurry of events, emotions, speeches, and general confusion. This was my first introduction to terrorism. I found it hard to come to terms with the idea that someone out there has been plotting to kill me, or someone I know, or the country I love, simply for political gain. It was also the first time I had heard the name Wahabi and Taliban. Before 9/11/2001, they were completely unknown to me. Then our country went to war, a war which I supported in the beginning because it seemed like the correct thing to do. You see, I, like everyone else, wanted to get rid of the bad Muslims I had just recently heard about. As I got older, though, I realized just how much the government lied.<br /><br />The lying isn't what astonished me later on in life; it was how easily Americans fell for it. I was a kid, that was one thing. Others were adults, and they still bought into it. Some of them still buy into it, to the point now where the entire airport check-in process has been changed forever, and where certain words have been, due to public opinion, disallowed altogether. In spite of all this, I seriously doubt we are any safer than we were ten years ago.<br /><br />Still, as I thought about all this today--how innocent I was ten years ago, one thing stood out among the rest; how Americans came together in so many interfaith sessions taking place across the country.<br /><br />I remember going to at least three of them. We had Christians invoking the name of Prophet Jesus (PBUH,) Jews invoking the name of Prophets Moses and Abraham (PBUH,) and Muslims invoking the name of Prophet Muhammad (SAWH.) We heard about Siddhartha, meditation, the Universal Being, and at the end of all this, we ALL joined hands (literally) to sing "I'm Proud To Be An American." I saw that unity come back today as people (including Muslims) announced the names of people they had lost to the Trade Center attacks, and it showed me where we should have been, and where we actually are.<br /><br />In the years that followed the 9/11 attacks, we saw a dramatic shift in attitude. Suddenly, no one wanted to listen to anyone else. Suddenly, you showed me a cross, I had to show you a Quran. Suddenly, you told me your god has four arms, I had to tell you my god has no physical representation.<br /><br />This gradual shift, over about two to three years, ended up escalating and getting narrower and narrower, until sights were focused purely as they are today--on Muslims. Even today, when I think back ten years ago, it is absolutely amazing how public opinion can change so quickly.<br /><br />Is this change unassisted? Change in public opinion always has a basis. Either Americans start losing touch with conservative religious doctrine (which resulted in public opinion to not be so conservative about sex, as Sayed Muhammad Rizvi talks about in his book "Marriage and Morals in Islam,") or Americans change their dietary habits (as is evident by the excessive amounts of Slim-Fast spin-offs available on the market today.)<br /><br />Therefore, the change in public opinion towards Muslims has to have a cause as well, and I daresay, it was not just the 9/11 attacks which caused the shift.<br /><br />Unlike the other shifts in history, this one was more deliberate, and was done by people with specific agendas. In fact, it was so strong, it drove someone to kill more than seventy people in Norway. Yes, you probably know who I'm talking about now.<br /><br />The shift from religions coexisting with each other to the idea that America must be deIslamized was caused by people who used 9/11 to define Islam. Essentially, if they wrote World Religion 101 textbooks, you wouldn't be able to learn about Islam unless you learned about the 9/11 attacks. People like Robert Spencer who calls himself an anti jihadist. People like Geert Wilders who wants to deIslamize the world and deport all Muslims out of America and the West. People like Pam Geller who runs Atlas Shrugs. They are like Hitler incarnated in the modern world; instead of putting us in concentration camps, they attack us on social media outlets, write strongly worded letters to pressure the government, all the while sitting in their nice, air-conditioned offices.<br /><br />What the three players conveniently ignored (there has been a lot of convenient ignoring going on lately) is one critical point which completely demolishes their ideas. However, Wilders can't acknowledge it because his Freedom Party is founded on the basis that it will rid Europe of Muslims--he has political stakes in the matter. Spencer can't acknowledge it because it would crush his site, jihadwatch.org, and render the few books he has published useless--he has money in it. Geller can't acknowledge it because she runs Atlas Shrugs, a site which doubtless generates quite a bit of revenue--she has money in it. All these three are in so deep that none of them could safely turn their backs without a major financial loss, and this is why, to this day, despite the evidence clearly being against them, they keep on professing their corrupt views of Islam and keep on stirring the public to the point where, now, it is becoming violent from peaceful.<br /><br />The critical piece of evidence against them is one thing: Alcohol. When Saddam was captured, it's common knowledge that the military discovered wine in his hideout. Wait, doesn't Islam forbid Alcohol?<br /><br />For Osama, it was pork and pornography. He also had several mistresses (despite Islam's limit being four.)<br /><br />Most recently, for Gadhafi, it was Alcohol, and very lavish living quarters, despite him claiming several times he lived modestly. Further, the Alcohol was found by rebel fighters during the month of Ramadan, when there was a country-wide ban on it.<br /><br />Despite all this, the three players still claim Muslims are to blame, that Muslims blew up the Trade Centers, and that Muslims should be killed.<br /><br />Over the last three years or so, I have found this hatred against Muslims has gotten more and more unfounded. People are simply angry to be angry. You say Muslim, and a bomb goes off in their heads. Yet, when you ask them, "Why are you mad?" They can't answer. Does this sound familiar? In the 1940s, a lot of the Nazi party simply followed orders. They had no idea why they hated Jews, but they hated them to hate them. Today, the very word, "Muslim," has such a negative connotation to it, even Muslims only but whisper it to each other. Others still completely conceal their identities for fear of retaliation, as if they caused the terror attacks of 9/11.<br /><br />I have news for you. We attend the same universities you do, eat the same food you do, walk the same streets you do, and you may even pass ME a couple times without knowing it. We don't chuck bodies into the sea when people die, we don't spend our entire lives locked in a laboratory thinking up the next clever plan on how to take down America. All we want is to be offered the same opportunities the rest of you have.<br /><br />So let me ask you this. If there was Alcohol found in Saddam's and Osama's place of residence, and there was Alcohol found in Gadhafi's place of residence, and the consumption of Alcohol is forbidden in Islam, how can these people possibly be Muslim? What, because they pray five times a day, they're Muslim? I have news for you, a WHOLE CHAPTER in the Quran is dedicated to condemning people like that, who pray but, as the Quran puts it, are heedless. Further, there is a requirement for prayer. One is not allowed to pray if he or she is "intoxicated," meaning if a person is under the influence of Alcohol, it is forbidden for them to pray.<br /><br />How can you possibly call these people Muslims--if, when Prophet Muhammad started preaching, he set a very important precedence of how Jews, Christians and Muslims should coexist as a single Abrahamic faith, and no one should ever step on the sacred symbols of another person--when these people have killed innocent civilians simply because they have a difference in faith? If these were real Islamic countries, any and all faiths would be welcomed. If you look into Islamic history, you'll see that when Prophet Muhammad established his government in Madina, he didn't force anyone to convert to Islam. In fact, the constitution of the government dictated that everyone should be judged by their own books. In other words, the Bible was the judge between two Christians having a disagreement, and the Torah was the judge between two Jews. Further, verse 2:62 from the Quran even praises Christians and Jews. As if that's not enough, a chapter later on states "You shall have your religion, and I shall have mine." I won't go into the details here, since the paper I wrote back in 2009 explains it in greater details and which I have linked elsewhere on this site (probably in the previous post.)<br /><br />How can you continue to call these people Muslims when Syria insisted on crushing civilians DURING THE MONTH OF RAMADAN when people were fasting?<br /><br />And this is what begs the question. How can they POSSIBLY be called Muslims? Is it because of self-identification? If so, your claims against Islam have no basis, since anyone can claim to be Muslim, Christian or Jew. It's just a name. But this is not how America was supposed to be. This nation was founded on rational thinking, freedom of religion and freedom from persecution because of opinion. Today, we have gone completely backwards. The very event we condemn, the Holocaust, we are helping to bring about in the form of an Islamocaust. The very persecution we ran from and wanted freedom from, we are committing simply because a country is not a democratic nation and has no car dealerships. The worst part is, this is not how we were ten years ago. <br /><br />As I watched the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of September 11, 2001, several things crossed my mind. At the forefront of all those things was one question: what happened to us?Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-86494425782541844792011-07-27T10:29:00.005-04:002011-07-30T14:59:49.627-04:00Geert Wilders: Politician Turned MurdererLast week, a man set off a car bomb in Oslo, Norway. Then, he took a trip to an island where a youth camp was being held, and has, as of this blog post, confirmed to have killed seventy people in total from the bombing and shooting.<br /><br />What got my attention right away was my initial reaction, and the shocking details that emerged afterwards.<br /><br />Most of us (including me) thought, "Another Al-Qaeda attack," or "I bet his name is Muhammad Omar Hussein Al-Jabar Al-Hakim Al-Aziz." However, his name is nothing of the sort.<br /><br />Given recent attacks and the common trend over the past ten years, it's become easy for us, even as Muslims, to blame the attack immediately on Muslims. Call it instinctive reflexes, following public opinion, brainwashing, or whatever else suits you, but I guarantee you that most peoples' first reaction was the likes of what I've just described; this is the first reason why I couldn't ignore it.<br /><br />I wrote that the details of the event grabbed my immediate attention as well. This is where things get really, really interesting.<br /><br />First, let us imagine the typical terror plot. Muslim kills Americans and says he hates the world. Muslim blows himself up and authorities find links to terror cells. Muslim kills people in Israel, England, and America and says he hates Christians and Jews because they're infidels.<br /><br />Next, we come to this event in Norway. It's the exact opposite of the typical, Muslim-hates-world plot. The media are calling Anders Behring Breivik a "right-wing Christian Extremist." Some are even calling him a "right-wing Christian Fundamentalist." Yes, you read that correctly. For the first time, an act of violence committed by a non-Muslim is being dubbed as a terror attack, and being called extremism.<br /><br />Why am I making this big of a deal out of it? The answer is simple, and I'll tell you in one sentence. <b>Anders Behring Breivik being dubbed as a terrorist and a fundamentalist shows that the world is finally coming to its senses and public opinion is changing; terrorism is no longer confined to just Al-Qaeda and so-called Muslims--it is, slowly but surely, being applied to so-called Christian terrorists (and probably so-called Jewish ones too.)</b> In essence, the "terrorist" label is no longer confined to Muslim terrorists--the context of the word is broadening to include anyone who decides to blow something up, not just Muslims who do it. This is a big change from <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/03/terrorism-negated-by-religious-ideology.html">a year ago</a>, when it seemed that to be a terrorist you had to have some sort of ties to Islam; whether you got it by praying five times a day or just by stepping on a prayer rug with a picture of a Mosque on it.<br /><br />Now, things continue to get better. Not only is this act dubbed an act of terrorism by mainstream media, Geert Wilders has some of the blame for it.<br /><blockquote><br />Geert Wilders, a Dutch politician whose Freedom Party is referenced in a manifesto apparently written by Breivik, condemned the suspect's alleged actions Tuesday. Wilders said he was not "responsible for a lone idiot who twisted the freedom-loving anti-Islamization ideals" of his party.<br /></blockquote><br />Of course, <a href = "http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/26/norway.terror.attacks/index.html">Wilders quickly disclaims any responsibility</a>, but any ounce of common sense will lead you to make the logical conclusion that if Wilders was referenced, Anders got his ideas partly from Wilders' ideas. In other words, Wilders, who has been responsible for spreading hatred about Islam and who leads a party whose goal is to deIslamize Denmark, is now responsible for influencing this shooting. His years of perpetual hatred, lies, fabrications and accusations has led a man to kill seventy people. Seventy innocent people died because this man, <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">Geert Wilders</a>, never stepped down and never listened to sane-minded people.<br /><br />Therefore, on this day I liken Geert Wilders to Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda uses perpetual hatred and demonization to get people mad at other religions, eventually pushing them so far they are willing to commit murder in the name of Islam. Geert Wilders, who demonizes Islam through his Freedom Party, pushed Anders so far he committed murder in the name of Christianity. I had a feeling this would eventually happen. Dangerous ideas are dangerous in dangerous hands; this shooting proved that. No matter how much Wilders disclaims the correlation, since he was referenced and his ideas were used, he has a part in it. Karma bites.<br /><br />I must add that I have the right to make this connection, mainly because of something said to me on a forum long ago when I was debating against Wilders. I drew the distinction between Islam and Culture and said that all these killings are not condoned by Islam and are purely political. A responder said that "until Wilders starts killing people and blowing things up, you can't make a razor-thin distinction between your religion [Islam] and politics." Well, today that distinction can be made, because now Wilders, like it or not, has blood on his hands. The unfortunate part in all this is that people had to die for it to happen, and no one can ignore that. It was a huge loss to the world because these were innocent people. They had no part in the hatred, and the question that is still left unanswered is, "If you hate Muslims so much, why kill innocent people?" I don't think any of the people he killed were Muslim; as far as I know, most of them were Christians. Anders claimed to commit the murders because he wanted to stop the colonization of Muslims in Europe. These people didn't need to die, but they died anyway because of Wilders' continued hatred against Muslims and his continued brainwashing of innocent people. Well, Geert, this is the end result. <b>Death</b>.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-28490125308387503552011-05-04T10:39:00.005-04:002011-05-05T20:57:06.159-04:00Monkey Floated Away; Did the Muslims Do It?I can hear it now. "We don't have a body because the Muslims wanted to bury him. We don't have a body because the Muslims have to bury people at sea, so we dumped his body to prevent jeering from them."<br /><br />On Sunday, May 1st, 2011, the United States killed Osama Bin Laden by storming his compound, asking him to surrender, and shooting him in the head when he refused.<br /><br />That's all well and good. What I find to have been quite unnecessary is attributing the dumping of his body overboard to "Muslim traditions."<br /><br />I have found some things which have made me smile, and some things which have made me shake my head at the still-present ignorance of so many people. I will cover them in this post.<br /><br />My question: Since when has any country had any regard for "Muslim tradition?" More importantly, if countries operate mainly for their own self interests, WHY would they have regard for Muslim tradition? And, is this even "Muslim tradition?"<br /><br />My dear readers, I would like to point out something very important, and I would like you to folow me very, very closely. This is your key to understanding why this is not a celebratory post.<br /><br />First, am I upset over the fact that Osama is dead? Certainly not. He has debased Islam to the point where I think our tarnished reputation is almost unrecoverable. He has killed thousands of people--even Muslims--just because him and a few of his followers were mad at the US. He has <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/11/out-of-darkness-general-george-casey.html">turned "Allahu akbar" in to a war cry</a>; and, he has used the Quran to justify this. The world is finally rid of one of the most wanted terrorists who changed so many lives that even Jimmy Carter can't boast as much as Osama could.<br /><br />Next, the "Muslim tradition." I have read several articles where the reporter states that Osama's body was given "proper burial procedures according to Muslim customs." Does anyone know what this REALLY means?<br /><br />First, you have to bathe him (Ghusl-E-Cuffan.) Next, you have to cover his body using an ehram (unsewn, two pieces of cloth.) Next, you have to recite Sallatul-Mayyat. Next, you have to bury the body so that the head is facing East.<br /><br />I find it hard to believe that this procedure took place, notwithstanding the details which I have left out, including reciting the Kalma (declaration of loyalty to Islam.)<br /><br />Still, though, the media heard this and essentially ran with it, to the point now that when I hear something about Osama's body not being available, it is almost always accompanied by "because he was buried according to Muslim tradition."<br /><br />This is where you should have followed me closely. If you review the outline of burial procedures above, you will notice one glaring discrepancy. Nowhere in the procedure is it required to dump the body in the sea. I'm especially stressing this because I was asked, myself, if everyone who dies that is a Muslim gets chucked into the sea. No. We bury our dead in the ground just like everyone else (well, except for Hindus and Pagans and Satanists and Atheists and sharks and ...) Seriously, this is the type of misconceptions that have already spurred from the US "following Muslim tradition."<br /><br />Now, I have no idea where they buried Osama's body--deep in the ocean or at a shore. I do know he received a navy burial (as my brother explained, "That's how they bury crewmen if they die on board--it's a proper, respectful burial, the only difference is they throw the corpse overboard.") What I don't understand is how this translates to a Muslim burial.<br /><br />Don't come to me saying, "Because of you guys, we have no body." I won't hear it. I've explained everything as well as I could above and I'll kindly direct you to this post. It was the military's choice to dump him, not ours. Yes, you can argue that we require bodies to be buried as soon as possible, but who would think that during this ONE incident, SUDDENLY some country has regard for our procedures?<br /><br />I was fast asleep when our Navy SEALs went in to Osama's compound and killed him. Later on, I watched President Obama's speech, thanks to our digitized world and the ability to grab almost anything on-demand today. One part stood out among the usual rhetoric, emotional words, scripted gestures and political professionalism.<br /><blockquote><br />Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.<br /></blockquote><br />I have written in the past about Obama losing points because he used the terms "radical Islam" and "Islamic extremists." This quote, though, I can't pass up. It's the first time I've heard any political leader call Osama anything BUT Muslim. I'm impressed, I really am. By doing this, Obama has even made Robert Spencer and Geert Wilders look bad, because he's shown that he's better than them; that he's at least not as ignorant as I thought. I underestimated him for the two years he's been in office. Thank you Mr. President for having the guts to stand up for us even when you're surrounded by an anti-Islamic environment.<br /><br />On the other hand, I have seen more misconceptions about Islam popping up. Specifically, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/CNN/anchors_reporters/zakaria.fareed.html">Fareed Zakaria</a>, a journalist who writes for Time Magazine, was <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/05/03/exp.ac.zakaria.fleischer.alqaeda.cnn">interviewed</a>. During the interview, he called the revolutions happening in the Middle East "non-Islamic, peaceful revolutions." Non-Islamic? Really? This is what you need to be "peaceful?" How come the revolutions <a href = "http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2011/02/middle-east-revolution-jihad.html">can be called a Jihad</a>, then? What really bothers me is that this label came directly from Fareed Zakaria, someone who I thought had his head on properly. Yet, he openly called the revolutions "non-Islamic" as if bringing Islam anywhere near the revolutions means instant radicalization. I see now why Americans are so ignorant. Because we live in a credential-based society, anyone looking at Zakaria's biography will think, "wow, he's smart," and take whatever he says as complete fact, not opinion. It looks like Obama and Zakaria's points are inversely proportional right now. Obama's points just went up for me, and Zakaria's points just dropped significantly for his, I venture to say, intentional mistake.<br /><br />When I watched his interview, I remember my Physics II professor recently saying that she was reading something about compasses. She mentioned how, even though the Arabs can be credited with inventing them, the book she was reading said "maybe the Arabs were the first." Then, she talked about this for quite some time; how, even though the Arabs did make a discovery, common public opinion is to insult them and understate their work because <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/03/terrorism-negated-by-religious-ideology.html">they are all terrorists</a>, so they were not given any credit.<br /><br />Similarly, Zakaria has effectively removed any notion of Islam from these revolutions, despite there being much evidence to the contrary. I won't reiterate what I wrote in my previous post, but you can easily read it by following the provided link above.<br /><br />Finally, I would like to close by stating that I am thrilled that Osama was captured and killed, that Obama actually does seem to have some intellect, but we still have a lot of work to do to rid the media of the people who will insist on stepping on Islam even during good times. Zakaria's comments basically negated any hope I had for our future. Then again, he's not alone. I have not looked at Robert Spencer's comments yet, but I doubt me visiting his site will do much good; I already know what he's saying. And one more thing I find sad is one of the commenters to the video referred to Zakaria as "brother," so I assume he is Muslim (I don't know if Zakaria is Muslim or not--names don't mean anything.) So you see how even our own Muslims have simply resigned and accepted the terms "moderate," "radical," and have also accepted that these revolutions are supposedly "non-Islamic," because calling them anything else is anti-American.<br /><br />I would also like to state that my faith in our military has been renewed (even though there is a big misconception going on about the burial procedure.) The burial misconception isn't their fault, but I think instead it is the fault of the media who likes to insert its own words into things. So thank you for ridding the world of this terrorist. There is always good and bad, and lately it seems as if we've been seeing more of the <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/10/out-of-darkness-rabbi-supports-ny.html">good</a>--especially since it seems as if people are now waking up and realizing that Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, and Savage are just people who earn their livelihoods by criticizing Islam, so if nothing else--they're just earning their bread and butter.<br /><br />For the Muslims, this means we no longer have a bearded monkey-like man supposedly representing us. At least if you're going to assume the throne, dress better, shave your face (don't even get me started on the beard misconception,) and stop womanizing. Has anyone else noticed that most of the time, when a terrorist is caught, they are always surrounded by a handful of women? It's never just one. It's always more than one. If you believe you're getting seventy-two virgins (don't get me started on that either,) why waste your time with earthly women and why not just wait for the much better ones God will supposedly give you? I wonder often times why Al Qaeda has so much anger, and I can't help but come to the conclusion that because of their oversized beards, angry scowls and non-commical natures, no woman would dare touch them and this is part of the reason why they're so angry. After all, sources say that one of the women Osama married was given to him as a gift. Translation: they wrapped her up, put a UPS or APS (Arab Postal Service) label on her, and shipped her off to Osama. For all we know, she could have gone against her will--which, believe it or not, is against Islam (at least the one <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">taught by Prophet Muhammad (SAWH)</a>.)<br />Ma'a Sallamah,<br />MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-58080842905474311042011-02-19T12:23:00.000-05:002012-06-14T15:19:23.403-04:00The Middle East: Revolution, JihadSallams All,<br />For the past three weeks or so, we have been seeing a very interesting development in the Middle East. This development is rightly called a revolution. No--not a revolution where the Taliban tell the women they are nothing and beat them for not veiling, and keep their women inside and don't let them drive. Instead, it's quite the opposite.<br /><br />In early January, Tunisia's people started protesting, which led to the eventual overthrow of their longtime president who had been ruling for over twenty years.<br /><br />Shortly thereafter, Egypt followed. After two weeks of protests (most of which were peaceful,) Hosni Mubarak--the president who has been ruling thirty years--resigned and fled.<br /><br />Next followed Yemen, Iraq (which wanted better living conditions,) and Palestine.<br /><br />Today, we're seeing protests in Iran (most notably Bahrain.)<br /><br />In essence, what I'm driving at here is an all out revolution--started by one country who was successful in overthrowing its president who had been ruling with an iron fist for years. The revolution Muslims all over the world have been waiting for. Finally, the Arabs are sick of being puppets in the game. They're sick of being pushed around when they used to be the greatest nation ever known to man, who has been responsible for translating so many books into Greek and other languages.<br /><br />This revolution has begun, and I think it is long from being over. Tunisia overthrew its president because he was corrupt. Egypt overthrew its president because he ruled with a very un-Islamic oppression and he was also corrupt. Iraq is not going to overthrow its government, but it's asking the question, "If you say Democracy is better, why hasn't our standard of living improved?" They are protesting because they want better power and water services.<br /><br />One thing, through all this, has out-right surprised me. None of the major media outlets have even thought of dubbing this as a jihad. Before you start shaking your head though, let me explain.<br /><br />When "Jihad Jane" was arrested, CNN, Fox, and other news agencies were quick to say she wanted to commit "violent jihad." Al-Qaeda is commonly known as a jihadi organization. Islam is often called a jihadi political ideology. Yet--when there is a revolution--the word "jihad" is nowhere to be seen. Why is this?<br /><br />To answer this question, we will define jihad in two contexts. Western, an Islamic.<br /><br />The Western notion of jihad is attributed most often to "holy war," "terrorism" and "killing Americans." Essentially, it's everything that <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">Geert Wilders</a> would say.<br /><br />Islam defines jihad as "struggle." This struggle is of two types--physical, and mental (called jihadun al-nafs.) I'm more concerned with the former of these two types, since it is this jihad that is the most misunderstood, and is used by people to call Islam a violent religion.<br /><br />If you read through my earlier posts, you will see that from time to time, we develop this concept of jihad; this is how important it is to understanding the central philosophy in Islam. It's the one thing that, if misused, has very dangerous consequences (Al-Qaeda.)<br /><br />This jihad, called "physical jihad" for lack of a better term since it has no perfect English translation, is a jihad which leads to eventual perfection, justice, and equality. These are three ideals about which Muslims are to go to arms if the need calls for it.<br /><br />So how does it relate to the misinterpretation, and further to the revolution?<br /><br />First, this jihad is not a "holy war." "Holy war" in Arabic is "harb muqaddata"; it is not "jihad." There is no place in the Quran where you see the words harb and muqaddata in this manner.<br /><br />Second, the revolutions going on in the Middle East are for these ideals. Mubarak was kicked out because he was corrupt [jihad for perfection.] Mubarak was also kicked out because his courts were corrupt; they stole a lot of funds, ruled in Mubarak's favor, etc [justice.] Iran is protesting because of Ahmadinejad--they don't like his favoritism, and oppression of the people [equality.] Iraq is protesting because they want better living conditions [perfection.]<br /><br />In other words, the revolution in the Middle East is jihad at its finest; however, because it's not violent (except for the clashes between protesters and antiriot police,) none of the propagandists can call it jihad because it doesn't fit with their manipulated definitions. That's right--they're confused. The whole ideological battle against Islam is confused. People see Arabs killing people on television, yet, about two weeks ago, Christians held a mass in Cairo's Tahrir square and a ring of Muslims formed around them to <b>protect</b> the Christians from being attacked. The Egyptian protests only got violent when pro-government protesters arrived; otherwise, it was a very peaceful protest.<br /><br />Still, even with the revolution reaching its climax, outlets such as CNN are clinging to their threads of anti-Islamic public opinion. For instance, on several occasions they have praised Mubarak, calling him the "embattled" president as if he is a king of some rich land. They have labeled the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization even though it is nothing of the sort. Despite all this, the revolutions are continuing. Slowly but surely there is change being brought about in the Middle East--whether it's calling an end to economic termoil (Egypt,) better living conditions (Iraq,) end to oppressive rule (Tunisia, Egypt, Iran,) or a call for more rights as a state (Palestine)--it's happening, and it's something that's so overdue, a lot of us are having trouble coming to terms with the fact that it's actually happening.<br /><br />Another thing I have noticed is that these revolutions are being started because people are tired of these dictators coming in, claiming to be Muslim, and then doing the opposite of what Islam advises. They're tired of the dictators using the religion for their own gains, and they're especially sick of all the oppression the dictators are doing in the name of Islam. This is another reason why the revolutions are so powerful. This isn't a revolution about "modernizing" a "legacy" state--it's about going back to the roots. It's about making Arabs what they once were until people like Ahmadinejad took over. I think this is why the revolution has been successful so far. It's not a corrupt revolution for personal gain. It's about collective perfection, justice, and end of oppression. It's not about secularization--it's about having Islam coexist with the rule instead of being used as a spiked hammer. This is what the people are fighting for, and so far, they have been completely successful. If you were confused about my explanations of jihad, look at this revolution and you will see jihad (the real jihad) taking shape in front of you.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-85458132897731225102010-10-09T11:15:00.011-04:002011-09-21T09:30:47.523-04:00Out Of The Darkness: Rabbi Supports NY Mosque, Condemns HatersSallams Readers,<br />Recently, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding an Islamic Center in New York which is going to be built two blocks from "Ground Zero"--the area of New York where the World Trade Centers once stood. Both towers were destroyed on September 11, 2001 by Wahabi terrorists for political gain.<br /><br />Arguments against the center, named Park 51, state that since "Muslims" blew up the Trade Centers, Muslims should not have their own center near Ground Zero. Pam Geller, who owns the blog Atlas Shrugs (which I have written about extensively in the past,) is campaigning very hard against the construction of this center. In addition, Sarah Palin has also become an advocate against the Islamic Center. Both these women claim that Islam is "Islamizing" the US, which is "taking away our freedom."<br /><br />By now, you are probably expecting me to start arguing in favor of the Park 51 center. Of course--I am Muslim, why would I not support it, right? Of course--I have a blog which is completely pro-Islam, why would I not support it, right? I am sorry to let you down, but I will not be arguing in favor of the Park 51 center. Instead, I will let a Jewish Rabbi do it for me.<br /><br />Wait, Jewish Rabbi? I thought Muslims and Jews hated each other. You are correct, <b>Arabs</b> and <b>Israelis</b> hate each other; however, I stand to be challenged by anyone who can still, after reading parts of the article I have provided below, say <b>Islam and Jews</b> hate each other.<br /><br />This Rabbi's name is Bruce Warshal, and I came across his article when it was forwarded to me through Email. Here is how it begins.<br /><blockquote><br />To begin, the mosque controversy does not involve a mosque. It is planned as a 13-story community center encompassing a swimming pool, 500-seat performing arts center, gym, culinary school, restaurant and, yes, a prayer space for Muslims, which already exists in the current building. A formal mosque would forbid eating or the playing of music on the premises. I guess that we are now at the point in America where Jews can have our JCC’s and Christians their YMCA’s, but Muslims are not wanted.<br /></blockquote><br />I could not have said this better myself. The "Mosque" is actually a "multi-purpose center" which contains a Mosque (a Muslim prayer space) in one area. I think the misunderstanding has stemmed from the words "Mosque" and "church" being used interchangeably. In Arabic, "Mosque" and "center" are two different words. A <b>Masjid</b> [Mosque,] is an open-door place where Muslims can come, pray, and leave. There are NO services held there. An <b>Imam Bargha</b> is what you would call the equivalent of a Church. While it is for praying, regular "services" are also held there, along with social gatherings. In other words, this Masjid or Mosque is <b>NOT</b> a Church; it is just a prayer room.<br /><br />The Rabbi goes on to describe the idea that the center should not be built because Ground Zero was the site of terrorism, and any such land should be respected.<br /><blockquote><br />President Obama in his defense of religious freedom commented that, “Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.” I beg to differ. If Ground Zero is holy ground, then the railroad station in Madrid, the Underground in London, the federal building in Oklahoma City, the Pentagon (where there is presently a prayer space for Muslims – yes, patriotic, religious Muslim Americans work at the Pentagon) and every other physical location that has been the object of terrorism is holy ground. If Ground Zero is holy space why plan for it to be developed with office buildings (in which the object will be to amass money – obviously a holy pursuit), a shopping center (in which consumer goods will be peddled to continue to gorge the American appetite for material possessions), and with a theater for modern dance (a project to which I personally look forward as a devotee of the Joyce, the modern dance Mecca of New York)? I’m sorry, but someone has to tell America that this designation of holy space is merely part of a mass hysteria that really scares me.<br /></blockquote><br />Let me reiterate that this is a Jewish Rabbi who has written this. If he is able to see past all the lies of Robert Spencer and Pam Geller (who he "calls out" later on,) why is it so difficult for the average person to see it? This Rabbi's religion has been stepped on and spat on by the so-called "Islamic fundamentalists," but yet he shook his head and said, "you don't represent Islam, I'm not going to believe you." This is exactly what has completely amazed me. This article is not coming from an Atheist--it is coming from a man who belongs to a religion that even Geert Wilders has claimed Islam hates. In essence, why should he support us? The answer is simple: he is the true embodiment of what the Abrahamic faiths should have been. You can completely eliminate any bias and notion of personal gain from this article, simply because of the situation the Rabbi is in. I would especially like my Muslim readers to understand this point. How many of you would be quick to support a Christian center? Be honest with yourselves. I can hear the voices and the arguments now. "The Christians hate us; the Christians do not follow their Bible; the Christians are this and the Christians are that." And if you are sitting there shaking your head, "no, I would support them," keep lying to yourself, because chances are, my fellow Muslims, if the roles were reversed, we would be guilty of the same hate against the Christians that we are receiving right now from these Islam-haters. Here, let me help you along and make things easy for you. Until I read this Rabbi's article, I would have been right there with you and slammed the Christians for their YMCA (Young Men Christian's Association) complex. There, I have publicly announced this for everyone to read. This is why, if nothing else, the main reason I wanted to bring this article to your attention is because of what it did for me. This is mainly because the Rabbi does not even hesitate to down talk <b>his own</b> people.<br /><blockquote><br />I guess that we are now at the point in America where Jews can have our JCC’s and Christians their YMCA’s, but Muslims are not wanted.<br /></blockquote><br /><br />The Rabbi goes on:<br /><blockquote><br />The question which must be asked is why this hysteria? The impetus comes from a triumvirate of right-wing Christians, Jews and politicians.<br /></blockquote><br />Here again, the Rabbi does not even flinch when he debases his own people. He is completely unbiased in his account; to him, a religion of the Abrahamic faiths is being trampled.<br /><br /><blockquote><br />Fundamentalist Christians are still fighting the crusades, still vying to convert the world to their truths. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, to the distress of these Christian proselytizers. What better way to win this battle than to brand all Muslims as terrorists?<br /></blockquote><br />Well said. Remember when I wrote that post about <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/03/terrorism-negated-by-religious-ideology.html">how to be branded as a terrorist</a>? I see that same thought here. In fact, after Prophet Muhammad's (SAWH) death, <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">Abu Bakr did the same thing</a>--debase the Prophet to uplift his own character; this is exactly what is going on today.<br /><br /><blockquote><br />Right-wing Jews think that they are doing Israel a favor by painting Islam as a terrorist religion thereby proving that Israel need not negotiate with the Palestinians. The idea is to project the concept that we are civilized and they are not. This theme is picked up in the right-wing press of Israel. Commenting on the New York proposed “mosque,” a columnist in the Jerusalem Post declares that “Islamism is a modern political tendency which arose in a spirit of fraternal harmony with the fascists of Europe in the 1930’s and ‘40’s.” Ground Zero isn’t Israel’s “holy ground.” Why would he be involved with this discussion? Simply because right-wing Jews in Israel as well as the United States believe that demonizing the religion of 1.3 billion people is good for Israel. God help us.<br /></blockquote><br />Did you read that, o Jewish-hating Muslims! A <b>Jewish Rabbi</b> has just denounced Israel. What does this mean? It means that Israel is <b>not</b> representative of the Jews. After all, next time you say "kill the Jews," remember that verse you read in the Quran that mentions the scripture of Moses.<br /><br /><blockquote><br />Periodically we go through this in America.<br />...<br />We deported over 10,000 people during the First World War because they opposed our entry into that war and we incarcerated loyal Japanese Americans during the Second World War. Now during this “war on terror” I shudder to think where we are headed.<br /></blockquote><br /><a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/05/islamocaust.html">Islamocaust</a>? Yes, you read that correctly. Rabbi Warshal indirectly mentions an era where Muslims are persecuted just like the Native Americans at the hands of Spanish explorers, and the Jews during World War II by Hitler. If you rolled your eyes at my last entry, here it is directly "from the horse's mouth" as the saying goes.<br /><br /><blockquote><br />The tool used in this hate campaign is the concept of collective guilt. Based on that, all Jews are traitors since Ethel and Julius Rosenberg sold out this country. All Christians are terrorists since Timothy McVeigh attacked the federal building in Oklahoma City. <br /><br />Neither are all Muslims traitors nor terrorists. Islam is not monolithic. Its forms are as varied as Judaism or Christianity. I do not practice Judaism the same as a Satmar Hasidic Jew. A Catholic does not practice Christianity the same as a Jehovah Witness. Imam Rauf does not share the same Islamic beliefs as bin Laden.<br /></blockquote><br />There you have it. Osama and Saddam are not representatives of Islam, and please, do not get me started on the Iranian president who I have actually <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/if-you-thought-it-was-overthink-again.html">supported</a> in the past. The Iranian president, who claims to be Shia, rules just like Saddam did, and has even restricted people from commemorating <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">Ashoorah</a>. Can you still call him Shia?<br /><br /><blockquote><br />Of all people Jews should beware of collective guilt since we have suffered from it for millennia. Yet the organization that started this hysteria is headed by a right-wing Jewish supporter of Israel by the name of Pam Geller. She is quoted in the mainstream media (including the Jewish Journal) as if she is a legitimate political voice. Yet on her blog, Atlas Shrugs, she has declared that “Obama is the illegitimate son of Malcom X.” She has written that we have “an American-hater for president.” She has proposed that devout Muslims should be prohibited from military service. She asks, “Would Patton have recruited Nazis into his army?” To all of the rabbis quoted in the Jewish Journal urging that the “mosque” be moved, know who is pulling your strings.<br /></blockquote><br />This is the portion of the article that made me chuckle. The Rabbi calls out Pam Geller and completely discredits her. You see how people like Geller look in the eyes of people who are respected, and have their facts straight? This is the first time I have seen anyone slam Geller for the hate she has spread, and directly challenged her on her credibility. Yet, as the Rabbi stated, she is getting quite a bit of media attention, simply because she is fulfilling the correct goal of the public opinion; otherwise, if you dig down deep in to her foundation, you will find--as this Rabbi has--that she makes no sense and her claims are either false, or filled with fabrications. Ironically, she was one of the lead sponsors of the Free Speech Summit in 2009. See what ignorance runs our country.<br /><br />Since Pastor Jones' proposed "International Burn the Quran Day," Pam Geller's continued campaign against the Park 51 center, and countless other anti-Islam movements started by Republican Sarah Palin, this is the first article I have read in favor of the center. I sent an Email to Rabbi Warshal after reading this article, and he actually took the time to respond to me. In the few communications I have had with him, I can tell these are not just words on paper; the Rabbi is a genuine man, and the Abrahamic faiths would have been somewhere quite different today if we were all like him. This article does an excellent job of capturing the core of the three monotheistic religions, but sadly people like Rabbi Warshal are few and far between.<br /><br />For all my Muslim readers who firmly believe Muslims should kill Jews, think again, and try reading your Quran one more time. You will be surprised at what you find, and how easily you can discredit the Wahabi and Al-Qaeda ideologies just by opening your own book.<br />Ma'a sallamah,<br />MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-3883538080093716982010-05-31T11:08:00.005-04:002010-05-31T11:20:32.013-04:00The IslamocaustSallams Everyone,<br />In light of Memorial Day, the day when, as Americans, we honor soldiers in battle, let us not forget the dark side to the bloodshed and the supposed saint like country in which we live.<br /><br />During the American Revolution, everyone from the common farmer to the foot soldier fought bravely to break away from the rule of the iron fist government of the British Empire. This war was a different type of war. This war had a purpose, a solid goal and, most notably, the victory of which released the Colonies from oppression. Wait, did I just use the word "oppression?" Yes, and you are free to re-read and re-re-read that sentence as many times as you like. Back then, the then nonexistent United States of America was oppressed by the British. Shortly after the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the subsequent victory, the USA was born. Memorial Day had a purpose then. It was a day to honor everyone who had battled tirelessly and with their lives to say no to injustice, just like <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">Ashoorah</a>.<br /><br />Unfortunately, those days are gone. As we come upon Memorial Day, instead of brave soldiers, what goes through my mind is exactly the opposite. Coward military operations doing the same oppressing that this very country was once a victim of.<br /><br />Today, we have passed the Holocaust era and are now in the Islamocaust era. We can sit here and argue all we want about how much oppressing Islam itself is doing, but I have reputed that elsewhere. Even so, the oppression being done by the Arab states is nothing near the oppression that America is doing. The Arabs are not coming here, overthrowing our government, and insisting that we become like them. Yet we see America, the British and NATO kicking in the door of those countries and turning their economies in to one run by the people, which makes profit off of the people, and uses the peoples' bad financial situations to help itself. We are already seeing car dealerships popping up in Iraq. Is this just a coincidence, or is there an obvious link here? Remember that the marines in Iraq have just recently left. Since 2003, the Iraqi people have been ravaged by misfire and mushroom clouds. Soon after, Western and Japanese car dealerships start popping up. This is exactly what America wanted; when its economy collapses, Iraq's economy will collapse also. This is because we have an economy based on consumption. As soon as people stopped spending and tightened their fists, look what happened? Credit card companies had no one to charge interest to, banks lost profit because of less overdraft fees, and the economy declined--very steeply, I must add. Your government wants you to keep spending so that you do not have enough to save for yourself. Why else do you think credit card companies charge inactivity fees? Does charging you because you <b>don't spend</b> make any sense? Of course not, but it certainly serves the interests of the government, and this is why Iraq was so quickly converted into a consumer economy as well.<br /><br />Next, we have the situation with Iran. Despite Iran's continued insistence that it is only pursuing nuclear power for <b>the benefit of its people and for electrical power</b>, America and NATO are descending on it like hawks. Once again, just like with Iraq, these actions by America are only based on suspicion. I am aware that Saddam was overthrown in Iraq; however, we all know where the military went when it first invaded Iraq--straight to the oil wells.<br /><br />Iran is still causing panic when North Korea has <b>actually declared international war</b> and has threatened South Korea with war should anyone invade it. Has Iran done this? No! So why should the priority be Iran? The answer is simple: <b>Islamocaust</b>. I have mentioned before that <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/03/terrorism-negated-by-religious-ideology.html">being Arab or Muslim guarantees you a terrorist label</a> when the same does not apply to so-called "normal people" doing the same thing. The real goal of the West, behind the guise of "making peace," is to completely "deIslamize" the world. Don't believe me? Just take a moment to consider that <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">Geert Wilders</a> was brought to the US to speak against Islam, and he was funded on government expense. Also take a moment to consider that someone none other than <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/honor-killings-robert-spencer-gets.html">Robert Spencer was hired to train FBI agents on Islam</a>.<br /><br />In addition, we find that France is <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/7735607/France-has-first-burka-rage-incident.html">moving to ban the veil</a>, and a Muslim woman was actually harassed because she was wearing one!<br /><br />If you still do not believe me, consider this <a href="http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=128214§ionid=351020403">article about a "mistaken" drone attack on Afghan civilians</a>:<br /><blockquote><br />A US air raid in the southern Afghan province of Uruzgan claimed the lives of at least 23 people -- including women and children -- in February.<br /><br />The airstrike took place in the middle of a turbulent two-week period, when US and NATO attacks reportedly left more than 50 civilians dead.<br /><br />The US military report on the incident claimed that the civilian caravan was mistaken for Taliban militants.<br /></blockquote><br />I can understand how mistakes like this could happen, but if we read further, it becomes clear that this could have been completely avoided.<br /><blockquote><br />The reasons for the alleged mistake were cited as ignoring available information and failure to properly analyze the situation.<br /></blockquote><br />"Ignoring available information." Translation: "We don't care, they're Muslim, bomb them!"<br /><blockquote><br />Four US officers have been reprimanded in connection with the incident; however, it is unlikely that they will face trial.<br /></blockquote><br />For killing 23 civilians, there will most likely be no trial? Where is your so-called justice? Apparently, this "mistake" is being taken very, very lightly, simply because these are "Afghan civilians" who are "Islamist Muslims with radical jihadi ideas."<br /><br />American Imperialism marks the wars of today, when Americans are led to believe that the Western system of Democracy is the only right way and that it is free from error. Further, they are taught that all other systems--whether Theocratic, Communist, or Socialist--are wrong and should be abolished in favor of Democracy. They are taught that when a woman wears a veil, she is oppressed. They are taught that Islam is Totalitarian and should be wiped out. They are taught that Arabic is the language of terrorists and that the "Muslim God, Allah, wants to implement Shariah law which means we will all lose our freedom." They are taught that "womens' liberation" means running around in scanty clothing "because the alternative is oppressive"--this is in spite of the fact that general statistics show that in the United States, a woman is raped every five minutes. They are taught that a consumer economy is the only way, and everyone should live to consume, otherwise we will have an economic collapse again. They are taught that high interest rates, inactivity fees, overdraft fees and wasteful spending is "normal" and "part of every system," and that "no system can exist without it."<br /><br />These sad realities are what we celebrate today. We celebrate the war on terror, the soldiers fighting to bring about the Islamocaust, a system that has failed us time and again, and the lies we are fed to make our country appear saint like. Where are our values on which our country was founded? Is this really what the Founding Fathers meant when they said "freedom?" Did they really mean we can go undisturbed, drawing cartoons of sacred figures, and mocking an entire religion by having "Draw Prophet Muhammad Day?" If you understand this, then you will understand one of the reasons for <a href="http://www.revolutionmuslim.com">Revolution Muslim</a> being in existence. I most certainly do not agree with them on everything, and have firmly <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2010/04/revolution-gone-rogue.html">condemned</a> their statement concerning South Park, but at the same time, I am with them completely when it comes to American Imperialism.<br /><br />Go on--call me a terrorist, put me on your watch list, suppress me like you do to every Muslim whose conditioning failed. In the end, you are doing <b>exactly</b> what you claim the terrorists do: killing or oppressing the threat.<br /><br />When terrorists bomb America and kill 1,000 people, America completely overthrows a government and kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Then they ask: "why are they mad at us?" Look at reality and stop living in an idealistic world. The "war on terror" will never be won. America overthrew Saddam, and look--North Korea is taking his place. America is "helping" Afghanistan by removing its reliance on Opium exports, when drugs run rampant in their own country and tons of Americans are on antidepressants because America cannot control it. This is why the world hates America; it tries to fix others' problems first before fixing its own problems. Do I support Taliban and the unIslamic beating of women for not veiling? No. But the government knows as well as I do, that is not the reason America went in to Afghanistan in the first place. The Taliban were just in America's way, so now it has to act good to justify killing them, when its own women are suffering at the hands of rapists and abusive partners.<br /><br />Please remember all the innocent civilians today who have died at the hands of deceiving Americans. Please remember that friend, aunt, sister, wife, or mother who was raped or shot dead by a stalking ex-boyfriend / husband because the court denied her a restraint order and protection because her case "did not fall within the legal definition of stalking." Please remember all the times you have tuned in to radio talk shows and heard the West crushing your religion with its mouth and dropping bombs on your Mosques because of "suspected terrorist activity."<br /><br />Today, while you hear the fireworks go off and you witness people drinking to their critical points, remember the Founding Fathers who fought so purposefully for freedom and how the American Mission has completely negated that purpose. If you are to mourn anyone today, mourn the Founding Fathers of our Constitution.Munawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-43799913991889433412010-04-27T16:23:00.005-04:002010-05-06T18:42:07.494-04:00A Revolution Gone RogueSallams Everyone,<br />Recently, South Park aired an episode in which they attempted to image the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) both visually and audibly. Further, they also ridiculed him by beeping out his name in the second episode in the two part series. Shortly after the airing of the first episode, <a href="http://www.revolutionmuslim.com">Revolution Muslim</a> issued a statement, which, according to <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/23/road-radicalism-man-south-park-threats/">this article from Fox News</a>, was a death threat against the creators of South Park. I have purposely chosen this article because two things become readily apparent here. First, a so-called "radical Islamist organization" has issued, supposedly, a death threat. Next, we can see from the article that the media appear to have blown things way out of proportion. I will present evidence first, and then give you something to think about afterwards.<br /><br />In response to the media's outburst, Revolution Muslim posted a <a href="http://revolutionmuslim.blogspot.com">statement</a> on their blog clarifying the situation. Zachary Adam Chesser, the man who issued the initial statement, was the one who wrote the clarification. There are things I agree with, and things I do not agree with. We will start with the former.<br /><blockquote><br />One of the major reasons there is such little opposition to American domination today is the reality that the principle of free speech, as envisioned by the founding fathers of the United States and by wise men and women throughout the ages, is a universal principle that may protect citizens from political, economic, or religious persecution. Today it is understood much differently; today “free speech” is interpreted as the right to promote pornography, homosexuality, slander, and libel against even that which is considered sacred. <br /></blockquote><br />This could not have been said better. We see examples of this everywhere; I have written several posts in the past about Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer. I guarantee you, if I turned around and insulted their faiths (whichever faiths they follow,) they would have problems with it. However, they feel it is no problem to go on undisturbed attempting to squash Islam. Wilders even had guts enough to speak IN THE SENATE against Islam, and rally politicians to remove Islam from America. Robert Spencer did his part by becoming a trainer for the FBI; he trained people on Islam, and later launched jihadwatch.org.<br /><blockquote><br />Indeed, it is in the shifting away from this conceptualization that America first deviated from its position as republic and assumed the role of global empire.<br /><br />Is there a purpose, other than evil, in insulting something someone holds sacred?<br /><br />While insulting Jesus, Moses, or any other prophet would remove someone from Islam, we Muslims are also forbidden to insult the deities that other religions hold in high esteem. Allah says in the Qur’an:<br />"Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance."<br /></blockquote><br />Revolution Muslim touched on a very valid point here. You are correct that a Muslim is forbidden to make fun of another sacred figure. In fact, we can see from the Quran how the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) responded to people who resisted Islam: "To you your religion, and to me mine" (Quran 109). Yet we see, time and again, people like Pope Benedict XVI ridicule Islam. I myself have been challenged, and Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) has been called a warlord and rapist right in front of me when they knew I am Muslim.<br /><br />Revolution Muslim's intentions become apparent when they mention that even the Prophets Jesus and Moses were insulted by South Park. In other words, this is not an isolated case against the Prophet Muhammad (SAWH); all these prophets are considered prophets of Islam and they are to be respected.<br /><br />I agree completely with your statement and your reasoning. Indeed, I too did not appreciate what they did to portray Prophet Muhammad (SAWH.) However, this is where we differ:<br /><blockquote><br />As for the Islamic ruling on the situation, then this is clear. There is no difference of opinion from those with any degree of a reputation that the punishment is death. Ibn Taymiyyah a great scholar of Islam says, “Whoever curses the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) -a Muslim or a non Muslim- then he must be killed…and this is the opinion of the general body of Islamic scholars.” Likewise Ibn Mundhir, another classical scholar, said, “It is the consensus (ijma’) of our scholars that the one who curses the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) should be executed!” This is also the opinion of Imams Malik, al-Laith, Ahmed, Ishaq, Shafi’i, and Numan Abu Haneefah. This shows that taking this stance is virtually obligatory, but it does not mean that our taking this stance is in some way an absolute call toward the requirement that the creators of South Park must be killed, nor a deliberate attempt at incitement, it is only to declare the truth regardless of co sequence and to offer an awareness in the mind of Westerners when they consider doing the same thing.<br /></blockquote><br />This is where you fall into the same trap so many Muslims have in the past. I noticed you quote several scholars. However, may I ask you one thing: where are the teachings of the Prophet himself? By teachings I do not mean any old narration from Al-Bukhari; rather, what you left out from your description of Islamic jurisprudence is that narrations we use must be authentic. It is a known fact that during the time of Abu Bakr's regime, he hired scholars to distort narrations. In fact, this is how Ayisha, the wife of the Prophet and who you call the mother of Islam, made her living. She, along with several other people, were paid to fabricate narrations, and I know that all these opinions were gathered from these fabricated narrations. I have written an extensive paper on this topic, and you can read it by <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">clicking here</a>. These ideas you get of executing people for insulting the Prophet are mainly from the Arab Radical population. They would use Islam, just like they are today, to justify hanging people from different tribes. Further, I see no quote from a member of the Ehlul Bait in your posts, so this further leads me to dismiss the opinions you have gathered as insufficient evidence. In other words, Islam does not appear to command Muslims to kill people who insult the Prophet. Instead, like you mention several times, we encourage dialogue.<br /><br />Zach goes on to post a quote from Osama Bin Laden: "If there is no check in the freedom of your words, then let your hearts be open to the freedom of our actions."<br /><br />I honestly do not see how we can let you be free in your actions if you insist on blowing up innocent people, holding journalists hostage and beheading them, and turning your women into suicide bombers because you believe you will get 72 virgins in Heaven. Further, you beat your women publicly (refer to the paper above,) and you prey on innocent children and turn them into terrorists. I agree that America has its own goals; to overthrow you and put a corrupted democracy in your place, but at the same time you cannot say that you did any justice to your people at all. Therefore, I stand by America when they crush you. At least when a woman gets raped, the law, at least ideally, should stand by her. In your government, you would stone the woman for BEING raped, which, again, Islam itself is against; a proper Islamic state would stone the criminal, not the victim.<br /><br />I would now like to turn your attention to the article I posted above from Fox News, and leave Revolution Muslim for a bit. We will come back to them later.<br /><br />As is always the case, the media's goal in all this is to perpetuate the misconceptions about Islam. I have criticized USA Today previously for being very one-sided in their articles, their bias readily apparent and, I may add, not free from religiously influenced thoughts and objectives. You can read the post <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/honor-killings-robert-spencer-gets.html">on a USA Today article here</a>. This time, Fox News was very guilty of this, and I am ashamed that these are the reporters in my country.<br /><blockquote><br />"He [Zachary Adam Chesser] was definitely sort of weird," the classmate told FoxNews.com. "He was very into violent industrial music, borderline Satanic bands and stuff like that. He had dark undertones in his interests."<br /></blockquote><br />Are these qualifications for a Muslim?<br /><blockquote><br />Two years later, Chesser is literally a changed man. He now uses an alias and has a new set of hobbies. He now likes to be called Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, and his primary interest in this world appears to be Islamic radicalism.<br /></blockquote><br />His interest is "Islamic radicalism." I have written several times on how those two words, when put right next to each other, do not make sense. In fact, my initial writings on this was because of a documentary by this same news agency. You can find my post <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/03/middle-east-foes-of-friends.html">here, entitled "Foes of the Friends."</a> Once again, I see Fox attributing "radical" with "Islam"; in fact, this time they even went as far as to call it an interest!<br /><blockquote><br />Chesser's background offers nothing to suggest that he would recently have eloped and married a Muslim woman he met in college, a woman who has given birth to their baby boy, according to neighbors.<br /></blockquote><br />Marrying a Muslim woman is suddenly radicalization? What about marrying a Jewish, Christian or Hindu woman? What does him marrying a Muslim woman have to do with anything? Although, it seems from your article that you are pointing fingers at the general Muslim population; this becomes VERY evident as we look further. I was completely shocked by your decision to include the following paragraphs.<br /><blockquote><br />While there is no evidence that Chesser became radicalized while at George Mason, there were "dark overtones in his interests" for years, dating back to his years in middle school and high school.<br /><br />Chesser's longtime classmate, who requested anonymity, said he did not overtly express an interest in converting to Islam while in high school. But given Chesser's past as a loner who sought to create conflict, she said she was hardly surprised to learn what's become of him.<br /></blockquote><br />May I ask you again, what about converting to Islam is significant here? I think you are suggesting that a conversion to Islam is somehow Satanic and wrong. It was not Islam that influenced Zach's actions; it was his desire for conflict. That is really obvious to me, so why are you avoiding and manipulating the truth?<br /><br />The article worsens as we read on. The next few paragraphs are a DIRECT attack on Islam by a Christian. I rarely, if ever, have sided with an ideology and downplayed other ideologies here, but these paragraphs leave me no choice at all.<br /><blockquote><br />The neighbor, a devout Christian, said she was scared and surprised to learn that Chesser has posted messages calling for the murder of Jews and, most recently, the deaths of Parker and Stone.<br /></blockquote><br />You are quick to call people "devout Christians," but when it comes to real Muslims who follow Islam how it is supposed to be followed, you call us "<a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/03/middle-east-foes-of-friends.html#c2.1">moderate</a>," and not "devout." Am I to gather that a "good Christian" is "devout" where as a "good Muslim" is "moderate" and, therefore, ignores the parts of his or her religion that "suggest radical leanings?" This is exactly what I've written about in the Fox rebuttal I linked earlier. I am shocked that this very thing is happening again.<br /><blockquote><br />"You have me sweating here," she told FoxNews.com. "I think he's really brainwashed to even think something like that. His family is not violent at all.<br /><br />"I am so shocked. I really think he had to have been brainwashed into something like that. Zac was a very nice boy. I would never have even associated him with something like this, to do anything harmful."<br /><br />She said she will maintain more of a distance from the Chessers now, "because we're Christians…. It's kind of sad that American people are falling into this. It's sad that he would be influenced to try to hurt people."<br /></blockquote><br />There is the direct slam on Islam I was talking about earlier. I see an obvious link to the "good American Christian" ideology here, and Fox News was quick to capitalize on it. Make every religion except Islam look good; what type of face-saving is going on here? I am disgusted by this article--although, I would like to add--I am not at all surprised. I was expecting something like this, especially from an agency like Fox.<br /><br />Fox goes on to interview Zach, with some comments from CAIR as well. However, I do not agree with all of Zach's comments in the E-Mail interview with Fox:<br /><blockquote><br />Reached by FoxNews.com via e-mail on Thursday, Chesser said one of his goals in writing for the group is to "raise awareness of the correct understanding of key Islamic beliefs." But he also warned: "If you kill us, then we kill you."<br /><br />"I seek to help the world understand that neither the Muslims in general nor the mujahideen including Al Qaeda are abject to peace...<br /></blockquote><br />I find it difficult to believe Al-Qaeda will like peace. I know them as an organization who would sacrifice innocent children and women for political gain. When the Taliban held control of Afghanistan, your women were beaten for not covering themselves. While the hijab is required in Islam, Islam also says "cover yourselves so that you may be modest." If a woman does not cover herself, it is up to the man to "avert your gaze." Although, I venture to say, I think your jurors whip the women for sexual pleasure themselves, so why would they pay any attention to the actual treatment of women anyway?<br /><blockquote><br />Basically the formula works like this … if you kill us, then we kill you. If you do not kill us then we can have peace. 9/11 had nothing to with freedom or democracy. It had to do with the murder of hundreds of thousands of Muslims around the world by American and other powers.<br /></blockquote><br />I agree with you here that so-called Muslim countries are being occupied unnecessarily. However, since I do not consider them Muslim countries because of how they treat their citizens--with terror and complete oppression--of both men and women--I will call them Arab states.<br /><br />Your Arab states are being occupied by our resources. Believe me when I say this, we do not want them there either. That is our money, which we earn through hard work; those are our tax dollars, going to help fund your Opium plants and corrupt thought. Americans want the soldiers out of your Arab countries as much as you do--if not more. May I remind you that Americans did not vote, as a whole and unanimously, to go to war with your Arab countries? In truth, I could not care less about your Arab countries. What is happening there is not OUR fault, it is our GOVERNMENT's fault. How can you possibly justify 9 11 when you yourself know this? Most of the people in that building would firmly oppose the wars. I agree that thousands of innocent citizens are being killed at the hands of America in Iraq and Afghanistan. I do not like it any more than you do. I am against this as much as I am against the historical battle between Muslims and the Byzantine Empire simply because they had ideological differences. The attacks on the World Trade Centers cannot be justified, just like America's ruthless and endless killing of innocent Muslims in Arab states. No Muslim would support such an action. If you look at Islam's history (authentic history and narrations,) you will see how kindly Prophet Muhammad (SAWH) treated prisoners of war. You will see how peaceful he was with the citizens of Mecca when his resistance group conquered their government. Islam is completely against killing innocent citizens, and I cannot believe you actually call yourself Muslim and support 9 11.<br /><br />As a final statement, I agree with your reasoning completely. Yes, America is pushing a political ideology and structure that is right because it thinks it is right; yes, America is killing thousands of Muslims overseas. However, please look at the actions of the Arab states as well. Ask a citizen there how they feel. I guarantee you, they will feel oppressed and hopeless. The governments rule with an iron fist. Indeed, because of America Israel has taken part of Palestine, but this is not the fault of Jewish people. Again, it is their government.<br /><br />As to your statement about the death threat. I understand that you were just suggesting something; it was a friendly warning--I see that. I ignored all the media opinions and agree with you that South Park will be in the back of the minds of many Muslims. I do not see your statement as a death threat at all, so I would like to apologize to you on behalf of the ignorant and entertainment-run media. I empathize with you, since I myself have been a victim of this by people I used to know. As Muslims, even if we are friends, people find fault with us. However, this does not give us a ticket to support Al-Qaeda. I was disappointed when I saw statements on your Web site supporting them. Why? Again, it is because they kill innocent people. Journalists, in the end, are only doing their jobs.<br /><br />In summary, I stand by you on your reasons but completely disagree with your methodology. You posted the following three questions on your blog. I will answer them now.<br /><blockquote><br />1.) Given that the Koran clearly and unambiguously calls for killing anyone who insults the Prophet, would you personally kill Matt Stone and/or Trey Parker given the chance? If your answer is no, how do you justify your answer in light of your insistence on adhering to the letter of Islamic law?<br /></blockquote><br />The Quran does not clearly and unambiguously call for killing of non-Muslims and people who insult the Prophet. If this were the case, the entire Kuraish tribe would have been killed during the lifetime of the Prophet. We all know they would throw stones at the Prophet, and feed lies to their kids to make them hate the Prophet. Why, then, did he say "To you your religion, and to me mine?" Also consider Prophet Moses' interaction with the Egyptian king. Quran tells him to "Speak softly to him; he raised you." The Fir`on definitely insulted a prophet of Islam. Why does the Quran not command Moses to kill him then?<br /><blockquote><br />2.) What if Matt Stone and Trey Parker expressed a willingness to engage in peaceful dialogue with Muslims regarding the matter of free speech, but stopped short of repenting for their depiction of the Prophet? Would Koranic law still require that they die?<br /></blockquote><br />Given that Quranic law does not require them to die anyway, my answer to this one is "No."<br /><blockquote><br />3.) What is your opinion of depictions of the Prophet in general, as in art works that attempt to render him respectfully?<br /></blockquote><br />We do not portray images of the Prophet because we do not wish to idolize him. Therefore, there is no "respectful" imaging of him. Anyone who knows this will adhere to it out of respect; they do not need to draw pictures to show their respect.<br />Ma'a SallamahMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-21433622942002633602010-03-13T13:31:00.003-05:002010-03-13T13:43:39.481-05:00Terrorism: Negated by Religious Ideology?Dear Readers,<br />Sallams to you. Recently, we have seen a lot of terrorism. Most notably though, are terrorist acts committed by non-Muslims. I have written about terrorism in the past and those of you who read my posts frequently know that I do not support it. However, I am not here today to talk about whether terrorism is justified or not. Rather, I am here to help us redefine terrorism--from the perspective of people who hate Islam and make a living out of hating us. What do I mean by this? Well, consider the <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7032669.ece">incident in which a man flew a plane into an IRS building</a>. Is this terrorism? How about the man who tried to blow up a plane on Christmas Day 2009. Is this terrorism? How about a <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,588074,00.html">man who drove from California to the Pentagon with the intention of killing government officials</a>, and ended up shooting and wounding two officers. Is this terrorism? How about <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/11/out-of-darkness-general-george-casey.html">Nidal Malik Hasan</a>. Is he terrorism?<br /><br />The Christmas Day bombing was labeled as an act of terrorism which actually prompted the TSA (Transportation Security Agency) to introduce a whole new line of equipment to airports, the controversial body scanners. Nidal Malik Hasan's Fort Hood shooting was dubbed as an act of terrorism, and he was claimed to have "contact with radical Islamic clerics overseas." This is all well and good; keep these points in mind, it's important here.<br /><br />Consider the IRS plane crash. According to the DHS (Department of Homeland Security,) it was a "deliberate criminal act." Terrorism? No, of course not. In another article I read on this topic, the DHS was quoted as saying "this does not appear to be an act of terrorism." People, wake up! <B>A man just flew a plane in to a government building!</b> You're saying it's not terrorism? Are you telling me you must have the name Abdul Malik Hasan Muhammad Hakim for it to be terrorism?<br /><br />The DHS' dismissal of this terrorist act would not have angered me if I had thought it was a mere slip. However, a while later, a man by the name of Bedell John Patrick drove from the West coast of the US to the East coast to attack officers at the Pentagon (military headquarters of the US for those of you who aren't American.) Yet, I do not see "terrorism" anywhere. In fact, the article from Fox links his actions to depression. That's right...they view him as a victim! The Fox article goes on to mention that the attack on the Pentagon came four months after Nidal Hasan's attack on Fort Hood, which they linked to "radical Islamic leanings." What are you suggesting, that Patrick got the idea of shooting people at the Pentagon because of the actions of a terrorist who is a "radical Islamist" and Islam should be the blame for Patrick's actions? Of course, you're a news agency so you can't come out and say that...but that's what it sounds like from what you've written.<br /><br />Now take all this, and we can answer our questions above.<br /><br /><ol><br /><li>Are Stack's actions of flying a plane into the IRS building terrorism? According to our government, "No, he's not Muhammad Abdullah Al-Zawiri."<br /><li>Are Patrick's actions of shooting two officers at the Pentagon an act of terrorism? According to our government, "No, it was Hasan's fault and Hasan gave him the idea. Besides, he suffered from depression."<br /><li>Are Hasan's actions of shooting military personnel at Fort Hood an act of terrorism? According to our government, "Yes! He had ties with radical Islamists and he was a radical Muslim with radical Jihadi ideas, and he was also radicalized by radical Islamic clerics overseas."<br /><li>Are the actions of the Christmas Day bomber's actions an act of terrorism? According to our government, "Yes! He was an Al-Qaeda member so he was a radical Muslim with radical Jihadi ideas and he associated with Radical Islamic clerics."<br /></ol><br /><br />Finally, I have outlined the criteria which constitute a "terrorist" based on recent responses to terrorist acts committed by non-Muslims:<br /><ul><br /><li>Must have a beard.<br /><li>Must be on, or look as if to have the potential to be on, a terrorist watch list.<br /><li>Must pray five times a day, so when we make a movie about you, we can show you praying right before you commit said terrorist act.<br /><li>Must speak Arabic.<br /><li>Must shout "Allahu akbar" before committing said terrorist act. During the act and after the act is optional, but highly recommended.<br /><li>Must have a name similar to Al-X; preferably, the name should include the following:<br /><ul><br /><li>Muhammad<br /><li>Abdullah (or any variation thereof)<br /></ul><br /><li>If death to the said terrorist is inevitable, said terrorist must only speak in Arabic during the last moments prior to his or her death; this includes, but is not limited to, Islamic prayers, curses, and common phrases such as "death to America."<br /></ul><br />Please note: Anyone who shows hatred an anger and carries out an act of extreme violence, will not qualify as a terrorist unless he or she meets the criteria above--it does not matter how similar the act is to an official terrorist. Failing to meet these criteria will result in the following:<br /><ul><br /><li>A diagnosis of mental health issues, and possible transfer from the category of "aggressor" to "victim" due to any mental health issues found.<br /><li>Front page headlines for only one (1) day.<br /></ul><br />If you do meet the criteria for "terrorist" as listed above, your benefits include the following:<br /><ul><br /><li>You will be dubbed "radical Islamist". This will allow you to blame Allah instead of yourself for your actions.<br /><li>You will receive front page headlines for at least one (1) month--even if you managed to kill no one.<br /><li>Our president will give a speech about your act, even if it failed, and you will completely change how passengers are scanned before they board public transportation.<br /><li>When we see another act similar to yours, we will remember you.<br /><li>We will come up with all sorts of dramatic names for your actions (examples of this include "Ground Zero" and "Christmas Day Bomber.")<br /><li>We will use your actions to say how bad Islam is, even though inside we know better.<br /><li>We will claim we suffered Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder because of your actions, but we're perfectly okay with one of our guys committing the same act you did; because of this, you will be remembered forever.<br /><li>We will have fun saying your name for years to come.<br /><li>We will blame every similar act on you. In this way, you will help us ignore how distressed our people are, since you will give us a solid reason for why one of our own guys did what you did.<br /><li>You will give us another excuse to hate everyone who is not us. In this way, we will praise you for years.<br /></ul><br /><br />Ma'a sallamah,<br />MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-29826674769147459402010-01-21T20:49:00.005-05:002010-01-21T20:58:07.505-05:00Fathima Rifqa Bary: The Truth Has Prevailed; An End to the Saga?Sallams All,<br />Welcome to the first post of 2010! I thought it best to start off by writing more about <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/selective-responding-we-do-what-we-feel.html">Fathima Rifqa Bary</a>, especially since this saga seems to be coming to a close--finally!<br /><br />While the Fathima Rifqa Bary saga has moved out of Orlando and back to Ohio, the pastors who brought her here are not off the hook. In a recent development, we find that the pastor who is based here in Orlando was fired from Global Revolution Church. If you recall, an earlier post stated that Global Revolution Church has moved. However, it turns out that the church was disbanded. According to <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-rifqa-bary-pastors-20100119,0,1750089.story">this article from the Orlando Sentinel</a>, Blake Lorenz was fired on September third. He lied to church officials--and to the public, an investigation found. Fathima never hitch hiked a bus; she was brought here to Orlando by the church--I have mentioned this before when I wrote a <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/09/fathima-rifqa-bary-investigative-report.html">summary of an investigative report concerning this case</a>.<br /><br />The media obtained a recording of the final meeting in which Lorenz was fired, and he can be heard calling church officials devils. In fact, <a href="http://wftv.com">WFTV</a> even published a derogatory statement he made against Muslims: <br /><blockquote><br />"Why lie if no crimes have been committed? Why?” a church board member asked Pastor Blake Lorenz."To protect innocent people who could be killed by Muslims, that's why," Lorenz replied.<br /></blockquote><br />To protect innocent people who could be killed by Muslims? What are you going to say next, Blake, "<a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/summary-of-2009-is-2010-predictable.html">Halal means it is lawful for them to kill me</a>?"<br /><br />You can find the audio of the meeting from WFTV <a href="http://www.wftv.com/news/22306740/detail.html">in their article about the case</a>.<br /><br />This is not all. Other articles from the media suggest that Blake could be charged with transporting a minor across state lines, even when advised against it by lawyers. Oops...I don't think this is what Blake signed up for. Sorry, but this is what you get when you mess with us. Who ever said the being that crushed Fir`on can't crush you? Oh yes, and didn't you say once "the truth will prevail?" I think it's finally prevailing, Blake. In fact, it's prevailing so much that Fathima "<a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/os-rifqa-fight-over-20100119,0,1034814.story">admitted to being unruly</a>." Amazing! Fathima admits she went overboard! Alhamdulillah--I never thought I'd see this day! So much for your wishes of honor killings and anti-Islam rhetoric, Blake.<br /><br />On another note, although Fathima's back in Ohio, she's in foster care and will probably remain there until she is an adult--under the consent of her parents. So they do have control of the situation now, and I'm glad they battled for it. You can find <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/os-rifqa-fight-over-20100119,0,1034814.story">the article about foster care here</a>.<br /><br />I wonder if I'm a devil now too because of this post.<br /><br />This is the latest in the Fathima case, but it may come to an end now--from Fathima's perspective anyway. The pastor seems to have a lot of face-saving to do, but I'm not concerned about that. I'm glad Fathima's at least back in Ohio--instead of with a hitherto unknown family.<br />Ma'a sallamah,<br />MunawarMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24984297.post-60520234909936410082009-12-31T16:45:00.009-05:002010-01-17T20:18:15.540-05:00Summary Of 2009; Is 2010 Predictable?Sallams Everyone,<br />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.<br /><br />We start with <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/03/middle-east-foes-of-friends.html">the very first entry on this blog</a> 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.<br /><br />For instance, we soon had the <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/letter-to-our-government.html">Free Speech Summit 2009</a> in April. This was probably the biggest event this year, prompting a <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/06/your-government-hates-people-it-serves_18.html">seven-page response</a> 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.<br /><br />Nonetheless, the Free Speech Summit battle raged on in July, with a co-sponsor of the hate campaign <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/07/hiding-from-what-you-cannot-fight.html">deleting my comment to the paper</a> which I posted on her blog. Now that I think back on it, I'm amazed at how much momentum this whole ordeal gained.<br /><br />Shortly after, I managed to get a hold of the entire Free Speech Summit video, and I wrote a <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/07/as-i-crack-open-egg.html">post concerning it</a>. 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.<br /><br />August started off on a good footing, with the first post for that month talking about an <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/agree-to-disagree-its-our-only-hope.html">in-depth discussion I had with a friend</a>. 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.<br /><br />Unfortunately, the smiles did not last long. A day or two before Ramadan, Obama decided to release a <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/if-you-thought-it-was-overthink-again.html">Ramadan greeting</a> 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.<br /><br />That same day, another shocking piece of news falls into my hands, and thus we begin the <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/08/selective-responding-we-do-what-we-feel.html">saga of Fathima Rifqa Bary</a>. 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.<br /><br />The next month continues the Saga, first with a video taken by pastors of Global Revolution Church coming to light. I started by <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/09/fathima-rifqa-bary-suicide-bomber-to.html">updating readers on Fathima's case</a>, 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."<br /><br />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 <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/09/fathima-rifqa-bary-investigative-report.html">my two cents</a> 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.<br /><br />We kick off the next month with an <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/11/earthquake-hits-iran-world-turns-blind.html">earthquake hitting Iran, and no one blinking an eye</a>. The only agency who ran the story was BBC. However, it's not the earthquake that made November a significant month.<br /><br />In November, a soldier named Nidal Hasan decides to <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/11/out-of-darkness-general-george-casey.html">shoot up Fort Hood</a>, 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.<br /><br />Once again though, the joyous occasion doesn't last long. In December we're back to the negativity again, this time with <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/honor-killings-robert-spencer-gets.html">Robert Spencer stating his view on honor killings</a>, 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!<br /><br />Also in December, we get another <a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/non-muslims-do-it-too-oh-wait-we.html">military killing incident</a>--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.<br /><br />Finally, we close off this year by the first ever historically-based post on this blog: "<a href="http://munawar0009.blogspot.com/2009/12/karbala-injustice-costs-blood-who-are.html">Who Are The Shia?</a>" 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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />Ma'a sallamah,<br />Munawar BijaniMunawar Bijanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09566649434287345561noreply@blogger.com0