Rabi' al-Thani 17, 1426/May 26, 2005 #40
to article from St. Louis, Missouri, about made-in-America "Islam."
Quote of the day:
"The extent to which you resist is the extent to which you are free."
[Imam Jamil Abdullah al-Amin,
formerly H. Rap Brown.]
WAR NEWS: [Collected with brief analysis by
U.S. Losses Rising but are not part of the News any more.
In the nine days between May 17 and May 26, the U.S. admitted the
loss of 22 of its best troops killed in action but these were not
reported in the news. No longer do the media show specific location
of related incidents.
On MAY 26, a U.S. Kiowa helicopter was reported shot down and
another damaged by "small arms fire" north of Baquba. Both airmen
in the Kiowa were killed.Again no details were provided. U.S. losses
are now 1646 troops killed, more than 12,000 wounded.
Is it a Shia-Sunni conflict? U.S. media insist that it is. However
the reports of attacks by the mujahideen indicate that the targets
are supporters of the U.S., be they Kurdish, Shia, Sunni Arab or
Turkoman. The most successful attack last month was on Kurdish
recruits hired by the U.S. SIXTY were killed by a martyrdom
operator who was himself reported to be from the Ansar al-Sunnah
which is Kurdish.
In turn the U.S. is killing all those opposed to it. More than
500 SHIAS in the Moqteda al-Sadr movement were killed by the U.S.
in TWO days as we reported late last year. U.S. forces stormed into
Najaf. U.S. is launching military operations against POPULATED AREAS
[Fallujah, Mosul, Al-Qaim, western Baghdad, Haditha]
and labelling opponents as "insurgents."
Complicating the situation further, Moqteda al-Sadr's mujahideen
exchanged fire for several hours, a few days back, with the
so-called Badr Brigade, Shias trained in Iran.
Meanwhile, the smoke-and-mirrors situation took a new turn with
reports that the leader of the Islamic forces, Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi
had been wounded in battle. U.S. media are playing with this news.
It could be a ploy by the resistance, or it could be real. The U.S.
thinks this could be a serious blow for the Muslims, but an American
general says it won't reduce the resistance at all. It might also be
an American story meant to trick the mujahideen into revealing
TWO IMPORTANT ADMISSIONS BY THE
An American general admitted that AFTER 3 YEARS of war, the Taliban
are stiill a viable fighting force.
In the last two months of fighting, 27 U.S. troops have been killed
[Very briefly mentioned with no details at all.]
[New Trend comment: Both items are from Fox News TV of May 21. If
you were watching U.S. TV news, you would think, there have been
NO U.S. losses in Afghanistan in recent fighting.]
KARZAI, the American puppet in Kabul, visited Washington May 24-25,
and begged America to keep its forces in Afghanistan PERMANENTLY.
He calls it a "strategic alliance." The fact is, he would not last
a day without those 14,000 American troops.
When the Taliban attack Amererican troops, the U.S.'s best soldiers
cannot fight them and call in their jet fighters and helicopter
gunships. In one such attack by U.S. helicopters, FIVE
CIVILIANS were killed inside Pakistan.
[Wide off the target!]
News [2 items]
Quick Response by North Carolina Muslims Neutralizes Baptist
Minister's Attack on the
Immediately after a Baptist Minister put up a sign outside his
church supporting the desecration of the Qur'an, Imam Badi Ali led
a move to get the minister to remove the sign. The Minister came on
MSNBC and was very aggressive but when he realized Muslims within
his own state were condemning his move, he changed his tune and too
back his message and his sign within two days.
Imam Badi Ali's
statement, which got wide distribution.
On behalf of Muslims for a Better North Carolina and all persons of the
faith, I strongly protest and condemn the flagrantly hateful and
provocative sign in front of the Baptist Church in Forest City on
a well-travelled highway that says that the Qur'an, Islam's holy book,
"should be flushed."
None of us would say that the New Testament should be flushed because
we respect what others believe as well as the spirit that aspires
brotherly love among human beings. It is an ugly disgrace that the
offending church's pastor intends to continue to foster his church's
most inflammatory message.
We recognize religious freedom and freedom of speech, but not to
inflame our fellow North Carolinians to stir up ancient biases
and political animosities.
President, Muslims for a Better North Carolina
May 25, 2005
RESPONSE to Jamaat's REPORT ON QAZWINI's $14 Million Mosque.
These Show Places are the Problem all over USA.
We need more Islamic schools and recreations facilities yet more
communities build show place masaajid. Where are the priorities of
the Muslims? We can build schools with gymnasiums, pray in the
school gym and then build a masjid, etc. We could host entertainment
for our young people in the gym and keep them from wanting to be
with those who are not practicing Islam and wanting to go with
their school friends to parties where all types of activities
that will harm them take place.
Our leadership is so gender biased that anything
that has to do with or primarily serves women and children
does not really matter. Who are in schools? Women are usually
the teachers and children the students. When will we learn?
I find it strange that most of them can't find $100 a month to give to
any charities not controlled by ISNA,
WD Mohammed or some other male dominated organization.
How blind and so very tragic. When will we learn?
These show place masaajid will not house one program to help anyone
and definitely will not house a child or woman in trouble for three
days even if they have nowhere else to go.
Muslim Women's Political Action Committee
By Jalaluddin S. Hussain
Spreading fear of "terrorist attacks:" Who is behind this Move?+New Low:
Pornography and sex for Mental Patients!
Montreal's day-long simulation of a chemical attack on metro station,
on Saturday, May 15, 2005, left me wondering as to who are the
initiators of this expensive but fear-striking exercise! What was
it really meant to achieve? Apparently, as explained to the media,
it was meant to test preparedeness of the Montreal's police and
firefighting departments. But was it really that simple or had it
some more ulterior and insidious motives also? Was this
simulation exercise of a "deadly chemical attack", meant to
spread fear and paranoia and reinforce an "international
terrorist attack" phobia which perhaps our southern neighbour
wants us to suffer from?
Do we care to stop the real terrorist attacks (in Iraq)?
It is ironical, bordering on cynical, that while hundreds of people
watched this fake "attack" as spectators, and dozens of Montreal
police and fire vehicles, with around 80 fire and police cadets,
played the roles of rescuers and victims of "chemical explosion",
back in Iraq itself, the very real American Coalition's
Operation Matador was killing and maiming hundreds of innocent
and defenceless Iraqis, in the Anbar province!
Why in Montreal?
The question is why, of all the places, in Montreal (which is
comparatively the safest city in all of North America) this
anti-terrorist simulation exercise should take place? Who decided
on this wasteful expenditure? Was it a political decision or a
bureaucratic decision? In these days of Justice Gomery corruption
inquiry, into the ruling Liberal Party's Sponsorship projects,
which may even result in early general elections and expenditure
of a lot of money, why waste money on these fear-mongering
simulations? This is the question which need to be properly
addressed by the relevant authorities.
Allowing sex in mental hospitals
What is the world coming to? Daily The Gazette reports in its Saturday,
May 21, 2005 issue: "Psychiatric hospital lets patients have sex.
They will get access to private rooms equipped with beds." Nicole Gagnon,
the ombudswoman of the Centre Hospitalier Robert-Giffard, thinks that,
"We want to make sex a positive rather than a negative thing"!
Starting from the month of May 2005, approximately 60 of the Quebec City
(capital city of Quebec province) 700 long-term in-patients will
have access to private rooms that are equipped with beds and
televisions. These rooms will also feature pornographic movies
and magazines, that do not depict violence and degrading images."
It is really cynical and laughable. While all around violence is
rampant it is considered important that mental patients should not
see violence. However, they can have sex (not necessarily with
their spouse) and they they can have their fill of ponographic movies!
A dissenting voice
Dr. Pierre Mailloux , a veteran psychiatrist, in Trois Rivieres,
Quebec and an outspoken host of a popular AM radio Talk Show, is
however of the opinion: How are these (mentally incompetent)
people supposed to give their consent to have sex? If they can,
they should not be in a mental hospital. It is crazy." A mentally
deranged person, having sex and that too in the safety of a mental
hospital! Is it the proper way of stopping "relationships between
patients" which are already taking place in absence of this new
policy? If Nicole Gagnon thinks that sex is a natural desire and
"not banning it" will help, she is wrong. This new pomiscuous policy
will only create more problems than it will solve.
in America's Image
Fake Muslim "Reformers:" They Want to "normalize Homosexuality" and "Modernize" Islam.
By Umar ben-Ivan Lee
St. Louis, Missouri
Over the last several months various movements that
are attempting to show a new face to Islam have been
featured prominently in American media outlets. Some
of those faces are less than sincere and are the
obvious spawn of those hostile to Islam, and they
themselves are an active part of a fraud that seeks to
deceive Muslims. Organizations that fit this category
are those such as the American Islamic Congress. In
other words, this is not a real organization, but one
organized by non-Muslims, who found gullible Muslims,
that seeks to demonstrate that there is support in the
Muslim community for the American agenda in the Muslim
The next group, which represents a tiny fraction of
the Muslim community but are now representing Muslims
on Meet the Press and PBS, are the liberal left-wing
Muslims. This is a group, made up primarily of
second-generation American Muslims from immigrant
families, who are acting as a proxy ideological army
for America. They are deemed as more credible culture
warriors to Muslims and they are being promoted by
many in America because they have Muslim names and
ideals about the future of Islam.
This group tends to be heavily influenced by the
Western cultural left and focuses heavily on sexual
issues, such as the normalization of homosexuality,
and issues of "modernizing Islam". They are following
in the footsteps of reformed and conservative Jews and
of some of the mainline Protestant organizations (and
both of those movements have been in decline for
decades as people are craving authenticity over
Like those Jews and Christians, who think of
themselves as too intelligent and modern to follow
traditional religion, and do not think that they
should be confined to any moral standards or a code of
conduct, they seek to maintain their Islamic
identities without actually practicing Islam and not
only that but they want to become the spokespeople to
the West for a faith they do not even practice.
The root of their rebellion is not just their level of
Westernization or education; but it is their basic
belief in the supremacy of Western values over Islamic
values and their desire for the values of the West to
infiltrate the world of Islam and reform the Muslim
World. In other words, they are a proxy army for the
West, whose ideas come from outside of Islam, and they
seek to change the Muslim world on behalf of those
whom they admire and serve. This contrasts to the
traditional methodology of Islam of seeking to spread
Islamic values and make Dawah to outsiders. The job of
Muslims in fact is to spread the light of Islam to the
world and to seek to help America while we are living
here and not to be seduced by its false promises of
materialism, immorality and usury. We take from the
good and leave the bad. If they seek to export
American cultural values to the Muslim ummah then they
are exporting a faulty product and one that will not
sell outside of the bourgeois classes who are already
upset they were not born to a Western mother.
These individuals consider themselves Muslims because
their parents are Muslims and they have an affinity
for Eid celebrations, calligraphy and maybe some
stories from Islam. Out of pride they do not seek to
leave Islam, and because they are generally secular
they would not entertain converting to another faith.
In the current fad of being spiritual and not
religious, as many say, these people seek to keep a
connection with Islam without praying, fasting,
following the Sunnah or any of the things that Muslims
are supposed to do. They claim they are Muslims but in
the same breath will tell you they don't believe the
Quran is from Allah and they don't believe in the Day
of Judgment and are not sure how good Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him) was.
Some of these people, like Irshad Manji, Amina Wadud
and the Progressive American Muslim Union, openly know
that they are being used as a proxy imperialist force
towards Muslims and have thrown their lot in with
those who are hostile to Islam to one degree or another.
They seek to reshape Islam by using Western philosophy
and modern political thought and feel they are too superior
to the ignorant masses of Muslims to
follow Islam as it has been practiced in the past.
Living as immigrants, and the children of immigrants,
they seek the constant affirmation from their white
role models in this society and crave their acceptance
more than anything in the world. The inferiority
complex of their parents has been passed to them and
they are even more willing to submit to the American
elite than to Allah than their parents.
There are others who are slightly more credible such
as Reza Aslan and Muslim Wake-Up who have maintained
some level of dignity and have some thoughtful
commentary on the state of Muslims. But even they make
the same catastrophic mistake; they seek to galvanize
support for their mission from non-Muslims who are
hostile to Islam and get funding from them and have
ceded the values of Islam in favor of non-Islamic
values and seek to systematically attack traditional
Islam on behalf of America. This is not the courage of
Bilal Ibn Rabah, who told his master Allahu-Ahad,
rather it is the cowardice of Abu Jahil, who out of
pride would not accept Islam, they follow.
The fundamental question is who is a Muslim and who
represents Islam? Should those who don't practice
Islam, for whatever reason, or seek to formulate some
make-believe religion under the guise of being
progressive and call it Islam, and then seek to push
those who follow Islam as it has always been to the
side represent Islam?
In order to represent Islam you have to first be
Muslim and your name can be Muhammad Ali and you can
be a Non-Muslim and your name can be John Brown and
you can be a Muslim. Being a Muslim has nothing to do
with what country your parents came from, mom plus dad
doesn't equal Muslim; being Muslim has to do with your
If you believe in the oneness of Allah (tauheed) and
the finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (pbuh) and
you testify to that, and you believe in His revealed
books, the Divine Will of Allah, the Hereafter, and
the angels you are a Muslim. And what does a Muslim
do? The Muslim follows the Quran, because you accept
it as divine revelation, and you give the Quran the
supremacy over all other knowledge and when you follow
the Quran you will follow the Sunnah of Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh) and that is Islam.
Other than that people can call themselves what they
want but that's not what being a Muslim is. If you put
three wheels on a bicycle it becomes a tricycle and if
someone eats chicken they are not a vegetarian. You
cannot say you are a Muslim and you think the Quran is
just good literature or Muhammad and Buddha are the
same and that praying five times a day is just a
suggestion or maybe we should lead prayers in Urdu or
whatever. That's not Islam, that's just some stuff you
decided to make-up and call it Islam. Islam is about
submission, and when you do that you are not
submitting to Allah, rather you are seeking to become
G_d yourself because you are too arrogant to submit to
anyone and anything. The reformers laugh at those who
follow the Sunnah and glorify the likes of Nietzsche
and Kant and they see Muslims as inferior to those in
the cafes and gay bars of the West whether they will
openly say it or not and they look down their noses
smugly at the sister in hijab and think she is too
unenlightened for low-rider jeans.
There is no such thing as a cafeteria Muslim and in
Islam you cannot create a G_d you are comfortable with
instead of the Allah that does exist. One has to make
a decision, do I want to be a Muslim or not, and you
cannot have your cake and eat it to.
Q & A
Wrong Time to Discuss
Leadership. Let's first Stop Wife Abuse & the Occupation of our Lands.
from Br. Adam in South Africa.
In response to a letter from Br. Ayub in Zimbabwe.
This is a sensitive topic which requires an expert which I am
definitly not. It is for this reason that I have copied Dr Kaukab
on this mail. What follows are my personal views. I am not
favourably disposed towards female leadership (and I realise Dr
Kaukab will differ with me) because I have not been convinced.
As far as a woman leading men and woman in prayer I am going with
the general consensus which has disapproved. There is no precedence
from the past which supports a woman leading salaah. I know of women
leading women and I have read of an extreme situation wherein a
woman can lead men but that is not the norm.
As for women being leaders:
The hadith about a nation not being prosperous was classified as weak
(if I can recall from an old issue of New Trend) by Dr Kaukab. If
this is the case not much more time should be spent on that
However my problem with evidence supporting women's leadership is
I would take it Dr Kaukab would add his views which I am certain
will differ from mine but are always interesting since it is
supported by Quran and Hadith
There have never been women anbiyaa (prophets) amongst the 124 000.
In the case of Hadrat Maryam (AS) although the Angel did come to her
she did not embark on a prophetic mission as in the case of say
Nabi Moosa (AS).
Those who support women's leadership would argue the case of the
(Bilqis) Queen of Sheba. My view is that I do not know whether
she continued being a leader after she embraced Islam. Also the
Shariah was really completed in the time of Rasullullah (SAW) and
it is from his utterances (hadith) that we should look for
guidance obviously with the Quran being the primary source.
Those who are in support of women as leaders also cite the case
of Sayyidinah Aysha (RA) who was an alim and her leadership during
the battle of the Camel. My view is that being a scholar does not
make her a leader. As far as the Battle of the Camel it is a sad
event in our history which I do not understand and it upsets me.
The biological issue such as menstruation result in mood swings
which I think impairs the ability to lead. In a corporate situatin
I do not like to report to someone who is susceptible to mood
swings whether male or female. Also pregnancies cause a break
At this time, America's hegemonistic power drive is attempting to
disrupt Muslim countries through exploitation of the issue of women's
Islam cannot be made real by people backed by anti-Islam forces.
Hence the moves made by Irshad Manji, Taslima Nasrin, Asra Nomani
and others must be rejected. These, at the mental level, resemble
the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which was meant enforce land
reform and put Afghan women into skirts.
Islamic priorities at this time are as follows:
Within that context, we should work to:
should be defeated and dismantled.
The ejection of American forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.
The defeat of occupation forces in
Distribution of wealth in Bangladesh,
and Tsunami struck countries
Ideological confrontation with multi-national corporations trying
to turn the Muslim world into a big market place.
nationalism, classism, sexism must be opposed.
As for women's leadership, the instances Br. Adam has given ,
all support the concept of women's leadership. I reject the four
points Br. Adam has made but will not discuss them now. I have
looked at the statements issued by funded organizations and
anti-woman groups, like ISNA here in America, against women's
leadership in prayer. I am afraid these statements only prove
the inability of these funded people to think.
stop violence against women within the family.
bring women into the decision making process.
give women their due share in inheritance.
provide economic and legal assistance to women.
give women equal rights within the mosque
[without free mixing, but keeping in mind that separation is
There is no teaching in the Qur'an or the Hadith which
negates women's leadership in any position.
If you can find any, send it to me.
However this is not the time for it. For any cause to emerge
successfully, the Muslim ummah has to reach the level of Islam
at which such development will be natural and indigenous.
American "Islam" is the greatest threat to our way of life right now.
When the Taliban told women to envelop themselves in the burqa,
they were providing the best solution in a war ravaged land.
Without such a literalist interpretation of Islam,
America would have turned Afghanistan into a brothel as it did
at one time.
There is a time for everything. There cannot be any women's leadership
in a nation where the incidence of wife beating and/or abuse is
quite high. Men's minds must be decolonized before women can
click here to email
a link to this
2005-05-28 Sat 20:14ct