Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Rajab 14, 1425/ August 30, 2004 #86

AFGHANISTAN: August 29. Taliban guarrillas attacked American security guards training Afghan police mercenaries in Kabul. Three Americans were killed, one critically injured. Four Afghan mercenaries were killed, 15 wounded. The attack took place right in Kabul, stronghold of American occupation forces and "northern alliance."

The security guards are special forces who guard puppet ruler Karzai. Observers now wonder: Who will guard the guards? Karzai does not trust any Afghans.

IRAQ: A series of attacks (August 25, 27, 29) on the southern oil pipelines near Basra have finally shut down the entire outflow of oil from Iraq which was being used to finance the American occupation of Iraq.

Two French journalists have been kidnapped. The hostage takers are demanding that France rescind its ban on Islamic dress in schools. The tactic seems to have backfired as the French people are rallying to the anti-Hijab cause. Observers say that worldwide Muslim protests boycotts of France would help to put some sense into the anti-Islam officials in France.

Why is Sudan the Target? Understanding the Media/UN/U.S./U.K. Blitz

by New Trend’s Special Sudan Monitor

Sudan’s government agrees to just about every United Nations move to investigate the situation in Darfur. All kinds of "charitable" organizations have sent representatives there. The most virulent opponents of Sudan have visited there. All restrictions on the infusion of food supplies were removed.

However the enemies of Sudan are keeping up a steady stream of hate propaganda aimed at demonizing the country. WHY? Here are a few pointers:

  1. Sudan is the biggest country in Africa, with one of the largest Islamic populations. Its destruction would reduce the overall power of Africa.
  2. Sudan protects the flank of the holy cities of Makka and Madinah. It straddles the key waterway through which American and British forces flow into the heartland of Islam.
  3. It’s a rallying point for Islam all over Africa and all over the world. Students from just about every African country attend Sudanese universities to learn Arabic and study Islam.
  4. It’s the only country in Africa which retains a modicum of independence, giving it a unique position after the of "FBIzation" of Egypt, the subservience of Muammar Qaddafi and the end of hope in South Africa [where behind the images of Mandela, gold, diamonds, industry continue to be in the hands of White Supremacists and Jewish merchants] with majority of the people denied basic amenities and suffering systematized spread of AIDS.
  5. The Sudanese government is far from ideal but it has distressed American-British planners by insisting on the viability and implementation of the Qur’an as the law of the land.
  1. Sudan is the only country in Africa capable of producing food not only for itself but for all of Africa. Fed by the Nile, the tremendous agricultural potential of Sudan could pose a serious threat to U.S.-Canadian-Australian control of food supplies in Africa and Asia.
  2. With the discovery and increasing production of oil in Sudan, and Chinese contracts secured and operative, Sudan can gradually become economically independent and viable.

In the southern Sudan, the U.S., Israel and U.K. were able to change a renegade colonel, Garang, leader of a minor southern tribe into a threat which drained the strength of Sudan for decades. Garang, with international support, forced the Sudanese to negotiate with him. Well placed heavy weaponry and the vast areas involved made it difficult for Sudan to respond quickly and decisively.
The same is now happening in Darfur, where well armed rebels who have destabilized western Sudan are being presented as a legitimate force with which the Islamic government must negotiate. The people in the area have a long history of mutual bickering, with farmers and nomads balancing each other out.


When the SPLA was trying to break away southern Sudan, the "slavery in Sudan" story was floated successfully by Jewish groups in the Baltimore Sun paper, the Johns Hopkins university radio station , and The New York Times. As a result incisive sanctions were imposed on Sudan leading to the country’s economic debilitation. After years of the slavery story, the fact that it was bogus came out. By then it was too late.

The same is happening now in Darfur. On a daily basis, the worldwide network of Zionist media blasts Sudan and denigrates its Islamic content. Atrocity stories of the "big lie" style are thrown around with no right of reply to the Islamic side.
Muslims must rally to support Sudan, however imperfect it might be, before the wolves of Zionism bite a fatal "pound of flesh" out of its African life blood.
CORRECTION: The news of the Zionist mole in the Pentagon was broken by CBS, not NBC. About half of our email list received the incorrect version before we could correct it. The error is regretted . [Editor]
[With thanks to Br. Hodari Abdul-'Ali, we have retained the British spelling of the following report.]
News Article by AFP posted on August 28, 2004 at 16:04:33: EST (-5 GMT)

Darfur elders say United States demonises Sudan to hurt Islam

KANO, Nigeria, Aug 28 (AFP) - A group of tribal chiefs from the war-torn Sudanese region of Darfur on Saturday told Nigerian Islamic leaders that the United States was using the conflict in their homeland to demonise Muslims.

The 11 elders were brought to Nigeria as part of a pro-government delegation to African Union peace talks aimed at resolving the bloody 18-month conflict between Khartoum and Darfur's two main rebel groups.

The United States has led international condemnation of the violence and US lawmakers have branded the attacks by the Janjaweed Arab militia on black African tribes regarded as rebel sympathisers a genocide.

But the chiefs, who were escorted to the northern Nigerian city of Kano by the Sudanese junior minister for social development Marghani Mansur Badawi, called such a stance an attack on the Muslim world as a whole.

"Its the United States that is fuelling the crises in Darfur, telling the world that the Arabs are commiting genocide against blacks," Badawi said.

"The target is not Sudan but the target is Islam although Sudans reputation has been defamed by this propaganda," he claimed.

Kano is the commercial centre of mainly-Muslim northern Nigeria -- which is home to more than 40 million black African Muslims -- and Badawi's party was met by some very senior local Islamic leaders.

"The Janjaweed is a group of criminals that have been operating since 1993, they are a bunch of bandits that have been robbing people, stealing herds from nomads and causing confusion in Darfur," Badawi said.

"When war started between the government and the rebels they seized the chance offered by the war to cause the damage they are now causing but the government has no hand in the atrocities they are committing," he insisted.

The United Nations, the United States, international rights groups and Nigeria's own President Olusegun Obasanjo, chairman of the African Union, have said that the Janjaweed were armed and sponsored by the Sudanese government.

Kano and Sudan have a relationship that dates back centuries to when Sudan served as a transit route for northern Nigerian pilgrims going to Mecca for the Hajj pilgrimage, crossing the Sahara on donkeys, mules and on foot.

Many of the pilgrims settled in Sudan on their way home, and it is widely believed in Nigeria that there are now more than four million Sudanese of Nigerian descent.

Badawi said the crises in Darfur is as a result of water shortage caused by a drought in 1993, which led to clashes between farmers and nomads over grazing fields as nomadic herdsmen encroached on crops.

"The tribes living there are all Muslims and Islam came to unite humanity and doesnt differentiate between races and tribes," said Badawi, who is a mamber of the Masalik tribe in western Darfur.

"Where there is war there is destruction because war causes havoc, pushing people to leave villages to cities where they can find safety," he said.

"But television footage from Western media depicts these displaced people as victims of ethnic cleansing to ridicule Islam," he continued.

The minister's thesis won a sympathetic ear in a region in which anti-US sentiment runs deep.

Magaji Abdullahi, Kano's deputy governor, accused the West of instigating the conflict in Darfur in order to "Balkanise the Sudan as they did in Bosnia and Afghanistan, with the motive of destroying our sacred religion."

"ELECTIONS!": FINAL OBSCENITY OF RUSSIAN GENOCIDE IN CHECHNIA: Compare with Kashmir, Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan.................

By Buut Shikan [Idol Breaker]

What do Kashmir, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Chechnia have in common? In each case the occupying power used overwhelming force to crush the resistance, terrorize the people, destroy mosques and imprison the political opposition. Then, step two, the occupier uses funding to organize collaborators, traitors, agents and non-Muslim groups to organize "elections" and set up a "democracy." Any attempt to oppose the "democracy" is labeled "terrorism" and liquidated..

Each tragedy has its peculiarities but the worst case is that of Chechnia.

In our previous report, we showed that the Communists deported the ENTIRE population of Chechnia in 1944, resulting in a million deaths. Then in 1945, the Communists started the story of the Jewish Holocaust in 1945, thus diverting attention away from Chechnia and other horrendous crimes they had committed [such as the liquidation of the entire Polish officers’ corp in the Katyn Forest.]

After the death of Stalin, the Chechens starting filtering back from Kazakhstan to Chechnia. When the Afghans brought down the Soviet empire, the Chechens became confident enough to declare their independence in 1991.

The Russian monster would not let the Chechens live in peace and has carried out two wars of aggression against Chechnia. The first war ended with the defeat of the Russian army, though little Chechnia underwent a catastrophe standing up to a giant military force.

A much weakened Chechnia was totally wiped out in the second war of aggression. Russia carried out GENOCIDE against the Chechen people. However resistance has continued owing to the intense new Islamic spirit which developed in Chechnia during the two wars. The resistance is now led by Muslims influenced by the example of Osama bin Laden and is condemned by the USA as "terrorism."

In spite of this ongoing tragedy, RUSSIA HAS CARRIED OUT "ELECTIONS" IN OCCUPIED CHECHNIA on AUGUST 29, 2004. The chief police officer imposed by the Russians on the bleeding country was declared "elected."

During the two wars, the Russia went beyond all limits of humanity and decency in its attacks on the Chechen people. Here are a few EYEWITNESS accounts from Khassan Baiev’s book THE OATH: A SURGEON UNDER FIRE. Baiev is a moderate Chechen who has taken refuge in America:

Here is a typical scene from the beginning of First War when Russia bombed the Chechen capital Grozny at random to terrorize the population and claimed that it had been done by Azerbaijan!:

"The bomb had ploughed into a street full of people, leaving a hole about 15 feet across and six feet deep. Asphalt, bricks, telephone poles, trees lay everywhere as if a large excavator had gouged up the area. The first thing I saw were three burned-out cars with drivers and passengers cremated in their seats. Next to the car lay a man who had been decapitated; nearby was a human arm attached to a blood-soaked sleeve, a child’s foot in a sneaker. Wounded people, corpses, body parts and bloody pieces of clothing littered the street like pieces of refuse...I approached what looked like an elderly woman, only to find her dead, her stomach split open, her colon and small intestine splattered in the dirt..." (p.88)

That was only the first Russian attack. One of the planes was shot down and the world saw that the pilot was not Azeri but Russian, and the Russian markings on the plane had been painted over. (P.89) After that the Russians never showed any shame in bombing civilian populations. However, when Russian tank columns entered Grozny, the Chechens, the pride of the Muslim world, defeated them and destroyed them en masse.

The Russians targeted mosques in particular although the Chechens did not use them for resistance. Here is another eyewitness account from Baiev:

"One afternoon, the Russians sent a helicopter gunship to destroy the mosque around the corner from us. Earlier a shell had toppled the minaret. I was home when the assault began...I knew from the way the helicopter gunship hovered above the mosque like a giant bird of prey, that it was poised to strike...Then a thunderous missile explosion shattered the heavy white walls of the mosque like egg shells." (P.104)
[To be continued, inshallah.]
Bloomberg Fails to Intimidate Protesters


by William Hughes
[The writer, a long time human rights activist and critic of the government, gets published in New Trend every now and then. He lives in Baltimore.]

Manhattan - It was a massive sea of people on the streets of NYC, on Sunday, August 29th, protesting the Iraq War and the GOP Convention. On 7th Avenue, in particular, under a scorching sun, with the temperature in the low 90s, banners, signs, flags, posters, chanting and parents pushing their infants in strollers dominated. The entire parade lasted for over six hours and the crowd stretched for nearly two miles.

NYC's Mayor Michael Bloomberg tried, but failed miserably to intimidate the protesters. They came by the tens of thousands! One guy I met on 7th Ave., an environmentalist, flew into NYC the night before from Olympia, WA to be at the rally. I think he revealed the fantastic spirit that drove this remarkable display of public revulsion at the GOP and the Bush-Cheney Gang's warmongering.

Over the last few months, Bloomberg had worked to manipulate a confrontation with the demonstrators and scare them off. He was assisted in targeting the peaceful dissenters by NYC's yellow-sheeted tabloid press. There were so many opportunities over the last few months for Bloomberg to work out a reasonable compromise with the organizers of the demonstration, to allow them to rally in Central Park. Yet, "Mayor Bully" repeatedly stonewalled their requests and waited until the very last moment to offer the Union Square site for the rally instead. He even resorted to mocking the protesters by wrongly insisting that their First Amendment rights to free speech and free assembly were "only privileges" (NY Newsday, "Protest a 'Privilege,' Mayor Bloomberg Says," Glenn Thrush, 08/17/04).

A Quinnipiac U. poll published before the rally found that 75 percent of New Yorkers supported a Central Park protest with only 21 percent backing Bloomberg and a ban. In the past, the Mayor, an arrogant multibillionaire, with an ego larger than Donald Trump’s, has acted like Central Park was "his" personal property to be used only as he and his fellow elitists dictated (NY Newsday, Glenn Thrush, "Mayor Wants to Protect ‘His’ Park," 07/20/04).

Bloomberg’s animus towards peaceful antiwar demonstrators was evidenced in two earlier rallies that were held in NYC. The first, that I was a party to, was held on First Avenue, on Feb. 13, 2003. At that rally, Bloomberg restricted the demonstrators to cattle bins. They weren't allowed to march at all! The second rally of March 20, 2004, centered around Madison Ave., Madison Sq. Park, 23rd St. and 7th Ave. The demonstrators again were placed in cattle bins at the start, on Madison Ave. between 23rd and 34th Street. Only later, when they reached 23rd St. were they allowed to march and then continue northward on 7th Ave.

It was also no accident that a highly inflammatory article ran in the New York Daily News, on 08/26/04, ("Anarchists Hot for Mayhem," Patrick O’Shaughnessy). In the piece, which demonized the protesters, the author, based on the worst kind of hearsay evidence and smear tactics, warned that some individuals supposedly headed to the anti-Iraq War rally were conspiring "to shutting down the Brooklyn Bridge and hurling bricks followed by Molotov cocktails through widows of military recruiting stations..."

As late as Friday, Aug. 27th, NYC police anticipated charging four nonviolent activists with First Degree Assault. It carries a draconian sentence of 25 years in the slammer for each. Why? Because in an act of theater politics they had dared to hang a banner over the swanky Plaza Hotel that mocked George Bush and the GOP. A policeman was unintentionally injured in the incident when he ignored the warning of the activists not to remain on a skylight that was cracked (NY Post, "Plaza Kooks In Trouble.")

The NY Daily News is owned by rabid warmonger and media mogul Mortimer B. Zuckerman. He has close ties to Bloomberg. The NY Post is owned by the hawkish Rupert Murdock, who also controls Fox TV. It hosts Iraq War zealots and notorious right wingers, such as: Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Oliver North. Zuckerman and Murdock both feature Neocons in their media organs, like: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and William Kristol. Bloomberg has reported links to both the Neocons and to Murdock.

Today, when I lined up to march with Irish Freedom activists at 20th Street, near 7th Ave., at around 11 AM, under the banner of "We Serve Neither Bush Nor Mobil," the demonstrators couldn't have been in a happier mood. I talked with Sandy Boyer, co-producer of the popular "Radio Free Eireann" program, on WBAI, in NYC, and many others. Everyone thought it was going to be a "great afternoon for a rally." Boyer said, "This is incredible! You have people as far as the eye can see. Irish-Americans are here as a contingent, flying the Tricolor Flag, to show that we are strongly against this war."

Although the media had predicted a crowd in the range of 250,000, John McDonagh, one of the leaders of "Cabbies Against Bush," (http://liteupbush.com/), told me on the morning of the rally, "Don't believe the controlled media." He added, "The crowd today will exceed 500,000." According to the United for Peace & Justice, one of the organizers for the rally, McDonagh was right on the money in his estimate.

The massive event started around noon at 15th St. The parade then moved northward on 7th Avenue past Madison Square Garden, where the GOP convention was to open the next day. It then progressed eastward on 34th Street to 5th Avenue. From there demonstrators marched south on 5th Avenue to 23rd Street, then east to Broadway, and south on Broadway into the Union Square Park area for the rally. This neighborhood is famous in NYC history as one of the leading symbols of the origins of the Labor Movement in America, that dates as "early as 1882" (http:www.mcny.org/Collections/paint/Painting/pttcat69.htm) .

Finally, despite all the opposition, scare tactics and demonizing, the rally was a huge success, with no thanks due to NYC's "Mayor Bully" - Michael Bloomberg!

© William Hughes 2004

Does Hadith Teach that Most Women will Go to Hell?
Are Women pre-Ordained to the Hell Fire?

by Kaukab Siddique

Dear Sis. Shafeeqah Abdullah (from Atlanta): asalamu alaikum

You have sent an article by Shakiel Humayun about a Hadith on women in hellfire . I don’t know who is Mr. Humayun but he has totally misunderstood the Hadith in question. I am worried that he is reported to be teaching new Muslims.

Mr. Humayun has based his entire article on his first point. Here I quote him:

" "I was shown the hellfire and most of its inhabitants were women."
How was the prophet able to see the future? Allah enabled the prophet to see the future and the inhabitants of the hellfire."

Mr. Humayun’s conclusion is as follows:

"Women will be most of the inhabitants of the hellfire is a fact spoken by the trusted and the trustworthy Muhammad (saaws). The statements of Allah and His messenger (saaws) are not subjected to the rationalization of any human. The statements of Allah are the truth and are just. They are not subjected to the acceptance of mankind to qualify being the truth or just."

What's his error?
It’s in front of his eyes but Mr. Humayun couldn’t see it. The Hadith says "I was shown" using the past tense, and again "its inhabitants were..." past tense. Thus the Hadith is about the past, not about the future.

The Prophet (pbuh) did not say, EVER, that women WILL go to hell! In fact many of the women who were his best supporters were promised Paradise even before they died. There is no question of any Muslim woman who follows Islam going to hell. I wonder which Muslim woman Mr. Humayun thinks will go to hell?

Quite the contrary, the Prophet (pbuh) has taught that even those Muslims who wrong their souls and commit so many sins that they will be sent to hell, will be redeemed and brought out of hellfire, if they have even an iota of faith in them. Here is what the Prophet (pbuh) said:

"From Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (r.a.): The Prophet, pbuh, said: ‘When the people of Paradise enter Paradise and the people of Hell go to hell, Allah will Say: Take those out of Hell who have faith even equal to a grain of mustard. When they will be taken out, they will be charred. Then they will be put in the river of life and they will revive like a plant that grows near the bank of a water channel. Don’t you see how it comes out yellow and twisted?’ " [Sahih of Bukhari, Vol.I, hadith 21.]

Mr. Humayun did not understand the Hadith because he did not quote it in full before he discussed it. [Later on he did quote it but then he did not discuss it because he was constantly focusing on the idea of what will happen to women in the future. ]

The complete Hadith is as follows:

"I was shown the hellfire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good done to them. If you have always been good to one of them and then she sees something [bad] in you, she will say, 'I have never received any good from you." [al-Bukhari]

Mr. Humayun does not give the reference which is Sahih of Bukhari Vol. I, Hadith 28.

The Hadith deals with a psychological problem which occurs in many marriages, when a wife who has been pampered by her husband, rejects all he has done the very first time he goes against her desire.

It’s a pre-Islamic issue: Hence the PAST tense. The Prophet (pbuh) did not want marriages to break up. He was teaching women of the future about one of the problems which can hurt relationships.

Similar words were expressed by the Prophet (pbuh) about RICH people. He said he saw them in hell and in the future they could save themselves by spending in Allah’s way.

He also admonished MEN who would choose a wife on the basis of a criterion other than that of PIETY. ["May your hands be rubbed in dirt."]

There are numerous Hadith of EDUCATION and ADMONITION, for instance about those who do not pray on time and who love the world and may other matters.

All this has nothing to do with the FUTURE and certainly nothing to do with PREDETERMINATION or Qadr. It has nothing to do with any INHERENT problem with women which would put them in hell. The Prophet (pbuh) is teaching about BEHAVIOR, not Qadr. A similar hadith occurs in Sahih Muslim where the Prophet warns that he saw in hell women who dress but remain naked owing to the way they dress. [See Sahih Muslim, kitabul-libas wuz-zeenah, section 131)

How can we be sure that women who follow the Prophet (pbuh) will not go to hell? They are many proofs, but let's take the Qur'an's verses referring to the oath of fealty Muslims took to follow Muhammad to martyrdom when 'Usman (r.a.) was feared to have been killed by the Makkans. The Qur'an says:
"It is He who sent down tranquility into the hearts of the believers.... that He may admit the men and women who believe, to Gardens beneath which rivers flow, to dwell therein for ever .... Surely those who give their pledge to thee (O Muhammad) do no less than pledge themselves to Allah: The Hand of Allah is over their hands ....[The Qur'an 48:4, 5 and 10.]

Among those who took this pledge were some of the greatest of women in human history. One of them was Asma (r.a.) the daughter of Yazeed who took part in many a jihad. At one time her marriage didn't work out and she underwent divorce. The respect she had in the Islamic community was never diminished owing to this problem with her husband.

Asma (r.a.) took part in the historic battle of Yarmouk which spelled the death knell of the Roman empire. She herself killed NINE Romans. She and the women with her swept into the battle killing hundreds of Romans. At one point, the Muslim army, greatly outnumbered, started to flee. The women, including Asma (r.a.), intercepted the fleeing units, threw stones and pieces of wood at the fighters and taunted them, saying: "Where are you running off to? Are you going to leave us to the kuffar?" The fleeing soldiers returned and pledged to fight to the death. The huge Roman army was totally routed. [Tabari's Tarikh, vol. 2, p. 335, Ibn Kathir's al-Bidaya wun-Niyahaya, vol. 7 p.13]

Thus there is no scope either in the Qur'an or the Hadith for the idea that women will go to hell because they are women. Islam decides on the basis of behavior, conduct, TAQWA [fear and awareness of Allah], not on the basis of gender.

click here to email a link to this article

2004-09-18 Sat 19:14ct