Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Ramadan 15, 1425/ October 30, 2004 #107


October 29: Hundreds of Kashmiris came out to protest in Srinagar [occupied Kashmir] after Indian soldiers and Central Reserve policemen held and gang-raped a 20 year old Kashmiri woman who was travelling from Jammu to Sopore. She was held in a government "guest house" in Srinagar and victimized all night. [Source: daily Nawa-I-waqt.]
4th Essay on Election 2004

Muslim Vote for Kerry and the Theory of the "Lesser Evil"
Is there any Justification for it in Islam?

By Kaukab Siddique, Ph.D

[The first three essays were on :
  1. Boycott of Elections.
  2. If Muslims Don't Vote, will they be Ineffective?
  3. CAIR or SCARE? The American People are not our Enemies.]
October 30. It's almost election time. The self-appointed "leaders" of the Muslims of America have not come up with even verse from the Qur'an or one Hadith which would justify participation in the oppressive power structure through elections or otherwise. There can be little doubt that the so-called leaders, be they in ISNA, ICNA, CAIR, MPAC or W.D. Muhammad have abandoned the Qur'an and the Hadith as sources of Guidance in political issues. These are secularized groups using the name of Islam and are often weighted down with barely hidden nationalism, classism and genderism emanating from the values of Pakistani, Indian, Arab and African-American elites.

Those who taught from the Qur'an and the Hadith, the real leaders of America's Muslims are in prison: Imam Jamil al-Amin, Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman, Siddique Abdullah Hasan and others.
Independent Imams like Imam Warithuddin Omar, Imam Musa, Imam Muhammad al-'Asi and others, as far as we know, have not endorsed ISNA-ICNA-CAIR-WD pro-power structure moves.

At the lower levels of the "invite me to the White House, please" groups are some "Islam leaning" individuals" who claim that voting for Kerry is the lesser of two evils. The question arises: Does Islam, in any shape and form, endorse the theory that Muslims should support the lesser of two evils?

The Qur'an and the Hadith are very clear. Islam supports GOOD. It does not support EVIL whether it is lesser or greater. The entire life of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) bears witness that for a Muslim, the only option is good, not lesser or greater evil. He opposed both Abu Jahal [who was vehement in his transgression, like Bush] and Abu Sufian [who was more diplomatic, like Kerry].

The Qur'an says:

"The believers, men and women, are protectors and guardians of each other. They command what is clearly JUST, and forbid what is EVIL: They establish prayer, pay zakat and obey Allah and His messenger. On them will Allah pour His mercy, for Allah is exalted in power, Wise.[9:71]

The Arabic word for evil, MUNKAR, encompasses all forms of evil, whether it is personal or economic or political. Nowhere in the Qur'an does one get the idea that "lesser evil" is acceptable.

In fact the Prophet (pbuh) was offered lesser evil and rejected it. In Makka, the chiefs of the Quraish implored him to desist from attacking their idols and they would give him whatever he wanted, be it wealth, women or power. They were willing to let him pray to "his" God as long as he did not oppose their power structure, their idols, their system of slavery and the subjugation of women, the weak, the oppressed. The Prophet (pbuh) rejected the offer out of hand without the slightest hesitation. [For various offers by the Quraish chiefs to Muhammad, pbuh, see Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq, the earliest extant biography of the Prophet, pbuh.]

In Islam, there is no substitute for a JUST struggle focused on goodness, virtue, chastity, truthfulness, and fearlessness. All the difficulties of this way must be endured for the sake of final victory.
[Notice how Imam Jamil does not compromise although he is pressured and humiliated in solitary confinement! He is 100% with the SUNNAH. Notice Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman, BLIND, UNABLE TO SPEAK ENGLISH, ailing, just about buried alive by his racist captors. Does he compromise? No. He is 100% with the SUNNAH .]

So what is the cause of ISNA-ICNA-CAIR-WD's claim of the lesser evil, be it Kerry [or even more ridiculous, Nader]? There is nothing in Islam for them. It is true that the Qur'an heartened the Muslims by referring to the victory of the Christians [Romans] over the Persians, but the Qur'an did not imply in any way that the Muslims should JOIN either side. In fact, when the time came, the forces of Islam faced both empires and toppled them. JOINING THE LESSER EVIL has NEVER BEEN an ISLAMIC OPTION. The Qur'an gives only one option:

" By the Declining Day: Surely humankind is in loss, except such as have Faith and do good works, and join together in teaching the Truth , and join together in patient Perseverence."


ISNA-ICNA-CAIR-WD have made it a part of their program to invite non-Muslim politicians and leaders to speak to Muslim communities. The result can be described as REVERSE Da'WAH. That is, we are subjecting our often fragile and weak communities to the idea that these non-Muslims are our friends even though they recognize Israel and we don't. The prayers and fasting of many Muslim congregations are disrupted by the presence and self-praise of these opportunistic activities of non-Muslim leaders.

If these "self-appointed" leaders of Muslims were capable of Islamic thought, they would send Muslim scholars, committed to the cause of Allah to speak in non-Muslim communities, and not the reverse. Already OUR CHILDREN are subjected every day to the propaganda of the subtle and not-so-subtle enemies of Islam, on a daily basis. Then the final sanctuary of the Muslims, the mosque, is invaded by non-Muslim politicians so that the self-appointed Muslim "leaders" can win some brownie points from their masters.

If this idea of "lesser evil" is allowed to flourish, our communities will be (and are being) initiated into "a LITTLE Haram," a "FEW" drinks, a little nudity, a little sex, only a few SPECKS of lard, and then into total assimilation.

The Islamic way is quite different:

"...Those who patiently persevere, seeking the countenance of their Lord, establish regular prayers, spend out of the what We have bestowed for their sustenance, secretly and openly: and turn off Evil with GOOD: for such there is the final attainment of the (Eternal) Home ..." [13:22]

Study: 100,000 Excess Civilian Iraqi Deaths Since War

Thu Oct 28, 2:57 PM ET

By Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violence since the U.S.-led invasion last year, American public health experts have calculated in a report that estimates there were 100,000 "excess deaths" in 18 months.

The rise in the death rate was mainly due to violence and much of it was caused by U.S. air strikes on towns and cities.

"Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq (news - web sites)," said Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in a report published online by The Lancet medical journal.

"The use of air power in areas with lots of civilians appears to be killing a lot of women and children," Roberts told Reuters.

The report came just days before the U.S. presidential election in which the Iraq war has been a major issue.

Mortality was already high in Iraq before the war because of United Nations sanctions blocking food and medical imports but the researchers described what they found as shocking.

The new figures are based on surveys done by the researchers in Iraq in September 2004. They compared Iraqi deaths during 14.6 months before the invasion in March 2003 and the 17.8 months after it by conducting household surveys in randomly selected neighborhoods.

Previous estimates based on think tank and media sources put the Iraqi civilian death toll at up to 16,053 and military fatalities as high as 6,370.

By comparison about 849 U.S. military were killed in combat or attacks and another 258 died in accidents or incidents not related to fighting, according to the Pentagon (news - web sites).


The researchers blamed air strikes for many of the deaths.

"What we have evidence of is the use of air power in populated urban areas and the bad consequences of it," Roberts said.

Gilbert Burnham, who collaborated on the research, said U.S. military action in Iraq was "very bad for Iraqi civilians."

"We were not expecting the level of deaths from violence that we found in this study and we hope this will lead to some serious discussions of how military and political aims can be achieved in a way that is not so detrimental to civilians populations," he told Reuters in an interview.

The researchers did 33 cluster surveys of 30 households each, recording the date, circumstances and cause of deaths.

They found that the risk of death from violence in the period after the invasion was 58 times higher than before the war.

Before the war the major causes of death were heart attacks, chronic disorders and accidents. That changed after the war.

Two-thirds of violent deaths in the study were reported in Falluja, the insurgent held city 50 km (32 miles) west of Baghdad which had been repeatedly hit by U.S. air strikes.

"Our results need further verification and should lead to changes to reduce non-combatant deaths from air strikes," Roberts added in the study.

Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, said the research which was submitted to the journal earlier this month had been peer-reviewed, edited and fast-tracked for publication because of its importance in the evolving security situation in Iraq.

"But these findings also raise questions for those far removed from Iraq -- in the governments of the countries responsible for launching a pre-emptive war," Horton said in an editorial.

OSAMA: HEALTHY, CALM, TALL, CHALLENGES AMERICA: If you don't attack us, we won't attack you.

[by our Media Monitor]

October 29 was full of drama. Two important news appeared: John Kerry came out with UNQUALIFIED SUPPORT for Israel. Totally ignoring the month long slaughter of Palestinian by the Jews, Kerry echoed Bush with the words: Israel has the right to defend itself.

Then came the report of Osama's video. Both Kerry and Bush went ballistic, threatening to destroy the terrorists by any means necessary.

The video is quite a blow for the conspiracy theorists: All those stories that: He has already been captured and will be brought to light just before the elections, that he is dead, that he is a fiction created by the Pentagon, that 9.11 was done by "you know who," Muslims don't know how to fly planes, etc., no plane hit the Pentagon, etc, etc.

Osama looked calm, healthy [though ascetic], tall as ever. Both his hands seem to be okay. He made no threats. Instead he offered a form of peace: "If you don't attack us, we won't attack you."

He indicated that Israel's genocide of Muslims is central to his vision; that he first became politicized by the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. PALESTINE's FREEDOM is his cherished goal.

He took responsibility for 9.11.

For Americans, this makes him a "barbarian" in Kerry's words. By contrast, a scientific non-propagandist report from the LANCET magazine which estimates that 100,000 Iraqis, mostly WOMEN and CHILDREN, have been killed in U.S. air strikes in Iraq since March 2003, hardly caused a ripple in U.S. media and government.

{New Trend stands by its earlier analysis that the 9.11 attack unit led by Mohammed Atta was autonomous. Osama is taking credit for it but could not possibly have directly organized it.]

WHAT IMPACT WILL OSAMA's VIDEO HAVE? There is a good chance that it will stir up America's power structure and elites. There is great anger already expressed by both parties. Bush is seen as stronger on terrorism than Kerry, so the video could give Bush the slight edge he needs.

Osama might have decided to get Bush re-elected. If the book IMPERIAL HUBRIS is to be believed, Osama wants to take on the U.S. by making the U.S. fight the entire Muslim world, which Bush is quite eager to do.

If Kerry gets elected, the wars will continue. If Bush is elected, the wars will be extended to other countries.

Osama is recognized even in U.S. polling experiments as the leader of the entire Islamic world [with the exception of Iran]. However, the Muslims who have actually joined him with weapons are said to number only in thousands, perhaps tens of thousands.

If Osama's video gets Bush re-elected, the war will become very open globally: Islam vs America. Osama is probably trying that Muslim youths should join him, not in tens of thousands, as now, but in millions. To reach that objective, he needs Bush to be re-elected and to send out more American troops to Muslim lands.

click here to email a link to this article

2004-10-31 Sun 19:10ct