News  #  1338
[ Click on NEWS for back issues ][ OUR BOOKS ][ Previous Issue ]

Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Jamada al-Thani 14,1431/ May 28, 2010 # 22

Unite Against Zionism: Jamaat al-Muslimeen Shoora Theme

Jewish Holocaust Program in Baltimore Challenged:
Fears of anti-Semitism are Bogus.
Israel is a Criminal Entity

On May 24, Baltimore's Jewish community presented a "Black Christian's Perspective" on the Holocaust at the CENTRAL LIBRARY on Cathedral street

The Presenter was Dr. Hubert G. Locke, Provost Emeritus for Academic Affairs, all the way from the University of Washington, Seattle, and member of the Committee on Church Relations and the Holocaust at the US. Holocaust Memorial Museum. He discussed the Holocaust and Jewish-Christian Relations.

The presentation was challenged by a number of African Americans and by Muslims of African ancestry, including a sister in hijab. Critics from the audience wanted slavery, not the Jewish story, to be seen as the real holocaust.
An entire group from Jamaat al-Muslimeen was in attendance. Br. Kaukab Siddique got the mike and rebutted the main points made by Dr. Locke. This is a summary of his 3 main points:

1. War time Jewish propaganda about the holocaust story is irrelevant to our times. The victims today are Palestinians, not Jews. All of Gaza has been turned into a concentration camp. Israel, supported by American Jewry, is committing crimes against humanity, including the murder of Palestinian children.
2. Dr. Locke's claims about the rise of "anti-semitism" and "extremism" are false. These claims are agenda driven and are coming out of the Southern Poverty Law Center which is pro-Zionist. It has completely ignored the suffering of hundreds of US Muslims who are unjustly imprisoned.
3. If Dr. Locke has any document showing an order from Hitler ordering the extermination of Jews as a people, let us know where it can be found. If not, then stop the stories about the "holocaust." Six million people cannot be exterminated without an order from the top.

When the Jewish organizers saw an entire group of Muslims and heard Dr. Siddique talk of Palestine, they called the police into the library. At one point it seemed that Dr. Siddique would be arrested.

Unite Against Zionism: Jamaat al-Muslimeen Shoora theme

Spotlight on Tariq Ramadan by Imam Badi Ali [Jamaat al-Muslimeen North Carolina] Shoora Leader

Why is Tariq Ramadan coming to the ISNA Convention, why is he invited to speak at Oxford University, why American power structure loves him so much, that he has replaced Warith Deen Muhammad, Siraj Wahhaj, Zaid Shakir and even Hamza Yusuf as chief collaborator?
Firstly look at his ideology: It is a mixture, a hodgepodge of Islam and secularism, and Islam and Christianity.
Secondly look at his opposition to Shariah and Islamic hadood. The West badly needs "Muslims" who can speak against Shariah. Ramadan has not been worried by the fact that the Qur'an and Sunnah are divinely ordained. They have come to reform society. There is no question of reforming divine law, but in his drive to please the Western powers, Ramadan easily forgets that Islam is from Allah and not to be reformed by him or anyone else.
Look at Tariq Ramadan's publications. They are all aimed at pleasing the West. He does not want to offend the enemies of Islam.
Worst of all, Ramadan wants Muslims in the West to melt into the West and to be separated from the global Ummah of Islam whose leader is Muhammad, pbuh.

Spotlight on Obama and the Oil Spill:
On May 27, 2010 CNN made a major blunder which exposed a weakness of President Obama which is now becoming obvious across the nation. CNN showed Obama speaking about the oil spill. In a corner of the TV screen, CNN showed oil gushing out of the leaking pipe.
Obama kept talking, the oil kept gushing.
The president has not learned yet that talk is not a solution for the fundamental issues wracking America.

Letter: Tariq Ramadan's Kufr is quite Manifest

Salaam Akhi,

Just for further information on Tariq Ramadan, if you do check the debate he did with Ayan Hirsi Ali, he clearly said Kufr.
Whereas amongst Muslims he is calling for a moratorium on hudood (which in itself is bad enough) stating the example of Omar Bin Al Khattab during famine, in this debate amongst kuffar he lets his true intention slip, that he is calling for a moratorium with a view towards ABROGATION!

Subhanallah manifest kufr, denial of a clear hokm.

Tariq Ramadan clearly says abrogation of hudood:
4min 9 secs in

Keep up the excellent work. May Allah reward you and keep you on Sirat al Mustaqeem. Ma Salaam

Abdul-Rashid Hamid

Islamic Leader in Norway
Cartoons of the Prophet, pbuh, are an attempt to destroy World Peace.
Munawar Hasan Urges Europeans: Don't Support US invasion of Afghanistan

LAHORE, Apr. 26: The Jamaat e Islami chief Syed Munwar Hasan, has impressed upon Norway's political leadership that caricatures of the Holy Prophet ( pbuh) were a heinous attempt to destroy world peace.

The JI chief underlined this point at his meetings with the Norwegian Christian Democratic Party chief, Mr. Dagfinn Hoybraien, Labor Party Member, and deputy Speaker, Akhtar Chaudhary, and high officials in the Foreign Ministry in Oslo. Important issues including the presence of the US in the region, Kashmir and the political situation of Pakistan also came under discussion at the meeting.

The two sides agreed that the blasphemy of the Holy Prophet (Pbuh) was something that could not be ignored.

Syed Munawar Hasan told the Norwegian leaders that the individuals, groups and the governments advocating freedom of expression considered a discussion on Zionists holocaust as a crime but they freely hurt the feelings of two billion Muslims in the world.

The Western governments championing the cause of democracy and human rights were backing the corrupt rulers and dictators in the Muslim world, he said, and added that the Western people and governments would have to abandon double standards.

The JI chief said the US had opted the path of self destruction by attacking Afghanistan. It was high time that the European countries realized the US folly in the light of the Afghanistan history and pulled out of this US war, he said.

JI Foreign affairs Wing chief Abdul Ghaffar Aziz, head of the Norway Islamic Cultural Centre, Mian Waqas Waheed and prominent Islamic scholar on Norway, Maulana Mehbubur Rehman, accompanied the JI chief in these meetings.

The JI chief returned to the country Wednesday morning after a 3- day visit to Norway.

US Bombing of Pakistan Continues
US Drone Attack Killed 15 Civilians, injured scores: Labeled as "suspected" Taliban

May 16, 2010. Drone air craft of the US air force fired missiles into three homes in the Tirah Valley of Khyber agency. At least 15 civilians were killed in the attack and scores injured in the attack. The three homes were completely demolished.

Pakistani sources say that such US attacks aimed at killing civilians have become quite common. The US theory seems to be, say our observers, that if the civilian supporters of the mujahideen are killed, that will weaken the resistance. The US and its Pakistani affiliates kill these people under the label of "suspected" Taliban.

Our America
Mr. President: You Gotta be Kiddin'!
by Kaukab Siddique, PhD

Previewing parts of the document, John Brennan, Obama's leading counterterrorism adviser, said: "We have never been and will never be at war with Islam."
"The president's strategy is unequivocal with regard to our posture -- the United States of America is at war. We are at war against al Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates," he said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Just think about it:

Mr. Obama supports Israel and never said a word against Israeli genocide in Gaza.
Mr. Obama's military forces have occupied Afghanistan.
Mr. Obama is bombing Pakistan which even Bush did not do.
Mr. Obama's occupation forces remain in Iraq.
Mr. Obama opposes the Muslims of Somalia.
Mr. Obama has sanctions on Iran.
Mr. Obama has sanctions on Sudan.
Mr. Obama's hand can be seen in bombing raids on Yemen's Muslims.
Mr. Obama supported recent massacres of Muslims in Nigeria by the US armed Nigerian military.
Mr. Obama has ordered the assassination of an Islamic scholar, Shaykh Anwar al-Awlaqi, though he is a US citizen. [See note below.]

Yet, Mr. Obama says America has not been and never will be at war with Islam. What is one to make of it?

A learned sister doing research on American war plans explained to me what Mr. Obama means.

He means that Muslims in America can pray and fast and have mosques. Muslim men can have beards. Muslim women can wear hijab and even visit the Pentagon to see charts and diagrams on how many Muslims in Iraq were killed by the US. Muslim organizations have been set up which are affiliated with the FBI and recently helped to get 5 US Muslims arrested in Pakistan where they were later tortured.

See, she said, this is what Obama means by being not being at war with Islam. If you pray and fast and that's all you see in Islam, then he is not at war with you.
But Islam abolishes usury [bank interest], it stands for the oppressed, it frees the downtrodden, it condemns the exploitation of women. Obama supports Usury, is against the oppressed, and is for the exploiters and fat cats.

He certainly is at war with Islam.
Is there any justice in America for Muslims? Why is Imam Jamil in prison, why is Dr. Omar Abdel Rahman in prison, why is Ahmed Abdel Sattar in prison, why are prisons packed with pious Muslims.
Even the attorney of Dr. Abdel Rahman, Lynne Stewart, is in prison.
Is this not war on Islam?
The Qur'an was desecrated in Gtmo. Has Obama punished anyone for that?

Note on Shaykh Anwar al-Awlaqi: Every week commentators on US media call for the bombing and killing of Muslims around the world. It's a 24 hour media blitz. The dirtiest possible enemies of Islam like Glenn Beck, Irshad Manji, Ayana Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter are brought on TV and talk of attacking Muslims and desecrating all that is holy to them, be it medressas or mosques run by Taliban, or entire populations of "suspected" terrorists.
A video has surfaced from a US citizen in Yemen, Anwar al-Awlaqi, in which he justifies jihad against America in retaliation for one million Muslim women and children killed by the US and Israel. So, if an American citizen turns around and says to Americans what Ann Coulter types say off the cuff about Muslims, then he should be assassinated? What happened to rule of LAW? What happened to: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Awlaqi is not even to be arrested but simply murdered in an air attack? [as a US citizen was killed in Yemen by the orders of Bush]. No trials, no evidence, no defense?
Doesn't Obama realize that when he kills a Muslim, the Muslim is shaheed and goes to Paradise and has the highest position in Islam, second only to the prophets, pbut? What will be gained by killing an Islamic scholar? You certainly cannot defeat Islam by killing Islamic scholars. They are looking for martyrdom. The very threat to kill a man of God is an admission that America has lost the war of ideas and ideals.

Our America

Federal Court Rules Bagram Prisoners Can't Challenge Their Detention In U.S. Courts
Decision Gives Government Unchecked Power To Detain Individuals Indefinitely Without Due Process Or Transparency, Says ACLU

NEW YORK - A federal court of appeals ruled today that three prisoners who are being held by the United States at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan cannot challenge their detention in U.S. courts. The non-Afghan prisoners, some of whom were captured outside of Afghanistan far from any battlefield and "rendered" or transferred to Bagram, have been held at the detention facility for more than seven years without access to a court or counsel. The American Civil Liberties Union has filed habeas cases on behalf of several Bagram detainees and a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records relating to the detention, rendition and treatment of prisoners held there. The ACLU's Bagram habeas cases were not addressed by the court of appeals ruling today; the cases at issue were brought by the International Justice Network, the organization coordinating Bagram habeas litigation.
http://www.aclu. org/national- security/ federal-court- rules-bagram- prisoners- cant-challenge- their-detention- us-courts

Hadith Studies: Q & A

How to understand the Qur'an: Issues of Women's Rights.
Doesn't the Qur'an 4:34 Put Men Above Women, Even Giving them the Right to Beat Women?

Qustion from Adam Seedat, South Africa:
How do you reconcile your view on the wife's obediance to verse 4:34 which deals with the light beating of the wife?

[Reply by Br. Kaukab Siddique, PhD]

Some Muslims in our times have delinked the Qur'an from the Hadith which enshrines the life of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). When these misled Muslims take the Qur'an, they take it one verse at a time and try to make the claim that in itself each verse is ultimate in meaning. Thus when they are faced with chapter 4 verse 34 of the Qur'an, we find Muslims taking these postures:

1. Some say the verse makes men the "rulers" of women.
2. They add that women must obey their husbands (be "qanitat.")
3. They claim that if women display "nushuz" (rebellion) against the husband, then the husband can carry out a three stage withdrawal from the wife, resulting in him beating her (lightly) for her rebellion.
4. The commentary of this group gives the impression that women are the slaves of men.

These are the 'modernist' apologists who are reacting to the West's attack on the Qur'an. They make weird efforts to twist the meaning of the verse to avoid its obvious meaning. The Pervaizi sectarian types use the dictionary. They find that, Arabic being a versatile language, the word used for 'beating' can also mean having sex. So they grab hold of this straw to, in their thinking, save Islam from barbarism which Western writers accuse it of. For them 4:34 does not imply inequality at all.
[Some writers, who are not Pervaizi but also want to have "Qur'an alone," like Amina Wadud, have worked hard on 4:34 to make it say what it obviously does not.]
The problem with the writings of this group is that it creates a "Qur'an" made in their own image according to which there is no issue of application or context. For them, there is no difference between war torn Afghanistan and an 'Islamic' conference in a Hilton Hotel.

In my book THE STRUGGLE OF MUSLIM WOMEN, I have shown the original, Islamic way of understanding the Qur'an, which is through the Hadith.

My viewpoint is that the Qur'an was a PROGRESSIVE REVELATION. "Progressive" here means that it went from stage to stage. The HADITH indicates and provides SOCIAL CONTEXT without which the Qur'an cannot be understood. I note in my book, for instance, that according to HADITH, 4:34 was revealed in the early period of Madina (Sahih of Bukhari, kitab al-Fadail). That was a time when the Muslim community was not fully formulated and people coming into Islam, especially women, had to be disciplined to understand that they could no longer keep in touch with men they knew beforehand. Sexual promiscuity was common in pre-Islamic Arab society. Also, on marriage, men would not take proper economic care of the wife. Hence the emphasis on this verse on men being "maintainers and providers" [qawwamun].

I also showed that the word NUSHUZ in 4:34 is not about the willfulness or rebellion of the wife but, as indicated by Hadith, sexual misconduct. It's the kind of loose sexual behavior which can undermine a marriage.

As the Qur'an was revealed progressively, Sura 24 verses 6-10, do not indicate any right to physically discipline the wife. In fact these verses indicate that even where the husband is alleging adultery, he cannot do anything other than to take an oath. The Hadith makes it clear to us that the Prophet (pbuh) forbade men to hit their wives. His SUNNAH, which is the model for all Muslims, shows, according to 'Ayesha (r.a.), that he never raised his hand against any woman.

From Hadith, we know that the last verses on male-female relationships were 9:70-71 and these state very clearly that BELIEVING MEN AND WOMEN are EACH OTHER'S GUARDIANS and PROTECTORS. [These verses do not say that men are guardians and protectors of the women.] Obviously, by the time Sura Tauba (chapter 9) was revealed, the Islamic community led by the Prophet (pbuh) had reached its perfection, which of course we know from Hadith.

Those who have a static view of the Qur'an tie themselves into knots by applying the "Qur'an only" method to 4:34 (of course in the process adding the Arabic dictionary while leaving out the Hadith).

O Canada: This Jew was Director of B'nai Brith
Surkis pleads guilty to child porn charges

May 26. 2010
MONTREAL (CBC) - The former director of B'nai Brith Quebec, Bill Surkis, has pleaded guilty to child pornography charges after agreeing to a plea bargain.

Surkis and his wife made a brief appearance at the Montreal courthouse Wednesday morning

In return for a guilty plea to charges of possessing and accessing child pornography, the Crown dropped a charge of distributing child pornography, said prosecutor Cynthia Gyenizse.

Explicit files were discovered on Surkis' computer when he brought it in for repairs in 2008.

The technician contacted police after 86 videos and 153 photos were found, including images of girls aged six to 12 years.

Surkis's lawyer had previously said he would argue the videos were downloaded as part of research Surkis was undertaking.

"The purpose of his viewing the child pornography material [was] to educate himself on the topic of child pornography," lawyer Steven Slimovitch told CBC News outside court in November 2009. "Then he would go into schools and give lectures on people abusing people."

But, prosecutors said there was no evidence of that. Surkis had not been hired anywhere to research child pornography and had not begun work on a study, they said.

Surkis's admission of guilt came as a surpise to those who knew the man who also served as the Academic Dean at John Abbott College for 22 years. He had also served as the executive director of the Holocaust Centre in Montreal.

"Shocking a person like that you hold in high esteem," said one woman who attended proceedings at the Montreal courthouse.

"The shock is how come it was in the closet for so long," said another man.

Surkis now faces a minimum sentence of three months behind bars.

He is due back in court Sept. 27.

In the meantime, Surkis remains free on very strict conditions. The father and grandfather was ordered to stay away from anyone under the age of 18 in private locations unless another adult, who was aware of the charges against him, was present.

He was also forbidden from accessing the Internet unless it was for work. In such cases, he was prohibited from erasing the web history from his computer.

Surkis was also barred from leaving the province while he awaits sentencing.

NT Ed Note: The Canadians know he would run to Israel, the land of brothels.

2010-05-30 Sun 08:25:51 cdt