Friday, April 28, 2006

Rigid dress codes are vital to islamofascism and the brainwashing of islam's zombie butchers

Iran clerics criticise president over Islamic codes
Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:14 PM IST

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian conservatives have called on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to reverse his decision to let women into sports stadiums, saying it was against Islamic values, newspapers reported on Thursday.

Ahmadinejad promised a return to the values of the 1979 Islamic revolution when he was elected last year, prompting many in the establishment to expect rigorous enforcement of Islamic dress and other social codes.

But he has been more moderate on social issues than many expected, including saying dress codes should not be imposed by force and, this week, that women should be allowed into sports stadiums for the first time since the revolution.

"Women's presence at such places is un-Islamic...The concerns will be removed by cancelling the decree," Grand Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpaygani said in a message published by the Tosea newspaper.

His comments were echoed by at least five other senior clerics, newspapers reported. The clerics included Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi, a staunch proponent of strict Islamic codes who some see as a mentor of Ahmadinejad.

Mesbah-Yazdi said it was his religious duty to voice his criticism. "Now, you are free to fulfil your religious duty (or ignore it)," he said in a message to Ahmadinejad published by the Jomhuri-ye Eslami newspaper.

Some 120 parliamentarians also urged the president in a letter to review his decision, the Kayhan newspaper said.

Analysts said Ahmadinejad had to tread carefully in trying to honour his hardcore backers' beliefs without risking unrest if hard-won freedoms enjoyed under former reformist President Mohammad Khatami were curtailed.

"Ahmadinejad has so far failed to pursue a radical agenda and appears in no mood to carry it out," said a political analyst who asked not to be named.

"He cannot afford unrest in the country, which faces global pressure on its atomic plans."

Western nations, fearing Iran plans to produce nuclear arms, have threatened to press for international sanctions if it does not heed calls to stop uranium enrichment work.

The United States has not ruled out military action, but Iran has said it will not halt its nuclear work, which it says is only aimed at generating electricity.

Last week, Ahmadinejad also said an annual summer campaign on women's dress codes this year should be carried out without force. The code requires women to cover their heads and bodies.

The hardline Ya-Lesarat weekly called on religious people to hold a rally on Friday to condemn "social corruption", including violations of the dress code.


Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Professor's e-mail outrages Muslims

Professor's e-mail outrages Muslims

BY LORI HIGGINS AND NIRAJ WARIKOODetroit Free PressDETROIT - An Islamic student group at Michigan State University demanded Monday that university officials publicly reprimand a professor whose Feb. 28 e-mail called on Muslims who don't "like the values of the West" to leave the United States.

But MSU officials said there's little that can be done to punish Indrek Wichman, 55, a tenured professor of mechanical engineering, because his comments essentially constitute free speech. Wichman sent the message to the Muslim Students' Association of Michigan State University while it handed out free cocoa during a public awareness event about controversial cartoons that depicted Islam's founder as a terrorist.

"I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders," Wichman wrote.

He went on to say: "I counsul you dissatisfied, agressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile `protests.'"


Monday, April 24, 2006

Unbelievable how anyone could do this is the name of any god

Three Explosions Rock Sinai Resort Town
Monday, April 24, 2006

Islamic Group Claims Egyptian Resort Attack
CAIRO, Egypt — Three explosions Monday night rocked the Egyptian resort city of Dahab at the height of the tourist season, killing at least 18 people and wounding more than 150 at just one hotel, according to the doctor who runs Egypt's Sinai Peninsula rescue squad.

Dr. Said Essa said he was headed to the scene of the blasts and that his casualty figures were for victims at the el-Khaleeg Hotel only. He said there were casualties at the scene of the other blasts, but he had no details. Posted by Picasa

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

Subjugation of women is essential to islamofascism

Police in Tehran ordered to arrest women in 'un-Islamic' dress

· Taxi drivers responsible for clothes of passengers
· Purge allied with effort to cut viewing of western TV

Robert Tait in Tehran
Thursday April 20, 2006
The Guardian

Iran's Islamic authorities are preparing a crackdown on women flouting the stringent dress code in the clearest sign yet of social and political repression under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.From today police in Tehran will be under orders to arrest women failing to conform to the regime's definition of Islamic morals by wearing loose-fitting hijab, or headscarves, tight jackets and shortened trousers exposing skin.

Offenders could be punished with £30 fines or two months in jail. Officers will also be authorised to confront men with outlandish hairstyles and people walking pet dogs, an activity long denounced as un-Islamic by the religious rulers.

The clampdown coincides with a bill before Iran's conservative-dominated parliament proposing that fines for people with TV satellite dishes rise from £60 to more than £3,000. Millions of Iranians have illegal dishes, enabling them to watch western films and news channels.

The dress purge is led by a Tehran city councillor, Nader Shariatmaderi, a close ally of Mr Ahmadinejad who helped to plot last year's election victory.

Loosely arranged headscarves - exposing glamourous hairstyles - and shorter, tight-fitting overcoats (manteaus) became a symbol of the social freedoms that flourished under the reformist presidency of Mohammed Khatami.

During his election campaign, Mr Ahmadinejad dismissed fears that his presidency might herald a forced reversal, saying Iran had more urgent problems.

However, Mr Shariatmaderi denounced the trends as "damaging to revolutionary and Islamic principles". "We are looking for a social utopia to live in but in the last couple of months, our attention has wavered," he told fellow councillors. "In the present international situation, people must unite under known principles."

The clampdown recalls the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic revolution, when women wearing lipstick were often confronted by female vigilantes wiping their faces clean with handkerchiefs, which were said to often conceal razor blades.

The new campaign will hold taxi agencies accountable for their passengers' attire, police will be able to impound cabs carrying women dressed "inappropriately". Agencies guilty of repeat offences will be closed. Police have reportedly been stopping women motorists recently whose hijab was judged inadequate. Police have also raided fashion stores and seized brightly coloured manteaus.

Tehran's police chief, Morteza Talai, said the campaign would try to clamp down on people making "the social environment insecure".

Young women shopping in north Tehran's fashionable Tajrish neighbourhood yesterday, however, were uncowed. Matin, 24, a nurse, was wearing a gaudily patterned light-blue head scarf pushed back to reveal sunglasses and bleached blond hair. Her tight, short black manteau with intricate gold patterns seemed designed to provoke the ire of the authorities. But she was unrepentant. "I'm a married woman and it should be my husband who tells me what and what not to wear. He likes the way I dress," she said.

Surprisingly, Narges Asgari, 20, a dressmaker wearing an all-encompassing black chador, was also critical. "I don't think people will listen because they want to take decisions themselves," she said. "Clothes depend on the culture of their families. I wear the chador because, in my family, it's something we accept."


Tuesday, April 18, 2006

  Posted by Picasa

Young males are brainwashed to smash young children's heads against rocks and then smile

Young terrorists are made, not born

What drives a young Palestinian to turn his body into a bomb? Children are not born hating. It is something they learn - and the Palestinian Authority has been the ideal teacher. It has perfected the art of fomenting hatred, and promoting suicide terror.

The first component in creating a terrorist is to promote hatred within the society by demonizing a target group. This target group is portrayed as so evil and threatening that killing its members is seen not as murder, but as justified revenge and admirable self defense.

Examples of the PA's incessant demonization of Jews and Israelis include a recent article in the official PA daily Al Hayat al Jadida describing Israeli military actions against missile launching sites in Gaza: "It seems that the rivers of blood in our cities, villages and refugee camps are not yet satisfying the thirst of the blood-thirsty for Palestinian blood among the Israeli politicians and military officers." [March 4, 2006]

PA TV has been in recent weeks running daily video clips with actors depicting Palestinian prisoners going through horrific torture at the hands of Israeli guards. Hate libels are a common, including the "drug libel" that Israel intentionally poisons and causes the addiction of Palestinian youth by spreading drugs throughout PA society. This was repeated on PA TV just two days ago by the PA Mufti, Ikrima Sabri.

Another component of this demonization is to depict Israel's very existence as a nation as being illegitimate and temporary. This likewise continues unabated. One example is a documentary broadcast twice in recent months, in which Jaffa is defined as a stolen Palestinian city. The documentary includes the words: "Palestine was attacked by invaders. It is time for you [Israelis] to be gone. Live wherever you like, but don't live among us (pictures of Jaffa). It is time for you to be gone. Die wherever you like, but don't die among us. We have the past here. We have the present, the present and the future. So leave our country, our land, our sea, our wheat, our salt, our wounds. Everything. And leave the memories." [PA TV, Dec. 20, 2005]

The essence of this first PA message is to turn Israelis into the ultimate enemy: Israelis are evil and dangerous. Their very existence is illegal, and so they must be defeated and destroyed. Killing them is transformed into justice and self defense.

But it's not enough to establish Israel as the enemy. The terrorists who kill Israelis must be seen as heroes and leaders of society - and that's the second component of the PA's creation of suicide terrorists.

There are no greater heroes and role models in PA society than terrorists. Summer camps for children have been named for Wafa Idris and Ayyat Al Achras - woman suicide terrorists. Sporting events are routinely named for terrorists, including a soccer match for 14-year-olds named after the terrorist who killed 31 Israelis four years ago at at the Park Hotel Passover Seder in Netanya. The PA Ministry of Culture recently produced a poetry collection named for Hanadi Jaradat, the woman terrorist who killed 21 in a Haifa restaurant.

And just last month, the PA announced it was granting honorary citizenship to Lebanese terrorist Samir Quntar, who is serving a life sentence in an Israeli jail. Smadar Haran, wife and mother of Quntar's murder victims, wrote in The Washington Post: "It was a murder of unimaginable cruelty. The terrorists took (husband) Danny and (daughter) Einat down to the beach. One of them shot Danny in front of Einat. Then he smashed my little girl's skull in against a rock with his rifle butt. That terrorist was Samir Quntar."

The message that the PA is sending to its people and its children by honoring Quntar and other terrorists is that killing Israelis is a ticket to honor and eternal glory. A special program broadcast just last week on PA TV captures the essence of this message - and its acceptance within the highest levels of PA leadership. This is part of the poem a young girl chanted on Palestinian Children's Day: "Even if all the Jews arrived (in Israel) seeking refuge with the monkeys [common euphemism for Jews]... we will never accept compensation for our land. There is no substitute for Jerusalem!... Our death is like life, My homeland is the invaders' grave... I will walk 1000 miles even if I die in it as a Martyr..." [PA TV April 10, 2006] Her audience included PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas, seated in the front row along with senior PA officials. Their reaction to these words of hate from the mouth of a young girl? A round of applause. With messages to children fomenting hatred of Israelis and glorifying terrorists, and when the supposedly moderate Abbas appears on TV to applaud a young girl's message of hatred and martyrdom, is it any wonder that a Palestinian youngster becomes a suicide terrorist?

Monday, April 17, 2006

Why does islam produce such hellish failed societies???

Explanations for evil
Bradley R. Gitz


The standard explanations for

Islamist terrorism—blowback from

Western imperialism, pervasive poverty, a reaction to oppression, etc. — contain kernels of truth but ultimately fail to satisfy. Such explanations identify some of the problems afflicting Muslim societies but don’t adequately explain why so many in those societies have responded with terrorism when others afflicted throughout history by similar problems haven’t. The search for a more comprehensive explanation might begin with the proposition that the fusion of church and state that Islamism represents is actually part of a broader absorption of all aspects of life into a religiously defined existence. The idea that religion explains everything about existence is as central to the more extreme versions of Islam as it is foreign to other cultures, including Christianity, where religion seldom provides all of the answers to life’s dilemmas or such an all-encompassing form of personal identity. For many Muslims, Islam is not only a comprehensive belief system and object of allegiance, but also the only aspect of life that provides meaning and dignity. Within this scenario, the “Islamification” of Islamic societies witnessed in recent decades represents a turn to religion in response to a range of undesirable social and political conditions, including tyranny, poverty and perceptions of foreign domination. Having retreated into religious piety and dogmatism as a means of providing meaning to otherwise dismal lives, Islamists must then find a way to explain the discrepancy between Islam’s allegedly superior tenets and the all too often ugly reality of Islamic life. For Islamists, Islam is not simply one belief system among many; rather, it is the one and only belief system, such that all other beliefs constitute blasphemy and insults to the integrity and truth of Islam. Any explanation of the fanaticism of the suicide bomber must start, then, with an understanding of the special religious zeal and intolerance that defines Islamism and is found in virtually no other sects.

But therein also lies the conundrum. If Islam is superior, then how to explain the horrific conditions in and the palpable weakness of most Islamic societies ? How can a belief system that is superior produce so much political tyranny, economic backwardness and social decay ?

Within this context, much of the Islamist rage against the external world can be encapsulated in the fact that tiny Israel every year produces more scientific patents and publishes more books than all of its Muslim neighbors combined.

The cognitive dissonance produced by the gap between belief in the superiority of Islam and the reality of the backwardness of Islamic societies is so profound as to require a reinterpretation of the failures of Islamic societies in such a manner as to absolve Islam.

We come, then, to the fundamental source of Islamist terrorism—the need to find scapegoats outside of Islam in order to retain a belief in Islam’s superiority. Only Western perfidy and deceit can explain the appalling real-world conditions of Islamic societies, never any elements intrinsic to Islam. Put differently, a psychological need is satisfied by blaming Western imperialism, Israel and the “Great Satan” for the decay of Muslim civilization. Within this context, governments like those in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan that maintain good relations with the West are culpable for both consorting with evil and for failing to properly implement Islam in their realms. If Western predations are to blame for the problems of Islamic societies, then any means of resistance can be considered justified, including terrorism, jihads and the videotaped beheading of captives. Because they operate under such powerful psychological impulses and with such all-consuming hatred, Islamists feel that no aspect of Western life is innocent or immune from attack. At the risk of being overly flippant, it is Flip Wilson’s claim that “the devil made me do it” which lies at the heart of Islamist rage and violence. Retention of belief in the superiority of Islam in the face of countervailing evidence requires the identification of real-world devils. What we consider Islamist evil, Islamists view as a legitimate defense against evil. Islam has met the devil and the devil is us.

—–––––•–––––—Free-lance columnist Bradley R. Gitz teaches politics at Lyon College at Batesville.

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Why laws liberating the women of Islam would have such a powerful domino effect on the horrors of islam

Why laws liberating the women of Islam would have such a powerful domino effect on the horrors of islam

Women in the workforce

The importance of sex

Apr 12th 2006
From The Economist print edition

Forget China, India and the internet: economic growth is driven by women

EVEN today in the modern, developed world, surveys show that parents still prefer to have a boy rather than a girl. One longstanding reason why boys have been seen as a greater blessing has been that they are expected to become better economic providers for their parents' old age. Yet it is time for parents to think again. Girls may now be a better investment.

Girls get better grades at school than boys, and in most developed countries more women than men go to university. Women will thus be better equipped for the new jobs of the 21st century, in which brains count a lot more than brawn. In Britain far more women than men are now training to become doctors. And women are more likely to provide sound advice on investing their parents' nest egg: surveys show that women consistently achieve higher financial returns than men do.

Furthermore, the increase in female employment in the rich world has been the main driving force of growth in the past couple of decades. Those women have contributed more to global GDP growth than have either new technology or the new giants, China and India (see article). Add the value of housework and child-rearing, and women probably account for just over half of world output. It is true that women still get paid less and few make it to the top of companies, but, as prejudice fades over coming years, women will have great scope to boost their productivity—and incomes.

Governments, too, should embrace the potential of women. Women complain (rightly) of centuries of exploitation. Yet, to an economist, women are not exploited enough: they are the world's most under-utilised resource; getting more of them into work is part of the solution to many economic woes, including shrinking populations and poverty.

Some people fret that if more women work rather than mind their children, this will boost GDP but create negative social externalities, such as a lower birth rate. Yet developed countries where more women work, such as Sweden and America, actually have higher birth rates than Japan and Italy, where women stay at home. Others fear that women's move into the paid labour force can come at the expense of children. Yet the evidence for this is mixed. For instance, a study by Suzanne Bianchi at Maryland University finds that mothers spent the same time, on average, on childcare in 2003 as in 1965. The increase in work outside the home was offset by less housework—and less spare time and less sleep.

A woman's world

What is clear is that in countries such as Japan, Germany and Italy, which are all troubled by the demographics of shrinking populations, far fewer women work than in America, let alone Sweden. If female labour-force participation in these countries rose to American levels, it would give a helpful boost to these countries' growth rates. Likewise, in developing countries where girls are less likely to go to school than boys, investing in education would deliver huge economic and social returns. Not only will educated women be more productive, but they will also bring up better educated and healthier children. More women in government could also boost economic growth: studies show that women are more likely to spend money on improving health, education, infrastructure and poverty and less likely to waste it on tanks and bombs.

It used to be said that women must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily that is not so difficult.

Why Muslims are a Threat to the Western society

Why Muslims are a Threat to the Western society?

by Alamgir Hussain

09 April, 2006


In an earlier essay titled “Migration to the West and Radicalization of the Muslims”, I have delved into how Muslims suddenly become more radicalized or Islamized when they arrive in the West and how that helps in transforming the next generation Muslims into tools of violence and terrorism. I have also explained that the Western cultures are hateful and unacceptable to Muslims. They consider Western way of life sinful. Migrants of other religious backgrounds, such as Hindus, Buddhist, Christians etc., coming from the same countries with similar socio-cultural traditions and values do not seem to show similar hatred against the Western social and cultural values as do the Muslims. The question readily arises: Why Muslims only find the Western culture, tradition and way of life sinful and unacceptable and get into clash with them?

The Islamic theological basis needs a detailed exploration to grasp this riddle of the migrant Muslim communities of the West. This clash emerges from the crux of the Islamic creed. The core theme of Islam is contained in the Islamic Shahada which reads “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet.” Explicit in this central creed of Islam is the denial of all other Gods and all other ways of spiritual life. Also implicit in the Shahada is the denial of the history, cultural and traditional heritage prior to the Islamic revelation. Islam in itself is the perfect and complete code of life, culture and tradition thrust directly from the infallible master of the universe. The history, culture and tradition, prior to Islam is unworthy – an era known as the age of Jahiliya (ignorance) in Islam. The civilized history of the world starts with the perfection of the religion of Allah and the history, culture, tradition and heritage within the fold of Islam are the only civilized ones. The extra-Islam tradition, culture and ways of life are the extension from the Jahilaya age and contrary to the wishes of almighty creator, Allah. Shashi R Sharma writes on the advent of Islamic theology in the 7th century Arabia, “In one fell stroke of theology, the accumulated vision of mankind in every other part of the globe – its most cherished cultural and intellectual acquisition – are consigned to a state of utterly forgettable decadence. Nothing was valuable prior to Islam and nothing will be valuable for mankind in the future unless the assignation of value corresponds to some element of Islamic ethics.” [Caliphs and Sultan, p38]. He continued, “Rejection of every value contrary to Islamic precepts is the sine quo non of a pure life of (Islamic) faith.”

Affirmation of this central thought in Islam has been brilliantly reflected in a recent article by Aatish Taseer, titled “The Damascene Conversion” in Prospect Magazine after his months-long probing the state of Islam in the so-called secular state of Syria. He wrote:

“Nadir, my guide and translator, showed me that history itself came from Islam. In a frustrated moment, he said: "We used to have a great history. Not before Islam of course, but since." By "we" he meant Syrians, who a mile away had founded the Christian church, and who, a millennium before that, had invented the alphabet.

"This land has had a great history for thousands of years that pre-dates Islam," I said.

"Yes," Nadir answered, "an immoral history."

I had never heard of such a thing, but Nadir's idea, like Khaldun's (author’s Arabic teacher in Damascus) was part of Islam's all-encompassing nature. If you had it, you needed nothing else. "If I find one thing," Nadir said, "one thing that the Koran doesn't cover, I will renounce the faith." But Nadir could never find that one thing because Islam served as the source of everything.

Since Islam is prefect in every aspect for living the ideal human life [Q10:37], everything else is unnecessary, uncivilized and immoral innovation and extension from the Jahiliya age. Those are not worth entertaining and must be rejected and destroyed, if within the power. The rejection of all extra-Islamic value and cultural systems, which is binding on the Muslims by the Islamic doctrine – comes to work when Muslims are faced with values and cultures which are different from what is acceptable in Islam, such as those in the West. If one follows Prophet Muhammad’s life and actions, it becomes evident that he had single-mindedly worked on destroying all other religions, cultures and tradition, including his ancestors’, which he came in contact with and replaced them with his own brand, that is, Islamic religion and culture. On the day the victorious Prophet Muhammad entered his hometown of Mecca in 630, he immediately destroyed all the pagan temples there, including the Ka’ba – which have been places of worship for his ancestors for centuries.

Indeed, Muslims have destroyed or tried to destroy every culture and tradition that they had come across during the glorious days of Islamic conquests and replaced them with the Islamic ones or sought to do so. One shining example is the people of Turkey whose life-style, social values and thought-process are so vastly different from the people of other European countries, despite desperate attempts to modernize, secularize and westernize the Turkish society and culture starting with the disbandment of theocratic caliphate and introduction of secularism by Kamal Ataturk in 1924. The vastly different life-style, culture and values of the Caucasian people of Chechnya and Russia also tell us the same story. The underlying reason lies in the fundamental theological basis of Islam. The word “Islam” means complete submission to Allah, the almighty owner of the Universe. This submission is achieved on earth by unquestioned acceptance of God’s perfect laws and guidance as revealed in the Koran. Allah Himself says, “Today I have perfected your religion” through the Koran. Since Allah is the unquestioned owner of every terrestrial being and object, who is infallible in his judgment, all must submit to His perfect and unchangeable code, which is Islam. It cannot happen that one lives in the Kingdom of Allah but does not follow or submit to His laws, which is perfect, infallible. This desire of the almighty Allah for complete submission of the entire mankind to Islam has been explicitly spelled in the Koran: “Mohammad is the messenger bringing Islam’s rules to all humankind, and Allah is sovereign of the heavens and the earth (7:157-158)”. This submission has to come through persuasion; if not, through threats and intimidation and if needed, through force including wars, massacres and mass enslavement. The protocol for submission of infidels to Islam as described in the Koran has been summed up by Sir William Muir in his “The Life of Mohamet” as follows [p288]:

In the Koran, victories are announced, success promised, actions recounted; failure is explained, bravery applauded, cowardice or disobedience chided; military or political movement are directed; - and all this as an immediate communication from the Deity (Allah).

All such means were put to practical application by Prophet Muhammad himself, which must be continued until complete submission of human beings to Islam has been achieved. Allah urges the Muslims to fight those, who are outside the fold of Islam, until such an end has been achieved:

·      And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors. [Q2:193]

·      Fight those who believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [Koran-9:29]

Destruction of extra-Islamic societies and cultures or attempt to do so, has been one of the glorious feature of the victorious history of Islamic conquests. If one takes a careful look at the Muslim people across the world and compare them with their non-Muslim counterparts (people of their ancestor religion), one can easily recognize how the invading Muslim rulers have systematically destroyed or the converted Muslims have ditched the vastly different cultures, customs and ways of life and replaced them with largely similar Islamic ones. In India, thousands of Hindu temples and Buddhist monasteries and other indigenous religious institutions were destroyed by the Muslim invaders and rulers and many famous temples were replaced by mosques. The construction of Babri mosque at the site of temple of Rama, the most revered Godly figure in Hindu religion (which has created so much tension and violence recently in India), is one such example. In fact, India’s National Archaeological Survey has identified 400 mosques across India having building materials extracted from destroyed Hindu temples. Remains of temples structures have recently been identified below the destroyed Babri mosque.

Thus, the desire to destroy extra-Islamic religion, culture and value system, which are all born out of ignorance (extension from Jahiliay age), is central to the fundamental thesis of Islam. This central ordinance of Islam has been put to practical application throughout the last 14 centuries of Islam's existence on earth, starting from the days of Prophet Muhammad. This doctrine is being routinely exercised by Muslims wherever they are a dominant force even today. In Saudi Arabia, one cannot carry Bible or any other non-Islamic religious book, nor can there exist any Church, temple or synagogue. In so-called modern democratic Muslim states, such as Bangladesh and Pakistan, non-Muslims are routinely being harassed, their young girls are being abducted and forcefully married to Muslims, they are being evicted from their homes, lands and properties and their religious places of worships are being attacked and destroyed. Even in a place like Kosovo, the Muslims Albanian settlers, brought during the Ottoman occupation and who now form a majority, are reported to have destroyed ~200 churches of indigenous Serbian Christians, since the Kosovo war ended in 1999. These are all happening in front of the very nose of UN protection force. The central writ of the Islamic theology has been applied by the Muslims with unfailing conviction – starting the Prophet Muhammad and continues even today in all Muslim-dominated territories. Import of the Muslims through the generous policy of the West have placed the Western social, political and cultural systems and values at the receiving end of the central Islamic doctrine which is now becoming increasingly evident as Muslims tend to constitute a visible numerical force there. Posted by Picasa

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

stop blaming others and start some self examination

Kuwaiti Reformist: The Muslims – Not bin Laden – are Responsible for the Hatred Towards Them in the West

Dr. Ahmad Al-Baghdadi, a reformist Kuwaiti intellectual and political science lecturer at Kuwait University, argues that the Muslims themselves - not bin Laden - are responsible for the rising hatred against them around the world. He says that Muslims living in the West have failed to repay the kindness of the countries that accepted them, and instead have followed the lead of the Muslim clerics and threatened to attack these countries from within. He adds that Muslims in the West must declare that they accept Western values and sever their ties with Muslims in the East, and with the religious clerics.
The following are excerpts from Al-Baghdadi's article: [1]
The Muslims are the Ones Who Failed to Present a Positive Image of Islam
"Osama bin Laden is a terrorist, criminal, murderer and villain, and every other inhuman description applies to him as well. However, he is definitely not responsible for the rising [level] of hatred towards Muslims in the West. This hatred is reflected in numerous new measures that have recently been adopted by Western governments in an effort to stop the stream of Muslims entering America and Europe. The governments also implement laws that limit freedoms and violate human rights as another precaution, to protect the safety of their citizens...
"Even though Muslims boast that Islam is the [fastest]-growing religion in America and in the West... it is [actually] the religion that is most incomprehensible to the Europeans and the Americans.
"What is truly saddening is that Islam is being associated with terrorism due to the terrorists' frequent use of Koranic verses and hadiths to justify their terrorist actions...
"Statements made by preachers in the mosques, in articles and on various media channels accusing non-Muslims of heresy, the [preachers'] curses, and their characterization of Jews as the descendents of apes and pigs - [all these] cause Westerners to perceive Islam as an intolerant religion that rejects religious pluralism.
"The Muslims, therefore, are responsible for the distorted image of Islam prevalent in the modern West, and they are the ones who failed to present a positive image of Islam. Thus, they are responsible for the problems experienced by the Muslims today...
"Among those who incite to jihad, have you seen a single one who set out [to wage jihad] himself, or sent one of his sons to wage jihad for the sake of Allah? On the contrary - while encouraging innocent people to wage jihad in Iraq and in Chechnya, they themselves take additional wives..."

"What Do You Expect the West to Do When it Sees its Citizens Being Murdered in the Name of Religion?"
"Osama bin Laden didn't force anyone to go to Iraq, murder its people and destroy its institutions. He didn't force anyone to murder innocent people in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, America and Europe. Bin-Laden did not tell the Muslims in the West: 'Hate the country that gave you shelter when you fled [from your homelands], made you rich when you were poor, fed you when you were hungry, gave you freedom after the bondage you suffered in your Muslim countries, and educated you when you were ignorant.'
"You caused all these catastrophes out of your own choice and your own free will... and failed to repay the kindness [shown to you]. So what do you expect the West [to do] when it sees its citizens being murdered in the name of religion, when it [experiences] hatred in the name of religion and suffers the damages of terrorism [perpetrated] in the name of religion? It is only natural that the West should hate you and tighten the rope around your necks, so you do not 'invade it from within' as you declare in your announcements and sermons...
"The truth that we must deal with today is that people in the West no longer trust Muslims in general. The Muslims in the West must therefore sever their ties with the Muslims in the east, and repair their relations with the Western societies by announcing that they accept the humane values on the basis of which they were received in the West. They must also sever their ties with the religious clerics and their fatwas...
"If they fail to do this, they must bear the consequences and the difficulties that will ensue. They must not blame bin Laden and Al-Zarqawi, but [only] themselves for being driven, in ignorance, by the views of the clerics..."

The famous Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Posted by Picasa

Thursday, April 06, 2006

Assimilate or annihilate

Islamic Attire Debate Continues Around the World

By Patrick Goodenough

Apr 6, 2006

( - A police union in New Zealand has called for a driving ban on Muslim women wearing the all-encompassing burqa, adding fuel to a widening debate over how Western societies should deal with the issue of strict Islamic dress.

A row erupted after the small country's police force announced a new policy on how to deal with drivers wearing the burqa -- head-to-toe apparel that incorporates a head covering and veil (niqab) hiding the face apart from the area around the eyes.

Officers were told that only female personnel should be involved in checking such drivers' identities, given Islamic sensitivities. The policy was established because of the growing number of Muslims behind the wheel and after consultation with the Muslim community.

But the police union, the Police Association, declared that a person should not be allowed to drive at all while wearing a burqa.

This was both for safety reasons and because criminals could wear the garb to conceal their identity, said association President Greg O'Connor.

"We should learn from Europe and make sure that if people come to this country, they have to integrate, and there's no better time and place than on the roads driving because that affects us all," he told Radio New Zealand......snip...... Posted by Picasa

The culture of islam needs it's moderates

Where are the Muslim moderates?

Scripps Howard News Service

In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev addressed a closed session of the 20th Congress of the Soviet Communist Party. For nearly four hours, he spoke about the unspeakable: the crimes of his predecessor, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.

Though listeners were warned not to reveal what was said, and the speech would not be published for 32 years, word leaked out. The most widely told story, probably apocryphal, had it that as Khrushchev was detailing the mass arrests, torture and executions carried out within the Gulag, someone in the audience shouted: "And what were you doing then?"

"Who said that?" Khrushchev demanded. No one made a sound. "I want to know who said that!" he repeated, slamming a fist on the lectern. The audience was silent, trembling in fear. "That's right," Khrushchev said finally. "That's exactly what I was doing."

I am reminded of this story not only because this year is the 50th anniversary of Khrushchev's "secret speech," but also because it may provide at least a partial answer to the questions: Where are all the Muslim moderates? Where are those who oppose terrorism, religious wars, hatred and intolerance? Where are those who think it crazy to attempt to re-create the eighth century in the 21st century? Where are those who want not to destroy the Free World but to join it?

They are out there, I suspect, in larger numbers than we might be led to believe. But if most are silent and fearful of speaking out, can you blame them? The vast majority of Arabs and Muslims live in countries ruled by illiberal and oppressive regimes. And in the few relatively free countries _ Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia _ there is no protection from the long arm of militant Islamism. Indeed, even in Europe it can be dangerous to challenge religious fascism. And last year, Shaker Elsayed, leader of Dar al-Hijrah, one of the largest mosques in the United States, told American Muslims: "The call to reform Islam is an alien call."

Muslims who dissent from this orthodoxy have received precious little support from anyone. As far back as 1989, Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini called for the murder of British author Salman Rushdie. Such a frontal attack on freedom of speech should have prompted Western governments to send Iranian diplomats packing. Instead, Rushdie went into hiding while most Western intellectuals persuaded themselves this quarrel was none of their business.

Since that time, and perhaps partly as a consequence, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was murdered for making a movie that some Muslims found insulting. Danish journalists who dared publish cartoons satirizing the radicalization of Islam have been threatened. Such formerly courageous publications as The New York Times declined to publish the cartoons, claiming _ unconvincingly _ that they had not been intimidated; they were merely demonstrating sensitivity.

Meanwhile, in Jordan and Yemen, editors who thought their readers deserved to judge the cartoons for themselves were jailed.

The pandering has escalated: Last month, Columbia University held a conference that included as a "highlight" a video of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi presenting "his views on the prospects for democracy in the twenty-first century." Columbia's teachers and administrators are apparently untroubled by the fact that Libya's leading dissident, Fathi Eljami, is currently rotting in one of Gadhafi's dungeons.

And in Tunisia, democracy advocate Neila Charchour Hachicha is under police surveillance _ her phone and Internet connections severed, her car confiscated, her daughter threatened and her husband in prison. What did she do to deserve such punishment? It's not clear, but she did give an interview to Middle East Quarterly ( about impediments to reform in Tunisia and she spoke at the "neo-con" American Enterprise Institute about the need for democracy in the Middle East.

The routine imprisonment and torture of dissidents in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia almost never prompts U.N. officials to consider interfering _ or even criticizing. Once in a while, a Western diplomat expresses concern.

"I keep hearing, 'Why are liberals silent?' " Said al-Ashmawy, an Egyptian judge and author, recently said. "How can we write? Who is going to protect me?"


Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Do evil to anyone and eventually it will boomerang on you. The golden rule really works

A muslim speaks the truth

'Cancer in its midst'
By M. Zuhdi Jasser
March 30, 2006

During the dark days of our Revolution, Thomas Paine wrote, "That these are the times, that try men's souls." As an American Muslim, I feel the sentiment of these words like a red-hot brand on my brain.

I have watched horrified as assassins have read out the words from my Holy Koran before slitting the throats of some poor innocent souls. To my non-comprehending eyes, I have seen mothers proudly support their sons' accomplishment of blowing up innocent people as they eat or travel. It shatters some part of me, to see my faith as an instrument for butchery.

It makes me hope and pray for some counter-movement within my faith which will push back all this darkness. And I know that it must start with what is most basic -- the common truth that binds all religions: "Do unto others, as you would have them do onto you." The Golden Rule.

But that is not what I am seeing taught in a great deal of the Muslim world today, and, unfortunately, in America it's just not much better.

Night after night, I see Muslim national organizations like the Council for American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, cry out over and over about anecdotal victimization while saying and doing absolutely nothing about the most vile hate-speak and actions toward Jews and Christians in the Muslim world. It is the most self-serving of outrage.

The question I ask myself in the darkness of my own night is, "How did my beautiful faith become so linked with such ugliness." To me, the answer is both deep and simple. A spiritual path must be only about the spiritual while a worldly path must be about this world. When the two get mixed together, it brings out the very worst in both.

Much of what passes today for religious thought and action is actually political. When I hear a sermon in a mosque about the horrors of Israeli occupation, I know that the political arena has taken over the spiritual one. When I see the actions of suicide bombers praised or excused by religious leaders, I know that this politicization is complete. But the current Muslim leadership in groups like CAIR and others want only to talk of victimization. So, it is now high time for a new movement by Muslims in America and the West.

We in the Muslim community need to develop a new paradigm for our organizations and think tanks which holds Muslims publicly accountable for the separation of the political from the spiritual. Gone should be the day where individuals and their organizations can hide behind the cloak of victimization as a smoke screen for what they really believe.

I do believe that religions have cycles that they go through. Christianity was once a highly intolerant faith. Jews were labeled as "Christ killers" and the colored peoples of the Third World were people whose native faith was like ragged clothes to be torn off their bodies.

Thank God those days are over. Now my faith community must do the same. It should be the true test of a Muslim, not so much how he treats a fellow Muslim but how he treats someone of another faith.

Time is not on our side and the volatile radical minority of Muslims could strike again at any time. But, while true change among Muslims may take generations, our history teaches us that once we start the ideological battle, nothing can counter the power of freedom, pluralism and the desire for human rights.

There are some small signs that my community is finally beginning to wake up to the cancer in its midst. We are learning something that was the central lesson of World War II -- that once aroused, evil never stays self-contained.

For many in my faith, it was all right to blow up innocent Israelis as they sat in their cafes and pizza parlors. Through some tortured act of logic, these suicide bombings were seen as some sort of legitimate religion-sanctioned acts. (All the while, notice how few Muslim organizations like CAIR will denounce Hamas by name). But, as evil always does, it migrates, and soon radical Muslims were blowing up little children in Russia, commuters in Spain and worshippers in one of Iraq's holiest mosques.

Maybe our first true wake-up call was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's homicide attack on the wedding party in Jordan. Because now, the evil unleashed on the occupying Jews had landed on the doorstep of Muslims as they partook in a joyous wedding day.

That is the lesson that we in the Muslim community are now learning. Do evil to anyone and eventually it will boomerang on you. Perhaps, that's a good place to start. Let the barometer of our faith be how we treat our Jewish friends, because in the end, that is how we will eventually treat ourselves.

M. Zuhdi Jasser is chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. A former Navy lieutenant commander, he currently is an internist in private practice in Phoenix.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Genocide in Pakistan (more disgusting news)

Ethnic Cleansing in Pakistan during Partition: A Preliminary Statistical Analysis


Sridhar N.




The partition of India into the two countries of India and Pakistan in 1947 is a topic that has been much studied and written about.[1]  In particular, there have been a number of scholarly studies, books and films on the human tragedy that accompanied partition.  A very large number of people lost their lives in the orchestrated violence that took place for sustained periods of times and an even larger number of people were uprooted from their ancestral homelands and forced to migrate to new and unfamiliar places.  Researchers, authors and filmmakers have explored a variety of issues related to this tragic period of our history.


Of particular interest to us in this article is the issue of ethnic cleansing of minorities – specifically the Hindu and Sikh communities – in the newly formed country of Pakistan.  From the very beginning of the movement to create Pakistan, the proponents of this movement espoused a blatantly communalist ideology – the two nation theory.  The ethnic cleansing of the minorities with active participation of the rulers of the new state was but a logical extension of the theory that said that Hindus and Muslims had irreconcilable differences and could not live together.

Another step backwards into barbarism and darkness§ion=todaysfeatures

Fatwa against statues triggers uproar in Egypt

3 April 2006

CAIRO -A fatwa issued by Egypt’s top religious authority, which forbids the display of statues has art-lovers fearing it, could be used by Islamic extremists as an excuse to destroy Egypt’s historical heritage.

Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the country’s top Islamic jurist, issued the religious edict which declared as un-Islamic the exhibition of statues in homes, basing the decision on texts in the hadith (sayings of the prophet).

Monday, April 03, 2006

Another muslim april fool's day


Muslims denounce terrorism, choose peace, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for all

All previously chopped heads to be returned to owners

Sunday, April 02, 2006

Those who hate others will bring hatred down on their heads.§ion=0&article=79830&d=3&m=4&y=2006&pix=kingdom.jpg&category=Local%20Press

Why Is There So Much Hate Inside Us?
Abdullah Al-Mutairi • Al-Watan

In the shop next to my house, there is a home delivery service which is run by an Indian. He is a good man, hardworking and devoted to his job. I talk to him whenever he delivers something to my house and he talks to me about the time he spent working in Abu Dhabi and of his dream to live in London.

Last week I asked him to deliver a newspaper to my house. When he delivered it to me, he asked me whether I wrote in it. I told him that I did and he asked me to write about why young Saudis hate foreign workers, particularly Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. He asked, “Why do they throw rocks at us when they see us in the street?” He said that in India they were taught to love others because that is the teaching of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). I was moved by his words and promised him that I would write on the subject.

I took his question to my students and started a discussion in class. The students agreed that they had harassed foreigners, particularly South Asians, in the street. One said that seeing a worker in the street was a perfect chance for them to beat him up and then run away. Some admitted searching for foreign workers to beat up, throw eggs at and generally abuse. I asked my students why they behaved in this way, what was the reason. Some said it was just fun, nothing more or less. Some said it was because those people were weak and unable to fight back. Some said that their favorite pastime was to catch cats, kill them and skin them. I was shocked and disturbed by all this violence and wondered what was causing it.

The classroom discussion ended but my questions would not go away. Is this violence only committed by children or can we see it at other levels in other forms? How do older people deal with foreign workers? Do the workers feel that we respect them? Sadly, the rude and sarcastic way we often refer to them sprang to my mind. Can such relationships be called humane? Are they based on equality? Are they in keeping with the tenets of Islam?

Do we adult Saudis who sponsor and employ foreigners fulfill the conditions of their contracts — which both we and they have signed? How many housemaids never get a day off?

I remember a worker in the school where I work who was on the job every day and who had not been paid for six months. I remember another unpaid worker who asked humbly and politely for his dues and received nothing but curses and insults. It seems to me that our children’s violent behavior has its origins and roots in the behavior and attitudes of adults. My Indian friend’s question should have thus been directed toward all ages and not just at the young.

Are these things related to education? Can we blame this shameful behavior on a lack of education? The answer came all too quickly to my head. I remembered one of my colleagues, a teacher who belongs to a certain tribe. He believes that a student lacking a tribal name is a man with no roots and hence of no importance. Then I remembered a preacher who visited the school after 9/11 and warned the students against dealing with non-Muslims. I also remember a sheikh in a mosque who would not allow a foreigner to pray next to him — simply because the man was not Saudi.

It is not difficult to come up with examples of our relations with people in our country who belong to different religions and cultures. And I will not discuss our own relations with other Saudis. Many of us will not allow our daughters to marry someone just because he is from a certain place or because, for some reason, we look down on him. Behind all these examples are beliefs and thoughts toward “others” which glorify us and our egos and degrade them and theirs. Such a situation is fertile ground for the idea of hate and infertile ground for the idea of love.

Those brought up to love people will not throw rocks at them and curse them. Those brought up to love people will not degrade those who are different from them? Where is love in our lives? Has it given way to hate? What answer can I give my Indian friend? Is he going to understand that it will take a long time to change this culture of hate? I do not think that it will be easy since so many of us do not want to and so many believe they are unique and the best in the world. I remember when I was in England last summer, arriving at the front door of the house where I was staying. I saw a little girl standing outside the house next to mine. I wondered if she would curse me or throw stones at me or whether she would just look away in disgust. Instead, she carried on watering the flowers in the small garden; then she looked up and waved at me, with a big smile on her face. Could that have happened here?

Those who hate others will bring hatred down on their heads.

Those who love others will bring love into their lives.

The fanatics and the bombers do not represent a resurgence of unreformed, fundamentalist Islam, but its death rattle.

When Islam Breaks Down
Theodore Dalrymple

My first contact with Islam was in Afghanistan. I had been through Iran overland to get there, but it was in the days of the Shah’s White Revolution, which had given rights to women and had secularized society (with the aid of a little detention, without trial, and torture). In my naive, historicist way, I assumed that secularization was an irreversible process, like the breaking of eggs: that once people had seen the glory of life without compulsory obeisance to the men of God, they would never turn back to them as the sole guides to their lives and politics.


Islam in the modern world is weak and brittle, not strong: that accounts for its so frequent shrillness. The Shah will, sooner or later, triumph over the Ayatollah in Iran, because human nature decrees it, though meanwhile millions of lives will have been ruined and impoverished. The Iranian refugees who have flooded into the West are fleeing Islam, not seeking to extend its dominion, as I know from speaking to many in my city. To be sure, fundamentalist Islam will be very dangerous for some time to come, and all of us, after all, live only in the short term; but ultimately the fate of the Church of England awaits it. Its melancholy, withdrawing roar may well (unlike that of the Church of England) be not just long but bloody, but withdraw it will. The fanatics and the bombers do not represent a resurgence of unreformed, fundamentalist Islam, but its death rattle.

The truth, along with freedom, will set the people free

Ex-Muslim preaches ‘dangers’ of Islam


Daniel Shayesteh was not long graduated from the University of Tehran when on Nov. 4, 1979, 500 students siezed the American embassy in the capital of Iran.

He sympathized with their cause and indirectly supported it, but refrained from bullying the Americans. Not because it was wrong, but because he felt that westerners needed to be kept unaware of the deep hatred Muslims held for them. Mr. Shayesteh, 50, grew up in northern Iran, along the coast of the Caspian Sea. Once a Qur’anic teacher and scholar, Mr. Shayesteh earned a doctorate in international business in Turkey.

Now a Christian, converting after he fled Iran, Mr. Shayesteh travels the world decrying what he considers the dangers of Islam. Last Sunday, he spoke at Westgate Chapel Christian and Missionary Alliance in Toledo.

“Committed Muslims want [westerners] not to have knowledge of Islam,” he said in an interview. “Democracy is against the values of Islam. [Muslims] say that Allah is the ultimate value-maker; he already has a law and democratic law is not higher than Sharia, the law of Allah.”

Through the last half of the 1970s and into the early 1980s, Mr. Shayesteh was a member of a group called the Free Islamic Revolutionary Movement. They set about helping to oust the Shah of Iran and install the Islamic mullahs.

Once they succeeded, however, the new regime under the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini turned and went after him.

Any Muslim who denies allegiance to Islam and its founder Mohammed can expect three outcomes: ostracism, imprisonment, or death, Mr. Shayesteh said.

“You do not have a right to reject Islam if you come from [an Islamic] family,” he said.

By 1980, Khomeini sat at the pinnacle of power in Iran. Mr. Shayesteh became the chief executive officer of a government department.

In 1981, he ran for a seat in the interim government’s Islamic Parliament.

That got him into hot water.

He won the election, but the clerics balked at giving the office to a secularist.

Three years later, he and four others were imprisoned and sentenced to death. Someone who worked in the high court office saw the order for Mr. Shayesteh’s death and interceded, but his fellow detainees were hanged.

When he was freed in 1985, Mr. Shayesteh said he was a persona non grata in Iran. He could not work, and tried but failed to flee to Turkey.

In 1988, he again attempted to leave the country but was blacklisted and had to relinquish his passport.

Still, he made it to the Turkish border and tried to cross. The border guards called for soldiers to arrest him, but when they failed to come after nearly three hours, the guards let him pass.

Several months later his wife, Mary, and three daughters joined him in Istanbul.

Mr. Shayesteh decided to go to a local Christian church, where a former business partner once visited, trying to locate him. That decision started him toward a life-changing break with Islam and conversion to Chrisitianity. In 1991, he moved his family to Australia where his wife also became a Christian.

Mr. Shayesteh taught business at the University of Technology at Sydney for eight years. Recently, however, he was fired when someone complained about his fervent Christianity.

Ultimately, the loss became an opportunity to begin a mission: teaching westerners the truth about Islam.

Saturday, April 01, 2006

Millions of muslims will march today

Mass demonstration
This report just in....

Over a million Muslims are to take to the streets of London today in a demonstration against Islam. They are to march from the notorious Finsbury Park mosque in North London to the not-quite-so notorious Brixton mosque carrying placards bearing the following slogans:
They're only cartoons.

Israel isn't that bad.

"The Satanic Verses" - it's only a book.

Mohammed wasn't a very nice man, and we ought to be honest about this.

The Koran isn't a very nice book, and we ought to be honest about this.

Jihad isn't a very nice thing, and we ought to be honest about this. Posted by Picasa

Free Site Counter