Extremists threatens and Catholic nuns in Libya

Extremists threaten Muslims & Catholic nuns in Libya

by Sheila Musaji
Once again Robert Spencer posts an article with a title that distorts the facts.

#MyJihad in Libya: Muslims threaten nuns, force them to leave Libya

Spencer introduce an article from Asia News saying These nuns are careful not to proselytize, as that would earn them antagonism in a land where proselytizing by non-Muslims is forbidden. But they have won the hearts of many in Cyrenaica by their love—which probably infuriated all the more the Islamic supremacists who threatened them and forced them to flee the country. Will any Western Christians speak for them? Will any Western Christians speak for them? Will Bishop Robert McManus of the diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts allow any discussion of their plight and of the Muslim persecution of Christians in his diocese? Or would such discussion be “Islamophobic”?

The impression he attempts to give is that this event was caused by Islam.  The title reads MUSLIMS threaten nuns, not extremists.  Nowhere does Spencer mention that MUSLIMS are being terrorized by these same extremists, or that the majority of the MUSLIM Libyans are angry about the threats to the nuns.

He posted this article title with a link to his article on the #MyJihad hashtag, and immediately his followers began reposting.  I am certain that most of them did not actually read the article in Asia News that Spencer distorted to get across his own bigoted message.

The article from Asia News Islamists chase nuns from Libya, people pray for their return says:

“Islamic extremists threatened us to leave, not the Libyan people, who instead protected us by coming to visit every day until our departure”, Sister Celeste Biasolo, former superior of the convent of the Holy Family of Spoleto in Derna tells AsiaNews. In October she was forced to leave Libya with four other sisters, because of the spread of Islamic extremists in Cyrenaica. The situation described by the religious is also confirmed by Msgr. Martinelli, Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli, who recently pointed out that two other religious communities will leave Cyrenaica after having been threatened by Islamists: the Franciscan Sisters of the Infant Jesus of Barce and the Ursuline Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus of Beida.

Sister Celeste Biasolo describes a climate of fear in Cyrenaica, which is especially affecting the Libyan people: “The same Muslim population is being terrorized by this situation. The people of Derna miss us and often contact us imploring us to come back. At Christmas more than 100 families called to our monastery in Spoleto with greetings for us”. “In Cyrenaica – she explains – the Islamists do not want to attack the Church as such, but the West, and unfortunately we are seen as foreigners. This is because the country is without a government and can not even guarantee the security of its citizens”.

The presence of the Sisters of the Holy Family of Spoleto in Libya dates back to 1921. The founder of the Institute, Blessed Peter Bonilli, wanted to open a mission in Cyrenaica, in the city of Derna. Sister Celeste notes that until their departure, the mission of the religious and the Church in Libya has focused primarily on health care and care for the elderly. “In these years – she says – we have tried to show joy of his own life of Christians and the Gospel through our presence and humanitarian work.” According to the religious this struck the Muslim population who continue to consider the sisters a fundamental part of their community.

The facts of what happened do not back up Spencer’s bigoted distortions.  There is a civil war going on in Libya and extremists are using the situation to attempt to gain power by terrorizing the population.

Spencer also refers to the “diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts” in his statement.  This is an attempt to use a terrible political situation in Libya to cover his embarrassment at being disinvited from speaking on Islam at a Catholic conference in that diocese.  As Alex Seitz-Wald reports Catholic diocese boots anti-Muslim speaker “Although the intention of the conference organizers was to have a presenter on Islam from a Catholic’s perspective, we are asking Robert Spencer to not come to the Worcester Catholic Men’s Conference, given that his presence is being seen as harmful to Catholic–Islamic relations both locally and nationally,” diocesan spokesman Raymond Delisle said in a statement to the Boston Globe.”

**********

RESOURCES FOR DEALING WITH ISLAMOPHOBIA SUMMARY

The Islamophobia Industry exists and is engaged in an anti-Muslim Crusade.  They have a manifesto for spreading their propaganda, and which states their goal of “destroying Islam — as a culture, a political ideology, and a religion.” They produce anti-Muslim films.  They are forming new organizations and coalitions of organizations at a dizzying speed, not only nationally, but also internationally.   They have formed an International Leadership Team “which will function as a mobile, proactive, reactive on-the-ground team developing and executing confidential action plans that strike at the heart of the global anti-freedom agenda.”

Currently, the Islamophobia Industry is engaged in a full-scale, coordinated,  demonization campaign against American Muslims and Arabs. In just the past few months we have seen a series of inflammatory provocations:    There was the Innocence of Muslims film Titanic, a German satire magazine plans an “Islam” cover article to be published later this month.   Charlie Hebdo, a French satire magazine published an issue with inflammatory cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.   Newsweek published their ‘Muslim Rage’ cover.  Terry Jones held a “trial of Prophet Muhammad”.  SION held a “global” gathering in NYC to plan propaganda strategy.  A group in Toronto publicized a “walk your dog at the mosque” day.   AFDI/SIOA has run a series of anti-Muslim ads on public transportation across the country.   AFDI/SIOA are planning to run 8 more anti-Muslim ads.  There are three more films on Prophet Muhammad in the works by Ali Sina, Mosab Hassan Yousef and Imran Farasat.   They are even bringing their hate messages into public schools.

Daniel Pipes is encouraging publication of “A Muhammad cartoon a day”, and says “So, this is my plea to all Western editors and producers: Display the Muhammad cartoon daily, until the Islamists become accustomed to the fact that we turn sacred cows into hamburger.”.  Pipes joins Daniel Greenfield (aka Sultan Knish) who published an appeal on David Horowitz’ Front Page Magazine Is It Time for ‘Make Your Own Mohammed Movie Month’?.  And, both are following in the footsteps of such luminaries as Pamela Geller, who promoted just such a plan back in 2010 with her promotion of Draw Muhammad Day, even after the cartoonist who drew the first cartoon and suggested the idea, Molly Norris apologized to Muslims and asked for the day to be called off, and American Muslims had issued a defense of free speech.    None of this is surprising as one of the Islamophobes laid out their strategy as “The Muslims themselves have shown us their most vulnerable spot, which is the questionable (though unquestioned) character of the ‘Prophet’ himself. We need to satirise and ridicule baby-bonking Mo until the Muslims fly into uncontrollable tantrums, then ridicule them even more for their tantrums, and repeat the process until they froth at the mouth and steam comes out of their ears.”

The Islamophobia of these folks is very real, it is also strikingly similar to a previous generations’ anti-Semitism, and it has predictable consequences.   The reason that this is so obvious to so many is that rational people can tell the difference between legitimate concerns and bigoted stereotypes.

Sadly, the Islamophobic echo chamber has been aided by some in the Jewish and Christian clergy, and even by some of our elected representatives, particularly in the GOP.

The claim that the Islamophobes are “truth-tellers” and “defenders of freedom” who actually “love Muslims” and have never engaged in “broadbrush demonization” or “advocated violence”, or that nothing that they say could have had anything to do with any act of violence,  are nonsense.  The claim that they are falsely being accused of Islamophobia for no reason other than their legitimate concerns about real issues and that in fact there is not even such a thing as Islamophobia, or their claim that the fact that there are fewer hate crimes against Muslims than against Jews or that some Muslims have fabricated such crimes “proves” that Islamophobia doesn’t exist,  or that the term Islamophobia was made up by Muslims in order to stifle their freedom of speech, or that anti-Muslim bigotry is “not Islamophobia but Islamorealism” are all nonsense.

These individuals and organizations consistently promote the false what everyone “knows” lies about Islam and Muslims (including distorting the meaning of Qur’anic verses, and distorting the meaning of Islamic terms such as taqiyya, jihad, sharia, etc.).

The most commonly repeated false claims about Muslims and Islam are that:

Everyone “knows” that most or all terrorists are Muslims, and there are no Christian and no Jewish terrorists (or terrorists of any other religious stripe), and that Muslims are all militant,  inherently violent, more likely to engage in violence against civilians, and more likely than other Americans to be radicalized.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are not interested in dialogue.  That Muslims don’t help Christians in need.  That Muslims can’t have Christians as friends, and are anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers, and intolerant of other faiths.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t unequivocally denounce terrorism, that American Muslim leaders have not responded to radicalization in their community,  that mosques are the source of radicalization, that 85% of mosques are run by radicals, that Muslims don’t cooperate with law enforcement.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are not equivalent to real Americans, that they are the enemy within, and a fifth column,  that good Muslims can’t be good Americans, that Muslims are not loyal to America, that they are not a part of our American heritage,

Everyone “knows” that Islam itself is the problem and makes Muslims “backward”, that Muslims have made no contribution to the West, that Islam is “of the devil”, a Crescent menace, a “green peril”, that was spread by the sword,  an “evil encroaching on the United States”, and not a religion.

Everyone “knows” that this is a Christian nation, which the Muslims are trying to take over, starting with getting an Eid stamp which is the first step towards shariah law which is a threat to America, and a threat to our judicial system, by purposefully having more children than others to increase their numbers, and they will be the majority in this country in 20 years.  Muslims are a threat to America

Everyone “knows” that Muslims have no respect for the Constitution, they don’t obey the laws of the United States,  that they are opposed to freedom of speech, don’t allow and freedom of religion.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are given a pass by the elite media.  It’s “us versus them”.

Everyone “knows” that the Muslims’ goal is world domination under a Caliphate, and the proposed Cordoba House in NYC is a demonstration of supremacism and triumphalism, and that Muslims planned to open it on the anniversary of 9/11.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t speak out against extremism or terrorism, and even those Muslims who do speak up or seem moderate are simply lying or practicing taqiyyah.

Everyone “knows” that the Qur’an is uniquely violent, that the Islamic concept of God doesn’t include God’s love, and does not include the concept of a Golden Rule,  that Allah is a moon god.

Everyone “knows” that Islam is a monolith and all Muslims are the same, like the “Borg”.  This means that every act committed by an individual who is a Muslim is directly attributable to Islam, and never because the individual is crazy, criminal, or perverted.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t have a sense of humor

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are like the Fascists and Nazis and that in fact they supported those movements.

The problem is that what “everyone knows” is wrong.  These self-righteous and incorrect statements are usually followed by a demand that the Muslim community do something about whatever is the false flag of the day or face the inevitable consequences.

Islamophobes falsely claim to see “JIHAD” PLOTS everywhere, particularly where they don’t exist.   They, like Muslim extremists, don’t understand the true meaning of the term jihad.  The Islamophobes have uncovered countless examples of “shocking”, non-existent Muslim jihad plots.

Islamophobes generalize specific incidents to reflect on all Muslims or all of Islam.    Islamophobes consistently push demonstrably false memes such as:  – we are in danger from creeping Sharia, – the Muslim population is increasing at an alarming rate, – 80% of American Mosques are radicalized,  –  There have been 270 million victims of “jihad”  –  There have been 17,000+ “Islamic terrorist” attacks since 9/11    – Muslims in government are accused of being Muslim Brotherhood plants, stealth jihadists, and creeping Sharia proponents and should be MARGINALIZED or excluded.  Muslim and Arab organizations and individuals are connected to the infamous Muslim Brotherhood document or the unindicted co-conspirator label, or accused of not condemning Hamas, telling American Muslims not to talk to the FBI, of being “Jew haters”, etc.

When Islamophobes are caught in the act of making up or distorting claims they engage in devious methods to attempt to conceal the evidence.

When Islamophobes are caught in the act of making up or distorting claims they engage in devious methods to attempt to conceal the evidence.

There is a reason that many, even outside of the Muslim community see such demonization of Muslims as Islamophobic.  There is a reason that the ADL has stated that Brigitte Gabriel’s Act for America, Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer’s Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA), David Yerushalmi’s Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE)  are “groups that promote an extreme anti-Muslim agenda”.  There is a reason that The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated SIOA as a hate group, and that these individuals are featured in the SPLC reports Jihad Against Islam and The Anti-Muslim Inner Circle.  There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured prominently in: — the Center for American Progress reports “Fear Inc.” on the Islamophobia network in America and Understanding Sharia Law: Conservatives skewed interpretation needs debunking. — the People for the American Way Right Wing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism.  — the NYCLU report Religious Freedom Under Attack:  The Rise of Anti-Mosque Activities in New York State.  — the Political Research Associates report Manufacturing the Muslim menace: Private firms, public servants, and the threat to rights and security.  — The ACLU report Nothing to Fear: Debunking the Mythical “Sharia Threat” to Our Judicial System — in The American Muslim TAM Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry.   There is a reason that the SIOA’s trademark patent was denied by the U.S. government due to its anti-Muslim nature.   There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured in just about every legitimate report on Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred.

See Resources for dealing with Islamophobes for many more reasons that these people cannot be trusted.

 

 

Sheila Musaji is the founding editor of The American Muslim (TAM), published since 1989.  Sheila received the Council on American-Islamic Relations 2007 Islamic Community Service Award for Journalism,  and the Loonwatch Anti-Loons of 2011: Profiles in Courage Award for her work in fighting Islamophobia.  Sheila was selected for inclusion in the 2012 edition of The Muslim 500: The World’s 500 Most Influential Muslims published since 2009 by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre in Amman, Jordan.    Biography  You can follow her on twitter @sheilamusaji ( https://twitter.com/SheilaMusaji )

 

 

 

Dont fear all Islamists, but fear Salafis

MUST READ:  Don’t Fear All Islamists, Fear Salafis

by Robin Wright

THIS spring, I traveled to the cradle of the Arab uprisings — a forlorn street corner in Sidi Bouzid, Tunisia, where a street vendor, drenched in paint thinner, struck a match in December 2010 that ignited the entire Middle East. “We have far more freedoms,” one peddler hawking fruit in the same square lamented, “but far fewer jobs.” Another noted that Mohamed Bouazizi, the vendor who set himself on fire, did so not to vote in a democratic election but because harassment by local officials had cost him his livelihood.

As the peddlers vented, prayers ended at the whitewashed mosque across the street. Among the faithful were Salafis, ultraconservative Sunni Muslims vying to define the new order according to seventh-century religious traditions rather than earthly realities. For years, many Salafis — “salaf” means predecessors — had avoided politics and embraced autocrats as long as they were Muslims. But over the past eight months, clusters of worshipers across the Middle East have morphed into powerful Salafi movements that are tapping into the disillusionment and disorder of transitions.

A new Salafi Crescent, radiating from the Persian Gulf sheikdoms into the Levant and North Africa, is one of the most underappreciated and disturbing byproducts of the Arab revolts. In varying degrees, these populist puritans are moving into the political space once occupied by jihadi militants, who are now less in vogue. Both are fundamentalists who favor a new order modeled on early Islam. Salafis are not necessarily fighters, however. Many disavow violence.

In Tunisia, Salafis started the Reform Front party in May and led protests, including in Sidi Bouzid. This summer, they’ve repeatedly attacked symbols of the new freedom of speech, ransacking an art gallery and blocking Sufi musicians and political comedians from performing. In Egypt, Salafis emerged last year from obscurity, hastily formed parties, and in January won 25 percent of the seats in parliament — second only to the 84-year-old Muslim Brotherhood. Salafis are a growing influence in Syria’s rebellion. And they have parties or factions in Algeria, Bahrain, Kuwait, Libya, Yemen and among Palestinians.

Salafis are only one slice of a rapidly evolving Islamist spectrum. The variety of Islamists in the early 21st century recalls socialism’s many shades in the 20th. Now, as then, some Islamists are more hazardous to Western interests and values than others. The Salafis are most averse to minority and women’s rights.

A common denominator among disparate Salafi groups is inspiration and support from Wahhabis, a puritanical strain of Sunni Islam from Saudi Arabia. Not all Saudis are Wahhabis. Not all Salafis are Wahhabis, either. But Wahhabis are basically all Salafis. And many Arabs, particularly outside the sparsely populated Gulf, suspect that Wahhabis are trying to seize the future by aiding and abetting the region’s newly politicized Salafis — as they did 30 years ago by funding the South Asian madrassas that produced Afghanistan’s Taliban.

Salafis go much further in restricting political and personal life than the larger and more modern Islamist parties that have won electoral pluralities in Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco since October. For most Arabs, the rallying cry is justice, both economic and political. For Salafis, it is also about a virtue that is inflexible and enforceable.

“You have two choices: heaven or hellfire,” Sheikh Muhammad el-Kurdi instructed me after his election to Egypt’s parliament as a member of Al Nour, a Salafi party. It favors gender segregation in schools and offices, he told me, so that men can concentrate. “It’s O.K. for you to be in the room,” he explained. “You are our guest, and we know why you’re here. But you are one woman and we are three men — and we all want to marry you.” Marriage may have been a euphemism.

Other more modern Islamists fear the Salafi factor. “The Salafis try to push us,” said Rachid al-Ghannouchi, founder of Ennahda, the ruling Islamist party in Tunisia. The two Islamist groups there are now rivals. “Salafis are against drafting a constitution. They think it is the Koran,” grumbled Merhézia Labidi, the vice chairwoman of Tunisia’s Constituent Assembly and a member of Ennahda.

Salafis are deepening the divide between Sunni and Shiite Muslims and challenging the “Shiite Crescent,” a term coined by Jordan’s King Abdullah in 2004, during the Iraq war, to describe an arc of influence from Shiite-dominated Iran to its allies in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Today, these rival crescents risk turning countries in transition into battlefields over the region’s future.

The Salafis represent a painful long-term conundrum for the West. Their goals are the most anti-Western of any Islamist parties. They are trying to push both secularists and other Islamists into the not-always-virtuous past.

American policy recently had its own awakening after 60 years of support for autocratic rulers. The United States opted to embrace people power and electoral change in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Yemen. Yet Washington still embraces authoritarian Gulf monarchies like Saudi Arabia, tolerating their vague promises of reform and even pledging the United States’ might to protect them.

Foreign policy should be nuanced, whether because of oil needs or to counter threats from Iran. But there is something dreadfully wrong with tying America’s future position in the region to the birthplace and bastion of Salafism and its warped vision of a new order.

Robin Wright, the author of “Rock the Casbah: Rage and Rebellion Across the Islamic World,” is a fellow at the United States Institute of Peace and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

This article first published August 19, 2012 in the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/opinion/dont-fear-all-islamists-fear-salafis.html?_r=0

Shaykh Wahbi Ghawji'(Ruhoona al Fatihah)

Shaykh Wahbi Ghawji’s Bio-Bibliography

(Ruhoona al Fatihah)

by GFH

taken from sunnah.org

Shaykh Wahbi ibn Sulayman ibn Khalil Ghawji al-Albani was born in 1932 CE (1343) in Skudera, the former capital city of Albania. He attended classes and learnt the Qur’an and what is called „the science of states, `Ilm al-H.al,which includes the books of doctrine and morals for us H.anafis.“ His first teacher and certifier in the Islamic Sciences was his father Shaykh Sulayman, who narrates from the Shuyukh of Albania.

His secondary studies came to an end when King Ah.mad T.ughu made it the law for students to wear European hats. He said: „My father sent me to Egypt and I stayed there for ten years. I learnt Arabic and received a degree from the Faculty of Shari`a and a specialized degree in Islamic judgeship. I attended the courses of Imam Muh.ammad Zahid al-Kawthari (in exile from Turkey) whose hand I was honored to kiss and who handed me his thabat or record of authorities (al-Tah.rir al-Wajiz fi-ma Yabtaghihi al-Mustajiz). However, I narrate from him only through the intermediaries of Shaykh Muh.ammad `Ali al-Murad al-H.amawi and Shaykh `Abd al-Fattah. Abu Ghudda al-H.alabi, Allah have mercy on all of them!“ He described al-Kawthari as „a Sign of Allah in learning, modesty and abstinence, as if he were a king walking in the street.“ This is how we see Shaykh Ghawji also.

In 1948 CE he was appointed as a religious teacher in the governmental schools in Damascus, a post he retained until 1980 CE, at which time he left Syria and moved to the H.ijaz. After several years in al-Madinat al-Munawwara he moved to the United Arab Emirates where he was appointed a lecturer at the Faculty of Islamic Studies and Arabic in Dubai. In 2000 CE he returned to Damascus where he has been living since, teaching at Ma`had al-Fath. al-Islami and striving to support da`wa in Albania.

Among Shaykh Ghawji’s teachers beside those already mentioned:

–          Shaykh `Inayat Allah Nabi al-Shahir al-Askubi who narrates from his Macedonian and other Shuyukh;

–          Shaykh `Abd al-Wahhab Dibs wa-Zayt al-H.ims.i,

–          Shaykh Muh.ammad Mah.mud al-H.amid, and

–          Shaykh Sa`d al-Din al-Murad al-H.amawi from their Syrian and other Shuyukh;

–          Sayyid Muh.ammad al-`Arabi ibn al-Tubbani the author of Bara’at al-H.anifiyyin (published as Bara’at al-Ash`ariyyin)

–          and Sayyid Muh.ammad ibn `Alawi al-Maliki from their Meccan and other Shuyukh;

–          Mufti Muh.ammad Shafi` al-`Uthmani,

–          his son Mufti Muh.ammad al-Taqi the continuator of Shibbir Ah.mad `Uthmani’s Fath. al-Mulhim `ala Sharh.i Muslim,

–          Mufti `Ashiq Ilahi al-Murtahini al-Madani, and

–          Sayyid Abu al-H.asan al-Nadwi from their Indo-Pakistani and other Shuyukh.

Among the works Shaykh Ghawji authored and published in Damascus and Beirut:

–          Abu H.anifata al-Nu`man Imam al-A’immat al-Fuqaha‘, a four-hundred page biography with an edition of the Fiqh al-Akbar which received over a half dozen editions at Dar al-Qalam. It was translated into Persian and published in Teheran in 2003.

–          Arkan al-Iman on the branches of faith at Mu’assasat al-Risala.

–          Arkan al-Islam on the fiqh of the Five Pillars according to the H.anafi School, in two volumes at Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyya.

–          Al-H.ayat al-Akhira: Ah.waluha wa-Ahwaluha wa-H.usn `Aqibati al-Muttaqina fiha bi-Fad.l Allah wa-Rah.matih at Dar al-Basha’ir, on the states of the hereafter.

–          Jabir ibn `Abd Allah: S.ah.abiyyun Imamun wa-H.afiz.un Faqih, a biography at Dar al-Qalam.

–          Kashfu Shubuhati Man Za`ama H.illa Arbahi al-Qurud. al-Mas.rafiyya in refutation of those who declared licit bank interests on loans.

–          Kalimatun `Ilmiyyatun Hadiyatun fil-Bid`ati wa-Ah.kamiha at Dar al-Imam Muslim, a fine, concise study of the Sunni definition of innovation.

–          Maqalatun fil-Riba wal-Fa’idat al-Mas.rafiyya at Mu’assasat al-Rayyan and Dar Ibn H.azm, against the legitimization of usury in all its forms.

–          Al-Mar’atu al-Muslima: { Wa-Laysa al-Dhakaru kal-Untha } which received many editions at Mu’assasat al-Risala and Dar al-Qalam, a study on the rulings pertaining to women in Islam.

–          Masa’il fi `Ilm al-Tawh.id, published in Dubai which is the redacted version of his introduction to Id.ah. al-Dalil [see below] and is epitomized at the fore of our forthcoming translation of Ibn Jahbal al-Kilabi’s refutation of Ibn Taymiyya on the attribution of direction to Allah Most High.

– Min Qad.aya al-Mar’ati al-Muslima: Maqalat fil-Mar’a at Dar Ibn H.azm. Naz.ratun `Ilmiyyatun fi Nisbati Kitabi al-Ibana Jami`ihi ila al-Imam al-Ash`ari, wa-Yalihi Fas.lun fi Khilafat Ahl al-Sunna wal-Khilafat al-Manqula bayna al-Maturidiyya wal-Asha`ira at Dar Ibn H.azm, a study of probable corruption in the text of al-Ash`ari’s Ibana followed by a review of the diffferences between the Ash`aris and the Maturidis.

–          Al-S.alatu wa-Ah.kamuha at Mu’assasat al-Risala, on the second pillar of Islam.

–          Al-Shahadatan wa-Ah.kamuha at Mu’assasat al-Risala, on the first pillar of Islam.

–          Al-S.iyamu wa-Ah.kamuh at Mu’assasat al-Risala, on the fourth pillar of Islam.

–          Al-Tah.dhir min al-Kaba’ir at Amman’s Dar al-Bashir.

He also wrote important marginalia:

–          Minah. al-Rawd. al-Azhar on Mulla `Ali al-Qari’s (d. 1014) Sharh. al-Fiqh al-Akbar, a classic textbook of Sunni doctrine, at Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyya.

–          Al-Ta`liq al-Muyassar on Shaykh Ibrahim al-H.alabi’s (d. 956) recension of H.anafi fiqh, Multaqa al-Abh.ur.

–          Muqaddima fi `Ilm al-Tawh.id, a long introduction to Id.ah. al-Dalil fi Qat.`i H.ujaji Ahl al-Ta`t.il by the Shafi`i Egyptian Qad.i Badr al-Din Ibn Jama`a (694-767), a defense of Sunni doctrine against over-interpreters and anthropomorphists.

–          On al-Qasim ibn Sallam’s Fad.a’il al-Qur’an at Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyya.

–          On the H.afiz. Murtad.a al-Zabidi’s (1140-1205) two-volume `Uqud al-Jawahir al-Munifa fi Adillat Madhhab al-Imam Abi H.anifa on the H.anafi proof-texts at Mu’assasat al-Risala, which Abu Ghudda identified as `Iqd al-Jawahir in his bio-bibliographical introduction to al-Zabidi’s Bulghat al-Arib fi Mus.t.alah.i Athar al-H.abib salla Allahu `alayhi wa-Sallam.

–          On al-Kawthari’s (1296-1391) Mah.q al-Taqawwul fi Mas’alat al-Tawassul and H.afiz. Muh.ammad `Abid al-Sindi’s (d. 1257) H.awla al-Tawassul wal-Istighatha at Dar al-Basha’ir, both of them written to clarify the Sunni ruling on using intermediaries and intercessors as opposed to the neo-Mu`tazilis who deny or downgrade this ruling.

–          He also wrote prefatory material for the following works:

–          `Abd al-Karim Tattan and Muh.ammad Adib al-Kilani’s Sharh. Jawharat al-Tawh.id in two volumes at Dar al-Basha’ir, together with Shaykh `Abd al-Karim al-Rifa`i.

–          Khaldun Makhlut.a’s 600-page Ah.wal al-Abrar `inda al-Ih.tid.ar at Dar al-Basha’ir, on the states of the pious at the threshold of death, which vastly expands on al-Raba`i’s (d. 379) slim Was.aya al-`Ulama‘ `inda H.ud.ur al-Mawt.

–          The Amman edition of Imam al-Lacknawi’s (d. 1304) Naqd Awham S.iddiq H.asan Khan at Jordan’s Dar al-Fath., whose original title is Ibraz al-Ghayy al-Waqi` fi Shifa‘ al-`Ayy.

The writer of these lines was honored to read with Shaykh Ghawji the Fiqh al-Akbar, the Wasiyya, the Tahawiyya, and the Nasafiyya. May Allah preserve him and continue to benefit the Umma with him, and to Allah the Lord of the worlds belongs all praise and thanks.

GF Haddad

[SP 2006-04-11]

Ibanah isnt Attributed Abul Hasan al Ashari ra:

•  http://www.sunniforum.com/media/Prob…kh Ghawiji.pdf
• http://asharis.wordpress.com/2010/08…ari-authentic/

Die großen Gelehrten Syriens, welche in den letzten Jahren verstorben sind (Ruhoona al Fatihah)

Refutations of false Accusations of Pamela Gellers

Pamela Geller’s False Claim that Muslims Curse Christians and Jews in Their Daily Prayers

by Sheila Musaji
Pamela Geller said Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that. in a 10/8/2010 article in the New York Times.

Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic wondered about the accuracy of this statement and did a little research:

I sent some of Geller’s quotes to my friend Reuel Gerecht, a genuine expert on Islam, to see what he thought of them. Reuel, as many of you know, is no apologist for radical Islamism; quite the opposite. He believes we are at war with a dangerous ideology. But he also has respect for Islam, and a great deal of knowledge of it. Here is what he says about Geller’s assertions:

I have to plead an embarrassing ignorance about Pamela Geller.  I was well aware of the Internet-driven opposition to Feisal Abd ar-Rauf’s Ground Zero/Park 51 mosque, but had not entered her name into my memory.  I don’t read blogs much—except Goldblog and those that publish me—and I was more than a little taken back when Jeffrey sent me a note containing comments by Ms. Geller about English translations of the Qur’an.  The intersection of politics, public policy, and scholarship isn’t always pretty, and we are most often fortunate that scholars don’t write our domestic and foreign policies.   However, there is a certain deference that activists must give to scholars when they tread on what is clearly academic terrain.  A good cause—and Ms. Geller’s general concern about the harm that violent Islamic militants can do is an estimable fight—is no excuse for agitprop and what amounts to a slur against some of the greatest scholars of the twentieth century.  According to the New York Times, Ms. Geller has stated:

Now I also believe that a true translation, an accurate translation of the Koran, is really not available in English, according to many of the Islamic scholars that I’ve spoken to.  That’s deeply troubling.  And I don’t think that many westernized Muslims know when they pray five times a day that they’re cursing Christians and Jews five times a day.  I don’t think they know that.

Let’s take the Qur’an first, Muslim prayers second.  Concerning the translation of the Muslim Holy Book, who might these Islamic scholars be?  Since Ms. Geller is without Arabic, it’s impossible for her to compare the original to a translation.  She must depend upon others, who, if I follow Ms. Geller, are involved in a conspiracy to hide the ugly truth about Islam.  If the translations were more “accurate,” we would all see what’s apparent to Ms. Geller, who ascertained the truth despite the blinding scholarly conspiracy.  One has to ask whether Ms. Geller has perused the translation masterpiece by Cambridge’s late great A.J. Arberry or my personal favorite, the awesomely erudite, more literal translation and commentary by Edinburgh’s late great Richard Bell?  Both gentlemen are flag-waving members of Edward Said’s most detested species—Orientalists.  Now if you look at these translations—especially if you look at Bell’s, which is blessed with exhaustive notes in a somewhat complicated formatting—even the uninitiated can get an idea that Muhammad had trouble with Christians and especially Jews during his life.  If you look at the Qur’anic commentary by Edinburgh’s late great William Montgomery Watt (another Orientalist), who was always attentive to Muslim sensibilities in his writings, you can also find in clear English Muhammad’s unpleasant ruminations about Christians and Jews.

Now what all of this means to contemporary Islamic militancy is a very long discussion, for which I suspect that Ms. Geller doesn’t have abundant patience.  Islam has been having awful problems absorbing modernity; its travails so far—let us underscore—have been less bloody than what we witnessed as Christianity modernized.  Any non-Muslim certainly has the right to study, question, and criticize the Islamic faith, as Muslims have the (well-exercised) right to let loose against what they see as the imperfections of Christianity, Judaism, and humanist secularism (the West’s dominant faith).   As Iran’s robust, astonishing intellectual wars over the last twenty years have shown, it’s good for Muslims and non-Muslims not to pull their punches.  Muslims should never be treated as children, which is a debilitating disposition found widely now on the American Left.  (President Obama has not helped.)   But the great Islamic scholars of the past did not lie.  There is no conspiracy.  We are blessed with illuminating English translations of the Muslim Holy Book.  Ms. Geller might consider blogging less, and reading more.

And about Muslim prayer:  I certainly have no perfect way of knowing what Muslims think when they pray, but I really do think they know what they’re doing.  If westernized Muslims are facing the Almighty, they know what’s in their hearts.  Devout Muslims need not hate Jews and Christians to worship the Creator.  Christians have slaughtered Jews through the centuries.  But it would be theologically atrocious to believe that the Christian message requires Jewish blood. (Christians’ killing Jews so often did provoke some Christians to question the foundation of their faith—a theologically estimable exercise.)  The Prophet Muhammad is certainly a different kind of historical figure than Jesus, but it should not be startling to discover that Muslims through the centuries have not seen the prophet’s slaughter of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe in Medina as a mainstay of their creed.  In my experience—and I’m intuiting here—most Muslims do not think about Jews and Christians at all when they pray.  Suffering, in all its merciless variety, takes center stage, I suspect.   When I’ve watched Muslim pilgrims come to Sunni and Shiite tombs and sacred sites in Egypt,  Turkey, and Iraq, I’ve not seen a conquering people.  I’ve usually just seen misery and the human hope that good fortune will come with a better heart.   I’ve seen fraternity among a men who live in lands where fraternal behavior is rare.  Ms. Geller would do well to travel more.   It’s a very good and essential cause to fight jihadism, but such a struggle should not incline us to maul Islamic history or to treat Muslims as if they were merely a walking version of this surah or that legal treatise.   Christians and Jews and atheists are much more than the sum of their parts.   So, too, are Muslims.

After this exchange, Geller’s partner, Robert Spencer published a defense of Geller’s statement in which he brings in “translations” like the Hilali-Khan, commentaries and interpretations as if they represent what most Muslims (or particularly American Muslims, or “westernized Muslims” as Geller calls them) understand about the meaning of Surah Fatiha.  The Hilali-Khan translation is an extremist interpretation of the Qur’an produced in Saudi Arabia and given out free.  I wrote about the Hilali-Khan translation at length here.  Here are a few passages from that article:

The number of comments in parenthesis in this particular translation is more than excessive, and instead of clarifying the text or explaining a word or phrase that cannot be easily translated into English, these comments make the text very difficult to follow and often distort rather than amplify the meaning.

The appendices contain discussions of Christian versus Muslim beliefs that read more like a polemical debate and really do not belong as part of a translation.

I will give just a few examples of the difficulties with this translation.  Sadly, I could give many more examples, but these should sufice to show the extremist character of this translation.

Beginning immediately with Surah Fatiha 1:1 (the opening chapter of the Qur’an) we find a translation not to be found anywhere else:

“Guide us to the Straight Way.  The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who have earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).” (HK translation 1:1-7)

This can only give the impression to any non-Muslim or Muslim who either does not have fluency in Arabic or access to individuals with competency in Classical Qur’anic Arabic that the Qur’an denounces all Jews and Christians.  This is a great untruth.

This unique translation is then followed by an extremely long footnote which justifies this hateful translation based on traditions from texts that go back to the Middle Ages (Ibn Kathir, Qurtubi, Tabari) as if these are the only interpretations, and without any discussion of the history of these commentaries and the hadiths on which they are based.

…  In the interests of preserving the purity of the Qur’an as much as possible for non-Arabic speakers and also as a means to combat the tirades of professional Islam bashers and Muslim haters, I would strongly recommend that every copy of the Hilali-Khan translation be removed from every mosque in the U.S.  …  This current crisis (and many others), I believe is a direct result of such translations as the Hilali-Khan which have been responsible for influencing some Muslims with extremist interpretations (and also providing them “justification” for criminal actions), and for providing Islamophobes with “proof” of the supposed “savagery” of Islam.  Basically, this translation (and others like it) are propaganda coming out of Saudi Arabia which attempts to spread their particular supremacist, divisive, bigoted, and very dangerous interpretation of Islam.

There are only two groups who equate jihad and terrorism – the terrorists and the Islamophobes.

Across the world, even in countries where Muslims and their non-Muslim neighbors have lived together for centuries in peace, we are seeing violence against churches and against minorities, and seeing violent non-Islamic responses to the provocations of Islamophobes.  Why?

I believe that propaganda such as the Hilali-Khan translation and other materials coming primarily out of Saudi Arabia are one of the root causes.

We need a counter-narrative, not only to the Islamophobes, but to the Muslim extremists, and our scholars and community leaders need to help get the message of traditional Islam out to the masses.

I believe that it is time for ordinary Muslims to go into their local mosque or Islamic bookstore and see if this translation is there, and if it is to ask the Imam or mosque leadership to remove it immediately and dispose of it in the appropriate Islamic manner.  And, it is time for the leadership of national organizations to speak out loudly and clearly condemning such translations and materials.  The Saudi’s may provide “free” copies of this translation, but there is a cost, and we are all paying it.

Here is a transliteration and translation of Sura Fatiha by Shakh Kabir Helminski of the Threshold Society:

Bismillaah ar-Rahman ar-Raheem
Al hamdu lillaahi rabbil ‘alameen
Ar-Rahman ar-Raheem Maaliki yaumid Deen
Iyyaaka na’abudu wa iyyaaka nasta’een
Ihdinas siraatal mustaqeem
Siraatal ladheena an ‘amta’ alaihim
Ghairil maghduubi’ alaihim waladaaleen
Aameen

In the name of God, the infinitely Compassionate and Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of all the worlds.
The Compassionate, the Merciful. Ruler on the Day of Reckoning.
You alone do we worship, and You alone do we ask for help.
Guide us on the straight path,
the path of those who have received your grace;
not the path of those who have brought down wrath, nor of those who wander astray.
Amen.

Here is the introduction to this verse from the translation by Muhammad Asad

THIS SURAH is also called Fatihat al-Kitab (“The Opening of the Divine Writ”), Umm al-Kitab (“The Essence of the Divine Writ”), Surat al-Hamd (“The Surah of Praise”), Asas al-Qur’an (“The Foundation of the Qur’an”), and is known by several other names as well. It ismentioned elsewhere in the Qur’an as As-Sab’ al-Mathani (“The Seven Oft-Repeated[Verses]”) because it is repeated several times in the course of each of the five daily prayers.According to Bukhari, the designation Umm al-Kitab was given to it by the Prophet himself,and this in view of the fact that it contains, in a condensed form, all the fundamental principleslaid down in the Qur’an: the principle of God’s oneness and uniqueness, of His being theoriginator and fosterer of the universe, the fount of all life-giving grace, the One to whom manis ultimately responsible, the only power that can really guide and help; the call to righteousaction in the life of this world (“guide us the straight way”); the principle of life after deathand of the organic consequences of man’s actions and behaviour (expressed in the term “Dayof Judgment”); the principle of guidance through God’s message-bearers (evident in thereference to “those upon whom God has bestowed His blessings”) and, flowing from it, the principle of the continuity of all true religions (implied in the allusion to people who havelived – and erred – in the past); and, finally, the need for voluntary self-surrender to the will of the Supreme Being and, thus, for worshipping Him alone. It is for this reason that this surahhas been formulated as a prayer, to be constantly repeated and reflected upon by the believer.“The Opening” was one of the earliest revelations bestowed upon the Prophet. Someauthorities (for instance, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib) were even of the opinion that it was the very firstrevelation; but this view is contradicted by authentic Traditions quoted by both Bukhari andMuslim, which unmistakably show that the first five verses of surah 96 (“The Germ-Cell”)constituted the beginning of revelation. It is probable, however, that whereas the earlier revelations consisted of only a few verses each, “The Opening” was the first surah revealed tothe Prophet in its entirety at one time: and this would explain the view held by ‘Ali.

Here is Asad’s translation and commentary

In the name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace:
ALL PRAISE is due to God alone, the Sustainer of all the worlds,
the Most Gracious,the Dispenser of Grace,
Lord of the Day of Judgment!
Thee alone do we worship; and unto Thee alone do we turn for aid.
Guide us the straight way, the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings,
not of those who have been condemned [by Thee], nor of those who go astray!

According to most of the authorities, this invocation (which occurs at the beginning of everysurah with the exception of surah 9) constitutes an integral part of “The Opening” and is,therefore, numbered as verse 1. In all other instances, the invocation “in the name of God” precedes the surah as such, and is not counted among its verses. – Both the divine epithets rahman and rahim are derived from the noun rahmah, which signifies “mercy”, “compassion”,“loving tenderness” and, more comprehensively, “grace”. From the very earliest times, Islamic scholars have endeavoured to define the exact shades of meaning which differentiate the two terms. The best and simplest of these explanations is undoubtedly the one advanced by Ibnal-Qayyim (as quoted in Manar I,48): the term rahman circumscribes the quality of abounding grace inherent in, and inseparable from, the concept of God’s Being, whereas rahim expresses the manifestation of that grace in, and its effect upon, His creation – in other words, an aspect of His activity.

In this instance, the term “worlds” denotes all categories of existence both in the physicaland the spiritual sense. The Arabic expression rabb – rendered by me as “Sustainer” -embraces a wide complex of meanings not easily expressed by a single term in another language.It comprises the ideas of having a just claim to the possession of anything and, consequently,authority over it, as well as of rearing, sustaining and fostering anything from its inceptionto its final completion. Thus, the head of a family is called rabb ad-dar (“master of the house”) because he has authority over it and is responsible for its maintenance; similarly, his wifeis called rabbat ad-dar (“mistress of the house”). Preceded by the definite article al, the designation rabb is applied, in the Qur’an, exclusively to God as the sole fosterer andsustainer of all creation – objective as well as conceptual – and therefore the ultimatesource of all authority.

According to almost all the commentators, God’s “condemnation” (ghadab, lit., “wrath”) is synonymous with the evil consequences which man brings upon himself by wilfully rejecting God’s guidance and acting contrary to His injunctions. Some commentators (e.g., Zamakhshari)interpret this passage as follows: “… the way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings – those who have not been condemned [by Thee], and who do not go astray”: inother words, they regard the last two expressions as defining “those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings”. Other commentators (e.g., Baghawi and Ibn Kathir) do not subscribeto this interpretation – which would imply the use of negative definitions – and understand the last verse of the surah in the manner rendered by me above. As regards the two categoriesof people following a wrong course, some of the greatest Islamic thinkers (e.g., Al-Ghazali or, in recent times, Muhammad ‘Abduh) held the view that the people described as having incurred “God’s condemnation” – that is, having deprived themselves of His grace – are thosewho have become fully cognizant of God’s message and, having understood it, have rejected it; while by “those who go astray” are meant people whom the truth has either not reached at all,or to whom it has come in so garbled and corrupted a form as to make it difficult for them.

And, before Pamela Geller gets too attached to her specious claims, she should consider that the Blessing/Benediction recited each morning by Orthodox Jews is the following:  “Blessed are you O God, King of the Universe, Who has not made me . . . ” and conclude, respectively, “a goy [Gentile],” “a slave,” and “a woman.”
UPDATE 6/1/2011

Another Islamophobe, Andrew Bostom has jumped on this bandwagon of insisting that the Hilali-Khan translation/commentary reflects the meaning of Surah Fatiha.

UPDATE 1/29/2012

Geller again raises this spurious issue saying: “The Muslims refer to Christians in their daily prayers as “those who are led astray” (Muslims curse Christians and Jews multiple times in daily prayers). This madness validates their contempt and supremacism.”
UPDATE 2/11/2013

Geller is nothing if not consistent.  Today she published Hamas-CAIR leads Arizona State Senate in anti-Jewish, Anti-Christian Prayer raising this same debunked issue yet again. She says:  “How many people actually know that every time Muslims get down on their knees, posteriors in the air, they are cursing Christian and Jews? Obama says, “respect it!”

All of this fury on the part of Geller (and her partner in hate Robert Spencer) was because an Arizona Imam, Anas Hlayhel, who is also the Chairman of the Arizona Chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations CAIR-AZ led the Arizona State Senate’s prayer invocation with a reading of Surah al-Fatiha.

*********

RESOURCES FOR DEALING WITH ISLAMOPHOBIA SUMMARY

The Islamophobia Industry exists and is engaged in an anti-Muslim Crusade.  They have a manifesto for spreading their propaganda, and which states their goal of “destroying Islam — as a culture, a political ideology, and a religion.” They produce anti-Muslim films.  They are forming new organizations and coalitions of organizations at a dizzying speed, not only nationally, but also internationally.   They have formed an International Leadership Team “which will function as a mobile, proactive, reactive on-the-ground team developing and executing confidential action plans that strike at the heart of the global anti-freedom agenda.”

Currently, the Islamophobia Industry is engaged in a full-scale, coordinated,  demonization campaign against American Muslims and Arabs. In just the past few months we have seen a series of inflammatory provocations:    There was the Innocence of Muslims film Titanic, a German satire magazine plans an “Islam” cover article to be published later this month.   Charlie Hebdo, a French satire magazine published an issue with inflammatory cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.   Newsweek published their ‘Muslim Rage’ cover.  Terry Jones held a “trial of Prophet Muhammad”.  SION held a “global” gathering in NYC to plan propaganda strategy.  A group in Toronto publicized a “walk your dog at the mosque” day.   AFDI/SIOA has run a series of anti-Muslim ads on public transportation across the country.   AFDI/SIOA are planning to run 8 more anti-Muslim ads.  There are three more films on Prophet Muhammad in the works by Ali Sina, Mosab Hassan Yousef and Imran Farasat.   They are even bringing their hate messages into public schools.

Daniel Pipes is encouraging publication of “A Muhammad cartoon a day”, and says “So, this is my plea to all Western editors and producers: Display the Muhammad cartoon daily, until the Islamists become accustomed to the fact that we turn sacred cows into hamburger.”.  Pipes joins Daniel Greenfield (aka Sultan Knish) who published an appeal on David Horowitz’ Front Page Magazine Is It Time for ‘Make Your Own Mohammed Movie Month’?.  And, both are following in the footsteps of such luminaries as Pamela Geller, who promoted just such a plan back in 2010 with her promotion of Draw Muhammad Day, even after the cartoonist who drew the first cartoon and suggested the idea, Molly Norris apologized to Muslims and asked for the day to be called off, and American Muslims had issued a defense of free speech.    None of this is surprising as one of the Islamophobes laid out their strategy as “The Muslims themselves have shown us their most vulnerable spot, which is the questionable (though unquestioned) character of the ‘Prophet’ himself. We need to satirise and ridicule baby-bonking Mo until the Muslims fly into uncontrollable tantrums, then ridicule them even more for their tantrums, and repeat the process until they froth at the mouth and steam comes out of their ears.”

The Islamophobia of these folks is very real, it is also strikingly similar to a previous generations’ anti-Semitism, and it has predictable consequences.   The reason that this is so obvious to so many is that rational people can tell the difference between legitimate concerns and bigoted stereotypes.

Sadly, the Islamophobic echo chamber has been aided by some in the Jewish and Christian clergy, and even by some of our elected representatives, particularly in the GOP.

The claim that the Islamophobes are “truth-tellers” and “defenders of freedom” who actually “love Muslims” and have never engaged in “broadbrush demonization” or “advocated violence”, or that nothing that they say could have had anything to do with any act of violence,  are nonsense.  The claim that they are falsely being accused of Islamophobia for no reason other than their legitimate concerns about real issues and that in fact there is not even such a thing as Islamophobia, or their claim that the fact that there are fewer hate crimes against Muslims than against Jews or that some Muslims have fabricated such crimes “proves” that Islamophobia doesn’t exist,  or that the term Islamophobia was made up by Muslims in order to stifle their freedom of speech, or that anti-Muslim bigotry is “not Islamophobia but Islamorealism” are all nonsense.

These individuals and organizations consistently promote the false what everyone “knows” lies about Islam and Muslims (including distorting the meaning of Qur’anic verses, and distorting the meaning of Islamic terms such as taqiyya, jihad, sharia, etc.).

The most commonly repeated false claims about Muslims and Islam are that:

Everyone “knows” that most or all terrorists are Muslims, and there are no Christian and no Jewish terrorists (or terrorists of any other religious stripe), and that Muslims are all militant,  inherently violent, more likely to engage in violence against civilians, and more likely than other Americans to be radicalized.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are not interested in dialogue.  That Muslims don’t help Christians in need.  That Muslims can’t have Christians as friends, and are anti-Semites, Holocaust deniers, and intolerant of other faiths.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t unequivocally denounce terrorism, that American Muslim leaders have not responded to radicalization in their community,  that mosques are the source of radicalization, that 85% of mosques are run by radicals, that Muslims don’t cooperate with law enforcement.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are not equivalent to real Americans, that they are the enemy within, and a fifth column,  that good Muslims can’t be good Americans, that Muslims are not loyal to America, that they are not a part of our American heritage,

Everyone “knows” that Islam itself is the problem and makes Muslims “backward”, that Muslims have made no contribution to the West, that Islam is “of the devil”, a Crescent menace, a “green peril”, that was spread by the sword,  an “evil encroaching on the United States”, and not a religion.

Everyone “knows” that this is a Christian nation, which the Muslims are trying to take over, starting with getting an Eid stamp which is the first step towards shariah law which is a threat to America, and a threat to our judicial system, by purposefully having more children than others to increase their numbers, and they will be the majority in this country in 20 years.  Muslims are a threat to America

Everyone “knows” that Muslims have no respect for the Constitution, they don’t obey the laws of the United States,  that they are opposed to freedom of speech, don’t allow and freedom of religion.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are given a pass by the elite media.  It’s “us versus them”.

Everyone “knows” that the Muslims’ goal is world domination under a Caliphate, and the proposed Cordoba House in NYC is a demonstration of supremacism and triumphalism, and that Muslims planned to open it on the anniversary of 9/11.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t speak out against extremism or terrorism, and even those Muslims who do speak up or seem moderate are simply lying or practicing taqiyyah.

Everyone “knows” that the Qur’an is uniquely violent, that the Islamic concept of God doesn’t include God’s love, and does not include the concept of a Golden Rule,  that Allah is a moon god.

Everyone “knows” that Islam is a monolith and all Muslims are the same, like the “Borg”.  This means that every act committed by an individual who is a Muslim is directly attributable to Islam, and never because the individual is crazy, criminal, or perverted.

Everyone “knows” that Muslims don’t have a sense of humor

Everyone “knows” that Muslims are like the Fascists and Nazis and that in fact they supported those movements.

The problem is that what “everyone knows” is wrong.  These self-righteous and incorrect statements are usually followed by a demand that the Muslim community do something about whatever is the false flag of the day or face the inevitable consequences.

Islamophobes falsely claim to see “JIHAD” PLOTS everywhere, particularly where they don’t exist.   They, like Muslim extremists, don’t understand the true meaning of the term jihad.  The Islamophobes have uncovered countless examples of “shocking”, non-existent Muslim jihad plots.

Islamophobes generalize specific incidents to reflect on all Muslims or all of Islam.    Islamophobes consistently push demonstrably false memes such as:  – we are in danger from creeping Sharia, – the Muslim population is increasing at an alarming rate, – 80% of American Mosques are radicalized,  –  There have been 270 million victims of “jihad”  –  There have been 17,000+ “Islamic terrorist” attacks since 9/11    – Muslims in government are accused of being Muslim Brotherhood plants, stealth jihadists, and creeping Sharia proponents and should be MARGINALIZED or excluded.  Muslim and Arab organizations and individuals are connected to the infamous Muslim Brotherhood document or the unindicted co-conspirator label, or accused of not condemning Hamas, telling American Muslims not to talk to the FBI, of being “Jew haters”, etc.

When Islamophobes are caught in the act of making up or distorting claims they engage in devious methods to attempt to conceal the evidence.

When Islamophobes are caught in the act of making up or distorting claims they engage in devious methods to attempt to conceal the evidence.

There is a reason that many, even outside of the Muslim community see such demonization of Muslims as Islamophobic.  There is a reason that the ADL has stated that Brigitte Gabriel’s Act for America, Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer’s Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA), David Yerushalmi’s Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE)  are “groups that promote an extreme anti-Muslim agenda”.  There is a reason that The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated SIOA as a hate group, and that these individuals are featured in the SPLC reports Jihad Against Islam and The Anti-Muslim Inner Circle.  There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured prominently in: — the Center for American Progress reports “Fear Inc.” on the Islamophobia network in America and Understanding Sharia Law: Conservatives skewed interpretation needs debunking. — the People for the American Way Right Wing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism.  — the NYCLU report Religious Freedom Under Attack:  The Rise of Anti-Mosque Activities in New York State.  — the Political Research Associates report Manufacturing the Muslim menace: Private firms, public servants, and the threat to rights and security.  — The ACLU report Nothing to Fear: Debunking the Mythical “Sharia Threat” to Our Judicial System — in The American Muslim TAM Who’s Who of the Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab/Islamophobia Industry.   There is a reason that the SIOA’s trademark patent was denied by the U.S. government due to its anti-Muslim nature.   There is a reason that these individuals and organizations are featured in just about every legitimate report on Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred.

See Resources for dealing with Islamophobes for many more reasons that these people cannot be trusted.

Sheila Musaji is the founding editor of The American Muslim (TAM), published since 1989.  Sheila received the Council on American-Islamic Relations 2007 Islamic Community Service Award for Journalism,  and the Loonwatch Anti-Loons of 2011: Profiles in Courage Award for her work in fighting Islamophobia.  Sheila was selected for inclusion in the 2012 edition of The Muslim 500: The World’s 500 Most Influential Muslims published since 2009 by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre in Amman, Jordan.    Biography  You can follow her on twitter @sheilamusaji ( https://twitter.com/SheilaMusaji )

Originally published 11/1/2010

http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/islamophobes-claim-that-muslims-curse-christians-and-jews

Against Extremism because its not anti-islamic

Holier than thou: extremism against Islam

by Sheikh Musa Furber

Statements from three popular Egyptian religious preachers have left the Egyptian public in an uproar. One of the statements justifies sexually assaulting female protesters; another calls for murdering leaders of parties in opposition to President Morsi; yet another calls on the president to crack down heavily on protestors – before private citizens take matters into their hands. The irony of this situation is that from a religious perspective, the uproar against these statements is far more justifiable than the statements themselves.

Ahmed Mohammed Abdullah justified the sexual assault of female protestors with a detailed “analysis,” including demographics: “they are going there to get raped”; 90% of them are Christian, and the rest are widows without husbands to keep them in line. How he knew any of this is unclear – but even if it were all true, how any of it would be justification for sexual assault is even more unclear. Moreover, he ridiculed statements from the opposition that attacking women is a “red line” that must not be crossed.

The insensitivity and inappropriateness of Abdullah’s statements aside, given Egypt’s increasingly difficult sexual harassment problem, they are also in direct contradiction to Islamic law, which considers rape, assault and sexual harassment as always forbidden, sinful and criminal, with the harasser responsible for the harassment. Considering that these are basic items within Islamic law, one wonders how he might be brought to account by the law for essentially perverting the perception of Islam in the public arena.

Nevertheless, while Abdullah’s statements attempt to legitimize criminal behavior, he did not actually order people go commit it – whereas, Mahmoud Shaaban and Wagdi Ghoneim did so. Shaaban, on a popular TV channel, called for leaders of the opposition, mentioning leaders Mohamed El-Baradei and Hamdeen Sabahi by name, to be put to death – although he clarified that this punishment should not be carried out by private individuals. Ghoneim had no such reluctance with regards to protestors outside the presidential palace – he called on the government to deal with the protestors, failing which, private citizens would: “We will kill the criminals, the thugs, the thieves and those who give them money and those who help them with words. No mercy with them.”

Ghoneim and Shaaban’s statements are reminiscent of a similar statement issued by Hashim Islam. In August, Islam declared those protesting against President Morsi were guilty of brigandage (al-hirabah) and high treason (al-khuyanat al-uzma). Their blood was forfeit as a result, and he commanded the people of Egypt to confront them – using deadly force if necessary. Islam’s various claims were rejected by the Ministry of Endowments, Azhar University, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

In contrast, Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa has said that peaceful demonstrations are a right in Islam, though they should avoid harming people, property, and national interests. While some protests have resulted in violence, much of this violence was due in part by the heavy-handed response of the police – and in any case, the opposition leadership’s ability to command the protest movement is tenuous at best, and non-existent at worst. Even if the protestors were guilty of crimes, it is down to the state authorities responsible for maintaining law and order that have the authority to consider issuing legal verdicts – not private muftis (even if they are qualified), let alone unqualified TV personalities.

The irony of issuing such statements is that the act issuing them itself could be considered a form of calling to brigandage and vigilantism – precisely the charge that Shaaban and Ghoneim lay at the door of the opposition. Ghoneim’s statements in particular could easily be interpreted as enticing the public to defy the president, and carry out violent acts – which is an affront to the institutions of the state. That fact that the statements themselves make a mockery of Islamic law only worsens the situation further.

The general public and those targeted by these statements are not the only ones who are upset. Members of Azhar’s Islamic Studies Academy met with Sheikh al-Azhar Ahmed al-Tayyeb, who vehemently rejected the legitimacy of the statement and cautioned Egyptians to ignore them.

While the President’s office was initially silent, it finally issued a statement last Thursday expressing its “full rejection of hate speech cloaked by religion,” calling for religious and intellectual leaders to unanimously reject such incitement. The statements included that “the promotion and instigation of political violence by some is foreign to Egypt, as is sanctioning killing because of political differences by others who claim to speak in the name of religion. This is terrorism.” The Interior Ministry consider the statements a public threat – especially since Shaaban’s statements were made soon after Chokri Belaid, one of Tunisia’s most well known anti-Islamist politicians, was murdered. Consequentially, the Ministry has increased patrols in areas where the opposition leaders reside.

It has been reported that the Egyptian cabinet is considering taking legal action against those who use religion to incite violence and that state prosecutor Talaat Ibrahim has ordered that Shaaban be investigated for his statement. Beyond incitement to violence, there may even be a case that such irresponsible statements fall under Egypt’s blasphemy law, which clearly states “whoever makes use of religion in propagating […] extreme ideas for the purpose of inciting strife, ridiculing or insulting a heavenly religion or a sect following it, or damaging national unity.” Abdullah used religion to justify and excuse the sexual harassment and rape of Christian and Muslim protestors. Shaaban and Ghoneim’s statements used religion to justify killing opposition leaders and protestors.

While it is doubtful that the state prosecutor might use the blasphemy legislation to pursue irresponsible and extremist preachers, the reality is that such discourse is indeed an affront to religion. Morally, it is far more disgraceful when those calling for Islam use religion in such an unethical fashion, than when anti-Muslim bigots make poorly made films which would have been ignored had extremists not opted to draw so much public attention to them. The films resulted recently in a call to ban YouTube; where is the corresponding measure to combat errant attempts to use religious edicts (fatawa) for purely partisan purposes?

Sheikh Musa Furber is a research fellow at the Tabah Foundation and a qualified issuer of legal edicts (fatwas). He received his license to deliver legal edicts from senior scholars at the Egyptian House of Edicts including the Grand Mufti of Egypt. Twitter: @musafurber

[This piece was first published in Al-Arabiya, and reprinted here with the author’s permission.]

Was sagt der Islam über den Terrorismus?

Der Islam, eine Religion der Barmherzigkeit, erlaubt keinen Terrorismus. Im Quran sagt Gott:

“Gott verbietet euch nicht gegen jene, die euch nicht des Glaubens wegen bekämpft haben und euch nicht aus euren Häusern vertrieben haben, gütig zu sein und redlich mit ihnen zu verfahren; wahrlich Gott liebt die Gerechten.” (Quran 60:8)

Der Prophet Muhammad verbot den Soldaten, Frauen und Kinder zu töten,[1]  und er wies sie an: “Seid keine Verräter, seid nicht maßlos und tötet kein neugeborenes Kind…”[2]  Und er sagte auch: “Wer eine Person tötet, die einen Vertrag mit den Muslimen hat, soll nicht das Paradies riechen, obwohl es bereits vierzig Jahre im voraus zu riechen ist.”[3]

Der Prophet Muhammad hat auch die Folterung mit Feuer verboten.[4]

Einst zählte er den Mord als zweite der großen Sünden,[5]  und erwähnte sogar, dass am Tag des Gerichts, “Die ersten Fälle, über die am Tag des Gerichts zwischen den Menschen entschieden wird, sind die der Blutschuld.[6]”[7]

Muslime werden sogar aufgefordert freundlich zu den Tieren zu sein, und ihnen wird verboten sie zu verletzen.  Der Prophet Muhammad sagte einst: “Eine Frau wurde bestraft, weil sie eine Katze einsperrte, bis diese starb.  Aus diesem Grund wurde sie in die Hölle verbannt.  Als sie die Katze einsperrte, gab sie ihr kein Futter oder Wasser, noch ließ sie sie frei, damit sie die Insekten der Erde fressen konnte.”[8]

Er sprach auch von einem Mann, der einem sehr durstigen Hund etwas zu trinken gab; da vergab ihm Gott seine Sünden.  Der Prophet wurde gefragt: “Gesandter Gottes, werden wir für die Freundlichkeit zu den Tieren belohnt?“  Er antwortete: “Es gibt eine Belohnung für die Freundlichkeit zu jedem Lebewesen: Tier oder Mensch.”[9]

Wenn man einem Tier für Nahrung das Leben nehmen muss, wurde den Muslimen darüber hinaus befohlen dies so zu tun, dass das Tier so wenig wie möglich Angst haben soll oder gar leidet.  Der Prophet Muhammad sagte: “Wenn ihr ein Tier schlachtet, so tut dies auf die beste Weise.  Man sollte das Messer schärfen, um das Leiden des Tieres zu verringern.”[10]

Angesichts dieser und anderer islamischer Berichte sind das Anstacheln zum Terror in den Herzen wehrloser Bürger, die vollständige Zerstörung von Gebäuden und Besitztümern, das Bombardieren und Verstümmeln unschuldiger Männer, Frauen und Kinder als vom Islam und den Muslimen verbotene und verabscheuungswürdige Handlungen anzusehen.  Die Muslime verfolgen eine Religion des Friedens, der Gnade und Vergebung, und der Großteil hat mit den Gewaltverbrechen nichts zu tun, die manche mit den Muslimen assoziieren.  Wenn ein einzelner Muslim eine terroristische Handlung begeht, macht sich diese Person im Sinne der islamischen Gesetze strafbar.

---

Footnotes:

[1] Überliefert bei Sahih Muslim, #1744, und Sahih Al-Bukhary, #3015.

[2] Überliefert bei Sahih Muslim, #1731, und Al-Tirmizi, #1408.

[3] Überliefert bei Sahih Al-Bukhary, #3166, und Ibn Majah, #2686.

[4] Überliefert bei Abu Dawud, #2675.

[5] Überliefert bei Sahih Al-Bukhary, #6871, und Sahih Muslim, #88.

[6] Das bedeutet töten und beschädigen.

[7] Überliefert bei Sahih Muslim, #1678, und Sahih Al-Bukhary, #6533.

[8] Überliefert beiSahih Muslim, #2422, und Sahih Al-Bukhary, #2365.

[9]. Überliefert bei Sahih Muslim, #2244, und Sahih Al-Bukhary, #2466.

[10] Überliefert bei Sahih Muslim, #1955, und Al-Tirmizi, #1409

A Shaitan(Geert Wilders) comes to Australia

 

By: Barney Zwartz

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

ALL Muslims should renounce their religion immediately in favour of Christianity or atheism – it would be better for them and for everyone else, controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders said in Melbourne on Tuesday.

Insisting politely that he did not want to incite or offend anyone, the anti-Islam campaigner described the prophet Muhammad as ”a warlord, terrorist and paedophile” and urged Australia to ban the Quran and all migration from Muslim countries.

Told that Premier Ted Baillieu had advised Victorians to ignore him, Mr Wilders said the Premier could ignore the threat of Islam and ”sing Kumbaya” all day long, but the voters would wake up eventually.

Mr Greet Wilders was speaking to the assembled media at a secret location 40 minutes’ drive north-west of Melbourne, of which they were notified only in the morning.

The media had to register in advance, show ID on arrival and pass several burly men in dark suits with black radio earpieces.

For years, Mr Wilders has lived under constant police protection, staying in a government safe house and being driven in an armoured car, but before his visit Melbourne Muslim leaders said he was under no threat of violence from local Muslims. However, the Q Society, which is hosting his three-city tour, says it has had more than two dozen venues refuse to host him or cancel bookings for fear of violent protests.

The Q Society was founded in 2010 to ”educate Australians about Islam”, media spokesman Andrew Horwood said.

Mr Wilders – impeccably dressed and coiffured and a polished media performer who never raised his voice despite some hostile questioning – said Islam was a totalitarian system that was incompatible with freedom.

”I am here to talk about the Islamisation of Europe,” he said. ”If you think what happened in Europe will not happen in Australia you are totally wrong.”

He said he did not oppose the multiculturalism on which Australia prides itself, but cultural relativism, ”the crazy idea that all cultures are equal, so you don’t have a dominant culture”.

He said Islam was based on the Koran, which contained more anti-Semitism than Hitler’s manifesto Mein Kampf, and on the example of the life of the prophet Muhammad.

”Muhammad was a warlord, terrorist and paedophile (who slept with a wife when she was nine). If 1.5 billion people think he is the best example to follow it’s fair and necessary to analyse it and be able to talk about it.

”I call on all the Muslims in the world to leave Islam for Christianity or atheism or whatever they want. This will be good for them and also for our free society.”

Australian Multicultural Foundation chief executive Hass Dellal said that call was so outlandish there was no sensible reply.

”He is full of contradictions and is wrapped up in his own notoriety. He never speaks of tolerance, understanding or cohesion,” Mr Dellal said.

Islamic Council of Victoria past president Ramzi Elsayed said Mr Wilders’ remarks simply showed ignorance. ”He seems to be losing rationality in his argument,” he said.

Mr Wilders cancelled the Perth leg of his tour because a hotel hosting him pulled out late on Tuesday.

MEDIA RELEASE – NSW ALLIANCE AFFIRMS MULTICULTURAL SUCCESS

Feb 20 2013

An alliance of organisations and individuals from across New South Wales have come together to re-affirm in a joint statement their support of the state’s multicultural and multi-faith community.

This is their joint statement in response to the Geert Wilders visit to Australia to spread bigotry and disharmony.

New South Wales is a multicultural and multi-faith society in which racial, religious and linguistic diversity is embraced as a strength. This vibrant diversity has generated social, cultural and economic benefits for all of the state’s citizens.

The community holds a diversity of views and beliefs, observes many different cultures and traditions and speaks a wide range of languages. The 2011 ABS Census illustrated our cultural diversity: In New South Wales 31.4% of people were born overseas; 48.1% had at least one parent born overseas; 27.5% speak a language other than English at home; and 129 different faiths are followed.

Community harmony in New South Wales is strengthened by a long-standing, shared commitment across government, community and business to respect and embrace difference, to respond appropriately to unjust treatment and vilification, and to recognise and celebrate our common bond as proud Australians.

We have a collective responsibility to respect fellow citizens and preserve the social cohesion that characterise New South Wales as a great society. We also encourage genuine and constructive engagement and dialogue as a means to achieving greater understanding and acceptance of diversity.

We welcome challenging ideas and debate which does not incite hatred and animosity towards specific cultural or faith-based communities. All people of New South Wales have a right to practice their faith and observe their cultural traditions and languages free from discrimination or vilification.

This statement is endorsed by the following organisations and individuals (in alphabetical order)

• Affinity Intercultural Foundation

• Amitabha Buddhist Association of New South Wales

• Australian National Imams Council

• Columban Mission Institute

• Islamic Council of NSW

• Standing Committee on Interfaith Dialogue for the World Fellowship of Buddhists

• The Catholic Diocese of Broken Bay

• The Uniting Church in Australia, Synod of NSW and the ACT

For more information contact:

Mr Mehmet Ozalp – 0401 222 706

Sr Trish Madigan OP – 0407 743 346

Rev Dr Brian Brown – 0408 421 744

 

 

Muslims regularly consuming Haram without knowing: expert

Taken from : Muslim Village  Global News

By: Gillian Duncan

Source: http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/industry-insights/retail/golden-halal-opportunity-beckons-at-heart-of-islamic-world#page2

Christien Meindertsma, an artist based in the Netherlands, once set about tracing all of the products made using the parts of one animal.

Three years later, in 2009, she published a book called Pig 05049 that proved pieces of one pig, the 05049 of the title, ended up in 185 separate products, from toothpaste to dough improver and desserts. The pig is an animal considered haram, or not to be consumed, by Muslims.

Industry specialists say Meindertsma’s book offers a lesson for everyone about how the processing of products has changed in the globalised world – and why it is important to know what is in the food we eat and items we use.

Halal, which means permissible, not only covers food and drink, but anything that can be used in daily life, including drugs and cosmetics.

The size of the halal industry globally is enormous – worth an estimated US$2.1 trillion (Dh7.71tn) annually and growing.

Yet the UAE’s industry is tiny in comparison, at just $550 million. However, it has a proportionally bigger share of halal trade, which was estimated to be $3.6 billion in 2010 and projected to grow to $8.4bn in 2020.

Initially, halal referred to meat that had been slaughtered according to Islamic law, by a Muslim saying a prayer. It then expanded to cover ready-to-eat food containing meat and, finally, all other products.

However, awareness about what is halal is lacking in some parts, according to Asad Sajjad, the chief executive and secretary general of the Halal Development Council and the founder and director of the International Halal Federation.

Mohammed Jinna, the chief executive of Halal India, says halal should cover everything.

“Your toothpaste and your soap and your creams and your lipsticks – everything should be halal.”

But even food one might expect to be halal by its nature is not necessarily permitted.

Take sugar, for example, a plant-based product that is processed using bone char, charcoal made from animal bones – usually from cattle or pigs. If it is the latter, the end product will not be halal.

And even meat that is permitted, such as chicken, is sometimes not halal. In some big industrial chicken plants, the birds are fed proteins and injected with water to make them gain weight.

“The protein is used so that water retains in the body. Otherwise it will just drain out. The protein is made of pig,” says Mr Sajjad.

In the Emirates, there are a handful of big halal food producers, such as Emirates Poultry and Al Islami. But the largest halal food producers are based in the West.

Take Nestlé, headquartered in Switzerland. It is not only the world’s biggest food company – it is also the world’s largest halal food maker.

In fact, 85 per cent of the products in the $2.1tn halal market – which makes up 20 per cent of the total global food industry – are produced in Brazil, the United States, Canada, Argentina, France, Australia, Holland and New Zealand, says Mr Sajjad.

“These are the countries in the West. In the East, the biggest halal producer is Thailand,” which is not even a Muslim country, he points out.

In fact, the only Muslim countries that produce halal food in any significant quantities are Indonesia and Malaysia.

“I have been to Asia and the Middle East and I try to convince them to compete in the non-Muslim countries, and they say, ‘we can’t compete because the quality is not there,’” says Farhan Tufail, the chief executive of Halal Certification Services, based in Switzerland.

But, he adds, some foreign companies, such as Nestlé, are investing heavily in halal production in Muslim countries and for a simple reason: the halal market is booming and the companies want to be prepared. They can buy the ingredients to produce halal food cheaper in the Middle East than in the West.

But industry specialists say awareness about halal in the UAE and the region is not as widespread as some might expect.

“Here, if you go to any store in the UAE and ask, ‘Do you have halal biscuits? Do you have halal confectionery?’ they don’t know. The people selling food have no awareness. The buyers have no awareness,” says Mr Sajjad.

But that is changing.

The UAE has in recent months sought to boost its influence in the halal food industry and was appointed late last year to chair the Halal Food Technical committee designed to set standards for the industry worldwide.

The Emirates Authority for Standardization and Metrology is now working on guidelines to unify standards for halal food and cosmetics, which are expected to be applied in 57 Islamic countries in the next three years.

Despite the current furore over horse meat labelled as beef in Europe, a certification system is key to boosting consumer confidence in halal products, say the experts.

“You can find a lot of sugar being certified in Singapore and Malaysia. There is a lot of awareness in these countries,” says Mr Jinna.

Regulations for halal certification bodies in the UAE are being drawn up and are expected to be issued in the next six months.

They will be compulsory for any organisation wanting to become a halal certification body.

If they comply with the rules they will be accredited.

Only with the implementation of a comprehensive certification system will people be sure about whether the products they are using and consuming are halal.

MV Editors note:

Please share this extremely important article with all your Muslim family + friends to help increase knowledge and awareness.

May Allah reward you for your efforts in helping other Muslims avoid that which is haram.

Salafiyya Lügen über Abu Bilal al Maliki

Erst die Salafiyya –Neigung:

http://www.ahlu-sunnah.com/threads/41126-Abu-Bilal-al-Maliki-Hamid-Karzai-ist-der-Amir-Afghanistans

Hier die Ahl as Sunnah wa´l Jama´ah Meinung :

http://ahlu-sunnah.de/foren/themen/5756-Emir-von-Afghanistan?p=53317&viewfull=1#post53317

Bei letztem Link bitte den gesamten Beitrag lesen

Wurde der Islam mit dem Schwert verbreitet ?

Es ist ein allgemeines Missverständnis mancher Nicht-Muslime, dass der Islam nicht Millionen von Anhänger auf der ganzen Welt hätte, wäre er nicht mit Gewalt verbreitet worden.

Die folgenden Punkte werden klarstellen, dass es die innewohnende Macht der Wahrheit, der Vernunft und der Logik gewesen ist, die für die rasche Verbreitung des Islam verantwortlich gewesen ist.

Der Islam hat allen anderen Religionen und Ansichten gegenüber immer Respekt und Freiheit entgegengebracht.  Religionsfreiheit ist im Qur´an selbst vorgeschrieben:

“Es gibt keinen Zwang im Glauben. Der richtige Weg ist nun klar erkennbar geworden gegenüber dem unrichtigen.”  (Quran 2:256)

Dies fiel dem Historiker De Lacy O’Leary auf, er schrieb:[1]  “Die Geschichte macht allerdings deutlich, dass die Legende von den fanatischen Muslimen, die über die Welt fegen und mit dem Schwert die unterworfenen Rassen zwingen, den Islam anzunehmen, ist einer der fantastischsten, absurdesten Mythen, die die Historiker jemals wiederholt haben.”

Der berühmte Historiker, Thomas Carlyle, nimmt in seinem Buch Heroes and Hero worship, bezug auf dieses Missverständnis über die Verbreitung des Islam: “Das Schwert, tatsächlich, aber wo wirst du dein Schwert her bekommen?  Jede neue Meinung und ihr Anfangspunkt in einer Minderheit eines Einzelnen; in dem Kopf eines Menschen alleine.  Dort verweilt sie.  Ein Mann allein glaubt sie, das ist ein Mann gegen alle anderen Männer.  Dann nimmt er das Schwert und versucht, sie zu verbreiten, das wird ihm wenig helfen.  Du musst dein Schwert ergreifen!  Im Ganzen, eine Sache wird sich selbst verbreiten, wenn sie kann.”

Wenn der Islam mit dem Schwert verbreitet worden wäre, dann war es das Schwert des Intellekts und der überzeugenden Argumente.  Es ist dieses Schwert, das die Herzen und Köpfe der Menschen erobert.  Der Qur´an sagt in diesem Zusammenhang:

“Rufe zum Weg deines Herrn mit Weisheit und schöner Ermahnung auf, und streite mit ihnen auf die beste Art.”  (Quran 16:125)

Die Fakten sprechen für sich selbst

·      Indonesien ist das Land, das die größte Zahl von Muslimen auf der Welt enthält und die Mehrheit der Bevölkerung Malaysias sind Muslime.  Aber keine muslimische Armee ist jemals nach Indonesien oder Malaysia gekommen.  Es ist eine feststehende historische Tatsache, dass Indonesien den Islam nicht aufgrund eines Krieges angenommen hat, sondern aufgrund seiner moralischen Botschaft.  Trotz des Verschwindens der islamischen Regierung in vielen Regionen, die sie einst regiert haben, sind ihre Einwohner Muslime geblieben.

Darüber hinaus haben sie die Botschaft des Islam weiter getragen, andere auch zu ihm eingeladen und indem sie dies taten, Schaden, Not und Bedrängnis ertragen.  Dasselbe kann für diejenigen gesagt werden, die in den Regionen Syriens und Jordaniens, Ägypten, Irak, Nord Afrika, Asien, dem Balkan und in Spanien lebten.  Dies zeigt, dass die Auswirkung des Islam auf die Bevölkerung die der moralischen Überzeugung gewesen ist, ganz im Gegensatz zu der Besetzung durch die westlichen Kolonialisten, die letztendlich gezwungen waren, die Länder wieder zu verlassen, deren Völker statt dessen nur Erinnerungen an Leid, Trauer, Unterwerfung und Unterdrückung behielten.

·      Muslime regierten Spanien (Andalusien) ungefähr 800 Jahre lang.  Während dieser Zeit genossen Christen und Juden die Freiheit, ihre Religionen auszuüben, und dies ist eine wohl dokumentierte Tatsache.

·      Christliche und jüdische Minderheiten haben in den muslimischen Ländern des Mittleren Ostens jahrhundertelang überlebt.  Länder wie Ägypten, Marokko, Palästina, Libanon, Syrien und Jordanien haben alle bedeutende christliche und jüdische Bevölkerungen.

·      Muslime beherrschten Indien über tausend Jahre lang und daher hätten sie die Macht besessen, jeden einzelnen Nicht-Muslim Indiens zur Annahme des Islam zu zwingen, aber das taten sie nicht, und so sind mehr als 80% der indischen Bevölkerung nicht-muslimisch geblieben.

·      Ähnlich verbreitete sich der Islam schnell an der afrikanischen Ostküste.  Und auch hier hat nie eine muslimische Armee den Boden betreten.

·      Ein Artikel im Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, Jahrbuch 1986, gibt die Statistiken von Wachstum der Hauptreligionen anhand ihrer Prozente in dem halben Jahrhundert von 1934 bis 1984 wieder.  Dieser Artikel erschien ebenfalls im Plain Truth Magazin.  An erster Stelle stand der Islam mit einem wachstum von 235%, während das Christentum um 47% angestiegen war.  Während dieser Periode von 50 Jahren hat es keine “Islamische Eroberung” gegeben, also hat sich der Islam auf außerordentliche Art verbreitet.

·      Heute ist der Islam die am schnellsten wachsende Religion in Amerika und Europa.  In diesen Ländern sind die Muslime eine Minderheit.  Das einzige Schwert in ihrem Besitz ist das Schwert der Wahrheit.  Es ist dieses Schwert, das Tausende zu Islam konvertieren lässt.

·      Das islamische Gesetz beschützt den privilegierten Status von Minderheiten, und das ist der Grund, aus dem nicht-muslimische Gebetsstätten auf der ganzen islamischen Welt erblühten.  Das islamische Gesetz gestattet nicht-muslimischen Minderheiten, ihre eigenen Gerichtshöfe einzurichten, die das Familienrecht, das diese Minderheiten betrifft, durchsetzen.  Das Leben und das Eigentum aller Bürger im islamischen Staat werden als heilig betrachtet, seien es Muslime oder nicht.

Schlussfolgerung

Es ist deutlich, dass der Islam nicht mit dem Schwert verbreitet wurde.  Das „Schwert des Islam“ hat nicht alle nicht-muslimischen Minderheiten in muslimischen Staaten konvertiert.  In Indien, wo Muslime mehr als 800 Jahre geherrscht hatten, sind sie noch immer eine Minderheit.  In der U.S.A. ist der Islam die am schnellsten wachsende Religion und besitzt über sechs Millionen Anhänger.

In seinem Buch The World’s Religions, diskutiert Huston Smith, wie der Prophet Muhammad den Juden und Christen Religionsfreiheit unter der muslimischen Herrschaft garantiert hat.

Der Prophet hat ein Dokument erstellt, in dem er festlegte, dass Juden und Christen “vor jeglichen Beleidigungen und Schäden beschützt werden sollten;  sie sollten die gleiche Recht wie unsere eigenen Leute auf Hilfe und gute Dienste genießen” und weiter: “sie sollten ihre Religion genauso frei wie die Muslime ausüben können. ”[2]

Smith betont, dass Muslime dieses Dokument als die erste Charta der Gewissensfreiheit in der Geschichte der Menschheit und als maßgebliches Modell für jeden weiteren muslimischen Staat betrachten.

---

Footnotes:

[1] In seinem Buch: Islam at the Crossroads, S.8.

[2] Zitiert in The World’s Religions von Huston Smith, Harper Collins, 1991, S. 256