Ramanisblog

Tag: Muslim

  • Islam’s Woman Problem.

    A Religious Text is to be viewed in the context it was written,nothing more, nothing less.

    Islam has had a woman problem from the beginning. One of the pillars of radical ( some would say “true”) Islam is the subjugation of  women.  Perhaps you got the left-wing public school version of Islam, about how Mohammed pioneered the women’s liberation movement. But this was a man who, at the age of 52, consummated his marriage to a 9 year old girl. Today, we call that first degree criminal sexual conduct. And the continued control and dehumanization of women remains so central to the power of radical Islam that women who resist it are often beaten or killed.

    But Islam has a new “woman problem.”  And it’s a media problem. With the brutal sexual assault and beating of CBS News reporter Lara Logan by Egyptian men, and revelations last month about Pakistani gangs preying on white girls in Britain, the western media has been dragged into an issue it should have been fully exploring long ago, and that is the pattern of sexual abuse and violence against women by Muslim men.

    National Review’s Andrew McCarthy writes that sexual violence against non-Muslim women is “perpetrated by Islamic supremacists acting on a sense of entitlement derived from their scriptures, fueled by the rage of their jihad, and enabled by the deafening silence of the media.”

    Islam expert Robert Spencer details how rape and the sexual abuse of non-Muslim women is central to Islam. He writes, “After one successful battle, Muhammad tells his men, “Go and take any slave girl.” He took one for himself also. After the notorious massacre of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe, he did it again.”

    Spencer adds that, “the Islamic legal manual ‘Umdat al-Salik, which carries the endorsement of (Egypt’s) Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, stipulates: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” Why? So that they are free to become the concubines of their captors.”

    Last month politically correct Britain was rocked when a Labor Party Parliament Member, Jack Straw—he’s no right-winger—publicly accused British Pakistani gangs of preying on white girls because they are seen as ‘easy meat’.

    British columnist Melanie Philips writes that the problem in Britain is more serious and widespread than described by Straw, and that, “Police operations going back to 1996 have revealed a disturbingly similar pattern of collective abuse involving small groups of Muslim men committing a particular type of sexual crime. This has typically involved abducting, raping or otherwise sexually attacking hundreds of mainly white girls aged 11 to 16, as well as enslaving them through alcohol and drugs and grooming them for sex.”

    McCarthy writes that Muslim men learn from the Koran and Islamic Sharia law that women are less than fully human and mere toys for sexual gratification:

    As documented in “Sharia Law for Non-Muslims,” a study published by the Center for the Study of Political Islam, Mohammed declared that women are inferior to men in both intelligence and religious devotion (Bukhari hadith 1.6.301), and that women will make up most of those condemned to Hell. (Bukahri 7.62.132). Sexual abuse is encouraged not only by hadith but…by sharia standards…

    I have interviewed Muslims and former Muslims from many different nations and yes, there are seemingly “normal” Muslim families where women appear to have equal rights. But that should not divert our attention from what the Koran and Hadith teach Muslim men about women, and the terrible consequences of that.

    http://canaryinthecoalmine.typepad.com/my-blog/2011/02/islams-woman-problem.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=canaryncoalmine#

    Related:

    Women in Islam.

    The study of women in Islam investigates the role of women within the religion of Islam.[1] The complex relationship between women and Islam is defined by both Islamic texts and the history and culture of theMuslim world.[2] While men and women have different roles within Islam, many argue that the Qur’an makes it clear that they are equal.[3][4][5]

    Sharia (Islamic law) provides for complementarianism,[6] differences between women’s and men’s roles, rights, and obligations. Majority Muslim countries give women varying degrees of rights with regards tomarriage, divorce, civil rights, legal status, dress code, and education based on different interpretations. Scholars and other commentators vary as to whether they are just and whether they are a correct interpretation of religious imperatives. Conservatives argue that differences between men and women are due to different status, while liberal Muslims, Muslim feminists, and others argue in favor of other interpretations. Some women have achieved high political office in Muslim majority states.

    Historically, women played an important role in the foundation of many Islamic educational institutions, such as Fatima al-Fihri‘s founding of the University of Al Karaouine in 859 CE. This continued through to the Ayyubid dynasty in the 12th and 13th centuries, when 160 mosquesand madrasahs were established in Damascus, 26 of which were funded by women through the Waqf (charitable trust or trust law) system. Half of all the royal patrons for these institutions were also women.[26]

    According to the Sunni scholar Ibn Asakir in the 12th century, there were various opportunities for female education in what is known as themedieval Islamic world. He writes that women could study, earn ijazahs (academic degrees), and qualify as scholars (ulamā’) and teachers. This was especially the case for learned and scholarly families, who wanted to ensure the highest possible education for both their sons and daughters.[27] Ibn Asakir had himself studied under 80 different female teachers in his time. In nineteenth-century West Africa, Nana Asma’uwas a leading Islamic scholar, poet, teacher and an exceptionally prolific Muslim female writer who wrote more than 60 works. Female education in the Islamic world was inspired by Muhammad’s wives: Khadijah, a successful businesswoman, and Aisha, a renowned hadith scholar and military leader. The education allowed was often restricted to religious instruction. According to a hadith attributed toMuhammad, he praised the women of Medina because of their desire for religious knowledge:[28]

    “How splendid were the women of the ansar; shame did not prevent them from becoming learned in the faith.”

    While it was not common for women to enroll as students in formal classes, it was common for women to attend informal lectures and study sessions at mosques, madrassas and other public places. For example, the attendance of women at the Fatimid “sessions of wisdom” (majālis al-ḥikma) was noted by various historians including Ibn al-Tuwayr and al-Muṣabbiḥī.[29] Similarly, although unusual in 15th-centuryIran, both women and men were in attendance at the intellectual gatherings of the Ismailis where women were addressed directly by theImam.[30]

    While women accounted for no more than one percent of Islamic scholars prior to the 12th century, there was a large increase of female scholars after this. In the 15th century, Al-Sakhawi devotes an entire volume of his 12-volume biographical dictionary Daw al-lami to female scholars, giving information on 1,075 of them.[31]

    Recently there has been several female Muslim scholars including Sebeca Zahra Hussain who is a prominent female scholar from the Sunni sect.

    Female employment

    The labor force in the Caliphate were employed from diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds, while both men and women were involved in diverse occupations and economic activities.[32] Women were employed in a wide range of commercial activities and diverse occupations[33]in the primary sector (as farmers, for example), secondary sector (as construction workers, dyers, spinners, etc.) and tertiary sector (asinvestors, doctors, nurses, presidents of guilds, brokers, peddlers, lenders, scholars, etc.).[34] Muslim women also held a monopoly over certain branches of the textile industry,[33] the largest and most specialized and market-oriented industry at the time, in occupations such asspinning, dyeing, and embroidery. In comparison, female property rights and wage labour were relatively uncommon in Europe until theIndustrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries.[35]

    In the 12th century, the famous Islamic philosopher and qadi (judge) Ibn Rushd, known to the West as Averroes, claimed that women were equal to men in all respects and possessed equal capacities to shine in peace and in war, citing examples of female warriors among theArabs, Greeks and Africans to support his case.[36] In early Muslim history, examples of notable female Muslims who fought during theMuslim conquests and Fitna (civil wars) as soldiers or generals included Nusaybah Bint k’ab Al Maziniyyah[37] a.k.a. Umm Amarah, Aisha,[38] Kahula and Wafeira.[39]

    A unique feature of medieval Muslim hospitals was the role of female staff, who were rarely employed in hospitals elsewhere in the world. Medieval Muslim hospitals commonly employed female nurses. Muslim hospitals were also the first to employ female physicians, the most famous being two female physicians from the Banu Zuhr family who served the Almohad ruler Abu Yusuf Ya’qub al-Mansur in the 12th century.[40] This was necessary due to the segregation between male and female patients in Islamic hospitals. Later in the 15th century, female surgeons were illustrated for the first time in Şerafeddin Sabuncuoğlu‘s Cerrahiyyetu’l-Haniyye (Imperial Surgery).[41]

    Marriage and divorce

    See also: Talaq

    Girl with headcovering.

    In contrast to the Western world where divorce was relatively uncommon until modern times, and in contrast to the low rates of divorce in the modern Middle East, divorce was a more common occurrence in certain states of the late medieval Muslim world. In the Mamluk Sultanate and Ottoman Empire, the rate of divorce was higher than it is today in the modern Middle East.[42]

    In medieval Egypt, Al-Sakhawi recorded the marital history of 500 women, the largest sample of married women in the Middle Ages, and found that at least a third of all women in the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and Syria married more than once, with many marrying three or more times. According to Al-Sakhawi, as many as three out of ten marriages in 15th century Cairo ended in divorce.[43] In the early 20th century, some villages in western Java and the Malay peninsula had divorce rates as high as 70%.[42]

    Gender roles

    Main article: Gender roles in Islam

    The Quran expresses two main views on the role of women. It both stresses the equality of women and men before God in terms of their religious duties (i.e. belief in God and his messenger, praying, fasting, paying zakat (charity), making hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca/ Medina)) and places them “under” the care of men (i.e. men are financially responsible for their wives). In one place it states: “Men are the maintainers and protectors of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women).” The Quran explains that men and women are equal in creation and in the afterlife. Surah an-Nisa’ 4:1 states that men and women are created from a single soul (nafs wahidah). One person does not come before the other, one is not superior to the other, and one is not the derivative of the other. A woman is not created for the purpose of a man. Rather, they are both created for the mutual benefit of each other.[Qur’an 4:34]

    Rape

    See also: Zina (Arabic)

    The majority of Muslim scholars believe that a woman should not be punished for having been coerced into having sex.[62] According to aSunni hadith, the punishment for committing rape is death, there is no blame attached to the victim.[63][64]

    Honor killings

    An honour killing[65] (also called a customary killing) is the murder of a family or clan member by one or more fellow (mostly male) family members, in which the perpetrators (and potentially the wider community) believe the victim to have brought dishonour upon the family, clan, or community. The Qur’an does not mention honor killings, and honor killings are a cultural practice which is neither exclusive to, nor universal within, the Islamic world.

    Who may be married?

    Marriage customs vary in Muslim dominated countries. Cultural customs are sometimes implemented under the cover of Islam. However Islamic law allows polygamy under some conditions.

    According to Islamic law (sharia), marriage cannot be forced.[46][66

    Behaviour within marriage

    The Qur’an considers the love between men and women to be a Sign of God.[Qur’an 30:21] Husbands are asked to be kind to their wives and wives are asked to be kind to their husbands. The Qur’an also encourages discussion and mutual agreement in family decisions.[46]

    Muslim scholars have adopted differing interpretations of An-Nisa, 34, a Sura of the Qur’an. In the event where a woman rebels against her husband, Muslim scholars disagree on what is prescribed by the Sura. According to some interpretations, it is permissible for the man to then lightly beat his spouse. However, this is disputed by many scholars who contend that the expression used alludes to temporary physical separation.[73]

    Sexuality

    Some hold that Islam enjoins sexual pleasure within marriage; see Asra Nomani‘s polemic “Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Bedroom”. Some examples of this influence are set out below.

    Qur’an 4:24— Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

    Qur’an 23:1-6—The Believers must (eventually) win through—those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex; except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess—for (in their case) they are free from blame.

    Qur’an 33:50—O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee . . .

    Qur’an 70:22-30—Not so those devoted to Prayer—those who remain steadfast to their prayer; and those in whose wealth is a recognized right for the (needy) who asks and him who is prevented (for some reason from asking); and those who hold to the truth of the Day of Judgement; and those who fear the displeasure of their Lord—for their Lord’s displeasure is the opposite of Peace and Tranquillity—and those who guard their chastity, except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess—for (then) they are not to be blamed.

    A high value is placed on female chastity (not to be confused with celibacy). To protect women from accusations of unchaste behaviour, the scripture lays down severe punishments towards those who make false allegations about a woman’s chastity. However, in some societies, an accusation is rarely questioned and the woman who is accused rarely has a chance to defend herself in a fair and just manner. This is often due to the local cultural customs rather than as a direct result of classic Islamic teaching.

    Female genital cutting has been erroneously associated with Islam, but in fact is practiced predominantly in Africa and in certain areas has acquired a religious dimension[74] The factuality of this is disputed though, as a UNICEF study of fourteen African countries found no correlation between religion and prevalence of female genital mutilation.[75] In Mauritania, where “health campaigners estimate that more than 70 percent of Mauritanian girls undergo the partial or total removal of their external genitalia for non-medical reasons”, 34 Islamic scholars signed a fatwa banning the practice in January 2010. Their aim was to prevent people from citing religion as a justification for genital mutilation. The authors cited the work of Islamic legal expert Ibn al-Hajj as support for their assertion that “[s]uch practices were not present in the Maghreb countries over the past centuries”. FGM is “not an instinctive habit, according to the Malkis; therefore, it was abandoned in northern and western regions of the country,” added the authors.[76][77]

    Divorce

    Main article: Talaq

    In Islam, in some circumstances, a woman can initiate a divorce. According to Sharia Law, a woman can file a case in the courts for a divorce in a process called “Khal’a”, meaning “Break up”. However, under most Islamic schools of jurisprudence, both partners must unanimously agree to the divorce in order for it to be granted. To prevent irrational decisions and for the sake of the family’s stability, Islam enjoins that both parties observe a waiting period (of roughly three months) before the divorce is finalised.[78]

    Sharia Law states that divorce has to be confirmed on three separate occasions and not, as is commonly believed, simply three times at once. The first two instances the woman and the man are still in legal marriage. The third occasion of pronouncing divorce in the presence of the woman, the man is no longer legally the husband and therefore has to leave the house. The purpose of this procedure of divorce in Islam is to encourage reconciliation where possible. Even after divorce, the woman should wait three monthly cycles during which her husband remains responsible for her and her children’s welfare and maintenance. He is not permitted to drive her out of the house.[79] This process may leave the woman destitute should her family not take her back or the ex-husband fail to support her and possibly his children.

    After the third pronouncement they are not allowed to get back together as husband and wife, unless first the wife is divorced in another lawful and fully consummated marriage. This rule was made to discourage men from easily using the verbal declaration of divorce by knowing that after the third time there will be no way to return to the wife and thus encourage men’s tolerance and patience.

    Usually, assuming her husband demands a divorce, the divorced wife keeps her mahr (dowry), both the original gift and any supplementary property specified in the marriage contract. She is also given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child’s custody will be settled by the couple or by the courts.

    In actual practice and outside of Islamic judicial theory, a woman’s right to divorce is often extremely limited compared with that of men in theMiddle East.[80] While men can divorce their wives easily, women face many legal and financial obstacles. In practice in most of the Muslim world today divorce can be quite involved as there may be separate secular procedures to follow as well.

    This contentious area of religious practice and tradition is being increasingly challenged by those promoting more liberal interpretations of Islam.

    Dress code

    Question book-new.svg
    		 This section needs additional citations for verification.
    Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(November 2009)
    Main articles: Hijab and Hijab by country

    Hijab is the Qur’anic requirement that Muslims, both male and female, dress and behave modestly. The most important Qur’anic verse relating to hijab is sura 24:31, which says, “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts and not to display their adornment except that which ordinarily appears thereof and to draw their headcovers over their chests and not to display their adornment except to their [maharim]…”

    Sartorial hijab, and the veil in particular, have often been viewed by many as a sign of oppression of Muslim women.[88] It has also been the cause of much debate, especially in Europe amid increasing immigration of Muslims;[89] the 2006 United Kingdom debate over veils and the 2004 French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools are two notable examples.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam#Female_education

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Quranic Verses On Violence.

    People have been saying that Islam is a religion of Peace.

    Story:

    The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers.  Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.  Muslims who do not join the fight are called ‘hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

    The Quran:

    Quran (2:191-193) – “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]…and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah.” There is a good case to be made that the textual context of this particular passage is defensive war, even if the historical context was not.  However, there are also two worrisome pieces to this verse.  The first is that the killing of others is authorized in the event of “persecution” (a qualification that is ambiguous at best).  The second is that fighting may persist until “religion is for Allah.”  The example set by Muhammad is not reassuring.

     

    Quran (2:244) – “Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things.”

     

    Quran (2:216) – “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.” Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time.  From the Hadith, we know that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding caravans with this verse.

     

    Quran (3:56) – “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help.”

     

    Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority”. This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be ‘joining companions to Allah’).

     

    Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.” The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter.  These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah.  Here is the theological basis for today’s suicide bombers.

     

    Quran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”

     

    Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”

     

    Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-” This passage criticizes “peaceful” Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah’s eyes.  It also demolishes the modern myth that “Jihad” doesn’t mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle.  Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption.  (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man’s protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

     

    Quran (4:104) – “And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain…” Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

     

    Quran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”

     

    Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

     

    Quran (8:15) – “O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey’s end.”

     

    Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah” From the historical context we know that the “persecution” spoken of here was simply the refusal by the Meccans to allow Muhammad to enter their city and perform the Haj.  Other Muslims were able to travel there, just not as an armed group, since Muhammad declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction.  The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad’s intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did).  Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until “religion is only for Allah.”  According to Ibn Ishaq (324), Muhammad justified the violence further by explaining that “Allah must have no rivals.”

    Quran (8:57) – “If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.”

     

    Quran (8:59-60) – “And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.  Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy.”

     

    Quran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.” According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam.  Prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religions Five Pillars.

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

     

     

  • Muslim Group Sue FBI for Surveillance.Why?

    Egypt: Fountain of Ablution, Mosque of Mahomet...
    Image by Brooklyn Museum via Flickr

     

    While it is understandable that Muslims might be hurt over the surveillance of Mosques, they must also understand that  some members of the community pose a threat not only to US but the world as well.

    How does one prevent a Crime of every one says that they should not be under surveillance?

    At this rate, Muslims  might be inclined to say that Muslims must not be questioned by authorities  for anything at all.

    Muslims know their prayer meetings are used to indoctrinate people into Terrorism.

    It was alright at the time of The Prophet when he had to preach(even that is debatable,- so is the pulpit lectures of Christians)

    Better course would be for Muslims, is  to understand that they have vermin amidst them and it is the Duty of a True Muslim to prevent murder and mayhem and ensure that Mosques are not used to indoctrinate people .

    They must be used to teach the preachings of God.

    Surveillance in fact helps Muslims to identify rogue elements in the Community and it helps Islam.

    If ,on the other  hand Muslims feel strongly about surveillance ,they might probably live in unfettered  Freedom to their satisfaction in Libya,Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen and of course Pakistan.


    The American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American-Islamic Relations allege in the lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles, that a paid informant named Keith Monteilh violated the First Amendment rights of hundreds of Muslim worshipers when he performed “indiscriminate surveillance” on “people who were more devout in their religious practice, irrespective of whether any particular individual was believed to be involved in criminal activity.”

    More broadly, targeting mosques and even fervent believers is a sure way for the FBI to alienate moderate, law-abiding Muslims, says Ameena Mirza Qazi, staff attorney of CAIR-Los Angeles.

    “When Muslims perceive that they are viewed as a suspect community by law enforcement or the FBI, it really has a devastating effect on relations between law enforcement authorities and American Muslims,” says CAIR’s Mr. Hooper.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0223/Muslim-group-sues-FBI-over-surveillance-at-California-mosques

    “The FBI should be spending its time and resources investigating actual threats, not spying on every American who happens to worship at a mosque,” said Peter Bibring, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Southern California, which filed the complaint along with the Los Angeles office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/22/AR2011022206975.html?wprss=rss_nation

     

  • A Frenchman’s view of ‘Hindu terrorism’-My reply.


    • Hinduism is different in that it is a way of life at the individual level and not institutionalized .
    • What is needed is faith-of any hue including Atheism.
    • Hinduism has survived because of its flexibility and tolerance.
    • Hinduism has been targeted as also Hindus, but it has renewed itself with vigor.
    • At the same time one should also remember that if you should not identify a religion as terrorist because of the activities of some (as has been stated here),is it not logical that you should extend the courtesy to Islam as well?
    • The difference is that people of Islam, at least most of them, keep quiet with out condemning terrorism.
    • Should Hindus also follow the same path?
    • Hinduism needed none nor does it need any one to defend it;it can, by itself.
    • Best way to defend Hinduism is to study the scriptures and live accordingly.
    • This is the best service we can do to Hinduism.
    • I received the following forward and above are my comments.

    By Francois Gautier

    Is there such a thing as ‘Hindu terrorism’, as the arrest of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur for the Malegaonblasts may tend to prove? Well, I guess I was asked to write this column because I am one of that rare breed of foreign correspondents — a lover of Hindus! A born Frenchman, Catholic-educated and non-Hindu, I do hope I’ll be given some credit for my opinions, which are not the product of my parents’ ideas, my education or my atavism, but garnered from 25 years of reporting in South Asia (for Le Journal de Geneve and Le Figaro).

    In the early 1980s, when I started freelancing in south India, doing photo features on Kalaripayattu, the Ayyappa festival, or the Ayyanars, I slowly realised that the genius of this country lies in its Hindu ethos, in the true spirituality behind Hinduism. The average Hindu you meet in a million villages possesses this simple, innate spirituality and accepts your  diversity, whether you are Christian or Muslim, Jain or Arab, French or Chinese. It is this Hinduness that makes the Indian Christian different from, say, a French Christian, or the Indian Muslim unlike a Saudi Muslim. I also learnt that Hindus not only believed that the divine could manifest itself at different times, under different names, using different scriptures (not to mention the wonderful avatar concept, the perfect answer to 21st century religious strife) but that they had also given refuge to persecuted minorities from across the world—Syrian Christians, Parsis, Jews, Armenians, and today, Tibetans.

    In 3,500 years of existence, Hindus have never militarily invaded another country, never tried to impose their religion on others by force or induced conversions. You cannot find anybody less fundamentalist than a Hindu in the world and it saddens me when I see the Indian and western press equating terrorist groups like SIMI, which blow up innocent civilians, with ordinary, angry Hindus who burn churches without killing anybody. We know also that most of these communal incidents often involve persons from the same groups—often Dalits and tribals—some of who have converted to Christianity and others not. However reprehensible the destruction of Babri Masjid, no Muslim was killed in the process; compare this to the ‘vengeance’ bombings of 1993 in Bombay, which wiped out hundreds of innocents, mostly Hindus. Yet the Babri Masjiddestruction is often described by journalists as the more horrible act of the two. We also remember howSharad Pawar, when he was chief minister of Maharashtra in 1993, lied about a bomb that was supposed to have gone off in a Muslim locality of Bombay.

    I have never been politically correct, but have always written what I have discovered while reporting. Let me then be straightforward about this so-called Hindu terror. Hindus, since the first Arab invasions, have been at the receiving end of terrorism, whether it was by Timur, who killed 1,00,000 Hindus in a single day in 1399, or by the Portuguese Inquisitionwhich crucified Brahmins in Goa. Today, Hindus are still being targeted: there were one million Hindus in the Kashmir valley in 1900; only a few hundred remain, the rest having fled in terror. Blasts after blasts have killed hundreds of innocent Hindus all over India in the last four years. Hindus, the overwhelming majority community of this country, are being made fun of, are despised, are deprived of the most basic facilities for one of their most sacred pilgrimages in Amarnath while their government heavily sponsors the Haj. They see their brothers and sisters converted to Christianity through inducements and financial traps, see a harmless 84-year-old swami and a sadhvi brutally murdered. Their gods are blasphemed. So sometimes, enough is enough.

    At some point, after years or even centuries of submitting like sheep to slaughter, Hindus—whom the Mahatma once gently called cowards—erupt in uncontrolled fury. And it hurts badly. It happened in Gujarat. It happened in Jammu, then in Kandhamal, Mangalore, and Malegaon. It may happen again elsewhere. What should be understood is that this is a spontaneous revolution on the ground, by ordinary Hindus, without any planning from the political leadership. Therefore, the BJP, instead of acting embarrassed, should not disown those who choose other means to let their anguished voices be heard.

    There are about a billion Hindus, one in every six persons on this planet. They form one of the most successful, law-abiding and integrated communities in the world today. Can you call them terrorists?

    Francois Gautier

    • Related:

    For far too long, the enduring response of the Indian establishment to Hindu nationalists has rarely surpassed mild scorn. Their organised violent eruptions across the country – slaughtering Muslims and Christians, destroying their places of worship, cutting open pregnant wombs – never seemed sufficient enough to the state to cast them as a meaningful threat to India’s national security.

    But the recently leaked confession of a repentant Hindu priest, Swami Aseemanand, confirms what India’s security establishment should have uncovered: a series of blasts between 2006 and 2008 were carried out by Hindu outfits. The attacks targeted a predominantly Muslim town and places of Muslim worship elsewhere. Their victims were primarily Muslim. Yet the reflexive reaction of the police was to round up young Muslim men, torture them, extract confessions and……………..

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/jan/19/india-hindu-terrorism-threat

  • 5 Ridiculous Things You Probably Believe About Islam.(?)

    Kaaba at the heart of Mecca. As the night goes...
    Image via Wikipedia

     

    Some facts and explanations seem to be contrived.

    Story:

    If You’re a Muslim Woman, You Have to Wear the Veil

    For instance, in France they have about 3 million Muslim women. French police decided to figure out how many of them wore burqas and/or niqabs and found the number to be … 367.

    Not 367,000, but 367, a number so small that from a statistical point of view, it’s barely enough to register as a margin of error. As for the rest of Europe, the numbers are even more disastrous for the burqa business (for instance, Belgium has 500,000 Muslims, a couple dozen wear the burqa).

    Yes, there are Middle Eastern countries where the veils are required by law (namely Iran and Saudi Arabia) and combined those countries have less than 5 percent of the world’s Muslims. There are actually more Muslim countries that outright ban the wearing of the veils than there are that require them. They can do that because wearing a veil is not required in Islam but is more of a custom, depending on where you live and who’s in charge.

    Our Founding Fathers Would Never Have Tolerated This Muslim Nonsense!

    Even if they were staunch Christians (or deists, whatever), plenty of the Founding Fathers had a healthy admiration for the Muslim faith. Thomas Jefferson, for example, taught himself Arabic using his own copy of the Quran and hosted the first White House Iftar during Ramadan.


    Jefferson believed in celebrating the deliciousness of all world religions.

    John Adams hailed the Islamic prophet Muhammad as one of the great “inquirers after truth.” Benjamin Rush, who was so Christian he wanted a Bible in every school, also said he would rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammad “inculcated upon our youth” than see them grow deprived “of a system of religious principles.” Benjamin Franklin once declared: “Even if the Mufti of Constantinople were to send a missionary to preach Mohammedanism to us, he would find a pulpit at his service.” Even George fucking Washington personally welcomed Muslims to come work for him at Mount Vernon.

    Another possible translation.

    #3.
    “Muslim” Equals “Arab“

    Remember that crazy lady with the Einstein hair who asked John McCain if Barack Obama was an Arab? No? Well, let us refresh your memory:


    The instant John McCain realized that he would never, ever be president.

    We’re willing to bet there’s more than a 20 percent chance this woman meant to say “Muslim” but accidentally said “Arab” because same thing, right? And even if you’re not in the tea party camp, where you’re convinced “Arab” and “Muslim” are interchangeable, you’ve probably operated under a similar assumption: that non-Jewish Middle Eastern people are Muslim and that most Muslims live in the Middle East.

    But actually…

    Only about 20 percent of the entire world’s Muslim population is Arab or North African. For comparison, about 22 percent of the global Christian population is African, yet when somebody says “Christian,” you don’t immediately picture a dude from Africa. Equating “Muslim” with “Arab” makes just as much sense.


    That’d be like associating “Kansas” with “hate-filled douchebags”.

    While we in the West have been conditioned to associate Islam with the Middle East, a whopping 61.9 percent of all Muslims — aka a supermajority — don’t live in the Middle East at all; most Muslims live in the Asia-Pacific region. Indonesia alone is home to more than 200 million Muslims, and the Indian subcontinent has roughly a half-billion Muslims.

    It works the other way, too. For example, if you think being Arab guarantees you being Muslim these days, well, we are sorry to disappoint. As much as 10 percent of the world’s Arab population is Christian (that’s more than 14 million people). That means there are 1 million more Arab Christians than, oh, we don’t know … the world’s entire Jewish population..

    #2.
    Western Cultures Are Far More Humane Than the Bloodthirsty Muslims

    Even before the whole terrorism thing, Islam had a reputation in the West for violence. Part of it has to do with how abruptly Islam was all up in everyone’s face. For instance, while Hinduism took about 1,000 years to spread through India, and Christianity took about 400 years to go from persecuted cult to the state religion of the Roman Empire, Islam went from one guy’s epiphany to the dominant political and religious force in the Middle East and North Africa in about 100 years.

    So a lot of people have reached the conclusion that the religion spread like holy wildfire for one reason: the sword. The next logical leap from this viewpoint is that as a people, Muslims must be violent and barbaric conquerors. Even before 9/11, you saw this portrayal in popular culture all the time:

    But actually…

    Muhammad laid out some pretty progressive rules of warfare, and medieval Muslims out-niced the Christians in battle by a landslide. Especially since Muhammad personally issued “a distinct code of conduct among Islamic warriors” that included:

    • No killing of women, children or innocents — these might include hermits, monks or other religious leaders who were deemed noncombatants;
    • No wanton killing of livestock or other animals;
    • No burning or destruction of trees and orchards; and
    • No destruction of wells.


    And no kicking with cleats on, Jeremy.

    In short, Muhammad wanted his armies to fight like freaking hippies. During the fucking Dark Ages. And they did.

    But the biggest territorial gains were made after Muhammad’s death, right? Maybe that was when Islam earned its bloodthirsty reputation? Not exactly. His successor codified the existing rules and made them the standard for his army. Which probably explains why the Muslim army conquering Europe “exhibited a degree of toleration which puts many Christian nations to shame,” in the words of one expert.


    Plus, they built all sorts of nifty buildings.

    So while Christian crusaders were beheading enemies and tossing their heads like oversized hacky sacks, their Muslim counterparts had a whole honor code that led them to feed the armies of their defeated enemies.

    #1.
    Islam Is Stuck in the Dark Ages

    There are really three big negative stereotypes about Islam — that it hates women, that it’s violent and that it hates any kind of scientific progress. We’ve covered the first two already, but how can you argue against the third? Their governments are based on ancient religious texts! And what diseases has Iran cured?


    You guys could at least take out herpes or something.

    But actually…

    In the same way that not all Christians are Young Earth Creationists, plenty of modern Muslims see room for interpretation in the Quran. In fact, 45 percent of American Muslims in one poll said they see evolution as “the best explanation for the origin of human life on Earth,” which isn’t so shabby, considering only 24 percent of evangelical Christians believed the same. The percentage of Muslims embracing the scientific explanation for the origin of life was about the same as Americans as a whole (48 percent).


    If they only knew how to communicate their views like we do …

    And historically, they have a hell of a track record. Science and math as we know it wouldn’t even exist without Islam. The Islamic Golden Age caused a revolution in virtually every field of human thought, during which they fucking invented algebra — and advanced everything from geography and exploration to the arts, architecture, philosophy, urban development, medicine and health.

    The Muslims actually came pretty damn close to sharing all this brilliance with the truly ass-backward kingdoms of Christian Europe, since the Islamic caliphates blanketed every country they conquered with schools, libraries, public works and the most comprehensive system of social welfare on the planet. In fact, the case has been made that if the caliphates succeeded in conquering all of Europe an Italian Renaissance would have been unnecessary.


    It would have saved us all a lot of dong-staring, too.

    So, there’s that.