Political cartoon - from an Arab Newspaper

This is a very telling cartoon: no matter how unhappy Arab people are, their 'official' government-controlled media paint a happy picture. I am not sure whom the media are trying to kid. It is unlikely any one will believe them anyway except their own dictators, if they care to pay attention to their own mouthpiece media outlets - the media that tells them exactly what they want to here.

But the sad story does not stop there. This very cartoon is a symptom of the same disease it is criticizing. .

The words in Arabic script read 'Hamas' on the painter's shirt, and 'Gaza' on the shirt of the unhappy broken arm 'model'. And while very few will dispute the validity of the statement made by the cartoon regarding Gaza, the cartoon is published in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (Arabic for: The Middle East), which is published in London under Saudi auspices.

That London based newspaper is also the mouthpiece of the Saudi government, and would not publish any criticism of the Saudi government or of other Arab governments. But since Hamas has no reach outside the few square miles that make the Gaza strip, Al-Sharq Al-Awsat has the 'guts' to criticize them.

Knowing that makes me, sadly, feel that the cartoon is a little 'funnier' than it really is.

Khaled

Other post with cartoons about the middle east can also be checked here:

• The Middle East: A place with a lot of laughs, very bitter laughs

Extremophobia: The hate that may save the world

Just in case anyone thinks that I am picking on Muslim extremists exclusively - in view of many of my previous posts - I want to assure everyone that I am an 'equal-opportunity' extremophobe (just remember that I am the first to coin that term).

Fundamentalists come in all religious (and secular) flavors. They all flavors have several common characteristics

• they have an unyielding belief that they - personally - are absolutely right all the time
  
• they believe 'the others' are always wrong all the time
• they are entitled to better treatment and more secure rights than anybody else, just because they are who they are
  
• they believe that their goals are always so legitimate and pure that any and all means are justified achieving them
• critical thinking for them only mean criticizing members and ideology of the 'other team'
  
• and of course their understanding of their own ideology is the only accepted gold standard for justice, truth and even humanity.

Over the years I have met, known, read about and listen to many extreme fundamentalists: Muslims, Jewish, Christians and secular. They always shared many if not all the characteristics I mentioned before.

When I read about or listen to Jewish extremists like Meier Kahane, Dov Lior or Avigdor Lieberman I am always amazed that I feel I am in the presence of one of their archenemies, the Muslim extremists. When I hear the words of John Hagee, Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell I go through a subconscious 'search and replace' mode - substituting Muslim Jargon for Christian Jargon - and right away the logic and conclusions sound like they could be part of a fundamentalist Muslim cleric anywhere in the world.

It does not take a lot of brains to see how racists, ultra-nationalists. and xenophobes also seem to fall very comfortably with the group that satisfies the above-mentioned criteria.

They, all, seem to have their brains frozen in time at a stage of late childhood and early teenage before the switch for concrete to abstract thinking takes place. Unfortunately, their means and influence on half-brained followers is usually more extensive than what their extremist infantile understanding of the world.

Hating extremists, or more precisely hating their way of thinking and dirty means of achieving their goals, should unite the rest of us. It is a lot easier for us to hate 'the extremists of the others', but we will not rid the world of their influence until with equally hate the extremists of our own kind. They are equally dangerous and moreover, they are more in symbiosis with other extremist that with moderates of their own kind.

Moderates of the world unite - You will lose nothing but your extremists.

Khaled

A window into Jewish Extremist-stan (aka, West Bank settlements)

The Israeli paper Haaretz is generally representative of the more moderate Israelis. Many of its journalist are very analytical and frequently critical of the dark side of the Israeli society, from occupation to daily humiliation of the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs.
Yesterday I read two brief articles with accompanying videos that are worth sharing. so here they are, with some excerpts to give a taste of the articles. Please read the articles and watch the videos to get the full picture.

Hebron settler mob caught on video clashing with IDF troops

During the clashes that erupted early Thursday, some settlers began to attack Palestinian locals while others wounded an IDF soldier by pouring turpentine on him as he tried to stop them from throwing stones at Palestinians.

Settlers spray 'Mohammed Pig' on walls of mosque
The settlers also scribbled graffiti around Hebron, including spraying 'Mohammed Pig' on the walls of a local mosque and on Palestinian homes nearby

An IDF spokesman said settlers also vandalized a cemetery near the mosque. Solders were "working to remove the graffiti and repair the damage" to the mosque and a cemetery, the spokesman said.

Prof. Avi Shlaim: Settlements turned Israel into apartheid state

British-Israeli Professor Avi Shlaim joined a handful of academics in London earlier this month to debate the future of Zionism, in a panel entitled "Israel at 60: What happened to the Zionist dream?"

... He continues, he said, to believe in Israel's legitimacy to exist within its pre-1967 borders, but "rejects uncompromisingly the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line."

In his talk, entitled "Obsession with Territory Post-1967," Shlaim blasts the settlements, which he says have turned Israel into an apartheid state, as the primary source of failure for peace efforts with the Palestinians.

Israel must give up land, he says, not just as a concession to the Palestinians, but because "a people that oppresses another cannot itself remain free."

Khaled

Former Zawahiri Imam denounces Zawahiri and Qaida ideology

It is interesting to read what one of Zawahiri's former Imams has said recently about him here.
This statement was made by a Sayed Imam, founder and first senior religious authority[mufti] of the former terrorist Jihad organization in Egypt, with which Zawahiri had strong association before escaping Egypt to Afghanistan. The statement is part of a book published by the former Egyptian Islamic Jihad leader in a new book as a 'revision' of the ideology that he helped establish and teach over 20 years ago.

In summary, he is accusing Zawahiri of being a dishonorable liar who lost competency even to testify in Islamic court. In Islam, this is as close as you get to Catholic excommunication in.
An excerpt in Arabic follows:

أن الظواهرى كذاب، والكذاب فاجر لقول النبى [: «إن الكذب فجور» رواه مسلم، والكذب وشهادة الزور من أكبر الكبائر وهى الفسوق، فالكذاب فاسق فاجر وهذا لا يُقبل قوله فى دين الله تعالى ولا يحل لمسلم أن ينقل عنه شيئًا من علم الدين، لقول الله تعالى: {يأيها الذين آمنوا إن جاءكم فاسق بنبأ فتبينوا...} «الحجرات:٦».

وقد أردت أن أوضح هذا للناس قبل الرد عليه: وهو أن قوله مردود وإن قال حقًا لكونه ساقط العدالة مردود الرواية والشهادة، فكيف إذا جمع مع هذا قول الباطل والمغالطة فى الأحكام الفقهية التى شحن بها كتابه «التبرئة» لينصر مذهبهم الفاسد فى الإسراف فى القتل بالجملة؟.

This is my quick translation:

"Zawahiri is a liar. Liars are wicked people as the Prophet said "Lying is iniquity"- as narrated in the book of Muslim. Lying and perjury are of the major sins [in Islam, i.e., mortal sins, in Christian jargon]. A Liar is iniquitous perverted transgressor, and he who does that has no valid testimony in religion. Other Muslims should not use such a person as a religious resource [i.e., religious authority]".

Then the author, Sayer Imam, makes a reference to the relevant Quran verse which follows.

"O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done."

Chapter 46, verse 6

The former Jihadist Mufti goes on to state that:

[Zawahiri] has loaded his book with false arguments and falsification of religious edicts to support their [i.e., the Jihadists] corrupt ideology of excessive and mass murder.

Too bad it took that 'Mufti' 20 years and the lives and blood of thousands to realize that.

But again, better late than never.

Khaled

Links:

Very little (that I could find anyway) has be published in English about these 'revisions by former ideologue of Al-Qaeda and AL-Jihad terrorist group. I will add English language references and links in English as I come across them.

• Al-Jihad's Revisions Scare Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri - Almasri
  
• Al-Qaeda: Egypt faked Islamic 'revision' - USA Today
• Audio: Al-Qaeda deputy blasts Annapolis talks - USA Today
  

Zawahiri: The Idiot-in-Command - or is it 'second in-Command'

Ayman Zawahiri and his elk have been a spot of shame for Muslims for many years. their poison spreads far and wide: from killing innocent peoples, to tarnishing Islam with fanatic statements, to undermining any glimpse of hope in peaceful reconciliation in many hot spots in the worlds. That criminal, his boss - Bin Laden - and the half-brained few thousands of their followers represent the worst in mankind, not only in Muslims.

They, like all fundamentalist, never fail to prove the hateful and exclusive nature of their distorted beliefs. Their sense of being the official spokesmen for God leads them to utter stupidities and lies without blinking, insult others with no sense of shame, and do most evil things with clear conscience, thinking that God speaks in their words, and executes by their hands. In other words, they behave as if they are God incarnate.

The latest 'pearl' of the idiot in hiding was to stage a racial attack on our President-Elect Barack Obama. According to recorded voice message from Zawahiri, the new administration that has yet to take office, has proven a failure and a disappointment to the Zawahiri (not that disappointing Zawahiri is a bad thing in my opinion).

Addressing Obama, the Qaida terrorist no.2 said:

"And in you [Obama] and in Colin Powell, Rice and your likes, the words of Malcolm X (may Allah have mercy on him) concerning "House Negroes" are confirmed."

The Arabic text actually translates as "house slaves" not "House Negroes".

If you care to read the rest of the rant you can find it here in English, and some of it here in Arabic.
Zawahiri tries to pander to "honorable black Americans" conveniently ignoring that Obama was elected with the approval of over 93% of honorable Black Americans, approval of almost 90% of Muslim Americans and approval of the majority of all Americans, regardless or their race.
But like fundamentalist from all religions: Zawahiri knows what is best of us. At least he thinks so.
Yet, his vast knowledge of what is good for Mankind did not extend to cover what the Quran enjoins Muslims to do in arguments and negotiations.

وَلَا تُجَادِلُوا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْهُمْ وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِالَّذِي أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَأُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ وَإِلَهُنَا وَإِلَهُكُمْ وَاحِدٌ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ

"And do not argue with the followers of earlier revelation otherwise than in a most kindly manner - unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing 'and are therefore not accessible to friendly argument' - and say: 'We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed from on high upon you: for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto Him that We [all] surrender ourselves.'"

Chapter 29, verse 46

He also conveniently ignores the verse ordering Muslims to repel the evil by paying back with deed of good nature

وَلَا تَسْتَوِي الْحَسَنَةُ وَلَا السَّيِّئَةُ ادْفَعْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ فَإِذَا الَّذِي بَيْنَكَ وَبَيْنَهُ عَدَاوَةٌ كَأَنَّهُ وَلِيٌّ حَمِيمٌ

"But [since] good and evil cannot be equal, repel thou [evil] with something that is better - and lo! he between whom and thyself was enmity [may then become] as though he had [always] been close [unto thee], a true friend!"

Chapter 41, verse 34

And if he ignored the Quran, then I do not expect him to remember the Prophet's manners in dealing with his contemporary leaders and People of the Book (Christian and Jews) in general. He does not even remember that Islam - from the day of its inception - was very clear that ethnicity, lineages, and skin color have no place in a decent argument, and should definitely not be used as a mean to insult anyone.

If there is still any brain-dead Muslims anywhere who saw any redeemable value in criminals like Zawahiri, Bin Laden and their gang: please wake up. These so-called Muslims betrayed us and betrayed Islam before they betrayed anybody else.

Khaled

Other Links:

• American Muslims overwhelmingly voted Democratic - Newsweek
  
• And here is the Council on Islamic American Relations (CAIR) on the Zawahiri released audio: CAIR- Zawahri Does Not Speak for Muslims
• Al-Qaida No. 2 insults Obama with racial epithet - Associated Press
• Also read what a former Zawahiri Imam said about him here.

Success has a million fathers

One day after the Presidential Elections 2008, American civil rights activist, former U.S. congressman and mayor of Atlanta Andrew Young was on Comedy Central's Colbert Report. He made a mild joke about Obama not being black, but rather Afro-Asian-European-Latin in origin. Considering how diverse the Obama supporter are, and how they felt close to the President-Elect as if he were one of them, the joke was tasteful and meaningful.

But I bet he was not expecting who else will be claiming Obama as their own on Haaretz Online yesterday.

I had to laugh when I looked at the following articles next to each other.

Click on the title if you want to read the full article.

Khaled

Links

• Some Chicago Jews say Obama is actually the 'first Jewish president' - Haaretz

• Galilee Bedouin claim Obama as lost member of tribe - Haaretz

American Muslims and the political process - A follow up to 'Is voting a religious duty?'

A commenter on a previous post about the importance of voting took exception with my feeling that voting is a religious duty. I may frequently assume that what is obvious to me must be obvious to others, but this is not always the case. So, I took the opportunity to express in some detail my sense of the necessity of participate in the American political process and the obstacles American Muslims face trying to be part of the political scene (not all issues will be raised in this posting).

A large number of American Muslims are transplanted from other societies. Early generations of immigrants tend to avoid political involvement in their adopted communities for many reasons, and under many pretenses. Their focus is usually on establishing sound economic foundations for their offspring.

Many also tend to be 'non-engaging' with their new communities for fear of losing their culture. Such desire for non-engagement plagues even some Muslims who are no longer immigrants or first generation American Muslims.

Other Muslims also like to cite their reason for non-participation in politics to be that it is important to hear explicit approval from the different Sheiks, Imams, etc, before getting involved. They also take the lack of repeated and explicit opinions on political American issues by most Muslim clergy to reflect that something is wrong with being part of the American political system.
I do not agree with these assumptions and reasoning, so I will state my case.

I doubt anyone would disagree with the fact that it is my religious duty as a Muslim to do what I believe to be beneficial to my community, Muslims and non-Muslims.

I doubt many would disagree that being part of a society is a choice that comes with some obligations. Citizenship entitles you to some benefits that you should take advantage of only if you agree - implicitly at least - to be in a social contract with the society. You are obliged to pay taxes, and defend the society if it is endangered. You are also in a contract to change the society only in the manners accepted by that society, and out of desire to benefit the society - your society - and not out of hatred for it. If someone does not feel such obligation to their society of citizenship, then they are not good citizens. And for them to be honest, they should strive to find another society to be belong to. And for the immigrants amongst you, do you remember the citizenship ceremony and the citizenship oath you took?

The American society agreed to govern itself in a public and participatory manner.

• Those who have ideas to change and improve the society, i.e. candidates, put their thoughts forward.
  
• The others , i.e., voters, make a 'judgment call' or better yet 'an educated guess' as to whether the plans are possible to implement, will indeed be useful, and whether the candidates seem honest enough to be trusted implementing their proposed plans.
  
• The America society then asks its members to 'give a testimony' as to which candidate they believe is better for our society.

This 'testimony' is represented in your vote.
If I think of myself as a citizen of this country, and as a responsible Muslim; if I have thoughts and feelings about the proposed changes put forward by different political candidates; and if I know in my heart that the proposals will have an impact - positive or negative - on American Muslims, American non-Muslims, non American Muslims and the rest of the world, THEN it is my religious duty to testify. It is my religious duty to vote.

As for religious opinion by Muslim scholars: there are many who have absolutely no problems with voting and political participation. Still, I do not need their approval to feel the way I feel about my civic duties, and my religious duty to my community. Islam is not Catholicism.

Of course, it will be great if our clergy -- and I am using the term loosely, as there is no clergy in the literal sense of the word in Islam -- put their minds together in public forums and engage in lively and free discussion with their communities and outside their communities but that, unfortunately, is just not part of 'our culture'.

We need them to go outside their immediate mosque communities, reach out to Muslims and non-Muslims outside the close circle of their followers, write Op-Eds and publish it on local and national media with what they feel is an Islamic religious opinion that relates to our Muslim community and American society issues.

By doing these things, their knowledge will have the impact that they hope for on all of us; Muslims and non-Muslims. An they would be fulfilling their roles as thought leaders in their communities.

But even then, if we were to wait for a consensus amongst them, we will have to wait forever. So far, we cannot even agree on starting Ramadan, the month of fasting, together or to cerebrate 2 days a year of Islamic feasts together.

Khaled

Voting as a religious duty for Muslims

Is voting a religious duty?
My simple answer to that is a resounding YES.
No matter whether your religion is a minority religion or a majority religion. Voting, to me, is like being asked to tell the truth, as you believe it is, in a court of law. If you are asked to testify, you are supposed to be there giving your testimony.
One of many concerns about the state of the Muslim communities that I lived in in the US, is that political activism, and even political participation, is looked at with some suspicion. There is always that cloud of uncertainty whether it is OK or not - religiously speaking.
Recently, a stupid email was circulated to many St. Louis Muslims by a fringe - and in my opinion, lunatic - group making a bold statement that voting is Haram, i.e., strongly prohibited on religious basis.
What a stupid idea, and what kind of a stupid group spreads an idea like that?
To my joy, the Friday sermon given my Imam Mihajuddin Ahmed in the Weidman Mosque a little over a week ago, brought the voting issue to the forefront in the largest weekly gathering of Muslims in St. Louis.
I do not have the transcript of the sermon, but from the many friends that attended it - and were euphoric about its content and message - the sermon highlighted that it is NOT religiously forbidden to vote. He actually encouraged Muslims to vote, stressing that they need to learn about all the issues, weigh both the likely benefits and possible harms - to both the Muslim community as well as the American society as a whole - resulting from the success of one or the other parties or candidates. Then, they need to vote their conscience. He also encouraged them NOT to be 'one-issue voters'.
It is difficult to overestimate the impact of statements like that by the most significant religious figure in St. Louis Muslim community.
Traditionally, many of the Friday sermons, shy away from 'iffy' subjects. I am happy that Imam Minhajuddin broke away from that tradition. I am praying that all those who are in a position of giving Friday sermons make similar efforts to awaken the spirit political participation, activism and volunteerism in the Muslim community. Muslim will not have a real impact in the USA until they are part of the political system.
As I mentioned to a group of friends in an email "one cannot be neutral in political elections. You may not agree with one side one hundred percent. But if you do not vote, you are automatically voting for the party or candidate that you think is more harmful."

Not voting for whom you think is the least harmful, is an automatic vote for the more harmful.

Do not kid yourself. There is not way to stay neutral. Whether you go to your voting precinct and cast a ballot or not, you are voting.
Khaled