Islamic Neology… a Threat to Humanity

Islamic neology, as I define it, is the current trend of political Islam, embracing a mixture of some modern and contemporary ideologies, meant to revive the lost glory of Islamic civilization. It’s a mixture of schools, different in their particularities, but share the same dream of Islamic supremacy in the world. Those are our Islamic politicians, and their religion is Islamic neology.
Islamic neology bears the radical ideology of Alafagani, Hassan Al-bana, Sayid Qutob, Almoudoodi, Muhammad Abdelwahab, Ibn Taimiya, as well as Khumani. It’s the seeds that produced the radical views of today’s Ben laden and Hassan Nasrulla in the cosmic war between God and “evil”.

Giving way to thousands of freelance suicide-bombers, of the 21st century. Most of whom were , and are, Afghan veterans, whom previously acquired expertise in the art of war, applying their brutality on civilians of their own countries, as well as abroad. With utter hate they call “Allaho Akbar”, and with complete relaxation they blow to scattered pieces. They have won paradise, they were reassured of that by the ones whom they pledged a bond of “Bae’as” , politicians had given them the legitimacy of their works by issuing the right fatwas. They soon should meet their 72 Hoor Alains (virgins). And their mothers are ululating happily for having won their tickets to heaven, sent by their martyred sons.

It’s the distorted psychology and male chauvinism of Sayed Qutb, Hassan Al-bana’s student  who went to the United States seeking education, and was shocked by its free society, and ended up in his own people’s jails, masterminding “evil” as the “West” and the “infidels” who gave women equality and personal rights. It’s Khomeini’s shortsightedness to analyze the deficiencies of Willayat Alfaqeeh, and gave way to Ahmadi Najad to blame the second-rate status, economically, militarily , politically, of the umma on the West. As Jason Burke illustrated their mentalities with the mind of a reporter who lived around those people in his book “Al-Qaeda”, “the fault lies with the West and with those Muslims who fail to practice their religion with sufficient discipline and devotion. The bombs are designed to restore the pride of Muslims worldwide. To shame and inspire “faithless” Muslims into greater observance and, by weakening the “Crusaders” and their local allies and proxies, to hasten the eventual return to the golden age of thousands of years ago when the lands of Islam were the world’s leading power”. A feudal war; this is our dilemma of political Islam of today.

In one of the articles of “ Government, as Perceived by Islamic Sects, a Collection of Chosen Documents of the Tenth Conference of United Islam”, under the title “ “Features of Iran’s Islamic Constitution” Shaikh Muhammad Ali Altaskhiri said “ the fourth item of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran says: all civil, penal, financial, economical, cultural, militarily, and political laws and manuals are based on Islamic counterpoise. And this principle has priority over all absolutes and generalizations of the principles and laws mentioned in the constitution, and other laws. And the diagnosis of that is left to the jurisprudence of the Constitution Maintenance Committee.” In other words, it is left to the clerics to decide how to run a 21st century civil country, based on their own interpretation of the holy texts of more than 1400 years.
He also mentioned “in reality, if Islam is practiced in all aspects of life, all economic and political goals will be achieved in its best and greatest form”
It is obvious after more than twenty-nine years of applying share’a in the Islamic Republic of Iran, that neither its economy prospered, nor its politics was able to provide and protect its people, although it had harvested thousands of corpses with its harsh injunctions. And more than that number fleeing to the West, the very “evil” Iran hung its dirty laundry on, seeking justice when their own country failed to provide it.

Iran is just an example; Saudi Arabia went through this neology much earlier, at the hands of Muhammad abdulwahab, and his Salafi follower. Taliban’s rule of Afghanistan is another. And now what is happening throughout the Islamic countries is another version of this revival. All those countries excel in the art of war, revolution, seizing control, yet, they fail to live up to the standards of a civilized state of the 21st century. And more importantly; those were the people who toppled the previous tyrannies and replaced them with sacred and divine tyrannies.

But, why does neology find a fertile ground in the Islamic countries?

Social grievances, post colonialism and corrupt systems of the Semi-Islamic countries gave way to political Islam as the only solution. People who were desperate to improve and attain their immediate needs were an easy prey to be recruited by radicals as their only resort of salvation. Governments’ intervention in other country’s internal affairs, like recent intervention of Saudi Arabia in Afghanistan, Pakistan in Afghanistan and India, and Afghanistan’s Taliban in Pakistan, either by directly providing the ground and training facilities or by affiliating it logistically and financially. Collaborated in one way or another to build this destructive ideology.

Here is a beautiful illustration by Marjane Satrapi in her book “Persepolis” that summarizes some of the grievances that led the Iranian Revolution of the late seventies. She summarized them wittily as:
persepolis.jpg

After a long sleep of 2500 years, the revolution has finally a awakened people.

“2500 years of tyranny and submission” as my father said.

first our own emperors.

Then the Arab invasion from the West.

Followed by the Mongolian from the East

And finally modern imperialism.

And by the way, Iranian revolution started as a protest against the previous Shah, it was not Islamic in any means, although as usual, Islamists climbed the tide.

To be continued

Advertisements

A Woman with Guts

Knowing how much I admire Dr. Wafa Sultan, a friend of mine e-mailed sometimes back, informing me that she will be one of the guests on Aljazeera’s “Alitijah Almuakis” (the opposite direction) program. And I was looking forward to that episode since the subject was the “Danish Cartoons fiasco”, which I have my own opinion about. Remember my old posts? check this, and this.That was my opinion then, and it’s still my opinion now. But I was eager to know what Dr. Wafa had to say.
The timing of the live program did not suit my timing here in the States, so I counseled myself to watch a replay later, since they usually broadcast it the next day. But to my surprise the program was taken off the Net, and this is what I found, translated to my English friends, Aljazeer’a announcement that says::

Aljazeera apologizes to its audience for offending Islam in Alitijah Almuakis (title):
In reference to Alitijah Almuakis that was aired last night, 4/3/2008, Aljazeera apologizes deeply for the participant’s offence (Dr. Wafa Sultan) to the religion of Islam and its divine beliefs.
My bad luck, but that raised my curiosity even more,
I checked Youtube to see if it was loaded, I know many of its geeksquads would happily do that, and luckily; I found these two clips:


Now, from what I saw in those two clips, Dr. Wafa Sultan was just stating an opinion. After all; she was an invited guest to state an opinion. Did Fisal Alqasim, the host of the show, expect her to lie and tell him what he and his audience wanted to hear? Did he REALY want her to state her OPINION?
Well, if Alqasem thought that he could blackmail Wafa into compromising her opinion then he made a great mistake. He should have apologized for his ignorance that this is the twenty-first century, and that in this century everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion. Or may be Alqasim had other plans in mind?
I never liked Alqasim btw, the way he conducts his program is too obnoxious and rude for my taste. And he’s never fair with his guests; his biasness had always been palpable with Pan-Arabism, pan Islamism kind of mixture, although as a host, he should be the neutral party. Or if he cares to state his own opinion, he should bring a fourth party, not to tip the scale toward one thought against its opposite, if he cares to have a fair debate*.

And here is an Interesting letter I found on the Net to Alqasim. But apologies to my English readers, if you can use an on-line translator, please do, it’s worth the effort.

But what was truly sad and at the same time disgusting was the reactionary comments on those clips from some of the commentators, who apparently brushed their teeth with Miswak before commenting, for the stinky odor smeared from their disgusting comments. So becomingly low into their snit, abominable, and very personal.

I advise you to check them out, some are satirically funny.

Some said that she’s a lunatic with no brains (the old tale of psychiatrics being lunatic ring a bell?) And that America is relying on her to stir the national security of Muslims! (WAW)

Another said that she’s been paid by the American Zionists (does conspiracy theory ring a bell, does Pan-Arabism ring a bell, did Abdel Nasser, Michel Aflaq, and Sadam Hussein resurrect from their graves?)

Another one said that she’s married to a Jew (Personalism!).

While most louts were just lowly blabbers, calling out to punish the infidel-b!^%, using derogatory name-callings and adjectives.

Not to be unfair, there were also very nice, and logical comments from other commentators which I liked. A good indication that there are in this “Medieval Islam” some beacons of light. There are those people who do not give a damn for Aljazeera and its crew’s agendas.

This reactionary response does not surprise me at all though. This kind of reaction, in fact, is expected from Muslims. For every Muslim knows that it is totally forbidden to criticize Islam. This is the way Muslim children are raised at their homes, and educated at their schools. They follow the footsteps of their beloved prophet who is beyond any criticism. Criticizing Islam is evil, and every Muslim is held responsible to correct that evil:

-On the authority of Abu Saeed (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The prophet ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him ) said: Anybody amongst you who notices something evil should correct it with his own hands. If he is unable to do so he should correct it with his tongue. If he is unable even to do this he should at least consider it as bad in his heart for this is the lowest degree of faith. ( Muslim).

Who would then blame the the surge of hysteria that gripped the Islamic World in reaction to cartoons published in a Danish newspaper, attacking Western embassies and burning their flags because the West differs in its perception to Islam and Muhammad?
They were simply applying force to correct “evil”. They were abiding to the teachings of Islam.
And who said that Aljazeera is free to practice democracy, or free speech? Here is the supreme judge of Palestine, sheikh Tayseer Altimeemi asking Aljazeera to interdict the program and subject its management to shari’a court.

But the most comical part of the program was the other guest, the Egyptian Islamist, Tal’at Remeih, who was brought in for a political debate, when he did not know anything, neither about politics, not about Islam. Otherwise he wouldn’t have said that there is a difference between Islam and politics. And the irony is that the two examples he presented; Noam Chomsky and Bernard Lewis, were both Jewish. Moreover; there is no evidence that the former’s book (which one?) was recalled from the market because of a line mentioned in it about the Holocaust, nor the latter was placed on trial because he said something about the Holocaust. As per wikipedia, Lewis was tried in Paris on charge of “denial of the Armenian genocide”, not the Jewish Holocaust. That’s just an example of the wide lies spread across the media to fool the poor audience and keep it in the dark. Tal’at is mocking the West for not being fair while he knows damn well that Muslims from the eastern coast of Asia to the western coast of Africa are conistantly denying the Holocaust and no one ever questions them, or even point a finger at them. Mullas mock Christians and Jews on their pulpits before every Friday prayer, calling them pigs and apes, yet no one dares to protest. For the one who does is dubbed as a traitor, or a Zionist.

You want to be fair Mr. Tal’at?

In her book “The Force of Reason”, Oriana Fallaci said that in the beginning of the eighties ” Mayor of Rome donated seven acres of public land to build the mosque and the Islamic Center which the few Muslem living at the time in Rome did not need at all. In order to express the glory of Islam, the Italian architect designed the project with a minaret eighty meters high. That is, twice as high as the highest domes and bell-towers of Rome.” And I dare Muslim political and religious leaders (no difference… theoretically speaking) in the whole bulk of Saudi Arabia to donate a fig of desert land for building a church, let alone a synagogue.

And who has awakened that evil in the minds of Muslim masses, but Aljazeera and its long-time strive to endorse Pan-Islamism, after the crash of Pan-Arabism ideology on the realms of reality?
Who gave Ben Laden and his gangsters public legitimacy but Aljazeera?
And how come no Muslim judge demanded a trial for Aljazeera when it’s constantly breaking Iraq into Shiites and Sunnis?

And wasn’t it the prophet of Islam who said:
On the authority of Abu Saeed (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The prophet ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him ) said: The best jihad is when a person speaks the truth before a tyrant ruler. ( Abu Daoud )
Islam today and its followers are “ the tyrant rulers”. Whatever Muslims accept for themselves, they should accept for others. Otherwise, they are the arrogant that Emma Goldman described in her quote “Patriotism … is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit.”

Aljazeera does not need to provoke lies and falsehood, it does not need to instigate arrogance, Muslims are arrogant by nature, by the very teachings in their holy book and their God who designated them as “The best Umma (nation) sent to people”.

As Dr. Wafa said; if you want others to perceive you differently, change yourselves first.

* Alqasim is not even a Muslim, he is a Durzi; the surrogate son of Islam.

An update
The whole video is provided here, thanks To NewMe. No English translation though, sorry about that.