Archived Content from 2010 - 2011
The Musalman Times was owned and operated by Sapartese Management. The goal was to shed light on World politics, economics, culture, and current events, demography, literature, sports via their fifteen contributing authors who resided in several Asian, American and South Asian countries, along with guest writers and free lance journalists.
Content is from the site's 2010 - 2011 archived pages providing examples of what this site offered its readership.
US Founding Fathers and Islam
Posted on 24 December 2010
In his seminal Letter on Toleration (1689), John Locke insisted that Muslims and all others who believed in God be tolerated in England.
The Founding Fathers and Islam
Readers may be surprised to learn that there may have been hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Muslims in the United States in 1776—imported as slaves from areas of Africa where Islam flourished. Although there is no evidence that the Founders were aware of the religious convictions of their bondsmen, it is clear that the Founding Fathers thought about the relationship of Islam to the new nation and were prepared to make a place for it in the republic.
In his seminal Letter on Toleration (1689), John Locke insisted that Muslims and all others who believed in God be tolerated in England. Campaigning for religious freedom in Virginia, Jefferson followed Locke, his idol, in demanding recognition of the religious rights of the “Mahamdan,” the Jew and the “pagan.” Supporting Jefferson was his old ally, Richard Henry Lee, who had made a motion in Congress on June 7, 1776, that the American colonies declare independence. “True freedom,” Lee asserted, “embraces the Mahomitan and the Gentoo (Hindu) as well as the Christian religion.”
In his autobiography, Jefferson recounted with satisfaction that in the struggle to pass his landmark Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom (1786), the Virginia legislature “rejected by a great majority” an effort to limit the bill’s scope “in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan.”
George Washington suggested a way for Muslims to “obtain proper relief” from a proposed Virginia bill, laying taxes to support Christian worship. On another occasion, the first president declared that he would welcome “Mohometans” to Mount Vernon if they were “good workmen”. Officials in Massachusetts were equally insistent that their influential Constitution of 1780 afforded “the most ample liberty of conscience … to Deists, Mahometans, Jews and Christians,” a point that Chief Justice Theophilus Parsons resoundingly affirmed in 1810.
The Founding Fathers and Islam (May 2002) – Library of Congress Information Bulletin
Read before posting
Thank you for your message. You seem very convinced of your wrong perceptions. Obviously your perceptions of Islamare based on your own personal paradigm. We cannot change your option. We don’t want to. It is sufficient to say that your rendition of Prophet Muhammad is vastly different than the reality.
Perhaps we can refer a few books to you.
1) Judeo-Christian Civlization by Dr. Bullet of Princeton University
2) What’s right with Islam is what’s right with America by Faisal Rauf of NYC
3) Muhammad by Karen Armstrong or History of God by Karen Armstrong.
The books may enlighten you and open windows which may help you understand Muslims and the Quran.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Some misquote the Quran and then build the case about the entire religion. One could do the same for the Bible, picking up a few lines from Deuteronomy or Numbers and then making a case about the entire religion-bringing up Blood Libel and the Holocaust etc.
Should we mention all the points in the Bible which discuss exemplary punishments for the enemies in the Bible–or just hints are enough. Leviticus, Deutronomy, Numbers and the Gospel of Paul. So let us not be sanctimonious about the scriptures. I challenge you to a deeper discussion of the surah of the Quran that you have listed. However we have already discussed each and every one of them on these columns. The Quran does NOT says what you attribute to the Quran.
All the pertinent Surahs of the Quran are listed at the top of the “page” on the front page.
The gift of Jesus to the world was a message. Muhammad never started his own religion, rather he championed “Deen e Ibrahim” or the religion of Abraham.
Peace upon you. May God bring prosperity and happiness to you.
Da Vinci Code, The Pentacle, Jesus and Islam
Posted on 04 December 2010.
By Moin Ansari
Da Vinci Code, The Pentacle, Jesus and Islam
This is a fantastic opportunity for the three Abrahamic religions to come together to solve the problems of humanity. We can use this opportunity to try to repudiate every alternate theory about Jesus or we can embrace all those who revere Jesus in different ways.
The choice is ours.
One does not have to go trolling through the Louvre, and reading the coded messages of Leonardo da Vinci to find the alternatives to gospel of Paul, John, Luke and Mathew. All one has to do is to download a copy of the Bible written by none other than our very own founding father, Thomas Jefferson. We could read the writings of Sir Isaac Newton.
The same information could be retrieved from Wagner’s “sacrilegious” opera “Parsifal”. D.H. Lawrence told the same story in “The Man who Died”. Robert Graves wrote about it in “King Jesus”. Servitus was burned alive by John Calvin for espousing similar beliefs. The Spanish Inquisition sought out people with these beliefs and got rid of hundreds of thousands of heretics, Muslims and Jews.
One does not have to seek out other Gospels in Naag Hammdi caves or the Dead Sea scrolls. There is another option. John Damascus, a leading theologian of our times calls Islam Heterodox Christianity. One of the criticisms of Islam, is that it is based on the Gnostic Gospel. In our times , we don’t have to go far, to find out about the other Gospels. We could ask a Muslim neighbor about their beliefs in God and Jesus. Muslims would give you the Brown/Baigent answer:
1) Jesus is the messiah.
2) Jesus is in heaven.
3) We are all God’s children.
4) The four gospels included in today’s Bible have been transformed, mainly by Emperor Constantine in the Council of Nicea in 325.
5) Feminists can find the Pentacle and the Crescent, symbols of Islam displayed on all flags of almost all Muslim countries.
6) Jesus may or may not have died on the cross.
7) Jesus was a man.
Emperor Constantine’s decision in repudiating Aires and his followers did not eliminate the “Arian” beliefs. There was a sea of persecuted Arians who kept the hope alive. Muhammad’s message resonated with millions around the world and the simple message about a monotheistic God spread like wildfire. Today Islam remains the fastest growing religion in the world and in America. Four out of five converts to Islam are women in the West.
Most Christians would be surprised to find out that the Quran has been say more or less what the Gnostic Gosples, the Dead Sea scrolls, the research of Michaael Bagent says. Whether it is the Bible written by one of the founding fathers of America Thomas Jefferson, or it is Holy Blood, Holy Grail or his latest writing “The Jesus Papers“, there is an overwhelming body of evidence that supports that Jesus may have survived the crucifixion. This possibility would bring the story of Jesus in the realm of reality.
This is a great opportunity for Christianity and Islam to come tighter both theologically and politically. No one is right or wrong on this. The perspective our religious leaders should take is to accept Islam as and the Muslim point of view as an alternate theory about one of the greatest phenomenons on earth, Jesus Christ. This will eliminate the animosity started by the Crusades, aggravated during the Spanish Inquisition, exacerbated by colonialism, and brought to head by our wars in the Middle East. We can use this opportunity to bring our people together or we can continue to fight about the details about the life and death of our beloved Jesus Christ
A J M A: AN AMERICAN CONGREGATION
An association of of the children of Abraham rebuilding the symbiosis among the physical & spiritual “progeny” of Abraham for all communities in the USA.
$100 mln Mosque, Cordoba Islamic Ctr being built near WTC site
Posted on 06 May 2010.
The Muslim community of the area and the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA) is trying to do something positive and build a testament to interfaith harmony–aptly named the “Cordoba House”. Cordoba or Qartaba remains the icon of the seven hundred year Jewish-Christian-Muslim symbiosis which was also considered the golden era of World Jewry. During the time, a Jewish Prime Minister (Wazir e Ala) Hasdai Shaprut was appointed to run the government, and he did this for 30 years. During his reign Shaprut was also the head of the Army (Sipah e Salar) and used to write threatening letters to those Christian states that abused Jews.
All this came to a crashing end after King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella defeated the last Muslim Caliph and then went on to impose the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition killed, converted or deported all the Jews and Muslims in Spain.
Many see the US as the rebirth of the Jewish-Christian-Muslim symbiosis. Columbus sailed from this Muslim area and many of the sailors were Arab and Muslim. At least two the captain of this three ships were the Syrian Arab Panzone brothers. Columbus used Arab maps to sail which had listed America as Ard a Majhoola (unknown earth).
The first Muslims apparently reached America in the 7th century–this deciphered from archaeological evidence from Arizona rocks which display Islamic inscriptions and names.
Some of the earliest American reconverts to Islam were apparently the Cherokkees, whose head dress, language, and names show Islamic inclinations, and culture.
One third of the slaves that were captured from Muslim African countries were Muslims and the Roots story told by Alex Haily showed Kunte Kunte as a Muslim. Today the African American community is about 33% Muslim moving towards 50% number.
Today there are between 6 million to 16 million Muslims in America–more than Jews, and many talk about what Dr Bulliet has defined as the Christo-Muslim Civilization.
- A 13-story mosque is planned near the World Trade Center site, in a building that was damaged by airplane debris on Sept. 11, 2001.
- A Lower Manhattan community board said Wednesday that it supported the $100-million mosque and cultural centre.
- The project is aimed at creating a space for the neighborhood’s growing Muslim population.
- Supporters say the history associated with the damaged former department store was one reason to pick it.
- The new mosque will be built on the former site of a Burlington Coat Factory that was damaged in the 9/11 attacks.
- The TriBeCa mosque has had to expand to three evening prayer services every Friday to deal with the growing Muslim population.
- “New immigrants coming to the area — you see a lot of people coming to Canal Street, a lot of street vendors and laborers,” says Daisy Kahn, executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement. “But also a lot of people in the financial community coming to prayers as well.”
- When Kahn’s organization found a vacant property on Park Place, the former site of a Burlington Coat Factory that had been damaged by airplane debris on September 11, 2001, the potent symbolism of the site also became a compelling rationale for the project.
- Two Muslim organizations have partnered to open the mosque and cultural center in lower Manhattan, saying the $100 million project will create a venue for mainstream Islam and a counterbalance to radicalism. It earned a key endorsement this week from influential community leaders.
- “We want to create a platform by which the voices of the mainstream and silent majority of Muslims will be amplified. A center of this scale and magnitude will do that,” Khan said. “We feel it’s an obligation as Muslims and Americans to be part of the rebuilding of downtown Manhattan.”
- “We decided we wanted to look at the legacy of 9/11 and do something positive,” she explained in an interview.
- Her group represents moderate Muslims who want “to reverse to trend of extremism and the kind of ideology that the extremists are spreading.”
- “Events like [Times Square] always set us back,” Khan said. “Leaders have to push back in the other direction, and that’s what we’re trying to do.”
- some see the bridging of a cultural divide and an opportunity to serve a burgeoning, peaceful religious population
In effort to tackle misunderstanding about Islam amongst the American society, Cordoba House – a Masjid and Islamic cultural center as well as community center – will be built at 45 Park Place, New York.
The Cordoba House – that’s the name of the Islamic center will be – will stand above the former Burlington Coat Factory building, World Trade Center.
“The Muslim community must provide an opportunity to educate individuals about Islam through education and organized experiences of art, culture, and entertainment,” as quoted from a release.
“We decided we wanted to look at the legacy of 9/11 and do something positive,” said Daisy Khan, the executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement.
Initiator of the project, Cordoba Initiative, is now concerned with raising funding at around $100 million.
This will apparently be accomplished smoothly as the initiator said there was no criticism as well as opposition so far, adding that full support of the Cordoba House Islamic center is supported by surrounding Muslim community.
Planned to be finished in 2013, the Cordoba House will not only be functioned for the five daily prayers, but also for community center, sports hall, gathering place, and Islamic center for teaching and learning.
As its goal to educate people about Islam, the Cordoba House will be open for all people, either Muslims or non-Muslims.
Cordoba Initiative alone is an Islamic organization that aims to to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade, steering the world back to the course of mutual recognition and respect and away from heightened tensions.Ahlul Bayt News Agency (ABNA.ir), United States-
- Edward “Ro” Sheffe, the chairman of the financial district committee for Community Board 1, said the 15 members passed a resolution of support for the project, though he emphasized that the board had no authority to approve or disapprove of a house of worship, per se. Indeed, he said the developers could do whatever they wanted with the building, which they own.
- “They came to tell us what they had in mind and see what we felt about it,” he said. “The understanding we came away with was that this was an ongoing dialogue.”
- The members’ only concerns had to do with the aesthetics of the building, and whether it would fit with the surrounding architecture, he said. The overall feeling was one of goodwill because the financial district, a fast-growing residential area, lacks for amenities such as community centers.
1930s anti-Semitism todays Islamophobia: OIC
posted on 07 December 2010.
1930s anti-Semitism todays Islamophobia: OIC
JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia — Growing Islamophobia echoes the rise of anti-Semitism in the 1930s with US leaders resisting it but Europeans abetting the trend for political gain, the head of the world’s largest Islamic group said.
Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said xenophobia directed at Muslim immigrants was taking hold, especially in Europe.
Vote-seeking politicians were advancing extremist groups behind the anti-Muslim sentiment.
“This issue has become a political agenda item,” the Turkish head of the 58-member OIC told AFP in an interview, while stressing that Islam was also a European religion.
“What worries me is that political authorities or political parties, instead of stopping this, or fighting this, some of them are using this for their political ends, to gain more popular support in elections,” he said.
“I’m afraid that we are going through a process like the beginning of the ’30s of the last century, when an anti-Semitic agenda became politically a big issue (together with) the rise of fascism and Naziism …. I think now we are in the first stages of such a thing.”
A “pandemic of Islam vilification” is rising steadily, he warned, as documented by the OIC’s newly-established office to monitor Islamophobia around the globe.
Ihsanoglu pointed to the protests in the United States against the “Ground Zero” Islamic centre in New York City, to the anti-burqa movement in Europe, to physical attacks on Muslims on both sides of the Atlantic.
The problem which most concerned him was the institutionalisation of anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe, citing Switzerland’s ban on minarets atop mosques and the movement to ban Muslim women’s “burqa” full-face covers.
“This burqa business is really a sad story, it’s only a few people who are doing this (wearing the burqa) … It’s just part of old habits of certain tribes in certain countries, it’s not at all to do with Islam.”
Yet countries like France, Spain and Holland were reacting with legislation.
The OIC chief from secular Turkey predicted that time would take care of problem issues such as the burqa, as Muslims from less-developed cultures reach “a modern way of life.”
But focusing on assimilation was the wrong approach.
“Why assimilation? If Europe and the West are advocating the rights of minorities all over the world, why then when it comes to Europe do we speak about assimilation? Again, that shows the double standard.”
“Europe has to understand the reality of Islam today, and the reality that Islam is not an alien religion of Europe. Islam is a European religion, and Europe has to come to terms with Islam.”
Mustachioed, with the erudite bearing of a scholarly British diplomat, Ihsanoglu is an expert in Islamic cultural history and the history of science, with a long career as a professor and department head at Istanbul University.
Born in Cairo in 1943, he has led the Jeddah-based OIC since 2005 through a period when the Islamic world has been mired in cultural wars with itself and with the West.
Ihsanoglu spoke to AFP before the massacre of more than 50 Christians by Al-Qaeda Islamists in a Baghdad church on October 31. In an official statement, he has vehemently condemned the killings as a “criminal and terrorist act.”
While such violent attacks feed anti-Islamic hate, he argued Islamophobia arised separately from them. “I think we have to keep extremism out of this discussion, which is a different topic.”
The real issue, he insisted, was how anti-Muslim sentiment was included in high-level policy debate in some European countries.
In the United States, he said, Islamophobia was not as virulent. One reason was that Muslim immigrants to the US were better-educated and fitted in more easily.
A key difference was how Washington had consistently resisted admitting anti-Islamic emotions into public policy.
“For instance, this marginal pastor who wanted to burn Korans. The (US) government took responsibility and talked to him and convinced him not to do that.”
While he advocates cultural compromise, Ihsanoglu draws the line at certain things, like the Danish cartoons of Prophet Mohammed that sparked outrage among Muslims worldwide after they first appeared in 2005.
“Asking us to accept the cartoons is asking to accept insults as a norm. How can people ask us to accept the cartoons? This is indecent,” he said, adding a warning that radicals on both sides should not be allowed to set the agenda.
“We are getting held hostage by the marginal groups on the European side and on the Muslim side,” he said. Islamophobia like 1930s anti-Semitism: Islamic forum head
By Paul Handley (AFP) –
Washington on Islam
By Michael Kessler | July 28, 2010
What would George Washington say about Islam in USA?
With all the loud clamoring about the proposed Islamic Center to be built near Ground Zero, reasonable voices are hard to discern. One thing is clear: this is not a debate about religious freedom. A mosque by peaceful Muslims of good will, unrelated to perpetrating the 9/11 attacks has every right to exist anywhere on these shores. It is the worst form of religious intolerance–and very un-American–to think that one form of religion has limits on where and when it may be practiced.
First a caveat: If there is any validity to the charges that the affiliations of principals or the finances of Cordoba House are questionable or linked in any way to terrorists, then there are other legal mechanisms to prevent such a law-breaking.
Far from stopping purported terrorist sympathizers, however, the debates so far have only shown our ugly side.
Sarah Palin ignited the flames when she posted a series of inflammatory tweets and an explanatory note on Facebook calling for Muslims to consider not “rubbing it in” to the victims of 9/11.
Fair enough, if what was proposed was a shrine to Osama bin Laden or al Quaeda. In a dubious bit of logic, Palin proposes that the 9/11 terrorists, coming from an Islamic background, must necessarily taint all Muslim belief and practice such that any Islamic religious practice anywhere near the WTC site is unseemly and immoral. I guess any religion similar to Timothy McVeigh’s needs to vacate Oklahoma City. This also leaves out the fact that a significant number of Muslim Americans are counted among the victims of the tragedy. They were among the workers trapped in the buildings.
But then Newt Gingrich came along and made Palin’s misguided argument look downright plain. Gingrich offered up this whopper:
“There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. The time for double standards that allow Islamists to behave aggressively toward us while they demand our weakness and submission is over.”
So much for Gingrich-style American exceptionalism.
The obvious preposterousness of his assertion defies imagining someone as smart as Gingrich could utter it. Our Constitutional order is grounded not as a counterpoint to the practices of Saudi Arabia but on the basis of what we have long held dear about each individual’s dignity and liberties. Religious freedom on these shores is not dependent on the goodwill and blessings of mullahs or priests or politicians–indeed our constitutional protections declare this sacred right in spite of what the passions of the day may indicate is favored or disfavored religion. Americans should proclaim religious liberty and condemn its absence elsewhere, not use the examples of other nations as justifications for our own intolerance.
Shame on Gingrich for such a stupid, unhistorical, and un-American statement. And, by the way, he’s wrong about the rebuilding, too. The site is well on its way to being rebuilt and you can watch it all be reborn here at the Project Rebirth website.
For those who want to say this mosque represents Islamic supremacy and must be stopped: how and on what grounds? What is your legislative strategy? ANY legislation that hints of targeting a group as religious in order to prevent them from doing something will be struck down (see Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993) if you want to find out why targeting a religion qua religion runs afoul of the Constitution).
This debate is not really about religious freedom, but shows the lingering and distressing tendency for the populace to harbor intolerance of certain religious groups who are not like the majority. Indeed, Gingrich lays bare the ugly truth: Muslims are lumped together into a group, and that group is suspected of being violent-prone and obedient to a religion that is inherently hostile to American values. Of course this is exacerbated by the violent acts of terror that some Muslims have perpetrated. Yet the fact is that some refuse to make distinctions between the vast majority of peaceful Muslims and those who are violent–a wide gulf exists between these groups. The majority of Muslim Americans (and Muslims around the globe) share the Abrahamic theism of most other Americans, participate in and believe in the many shared values, and hope for a better future for their families and communities. In spite of this, some loudly proclaim the inherent deficiencies of Islam and incite fear that all Muslims will take up violent means in their quest for world supremacy. We owe others a more careful assessment of their values and lives.
But don’t take my word for it. Perhaps Palin and Gingrich and others who chatter about loving America and hating all Muslims might quiet themselves for a moment to reflect on the way that our first President -George Washington–treated the other disfavored tribe of Abrahamic descendents (the Jews) during his day.
Turns out, he was quite the believer in freedom of religious practice and, more central to our point, decried religiously-based intolerance. Oh, and he vividly confirmed that the new American Republic was, if nothing else, the land of freedom for every believer to practice their religion and erect their houses of worship undeterred by those who sought to delegitimize their faiths.
In August 1790, President Washington, along with an entourage including Thomas Jefferson, visited Rhode Island to great fanfare. Part of his agenda was to promote the passage of the Bill of Rights (they needed to lobby individual states to ratify the Amendments, which included twelve amendments. The third of which became the first amendment protections of free exercise of religion, speech, and press after the first two proposed amendments failed to receive ratification by ¾ of the states). During the visit, various officials offered speeches, including Moses Seixas who was the warden of Yeshuat Israel, the first Jewish congregation in Newport. The speech was preserved as a letter:
To the President of the United States of America. Sir:
Permit the children of the stock of Abraham to approach you with the most cordial affection and esteem for your person and merits — and to join with our fellow citizens in welcoming you to NewPort.
With pleasure we reflect on those days — those days of difficulty, and danger, when the God of Israel, who delivered David from the peril of the sword, — shielded Your head in the day of battle: — and we rejoice to think, that the same Spirit, who rested in the Bosom of the greatly beloved Daniel enabling him to preside over the Provinces of the Babylonish Empire, rests and ever will rest, upon you, enabling you to discharge the arduous duties of Chief Magistrate in these States.
Deprived as we heretofore have been of the invaluable rights of free Citizens, we now with a deep sense of gratitude to the Almighty disposer of all events behold a Government, erected by the Majesty of the People — a Government, which to bigotry gives no sanction, to persecution no assistance — but generously affording to all Liberty of conscience, and immunities of Citizenship: — deeming every one, of whatever Nation, tongue, or language equal parts of the great governmental Machine: — This so ample and extensive Federal Union whose basis is Philanthropy, Mutual confidence and Public Virtue, we cannot but acknowledge to be the work of the Great God, who ruleth in the Armies of Heaven, and among the Inhabitants of the Earth, doing whatever seemeth him good.
For all these Blessings of civil and religious liberty which we enjoy under an equal benign administration, we desire to send up our thanks to the Ancient of Days, the great preserver of Men — beseeching him, that the Angel who conducted our forefathers through the wilderness into the promised Land, may graciously conduct you through all the difficulties and dangers of this mortal life: — And, when, like Joshua full of days and full of honour, you are gathered to your Fathers, may you be admitted into the Heavenly Paradise to partake of the water of life, and the tree of immortality.
Done and Signed by order of the Hebrew Congregation in NewPort, Rhode Island August 17th 1790. Moses Seixas, Warden
President Washington, in reply a few days later, offered one of the most important visions of religious liberty for his new nation, recalling the context of oppression that his fellow children of Abraham’s God had suffered by the intolerant many. Washington promised, with simple clarity, that these new United States would offer a haven for peaceful practitioners of all faiths:
To the Hebrew Congregation in Newport Rhode Island. Gentlemen,
While I receive, with much satisfaction, your Address replete with expressions of affection and esteem; I rejoice in the opportunity of assuring you, that I shall always retain a grateful remembrance of the cordial welcome I experienced in my visit to Newport, from all classes of Citizens.
The reflection on the days of difficulty and danger which are past is rendered the more sweet, from a consciousness that they are succeeded by days of uncommon prosperity and security. If we have wisdom to make the best use of the advantages with which we are now favored, we cannot fail, under the just administration of a good Government, to become a great and happy people.
The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent national gifts. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
It would be inconsistent with the frankness of my character not to avow that I am pleased with your favorable opinion of my Administration, and fervent wishes for my felicity. May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and figtree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy.
As we consider the terrible tragedies of the terror attacks ten years prior and the ongoing war on terror–our own days of difficulty and danger–Washington’s words ring just as true.
Bigotry has no sanction by our laws and each of us can live under our own vines and figtrees. Peaceful Muslims can and will build their Islamic centers just as Christians maintain or build their own churches and Jews worship in synagogues and gather in the Jewish community centers. Some of us will simply ponder the mysteries of life while walking in the woods.
If those who would do us harm try to find harbor in our midst, we can and should remove them like a cancer. But shared religious pasts, just like shared last names, do not define who we are. Rather, our words and deeds, our goals and values, and the labors we pursue will show each of our true intentions. We have nothing to fear from peaceful Muslims who seek peace and the dignity of others as people of good will. To ostracize them and tarnish their good works is nothing short of apostasy in the canon of American freedoms.
Bible Violence: Chronicles 21, Deut 3, Judges 21, Exodus 21:1-11
Image via Wikipedia
In the Bible God orders the killing of innocent people even after the Ten Commandments said “Thou shall not kill”.
For example, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21). God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6).
In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife! Just about every other page in the Old Testament has God killing somebody! In 2 Kings10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered.
The God of the Bible also allows slavery, including selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 & Psalms 137:9).
This type of criminal behavior should shock any moral person. Murder, rape, pillage, plunder, slavery, and child abuse can not be justified by saying that some bible says it’s OK. If more people would actually sit down and read the Bible there would be a lot more atheists or Muslims.
Paul version of Jesus also promoted the idea that all men should castrate themselves to go to heaven: “For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (Matthew 19:12 ASV) I don’t know why anyone would follow the teachings of someone who literally tells all men to cut off their privates.
The God of the Paul’s Bible also was a big fan of ritual human sacrifice and animal sacrifice.
And just in case one is thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps one should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear: “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB) There are many more worse quotes on this topic at my disposal.
Thou shalt not kill?
“How can anyone incite violence? Violence has to be inside to be incited. How can anyone lead you to mistake? Unless there is greed and you would have wanted to do wrong”.
That is not all hard to explain for instance read as under the bible that was concocted by mischievous writers and followed by bible thumpers:
The God of man manufactured Bible orders the killing of innocent people even after the Ten Commandments said “Thou shall not kill”. For example, God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21). God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6). In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife! Just about every other page in the Old Testament has God killing somebody! In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered..
The God of the Bible also allows slavery, including selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 & Psalms 137:9).
This type of criminal behavior should shock any moral person. Murder, rape, pillage, plunder, slavery, and child abuse can not be justified by saying that Bible says it’s OK. If more people would actually sit down and read the Bible there would be a lot more atheists or Muslims
Jesus of Bible also promoted the idea that all men should castrate themselves to go to heaven: “For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (Matthew 19:12) I don’t know why anyone would follow the teachings of someone who literally tells all men to cut off their privates parts.
The God of the Bible also was a big fan of ritual human sacrifice and animal sacrifice.
In case you are thinking that the evil and immoral laws of the Old Testament are no longer in effect, perhaps you should read where Jesus makes it perfectly clear: “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB) There are many more worse verses quotes on this topic in the Christian Bible (New Testament) that the conservative Christians and the Fake Jews (Khazar & Ashkenazi) follow for greed, pillage and murder.
One may ask why? That was also your question.
To explain this I have to go all the way back to the Father of Monotheist religion, ‘Abraham’ . Abraham had four wives. Sarah, Hagar, Kethura and Hajun. Sarah had no children that lead Abraham to marry Hagar. Hagar bore him Ismail the first son. !3 years later God gave Sarah a son, Ishaq. Later on Kethura gave Abraham 6 sons, namely; Zamran, Yaqshan, Madan, Madyan, Washyak and Shaoh. Hajun gave Abraham 5 sons, namely; Kaisan, Suraj, Umaim, Lotan and Nafis. Does the last five sons sound familiar? They are the forefathers of people of India.
As per Abrahamic Law, the first son Ismail gets the Majority of inheritance and others gets father’s tent. Meaning after the demise of father the other brothers have to accept Ismail’s superiority and the rest of the sons would be wanderers and gypsies. For a while this was accepted until the people of Israel (Jacob) son of Ishaq split into different tribes. One of such tribe came to be known Judah. Those who follow Judah became Jews. They challenged the superiority of Tribes from Ismail and started re writing the scriptures. They tore the Torah and invented Talmud in Babylon and also learnt Magic from the locals (Kabalah).
Jews and Hebrews always has been gypsies which they resented. They master planned and engineered to change the dynamics through deception, treachery, mass murder, pillage. That is what the above verses are stating. Those are not the words of God but of greedy and evil people.
In parts of subcontinent every thing was peaceful until the same people migrated and totally messed up the gullible vedic people. They introduced themselves as superior race as Brahmic (Abraham) and introduced caste system. Even though they knew that these vedic people were their brethern (Sons of Hajun and Abraham). So here you have now a big problem. The Brahma’s are no different than the Zionist and they are helping each other to demoralize and annihilate Islam as it is the only stumbling block before they take the whole world by its forelocks. After the Zionist has used India to destabilize Pakistan and its people (Follower of Muhammad whose progeny comes from Ismail first son of Abraham) they will then back stab the Indians. But the Zionist have one big problem and that is the Pathans or Pashtun or Pakhtun who are their brothers through Ishaq but now Muslims. They are more fierce than the chidren of Ismail and are known to be Zealots and Warrior Race. It was due to (ALLAH) and them that Jesus survived the onslaught of the Rabi, Pharisees and Scribes.
They are the lost tribes of Israel now Muslims therefore they know the superiority of Arabs (Children of Ismail). Hence the pre-emptive strike on Afghanistan, Iraq and Paksitan on false and concocted charges. There was no Muslims involved in the atrocities that they are accused of. Due to its own interest India is helping the Zionist and therefore the friendship between Indians and Pakistanis though sought after by people but will not consummate due to pressure on the Indian Govt. by the Zionist.
Muslims want peace with justice and does not create misery for others or feel happy about it. It is absolutely against the injunction of Qur’an and Shariah.
You then wrote,”These simple principles dont need religious guidance nor statistics. The dajjal is inside. But the human mind tries to find it in others. The divine is also inside. Can you find that in others?”
ALLAH has sent 124000 Messengers, Prophets or Rishis to guide the mankind to path right and straight. They all brought one and same message to guide human kind. The guidance are laid out. When some one deviates from, it creates problem from others. For eg. “Thou shalt not kill”
How many innocent people have been mass murdered through out the history. “Thou shall not steal”, few handful people have stolen the wealth of the world. British crown stole India’s riches. Spanish crown stole all the gold from S. America besides mass murdering the natives. The British mass murdered the Native Americans and stole their riches. Then in turn the Rothschild family stole these robbers and he is closely aligned with the British Crown.
Ad-Dajjal means LIAR. Did you not see war on Afghanistan and Iraq was wages on fabricated LIES? And we as a people are helpless, because we lack resources which they have already stolen from us poor masses. Since we are not able to correct this situation therefore we the people are not Divine but are dependent on Divine to relieve us of this humongous carnage and injustice.
Ayodhya Multifaith complex is the right thing to do
Posted on 09 May 2011.
Babri Masjid built in grand Mughal style of symmetryImage via Wikipedia
The BJP mobs destroyed a mosque, and the massacred hundreds of Muslims around Bharat. All for an election victory–which they got. Mob vendetta cannot be allowed to stand. Finally some sense of sanity from Bharat. After the devastating and erroneous verdict that came out of the High Court, the Supreme Court’s stay order on the Babri Masjid issue has brought back some credibility to the Bharati judicial system. The High Court judgment was so flawed that it did not pass the smell test. Something was fishy–and the Supreme Court agreed. How could a court, any court adjudicate a partition of a property, when it was not even asked for by any of the three parties.
The Supreme Court verdict is a breath of fresh air. The question is, can it stand up to the mobocracy that has been ramrodding (no pun intended) the will of a tiny minority and creating the mischief.
A three-judge special bench of the Allahabad High Court comprising Justice S.U. Khan, Justice D.V. Sharma and Justice Sudhir Agarwal were insane. We wrote about it on http://rupeenews.net/?p=34986. The High Court was asked to answer three questions:
1) Was a Hindu God born in Ayodhya? Amazingly the High Court answered it that yes a Hindu God Ram was born in Ayodhya 900,000 years ago, at the exact spot of the Babri masjid. Never mind the fact that the ice age melted in 600o BC and that is when civilization started–in warm areas of the world like Greece, Italy, China and Pakistan. Never mind the fact that Bharat was like Antarctica for thousands of years.
2) The High Court was asked if the temple existed on the spot. The High Court found that the temple indeed did exist, even though cow-bones were found below the masjid, and several animals were found on the site, along with various other structures. The Gangetic plain is graveyard of civilizations. Every layer below the ground has a period of history buried beneath. The question which was not answered was was there a Buddhist vihara or monastery at the spot which is claimed as the Ramjanmabhoomi?
3) The High Court was asked if the masjid existed on the spot. The third question is; was the Babri Masjid built in accordance with the tenets of Islam?Astonishingly the court could not answer the question. Mughal Narratives did not mention any destruction of the temple.
The High Court of India had directed that the Babri Masjid land of 2.77 acres at the Babri Masjid site be divided equally among Hindus, Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara, –the three parties to the suit. At the start of the Supreme Cout proceedings, the Bench asked if any of the parties was in favor of the High Court’s verdict. Not surprisingly none of them supported the judgement.
“At least there is unanimity on it,” the Bench remarked.
The appeals filed by various Hindu and Muslim religious organisations pertained to only 2.77 acres of disputed land, the Supreme court Bench ordered status quo on the 67 acres of land adjacent to the disputed site.
After the demolition of the masjid on December 6, 1992, the demonstrators created a makeshift temple. On January 7, 1993, the Congress government enacted the Ayodhya Act 1993 which preserved the status quo of the destroyed mosque and limited prayer on the disputed site.
The Sunni Waqf Board is scared now and its counsel Zafaryab Jilani said, “We are satisfied with today’s order of the Supreme Court… This will help in maintaining peaceful position in the country.”
Looking at the 67 acres would help resolve the issue. The best solution is the construction of a grand mosque and temple with access to large gardens. This way the Hindus and the Muslims can pray in their own worship areas. The illegal destruction fot he mosque has to be reversed and declared illegitimate. There is a solution and the Supreme Court’s verdict is a step in the right direction.
The Jewish Halacha
Expulsion of the Jews from Frankfurt on August 23, 1614, after riots in the “Jews Street” led by Vin Wikipedia
We present the Jewish Halacha not to disparage any religion or any body of people. We present it as an argument against those who use excerpts of the Quran to disparage Islam.
May God forgive us if we have transgressed. Certain sections of the Halacha have been repudiated by mainstream Judiaism, however they exist and the Halacha has a following.
The Halacha is the core of Jewish Law.
Halakha (Hebrew: הלכה; also transliterated as Halakhah, Halacha, Halakhot and Halachah) is the collective corpus of Jewish religious law, including biblical law (the 613 mitzvot) and later talmudic and rabbinic law as well as customs and traditions. Like the religious laws in many other cultures, Judaism classically draws no distinction in its laws between religious and non-religious life. Hence, Halakha guides not only religious practices and beliefs, but numerous aspects of day-to-day life.- from Wikipedia
One of the core doctrines of the Halacha is that Gentiles (all non-Jews) are not human beings but animals. Correspondingly, it teaches that it is permissible for Jews to kill, harm, cheat, and steal from Gentiles, in fact such is sometimes even commanded by their law. It actually teaches that Gentiles are in three categories, those that obey all seven Noahide Laws (though in practice no Gentiles fit this category), Gentiles who do not keep the Noahide Laws, and Gentiles who are Idolater Gentiles (as Halacha considers all Christians).
We learn from the laws that we wrote here that there are three levels of killing one who is not a Jew: One, if he is a Noahide gentile, fulfilling the seven laws–a Jew who kills him is not liable to death by the courts as he would be had he killed a Jew, but he is liable to death by the hands of Heaven. The second is a gentile who does not keep the seven Noahide laws (and we know of no gentile who keeps the seven Noahide laws)–this one may be killed, but the Jews are not commanded to kill him. The third is an actual idolatrous gentile (as Halacha considers all Christians): it is a commandment to kill him. The Rama, in Yoreh Deah 158, section one, writes: “And therefore one is allowed to try medicines on gentiles to see if they help.” This is an explicit halachic license to perform medical experimentation by force on gentile slaves bought by Jews.–from Parashat Maatot on Daat Emet website
INFORMATION ABOUT HIERARCHAL ORGANIZATION : This site is owned and operated by Sapartese Management. There are several editors, Aliya Khan, Saima Khar, Seema Firdausi, Mohammad Akbar, and Ismail Farabi.
CONTACT INFORMATION: For email contact please contact firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com
6056 6th Avenue
New York, NY
Islam Khan writes from Bangladesh
Asia Aslam writes from Karachi, Pakistan
Firdaus Al-Farabi writes from Egypt
Mohammad Ismail wrties from the US
Raja Mujtaba contributes from Opinion-Makers.
Jason Miller is a tenacious anti-capitalist and vegan animal liberationist. He is also the founder and editor of Thomas Paine’s Corner, associate editor for Cyrano’s Journal Online, blog director for The Transformative Studies Institute and associate editor for the Journal for Critical Animal Studies.
A Bangladeshi activists who regularly posts on Rupee News
Dr. Fawzia Khan
A professor based in New Jersey who writes for various magazines including Counterpunch.
Dr. Abdul Ruff
Prolific writer from Delhi who regularly contributes to Rupee News
A Dalit activist from Hyderabad India who highlights Dalit issues in Dalit Freedom Network
Jim Mondavi: 27 year old economist and journalist, center-left.
An American freelance journalist who lives in the US
An Indian activist who writes on politics
A Pakistani nationalist who has his own site www.ahmadquraishi.com
ABOUT THIS SITE: We present independent ideas, thought-provoking perspectives and unique opinions. We criticize many but intend malice towards none.
This site presents fresh ideas. Its purpose – as well as that of the other such sites is to provide a venue for informed commentary on World politics and culture from a international perspective. We write about important developments in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Europe, Canada–the world. We shed light on World politics, economics, culture, and current events, demography, literature, sports.
There are currently fifteen contributing authors who reside in several Asian, American and South Asian countries. We occasionally invite guest writers and appreciate the contributions of free lance journalists. Our contributors are keen observers of socio-economic developments, both on a international and a national level, who, in addition to their determination to contribute to an informed debate in the public square, have backgrounds in political journalism, international relations, judicial advisory, think tank lobbying, or academia.
Disclaimer: All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. This sites makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site & will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.