Image: Scraptv.com

Liberals may joke about people who live in the sticks – the truck driving, plaid wearing variety. The type that sit on their front porch chewing a blade of grass with a shotgun resting on their lap. They may be labeled as uncultured but they definitely cannot be labeled stupid. If you trespass with intent or resulting damage to their property or persons, you better believe you’ll be at the other end of that barrel.

There’s a lot at stake post 9-11 that’s much more relevant than individual person or property, and that’s the great republic built brick by brick through the culminated sweat and blood of generations of visionary Americans. At its core, America symbolizes freedom and possibility – a dream that reaches the most desolate corners of the world. As with any with dream, there are always those looking to destroy it.

The September 11^th attack by 19 Al-Qaeda members was designed to destabilize the foundation of our society. Ten years later, failed American leadership has ensured just that.

Things were arguably pretty bad when Bush was in office; but they worsened with Obama. Bush engaged in questionable and seemingly unending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that to date have resulted in the deaths of an estimated 110,000 total to 3,500 civilian deaths respectively. Despite best efforts on the part of sincere individuals working tirelessly to bring about a better tomorrow, Iraqis feel their lives have delved into uncertainty in a post Saddam era; better the devil you know they say. On the Afghan front, a majority the uneducated class left behind after a mass migration in the 70’s and left to suffer a hellish fate, hadn’t even heard of 9-11. Add to their hellish fate a brutal war that will never be won.

With already shredded lives left in ashes after U.S. invasions, with a death toll of over 100,000 compared to our 2,977, it’s clear to see that our leadership didn’t just fail Americans…it failed humanity.

The problem that has positioned us in a stand off, this ‘clash of civilizations’, cannot and will not ever be won with weapons. It’s a war of perceptions that has to be fought the same way.

With Obama, some believed “Hope and Change” would fix everything. Though if you strip away a grand national stage showered with rhetoric and glitz, it’s all nothing more than an empty chime drawing in wide-eyed kids. And like the suckers we are, we fell for it again.

Obama made the most fundamental of errors. He surrounded himself with “safe” Muslims by hiring Muslims who fit well into his liberal agenda. He ordered a change in the language we used to deal with terrorism by dropping references to Islamic extremism and eradicating the phrase “war on terror” – though he and press secretary Robert Gibbs stumbled a few times leading us to think that it’s more show than policy.

Progressive Muslims weren’t of any use. They continued to be blind to the high relevance Islamic terrorism plays in the ongoing war. As Zuhdi Jasser points out…

“The threat to the United States has grown exponentially in ten years. A report from the Department of Justice in March of 2010 showed that of 228 terror-related arrests 186 of them were Muslim. That is over 80 percent from a Muslim community that represents less than 2 percent of the U.S. population.

What this report does not tell us is that of the 186 Muslim arrests almost certainly all of them were Muslims that believed in and adhered to an Islamist ideology. Since this report we have seen upwards of another 28 terror-related arrests of Muslims including the likes of Faisal Shahzad — the Times Square bomber — and Pvt. Naser Abdo who was preparing a second attack on Fort Hood who both claimed to be “Muslim soldiers” fighting for the ummah (Muslim nation).

The threat is increasing because the ideological message has largely gone unchecked. To change that we need to empower reform-minded liberal Muslim leaders. We need the political will from the Administration and Congress to identify political Islam as the problem and devout reformist Muslims and enlightened Islam as the solution. We need our government, media, and academe to have the skill set to not cower when terms like “Islamophobia” are leveled against those who are smart enough and brave enough to call out political Islam as the problem and we need for Muslims to separate religion and state to defeat Islamism. Unless we do that, our “whack-a-mole” approach to security will eventually miss one.”

If there’s anything to be taken from this it’s that the solution lays in empowering Muslims reformers – not in avoiding truthful dialogue, not in entrapment, not in blanket surveillance of Muslim communities, and certainly not in playing into delusions of Muslim victimization.

According to Paul Achter, associate professor of rhetoric and communication at the University of Richmond, Virginia, “television news producers, political leaders, and others have a role in shaping what is shared and how it is presented. “They can’t prescribe history, but they can set the agenda.’ That, in turn, can sway viewers’ ideologies.”

It would seem then that America is struggling with systems of ideology – Islamic fundamentalism and their own struggle to make it through the next decade. For now it seems America is losing both battles.

9-11 will eventually become a calendar footnote as each passing year dims our memory just a little more until the last generation witness to it also fades. What is for certain though is that the events set in motion by that tragic day have forever changed the American (and Muslim) landscape.

Ninteen terrorists aimed to shake the bedrock of American society – and they have. I don’t think they expected their acts to also affect Islam – which it has. Islam has never evolved as quickly or as dramatically as it has in the last ten years. Those who deny the possibility of an Islamic reformation simply need to see how much the dialogue has evolved, how many more Muslims are gaining a voice, whatever it may be and whatever their shortcomings in seizing the full potential of that opportunity.

An Islamic reformation was sparked by 9-11. It remains to be seen if an American Reformation is in the cards as well – but that would first require genuine leadership.

When watching G.I. Joe as a kid, I knew Cobra Commander was an inherent baddie. Of course, I was about 20 years too late for the propaganda to have any effect on me; the Cold War was long over.

G.I. Joe would never survive today. And for that I feel a little at loss knowing my son will probably never grow up with a show that clearly demarcates goodies from baddies. As a responsible parent, I’d teach him of course that nothing is black and white, that compassion and empathy are important, but that (above all) you have to have to know what you’re up against.

Perhaps liberal media could use a similar talk, which ten years after 9-11 is clearly that lingering drunk dipping into the progressive Muslim Kool-Aid. The result – an even more dangerous propaganda through an over glorification of all things Islam.

Liberal media outlets aren’t interested in Muslim narratives aside from these two: (1) the Muslim victim and (2) the trend-setting stereotype busting Muslim that’s doing everything to shine a liberal facet of Islam but doing nothing to challenge what’s wrong with it. Most Muslims also play into this willingly…it’s safer and doesn’t challenge a faith that is ripe for a reformation.

Their overwhelming support for a strict template is demonstrated by…

• Discrimination against works critical of Islam as book publishers continue to get cold feet over taking on a dissenting Muslim voice.

• Hollywood’s emphasis on narrow Muslim narratives including The New Muslim Cool, Mooz-lum, and Fordson: Faith, Fasting, and Football among others. But with topical themes and shallow story telling, they’re nothing more than trinket stories that feed the hype rather than move beyond it.

• Romanticizing Islamic culture as seen with the  emphasis on hijabs as fashionable.

This is just a sampling. Major media outlets are also guilty of painting realities, such as Newsweek’s February 22, 2010 issue of How Bin Laden Lost the Clash of Civilizations which included a piece on “How Moderate Muslim Leaders Waged War on Extremists – and Won.” I’m not saying these accounts are fictional, but they aren’t exactly looking at the whole picture either.

Art, and its juggernaut potential to offer society a transcended level of consciousness, is also deeply nested within the media machine. Where news media is society’s ego, art is its subconscious readily believing whatever it’s fed. “If art is meant to reflect what we hold dear as a society, and what represents us,” then clearly there is “no such thing as a great 9-11 work of art.”

Most Muslim artists (regardless of their medium) delve into themes of culture and identity rather than tackling the core issue – which is the Islamic faith and it’s bastardization by Wahhabi/Salafi ideology. It’s great that American Muslims feel more secure in their identity, but that does nothing to change fundamentalism with Islam, to address the wavering interpretations between radicals and secularists.

But Muslims aren’t the only ones burying the real issues. Events and exhibitions like 1001 Inventions, hosted by the Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilisation, cause an immense amount of harm to the overall dialogue. Their theme, “Discover the Muslim Heritage in Our World” keeps Muslims in a safe cocoon that fractures a reality we haven’t really developed a whole lot since then.

“Look at how great we are. See what great things the Muslims did,” is the common boast I hear in association with epic feats achieved by other Muslims in the past – the question is what have YOU done? It’s delusional and it’s systematically pushed into our thought-sphere by media that would be better suited to write bed-time stories of how wonderful everything really is.

Next… Government and Politics Ten Years Later

TV channels are showing a popular reality show these days all over the world called “Obama Got Osama” and we the poor, captive audience tend to believe what we see without asking any question! Although the death of the terrorist leader Osama bin Laden is good news for the whole world, I sincerely believe it was a stunning performance of the U.S. Navy Seals in Abbottabad, Pakistan, collaboratively conceived by the United States and Pakistan.

There is little doubt in my mind that the reality show was innovatively produced by the joint efforts of the CIA, the U.S. armed forces in Afghanistan, Pakistan army and its intelligence agency ISI. The spectacular reality show served both Pakistan and the U.S. perfectly. It improved President Obama’s rating, who was losing popularity, and the timing was perfect for Pakistan to stage the event. The American aid package to Pakistan is currently being discussed in Washington D.C. while the mutual diplomatic relations were taking a nasty downturn before the operation.

Americans, on the other hand, repeatedly assured Pakistanis that their leaders were not involved in the operation apparently to calm down their protest. Pakistan, in return, allowed Americans to provide access to Osama’s wives for further interrogation.

Army, however, is the strongest force in Pakistani politics and it has a tendency to keep politicians and elected governments in the dark about important strategic matters. Although it is quite possible the president and prime minister are not informed about the raid in Abbottabad but it is hard to believe the military top brass and ISI did not know about the operation in a military town near its enormous training center.

Pakistan has been playing a double game of mouse and cat for quite some time. Whenever, there are bumps in the relations or the U.S. aid to Pakistan is in jeopardy, some terrorists magically pop up, get caught, and handed over to Americans promptly. Two top Al Qaeda leaders, Abu Zubaidah and Abu Faraj al-Libbi were handed over to the U.S. in 2002 and 2005.Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,one of the masterminds of 9/11 wasalso caught along with several other terrorists and handed over to the U.S. in March 2003. Pakistan army might have decided to hand over the top Al Qaeda leader to the United Sates when he became a liability for them.

If it would have been a one-sided operation as claimed by the U.S., it would have ignited a wave of strong protest from the Pakistani establishment. Although Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani lodged a lukewarm protest in Parliament, surprisingly there was a pin drop silence with no significant hue and cry from any side.

Interestingly enough, the British newspaper Guardian has recently revealed a secret agreement between the two countries struck in 2001 that allowed the U.S. to pursue and catch Osama in Pakistan. The report said the secret deal between the former presidents of both countries George W. Bush and General Pervez Musharraf gave a free hand to the U.S. to pursue and catch Osama inside Pakistan. It was agreed that Pakistan will protest for face saving with no real action in case this happens.

This is exactly what the Pakistani government doing these days! Although the Army chief General Pervez Kayani and Prime Minister Gilani both have issued warnings that any further U.S. intrusion inside Pakistan will be dealt with force, no real measure was announced to back up their protest.

Official statements in Washington D.C. and Islamabad also revealed collaboration between the two countries carefully isolating Pakistan from the operation to avoid public reaction against the civil-military establishment.

President Obama’s televised speech on May 2 carefully placed the event in the proper historical context and declared in inconspicuous terms that the U.S. has full power to operate in Pakistan. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Islamabad, toeing the same line accepted the U.S. rights to enter the country in a press release on May 2.

On the U.S. side, President Obama desperately needed to improve his image to restore his popularity for the 2012 election. A survey of Americans reported he regained popularity after the operation as 54 percent of the U.S. public viewed Obama favorably versus 31 who had a negative opinion of the president, according to an NBC News poll conducted May 5-7. Of course, that was one of the major motives behind the whole adventure in Abbottabad.

So far Pakistan and the U.S. have been successful in creating the illusion that it was the U.S. that developed and managed the reality show “Obama Got Osama” single handedly. In this age of internet marvels, however, we might not have to wait too long until another leak reveals the secret.

Enjoy the reality show until then!

Dr. Qaisar Abbas, a U.S. based freelance journalist, grant writing consultant and a published Urdu poet, frequently writes on media, literature and society. With a Master’s degree in Journalism from Punjab University, Lahore, he worked as Public Relations Officer for the provincial government of Punjab. Later he joined Pakistan Television as News Producer before moving to the United States where he did Ph.D. from University of Wisconsin-Madison in Mass Communication. After working on administrative and teaching positions at several universities in the U.S., he is currently working as Assistant Dean at the University of North Texas.

Our “Letters” page is an open forum for readers to express their views. To submit your letter, opinion or essay, email editor@qudosi.com. All submissions are protected by the First Amendment’s Right to Free Speech, provided they’re not hateful or provocative. The Qudosi Chronicles is not responsible for the views held by readers and in the interest of free speech, we’re open to posting submissions even if the arguments are disagreed with.

During his recent speech, addressing the Middle-East North African issues, President Obama stated: “The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps”

Even before the speech, Obama knew that it is not an acceptable proposition to both sides, Israel and PA. Israel had much suffered from Arab aggression, before it was able to free some of Jewish land from Arab occupation in 1967. To return to 1967 borders would end the hope of the Jewish people to reunify Eretz-Israel and will put Israel in existential danger again. The PA has just been pretending that it is considering the idea of peace (a tactical deception to advance Israel’s destruction), as it was clearly outlined in the “Stage plan”! A few days later Obama reverted to the guarantee President Bush gave Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2004, but humiliation and political damage to Israel had already been done. “Shoot first, clarify later” is a commonly used tactic of political assault on Israel!

”There was nothing particularly original in my proposal,” Obama admitted later during his presentation to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The idea of land swaps were proposed several times before, including by President George W. Bush but more diplomatically, and was vigorously rejected by PA. Knowing that, Obama had still felt compelled to publicly humiliate Israel again by this unacceptable idea of swapping Jewish land for Jewish land in order to accommodate the creation of another Arab-terror state.

During the years of fruitless negotiations the same idea was put on the table even by Israel several times. It was instantly squashed and rejected by PA leadership. The only reason why Obama has mentioned the “land swap” is to pretend that there is a ground for negotiation to make progress in the fake peace process. Fostering illusion of the peace process is the surest way to continue the conflict. This is the true aim of the multifaceted game! This is consistent with the history of US involvement in Arab-Israel conflict and all players have been playing this game quite well.

In his speech Obama said “The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.”

What map had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, not a friend of Israel, shown to him? Where did he see “contiguous” land – connection between Gaza and Judea/Samaria (West Bank)? Is he planning to cut Israel a half? Is it OK for Israel to be non-contiguous?

Fatah, Hamas and their masters will never recognize Israel – so forget about Israel as the “Jewish state”. They made it clear many times before. The PA blatantly ignores the major Oslo accords’ requirements for – recognition of Israel, stopping terror attacks and anti-Israel incitement.

A few years ago 8,500 Jews were forcefully removed from Gaza. There are almost 500,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria. The PA is planning to create another Islam dominate state without Jews! Why is transfer of Jews from their ancestral land, in order to accommodate bogus claims of the terror supporting population, is satisfactory to the international community and it is not considered as a violation of the 4^th Geneva convention, but transfer of the fake Palestinians to Sinai, a vast contagious land with very low population and various resources is not an acceptable one?

Why must the state of this fake nation, which was forged in order to destroy Israel, be created on Jewish land? The international anti-Semites have already displaced and committed numerous genocides and crimes against Jews in Britain, Spain and other places in Europe. Now they are assisting Arabs to finish their dirty job in the Jewish homeland!

Obama has also suggested put aside for the future negotiations the future of Jerusalem and the fate of Palestinian refugees. Recognition of Israel was ‘put aside’, end of terror attacks again on Israel was ‘put aside’, establishing democratic governance in PA is not a priority! Have this ‘genius’ negotiating tactic brought peace to Israel?

Why can’t we talk about fake Palestinian refugees now? During the war of Independence, which Arabs had instigated, some 460,000 people, currently known as Palestinians, left the conflict zone following orders from their leaders. Their numbers had doubled immediately following that the UN announced the aid available to them. Several generations of professional refugees have been created as a result.

Since then, close to 850,000 Jews have been forced to leave Muslims countries. Hypocrisy must be exposed! Facts are available if someone wants to find and learn them. Jew-haters and self-hating Jews do not want to know or just purposely disregard them!

The Arab-Israel peace process is a deception!

It is designed to prevent Israel from reclaiming Jewish land and establishing the sovereign Jewish state, Eretz-Israel. Western countries have been using instability in the Middle East in order to control oil supply from Islamic states. At the same time major Islamic ideological powers and organizations (Iran, Wahabi Saudi Arabia and Muslim brotherhood) are using the Arab-Israel conflict to divert attention from themselves and their true Islamic agenda – global world domination of Islam. That is why they created the fake Palestinian nation in 1964. Termination of Israel is just the first step in the holy war against “infidels”!

This is a peculiar symbiotic relationship between two enemies united by their hate for Jews and lust for power. Traditional anti-Semitism of the Western democracies and Russia have become the best ally of their own mortal enemies!

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist “refusenik” movement and currently lives Australia. He publishes internet editorial letter (for almost 10 years) and website www.shamrak.com on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com

Our “Letters” page is an open forum for readers to express their views. To submit your letter, opinion or essay, email editor@qudosi.com. All submissions are protected by the First Amendment’s Right to Free Speech, provided they’re not hateful or provocative. The Qudosi Chronicles is not responsible for the views held by readers and in the interest of free speech, we’re open to posting submissions even if the arguments are disagreed with.

Dear National Review Editors,

Your publication of Andrew C. McCarthy’s piece, “Uncharitable: Zakat is Not About Charity, but Jihad”, featured April 23, 2011, is a complete disappointment to your standing as a leading conservative publication, as well as to journalism and truthful reporting.

Mr. McCarthy indulged in several exaggerated statements about Islam and Muslims that surprisingly missed a keen editorial eye and were allowed to be published. It is my interest to address those inaccuracies and educate you on what zakat truly is; clearly, there is an imperative need for such education at this time. Allowing such a level of gross statements to circulate uncorrected among your readership is the reason why conservatism has not only earned a poor reputation but also why it flourishes with racism at this time. Mr. McCarthy’s piece is a clear example of what’s wrong with modern conservatism.  Your willingness to publish his ill-informed piece is also a clear example of what’s wrong with conservative media.

His first misstatement is as follows:

There are, in fact, no American laws or rules that make it harder for Muslims to give to charity. What we have are laws against material support of terrorism — against using devices like charitable fronts to channel money to jihadists. Those laws are not directed at Muslims. They apply to everyone but are applied most often to Muslims, because Muslims carry out most anti-American terrorism.

Correction: While it is true that at the moment, Muslims carry out the most known anti-American terrorism, his preceding statement touching on Obama’s Cairo speech addressing an alleged difficulty for Muslims to give to charity, makes a direct connection between all Muslims as referenced in Obama’s speech and the small percentage of Muslims who I’m sure do redirect zakat money to fund jihadi objectives.  However, such actions are the cause of individual choice and cannot be ascribed to the faith nor be treated as a blanket statement stereotyping all Muslims.

Second misstatement:

The president’s suggestion that the religious obligation of zakat — one of the “five pillars of Islam” — is the equivalent of “charitable giving.” It is not. Zakat is every Muslim’s obligation to contribute to the fortification of the ummah, the notional worldwide Islamic nation. And that very much includes the funding of violent jihad against non-Muslims.

Correction: First, zakat is charitable giving. I invite Mr. McCarthy to share where in the Quran Muslims are supposedly urged to fund violent jihad. He will not find it because it’s not there. However, verses explaining and encourage charity are readily available (see 3:92; 2:177; 2-261-266, 2:271-273). I’m not an Islamic scholar, but all it takes is a little bit of research and fact-checking to make sure you know what you’re talking about, rather than indulging in bigoted statements that ensure higher readership among a fringe audience.

To continue, there are two types of charitable giving, zakat and sadaqa. Zakat is required giving for Muslims. Muslims are expected to give 2.5% of their annual income to charitable aims to support the needy. If we cannot give monetarily, we are expected to give of our time. As in any act of giving, the goal is to strip ourselves of selfishness and to think of our community.  Unfortunately, yes it’s true that zakat is reserved for Muslims. While this was very likely because an early Muslim community was struggling to thrive and needed internal help, it certainly is disappointing to see that mentality continue among many (but not all) Muslims today. However, this is where sadaqa comes in. Sadaqa is general charitable giving without stipulations or guidelines. One can give sadaqa freely to whomever they please, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, and this does occur regularly among Muslims. Where Muslim organizations have failed, Muslim individuals have gone above and beyond the call of duty to help non-Muslims – stories which simply do not garner mainstream media interest.

Third misstatement:

[On Global Giving:] What of the world’s Muslims? Over the same period of time, they accounted for a whopping 0.1 percent of the total donations committed by governments — basically, a rounding error for a Saudi sheikh’s weekend in Vegas. Drawing a telling contrast, Ms. Rosett noted that the House of Saud’s annual contribution to ICRC operations in 2008 came to a grand total of $216,460 — less than a penny per Saudi, though quite generous compared with the $50,000 kicked in by Iran, whose population is three times larger. By contrast, the United States gave $237.8 million.

How could it be that the oil-drenched realm of zakat – of what we are to believe is obligatory benevolence — lags so embarrassingly behind Dar al-Greed? Very simple: Zakat is not “charity” as we understand that term.

Mr. McCarthy has taken arguably one of the worst examples of Muslim leadership and applied to to the whole. The House of Saud hardly represents Muslims (especially when considering that most Muslims aren’t Arab), nor can Islam itself be held responsible for the disproportionate giving among failed Muslim leadership.

In closing, I’m extremely disappointed to see such rhetoric published in your magazine, and hope that in the future you’ll offer a little more accuracy to your readership. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Shireen Qudosi
Editor, Qudosi Chronicles
editor@qudosi.com

Editor’s Note – April 24, 2011
McCarthy offers a response. Unfortunately, he fails to address my argument premises. Regarding verse 9:60, which he uses to justify his argument connecting zakat with jihad by citing it’s “in the cause of Allah”, and then relying on Islamic scholarship as a support his claim – allow me to remind McCarthy that not only does the ‘supporting’ text interpret rather than look at the exact text, but that (if he had read the Quran himself before criticizing it, he would know) there are many causes of Allah and that violent jihad is one scholar’s interpretation. McCarthy has selected one vague verse and applied a chosen meaning to it rather than look at all the verses that directly state zakat’s purpose.

And again, there is no denying that there is a problem within Islam and it’s followers – which in all fairness, in this context, cannot be pinned on the faith.

It can be seen this way; but it can also be seen another way. 

Personally, I don’t accept a division of the two groups (cited most recently in my opposition piece to the mosque on Ground Zero). Rather, Muslim American is just that – understanding relations within Muslim American groups and taking that one step further to consider American relations with a larger Muslim community that is beyond our borders.

The idea of understanding or advocating Muslim American relations doesn’t not automatically reflect an attitude that sees the two (Muslim and American) as mutually exclusively; to understand the context in which it’s being used we have to direct our attention to the individual citing that phrase.

Furthermore, the idea of utilizing advisers under this position is a smart move for those who are stuck in political plays with media attention on them.  A trending example is UCI, which recently aced an erudite outburst from its Muslim Student Association.

Quran-burning Terry Jones recently put the Quran on trial and burned it upon it having been found ‘guilty’ of “crimes against humanity”. Aside from my observations including questioning who made up the jury, how a book could possibly be on trial when it cannot speak for itself and is a merger of history beyond just what is in its pages, the question falls upon you…what do you make of this?

On a closing note, someone please give Texas Imam and ‘defense attorney’ Mohamed El Hassan a clue. Playing any part in this cherade legitimizes it, particularly when that role is played by a Muslim cleric.

ICNA Protest Organizer Responds to “Hate Comes to Orange County”

As a planner — and the emcee — of the protest of the Islamic Circle of North America’s (ICNA) fundraiser featuring radical Islamists Malik Ali and Sirhaj Wahhaj, I am very disturbed by CAIR’s representation of the gathering in Yorba Linda. The video presentation with footage and quotes selected for their sensational and hurtful value, is an intentional misrepresentation of the program that evening.

There were two groups demonstrating on February 13^th and CAIR chose to only present video of the splinter group that was not invited and not welcome. The main program was in a completely different area and continued with speakers while the ICNA fundraiser began. Never did the main group dismiss and gather at the entrance to the community center.

The obvious goal of deflecting attention from our clear statements about ICNA’s extremist speakers is an obvious attempt to intimidate, discredit, and silence our efforts to expose the true nature of the Muslim fundraiser’s organizers. This will not work. We are committed to moderate Muslims and will continue to expose groups and individuals that are working against American constitutional freedoms.

Here are the facts that the CAIR video (while CAIR does not take credit for production of the video, they distributed it) did not present. The event was planned, as the flier shows, as a “peaceful and patriotic” protest. Instructions on the fliers even requested that demonstrators bring only flags, and no signs. CAIR has chosen to spotlight only the most incendiary remarks. Furthermore, not one of the protest organizers recognized anyone in the group that splintered off. We do not know who they were or who sent them.

What CAIR also does not address is why hundreds of individual Southern Californians many of whom have never protested against anything before, were out on a beautiful Sunday afternoon waving flags and listening to speakers. These people, many not affiliated with an organization, were all there to express solidarity in declaring that extremist Muslims like Malik Ali and Siraj Wahhaj are not welcome in the community.

Featured speaker, Imam Siraj Wahhaj was named as a possible co-conspirator in the to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and testified as a character witness for the convicted terror mastermind, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. Imam Malik Ali frequents America’s university campuses and speaks on the theme of “the convergence of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X: we shall overcome by any means necessary.”  He is known for his anti-semitic statements and his credo or pledge including the lines, “Jihad is my spirit” and “I will die to establish Islam.” The sponsor organization, ICNA has been called a friend by the Muslim Brotherhood, is aligned with extremist organization Jamaat-e-Islami, and has been praised by the Brotherhood as an ally that could help teach American Muslims “that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands… so that… God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.” (Arabic translation via Discover the Networks)

This is why community members were alarmed and joined in protest.

We applaud the members of Congress: Rep. Ed Royce and Rep. Gary Miller, as well as Mayor Nancy Rikel, for their participation. We also strongly support the efforts of Rep. Peter King to conduct hearings into why and how Islamists are being radicalized in the United States.

The link below is a video of the official program and demonstrates our commitment to moderate and patriotic Muslims as well as our firm stand against political Islam as advanced by the rules of shariah law.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJyt1gC4bNo&feature=related

- Karen Lugo

Our “Letters” page is an open forum for readers to express their views. To submit your letter, opinion or essay, email editor@qudosi.com. All submissions are protected by the First Amendment’s Right to Free Speech, provided they’re not hateful or provocative. The Qudosi Chronicles is not responsible for the views held by readers and in the interest of free speech, we’re open to posting submissions even if the arguments are disagreed with.

Protest image provided by Karen Lugo

HATE COMES TO ORANGE COUNTY

Anti-Muslim Protest in Yorba Linda Signals Growing Close-to-Home Hatred of Muslims

ICNA Relief hosted a February 13, 2011 charity fundraising dinner in Yorba Linda, CA. ICNA (The Islamic Circle of North America) aimed to help raise money for women’s shelters and help relieve homelessness and hunger in the United States.

The event was disrupted by protestors flanked by towering American flags, who verbally assaulted attendees; families, women, and children were subjected to aggressive and ignorant chants as they entered the building.

The protests was sponsored by “We Surround them OC 912” (a local Tea Party group), Rabbi David Eliezrie of the North County Chabad Center, and North Orange County Conservative Coalition.

Guest speakers included local elected officials such as Congressman Ed Royce, who had this to share:

“A big part of the problem that we face today is that our children have been taught in schools that every idea is right, that no one should criticize others’ position, no matter how odious. And what do we call that? They call it multiculturalism. And it has paralyzed too many of our fellow citizens to make the critical judgment we need to make to prosper as a society.”

What’s surprising about Ed Royce is that he chairs the international terrorism subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. While I would otherwise agree with some of his intelligence analysis, such as one featured in Red County in September 2010, I find he discredits himself with the affiliations he’s makes at this protest. What’s more, Royce gets it wrong when he condemns multiculturalism. The problem isn’t multiculturalism; the problem is political correctness.

Villa Park Councilwoman, Republican Deborah Pauly put on a more horrid display than Royce by adding…

“Let me tell you what’s going on over there right now, make no bones about it, that is pure unadulterated evil.” Her speech interrupted by shouts of approval and applause from the crowd, she continued, “I don’t even care if you think I’m crazy anymore. I have a beautiful daughter. I have a wonderful nineteen-year-old son who is a United States Marine. As a matter of fact, I know quite a few Marines who’ll be happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.

And finally, Republican Congressman Gary Miller had this to say…

“That’s the only reason I’m here today. To give you a flag and to say I’m proud of you. I’m proud of what you’re doing. I’m proud of this country and what we believe in. And let’s not let people who disagree with it, destroy it.”

Protester comments weren’t any better, and included shouts of “Go Back Home” and “Terrorists” among simple-minded statements such as “Muhammad was a terrorist. Muhammad was a pervert. Muhammad was a fraud. Muhammad was a false prophet.”

While Muslims will definitely be furious over such direct attacks on the prophet, this Muslim doesn’t see a problem with critical analysis of Muhammad. However, what was offered at the protest wasn’t critical analysis or questionable commentary; in my opinion, it was arguably vile and provocative hate speech said out of spite and for the sake of getting a reaction from the attendees.

Other protestor also proved they didn’t have two brain cells to rub between them, with shouts hurled across the parking lot, including “Stupid Terrorist. Go home. Go home. Go home. No sharia. Do you beat up your wife too? Are you a molester?”

Event attendee Adel Syed commented to ABC 7 News, “I’m being told to go back home. I’m actually from Fullerton [CA], so I don’t know where back home is for me.”

The hateful words continued with, “you beat your children and rape your women. Why don’t you go home and beat up your wife like you do every night. You probably have sex with a nine year old and then marry her,” while protestor Karen Lugo told the OC Register, “This is not about hate. We are not hate mongers.”

“It’s not right for terrorism to come to Yorba Linda. I always stress the need to be peaceful and positive,” added protest organizer Steven Amundson.

Yet the now-tired association between Muslim and terrorist once becomes a central issue. At the very least, Steven should have done a better job of rallying his protestors and making sure they were informed and behaved within reason. Rather, we have belligerent cries of “Take the Sharia. Go home. Eat sand. You terrorist lovers,” and “We’re patriotic Americans and we love our constitution and it’s going to stay that way. One nation under God, not Allah. Get out of here. Never forget 9-11″.

Again, there is no difference between God and Allah. They are two different names for the same diety of monotheistic faiths.

As an American, a patriot, and a conservative, I’m embarrassed for America because I know we’re capable of being better than this. I’m embarrassed for Christians because I know the hate these “Christians” dished out is hardly in keeping with Christianity and the teachings of Christ. And I’m embarrassed for Republican leadership because I’m seeing more and more anti-Islamic sentiment within a party I know possesses honorable values at its core; they also are capable of better and I for one am getting tired of waiting around for someone to be better.

These protestors, the elected officials on their soap box peddling to an uninformed and close-minded audience, represent some of the very worst of our society. They appear civil but their hateful actions show that not only are they uninformed, but that they choose to remain uniformed. Just like the Muslims they condemn who choose to only view the world within the constraints of their own perspectives, these officials and protestors also choose to view Muslims and Islam within their own tunneled vision.

Their cries invoking America and their flag waving is just as hypocritical and misdirected as terrorists shouting “Allahuakbar” or “God is Great”. Neither understands nor represents the thing they claim to be or be acting on behalf of. These people are not true patriots, nor people of faith, just as terrorists who kill in the name of God couldn’t be further removed from Him.

What we have here is far beyond the bounds of Islamophobia. There is no fear of Islam here; there is just an outright hatred of Islam and Muslims. And as far as the lofty credentials go when it comes to these elected officials, they’re about worth as much to me as used toilet paper. It’s one thing for the crowd to have acted as they did; they’re a mob. But elected officials have a duty to show a little more intelligence and not fuel fires.

If these people REALLY care about Islamism, and truly wish to deal with the problem, then the solution isn’t attacking Muslims at an event – which will only increase Muslim insecurity, causing them to withdraw and ferment anti-American “they hate us” sentiment. Ask yourselves this, did ONE sentence, one speech or one poster board sign do ANYTHING to redirect even ONE Muslim away from what YOU perceive as radical Islam?

No. What it did do is make them more vulnerable to the words of flamed anti-West, anti-Israeli rhetoricians that would have their ears as soon as they walked through those doors.

The only thing these protestors and elected officials did is ensure the problem gets worse. They proved there is a hatred of Islam, especially as more and more elected officials feel confident enough to voice inaccurate, hateful, and threatening speech in a public forum.

ICNA affiliate Waqas Syed puts it best when he says,

“These qualities [cooperation, collaboration, peace, and mutual understanding] should be foremost represented in our elected officials, yet it is with great disappointment that we witnessed Congressmen Ed Royce of Fullerton and Gary Miller of Diamond Bar being complicit in the toxic, inflammatory rhetoric that was spewed against the half million American Muslims they have sworn to protect. Their participation in such rallies is inappropriate and irresponsible, to say the least, and essentially shows a lack of leadership and judgment.

To Congressmen Ed Royce and Gary Miller—it is your civic duty to represent all constituents, yet time and again you have stood beside those who seek to strip American Muslims of their fundamental rights. You distribute flags at a rally against our fundraising dinner, but do not extend that service to the dinner itself. You speak out against American Muslims in Yorba Linda, but do not speak for us. Your biased actions contribute to a climate of hate and intolerance, and suggest that American Muslims are somehow less American simply by virtue of their faith. I urge you to revisit your oath and uphold the constitution and your responsibility to the citizens of your district.”

Waqas’ commentary aside, the real problem is ICNA, which has been linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. The fact that the evening’s fundraising event speakers included Amir Abdel Malik Ali and Imam Siraj Wahhaj doesn’t help the defense of ICNA’s innocence in the eyes of the Muslim community.

These facts should have been the protest’s focus, rather than protestors making fools of themselves by attacking the Muslim attendees with complete nonsense commentary. I can guarantee many attendees were not even aware of ICNA’s suspicious activities and would have benefited far more from a calm peaceful organization where the core issue, ICNA, was addressed with a degree of intelligence.

As for the attendees, I give them great credit for not engaging with the protestors, for not shouting back as far as I can tell, for walking through the protesting crowd peacefully. This couldn’t have been easy to do and I give each and every attendee full credit for remaining so composed.

With hate levels rising, Muslims need to start getting informed. We need to know where the opinions are coming from, which are based on truth and which aren’t. If you’ve heard something negative about ICNA, don’t just ignore it but investigate it. Stop being defensive.

See what’s being said about your faith, about your community and organizations, even if you don’t believe it. Above all, get involved with your community – and I don’t mean just your Muslim community.

And finally, dress the part. Looking like a migrant Muslim farm worker who just stepped off the boat isn’t going to give the right impression that you’re a sharp, well-educated member of American society. Ditch the ethnic wear and accept a more stylish wardrobe – or learn to seamlessly fuse the two. Men should be in suits or business casual attire in such public venues as fundraising events – especially if you know there’s going to be protestors present. Women, while they can still be covered, shouldn’t look like they’re messily wrapped in layers of bed sheets.

As Muslims we can’t just play victim and say “oh look how they’re treating us.” We have to be smart. We have to educate ourselves. We have to step outside our comfort zones. And we have to accept the call to duty to do our part to create positive changes in our society.

** SUPPORT SHIREEN QUDOSI **
Like what you read? Then take a moment to show your support.
Donations can be made via PayPal in the top left column on this page.

Editor’s Note | March 4, 2011

Not surprisingly, the featured video by CAIR misinforms the public and makes it appear that there was one general protest and rally, when in fact there were two.

While the rally organizers are distancing themselves from what they say were rogue protestors, it doesn’t change the rhetoric of Villa Park Councilwoman, Deborah Pauly, who I’m told is also the Vice Chair of the Orange County Republican Central Committee. Nor does it take away from Royce’s associations and his inaccurate stance against multiculturalism.

Please also refer to the insightful comment offered below by reader “Brooklynjon”, who had this to share:

Reading the article about the day’s events in the Orange County Register – http://www.ocregister.com/news… – it seems that there were, in essence two protests that day. One protest consisted in roughly 1000 people gathered listening to speeches which evidently denounced two of the speakers at the ICNA fund raiser, Amir Abdel Malik Ali and Imam Siraj Wahhaj. I do not personally know these men, but evidently one was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and the other notably supports groups listed by the State Department as terrorist organizations. It seems plausible to me that one can be opposed to these particular individuals without harboring hatred to the peaceful majority of American Muslims, or to Islam in general. Of note, this protest occurred outside the venue, did not interfere with the speakers or the attendees, and was apparently peaceful, both in the letter and the spirit of that term. This protest was attended by a US Congressman, and evidently “a couple of rabbis” among others. Again, not having attended personally, it does not seem to have been an entirely inappropriate venue for the congressman or the rabbis.

According to the article, there was a second protest which broke off this larger protest. The second protest, according to the article, was around 50 yards from the community center entrance, and consisted in around 100 people. These individuals were captured on video shouting things to those people arriving for the fund raiser. No doubt the things that were shouted were mean-spirited and in exceptionally poor taste. Although I support the right of these individuals to say things in poor taste (so long as they don’t inspire violence), I can’t say I agree with the sentiments expressed. Nevertheless, there were apparently no threats of violence, there was suitable police protection, and there was an appropriate distance maintained. Photos on the OCRegister’s page show people attending the fund-raiser, walking past the protest, and laughing, apparently untroubled and unthreatened by distasteful epithets hurled their way. Also noteworthy is that the speeches by the allegedly objectionable speakers were not interrupted in any way. It appears that free speech was the big winner that day, for better or for worse.

….

Secondly, the controversial speakers did, evidently, get to speak without incident or interruption. This notably contrasts with what happened almost exactly a year prior when Ambassador Michael Oren was invited to speak at UC Irvine. At that event, the ambassador was repeatedly shouted down and interrupted in an attempt to prevent him from speaking. This was, of course, not the first time an Israeli politician’s speech was disrupted in North America, and not the first time an objectionable speaker was disrupted by Muslims at UCI – http://www.jewishjournal.com/t… But it is notable for its location, and for the respect for controversial free speech displayed by one group – http://www.jewishjournal.com/t… – and the lack of respect for it displayed by the other. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…

>> See related article: “ICNA Protest Organizer Responds to ‘Hate Comes to Orange County’”.