Monthly Archives: March 2010

Extremists of any color or belief can commit terrorism: Arsalan Iftikhar

Link to article
By Arsalan Iftikhar, Special to CNN
March 10, 2010 3:46 p.m. EST

Editor’s note: Arsalan Iftikhar is an international human rights lawyer, founder of TheMuslimGuy.com and legal fellow for the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, a nonprofit research organization in Washington, D.C.

(CNN) — Within the last month, our country has witnessed two senseless, high-profile acts of criminal violence that would have been labeled terrorism if brown-skinned Arab Muslim men with foreign-sounding names had committed them.

Because two white men committed these acts of violence, however, our political and media chattering class never used the word “terrorism” in its discussions.

Most recently, John Patrick Bedell, a 36-year-old man from California, walked up to two security guards outside the Pentagon Metro station in suburban Washington and started shooting. He was then shot and killed. According to The Christian Science Monitor, Bedell appeared “to have been a right-wing extremist with virulent anti-government feelings” and also battled mental illness before his shooting rampage.

A few weeks ago, on February 18, another white anti-government extremist named Joseph Stack flew his small airplane into an Internal Revenue Service building in Austin, Texas, killing two people and injuring 13 others.

According to media reports, Stack had left behind a disjointed suicide letter in which he expressed his hatred of our American government and outlined grievances with the IRS, chillingly stating that “violence not only is the answer; it is the only answer.”

Both the Pentagon Metro and IRS attacks come at a time of “explosive growth in [domestic] extremist-group activism across the United States,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

A recently released law center report showed so-called patriot groups — steeped in anti-government conspiracy theories — grew from 149 in 2008 to 512 in 2009 — a 244 percent increase that the Southern Poverty Law Center report judged to be an “astonishing” rise in the one-year period since President Obama took the oath of office. The number of these groups that are domestic extremist paramilitary militias grew from 42 in 2008 to 127 in 2009, the report said.

Even so, for any reasonable observer who is still skeptical about labeling the recent Pentagon area shooting and IRS attack terrorism, keep one thing in mind:

Let us imagine that these Pentagon and IRS attacks had been committed by an olive-skinned Arab Muslim man named Ali Muhammad.

Our national media and political commentators would have wasted little time in calling both of these acts terrorism, and some might have also called for the closings of other IRS and federal government office buildings around the country as a necessary counter-terrorism safety precaution.

Instead, shortly after the IRS plane attack, some prominent media commentators immediately asked why people — especially conservatives on the right — were not calling the IRS attacker a terrorist.

“If this had been done by a brownish-looking Muslim guy whose suicide note paralleled Islamist political themes,” wrote media commentator Matthew Yglesias, then right-wingers would “demand that anyone who refused to label the attack ‘terrorism’ be put up on treason charges.”

In a recent piece, Robert Wright, of the New America Foundation, wrote: “In common usage, a ‘terrorist’ is someone who attacks in the name of a political cause and aims to spread terror — to foster fear that such attacks will be repeated until grievances are addressed.” Following suit, the IRS attacker’s suicide manifesto before his aerial kamikaze attack reads in part: “I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after … I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be whitewashed and ignored” — at which point, God willing, — “the American zombies wake up and revolt.”

If this same above-mentioned suicide letter had been instead written by an Arab Muslim man named Ali Muhammad right before crashing his airplane into an IRS building, most of the right-wing blogosphere would instantaneously erupt with screaming headlines of another act of Muslim terrorism.

Because Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber; Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh; Atlanta, Georgia, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph; the Pentagon shooter and IRS attacker were all white men motivated by their respective ideologies, surprisingly, the term “terrorism” has never seemed to stick to any of them. To prove my point even further, the recently indicted American woman Colleen LaRose, who called herself “Jihad Jane,” can rightfully be termed a wanna-be terrorist. But why does this not apply to other white extremists?

If our nation is truly conducting a ”war on terror” and not a “war on Islam,” it is our duty as Americans of all colors, political persuasions and nationalities to condemn and distance ourselves from all acts of terrorism, regardless of the race or religion of those who commit violent acts in the name of extreme ideology. Simply put, terrorism is terrorism, whether it is committed by a white, black or brown person anywhere in the world.

If we as a nation fail to adequately condemn all acts of terrorism equally, the only clear message that we will be sending to the rest of the world is that the word “terrorist” applies only to those with olive skin and foreign-sounding last names.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Arsalan Iftikhar.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, Current Events, Islam, Politics, Religion

Islam and Ego – Nouman Ali Khan

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam

Sh Yousuf Idris: Peace Conference 2009

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Celebrate Mercy

CelebrateMercy.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam

The Story of Alqamah

“Alqamah (radi Allahu anhu) was a very pious person. He spent his time in prayer and fasting. At the approach of death he was unable to proclaim the Kalima Shahada, in spite of repeated instruction by those present. Alqamah’s wife sent a messenger to Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) to inform him of Alqamah’s grave condition.

Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) enquired whether the parents of Alqamah were alive. He was informed that Alqamah’s mother was alive. Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) asked the aged mother about Alqamah. She replied: ‘Alqamah is a very pious person. He passes his time in Salat and Saum. He performs Tahajjud, but he always disobeys me for the sake of his wife. I am, therefore, displeased with him.’

Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘It will be best for him if you forgive him.’ However, she refused. Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) ordered Bilal (radi Allahu anhu) to gather firewood. On hearing this order, Alqamah’s mother asked in consternation: ‘Will my child be burnt in the fire?’

Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘Yes! Compared to the punishment of Allah, our punishment is light. I take oath by Allah that as long as you remain displeased with him, neither his Salat nor his Sadaqah is accepted.’

The old lady said: ‘I make you and all people present witness that I have forgiven Alqamah.’ Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) addressing the gathering, said: ‘Go and see if the Kalima is on the tongue of Alqamah or not.’

After returning from Alqamah the people informed him that he was reciting the Kalima. Thus, he left this world with the Kalima on his lips. After burying Alqamah, Rasul Allah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘The curse of Allah is on the one who causes difficulty to his mother. The curse of the angels and the curse of mankind be on him. Allah Ta’ala neither accepts his Fardh nor his Nafl Ibadat as long as he does not repent and obey his mother. He has to gain her pleasure as best as he can. Allah’s Pleasure depends on the mother’s pleasure and His Wrath is concealed in her wrath.’” [Ahmad]

This hadith is a sobre reminder for us to be respectful and obedient to our parents and try to keep them happy with us. It is not a small matter to upset them for the sake of our friends or others who we value more. The only time that we are allowed to give preference to others is in the matter of others’ Allah-given rights, since no obedience can supercede obedience to Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam).

Therefore, it is important to find out what the rights of our children, spouses, relatives, friends, and other Muslims are, so we know what Allah (subhana wa ta’ala) wants us to do in case there is a clash between what different people want from us. This is the only proper way to balance relationships as it seeks Allah’s pleasure. Otherwise, mothers deserve our utmost attention, respect and obedience.

Leave a comment

Filed under Islam