Muslims in a Post 9/11 World

Muslims in a Post 9/11 World

Abdul Malik

 

Introduction

 

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks using passenger airplanes that destroyed the twin towers in New York City, part of the Pentagon, as well as another plane over Pennsylvania, the media highlighted isolated groups of Muslims celebrating these tragic events, insinuating that this was representative of the Muslim worldview even though the majority of the world’s Muslims were just as outraged at this atrocity. Later surveys also showed that some Muslims did not believe that their brethren were involved in the attacks. Fueling this doubt was the fact that Building 7, which was not hit with anything, also crumbled to the ground later that same day. Furthermore, the BBC revealed that four of the alleged hijackers were still alive.[1] Conspiracy theories aside, some Muslims refused to acknowledge that a few bearded extremists hanging out in Afghan caves could have planned and actually pulled off such a spectacular attack that took nearly 3,000 innocent American lives. The fact is that in all nations, irrespective of religious denomination, there is a small percentage of radicals who believe in violence to achieve their goals, but the Western media have given Muslims a unique distinction – their extremism (associated with a very small percentage of the world’s Muslims) has been linked with the Qur’an and Islam as the guiding force for any heinous crimes that Muslims commit. Such a connection was never made between Irish terrorists and Catholicism, for example, or the Hindu extremists who rioted and destroyed the Babri mosque in Ayodhya, India, because it was allegedly built where a Hindu temple once stood centuries ago – a highly controversial (and possibly fabricated) claim that nonetheless resulted in the slaughter of thousands of Muslims.[2]

 

Following the 9/11 catastrophe, President Bush visited a mosque in Washington, DC and publicly declared that Islam is a peaceful religion that was hijacked by terrorists. While this was a commendable step and seemed to indicate that Bush would reach out to moderate Muslims (who comprise the majority of the world’s 1.3 billion adherents) and work collaboratively with them to isolate extremists, the President apparently had other nefarious ambitions. Little did the world know at the time that US foreign policy was also hijacked by a group of extremists in Washington, and no one (except maybe the President’s inner circle) could have known that he would do the opposite of his pre-election rhetoric and use this apocalyptic event to pursue what some analysts have described as possibly the most disastrous foreign policy blunder in US history.[3] There seems to be a direct correlation between the administration’s demonization and harassment of American Muslims, charitable organizations and businesses, etc., and its strategic foreign policy objectives. Such tactics make it easy for the American public to go along with the idea that American Muslims are the enemy within, thus allowing the administration to pursue its hubristic policies using the “global/perpetual war on terror” as a pretext.[4]

 

Deliberate Deceptions

 

The administration’s first trickery involved glossing over the root cause of Muslim grievances, which is an unfair US foreign policy towards the Muslim world,[5] and instead conveying to the American people (and the world) that Muslim extremists hate freedom and democracy. While terrorism (be it by individuals, groups, or nation States) cannot be justified under any circumstances,[6] I have yet to read or see a media report claiming that any terrorist (regardless of religious affiliation) commits their crimes against innocents because of a hatred for freedom and democracy. But the biggest treachery was yet to come. With the UN as its medium, the Bush administration (using then Secretary of State Colin Powell) claimed that the brutal Iraqi dictator (Saddam Hussein) had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in his possession. This preposterous claim was propagated despite more than a decade of UN inspections and crippling sanctions (following the first Iraq war in 1991) that killed more than a million Iraqis, many of them children – these numbers are disputed and might just be in the hundreds of thousands, and do not include over a million more Iraqis killed as a result of the current invasion.[7] Moreover, the administration continuously pitched to the public the notion that Saddam Hussein had links to “al Qaida” and a role in 9/11, which turned out to be another blatant lie.[8] These deliberate deceptions, with the help of nearly all of the mainstream media parroting the administration’s position and a public salivating for vengeance, facilitated the illegal invasion of Iraq. The hijackers who flew the planes into the twin towers were supposedly from Saudi Arabia and Egypt (US allies), so the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

Even prior to Bush’s presidential inauguration on January 20, 2001, the embassy of Niger in Italy had a break-in on January 2, 2001, and nothing of consequence appeared to have been taken except some paraphernalia like letterhead and official embassy stamps. Coincidentally, there was a forged document that Iraq had tried to obtain yellowcake from Niger – yellowcake can be refined to make enriched uranium which can then be used for nuclear weapons. This forgery was part of the fraudulent data that the administration presented to make the case for the Iraq war.[9] Additionally, the administration enlisted scores of Iraqis (both in the US and Iraq) to try and find evidence of WMDs in Iraq, and they all came up empty but their findings did not matter.[10] So there seems to have been a well orchestrated, sinister scheme to invade Iraq, and all that was needed was a catalyst.

 

With the fall of the former Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the Project for the New American Century (PNAC – a right-wing group of neoconservatives or “neocons”) felt that the United States was unrivaled as the world’s preeminent superpower, and they proposed a fundamental new approach to US foreign policy. Their proposal was so radical that they admitted that it could not be implemented without some kind of cataclysmic disaster. Their strategic manuscript has the following chilling statement: “…Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”[11] On September 11, 2001, the PNAC neocons got their wish. This was followed by the purposeful manipulation of intelligence data to make the case for the Iraq war. The level of European involvement in this elaborate swindle is still unraveling, but at the very least, some officials within the British, German, and Italian governments were aware of the evil plot to illegally invade and occupy Iraq.[12] The much touted “coalition of the willing” that went along with this quagmire should have been coined the “coalition of the bullied”, as they were mostly coerced (with threats of repercussions) into signing up.[13]

 

Five years after the invasion, none of the much vaunted WMDs have been found, and a former administration official (Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan) and the current Republican presidential nominee (John McCain) have indicated that the invasion was really about oil.[14] It is no surprise then that the rationale for the war keeps changing – first to stop the proliferation and potential use of WMDs, then Saddam’s imaginary involvement in 9/11, then bringing freedom and democracy to the Iraqis, then keeping the oil from falling into the hands of terrorists, and so on. Prior to the US invasion, Iraq did not have a terrorist base, but it is now a haven for extremists who are looking for avenues to get back at the US. Iraq (the land of the Prophet Abraham) sits on the second largest oil reserve in the Middle East (after Saudi Arabia), and with oil driving the world’s economy and an ever increasing global demand for a dwindling resource, policy hawks apparently believe that controlling the flow of oil to world markets provides defacto influence over the world’s economy. The administration could not possibly have sold the invasion to the public based on the perceived US need for jurisdiction over oil (with 5% of the world’s population consuming 25% of its energy), hence the reason for deceiving a largely naïve and gullible public.[15]

 

The Politics of Fear

 

President Teddy Roosevelt once warned Americans that “the only thing they have to fear is fear itself.”[16] During the more than six years since the 9/11 tragedy, the Bush administration seems to have taken a different tact, i.e., the only thing that Americans have to fear is not enough fear.[17] Arabs/Muslims who were not permanent residents or citizens were told to show up for special registration, and many were rounded up and “interned” or deported. All Muslims were treated as “guilty until proven innocent”, even though the majority of them are just “mainstream” and trying to have a peaceful life and enjoy the American dream.[18] Since 9/11, probably no other community was scrutinized and spied upon as the American Muslim community, and except for a few minor infractions or visa violations, no terrorist group or plot has been uncovered. A few Muslims were arrested for allegedly planning terrorist activities, which the media and government officials highlighted with great fanfare, but analysis showed that most (if not all) of these accusations were tenuous at best, and the incarcerations were a result of them being entrapped, or given one of two options: plead guilty and go to jail for a limited term, or refuse to plead guilty and be treated as “enemy combatants” with no chance of a court hearing and the possibility of being incarcerated indefinitely.[19]

 

With the introduction of a color coded warning system, Americans were frequently cautioned about terrorism so that they live in constant fear of another attack on the scale of 9/11 being possible at any given moment from the enemy neighbor (Muslims). With a string of Hollywood movies, TV shows like Fox’s 24,[20] and supporting rhetoric from radio/TV bigots reinforcing this siege mentality, constitutional rights are gradually being eroded in the name of national security. American citizens are being held as enemy combatants, the government now has the right to spy on all citizens with immunity,[21] and legislation is currently being debated in Congress (H.R. 3773) to extend this immunity to the phone companies and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that are colluding. While the color coded terror warnings have faded following the 2004 presidential election, the public is still notified periodically (especially via interstate highway traffic signs) to be on the lookout for suspicious activity, i.e., report “shifty looking” people, viz., Arabs/Muslims. The result is that hate crimes against Muslims (also those perceived to be Muslims including some Sikhs and Hispanics) have continued to rise both in the US and Europe.[22] Many Americans are either oblivious to the fact that they are slowly losing their freedoms, or seem to believe that American Muslims are getting what they deserve and non-Muslim Americans will remain unaffected. As a great American (Benjamin Franklin) once warned his colleagues in the Continental Congress: "Those who would give up essential liberty to pursue a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

 

The Europeans, not to be outdone, having previously passed laws that criminalize Holocaust denial and the glorification of Nazism, have permitted “open season” when it comes to the denigration of the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad under the guise of freedom of expression (obviously selective). The double standards and bigotry are no longer subtle.[23] The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), an inter-governmental group made up of 57 States, recently decided to take action to try and stem the tide of racism, but their leadership is reactive as usual, nothing more than symbolic, and unlikely to achieve any concrete results.[24]

 

Fear of Islam

 

On an almost daily basis, the American public is fed a diet of hate against Islam and Muslims on the Internet, talk radio, and cable TV. So called “experts” on terrorism and Islam have coined terms like “Islamofascism”, conveying that there is some global movement for Islamic domination of the world. These “experts” frequently quote the Qur’an as the source of everything that is evil about Islam (the word Islam actually means peace), but they seldom provide any evidence. Muslim organizations have in turn created their own term for this prejudice – Islamophobia.

 

Outside of the print media, rarely discussed on talk radio and cable TV is the propriety and ethics of a wide range of attacks and slander heaped upon Muslim symbols, values, and religious personage – perpetrated by Western governments, conservative/right-wing political windbags, and other established media entities. These include:

·         The amendment to the French constitution in 2004 banning “conspicuous religious symbols” in government-operated schools, a law considered by many to be specifically targeted towards the headscarf worn by Muslim schoolgirls;

·         The scornful libel of the Danish cartoons published and re-published by European media against Islam and its noble Prophet, an act without any social or educational redeeming value;

·         The Pope’s disparaging Regensburg address, which was essentially an unwarranted act of hostility dismissing Islam as a faith tradition not built on reason but on violence;

·         The US and Western Evangelicals’ constant attack on the personage of Islam’s Prophet as a man of violence and a pedophile.[25]

 

As someone who has read and studied both the Qur’an and Bible, I have yet to find anything in the Qur’an remotely resembling the following verses (there are many others):[26]

 

… Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the first born bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day. And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day… (Genesis 19:31-38)

 

… Neither left she her whoredoms brought from Egypt: for in her youth they lay with her, and they bruised the breasts of her virginity, and poured their whoredom upon her…

… For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses… (Ezekiel 23:1-49, also see Ezekiel 16:1-40)

 

… Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves… (Numbers 31:17-18)

 

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. (Matthew 10:34,35)

 

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:26)

 

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. [Luke 19:27]

 

Muslim researchers, writers, and political commentators have accorded the Bible due respect as the sacred gospel of Jews and Christians, and have stayed away from slandering it, even though some of their Judeo-Christian brethren seem to be following the above-noted immoral and highly objectionable statements codified in their religious doctrine when it comes to lambasting Islam and Muslims.

 

For comparative purposes, the following few verses from the Qur’an have often been (mis)used and misrepresented by so called Western “terrorism experts,” who quote them freely to support the misconception that violence is enshrined in Islam’s sacred Book:[27]

 

And slay them wherever you may come upon them, and drive them away from wherever they drove you away – for oppression is even worse than killing. And fight not against them near the Inviolable House of Worship unless they fight against you there first; but if they fight against you, slay them: such shall be the recompense of those who deny the truth. (Q2:191)

 

They would love to see you deny the truth even as they have denied it, so that you should be like them. Do not, therefore, take them for your allies until they forsake the domain of evil for the sake of God; and if they revert to [open] enmity, seize them and slay them wherever you may find them. And do not take any of them for your ally or giver of succour… (Q4:89)

 

You will find [that there are] others who would like to be safe from you as well as safe from their own folk, [but who,] whenever they are faced anew with temptation to evil, plunge into it headlong. Hence, if they do not let you be, and do not offer you peace, and do not stay their hands, seize them and slay them whenever you come upon them: for it is against these that We have clearly empowered you [to make war]. (Q4:91)

 

The fact is that the above quoted Qur’anic verses are without doubt related to the self-defense of the early fledgling Muslim community against a hardened, oppressive Meccan enemy, which tried its utmost to liquidate the early adherents of Islam. What is to be noted in these verses is that permission to fight the enemy is temporary and only to be used as a last resort! However, the true context of these verses has universally been ignored by Western commentators, who deliberately select only portions from these quotes, labeled “verses of the sword” to highlight their scholastic incompetence and prejudiced interpretation.

 

One foundation verse of the Qur’an also states:

 

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. (Q5:32)

 

This powerful verse (and others too numerous to quote) clearly indicates the idea of peace as the central overall message of the Qur’an. I have to strongly emphasize here that this brief comparison of Qur’anic and Biblical verses depicted above is not meant in any way to disparage the Bible (since the Qur’an describes Jews and Christians as “People of the Book” who are eligible for heaven – Q2:62, also 5:69), but to remind the “experts” that those “who live in glass houses should not throw stones”:

 

"Judge not, that you be not judged, for with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. Why behold you see the mote that is in your brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in your own eye?" [Matthew 7:1-3]

 

As a result of constant fear-mongering and hyperbole, Americans now have a more unfavorable opinion of Islam and Muslims than they did immediately following the 9/11 attacks. Samuel Huntington proposed the idea that with the end of the Cold War between the Soviets and US, the new enemy is the Muslim world and there will be an inevitable “Clash of Civilizations.” Perhaps the goal of the latest “crusade” in the Middle East is to make this “clash” a self-fulfilling prophecy.[28]

 

Muslim Defamation of Islam

 

Muslims are not blameless and have played a role in misrepresenting Islam, thus assisting with its defamation. If they do not comprehend their religion, how can they accurately present it to non-Muslims? A few areas of distortion include the barbaric punishment of stoning to death for adultery (still practiced in some countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates), the death penalty for apostasy, the second class status of women and non-Muslims in a so called “Islamic State” under Shari’a (perceived religious/Islamic law), promoting cultural baggage as creedal obligations, and a general intolerance for differing viewpoints that are not in alignment with traditional Muslim thought. The problem starts with many of the self-proclaimed Muslim scholars who are essentially untrained. The majority of those who are trained attend sectarian religious institutions that specialize in memorizing and propagating medieval thought. The few contemporary thinkers and scholars, whose academic and intellectual credentials are unquestioned, are for the most part not popularly known. The result is that the traditional ‘ulama’ (self-proclaimed scholars) are merely repeating and passing down today the same half-baked rulings from centuries ago, leaving the lay Muslim population not only confused but vulnerable to inflexible and intolerant ideas from the retrograde thinkers of the "Deoband" and "Wahhabite" radical fringe.

 

For example, one popular issue that has polarized the traditional scholars from modern thinkers and theologians concerns the punishment for adultery. The majority of Muslims (including jurists) believe that stoning to death is the prescribed punishment for committing adultery, when a little research and common sense proves otherwise. In fact, the Qur’an actually stipulates 100 lashes as the punishment for adultery. Of course there has to be four witnesses, so this would indicate that sexual impropriety is endemic in society for four people to witness the act (see Q24:2-4). Stoning to death is Jewish law (see Leviticus 20, also Ezekiel 16), and derived from the hadith/Sunnah (the Prophet Muhammad’s sayings and actions passed down verbally through several generations and then documented about 200 years after his death).[29] Since most Muslims have been conditioned to believe in the sanctity of the hadith, they feel that these are on par with the Qur’an. This places Muslims in a perennial dilemma as they are always trying to find ways to reconcile contradictions between the Qur’an and hadith, sometimes twisting the Qur’anic interpretation of verses to harmonize them with the hadith. An example can be seen in the plagiarized version of Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Qur’an published by the King Fahd Holy Qur’an Printing Complex, where the Saudis added the following commentary for the applicable verse mentioned above (footnote 2954):

 

“Although zina covers both fornication and adultery, in the opinion of Muslim jurists, the punishment laid down here applies only to unmarried persons. As for married persons, their punishment, according to the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be on him), is stoning to death.”

 

The Qur’an did not make any distinction between married and unmarried people, so it is unthinkable that the Prophet Muhammad would have ignored the Qur’anic dictate. The misinformation about stoning being Qur’anic legislation can be found in Caryle Murphy’s “Passion For Islam”, Robert Fisk’s “The Great War for Civilisation”, and R.T. Naylor’s “Satanic Purses” (to name a few works) – these are all great books by respectable authors. One can only presume that these authors took for granted that Muslims understood their religion, so they (the authors) just repeated the “stoning to death” punishment verbatim as a Qur’anic decree in their books.

 

On the issue of apostasy, again there are no Qur’anic verses that mention the death penalty for apostasy. This would be contradictory since the Qur’an clearly states: There shall be no coercion in matters of faith.(Q2:256) The idea of punishment for apostasy had nothing to do with religion but with subversion of the state, or sedition, and comes from the hadith. Until recently, many Western countries executed spies for treason, and this is still the case in some parts of the world.[30]

 

Recently, some Muslims living in the West have been pushing for Shari’a as an alternative source of legislation in conjunction with secular law. The Prophet Muhammad never instituted Shari’a (as it is understood and implemented today) during his lifetime, nor did any of his immediate successors. The evolution of Shari’a occurred centuries after the Prophet’s death, and is now erroneously believed by many Muslims to be a divine injunction. Contrary to popular belief, Shari’a is not divine law, but "fiqh" or human interpretation of what is deemed to be divine law.

 

Some years ago, I was listening to National Public Radio in the US and the topic was Islam. A Muslim listener phoned in to the station to defend Islam, and when asked by the host if non-Muslims would have the right to vote in an “Islamic society”, the caller said that they would not. In his eagerness to defend his faith, this caller ended up misleading thousands of listeners. The problem with his archaic assumption is that there was no voting in medieval Islamic society as we understand it. In many countries today where Islam is the dominant religion, non-Muslims have the right to vote as well as hold office. This incident reminded me of the 20th century Egyptian “counselor” Sayyid Qutb, whose guidance sets the bar for intolerance and polarization. It is unfortunate that some Muslim organizations distribute his literature as a “scholarly” work.[31]

 

In retrospect, Shari’a was much more equitable and humane compared to European law up until the 18th century, however, European/Western legislation has continued to evolve and is now regarded as “more civilized” than Shari’a.[32] The problem with this stagnation is that many Muslims view Qur’anic decrees as immutable, and as such, believe that women and non-Muslims are not eligible for equitable status in a so called Islamic state. This is not the view of some progressive Muslim scholars, who propose that these Qur’anic rulings were meant as a blueprint for the continuous evolution of legislation and not “written in stone”. For example, the verses that half the inheritance for women and require two female witnesses (as opposed to a single male) were laying the foundation for the emancipation of women in a traditional setting, and not necessarily permanent injunctions.[33] Many Muslims who advocate Shari’a are probably unaware that it has not been updated for centuries and is inherently biased against women (regardless of denomination) and non-Muslims. The checks and balances that Shari’a provided in the past where there was a balance of power between the scholars and Muslim leaders no longer exist in today’s world of despotic “Muslim” leaders. Besides, Shari’a violates some sections of the internationally recognized UN Charter on Human Rights and ironically, some Muslim countries that promote Shari’a are signatories to the very same UN charter.[34]

 

Probably no other symbol in Islam conveys the oppression of Muslim women (real or perceived) more than the headscarf (hijab). In response, some Muslim women have claimed (in what would seem oxymoronic) that they find the head-covering “liberating”. Taking “liberation” to the extreme is the face-veil (niqab). Like other pre-Islamic/Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices that Muslims have adopted and refined throughout the centuries (including but not limited to the second coming of Jesus, stoning to death, punishment in the grave, and the soul as a separate entity), the headscarf now symbolizes how Muslim women are supposed to dress. This centuries-old dress code was given sanctity when someone alleged that the Prophet Muhammad stated that only a woman’s hands and face must be seen when she reaches the age of puberty. Some believe that the primary objective of the headscarf is to make women appear less sexually attractive to men, as hair is considered part of a woman’s beauty. Muslim women are also required to make themselves less conspicuous as some societies still practice “honor killings” if a female relative’s name gets tarnished.[35]

 

It would seem absurd then that a Muslim woman would take a job as a flight attendant, which requires dealing primarily with a male clientele, and serving alcohol and pork (items prohibited in Islam), then make a “civil rights” argument for wearing the head-covering. The first question that comes to mind is how this woman got the job in the first place, did she interview without the headscarf (which is deceitful)? There was also a case of a Muslim firefighter who wanted to keep a beard, even though for years the fire department’s code has been that beards are hazardous in their line of work. There were also cases of Muslims insisting on praying in the aisles of planes and restricting the movement of other passengers and flight attendants while they carry out their religious duties, ignoring the fact that in Islam, the safety of the majority takes precedence over inconveniencing others.

 

The wearing of the face-covering even under the guise of freedom of religion should not be permitted given its societal implications – it should come as no surprise that people have robbed businesses dressed this way. Muslim women who, under freedom of religion, want to wear the headscarf as an icon of identification (like Catholic nuns), make a political statement, or based on personal interpretation, should be allowed to do so, especially when constitutional rights provide such freedoms. The same goes for men with beards. However, some Muslims living in the West feel that their individual rights supersede business and communal rules, and as such they are empowered to endanger themselves and others, when there is no society that I know of (Muslim or non-Muslim) that treats individual privileges as paramount to societal rights.

 

Personal interpretations of religious obligations should not be used as an excuse to force changes to established societal rules. Muslims often ignore the historical context and reasoning behind some traditions, and erroneously believe that exposed hair (and in a minority of cases an exposed face) is tantamount to promiscuity. Both the head-covering and face-veil are cultural practices that have become ingrained in Islam as religious symbols, analogous to the amalgamation of pagan traditions like the worship of the “evergreen tree” and December 25th – the birthday of the Roman sun god – into Christianity during the eight centuries that it took the Europeans to accept Christianity. But even in the face of compelling evidence, it is difficult to discard beliefs and practices (in any faith) that have been established for over a millennium.

 

There is no denying that there are legitimate cases of discrimination and these should be aggressively pursued. But there are also many trivial cases (as outlined above) that just serve to further demonize Islam. Muslims (and their affiliated organizations) should be careful when pursuing litigation that their cases are legitimate civil rights issues, and not based on self interests or a warped interpretation of religious requirements. More importantly, these Muslims need to carefully choose their battles. For, while focusing on having their way, some Muslims neglect to think about the damaging publicity and detrimental effects that their actions have on the Muslim community as a whole, as these are the cases that the media repeatedly focus on (especially is a post 9/11 environment). Muslims should be careful to convey that these customs are their personal views or interpretation of religious obligations, and not compulsory requirements in Islam, which has negative connotations and leaves an impression of inflexibility in the name of religion. Muslim organizations seem to miss this point also, and instead of looking at these cases objectively, they swallow  the “civil rights” bait wholesale, and go after businesses claiming discrimination under the guise of Muslim women’s “religiously mandated” obligation to cover up.

 

Theocratic rule may have worked in a medieval setting, but it is anachronistic today in any pluralistic society.  Religious dogma suppresses critical thinking, results in intolerance for multiple viewpoints, and in extreme cases internecine warfare. As the Egyptian judge/scholar Al-Ashmawy discerned, how can you have a theocratic government when the Qur’an (from which Shari’a is supposedly derived) states that religion cannot be imposed on people? As expected, Al-Ashmawy has been under a death threat for decades for his rational views, one being that the term “religiously mandated” is somewhat of a paradox.[36] This is just one of many examples of a lack of debate and religious intolerance from fringe extremists in the Muslim world, and is typical of some Muslim responses to any deviation from their perspective of the norm. Even in the West, Muslims trying to work towards an Islamic reformation are hounded on two fronts: some of their fellow Muslims who view any changes to the status quo as tantamount to heresy, and some non-Muslims who treat all Muslims as suspects, albeit with tacit government and media encouragement.

 

Truth and Consequences: Retrospective on Empire Building

 

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." – Adolf Hitler.

 

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." – Hermann Goering.

 

The above quotes from the Nazi era are just as applicable today, in fact, the evidence suggests that the same playbook might be in use and history is repeating itself. During May 2002 through July 2005, there are at least fourteen documented instances of the US administration playing the “terrorism” card (including a sprinkling of Bin Laden videos for good measure) to keep instilling fear in the public and distract attention from damaging political issues.[37] Furthermore, the US administration issued 935 false statements in the two years following the 9/11 attacks and leading up to the invasion of Iraq, no ordinary feat but easily accomplished if the mainstream media is asleep, coerced, or complicit with the government in its mendacity.[38] While the public remains sedated under a cloud of fear and the administration is busy chasing ghosts,[39] the national debt continues to skyrocket at over $9 trillion and counting, the deficit is out of control, the dollar is on a nosedive, and new estimates for the Iraq war place the cost at $3 to $5 trillion.[40] The national infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) is disintegrating and the economy is on the verge of financial ruin. In the “richest” country in the world, over 36 million people live in poverty, and a recent survey found that 47% of Americans are struggling in life. Furthermore, “tent cities” reminiscent of third world refugee camps are springing up.[41] Meanwhile, the administration continues to incinerate trillions of dollars in a misguided and futile war, burdening current and future generations with a seemingly insurmountable debt.[42]

 

As the 20th century approached and the US was trying to determine its place on the world stage, it did not initially plan on imperialism. Given its history of violence – the genocide of the American Indians, the despicable African slave trade, a brutal civil war, and a battle with Mexico to cite a few instances – the US initially considered a pacifist foreign policy. But under President McKinley, it was decided that the US did not want another “black republic” in its backyard (the first being Haiti which had kicked out the French and gained independence), so the US took action against the Spanish in Cuba in 1898. This intervention towards the end of the 19th century continued a policy of periodic war and jingoism throughout the 20th century and into the 21st. The objective of the Cuban invasion was to secure US interests militarily and economically when it seemed like the Cuban revolutionaries were gaining the upper hand over the Spaniards. Rather than provide Cuba with independence, however, the revolutionaries were furious when they were colonized by the US following the defeat of the Spaniards, and all of their resources were made available for American corporations to exploit. The subjugation of Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Guam, and the Philippines quickly followed. Given overwhelming American firepower, as a British witness observed: “It was not a war against the Filipinos, but a massacre and murderous butchery.”[43]

 

Dehumanizing those who are to be systematically “subdued” and “immolated”, and referring to them in derogatory terms make the carnage more palatable. Like the Native Americans (red savages), Africans and Filipinos (niggers), Vietnamese (gooks), and others before, the Iraqis have been portrayed as subhuman and the soldiers commonly use racist terms like “rag-heads” and “sand-niggers” in reference to them. Euphemisms provide a convenient subterfuge for war crimes, so the current genocide of the Iraqis passes under the rubric of “shock and awe”, and torture is “extraordinary rendition” and “water-boarding”. “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”, and the present “crusade” is proof that our leaders have learned nothing from the lessons of history.[44]

 

There was a realization at the end of the 19th century that the majority of sacrifices for wars was borne by the poor, while the few who are already rich reap additional benefits. President Eisenhower warned Americans in his farewell speech in January 1961 about the increasing power and influence of the military-industrial complex.[45] To date, his warning is ostensibly unheeded. Contractors who deal in military hardware and services have seen profits hit the roof, and oil companies have also seen record gains.[46] To supplement the troops and avoid reinstating an unpopular military draft, which rapidly depleted public support for the Vietnam war, mercenaries (who outnumber the troops) are now employed to make up for any shortfall.[47] These steps along with declining media coverage have not prevented the war from becoming increasingly unpopular, with 81% of the public now believing that the nation is on the wrong course.[48] One also has to question the vested interests of some congressional representatives in the rush to war, as several of them have investments in defense companies and stand to make huge profits as the war continues.[49]

 

Ironically, after starting what appears to be a “war for oil” (which was supposed to be a cakewalk with “Mission Accomplished” a mere two months thereafter, not to mention the Iraqi welcome for US soldiers with “sweets and flowers”), it appears that the administration and neocon cabal not only underestimated the length of the conflict (five years and counting), but also did not have a clue regarding the amount of oil that would be needed for maintaining a long and drawn out occupation. There are 157,000 US troops in Iraq and each is consuming an average of 20.5 gallons of fuel on a daily basis. The rising fuel costs just to keep the war going is approaching one billion dollars weekly, and this is likely to continue increasing as heavier and less fuel efficient equipment gets deployed to better protect the troops.[50] Prior to the war, oil was $37.00 per barrel, and it is now over triple the cost at $125.00 per barrel and rising, and could potentially hit $200.00 per barrel in the next six months.[51] The mainstream media have highlighted increasing demand in countries like China and India for rising fuel costs, and have refrained from making any connection between the amount of fuel required to sustain wars and the impact this has on the world’s supply.

 

While terrorism (which a tiny minority of extremists view as a viable response to unfair policies and hubris) remains a danger, the main threat from the Muslim world is any disruption to the free flow of oil to Western nations. Two thirds of this coveted resource is located in Muslim lands, so any reluctance on the part of leaders to acquiesce to Western demands presents a threat. The perpetual “war on terror” is the perfect mechanism for ensuring that compliant dictators remain in power, and replacing the rebellious ones with “friendly” despots (as is being attempted in Iraq).[52] Meanwhile, the number of US troops now killed has surpassed 4,000, and tens of thousands are physically injured, not to mention hundreds of thousands suffering from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other “invisible” war-related symptoms.[53] Seldom mentioned is the enormous price in blood that the Iraqis are paying, with over one million dead and counting. A majority of Americans now believe that victory in Iraq is impossible, and Bush’s approval rating has plummeted below the freezing mark.[54]

 

The Way Forward

 

The US, once looked upon as a beacon and model for democracy and human rights, has seen its image around the world plunge to an all time low following the illegal invasion of Iraq, not to mention its disregard for the UN and flagrant violation of the Geneva Conventions. The US image in the world now calls to mind places like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay – the gulag of our times – known for prisoner abuse and torture.[55] Polls show that a majority of Europeans (traditional allies) view the US as the biggest threat to world peace and global stability.[56] Whether or not this will change will depend in large part on the next US administration, as the current one is more enamored with its chicanery and does not seem to care what the world thinks.[57]

 

There are tens of millions of Muslims who live in North America, Europe, New Zealand, and Australia, many of them born and raised in these regions. Unless Western nations are planning another genocide like the 20th century one against the Jews, or the gypsies who were classified as “mentally retarded” and rounded up and killed, they should realize that these Muslims are here to stay. The latest survey of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims shows that 93% have moderate views, with “the majority (including radicals) admiring the West for its democracy, freedoms, and technological prowess.” Ironically, there are more Americans (6%) who think that attacks in which civilians are targets are "completely justified," compared to the public in such “pariah” countries like Saudi Arabia (4%) and Iran (2%).[58]

 

Historically, enemies are recurrent and a new one emerges every decade or two. Former Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev believes that "The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently" and "Every US president has to have a war." It is just a matter of time before a new scapegoat is identified, probably Russia (again), or more likely China, which is vying with the US for its superpower status, and expected to take the lead in the next decade or two.[59] The timeline will depend on whether or not the next administration changes course or just continues the current bellicose policies and keeps accelerating the US towards economic (and possibly military) self-destruction. The next Republican presidential nominee’s spiritual advisor has already called for the destruction of Islam.[60]

 

It is not yet absolutely clear what the latest “crusade” in the Muslim world and especially the harassment of Muslims living in the West is supposed to achieve. Is it all about oil, fear of Islam, enriching corporations that profit from war and oil, the influence of the Christian evangelical right, arrogance, stupidity, or some combination? The great civil rights leader and peace activist Martin Luther King (whose life is commemorated annually in the US with a federal holiday) once observed that "America is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today," and his words remain true to this day. The US has used more WMDs than any other country, yet hypocritically claims that it wants to prevent the proliferation of such weapons.[61] The days of superpowers based on military might alone are over, and robust financial economies are more the norm in today’s world when it comes to exerting global influence. China now has the largest surplus of funds, and of the more than nine trillion dollars in debt that the US owes, 24% is owned by Japan followed by China with 20%. Even Russia, which only two decades ago was bankrupt as a result of the Cold War, has made a comeback and is now number five on the list of countries with excess money in the coffers.[62] Americans need to reflect on their government’s policies/actions and carefully choose their future leaders, or they will have only themselves to blame.

 

Muslims the world over will face several challenges in the coming years. Many highlight the contributions of Islamic civilizations from a millennia ago,[63] and are now content with focusing their energies on minutiae and trivia revolving around religious beliefs and practices. In the 21st century, Muslims cannot even reach a consensus on how to start and end a lunar month. The Muslim world is the most backward politically, economically, and scientifically.[64] Meanwhile, the rest of the world steams ahead pushing the limits of creativity in education and science/technology. As Muslim scholars living in the West have observed, an Islamic reformation will have to come from “Western Muslims” because "Muslim countries" do not provide a conducive environment for promoting such a fundamental and much needed change.[65] Akbar Ahmed noted that the current state of the world’s Muslims is due in large part to a failure of Muslim leadership, both on the political and religious fronts. The West, in particular the US, is also to blame for its missteps in foreign policy and the latest misadventure, which could potentially lead to a “clash of civilizations”, when what is needed instead is a “dialogue of civilizations”.[66]

 

Muslims in the West have to become more self reliant and eliminate their dependency on funding from abroad (Muslim countries) for building mosques, schools, etc., which usually comes with strings attached. They also need to stop looking to “foreign scholars and imams (priests)” for advice, as these “alien advisors” are usually unfamiliar with Western culture and thus disconnected from reality. Recently I visited a mosque for a funeral prayer (janaza), where the majority of the adherents were of Pakistani origin. The women were physically separated from the men with a barrier that stretched from the floor to the ceiling, but that wasn’t enough. Every time the women’s voices got beyond an acceptable level, i.e., audible enough to be heard, an elderly, bearded gentleman would bang his walking stick loudly against the barrier to indicate that the women needed to pipe down, as their “sexy” voices were obviously a distraction to the pious male segment of the congregation. Needless to say, the men did not have any decibel restrictions, and were quite boisterous by comparison. This retrogressive, Wahhabi/Taliban mentality that is still prevalent in some countries has no place in the West (or the Muslim world for that matter), and will hopefully disappear as these fossils find their rightful place in a different realm and are replaced by future generations of Muslims.[67]

 

The majority of the world’s population (regardless of faith) prefer peace over conflict. Muslims have to be patient, continue their interfaith dialogue and help educate non-Muslims about the true teachings of Islam (which some organizations started following 9/11), and work with people who have the common goals of justice and harmony. It is in the best interests of American Muslims to see the US improve its image, move from a military-based economy, and focus on fiscal responsibility and a more impartial foreign policy, as American Muslims are going to be in the same boat as the rest of the population should the US implode. It will not be an easy task working towards this goal while being periodically harassed. We live in a time where “ignorance is bliss”,[68] so it is worth recalling the prayer of the Prophet Moses mentioned in the Qur’an when he faced a similar challenge:[69] “…I seek refuge with God against being so ignorant!" (Q2:67).

 

Despite the odds being stacked against them,[70] it is incumbent upon Muslims to build their own “Western identity” while sticking to Islamic principles, demonstrate measurable progress towards an Islamic transformation, and build a more just and peaceful world, following the Qur’anic advice: O You who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk. Whether the person concerned be rich or poor, God's claim takes precedence over [the claims of] either of them. Do not, then, follow your own desires, lest you swerve from justice: for if you distort [the truth], behold, God is indeed aware of all that you do! (Q4:135)

 

 

Works Cited

 

1. Wikipedia. Celebrations of the September 11, 2001 attacks. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebrations_of_the_September_11,_2001_attacks

 

9-11 Research. Building 7 – The September 11th Attack. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html#leveling

 

(2001, September 23). Hijack 'suspects' alive and well. BBC News. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

 

2. (2005, July 5). Timeline: Ayodhya crisis. BBC News. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1844930.stm 

 

3. Unger, Craig. (2007, November 13). The Fall of the House of Bush: The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America's Future. Scribner: 1st Edition.

 

Walt, Stephen M. (2006, October 5). Misreading the tea leaves: US missteps on foreign policy. The Boston Globe. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/05/misreading_the_tea_leaves_us_missteps_on_foreign_policy

 

4. Naylor, R. T. (2006, August 3). Satanic Purses: Money, Myth, And Misinformation in the War on Terror. McGill-Queen's University Press.

 

5. Chomsky, Noam. (2004, August 12). Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance. Holt Paperbacks.

 

6. The New International Webster’s Dictionary defines “terrorism” as follows: “The act or practice of terrorizing, especially by violence committed for political purposes, as by a government seeking to intimidate a populace or by revolutionaries seeking to overthrow a government, compel the release of prisoners, etc.” While this definition seems pretty straightforward, it appears that the United Nations and its member States have yet to reach a consensus on what constitutes “terrorism”.

 

(2005, July 26). UN seeks definition of terrorism. BBC News. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4716957.stm

 

7. Cortright, David. (2001, December 3). A Hard Look at Iraq Sanctions. The Nation. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011203/cortright

 

Susman, Tina. (2007, September 14). Poll: Civilian Death Toll in Iraq May Top 1 Million. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved March 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/14/3839

 

8. Strobel, Warren P. (2008, March 10). Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam and al Qaida. McClatchy Newspapers. Retrieved March 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/29959.html

 

9. Unger, Craig. (2007, November 13). The Fall of the House of Bush: The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America's Future. Scribner: 1st Edition.

 

10. Risen, James. (2006, January 3). State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration. Free Press.

 

11. (2000, September). Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. A Report of The Project for the New American Century. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

 

Scheuer, Michael. (2008, May 2). Douglas Feith's War and Decision: Life in a Neocon's Parallel Universe. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.antiwar.com/scheuer/?articleid=12771

 

12. Follath, Erich; Goetz, John; Rosenbach, Marcel; and Stark, Holger. (2008, March 22). The Real Story Of 'Curveball': How German Intelligence Helped Justify the US Invasion of Iraq. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,542840,00.html

 

(2005, May 1). The secret Downing Street memo. Timesonline. Retrieved April 18, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece

 

Strong, Morgan. (2008, March 30). PBS on Iraq: A Compilation of Deceit. Consortium News. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/032908b.html

 

Ackerman, Spencer. (2008, March 19). Fast and Loose With the Facts: How Two Leading Journalists Played the Public to Help Bush Sell His War. The Washington Independent. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.washingtonindependent.com/view/fast-an-loose-with

 

13. Lynch, Colum. (2008, March 23). U.S. Pushed Allies on Iraq, Diplomat Writes. The Washington Post. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/22/AR2008032201020_pf.html

 

14. Adams, Richard. (2007, September 17). Invasion of Iraq was driven by oil, says Greenspan. The Guardian. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/sep/17/iraq.oil

 

Aigner-Treworgy, Adam. (2008, May 2). McCain: Iraq War Was For Oil? MSNBC. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/02/974014.aspx

 

Schwartz, Michael. (2007, October 30). Why Did We Invade Iraq Anyway?: Putting a Country in Your Tank. Tom Dispatch. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/print/174856/Tomgram%253A%2520%2520Michael%2520Schwartz%252C%2520Iraq%2520Policy%2520Floating%2520on%2520a%2520Sea%2520of%2520Oil

 

Lando, Ben. (2008, April 14). Iraq qualifies 35 companies for oil deals. United Press International. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.upi.com/International_Security/Energy/Briefing/2008/04/14/iraq_qualifies_35_companies_for_oil_deals/6174

 

15. Donnelly, John. (2006, August 31). Alarm sounds on US population boom. The Boston Globe. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/08/31/alarm_sounds_on_us_population_boom

 

16. The White House. Franklin D. Roosevelt. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/fr32.html

 

17. Naylor, R. T. (2006, August 3). Satanic Purses: Money, Myth, And Misinformation in the War on Terror. McGill-Queen's University Press.

 

18. Ibid.

 

Lobe, Jim. (2007, May 23). Survey Finds US Muslims Mostly Mainstream. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=11010

 

19. Naylor, R. T. (2006, August 3). Satanic Purses: Money, Myth, And Misinformation in the War on Terror. McGill-Queen's University Press.

 

Gage, Julienne. (2008, April 17). 2nd Mistrial in 'Liberty City 7' Case. The Washington Post. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/16/AR2008041603607.html

 

20. Perry, Tom. (2008, May 1). Critic accuses Hollywood of vilifying Arabs. Yahoo News/Reuters. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080501/en_nm/arabs_critic_dc_1

 

21. Isikoff, Michael; and Hosenball, Mark. (2008, April 30). Just Between Us: Telecoms and the Bush administration talked about how to keep their surveillance program under wraps. Newsweek. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.newsweek.com/id/134930

 

Byrne, John. (2008, April 8). Documents prove FBI has national eavesdropping program that tracks IMs, emails and cell phones. Retrieved April 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/FBI_linked_to_national_eavesdropping_program_0408.html

 

22. Elliott, Andrea. (2005, May 13). Reported hate crimes against Muslims rise in U.S. International Herald Tribune. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/05/12/news/islam.php

 

(2008, April 6). Vandals desecrate Muslim graves in northern France. International Herald Tribune. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://iht.com/articles/2008/04/06/europe/france.php

 

23. Alexander, Gerard. (2006, April 10). Illiberal Europe. The Weekly Standard (Volume 011, Issue 28). Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/055sbhvq.asp

 

24. Callimachi, Rukmini. (2008, March 14). Muslim Nations: Defame Islam, get sued? Yahoo News/Associated Press. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080314/ap_on_re_af/islamic_summit_islamophobia

 

25. Bittermann, Jim. (2004, February 10). France backs school head scarf ban. CNN World. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/02/10/france.headscarves/index.html

 

Spencer, Julien. (2008, February 19). Republished Danish Cartoon of Prophet Muhammad Ignites Tensions. The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0219/p99s01-duts.html

 

(2006, September 20). Pope's speech at University of Regensburg (full text). Catholic World News. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474

 

Harris, Dan. (New York, November 19). Evangelical Christians Take Aim at Islam. ABC News. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130009&page=1

 

26. The Holy Bible King James Version. (2006, February 28). Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.biblegateway.com

 

Fighting Against Immorality in Religion. Retrieved March 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.evilbible.com

 

27. Asad, Muhammad. (2003, December). The Message of The Quran. Retrieved March 9, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch

 

28. Ireland, Doug. (2001, October 29). The Long War: Bush’s crusade has no end in sight. In These Times. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/1593/

 

Huntington, Samuel P. (January 28, 1998). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster: 1st Edition.

 

29. Naveed, Baseer. (2008, April 11). Why was a couple stoned to death? UPI Asia Online. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Human_Rights/2008/04/11/why_was_a_couple_stoned_to_death/1280

 

Ahmad, Kassim. (1997). Hadith: A Re-Evaluation. Retrieved April 18, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.submission.org/HADITH2.HTM

 

30. Wikipedia. Treason. Retrieved April 20, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor

 

31. Qutb, Sayyid. (1980). Milestones. International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations. The Holy Koran Publishing House.

 

32. Feldman, Noah. (2008, March 16). Why Shariah? The New York Times. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?_r=1&ex=1363320000&en=fac1735bddf28a5d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

 

33. Rahman, Fazlur. (1989, June). Major Themes of the Quran. Bibliotheca Islamica; 2nd Edition.

 

34. An-Na'im, Abdullahi Ahmed. (1990, May). Toward an Islamic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and International Law. Syracuse University Press.

 

An-Na’im, Abdullahi Ahmed. (2008, March 20). Thomas Jefferson, Islam and the State. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/abdullahi-ahmed-annaim/thomas-jefferson-islam-a_b_92533.html

 

35. Mayell, Hillary. (2002, February 12). Thousands of Women Killed for Family "Honor". National Geographic News. Retrieved May 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling.html

 

36. Fluehr-Lobban, Carolyn. (2002, January 2). Against Islamic Extremism: The Writings of Muhammad Sa'id al-'Ashmawy. University Press of Florida: First Edition

 

37. Olbermann, Keith. (2007, December 26). Truth and Consequences: Special Comments on the Bush Administration's War on American Values. Random House; 1st Edition.

 

38. Froomkin, Dan. (2008, April 3). Intimidating the Press. The Washington Post. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/04/03/BL2008040302203.html

 

Lewis, Charles; and Reading-Smith, Mark. False Pretenses: Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Retrieved March 18, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard

 

39. Lawson, Guy. (2008, February 7). The Fear Factory: The FBI now has more than 100 task forces devoted exclusively to fighting terrorism. But is the government manufacturing ghosts? Rolling Stone Magazine. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18137343/the_fear_factory

 

40. National Debt Clocks and Savings Clocks. Retrieved March 17, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://zfacts.com/p/461.html

 

Cowan, Richard. (2008, March 13). Economists see long-term ills from Iraq war. Wiredispatch. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=84085

 

Ward, Olivia. (2008, March 16). $3 trillion is just a part of the cost. The Toronto Star. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.thestar.com/article/346563

 

Schumer, Charles E.; and Maloney, Carolyn B. (2007, November 13). War at Any Price?: The Total Economic Costs of the War Beyond the Federal Budget. A Report by the Joint Economic Committee. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2007/Iraq-War-Costs-JEC13nov07.htm

 

Ferguson, Nick. (2008, April 14). The true cost of the Iraq war. FinanceAsia.com. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.financeasia.com/article.aspx?CIaNID=73579

 

41. Schoen, John W. (2007, August 3). U.S. highway system badly in need of repair: Thousands of bridges need rebuilding, but funding hasn't kept up. MSNBC. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20095291

 

Historical Poverty Tables. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov2.html

 

Fox, Maggie. (2008, April 29). Many Americans struggling in life, survey finds. Yahoo News/Reuters. Retrieved April 30, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080429/hl_nm/wellbeing_usa_dc_1

 

D'Innocenzio, Anne. (2008, April 29). Americans unload prized belongings to make ends meet. Yahoo News/Associated Press. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080429/ap_on_bi_ge/cashing_out_the_attic

 

Kelly, David. (2008, March 18). 'Ontario residents only' at Tent City. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-tents18mar18,1,7073495.story

 

42. Broder, John M. (2008, April 14). Views on money for Iraq war, and what else could be done with it. International Herald Tribune. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/14/america/14warcosts.php

 

Paltrow, Scot. (2008, May). The Pentagon's $1 Trillion Problem: The Defense Department has spent billions to fix its antiquated financial systems. So why does the Pentagon still have no idea where its money goes? Portfolio.com. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/04/14/Pentagons-Accounting-Mess

 

43. Zinn, Howard. (2005, August 2). A People's History of the United States: 1492 to Present. Harper Perennial Modern Classics.

 

44. Fisk, Robert. (2008, March 19). The only lesson we ever learn is that we never learn. The Independent. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/robert-fisk-the-only-lesson-we-ever-learn-is-that-we-never-learn-797816.html

 

45. Military-industrial complex. SourceWatch Encyclopedia.  Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Military-industrial_complex

 

46. Taibbi, Matt. (2007, September 6). The Great Iraq Swindle: How Bush Allowed an Army of For-Profit Contractors to Invade the U.S. Treasury. Rolling Stone Magazine. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/16076312/the_great_iraq_swindle/print

 

Rose, David. (2007, November). The People vs. the Profiteers. Vanity Fair. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/halliburton200711?printable=true&currentPage=all

 

(2008, May 1). Exxon Mobil reports $11B in quarterly profits. Dallas Business Journal. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/othercities/dallas/stories/2008/04/28/daily44.html

 

47. Scahill, Jeremy. (2007, February 15). Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. Nation Books.

 

48. Leonhardt David; and Connelly, Marjorie. (2008, April 4). 81% in U.S. poll say nation is on the wrong track. International Herald Tribune. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://iht.com/articles/2008/04/04/america/04poll.php

 

49. Flaherty, Anne. (2008, April 3). Lawmakers heavily invested in defense. Yahoo News/Associated Press. Retrieved April 6 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080403/ap_on_go_co/congress_defense_investments

 

50. Bryce, Robert. (2008, March 10). Oil for War. The American Conservative. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://amconmag.com/2008/2008_03_10/cover.html

 

51. (2008, May 7). Oil price 'may hit $200 a barrel'. BBC News. Retrieved May 8, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7387203.stm

 

52. Mufson, Steven (2008, March 16). A Crude Case For War? The Washington Post. Retrieved March 16, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/14/AR2008031403677.html

 

Lauria, Joe. (2008, April 13). The Coming War with Iran: It's About the Oil, Stupid. The Huffington Post. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-lauria/the-coming-war-with-iran_b_96428.html

 

Porter, Gareth. (2008, May 5). Pentagon Targeted Iran for Regime Change after 9/11. IPS News. Retrieved May 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42241

 

53. Morgan, David. (2008, April 17). Study says 300,000 U.S. troops suffer mental problems. Yahoo News/Reuters. Retrieved April 17, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080417/hl_nm/iraq_usa_health_dc

 

White, Michael. (2008). Iraq Coalition Casualty Count. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://icasualties.org/oif

 

Malbran, Pia. (2008, April 14). Military Releases High Casualty Figures. CBS News. Retrieved April 15, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/14/cbsnews_investigates/main4012249.shtml

 

54. Reid, Angus (2008, March 20). Victory Impossible in Iraq, Say Americans. Angus Reid Global Monitor. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/30201

 

Landay, Jonathan S.; and Walcott, John. (2008, April 17). Pentagon institute calls Iraq war 'a major debacle' with outcome 'in doubt'. McClatchy Newspapers. Retrieved April 18, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/34101.html

 

Byrne, John. (2008, May 2). Ex-Iraq commander accuses Bush Administration of 'gross incompetence'. The Raw Story. Retrieved May 4, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/ExIraq_commander_says_Bush_Administration_grossly_0502.html

 

Page, Susan. (2008, April 22.) Bush's disapproval rating worst of any president in 70 years. USA Today. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080422/a_pollbox22.art.htm

 

55. Lobe, Jim. (2007, June 27) US Image Abroad Still Sinking. Inter Press Service. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=38346

 

Norton-Taylor, Richard. (2008, April 19). Top Bush aides pushed for Guantánamo torture. The Guardian. Retrieved April 20, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/19/guantanamo.usa

 

Barstow, David. (2008, April 20.) Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand. The New York Times. Retrieved April 20, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

56. Reid, Angus. (2006, September 05). Europeans See U.S. as Threat to Global Stability. Angus Reid Global Monitor. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/13028

 

57. Fisk, Robert. (2008, April 12). Semantics can't mask Bush's chicanery. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/robert-fisk-semantics-cant-mask-bushs-chicanery-808171.html

 

58. Zeitvogel, Karin. (2008, February 27). Major survey challenges Western perceptions of Islam. Yahoo News/AFP. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080227/ts_alt_afp/usislamreligionethics

 

Esposito John L.; and Mogahed, Dalia (2008, April 3). Muslim true/false. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-esposito2apr02,0,5220274.story?track=rss

 

59. Blomfield, Adrian and Smith, Mike. (2008, May 7). Gorbachev: US could start new Cold War. The Telegraph. Retrieved May 8, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html

 

Margolis, Eric. (2008, March 9). Another ‘red scare'. Khaleej Times. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/opinion/2008/March/opinion_March35.xml&section=opinion&col=

 

Zaracostas, John. (2008, April 18). China passes US as second-biggest exporter. Timesonline. Retrieved April 20, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/china/article3767910.ece

 

Havely, Joe. (2005, May 5). Giant aspires to superpower status. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/04/29/eyeonchina.superpower/index.html

 

60. Corn, David. (2008, March 12). McCain's Spiritual Guide: Destroy Islam. Mother Jones. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html

 

Raimondo, Justin. (2008, February 11). The Madness of John McCain: A militarist suffering from acute narcissism and armed with the Bush Doctrine is not fit to be commander in chief. The American Conservative. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_02_11/cover.html

 

61. Potter, Joseph. (2008, May 1). War and the Morality of Americans. LewRockwell.com. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/potter5.html

 

Vance, Laurence M. (2008, May 2). Christianity and War: Readings in the Age of Empire. Retrieved May 2, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.antiwar.com/bandow/?articleid=12767

 

62. Amadeo, Kimberly. The U.S. National Debt and How It Got So Big. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/US_Debt.htm

 

(2008, March 20). Rank Order – Current account balance. Retrieved April 13, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html

 

63. Vallely, Paul. (2006, March 25). How Muslim inventors changed the world. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.dawn.com/weekly/science/archive/060325/science3.htm

 

1001 Inventions: Discover the Muslim Heritage in our World. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.1001inventions.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.viewSection&intSectionID=309

 

64. Hoodbhoy, Pervez. (1997, December 23). Why didn’t the Scientific Revolution happen in Islam? Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.chowk.com/articles/4091

 

Hoodbhoy, Pervez. (2007, August). Science and the Islamic world: The quest for rapprochement. Retrieved April 7, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml

 

65. Arkoun, Mohammed. (1994, July1). Rethinking Islam: Common Questions, Uncommon Answers. Westview Press.

 

66. Ahmed, Akbar S. (2003, August 15). Islam Under Siege: Living Dangerously in a Post-Honor World. Polity; 1st edition.

 

67. Butt, Riazat. (2008, April 21). Our dirty little secret: The way women are treated in Saudi Arabia is a disgrace – and Muslims, including myself, are colluding with the regime's gender apartheid. The Guardian. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/riazat_butt/2008/04/our_dirty_little_secret.html

 

68. Herbert, Bob. (2008, April 22). Clueless in America. The New York Times. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from the World Wide Web:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/opinion/22herbert.html?th&emc=th

 

69. The Prophet Moses is referenced in the Qur’an about 136 times, more than any other Prophet.

 

70. Miller, Lisa. (2007, August 15). American Dreamers: Muslim Americans are one of this country's greatest strengths. But they're vulnerable as never before. Retrieved April 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www.newsweek.com/id/32868

 

 

Webmaster’s note: Some of the Internet references may no longer be available, however, an Internet search on the title(s) referenced may produce similar material. Articles are posted at this website (based on our selection criteria) in order to educate visitors and promote discussion and critical thinking. Since this website features multiple viewpoints, some of the opinions expressed in some articles may not be congruent with those in other articles posted here.

 

Posted May 9, 2008