Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
The Project Team of this blog will temporarily be shelving the IM Blog due to uncontrollable security threats and obscene input & sabotage by external individuals wishing to undermine the integrity of our site and the credibility of our content. The IM Blog will return, after we have ensured that the site is secure and 110% manageable without compromise. We take this opportunity to sincerely apologise to our regular readers and to non-readers alike that have been targeted with illicit/intrusive emails originating from our holdings.
For the time being all your email addresses will be deleted from our databases with immediate effect and you will cease to receive any newsletters/feeds from this site, You can choose to resubmit your details and join our mailing list at any time in the future upon our return.
We thank you all for your positive contributions and hard work through your comments and guest posts – May Allah reward you.
You can still contact us at our new email address: email@example.com
To those outsiders that believe they have defeated us: The IM Blog will resurface soon!
Following our last post based on the email that was communicated to the group Islam4UK, we have received a flood of emails from concerned brothers and sisters from around the UK. Based on the communications we have been receiving, we can say that anyone could very easily misinterpret the part of the message of our email due to the way some points had been worded. Recognizing this fact, another email has been sent to the Islam4UK group to diffuse any tensions that would have arised from the 1st communication.
The email follows below:
Dear Webmasters of the website: www.Islam4uk.com
Assalaamualaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakaatuh – May the Peace and Blessings of Almighty Allah be upon you.
I have been reviewing my last email that was communicated to your group and I have concluded that anyone reading the email could very easily misinterpret parts of the message due to the way some points had been worded. Recognizing this fact, I am sending this email to help diffuse any tensions that would have arised from the 1st communication.
I would like to point out that the content of the email was nothing more than advice given to the webmasters and leaders of the group, and was not in any way intentionally written to portray the group as fanatics or extremists. I briefly mentioned the notoriety of Omar Bakri in the email. I am not saying anything against Omar Bakri.
By this point I meant that due to the Tabloid filth that had already been published and circulated previously, together with the take on issues by the main broadasheet newspapers, anyone seen to be alligning their views towards siding with Omar Bakri’s talks would automatically fall prey to being labelled by the majority as a crackpot or lunatic. And so by including such a figure in the promotion of their work to the British people they would no doubt alienate many and the group would lose any credibility it had left. The email was not written to backbite against any individual.
The pictures of Trafalgar square and Nelson’s column were unneccesary. I’m sure that you can appreciate what the public reaction would be immediately after viewing such material and that would be advanced by further chaos and unrest. However, I do support you with your writings conveying how life in Britain would change with shariah implemented. Such pieces are highly valuable as resources for Dawaah work to continue and whilst at present the effort to publishes such pieces is underway, more detail is needed to win over both Muslims and non-Muslims.
The email that was sent was in no way obstructing the implementation of Shariah Law as what can be more better than to live by the wisdom of the divine laws of the Almighty for the welfare of all individuals?
The communication was however, questioning the timing of this call to Shariah, amidst the current issues engulfing the Muslims of Britain. The email aimed to point out that certain logical conditions had to be fulfilled before establishing and implementing Shariah over the earth.
This was my view and although I am no scholar, I am a practicing Muslim, (British born) that sees the only logical way of deriving an increase to Islam in the UK is by Daa’wah and making use of existing legal mechanisms and by our rights as individuals given to us by the state.
I may be wrong with this approach and I ask those with more knowledge to enlighten me & point me in the right direction if you see shortfalls in my argument.
I would also like to say that the previous post was in no way, shape or form an attack on Anjem Choudary. If the webmasters of the Islam4UK group and/or Anjem Choudary have any reason to believe that the email was offensive and hurtful then I extend my sincere apologies to them and ask for forgiveness in an attempt to consolidate any ill feeling.
Despite what the ‘media machine’ has to say about him, Brother Anjem speaks good english through his talks. He is highly qualified in Islamic matters and conveys a very honest outlook, he seems like a very decent person, working solely for the pleasure of Allah. Brother Anjem seems to have a lot of care and concern for the safety, protection and fulfillment of rights for his fellow Muslim brothers and sisters, he appears to be intouch with the problems of the time, problems that are affecting the youth of today, and more importantly, he seems to be actively engaging the population in Daa’wah work. His approach may appear to be a little direct and confrontational, but I don’t think this is his aim. His heart seems to be in the right place and his efforts appear to be far more that what each of us is doing at the moment.
p.s. a copy of this email has been posted on ‘www.intellectualmuslim.blogspot.com’
Many of you will be aware that the group Islam4UK has announced plans to hold a potentially incendiary rally in London later this month. And it is calling for a complete upheaval of the British legal system, its officials and legislation. Members have urged Muslims from all over Britain to converge on the capital on October 31 for a procession to demand the full implementation of sharia law.
We have sent an email to the group asking its leadership to re-evaluate their whole approach as they risk sparking explosive civil unrest and increased difficulties for British Muslims.
The email follows below:
Dear Webmasters of the website: http://www.Islam4uk.com
Assalaamualaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakaatuh – May the Peace and Blessings of Almighty Allah be upon you.
I have been carefully browsing your website and whilst your intentions to propagate Shariah Law into mainstream British Culture are admirable, I’m not quite sure that you fully understand the devastating repurcussions and consequences of your proposed march/demonstration on 31st October. I am very concerned to say the least.
The pictures that you have used on your website to demonstrate the aims of your group are doing nothing more than helping spread unneccesary hatred of the Islamic faith. Adding to that, the notorious reputation of one of the scholars whose talks that you promote on your site (Omar Bhakri) doesn’t grant you further credibility. Muslims up and down the country are already facing waves of continuous persecution and unjust oppression by right wing groups like the BNP and the EDL. Surely your activities will only serve to widen the divide between the Muslims and the Non-Muslims and will propel the advancement of forthcoming civil unrest, rapidly moving towards an age of intolerance and war.
What will be the difference between the Muslims and those groups? Both sides will be looked down upon as snakes sharing the same venom!
Whilst there naturally exists an urge or a desire within every Muslim of convincing non-Muslims around them to embrace the Islamic faith. This innocent motive does not warrant the forceful establishment of an Islamic State/Republic in the United Kingdom governed solely by Shariah Law.
I’m sure that you understand that there are pre-requisites and certain conditions need to be fulfilled before such work goes ahead. Primarily, there needs to be a sizeable Muslim majority of practicing Muslims that require greater integration and that sizeable majority would be the next step to moving towards or securing an Islamic framework or governance (based on a sizeable need or demand). There also needs to be a Caliph or leader for the Muslims and at present the Muslims are scattered under many different banners (to place it mildly).
If you look up and down the British Isles, Alhumdulillah the Muslims have approximately 1600 Masjids and Islamic Centres together with a massive Muslim population of Approximately 2.7 million individuals. And even though the rate of our growth has advanced due to a decline in the spread of Christianity and Judaism, we as a people and as a religious ethnicity are still a meagre minority, standing at just over 4% of the British population.
We are a tiny vessel sailing through an ocean of agnostics, atheists, materialists and secularists. Allah-forbid, but this vessel can easily be capsized, drowning each and everyone of its passengers.
A small minority of 4% are not in any position to demand anything like an upheaval of UK Legislation in favour of Shariah Law and be listened to.
For many thousands of years people’s of all ethnicities, backgrounds, races and creeds have co-existed without exploiting sectarian differences and differences of belief. Muslim generations that had chosen to emmigrate to this country did so out of choice knowing full well the burdens the burdens that they will have to undertake. They were fortunate enough to be granted a permit to stay, they later became citizens, married, had children, contributed to the running of the country, paid the taxes and voted etc.
Overtime we have seen an evolution of rights and freedoms that had been extended to us, that now, our generation often seem to take for granted. We have been recognised as equals, we have been extended/given the same priveledges as everyone else and over the ages we have each become a valuable piece of this country, a national, this has become our home. We have been living in peace, asked to obey the rules and carry on doing what we have been doing and what we choose to do. And as I’m sure that you’re aware breaking that peace is against Islamic practice:
Allah has forbidden treachery and has condemned those who do it. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“They are those with whom you made a covenant, but they break their covenant every time and they do not fear Allah”
And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Every betrayer will have a banner on the Day of Resurrection, by which he will be known.”
Sure, we have been plagued with turbulent times where we’ve seen our economy rise and then fall into recession, our anger has grown with the way our leaders have ignored our requests to pull away and out of unneeded involvement in foreign wars, our loyalties have been tested with government after governement being dogged in sleaze, corruption and unaccountability. Sure there is fitnah everywhere we turn. Sure, there is usury, there is perverse exposure, there is alcohol, there is homosexuality and all the other evil activities of a Godless environment that don’t fit in with our faith but these negative hits on our lives do not warrant the hostilities that you’re happily driving forward.
Ask yourselves how can a Muslim minority of 4% overturn such a big majority peacefully?
The answer lies in engagement and not action as you may think. There is no Us Vs Them scenario as your minds have been led to believe.
We need to engage the public with our Daawah, (and no, this isn’t an instant solution, it may take many many years, the movement may pass from us to our children and from them to their children, but we can be sure that atleast we’re utilizing legal measures to make a lasting positive difference in the best interests of everyone) we need to engage with the public at the political level as this is where we have an opportunity to use the tools of the british system to our advantage and put across the beauty of the deen with the practices and policies that we adapt. As British Citizens, we are fortunate that we have certain rights that we have been granted from birth. We can create a political party, we can stand for election democratically and keep on campaigning for support. There are mechanisms such as these in place for concerned Muslims to exhaust. At present our political arena is tainted with sleaze allegations, corruption and unaccountability.
Governments should realize that they are not investment companies, whose main concern is making a profit from their citizens. Rather their main role is to serve their citizens, make things easier for them, and be kind towards them.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed: “O Allaah, whoever is put in charge of any of the affairs of my ummah and treats them harshly, treat him harshly, and whoever is put in charge of any of the affairs of my ummah and treats them kindly, treat him kindly.”
These officials should realize that tomorrow they will be standing before Allaah and accounting for their deeds, being rewarded or punished for them. Each ruler, official and minister will be asked about all of those who were under their authority: “Each of you is a shepherd and each of you is responsible for his flock…”
May Allaah be pleased with ‘Umar, for he used to say: “If a mule stumbles in Iraq (which was on the edge of the Islamic state at that time), Allaah will ask me on the Day of Resurrection, ‘Why did you not maintain the road for it, O ‘Umar?’”
The questioning on the Day of Resurrection will be to such an extent, even about animals – so how about the thousands and millions of people who are subjected to oppression and wrongful treatment?
Nations become strong when justice prevails, and nations decline because of injustice.
Hence it was said that Allaah supports just nations even if they are kaafirs, and He does not support unjust nations even if they are Muslims. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “No sin brings a swifter punishment than injustice and severing the ties of kinship.” The unjust person will be punished in this world even if he is forgiven and granted mercy in the Hereafter. That is because justice is the foundation of all things. If a thing is based on justice it will endure, even if its founder has no share in the Hereafter. If it is not based on justice then it will not endure, even if its founder has faith for which he will be rewarded in the Hereafter.
A political avenue exists and there is still enough room for a totally committed and dedicated Islamic group to enter the political race and broadcast their aims and objectives for all to see. We can realistically pool together and convince the people that we are striving to work in their interests to save them and ourselves from the tyranny of the oppresive systems that are prevalent and dominant within our societies. Our focus should be on winning them over holistically so that they elect us with full confidence, and so that we have unanimous support and growth in our numbers, because indeed our strength lies in our numbers.
Right now, by invoking Shariah Law on the whole of the UK you are both demonizing Muslims and alienating non-Muslims in one foul swoop, by forcing everyone to abide by your maxims. At present, I feel that you are ‘trying to walk before you can crawl’.
We have a democracy and I suggest that you use it before being dismissed by Muslims and those outside the fold of Islam as extremists and religious wacko’s that deserve to be locked up.
The Muslims of today do not have a substantial majority, nor do they have any significant resource and niether do they have the support of the Ulama as you point out in one of your articles. In such catastrophic times, the Muslim community needs to tread wisely and be productive rather than collectively enjoin in intolerant and counter productive activities that will only intimidate non-Muslims further.
Your renewed focus should be on:
1). Spreading Islam through peaceful means to non-Muslims, educating them and empowering them peacefully to support our cause.
2). Uniting the existing Muslim factions and sects (strengthening our brotherhood, this in turn will help promote solidarity and will ‘pull in the crowd’), We may boast that the Muslims have 2.7 million Muslims and approximately 1600 Masjids and Islamic centres up and down the country. But we know the truth of the matter, our Islamic presence is nothing more than 4% and add to that the irony of those 1600 establishments accomodating a mismatch of sects and intolerant attitudes towards one another. We need to strengthen our own communities first before spoon feeding Islam to the masses.
3). Setting up an active political party to engage with the public and provide adequate Muslim representation, engaging with existing politicians and the public to re-evaluate the framework that governs us.
4). Once we have a good enough majority it would seem appropriate to call for or invoke change.
I sincerely ask you to rethink and re-evaluate your strategy.
May Almighty Allah guide you towards the truth and may he guide me along the right path also.
p.s. a copy of this email will be appearing on ‘www.intellectualmuslim.blogspot.com’ to warn our readers to think twice before participating in such direct and inappropriate action that is going to stir up nothing but trouble for the wider Muslim community of the UK.
Since 9/11 many people have come forward offering various conspiracy theories for the tragedy but none have managed to capture our imagination in quite the same way as Professor Niel Harrit.
For those of you who are new to this name: Professor Niels Harrit is a Professor of Chemistry at the University of Copenhagen. In the following first two clips he is being interviewed by Russia Today about his discovery of nano-thermite in the rubble of the WTC and his view (proven by scientific research) that the World Trade Centre towers were deliberately demolished professionally by higher powers/the elite.
You need to listen to what he says about Tower 7 and then focus on the video screen below delivering the short film ‘Loose Change’ which everyone needs to see.
Please find below a very interesting & informative peice that appeared on the http://www.campaigniran.org site yesterday.
The article has been written by: Phil Wilayto, a writer and organizer based in Richmond, Virginia, USA. A civilian organizer in the Vietnam-era GI Movement, he is the author of “In Defense of Iran: Notes from a U.S. Peace Delegation’s Journey through the Islamic Republic” (December 2008) and “An Open Letter to the Anti-War Movement: How should we respond to the events in Iran?” (June 2009) He can be reached at DefendersFJE@hotmail.com. The article exposes the reality of the ‘unjustified’ looming threat of military action against the Islamic Republic of Iran over its ‘supposed’ nuclear ambitions.
The author gathers and conveys evidence on how Iran has done everything it can to work with the NPT and the IAEA by registering the construction and usage of their nuclear facilities well before the current western colonial powers siezed the media spotlight to concentrate their collective energies on bullying Iran in to a corner. The piece emphasises how the biggest names in politics who we trust to run our affairs: Obama, Brown and Sarkozy have got it all wrong – yet again!, incorrect military intelligence of a similar calibre to the Bush and Blair administration that forced an illegitimate war on the provinces of Afghanistan and Iraq on the pre-text of weapons of mass destruction that didn’t really exist. The passages below also clear up much of the lies presented by the media that have led to the average person to conclude that President Ahmedinajad refuses to believe in the Holocaust. Our take – A very thorough report that should be read and re-read:
Representatives of Iran and six of the world’s most powerful countries are scheduled to meet this week in Geneva, one of a series of events that increasingly looks like a rerun of the build-up to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
As we prepare for a barrage of anti-Iranian media spin, it would be good for anti-war activists to remember five basic facts:
- There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon.
- The U.S. has NOT discovered a “secret nuclear facility” in Iran.
- The recent Iranian tests of long-range missiles is a PURELY DEFENSIVE exercise.
- Despite what we all have repeatedly heard, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad DOES NOT DENY the Holocaust. (Please see quotes below.)
- Iran has A LOT of oil. A whole lot.
On Oct. 1, a senior Iranian diplomat is to meet with representatives of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council: the U.S., U.K, France, Russia and China, plus Germany, a group dubbed the G-5-plus-1. These will be the first international talks to address Iran’s nuclear program in more than a year.
During these negotiations, Iran will attempt to discuss a wide range of issues. The six countries – or at least the U.S., U.K., France and Germany – will make demands on Iran’s nuclear program that they already know will be rejected. These four most powerful Western nations will then move to impose even harsher sanctions than the three sets they have already rammed through the U.N. Security Council.
There may even be a military attack on Iran by Israel, a move already given the green light by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden.
And this will all be in violation of international law.
Is Iran trying to develop a nuclear weapon?
Iran has a program to develop nuclear power for peaceful energy purposes. Part of that program involves enriching uranium to power nuclear reactors. Enriched uranium is also an essential component in building a nuclear bomb, but the enrichment process is so different that it would be virtually impossible to conceal it, and Iran is the most inspected country in the world.
Further, Iran was one of the first countries to sign the U.N.’s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), under which it renounced the right to build nuclear weapons in return for not only the right to develop nuclear power, but to receive help in doing so from the world community.
There is absolutely no evidence that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. None. Zip. Not from the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, the U.N. body charged with making sure NPT members abide by that treaty. Not from the U.S. and its 16 separate intelligence agencies, nor from Israel and its Mossad intelligence agency nor from counter-revolutionary Iranian organizations such as the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), all of which have been working overtime to come up with any fact, report, material or rumor with which to indict Iran.
Meanwhile, of course, none of the G-5, G-5-Plus-1, G-20 or G-We-Rule-the-World countries are saying “boo” about Israel’s estimated 200 nuclear weapons, let alone the U.S. with its 10,000. It’s true that Iran has a lot of oil, but oil is a finite resource. Even Iran’s vast reserves will someday run out. So it’s developing alternative sources of energy, including solar and wind, as well as nuclear.
The U.S and other Western powers are opposed to Iran developing nuclear power because that would ensure Iran can remain independent. And strong. And influential in its own region. And that is unacceptable to the world’s former colonizing powers.
“Iran, like Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, North Korea, Zimbabwe, the Sudan and many other countries, rejects the status of a “second-tier” country. These countries refuse to accept the authority of the Empire.”
They have thrown off the yoke of colonial oppressors and have charted their own independent courses on the world stage. Their peoples are like runaway slaves who have established their own modern maroon colonies and as such are viewed as a threat to the orderly administration of the New World Order.
And they must be brought back under control, lest they serve as dangerous examples for those peoples still enslaved.
That’s why keeping those countries from developing technologically is a prime goal of U.S. foreign policy.
Has the U.S. discovered a “secret nuclear facility” in Iran?
On Sept. 21, the Iranian government sent a letter to the IAEA in Vienna describing the construction of a plant designed to enrich uranium, up to 5 percent in purity, sufficient for energy production but well below the 90 percent level required for weapons-grade material.
“Further complementary information will be provided in an appropriate and due time,” the letter stated.
According to the provisions of the NPT, Iran and other treaty signatories are required to inform the IAEA six months before a uranium enrichment facility becomes operational. President Ahmadinejad later told a news conference that the new facility won’t be up and running for 18 months.
In other words, Iran was a year early in fulfilling its treaty obligations to provide notice to the IAEA. But on Sept. 25, U.S. President Barack Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy interrupted their G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh to hold a press conference at which they charged Iran with constructing a secret nuclear fuel facility.
Sarkozy, whose country depends on nuclear power for 80 percent of its energy needs, detailed intelligence information that Brown said would “shock and anger the whole international community.” Obama charged Iran with “breaking rules that all nations must follow … and threatening the stability and security of the region and the world.”
The next day, Iran announced it would place the plant under the IAEA’s supervision.
So: Iran built a nuclear facility. Then, fully one year before the required deadline mandated by the U.N.’s NPT, it informed the IAEA about the plant’s existence.
But, just days before the Oct. 1 seven-nation negotiations, the leaders of the U.S., U.K. and France decided to hold a dramatic press conference to denounce Iran for breaking the rules.
A Sept. 26 story in The Washington Post noted that “the rapidly escalating confrontation provided (Obama) with a fresh opportunity to project toughness and success on the world stage. Obama’s detractors have long called him naive for his willingness to engage diplomatically the nation’s adversaries, including Iran. Republicans say his decision to change the deployment of a missile shield for Eastern Europe demonstrates weakness, and critics have chastised him for taking time to weigh a decision on sending additional troops to Afghanistan.
“The announcement also provided a boost for the CIA at a time when the agency is facing harsh attacks – and possible prosecution – for detainee interrogations.”
Are the recent Iranian missile tests an offensive move?
Starting on Sept. 26, Iran began testing a number of missiles, including its medium-range Shahab-1 and Shahab-2 and, on Sept. 28, its longer-range Shahab-3. The latter missiles are believed to have a range of up to about 1200 miles, far enough to reach Israel, U.S. bases in the Middle East and parts of Europe.
So the question is, are the missiles meant to be defensive or offensive?
Defensive, according to Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, as quoted by the semi-official Fars News Agency: “As a result of this capability, those who used to speak of attacking Iran are now declaring that they entertain no such desires or thoughts, for they have realized that attacking Iran is an extremely dangerous act.”
It’s a little hard to argue with that logic, since Israeli officials have now toned down their threats to attack Iran, citing an increased international concern after the revelation that Iran had been building a new uranium enrichment facility.
Yes, the missiles could be used to attack as well as defend or retaliate. But Iran hasn’t attacked another country for hundreds of years. For it to launch a war now against nuclear-armed opponents would be a complete departure from 30 years of foreign policy into the realm of insanity, something for which there is no recent historical precedent.
Does President Ahmadinejad deny the Holocaust?
Every time I read somewhere that President Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust, I try and go back and find his original quote. That’s not easy, because most of the time the alleged denial is paraphrased or partially quoted.
This month, I finally got a break.
On Sept. 24, Steve Inskeep, host of National Public Radio’s Morning Edition program, interviewed President Ahmadinejad at his hotel in New York. The transcript (see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113175352&ps=rs) says Ahmadinejad’s remarks were delivered via a translator.
Here’s the relevant section of that interview: INSKEEP: We have, in a previous interview, discussed how you feel (the Holocaust) is being used unjustly to justify Israel, so we need not cover that ground again. But if you would like to describe to me what specifically you believe happened between 1942 and 1945, I would be interested.
AHMADINEJAD: But then 1942 to 1945 is still about the Holocaust, right? I do raise a couple of questions about the Holocaust, and you are a member of the media, and I believe that you should actually tell people what these questions are, and try to receive answers from them as well.
The first question is, is the Holocaust a historical event or not? It is a historical event. And, having said that, there are numerous historical events. So the next question is, why is it that this specific event has become so prominent? Normally, ordinary people and historians pay attention to historical events. Why are politicians giving so much attention to this particular event? Why are they so biased about it? Does this event effect what is happening on the ground this day, now? What we say is that genocide is the result of racial discrimination. Sometimes we look at history to learn the lessons of history.
INSKEEP: Are you acknowledging that millions of people were killed? Millions of Jews, specifically, were killed during World War II?
AHMADINEJAD: If you bear with me so that I can complete my statements, you will receive your answer. I’m asking, and I’m asking a number of serious questions. And I’m not addressing these questions to you, but to a wider audience — everyone — anyone who cares about the fate of humanity; who care about human beings and the rights of people. These are serious questions. If we are looking at history with the aim to learn — derive lessons from it, then what this indicates is that in the future, we should not carry out the same mistakes that were done in the past. While I personally was not alive 60 years ago, I happen to be alive now, and I can see that genocide is happening now under the pretext of an event that happened 60 years ago.
So the fundamental question I raise here is that, if this event happened, where did it happen? As a form of an objection question, who was it carried by? Why should the Palestinian people make up for it?
Up to 100 million Africans died as a result of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. Surely these also were “holocausts”?
Six million Jews were systematically murdered in what has come to be known as The Holocaust. And, although it is rarely mentioned, that diabolically efficient mass murder also took the lives of up to 5 million political prisoners, trade unionists, communists, gays and Roma people. Truly, this was one of the world’s great atrocities – an atrocity committed in Europe, by Europeans, against Europeans.
It had absolutely nothing to do with Palestinians. Or Iran.
“So why, after being elevated to a status above all other mass murders in history, is it used to justify the establishment of what basically is a European colony on Arab land?”
Ahmadinejad isn’t calling the Holocaust a myth – he’s asking why the mythology that has been built up around it is used as a weapon against the Palestinian people and those who support their struggle for self-determination.
Iran has oil
Iran has a lot of oil. And that oil has been off-limits to the world’s private oil companies since it was nationalized after the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Huge potential profits are at stake. Further, whoever controls the flow of oil – whether or not that involves actual ownership – can control the development of world production, commerce and politics. And the U.S is determined that, rather than allow a multi-polar world to develop, it will be the only country to play that role.
Tasks facing the U.S. anti-war movement
After an unfortunate year-long ebb, the anti-war movement in the U.S. is again beginning to show signs of life. This October there will be many local and regional protests against the U.S-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Most will also address the expanding war in Pakistan and the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.
While some of these protests also will demand no war against Iran, there seems to be less enthusiasm for addressing this issue. The barrage of media attacks, charges and misinformation has taken its toll. The controversy around the Iranian presidential elections and their aftermath have also played a role. Taken together, these factors have to a certain extent disarmed the anti-war movement, even as the possibility of a new war grows ever more serious. Now is the time to reaffirm this one simple principle that ought to be the bedrock of our movement: every country that has been oppressed by U.S imperialism has the right to determine its own destiny.
It has the right to determine its own form of government, choose its own leaders, decide on its own relations with the rest of the world. And the U.S., as the world’s foremost imperialist power, ought to be the last country on earth to presume to dictate to any other how to conduct itself. It’s not necessary to agree with every pronouncement of the leaders of oppressed countries in order to demand loudly and determinedly
“No war, sanctions or internal interference!”
If we were anti-slavery activists in the 1800s, would we stand by as Nat Turner or John Brown were about to be hung, arguing about tactics or controversial statements? Or would we defend the oppressed and their defenders? This is how we need to approach the issue of defending Iran.
This October, as we denounce the wars against Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and the continuing oppression of the Palestinian people, we must also raise our voices loud and clear to demand
“No war, no sanctions, no internal interference in Iran!” (c) 2009 – Permission to reproduce with attribution.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, recently delivered its long-awaited response to the invitation by Western governments to begin another round of negotiations yesterday. The actual document has been held very closely for the last 24 hours, but a copy has recently been made available online, via Dafna Linzer of the website Pro Publica.
From a western point of view, the proposals were somewhat disappointing, but by no means closed the door on constructive engagement. Unfortunately, by the time the actual document was released, the media and many policymakers had already made up their minds about what the package said, based on accounts from western diplomats, Headlines from some prominent news agencies follow below:
Having read the proposals ourselves, we cannot find a single passage in the document that swiftly rejects any commitment to peace, not one sentence that closes the door on negotiation and not one reference shying away from the Nuclear debate. It looks as though the leaders of the supposed ‘civilized’ world together with their ‘media misfits’ are eager to push this long standing issue towards confrontation and towards an inevitable war. Even from the ‘Obama HQ’, it seems like their initial offer to the Islamic Republic was a political formality that they must be seen to exhaust, to appease their anti-war critics before they come out with ‘all guns blazing’.
Their critique of the Iranian proposals seems to be centered on style and grammar, on what the Iranians have said and how they’ve said it rather than on the actual content of the text. And whilst the text is hardly Shakespearerean’, we need to realize that debate between world powers over the NPT (Nuclear Proliferation) issue is no joking matter and thus should not be dismissed solely on literary appeal.
Contrary to what many believe, we at the IM blog (along with Russia) applaud Iran’s first step towards sustainable dialogue and we look forward to running you through Iran’s 5 page proposal document in an attempt to convey to you just what exactly the rest of the world was so fast to dismiss without valid reason:
Page one seeks to place Iran’s Intentions at clear view before the worlds view on the diplomatic level. It is clearly headed: Cooperation for Peace, Justice and Progress with a subheading that says: ‘Package of proposals by the Islamic Republic of Iran for Comprehensive and Constructive Negotiations‘. Some may argue that much of the first few paragraphs spanning pages 1 and 2, seek to cheekily educate the world about existing problems, but we disagree.
The first few paragraphs show Iran taking positive steps to openong its eyes and identifying the problems of the world, linking those problems and their solutions to Iran’s interests for peace. The wording is a positive step towards addressing any previous thought of Iran being viewed as a totally unresponsive, primitive, anti-semetic and thus barbaric opponent by the world audience. The paragraphs enforce an acceptance to work together, to collectively identify and work towards a lasting future. The words here are about team work, alliance, global relations, creating opportunities, and about preserving political & cultural union.
‘The existing mechanisms are not capable to meet the present needs of humankind and their ineffectiveness has been clearly proven in the realms of economy, politcis, culture and security. These mechanisms and structures are the direct products of relations based on brute power and domination. . . . .‘ – A clear message to the US. And this dig at the US and member states continues with: ‘While our world today needs mechanisms that come from divine and godly thinking and an approach based on human values and compassion. The new mechanisms should pave the way for the advancement, full blossoming of the talents and potentials of all nations and establishment of lasting world peace and security.’ – we see the Iranians saying: ‘We long to work with you, work alongside you, share our progress together and that can only happen if you place your arrogance and prejudice aside and recognise us as human beings much like you.‘
The paragraphs below echo nothing but open offers of peace by the Iranians to diffuse a much growing and politically sensitive issue:
‘The Iranian nation is prepared to enter into dialogue and negotiation in order to lay the ground for lasting peace and regionally inspired and generated stability for the region and beyond and for the continued progress and prosperity of the nations of the region and the world.’
‘We stand ready to enter into this dialogue on the basis of godly and human principles and values, including the recognition of the rights of nations, respect for sovereignty and principles of democracy and the right of people to have free elections, as well as refraining from imposing pressure or threats and moving forward on the solid foundation of justice and law.’
‘The Islamic Republic of Iran voices its readiness to embark on comprehensive, all-encompassing and constructive negotiations aimed at acquiring a clear framework for cooperative relationship by ensuring the adherence of all parties to collective commitments…’ – Here there is a little dig at Israel, but just you analyze the text, its crystal clear that this is a mesaage of co-operation and not a retaliation or a rejection as the US would have the rest of the world believe.
Whats interesting in the statements above is that this isn’t your typical ‘Saddam Hussain type’ defiance and arrogance, this is an offer that has been well thought out and projected to the international community with the best of intentions to halt the severing of further political and diplomatic ties.
The last portion of page 2 moving on to the top of page 3 emphasizes the need to call for change with regards to the the International community, in the composition of its functions and its structures so that the International community, comprising of its key member states are all aligned in unison with Iran in their aims and objectives and rules that move towards securing lasting peaceful resolutions. The republic emphasizes that there is a growing need for all, to forgive and forget the mistakes of the past if we wish to embrace solidarity and cooperation in the future. Iran talks about collective commitments focusing on the fact that this is not just down to the Republic and so it is wrong to just bully one country into submission, that however, this is a collective agreement and route whose commitment all parties need to share and be willing to implement.
Even at this dark hour, in their time of increased pressure from the international community, its admirable that the republic chooses to twice mention Palestine and the Palestinian conflict!! alongside their requirements from the international community about what needs to be disclosed and in how much detail: ‘Joint efforts and interactions to help the people of Palestine to draw a comprehensive, democratic and equitable plan in order to help the people of Palestine to achieve all embracing pace, tasting security and to secure their fundamental rights could be good examples of these cooperative ralations.’
The document lays out a framework of three areas that negotiations could focus on: political-security issues, international issues, and economic issues. And yes, the term “nuclear issues” is noticeably absent. But their suggestions do include the following: 2.4 Definition and codification of the rights relating to new and advanced technologies. 2.5 Promoting a rule-based and equitable oversight function of the IAEA and creating the required mechanisms for use of clean nuclear energy in agriculture, industry, and medicine and power generation.
2.6 Promoting the universality of NPT mobilizing global resolve and putting into action real and fundamental programmes toward complete disarmament and preventing development and proliferation of nuclear, chemical and microbial weapons. Understandably so, why should Iran surrender all documentation hosting all details about their Nuclear Programmes to the US and to the International community. The US and their allies need to come back and tell Iran how much information they need to see and what exactly Iran needs to disclose to the international community as a sure prentative measure against possible future military enagement. This is the message that the above points are attempting to convey to the US.
Whatever the world says, every person needs to read the proposals and reflect heavily on how the Republic of Iran has fairly extended its hand of friendship (during the month of Ramadhan) to the international community in the interests of economic, political and social security, only to be slapped away and dismissed without reason.
May Almighty Allah help all the Muslims unite against the wave of intolerance and carniverous abuse that is approaching them.
[Approximate reading time: 21 Minutes – Includes viewing the clips]
We briefly interrupt our break from postings within Ramadhan to bring you the following post (originally published on the ‘Different Perspective website’ at http://thinkingoutoftheblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/scaremongering-on-mass-scale.html).
There’s no denying the popularity of the following video on Youtube, which has been viewed over 10 million times and paints a depressing and “terrifying” picture of Muslims dominating the World in just a matter of decades.
The reality, as it turns out, is something else and thanks to this article on the BBC we can see through the lies being perpeatuated through such videos whose sole purpose is to scare people, create fear and, as a by product, encourage hatred of Muslims.
Help spread the word that this video is a big fat lie and will only fuel Islamophobia.
End of Post.
The BBC have put together their own ‘response piece’ that seeks to expose the large scale fabrication of the figures reported in the slick presentation.
The fact that 10 million+ people have viewed the video demonstrates that there is a growing flux of Western Islamophobia or a variation of that phobia that is manifesting itself, in its transition from thought to action – leading to a progressively inevitable eventuality – War!
On the flipside, the BBC response downplays the significance of the growing possibility of a Europe dominated by Muslims. Such a ‘statistical’ approach undermines the progress of the growth of Islam in the west. Its falls nothing short of formalizing its findings through the official level to downplay what is in actual fact a worldwide phenomenon that will always be opposed by the ‘gospel bashing, born again’ christians that live amongst us today.
What do you think about the above videos?
Send us your comments . . . .
The IM Blog will be taking a break from posting for the next few weeks so that both writers and moderators can spend more time concentrating their positive energies on Ibaadah and worship during the month of Ramadhan. We pray that our viewers will do the same.
During the fasting period, its very easy for one to get consumed with all the distractions that the internet accomodates and as one gets more and more into the material that is being viewed, hours seem to fly by without much effort and so time is wasted on unproductive activity, when that time could have otherwise been utilized for securing our hereafter.
We ask you to make the most of Ramadhan. This month only comes once a year and who knows whether this will be our last Ramadhan that is spent in this world? My posts are certainly not more important than the month of Ramadhan itself and thus its logical to take a break and distance oneself from all worldly pursuits in an attempt to make full use of this opportunity that Allah has promised for all believers during this month.
Please feel free to continue to visit us and read previous posts, or to contribute to the comments threads, to forward any suggestions or to post reviews. All comments will be moderated and all emails will continue to be answered within the normal 5 working day timescales and guest posts will still be open for publishing following content approval.