Another Islamist terror attack, another round of assurances that it
had nothing to do with the religion of peace.
By A Y A A N H I R S I
A L I
seen this before. A Muslim terrorist slays a non-Muslim citizen in the
West, and representatives of the Muslim community rush to dissociate
themselves and their faith from the horror. After British soldier Lee
Rigby was hacked to death last week in Woolwich in south London, Julie
Siddiqi, representing the Islamic Society of Britain, quickly stepped
before the microphones to attest that all good Muslims were "sickened"
by the attack, "just like everyone else."
happens every time. Muslim men wearing suits and ties, or women wearing
stylish headscarves, are sent out to reassure the world that these
attacks have no place in real Islam, that they are aberrations and
corruptions of the true faith.
But then what to make of Omar Bakri? He too claims to speak for the true
faith, though he was unavailable for cameras in England last week
because the Islamist group he founded, Al-Muhajiroun, was banned in
Britain in 2010. Instead, he talked to the media from Tripoli in
northern Lebanon, where he now lives. Michael Adebolajo—the accused
Woolwich killer who was seen on a video at the scene of the murder,
talking to the camera while displaying his bloody hands and a meat
cleaver—was Bakri's student a decade ago, before his group was banned.
"A quiet man, very shy, asking lots of questions about Islam," Bakri
recalled last week. The teacher was impressed to see in the grisly video
how far his shy disciple had come, "standing firm, courageous, brave.
Not running away."
Bakri also told the press: "The Prophet said an infidel and his killer
will not meet in Hell. That's a beautiful saying. May God reward [Adebolajo]
for his actions . . . I don't see it as a crime as far as Islam is
The question requiring an answer at this moment in history is clear:
Which group of leaders really speaks for Islam? The officially approved
spokesmen for the "Muslim community"? Or the manic street preachers of
political Islam, who indoctrinate, encourage and train the killers—and
then bless their bloodshed?
In America, too, the question is pressing. Who speaks
for Islam? The Council on American-Islamic Relations, America's largest
Muslim civil-liberties advocacy organization? Or one of the many
Web-based jihadists who have stepped in to take the place of the late
Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born al Qaeda recruiter?
Some refuse even to admit that this is the question on everyone's mind.
Amazingly, given the litany of Islamist attacks—from the 9/11 nightmare
in America and the London bombings of July 7, 2005, to the slayings at
Fort Hood in Texas in 2009, at the Boston Marathon last month and now
Woolwich—some continue to deny any link between Islam and terrorism.
This week, BBC political editor Nick Robinson had to apologize for
saying on the air, as the news in Woolwich broke, that the men who
murdered Lee Rigby were "of Muslim appearance."
Memo to the BBC: The killers were shouting "Allahu akbar" as they
struck. Yet when complaints rained down on the BBC about Mr. Robinson's
word choice, he felt obliged to atone. One can only wonder at people who
can be so exquisitely sensitive in protecting Islam's reputation yet so
utterly desensitized to a hideous murder explicitly committed in the
name of Islam.
In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing and the Woolwich murder, it
was good to hear expressions of horror and sympathy from Islamic
spokesmen, but something more is desperately required: genuine
recognition of the problem with Islam.
Muslim leaders should ask themselves what exactly their relationship is
to a political movement that encourages young men to kill and maim on
religious grounds. Think of the Tsarnaev brothers and the way they
justified the mayhem they caused in Boston. Ponder carefully the words
last week of Michael Adebolajo, his hands splashed with blood: "We swear
by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reason we
have done this is because Muslims are dying every day."
My friend, the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, was murdered in 2004 for
having been insufficiently reverent toward Islam. In the courtroom, the
killer looked at Theo's mother and said to her: "I must confess honestly
that I do not empathize with you. I do not feel your pain. . . . I
cannot empathize with you because you are an unbeliever."
And yet, after nearly a decade of similar rhetoric from Islamists around
the world, last week the Guardian newspaper could still run a headline
quoting a Muslim Londoner: "These poor idiots have nothing to do with
Islam." Really? Nothing?
Of course, the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not terrorists or
sympathetic to terrorists. Equating all Muslims with terrorism is stupid
and wrong. But acknowledging that there is a link between Islam and
terror is appropriate and necessary.
On both sides of the Atlantic, politicians, academics and the media have
shown incredible patience as the drumbeat of Islamist terror attacks
continues. When President Obama gave his first statement about the
Boston bombings, he didn't mention Islam at all. This week, Prime
Minister David Cameron and London Mayor Boris Johnson have repeated the
reassuring statements of the Muslim leaders to the effect that Lee
Rigby's murder has nothing to do with Islam.
But many ordinary people hear such statements and scratch their heads in
bewilderment. A murderer kills a young father while yelling "Allahu
akbar" and it's got nothing to do with Islam?
I don't blame Western leaders. They are doing their best to keep the lid
on what could become a meltdown of trust between majority populations
and Muslim minority communities.
But I do blame Muslim leaders. It is time they came up with more
credible talking points. Their communities have a serious problem. Young
people, some of whom are not born into the faith, are being fired up by
preachers using basic Islamic scripture and mobilized to wage jihad by
radical imams who represent themselves as legitimate Muslim clergymen.
I wonder what would happen if Muslim leaders like Julie Siddiqi started
a public and persistent campaign to discredit these Islamist advocates
of mayhem and murder. Not just uttering the usual laments after another
horrifying attack, but making a constant, high-profile effort to show
the world that the preachers of hate are illegitimate. After the next
zealot has killed the next victim of political Islam, claims about the
"religion of peace" would ring truer.
Ms. Hirsi Ali is the author of "Nomad: My Journey from Islam to America"
(Free Press, 2010). She is a fellow at the Belfer Center of Harvard's
Kennedy School and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise
A version of this article appeared May 28, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S.
edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Problem of
The Holy Qur'an: Text,
Translation & Commentary
Abdullah Yusuf Ali
King James Version:
Standard Text Edition
Holy Bible on
Ken's Guide to the Bible
by Ken Smith
precision and pig-
iron wit, this compact
volume lays bare all the
sex, gore, and lunacy
that the Bible has to offer.
Why I Am Not a Christian,by Bertrand Arthur Russell
"Great book, solid arguments, a challenge to
believers. Easy-to-understand; presents an almost watertight case against mythology.
Why I Am Not
by Ibn Warraq
Raised in the Muslim faith, Warraq came to reject religion and
now spends his time lecturing and writing. He recently authored a piece "Islam,
The Middle East and Fascism" which critiques the Islamic holy book, the Qur'an.
The Quest for the Historical Muhammad
by Ibn Warraq
Publishers Weekly, March 6, 2000
"... Warraq has provided a highly readable critical survey of the literature of this quest..."
by Ed Decker, Dave Hunt
Other Free Stuff
Celebrity Atheists' Archive
Atheists Of Utah
Humanists of Utah
Wikipedia - Atheism
Books on Mormonism
The Mormons (Humor)
Kiss Hank's Ass
Utah Bus signs '84
Local Atheists Debunk.
Most Muslims know the famous saying of Prophet Muhammad (S) in which
he mentioned that a woman can be married for wealth, status, beauty, or
her religion and that her religion (piety) was the most important factor
Scholars have expounded upon this by adding to the understanding of the
types of women a man should not marry. The great jurist of the last
century Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen taught Muslim men that
seven types of women should not be married:
1) Al-Annaanah: The woman who whines, moans, and complains and ties a
band around her head all the time meaning that she complains of a
headache or some illness but in reality she is feigning illness.
2) Al-Mannaanah: The woman who bestows favours and gifts upon her
husband then in the future reminds him “I did such and such for you or
on your behalf or because of you”.
3) Al-Hannaanah: The woman who yearns for her former husband or children
of her former husband.
4) Kay’atul-Qafaa: The woman who has a brand mark on the nape of her
neck meaning she has a bad reputation or doubts about her.
5) Al-Haddaaqah: The woman who casts her eyes at things meaning she is
always looking at something to purchase, then desires it, and then
requires her husband to buy it no matter what.
6) Al-Barraaqah: The women who spends much of her day enhancing her face
and beautifying it to such an extent that it will seem like it was
7) Al-Shaddaaqah: The woman who talks excessively.
His eminence outlined this advice to the men of the Muslim nation and
for that the nation is much obliged. To that I can add the following
modern phenomenon that requires careful consideration:
1) Twitterer: A woman who uses a twitter account for anything that is
not related to keeping in touch with her relatives or for professional
work (e.g. a gynecologist tweeting child birth advice). Our advice is to
stay clear from twitter users who use it for non-family or
non-professional reasons. Some women use twitter to stay connected to
Islam and Islamic knowledge but they quickly fall into useless
conversation and openly flirt with and/or praise their Shuyookh/teachers
on twitter. If a woman does not have a Twitter account move her up your
2) Facebookers: Facebook is now one of the leading conduits of the
break-up of marriages. Any woman who has pictures of herself displayed
on her Facebook page should be automatically disqualified. If she is not
shy to have millions of men feast their eyes on her then groom beware!
If she is using Facebook for strictly business or for staying in touch
with only her female friends and her relatives then an exception can be
made. If a woman does not have a Facebook account move her up your list.
3) Professional/Career types: Muslim scholars of classical times and
contemporary times have explained that a woman has no need to go outside
the home to earn a living. Her father, brother, grandfather, husband,
son are all there to provide for her. Career Muslim women will say
Khadeejah bint Khuwaylid (RA) worked. In fact she hired men to work on
her behalf. She was not out in the markets bartering and trading. Even
speakers such as Yasir al-Qadhi have stated that women should not work
except in a couple of professions such as teaching girls and gynecology.
Muslim women marriage counselors have stated that a major cause of
disruption in marriages is the inflexibility of the career wife. Avoid
career women who go out to corporate offices and intermingle with men in
the course of their work. If a woman loves home making, cooking,
cleaning, and raising children move her up your list.
4) Temperamental types: Any woman who cannot check her emotions and is
prone to frequent angry fits over little things should be avoided at all
costs. If a woman’s temperament is cool as a cucumber move her up your
5) Non-virgins: Do not marry a woman who lost her virginity outside
marriage or even engaged in any sexual exploits such as kissing and such
outside marriage. According to psychologists these women have attachment
issues, tremendous baggage, and may compare you to her previous lover(s).
If she was previously married or widowed or if she is a convert then
there is no harm in marrying her. If a woman did not lose her virginity
to anything except a marriage then move her up your list.
6) Truculent types: The last thing you want is a woman who argues with
you about every insignificant thing. There are women who know when to
back off from an argument to keep peace in the home and there are those
that will want to have their way. Avoid at all costs the truculent
types. If a woman is wise and non-argumentative move her up your list.
7) Non-hijabis: Do not marry non-hijabis. Too many men have married a
non-hijabi because she promised she’ll wear a hijab afterwards but that
never materialized and he’s left in embarrassment as his friends can see
his wife’s hair and the shape of her bosoms and hips. Just don’t fall
into that trap. If a woman wears hijab, move her up your list.
8) Non-haya types: You can spot these women easily. They may even be
wearing hijab. But they do not have any shyness when talking to a man.
They will ease into a conversation with a stranger man in her college
class or work or public just as easily as she would ease into a
conversation with a woman. This is not her fault. She was raised in an
inclusive environment where men and women are ‘equal’ and so her
dealings with men and women are also identical. If the woman you are
talking to for marriage blushes or lowers her eyes instinctively when
you say “Salaam” to her then move her to the top of your list.
9) Daughters of men who are in haram professions: If a woman’s father is
a banker, loan officer, pork farmer, gas station owner who sells lottery
tickets and alcohol, brothel owner, night club owner, pays interest on
his house or pays interest on business loans then avoid marrying his
daughter if she sees nothing wrong with those professions/transactions.
Your wife will be the mother of your children and will teach your
children what is acceptable and what is not. If she deems nothing wrong
with those professions steer clear. If a woman is the daughter of a man
who is in a halal profession then move her up your list.
10) Contemptuous feminist types: While feminism in general has died a
protracted death in America, Muslim feminism is currently riding a wave.
If a woman you are talking to for marriage shows signs that if she were
asked to make a sandwich and tea for you on a Saturday morning she would
not do so except as a chore or begrudgingly then steer clear. In fact
you shouldn’t even have to ask her. It should come naturally. Just as
naturally as you go to work 40 hours a week for the family. There are
two types of women. Those who consider home making a humiliating chore
and those who love to please their man by making him dinner and soothing
conversation after a long day or after a long week. There are niqabi
women who have come on CNN and proudly boasted that they make their
husbands do the dishes. If you are an impuissant man and can deal with
that then all clear. If you cannot then steer clear of the women who
wear the pants in the family because our Prophet Muhammad (S) has stated
that the man is the leader of the family. The leading cause of American
Muslim men going abroad to marry brides is the high percentage of
contemptuous feminists in the marriage pool in America. If a woman feels
happy about the thought of pleasing her husband then move her to the top
of your list.
There are a lot of other considerations and guidelines provided in the
Sunnah and the eager bachelor is urged to add to his knowledge by
researching further. I pray that Allah grants you a beautiful pious home
maker(s) who will be the delight of your eyes and the coolness of your
are no gods,
no devils, no angels,
no heaven or
There is only our natural world.
myth and superstition
that burdens hearts
and enslaves minds.
Other Free Stuff
Banned in 9 States
101 Book Library
Help listen for ET !