Their hypocrisy about Islam

Category: World Affairs Topics: George W. Bush, Iraq Views: 8226

Ever wondered why the Bush administration seems so committed to promoting the "liberation" of women in the Muslim world while systematically opposing it inside U.S. borders?

U.S. officials insisted that one-third of seats to the new Iraqi National Assembly be held by women. Yet it is well known that Mr. Bush vehemently opposes "affirmative action quotas" in the U.S. "The Americans have actively pushed for equality for women" in Iraq, the New York Times recently reported, under a headline warning "Leading Shiite Clerics Pushing Islamic Constitution in Iraq."

Championing women's rights against "Islamic fundamentalism" has proven a useful tool for the Bush administration to sell its war on the Muslim world.

Mr. Bush claimed to be "liberating" Afghan women from Taliban rule in November 2001--complete with smiling Afghan women lifting their veils for Western television cameras. Three years later, the vast majority of Afghan women remain forced to wear the burqa--head-to-toe Islamic covering.

The Taliban's Department of Vice and Virtue has been resurrected, under the name of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, to enforce Sharia (Islamic) law. Warlords responsible for a reign of terror between 1992 and 1996, including the mass rape and murder of women, remain in power throughout the countryside, enriching themselves through opium production. And the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan continues, enforcing the new regime.

This outcome was easy to predict, challenging the ridiculous notion that a right-wing Republican like Bush would take a genuine interest in advancing women's rights anywhere in the world. 

Such hypocrisy is not unique to the Bush administration, however. The reference points of European colonizers of Muslim nations a century ago bear a striking resemblance to those of U.S. imperialists today. 

British Consul General Lord Cromer, for example, claimed the British occupation of Egypt targeted "first and foremost" Islam's "degradation of women." Yet back in England, Cromer was a founding member of the Men's League for Opposing Women's Suffrage. And Britain's colonial policies aimed to develop Egypt's economy no further than as a supplier of raw materials for the British Empire.

Sound familiar? The systematic denigration of Islamic culture long outlived colonial rule and remains alive and well today. 

Throughout the twentieth century, Western-allied Arab rulers imposed "Europeanization" on their own populations--banning Islamic dress. In 1925, Kamal Ataturk, ruler of post-Ottoman Turkey, banned the traditional fez cap for men, under penalty of death. Iran's Shah Reza Khan mandated European attire for men in 1928 and banned the hijab (Islamic veil) for Iranian women in 1936.

In this context, Muslim organizations have historically embraced Islamic religious customs as a counterweight to Western imperialism. In addition, the U.S. played a role in building up the very "Islamic extremists" that its war on terror targets today. 

The U.S. provided $3 million for the buildup of an Islamic fighting force, known as the mujahadeen, to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in the 1980s. Journalist Ken Silverstein described, "The mujahadeen fighters espoused a radical brand of Islam--some commanders were known to have thrown acid in the faces of women who refused to wear the veil." BBC correspondent Matt Frei noted, "The CIA even helped 'Arab Afghans' like Osama bin Laden, now 'America's most wanted,' to fight [in Afghanistan]."

Understanding this history sheds light on the resurgence of Islam--as a reflexive hostility among most Arabs and Muslims to U.S. efforts to impose "Western values" at gunpoint today.

The U.S. claim to be "liberating" Afghan women launched the "war without end" and provided the steppingstone to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Now the U.S. claims to be protecting Iraqi women from encroaching (Iranian-backed) Islamic rule to justify its continued occupation of Iraq, while laying the groundwork for a possible assault on Iran.

The New York Times reported on February 14, "The prospect of a ... split between religious and secular parties, also appeared to signal a continuing role for the U.S. government, which already maintains 150,000 troops here, to help broker disputes." If the first claim resulted in tragedy, the second should be regarded as farce.

  Category: World Affairs
  Topics: George W. Bush, Iraq
Views: 8226

Related Suggestions

The opinions expressed herein, through this post or comments, contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. These are offered as a means for IslamiCity to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization. The IslamiCity site may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. IslamiCity is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Older Comments:
I must speak up for my friend, Akbar Khan. My brothers, you may not agree with Mr. Khan's statements or beliefs, I am not here to debate that. But what I must say is that he is a young man of very good character; he is indeed a Muslim and one of the better ones I have known. Akbar says what he thinks and believes; you may not agree with him, but that doesn't make him a CIA plant, a pawn of Israel, a tool of the neocons or any other sort of melodramatic nonsense. It simply means that he is a thinking person who isn't afraid to speak out for what he believes. If you don't like Sufism or find its practice valuable, that is fine; it obviously does not work for you; but I think that is presumptuous to draw the conclusion that it therefore is not valuable to anyone.
Inshallah, I hope you see my point. Akbar is a good young man. If you do not agree with him, then please at least appreciate his passion and emotions. We should endeavor to engage in positive discourse and let us not condemn one another, but see that we are all of the same umma, and seek to serve the same Lord.

Ken, I love Arab people, I have many arab friends and they are beautiful and have beautiful families. The respect that they have for older people, the way they carry themselves in public, how they speak, how they live theirs lives, Alhumdulillah I'm very blessed to have such friends. So don't you dare try to say that I hate Arab people. Your labeling of me is what causes problems in the first place. If you would stick your nose into where it belongs instead of prescribing beliefs to me, that would be a different story.

I am not talking about Arab people, I am talking about Islamic values and Islamic beliefs. About Aqeedah, Fiqh, and Ihsan. Stop making up lies you are such a liar man, you have some nerve to tell me what I believe about Arab people.

A typical Salafi-Wahhabi belief, taken from

as mentioned in the following Hadeeth: "The doers of justice will be on thrones of light at Allah's Right Hand - and both of Allah's Hands are Right Hands" - those who were just in their Ruling, with their families and in all that over which they were given authority [2].

[2] Narrated by 'Abdullah ibn Umar & reported in Saheeh Muslim (eng. trans. vol.3 p.1016 no.4493). This Hadeeth is one amongst a number of authentic Hadeeth which prove that Allah - Glorified be He as He deserves - has the Attribute of possessing Hands.

- So now if you were to open up Sahih Muslim by yourself, and read this hadith without reading what the Jurists from the people of the Sunnah have said about this hadith, I wonder what you'd think, you'd probably think Allah has two right hands. Maybe not you, but what about the next person who comes along and think they can interpret hadith on their own?

You've got it all backwards.

Ken, your insults on me do nothing, because they are complete lies. THe only thing that will divide this Ummah is when everyone thinks they can read an ayat from qur'an or hadith themselves and say what it means.

And when I say new inventions, I am referring to the Salafiyya-Wahhabiyya sect primarily. You cannot create a new madhab in the 17th century A.D. If you think that it is allowed, may Allah help you and forgive you.

You guys talk as if you can just open up Qur'an and Hadith and tell the whole world what you personally think about it, and somehow that is what is ends up meaning? No....this is wrong, this is forbidden. By doing these things, you are going against the Ijma of the entire Muslim Ahl' as-Sunnah 'Ulema, and whether you like it or not, most of the Muslims in the world have belonged to the four madhahib, that is, Maliki's in North Africa, Hanbali's in Hejaz, Shafi'e's in places like Egypt, and Hanafi's in places like Syria, Jordan, Hindustan, Bukhara, Samarqand, Indonesia, Malaysia.

If you goons are going to sit there and try to tell everyone that you can just open up hadith and make a fatwa on it by yourself, that is your option. But when you try to tell me that what I am saying is something I am making up on my own, that is the most insulting and most hypocritical statement that you could ever make, because I listen to Ahl' as-Sunnah scholars and I read books which they recommend. I follow Imam Abu Hanifah in Fiqh and I follow Maturidi in Aqeedah.

You can hate on me all you want, but whether you accuse me of being a CIA spy, working for Jews, working for neo-cons, of being a "Pakistani" or "Urdu speaking," it just goes to show your racist taunts and ignorance against people of various cultures. It shows that you have a superiority complex, in that you think that just because you speak Arabic, that somehow that makes you an Alim or Hafidh, or a Mufti?? Sorry buddy, but just because you speak arabic, doesn't make you a better Muslim than anyone else, and likewise, it doesn't mean that you can give fatwas on Quran and Hadith by yourself either. That act in itself is what separates the Ummah. If everyone were to do what you do, Muslims would be in a disasterous state of extinction. Unfortunately, it seems as if the Wahhabiyya or more precisely the Salafiyya movement plans on doing precisely that.

So what is wrong with trying to achieve a high spiritual state? What is SO wrong with that?

You know what both of you guys have in common, you like to attack people personally because you think that I am opening up and reading Qur'an and Hadith on my own the way that you both, Asif Zaidi and Ken are.

Both of you think that you can open up the Qur'an, read a hadith, and that you yourselves can tell everyone you know what it means. That is the problem with you guys. You think that you have not been influenced by Wahhabi mentality. How much clearer can I make if for you? Forget Saudia, they have already basically taken off of the shelves most of the greatest books written by Sunni 'Ulema throughout Muslim history. Now, ever since the Wahhabi concept of things like Allah literally existing above his thrown, and other garbage like that, this is something called anthropromorphism. If you don't know what it means, well go look it up. It is the main doctrine that has fueled scholars like ibn Taymiyya, ibn Abd' Al-Wahhab, bin baaz, and Albani, among others, these are the greatest scholars known to the Wahhabi sect. They have said things like Allah has two right hands. Do you really think I am going to listen to you talking about Naqshbandi Sufi's asking people to try to reach a "spiritual nirvana" as you put it, that there is something wrong in that, meanwhile I have listened to Salafi khateebs talking about Allah having two right hands, and that Allah is physically above his throne? By doing this, you are prescribing hte human qualities or qualities of Allah's creation, to Allah. Now you tell me, is that fundamentals?

You all sit there and try to accuse me of trying to "divide the ummah," but you reek of hypocrisy. The very Wahhabi movement has for this last century allowed for the dessimination of the middle east into different nation states by conspiring with the British.

The problem I have with people like Akbar Khan is they think they a sound knowledge of Islam without actually knowing Arabic. People like him have read a translation (Eng/Urdu) of Quran and probably all the hadiths and think they can say what they want.

Having lived in Kuwait (17 yrs) and also experience with Saudi, I will admit they have problems. Like all Muslims in the world they have made mistakes in past and present. However, saying what Akbar Khan says is totally unfair and does not represent the good they have done for the Muslims.

An example: I visited the naqshabandi sufi conferenc in Chi and they were asking people to achieve a spiritual 'nirvana'. Contrast this with Saudis/Kuwaitis who basically tell you to just pray and read the Quran. Once you have mastered the fundamentals, go beyond. They stress more on the fundamentals rather than achieving some unknown (to me at least) spiritual state.

Does this make me a wahabi lover?
I think not.


As an observer, of Akbar Khan's postings, it is obvious that he or she uses this site to achieve four things: 1. Spew hatred against Arabs, particularly Saudis 2. Promote the Sufi agenda, and anyone who disagrees with him he condemns as being Wahabi 3. Conjure wild interpretations of the Koran, hadees and any other text to support his anti-Arab hate fest. 4. Keep the Muslims divided with his hate mongering through one trumped up ideology against the other. I hope Muslims are wise enough to understand the true intentions of this deviant and simply ignore him.

Wake up pleaseee, you don't even realize that they are playing Chechnya like it's some chess piece. You can call me names and what not, but hte fact remains that this is what is going on here, read what dear Aslan Maskhadov said about these acts and how he said they had NOTHING to do with the Chechan Resistance:

Look at the problems and controversy they have caused everywhere they go. Do you really think I care if you think I'm some imaginary spy or something? It is undeniable, Wahhabi fitnah gets everywhere, even when Muslims of Chechnya are trying to fight psycho red commies who use the excuse of rooting out wahhabi's to kill Chechyans. You can judge me this and that, but I cannot be swayed from what I see as the problem everywhere in the Muslim populations around the world. They all go back to fitnat al-wahhabiya. Where did they come from? Who made them surpreme authority in Islamic matters...who wrote this kitab al-tawhid, why is it more precious than the qur'an?

If you took a brief moment to study the history of this movement, you would be just as disgusted as I am. Unfortunately seeing to your reaction you probably never will, but will continue to say to me that "you're all talk" meanwhile you should go and read the book Aslan Maskhadov wrote before he took shuhadat. Maybe you should READD what he wrote about wahhabis........before you get so crazy.

Read these okay once ur breathing a little easier:

Please open your eyes, may you attain peace Insha'Allah.

He fought against Wahhabi fitnah just as amir-al mu'mineen Uthman (ra) and amir al-mu'mineen Ali (as) fought against the Khawarij. I am sick and tired of Wahhabi apologists. Not one article discussing Aslan Maskhadov's life struggle, WHY HUH?? I'm expecting lots of more lies from you whoever you are.

Akbar Khan, you do not know one thing about my people or Aslan Maskhadov or Islam. You .. plant seed of hate among all Muslim brothers. Saudi Muslim brothers help us many times with money against Russia. Brothers from Pakistan and Yemen and so many Muslim countries people come and help us. What you give Akbar khan? your mouth ? We don't need. Tahnk you. But they Saud don't go say boasting like American and say we pay money to Chechnya and also so many million to this and that. All Muslim are my brothers and I fight for them any time all time. I am hating what you Akbar kahn say. .. You only use Muslim name. I know sure you are American cia or Russia FSB man using the computer internet to enter muslim web site and make and talk hate in my Muslim brother groups. You people like You Akbar Khan I fight. Aslan was just a man and teh fight goes on, but you Akbar Khan liek a devil use this chance of his death to make Muslim kill Muslim. I tell Islamiccity this web, to watch you. ..

Islamicity should put up an article to talk abou the martyrdom of Chechyan rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov. May Allah bless his soul and his lifelong struggle against Russian Communists trying to destroy the history of Chechnya.

Aslan Maskhadov was not only fighting the Russians from invading Chechnya, but was also a lifelong fighter against Wahhabism infiltrating the country. He was a student of the Naqshbandi Sufi Order, and to those who claim that Sufi's do not do Jihad, may you be shown the truth against your lies, and may your lies be exposed for the world to see. Before Wahhabism entered into Chechnya and Dagestan, Chechen leaders like Aslan Maskhadov were not criticized for their resistance against Russia, as they fought honourably and bravely. But ever since Wahhabism started to be propogated throughout the country, unfortunately now they have taken up extremist measures against Russians, like barracading themselves up in a elementary school and killing little children, or walking into a theatre and shooting people at random.

He has taken Shuhadat (martyrdom), and during the last few years of his life, sought to ban Wahhabism from his country. Allah bless him for his life long efforts in stopping the invaders from the north, and the the South, or should I say the "Saud".


To mohamed from brazil:

Emancipation of woman is not the cause of western society moving forward. Rather it is a result of having moved forward. Furthermore, the sustaining factor in modern western economy is simply cheap energy - I posit that had Ibn Saud not aligned himself with UK/US in 1932 and instead aligned with Russia, the world would be quite different. However, this is my opinion and I cannot prove it.

Getting back to your point about western societies being advanced - it is also a result of coloniasm. While Muslims did advance science and society to a certain point, we stagnated. Europeans realized this and took advantage. Nothing wrong with it - we, Muslims, are to blame.

My point in saying this is we, Muslims, also have a great intellectual legacy. We need to rediscover it and sustain it to regain our pride.

Just saying that liberating women will result in an advanced society is rather naive and is the easy way out. Face it, the majority of Muslims all over the world would not like to see their women in the type of clothes, behavior exhibited by western women. We would like to see our women educated and hold professional careers and yet be consistent with the teachings of prophet Muhammad.



By the way Mira...I do believe in Ihsan, along with having Imaan and try to make myself better to be a Muslim following Islam. I conform, Insha'Allah to His pleasure and satisfaction, in Sunni Aqeedah. Thus I come to your mentioning of Gurus. Guru means teacher in punjabi. SO how much do you really know about what you're even talking about? Are you trying to tell everyone not to follow teachers now? lol...

Next point, "self-proclaimed messiahs"?? Who claimed to be one, the only Al-Masih is Hadhrat Issa (alaiyhis-salaam). Anyone who claims otherwise is a clear fasiq and sinner, reminds me of Musailamah, who was from the Banu Tamim tribe and claimed prophethood after the death of Prophet Muhammad (saaw). This is forbidden and anyone who does this is outside of Islam.

Magicians...? these are those who enjoin in such evil illusions and deceptions. Once again, never in my life have I followed magic. This is a Haraam practice and has nothing to do with Ihsan.

"Word Charmers." Honestly I don't know what you're talking about by now because that is vague and pointless. Islam is easy, not hard. Islam is beautiful, not ugly. By you referring to a Sufi as word charmer is an ugly lie. What books on Tasawwuf have you studied, which teacher taught you?

"bible-thumpers"?? - we believe in Qur'an which is unadulterated and unchanged and it commands over the Injeel (Bible),Zaboor (Psalms), and Taurat (Torah).

"Hate/fear mongers" - Ihsan/Tasawwuf teaches love, peace, and tranquility, and constant rememberance of Allah in every action and thought that we do. So I don't know where you're getting this from...(I'm not following you).

Please give me one example where in my posts I have contradicted myself. If I have made any contradictions, please prove it, and I will humbly accept such a mistake and immediately correct it.

Please do not accuse me of leaving Islam.

Allah bless you and may He take care of you and guide you alw

With all due respect to you Mira, comparing Tasawwuf with idolatory of Hinduism, Buddhism and deviation of Sikhism is completely unfounded. Tasawwuf is not a separate religion. It is Ihsan (perfection of faith) and an aspect of Islam.

The fact remains, that ibn Wahhab himself approved of Tasawwuf in his fatwa, along with what all of the teachers ibn Wahhab followed have said about Tasawwuf.

Tasawwuf is simple, clear and easier than anything else. You cannot just "try" it. It is an aspect of Islam. Its practice teaches you to replace not only external, but internal vices with virtues. It teaches to become clear and purified not only from the outside, in your actions and words, but also from the inside, to clear up Shaytan's deceptions that can go unnoticed. Please understand, that no one can practice Tasawwuf, without praying five times a day and performing hajj and fasting the month of Ramadan and paying Zakat-ul-Mal, as prescribed in the fashion of the the Holy Prophet (saaw). To leave prayer is like leaving Islam. Tasawwuf cannot get rid of prayers or any other pillar, it only teaches you to pray as though you can see Him (Allah), and since you cannot see him, know that He sees you.

There is nothing wrong in not practicing Tasawwuf, it's optional for anyone who wishes to reach perfection in faith, and that is what Angel Gibraeel (as) said to Mustafa (saaw) in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim.

I am content if Muslims follow the Sunni way, and that is, to have a proper understanding of Aqeedah. As long as a person sticks to that basic and performs the regular Pillars of Islam and believes in the 6 articles of faith, then Alhumdulillah, may Allah Subhanahu wa ta'ala bless you abundently and reward you duly for following this straight path. Ameen.

If you would like to understand Tasawwuf better, please be inclined to read this article:

Jazak Allah khair.

This article is way off the mark. The main reason western societies have advance so far head of other regions of the world is due to the fact that women have be given the more freedom then the rest. (i.e. the right to vote, own their own business, run for political office, join the military, become leaders of state, pursue professions, receive a quality education, etc.) Bottom line: the west my not be a utopia, and it has its falts, but it's still far better then what's out there today in other parts of the world. That's probably why some many Muslims migrate to the west. They hate the west, but they sure love to live in the west.

I have tried Sufism, Hinduism, Bhuddism, Scientology, Sikhism and state with great comfort, peace and perfect conviction that there is nothing like simple Islam. Islam is always there for you to come to it. It does not need the mad logic of cult tricksters, self-proclaimed messiahs, gurus, magicians, word charmers, bible thumpers and hate/fear mongers to lead you to the truth. Look at it any way you want Akbar Khan you are wrong and contradict yourself. Go back to Islam and if not at least stop spreading hate amongst Muslims.

Akbar Khan, your ability to fabricate and mislead through lies and deciet is simply fantastically amazing. It is commendable how you are able to pull a quote out of thin air and state that as fact. Anyone reading Kitab al-Tawhid will know that not only does Ibn-Wahab NOT support Sufism, in fact you modern day Sufis are regarded by him as pagans and rightly so. .. Maybe you can pull yet another rabbit out of the hat.

What did you say about Tasawwuf Murad? They said this:
Muhammad ibn Abd' Al-Wahhab said about Sufism:
In the 3rd Volume of his complete works published by Ibn Sa`ud University,on page 31 of the Fatawa wa rasa'il, Fifth Question:

"Know -- may Allah guide you -- that Allah Almighty has sent Muhammad, blessings and peace upon him, with right guidance, consisting in beneficial knowledge, and with true religion consisting in righteous action. The adherents of religion are as follows: among them are those who concern themselves with learning and fiqh (attaining a level of Islamic understanding to be able to make specific legal rulings), and discourse about it, such as the jurists; and among them are those who concern themselves with worship and the pursuit of the Hereafter, such as the Sufis. Allah has sent His Prophet with this religion which encompasses both kinds, that is: fiqh and tasawwuf."

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya says in Madarij al-salikin, (2:307):
Religion consists entirely of good character (al-dinu kulluhu khuluq). Whoever surpasses you in good character surpasses you in religion, and the same is true of tasawwuf. al-Kattani said: "Tasawwuf is good character (al-tasawwuf khuluq). Whoever surpasses you in good character surpasses
you in tasawwuf."

Even Muhammad ibn Wahhab's son, Abd' Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Wahhab said:
"My father and I do not deny or criticise the science of Sufism, but on the contrary we support it because it purifies the external and the internal of the hidden sins which are related to the heart and the outward form. Even though the individual might externally be on the right way, internally he may not. Sufism is necessary to correct it."
[Ad-Dia'at al Mukhtthafa Didd Ash-Shaykh ibn Abdul Wahhab, Page 85)

Ahmed ibn Taymiyya said:
"I wore the blessed Sufi cloak of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Gilani, there being between him and me two Sufi Shaykhs."
[Majmu Afatawa Ibn Taymiyya, Vol 10, P516]

May A

I don't blame the people of the west for not knowing much about Islam. I don't think they know about their own religion.

No religion allows people to revolve around an axis of evil meaning an axis that contains alcohol, infidelity(sex), porngraphy, gambling, and nudity as its main components.

It's very sad. In name of high spirit and modernity, most of us are rotating around this axis of evil. And THIS IS THE TRUE AXIS OF EVIL.


To: Korinkas, is that what you tell the people? you are agianst brulity, opression or violiting one's private right. right? you government care about human dignity and freedon. so why didn't they do it? do you remember anything about Abu Ghurayb Prison? did you ever hear Guantanamo bay? you should be ashamed to talk about freedon or personal rights.

For Murad:

Muhammad bin Abd' al-Wahhab said:
In the 3rd Volume of his complete works published by Ibn Sa`ud University,
on page 31 of the Fatawa wa rasa'il, Fifth Question:

"Know -- may Allah guide you -- that Allah Almighty has sent Muhammad, blessings and peace upon him, with right guidance, consisting in beneficial knowledge, and with true religion consisting in righteous action. The adherents of religion are as follows: among them are those who concern themselves with learning and fiqh, and discourse about it,such as the jurists; and among them are those who concern themselves with worship and the pursuit of the Hereafter,
such as the Sufis. Allah has sent His Prophet with this religion which encompasses both kinds, that is: fiqh and tasawwuf."

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya says in Madarij al-salikin, (2:307):

Religion consists entirely of good character (al-dinu kulluhu khuluq). Whoever surpasses you in good character surpasses you in religion, and the same is true of tasawwuf. al-Kattani said: "Tasawwuf is good character (al-tasawwuf khuluq). Whoever surpasses you in good character surpasses
you in tasawwuf."

Ibn Taymiyya said:

"I wore the blessed Sufi cloak of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Gilani, there being between him and me two Sufi Shaykhs." [Al Mas'ala At Tabriziyya]. Ibn Taymiyya's Sufi lineage is given as follows: Shaykh Abdul Qadir Gilani(RA), Abu Umar Ibn Qudama, Muwaffaq Ad-Din Ibn Qudama, Ibn Ali Ibn Qudama and Ibn Taymiyya. [Majmu Afatawa Ibn Taymiyya, Vol 10, P516]

Muhammad ibn Wahhab's Son Abd' Allah ibn Muhammad said:

"My father and I do not deny or criticise the science of Sufism, but on the contrary we support it because it purifies the external and the internal of the hidden sins which are related to the heart and the outward form. Even though the individual might externally be on the right way, internally he may not. Sufism is necessary to correct it."
[Ad-Dia'at al Mukhtthafa Didd Ash-Shaykh ibn Abdul W

Oh yeah I also forgot to mention to everyone, according to people like Murad, any criticism of Wahhabi's means that you work for neo-conservatives and Jews. Well if that were true, that would mean that we'd be working for you right. You think I am afraid of saying that Wahhabis and neo-cons have been best friends since even before the fall of the Ottoman Khilafate? The whole world knows your the one who is full of it. Go return to your master. Wahhabi's own 10 percent of America's economy, they have trillions of dollars invested into American banks.

Murad in your anger rage filled state, I would like to bring to your attention that I love Arabs. Once again another loony comes along accusing me of bashing arabs. What I am bashing are those secularists, who were not only arabs, but some from Iran and Turkey as I had previously mentioned. You FAILED to see the next words which I wrote in referring to certain individuals who helped the rebellion of Wahhabi's infiltrate Muslim lands and attempt to monopolize traditional Sunni Islam.

It's funny how you believe that ibn al-Wahhab and his "legion of followers" out there are beautiful and perfect and somehow unadulterated, clean from the so called "dirtyness" of Sunni's.

These very present day conservatives (neo-cons), and neo-conservatice Zionists who work with the Wahhabi's today have been best friends for over 90 years.


The problem with people like you is you don't read what Sunni 'Ulema have been trying to stick into your heads for over 1000 years yet you choose to act deaf.

Since your such a lover of Wahhabi's I have a present for YOU:

In the 3rd Volume of his complete works published by Ibn Sa`ud University, on page 31 of the Fatawa wa rasa'il, Fifth Question:

"Know -- may Allah guide you -- that Allah Almighty has sent Muhammad, blessings and peace upon him, with right guidance, consisting in beneficial knowledge, and with true religion consisting in righteous action. The adherents of religion are as follows: among them are those who concern themselves with learning and fiqh, and discourse about it,such as the jurists; and among them are those who concern themselves with worship and the pursuit of the Hereafter,such as the Sufis. Allah has sent his Prophet with this religion which encompasses both kinds, that is: fiqh and tasawwuf."

GO LOOK IT UP NOW. Or keep up the 'wish

Akbar Khan you bashing of Arabs, conservative Islam and followers of conservative Sunni ideas is indeed reprehensible. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the beliefs of the Wahabis sect. Its typical of the devil to sow seeds of discord amongst the Muslims. I have seem most of them take the form of modern day Sufis and those associated with the bogus Tawassuf BS movement. Their belief such as yours are based on promoting lies and false impressions of Islam. You can not be a Muslim and throw mud on other Muslims. Neocon Americans and Jews would be proud of you, or are you working for them Akbar Khan ?

To korinkas:

You have basically written a load of ... - your assessment that Jordan is a model nation shows how much you know. Your government is not interested and has never been interested in developing governments in ME which are democratic. Past history has shown this (plz refer to Madeleine Albrights official staements) and present situations (Afganistan, Iraq) will materialize in due time. Past US govt have always squashed democratic movements in ME and have continued to support dictatorial regimes. This has been even said by your president. It will not change.

The only thing we ever hear from western media/people is Muslim women this, women that. Enough of this rubbish. The more serious problems that we face is not the oppression of women - rather, for Muslims, it is that the majority of us are not allowed by our governments (which are US/UK backed) to practise Islam as we envision it in the tradition of Prophet Muhammad. The problem that Muslim women have are real - but they will be solved when we have government(s) which are representative of the will and desire of the Muslim people not of people living in Washington/London/Paris. Muslim problems will not be solved by myopically looking at the woman issue and leaving everything else. Sadly even Muslims have fallen into this trap.



Article is definitely biased. I certainly do not agree with many items on Bush's agenda, but his presidential staff is more ethnically and racially diverse than in any previous US presidential administration. Truth be told, Afghan women fear being raped and beaten by their husbands and local men if they don't wear the burqua. Despite this fact, Afghan women/children are better off now (socially, culturally, medically, etc.) than they were 3 years ago under the horrible rule of the Taliban. Afghanistan's progress will be slow because of those who feel threatened and are afraid of change, afraid of not having control. This isn't due to the Bush administration; it's because of the many male-dominated cultures that seek to oppress the rights of others except for themselves. Millions of Americans (myself included) support middle east right to form whatever form of government they desire. What we DO NOT support is political corruption and brutality of others, suppression/oppression of a woman's right to make fundamental decisions for themselves and their families--decisions such as what to wear, going to school, running for office, owning a business, driving a car, divorcing abusive husbands without losing everything, etc. Women are a vital part of every culture around the globe and regardless of government or religion formations, should be regarded and treated with the highest of dignity and respect in the home and in public. If progress has not been made, it's NOT Bush's fault. I look to Jordan as a good example of what a middle east country can accomplish. Afghanistan and Iraq were both progressive cultures at one time. It's time to get back to business and start moving forward, not backward.

You are missing a giant factor in your analysis, which played the most significant role here, and was being engineered by those against Ahl' as-Sunnah Wa'l Jam'aat for 200 years before the destruction of the Ottoman Khilifate. With the rise of a very few secular minded individuals within Iran, Turkey, Mesopotamia and Syria, certain sects hiding in Eastern Arabia, referring to the descendants of Banu Tamim and Banu Asad of Najd, also known as the Khawarij, took advantage of such secular minded individuals, and sought the destruction of Islamic Unity amongst these nations, and those surrounding them. They (Khawarij) and followers of Abd' al-Wahhab, came from the East and invaded Madinah and murdered hte governor in cold blood, pillaged hte city and destroyed homes and graves of the prophet's companions, his wives, and others, and further murdered thousands upon thousands of Syed's (descendants from the Prophet's family). These neo-Khawarij would not have been able to accomplish these tasks of theirs if they did not conspire firstly with the British, and the United States. They saw their military might and saw it as the opportunity of a lifetime to fulfil their dreams of installing their family as rulers over the province of Hejaz, along with the rest of Arabia which is the province of Najd. By doing this, the neo-Kharijites aka neo-Khawarij made Arab nationalism an important factor in doing away with the rule of the Ottoman Khilfate, since they were not Arabs and were Turks, yet they had command over all Muslim nations. These seeds of racism allowed for Palestine to be captured by the British and made into a British colony until 1948, and made Baghdad the target of British bombings in the early 1900's, and created disunity and nationalistic tendencies to be raised up in the hearts of people, above Muslim unity.

Without taking in the factor of the rebellion of the ibn Saud and followers, you are reaching conclusions just to suit your thesis.

If only our country could apply the bill of rights in its foreign policy ....

I am not too clear on just what point this article is trying to make.

Gurmukh & Gary, I suggest that you should first read the article, try to understand the message it conveys, analyze this and that and only after make an attempt to answer in an intelligent way. Gurmukh, how does Taliban come into picture here?! Taliban was a Puritan movement in Islamic Afghanistan as were the Puritans in USA when alcoholic drinks were banned. That time is known as the time of the prohibition. The USA Puritan movement had a greater effect on the world than the Afghanistan Puritanism, the Taliban regime. Both are not representatives of either main stream Christianity or majority of Islam. Last week a Sikh stabbed his own daughter 11 times for falling in love with a non-Sikh in British Columbia. Some years ago, here in GTA(Greater Toronto Area) a Sikh killed the bride and a few others at a wedding. Sikh barbaric murder of their daughters and wives is not reserved only to Punjab, they brought this despicable custom with them in North America! I have a piece of advice for you Gurmukh:"If you dwell in a glass house, don't throw stones."
Gary, read the article again. USA gave freedom to women to practice whoredom as well as oral and anal sex. Was there ever a woman head of state in USA history? Check the Islamic history, in India and Egypt as early as the turn of the first millenium, women were head of state. In our time, Venazir Bhutto, Pakistan's head of state, in Turkey, and other places. The kindest person turned into an Anti-Islamic advocate? You are prejudiced up front, for you a good Muslim is a dead one. I know your kind. You wonder maybe, how? Simple, you had an article to read and to learn from, instead your blind hate overtook your meagre leftovers of humanity and try to turn the tables around. Know this, the present US administration is one of the most hypocritical and fascist in the history of the Americas. I not only deplore it but also greatly despise it. There are so many things to fix here at home, health, welfare, pension & education.

This is exactly what has happened and is happenning today in the islamic world and all because of our so called own people selling the
muslim interests to either U.S or the WEST just to be in power against the will of their people.Unless and untill muslims all over the world stick to and toil for bringing in the islamic culture and follow what has been prescribed to them by the ALLMIGHTY ALLAH ,they will continue to be in trouble.
But regarding TALIBAN i would like to say that this regime was good in bringing peace to the war-torn AFGANISTAN and wiping out the POPPY CULTIVATION PRACTICE-They needed to be given a fair chance.

Salaam, Being a muslim i dont find that article any good. neither it provides new information or perspective of how West is being hypocrite, nor its conclusion go hand in hand with islamic views.

Being non muslim, he can have as much prejudices over islam as he likes, but it is not necessary for a muslim to put up with all of them. Even though author implies, bush was right wing radical who will not champion the women cause in his own borders, he still convey, application of hijab is backward.

As a muslim,one could appreciate that the author managed to see the hypocracy in actions but failed to notice the prejudices in the heart of most westerners.


Nice. Hypocrisy is the right word.

There is a standard of objective justice, and cultural relativism wont get anyone very far in trying to deal with monsters like the Taliban.

I wonder where this author finds facts. He (a womam would never be allowed the freedom) is just an Islamic anti-american and is quick to blame everything on the USA. The USA is not perfect but we give more to the rest of the world than we buy from it. It is this kind of garbage that is quick to turn the kindest American into an anti-Islam person.