Thursday, January 03, 2008

Hindraf - Ganas dan Batu Caves menyala


Sungguh mengelirukan

Laman-laman pro-pembangkang banyak yang mengatakan bahawa Hindraf adalah hasil kolaborasi Khairy Jamaluddin @ UMNO dengan P Uthayakumar dan kepimpinan Hindraf. Ada komen yang kami terima turut menggariskan bahawa isu Hindraf adalah untuk mengembalikan sokongan Melayu pada UMNO dan Hindraf adalah satu pertubuhan tidak berdaftar yang aman dan tidak bertindak ganas. Dalam komen-komen di www.arahkita.blogspot.com, ada yang mengatakan bahawa Hindraf TIDAK ANTI MELAYU tetapi malang memorandum mereka tertulis berlainan. Antara pengikut Hindraf mengatakan bahawa Hindraf pada asalnya adalah untuk menuntut penindasan terhadap kaum India dihapuskan tetapi akhirnya bergerak menuruti landasan politik serta mempunyai motif politik. Apa pun isu Hindraf belum berakhir. Mereka semakin berkembang dan mereka semakin lantang dengan penahanan 5 kepimpinan mereka dalam ISA.

Berbincangan antara rakan banyak yang mengatakan bahawa Hindraf adalah isu ciptaan UMNO tetapi tersasar dari skrip.Ada yang mengatakan bahawa 5 kepimpinan mereka akan dibebaskan dan adalah aneh mereka tidak ditahan di Balai Polis tetapi terus di bawa ke Kemunting. Ada yang menyoalkan dari mana mereka memperoleh dana untuk menggerakkan masyarakat India untuk berhimpun.

Dalam pada itu kami menerima satu salinan VCD yang menunjukkan rakaman dari awal ke akhir insiden di Batu Caves. VCD ini hampir 40 minit tetapi dua babak yang menarik perhatian kami adalah tindakan GANAS PENYOKONG HINDRAF dan TINDAKAN yang terpaksa diambil sehingga BATU CAVES menyala. Saksikan dan diharap Penyokong Hindraf dapat memberi komen mengenai keganasan yang timbul dan justifikasi tindakan polis.









Batu Caves MENYALA

18 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Saya bukan pernyokong Hindraf...sehingga semua rujukan dan kajian saya( mungkin tidak menyeluruh) saya dapati walaupung kelihatan matlamat Hindaf menguris hati Bumiputra, saya dapati terdapat beberapa perkara yang perlu dititikberatkan. Masalah miskin yang menjadi semakin miskin, pilih kasih telah wujud. DEB kerajaan telah disalah gunakan, hanya segilintir Melayu dan segelintir bukan Melayu yang berpuas hati.
Sebagai kelompok kecil yang memberi pandangan mereka, Hindraf telah melihat kedudukan warganegara Malaysia dari keturunan Hindu India terancam atas atas dasar kerajaan, walaupun kerajaan ingin mengurangkan jurang perpezaan ekonomi(atau sosio-ekonomi lebih tepat) tanpa menginra kaum telah gagal.
Kita tahu bukan sahaja isu pendapatan atau perkerjaan awam yang dijeritkan oleh Hindraf seperti yang dilagukan oleh DS. Sammy Vellu, tapi lebih menuntut kepada perubahan dasar kerajaan yang lebih mantap, peka dan adil.
Hindraf mula mendapat sambutan hangat daripada masyarakat India Malaysia sejak isu Allahyarham Murthy (sumber Youtube), Kegagalan UMNO memberi pendekatan wajar isu Memorandum Menteri-Menteri Bukan Islam, pembelaan beberapa kes sensetif di mahkamah oleh peguam-peguam Hindraf (isu membabitkan agama, ketidakadilan dari pelbagai segi) dan seterusnya pembabitanya yang aktif dalam isu perobohan dan pencerobohan Kuil-Kuil Hindu (Media aliran perdana menyangkal beberapa info diatas).
Kaum India kini melihat kaedah Diplomasi telah gagal dan MIC hilang taring. Menteri Bukan Melayu lihat tidak lebih daripada kerbau yang dicucuk hidungya dengan cara suaka politik atau ekonomi dengan cara kasar mahupun lembut.
Darihal video di web saudara, sebagai penguna jalur lebar yang peka dengan isu tersebut, saya dapati, penyokong Hindraf dan pengunjung kuil termasuk mereka datang dengan keluarga (dan mungkin kekasih dalam kes saya) untuk sembayang atau menunaikan hajat...adalah mangsa yang terperangkap. Ini disebabkan FRU mengepung bahagian hadapan pagar utama dan menembak gas pemedih ke bahagian belakang gerombolan manusia yang tidak dapat bergerak.
Beberapa individu memang telah bertidak diluar kawalan dengan membaling batu ....terutama mamat yang pakai topi keledar kerana motorsikal barunya disepak sehingga jatuh oleh angota FRU..

Terima Kasih kerana sudi membaca...diharap rakyat Malaysia secara menyeluruh membuat pertimbangan wajar untuk diri kita sendiri, bukan untuk segilintir ahli politik.

11:04 PM  
Anonymous Dulu & Kini said...

Ini hanya pendapat dari hati kecil aku saja. Bagi aku sememangnya matlamat hindraf mengenai hak orang melayu adalah salah dan ianya tidak boleh diganggu gugat kerana orang melayu adalah orang pribumi dan itu adalah titik noktahnya and please don’t question about it.

Masalah kemiskinan yang berlaku terhadap orang india sememangnya berlaku juga kepada orang melayu. Kesemua ini berlaku adalah kerana salah satunya DEB yang kerajaan cuba laksanakan. Kerajaan yang sedia ada sebenarnya makin tidak ketentuan kerana pemimpin atasan masing2 ingin memenuhkan kantung mereka sendiri dan rakyatlah yang menerima akibatnya.

Gelagat pengikut hindraf ibarat samseng sememangnya perlu dihentikan kerana segala matlamat tidak menghalalkan cara. Tuntutan dan luahan sememangnya perlu kerana ianya dapat memaklumkan kepada semua tentang kehendak masyarakat tetapi perlu dengan cara yang dibenarkan undang2. Bagi aku perhimpunan secara aman memang berkesan untuk memberi isyarat kepada parti pemerintah yang memang pekak badak.

Oleh yang demikian marilah kita berikan tentangan yang hebat kepada parti pemerintah agar mereka sedar tentang kehendak rakyat jelata yang makin hari makin tertekan dengan segala kenaikan barang yang berlaku.

Sekian.

1:02 AM  
Anonymous Sebahagian Suara Anak Muda said...

Kaum india di Malaysia kalau miskin perlulah menyalahkan sepenuhnya kepada pemimpin mereka sendiri, tidak kiralah mic ka, ppp ka, atau apa saja pemimpin india yang ada sekarang ini yang memperjuangkan nasib kaum india di malaysia.

7:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Video yang dipaparkan tidak lengkap. Ia tidak menunjuk permulaannya..bila polis mengarahkan semua orang disana masuk kedalam kawasan kuil. Lepas tu ditembak dengan gas pemedih mata. Mestilah orang disitu marah.Walaubagaimapun, aksi-aksi seperti ini mestilah di kutuk. Kedua-dua pihak FRU dan yang baling batu memang salah.

Saya nampak sekarang macam perhimpunan Hindraf berjaya menghasilkan sesuatu yang positif bagi kaum india. Samy velu nampak bekerja lebih keras, sekarang dah tak boleh kuil sesuka hati..kena buat bincang dulu..

Pada pendapat saya, Hindraf telah berjaya membukak mata semua orang.

4:37 PM  
Anonymous Mohamad Derus said...

Tidak benar - polis mengarahkan mereka masuk dalam kuil selepas itu menembak gas. Saya juga telah melihat keseluruhan video tersebut dan apa yang jelas ialah polis mengambil masa yang lama setelah di hujani batu untuk bertindak. Ada juga komen yang menyentuh tindakan polis kerana itu kuil namun mereka berselindung dibelakang kuil untuk mengelakan dari tindakan. Tindakan polis wajar

11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

polis bagi je la permit..macam najib cakap bagi je buat kat stadium brceramah la smpai pagi..tu pun klu najib tak lidah berputar macam samy velu..ni nampak macam konspirasi utk buat suasana tegang supaya peserta perhimpunan marah

1:14 PM  
Anonymous God Bless M'sia said...

Siapa salah???!!!
Hindraf lah salah kenapa polis pula?
Buat kacau, ganggu ketenteraman, memang patut lah.
Bagi org yg sgt liberal kepada demonstrasi mcm ni, apa kata jika perusuh Hindraf baling batu terkena dgn anak sendiri ke, bapak sendiri ke atau orang2 yg tersayang ke? mcmana?
apakata if hindraf merusuh depan rumah? depan kedai kita cari makan? depan anak2 yg lalu lalang? nak salahkan polis lg?
Jika betul2 nak perjuangkan apa2 pun, tak boleh ke buat dgn aman? Tgk la muka2 yg merusuh tu, muka budak2 yg tak de kerja.
Ini merosakan negara kita. Tak suka kerajaan, undi yg lain, if undi pun tak jalan, apakata saudara semua berusaha utk menjadi pemimpin supaya memperelokkan kerajaan. bukan kah itu lebih baik? dari menyalahkan polis buat keja. jika tak buat masalah takkan polis nak tembak, ingat tembak anjing ke? polis pun ada procedurenya.

p/s:if batu yg dibaling tu terkena kepala anak sendiri, i wonder if u still sokong hindraf at that time atau pegi buat report polis. then kutuk polis tak buat keja.

Melayu Mudah Lupa

2:32 AM  
Blogger dari perak ke gombak said...

ape la yang 'God Bless M'sia" merepek ni..dh tentu drg merusuh kt kuil dorang dan kenapa nk buat depan anak korang ke,kedai korang ke..dorang pn ada sasaran dorang gak nk baling..aku ada gk pergi join demonstrasi ni yang dlm paper kononnye kata haram tp aku rasa ikut amalan demokrasi xharam pun..biasanya untuk menggagalkan demo tu atau memburukkan suatu perarakan akan ada "mata2" atau SB pki preman yg konon join skali perarakan pastu dia yang buat provikasi..tu belum lagi polis2 yang dikerah berkawal dan tembak meriam air kimia..klu "Bd bless m'sia ckp polis ada prosedur untuk menembar orang..yang kt batu buruk tu ape cite plak..dh la polis yang tembak tu pki preman je yang konon2 nk sm2 dengar ceramah bersih tu...skarang yang kena tembak plak kn dakwa bl dh sihat..pelik kan..

3:44 PM  
Blogger nik said...

kerajaan (umno sbgai pemimpinnya) memang dah bnyk berlembut dgn org bukan melayu melebihi dari org melayu sendiri.

Kes batu buruk-Melayu demo.Melayu KENA tembak. Melayu yang kena tahan! Melayu kena dakwa atas tuduhan membunuh!!!(tlg betulkn jika salah)

Kes hindraf-India demo.Polis kena belasah.India bebas tuduhan membunuh!!

Ini hanya satu contoh. Bnyk lagi contoh Kerajaan berani bertegas/brtindak kpd org melayu, ttpi penakut kpd bngsa lain.

Kerajaan(umno) memang sanggup mengorbankan Melayu, wlupn kbnykan org K'jaan adlh org Melayu!!

Memang sifat melayu untuk bertoleransi..untuk 'tak apala, bukan rezeki kita'. Pasif

so kpd bgsa lain, jgn diberi betis nak paha plak.

8:07 PM  
Blogger KZ Ahmad said...

Apabila Hindraf menyentuh Islam, maka terbatal kesemua agenda yang diperjuangkan.

Hindraf kena reform semula dan menggariskan perjuangan mereka dengan jelas tanpa menyentuh Islam dan Melayu. Ketika itu barulah ia releven dan boleh dipertimbangkan untuk untuk disokong.

Hindraf perlu pisahkan Islam dan Melayu yang disentuhnya dari perjuangan mereka.

Mampukah mereka melakukanya? Nasi sudah jadi bubur. Hindraf kena minta maaf terlebih dahulu kepada Islam dan Melayu dan reform perjuangan mereka dan setelah itu mungkin kita mampu membantu mereka.

7:04 PM  
Anonymous akalamakala said...

tuntutan mereka mengenai hak2 org melayu mmg tidak boleh diterima.tetapi apa yg mereka suarakan ada betulnya.kenapa?? sbb DEB yg dilaksanakan tidak berjalan dgn betul..org melayu sendiri jugak ada yg menderita,miskin dan terhimpit.org2 atas sibuk kaut keuntungan,penuhkan poket sendiri..lupa ker hak2 org lain,rakyat.tapi tindakan ganas hindraf mmg haruslah dileraikan oleh pihak polis...walaupon dgn apa cara sekalipon..

4:32 PM  
Blogger wan2no said...

Hi

I've been living with a musulman family in Senegal for 2 months now.

First I can tell that the situation of the women is sad and full of injustices. They accept it cause they have to, but you can see that deep, they are really sad and they would like that to change. Especially there is one girl in the family is now a good friend of mine, and it makes me sad to know what here future is gonna be made of because she deserves far better than that..

One thing ive experienced that scared me. I was with a guy of the muslim family where i live, we were driving back from the restaurant. He is a good friend and is always very sweet with me. He asked be: Will you ever convert yourself to islam? I said NO, of course No. (it wasn't a surprise I've already told him that clearly). Throwing back the question, i asked, (sure he would say no), And You, would you ever convert yourself to anything other than Islam? He looked at me, angry. Regret what you just said! I responded, surprised, What? He said loudly and more angry : Regret what you just sais or I smash the car! OMG I regret it I regret it! I couldnt beleive what just happened. Usually he is always so sweet with me and suddenly he became someone else, a defender of his religion who was willing to do anything to prove his faith to Allah. I was scared..

I'm telling you this from my own personal experience in a West African Muslim country...

A Canadian girl



Within every good Muslim there is an animal lurking.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2007/11/26

Dear Mr Sina,

One day the world will owe you a big thank you, there is no doubt. How much time and effort you put into this I can only guess and I hope you also get a lot of credit for it not only hateful stupidities. If you ever come to Sweden I would love to be of ANY assistance you might need, and proudly take you in as a guest in my home (so don´t hesitate if you come here). What you do takes a lot, so thank you on behalf of us all who can still think and love freedom. The importance of your work cannot be overestimated. The problems with Islam is getting bigger here in Sweden and still a lot of people don´t wanna face the obvious, so it´s always good to be able to point their way to faithfreedom.

Dear Peter:

Thank you. You made my day. I actually love it when I receive undeserving compliments that stroke my ego. It’s just too bad I know the truth and I can’t fool myself to take these compliments to heart.

Anyway, you can do a lot even if I never come to Sweden . You can join me and other friends in our fight against the spread of Islam. There is so much to be done and the workers are so few, the task is so lofty and the resources so scarce, the work is so big and the time is so short, the dangers are so immense and the rewards so immense that no one can afford to remain indifferent and let humanity face its doom. It is time to change the course of history and no one can do it better than you and me. We, ordinary people, can do it. We who care about this world, our freedom, our children and the future of human civilization must do it.

Wish you all the best

Ali Sina


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2007/08/16

Ali,

I do feel the need to express my gratitude to you and your website. I finally decided to try and find out what makes Muslims tick. What makes them so narrow-minded and blind? Why do they want to kill people in the West?

I've spend numerous weeks now reading book after book after book (and still reading). Not that I remember all the details, but I have to say, I have honestly
been in a state of shock. Like many other people, I want to give everyone their space to pursue their religion of choice. Never in my wildest dreams would I have been able to conceive what I have found. I have barely begun to read your website but I can see that the facts are obvious to you and anyone who informs
him/herself and dares to use their brain. My question most recently has been, what can I do, what can I do? I have been talking to friends about what I found but not having read what I read, they may very well think I am overreacting. I am very concerned about our future - physical survival, history, etc. etc. Will
everything be wiped off the earth? Because I can see that even killing every last non-believer will not be the end. Muslim will kill Muslim because s/he "interprets" the insanity in a different way.

So I have to admit, it was a relief to find your website, knowing there are other like minded people in this world.

Thank you!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2007/04/04

Dear Dr Sina,

I'm a newcomer to your site and haven't read it all by any means. Basically I think it's a good thing but I won't reiterate other people's praises, there's no need. However, I feel that sometimes your tone doesn't help your case. I admit that it's very difficult to avoid sarcasm when dealing with irrational opponents, but you could be accused sometimes of descending to their level, for instance in the following response of yours to a comment by a Muslim (and not one of the hateful abusive ones):

"You will wonder why MuHamMad is being roasted like a Ham and other Muslim terrorists who have gone to hell will tell you that he is being tortured because he sold his soul to devil in this world. He got to become king and sleep with a score of young women and lied to everyone. In exchange his soul is going to be burned for eternity. Then you remember my words to you."

Presumably this is some sort of joke as I gather you don't believe in hell. It must be so tempting to make this sort of comment but I still think you should resist it.

Here is another comment of yours:

"I hate Islam because Islam is evil. But other religions are not evil. They are just fairytales. Many people like to believe in fairytale."

I don't think it's quite as simple as that. Christianity is much more diverse than Islam but in some manifestations it can be just as evil. The first crusade was instigated by the Pope and culminated in the massacre of the inhabitants of Jerusalem - men, women and children. Then you had the Inquisition etc etc. The Bible is more diverse and ambiguous than the Quran (from what I understand) and you can find something in it to back up pretty much whatever you believe. But I think all religion is dangerous when it is fundamentalist - in other words putting dogma above reason and authoritarian teachings above human decency.

In another place you say:

"When Amnesty International talks about the human rights of the terrorists in Guantanamo Bay I want to puke. These people have no clue what the heck these monsters are. Terrorists are not humans and human rights should not apply to them. Where is Amnesty International when Iranians are constantly being hung and tortured by the Islamic regime? The Amnesty International no longer has moral authority to decide what is right and what is wrong."

Amnesty International highlights what it considers abuse of human rights in all countries, irrespective of ideology. That includes Iran (check on their website). It might be criticised for concentrating too much on one rather than another, but it does aim to cover all countries. As for your comments "Terrorists are not human . . . " you sound like a Muslim here! Terrorism is evil, terrorists are evil (or misguided), but they are still human beings (that's the trouble - it's humans that cause the problems) and to say they have no rights and should not be treated as humans seems to me dangerous. You should think not only of how you feel but how people might interpret your words.


Mark



Dear Mark:

Your words are wise and everything you say is true. However, remember that I am writing for nine years and I generally write everything that comes to my mind. At times I am angry, at times happy and optimistic and in other times calm and rational. My moods change like everyone else and my writings reflect my mood. As time went by, the site became more than my personal blog. I probably should have been more careful in the choice of my language.

Now we have a panel of editors who make sure everything is written in a right way. My original writings did not pass through this rigorous filtering and frankly it still does not. They almost tolerate me and let me do what I want. I am treated like Prophet Mo. I can act above the law and no one stops me. (I don't get as many women as he got.) I am sure one day they will draw the line in the sand and will tell me enough is enough.

I fully realize that the site is no longer my ranting soapbox and I must be more careful of what I write and how I express myself. However, going through all those thousands of pages and cleaning them up, is nearly impossible. Let this stand as the testimony of my imperfection. I will be more careful in future. You are not the first to tell me that.

Wish you all the best

Ali Sina




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2007/02/21

I just visited your website for the first time and spend 3 hours reading and looking at the pictures. Some were difficult to see. I plan on visiting it more and reading it all. I want to thank you for all this information about Islam. I personally don't know any Muslims but I have had email conversations with 2 Muslim men from Egypt. They promote Islam as a religion full of love and that they only want peace in the world. But from your site and from the comments from Muslims on your site, I don't see them promoting love for their neighbors. All the Muslims that sent you a comment threatened you with physical pain and even death. I see no love nor peace in that. And they all told you that your site is full of lies and errors. But not one of them gave proof to your so-called errors. I doubt you will ever have to pay out the $50,000 to anyone.

I am a Christian and I hate no one. I dislike some people and hate sinful acts but I love the persons and pray for their souls. Just like I would hope others would pray for my soul (I am not perfect and I sin from time to time). But I would never threatened harm or death to another person because they disagreed with my religion or believed that Jesus was a fraud or mock God. I'd rather talk with reason and respect and if we still couldn't see eye-to-eye, leave it alone and let them disagree. I would still believe and go on with my life. I pray that non-Christians some day will find the Lord but I never want them dead. That isn't a religion of love and peace. How can Muslims promote love when they are constantly harming and killing non-Muslims? They say that Islam is spreading worldwide. I see people converting to Islam due to fear and out of force. If one converts to Islam out of fear of being killed, they don't truly have that faith in their hearts for Allah. In Christianity, God is love. He wants a personal relationship with us and we earn entrance to Heaven through our loving faith and good deeds on earth to our friends and enemies. In Islam, Allah sounds like a distant God who will allow one in Paradise if they kill non-believers. How do Muslims repent for their sins? Who gives them the right to judge others when they themselves are killing millions of people, molesting children, treating their own women (mothers, wives, sisters, aunts) as vaginas [can't men have self-control??]? Plus Jesus never sinned, making Him perfect. And Muhammad lived a sinful life. Which man would be a better role-model for you?

It scares me that Islam is getting stronger. Maybe not stronger, but definitely more world spread. I do believe that the word is mightier than the sword. But it's doesn't seem fair that that sword is touching more hearts than the word is. I pray that no harm comes to you and your loved ones. I pray that your website reaches thousands every day and never stops. God bless you for opening your heart to the truth and telling us the truth about Islam. Please don't stop!

Peace and love!
Michele
Wisconsin, USA



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2006/08/20

To Ali sina sir,

I have become an ardent lover of this site. there is a lot of substance in your articles. sir, since years i was dubious about the teachings of "quran". i feel very fortunate and lucky that i got this site. now i am completely aware of what quran mean.

i feel you are a spark of divinity, and a boon to human race. you are the eye opener and an inspiration to many of us who used to think quran is as much sanctimonious as any other holy epic.

i think islam is a "virus" spreading through out the world and your site is an anti virus for the eradication of this contagious disease. i highly appreciate you for the effective work you are doing as a responsibility to save humanity from the claws of evil islam.

it's obvious that mistake doesn't lie with muslims alone but the preaching of Mohammed prophet & quran is making them to live like wild animals. I feel quran is applicable to animals rather than humans.

being a Hindu and a peace lover from india i would like to ask whether it is possible to change minds of stubborn people (muslims) whose blood is filled with aggression and malice ,flowing through out their body?

India a country where people given equal rights irrespective of religion is now under the threat of islam. its vivid that demons and divines cannot live under one roof. we (hindus) cannot change them, even if we do so, they are not in a position to face the truth.

hinduism is not an identity or religion but a path to reach righteousness of ones soul. soul searching with wisdom and knowledge is the theory of hinduism. peace and love are the main brands of it.

the situation in india suggests a war for the survival of humanity. but is it possible for a strict follower of peace take his sword and combat in the battle field? can you suggest what can we do this high time?

eagerly waiting for your reply .for now ill conclude by thanking you whole heartedly. you are a graceful man and i want to become your disciple.

with lots of love from hindus,

your disciple ravi



Dear Ravi:

Unfortunately when one follows an evil doctrine one can become evil and do evil. Many good people did terrible things when they joined the Nazi party. They later came to their senses, alas too late, and regretted ever since. Yes, it is true that humans can act like beasts or even worse by believing in big lies such as those of Hitler and Muhammad. These terrorists plotting against the lives of innocent people so zealously cannot be called human.

How to counter that? Not with violence. We must be firm and unyielding towards them and meet their aggression with force. You can’t contain ferocious beasts with kindness because they interpret kindness as weakness and become emboldened. When faced with ferocious beasts you must show strength and frighten them. Animals will respect you if they fear you. People whose humanity is not evolved, who have no feelings for members outside their own pack, are very much like animals. However, these beasts we are talking about were not born that way, they have become beasts through indoctrination. If you pay attention to what Muslim countries teach to their children in schools or to their public in their media, you’ll see how easy it is to become beasts through indoctrination and brainwashing. Lies and hatred can transform anyone into a subhuman.

So what is the solution? The solution is to counter this brainwashing with education. Truth is very powerful. It is the antidote to lies. All we have to do is tell the truth. We can’t of course rescue everyone, but we will eventually be able to rescue the good people caught in this web of lies. The majority of Muslims belong to this category. These people will see the light and will leave Islam. Once they do that, others will follow. The collapse of Islam will be sudden.

Also you should not expect Muslims to leave Islam as soon as you tell them the truth. Faith is not something that can go away easily. Those who have been victim of faith know what I am talking about. Look at the communists! Some of them are highly educated and yet when it comes to reasoning they are as dumb as doorknob. They are unable to see the truth that communism is evil, unworkable, causes poverty, encourages dictatorship and results in oppression. They are brainwashed. Communism is an atheistic religion. Theistic religion are much more difficult to get rid of. The fear of hell and punishment is an added impediment for the believer to see the truth. It took me two years to admit the truth that I had found on my own. I was ready to deny my own intelligence and not give up on my faith. The process was painful and difficult.

The best way is to spread the truth far and wide, like sowing the seeds, and leave time to take care of things. Once the spring comes all the seeds will germinate at once.

I do not believe in pacifism but also it is not necessary that you take your sword and combat in the battlefield. Pen is mightier than sword. The added benefit of waging the war with pen is that every person that you conquer becomes your ally. What a marvelous way to wage this war and win. This is truly a win-win situation. You win and so does your enemy whom you win as a friend. This is not wishful thinking. This is already happening. FFI has won over many enemies and has converted them into allies and friends who are now fighting alongside us to wage this war of truth against falsehood. Moreover, your pen can conquer, hundreds, thousands or even millions of people, while with a sword or a bomb you can only kill a handful of people and make more enemies.

All the best

Ali Sina




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2006/04/08

Dear Ali Sina,

After I have spent hours and days reading through your site, I found my self compelled to write few lines to you and I hope it will be posted for all to read. What interested me the most is the debates that you have done with many people. And taking the time to write, document and publish every thing on your site. Great work, I congratulate you for a job well done. Nevertheless, I found one thing consistent with all the Muslims that you debated, that they all rely on what other scholars; I should say Islam apologists and Muslim writers, to present their case, by defending Islam through writings of Muslim apologists and Muslim writers. Not one could prove that Qura'an is divine revelation.

They always find a good reason to divert from the main subject, and direct the discussion into some other path. They are swift to quote what so and so said about Islam, they take pride in that, but blindly they turn away from reality of Islam, the cult of doom. Egocentricity is their dictum, being superiors is their doctrine that they took from Mohammad and the Qura'an. Every one else is looked upon as lesser in his humanity than them, Islam is the sublime and no others could be as equal. These are the beliefs of every Muslim, can you see where the hate comes from. Deceiving is also a doctrine, because Allah, according to Qura'an is the best deceiver ever, I don't remember the 'sorra" and the number of the verse where it says "deceive and Allah will deceive, Allah is the best deceiver" these are the words of Allah to men. So what do you expect from people believing in teachings like this, worse yet defending it.

Serving in Iraq with US army for quite a while now, put me in direct contact with these people and the way they believe and live. Some savage rules, brutal customs, and inhumane activities even the monkeys in jungles have better rules to live by. I have a lot to say from what I have seen here, from brutality and violence, child molestation and many other things, but not much time to write every thing. I will try from time to time to visit your precious site and drop few lines in the future. But most importantly I can see the main goal of work like yours, it is very essential to rid this world of this destructive cult that will destroy this world and all the advancement that was accomplished by the mankind, if given the opportunity to do so. Simply because they haven't given any thing to this humanity other than killing and destruction, so their trend is obvious. keep up the good work.

Yours truly,

Danny


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2006/04/03

Your website is fantastic. It really reveals the TRUTH about the cult of Islam. You display the perfect arguments and yes you are right, the Muslims have no legit response to your challenge.

Not too long ago I was very close to converting to Islam because of a handful of videos I watched, most influential videos were that of Sheikh Yusif (an ex-priest), from Texas... he was a Protestant white man who converted to Islam. I viewed many of his lectures in the past and they convinced me to want to convert. Make a long story short, after a few talks with the family, few friends talking some sense in me, and a few hours browsing your website, I learned that Islam is EVIL and I want to thank you personally for your website...not only have you opened my eyes wider, but you WILL open the eyes of many Muslims as well in the future. Don't let the negativity of these Muslims get to you... trust me... your website IS very influential, and I'm sure you know all of this.

Anyway, this Sheik Yusif had many videos on Google video, and I was browsing it earlier today and I stumbled upon this 1 video of his lecture in India where he spoke about Islam and terrorism. In this lecture, you won't believe what he said ... he actually compared Muhammad to Jesus. He said that Muhammad told his followers not to kill, to let the disbelievers talk but not to fight back... this is what Yusif preached. It disgusted me, so I had to take matters into my own hands, and wrote him an e-mail myself, pretty damn big email too... using lots of the points you brought up, and I challenged him as well to prove to me that Muhammad wasn’t a narcissist, rapist, pedophile, mass murderer, etc. I’m hoping he replies back or something, but it is YOU who gave me the courage to take a stand whenever I see wrong. I just wanted to ask if you're familiar with any of his lectures, or if you have had any contact with him, any debates or anything. I really want this man to snap out of being an Islamified zombie and to really look at what he's doing. By the way I love reading the Muslim hate mail on your website, it gives me a great laugh haha... I especially love the part when you responded to the Muslim who wanted you to take off the Muhammad portrait , you served it to him brother haha. Anyways, hope you can reply to this e-mail, just wanted to thank you... keep doing your thing and I will KEEP browsing your website, may it never be shut down.

Take care.

6:10 AM  
Blogger wan2no said...

Sina's Challenge


I receive many emails from angry Muslims, who sometimes beg me, and sometimes order me to remove this site. I consider both, pleading and bullying, signs of psychopathology. Argumentum ad baculum and argumentum ad misericordiam are both logical fallacies.

If you do not like this site and want me to remove it, instead of acting as a bully or as a victim, disprove my charges against Muhammad logically. Not only will I remove the site, I will publicly announce that Islam is a true religion. I will also pay

$50,000 U.S. dollars

to anyone who can disprove any of the dozen of the accusations that I have made against Muhammad. I accuse Muhammad of being:

(This section is under construction. Links to all the charges will be added soon)

a narcissist a misogynist a rapist
a pedophile a lecher a torturer
a mass murderer a cult leader an assassin
a terrorist a mad man a looter

I have debated with many Muslims. Their defense of Islam can be summarized in two categories:

a- Denial of the authenticity of Islamic sources that report the stories of crimes of Muhammad (example: debate with Edip Yukssel, a leader of the Submitters)

b- Moral relativism and situational ethics, e.g., “In those days, pedophilia, assassination, rape, raid, pillage, massacre and lying, were common practices, so Muhammad is innocent because he did what everyone else was doing.” Muslims even go as far as to question the legitimacy of the Golden Rule to claim I do not have any basis to condemn Muhammad. In other words, who can say what is good and what is evil? That is up to the messenger of God to decide. (Example: debate with Yamin Zakaria)

These are the main two arguments that Muslims present in defense of Islam. Any rational person can see they are logical fallacies.

These charges are irrefutable. You simply can't disprove them because they are reported in Islamic sources and as such they are as good as confession. You can't acquit a criminal after he has confessed, unless you plead insanity, which is my point.

Muslims often ask: "Who will judge whether or not an attempt to disprove your accusations against Muhammad and Islam, was successful?" The readers will be the jury. It is not difficult to see which side is right once both arguments are presented without one side fearing the other. I will publish the debates in this site. My opponents are also encouraged to publish them in any Islamic site. Please note that I will not accept face to face debates. The debates must be in writing.

Edit 2007/07/29

The above challenge was issued in 2001 and it hasn't been met yet. See the debates I had with Muslims. Also see the pathetic attempt of some Muslims trying to refute me here , here, here and here. Is that all the Muslim world can offer? Where are the scholars of Islam? Why such an important task is left to a bunch of amateurs who actually do more damage to Islam? Isn't it time that the real scholars come forth and refute my charges?

The truth is that several of the people that debated me were real scholars, such as the eminent Pakistani scholar Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and his disciple Dr. Khalid Zaheer. This debate is a must read and is available for download. Dr. Zaheer is a learned man, a moderate Muslim and a good human being. I have utmost respect for him.

As of this date (2007), I will no longer debate with people who want to debate anonymously. I only debate with reputable scholars. I made this decision because often, Muslims moved by their faith and zealotry, but with little knowledge of Islam, challenge me to debate. They rehash the same tried and refuted arguments that bore everyone and disappear. Then, other Muslims, either accuse me of fabricating those debates or pooh-pooh my opponents for not being scholars.

As of this day, I am also doubling the reward. If you are not a reputable scholar, you can still win the prize. All you have to do is persuade a scholar to debate with me. If he (she) disproves my charges or can prove that Muhammad was a prophet of God, both you and he (she) will be rewarded $50,000 dollars each. This is to encourage you to write to your admired scholar and convince them that Islam is in danger and that it is their duty to defend it. Once you write to invite someone, please CC a copy to us for announcing the invitation. Our email is faithfreedom2 (at) gmail.com

Yes, Islam is in grave danger. Never, since its inception, Islam has faced a threat as serious as this. Today, millions of ex-Muslims are questioning the claimed truth of Islam, can make their criticisms heard worldwide, and unlike before, not fear for their lives. As long as these questions are not answered, this trend is only bond to continue, until the trickle becomes a torrent and the fall of Islam becomes obvious. In the past, the critics of Islam briefly shined like lamps in darkness, only to be put out by winds of persecution. What is happening today can be likened to the break of the dawn. Darkness has no chance in front of this much light. Muslims are waking up and leaving Islam like never before. A spiritual and intellectual revolution is underway. This is the century of enlightenment of the benighted Muslims. The giant is finally awakening. The days of Islam are numbered. This demon of hate and ignorance will be slain by the hands of its own primary victims. The unity of mankind and the world peace are around the corner.

Please advertise this challenge. Every Muslim must see it. This is like throwing water on their fire. Nothing will dampen their zeal more than the realization that among a billion Muslims there is not a single scholar who can prove the wild claims of Muhammad, nor acquit him of these grave charges. This unmet challenge has a sobering effect on them. They can make any excuse, such as, I am not worth their response, that there have been greater men than me who opposed Islam, or that I have been refuted already, but they will not be able to fool themselves. The more this challenge is circulated, the more Muslims will be forced to remain silent and doubt Islam. Do not undermine the psychological effect of this impossible challenge.

Sincerely

Ali Sina

6:12 AM  
Blogger wan2no said...

Question:1
Islam is a an old religion. Some of its teachings may not applicable today. But Islam was and still is a great religion with a billion of believers. Islam played an important part in human civilization.



The greatness of a belief is not determined by the number of its adherents but by its coherence and its inherent truths, its usefulness and practicability. There was a time that everybody believed that the Earth was flat. All philosophers and prophets concurred and the common sense confirmed it. Yet it was not true.

Islam did play an important part in human civilization. But was that a positive or a negative role? How many human lives were sacrificed at the altar of Allah? Muhammad exterminated the Jews of Arabia who called that land home for 2000 years. They had alliances with their Arab compatriots and intermarried with them. They were completely Arabianized. There was no religious conflict in Arabia. Muhammad not only introduced religious intolerance, he undertook the ethnic cleansing of Arabia and instigated a " divinely ordained" hatred between his followers and the Jews that is taking its toll even up to this day. His command to kill the idolaters destroyed more human lives in 1400 years than Hitler succeeded to destroy in 13 years. Only in India the death toll was close to 90 million. Yes Islam had a great impact on the minds of its followers. But we paid and keep paying with our lives for that impact. The suffering and backwardness of Muslims and the present wave of terrorism are the result of that impact.

6:14 AM  
Blogger wan2no said...

Question:2
What about the great minds of Islamic world, like Zakaria Razi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, Khayyam, Ibn Arabbi, Al Muari and many more? Shouldn’t we thank Islam for rearing these luminaries?



We should thank Islam for rearing Khomeini, Bin Laden, Umar and Ali. They killed people inspired by Islam. The thinkers of Islamic world were almost all apostates. Ibn Sina did not believe in the immortality of the soul and did not believe in a god that cares about the creation. His concept of God was very much similar to that of Espinoza. He was attacked vehemently by Ghazali because of that. But he was a genius who started to teach medicine at the age of 20. His life was spared because he was much needed and because in those days we had tolerant governors who were more secular than religious. Khayyam was obviously an apostate as you can see from every robai that he composed. Hafiz memorized Quran before he reached the age of 15. But as you see there is no praise of Muhammad in his poetries when he became an adult and could think independently. Only a non-religious humanist would say: “Mei bekhor manbar besoozan, mardoom aazaari makon.” (Drink and burn the pulpit but don’t hurt people) This is totally opposite with Muhammad's instructions who prohibited drinking wine, used the pulpit and ordered killing the non-believers. Ar Razi spoke fearlessly against all the religions calling the Prophets disdainfully “Billy Goats” and liars. These truths have been kept hidden from us. We have been lied to constantly. First the Muslims persecuted these apostates and after their death they credited Islam with their great works and contributions to science and learning.

The reason the Golden Age in the Islamic world became possible was because the rulers in those days were more secular than religious and they tolerated the apostasy of the great minds who in turn contributed to science.

6:15 AM  
Blogger wan2no said...

Juwairiyah
Italian translation

By Ali Sina



In the history of the Arabs that predates the arrival of Islam, never before had there been such wars, certainly none on the scale and magnitude of those that were instigated by Muhammad the founder of Islam. Previous battles in Arabia had mainly centered on tribal differences and were confined to bouts of squabbling with some fights. With the introduction of Islam came not only war, but also an unrelenting genocide and terror that would quickly become integral components in furthering Islam’s expansionism.

The early years of Muhammad’s prophetic carrier, in his native town Mecca, were peaceful. After 13 year of preaching no more than 70 or 80 people had embraced his cause. Not all of them were able fighting men. That explains why those early years were peaceful. Muslims did not have the strength to fight. However soon after Muhammad migrated and settled in Medina, and the Arab population of that town accepted his religion, he began invading and looting first the merchant caravans and then the human settlements to survive and to provide for his followers who had accompanied him and because of their lack of expertise had a difficult time finding employments in Medina.

The fifth year of hijrah (migration to Medina) was an eventful year. That was the year that Muslims fought the famous war of the ditch against the Meccans and soon after that they surrounded the Jewish quarter of Bani Qaynuqa of Medina who were a prosperous population of goldsmiths and blacksmiths and after confiscating their properties (vineyards and homes) and belongings (jewelry and arms) they were banished from their ancestral home. After that he set his sight on another Jewish tribe, the Bani Nadir. He did a similar thing to them. He killed their leaders and many of their able-bodied men and after confiscating their properties and much of their wealth, expelled the rest from Medina. In neither of these cases the Jews offered any resistance. They were taken by surprise and simply surrendered under the superior forces of Muhammad’s men.

Emboldened by his victories over these weaker, non-combative and non-threatening people who agreed to give up their wealth in exchange for their lives and goaded by an insatiable greed and his lust for power this self styled messenger of Allah then set his eyes upon other Jewish tribes of Arabia living outside of Medina. This time it was the turn of Bani al-Mustaliq.

Bukhari, the great biographer of Muhammad, narrates the attack on Bani al-Mustaliq in the following story (Hadith)

"Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army.” Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:



This same Hadith is recorded in the Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4292, which validates the claim of its authenticity.

Muhammad molded his religion after Judaism and had great expectations that the Jews would be the first to heed his call. Nevertheless, to his chagrin, the Jews had no interest in his religion and he never forgave them for that. You cannot reject a narcissist without invoking his rage. Muhammad was so upset that he changed the direction of the Qiblah (the direction towards which the Muslims pray) from Jerusalem to Kaaba, which at that time was just a temple of idols and said Allah transformed the Jews were transformed into apes and swine because of their transgression (Q. 5:60) and (Q. 2:65). Muhammad made the Jews the scapegoat to rally his followers around himself. He was an expert of that old trick known as “divide n’ conquer”. The Arabs of Medina were generally a bunch of illiterate folk with little skills and often poor who made their living by working in the vineyards of the Jews and rendering other services to them. They where originally immigrants from Yemen while the Jews were the masters of trades and the owners of the lands who had called Medina home, for 2000 years. They were easy targets. Prowling their wealth and making more money by enslaving their women and children and distributing them among the poor Arabs while giving them the assurance that killing their masters and bread givers is not only ethical but also sanctioned by God proved a very lucrative enterprise for Muhammad, one that would change his fortunes, and set this new religion on its eventual path of war and military conquests.

Muhammad sent one of his companions; Bareeda bin Haseeb, to spy on the Bani al-Mustaliq and after assessing the situation he ordered his men to attack. Muslims came out of Madina on 2nd Shaban of 5 A.H. and encamped at Muraisa, a place at a distance of 9 marches from Medina.



The following quote from an Islamic site states:

"The news of the advance of Muslim forces had already reached Haris. In panic, his men deserted him and he himself took refuge in some unknown place. But the local population of Muraisa took up arms against the Muslims and rained showers of arrows in a sustained manner. The Muslims launched a sudden and furious attack and routed the enemy, who suffered huge casualties and nearly 600 were taken prisoners by the Muslims. Among the booty there were 2,000 camels and 5,000 goats.
The prisoners of war included Barra, the daughter of Haris, who later on became Hazrat Juwairiyah, the consort of the Holy Prophet. According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers. Hazrat Juwairiyah fell to the lot of Thabit bin Qais. She was the daughter of the leader of the clan, and therefore, very much felt the discomfiture and disgrace of being made slave of an ordinary Muslim soldier. Therefore, she requested him to release her on payment of ransom. Thabit agreed to this, if she could pay him 9 Auqias of gold. Hazrat Juwairiyah had no ready money with her. She tried to raise this amount through contributions, and approached the Holy Prophet also in this connection. She said to him "0' Prophet of Allah! I am the daughter of Al Haris bin Zarar, the Lord (chief) of his people. You know that it is by chance that our people have fallen captive and I have fallen to the share of Thabit bin Qais and have requested him to release me considering my status, but he has refused. Please do an act of kindness and save me from humiliation". The Holy Prophet was moved and asked the captive woman if she would like a thing still better. She asked as to what was that thing. He said that he was ready to pay her ransom and marry her if she liked. She agreed to this proposal. So the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) paid the amount of ransom and married her.”



The above is the story how Muhammad married Juwairiyah as recorded by Muslim historians. Interestingly Muhammad makes his Allah praise him with verses such as the following: "And surely thou hast sublime morals" (Quran 68:4). and “Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example to follow" (Quran 33:21). The question that begs an answer is; was he really the standard of sublime morals and good example to follow?

First he attacks a population without warning and only because they were easy targets and wealthy. As usual he kills the unarmed able-bodied men, plunders their belongings, then enslaves the rest. Is this behavior befitting of a messenger of God? The narrator says, “According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers.” As we read the history of Islam, we see this WAS indeed the prevailing practice of the Muslim Mujahedin, throughout the bloody history of Islam. Yet the question remains unanswered. Is this how a messenger of God should behave? In another place Muhammad called himself the mercy of God for all the worlds 21:107 . What is the difference between this “mercy of God” and a ruthless marauding gangster and a tyrant? If Muhammad were not the “mercy of God” and if he were not “a good example to follow”, how else would he have then behaved?

If this was the prevailing practice of the Arabs, couldn’t the messenger of God change it? Why engage in such a barbaric practice at all? Did he not say that his is the example to follow? Why should a man with such a claim behave in so brutal a fashion? Was he merely following the customs of his people or was he attempting to set an example for them to follow?

It is very clear that Muhammad was not "moved" by compassion but by lust. Muhammad did not set free Juwairiyah because he felt sorry for her. He was a man incapable of such feelings. He wanted Juwairiyah for himself. And this is the man 1.2 billion people follow as the perfect example and a messenger of God.

Unlike what most people may think, Muhammad’s intentions were not to convert people to his religion. His real aim was power, wealth and domination. Religion was just the pretext he used to subdue and conquer those he first sought to have dominion over. He weighed each case differently and considered its financial benefits. In most cases it was more profitable if the people did not convert to Islam, but killed and their belongings taken as spoils of war and their wives and children enslaved and soled with huge profits. This could bring sudden wealth to this “messenger of God” that otherwise he could not have. If people were given the choice they could have feared defeat and the harsh consequences and they could have accepted Islam. This would have impeded Muslims of looting them, which meant loss of profit. That is why Muhammad did not deem appropriate to warn the Bani Mustaliq just as he never warned his other victims but attacked them by surprise.

Muslim, another biographer of Muhammad narrates:

Ibn 'Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi' inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi' said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.” Book 019, Number 4292:



Muslim warriors carried on this sunnah (examples set by Muhammad) after his death.

When a Muslim army invaded a town, they would not allow anyone to convert to Islam for three days. During these three days they could kill as many men as they liked, pillage their properties, then rape and enslave their women and children. Only after a town had been decimated and all the young women and children that could be sold as slaves were captured would the brutal campaign of Islamization, with its brutal mandate that all must convert or die, began. However the Jews and the Christians were given protection to live provided they pay a penalty tax called Jizyah and enter into dhimmitude. Dhimmi means protected. But the dhimmis had to pay a hefty jizyah for their protection. This Jizyah was the source of livelihood of the Muslims who through it were able to live like parasites off the labor of the dhimmis. The following Hadith, reported by Bukhari, records the source for this practice based on the admonitions of Muhammad toward the dhimmi:

Narrated Juwairiya bin Qudama At-Tamimi:
We said to 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, oh Chief of the believers! Advise us." He said, "I advise you to fulfill Allah's Convention (made with the Dhimmis) as it is the convention of your Prophet and the source of the livelihood of your dependents (i.e. the taxes from the Dhimmis.) " Volume 4, Book 53, Number 388:


Continuing the story of Juwairiyah, Aisha who accompanied the prophet on this expedition related:

"when the prophet-peace be upon him- distributed the captives of Banu Almustaliq, she (Barrah) fell to the lot of Thabit ibn Qyas. She was married to her cousin, who was killed during the battle. She gave Thabit a deed, agreeing to pay him nine okes of gold for her freedom. She was a very beautiful woman. She captivated every man who saw her. She came to the prophet-peace be upon him-, to ask for his help in the matter. As soon as I saw her at door of my room, I took a dislike to her, for I knew that he would see her as I saw her. She went in and told him who she was, the daughter of al-Harith ibn Dhirar, the chief of his people. She said: "you can see the state to which I have been brought. I have fallen to the lot of Thabit, and have given him a deed for ransom, and I have to come to ask your help in the matter.' He said: 'would you like something better than that? I will discharge your debt, and marry you.' she said: 'yes. O then it is messenger of Allah! Done.' he replied.” http://66.34.76.88/alsalafiyat/juwairiyah.htm

This story ends any further arguments about to the real motives of Muhammad in marrying only the young and beautiful women. As it can be seen Muhammad murders the husband of Juwairiyah, who was also her cousin. Captivated by her beauty, he offers to free her, but only on the condition she marry him. After having come to Muhammad to plead for his help, this self declared Messenger of God, this self proclaimed “mercy of God for humanity”, this self styled “example to follow” by all the Muslims presents her with a most unwelcome choice, for whose price is that she must surrender her freedom. What other choice could there possibly be for her? Muslims apologetics insists that most of Muhammad’s wives were widows. They try to give the impression Muhammad married them as an act of charity. However as it becomes clear these women were young and beautiful. If they were widows, is because Muhammad murdered their husbands. Juwairiyah was just 20 years old then while Muhammad was 58.



Interestingly, the name of Juwairiyah was originally Barra (Pious). Apparently Muhammad did not like this name and so changed her name to Juwairiyah. Even the two Zeinabs who were his wives were previously called Barra and he changed their names as well to Zeinab, It would appear the Prophet had some guilt in becoming sexually intimate with women that were called “Pious”. These seemingly incidental incidents reflect a certain hitherto humanity, a conscience, if you will, to his character, and perhaps hint at his own real, but hidden religiosity. Muhammad was certainly convinced of his own cause. However his understanding of reality was distorted as he had difficulty to distinguish between what is real and what is imagined. In fact Muhammad was more motivated by fear and superstitions than by conscience and ethics.



The rest of the story of Juwairiyah is mixed with half-truths and exaggerations, in the manner that have tainted most of the Hadiths. We read:

It is said that when the Prophet-peace be upon him- departed from the raid with Juwairiyah and was at Dhuljaysh, he entrusted her to one of the Ansar and went forward to Madinah. Her father, al-Harith, discovered that she was held captive and went back o Madinah, bringing his daughter's ransom. When he reached al-Aqia, he looked at the camels he had brought as her ransom and admired the two of them greatly, so he hid them in one of the passes of al-Aqia. Then he came to the Prophet-peace be upon him- dragging the camels behind him, and told him: "My daughter is too noble to be taken as a captive. Set her free by this ransom." the Prophet-peace be upon him- replied: "Isn't it better that we let her choose her self?" that is fair enough," said al-Harith. He came to his daughter and said: "This man is letting you chose so do not dishonor us!" "I choose Allah's messenger," she replied calmly. "What a disgrace!" he exclaimed.

The Prophet-peace be upon him-, then said "where are two camels which you have hidden in al-Aqia in such -and- such a pass?" al-Harith exclaimed: "I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that you Muhammad are the messenger of Allah! For none could have know of this but Allah."

Ibn-i-S'ad in his 'Tabaqat', states that the father of Juwairiyah paid her ransom amount, and when she became free, the Holy Prophet married her. As a result of this marriage a11 the prisoners of war numbering about 600 were freed by the Muslims as they did not like that any member of the family in which the holy Prophet was married, be made a slave."



It is hard to determine which part of these stories is true and which part is not. However, what is not so difficult to notice are the many contradictions contained within the main storyline. For instance, we read that Muhammad paid the ransom to Thabit the captor of Juwairiyah, and then married her after freeing her. Then we read that Hairth, the father of Juwairiyah also paid the ransom to set her free. As to the claims of Muhammad having some sort of psychic power, that empowered him to know or tell certain things in advance, for instance knowing certain information such as the whereabouts of camels, we can safely conclude that these claims are false. On many occasions Muhammad demonstrated precisely the opposite, and proved that he was by no means psychic, let alone prescient, as he failed to discern or to obtain through divine blessings the information he so desired. For instance, when he raided Khaibar, he tortured the treasurer of that town, even to the point of death, just so he could extract from him the information that would lead to the whereabouts of the city’s treasures.

It is important to understand the character of the Arab peoples. In this particular instance it was the Arabs who exhibited higher moral standards than their prophet. They released the relatives of Juwairiyah after they learned that Muhammad had married her. Muhammed was devoid of common decency, of having or showing even a hint of the virtues reflective of a moral leader. Without any empathy for those whose misfortune it was to become his victim.

Muslims claim that Juwairiyah became a very devout believer and would spend all of her days praying. The source of this claim can be found in the book Usud-ul-Ghaba. There the author writes that whenever the Prophet used to come to Juwairiyah he would find her praying, then when he would return at a later time he still found her praying. One day he said to her: “Shall I tell you few words, if you say them they will be heavier in the scale than what you have done? You say: 'subhaana allahe 'adada khalqihi, subhana allahe ridhaa nafsehe, subhana allahe zinata 'arshehe, subhana allahe zinata 'arshehe,subhana allah midadda kalimaatihi.' (Praise Allah as many times as number of his creatures, and as much as pleases him, and as much as the weight of his throne, and as much as the ink for his words).

One wonders why Muslims spend 5 times a day praying and waste that much man hours unproductively when they have such a simple and unbeatable formula to praise Allah?

Let us look at this situation from a more realistic perspective. Put yourself in the shoes of a young woman who has just fallen into the lot of a murderer of her husband who also happened to be her cousin! As relatives, they grew up together. They were more than just husband and wife. They were first playmates, then lovers and companions for life. If you were a woman in Juwairiyah’s situation, how would you feel about the killer of your husband and many of your relatives and loved ones? Suppose further you don’t have anywhere to go to. Without any viable options for escape, your only choice would be to surrender as a sex slave to this old man, one who is the king of his people and has plenty of money or to be given away to one of his soldiers. Under whose captivity would you rather be? I believe the answer is clear. Juwairiah had no choice but to accept Muhammad’s offer to marry her. Now what would any woman do if such an old man as this came to her for sex or company? She probably would devise a survival ploy. That is what Juwairiyah did. Any time she noticed Muhammad is coming, she pretended that she was busy praying, hoping that he would leave her and go to his other wives to satisfy his wretched lust. Yet, as we see, Muhammad was a cunning old man. He soon prescribed a sentence and told her that this “will be heavier in the scale” than praying all day long, robbing her from excuses to shun him when he desired her.

6:18 AM  
Blogger wan2no said...

This testimony is long. Don’t read it if you have something important to do because once you start you won’t be able to stop.
www.faithfreedom.org

This is only for humans with brains and not animals. Think for which you belong before you start to read.

Abdul Quddus explains how Muslim propagandists lie and portray a peaceful image of Islam in order to make the unwary westerners fall into their trap, and then they slowly brainwash him and inculcate in him the hatred of everyone, particularly the Jew. He talks about the double standard and the hypocrisy of virtually all the Muslims, including the so called moderates, who on one hand rejoice every time a Jew or an American is killed and on the other hand, despite having seen the videos of the Jihadis bragging about the 9/11, brazenly deny that it was the work of Muslims and accuse the Jews for it. He explains how, once he converted to Islam, he was so brainwashed that he contemplated joining the jihad, to kill innocent people and becoming a “martyrs”.

This testimony is an eye opener for anyone contemplating converting to Islam. It is a must read for anyone who wants to have a glimpse of Islam from inside. If you have teenagers at home ask them to read it. This testimony could save their lives. Please spread it.

As I have always said, Islam will be dismantled by the pen of ex-Muslims.

Ali Sina



I Left Islam
16 03 2007
Journey Through Islam
The testimony of a former convert to Islam
By: Abdul-Quddus
[Final Draft: 03/16/07]


I’m often asked, despite knowing the pros and cons of Islaam, why would a Westerner embrace a religion they hated? Though surrounded by believers, while growing up as a child, I was essentially an agnostic. I pondered that, if this Creator actually existed, an unbiased investigation was needed to discover who He was and what He wanted from me. The following testimony is a trustworthy account of a journey through Islaam.

I was raised by non-practicing Christians who immigrated to Canada from an anonymous country near the Caribbean. In the beginning, our family would occasionally attend Sunday’s church services. However, my mother later realized that her husband’s inattention and son’s rebellious behaviour during the sermons conveyed an undeniable expression of disbelief. Considering we had more nominal believers in the household, our church visits as a family unit slowly withered and then finally ended abruptly.

To my adolescent mind, the deity of the Judeo-Christian faith baffled me. I would curse the Biblical God, who although was once supposedly involved in human affairs, for now being idle during all the injustice and suffering I saw rampant in my world. However, following the blasphemous utterance, I’d immediately reprimand myself. To battle my agnosticism, during age twelve, my parents gave permission for the public school to have myself proselytized to by a Christian minister. In an experiment that would likely be illegal today within public school walls, a few other parents consented and we children were in the library being handed a red book labeled ‘The New Testament’. This book I would soon abuse with a black-ink marker with obscenities and my scissors. Without any guidance or education, I was left confused about God, albeit, the Judeo-Christian interpretation of the being.

Beside from my almost quasi-religious upbringing, early in my youth I had close contact with a conservative Christian family that would subsequently influence my behaviour and thinking. One of their boys was my age and I would never find a closer companion and friend in life like him. Originally from Newfoundland, the father was a minister and both husband and wife had a zealous demeanor towards their sons. To my shock, even uttering “damn” in their home was reprehensible and would bring chastisement. The mother always fed me as if I were her visiting nephew, even though we were not related by blood. Aside from my immediate family, from these people I perceived love and friendship. Although disciplined and strict, the warmth and compassion received from this God-fearing family I would consider ideal and exemplary in a world void of.

As a teenager, an encounter with a Jehovah’s Witness introduced me to another kind of believer. While waiting at a bus-stop, standing beside myself was a woman who suddenly began preaching to me from her copy of the Bible. Throughout the pages, her penned notes around the verses, which accumulated over the years, caught my interest. In order to approach a complete stranger in this manner, she must surely have believed in her religion, I thought. The sense of purpose and spiritual fulfillment she seemed to receive from her religious practice would plant a seed on my own spiritual path.

During my mid-teenage high school years, I developed a severe clinical depression that would endure for many years affecting my religious perspective. My social and academic life became strained and eventually I found myself dropping-out of high schools repeatedly. During one early morning, I came across Nightlite Live, a call-in television show about prayer, repentance, and salvation. The messages of hope from the counsellors were candy for the downtrodden folk and I would frequently view the program. I resonated with the despondent callers. This Christian-owned television station CTS was balanced and tolerant enough to allot program space for other religions faiths in order to reach their adherents. The hope I was receiving from these Christian ministers watered that planted seed given earlier by the Jehovah’s Witness preacher. My clinical depression would become propellant for a now unequivocal spiritual endeavour.

Browsing through a CD-ROM encyclopedia, I came across the section on ‘Religion’ and would gravitate towards the entries on Buddhism. The biographies of the world’s religious figures was a favourite read but I then attempted to educate myself on doctrine and theology. An upbringing of Christianity could not motivate me, however, the gnostic perspective on the Gospel almost renewed a passion for Christ. The Baha’i Faith, being fairly new compared to other organized religions, was difficult to view as anything but a cult eclectically borrowing from a multitude of sources. The idea of a direct and transcribed communication with God, along with a photograph of the Arabic verses, ignited an interest in Islaam but my agnostic mindset squashed it within days. Hinduism offered nothing that Buddhism couldn’t deliver and, to my knowledge, even absorbed many elements of Buddhism. From the outside, Sikhism appeared steeply cultural and as a hybridization of Hinduism and Islaam. Daoism intrigued me for a brief period, but I later discarded the philosophy because it seemed to lack direction and purpose. From a comparative analysis of the world religions, the path of Buddhism and it’s founder resonated with me deeply and seemed closest to an absolute truth I’ve been searching for.

I would return to the character of Siddhartha Gautama, who I resonated with personally. According to my comprehension, his character was impeccably ideal and his dispensation faultlessly moral and rational. Buddhism had profound wisdom, encouraged independent thinking, discouraged blind faith, was not exclusive but inclusive for all humankind, and could be practiced without the superstitious beliefs abound in other religions. With an agnostic and/or atheistic temperament, and a leaning towards scientific inquiry than blind faith, Buddhism seemed befitting. Influenced by my discoveries in the encyclopedia, I would pursue a devout Buddhist practice that would last six years.

However, for reasons and causes unbeknownst to me then, the Buddhist practice that once filled my life with meaning and purpose would meet with disenchantment. I would perform quadrupled fasts each month for uposatha, an occasion dedicated for intense discipline, doctrinal study, chanting and reflection. The duration of each fast spanned from noon until the next day, with a break in between for plain tea. Although most Buddhists partaking in this observance would be at the temple, I eventually chose the confines of my bedroom in isolation. My withdrawal from public life and anti-social behaviour would be the result stemming from a surging illness of clinical depression. The total lack of guidance from engaging mentors, and sole reliance on inanimate books for my religion stifled my inspiration and I began to experience disenchantment.

In retrospect, if it were not for a family member converting to Islaam, I would likely have not embraced it myself. Having a lost loved one unanticipatedly reappear and noticeably dedicated to this Arab “cult” would spark my curiosity. Recent terrorist campaigns overseas by Muslim extremists were escalating and the need to understand the Muslim perspective was paramount. My obligation to reconnect with my sibling would contribute Islaam to affect my own religious experience.

Out of curiosity of Muslims, belief in Islaam, and fear of Allaah, I considered the process of converting to Islaam to become Muslim. Beforehand, I’d been a mild opponent of Abrahamic religions. After an exigent probing of Islamic websites, inconceivably, I was mesmerized. Islaam wasn’t a cult, but a rich faith tradition that rivalled all others. I highly regarded the comradeship of the ummah (Muslim community), clarity of the Qur’aanic text, and simplicity of the religion for the adherent. I brought myself to open the Qur’aan, beginning with page numeral uno, Soorah al-Faatihah. Islaam seemed created in a competently organized fashion. Allaah (Arabic; lit. The God) was distinguishably one and without partnership. Understandably, all those sincerely contemplating on converting to Islaam have already accepted theism over atheism. The primary attraction to Islaam was not in geometric Arabesque art, Islaamic-inspired calligraphy and architecture, the constant argumentatious fights over Middle Eastern politics, nor the latest innovative model of hookah. No question about it, on the minds of all sincere converts to Islaam was tawheed (monotheism, affirmation of the Oneness and Uniqueness of Allaah).

In the past, I had encountered some uncompromising critics who vigorously presented explosive accusations on Islaam and the character of Prophet Muhammad. I was not unfamiliar with the charges of pedophilia, genocide, thievery, rape, and murder. Supposedly, Islaam was a barbaric cult stuck in seventh-century Arabia bereft of human rights and with a disavowal for advancement. Initially, as a kaafir (unbeliever), I had accepted some of the charges as true and was perhaps an “Islamophobe.” However, once I held a belief in Allaah and an admiration for Islaam, any propaganda or criticism could easily be dismissed as an undertaking to discredit the religion. I bared in mind that all organized religions harboured objectionable and disagreeable content, at least in the eyes of some. I was given a sanitized version of Islaam by moderate Muslims and read merely segments of the Qur’aan in English translation. Naturally, I felt compelled to fully trust the Muslims’ explanations since a selected few had the monopoly on this Arabic revelation from God. I decided to reject any subconscious Islamophobic mentality, ignore all anti-Islaamic subject matter, and solely submit myself to brainwashing

Despite having close friendships with Muslims, my initial exposure to Islaamic subjects was via cable television. Airing on VisionTV, a nationwide Canadian multifaith and multicultural television network was a program called ‘Journey Through Islam’. Using material from the Islamic Information Service (IIS) based in California, this one-hour show featured conversion testimonials, documentries, interviews with scholars and thinkers (Maher Hathout, Muhammad Asad, Muzammil Siddiqi, Jamal Badawi, John Esposito, Yusuf Estes, Yusuf Islam, Hamza Yusuf, etc.), and snippets from Harun Yahya’s cunning videos on Creationism. Another program was ‘Let The Qur’an Speak’ by Shabir Ally which featured mostly Qur’aanic lectures and interviews. ‘Reflections on Islam’ by Ezz E. Gad and ‘Call of the Minaret’ by Steve Rockwell also were influential to my indoctrination. Besides the wealth of Islaamic programs on VisionTV, the Christian CTS network aired ‘Islam Today’ with host Bashir Khan and ‘The Muslim Chronicle’ hosted by Tarek Fatah. Both programs featured local interviews, documentaries and educational material. With this wealth of Islaamic education, my heart and mind was won.

But by far, the most stimulating and persuasive piece of all was footage of a talk (titled: ‘Glorious Qur’an, The Liberator’) delivered in 1987 by Yusuf Islam (formerly the pop singer Cat Stevens) at the University of Houston wherein he spoke of the Prophets and their struggle to present the same revelation to mankind. With a pointed index finger and green Qur’aan in hand, he spoke with profound meaning, contentment, spirit, composure and enlightenment. His gift left me in awe and craving what a billion Muslims possessed; a sense of purpose.

With assistance from cunning Muslim proselytizers, I deprogrammed my acquired beliefs and swallowed the da’waganda. After one converts and embraces this religion, all previous sins will be blotted out. Even the name ‘Islaam’ (submission, to the will of God) seemed truthful and posed actual meaning; the other religions were either named after a man or tribe. Apparently, the Jews were strict monotheists but had rejected Jesus, while the Christians accepted Jesus but then rejected Muhammad. At the time, Islaam seemed a sure option as “Judaism was for Jews” and Christianity had the “polytheistic” Trinity. One common point delivered repeatedly to me was how only in Islaam had a revelation been absolutely preserved in its original language uncorrupted. No brilliant criticisms of Buddhism were given; no Muslims knew what the Buddha actually taught. As I became increasingly impressed with the Islaamic position on theism, Buddhism seemed odd with its absence of an omnipotent Creator God and obscure purpose for man’s existence. I saw the superb design pervasive throughout creationism that pointed to a higher intelligence. Coupled with clinical depression and a loss of conviction, I became disillusioned with Buddhism. Vegetarianism became too strenuous to endure. If Allaah willed meat for our consumption, and I disagreed by being a vegetarian, it would put me with the munafiqeen (hypocrites) since I would be protesting to have more knowledge than Allaah al-Hakeem (the Most Wise). With Islaam, I could return to succulent meat-eating dinners and abandon my daunting dream of becoming a monk. However, now that I was admonished with threats by al-Qur’aan, I was fearing Hellfire for believing yet denying the revelation simultaneously.

Harbouring an aversion for a decadent Judaeo-Christian modernity, believers born into Christianity began to search for meaning elsewhere. The prevailing vehicles facilitative to escaping a sinking Western society were usually Buddhism, Islaam, and secular humanism. Islaam, “the fastest growing religion,” was an ubiquitous mantra. The vast majority considered converting to Islaam following a relationship with a Muslim. When an empathetic accord with a Muslim peer ensued, exposure to Islaam increased in addition to curiosity while submerging into a foreign culture. The media’s popular portrayal of Islaam would be contradictory with a first-hand experience with Muslims. Western society seemed to degrade women as exploitable objects while Islaam offered a woman security and respect. When juxtaposed to our Christian environment, adherents to Islaam exhibited uppermost consciousness of God; they appeared pietistic to the halaal (permissible) and apathetic to the haraam (impermissible). The foremost decisive factor captivating soul searchers to Islaam was aversion for and disillusionment with the West or dunyaa (this temporal world, as opposed to the Hereafter).

While home alone contemplating and pacing repeatedly back and forth, I sensed my existence in jeopardy and so decided to plunge into Islaam wholeheartedly. I rode my bicycle to the local masjid (mosque) with the ulterior motive of requesting books. The Islaamic building was a fortress, surrounded by concrete and brick walls and metal gates. Since the main entrance was sealed off by a barrier, I attempted to access the masjid through the car entrance. The building’s rear had an entrance for “Sisters Only” so I ran away with lightening speed. Through another entrance, I wandered about searching for the masjid office. Inside that office, while looking at the security-camera monitors, I awaited assistance while noticing the unclean and disorganized mess. A middle-aged committee member approached me, a man that would later order me to come to the masjid everyday. I received some moderate Islaamic material and a Yusuf Ali translated Qur’aan. Out of fear of Hellfire, and with a growing belief in Islaam, I confessed that I wanted to say the shahaadah (declaration of faith). It was either during ‘Asr (mid-afternoon) or Maghrib (sunset) prayer that I sat on the floor and viewed the men prostrate in prayer. Just as the speaker announced a statement, someone grabbed my hand and then guided me to the front. The Pakistani imaam asked if anyone was forcing me to convert, to which I replied negative. He recited with me, in Arabic and English, the shahaadah (declaration of faith - “There is no deity but Allaah, Muhammad is His Messenger”). An individual yelled “Takbeer!” This signalled the congregation to chant “Allaahu akbar!” (Allaah is the Greatest) two more times. A procession formed wherein everyone anticipated to hug the new Muslim. After the ceremony, I felt frightened, extremely drained, and disorientated.

At the end was a fully bearded Muslim in Islaamic wardrobe who asked the committee member of my previous religion. When told of my Buddhist past, he scorned twice, “So he’s a loser? So he’s a loser?” After mocking my conversion, he offered a hug. I later learned that he viewed me as an idolater that could never make it to jannah (paradise). According to al-Qur’aan, Allaah will never forgive shirk (associating partners with Allaah) and “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islaam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” (3:85) On my first day as Muslim, even before taking my first steps, I encountered fitnah (trials, tribulations, sedition). The Muslim that chastised me, who was perhaps of the Salafiyoon, never was seen again.

I was led into the masjid office to sign a document testifying to my Islaamic faith, in case I wanted to perform hajj (pilgrimage) and needed verification in Saudi Arabia. Then, I was given a prayer mat, many Islaamic books and Syed Abu-Ala Maududi’s Arabic-English Qur’aan with his famous commentary. This was a totally different ideology given to me before they knew I was “with them” and not simply interested in studying the religion as a kaafir (unbeliever).

My parent’s reaction to the conversion was tolerant, to say the least. After two days as a Muslim, I approached them in our living room and uttered, “Mom, Dad, I have something to tell you. You won’t get angry, will you?” When they said no, I replied, “I’m a Muslim.” The excitement from their faces quickly vanished. Regardless, they responded with tolerance and acceptance, saying, “Are you sure? If it’s what you want, it’s your decision.”

With Islaam my only obligation, the following year after my conversion was devoutly productive. As a high school drop-out without employment, all my energy was dedicated to worship Allaah and learning the deen (religion, way of life). Day and night, I resided at the local masjid. In my Arabic class, the teacher remarked about me, “I’ve never seen anyone learn it this quick.” I grew my beard unshaven like the Prophet, studied the Qur’aan and ahaadeeth, would pay zakaat, give sadaqah, sawm during Ramadaan, walk by foot to the masjid, perform all the fard, sunnah, waajib, nafl, dua’a prayers, and basically do everything right down to Islaamic toiletry etiquette. Successfully, I gave da’wah (missionary activity to invite others to Islaam) and converted people to the religion. My conversion testimony was being read on Islaamic websites. Most reverts were often paraded around as tokens. As trophy Muslims, our conversion to the religion apparently was validation for the insecure Muslims born into the faith that Islaam was true. Before going to sleep, I sincerely yelled, “Ya Allaah (Oh Allaah)! I am a Muslim. Alhamdulillah (Thanks to Allaah), I am safe and secure now. Don’t you dare ever leave the deen, boy! You’re going to jannah (paradise)!”

Over time, certain individuals were introduced to me that changed the course of my journey. Being a revert (convert) and impressionable, I was vulnerable prey and acquainted with predators. After taking shahaadah, I was given many telephone numbers for contacts. The first contact being from a brother named Yusuf eagerly seeking my attendance to reinstate a revert support group dismantled after the founder left the country. I’d encounter numerous brothers attempting to recruit me into their organizations. My hesitation to partake in many activities perhaps saved my life. The claims by brothers who left us for “Arabic studies” or “humanitarian work” overseas caught my suspicion. Some actually went for jihaad; one brother returned very depressed from qitaal (warfare, fighting) in Iraq. Yet, even with all precautions, the dreadable risk of having “tea with terrorists” supervened. When over a dozen Muslims were arrested on terrorism-related charges, we discovered one “suspect” was from my close-knit clique of brothers, passing his house hundreds of times while he plotted using three metric tonnes of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Reverts were wandering sheep that had to be extra cautious of acquaintances.

The only way for the non-Muslims to consider Islaam was by proving our Qur’aan superseded previous revelations. To establish the immaculacy of the Qur’aan to Christians, it was imperative to expose the fallibility of the Bible. Once the Christian had encountered inconsistencies in the substructure of his faith, he became more open to the possibility of Biblical errancy. Faced with numerous contradictions, the keen recipient would be guided to a more agreeable theology found within the Qur’aan. They knew not Arabic, so we provided selected material to them. In specific cases where Christianity and/or Judaism lacked in subject matter and Islaam had the leeway, I took advantage to prove the superiority of the Islaamic religion and its honor by staying true to the previous revelations with Ibraaheem (Abraham), Musa (Moses), or ‘Isa ibn Maryam (Jesus, son of Mary). To convince atheists and agnostics, we exposed the loopholes in evolution and modern science, presented the finest examples of Islaamic creationism, and perhaps mock their presumption of the universe existing merely by chance. Once the non-Muslim was eagerly reading the Qur’aan and Islaamic material, I would present Muhammad as a prophet of God no different from the accepted Hebrew prophets. Guilt and fear were common tactics used to pressure the conversion process. Just as the Jews denied Jesus, so did I admonish the Christian for rejecting Muhammad. If they recognized monotheism and Muhammad, I seized the opportunity by recommending the individual to embrace Islaam and take the shahaadah (declaration of faith - There is no deity but Allaah, Muhammad is His Messenger).

As I gained experience as a Muslim, I sought a more literal interpretation of Islaam closer to the pristine deen of Prophet Muhammad. Without equivocation, the notorious “Yusuf Ali” Qur’aan was a translation that pandered to Western liberal values attempting to lure non-Muslims to Islaam. Although I used Syed Abu-Ala Maududi’s Qur’aanic commentary as a reference, I closely adhered to Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan’s translated work ‘The Noble Qur’aan’ which offered a summarized version including the efforts of At-Tabari, Al-Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir, and Al-Bukhari. Tasawwuf (Sufism) and modern progressive movements conniving to reform Islaam were not considered the real McCoy for they presented serious drawbacks and discrepancies that revealed an intentional divergence from Sunnah (the sanctioned practices, sayings, or actions of Prophet Muhammad). The Saudi-based movement of Salafiyyah, heavily influenced by ibn Taymiyyah’s call to renounce innovation and return to the genuine Islaam, seemed to be a viable option. However, concluding that being “Muslim” was sufficient, I rejected any labels of sectarianism that would consequently divide the Islaamic ummah.

Guidance and companionship from my brothers in Islaam gave me a sense of belonging. Being a “revert” signified the reversion to a state of fitrah (the inherently pure disposition a being was created with). Everyone adopted an Islaamic first name, shunned music, and only ate halaal. We new Muslims delightfully welcomed a “brainwashing” since years in kufr (disbelief, ungratefulness to Allaah) left us feeling filthy. An unadulterated Islaam was difficult for the kuffaar (unbelievers) to digest so deviants evidently had a higher success rate in their propagation of Islaam (da’wah) as they modified principles to suit the nafs (carnal self) of recipients. The moderate and sanitized version of Islaam that initially brought me to conversion had to be reassessed. Through the local masjid (mosque), always available was a handshake and anticipated hug. This was a comfort unavailable at home, especially from a mother always unsatisfied with my performance and father unconcerned with my progress. Encouraged by my Muslim brothers, I desired to excel in my religion; possibly get married, master the Arabic language and be a mujaahid (partaker in jihaad) and shaheed (martyr).

We viewed contemporary Muslims as crippled by colonization and far adrift from the straight path. In much insecurity and drifting, I found fundamentalism a perdurable anchor. We romanticized the early generation of “pious predecessors” and sought to capture their vigor by imitation. To revive the Islamic spirit for a fresh renaissance, we propagated a fundamentalist version of Islaam to unite Muslims under one refined but exemplary model. Unislaamic programs such as communism, democracy, socialism, and capitalism were thought as destined for the dustbin. The ideal of freedom was vehemently rejected as implausible, even in a democracy; the latter we ridiculed as “democrazy.” The plan we envisioned was a homologous Islaamic ummah comprised of compliant Muslim nations willing to accept this nostalgic ideology, followed by a pan-Islaamic government. Funded by Arab petroleum sales, this jihaad could be sustained because Muslim countries held approximately 80% of the world’s readily accessible reserves of crude oil. This would enable the restoration of the Khilaafah, and thus usher in a Khaleefah. The military defeat of an emasculated mujaahideen brought about some promising perspective and reformation. Our focus was needed elsewhere, besides Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao, Pattani, Palestine, etc. We chose the alternative frontier in jihaad, Islaamic da’wah, to rectify the decadent affair of present-day Muslims. However, from the very get-go, politicized Islaam was a dud that failed to launch. The Salaf (pious predecessors of the first three generations of Muslims) of seventh-century Islaam were far from exemplary and their ummah was riddled by schism and assassinations. With a religion that advocated jihaad and casus belli, it was inevitable to have infighting factions. We had never achieved an Islaamic utopia and, without an appropriate method for reformation of Islaam, the future seemed not promising without a strategic platform to alleviate the plight of Muslims.

With hindsight, I perceive the quintessential factor sustaining my Islaamic faith to be fear. I had buckled under the coercion. After embracing the notion of a Supreme Being, anxiety ensued while receiving admonishment from Allaah’s Book. A substantial amount of aayaat (verses) of the Qur’aan are intimidating threats against your personal well-being. Consequently, after departure from the masjid as a new Muslim, I sensed regret and remorse. By taking precautionary action, I had determined the expected value of submission to Allaah overweighing the value of punishment in Hellfire or emptiness of non-belief. This erroneous and biased wager sought the necessity of considering God for personal convenience, without considering the necessity of truth for the sake of truth itself. There lies Pascal’s Flaw. When emotions took precedence, in dire desperation, I abandoned my most cherished opinions and chose to surrender voluntarily as Allaah’s slave.

Surprisingly, the greatest challenge that threatened my servitude to Allaah came, neither from criticism by Islamophobic orientalists nor polemics by Neo-conservative Christians but, from Muhammad’s holy book itself. Muslims may interpret my doubt as possession by the whispers of Shaytaan (Satan). Prior to my conversion, I had read merely a third of the Qur’aan accompanied by a minuscule amount of ahaadeeth. Since Arabic is foreign to the majority of non-Muslims, conniving proselytizers with impunity can expurgate a compromising interpretation of the Qur’aan. Conceivably, had I examined Islaamic subjects more thoroughly, I likely would have never walked in a mosque, let alone convert. From my sincere study of al-Qur’aan wa Sunnah, at an occurrence when my credence to Islaam and servitude to Allaah was culminating, I would become disillusioned with an apparently incongruous Qur’aanic text.

Once acquainted with a bona fide Islaam, I reevaluated my commitment and questioned whether or not to continue an adherence to the religion. A Muslim eventually stumbles across contestable matter in a Qur’aanic aayah or hadeeth. Paradoxically, we questioning Muslims had to use the very scripture under scrutiny that advises us to seek “the people of knowledge” (16:43), or the ‘Ulamaa (religious-legal scholars) for tafseer (Qur’aanic exegesis or commentary). As one brother put it, you either “believe in it or you don’t.” Now exposed to unadulterated Islaam, I would encounter a crucial test of submission. A decisive decision would follow; whether to blindly believe or independently scrutinize a book “wherein there is no doubt.” (10:37)

The strongest evidence and proof for Islaam was al-Qur’aan (Arabic; lit. the recitation). As Muslims, we spuriously believed Jibreel (archangel Gabriel) was sent by Allaah to bestow the revelations to Prophet Muhammad. In fact, empirically speaking, the Qur’aan definitively disembarked from the vocal cord of Muhammad’s larynx to be heard by his companion’s eardrums. If Muhammad was truly illiterate, without the ability to read nor write, then he couldn’t adequately supervise the written compilation of the Qur’aan nor proofread. Our faith was reliant upon the fallible sahaaba (devoted companions of the Prophet), whom were not scholars, to manufacture the Qur’aan and preserve it. Devastatingly, most of the companions memorizing the Qur’aan were also illiterate and an enormously significant number of companions died in battle, before and after the death of Prophet Muhammad. Although our Qur’aan was transmitted, memorized, and later written by men, I pondered, could it also have been tampered by them in the process? Religion being the machine and believers the automatons, while avoiding the monumental task of thinking hard, many Muslims would ignore any possible inconvenient truths and say, “Allaah knows best.” Instead of a cold-blooded answer, the evasive responses I’d receive from the ‘Ulamaa were unsatisfactory. With the discovery of the Arabic Qur’aanic containing foreign linguistic influence, I doubted the claim of its preservation in “pure Arabic” (16:103). Our Qur’aanic text claimed to be “an exposition of everything” (16:89) and “the Book explained in detail” (6:114). Yet, the actual implementation of Islaam necessitated the assistance of ahaadeeth (narrations, the sayings or doings of Muhammad and his companions). Without a hadeeth, we could not properly perform salaat. Regardless if the creation of al-Qur’aan occured by Allaah or in the confines of Muhammad’s cerebrum or cerebellum, an unbiased exegete would conclude that nothing “new” arrived with seventh-century Islaam. Likewise, we Muslims postulated the Islaamic belief that Islaam had the same message revealed to previous Prophets such as Ibraaheem (Abraham), Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus), or Musa (Moses), all of whom had the same religion. Truthfully, I found nothing “revealed” by Prophet Muhammad that couldn’t be influenced by or plagiarized from existing sources, especially from the Judeo-Christian tradition (Tanakh, Talmud, New testament, apocryphal works). Everything Islaamic could be traced to pre-Islaamic origins, from theology to pilgrimage rites. Islaam attempted to abolish idolatry when Muhammad, like Ibraaheem (Abraham) who was once an idolator (6:76-78), became disillusioned with idolatrous pagan rituals. Prophet Muhammad beseeched the monotheist deity of the Jewish constituents in the Arabian Peninsula but not without undertaking a reform of their Hebrew religion. Evidently so, Musa (Moses), considered the greatest Prophet to the Jews, is the most mentioned Prophet in the Qur’aan. Disdain for the Jewish people permeates throughout al-Qur’aan and ahaadeeth for, when the Jewish people eventually rejected Muhammad as a possible Prophet, he vengefully sought against them in heartache. This is why Islaam harbours considerable disparagement and hatred for the Jews, a people exceptionally monotheist, rather than Christians or Zoroastrians who apparently commit shirk (polytheism, aligning partners with God). With the epiphany that al-Qur’aan was not Allaah’s infallible speech, subsequently, I would approach certain aspects of the religion as man-made.

My expectations of a Supreme Being was in contrast to the conventional god of Prophet Muhammad. I yearned for a deity that was transcendent, incomparable, and an indefinable holy unable to be conceptualized. To my discovery, the Islaamic deity was actually the generic anthropomorphic Sky Father abound in popular mythology. He was afflicted with psychological infirmities such as megalomania, melancholy, and malevolence. Allaah suffered from ambivalence, claiming to be ar-Rahmaan, ar-Raheem (The Most Merciful, The Most Beneficent), while simultaneously being malicious or fastidious. As an omniscient entity, he should have exhibited irrevocable authorship in his scripture, instead of acting capricious by amending and abrogating revelations like a fallible redactor confused about what He should have written initially. On the one hand, there is the incapacity of man to grasp the nature of omnipotent Allaah, yet His Will can be altered by exterior forces such as the affects of human prayers. I could not worship a God that changed. As just another idol, Allaah was depicted and contained in the literary work of al-Qur’aan. According to one hadeeth (Sahih Bukhari: Volume 8, Book 74, Number 246), the Islaamic God created Aadam upon His soorah (form, shape, image), sixty cubits in height. Allaah rested upon His Throne (arsh) near His Footstool (kursi). He claimed to have an Eye (20:39), a Shin (68:42), a Face (55:27), a Foot (Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 93, Number 541), even both Right and Left Hands (39:67). Surely, there were many “comparable unto Him.” (112:4) Discovering Allaah to be as mythical as the elephant-god Ganesha or temper tantrum Yahweh was a devastating blow to my heart. Relying on tawheed, the initial attraction to Islaam, was ineffectual for I now discerned Allaah as fictitious like the rest of the idols. The god of Islaam, likely just Muhammad’s alter-ego, displayed masculinity, anger, indecision, misogyny, and other moral weaknesses unbefitting of a majestic deity. Between Muhammad and Allaah, there was an uncanny resemblance in personality. Similar to the 1939 musical fantasy film, ‘The Wizard of Oz’, I realized that the Wizard (Allaah) was a fabrication concocted by the man (Muhammad) behind the curtain.

My withdrawal from Islaam occurred suddenly as I studied the Qur’aan and ahaadeeth. The same disillusionment I experienced as Buddhist and Christian began to now emerge while a Muslim. I found it difficult to believe in angels, jinn, or talking trees. My mind clustered with doubts and objections as I raged with discontent. The deity was fictitious and cruel, the founder deplorably barbaric and sinful, the scripture mediocre and uninspired, the laws primitive and unjust. I perceived Muhammad as a fraud and Allaah as his imaginary friend. Instantly, while holding the Qur’aan still open, I slammed the covers shut. I tossed the book across the room and ran downstairs. With two garbage bags, I eagerly erased Islaam from my life. This included every Qur’aan, Arabic course tutorial, hadeeth book, da’wah pamphlet, tape, and paperback book on Islaam into the trash. The texts nearly burst the bags. My prayer rug, favourite woolen kufi caps, thobe, and compass followed next. I stored the garbage in our garage until night in order to dump near a neighbour’s curb for pick-up in the morning. Never had I eagerly renounced an attachment with such certainty and resentment.

When I accepted fundamentalism and uncovered the unadulterated religion of Islaam, I eventually became unimpressed. Besides tawheed, what the religion offered wasn’t much. To the naive, Islaam appeared divine with the hypnotic recitation of the Arabic Qur’aan, captivating Middle-Eastern architecture, and stunning Arabic calligraphy. Our Western culture and Judeo-Christian traditions just paled in comparison. However, just like in art, it only seems creative when the influences and sources are left unknown. Once you uncover the plagiarism, what remains is tediously pedestrian. Reverts from a Christian upbringing, because of their dire hatred for Christianity, were blinded to the core principles as taught by Jesus. The grass seemed greener on the other side. But the reality is, where Christians sought forgiveness for sinners, Muslims sought punishment. Muslims prayed towards an inanimate object (i.e., the Ka’bah at Makkah), while Christians prayed towards the heavens. Ahl us-Sunnah proudly ate on the floor with their hands like animals, while the kuffar used chairs and utensils like rightly guided people. As for the corpus of Islaam, unable to find a shred of originality, I concluded the Qur’aan as the most unoriginal composition in religion. I’ve read beautifully written books without any errors, but that doesn’t mean they’re divine. Judaism was actually more Islaamic than Muhammad’s religion for Yahweh forbid angels and humankind from bowing to creation, whereas Allaah commanded the angels to bow before Aadam. Religion should have man change for God, not vice versa. Allaah would make changes to suit the whims and desires of Muhammad. We reverts were lied to, though none admitted it. Islaam did not mean peace but “submission.” Even those religious groups - the Jews and Christians - which share theological similarities with the Islaamic faith are not to be taken as auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers). There was a legal hatred for the Jews, fully sanctioned by our scripture. It was a very politicized religion pushing much propaganda. The longer I was Muslim, the more ahaadeeth and less Qur’aanic aayaat we would receive. Sunnah became the obsession as man-made laws and traditions basically replaced Allaah’s revelations.

For an unbiased investigation, I examined the veracity of Islaamic Creationism. Muslims claim that the perfection of “creation” implies intelligent design. According to creationists, certain natural systems are too sophisticated to be adequately explained without help from an intelligent agent. Using their logic, for the sake of my argument, I will claim that Allaah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) al-Mutakabbir (The Supremely Great, The Majestic) is greater than any evidence found in “creation.” The Qur’aan agrees that not everything has a cause. However, since Allaah merely “exists” Himself in arbitrariness, without any given antecedents, given purpose, nor given meaning, so can the universe itself. If the anomalistic existence of Allaah al-Kabeer (The Most Great) can just be without cause, no logical explanation should be required for the lessor entities in the universe such as bacteria, planets, cells, or DNA. This is their logic. Ironically, instead of perhaps concluding that the universe always existed, Muslims create the idol or anomaly of God in partnership with the universe. No longer impartial by blind faith and delusion, I rationally dismissed the Islamic assertion of a Creator in their absence of compelling evidences.

Although the non-zero probability of the existence of God was and will remain present, the same probability exists for gods, ghosts, monsters, and boogie-men. The stated entities have been encountered in every civilization during every time period throughout history. Primitive man once believed everything from trees to rocks contained a spirit. Animism is still practiced today by native populations around the globe. Even the Islaamic tradition has kept a few spirits, such as angels and jinn. Eventually, two spirits remained in mainstream belief, because of atheism. Those two are God and the human soul. No reason surfaced to suggest Muhammad’s Allaah was any more significant than the other quadrillion gods contrived throughout human history. Like all theists, Prophet Muhammad approached the “chicken or and egg” dilemma by guessing that a motherless chicken once upon a time created everything. The whimsical being of Allaah, the epitome of arbitrariness and fortuitousness, exists superficially and accidentally by chance with no given purpose or meaning. He is the fiction of imaginative hope. The Islaamic understanding conclusively bypasses the probability consideration and boldly begins at a mind-boggling refutable truth: “There is no deity but God.”

Certain rituals and conditions required by Sunnah for the ibaadah (worship) of Allaah actually were a distraction from worship itself. One must be in a purified condition for acts of worship, and to facilitate this, a ritual of purification known as wudoo (partial ablution) or ghusl (full ablution) must be conducted. The wudoo would be rendered nullified if, for example, the Muslim defecated, urinated, bled, fell asleep, or passed gas. Since Sunnah allocated a limited time frame for each of the five prayers, the result would be disastrous. If you completed al-wudoo to begin an obligatory salaah, and suddenly released gas, the entire cleansing ritual had to be redone. This entailed getting semi-undressed, making niyyah (intention), doing recitations (e.g., bismillah, shahaahah), washing the face, neck, arms, head, nasal cavity, mouth, ears, feet, including the repetition of each act three times. By desperately undertaking to postpone flatulence and the call of nature, during prayer, a worshipper would experience consciousness of one’s own bowel movements, rather than consciousness of God. Instead of praying to God alone, we Muslims were submitting to the automatic prayers constituted by mere men. During worship in jamaa’ah (congregation), especially for ‘Eid or Jumu’ah salaat, you had to prostrate behind men. This position gave one a view of the carpet below, the masculine buttocks of the worshipper in front, or the holes in his socks. For any heterosexual revert, this was an uncomfortable predicament. Truthfully said, for this reason is why brothers came early to reserve a spot in the front row. If a Muslimah was allowed in the masjid, she’d unfortunately be behind a man’s behind or in an enclosed section separated by a screen. Islaam was vehemently against idolatry, yet when we Muslims performed salaat, there was always a figure before us. And if you traveled to Makkah following the qiblah (direction of worship), you’d discover Muslims prostrating, touching, caressing, and even kissing the Ka’bah. During hajj (pilgrimage) at Mina, hundreds would be killed and thousands injured following the idolatrous ritual known as the “stoning of the devil.” Al-Jamaraat, the three symbols representing the devil, have been since renovated into 26-metre-long walls in the hopes that more Muslims don’t die trying to make an impression on the idols. The Arabic Qur’aan, believed to be incarcerated Truth and the literal speech of Allaah, also became an idol for Muslims. With washed hands, we held our Holy Book and many would actually kiss it. For Christians, Jesus was the Word of God made flesh, while Muslims held the Qur’aan as the Word of God made text. I questioned the necessity of prayers and Qur’aanic recitation being reserved only in Arabic, simply for the “pleasure of Allaah.” Clearly, we were following traditions for the sake of Arab supremacy. Most Muslims were not fluent in Arabic, so instead of reaping the benefits in our native languages, we recited in a foreign tongue what many could neither articulate with nor understand. If Allaah was omnipotent, he could understand English. In Islaam, instead of being Muslim for Allaah, we had to become Arab to be Muslim.

The Islamic world was a catastrophe for we Muslims were unable to reconcile the discrepancies in our religion, the bedrock of all predominantly Muslim states. In the Qur’aan, particular Madinan revelations conflicted with Makkan ones. Our foundation was an incomplete sacred text quite ambiguous, inconsistent, and without chronological order. With the Qur’aan lacking proper substance to be a constitution for a civilization, we implored man-made ahaadeeth to help a divine revelation. Although this combination provided substance to implement Sharee’ah (Islaamic law), it brought more discrepancies into the religion. According to the Qur’aan, all men and women are born in a state of fitrah as Muslims. However, the Sunnah demands the adhaan (call to prayer) and shahaadah to be yelled into our infant’s ears at birth. While the Qur’aan commanded worship in “neither aloud nor in a low voice,” (17:110) Sunnah instructed a Muslim to scream at pedestrians the adhaan (call to prayer) from the top of buildings. Allaah’s Creation is perfect, but Sunnah mandates that Muslim infants should be corrected with circumcision. The Qur’aan says to make no distinction between the Prophets, yet, the hadeeth-inspired Islaam with “Allaah and His Messenger” was awfully similar to the “Father and His Son” in Christianity. Islaam has elevated the Prophet Muhammad to an infallible hero with almost godlike status. However, when Allaah commanded fifty prayers a day in the night of al-Israa’ and Mi’raaj, Muhammad could not “submit” and disobediently sought to reduce the amount repeatedly until it was down to five. Women could legally have no more than one husband, while the Prophet Muhammad could and did have several in one day. Allaah created everything perfect, especially the Qur’aan which is considered to be the ultimate miracle (17:88) proving Islaam by containing aayaat (signs, verses, proofs, evidences, miracles). Non-Muslims who doubt the Qur’aan are challenged by Allaah to produce a soorah like it (2:23). Yet, throughout Muhammad’s prophetic career, Allaah would abrogate verses to “substitute one revelation for another” (2:106, 16:101) as if the “Truth” needed correction. He claimed throughout the Qur’aan to be the “The Most Merciful” and “The Most Beneficent” while simultaneously threatening man in detail the prepared punishments and tortures awaiting him in Hellfire. Although the Qur’aan claimed to be the “best hadeeth” (39:23) and contained Sunnah, fundamentalists were not satisfied with the Qur’aan. Indeed, they abandoned the Qur’aan in the process as the Prophet Muhammad said of his people (25:30). With such inconsistencies, no wonder a schism in the Islamic ummah occurred immediately after the Prophet’s funeral.

The evolution and behaviour of a Muslim revert has always been predictable. Soofiyyah (Sufism) was what attracted the ample majority of today’s converts. In fact, without a military conquest by the sword, this has basically been the endorsed ideology for the amicable expansions of Islaam. Indeed, Islaam wasn’t completely spread by the sword but was welcomed by many. However, to be downright and straightforward, Sufism isn’t Islaam but a deviation from it. Tasawwuf or Soofiyyah ingratiated Islaam to the kaafir by accommodating a rigid theology into a compromising spiritual mysticism. Islaam almost took the backseat for some individuals. Instead of pursuing the Muslim identity, many reverts would become obsessed with their Arab wardrobe, the Arab language, and Arab politics. If they converted in a predominantly South Asian neighbourhood, you’d notice the reverts mimicking desi culture in an attempt to assimilate. It’s a daunting task, especially for Muslims, to rectify the confusion of Islaam with culture and culture with Islaam. From firsthand experience, I’d generously estimate that merely a quarter of all converts actually remain Muslim by their first year. Oftentimes, a serious revert would exhaust him/herself to the point of burn-out and would slowly disappear into apostasy. The latter individuals were never spoken of as we ignored anything that could possibly jeopardize eemaan (faith) and taqwaa (piety, fear of Allaah). Judging by their facial expression and physical posture, I could differentiate between a now moderate Muslim and a timid apostate trying to go undetected. Those Mu’minoon (faithful believers) that actually kept their Islaam, now keen on fundamentalism, eventually disowned their native culture and decidedly lived and dressed as seventh century Arabian Muslims, even in a North American metropolitan city. The first turban I actually saw was on a Canadian, a Caucasian convert trying desperately hard to “be one” with his Pakistani congregation. These particular reverts - ripe for a picking by the Salafiyoon - would willingly yearn for a strict adherence to the fundamentals of Islam. As reverts, readily dupable and persuadable, our dependence and submission was crucial for a successful brainwashing.

Reverts to Islaam, ever so gullible and naive, were easily susceptible to the prevalent dysfunctional behaviours and propaganda infecting most Muslim societies. By striving to not conform with the kuffaar, we duly had to be ignorant by circumnavigating anything unislamic. We believed, if a Muslim concealed the faults of another in this world, his own faults would be concealed by Allaah on the Day (i.e., Day of Resurrection). One revert declared that Usama bin Laden was better than “a million George Bushes” and “a thousand Tony Blairs” simply because he’s a “Muslim”. Arrogantly speaking, we Muslims were “the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind.” (3:110) So when an atrocity occurred that was obviously committed by Muslims in the name of Allaah, my fellow brothers and sisters were complacent. We obsequiously forsook the human rights violations in Muslim countries, even when the victims were Muslims. The conspiracy theories widespread in my Muslim society were outright delusion. Not even the moderate Muslims, who neglected salaat and committed zinaa (illegal sex; fornication, adultery, etc.), could accept the Muslim identities of the 9/11 pilots. As my Afghani classmate remarked, “It was the Jews!” When the opportunity arose for self-criticism, inevitably, we instead blamed the Jews, our favourite scapegoat. Homogenizing oneself into the Islaamic ummah was ostensibly clinched if one supported the latest Arab-Muslim agenda, grew an outstanding beard, abstained from using beads during tasbeeh, expressed hatred for the Jews, uttered the word “bid’ah” occasionally, and repudiated the modern state of Israel. We proudly acknowledged the jihaad, yet acted stupid if questioned by a kaafir and responded to their accusations with, for example, “How do you know it was done by Muslims? Where is the evidence?” Although they were not blind to the videotaped confessions by boasting Muslim terrorists, they chose to be. Not all Muslims were terrorists, although it was unequivocally but agonizingly true that most terrorists were Muslims. Sunni Muslims, to be exact. If some Americans or Jews died, there was sympathetic joy and I observed this particular behaviour genially absorbed by one Muslimah just five years old. Reverts hopelessly adopted a rigid interpretation of Islam taught by immigrants from oppressive theocracies that incarcerated ijtihaad to keep freethinking and dissent criminal and their rule immutable.

The greatest threat to dogmatism is doubt because thinking leads to kufr (disbelief). Islaam thought for us. My classmate Mohammed once said, “You know what your problem is? You think too much!” Ironically, freethinking and open-mindedness brought me to tolerate their da’wah and convert. I embraced Islaam and gave Allaah my undivided worship. But because I now kindly disagree, Islaamic scholars say I should be killed. Even moderate Muslims living in the West concede with my death sentence. All Muslims encountered aayaat and ahaadeeth too unpalatable to digest. Did submission (Islaam) mean accepting not just everything, but anything? I realized that I could not be a muqallid (follower who imitates another blindly and unquestioningly). I found it deplorable that Muhammad, a man over fifty years of age, married six year-old ‘Aishah and then consummated the marriage when she was nine. His hatred for the Jews rivaled the antisemitism of Adolf Hitler. The Prophet, supposedly guided by God, did not abolish slavery but actually possessed slaves. He waged systematic campaigns to exterminate opponents. I came from a civilization where murder was considered, believe it or not, wrong? I had to draw the line somewhere. Yielding to fundamentals and authority is a legitimate endeavour, while fundamentalism and authoritarianism is not.

In the pursuit of a strict monotheistic belief system, I incidently had accepted the irrational and illogical along with the absurd. In the process of wishful thinking, we fell into willful delusion. As blindly obedient slaves of Allaah, resultantly, believers became subdued as mentally comatose Islamobots without the ability to doubt, question, or scrutinize. This dogmatic approach by theists favoured delusion and coercion that intentionally set believers as sheep to be led by shepherds into justifying anything they so desired (e.g., Jonestown by Jim Jones, 9/11 by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed). We harboured the delusion that Islaam was perfect, while Muslims just did not live up to Islaam. We had to agree with the inferiority of women, the amputation of the hand for thieves, and antisemitic hatred of the Jews. There was stoning of women and animal sacrifices. Even the incentives of Islaam were ignoble. Paradise, an apparent Club Med in the sky, contained earthly sensuality and materialism catering to primitive man, such as numerous women, wine, and couches. A married Muslimah would spend eternity attending her husband as he titillated with numerous women in bed. A sensible man should expect better treatment for his wife (i.e., an equal human being that is someone’s daughter, sister, or mother). No progressive interpretation of such scripture could hide the ignominiousness. Although the Qur’aan alone was a revelation unto itself, to deny a saheeh hadeeth was an intellectual cop-out. One had to simultaneously obey Allaah and the Rasool (messenger), without bias to sound evidence. Reason can exist, but so long as its conclusions conflict not with the institutionalized logic frozen in seventh-century Islaamic orthodoxy. To be a Muslim, one had to absolutely relinquish heterodoxy, as the name of the game is literally “submission” (Islaam). No Muslim could rationally reform a religion that had been “perfected” (5:3) by an omniscient and omnipotent God. I realized that Islaam could likely not be reformed.

Surprisingly, even as an apostate of Islaam, I contemplated on reverting back to the religion on numerous of occasions. To outsiders, Islaam was an unfashionable and demanding faith tradition to adopt. However, contrary to most apostates, I view my experience with Islam as a blessing. I enjoyed the obligations and would establish my salaah regardless if I was under a staircase in a busy subway terminal or outdoors bracing the elements. I immensely miss fajr (dawn) salaah and cleansing myself by wudhoo (ablution), a reinvigorating ritual leaving your body, heart, mind, and soul in rejuvenation. Never had I felt so pure. Islaam was intentionally my chosen faith out of sincere submission to God, not for conniving to woo a Muslimah or it being adopted by my forefathers as my birthright. Only with the Qur’aan could I facilitate a belief in God. There seems to exist a religiosity innate in man, including the atheist. Considerably, Allaah proved to be a comforting solace, though one day I contemplated on why none of my modest supplications had ever been answered. And I begged Allaah (swt) to keep me Muslim. If I could sustain the belief in Allaah, I would remain Muslim and try to courageously reform Islaam from the clutches of fascists. Eventually, I accepted the fact that I was plagued with doubt from the veritable onset. Although once again skeptical of religion, I continued to uphold ethics and ideals such as pacifism and vegetarianism. I had faith, just not in a particular god or religion and held my quintessential identity to be as ex-Muslim. No longer a Muslim, life now was a vacuum and I knew Islaam could never fill that void.

As an apostate of Islaam, similar to all dissidents, I keep my views hidden. But on one occassion, I confessed about my apostasy and opinions to one Muslim and was almost physically assaulted. Living with fundamentalist Muslims certainly made for a tense situation. For safety reasons, I kept up appearances and preferred to pose as a nominal or nonpracticing Muslim instead of an apostate. As an atheist, I view all religions as man-made institutions. Unfortunately, due to inadequate evidence, I’d concede the existence of God as highly unlikely. Most definitely, this “God” described in all world religions is but a trivial idol. The whole premise of my conversion to Islaam was to embrace a monotheistic view of God and fully submit to Him. I presumably accepted an omniscient, transcendent, and sublime deity, but after delving into Islaam, I realized that Allaah was just another conventional god. God could still exist, but equally, so could the other supernatural beings abound in mythology. The time has come for adults to grow-up and discard their imaginary friends. I’d estimate that 99.99% of believers adhere to a particular religion, not by choice, but because their parents indoctrinated them. Before I was an agnostic, but after my experience with Islaam, I’ve become an atheist. This testimony ideally must bear criticism of Islaam, but don’t be fooled. From my intimate experience with Islaam, I’ve encountered much truth and good. For that, I’m truthfully appreciative. Some of the best people I’ve met are, in fact, Muslims. Before my conversion, I despised the religion of Prophet Muhammad. However, I now respect Islaam, but notwithstanding that I kindly choose to disagree with Muhammad.

Leaving Islaam was likely the greatest decision I’ve ever had to make. The religion of Prophet Muhammad kept me shackled from the diverse richness that is life. I rediscovered love; the unconditional loving-kindness and equal respect for all humankind, irrespective of gender, caste, race, language, nationality, religion, or lack there of. By doubt, I scrutinized and by questioning, I sought. In seeking, I increase the possibility that I may come upon more truths. But I’m not as arrogant to claim I possess “The Truth”, with a capital tee. In conclusion, for the Muslims in the audience, a quotation from Stephen F. Roberts who eloquently said it best: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

6:24 AM  
Blogger salma hayek said...

Earning money online never been this easy and transparent. You would find great tips on how to make that dream amount every month. So go ahead and click here for more details and open floodgates to your online income. All the best.

2:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home