Click here to view the embedded video.

Related posts:

• “Britain’s Most Powerful Muslim Woman” takes an egg
• American Media and its Jewish Owners
• Amir Junaid formerly known as Loon (from P. Diddy’s Bad Boys) on AlJazeera English

Who’s going to BestBuy this weekend?

UPDATE: “Merry Christmas” BestBUY TV AD

Related posts:

• New York City Public Schools may get two more holidays: Eid-ul-Adha and Eid-ul-Fitr!
• Hillary Clinton Eid ul Fitr Message | Obama Family sends Eid Greetings
• Hezbullah & Lebanese Christians Unite!

Go Seawolves!

Related posts:

• Stony Brook University ranks 17th in the Top Public Colleges For Getting Rich
• Stony Brook(lyn) – 4 SBU Students get Robbed
• Thank you ABC News for the Islamophobia Series!

Edit: I know I’m going to take heat for saying Saudi Arabia is better to live than America, but I say this primarily my bias for the lack of ease of eating Halal food in America. Everyone who lives/visits Saudi Arabia always tell me how great the chicken and lamb is in Saudi. So meat is a factor for me where I live. I’m bias for the availability halal fried chicken. If I can make my daily salat, work and get some nice halal lamb and chicken, then I’m straight. If I can do this in Makkah, of course it’s better than the entire world. The Dajjal ain’t going to get me there!

Edit 2: For those who took me seriously about the meat thing, I apologize. It does play a factor but obviously it’s not number 1. I still think Saudi Arabia for me personally to practice Islam would be almost as good as America. America would still be the best option for me since I am an American.

Best place for Muslims to live? America

Muslim nations could learn a lot from the US.

By Merve Kavakci

Washington – This summer Muslims were murdered in Holland, Germany, and Belgium – four victims of hate crimes.

These murders are just the latest examples of Islamaphobia coming out of Europe. But Europe is not the only place intolerant of its Muslim citizens. Even in some Muslim countries, expression of religion is often perceived as a threat to the secular state.

One of the best places for a Muslim to live is the United States. In a lot of ways, conditions are better here than almost anywhere. As a Muslim not permitted to wear my head covering as a politician in my home country, Turkey, I know.

Think about it: In Turkey, where the vast majority of the population is Muslim, you will not find a lawyer with a beard or a student at a university wearing a head scarf, but you can find plenty in New York City. In Tunisia, you won’t see a religiously dressed physician at university hospitals – but you can in Alabama.

In the majority of Muslim countries the government is an intrusive enterprise with eyes and ears everywhere. The result is bleak. Countries reward only sycophants of the “divine” state. Muslims feel stifled by the encroachments of the establishment and lack of religious tolerance. If a man or a woman wanted to organize a protest against the government to gain the right to practice their religion more openly or be politically active against the status quo, may God help him to escape from the wrath of the state.

Many Muslim countries promote homogeneity while their citizens yearn for a right to diversity, which will give them the ability to practice their religious rituals freely.

In America, on the other hand, doors open to accommodate people’s religious beliefs. And that, along with citizenship rights and the opportunity to exercise the freedom to practice Islam day in and day out, is what makes the US so good for the millions of Muslims here.

American Muslim women can engage in any sport they choose wearing their religious garment – unlike in France and Italy where Islamic-approved swimsuits, and therefore Muslim women, are not welcome in the pools.

The White House and universities alike host iftars to celebrate Muslims’ holy month of fasting. Elementary school students can attend Friday prayers without having to worry about absentee records.

These small but significant examples of freedoms attest to the country’s sine qua non of inalienable citizenship rights: freedom of expression and freedom of religion.

That is not to say that the US is exempt from the mistreatment of Muslims. Racial profiling and workplace discriminations sometimes do occur. Yet the difference is when American Muslims face an unjust treatment, they have recourse where they can find justice.

Examples abound: The Justice Department sided with Muslim high school students in Texas who weren’t allowed to pray on school premises during lunch break in 2005, when they took their complaint to the federal government.

This year, a judge has ruled favorably in the pretrial lawsuit brought by six imams who were detained in 2006 for “flying while Muslim.” This would not happen in many Muslim countries since judiciary bodies are generally under the thumb of the regimes that promote coercive secularization.

Post-9/11, the US did mistreat some Muslims. But today, the Obama administration is making amends by probing alleged CIA torture and by closing the Guantánamo prison. There, after early abuses, officials accommodated detainees’ religious needs. So-called Muslim nation-states could learn from these steps in their treatment of devout citizens.

As President Obama tries to mend America’s relationship with the global Muslim community, he should promote “democratic” change from within, supporting any push from within countries for more heterogeneity.

Supporting the will of the “people” alone rather than the (semi) dictators, even when it is difficult, could make a huge difference.

Dr. Merve Kavakci is a lecturer of international affairs at George Washington University.

Source

Related posts:

• In my opinion, the Best Muslims and the Worst Muslims live in America
• Muslim women seeking Islamic knowledge in the Muslim world vs. the non-Muslim world (Edit: See comments)
• Would we, as Muslims, live happily under an Islamic State?

I thought the Republicans were bad, but Israelis beat them.

Related posts:

• Muslims Approve of Obama more than any other religious group
• Malik Obama, the Half Brother of Barack Obama: “I don’t think that my being a Muslim has got anything to do with my brother being the President of the United States.”
• Israelis breaking their own laws – Tear Gasing Civilians

Related posts:

• McCain’s Pastor Is Anti-American!
• “Why Do YOU GUYS Chop Peoples Heads Off?!?”
• When Muslim Guys try to be Gangstas!

For two recent crimes, a Muslim, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, is charged with terrorism and murder. In a similar case, a Christian, Scott Roeder, is charged with murder but not terrorism. Yet, there are ample indications that both sought to influence government policy.

Two men, one Christian and the other Muslim, commit murder just one day apart in the United States. Both appear to have been motivated by their religious beliefs. The Christian murderer is Scott Roeder and his victim is Dr. George Tiller, a physician from Wichita, KS who performed late term abortions. The Muslim murderer is Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad and his victims are Pvt. William Long and Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula who were new U.S. Army recruiters.

These two murder cases expose the media’s and our legal system’s bias against Muslims. Both crimes seem to fit the definition of terrorism motivated by religious extremism. The media and the legal system, however, are treating these alleged murderers and their crimes very differently.

The Muslim murder suspect, Mr. Muhammad, is charged with terrorism along with first degree murder. Mr. Muhammad’s faith has been front and center from the very earliest news reports. The American-Muslim community’s almost immediate repudiation of Mr. Muhammad’s murder was and still is largely ignored.

On the other hand, the Christian murder suspect, Mr. Roeder, is not being charged with terrorism. His faith has not been the focus of news reports even though there seems to be ample evidence to suggest that Mr. Roeder espouses extreme, right-wing Christian beliefs. And lastly, the media is giving anti-abortion groups ample opportunity to distance themselves from the murderous actions of one of their own.

Let’s start with the terrorism charges. Domestic terrorism is defined as an act that is dangerous to human life (guns were fired in the direction of the victims – this requirement is met) and which is a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or any State (both shootings fulfill this requirement) and which appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion or to affect the conduct of a government by, among other things, assassination (an argument for this element can be made in both shootings).

Mr. Muhammad is charged with 15 counts of engaging in a terrorist act. This is in addition to the murder charge. Mr. Roeder is charged with murder but there are no terrorism charges. On the face of both cases there seems to be ample indications that these men committed murder with the objective of intimidating a civilian population or with the intention to influence a government policy.

So, why a terrorism charge in one case but not the other? Both cases are heinous. Both local communities surely want to send the strongest message possible to the public that these crimes will be punished to the greatest extent of the law. And ultimately a judge or jury will decide whether the charges are proven beyond a reasonable doubt so the prosecutor runs little risk by adding the appropriate terrorism charge.

The disparate treatment of these two murder cases began right from the first media reports. Most major newswires and major newspapers focused heavily on Mr. Muhammad’s religion very early on.

The Associated Press reported on Mr. Muhammad’s crime by stating that a “Muslim convert with political and religious motives” shot two uniformed soldiers. The New York Times described Mr. Muhammad as “an American convert to Islam.” CNN reported that Mr. Muhammad is a “Muslim convert”.

Let’s compare the reporting by these same news sources on Mr. Roeder’s murder. The Associated Press is mum on Mr. Roeder’s Christian faith. Ditto for the New York Times and CNN. None of theses same news sources make any mention of Mr. Roeder’s religious affiliation or the obvious role his extremist religious beliefs may have played in the killing of Dr. Tiller.

What exacerbates this obvious bias in reporting is the willingness of the media to offer the anti-abortion groups immediate opportunities to distance themselves from Mr. Roeder’s murder while none of them provided a similar opportunity for the American-Muslim community even as they reported that Mr. Muhammad is a Muslim. Major national and regional American-Muslim organizations issued almost immediate statements condemning Mr. Muhammad’s murderous actions so the excuse cannot be a lack of public condemnation of the murder from the American-Muslim community.

To the American-Muslim community this unequal treatment is at the very least annoying and more likely very troubling. The bad news is that this situation is not going to change in the immediate future.

Not enough Americans know what real Muslims are like. There are up to 7 million Muslims living in America. By contrast there are a few hundred million Christians in America. Suffice to say that Americans feel more familiar with Christian values than they do with Muslim values. They don’t realize just how similar these values are – both faith traditions abhor the killing of innocents and neither faith condones the actions of Mr. Muhammad or Mr. Roeder. Plus, the steady stream of news about Muslim extremists killing others and themselves in suicide missions overseas certainly doesn’t help.

There is only one way for American-Muslims to sway Americans’ opinion of Islam. More Americans need to know what real Muslims are all about. While the media can do its job better by giving a voice to the American-Muslim community, American-Muslims need to take matters into their own hands.

American-Muslims need to become civically engaged. They need to get involved on issues of the common good and not just special interest issues. It has to be at the grassroots level with one on one interactions predicated on substantive work that gives non-Muslim Americans a chance to see firsthand what American-Muslims are all about.

President Obama’s message to the Muslim world, including his numerous nods to American-Muslims was great, but American-Muslims need to do some serious, old school, grassroots relational work of their own.

Junaid M. Afeef, Esq. is the Executive Director of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago. He can be reached at Junaid.afeef[at]gmail.com

Source: AltMuslim.com

Related posts:

• Muslim Americans more Diverse, Religious than others – Half of Muslim Youth Don’t Vote
• What the media needs to show: Muslim Scholars condemning Terrorism
• The Elections has Cast a Shadow over Terrorism and Islam

May God guide them all.

Related posts:

• American TV Show actually says something good about Islam
• Convert or Die
• Show your Parents this!

What is the Islamic ruling on cats? Is it permissible or not? Please share any hadith on cats.

Please also share your personal cat stories.

JazakAllah khair.

Related posts:

• Favorite Quranic Reciters?
• Cursing, High School, College and the MSA
• Back from Canada

New research shows young Americans are dramatically less likely to go to church — or to participate in any form of organized religion — than their parents and grandparents.

“It’s a huge change,” says Harvard University professor Robert Putnam, who conducted the research.

Historically, the percentage of Americans who said they had no religious affiliation (pollsters refer to this group as the “nones”) has been very small — hovering between 5 percent and 10 percent. However, Putnam says the percentage of “nones” has now skyrocketed to between 30 percent and 40 percent among younger Americans.

Putnam calls this a “stunning development.” He gave reporters a first glimpse of his data Tuesday at a conference on religion organized by the Pew Forum on Faith in Public Life.

You can read more here.

Good or Bad for Islam in America?

I say both. It’s good, because the next generations of Americans won’t care about Muslims as much as the current Christian majority does. They wouldn’t make a big deal if a woman is wearing hijab or a brother rocking a thoub. Plus, Atheists and Agnostics are more prone to be anti-War and pro-Peace.

Unfortunately it can be bad because society will decay with loose morals. Homosexuality will become a norm (if it isn’t already) and young Muslims growing up in the future will find it extremely hard to keep their iman strong. May Allah protect them and us all.

Some could say that this is much better for Islam for dawah purposes since most people will have no belief system inherited so it’ll be easy to spread the message of Truth. This could be true but it could work the opposite way too.

For the most part Atheists/Agnostics are more friendlier to the Muslims than Christians and Jews when it comes to American foreign policy which matters the most to the majority of the Muslims in this world.

Related posts:

• The Future of America is with Barack Obama
• Muslims Approve of Obama more than any other religious group
• 93% of Muslims Worldwide Condemn 9/11!