Refutation of a Rand Corporation Apologist (RCA)
This is a response to an opinion piece by a character named Qanta Ahmed on Huffington Post:
Oh boy, where do we get started? First off, the author seems to be suffering from the LIS (Lost Immigrant Syndrome). That is, the mental disease that accompanies a disabling sense of inferiority and an overwhelming need to be accepted by non-Muslims—in particular non-Muslims of European descent. Such people live and breathe not to obey Allah but to please their former(?) colonial masters… or at least those who look like their former(?) colonial masters.
Now what does this author claim to mean by “other monotheisms?” God is One, Eternal, and Omnipotent. Allah is beyond need or comparison. There is only One God and only one correct belief in God. There can only be one true monotheism, and it is not a belief that entails claiming God is ignorant, walks about, or rests; nor does the true monotheism claim that God is a triune entity. True monotheism is found exclusively in the creed of the Muslims.
As for “versions” of Islam, our most important concern should be following the correct “version”—that is, the method approved of by the Prophet, his Companions, and the learned scholars who have preserved and transmitted those teachings. The author wrongly calls the Saudi-Wahhabi regime a Sunni theocracy. Well, let’s start by saying, contrary to the claims of the secular supremacists, Muslims do not consider the term “theocracy” an execration. Every sincere Muslim considers a theocracy governed by the Sacred Law to be an ideal. Also, Wahhabism is NOT a “version” of Sunni Islam. Wahhabism is a sect that espouses an anthropomorphic notion of the Creator. This includes believing that God is a giant shadow-casting unidentified extraterrestrial object with fingers, eyes, hands, two feet, and one shin. Muslims (Sunnis or otherwise) believe that God (Allah) exists without being in time, place, or direction. Allah is not a spatial entity—Allah existed before space, and after Allah created space, Allah did not transform and materialize in a space or place. Whatever one imagines, Allah is different from that. For more on the difference between the Sunni and Wahhabi creed, please see here:
This woman then goes on to use the loaded term “Islamism.” She includes in this (apparently) not only those radical extremists groups, such as, the Wahhabis and the Ikhwanis (so-called Muslim Brotherhood) but also those groups which are non-violent. Yet, it seems she paints all of them with th ebroad brush of being advocacy of “fascist supremacy.” I think what she means here is that any Muslim who believes that his or her religion is the true religion that God has mandated for humanity is also a “fascist.” This would, of course, include the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu `alayhi wasallam) as being a “fascist.” May Allah protect us from believing such blasphemy.
As for Muslims feeling a sense of “inferiority,” I think the more appropriate word would be feeling a sense of frustration (Qanta is the one here demonstrating a sense of inferiority). To claim that Muslims… just for no reason at all… feel this way is disingenuous. Of course, the legacy of being colonized, being ruled by (usually) Western backed tyrannical puppet regimes, and being terrorized by those puppets, as well as, Western states constantly meddling in the affairs of Muslim majority states has a little something to do with this sense of frustration. That’s not to mention that elements within the Pentagon are teaching courses on “an all out war against Islam.” Qanta seems to like leaving out those points. Okay, Bin Laden is a bad guy… we get it—after all he was(?) a Wahhabi (who was at one time supported by the United States). After we’ve got that out of the way, can you share with us how many people the U.S. military has killed? You can start your body count with the Vietnam War.
Now Qanta starts to pour on the secular supremacist rhetoric. She calls the wearing of the niqab an “intrusion of ritual Islamic symbolism into the public place.” Muslims calling it, “Sisters wanting to follow the Sunnah seeking the reward from their Lord.” As for FIFA excluding players from wearing hijaab, it is in essence, a ban against Muslim women, for Muslim women are obligated to wear the hijaab. If they fear Allah, they won’t consider it an “optional” form of dress or a “vestige of an old Arabian custom,” as the Munaafiqs (Hypocrites: those who pretend to be Muslim while hating Islam in their hearts) of Qanta’s ilk usually claim.
Banning the Gaga-Thing from performing a concert in Indonesia is a VIRTUOUS DEED. It involves enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. Gaga has a song that blasphemes Prophet Jesus, and she is a well-known proponent of homophilia. In Islam, homosexuality is considered an abomination, so it is a good thing that the Indonesian government stopped her from performing. Regarding Irshad Manji, she is another homophile who openly blasphemes the religion of Islam. It’s good that the Muslims prevent her from spreading her lies and confusion.
Now Qanta starts to hit her stride here with her secular humanist tripe right here:
“Claiming persecution, discrimination, profiling or victimization liberal democracies are pressured in relinquishing not only their own sense of identity but also significant concessions in a shared public space which truly belongs to everyone, irrespective of faith and not merely the ‘victimized Islamist Muslim’. It is this last fallacy, of collective victimhood, that most fuels my drive to expose Islamism for what it is – a weak yet vicious imposter for a great religion, an imposter which seeks to exploit and devour both Muslims and non Muslims it its pursuit for power and dominance.”
Et tu Brute. Why not mention how the West is attempting to impose it way of life upon the Muslims all over the Muslim world. What is the spread of this secular corporate consumer culture via the media and educational institutions (and when they don’t work, you get bombed and droned into “freedom”) other than a people seeking power and dominance? Why not mention how one particular credo-ethnic group with already immense amount of influence can’t stop making movies about what a mean German guy with a funny mustache did to them about 60 years ago… in order to drum up feelings of “persecution” and “victimization?” As we said, perhaps she missed the expose on segments of the Pentagon declaring all out war on Islam. Or perhaps she has never hear of a guy named Michael Weiner… oh, I mean, Michael Savage… who stirs up hatred against Islam with millions of listeners weekly on AM radio. Or maybe… just maybe she’s never read the comment sections for the so-called “Islamic” topics here on Huffington Post, where the Sacred Law is denigrated, the Prophet slandered, and (a`udhubillah) Allah is cursed. Personally, I don’t think that it is prudent for Muslims to play the victimization game (we already have seen what it’s done to one minority group here in America). At the same time to deny anti-Islamic bigotry indicates that this woman is not just ignorant but she has an unscrupulous agenda.
Now, Qanta falls off the cliff. She (of all people) is going to try to make a theological argument against the “Islamists” (which, I assume includes those Muslims who simply wish to follow what the Prophet taught). The folks over at the Rand Corp. were right: when it comes to matters of theology, you better leave this in the hand of the “Traditionalists” (i.e., the real Sunni Muslims). Alright, here we go. She says:
“Islam is nothing if not justice. Any injustice committed or pursued in the name of Islam is anathema to the believing Muslim and counter to the ideal which is Islam. Muslims must remember their duty not only to themselves or their Maker but also to their society wherever they find themselves.”
Okay, yes Islam is for justice… but Qanta, you failed to define justice. Justice in Islam is for one to behave in compliance with the Laws of God. “Justice” isn’t what some people (or the psy-ops corporate manipulators of the people) say is “good” this week. Then you just go on to lie. She says:
“There is no place for Muslim claims of supremacy. The Prophet Mohammed (SAW) himself admonished his followers not to make claims of supremacy over Moses, or indeed any other messenger of God.”
A Muslim (who is not a Prophet) does not claim to be superior to a Prophet. Such a claim is disbelief. However, Qanta, the Muslims follow a Divine Book. It is called the Qur’an. Therein, it says:
“You are the best of Nations [the Nation of Prophet Muhammad] brought forth to humanity, for you enjoin the good and forbid the evil.” (Aal `Imraan, 110)
Furthermore, the Prophet said: “I am the master of humanity on the Day of Judgment.” The Qur’an time and time again mentions the merits of Imaan (Islam and True Faith) over disbelief. Only a disbeliever would claim that the Qur’an doesn’t. I guess we all know what category this Qanta character is in.
Qanta goes on to get really mixed up—to the point of saying that if a Muslim majority state renounces or doesn’t apply “democratic principles” in its governance, then that government loses the right to call itself “Islamic.” Uh, Qanta, can you show us where the Prophet advocated a Western style democracy? What about Abu Bakr? Well, if not Abu Bakr, how about `Umar, `Uthman, or `Ali? Which madhhab said that Islam is based upon “democracy?” (It is important to note that for these apologists, the West is the source from where they derive their values and sense of right and wrong and normalcy. These are the same lost and confused souls who, fifty years ago would be telling the Muslims in the Balkans or in the Soviet Union that Islam and communism are compatible, and that one needs to embrace communism in order to “advance.” These apologists are incapable of criticizing the West from an Islamic perspective, for they believe that the West is inherently superior to Islam, and it would be unfathomable that Muslims might actually have a sophisticated critique of Western culture and civilization.)
Qanta then goes on to claim that the rules pertaining to blasphemy are “extraordinarily vicious” (I think that she means apostasy, but Qanta is so mixed up in her little head she might not know the difference). Then… low and behold… contrary to what most of the apologists do, she actually quotes a Hadith of the Prophet (most of the apologists actually reject Hadith altogether (well, sometimes they accept those Hadith which fit with their Yusuf Ali (mis)interpretation of the Qur’an) because there is just too much in the Hadiths of the Prophet that they just can’t seem to get their former(?) colonial masters to approve of). She quotes the Hadith about the need for one to remove evil by hand (if able) and then to renounce it by tongue (if able) and in not at least the rejection of the disobedience in the heart. This is problematic for Qanta, for this Hadith is related by Al-Bukhari. …But then so is the Hadith regarding the punishment of the apostate (in the Islamic state), which she calls “extraordinarily vicious.” This is typical of the apologists: they pick and choose what they like, while rejecting entire aspects of Islam that they can’t reconcile with secular humanism. They often do this deceptively. They often outright lie. As L.L. Cool J. once rapped, and this can apply to Qanta and those like her: “You lied about the lies that you lied about. You’re a LIAR.” Shame on you Qanta. If you knew something about Islam, you’d at least know that lying is haraam.