NewTrendMag.org   News  #  1382
[ Click on NEWS for back issues ][ OUR BOOKS ][ Previous Issue ]

Dr Kaukab Siddique | Editor-in-Chief Jamada al-Awwal 6, 1432/April 10, 2011 # 15



On the issue of the Jewish holocaust story, we have an unusual critique by Anthony Lawson special to New Trend which brings out the difference between advocacy and information. Please scroll down.



Very latest: New clashes between the military and the people occurred in Cairo's Tahrir Square on April 9. The square is back in public hands. The people are demanding that Mubarak and his crew be put on trial.

In Yemen, the dictator Salah faced huge new protests on April 8 and 9 but refused to back down. His relatives run the security forces and shot more people. The Zionists are very worried because an Islamic Sheikh addressed the crowds and chanted: "The Caliphate is coming.!" Al-Qaida has captured a town in Yemen. [Reported on NPR.]



Jamaat al-Muslimeen [News], POB 356, Kingsville, MD 21087
An Islamic effort to change society by peaceful means.

Jamaat al-Muslimeen's National Islamic Shoora: Final reminder: April 23, Inshallah
Host: Imam Badi Ali
Secretary General: Sis. Ashira Na'im
Ameer : Kaukab Siddique



Education is the key but what kind of Education?

Words of wisdom from Dr. Abdulalim Shabazz [ DrAAS.info ] , Distinguished Professor of Mathematics, Grambling University, Louisiana

"What the masses are receiving is an education which does not benefit them, but which conditions them to acquire attitudes toward the glaring inequalities of life so that they can adjust themselves thereto with the least possible difficulties; and when this fails, especially for the males, the uneducated are placed under the control and supervision of the vast prison system."



Imam Badi Ali Focuses on Key Issues: Urging Muslims to think
[National Shoora leader: North Carolina]

Spotlight #1: Lying has become essential to the American upper classes, be it lawyers or media pundits or members of the Congress and the Senate. So don't be fooled. Be skeptical.

Spotlight #2: Tribalism, nationalism and racism have become the biggest obstacles in the way of the Muslim ummah. The way to unity is to reject these three evils.

Spotlight #3: Numerous sectarian satellite TV channels are springing up. There are Coptic Christian, Shi'a, Kurdish, etc., channels and a lot of Sunni channels, all indulging in minor divisive issues. Look closely. The western powers are behind these. Why not turn them off and look for the Truth?

Spotlight #4: These borders which divide us were drawn by western powers. They broke our Ummah into 57 countries and the Arab world into 22 states. We are ONE Ummah.



Self-Evaluation
"A Da'ee ilAllah [one who calls to Allah] should analyze, judge and visualize his own developments and shortcomings in the light of the Qur'an and Sunnah in the privacy of his house..." [Br. Shamim Siddiqui, Long Island, New York.]



Outreach:
Message to African American Muslims: Literature to 92 in Baltimore: Examine the Jewish holocaust story.

On April 8, after Juma prayers, Jamaat al-Muslimeen's literature was given to 92 Muslims, almost all African Americans at the biggest mosque in the heart of Baltimore. It included Imam Badi Ali's spotlights about Israel, news about Libya, Ivory Coast, and Al-Awlaki's comment from Yemen about uprisings in North Africa. Also included was Dr. Siddique's extensive interview with the Kevin Barrett show in Milwaukee in which Dr. Siddique urged critical examination of the Jewish holocaust story as well as condemned Zionist attempts to attack him and the historically Black college where he works. In the interview Siddique uncovers Qaddafi's attempts to crush the people as well as USA manipulation of the tragic situation.

The audience was receptive. It was raining but no one used the literature to cover their heads but tucked it away carefully into their bags.

The same chant was used as at masjid Rahma:"Muslim world is rising up!"



Dr. Siddique now has a blog for discussion of controversies related to the rights of women. Please go to:

WRCI.org


Latest news: US response: Zero
Syria: Assad following Qaddafi's Example: Rising Death toll

April 8. Huge crowds rallied in Deraa with the central mosque as their focal point. Assad's security forces repeatedly opened fire, killing at least 15 unarmed people.

Smaller rallies were held in 4 other cities.

April 9: Assad's security forces targeted a large funeral procession in Deraa for the victims of the previous.This time more than 30 people were killed. More people rallied in cities across Syria. The regime opened fire on a large crowd in a suburb of Damascus.

[NT comment: The tyrant Bashir Assad, son of the tyrant Hafiz Assad , is in cahoots with Israel and the US. He claims to support Palestine but has not clashed with Israel EVEN ONCE in 30 years. The rulers are a tiny Nusayri Shi'ite sect who hate the people.]



US Response: Zero: Israel in Gaddafi's camp
Gaddafi Appeals to Obama for Help: "Equal Opportunity" bombing by NATO

On April 9 the rag tag rebel army and the heavily armed Gaddafi military forces are more or less where they were a week ago. US help for the rebels stopped last week. Now NATO is bombing the rebels. The rebels were advancing with the help of a few tanks they had captured from Gaddafi's son: NATO bombed and destroyed them and then claimed that it did not know they were rebel tanks. NATO refused to apologize. Also the west has decided to deny weapons to the rebels.

Apparently late as usual, the news got through to the US that Gaddafi was right. There is a strong Islamic element among the rebels. Al-Qaida has published pictures of its fighters praying in the Libyan desert.

Appalling conditions prevail in Misurata where a son of Gaddafi is using artillery to destroy the city home by home. A Turkish ship which brought out wounded civilians uncovered the atrocities Gaddafi is committing in Misurata. [No US response.]

[Gaddafi wrote a pathetic letter to Obama, based on racial affinity, calling Obama "our son." With the rise of Islam in Africa, Gaddafi is still harping on the old race card. Race has NEVER united Africa. Islam has.]

[Palestinian blogger Sami Jadallah writes: It seems the secret visit of [Qaddafi's son] Seif el-Islam to Israel via Jordan in the first week of uprising is paying off and paying off very well. It is reported in the media that the first plane to take off from Libya after the uprising was to Jordan and from there Seif el-Islam either went across the Jordan River or met with Israeli officials seeking help in quashing the rebels and seeking Israel's support in thwarting US efforts to topple his father criminal regime. Gaddafi, thanks to Israel seems to be winning the battle.Obama's policy suddenly changed from pro-active one leading world support to topple Gaddafi and his regime to wait and see allowing Gaddafi forces to make gains on the ground.]



India kills Islamic scholar
Complete shutdown in Kashmir against Indian occupation
Srinagar, MTT News Desk: In Occupied State of Jammu & Kashmir (OSJK), complete shutdown was observed, today, against the killing of a noted Kashmiri religious scholar, Maulana Showkat Ahmed Shah who was martyred in a blast outside a mosque at Maisuma in Srinagar, yesterday.

Call for the shutdown had been given by the All Parties Hurriyat Conference Chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq.

All shops, business establishments, schools, banks and courts remained closed while traffic was off the road. The strike will continue for the second day, tomorrow.

The martyred scholoar was laid to rest at the martyrs' graveyard in Srinagar in presence of thousands of people amidst pro-freedom slogans. The APHC Chairman, Syed Ali Shah Geelani and other Hurriyat leaders including Maulana Abbas Ansari, Shabbir Ahmad Shah, Sheikh Muhammad Hassan, Nayeem Ahmed Khan and Javed Ahmed Mir besides thousands of people visited the house of Maulana Showkat Ahmed Shah.



Mother and Daughter

Personal from Kaukab Siddique, Editor NT: It's my mother's anniversary and my sister's birthday. We are strange people. Let me explain. My ancestors came from Arabia to India and married among the proud Rajputs who were starting to embrace Islam. My mother inherited the generosity and gentleness of the Arab woman along with the self-respect and sense of honor and pride of the Rajputs. She was a beautiful woman both physically and spiritually. She stood with the Qaid-e-Azam, the founder of Pakistan, at a time when most women did not speak out. India could hear the thunder of the awakening Muslim masses chanting: Pakistan ka matlab kiya? La illaha illalah. It was the invincible call of history in the making. Pakistan, a new nation, emerged from the heart of darkness that was India. Both the Hindus and the British were determined that Pakistan should not be born or should die soon after birth. People like my mother through hard, honest, work made Pakistan a reality.

For my mother, success was the future which she would never see in her own life but which she made possible. For her Pakistan was a dream from the life of the Prophet, pbuh, as sung in the lilting verses of Hafiz Jullundhri and in the visionary power of the cadences of Allama Iqbal's Masjide Qurtuba. She suffered much but nothing could defeat her. One would think she was soft but her endurance showed that she was made of spiritual steel.

In her own quiet, mild, way she encouraged me to think about the rights of women in Islam. She made my books possible.

Now I see the spiritual beauty of my mother and her sublime faith in Allah emerging in my sister. For my sister, Islam was even more difficult because she was almost secularized by the seductive call of America. I see in her, Islam victorious in the battle for the hearts and souls of highly educated Muslims. Islam is not easy to live in America, but my sister is winning. She is praying, going to Makka and Madinah, loving the hijab. For a highly secularized woman to voluntarily accept the hijab is a sign for us. We can see in her the miracle of Allah's message. As she moves forward, I sense my mother's spirit behind her, smiling with joy.



Smile!
Saudi Arabia Keeps Ban On Women Voting But they can still cook, clean, provide sex.
 {courtesy Ironic Times. www.IronicTimes.com]


Rebuttal of the Attacks on Abu Huraira (r.a) [Part II]
Did 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, r.a., stop Abu Huraira, r.a. from Narrating Hadith?
by Kaukab Siddique

[In Part I, the love of the Prophet, pbuh, for Abu Huraira was pointed out, along with Abu Huraira's participation in jihad both during and after the time of the Prophet, pbuh.
For most Muslims, the qualities of Abu Huraira, r.a., documented in the first part of this study would be enough to love him. However, the Shias and the Pervezis find that difficult because it would demolish the premises of their sectariam theories.

For Shias, it should have been very difficult to attack Abu Huraira, r.a., because he loved the Ahlul Bait and narrated beautiful Hadith about the grandsons of the Prophet, pbuh. Shia scholars should know that Ali, r.a., Hasan, r.a., and Hussain, r.a., did not speak against Abu Huraira, r.a. There are a few Shia fabrications to this effect but they are from later times and cannot be traced back to the three greats of Shia'ism.

However, the Shias work by way of "guilt by association." They try to make the claim that Ameer Muawiyya and Yazeed were identical in their behavior. For them, connection with Ameer Muawiyya and Yazeed is equally bad, and because Abu Huraira, r.a., cooperated with Ameer Muawiyya they condemn him.

The Shias forget that Imam Hasan, r.a., made peace with Ameer Muawiyya, and he and Imam Hussain both received respect and copious gifts from Ameer Muawiyya. Ameer Muawiyya was KATIBE WAHI [writer of the revelation, the Qur'an] and was accepted by the Prophet, pbuh. During his rule, there was general consensus and peace within the Muslim domain, and as a result Jihad of great significance was carried out against the oppressive empires in the West.
The attacks of the sect known as munkareene Hadith [deniers of Hadith] on Abu Huraira, r.a., are much more dishonest than those of the Shia. These sectarians, following the line of Jewish abusers of Hadith, like Goldziher and Schacht, resort to outright intellectual dishonesty. For instance, G.A. Pervez wrote:

"Once Abu Salama asked hazrat Abu Huraira, who is well known for being prolific in Hadith narration, did you narrate Hadith this way in the time of Hazrat 'Umar? He replied, if I had done so in his time, he would have beaten me." [Maqame Hadith, in Urdu language, p.52]

G.A. Pervez gives a reference for this supposed narration but it is not from a primary book of Hadith but from a secondary scholar named Tahir bin Salih al-Jazairi.

Thus Pervez, whose entire book is aimed at proving that Hadith is not to be trusted, tries to use a supposed Hadith narration to oppose Abu Huraira, r.a., and then does not give a primary source. In fact, Pervez's study of Hadith was very poor and he had collected a whole series of quotes from various secondary writers, taken out of context, to attack Hadith.

Let's see what the original texts on which Islam and Islamic history are based, say about the relations between Umar, 'ra., and Abu Huraira, r.a., regarding Hadith :

The context of the personality of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab is that he was very strict with HIMSELF and with ALL the companions of the Prophet, pbuh. But when he would hear Abu Huraira, r.a., reciting Hadith, 'Umar, r.a., would take back his own opinion. There is NO evidence that he wanted to stop Abu Huraira, r.a., from narrating Hadith. Quite the contrary. Here are specific instances:

"A woman who blew on knots (a form of witchcraft) was brought to 'Umar, r.a. He asked the people (assembled): Have any of you heard anything from the messenger of Allah, pbuh, regarding blowing on knots. Abu Huraira, r.a., got up and said: O Commander of the Faithful! I have heard. 'Umar, r.a., asked: What have you heard? Abu Huraira replied: He (the Prophet, pbuh) said: O women who blow on knots, do not do so and and do not ask anyone to blow on knots. 'Umar, r.a., accepted Abu Huraira's words [in front of the entire assembly].
[Sahih Bukhari, vol.2. Urdu translation]

"Once 'Umar, r.a., took Abu Huraira, r.a., with him from Madinah to Makka for Hajj. On the way, a storm started blowing. 'Umar, r.a., asked his Companions, does anyone remember anything from the messenger of Allah regarding a strong breeze.? No one answered. Abu Huraira, r.a., who was trailing behind the caravan learned of the question 'Umar was asking. He put his mount to the gallop, reached 'Umar, and said: I learned of the question you were asking. I heard the messenger of Allah, pbuh, say, the wind is a sign of Allah's mercy."
[Musnad of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. vol. 14]

"Hissan ibn Thabit, r.a., was reciting poetry in the mosque. 'Umar, r.a., passed by and forbade Hissan, r.a., from reciting poetry in the mosque. Hissan replied: I used to recite poetry in the mosque when one better than you [the Prophet, pbuh] used to be there. Then he turned to Abu Huraira, r.a., and asked him: O Abu Huraira, I ask you in Allah's name, didn't you hear the messenger of Allah, pbuh, say about me: "(O Hissan) answer the unbelievers from my side (in poetry). O Allah support him (Hissan) with the sacred spirit." Abu Huraira, r.a. replied: "Yes, I did hear him. (say that)." [Sahih Muslim, vol. 2]

In each case, Abu Huraira's words were accepted by 'Umar, r.a.

There is NO EVIDENCE that 'Umar, r.a., or any other Companion of the Prophet, pbuh, stopped or tried to stop Abu Huraira, r.a., from narrating Hadith. Ayesha, r.a., corrected two of his narrations but did not stop him and did not make any general comment against his narration of Hadith. In fact he used to sit outside her door and narrate Hadith, so that in case he was wrong, she could correct him.
It's possible that in later times Abu Huraira, r.a., might have quipped that if 'Umar, r.a., had heard me reciting so many Hadith, he would have hit me. Abu Huraira, r.a., was very humble and would often say things against himself. He even told of the time when he was an employee of the woman who later became his wife, and he said, she used to push him like a servant, and he said jokingly, after she became his wife, I'll now make her work for me!

Once during Muawiyya's Caliphate, Abu Huraira, r.a., sneezed and then made fun of himself, saying: what a time of wealth has come that the poor man who used to pass out from starvation in front of 'Ayesha's home (he himself) cleans his nose in a fancy kerchief. [Sahih Bukhari]

In any case, NO COMPANION of the Prophet, pbuh, EVER claimed that Abu Huraira, r.a., was narrating too many Hadith.

G.A. Pervaiz made such false claims against this beloved servant of the Prophet, pbuh.


Holocaust, Hate Speech

& Were the Germans so Stupid?

by Anthony Lawson

Although it has innumerable advantages, one of the great disadvantages of being able to communicate using a spoken and written language, is that it allows us to tell lies.
Normally, when one thinks about telling lies, one immediately thinks of doing something that is wrong. But what if telling a lie could save your wife and children from certain death—would you be doing wrong to tell that lie?
It is thought by many historians that Rudolf Höss, who was the commander of Auschwitz from 1940 to 1943, did just that.
Having also been tortured, he signed a confession about his part in the alleged murder-by-gassing of millions of Jews and others in the so-called death camp whose name became inextricably linked to what is known as the Jewish Holocaust.
Even if torture and duress cannot not be proven, the overwhelming reason for recognizing the utter falsity of the Höss confession, is that the gassing method he described not scientifically plausible.
Yet it has stood, by inference, as a testament to the cruelty of Germans in general, since Rudolf Höss was tried at Nuremberg, in 1947, and subsequently hanged on April 16th, 1947.
Although specific evidence of Höss's torture did not surface until long after he was executed, in February, 1948, shortly after the Nuremberg trials were over, the thoughts of one of the American judges, Charles F. Wennerstrum were published in the Chicago Daily Tribune

Chicago Daily Tribune 23 February 1948

The initial war crimes trial was judged and prosecuted by Americans, Russians, British and French with, much of the time, effort and expenses devoted to whitewashing the Allies and placing the sole blame for World War II upon Germany.
"What I have said of the nationalist character of the tribunals applies to the prosecution. The high ideals announced as the motives for creating these tribunals has not been evident.
"The prosecution has failed to maintain objectivity aloof from vindictiveness, aloof from personal ambitions for convictions. It has failed to strive to lay down precedents which might help the world to avoid future wars.
The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome. Linguists were needed. the Americans are notably poor linguists. Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were embedded in Europe's hatreds and prejudices. . .
Of course any number of refutations can be found for this and other statements which are highly critical of the way in which the Nuremberg trials were conducted, but Wennerstrum's words stand as testament that dissenting voices were already being heard, less than a year after the War Crimes Tribunals were over.
Holocaust Denial and Revisionism
But many individuals and groups, particularly Jewish and Zionist organizations, would prefer that the world remains ignorant of these dissenting voices, and have coined the terms: Holocaust Denial and Revisionism in an attempt to silence them.
They have managed to persuade the governments of many otherwise civilized countries to criminalize any adverse discussions about the details of the Holocaust, on pain of imprisonment, or a heavy fine, on the basis that to question any facet of the official Holocaust story somehow constitutes an incitement to racial hatred, or something equally nonsensical.

Now Criminalized in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Switzerland

I find it offensive, beyond belief, that a combination of Jews and Zionists has been able to persuade so many governments that the Holocaust is the single event in history on which open discussion will not be permitted, which is a gross infringement of Article 19 in The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
But there are those who claim that Article 20 of The United Nations International Covenant On Civil And Political Rights, can be used to take this basic right of freedom of expression away from us.
(Article 20) Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
This is not unreasonable, as long as the wording is correctly interpreted The key word is "Advocacy" which, according to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary means: "The function of an advocate; pleading for or supporting"
So as to make this absolutely clear, one may substitute the appropriate, expanded meaning of the word "Advocacy" into Article 20, as follows.
Article 20 Any pleading for or supporting of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
We should also look at the definition of incitement. The root word is the verb incite: To urge or spur on; to stir up, instigate, stimulate. Thus incitement clearly means an intention to cause others to take some kind of action, it does not mean providing information which may cause someone to do something illegal.
If I told a friend that I had seen pornographic material on display in a shop where his daughter buys her teen magazines, and he smashed the shop's window and rubbished the offensive material, I could not be held responsible for his actions, because merely imparting information is not inciting another person to take action.
Revealing and disseminating material contained in historical documents with a conviction that the information is plausible is not urging or spurring on others to take adverse action against any national, racial or religious group.
To suggest that it is incitement is a gross distortion of language, known as Doublespeak
The word incitement has been deliberately misinterpreted in the past and this must not be allowed to continue, because such doublespeak demonstrates a level of dishonesty that should never have been allowed to insinuate itself into the legislation of any nation which claims to uphold the accurate meaning and spirit of the Declaration of Human Rights.
It cannot possibly be incitement to racial or religious hatred to point out that something that is said to have happened, over sixty years ago, may not have happened in exactly the way it was reported to have happened, at that time.
The world had not even begun to recover from the unbelievable suffering of hundreds of millions of people, not only Jews, and the deaths of about 60 million human beings for reasons and causes which may never be fully understood.
Just as there is no disputing that atomic bombs were dropped on Japanese civilians, the Jewish concept of a Holocaust cannot be denied, but why should it be the only episode in history that is off limits to fair comment and freedom of expression? Whatever the reason, such a ban is certainly not in line with The Declaration of Human Rights, conferring, as it does, a special privilege on one particular group of people over all others.
Making certain details of the Holocaust sacrosanct stirs deep suspicions in my mind, because it could mean that there are those who wish to conceal certain facts which may not reflect well on themselves or on those who played an active part in the deaths and suffering of Jews and Gentiles alike, before, during and immediately after that terrible war.
I cannot think of any other reason why genuine historical research should be characterized as being offensive to the memories of those who died, or as an incitement to racial or religious hatred.
And I often wonder why so many of the people who seem to claim a special privilege of remembrance for their own suffering, or for that of their forebears and co-religionists, are now and killing others, in a land that Zionism has been insisting that they were predestined to settle in, since before the beginning of the twentieth century; a land already occupied by Palestinians, none of whose forebears were responsible for the death of a single Jew in Europe, during the period when the Holocaust took place.
It is the utter single-mindedness of those who hunt down and persecute so-called Holocaust Deniers and revisionists that I object to. Millions of people, not only Jews, suffered and died horrible deaths on battlefields, on the high seas, and in fire-bombed cities during a conflict that may never have happened, had International Jewry not declared economic war on Germany. The front page of the London Daily Express of March 24, 1933 says it all: "Judea Declares War on Germany! Jews of all the World Unite! Boycott of German Goods! Mass Demonstrations!"
One of the leaders of the movement, Samuel Untermeyer, ignored pleas from Jews who lived in Germany, not to go ahead with the boycott, for obvious reasons, but on August 6, 1933, he said this on WABC, New York.
"Each of you, Jew and Gentile alike, who has not already enlisted in this sacred war should do so now and here. It is not sufficient that you should buy no goods made in Germany.
You must refuse to deal with any merchant or shopkeeper who sells any German-made goods or who patronizes German ships or shipping.
We will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends."

Bernard Baruch joined Samuel Untermeyer in calling for an economic boycott, and at the same time, was promoting preparations for a shooting war.
" I emphasized that the defeat of Germany and Japan and their elimination from world trade would give Britain a tremendous opportunity to swell her foreign commerce in both volume and profit." -
Baruch, The Public Years, by Bernard M. Baruch, p.347 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960).
And Bernard Baruch was no stranger to the profits of war. After Woodrow Wilson brought the United States into what became known as The Great War, he appointed Baruch Chairman of the War Industries Board, where he had control of all domestic contracts for Allied war materials.
A service to his county, of course, which it is estimated benefited him, personally, to the tune of 200 million dollars.
Over 35 billion in today's terms. Oh yes, wars mean profits, but only for those who don't have to risk their own lives fighting them.
Bernard Baruch died in New York City, in 1965, 20 years and almost 60 million deaths after the end of the Second World War, a war that he had advocated.

Anthony Lawson (known professionally as Tony Lawson) is a retired international-prize-winning commercials director, cameraman, ad agency creative director and voice over. He used to be known for shooting humorous commercials, but doesn't find much to laugh about, with the way the world is going, these days.

2011-04-12 Tue 03:10:28 cdt
NewTrendMag.org