Islam4UK: An Islamic Perspective

Assalamu aleykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious and the Source of All Mercy.

I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship but Allah, the one and only true God, without partner or companion. I testify that Mohammed (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the Messenger and the Prophet of Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger, his family and his companions.

To proceed:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

In light of the recent commotion associated with our brothers and sisters in the Islam4UK movement, I would like to remind myself and all Muslims about the rights that neighbours and the communities we live in have upon us and the manner in which we call people to Islam.

The fundamental difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim in the question of political activism lies in the fact that a Muslim’s duty lies not only to his Lord but also to the community he lives in whereas the non-Muslim is not bound by such a duty. When I talk of the community, I take the narrowest possible definition here – that of a Muslim community we live in – although this is not the only possible definition of the term.

When acting in public space, attracting the attention of the media and public in general, any Muslim must take great care to ensure that his actions do not harm the Muslim community he lives in and that his actions are carried out in the manner that is prescribed by Allah (swt). This is clear from the following hadith:

“The Muslim is one from whose tongue and hand other Muslims are safe...” (Bukhari)

The meaning of the hadith is clear and, as has been explained by the ulama, it implies not only physical attack or verbal abuse towards Muslims, but covers all actions and all statements made by a Muslim that have the effect on the Muslim community.

Allah enjoins upon us in the Quran (4:36):

“Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are of kin, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (you meet) and what your right hands possess: for Allah loves not the arrogant, the vainglorious”

Once again, here the implication of the verse is not only a direct one, ie performing the acts of charity or kindness or fulfilling one’s duties, but in fact it is also a command to refrain from causing harm.

In another hadith, the Prophet (saw) said:

“One who believes in Allah and the Day of Judgment must not cause hardship and inconvenience to his neighbour...” (Bukhari and Muslim)

And:

“That person will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not safe against his mischief.” (Bukhari and Muslim)

It is clear from the above that our duty lies unequivocally in ensuring that our words and actions do not bring harm to the Muslim community we live in. With this in mind, we have to acknowledge and understand that, irrespective of validity or invalidity of the message, conveyed by the Islam4UK, the manner in which this message has been presented has had a serious detrimental effect on our community – our mosques have been firebombed, our brothers and sisters have been attacked and abused and the general public has been incited against us, fuelled by the Islamophobic media for the sake of sales and profit. The leadership of Islam4UK are not a bunch of naive fools, unaware of the meaning and after-effects of publicity – instead their actions, as stated by them, have been intentionally calculated to draw the greatest amount of publicity to the issues they are advocating. Once again I stress that I have no intention to comment in any way on the validity of those issues, but the side effects of their actions have had and continue to have a clear adverse effect on our community. It is also the case that the potential for these adverse effects on the community were evident to every sensible individual. Furthermore, Allah has informed us in the Quran (6:108) that the outcome we are faced with and have been faced with for quite a while is exactly what would happen if we behave ourselves in the public arena in the manner that is not appropriate:

“Revile not those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance”

And this is exactly what is happening today – as a result of the members of the community having reviled those things which are sacred to the general public in the society we live in, we are now reviled, Allah and the Prophet (saw) are openly reviled and no respect is accorded to our religion. Allah also informs us of the correct way to propagate and advocate that which we stand upon:

“Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious...” (Quran 16:125)

The above verse enjoins on all of us to understand the context of our words and be aware of the consequences, for “wise and beautiful preaching” does not only mean being smart and eloquent in a debate, but, since by Islam4UK’s own admission, they are involved in calling to Islam, it also means doing it in a media-aware, consequence aware and appropriate way. Spotting a placard “Behead those who insult Islam” or those that threaten terrorist attacks on Europe is not “wise and beautiful”. Furthermore, Allah instructs us to argue “in ways that are best and most gracious”. Making a point by intentionally seeking to cause offence is not a way that is best and definitely not gracious in any way. Those of us involved in calling to Islam must also bear this point in mind.

I ask Allah to grant us all guidance in the matter, to safeguard our community and to keep us on the right path.

All that is wrong in this article is from me, all that is right is from Allah.

Wa salamu aleykum,

Abdulhafid ar-Russi

A comment on MPACUK's article "France's 'War on Veil'"

On 18 December 2009, MPACUK published an article entitled "France's 'War on Veil'". Below is the letter to Editor that I wrote in response to that article.

Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to the article published on your website on 18 December 2009 titled “France’s ‘War on the Veil’”. In particular, I would like to address a couple of issues raised in the article in the hope of articulating the background to political passivity of French Muslims.

Your article states, quite correctly in my view, that “France's Muslim community needs to start actively engaging in political and media activism and to stop waiting for somebody to do it for them”. A call for Muslim political activism within the societies we are living in is not only pertinent and admirable but also addresses the widespread tendency of most Western Muslims to sit on their hands in the hope that someone else will come along and solve their problems for them. This, as stated in your articles on numerous occasions, is the fundamental problem facing Muslims today and is one of the main causes of Islamophobia and disenchantment of Muslim youth.

What I would like to note, however, is that the call to the French Muslims to act on the issue of the full-body veil, or even niqab (which the proposed ban may extend to), is a false hope. My position on this is underlined by simple statistics and the experiences of my family some of whom reside and work in France.

Before I enumerate the above point, allow me to state that despite the statements of various pundits or the French politicians, such as Jean-François Copé’s statement quoted on your website, the potential outcome of political activism in France does historically lie in favour of the Muslims. To site just a few examples, I would like to note that as far back as November 1989 the French Council of State, which is effectively the highest administrative court in France, handed down a ruling that affirmed that “the wearing of the Islamic headscarf, as a symbol of religious expression, in public schools was not incompatible with the French school system and the system of laïcité [i.e. French model of secularism]”. Furthermore, before the passing of the 2004 Hijab Law, in 50% of cases, where expulsion of girls from French schools on the basis of wearing the hijab was challenged, such expulsions were overturned. The only reason the 2004 Hijab Law remains in force is that to date no member of the French Muslim community has attempted to challenge the Ban all the way to the European Court of Justice[1]. There is simply no will to do so. What is clear from the above is that were the Muslims to seek to assert their rights, there is a very good chance they would be able to achieve their aims.

I now return to my initial point - that calling on French Muslims to politically mobilise in response to the proposed “burqa” ban is a false hope. The reason lies in the religious demographics of French Muslims. A number of surveys, while not necessarily the gospels of truth, do provide an indication. Specifically, while 70% of French Muslims tend to fast during Ramadan, general religious observance (in this particular case illustrated by the percentage of people praying five times a day) varies from 6% to 36% between the French Muslim ethnic groups – Algerian men who pray five times a day come at the lowest end of 6%, while the Turkish Kurds come at the highest of 36%. At the time of the 2004 Hijab Ban, 40% of Muslim women in France were “for” the Ban. It has been estimated that the “burqa” ban, should it come into force, would only affect a few hundred women.

While statistics, in and off themselves, are an indicator of the reason for lack of motivation to mobilise behind any campaign to fight the “burqa” ban, anecdotal evidence from my family members is more revealing about the attitudes of French Muslims. My cousins-in-law are unable to get a job if they wear hijab – therefore they choose to not wear hijab, rather than challenge the employer in court or look for another job. My brothers-in-law are unable to have a beard at work or pray at work, and therefore choose to postpone their prayers and forgo the wearing of the beard. When I asked both groups as to why they did not seek to enforce their rights in a legal way, two answers were given: “this is not England” and “I need a job”. The point that is self-evident here is that French Muslims, unlike the British Muslims, fail to appreciate the concept of citizenship – in particular, having rights and asserting them through the legal system. As a counter examples, in the UK, through political activism and a realisation of the concept of being a citizen, British Muslims have achieved the ability to work while wearing hijab, to have prayer facilities at places of work and to have flexible working practices in relation to Ramadan.

I hope the reasons for my statement that a hope to see political active French Muslims is a false hope, at least for now, are evident. What is more important, however, is that it is also clear from the above that, for those of us living in the UK, political activism and engagement with the society has brought real tangible benefits, not achieved on basis of compromising our faith but because of our desire to live according to it. It follows that we, as a community, should seek to be more politically active rather than shying away from it.


Yours faithfully,

Abdulhafid ar-Russi
www.abdulhafeed.com

1 - This statement is based on the personal research. Should you have information to the contrary please let me have the references – no one is beyond fault.

A response to "Muslim Brotherhood vs Saudi Salafis – The Political War for the Muslim Mind"

On 6 December 2009, MPACUK published an article entitled "Muslim Brotherhood vs Saudi Salafis – The Political War for the Muslim Mind". Below is the letter to the Editor I sent in response to that article.

In the Name of Allah, Most Merciful and the Source of All Mercy

Assalamu aleykum,

Dear Editor,

I am writing further to your article posted on 6 December 2009 titled “Muslim Brotherhood vs Saudi Salafis – The Political War for the Muslim Mind”.

In my opinion your article somewhat misrepresents the situation vis-a-vis the so-called “salafi” movement and the Middle Eastern governments, which are, as you correctly point out, dictatorial. You suggest that this movement is in fact favoured by such governments at the expense of movements such as Muslim Brotherhood due to alleged advocacy of political passivity. I would venture to say that your assertion is not entirely correct.

There two issues that need to be understood in this context.

First of all, most Middle Eastern governments in countries such as Morocco and Egypt, countries I have personal experience of, would ideally prefer to be rid of both types of movements – the conservative “salafi” movements and the “political Islam” movements, such as Muslim Brotherhood – since both movements seek to challenge the status quo on which the power of those governments rests. Both in Egypt and Morocco, members of both types of movements face arbitrary arrests, restriction on activities and other forms of political persecution. The recent moves against hijab in Egypt as well as closing of “salafi” Quranic schools in Morocco are among the examples of such persecution aimed at the “salafi” groups, while regular arrests of Muslim Brotherhood members in Egypt and similar group in Morocco continue to illustrate those governments’ hostility towards “political” Islamic movements.

Secondly, to speak of the “salafi” movement as a single movement is factually incorrect. Various stripes of “salafis” exist today and these range from jihadis and takfiris to those who advocate abstinence from politics to advocates of Islamic State based on the 7th century model.

The main point of your article, I believe, addresses a far more important, difficult and deep rooted problem of the ummah – the question of political participation, or rather the clearly apparent lack thereof. The causes of this problem are manifold but I would like to mention just two aspects of it, for the sake of brevity.

First and foremost, the cause of an apolitical attitude among many Muslims lies in the fact that the scholars of today have not managed to work out a unified fiqh understanding of the place of modern politics in Islam. No unified modern political theory exists in Islamic law today – save for a couple of general works on the subject, there is no authoritative and agreed upon fiqhi position regarding political participation of Muslims in modern Muslim and non-Muslim societies. As an example of this, you will quite easily find scholars advocating political “abstinence” and active political participation in one Google search. This lack of an authoritative Islamic position leads many Muslims to simply forgo the question altogether. In the modern times there has been no successful attempt to build a political system entirely and exclusively based on Islamic principles and therefore there has been no impetus to develop the fiqh of political participation.

The second related aspect is that there appears to be a lot of contradictory statements coming out from scholarly circles. Respected scholars, often seen as representatives of the “Muslim establishment”, have made statements encouraging political participation while visiting non-Muslim countries with Muslim minorities, while at the same time their colleagues have come out strongly against political activism in their own countries. One of the examples of this would be Sheikh Sudais’ advocacy for political participation on his recent visit to London, while the Saudi religious establishment came out strongly against demonstrations in support of Palestine during the Gaza Massacre, declaring the whole concept of demonstration to be unIslamic. This, almost two-faced, nature of the debate, sows a lot of confusion in the minds of ordinary Muslims who tend to afford a lot of respect to the opinions of such scholars.

Islam cannot be divorced from its scholars and therefore until the above issues are sorted out, it is natural that active/not active dichotomy will remain.

Wasalam,

Yours faithfully,

Abdulhafid ar-Russi
www.abdulhafeed.com

Dyson's Sphere

[Here's small exercise in creative writing for your pleasure.]

Gunter sat at his usual place in the cafe, nursing his second cup of coffee for the day. He loved coffee and felt he could never get enough of it. "Three cups a day is a bare minimum for my survival!" - he used to say whenever his academic colleagues made a comment on his habit. Not habit - an addiction really, but he preferred not to think of it this way. A cigarette and a cup of coffee in the morning were among his most treasured little pleasures and even though he did not smoke for the rest of the day, he has never managed to give up that one.

Staring at nothing in particular through a cafe window, Gunter thought about the latest batch of data he received from UCLA. Something was wrong and he knew it - he just did not know what it was exactly. The gravity data indicated that he was looking at a star while the infrared readings from the NASA's WISE telescope read like no star modern astronomy came across, whether actually or theoretically. He had earlier decided that there must have been a mistake in his calculations and, drawing on the benefits of academic hierarchy in which, being a professor of astronomy, he now occupied a sufficiently high position, Gunter had his research assistant go through the data again.

A buzzing sound and a peripheral sight of his vibrating mobile phone slowly travelling across the smooth fake wood tabletop brought Gunter out of his reverie. "Kostya" - his eager grad student cum research assistant - declared the blue pulsating mini-screen of his clamshell phone.

"Hello, Kostya. What's the news? Where did I mess up?"

"Hello, Professor. The thing is, either we both are making the same mistakes, or there is no mistake at all - my results are identical to yours. I don't know what to say - the data does look odd, but there is no mistake on our part. Maybe the UCLA people made a mess of the raw data before they sent it to us."

"OK, Kostya. Thank you. I will be back shortly."

"Good bye, Professor."

Gunter closed his clamshell, and stared at his half-empty cup of coffee. He hoped it would not come to that, he hoped, even though ordinarily it would not be normal to do so, that he had in fact made a mistake. Now, he would have to call Wright's people and plead with them to have the raw data checked and re-checked without disclosing exactly why he was asking for it. He hated the inter-academic politics, but there was no getting out of it - they must have made a mistake and this must have been the cause of the data not making any sense. But of course, nobody likes to hear they made a mistake. So he would have to be diplomatic, and careful. All this "cloak and dagger" stuff. Yep, he definitely, hated it - if there was such a thing as a stress-o-meter, his measurement would have shot up 50% by now. But, alas, it was all in his head, he told himself.

Gunter picked the phone, scrolled through the contact list and pressed the call button.

"Good Morning. Professor Wright's office, Shelly speaking."

"Good morning, Shelly. This is Professor Geist calling. Any chance I could have a talk with Professor Wright?"

"I am sorry, Professor Geist. The professor is teaching right now. Would you like to leave a message?"

Gunter saw his chance and went for it "Yes, I am having a bit of a trouble with the WISE data he sent over the other week. Could he possibly let me know whether the data was processed in any way before he passed it over to me?"

"I will let him know, Professor."

"Thank you, Shelly. Good bye."

"Good bye, Professor."

Gunter closed his clamshell with a visible sense of relief. No need to explain myself, no need to wiggle around the problem, nothing. Fantastic, he thought. Finishing his almost cold coffee in one go, Gunter set off for his office.

***

"Did you see that?"
"I did."
"Report it."

***

Back in the office, Gunter was going over his results once again. Sure, Kostya double checked them, and Gunter has been over Kostya's calculations just to make sure, secretly hoping that the error would jump out at him like it did every time he checked the undergrads' exam papers, but he still could not see anything wrong and yet the results simply did not make sense. Let's try a different approach, he thought.

"Kostya." - he called out opening the door that led from his office to his assistant's.

"Yes, Professor?"

"Could you come in here, for a sec."

"Sure."

Kostya Skoletsky was, for the lack of a better word, huge. Astronomy undergrads used to joke that he generated his own gravity field, a joke that Kostya knew well, but never took offence in - after all, none of them would dear repeat it to his face. He was not fat, but very large built - "abnormally large bone structure" is what his doctor called it. Almost 7 ft tall, with a passion for body building and, at one stage, over eager use of steroids, created a bulk that was more properly placed in a heavy weight boxing ring or a some theatre of war, but God has gifted Kostya with an exceptional talent for mathematics and astronomy was his second passion, so here he was, a graduate student working on infrared fields and star clusters.

As Kostya walked in, bending to avoid hitting the doorframe, Gunter suddenly felt dwarfed and a sense of spaciousness, that was ordinarily conveyed by his office, evaporated.

"Take a sit, Kostya. I was wondering if I could talk this thing over with you."

"You mean the results? Sure thing, Professor." - said Kostya, pulling a chair and sitting down. The chair squealed, complaining, and for just a moment Gunter could see in his mind a picture of chair, crumbling into pieces, and Kostya with it. A smile started to spread across his face, but he quickly suppressed it.

"Say the data was correct, and say we did our calculations correctly..."

"We did, Professor, I am sure of it. There is no mistake on our side."

"Yes, say this is correct. How would you explain the results?"

"Well, Professor, it would seem clear from the gravity readings that we are looking at a star. Granted, the infrared is not what it supposed to be, but maybe there is something between us and the star that is sort of, well, blocking our view, so to speak. That would alter the infrared."

"In such a case, Kostya, we should be able to tell from the infrared reading what material alters it. Have you, by any chance, done a spectrographic analysis?"

"I have, Professor. Nothing came of it. The material that could change the infrared readings in such a way does not exist, at least to my knowledge. It is definitely not something naturally occurring."

"You mean it could be an artificial material?"

"Well, theoretically yes, but I was working with estimates here - the actual reading of this star, if this is a star, is not known, so I had to assume it on the basis of a star with a similar gravitational field. Such a material would have to have an impossibly high density, which, to my mind, cannot be created. I could not even begin to theorise how it could be achieved. So, it follows, that there is either a problem with our calculations, or a problem with the data sent over by UCLA."

"Unless..."

A buzzing sound and the mobile's attempt at imitation of a crawling creature by sliding across the desk towards its imminent plunge to the floor interrupted Gunter.

"Professor Geist speaking." - Gunter caught the creature-phone and opened it in one fell swoop.

"Gunter, this is Edward. How are you doing?" - Professor Wright's voice boomed from the phone.

"Edward, thank you for calling back. I am fine, fine. How are you?"

"I am good, thank you. I just got back from my class and found this message from you. What is the meaning of it? You know very well we do not edit the data before passing it over to you. Have you messed up your maths? Dare I say, again. I remember the last time it happened you had us all almost believe there were little green men living in Orion."

Gunter cringed at the mention of his grad days mess up. He could see without seeing the smile across Professor's Wright face.

"Edward, you will never let me forget it, will you. It was more than 10 years ago, and yet you still bring it up."

"You wanted to assemble Harvard's scientific committee and call a press conference to announce the "Discovery of the Age" - the extra-terrestrials have finally been found. All went well until Professor Higgins found an error in your calculations. The whole thing made the student paper that week. How could I ever forget?"

"Alas, I was wrong."

"Don't go all Shakespearean on me, Gunter. What is the problem with the data?"

This was the question Gunter fear most - he may be on the verge of the greatest discovery in the modern age, who would want to share such a thing with others before he was ready? But the reminder of the most embarrassing episode of his life made up his mind for him.

"Well, for signal 1245/WISE I got the gravity data that shows a star and yet infrared shows something else. What this "else" is I do not know, but it is all wrong for the star of this gravity or any star, for that matter."

"Fear not, Gunter. I will have a look and I will keep it under wraps. Will let you know what I come up with once I am done. Edward out."

***

"Gunter, Edward here. How are you doing?"

"Hi, Edward. Massacring my fifth cup of coffee for the day. And you?"

"You and coffee, Gunter. This stuff is going to kill you, you know."

"Coffee has never killed anybody I know of, Edward. And I know this because they are all still alive, or I would not have known them."

"Gunter, the fallacy of that statement would be obvious to a five-year-old."

"Edward, irrespective of how much I would love to continue discussing coffee with you, I am sure you did not call me for that."

"You are right. I had a look at the data and you are correct - the gravity and infrared figures do not add up. There must have been a glitch in the telescope. We will be scanning the same area in about three months, so once that data comes in, you will be able to double check."

"Thank you, Edward."

***

"We have located the system. It has a single dwarf star. One populated world. It is the source of the signal. It is too far for a return trip."
"Send a Loner. With the full payload."
"Understood."

***

"Kostya, did you get the latest batch of data from the UCLA?"

"Yes, Professor."

"And?"

"The results are the same, Professor. There must be a glitch with the telescope, as Professor Wright has said."

"Tell me, Kostya, how is it that this "glitch" affects only this signal and no other?"

"I do not know, Professor."

"What do you know of Dyson's Sphere, Kostya?"

"It is a theoretical concept that considers a construction of a shell or other stellar structure around the star to harness its energy. Dyson proposed that such a construction would emit infrared radiation by virtue of absorbing the energy emitted by the star and this emission of infrared radiation could be used to detect extra-terrestrial civilisations who would be the builders of such a structure."

"And what do we have here? An infrared radiation that does not fit with what a star would emit, while the gravity data tells us that there is a star there!"

"Seriously, Professor! You are not proposing that there are aliens there who actually built a Dyson's Sphere?"

"You said yourself that the material that would emit such an infrared radiation is not a naturally occurring one. So it must be an artificial one and I am sure as hell we did not build it!"

"There must be an explanation for it. An explanation that does not involve aliens. We will be the laughing stock of the academia, Professor!"

"You mean I will be the laughing stock. I know how it feels, Kostya, I've been there before. And you are right - we need better proof than what we have."

***

"Are you Professor Gunter Geist?"

Gunter did not notice the old man approach - he was staring at the university grounds through the cafe's window, nursing yet another cup of coffee, lost in his thoughts. The old man, dressed as if he stepped out of 1930s movie - an old fashioned suit, a coat and a wide brimmed hat, all in dark colours - was standing next to his table, leaning ever slightly on a walking stick.

"Are you Professor Gunter Geist?" - repeated the old man. There was a slight lisp in the way he pronounced the "s", a lisp that evoked an image of something remotely reptilian in Gunter's mind.

"Yes, I am. How can I help you?"

"Do you mind if I join you?"

"Go ahead."

The old man literally slid into the chair in one fluid motion, something Gunter did not think possible. It was as if the motion did not originate with the legs but rather from the centre of the old man's body.

"It is amazing how green the grass is, don't you think, Professor?" - the old man was looking outside at the university grounds rolling away from the building.

"I suppose it is. I am at a loss here - you know my name and yet I do not know yours."

"My name is Smith." - and a quite distinct image of a snake formed in Gunter's mind as a result of the way the old man pronounced his name. "What did they put in my coffee today?" - thought Gunter. "This snake thing is definitely weird."

"How can I help you, Mr Smith?"

"Professor Gunter, it may surprise you to know, but I have been looking for you for quite a while and given that we do not have much time left, I am glad I was able to find you."

"I am not a hard man to find, Mr Smith. I do not hide."

"Indeed, but it is difficult to find someone when you do not know who you are looking for."

"I am confused, Mr Smith. What is it that you want."

"I had one desire coming here, and that was to find the man who destroyed the world."

"Which world, Mr Smith? What on Earth are you talking about?"

"Why, the Earth of course."

"Are you like, a crazy person? A bit light on the proverbial marbles? What are you talking about, old man?" - Gunter could feel himself getting angry. The last thing he needed at the end of a long day was some crazy bloke pestering him.

"No need to get angry, Professor. I shall explain."

"You are the person who first detected the anomaly between the gravity and infrared reading for what you called signal 1245/WISE, correct?"

"Yes, that is correct."

"You then convinced your colleagues that it was not some glitch in the equipment or a malfunction, but in fact an anomaly worth investigating, is that correct?"

"Yes, that is correct as well. All of this you could have gathered from my last interview with the Scientific American. What is your point?"

"And, as you stated in the same interview to that journal, you are the driving force behind the plans to build and launch a new telescope for the sole purpose of studying that anomaly. And we cannot allow that to happen. At any cost."

"Who are this "we", old man? Allow what to happen? A launch of a telescope? Are you some religious terrorist or something? Study of the universe is an affront to God or some rubbish like that? How could you possibly know what God wants? Or what affronts him? People like you held back humanity for centuries, and now that we are finally out of the control of religious fanatics, your choice is to turn to terrorism? Is that it? Well, I will not stand for it. I will call the police this very minute..."

"Hold still, Professor!" - the old man removed a weirdly looking pistol-like contraption from his coat and pointed it at Gunter.

"Hold still, or I will reduce you to a rather unimpressive looking pile of basic elements that makes up your ridiculous looking body." - Gunter froze, noting in passing that the old man's comment about his body made no sense whatsoever, but still, he decided he would not move just in case that weird looking gun-like thing in his hand was something he should be afraid of.

"What do you want from me?" - Gunter managed to squeeze out in a suppressed manner.

"I will tell you a very short story. My purpose is simple - I believe that every man should know the consequences of his actions for which he shall face punishment. And I am here to fulfil that purpose."

"My people once lived on a planet much like yours - from our ancestors we know it was green and luscious with vegetation. We lived in bliss, believing ourselves to be alone in the Universe. When we discovered space flight, we started exploring the space and still our belief in our solitary existence was unshaken. Then one day it all ended. A race of beings came and destroyed our world utterly. We know not why nor do we care anymore. When they left, our planet lay in ruins, its core frozen, our sun on the verge of a supernova. Those of us that survived this devastation built large vessels that carried the remainder of our race deep into the space, away from our home world, away from those that destroyed it. We travelled for a thousand years and finally found a system we thought was far enough away for us to never be found again. Instead of settling on the planet and be vulnerable to another attack, we converted our ships to living habitats and anchored them around the sun with solar sails, that harness the energy of the star and keep the habitats from drifting towards the sun. The sails blot out the sun, blocking its light, making it invisible. Our aim was achieved - we found a new home for our race, hidden from prying eyes and away from those who wish to destroy us. But true invisibility is impossible and so we constantly watch and monitor for any attempt directed at finding us. And found us you did. We had no choice - your world, and the knowledge of us it contains, have to be destroyed. For our safety. For our survival."

Gunter sat there unable to decide whether the man was nuts or whether Gunter himself was dreaming.

"And you think that because you are holding a weird looking toy that is masquerading as some sort of beam gun from a sci-fi movie I am going to believe you?" - asked Gunter.

"You belief is not required. Your world will be destroyed in a few minutes, so that would be proof enough." - replied the old man.

"And how do you propose to do that?" - "Why not humour the old man?" - thought Gunter. "I might distract him long enough to grab that thing away from him, even if it is just a toy."

"When I arrived in your system, I altered the reaction rate of your sun so that it would explode, taking your world with it." - replied the old man matter of factedly.

"Excuse me? That is just impossible! And also there is a problem with your story - you are still here, if the world was going to explode, why would you be here - you would die as well."

"Your galaxy is too far away for a return trip for a scout ship, Professor. My trip was one way from the beginning."

"Well, I imagine you have an answer for everything. I have had pretty much enough of your rubbish, thank you. And you have said just about enough I care to hear. What now?"

"Now, it is time, Professor."

A flash of brilliant and blinding light swept across the Earth, ripping the comforting blanket of the atmosphere away. The expanding corona of the Sun going supernova enveloped the planet, leaving nothing in its wake...

Good News: Israel is building itself out of the two-state solution

As reported by BBC:

Palestinians might have to abandon the goal of an independent state if Israel continues to expand Jewish settlements, the chief Palestinian negotiator said.

At a news conference in the West Bank, Saeb Erekat said it was a "moment of truth" for President Mahmoud Abbas.

He said it might be time for Mr Abbas to "tell the truth" that a two-state solution "is no longer an option".

...

It may be time for President Abbas to "tell his people the truth, that with the continuation of settlement activities, the two-state solution is no longer an option", Mr Erekat said in Ramallah.

...

Mr Erekat said Palestinians had made a mistake in the last round of talks by agreeing to negotiate without insisting that Israel settlement building be stopped, but he said this time would be different.

The alternative left for Palestinians was to "refocus their attention on the one-state solution where Muslims, Christians and Jews can live as equals", he said.

Personally, I think that, given the current situation, Israel will build itself out of the two-state solution. Which is a good thing because as long as two-state solution is on the table it is easier for the outside world to divert their attention from the Israeli abuses on the basis that, among other things, "once the two-state thing happens, the occupation will stop".

Once the two-state option is off the table we are entering a scenario close to the South African one, which, as history shows, may lead to action finally being taken on economic and social fronts to force Israel to comply.

Additionally, if a one state solution became a reality, the discriminatory nature of the Israeli legal system as well as social and economic policies will become even more apparent for all to see and, even more so, put the final stake into the myth of Israel being a democratic state that treats its citizens equally.

Good Advice to all Muslims Living in the West: Shaikh al-Uthaimeen & Shaykh Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais: How Muslims Should Behave in Non-Muslim Societies

Sources: Islamic Monitor, Islam Against Extremism


The esteemed and late Shaikh Muhammad bin Salih al-'Uthaimin of Saudi Arabia stated, during a tele-link in the evening of Friday, 28th July 2000, to an audience in the city of Birmingham, UK:

... Likewise I invite you to have respect for those people who have the right that they should be respected, those between whom there is an agreement (of protection) for you. For the land in which you are living is such that there is an agreement between you and them. If this were not the case they would have killed you or expelled you. So preserve this agreement, and do not prove treacherous to it, since treachery is a sign of the hypocrites, and it is not from the way of the Believers. And know that it is authentically reported from the Prophet that he said,

Whoever kills one who is under and agreement of protection will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.

Do not be fooled by those sayings of the foolish people, those who say "Those people are Non-Muslims, so their wealth is lawful for us (to misappropriate or take by way of murder and killing)." For by Allaah - this is a lie. A lie about Allaah's Religion, and a lie about Islamic societies.

So we may not say that it is lawful to be treacherous towards people whom we have an agreement with.

O my brothers. O youth. O Muslims. Be truthful in your buying and selling, and renting, and leasing, and in all mutual transactions. Because truthfulness is from the characteristics of the Believers, and Allaah - the Most High - has commanded truthfulness - in the saying of Allaah - the Most High -

O you who believe - fear and keep you duty to Allaah and be with the truthful

And the Prophet encouraged truthfulness and said,

Adhere to truthfulness, because truthfulness leads to goodness, and goodness leads to Paradise. And a person will continue to be truthful, and strive to be truthful until he will be written down with Allaah as a truthful person.

And he warned against falsehood, and said,

Beware of falsehood, because falsehood leads to wickedness, and wickedness leads to the Fire. And a person will continue lying, and striving to lie until he is written down with Allaah as a great liar.

O my brother Muslims. O youth. Be true in your sayings with your brothers, and with those Non-Muslims whom you live along with - so that you will be inviters to the Religion of Islaam, by your actions and in reality. So how many people there are who first entered into Islaam because of the behaviour and manners of the Muslims, and their truthfulness, and their being true in their dealings.

On his recent visit to East London Masjid, London, Shaykh Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais, the Head Imam of the Masjid Al-Haram of Makkah al-Mukarramah, mentioned in his khutba that "Muslims should be proactive positively in our communities and work for all humanity."

Good advice overall, methinks. Yeah, I know these things are old, but still, given current climate, it is always good to remind ourselves of some decent advice.

Dov Weissglass: "Israel is dependent economically on Europe"

In a little-publicised speech, Dov Weissglass,former advisor and bureau chief to prime minister Ariel Sharon, clearly explained the thinking behind the Israel's change of heart over marking the products produced in Occupied Territories as such rather than stamping them with the "Made in Israel" logo.

The original position was as follows:

Weissglas ... said Israel had been ignoring the European Union and European Economic Area (EEA) demand that it mark such products [Ed. - as being made in Occupied Territories] out of "national pride, and based on the position that all our producers are citizens of Israel, and we must not yield to the political discrimination Europe was demanding."

However, when that bastion of the Zionist commercial support, Marks & Spencers, returned millions of Israeli goods, presumably due to non-compliance with the EU demands, the Zionist regime quickly capitulated ordering the marking of "the products in keeping with European demands".

There is also in that speech some interesting points concerning the recognition that the EU plays a major role in keeping the Zionist Entity "alive" economically:

Weissglas said Israel is dependent economically on Europe, and militarily on the United States. "$4 billion, a quarter of all American military aid, goes to Israel.

Without Europe and the States we'd be like the Palestinians, surviving on $200 a month," he said.

In light of this, it would seem that, in fact, political activism in Europe as well in the United States does have a chance, if properly directed, to affect the conduct of the Zionist entity.

There is also appears to be a seeming support for evacuation of the settlements:

"Only one state out of 188 supports the settlement project, and that's Israel. The world doesn't care about historic rights, it cares about reality. The reality is that there are 2 million Palestinians living in the territories, but only 300,000 Israelis."

"Now that we've left the Gaza Strip, we will give back the rest of the territories sooner or later, and every single settler will have to leave," he said.

Well, let's hope this would come sooner rather than later. In the meantime, some political organising and activism would go a long way in making this a reality.