by Abdul-Jalil Rashid Al-Imarah (S. Baptiste)
[Paid content is as submitted, other than minor editorial changes. Straight from the Pen does not express any opinion on the subject matter or content or the validity of any statement or claim made. Views and beliefs expressed and posted herein are those of the author and not necessarily agreed with or endorsed by your host]
All praises and thanks are due to Allah, the Lord of Honor, the Mighty and Majestic who sent to mankind a Messenger while they were in a state of darkness, ignorance, and tyranny perpetrated by their deception from Satan. He sent this Messenger as a caller inviting and illuminating with the bright Light of Truth in order to rescue them from the darkness and heedless that they were in. Some hearts were softened and thus beckoned to this call while some on the other hand chose the path of slander, revilement, defamation, and launching wars of hostility in order to malign this call seeking thereby to be a violent whirlwind of darkness to descend upon a lone and illuminated candle:
< They desire to extinguish Allah’s Light by their lips but Allah refuses except to perfect His Light even if the Disbelievers hate it so>[At-Tawbah:32(Qur’an)]
And after many tentative steps of incitement as well as mediation were made, Allah decreed the convergence of the two forces on a decive day and in an epic way to mark the prevalent swaying of bigotry and rancor, and even extending to them a chance to change course anew:
<If you seek an opening (start) then certainly the opening (al-Fath) has come. And if you desist it will be better for you all while if you all resume, We will resume and your forces will not avail you anything (in the least) even if they were to be many and that is (because) Allah is with the believers>[Al-Anfal:19]
And thus the promise of Allah was made true for those before and we will not be asked regarding what they used to do in the past and nor will they be asked about what we do. Prayers and Peace be upon the Messenger of Allah Muhammad, his family, companions, and those who follow their example until the Day of Judgement.
As for us today, what will be the legacy and remnant memories of these times? As the scorching winds of bigotry blow to and fro and the disease of Wahn in the hearts continues to infect the world faster than the Coronavirus-what exactly is it that we are observing? And are the conspiracies we hear of truly existent or are they nothing but childish play like the fantasy world espoused by the QAnon members?
As the world sat back contented to watch the atrocities hailed upon the Muslims of Syria by the Nusayri elite minority, feigned uproar to the Chinese persecution of Uighurs, shed crocodile tears over the fruit of their poisonous tree that led to the massacre of unarmed worshipping their Lord in new Zealand, and turned deaf to the cries of the Rohingya Muslims in Burma (Myanmar), after we hear of two novelties which by technicality, is nothing new, we are left with the Armenian aggression on Azerbaijan and the retaliatory attack following an attack on the honor of the Prophet (SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) in France.
As for the conflict in Azerbaijan then perhaps this could be chalked up to ethnic rivalry, territorial aspirations, and long held grievances mutually held by two sovereign states. What then of that event they speak of in France? Is it something new or old? Or is it simply the blame on Islam and intolerance of Muslim fanatics wishing to demolish the foundations of Freedom, as said by the effeminate mayor on BBC?
The person with intellect irrespective of their beliefs, if they choose to be objective and just, will easily concede that this is nothing new. For so it is that the twin humiliations wrought upon the confederates of Charlie Hebdo is not too far behind us in the past. So if that question is answered we must then turn upon another. Yet in order to do that we must discuss the concept of freedom of speech and expression. No right thinking person advocates the necessity or even permissibility of absolute free speech nor on the opposing side, absolute curtailment and censorship of an individual’s thoughts and ideas except for the rubbish and immoral and then the likes of Hobbes, Nietzsche, and the extreme Libertarians and their comrades who envision a homogenous secular utopia in the mode of 1984, Atlas Shrugged, or Brave New World.
Even the fanatical Jacobins from the French Revolution, Rousseau, and others left realms of delineation for the limiting of such in light of public morality, sedition, and other factors. Even those with the false sirens of individualism were hurt and offended when Trump shunned and chose not to engage with them on Twitter so they sought a recourse of ‘justice’ because they felt some sort of injustice and did not believe that his ‘freedom’ should affect their ‘freedom’ and sensibilities.
As for today no one holds this position except in the idealistic sense or the aforementioned rubbish and tyrants. For instance every government (Islamic or otherwise) has enacted laws sanctioning against threats of violence to others, speech directing others to commit violence or crimes, false advertisement, defamation, libel, spreading falsehood, false witness or testimony, and the like. It is illegal to deny the “Holocaust” in some countries, or to make racist, anti-sematic comments, or to express so-called ‘hate speech’.
In line with the idea and claim for absolute freedom of speech and expression then we should be able to deny the existence of the Atlantic Slave Trade as a myth or fable, be able to claim Whites or Aryans are superior to Blacks and other races and vice-versa, praise Hitler and his actions, Stalin, Judas, Charles Manson, the Pharaoh who persecuted the children of Israel, the Roman’s subjugation of early believers and followers of Christ, fly the Confederate flag, extols the genius and greatness of Robert Lee, call Blacks monkeys or Whites ‘devils’, advocate and allow the promotion of incest on television, the radio, and the like and glorify wantless murder, rape, and pedophilia. Yet this is not what they are doing. All of these infringe on ‘Free Speech’ as they claim yet they don’t deem it as the ultimate act of enlightenment and hallmark of the civilized man to take on these sorts of taboos.
But when this zeal is exclusively shown and promoted calling for caricatures, smears, and insults to the Prophet of Islam under the guise of Free Speech, Free Expression, and ‘art’ , then this is something that must be scrutinized, observed closely, and categorically and unapologetically condemned. It is the same with these governments as well. In this ‘need to tackle on hate speech’, they do not include these vile acts but instead condone, encourage, and defend them. While on the other hand these ‘Free Republics’ and ‘Democratic States’ permit Twitter, Facebook, and the like to penalize and ban American white conservative ideas, causes, and ideologues, ‘Confederate Pride’, QAnon and the like yet they do not interfere with the base acts of others. When states do not restrain culprits then only vigilantes and brigades of force excused or unexcused will pursue culprits. And culprits, evil people, and such are what these people are without doubt.
If Charlie Hebdo, Pamela Geller, and the like were sincere then they would also take it upon themselves to take the mantle and uphold the banner challenging these other infringements on so-called free speech as well. Why don’t they conspire, assemble, and congregate to do such in respect to the Pope, Christian saints, Civil Rights leaders, and Biblical prophets if they are truthful? If it is a matter of a group’s intolerance then why don’t they take on the bishops, cardinals, and priest of the Catholic church in order to take on the silence regarding the molestation of altar boys?
Yet if you engage them in this vein they will say that “there is no need to do such because it will only offend and irritate. And the Christians, Jews, and others do not share the fanatical intolerance like the Muslims and they accept difference of opinions and the agenda of the modern secular state, or ‘civil democratic state’ as some call it, if offended.” And thus if they respond as such it will prove that they only wish to infuriate the Muslims and this is the sole underlying reason which is to bring about humiliation and calumnies.
Every peace loving person with the most basic shred of ethics would agree that the aims of society is not to pit people against one another, cause transgression, hurt feelings, humiliate or subjugate another group in society, unless you believe in the Marxist call for the necessity of delusional class warfare or promote some sort of epic Aryan race war. They may also claim:
“Yes you are right this is not the proper aim or objective of society but nor is it to allow intolerance and fundamentalism to fester and grow like a spreading disease. If we treat the Muslims special in that regards then we will be accepting a challenge, defiance, and nullification to what the concept of liberty is based on and such would be a loss and setback in the long held battle and gains fighting to preserve the rights and voices of individual liberty. Fanatical attachment and this sort of devotion that the extremists have, threaten the freedom of others and whenever society remains silent on it, it then breeds the seeds which may one day duly rise as totalitarianism and censorship or embargo within the free market of exchange of ideas.”
We would then then point out the hollowness of their argument. For, the extremism and fundamentalism they censure in reality come from fanatics who promote burning the Qur’an and making such a festival for rallying and insulting their (the Muslims) prophet a symbol of progress and civilization. The Muslims do not go out burning Bibles, copies of the U.S. or French constitution, Torah, Talmud, Communist Manifesto, Bill of Rights, or other religious tracts and political treatises. The Muslims in the land of the agitators simply tend to their own affairs and are the ones being needlessly bludgeoned over the head with provocations, disrespect, and campaigns of intolerance.
And if we talk about the seeds of tyranny then it is from their side who are the zealous farmers of barren land ardently sowing discontent. For all tyrants start off by persecuting a group through demonization until horrors like what the Egyptian Pharaoh did the to the Israelites, Hitlers campaign against gypsies and non-Aryans, the Zionist persecution of Palestinians, and Stalinist ‘purges, the Japanese internment, McCarthyism, and the lynching of black folks in the southern U.S. states take place. Rather instead of ‘multiculturalism’ they seek to instead impose conformity. And if the Muslims are truly bigots as they say and we were to accept this for the sake of argument we would say: This bigotry of theirs is a private and personal religious matter to them. Meaning if they are left alone believing or harboring their ‘bigotry’ then this harms no one since they are not going around forcing people to confess to the nobility of their prophet. In fact they accept the fact and reality that others don’t even deem him a prophet. Aside from this small cadre of malcontents disguising themselves as champions and stalwarts of liberty, no one sees a need or desire to go around mocking their beliefs or prophets. They mock the hijab, niqab, and burqa but don’t target the dress of nuns, Mormon women, or the headgear of Sikhs…
It can’t be said that any value is obtained from such base acts for it does not further any perspective, shed light on a discussion, or educate people by the act of insulting the prophet; the teacher who wishes to teach about freedom of expression should teach the responsibility and mature use of words and effective communication if they wish to bring up the next generation upon noble virtues and create exceptional citizens who are familiar with their civic duties but these are not the type of people they wish to produce rather the rubbish wish to produce more rabblerousers. If one says it has entertainment value of humor then this still lacks legs to stand on. For we would say, you it is who don’t accept Whites to do ‘black face’ or make stereotypical jokes of minorities refrain from one sort of so-called entertainment for fear of ruffling feathers while choosing to permit and engage in another revolve around hypocrisy and contradiction. Yet it is no surprise for it is you as well who were enraged against a congresswoman for saying “all about the Benjamins” and thus lashed out saying it was a Jewish Trope. It is you who abandon your illusion of absolute free speech and hound the U.S. president Trump for using his discretion(in light of absolute free speech) for making remarks you deem as racist or sexist. If such is outrageous to you then why not the insult, slander, revilement, defamation, and mockery to a man revered by more than 1/5th of the world’s population, who brought a religion which does not permit transgression nor compel the conversion of others forcefully? You it is who claim rights of individuals yet sought to use the power of the state and courts to force a devoted and respectful Christian bakery to bake cakes for a newlywed gay couple after they used the liberty of their discretion to refuse such request.
The sane and prudent person, if he or she has reservations on saying ‘he got what he deserved’ would nevertheless agree that this individual knew the risk he was undertaking. He was not ignorant of the fate of the illustrators and publishers of the Danish cartoons, the offensive against the creators of SouthPark, the Garland, Texas affair, and the twin strikes upon Charlie Hebdo. If they consider him a ‘liberal saint’ or ‘martyr’ then by all means let them do so and anyone who wishes to trek this path of ‘martyrdom’ would not be restrained or blocked from doing so. Let them follow the path of their forebears. And let the agitators continue to run out of breath like one repeatedly blowing upon trick candles at an American style birthday party for kids. And let them continue to mask their true motives and desecrate the name of that noble and virtuous human right we all wish and attain for and strive to protect anmed Freedom. And let them defile it until she is nothing more than a harlot masquerading in make-up as a woman of nobility. Because we will not accept this, and we will not be deceived. For that queen of liberty for us will always have supporters and loyal subjects behind her to stand with her against this coup that they are hatching.
And the apologists say to the Muslims as was said by that magician on BBC after the last saga of the Charlie Hebdo affair: ‘The Muslims are undermining their own interest and causing what they abhor to repeat since anytime they do this it brings more attention to what they were offended by’ and ‘they need to be like the prophet who forgave’. Part of what was said is correct and the other part is ignorance, feigned misunderstanding, or a lie. Before we move on it must be said that what we as responsible free people citizens of the world simply ask for is responsible speech. Debate is welcome and constructive even if it happens it the most robust and aggressive manner and even if egos are bruised. A scathing criticism and pure maloney trolling are two separate and entirely different thing as different as the distance between the East and the West. And the last kind is what must be opposed just as these fake guardians of morality and information launch the audacious campaign against ‘fake news’ and ‘misinformation’. I see no one with decency who would oppose standing together to ban or turn away from maligning the prophet Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, Abraham, Jacob, or the like. Where are these so-called voices of inter-faith?
The prophet Muhammad(SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) who Allah sent as a mercy to the universe was very forgiving especially to the violation of his own rights and person yet those ignoramuses can’t claim for sure to know that these cartoonist and others would have been forgiven as the classical Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyyah stated:
“The Prophet’s reputation may be damaged by reviling because he is human being like other human beings whose reputation and image may be tarnished by reviling and slander….
“Because reviling the Prophet(SAW) leads to a loss of respect for him in people’s minds and thus tarnish his reputation and undermine him, and it may be a cause of people being turned away from him and losing respect for him, the punishment is prescribed because of the evil consequences that result from reviling him…
The Prophet(SAW) is reviled by trying to belittle him and put him down. Disbelievers and hypocrites have motives for that, such as jealousy for what Allah has bestowed upon him of His bounty; enmity towards his religion…
“There is a hadd punishment for reviling the Prophet(SAW) because it is reviling of a human being who is dead, so there no way of knowing whether he would pardon that person; that punishment is not waived by repentance. That unlike the case of reviling Allah (GOD), because it is known that He will forgive the one who reviled Im if he repents.” [See 8/926-930 of As-Saarim Al-Maslul ‘alaa Shaatim Ar-Rasul]
***And this has been stated before by other classical scholars before him like Qadi ‘Iyad the author of Shifa which is a biography of the prophet. The term ‘hadd’ or ‘hudud’ refers to certain penal ordinances and punishments of Islamic law to be enacted within a country ruled by the Shariah. Islamic laws are not executed or performed in a vigilante manner nor outside of the territory of the Islamic government.***
As for the hashtag #Jesuis_Samuel then I believe scholars and students of knowledge like Shaykh Ahmad Musa Jibril, ustadh Abu Baraa from SalafiMediaUK, and Ustadh Musa Cerantonio have discussed the impermissibility of using such. So this launching the blame on the Muslims is not something new, rather it is their preferred and coveted method or tactic when a need for serious discussion arises as I mentioned previously in my essay, “Islam is to blame,” which whoever wants to look it up will find it. It is like Abu Abdullah mentioned once in a speech summarizing or referring to what is written in Aesop’s Fable about the deer who after being provoked and provoked while meekly submitting one day decides to lash out after the wolf went too far and ate her young doe. But instead of blaming the persistent wolf, the monkeys, parrots, and others chose to find fault with the deer.
So, it must be known by every man or woman who can reflect or ponder, that these are not vanguards, stalwarts, protectors, guardians, nor supporters of freedom as they claim. They are a bunch of provocateurs with an anarchist concept of liberty who wish to make attacks on Muslims legitimate and protected. Yet drawing a swastika or the like is evil to them It is beyond double standards but more like the ‘one standard’ previously articulated by the likes of Noam Chomsky.
Even if we were to accept their arguments or justifications and distinctions it is universally acknowledged that the golden rule or principle is no one should not be allowed to cause harm to others. The one who creates loud noise that disturbs his neighbors would be penalized in any country then why not afford this to the Muslims, who are being greatly harmed, disturbed, offended, disheartened, and dishonored by this act of theirs? Yet it is the same whether we choose to partake or remain spectators. You can’t save pepo-le from their folly. If they consider these slanderous and offensive acts ‘freedom’ then let them proceed upon their caravan of ‘freedom’ and ‘Liberty’ and ‘progressivism, I for one won’t come between them and their ‘liberal martyrdom’. Who are we to proscribe this new sacrament of self-sacrifice upon the mantle and altar of freedom? We will treat them like the self-flagellating catholic priests or Shi’ah and watch with dismay what happens.
Allah says in the Qur’an:
“Say to those who disbelieve: If you desist then what was in the past would be forgiven of you bit if you all return then certainly there has occurred for you the examples of the previous ones.”[Surah Al-Anfal:38]
So if these governments established and ruled by the whims of men and man-made laws seriously wish to fight ‘hate speech’ then let them stand with their Muslim citizens who they claim to afford protections to, and ban/criminalize the drawing of the Prophet Muhammad “SAW” as they ban the depiction of swastikas and holocaust denial, and ordered the removal of certain flags and images. And let the reporters and journalists come together rejecting the vitriol and bile that some of their colleagues who speak such under the guise of freedom. Let them go to North Korea and stay firm to let ‘enlightened’ principles or let these vanguards of free speech publish criticism of Xi Jing Pin while in China on assignment for a story if this is truly a principle they uphold. But we know that they won’t and never will since for now Muslim are their easy targets.
it shows the extent of backwardness and regression when they deem insulting a person who lived almost two thousand years ago to be a mark of prestige, status, and symbol of progressivity. And so too are these governments who feign benign rule yet undermine the Muslims and fill their prisons with them from the East to the West simply for demanding the most basic of human rights and the observance of their religion. they would mourn for this teacher and Charlie Hebdo yet shed no tears or raise serious objections to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. It is thus clear from this what sort of journalism they wish to see, and which type they could care less about. How plump are the strutting peacocks and mockingbirds!
Originally written on the 18th of October 2020 from the jaws and prison of Leviathan.
[This article is not advocating any acts of violence but simply a rigorous and scathing commentary on the illusions of modern liberalism and wished to expose, dissect, and analyze this phenomenon in a thorough manner from an Islamic standpoint. Any errors or misconstrued content is only from the author.]
Abdull-Jalil Rashid Al-Imarah
(Samuel Baptiste) #09681-104
PO Box 019120
Miami, Fl 33101