This blog post contains religious content. 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, as the posted content is expressly that of the author.

by Abdul-Jalil Rashid Al-Imarah

The false narrative that exists which is circulated by the Zionist, Western, establishment and Anti-Islamic media is that Islam is an intolerant misogynistic religion that allows no debates and stifles the free exchange of ideas. In furtherance of continuing their perpetuation of this falsehood they allege that Islam does not allow the challenge to its doctrines or practices and cannot operate in an open honest playing field. This isn’t true. For the self-containing vices, they embody forces their want to blemish and launch their own characteristics as attacks on Islam. the West is the one feeling challenged and is suffering an identity crisis. Any Islamist would be willing to honestly debate their secular counterpart but such is never allowed by the ‘freedom-loving people’ because they view this as giving an opportunity to ‘spread hate’ or rather ‘infect’ others.

Yet it is the West that demonizes Islam, spends billions of dollars to misportray it or show it in an alternative light suitable to their objectives[1] and motives, have called for re-interpretation of its scriptures and practices and promoting or rather creating fake dissidents whom they could promote. If there was any television network that allowed any dialogue to be aired about political Islam, it would censor parts of such and only portray segments that fit a certain narrative. Islamists fully quote and refute opposing intellectuals, policymakers, and others and directly challenge the premise which they stand on while the other side manufactures stereotypes to combat and engage with, omitting facts and statements, promoting outright fabrications and never quoting from any Islamist themselves or Islamic texts.

Thus, we are hen only left with the claim that either Islam is an evil religion or a faith that has been ‘hi-jacked’ or ‘misinterpreted’ by ‘extremists’ and ‘fundamentalists.’ Yet they bring forth no proof to their claims. Islamists quote from Islamic scriptures and classical ‘orthodox’ scholars while the opposition (western critics of Islam) is ignorant and unwilling to do such. They do not present viable arguments or opinions from the texts all Muslims agree on, rather they bring their deviant, secularized, ‘modern’ scholars who themselves do not quote from what was mentioned. So, we are left with the ‘they hate our freedoms’ nonsense or ‘they simply want to kill all infidels’.

The clash of civilization is not so. One side is actually engaging its adversary directly while the other is fighting and engaging phantoms and figments of its own imagination. So where are the two civilizations clashing? The truth is that Islam wishes to be heard without censorship and give the listener an opportunity to make an informed choice. As there is ‘no compulsion in religion'(Qur’an 2:256). So, for this reason, Islam takes it upon itself to combat those hindering the free propagation of its faith or erecting obstacles in its path. Islam sees itself as freeing mankind from the servitude of others to that of God, Allah, the Divine. Islam stands for the upholding of justice and the removal of all types of tyranny and oppression. And it views the greatest oppression as shirk (polytheism; worshipping inanimate or animate creation; judging by or the creation of manmade legislation without due right).

Islam wishes the ability to uphold the sanctity of Muslims ‘ rights and honor and to defend them. The propagation of Islam is not like the violent exportation or imposition of ‘Democracy’. The Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) called to Islam for a period of 13 years in Makkah patiently, while his call was slandered, belied, and demonized. He and the Muslims then proceeded to migrate to Madinah which accepted the call of Islam.

And here lies the beginning of the origin of enmity and hatred shown by idolaters, secularists, and satanic forces against Islam. The Qur’an tells us that ‘they wish to extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths but Allah wills only perfect His light [Islam; Monotheism] however much the deniers of truth abhor it’.[9:32]. the polytheists of Makkah hated the idea of a Muslim state living in accordance with the principles of Islam. The fact that there existed people who had the audacity to willfully, consciously, and voluntarily forsake the ‘freedoms’ of immorality and promiscuity for chastity, who forsake the ‘freedoms’ of intoxicants for sobriety, who forsake interest-based capitalism for a non-usurious one, who forsake the ‘freedom’ to legislate or enact laws in accordance with the whims of the masses for Divine rule according to their religious scripture, this enraged them.

They felt that possibly others would also be ‘radicalized’, ‘brain-washed’, or ‘infected’. So to ‘protect’ the world from such, the forces of polytheism and idolatry descended upon Madinah the city lit by the divine light and it resulted in the decisive battle of Badr at which point the Muslims were victorious. They ignored the promise of Allah that stated that Islam would ‘prevail [ideologically, militarily, legislatively, and all other ways] over every other religion however much the idolaters hate this’. [9:33].

From Madinah, the Muslims continued calling to and propagating their faith at which point multitudes flocked to it. When emissaries or preachers of this faith were harmed or killed then the Muslim State of Madinah retaliated on their behalf and for the faith. When the Romans mobilized and began inching forward to destroy this call and new polity then Islam also mobilized its men to push back the possible coming onslaught. As time went by the Muslims continued to send emissaries and preachers to distant lands inviting to the faith. Those countries or tyrant rulers that blocked humanity from the opportunity to respond to this call or deliberately kept the people ignorant from it were fought.

Armies were mobilized to make sure this call was protected, to give strength to it, and pave the way for it, but never to impose it. It was for the freedom to deliver the message, the freedom to respond to this message, and freedom to live in accordance with this message that these battles were fought and every opposer and hinderer was hit in the head with the sword and left as garbage to be abhorred in the pages of history. For there were countries of shirk such as Roman territory and lands of Christendom that allowed this preaching to go on while even speaking against it or launching intellectual challenges due to their difference of religious inclinations yet history shows that they were not fought, instead there were peace treaties between them and the Muslims. Muslims even had tax-paying Christians within their own lands who preferred to live under the justice and Islamic system of government. They did not deny Islam its voice even if they made their ruckus, shouts, and another cacophony of sounds.

Now think about the situation that we are all faced today concerning the violent exportation of democracy. No one is ignorant of democracy today for the cold war seen to that. Yet despite all of the incitement, funding, and incentives promised by the US government and Western countries there are those who willingly reject democracy. So, in Egypt today you find traditionalists, Islamists, Marxists, and those calling for democracy. The same in turkey, Pakistan, and others. even in China! Yet it is not to safeguard democracy and to provide it voice[that they fight or go out for], for it is the loudest voice of all the many different types of political systems. Know that it is western hegemony and imperialism that is the true motive behind the false call of democracy.

They topple governments solely for being ‘undemocratic’ yet they have not taken on Communist China, Autocratic Russia, Monarchist Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Morocco. Why is that? Islam didn’t differentiate as to who it confronted in pursuit of its message. So the weak clans and polytheistic tribes of Arabia were fought with the same vehemence as the paganistic Roman empire, which Islam caused to weaken and collapse, and the Persian empire which is caused to be totally wiped from existence along with others, for its claim was sincerely held. So at the dawn of the Islamic Revival when the Soviets were defeated and IsraHell remained as the occupier and the West, after destroying the Islamic Caliphate(de facto; Ottoman not de jure), was demonizing Islam and interfering with Muslims attempt to abide by Islam in Algeria, Tunisia, and others seeking it by the mirage of democratic elections[what did they expect?].

And after the atrocities Muslims endured in Chechnya, Bosnia, Palestine, and others, doesn’t it make sense that the conclusion the Muslims would come to is that the West is enemy? Wouldn’t the logical conclusion be to go after the West for its defiling the sanctity of Muslims’ honor and blood and hindering Islam? So, what is the clash of civilizations that they speak of? Is it the US invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan? Or is it after Bush and Cheney said, ‘with us or against’ and then proceeded to label it a crusade? Is it their support of the Zionist entity? Or is it their ‘War on Terror’? Or is it recently begin when an Islamic state rose with Raqqah declared as its capital?

I’m an Islamist if that is the term I must be labeled. I consider myself a muwahid (which means a monotheist) and an orthodox Muslim yet if the term Salafi Jihadist fits better then that is what I am. As such, I oppose honor killings and say that it has no basis in Islam and is a deviant cultural practice that occurs at the hands of people in Muslim lands who are not firmly granted with a proper understanding of Islam. There are penal or capital punishments in Islam that must follow the procedures of Islamic law and executed by officials of an Islamic government. No father, brother, husband, or son has the exclusive right alone to kill their mother, daughter, sister, or wife.

I believe in stoning since it is a divinely legislated Islamic punishment and has been practice as a divinely related ordinance by all the previous Abrahamic prophets, and I have no qualms about it nor am I apologetic about it. Yet Islam grants each person due process in accordance with the statement of the prophet that ‘the burden of proof is upon the claimant and the swearing of an oath for the one who denies[the claim]’ and the Quranic injunction of 4 witnesses in cases of adultery/fornication. With that being the case I believe that the majority, if not all of the sensationalistic Western media frenzy on claims of stoning taking place in rural parts of Muslim lands whether Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Iraq, that these took place in opposition and not in conformity with Islamic law so they are thus not Islamic. Many are due to ignorant tribesmen or tribeswomen engaged in un-Islamic behavior that leads to vigilante like justice which Islam condemns. I also believe that some are outright fabrications and simply designed to shock the mind like any other tabloid type news and that the only modern-day proper stoning that ever took place within this century has occurred in the territory controlled by the Islamic State.

I am not misogynistic if the word is to mean that a man has full absolute rights over a woman or that he owns her in the matter of possession of the property and no Islamist I’ve met is a misogynist according to that meaning. Islam says that husbands and wives have rights over each other.

Another stereotype is that Islam or Islamists oppose female education. Every Islamist falls outside of that so-called norm, fully accepting the prophetic narration that ‘seeking knowledge is an obligation on each and every single Muslim male and female’ especially if this Islamist reads ‘Wahhabi’ books which cite this tradition of the Prophet(Peace be upon him) allot. Another claim is Islam enforces or imposes forced marriages. Such is far from the truth since the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) has clearly stated that marriage is not valid without a bride’s consent, meaning it will be akin to rape, slavery, or trafficking, in other words, contrary to Islam. There is a verse in the Qur’an which explicitly states that a man cannot take a woman by force or inherit her against her will since the pre-Islamic Arabs upon the death of their fathers would also inherit the widows and such is also a Jewish practice mentioned in the Talmud.

Yet such lies and others are perpetrated by establishment elitist feminists who are demagogues or mouthpieces of Western Imperialism. They feign concern for Muslim women, yet what have they actually done to actually lift her plight besides denigrating and disparaging her prophet and noble religion of Islam?

Muslims do bad things that it not hard to admit. Some treat their children and wives in a horrible fashion, yet such is not reflective of the noble principles of Islam. That is reflective of those individual cultural values and lack of personal ethics.

In a sense, every Islamist is a feminist in the truest sense of the word since an Islamist is against using women as commodities, and against the visual imaginative depiction of a woman in the so-called art of pornography which is none other than a form of passive rape. [They are] against using them as commodities in the fashion industry which demeans the appearance of women and imposes a conformist culture which causes some women to starve themselves to fit a particular mold. [They are] against anti-female capitalism which exploits women for the purpose of using women to market products, lifestyles, and popular culture through music videos, magazines, and others. [They are] against the idea that a woman’s value is solely in her attractiveness and not her intellect or contributions she can make to society and the world at large.

So, what is this clash about? Is it one side defending the chastity and honor of women with the opposing side giving itself the right to enslave them or barter them as pawns for corporate interests? Is it one side advising her to preserve her virginity and chastity for a lifelong intimate relationship with one person who would, honor, love, and respect her while the other side is fighting to impose a ‘freedom’ that incites her to debase herself to catcalls, shattered reputations, broken hearts, manias, and the cycle of men she would succumb to? Is it not that one side wants a ‘market’ of ‘available’ women to date, fornicate with, and for her to be plastered on screens and magazines as an ornament or trinket?

 A clash of civilizations. If that is what the clash is about then surely the hedonistic side will surely implode on its own and would not ever be able to withstand a confrontation on an equal footing. Of course, that is not it for the talking points are obfuscated by one side that refuses to engage with the other. What sort of clash is it that is limited to one participant? For the West alone is the aggressor and the sleeping Muslims are only now awaking to realize and become aware of what is going on. So let it be known that the West is clashing with itself and while being held hostage within it as a casualty of this ‘clash’, I’m the victim of the ‘clash’ and for such views, I have been branded terrorist. Such is the false narrative the courts wish to present to the jurors in their cases against ‘terrorists’ and on the international scene to the global audience in support of its ‘War on Terror’. Such is the false narrative. But then again, I am a Muslim. No wonder they say, ‘Islam is to blame’.

1. Rand Corp has their suggestion of an American or reformed version of Islam which is called ‘Civil Democratic Islam’ which advises the government to promote one type of Islamic tradition over another and to use one sect against another and to give incentives to individuals that they vet. Rand Corp is an American think tank affiliated with the US government focusing on international affairs, counter-terrorism, and US policy and conducts analysis based on such.

By Abdul-Jalil Rashid Al-Imarah, written on the 2nd of December of in the year corresponding to 2018 C.E from the depths of the taghuti prison known as the US criminal justice system and pejoratively as LEVIATHAN.