Leslie and Milo :Two Branches Off The Same Tree (Part One)

Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, yet what is in their hearts is worse.

The Holy Quran, Surah Ali Imran (Chapter 3) verse 118

...the most effective form of propaganda is when the subject moves in the direction you desire for reasons he believe to be of his own.

The Cultural Cold War,  by Frances Stonor Saunders

The intent of this blog is much more far-reaching than just focusing on that hideous Twitter cat-fight between Milo Yiannopulous and actress Leslie Jones, star of Saturday Night Live and the recent remake of the movie Ghostbusters. This blog intends to go into depth about two individuals, whom although they appear to be entirely different, actually have more in common than you think. Both are attention seekers, deal with the mind-warping media, relying on unfunny jokes, wit (dim-wit is more like it), and rely on stereotypes and misinformation to butter their bread and garner attention. The only real difference is while Leslie involves herself with what is called "ethnic humor" and comedy, Milo just focuses on making fun of other's beliefs and ethnicities.

Milo is a strange breed of all sorts. A self-proclaimed Jewish/Catholic who is openly gay, claiming to acknowledge Christianity's prohibition of homosexuality on Joe Rogan's Youtube show, yet claims he can't cure himself of it, and yet this same individual blasts Islam because of ITS prohibition of homosexuality, using the suspicious Orlando, Florida massacre as a pretext to accuse Islam of homophobia, whatever the hell that means.


SIDE NOTE 1: Islam is the Way of Life prescribed for those who submit themselves to God, referred to in Arabic as Muslims.  Despite the propaganda by bigots and liars like Milo, who infest all forms of media, the prohibition of homosexuality in Islam is reserved only for MUSLIMS. Islam does not concern itself with the sexual mores of those who do not claim to be Muslim, unless either one lives in a society where Islam is the Rule of Law (in which those who have sex outside of marriage even if heterosexual are also punished as well, Muslim or non-Muslim) or try to undermine the Islamic Way of Life with their personal mores and beliefs. Besides that, non-Muslims in general do not fall under this prohibition, especially those who live in Non-Islamic societies. 

SIDE NOTE 2: The people of Prophet Lot (AS) were not destroyed for their disobedience, but they were destroyed for their disbelief and denial.  The Quran clearly speaks of this when it says;

And We said "Go down all of you. And when Guidance comes to you from Me, whoever follows My Guidance, there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve. And whoever DISBELIEVES and DENIES My Signs, those will be the Companions of the Fire, they will abide in forever... Surah Baqarah (Chapter 2) verses 38-39

And Lot, when he said to his people, do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you among the worlds? Indeed you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people. But the answer of his people was only that they said "Evict them from your city, indeed these are MEN OF PURITY."   So We saved him and his family, except for his wife, she was of those who remained.  Surah Al Ar'af (Chapter 7), verses 80-84.

SIDE NOTE 3: There is no evidence in the Quran or The Sunnah in any way to justify or validate what happened in Orlando, Florida as being Islamic, especially considering these facts;

1. The people were not Muslim.

2. They were not in an Islamically run environment.

3. There was no evidence showing any of them were hostile to Islam, nor even heard of Islam. Islam concerns itself with calling the people to its Way, not killing.

As I stated in my last blog, when someone does not like you, there's nothing you can do to change them. All you can do is take control of the narrative.

Anyway, I took the dubious and unpleasurable task of watching certain excerpts of this dialogue between Rogan and Milo, concentrating on the part where things got really heated, and being a former Christian, I felt Milo was not being sincere in most, if not all of his responses, but was in fact very patronizing of Joe Rogan, and the Christian religion, talking about his alleged sexual encounters with Catholic priests, and proclaiming that if he could in his own words, "cure his homosexuality", he would.

I came out of that wondering if Joe knew when somebody was playing him for a fool.

Even more troubling are the conservatives who employ or support this guy simply because of his "logical" arguments against feminism, the Left, his racist beliefs, and his undeniable bigotry towards Islam, which had him rubbing elbows with fellow propagandist Pamela Gellar, the co-creator of the Prophet Muhammad cartoon drawing contest disguised as "free speech", and founder of the pseudo-patriotic American Freedom Defense Initiative, supposedly dedicated to stopping the "Islamicization" of America, a phrase which along with radical Islam, Islamic extremism, and fanatical Islam I have yet seen defined by these propagandists. Together with sites like Answering Islam, with its rabidly inaccurate article 164 Jihad Verses In The Quran, it seems that these people will stop at nothing to have their idea become the dominant thought or belief in America, and throughout the world. Even if it means lying and deceiving, something supposedly abhorred in the Holy Bible...

Do not steal, do not lie, and do not deal falsely with one another... 

The Holy Bible, Leviticus 19:11

It just seems nowadays The Truth Don't Matter.

More Harm Than Good: Making Muhammad Ali The Face of Islam CONTINUED

Blogger Note: This blog entitled MORE HARM THAN GOOD: Making Muhammad Ali The Face Of Islam began construction a few hours before the Orlando, FL shooting took place, where a young man, now being fashioned by the media as another "radical Islamic" terrorist, allegedly opened fire in a crowded gay club, and single-handedly killed as many as over 50 people, and injuring over 50 more.  It is the sincere belief of the blogger that one should not try to deconstruct EVERY incident that is blamed on the Islamic Way of Life, because the accusations are plenty. Rather than spend precious amounts of energy trying to deconstruct ALL claims produced by the media and non-Muslim entities bent on propaganda, the blogger believes it is much better to create a premise to use as a reference point, so that the people can see for themselves, and make up their own minds. That is one of the primary intentions of this specific blog about Muhammad Ali. It is not just a commentary about an individual or an event, but also a statement and a premise regarding the Islamic Way of Life, as well as a critique and a reflection regarding the tactics and methods some people use to distort and besmirch another's way of life, and finally a reflection of those who try to placate and diffuse an already misinformed and/or bigoted audience. So for the sake of continuity, the blogger wishes not to dedicate an entire blog or blogs regarding the Orlando shootings, and the recently alleged attacks in France. 

To continue: Answering Islam is a crystal clear case of people openly and intentionally misleading its readers with obvious distortions of Quranic verses and Islamic concepts, in an attempt to defile and defame the Islamic Way of Life. If one had the time and resources, it would be very easy to respond to such a vicious website, and clarify matters regarding its content, particularly 164 Jihad Verses in the Quran, but here one piece of clear evidence should be enough to destroy its credibility, and affirm its clear bigotry towards Islam.

But not to be outdone by the likes of Answering Islam is the so-called free online encyclopedia Wikipedia. Boasting free and robust content on almost any relevant issue, Wikipedia tries to symbolize democratization of information with free and accurate information regarding its discussed topics, and the supposed ability of anyone being able to edit its content. This in itself poses a serious problem, for what could be here today may be gone tomorrow, and what appears today may be totally inaccurate. What could be removed due to inaccuracies may not be reported and re-issued as a retraction and/or a correction.  Looking through Wikipedia's content regarding Islam, one finds bountiful distortions and inaccuracies regarding Islam in need of re-editing.

Type the words "radical Islam" in the search box, and you're automatically linked to the topic of Islamic fundamentalism. This represents a subversive attempt of describing the basic fundamentals of Islam, encased in a construct known as Shariah, often translated as Islamic Law. In other words, one is automatically connecting Islamic law to radicalism. The problem with this is severalfold. For starters, when you add words to Islam, especially words like radical, extreme, militant, etc., it automatically becomes a descriptive noun. A descriptive noun serves to indicate a specific person, place, thing or idea in an evocative or descriptive manner, rather than general. (source WiseGEEK)

Descriptive nouns can fall under two main categories, objective and subjective, and those who refer to Islam as extreme, militant, intolerant, radical and such usually fall under holding subjective opinions of Islam. Examples such as the woman's form of dress when in the presence of men not closely related, gender roles of the sexes, the permissibility to fight back when attacked by opposing forces, the declaration of absolute truth, and others are usually lumped into these descriptive, opinionated forms of Islam by its detractors. Unless the reader is aware of what is going on, and does not study the information on their own, one may find oneself holding the same opinions expressed by the propagandist using such  persuasive techniques. 

This propaganda usually results in what you're witnessing today when you hear of Muslims being thrown off airplanes, although they've passed through more intensive security screening than the average non-Muslim flyer, the Ahmed Mohamed clock incident that occurred in Irving, Texas last year, the numerous states attempting to pass anti-Shariah laws, using radicalization as a false pretext, to the shooting of the Muslim students in Chapel Hill, NC by a confirmed atheist, to other sad conclusions affecting the Muslim community, psychologically, economically, and in some cases, spiritually. 

Through the use of propaganda and modern technology, the word extremism has become so synonymous with Islam, it's as if you're saying the same thing. Sites like Wikipedia throw this word around very liberally when it comes to Islam, and the masses consume this with no regard to truth or validity. 

For instance, the Khawarij is a sect that has its roots in early post-Prophethood history. They held some views contrary to the core beliefs outlined by the Qur'an and the Sunnah(the Prophetic Explanation of Revelation consisting of actions and statements made by Prophet Muhammad(S). In this article you will find the words radical and extreme, like other articles in describing the Khawarij views, but they, like other media outlets they have suspiciously refrained from using the one word that describes them best, as well as other groups who don't tread the straight and narrow Path of Islam. Deviants. 

There's a simple explanation for that. If one is referred to as a deviant, it automatically denotes that one is off the established course, or Straight Path, and one is forced to research the true Islamic position of any issue. But when you classify something as extreme or radical, you're implying that there is something there that can be taken out of context. 

       (To Be Continued.)

Click here to go to Part One:

http://realquwwa.blogspot.com/2016/06/more-harm-than-good-making-muhammad-ali.html