The Big Switcheroo...MORE HARM THAN GOOD CONTINUED.

To continue: Labeling someone a deviant indicates there was an established system already in place, yet for whatever reasons, beit ignorance or willful deception, some people wish to tread a different path. Islam strongly denounces such actions, as well as sectarian groups who attempt to create their own niche. The methodology of implementing the Islamic Way of Life came only through the Prophets of God, ending with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Only he and God(Allah) alone can sanction any action with the intention of servitude, or in arabic ibaadah.

But in efforts to distort and manipulate, appropriate terms such as deviant, inventor (mubtadi), liar (kadhab), transgressor or sinner (faasiq), wrongdoer (dhaalim), and astray (dhaaleen) are replaced with extremists, terrorists and such to intentionally mislead, and from there comes as the late psychoanalyst Edward L. Bernays coined as "The Engineering of Consent". The creations of "anti-Shariah" laws in certain states, which have now been renamed as "anti-foreign" laws to disguise bigotry towards Islam, as well as the Patriot Act, which allowed spying on American citizens all come from this social engineering and social control.

To further illustrate the point, looking at the profiles of the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, and the current so-called khalifah of the group ISIS, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi (which is not his real name mind you), Wikipedia classifies both individuals as "Sunni Muslims" (another descriptive term that does not exist). This implies that all of their actions have their basis in core Islamic principles. That means when one hears reports of suicide bombings, or internet beheadings, kidnappings, all which are designed to antagonize the so-called "free world" and challenge the "free world" to come and fight, it has it's roots in  "Sunni" Islam, although there is absolutely no evidence to suggest such actions are permissible or even make sense, especially in the constant proclaimation of committing such horrendous acts by certain so-called groups.

Wikipedia also has a site entitled WikiIslam, a page dedicated to discussing Islamic topics only. On this site I found a horrendous article intent on discussing a statement made by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) regarding men who are killed for the religion receiving 72 virgins in Paradise as a reward. Using an array of information, mostly not attributed to the Quran and/or the Prophet(S) himself, as well as unauthenticated statements reportedly made by him,  this article goes to great lengths to 1) describe the Islamic concept of Paradise as a pleasure palace, complete with orgy-esque and free-flowing sex amongst the men and 2) Show justification of the modern-day concept of suicide bombings, or some refer to it as "martyrdom operations".

For the sake of digressing even further, I plan to address that particular article in the very near future, but what I can state now with surety and clarity that there is no evidence that Islam sanctions such actions, and how can such actions be attributed to "Sunni Islam" when there is no such concept mentioned by the Prophet of killing oneself in order to kill others, nor was such actions even possible during his time? History tells us that explosives and gunpowder were invented two centuries after his death! So if "Sunni Islam" is to follow the Way of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH), how can he give such directives without knowing what is an explosive?

 It represents an excellent case in point with regards to the quote "A lie can travel halfway across the globe, while the truth is putting on its shoes." Truth sometimes require extensive research, and those who show so much animosity towards others so much so that they are willing to lie about another's lifestyle or culture can realize the tedious task of finding out the truth in a matter by looking up several sources, and going to the official text to ascertain the truth.

So why the long drawn out digression from the initial topic of Muhammad Ali? 

     (To Be Continued)

Click here to go to Part One:

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

To Read Part Two, Click on the link;

http://realquwwa.blogspot.com/2016/06/more-harm-than-good-making-muhammad-ali_15.html

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