Where have I been? Good question, probably deerves a good answer, but I don't think you have the time right now. God willing, I will be posting more frequuently, and in the meantime, check out one of my projects I am working on. Peace.
After becoming Muslim in 1992, I stopped celebrating the usual holidays and certain cultural festivals. I figured October wouldn't have that same creepy feel or atmosphere, since I no longer participated in Halloween festivals, both on the job and at home.
Yet another form of creepiness has started taking place in October that seems to get worse every year. One that has devastating and frightening effects on society, and unlike Halloween, is far from fictitious.
It seems to have started before the turn of the decade,when the NFL jumped on the "humanitarian" and PR bandwagon, and decided to promote Breast Cancer Awareness to its fans, by making the players add pink to their usual attire....
Let me pause for a moment to let that sink in. So the NFL took the opportunity to publicize its support for Breast Cancer Awareness, a condition mostly experienced by women, who at this time only made up a small fraction of the fan base until 2009, and even to this day has very little to no female personnel on the field, by making the team players add the effeminate color of pink to their attire.
Then the field began to look increasingly pink in hue.
This also allow the NFL to promote Breast Cancer Awareness by selling pink NFL paraphanelia to its patrons.
One would begin to wonder since this is a sport dominated by males, shouldn't the NFL at least provide some sort of balance by promoting prostate cancer as well? It's only logical, but for some reason, they've failed. I guess they figure the only thing men should be concerned with is erectile dysfunction, but even that's gone now, since Viagara and Cialis have pulled out of sponsorships due to loss of patents.
So I sit here, years later, still trying to make the connection between breast cancer and tossing a football around a field, and trying to avoid getting clocked by a 250-pound linebacker who runs a 40-yard dash in 4 and a half seconds. My primary conclusion seems to be to tap into the largest consumer bloc in the world, being that of women.
My one sole consolation in all of this is that I no longer had to watch Jessica Simpson prance around Texas Stadium and abroad with that God-awful Pepto-Bismol Tony Romo jersey. Good riddance to both.
But then it got creepier, as the Ray Rice/Janay Rice debacle in 2014 kicked into overdrive, causing Ray Rice to lose his livelihood and be stripped of his constitutional rights of not being punished for the same "crime" twice by the tyrant and protector of feminists' interests, commissioner Roger Goodell. But that didn't matter, nor did it matter that Janay instigated the altercation by spitting and hitting Ray. The only thing that mattered was that Janay seemed to have started something she could not finish.
The NFL announced in October of 2014, primarily as a response to 16 female senators and other womens' groups trying to throw their biased and partial influence around, it was adopting a "No More" campaign, where NFL players this time had to appear on a series of commercials taking a stand against "domestic violence", which is really a code phrase for violence against women. The month of October is now also recognized as well for violence against women, or domestic violence. In addition to having a pink ribbon to commemorate BCA, now a purple effeminate ribbon is now introduced.
Never mind the fact that a growing amount of studies show the rise of abuse of men by women. Forget studies showing that a growing number of altercations and domestic abuse are instigated by women, the only concern is what happens to women.
The No More campaign had some very head-scratching moments, to say the least. My biggest question was what in God's Holy Name is Ice-T doing on such commercials? Mr. Ice "Mutha-F***in'" T, who introduced himself as "The L.A. Player" on his first album "Rhyme Pays", who cites the late pimp and author Robert "Iceberg Slim" Beck as a main influence, whose songs about sex and women would make Tipper Gore's face turn red with rage, is now concerned about "domestic abuse?" Wow.
Then in October of 2015, Ebony Magazine tried to get into the act, amidst multiple accusations of sexual assault against comedian and TV star Bill Cosby. They conveniently used the month of October, designated as Women's month, as a springboard to promote a November 2015 issue entitled The Family Issue(s). Yeah, I'm scratching my head at that propaganda move to this day. But it also gave a chance to show-off the new editor-in-chief and self-proclaimed black feminist Kierna Mayo, as she took to national news to discuss the edition with other White female journalists, who obviously threw softball questions at Kierna, all designed to not only subtly implicate Bill in the accusations, but to generalize ALL BLACK MEN as monsters and predators, and to subvert the traditional definition of a nuclear family, which included both a mother and a father, and the father is normally the head of the household.
Suddenly October no longer seems like a month to promote the overall well being of women, but to scandalize and propagate feminists' man-hating notions, and promote power trips by using issues such as sexual harrassment and assault, street harrassment, rape, and the totality of no good men. October looks less like a month of preparing to dress your kids up like ghosts, goblins, witches and warlocks, and more like a male witch-hunt by malcontent feminists.
But October of this year has been the creepiest yet, especially in light of the sexual assault allegations of film mogul Harvey Weinstein. With numerous charges and allegations being levied against Harvey, two of the craziest incidents occurred.
The first concerned Donna Karan, the famous fashion designer, who briefly added in a short interview that it is women's responsibility of how they project themselves in public, which opened the floodgates of howls, boos and hisses from the feminists. Donna apparently broke the first feminist commandment;
Thou shalt not hold women accountable for anything bad that happens to them. It is never their fault.
But Donna has an undeniable point here. Women are responsible for how they project themselves. Yet these feminists continue to feed their foolish desires using irrational opinions, trying to assure women that sexual harrassment/assault is an issue of power, and not of declining morality, in which both men and women have aptly contributed to.
We just witnessed a sickening social media challenge taking place, where women appeared on social media, rapping about what extremes they would go through to get some d**k. Some of the participants were of dubious distinctions, some had their careers started by being in sextapes, some were single mothers who had babies by different fathers, all contributing to rhymes describing what lengths would they go through for some sex. The song itself, sung by a rapper name GameOva Reedy, which which is so raunchy that it's not worth repeating, but is also worth noting of the another popularized song from the same area, entitled Monkey on tha D***K
The other incident involved this ridiculous #metoo campaign, where women who were victimized by sexual assault/harrassment/rape posted their experiences on social media to a broad audience. Why this was done was beyond me, for as I stated in a blog of 2016, courting public opinion is not always a good thing to do in this society, and in many cases will come back to haunt, such as the so called War on Drugs, and the War on Terror. Well now add the War on Men to that list.
Using Harvey's allegations and President Donald Trump's comments, feminists used these men, as well as Bill Cosby, and other male public figures to suggest that sexism and assault/harrassment are issues of power, and not of declining sexual mores. That's why it's important to them to leave out the male counterpart narratives, because it exposes their faulty logic.
Many women became upset at the fact that men were trying to chime in on this silly social media campaign, and some publicly showed their disdain towards such a thing, but the question is why? Why are they so hellbent not to include the male counterparts' story, whether it regards domestic violence, rape, or any other trauma women wish to claim only they suffer?
Why do they always refer to these things as issues of power? Do they not realize it does not take a person of power/influence to sexually violate someone, nor does someone have to sexually violate a person to wield power or influence over another? So when these female teachers are seducing young males into having sex with them, where is the power dynamic in that?
They know those theories won't hold water. But they also know when a person is emotionally vulnerable, it does not take much to make them feel good. Just boost their self-esteem, even if you have to LIE.
Tell them your clothing does not make a difference in how you are perceived. They'll love to hear that, even if it's not true. Never mind the fact the man has seen MULTIPLE IMAGES of women in provocative or scantily clad clothing, which obviously is going to have an effect on his perception of women in general, especially in Western societies. Just assure them they are not accountable for any degradation and decline in society. It's all the man's fault.
Then to cap it all off, a female judge overturned Ezekiel Elliots' injunction, and ordered him to begin to serve a 6-game suspension for charges he continues to deny to this day, and despite refusals to indict from the Columbus, OH police department, to the findings of the investigator that Goodell personally employed, not only has he ignored those findings, he even withheld the investigator from attending the final decision, he and his connected friends have deliberately railroaded Elliot, all for the sake of keeping some malcontent women off his back.
That letter must have really spooked him.
I know October has spooked me in ways Halloween has failed. I pray I can survive the next October. Only God knows what's in store.
Last week was a momentous week for certain residents of Highland Hills, a small community located in Southeastern Dallas. For the past 8 YEARS the area lacked among other basic necessities a grocery store. Imagine 8 YEARS without a grocery store. Imagine having to go to another city to get food. Imagine having to ride the bus to go to another sector of Dallas, to go to a store and get fresh food. Imagine having to walk as much as 45 minutes to an hour to and from an adequate supermarket to get food. Imagine having to bring backpacks on your journey to load up with groceries to take back to your home. Imagine having to hop on the bus or walk with a couple of bags of chicken, a 15 pound bag of potatoes, a gallon of milk, bread, veggies among other things. I did all of that, and wore out numerous pairs of shoes in the process.
The previous local store, E-Zee Shop, which existed even before my parents arrived here in 1972, had become a shell of a supermarket until it closed around '07/'08. The atmosphere was dreary to say the least, and most of all meat, fruits and veggies were not up to par, the refrigerator equipment had become well outdated, causing meat and fruits/veggies to lose their freshness. Bread was rumored to have mold and droppings in them. I say rumors because I didn't witness it myself, but I clearly remember seeing Flour Weevils in a couple of cake mixes I purchased. When I went to the owner/operator to tell them what happened, they informed me of a switch in warehouses, mostly likely an older warehouse, as the reason for the change in the quality of food.
Plus the people there were not always the best when it came to customer service. Some people had run ins with them. The old man who owned the building was somewhat cool, but after his death, it was off the hook. The story as some folks tell it was they closed up because they were robbed at gunpoint. Typical hood story, yeah I know.
However a neighboring tenant who ran her own tax service stated they were not only mean to customers, but also to her as well, and cited that mistreatment among local citizens may have actually caused the robbery, as an act of retaliation and not just some attempt to get money.
I can agree with that analysis, because after closing shop for several months, the same people came back as another so-called grocery store, this time they called themselves Value Giant, promising to open up as a totally different store, even promising to open a deli, and allow customers to rent DVDs. Doesn't sound to me like the robbery attempt affected them that much.
Within days, maybe less than a week or two, Value Giant had to close down, selling off their meat at prices like 25 cents a pound. Did another robbery cause this to happen? Not at all. What happened was Value Giant was using E-Zee Shop's old outdated equipment (since they were the same people anyway), including the refrigerator, causing the meat to become brown and aged, and ultimately they could not operate any longer. My question is simply why would you try to re-open a store using the same antiquated, broken down, substandard equipment anyway? What does that say about your perception of the community you claim to serve?
Well you know how it is in the hood right? It's never their fault as to why these areas become targets of urban neglect, right? It's not the city's fault as to why a prison was built in the surrounding area before the crime actually came, right? It's all these damn criminals around here, right? Even if crime was not a problem at all, even when Highland Hills was considered a lower-middle class neighborhood designed and built especially for African-Americans who were looking to move their growing families into actual homes they could afford to buy, before the crack and drug era, before the proliferation of street gangs, but hey, let's not blame them, and definitely do not bring up the subject of racism. Racism and Dallas, Texas does not go together at all, even if in 2010 they allowed a casino named after a Native American tribe to post an offensive giant size advertisement in the middle of Downtown Dallas.
It's always the citizens' fault, and we blindly jump right on the bandwagon, with our self-hating, one -bad-apple-spoils-the-whole-bunch, believe everything they say about us, selves. Can you believe local ex and current politicians actually believed that developers refused to assist in "revitalizing" and investing in the area because of a few young Black men who wore baggy pants, and the supposed crime in the area?
During a talk about art in 2013 one ex-politician tried to challenge me on not believing such an idea, leaving me to present the flyer that the city of Dallas was sending out in 2010, encouraging local residents to vote yes to allowing liquor and beer to be sold in local stores, claiming the money accumulated would help build roads, parks, and aid in the police force.
So imagine this community being persuaded to allow a store that we don't have, because nobody wants to invest in such a "crime-ridden" area (code word for "a place filled with niggers") to sell a DRUG which contributes to up to 20,000 road deaths ANNUALLY, but not good enough to actually put a STORE with FRESH, QUALITY, AND REASONABLY PRICED FOOD in a neighborhood to aid and assist its citizens? And don't tell me nothing about paying taxes...We all know about taxation without representation...
Just when I got into the groove of blogging, other things pop up, and blogging takes a back seat. I'm preparing for a showcase coming up in which yours truly will exhibit my work to my local community, something I haven't done in 5 years, and it's been long overdue. This one here promises to be somewhat different than the previous showcase, due to changes in certain areas, especially in the rebuilding of the local library. This is a big plus for me, because not only do I get to exhibit my work, I can also access classrooms with projectors and screens, and trust me, I do have something planned for that as well. I don't want to spill all of the beans right now, but just to inform those who started getting into the habit of reading my blog regularly that I would be off the social topics for a while, but only on this platform.
I know I had not finished the blog concerning Leslie Jones and Milo Yiannopolous, but in this age of fast food information and hot gossip, it's become passe' anyway, not that it's no longer important to discuss the issue, but one with much insight will see this issue pop up in another way shape or form, and the Leslie vs. Milo incident can be used as a reference point. But that's for people who value critical thinking and reasoning, which is not what our world is concerned with.
Anyway an extra special thanks to those who take the time to read my lil' ol' blog, it is greatly appreciated. Not to get too involved with stats and metrics, which brings me back to my old customer service rep ways (UGGGH!) but last month set personal records for my blog in terms of views and readership. It's only fitting that I show gratitude in some form for those who take the time out of their busy schedule to come and See What I See (CWATIC).
Until next time, take care and hang tight, we're only getting started here.
To Conclude: The purpose of digressing from the main topic of this blog serves to show that regardless of any attempts to use Muhammad Ali's life and death as a glowing example of a more "peaceful" ,"progressive" and "moderate" version of Islam and a beacon of American values, the PR campaign does more harm than good for Muslims in America.
The reality is that Muslims, like other marginalized and fringe groups in America, must come to understand they are in the middle of a battle of ideas within American society, mainly between conservatives and liberals, to which neither side Islam has a total alliance and affinity with. Both philosophies express White supremacist thoughts and ideas with regards to other races, cultures, creeds and religions, although the approach and tactics may differ. Since the rapid growth of Muslims and the Islamic Way of Life in the 1990s, especially among the indigenous population, America has had to come to grips with the reality that Islam in America is growing and is not going away anytime soon, so attempts to stifle, diffuse, and neutralize its potential growth, influence and power have become a priority, despite the huge amount of statistical evidence to prove that the fall of the American society is a product of its own undoing.
Accomodating Muslims will always find themselves ping-ponging on both sides in a futile effort to assimilate into a society that has not fixed its internal issues, beit structural racism, government corruption, crime, drug abuse, failing educational system, or the decline of societal values and priorities which has some people valuing the life of dogs over humans. Homicides, suicides, deaths by alcohol and other drugs, along with death by diseases continue to plague the country, reaching newer heights almost annually, yet all of that is trumped by claims of a so-called global terrorist group seeking to "Islamicize" a country in which Muslims only represent 2.5 to 3 percent of the population.
SIDE NOTE: Islam sees the life of this world as a test, as stated in numerous versus in the Quran, such as the 67th Surah Al Mulk, verse 2:
It is He(Allah) Who created death and life in order to test those who are best in deeds... Islam does not encourage any forcing of the religion on one who does not believe on one's own volition. There is no need nor use for forced conversions, as some claim, for they do nothing for the soul in the Hereafter.
To Continue: Conservative propaganda continues to range from the overtly bigoted sites such as Answering Islam to all forms media which basically tells its readers that ALL Muslims cannot be trusted, and are potential terrorists, that Islam is to blame for the destruction of the Twin Towers, to discount dissenting opinions among American citizens regarding 9/11 as conspiracy theorists, how Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) encouraged everything from suicide bombings to domestic violence without giving actual evidence, or using gross distortion of texts, such as the article 164 Jihad Verses in the Quran, where any verse containing words such as kill, fight, die, blood, retaliate and so on are listed as a verse allegedly proving Islam's preoccupation with fighting and killing. No such evidence exists in such texts, however despite the Religious Rights' claim to The Ten Commandments in The Holy Bible, in which one of those commandments levy stern warnings against bearing false witness against thy neighbor, conservatives continue an assault filled with distortions and blatant lies to their Muslim neighbors.
Liberal propaganda against Islam is of a different substance, yet it wishes to produce the same results. Claiming that "Truth is relative","All religions hold truths" and "All religions encourage people to do good", liberal propaganda seeks to destroy the notion of an Absolute Deity and an Absolute Truth, as long is the notion is pertaining to their conservative counterparts. Allegations of possessing phobias such as the recent Orlando, Florida shooting, which has new twists and turns to the story appear daily, claims of misogyny and inequality among the sexes permeate throughout. Adding to this is the support and propagation of Sufism, a self-proclaimed, mystical version of Islam that claims to look beyond mere Sacred Text, and finding the personal connection with the Divine. This sect is supportedby such people as Oprah Winfrey, who along with the rest of the liberal contingency, like it's conservative counterpart, wishes to rid Islam of its essence, which is encased in Shariah, or Islamic Law.
Neither of these approaches have sufficiently given any definition of what Radical Islam means, but instead flood the media with pictures, videos, soundbytes, and distorted writings about what it claims to believe, but as of yet has not given a definition of Radical Islam itself. If one doesn't believe the bloggers' claims, then Google it for yourself. You will not find a clear cut definition, but instead a description which at best is merely subjective, and in the eyes of the beholder.
But in closing all of this would be for naught if the Muslims did not believe in the propaganda pushed on both sides, and not use the subversive terminology which floods these airwaves, intended to cause division, dissension, and dissolution of the True Islamic Way of Life. Some Muslims have taken it among themselves to align themselves with groups and organizations that are contrary to the Islamic ideas in an attempt to placate and diffuse an already ignorant and/or bigoted society, ready to attack and scream extremists and radical at the first instance of an alleged ISIS attack, even if no evidence is found to support such an event.
It is of the utmost importance that Muslims establish credible venues and outlets that give a clear definition of Islam, using evidence from the two main sources in Islam, the Quran and the Sunnah of Its Last Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) to dispel all rumors and accusations, and to set forth a premise so non-Muslims can see for themselves, instead of holding circus acts, such as Muhammad Ali's funeral, which should have been a few days after his death, and holding memorial services with eulogies by politicians and so called interfaith groups claiming tolerance and diversity. Islam is in no need of such PR campaigns to prove that it is not intolerant of other beliefs and ways.
Muslims who use words such as fanatical, radical, extreme and the like to distinguish and distance themselves from what the media says will not stop others from attacking Islam, nor will fatwas (Islamic rulings regarding a particular issue) from accommodating scholars. If someone does not like you, there is nothing you can do to change that. Only the wresting of this terrorist and radical narrative from the liars and media magicians, along with giving a complete and true analysis of Islam can one give a true perspective as to whether or not a group is treading the True Path or has deviated, or has become a misguided and disbelieving group, and in some cases a hypocritical group (Munaafiq, a term for one who feigns Islam but wishes to destroy it), and the person will have a true account in place.
In other words as the Nigerian proverb goes, "Don't let the lion tell the giraffes' story."
Click here to go to Part One:
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:
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.
Over the past week and a half we have seen a constant stream of articles, mostly paying tribute to the late boxer and humanitarian, Muhammad Ali, who passed on June 3rd from complications regarding his long-time bout with Parkinson's disease, which he was diagnosed with shortly after retiring in 1980.
While no one can deny there was a time when Ali was the most recognizable human on Earth, as well as the most recognizable of Muslims, some of the articles seem to have gone to great lengths to place him in a league of his own, referring to him as the face of "real Islam", or "America's first Muslim Hero." Such lofty accolades are given, considering the fact there was a time when Ali rubbed many Americans the wrong way, mostly White Americans, with his critique of race relations, his refusal to enter into the military service, his relationship with Malcolm X(Al-Hajj Malik Shabbazz), his defiance, and his constant rants and never-ending taunts of his opponents inside the ring.
Three articles come to mind, two of them similarly titled; one reads Muhammad Ali: America's First Muslim Hero, by Dean Obeidallah, a comedian of Palestinian and Italian descent, the other Muhammad Ali: America's First and Last Muslim Hero by Lorraine Ali, a journalist of Iraqi and French-Canadian descent. Together with an article from Al-Jazeera, a satellite channel based in the country of Qatar, entitled Muhammad Ali; The Face of "real Islam", these articles attempted to portray Ali as the "true" image of Islam, with his promotion of peace, love, humility and supposed grace, his humanitarian ventures. Lorraine Ali tries to express in her article his "embracing American values" of hard work, fighting against racism and bigotry, and still becoming a beloved figure in the American mainstream.
What all three articles also intended was to portray Ali in the image of "moderate Islam", contrasting with "militant or radical Islam" in light of the mega-blitz of bigotry against Muslims in America and throughout the world, mostly generated by the media. This portrayal has had very negative effects against Muslims in the Western world. Having experience persecution, murdered, unjust incarceration, threats, laid off from jobs, and having laws being made against them using a suspicious claim of "terrorism" ,"radical Islam" ,"radicalization" or as some would say "Islamicization". This is intended to caste Islam as an intolerant, belligerent way of life. The propagation of such beliefs give rise to some of the most despicable deeds such as the protests whereas people stand around the Muslims' place of worship, some carrying firearms claiming to "protect themselves" from the evil, bad, terrorists, and their "forced" conversions and Islamicization of America.
The articles also attempt to portray Islam as having values in line with "American values". The problem with such an attempt is that it fails to take into consideration the constant war of ideas taking place in America, as well as the rest of the Western world, where once conservatism ruled the political, social, and economic landscape, but is now being fiercely attacked by the liberal contingency. So these American values that Islam share a commonality with seem ambiguous, and Islam in America finds itself caught in the middle of trying to align itself, if ever possible, with whoever seems to be winning the war of ideas. The latest examples being that of feminism (often called women's rights), same sex marriage, homosexuality, and the transgender issue.
But the biggest problem with these articles is that the authors give the reader the assumption that there is such a concept of radical Islam, a concept not really fully described by anyone, especially since most of the articles, videos, reports and documentaries about radical Islam comes from outside the Muslim community anyway. Just Google the phrase radical Islam and you will come up with so many articles which discuss the concept, but none can ever give clear definitions of what radical Islam is. And where there is such definitions, it's usually provided with such outrageous distortions of the foundations and fundamental beliefs of Islam, that it seems inconceivable that such claims can be made without checking all of the facts. One cannot possibly think that such individuals who pride themselves as being "thinking", "intelligent" beings will stoop so low as to reintrepret Islamic concepts to fit their bigoted conclusions, but alas the propaganda is plentiful.
Take the website Answering Islam, a Christian website designed to prove the "brutalness" of the Islamic Way of Life. This site has an article entitled 164 Jihad Verses In The Quran, an outrageous claim that these verses in the Quran all relate to Jihad, a grossly distorted concept propagated by some non-Muslims, and even some ignorant Muslims. What is found in this article is a hodge-podge of misinformation, whereas the author/s took great liberty at redefining Jihad as simply holy war, then took verses out of the Quran which contained words like kill, death, fight, retaliate, and so on, with the intention of casting Islam as a religion of violence. Regardless of the context, these verses were posted as evidence of Islam's preoccupation with fighting and death.
One erroneous example given can be found in two verses from the second chapter, Surah Al Baqarah. The verses involved, verses 178-179 deal with the concept of Qisaas, or retailiation. The verses clearly apply to the event in which a Muslim intentionally kills another Muslim without right. The victim, or the victims' family in the case of murder has the option of either retailiation, or compensation (diya);
2:178-179 Oh you who believe! Retaliation(Qisaas) is prescribed upon you in the matter of the slain; the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But if any remission is made for you by the aggrieved, then the diya(blood-money) should be made according to usage, and payment should be made in a good manner. This is an alleviation from your Lord, and a mercy, and whoever exceeds the limits after this, will suffer a painful chastisement.
Clearly these verses relate to dealing with the matter of Muslims killing other Muslims, yet Answering Islam chooses to display this as one of the verses relating to Jihad, which means to struggle on all fronts, not holy war. One would like to think that this is merely an oversight, but one can only make excuses for so long before suspecting other agendas.
We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights, that among these are the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776...
Have no faith in Constitution...
lyrics from the song "Spirits In The Material World", sung by The Police
I'm trying to think how long I tolerated the movie The Pursuit of Happyness, starring Will Smith, before ejecting the DVD and placing it back in the case. I think it was somewhere around the 30-40 minute area. The last thing I can remember was this man accepting a full-time, no paying, intern position, while his living conditions greatly deteriorated, causing internal strife within the family, and ultimately leading to his wife leaving he and his son behind. He also spent the course of a year homeless while he pursued his quest for "happiness."
Today Chris Gardner, the protagonist of the movie, is touted as some type of shining example of "initiative", or as conservatives say "pulling up the bootstraps" and all that mumbo jumbo. Personally, I saw the movie as another scapegoat of avoiding the rights of the people upon its' government, which is to insure justice among its citizens, by using media to persuade the ignorant masses that access to the basic necessities is a "privilege", and not a right.
What if this guy was unsuccessful in his pursuit? Would we have a movie entitled "Ni**er, Have You Lost Your Damn Mind?!" ? How many of us have been chastised or questioned for "quitting our day job," to follow our dreams, and pursue this ever-elusive "happiness"?
Looking back on this piece of propaganda now, and how it upset me so much, I think about the title itself and what it entails, and I think about the omission of the other "unalienable Rights" not mentioned in the title, which to me are more important than this "right" of the "Pursuit of Happiness", a vague "right" which was declared at the expense of the genocide of Native Americans, and the multitudes of African slaves who were exploited to the utmost degree while a few European immigrants sought their slanted interpretation of this pursuit, and to fulfill this "manifest destiny".
No Right to Life, and definitely no Right to Liberty for them. So don't even bother mentioning happiness.
Today when I look at this nation and its pursuit of happiness, I think of the constant propaganda campaigns by some liberals used to persuade people to be more concerned with legalizing certain drugs and certain lifestyles, same-sex marriage, instituting transgender bathrooms and gentrifying areas the local or state government neglected, forcing the current residents to flee due to the inability to afford high rent and property taxes, while neglecting what this nation seems to be doing to those who don't have access to the basic essentials of life itself; food, clothing, shelter, general health care, and so on.
Yasmin Nair, an LGBT activist, spoke last year about what she felt was the real intention behind this push for same-sex marriage.
At the same time I see some conservatives denying people of colors' Right to Life, defend the killing of unarmed Black men, criminalizing the poor, justifying mass incarceration and disenfranchisement of Black men, using this so-called War on Drugs and the profits generated from it, legalize mass exploitation of people through banking systems, using Big Gov to fund their imperialistic endeavors, inflate prices upon the populace, and demonizing other governments and beliefs by accusing their way of life as backwards and barbaric in an effort to assure no one would look for alternative ways of life.
In all of this furor, these "Rights" endowed by Creator, as the Declaration claims, seem to look more like privileges to those without any political voice, means, and definitely no media to articulate their concerns.
And BET and TV ONE do not count as Black Media...and definitely not OWN...so don't begin to kid yourself.
Deep in the heart of Texas, more people on food stamps are being "re-orientated" to get back into workforce, obtain jobs, or to get "better paying" jobs, in an effort to make themselves "self-sufficient". Recipients are being sent blue sheets of paper which state that it is a requirement for those on food stamps to look for work. This scheme requires a collaboration between the State Department of Human Services and the Texas Workforce Commission.
In this program people are being required to submit a certain amount of entries to businesses every week for a number of weeks in order to keep their food stamp benefits. Those who are working, but not working a required amount of hours are also being placed in this program as well.
In order to sell this, propaganda, or PR was used, and you know the usual culprits; racial anecdotes of Black people and their "treacherous" ways of manipulating human services, selling their food stamps for money to buy drugs, abusing their Section 8 privileges by allowing uncertified people to live with them, and so on. This propaganda perfectly fits the analysis given by Mumia Abu Jamal of how the impoverished are portrayed in America as possessing "character flaws", or a "defect of the spirit".
While many may think this orientation process is admirable, the reality is that this scheme's ultimate purpose is to reduce the state's' "burden" of having to provide access to decent nutrition to its citizens, a "right" or "entitlement" to the citizens of the state. The fact remains that the overwhelming majority of those on food stamps are not on it due to lack of employment, or of substantial employment, but the inability to afford sufficient nutrition for themselves and their families.
But when the masses of people hear the constant rumblings in the media about LaQuita and her 5 children by 4 different men, the tendency of Americans is to welcome these "reforms" presented to the nation as a way to get rid of this "welfare state", or as Bill Cosby put it once, a "culture of poverty".
Edward L. Bernays, the late psychoanalyst and nephew to Sigmund Freud called it "The Engineering of Consent."
So forget the statistics that show most food stamp recipients in America are White, you can't use them as the boogeyman, that won't go over too well. You need to reach deep down and pull out the most sinister culprit to remove people's entitlement to the basic necessities of life. Sorta like when "radical Islamists" are used to remove people's entitlement to privacy.
Oh, and I forgot to mention, under this program those considered able to work but unable to find "gainful employment" are subject perform "community service". So now not having a job sounds like a misdemeanor. Just like the Black Codes. And you know what that lead to.
No wonder so many disenfranchised and poor youth either take the grimy road of hustling, or voice their displeasure of the way things work here in America, such as lyrics like these:
F**k your American Dream
That sh*t's not real
It's really more of an American Scheme
Cuz ' When I think of the American Dream
I think about
Student Debt, Inflation, and how my Ancestors screamed
Look the corporations really hate you
and almost every institution is tryin to rape you
But they don't care...
lyrics from the forthcoming song "Like Us", performed by Knoxie-Ty.
Okay, I know this incident occurred in December of last year, so sue me. But I have my reasons for bringing it up now.
First of all, until three weeks ago, I didn't even know who Ayesha Curry was. I mean I'm on social media, but not on the magnitude that some people are, commenting on EVERY LITTLE THING said or done, and commenting on what so-called celebrities have said and done is definitely not the move for me.
However, some things have to be addressed, and this is one of them. Not just because of the ultra-sensitivity black feminists exhibited on this issue, but also how this reflects the tense environment concerning Black male-female relations on the whole. Yes, I am very critical of feminism and it's meteoric rise in the culture and psyche through all media outlets, but truth is truth, regardless of who delivers it.
A couple of weeks ago I was shown a blog post entitled Ayesha Curry Is A Threat To Black Feminism, written on March 9th, 2016, by one Ali Shakur, aka Hannibal X, a Youtube blogger and host of a podcast show called Hannibal At The Gate. Seeing that I was busy continuing with deconstructing the Beyonce Super Bowl performance, I put it over to the side, still curious as to what it meant, but not curious enough to interrupt what I was already working on. To be honest I wondered who was this Ayesha Curry, this woman who from my initial impression openly opposed feminism, and their pundits.
When I finally read the article, I was kinda taken aback, expecting to hear damning statements about feminism from this Ayesha The Feminist Slayer character that the title insinuated, but what I seemed to have gotten was a sensationalized article, taken out of context by virtually all parties involved.
First off, when I realized Ayesha Curry is the wife of All Pro Golden State Warriors point guard Stephen Curry, my enthusiasm quickly turned to skepticism, because I usually don't perceive supposed celebrities or their spouses to make comments about political issues, especially when they concern the Black community. And after reading this blogpost, I rest my case.
Seems that this "threat to Black feminism" made comments in late December concerning certain unspecified attire that she considered to be trendy, and stating her opinion that although wearing barely anything in public seems to be the trend, she'd rather "save the good stuff for the one that matters".
Somehow the super-duper-ultra-sensitive felt shamed, and therefore a flurry of responses flew, reading more into what they felt Ayesha was implying, and immediated accusing Ayesha of feeling herself, and attacking women who wear provocative clothing in public. This seems commonplace for certain people who tend to read into everything as some type of shaming, or the new word "micro-aggression" against feminism, accusing others of being judgemental while they themselves exhibit the same tendencies, as shown in the last tweet, where the word "patriarchal" is used to assert that Ayesha is not thinking with her own mind, but instead is "indoctrinated" with what they consider "male thinking."
Now where the "slut shaming" accusation came from I have no earthly idea, but again, that's feminism for you. Or better yet, that's what liberalism is about...
By now you're asking yourself "Why so much energy on this ONE event?"
My response would be: Something's in the air, and it's not just that funky weed smoke I keep smelling in public nowadays. We have been witnessing a sociopolitical climate change that I feel intensified during 9/11 and Obama's Presidential elections. These are just two telltale events that conservatives use as fuel to recruit new believers and as they say "Take back America" in this war of ideas between conservatives and liberals, although the War on Ideas in America can go back to 1925 with the Daniel Scopes trial.
Today in America attention is being directed to 2.5 to 3 percent of the population who identify themselves as Muslims, being demonized and accused of attempting to take over this nation and "Islamicize" it, whatever the hell that means. Using "terrorist" attacks, alleging plots of biological terrorism that has been trumped recently by the events in Flint, Michigan, and the latest boogeyman, or in this case a boogeygroup with an English acronym and a mysterious khalifah as a pretext to demonize and ban a lifestyle that has very little if anything to do with those who don't ascribe themselves to being Muslims in the first place. It should be strongly noted that forcing people to adhere to a law when they don't believe in the way of life is nothing short of foolish, if not flat out stupid, and there is nothing in the Holy Qur'an to support this idea anyway.
Yet we hear of the big, bad, radical Muslim, severing heads on the internet, calling to a distorted definition of jihad, blowing up him or herself and for some strange reason publicize their intent to kill, maim and destroy, in an effort to Islamicize the entire globe, starting with America, whether anybody likes it or not. This scare tactic then becomes fuel for the likes of conservatives Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson, and any other conservative to use to rally America and the rest of the so-called free world to rid this menace. So now so-called patriots stand outside mosques, armed with weapons because of a claim, without looking deeply into the evidence, and asking who really benefits from such terrorists attacks?
Never mind the growing liberalization of America, especially in the areas of marriage, family, morals, something conservatives always pride themselves on. Never mind the abortion issue, the rise of feminism, the prevalence of pornography and the harmful effects, the fact that 20,000 people die annually from alcohol related issues, and the same sex marraige victory in the Supreme Court in which one conservative voted in favor. Never mind the secularization of America, and the growth of atheism. Nope, Islam is Public Enemy No. 1 here.
SO WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH BEYONCE'?
Simple. Since the movie Birth of A Nation, Blacks have always been portrayed as savage-like creatures, who if freed with wreak havoc on such a "blessed" nation, especially on White women. This technique was used to justify the creation of a White group, claiming to adhere to the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Holy Bible, to keep the "savages" in line. It was eye-candy for racists who had never perceived Blacks as human beings in the first place, even if White men in Black face were used to get their point across.
And since that time any attempts made to either intergrate, assimilate or simply receive justice and self-determination in this society by and for Black people has been deemed as subversive, and detrimental to this nation by conservatives. Go figure. The demonization of the Black Panther Party by certain agencies serves as a reminder that America's melting pot and social status quo never meant to include Black people, regardless of certain "concessions" made in all spheres of American culture.
Rudy Giuliani exposed himself in criticizing Beyonce's Super Bowl performance by proclaiming what he saw as an attack on police by women in provocative getup, gyrating to a song proclaimed to be a Black pride anthem, sung by a self-proclaimed "bitch-slaying" feminist, which includes certain graphic sexual lyrics like;
When he f*** me good, I take his a** to Red Lobster, because I slay If he hit it right, I might take him on a flight on my chopper, because I slay
Wow...How could Giuliani or anyone see an attack on police with a song like Formation is beyond me. A video of a Black woman seductively sprawled on top of a sinking police vehicle is by no means revolutionary nor empowering to me, nor is a child in a black hoodie defiantly dancing in front of cops, who eventually raise their hands in submission does anything for me either. If anyone found that threatening, my belief is that they'll buy anything.
But some concern also goes to those who took this as something positive for Black people, that a feminist who would tell "bitches" to bow down, would promote hetero Black male figures that are now being dragged across the coals by Black liberals in some of the most disgusting ways is even more troubling for me.
Yep...Something's in the air...
But going back to Rudy, it seems he has a history of histrionics, creating or contributing to contrived events garnered to grab attention, such as the convoluted display of heroism during the 9/11 event. His constantly appearing in front of the cameras, posing to give off commands during rescue efforts, and his "take charge attitude" and "sincerity" won him the Time Magazine Person of the Year Award in 2001. Boy, you gotta give it up for propaganda.
The media circus that surrounded this event is just one of many ways some groups use to engineer consent to spread further injustice on an unknowning, unaware or unconcerned community of people, many who are either too preoccupied with frivolity or too uneducated to figure out what's in store for them. The recent repealling of key parts of the voting rights act of 1965, combined with the rise of right-wing militias, and the acquittals of the likes of George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, the Charleston, South Carolina shootings and others in the deaths of unarmed Black people indicate that things don't seem to look very bright for people of color in the United States in the near future, regardless of who takes the Presidency in this year's election.
Beyonce's Bogus Black Power tribute being criticized and protested by some shows that certain sectors of the American public will read into anything as some form of justification to take America back to its' early years. When people of color were held captive in chains and enslaved. But why would the liberal media take this event and broadcast and parade it as such is even more puzzling.
Now I'm really beginning to understand the meaning behind this recent plethora of slave movies.
Just like those Prophet Muhammad cartoon drawing contests.
Yep...Something's afoul in the air here... and it ain't just the weed smoke.
Brunch at Mercat Bistro
-
Mercat Bistro, a Michelin-recommended European-style bistro in the Harwood
District, offers an exceptional weekend brunch experience. With a
zero-waste a...
New site, late goodbye
-
Hello, Friends!
Observation: I am not actively blogging here anymore, but I never said
goodbye.
I have never been great at goodbyes. But I'm not trying to...
ORIGINAL ABSTRACT PAINTING SOLD
-
Hi My Friend, I have not had a chance to say much about this new piece. I
was showing a friend some work on my phone and she saw this one and wanted
it...
Let Bannon and Trump talk. We’ll report.
-
*When a top White House* aide called *The New York Times* on Wednesday to
offer up the sort of cartoonish, press-hating invective that has
characterized Pr...
Spring FEVER
-
Spring has got me in a frenzy lately. I'm trying to design new goodies as
well as keep my wonderful clients happy. It's something really special
when a c...
End of Summer, Already?
-
"BoatYard"
16 x 20 Oil on linen
Framed
Available
(detail)
(detail)
It seems like July just began and now here we are at the end of August.
Most of the ...
Ms Dopson's class FDHS spring 2014
-
My students' activating activity was to build the tallest free standing
tower with spaghetti, marshmallows, and gum drops. Students then explained
how pr...
Remembering Hurricane Katrina
-
We should never forget what took place 8 years ago in the city of New
Orleans. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina the levees broke and massive
flooding ...
Colors
-
What do your dreams hold for you? What does your subconscious tell you to
do? Do your dreams happen in sleep or wide awake? Do they reveal what you
must un...
Gracious Gretchen
-
*"Gretchen"*
20x16 oil on gallery wrapped canvas
I've been painting but was not satisfied with anything that I thought was
post worthy. How excited was ...