response to accusations

8/8/2019 Response to Accusations

1/5

www.fahmedeen.org

1

To SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence)

Recently I came across your lengthy diatribe against Mufti Taqi Usmani

in your so-called March 26, 2009 letter addressed to him. He was not

supposed to answer you personally because he is humble and polite

and because he is pretty far from cheap altercations. But I, as one of hisadmirers, took it upon myself to take you on.

Just as you are serving your master David Yerushalmi, I am serving

mine. Your master teaches you to traduce and badmouth other people.

My Master, in contrast, commands me to speak fair to people (Al

Quran 2:83). He also commands His servants to say peace in response

to the ignorant ones. (Al-Quran; 25:63). I therefore, say, Peace! in

response to your letter, because every sentence of your letter

demonstrates the ignorance against which we are directed by the Holy

Quran (25:63) to say peace.

No wonder! As John Monbiot says, - one adult in five believes the sun

revolves round the earth; only 26% accept that evolution takes place by

means of natural selection; two-thirds of young adults are unable to

find Iraq on a map; two-thirds of US voters cannot name the three

branches of government; the maths skills of 1 5-year-olds in the US are

ranked 24th out of the 29 countries of the OECD. (Guardian: October

29, 2008)

You seem totally ignorant of the maxim that ones language reflects

ones stock, breeding and schooling, -the way one is born and taught.

Please judge your language against this altruism. You did not take away

a whit from Mr. Usmani or Mr. Ranzini; you only gave yourselves away.

You say, You, Mufti Usmani, have issued a fatwa for violent jihad

against the West to be conducted by Muslims living in the West.

Although Mufti Usmani has never issued such a fatwa and you cannot

prove it through any of his writings, you dont even know what a

fatwa is. You may profit by consulting the Columbia World Dictionary

of Islam, which states that, It is a vulgar error to suppose that a Fatwa

is a sentence of death, or some such thing, as Western journalists

sometimes imply. Rather, A Fatwa (Arabic plural Fatawa) is nothing

more or less than the answer to a question on a matter of religion put

to a person qualified to deliver answers to such questions, who is

known as a mufti.

In other words it is the expression of expert opinion. It is like an opinion

by a legal or medical expert. So, would you deny Mr. Usmani the free


2/5

www.fahmedeen.org

2

expression of opinion, because, such freedom is the exclusive

prerogative of Zionists and Christians, and he is a Muslim?

Evidently you do not even seem to be aware of the true connotations

of violent. If you were you would know that armed jihad, -which is

what Mr. Usmani meant by jihad in some of his writings can NEVER beaggressive, brutal or cruel, which is what violent is synonymous with.

The epithet would, on the contrary, apply admirably to Crusades.

Your observation any wonder a Pakistani newspaper all the way

around the world takes notice of Bank and Ranzini going Shariah!?!

exposes the lamentable extent of your ignorance. It is the very apogee,

because, the Pakistani newspaper, Pakistan Daily, you have made such

a brouhaha about, was not the original publisher of the news item. Nor

was it all the way round the world. Right in your own home a very

American ABC News telecast the detailed Associated Press story onJanuary 13. The Pakistani newspaper, on which you have vented your

misplaced rage, only published an excerpt of the story, full 18 days

later, on January 31. Anyone in your place would feel contrite at the

gaffe you have made.

The panic, that has overtaken the Shylocks due to shariah banking

having secured a foothold on what has been their exclusive turf, is

understandable. Hence, your vitriolic language, as if you would chew

Mr. Ranzini (and Mr. Usmani, too?) if you could lay your hands on them,

as the Crusaders chewed the flesh of Muslims and even Christians of

the Eastern Church who did not join them.

You taunt MF. Ranzini, saying, Shariah is not quite as profitable as he

thought! But you are ignorant of the fact that shariah financing is not

about blind profit-making. This is what insulates shariah financial

institutions against collapse. The total net income for this pathetic

excuse of a bank for the 9 months ending Sept o8 was $108,739 as

you say. But did it go bankrupt? Did it seek any bailout? Did it have to

lay off its staff? Compare that, please, with the giants that made

mountains of profits: Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,

Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual Bank, AIG, et al. By the way did

you know that the chief financial Officer of Freddie Mac committed

suicide recently? This would never happen to a shariah-based financial

institution.

So pathetic is your ignorance that you dont even know what your own

Old Testament says on charging interest. If you lend money to my


3/5

www.fahmedeen.org

3

people, the poor with you, you shall not be as a money lender to him,

you shall not put interest on him, is not an Islamic injunction; it is right

there in Exodus 22:25!

Your claim that Mr. Usmani is a leader of the war against the West, -

in other words, Christendom, is blatant calumny. It is true that he insome of his writings supported armed jihad when the freedom and

honor of an Islamic state is in danger. But, as a mufti, he only offered

his considered opinion on a theological issue. How does that make him

a leader? But taking liberty with language only exposes your crass

ignorance.

Your fulmination against Dow Jones, too, is risible. The company only

demonstrated its vision and commonsense. It hired Mr. Usmanis

services as an authority on Islamic theology which has no relation to his

views on jihad.

And, finally, jihad! With the level of knowledge you seem to have and

with your brains washed with a powerful anti-Islam detergent, you had

better leave the subject alone. It is far too profound a subject for you to

comprehend. However, the question Is he who goes groping on his

face more rightly guided or he who walks on a straight path? (Al

Quran; 67:22), illustrates the difference between Islams jihad and

Christian crusade.

For example, your Scriptures do not offer any guidance on how war is

to be waged, when and with whom. So you have Dresden, Hiroshima,

Nagasaki, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and so forth. You have Abu

Gharaib, Guantanamo, Bagram, My Lai, Deir Yasin, Sabra Shatila, Qana,

Mirwahim and, more recently, Gaza. And you have not only devastation

of property but also merciless destruction of foliage as in Vietnam with

Agent Orange.

Such practices are unthinkable in jihad which prohibits spilling innocent

blood. Islam prescribes strict rules of engagement. A mujahid enlists to

fight only to please God and for no personal gain. He would not

appropriate even a pin or a straw for himself. Unlike non-Muslims, who

are accountable only to their commander, a mujahid is answerable not

only to his commander but also to God.

No mujahid ever ate the flesh of his victim. Crusading Christians did.

They ate the flesh not only of their Muslim adversaries but even of the

Christians of the Eastern Church who did not join them. No Muslim


4/5

www.fahmedeen.org

4

burnt Jews on stakes or in gas chambers. Westerners did. Muslim rulers,

on the contrary, offered sanctuary to Jews oppressed by Christians.

Moreover, mujahedeen will never cheat on an undertaking. Compare

this with what the Jews, -Gorion son of Nicomedes, Ananias son of

Sadok, and Judas son of Jonathan did with the Roman commander

Metilius. They assured Metilius upon oath that they would allow safepassage to the Roman contingent if the soldiers laid down their arms.

But when, in accordance with the covenant, they had all laid down

their bucklers and swords and with no suspicion remaining, were taking

their departure, Eleazars party fell upon them.... Thus brutally

butchered, perished all save Metilius; he alone saved his life by

entreaties and promises to Judaize, even to the point of being

circumcised.

This happened around September 66 C.E and it was Josephus, a Jewish

historian who narrated this story. Ah! But you are ignorant even of yourown history. In contrast, when the Prophet of Islam entered into a

treaty with his foes, he stuck to it in letter and spirit, despite frustration

among his followers. History celebrates this event as the Treaty of

Hudaibiya. And, when he entered victorious into the city of Makka he

declared general amnesty instead of ordering a massacre. That is jihad.

Even today, you may contrast what Pfc. Steven Dale Green and his

companions did to 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, in Iraq, with

how Taliban behaved with the female Christian (Western) journalists,

whom they kidnapped. By your standards Green and his pals were

civilized guys and Taliban are backward. But the civilized ones gang-

raped a Muslim girl and then shot her along with her parents, while the

backward Taliban did not ever touch their Christian captives.

One such was Sunday Express reporter Yvonne Ridley. No wonder she

was so enchanted by the conduct of her captors that she took to

reading the Quran, converted to Islam and gave up drinking. You may

turn to the BBC news for the full story.

Indeed, if you sought Divine guidance and tried to learn and

understand the meaning of jihad and the precepts of Islam, you would

feel the change.

By the way your threat that David Yerushelmi has Mr. Usmani in his

litigation sights is no news. Shylocks will always drag innocent

Antonios to the court.


5/5

www.fahmedeen.org

5

As to your challenge, Bring it on, it befits you. But Mr. Usmani desires

me to convey to you that in answer to your challenge, he humbly prays

to God that He may guide you to the Eternal Truth and the Straight

path, -that is Islam. Amen!

Peace!

Dr. Muhammad Akbar

response to accusations

Documents