USA is officially anti MUSLIM

There is evidence that American soldiers who burned copies of Quran in AFGHANISTAN didn’t do it by mistake. This suggests that hate toward Islam and Muslims is part of undeclared US policy.

Please note: anti-Islamism is not part of NATO’s policy, so you don’t see European soldiers burning Qurans. American soldiers do it because they are trained to hate Muslims. A US Colonel and Major shot in the head inside the heavily fortified Afghan interior ministry on Feb. 25 were killed after they repeatedly insulted the Quran in front of an Afghan intelligence officer as they watched riots on TV. The Afghan couldn’t take it and turned his weapon on his American trainers.

Why American soldiers burn Qurans and pee on dead bodies even after ten years of living with the Afghans? After all, you learn to show courtesy in a day or two, let alone a decade.

It is because anti-Islamism is part of America’s unstated policy where US government departments encourage hate toward Islam and Muslims. The idea is to create an enemy, unify America and justify a large war machine.

American government departments nurture this hate through the media and training academies for policemen and the military.

Departments like the Pentagon and CIA and some civilian hate groups believe that pitching the united states against Muslims serves strategic interests. This overlaps with the agendas of lobbies in washington promoting Indian and Israeli interests. Governments in these two countries actively encourage American journalists and government officials to adopt an anti-Islamist attitude.

All of this leads to a pattern: Breed anti-Muslim hate to continue the war on terror and achieve several side goals.

If you were a Muslim, you would never throw a Bible into a garbage pit. Most Muslims are trained since childhood to respect the Bible and the Torah as holy books equivalent to the Quran. The only situation where a Muslim would commit the blasphemy of throwing a Bible in a garbage pit is if he or she were trained to hate christians.

American soldiers and their commanders could have issued instructions to properly dispose of the copies of the Quran in their possession. But they didn’t. It was their deliberate choice to give the Muslim holy book a humiliating treatment.

The case of the US Army Colonel and Major killed with bullets in the head is an example of this.

Also, one can look at the reckless statements from US politicians, especially Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin. Both criticized Obama for his apology on Quran burning. Imagine the reaction of Afghans reading this the next morning before going out for more protests? Will they not kill another American just to spite Newt and Sarah?

Gingrich and Palin probably led to more American deaths in Afghanistan.

Recently, authorities in New York City added anti muslim films to the training course at New York police department. And Norway’s mass murderer, Anders Breivik, who killed nearly 80 innocent Norwegians last summer, has told investigators he was inspired by extremist American evangelists.

According to an American study, hate groups in America have multiplied since 2000. And one American think tank has accused people in us government of organizing & fomenting anti-Muslim hate.

A year ago, an American extremist almost assasinated a Jewish congresswoman. She barely survived but had to end her political career. And she’s Jewish, supposedly America’s most privileged minority.

So in many ways, the US is officially anti-Muslim.

 americans are good people. They should push for recognizing and containing hate in America as a first step to address the problem. Punishing US soldiers who burned the Quran can be a good step forward. That’s what the UN has suggested but American officials continue to stonewall.

American president Obama delivered a message of friendship to the muslim world in Cairo in June 2009. The US soldiers buried it forever with one matchstick at Bagram base, Afghanistan

SAY YES TO THE SHARIAH ECONOMY

The current financial crisis has seriously eroded confidence the Western world had in the suitability of the free market. However the Western world when looking at alternatives only see remnants of Socialism or some state intervention in economy as feasible and workable systems. It is also this reason that allowes free market ideologues to continue citing more regulation, transparency i.e. more capitalism with some tinkering as solutions. This crisis represents an opportunity for all Muslims to present the Islamic alternative. It is important to show Islamic economics as much more then Islamic finance and Banking. This is exactly what Adnan Ahmed Yousif, CEO of the Bahraini-based Albaraka Banking Group and chair of the Union of Arab Banks outlined in an interview with the Middle East's Asharq Al-Awsat when asked about the global financial crisis: ‘The success of Islamic banking will lead to serious consideration of Islamic economics, which continues to realize numerous achievements, as a viable alternative to the current global economic system which continues to be hit by these crises.' With this in mind the following points should be borne in mind and when presenting Islam:-

1. The Islamic economy follows a philosophy which is very different to Capitalism, as a result the end objectives both economies attempt to achieve, widely differ and thus it would be invalid to measure one against the other as they both have different foundations and aims. Islam has detailed laws on the distribution of wealth and this is its ultimate aim with the economy - to ensure wealth circulates around the economy so all can share in the wealth that is generated.

2. Because all economic systems aim to address the same issues, there are many peripheral similarities between Islam and the free market. At a doctrinal level however Islam and Capitalism are two distinct systems. The Islamic economic system is fundamentally about people and their needs, this is the fundamental principal the Islamic economy is built around. In a narration from the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم it was said that: "The son of Adam has no better right than that he would have a house wherein he may live and a piece of cloth whereby he may hide his nakedness and a piece of bread and some water." (Tirmidhi). The Islamic economy is geared towards fulfilling the basic needs of its citizens and these in origin were defined as food, clothing and accommodation. This forms the basis of the Economic system of Islam, all policies and rules are geared towards achieving such ends. Islam focuses on the needs of the people which the hadith outlined and not merely increasing Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

3. Islam does not view the human as an economic unit and then look to find the most economically viable solution thus viewing all problems, whether from marriage to pensions to drugs to education, from the angle of the economic effect and cost. Neither does Islam view the human the way the Communists did which is that people are simply matter, just one aspect of nature, nothing more. Islam views the human as being composed of organic needs as well as instincts, all of which requires answers on how to satisfy them. So Islam organised these instincts and needs in a way that ensures the satisfaction of them all, such as the need to eat and the need to reproduce and others. However, this organisation is not arranged in Islam by satisfying some of them at the expense of the others, nor by suppressing some of them, setting others loose, or setting all of them loose. Instead, Islam has co-ordinated the satisfaction of all of them in a way to ensure comfort, preventing conflicts and a lapse to a primitive level through the anarchism of instincts.
4. Through its own economic system Islam laid down rules for the means to acquire wealth and commodities, how they can be utilised and their manner of disposal. It certainly did not make freedom of ownership the basis of the economic system or even the socialist principal of ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs'. It did not define the basic problem as ‘unlimited wants, limited resources'. Islam views the resources to be ample enough to completely satisfy the basic needs of all. Therefore, amongst a host of other detailed rules, one will find the Shari'ah aims to secure the satisfaction of all basic needs (food, clothing and housing) completely for every citizen of the Khilafah State.

5. In order to facilitate the acquisition of goods and services Islam put forward rules related to the manner of possessing wealth without any complications. Islam defined the legal means of ownership, and it defined the contracts through which possession can take place. This left humanity free to develop the styles and means by which they earn, as Islam did not interfere in the production of wealth.

6. The Islamic economic system has extensive rules for ownership and disposal of citizen's wealth and assets. Beyond this Islam recognises a sphere of the economy as the economic science i.e. through study and research a solution can be derived. Hence how to develop and economy or to industrialise where the factories and the supply lines should be, how the steel and iron mills should be constructed fall under this category, however what is produced and how it is distributed falls under the ‘system' for which Islam has extensive rules.

7. The Islamic economy is based upon wealth generation where participants partake in investment, employment and trade in the real economy. Islam does not have a dual economy where the real economy operates alongside a financial sector. The Islamic economy focuses all participants on the real economy, through employment, company profits, utilisation of land (agriculture) and manufacturing, wealth is generated in only one sector. This brings the huge benefit of wealth only circulating in one sector - the real economy, where all can participate. Derivatives would be withdrawn as this type of contract is not trade in real goods; rather it is betting on the price movements of a commodity and one must posses what they sell in Islam.

8. The Islamic system does not recognise the financial markets in their current form. One is able to purchase shares and transfer them without actually partaking in the running of the underlying company that the shares are meant to represent. In Islam ownership is a direct role in a company and not just a share certificate which in effect the stock market allows to be traded and re-traded. It is this ability to not have a direct role in a company that allows excessive speculation.

The Islamic economic system does not recognise the financial markets in their current form and has made the Western style Public Limited company (joint stock (share)) companies haraam for a number of reasons. Fundamentally this type of contract contradicts the Islamic rules for contracts. The company in the West represents a particular type of contract - the ‘Solitary Will,' this is where an individual agrees to the written constitution of a company by purchasing its shares with no formal offer from anyone. This has come to be termed as the Individual Will whereby shares could be exchanged very quickly without the need for two people to continuously sit down and have a formal offer and acceptance. An example of this is the take-over bid of the world's richest football club, Manchester United FC by Malcolm Glazier in 2005. He imposed his will on the company (i.e. he brought shares) and even though other shareholders were against such an action it was a legal form of acquiring ownership even though there was only one person in the contract. Most contracts involve two parties where one party offers terms and the other accepts, however under corporate law in the West setting up a business is a contract of ‘solitary will.' It is not a contract between two or more people; rather it is an agreement that stipulates that all parties agree to it when they subscribe for shares in the company. So an individual joins himself to the conditions of a company - through purchasing their shares. This means to become a partner one does not need approval from the existing owners - this contradicts Islam.

1. Islam's monetary policy is centred around a legal tender based upon the Gold and Silver standard and not one based upon interest rates to regulate inflation and the economy. In Islam when it comes to exchanging a commodity with a specific monetary unit, Islam has guided Muslims to the monetary unit by which the exchange is to take place. It has restricted the Khilafah to a specific type of money, which is gold and silver. The Islamic evidences have designated gold and silver as the primary measuring unit for prices and labour. This is understood from the actions of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم when he collected Zakat, levied taxes and imposed fines, all were measured according to gold and silver. This means the notes and coins circulating in the economy would all be backed by gold and silver. This will no longer make possible the free printing of currency as the Khilafah would need to increase the actual holdings of gold and silver. This has a unique effect on Inflation which free market economies have been unable to contain.
3. Islam contains inflation by changing the role of banks. Currently banks practice fractional reserve banking whereby they create credit, borrow money from the financial markets and lend to depositors. This creates a big problem in the economy as very little equity can be used as collateral to borrow large sums of money which creates a bubble waiting to burst. Islam strips the ability of banks to create money and transfers this to the central treasury - Bait ul-mal. Money creation will be the sole role of the state.
5. The role of banks in Islam will be to collect the nation's deposits and to also act as a central pool whereby money can be collected and invested in the economy, with the returns being distributed amongst investors. The banks would only be able to invest what they have in deposits and cannot create money as this is the role of the central treasury - bait ul mal. As interest (Riba) is haraam the main function of banks will become the pooling of wealth which can then be invested across the economy aiding wealth distribution and economic growth.
7. The Islamic economy is stripped of ‘interest' as this is something Islam has categorically forbidden in the Qur'an. Holding wealth in a bank account will no longer accrue interest and any unused wealth for a year is liable for taxation. In this way such wealth is only productive if invested or spent, and this can only take place in the real economy. The removal of interest in the economy will act as a multiplier affect circulating wealth around the economy.
9. Islam does not have a concept of income tax; value added tax, excise duties, nor national insurance contributions. Rather Islam puts the emphasis of taxation on wealth rather than income. Take the average salary in the UK of £24,000. At current tax rates the tax burden alongside National Insurance contributions falls at 33%. This alongside indirect taxation (that is taxation on spending rather than income) as well as council tax, road tax and so forth mean that the real tax burden falls at closer to the 40-50% mark. This means that the average person in UK is losing between £10,000-12,000. So at higher wage levels, the monetary amounts lost towards taxation is much greater.
11. In Islam, although simplified, the wealth tax falls at 2.5%. This means that within one year, on average one can save at least £10,000. Therefore two or three people could easily enter into a business contract such as Mudharabah (An Islamic company where one provides the Capital and the second partner works with it) to supply some of the demand in the economy for consumer or manufactured goods thereby creating more employment in the economy. With no concept of interest rates and hoarding forbidden in Islam wealth will circulate quickly ensuring the public can purchase what they specifically need, creating employment and giving all more and more disposable income.
13. Islam considers poverty as one matter for humans in any country and in any generation. Poverty in the view of Islam is the non-satisfaction of the basic needs in a complete way. Islam defined these basic needs as three things, which are food, clothing and accommodation. This is seen from the following evidences:
15. وَعلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
16. "The duty of feeding and clothing nursing of mothers in a seemly manner is upon the father of the child." [Al-Baqarah: 233]
18. أَسْكِنُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ سَكَنتُم مِّن وُجْدِكُمْ وَلَا تُضَارُّوهُنَّ لِتُضَيِّقُوا عَلَيْهِنَّ"Lodge them where you dwell, according to your wealth." [At-Talaq: 6] Specifically Islam made the financial support (Nafaqah) compulsory from the revenues of the Bait ul-Mal and from Zakah. From a Macroeconomic perspective the removal of interest, the financial markets and direct taxation allows wealth to freely circulate around the economy so all citizens can partake in the wealth generation process.

 Islam has ordained the state to play a direct role in the economy and does not leave things completely to the market. Islam lays out three types of property; state, public and private. It designated any utility regarded as indispensable for the community, such that its absence would require people to search far and wide for it, as public property. It would then be publicly owned and the revenue generates would be administered for the benefit of all citizens. This is derived from the hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: "Muslims are partners in three things: in water, pastures and fire." Although the hadith mentioned just three things we can utilise qiyas (analogy) and extend the evidence to cover all instances of indispensable community utilities. Thus water sources, forests of firewood, pastures for livestock and the like are all public utilities as well as the mosques, state schools, hospitals, oil fields, electricity plants, motorways, rivers, seas, lakes, public canals, gulfs, straits, dams etc. Islam would allow ownership if it were not indispensable for the community. This solution will have a unique effect, as it will ensure all will receive the basic requirements to live and not be at the will of monopolies or high prices.

OBAMA THE STOOGE !

Ok, Barack, from one Brooklyn boy to one Chicago boy, let’s talk straight and pull no punches. I don’t care how nice of a guy you may be, or how intelligent and articulate… ya blew it kiddo! Just like with your predecessors, especially Clinton and Junior Bush, you simply are a stooge of the wizards who control this empire.

Now, having said that, I’m no fool Barack. I realize that a president does not have the power that our phony media and our hot air academics have been selling to us for who knows how long. I know that. Yet, even with all the conspiracy info that I possess, I do know that even the wizards cannot keep any president from making some headway against this empire of greed, war and imperialism if the president had the will to change things.
Here five things that prove to me that your “hope and change” was a fraud, and that you’re a stooge for the elite
Continuing The Iraq & afghanistan Debacles: You knew that our invasions and occupations of Iraq and afghanistan went against every moral compass you claim to possess. You knew the Iraq thing was all about lies and disinformation. You knew we had no legal or moral justification to bomb the hell out of that country and then invade and occupy it. You could have told Congress and the American people that funding such a disgrace would bankrupt us financially and spiritually… as it has. As president, you could have and should have used the bully pulpit to alter the conversation and push for a withdrawal of forces and funds immediately
Yes, you would have gotten slack from it, yet with folks like republicans Ron Paul and Walter Jones, and Democrats like Dennis Kucinich and many others, the case would have been one of a bipartisan nature. The fact is, Barack, that most americans would have agreed with you, despite the bought-and-paid for mainstream media with its phony left-and-right slants. As far as Afghanistan, this whole ‘get those who did 9/11’ (if they were even the real culprits) action should have been part of a united nations policing effort… not a vendetta or revenge act of imperialism. By now you should realize that it really had very little, if at all, to do with Bin Laden or Al Qaeda. It was about extending our power to that region. History should have taught you, the scholar, that no foreigners have ever successfully colonized or occupied Afghanistan. How many of our own former military officers and CIA analysts do you need to tell you that?
Increasing Funding For This Military Empire: You have turned out to be the same as that jackass who you followed into the Oval Office. Instead of drawing down our 800+ bases worldwide and cutting this outrageous military spending, you give us halfhearted political stunts. The military spending last year was over 560 billion dollars…and that does not include the black budget that even you probably know very little about (so much for who runs things Barack). Ten years ago, the military spending was almost half of what it is now! We now spend, and you know this, Mr. President, 56 cents of every federal tax dollar on it… and you say we need economic stimulus!? Now, you are being forced, along with Congress, to cut spending. The plan you are selling us is a joke Barack, and you know it! It comes out to less than 8 % a year over 10 years. Ron Paul says all the cuts should be completed in one year! How many more forclosures, lost jobs, homeless, hungry, medically untreated and underwater americans need you see before you ‘Get it’?
Bailing Out the Rich and Not the Public: Have you seen the new film margin call yet? Watch it and understand what really went down, just in case your so called economic advisors have kept the truth from you. You could have stopped the TARP program, or at least put pressure on Congress to revamp it. How?

Well, that money could have gone to having Uncle Sam negotiate the purchase of all the bad mortgage paper at fire-sale prices. Then, the homeowners could have been given a choice to make a much lower payment each month, which would still go towards what they owed on the original mortgage. That way, even if it meant a longer time to finally repay the mortgage, the homeowner would not have to leave or lose the house. More important, the home would be off the market and all the rest of our homes would slowly increase in value. Instead, your advisors told you to continue the bailout of the rich investment sharks and let the rest of us struggle because of their recklessness.

Now, in a reelection bid, you say you finally ‘see the light’ and understand that the super rich need to contribute more by way of federal taxes. Yet, just like your phony party, you go ‘halfway’ on all good ideas. Your way is to make sure those millionaires pay 30%. You must know that in 1960 when JFK took office, the top bracket for federal income tax was at 90%. When Reagan took office, I believe it was around 77%, we both know that no one actually pays that high a rate, what with how accountants can nibble away here and there. Why not a simple Surtax with NO deductions? You cannot do it because your wealthy handlers won’t like that Barack, would they? I bet even your new poster boy Warren Buffet would not go for that much leaving his pocket either