NYC Mosque Solution: Move It...In Exchange for a Real 9/11 Investigation

American Muslim author Anab Whitehouse writes:

I propose that Imam Rauf and the other stakeholders in the Burlington Coat Factory property should be willing to move the mosque in exchange for a fair, independent, and transparently rigorous investigation into the events of 9/11.

full article here

Ahmadinejad: 9/11 scenario dubious

Press TV 8/7/2010 (26 Shaaban 1431)

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Western media hyped the September 11, 2001 attacks to pave the way for the US-led invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

"What was the story behind September 11? In the space of five to six days, and with the aid of the media, they swayed public opinion to the point of considering an attack on Afghanistan and Iraq permissible and a right [for themselves]," he said in a televised speech.

The president went on to add that while 3,000 deaths had been announced, no report containing the names of these victims had been released.

"Presently, more than 110,000 people [have been killed] in Afghanistan and over one million people have been killed across Iraq. But they will not allow [the figures to be made public]. How? [By] using media and fabricated news," he was quoted by IRIB as saying.

The Iranian president made the remarks on Saturday at a ceremony in Tehran marking the eve of the National Press Day.

Ahmadinejad said Western media had enabled the US to mount its campaign against Iran's nuclear program.

He said that the media had helped the US which has amassed thousands of Atomic bombs to claim another country might move towards building an A-bomb.

Tehran argues that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency it has the right to peaceful nuclear technology.

Dr. Salah Soltan Supports 9/11 Truth

"I share the view of many Americans, French, and Europeans, who say that 9/11 could not have been carried out entirely from outside [the U.S.] - by Muslims or others. The confessions by some people could have been edited. But even if they were not edited, I believe that these people were used in a marginal role. The entire thing was of a large scale and was planned within the U.S., in order to enable the U.S. to control and terrorize the entire world, and to get American society to agree to the war declared on terrorism - the definition of which has not yet been determined." -Dr. Salah Soltan, May 17, 2006 address on Al-Risala TV; cited by MEMRI, the "Zionist propaganda machine" run by former Mossad officers which is apparently hoping to scare Muslims away from supporting the 9/11 truth movement. Even MEMRI can't help being impressed by Dr. Sultan's credentials:

Dr. Salah Sultan is president of the American Center for Islamic Research (ACIR). On his website, he asserts that the main purpose of the ACIR is to "serve Allah (God) in the best way possible through the principles laid out in the Quran and Sunnah," to address misconceptions and extremism, to build bridges with non-Muslims, and to provide fatwas.

Dr. Sultan, who has been called "one of America's most noted Muslim scholars," is signatory to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) 2005 fatwa against terrorism, and is a former professor and president of the Islamic American University in Michigan. He is president of the American Institute for Religious and Cultural Studies, and active in the European Council for Fatwa and Research;the Fiqh Council of North America; and the International Association of Muslim Scholars. He previously served on the board of directors of Islamic American University, and on the Muslim American Society Board of Trustees. Dr. Sultan's resume states that he also serves on the board of trustees of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, and is a member of the Council of Indian Scholars and of the Association of Scholars in Germany.

CIA Admits Bin Laden Videos Are Fake!

By Steve Watson, PrisonPlanet.com

Two former CIA officials have admitted to creating a fake video in which intelligence officers dressed up as Osama Bin Laden and his cronies in an effort to defame the terrorist leader throughout the Middle East.

The details are outlined in a Washington Post article by investigative reporter and former Army Intelligence case officer Jeff Stein...

(full story at AscertainTheTruth blog)

Enver Masud: Fear Paralyzes U.S. Muslim 'Leaders'

Fear Paralyzes U.S. Muslim 'Leaders'

Citing the thoroughly debunked, official account of 9/11 as gospel, anti-Muslim bigots and opportunists rally around opposition to an Islamic Center near Ground Zero

August 3rd, 2010/22nd Shaaban 1431

by Enver Masud (http://www.twf.org/News/Y2010/0803-Fear.html)

Following the events of September 11, 2001, Muslims in the U.S. had reason to fear the U.S. government. Nine years on, the failure of Muslim leaders to make a concerted, united effort to expose the false account of 9/11 put forth by the U.S. government is inexcusable.

Earlier this year, the Guardian (UK) reported:

in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 the US government undertook the "preventative detention" of about 5,000 men on the basis of their birthplace and later sought a further 19,000 "voluntary interviews". Over the next year, more than 170,000 men from 24 predominantly Muslim countries and North Korea were fingerprinted and interviewed in a programme of "special registration". None of these produced a single terrorism conviction.

Muslims were hauled away by the government to places unknown. They were not informed of the charges against them, had no idea when they would be released, and were not given access to lawyers. Several Muslim charities were raided, their offices shut down, and officers imprisoned.

The Orwellian named Patriot Act had destroyed habeas corpus. U.S. District Judge John Gleeson had "ruled that it is constitutionally permissible to round up foreign nationals on immigration charges based solely on their race, religion or country of origin. What's more, he said they can be detained indefinitely, even after they have agreed to be removed to their home countries" wrote David Cole, law professor at Georgetown University.

While the George W. Bush administration was rounding up Muslims, and launching attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, president Bush, Jews and Christians spoke out against associating Islam with 9/11.

Since then, while the evidence against the official account of 9/11 has grown, so have attacks on Muslims and Islam, but Muslim "leaders" aren't using their trump card -- the false account of 9/11, to fight back.

Anti-Muslim bigots and political opportunists have rallied around opposition to the Islamic Center planned near Ground Zero -- the site of the World Trade Center attacks.

Former Republican candidate for vice president Sarah Palin, candidates for 2010 elections, right-wing news media, and the Anti-defamation League (ADL) have jumped on the bandwagon.

Mosques are being vandalized, and the construction of new mosques opposed.

If Muslim "leaders" were to fight back by denouncing the official account of 9/11 as patently false, they would find many Americans supporting their effort.

The number of Americans who do not believe the official account of 9/11 is increasing

Nine years on, there's overwhelming evidence that the official account of 9/11 is false, and a significant number of Americans do not believe "The 9/11 Commission Report".

These include 220 senior military, intelligence, law enforcement, and government personnel; 1200 architects and engineers; 250 pilots and aviation personnel; 400 professors; 300 survivors of 9/11; firefighters, and their numbers keep increasing.

"A poll taken by World Public Opinion, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, College Park, polled 16,063 people in 17 nations outside of the United States during the summer of 2008. They found that majorities in only 9 of the 17 countries believe Al Qaeda carried out the attacks."

In November 2007 Scripps Howard survey found that 32% believed it was "very likely", and 30% believed that it was "somewhat likely" that "some people in the federal government had specific warnings of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings."

On August 30, 2004, Zogby International, an independent U.S. polling company, reported half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International.

On May 24, 2006, Zogby reported that 42% believe "believe the government and 9/11 Commission are covering up", and 44% "believe President Bush exploited the 9/11 attacks (44%) or justified an attack on Iraq (44%). 43% were "not aware of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse", and 45% believe the "government should reinvestigate the attacks".

There are dozens of books exposing the false account of 9/11 -- books by Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, David Ray Griffin, are highly recommended to those who have the patience to digest the wealth of information he makes available.

Easier to digest is the 80-page "9/11 Unveiled" which is a free download -- for sources, photos, videos, referred to in "9/11 Unveiled" go to The Wisdom Fund website.

Paralyzed by fear, Muslim 'leaders' silent on 9/11

Despite the widespread skepticism voiced by non-Muslims, Muslim "leaders" remain silent about 9/11. They refuse even to examine the facts about 9/11, and silence discussion of those facts by members of their organization.

Their silence implies agreement with the official account of 9/11 -- now thoroughly debunked by engineers, architects, pilots, and others.

These silent Muslim "leaders" include officials of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) -- the organizations most often cited by establishment news media.

As far as we know, no Muslim "leader" who came with the Obama administration, or who has been funded by the Obama administration, or whose articles appear in establishment newspapers such as the Washington Post, has criticized the official account of 9/11.

Interfaith organizations in which Muslims participate have remained silent -- the truth about 9/11 would drastically change the tone and substance of their dialogue.

There are, however, exceptions. Kevin Barrett's radio show hosts outspoken critics of the official account of 9/11. Several African-American, Muslim leaders have criticized the official account.

In stark contrast with U.S. Muslim "leaders", Muslims in South Africa invited me on a 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour where they arranged radio interviews, a television interview broadcast to 20 plus countries, and for me to speak to audiences of hundreds daily in 11 cities in South Africa, and in two cities in Malawi.

A similar effort by U.S. Muslim organizations in support of the "9/11 truth" movement may have quashed, or at least diminished, the anti-Islam hysteria prevalent today.

Ground Zero Islamic Center controversy -- a unique opportunity lost

The controversy over the $100 million Islamic Center being developed by the Cordoba Initiative and the American Society for Muslim Advancement near "Ground Zero" in New York -- now called Park51 -- is a unique opportunity for Muslims to speak out on 9/11, but there's no evidence that Muslim "leaders" will do so.

Despite the repeated use of 9/11 by opponents of the Islamic Center, no leader of a major Muslim organization has argued that there's hard evidence to refute the official account -- 19 Arab hijackers led by Osama bin Laden did not carry out the attacks of 9/11.

The evidence against Bin Laden and al-Qaeda promised by then Secretary of State Colin Powell on NBC's Meet the Press, September 23, 2001, has yet to be made available to the public. The Osama bin Laden poster at the FBI website, does not claim that bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.

The Cordoba Initiative (founded 2004) last filed an IRS Form 990 in 2008 showing revenues $0, expenses $2767, and net assets of $18,255. The American Society for Muslim Advancement (founded 1998) has apparently never filed an IRS Form 990.

Officials of the Cordoba Initiative and the American Society for Muslim Advancement will need millions in donations to build the center. Their position on 9/11 is most likely to reflect the position of their donors.

Don't expect them to denounce the official account of 9/11.

ADAMS Center officials say they 'cannot legally provide a platform' for discussion of 9/11

The Washington DC area is home to the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS); its influence extends well outside the area.

A recent exchange of emails with officials at ADAMS is an example of the pervasive fear among Muslim "leaders" to speak out, or even be seen to provide a platform for others who speak out against the official account of 9/11.

Excerpts from the first email exchange:

EM: But isn't it also our duty to stand for truth and justice even when it may involve some personal risk? Unfortunately, when it comes to the biggest issue of our time (9/11), it appears that Muslim "leaders" are unwilling to speak out. They are unwilling to even discuss the facts with fellow Muslims.

ADAMS: . . . the time and place to discuss 9/11 is through political dialogues like these. While Virginia Delegates have little impact on U.S. national policy, they are responsible for legislation and regulation in Virginia that can and will affect our community . . . If you see our duty as being involved in these issues, why are you not signing up to attend this event?

Excerpts from the second email exchange:

EM: I've been trying to get ADAMS to discuss 9/11 for quite some time, and keep hitting a brick wall. I believe that the official account of 9/11 is false. I've been told that ADAMS does not permit political discussion, and I have stopped using the ADAMS list to try to express my views on the subject.

ADAMS: Thank you for clarifying what you meant. . . . As a 501(c)(3) organization, ADAMS can organize or implement only those kind of political discussions that are non-partisan, . . . programs that are patently partisan would violate our legal status. Your message makes clear your strong partisan views about 9/11. It is your right to hold and promote such views. But all religious organizations are legally obliged to remain non-partisan, and to mount political outreach events only for the education of our community. . . . ADAMS therefore cannot legally provide a platform to promote personal and politicized views.

Excerpts from the third email exchange:

EM: I believe ADAMS misunderstands the role of 501(c)(3) corporations. Non-partisan means not supporting a particular candidate. A 501(c)(3) corporation may hold and expound views on any issue. The Wisdom Fund is a 501(c)(3) corporation, established in 1995, . . . as examples of public expression: (1) our quarter page advertisement in the Obama inaugural issue of the Washington Times -- (bottom right), enlarged; (2) letter to the president, attorney general, etc. How can ADAMS claim to lead, and not take a position on the biggest issue of this decade -- 9/11?

ADAMS: I have tried to rationally explain our position; it is clear you are not open to any position but your own. I have greeted you as a brother but your responses make clear you do not reciprocate that approach. I pray that Allah (SWT) will bless and guide you to the right path, and grant you Wisdom. Please do not respond to this e-mail. I will delete any further messages from you unread.

To summarize, ADAMS invited me to attend their dialogue with "Virginia Delegates" scheduled for July 28, then they claimed that they could not "legally provide a platform" for my views on 9/11. When I informed them that a 501(c)(3) corporation may legally voice its views -- it may not support a candidate for office, ADAMS terminated the discussion.

ADAMS is not alone in shying away from 9/11.

Mosques across America have similar policies. Several invitations that I received to talk on 9/11 were cancelled after they were issued and accepted -- including two attended by officials and imams from majority Muslim countries.

America's foreign policy establishment created the Islamic threat to advance its interests

On August 27, 1992, Leon T. Hadar, a former bureau chief for the Jerusalem Post, and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute, wrote in "The 'Green Peril': Creating the Islamic Fundamentalist Threat":

Now that the Cold War is becoming a memory, America's foreign policy establishment has begun searching for new enemies. . . . Topping the list of potential new global bogeymen, however, are the Yellow Peril, the alleged threat to American economic security emanating from East Asia, and the so-called Green Peril (green is the color of Islam). . . .

George Will even suggested that the 1,000-year battle between Christendom and Islam might be breaking out . . .

Indeed, "a new specter is haunting America, one that some Americans consider more sinister than Marxism-Leninism," according to Douglas E. Streusand. . . .

"Islamic fundamentalism is an aggressive revolutionary movement as militant and violent as the Bolshevik, Fascist, and Nazi movements of the past," according to Amos Perlmutter.

In 1997, former National Security Advisor to President Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wrote in "The Grand Chessboard":

A power that dominates Eurasia [the territory east of Germany and Poland, stretching all the way through Russia and China to the Pacific Ocean -- including the Middle East and most of the Indian subcontinent] would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for 60 per cent of the world's GNP and about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources.

The key to controlling Eurasia, said Brzezinski, is controlling the Central Asian Republics.

In the September 2000 report, Rebuilding America's Defenses, the neocon funded Project for the New American Century (PNAC) stated:

America's global leadership, and its role as the guarantor of the current great-power peace, relies upon the safety of the American homeland; the preservation of a favorable balance of power in Europe, the Middle East and surrounding energy producing region, and East Asia . . .

A transformation strategy that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds with larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies.

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.

9/11, many now believe, was the new Pearl Harbor, the pretext for the U.S. "war on terror", a cover for advancing perceived American interests.

In fact the "war on terror", and the search for nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, have brought the U.S. economy to the brink of collapse, and has caused a massive shift of wealth from poor and middle-class Americans to the wealthiest few.

The silence of Muslim 'leaders' is inexcusable, risks driving some to violence

The 9/11 Commission investigation (November 27, 2002 -- August 21, 2004) was flawed from the outset. It was set up despite strong resistance from the White House.

By March 2003, with the commission's staff barely in place, two men (Philip Zelikow, Executive Director, The 9/11 Commission, and Ernest R. May, a Harvard historian) had prepared a detailed outline, complete with "chapter headings, subheadings, and sub-subheadings" of the final report according to New York Times reporter Philip Shenon.

Zelikow served on the National Security Council under George H. W. Bush, on the George W. Bush transition team, and President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. He coauthored a book with President Bush's National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.

Zelikow controlled the 9/11 Commission's access to witnesses. Testimony that did not support the official account was excluded from "The 9/11 Commission Report".

For American Muslims, whose faith commands them to strive for social justice -- "the first pillar of Islam", and to "seek knowledge even unto China", blind acceptance of the official account of 9/11 is deplorable.

For Muslim "leaders", blind acceptance of the official account of 9/11, and their failure to denounce it, is inexcusable.

The renowned Indian, poet-philosopher Allama Iqbal (1877-1938), in his famous Shikwa & Jawab-i-Shikwa (Man's Complaint and God's Answer), wrote (translated from Urdu by Indian journalist-author Khushwant Singh):

With reason as your shield and
the sword of love in your hand,
Servant of God!
the leadership of the world
is at your command.

Excluding opposing views risks driving some to express themselves in a more violent manner.

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi: Islam in a Post 9/11 World

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward

Source: Oxford Cross-Cultural Research Institute (OCCRi).

A lecture on the plots of those who wish to dismantle Islam in the name of reformation and on the excuse of 9/11. The lecture was deliver in 2004 and is even more important for Muslims living as a minority in 2010 than it was when it was first delivered.

Shaykh (Dr.) M. Riyad H. Nadwi is a graduate of Dar al-Uloom, Nadwatul 'Ulama in Lucknow, India, where he studied the traditional Islamic sciences for a period of twelve years. He has been living in Oxford for the last 18 years where he has served in several academic positions. Shaikh Nadwi also has a PhD from the University of Portsmouth in Cognitive Science. The Shaikh has published works on a variety of subjects ranging from Islamic theology, philosophy, to science, psychology and politics and is considered as one of the most erudite scholars alive today

(Part 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oec2Adey0w8&feature=related

Transcript of Part 1:

The question is, whose purpose has 9/11 served? As Muslims, I think we need to have a serious soul-searching, an intelligent debate on the reasoning behind acts of violence, acts of senseless violence being perpetrated around the world in the name of Islam and in the service of Muslims. And of course the most recent being the tragedy of Beslan. I say this while recognizing that yes, thousands of Muslims, in fact, 100,000 Muslims were massacred in Chechnya, of which around 40,000 were children.

I use the word senseless on two counts -- first, the overwhelming fiqh arguments against such actions. But apart from that, if one looks from a purely tactical perspective, we can find that it is persistently counterproductive. In fact, this course of action is precisely what Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israelis are delighted to hear about. On the 12th of September 2001, when Netanyahu was asked about what he thought about the 9/11 attacks, he responded, and I quote, "It's very good." Yes, this is what he said; he said that it was very good. Now, obviously, he didn't stop there, he said, "oh, well, it's not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy" (for Israel). The reporter understood what he was saying. He read his emotion, and reported it exactly as he had said it, and it was published in the New York Times.

We also know of the confirmed stories of the Israelis in New York who were arrested for dancing and celebrating on the rooftops when the planes hit the building. They celebrated because they knew how much this would serve the cause of Israel.

This kind of strategic thinking is not new. In fact, right-wing military generals in the United States Army are historically infamous for seeking this kind of action. These actions are known as pretext operations. We need to read the history of these people, to learn about the depravity of their thinking, before allowing ourselves to be used, indirectly or directly, within or for their grand and vicious plans.

There is authenticated documented evidence confirming that the US military High Command had not only recognized the benefit of this kind of attack on America decades ago, but at one point they drew up detailed plans to conduct terrorist campaigns on American citizens in order to justify the invasion of another country. Now before people put their "conspiracy theory" earplugs and blindfolds on, please allow me to point out that what I'm saying and what I'm about to say here is not based on ignorant paranoia, hearsay and unproven conspiracy; rather it is based on published declassified and authenticated documents; documents that confirmed that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army, General Lemnitzer, approved a plan code-named Operation Northwoods; during the stand-off with Cuba Operation Northwoods was conceived.

The plan was approved by every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It called for innocent people to be shot on American streets, of boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas, and for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. It called for the framing of people for bombings they did not commit, and for planes to be "hijacked" using phony evidence to blame Fidel Castro, in order to give General Lemnitzer and his colleagues the excuse as well as the public and international backing they needed to launch their war against Cuba.

One idea seriously considered involved the launch of John Glenn, the first American to orbit the earth. He was going up in a rocket. And their proposal was that the rocket should explode and kill John Glenn. And I quote here: "The objective is to provide irrevocable proof that the fault lies with the Communists in Cuba." And Lemnitzer explained that this would be accomplished by manufacturing various pieces of evidence which would prove electronic interference on the part of the Cubans.

They proposed that, and I quote again, "We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba." And they also explained that the casualty lists in US newspapers would cause "a useful wave of national indignation." "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities, and even in Washington," they wrote. "The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States, exploding a few plastic explosive bombs at carefully chosen spots. The arrest of Cuban agents and the release of carefully-prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government. Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft could appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba." (End of transcript of Part 1)

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfNN3IR77NE

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeG1tU3M8HI

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSRx8cdglbg

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL_v-HhD9aY

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 6)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LmCrozZhvw&feature=related

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 7)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhjdPN4LvJA

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FC5rOtAEFI

Shaykh Riyad Nadwi - Islam in a Post 9/11 World: Muslim Minorities and the Way Forward (Part 9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1ks22H20PI&feature=related

Muslim Weekly Slanders 7/7 Patsies

http://www.themuslimweekly.com/DetailView.aspx?NEWSID=TW00015005

"When Mohammed Sidique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain and Germaine Lindsay carried out the terrorist attack, they succeeded in bringing the pure name of Islam into disrepute and instantly dissolved the efforts of a Muslim community that had worked tirelessly to show that Islam and terrorism/ extremism were mutually exclusive terms."
- The Muslim Weekly, "Five Years On: 7/7 Remembered"

“Ye who are conscious of God – If a fasiq [untrustworthy violent person] comes to you with alarming news, make sure you verify their word, lest you afflict people out of your ignorance, and regret your actions” – Holy Qu’ran, 49:6

Why would The Muslim Weekly slander four young men who have for all intents and purposes been proven innocent by the research of Nick Kollerstrom (Terror on the Tube: Beyond the Veil of 7/7) and Muad'dib (7/7 Ripple Effect)? Why would the Weekly's editors take the word of a fasiq - the criminals who have murdered millions of Muslims in wars of aggression using false-flag ops like 9/11 as a pretext - without verifying the matter?

John Leonard, editor of Progressive Press, called our attention to this problem.

Kevin Barrett (editor, Muslims for 9/11 Truth website) responds:

Someone should tell them that Islam means submission to God, not submission to the lies of shayateen (satans).

David Livingstone (of Surrendering Islam) adds:

The problem is love of Dunia (material world). We naively assume that most Muslims here in the West are devoted to Islam. They are to an extent, but mostly they are here for the material benefits, and have constructed an edifice of excuses to claim otherwise. And that is the problem, and that is why they don't see the contradiction (or hypocrisy?) of their actions.

For example, many years back, I challenged a Muslim who was a good acquaintance of myself and a number of other converts. This was a very active brother in the community, very knowledgeable, and always at the mosque. I asked him why he came to Canada, and he said, "for Dawah". I laughed. I said, "come on?!". My convert friends were shocked that I would challenge him this way. He said, "no, really". I said it again, "come on?!" It really seemed absurd that he would think I would fall for that.

Then he finally conceded. "Yes, brother, you are right, I came here for Dunia." He's just one example, but how many others are like him?

They actually all naively thought they would come here and everything would be peachy, and as a bonus, they would attract Westerners to Islam. This is a result of their excuses. Dawah doesn't work like this. It doesn't happen with millions of self-appointed Muslim missionaries flocking here to do the work.

They are not here to spread Islam. Or, they are only willing to spread the kind of Islam that will not place in jeopardy their ability to participate materially in this society.

So in whichever way they are challenged to apologize for Islam, they'll do it. They don't want to see the bigger picture. They can't even imagine it. Muslims tend to be proud. They assumed they would impress. So this oppression all comes as a great shock.

They don't remember the verse in the Qur'an which warns them, "... And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion if they can."

They don't want to challenge this society, they want to be a part of it.

They should be working to reform this society, but how can they when they have lost touch with the meaning of Islam in the first place? How is wearing hijab and growing a beard, and eating and drinking with their right hand going to solve the endemic problems of the West? They should be highlighting how Islam has the answer for many of the injustices that plague the modern world, beginning with the impoverishment of the Third World by the World Bank.

But they don't even realize that social justice issues are the very basis of Islam. They've completely lost tough with that. So in preaching their deviated version of Islam here in the West, they are doing more harm than good.