Quarterly: Issue No 20

Shawwaal 1422




As the US murder of unarmed and distressed Afghans continues and intensifies each day, the simultaneous murder of values and universally accepted fundamental human principles is taking place on such a wide scale that if the world leaders still choose not to remove the blindfold of American influence from their eyes the whole world will turn into a perpetual inferno of violence and chaos.

The fact is US has created such monstrous precedents in her war hysteria that if the present state of affairs were to prolong, there could only be rule of arms and violence on the surface of the earth and the notion of peace and stability will vanish from this world.

As a sequel to the tragic incident of September 11th the brand new set of principles in human, moral and international values that the rulers of the United States have given to the world need to be looked into. Let us take a look at some of them.

1. Guilt has to be proven before a punishment can be meted out to an accused i.e. innocent until proven guilty is such an established principle since antiquity that not one civilization in the world has ever differed with it. But in the case of Usama Bin Laden and Afghanistan the decision to take direct action against them was taken the very first day of the incident. The new principle now states that one with might and power can accuse any one it deems fit and can dispense punishment at will. The mighty neither needs to prove the guilt nor has to wait for the decision from any court of law for the one it has accused.

2.  Until this day it was an accepted principle that the benefit of doubt always went to the accused. If the evidence that exists against the accused contains an element of ambiguity the accused could never be punished under such circumstances. Now the freshly introduced principle states that the benefit of doubt goes to the one who unilaterally decides to accuse another, implying that the accused can be declared a convict simply on the basis of doubt.

3. To this day the international law and norms dictated that if an accused happens to be in another country, he or she can be tried in a court in that country only, unless there is an explicit treaty for extradition between these countries in which case the accused may be handed over to the complaining country to be tried in a court of law. There exists no Extradition treaty or agreement between US and Afghanistan. The only civilized set of solutions presented under the circumstances was that either the accused be tried in a court in Afghanistan or the US enters into an extradition agreement and by virtue of that demand for the accused. Dismissing both of these options and demanding that "Our accused be handed over to us" resembles the practice of the mediaeval times of ignorance when warring tribes resorted to such demands.

Although Afghanistan was under no obligation to hand over Usama under the un-immutable law of human society, it still demonstrated a conciliatory offer to consider if Afghanistan was shown the proofs and evidence. But the US insisted that whatever evidence it has it will show it to its "friends" but will not produce before Afghanistan. In other words, the very country that is a party (in the demanded extradition) will not be shown the evidence. Later on the Taliban government even offered for dialogue to consider trial in a neutral third country but the US continued to insist that there could be no dialogue and Usama must be handed over to them.

The demand "Hand him over to us" is providing an analogy and an excuse to every bully on the earth. As a direct consequence Israel demanded from the Palestinian authorities that the suspects of their murdered person be handed over to them. Back home here even India is inching toward raising a similar demand to handover their "terrorists" over to them. If the trend progresses, then every country that has offered political asylum or political sanctuary to people will be subjected to the same principle by the more mighty that either "give us our accused or get ready for aerial bombardment".

4. Another established principle of civilized society has been that the punishment can only be given to the one who has committed the crime not to another person instead. The innovative new principle now allows that along with the criminal punish the whole country and its innocent civilians. In fact in the present American move the very person who is accused to have committed the crime and is sought to be punished is tucked in safety and instead thousands of those people are being maimed, made homeless and destitute who had probably never even heard the name of World Trade Centre.

5. International norms dictate and US itself has on numerous occasions advised conflicting parties to settle issues through talks and negotiations but in the case of Afghanistan it simply announced that doors are completely closed to negotiations.  Another new fundamental that emerges is that if you have the might and power you need not negotiate or talk, simply run over the less powerful.

6. A recognized principle has been that a sovereign state cannot be forced to participate in a war. Now a new principle has been brazenly made acceptable that if a mighty and powerful country wishes, it can coerce a smaller country to act against its conscience and join the "coalition" or else be prepared to be consigned to the Stone Age. In this way, a powerful bully can put together a large coalition of its choice to thrust upon a pauperized and weak nation if it so desires. The small and less powerful countries have been deprived not only of the right to act according to their conscience but even the right to remain neutral has been made non-existent; the only option for the weaker country is to side with the bully.

7. In whatever laws are passed in the international forums and bodies, so much so that even in the case of individual resolutions every word used in the drafts is thoroughly reviewed and only after long debates the selection of a word is made for the draft resolutions (very rightly so). The purpose behind such prolonged deliberations has been to keep the resolutions clear of ambiguity lest a member state draw advantage from the loose ends creating conflicts and disagreements as a result. However, the recent anti-terrorism resolution passed by the Security Council of the United Nations in a matter of hours contains no definition of the concept of "terrorism" opening up the doors wide open for the mighty on the earth to accuse anybody of terrorism and for that instantly flash the Security Council's resolution to give legitimacy to its action.

8. Taking a human life is that extreme step which attracts immense precautions in framing of laws. And even when the law necessitates that a life be taken, a capital punishment be meted out, the methods devised for the execution are ensured to live up to the standards of equity and justice. Now the new edict. The US has passed a new law empowering its intelligence agencies to employ whatever means they deem fit to execute or kill "terrorists". So therefore, these American intelligence agencies will now sit on judgment to declare somebody a terrorist, decide about the fate of his or her life and even devise their own ways of bringing about the execution.

9. International laws governing the conduct of wars view as criminal acts the senseless bombing of civilian targets, hospitals, Red Cross centres etc. But, in the past three weeks the impunity with which the civilians are being bombed and hospitals targeted, and the brazenness shown over and above all this - that not a word of remorse or apology is forthcoming is further consolidating the principle that for the mighty every (criminal) act is legitimate.

The question is, will the new set of principles that is being given to the world and new precedents that are being drawn along these lines, will these eliminate terrorism or lend perpetuity to it? Will the world become a more peaceful place as a result or will be inflamed in a vicious cycle of violence? Will these new principles breed love or promote intense hatred?

[This Article was published in Urdu by Daily Jang in Pakistan and written by renowned Scholar Mufti Taqi Usmani, a Judge at the Shariah Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.]




Its hard to believe for many among us, but the fact is that the US is more than half way through its war on Islam. The stage has long been set for the Mossad and its lackeys in the CIA to use Pakistani leadership, military intelligence and their "expertise" and the intermediaries to do anything in Pakistan from abducting Usama bin Laden to robbing Pakistan of its nuclear capability and also do anything through Pakistan, from dismantling the Taliban government to abandoning the cause of Kashmir. The reason behind the renewed American interest in Pakistan is not to combat the so-called terrorism but to target Islam.

Undoubtedly, Pervez Musharraf has taken all the decisions in the best interest of the state, but the secret and open demands would never stop until we fully surrender our souls, our faith and ourselves. It is a campaign against Islamic world. Apart from other undeniable evidence, consider the following fact to fully understand the  argument that contrary to all the claims of American leadership, this is a war on Islam. According to well placed sources, in the Fall of 1993 at the initiative of Clinton-Gore government, a secret conference of anti-Islam forces was called in Washington, D.C. area to develop a long-term strategy of defeating Islamic resurgence worldwide. It lasted for three days and many papers were presented.

Naturally, no serious Muslim was represented in the conference. The main resolution was to fight Islam the way West fought communism and defeat Islam even if it took 70-80 years. At least one of the resolutions was to remove "fundamentalist Islam" from the West and fight Islam in the Muslim majority countries. Islamic movements like those of Tanzeem-e-Islami, Jamaat-e-Islami, Ikhwan al-Muslimoon and similar movements are their main targets. All the recent development are simply directed to bring this war from Washington to the real front, to the doorsteps of Muslim countries.

The American methodology against movement orientated organizations is infiltration, spreading rumors, sowing dissensions within the organization leadership, and now outright ban on religious parties that refuse to tread the line set forth as acceptable to Washington. From outside, spreading rumours to make leadership or the organization itself unpopular would remain part of the wider strategies. If nothing works, outright murder is their ultimate weapon.  In its campaign against the Islamic world, the US depends on a number of weapons.

The first weapon is its international weight and influence in the Islamic world, particularly after the second Gulf War policy, which resulted in further consolidation of its influence.

The second weapon is it's ensuring others' participation in the campaign against Islam. The US uses their influence and their agents to guarantee the success in the whole Islamic world particularly as these states do not differ from America in viewing Islam as a threat to them under the draconian banner of "fundamentalism."

The third weapon is the international law, and its tools represented by the UN, its charter and its other sub-organizations which the US employs to implement its sinister designs.

The fourth weapon is the world media dominated by the US and its allies, which is used as one of the most deadly weapons in its campaign. The media is used to distort the image of Islam and to incite the world against those who adhere to it, portraying them as fundamentalists, zealots, extremists and terrorists.

The fifth, the ugliest and most dangerous of these weapons are the agent rulers and the circle around them of underlings, hypocrites, opportunists and those lured by the liberal culture and fascinated by its way of life.  All of these are paid or blessed by the US  government one way or the other.  This circle also includes those who pretend to care about Islam whether they are government scholars or those presented to the people as Islamic intellectuals from some Islamic movements who are in reality nothing more
than secularists, calling for the detachment of religion from life.

The CIA, as the arm of the U.S. government most concerned with fighting the US wars, focuses on Islam in the period immediately following the Post-Gulf War. To counter the appeal of Islam and the growth of Islamic movements, the CIA has devised a two-tier program. On the one hand, certain Muslim authors are promoted as part of an explicitly "anti-Islam program." The CIA cultural commissar's criteria for "suitable texts" include whatever critiques of "Islamic fundamentalism" and role of religion in running predominantly Muslim dominated countries, the CIA finds to be objective and convincingly written and timely.

On the other hand, the CIA is especially keen on promoting liberal politicians and protecting disillusioned Muslim leaders. The present funding of the secularists and westernised human rights activists reminds on of the CLA, which promoted anticommunist writers by funding lavish conferences in Paris, Berlin, and Bellagio (overlooking Lake Como), where objective social scientists and philosophers like Isaiah Berlin, Daniel Bell, and Czeslow Milosz preached their values (and the virtues of Western freedom and intellectual independence, within the anticommunist and pro-Washington parameters defined by their CIA paymasters).

The singular lasting, damaging influence of the CIA's buying our leaders and intellectuals is not their specific defences of US imperialist policies, but their success in imposing on subsequent generations the idea of excluding any sustained discussion of US involvement in our internal affairs through sheer terror and injustice. The issue is not that today's intellectuals or leaders may or may not take an Islamic position on this or that issue. The problem is the pervasive belief among writers and leaders that anti-US
expressions should not appear in their speech and writing if they want to be successful in their careers. The enduring political victory of the CIA through buying out our leaders and influencing our policies without any hurdle is to convince the rest of us that serious and sustained political, economic and social development is incompatible with our religious beliefs and practices.




On the authority of Abu Dharr al-Ghifari (radiyallahu anhu) from our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is that among the sayings he relates from his Lord is that Allah says:

O My servants, I have forbidden oppression for Myself and have made it forbidden amongst you, so do not oppress one another.

O My servants, all of you are astray except for those I have guided, so seek guidance of Me and I shall guide you.

O My servants, all of you are hungry except for those I have fed, so seek food of Me and I shall feed you.

O My servants, all of you are naked except for those I have clothed, so seek clothing of Me and I shall clothe you.

O My servants, you sin by night and by day, and I forgive all sins, so seek forgiveness of Me and I shall forgive you.

O My servants, you will not attain harming Me so as to harm Me, and will not attain benefiting Me so as to benefit Me.

O My servants, were the first of you and the last of you, the human of you and the jinn of you to be as pious as the most pious heart of any one man of you, that would not increase My kingdom in anything.

O My servants, were the first of you and the last of you, the human of you and the jinn of you to be as wicked as the most wicked heart of any one man of you, that would not decrease My kingdom in anything.

O My servants, were the first of you and the last of you, the human of you and the jinn of you to rise up in one place and make a request of Me, and were I to give everyone what he requested, that would not decrease what I have, any more that a needle decreases the sea if put into it.

O My servants, it is but your deeds that I reckon up for you and then
recompense you for; so let him who finds good, praise Allah; and let him who finds other, then blame no one but himself.

(Muslim; Tirmizi; Ibn Majah)

I request your humble du'aas.


Abdul Haq Abdul Kadir

Umhlanga Rocks, KZN

South Africa