Jewish Rabbi Proves that Muhammad is a Prophet

*** Muhammad in The Bible Rabbis Who Acknowledging The Fact and..P1/2

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=305090749576&saved#!/video/video.php?v=305090749576

*** Muhammad in The Bible Rabbis Who Acknowledging The Fact and..P2/2

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=305248124576&saved#!/video/video.php?v=305248124576

*** Jewish Rabbi Proofs That Muhammad is a Prophet

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?v=app_2392950137&id=828359576&sb=32#!/video/video.php?v=242424304576

*** The Promise (05) Spirits of Truth

http://www.facebook.com/video/?upload#!/video/video.php?v=188413279576

Listen to this Jewish Rabbi who agrees with Islam. He confirms and
admits that Islam is the oldest religion on earth. This is true, one
just has to realize that Islam pre-dates Prophet Muhammad (p) who was
simply the final Prophet in the long line of Prophets (p).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfByvw_jomo

See also how ancient Hebrew speaking Jews as well as Christians used
to pray. Notice how Islam is calling us back to the true monotheist
worship, faith and path of Abraham and all the Prophets. The Rabbi
even admits that Islam's roots trace back to the first man, Adam
(peace be upon all the Prophets).

May Allah (G-d, YHWH) be praised.

THIS VIDEO IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES!

www.jews-for-allah.org

Read More “Jewish Rabbi Proves that Muhammad is a Prophet”

The Truth About US Justice

THE TRUTH ABOUT US JUSTICE

By Yvonne Ridley

Many of us are still in a state of shock over the guilty verdict
returned on Dr Aafia Siddiqui.

 The response from the people of Pakistan was predictable and
overwhelming and I salute their spontaneous actions.

 From Peshawar to Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore and beyond they marched
in their thousands demanding the return of Aafia.

 Even some of the US media expressed discomfort over the verdict
returned by the jurors … there was a general feeling that something
was not right.

 Everyone had something to say, everyone that is except the usually
verbose US Ambassador Anne Patterson who has spent the last two years
briefing against Dr Aafia and her supporters.

 This is the same woman who claimed I was a fantasist when I gave a
press conference with Tehreek e Insaf leader Imran Khan back in July
2008 revealing the plight of a female prisoner in Bagram called the
Grey Lady.

 She said I was talking nonsense and stated categorically that the
prisoner I referred to as "650" did not exist.

 By the end of the month she changed her story and said there had been
a female prisoner but that she was most definitely not Dr Aafia
Siddiqui.

 By that time Aafia had been gunned down at virtually point blank
range in an Afghan prison cell jammed full of more than a dozen US
soldiers, FBI agents and Afghan police.

 Her Excellency briefed the media that the prisoner had wrested an M4
gun from one soldier and fired off two rounds and had to be subdued.
The fact these bullets failed to hit a single person in the cell and
simply disappeared did not resonate with the diplomat.

 In a letter dripping in untruths on August 16 2008 she decried the
"erroneous and irresponsible media reports regarding the arrest of Ms
Aafia Siddiqui". She went on to say: "Unfortunately,
there are some
who have an interest in simply distorting the facts in an effort to
manipulate and inflame public opinion. The truth is never served by
sensationalism…"

 When Jamaat Islami invited me on a national tour of Pakistan to
address people about the continued abuse of Dr Aafia and the truth
about her incarceration in Bagram, the US Ambassador continued to
issue rebuttals.

 She assured us all that Dr Aafia was being treated humanely had been
given consular access as set out in international law … hmm. Well I
have a challenge for Ms Patterson today. I challenge her to repeat
every single word she said back then and swear it is the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth.

 As Dr Aafia Siddiqui's trial got underway, the US Ambassador and some
of her stooges from the intelligence world laid on a lavish party at
the US Embassy in Islamabad for some hand-picked journalists where
I've no doubt in between the dancing, drinks and music they were
carefully briefed about the so-called facts of the case.

 Interesting that some of the potentially incriminating pictures taken
at the private party managed to find the Ambassador was probably
hoping to minimize the impact the trial would have on the streets of
Pakistan proving that, for the years she has been holed up and
barricaded behind concrete bunkers and barbed wire, she has learned
nothing about this great country of Pakistan or its people.

 One astute Pakistani columnist wrote about her: "The respected lady
seems to have forgotten the words of her own country's 16th president
Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865): "You
can fool some of the people all of
the time, and all of the people some
of the time, but you cannot fool
all of the people all of the time".

 And the people of Pakistan proved they are nobody's fool and
responded to the guilty verdict in New York in an appropriate way.

 When injustice is the law it is the duty of everyone to rise up and
challenge that injustice in any way possible.

 The response – so far – has been restrained and measured but it is
just the start. A sentence has yet to be delivered by Judge Richard
Berman in May.

 Of course there has been a great deal of finger pointing and blame
towards the jury in New York who found Dr Aafia guilty of attempted
murder.

 Observers asked how they could ignore the science and the irrefutable
facts … there was absolutely no evidence linking Dr Aafia to the gun,
no bullets, no residue from firing it.

  But I really don't think we can blame the jurors for the verdict -
you see the jury simply could not handle the truth.    Had they taken
the logical route and gone for the science and the hard, cold,
clinical facts it would have meant two things.  It would have meant
around eight US soldiers took the oath and lied in court to save their
own skins and careers or it would have meant that Dr Aafia Siddiqui
was telling the truth.

 And, as I said before, the jury couldn't handle the truth. Because
that would have meant that the defendant really had been kidnapped,
abused, tortured and held in dark, secret prisons by the US before
being shot and put on a rendition flight to New York. It would have
meant that her three children – two of them US citizens – would also
have been kidnapped, abused and tortured by the US.

 They say ignorance is bliss and this jury so desperately wanted not
to believe that the US could have had a hand in the kidnapping of a
five-month -old baby boy, a five-year-old girl and her seven-year-old
brother.

 They couldn't handle the truth … it is as simple as that.

 Well I, and many others across the world like me, can't handle any
more lies. America's reputation is lying in the lowest gutters in
Pakistan at the moment and it can't sink any lower.

 The trust has gone, there is only a burning hatred and resentment
towards a superpower which sends unmanned drones into villages to
slaughter innocents.

 It is fair to say that America's goodwill and credibility is all but
washed up with most honest, decent citizens of Pakistan.

 And I think even Her Excellency Anne Patterson recognizes that fact
which is why she is now keeping her mouth shut.

 If she has any integrity and any self respect left she should stand
before the Pakistan people and ask for their forgiveness for the drone
murders, the extra judicial killings, the black operations, the
kidnapping, torture and rendition of its citizens, the water-boarding,
the bribery, the corruption and, not least of all, the injustice
handed out to Dr Aafia Siddiqui and her family.

 She should then pick up the phone to the US President and tell him to
release Aafia and return Pakistan's most loved, respected and famous
daughter and reunite her with the two children who are still missing.

 Then she should re-read her letter of August 16, 2008 and write
another … one of resignation.

 * Yvonne Ridley is a patron of Cageprisoners which first brought the
plight of Dr Aafia Siddiqui to the world's attention shortly after her
kidnap in March 2003. The award-winning, investigative journalist also
co-produced the documentary In Search of Prisoner 650 with film-maker
Hassan al Banna Ghani which concluded that the Grey Lady of Bagram was
Dr Aafia Siddiqui

Read More “The Truth About US Justice”

The Russians Are Coming: The T-50's Flight to the Future

The Russians Are Coming: The T-50's Flight to the Future

by Meinhaj Hussain, m.hussain@grandestrategy.com

Introduction

In late January 2010, the PAK FA made its maiden flight, ushering in an end to an era of US dominance of stealth, fifth generation fighter aircraft. Military analysts of every shade and nation spent endless times speculating and awaited the first flight with sleepless nights and over bitter arguments about its final configuration, for the PAK FA was kept so secretive that none other than a very choice few knew what it would look like.

Combat aircraft are the spear tip of any military power, and play a pivotal role in air warfare. And in today's day and age, any nation that has the decisive advantage in the air war, dominates the ground war, and by extension, the political arena. The PAK FA, also known as the T-50 and possibly to be known in its final version as the Su-50, is an aircraft that not only Russia, but the world needed.  For the unipolar world that ushered in an American Empire has increasingly become an unfair and unjust world  where American arrogance and exploitation is increasingly creating fiction, not only with the Muslim world but with such powers that have had the most to lose and least to gain, such as China, Russia and Brazil.

Even some of the US's allies in Europe, staunch in their support are increasingly feeling like surrogates rather than allies, slaves rather than friends. An example within the military aviation industry is the F-35, a promised cooperative project by the US with its allies, has turned into a chain of dependence, where vital software codes and maintenance legacies will now remain in the purview of the US, with their Allies permanently dependent. It is no wonder that many Western Europeans of various shades have cheered at the PAK FA, even though it is Russian. Freedom perhaps cannot exist in a monopoly. 

The PAK FA is an answer to the US F-22, a fifth generation fighter that till now had no equal. A comparative analysis will follow later in this paper, but for now it suffices to say that it contends with the F-22 on stealth, aerodynamic performance and sensor sophistication and capability, as well as in cost, maintenance and practicality.

It must be understood that the T-50 is not merely a combat aircraft, it is an investment in technology and engineering that has implications for Russian industry, and has economic implications for Russia as well as for Su-50 customers who may thus be able to avoid conflict by deterrence. As a superficial example, two squadrons of this aircraft with Iran would dispel all possibilities of an Israeli strike on that nation.

Guesstimates on Performance

There is scant data on the PAK FA, but educated estimates can be made from carefully analyzing pictures and videos. Following are some basic guesstimates on the present prototype aircraft by this author:

Length 19.5m

Height 5m

Wingspan 14m

Empty Weight 18.5t

Wing area: 75 m2

Performance

Much of the performance analysis is unreliable as the actual power-plant is unknown. However, it should be in the range of a max speed of 2.5 Mach, service ceiling of 20,000 m and rate of climb greater than 350 m/second.

Armament

Guns: 1x30mm

Hardpoints: unknown, speculated to be 8 hardpoints.

Radar

The aircraft is known to have five radar modules with known primary radar to be an AESA. Innovative wing leading edge radar of lower frequency (perhaps L band) would be able to locate stealth aircraft like the F-22, a capability that the F-22 does not have.

General Analysis

Basic Aerodynamics

The wings on the PAK FA are large and well-swept, optimized for supersonic flight and for high(er) altitudes. In comparison to the F-22, given even remotely comparable engines, the PAK FA should be able to fly faster, for longer and supercruise more effectively (with lower fuel consumption and greater speed).

The all-wing shape of the PAK FA follows the same principles that was so successful with the Su-27 FLANKER and the MiG-29 FULCRUM and not only provides lift, but also provides ample space (along with the large wings) for massive fuel and/or weapons bays. Reducing drag, increasing range and payload and creating lift and stands in good light compared to the F-22s design.

Air Intakes

CARET inlets of the air intakes are useful for “wave riding”, generating increased lift for the airframe. This allows lower RCS and increased airflow. With the long length of its horizontal wedged edge (of the inlet) additionally helps lift. 

Large, moveable Leading Edge Root Extensions (LERX) over the inlets are highly innovative and perhaps plays a role in making the PAK FA super-maneuverable. It is not a flap-like structure but perhaps more like an aileron and behaves in someways perhaps like a canard. 

This is an interesting innovation and also provides a solution for the PAK FA in managing air-flow over the wing and onto the slanted stabilizers, solving problems of a twin-tailed delta configuration. 

Angled Twin Stabilizers

The twin all-moving stabilizers are innovative in that they can be smaller and have the same effect as a larger conventional stabilizer. Given that the PAK FA also has 3D Thrust Vector Controls (TVC), this makes the PAKFA a fundamentally more stealthy design given that large stabilizers contribute to RCS significantly.  Other advantages include reduced weight, stability in hard maneuvering and the ability to go supersonic in a turn.

Large Tires

The large low(er) pressure tires, a bane for space on an airframe implies that the Russians are still staying real, for in any future conflict with a comparable power, airbases could easily be destroyed and operating from semi-prepared strips would provide the Russians (and any other operator) with a key advantage over American designs, whose runways have to be carefully combed for the smallest intrusion.

Technology and Basic Industrial Manufacturing

The PAK FA is built using new methods that the Soviet Union did not have – electro-chemical milling rather than traditional welding methods. While this has been in use since the late 1950s in the West, this method has only now found its way to Russia. This would allow far better finish which has major implications to stealth and minor implications to reducing drag. Along with RAM coatings and the extensive use of composites, this spells a major industrial leap for Russian industry.

Sensor Fusion

Electronics and avionics have traditionally been an area that Russia lagged behind in. However, the PAK FA makes ground here as well. Other than having five radars, informed sources understand that it has a high degree of sensor fusion, combining sensor fusion, Electronic Warfare (EW), data linking and the general Man-Machine Interface (MMI) are said to now be in the league of the US fighters. How far this gets confirmed is yet to be seen but this author believes that given the Russian IT sector's pivotal role globally, this is a leap they have long made and are but only now implementing in their aviation industry.

RCS Reduction

The PAK FA is the first non-American stealth VLO fighter. The F-22's frontal Radar Cross Section (RCS) is compared to a metal marble, the F-35's to a golf ball and it is this author's speculative contention that the PAK FA's could perhaps be compared to a baseball. The Russians are not looking to make the aerodynamic tradeoffs to stealth that the US has made, for a variety of reasons including the effectiveness and costs of such stealth. Given that stealth in the real world would be far less effective than the advertised “metal marble” because the enemy may not always come exactly head on, nor use the radar's that the F-22s were tested with. Nor would any future competent enemy only have one radar on (but rather a plethora of ground and airborne radars at various frequencies). Further, wear and tear in a real world operational scenario are likely to reduce stealth.

The PAK FA thus would save weight and enjoy superior aerodynamics while trading off some stealth. It's S-duct may not fully hide its fan blades from every possible angle but rather perhaps allow a maximum of 5% of it to be exposed from very specific angles. These may still be RAM quoted and netted.

The PAK FA abandons stealth from the rear quarter altogether. Detractors would scoff at such a tradeoff but, considering the aerodynamics and high altitude and high speed effectiveness of PAK FA, the aircraft may not need stealth in the hind quarters, as it could always out run any enemy. Case in point, the F-35 which also remains exposed from the rear quarters would have no such capability. For air combat after a merge however, this would still be an issue for the PAK FA, but RCS reduction then becomes of little relevance, given that IR missiles and IRSTs would then be more effective in any case.

The Russians seem to have carefully watched the US fighter programs, taking the best elements without buying Lockheed Martin propaganda and stealth as the final panacea to fighter combat.

Comparison

The PAK FA compares most favorably to the F-22, surpassing it on a number of parameters while sacrificing certain parameters to the F-22. The relationship is not dissimilar to that between the early FLANKER and the F-15. Primarily, the F-22 is stealthier while the PAK FA is likely to exceed the F-22 in the critical arena of a high-high combat profile. The PAK FA also has a bigger weapons bay and greater fuel capacity. In terms of operational capability and cost, the PAK FA wins hands down to the high cost and complicated maintenance of the F-22, while the PAK FA is said to be an improvement over the maintainability of the Su-27. It could cost a third of an F-22 by its greater simplicity and managed tradeoffs as well as greater production run (being procured by both Russia and India if not any other country).

Until the US produces the next generation of aircraft, this spells the end of their monopoly in 5^th generation aircraft and is likely to usher in other players such as China and perhaps give enough hope to Europe to produce its own fighter rather than sink to the humiliation to their sovereignty that the F-35 provides.

The Euro-canards now appear out-dated and out-classed, a situation unlikely to sit well with Western Europe. Given the attitude of the US towards her allies vis-a-vis the F-35, Europe now finds itself between a rock and a hard place. It is the contention of this author that Europe will get together and build a fifth generation fighter, for the spirit of Europe has not been one to see its technological edge corrode or to be demeaned by external powers.

Implications for the Subcontinent

Given that by 2018 the Indian Air Force could be receiving the PAK FA, there are serious implications for India's neighbors, particularly Pakistan. Vis-a-vis India, Bangladesh may as well stop operating an air force, for the gap in capability between the two countries is now too great to bridge.

For Pakistan, this implies that the massive resources and labor that she has spent in closing the gap between her and India will again widen as nothing in the PAF arsenal would compare to the PAK FA. The future of air combat is increasingly moving to high speed high altitude fights, something that the JF-17 design is ill-suited for. The J-10Bs may be of relevance, but would be completely outclassed by the PAK FA. Consider the simple fact that the J-10s powerplant would merely be a fraction of PAK FA's and would have no stealth to speak of in comparison.

The future of the PAF will depend on whether she can again innovate in collaboration with China to build a fifth generation aircraft without breaking the bank. Investments in R&D and a strong commitment from the military and the government would need to start now, if such a project is to succeed. A single engined fifth generation project would also be something that many other smaller powers would be looking for and could be viable in the international arms market. This plane could be built around a WS-15 with a small weapons bay and perhaps built around a high sweep delta. While such a plane may sound impossible now, given that the JF-17 has hardly started production and that China may have little interest in pursuing it for its domestic use, thinking forward could save Pakistan from being threatened again as it was after the Mumbai incident.

Conclusion

Just as the US is being challenged in global economics and is seeing a resistance to its political imperialism and empire building, the world of military aviation also mirrors this challenge in the shape of such aircraft as the French Rafale, the Chinese J-10 and the Indian Su-30MKI. The PAK FA represents the pinnacle of this challenge and puts the ball squarely back to the US court. Can the US now move on to another generation of combat aircraft? With a failing economy, ever decreasing competitiveness, ever increasing dependence on government spending and increasing dependence on indirectly taxing the rest of the world through dollar depreciation, spending billions on a new fighter project may be outside the realms of the US Empire. As such, this may spell the beginning of the end of the US as the center of a uni-polar world. That is exactly what the PAK FA challenges and symbolizes in its capabilities.

Videos of Flight:

http://rutube.ru/tracks/2877526.html...09ca66c05a883b  Russian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XqwDEU0fus&feature=player_embedded  Russian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPHzCqSJ5xY Russian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmt9KPl0yNw  Russian

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKFiO8juHNI  English

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S67zfmEqGxQ  Full Video

Read More “The Russians Are Coming: The T-50's Flight to the Future”

Don't Come to a Gunfight with a Butter Knife

Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein | University of Waterloo. Dr. Norman Finkelstein debunks a holocaust card thrown by a Jewish girl, having crocodile tears in her eyes, with a holocaust card of his own but of different nature.

Read More “Don't Come to a Gunfight with a Butter Knife”

New York Media Misses out on Shock, Drama & Horror

By YVONNE RIDLEY
Posted From: http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=30995
Dr AAFIA Siddiqui is a bright, intelligent woman who has been through
hell having being kidnapped, tortured in secret prisons, gunned down
by US soldiers and renditioned to America where she is now facing
attempted murder charges against those who shot her. Only in the
cock-eyed crosshairs of George W Bush's War on Terror could this
happen and I hope to God that the jurors who will go through the
evidence during the next few hours, if not days, see through this
rotten legacy and recognize the case for what it is ... a tissue of
lies enveloped in a web of deceit. The last seven years of Dr Aafia's
life could have been penned by a Hollywood scriptwriter, but instead
all the folk from Tinsel Town could come up with was the rather tame
blockbuster movie Rendition starring Reese Witherspoon. But several
days ago those of us following the case closely were given a glimpse
into the dark, mysterious world in which Dr Aafia has been forced to
live since 2003. And more importantly the details were relayed in a
hushed court not by any lawyer, but by the only person qualified to
talk with any authority about dark prisons, interrogations and abuse -
the account relayed to the courtroom in Manhattan, New York came from
the mouth of Dr Aafia herself. Running for more than two weeks
there's been little or no record in the Western media of this shocking
case other than some of the most ill-informed, embarrassingly skewed
reports which indicate the noble profession of journalism is still in
a narcotic malaise in the Big Apple. That the New York Times had to
apologise to its readers on the front page for selling them short on
the build up to and the unfolding war in Iraq, one would have thought
would have had an impact on the quality of future output. That the US
press corps, with the exception of The Baltimore Sun, had to play
catch up after 'missing' the Abu Ghraib scandal speaks volumes.
Sadly it seems that huge swathes of the US media have learned nothing.
Just a few days ago an embarrassing wealth of riches in terms of
soundbites which would have had most journalists salivating like a
Pavlov Dog came tumbling out in the lower Manhattan court.
But like a gaggle of bald men fighting over a comb, the scribes
present in the main courtroom could only focus on one irrelevant
detail ... Dr Aafia Siddiqui had fired a pistol at a gun club. Excuse
me? This is America ... where half the adult population live in houses
where guns are kept. Let's keep it real - America has 80 million gun
owners with a total of 258 million guns. Possibly the most wronged
woman in the entire War on Terror had just revealed how she was held
in secret prisons, with no legal representation, cut off from the
outside world since 2003 where brutal interrogation techniques were
used to break her down. And, to make matters even worse when she was
kidnapped from her home city in Karachi, Pakistan her three children
were also snatched ... the fact two of those children are American
citizens held no sway with the majority of the assembled press corps.
One wondered if their pants had caught fire if they would have even
smelled the smoke. And so what held the Western media attention?
Well, it transpired that Dr Aafia may have taken a pistol shooting
course as part of her curriculum in an American university. That's a
bit like an American tourist ordering fish and chips and a cup of tea
on arrival in Britain. Hold the front page! So for your benefit, let
me tell you about the real "shock, horror, drama" that you won't read
in the New York Times or the rest of the corporate media.
After two weeks of being baited and defamed, in a calm, articulate and
precise manner Dr Aafia Siddiqui finally had her day - and her say -
in court. It should have been a moment of schadenfreude for the
prosecution team as they prepared to sit back and enjoy the spectacle
of the defendant rant and rave like a mad woman when she decided on
her right to take the stand. Perhaps Judge Richard Berman, a modest
little man with much to be modest about, must have thought his rather
unremarkable legal career would finally make more than just the
current footnote in Wikipedia. Most of her own legal team watched
mortified in the belief that their reluctant client (she had dismissed
them publicly many times to no effect) might destroy the robust
defence they had built over two weeks. Even her brother Muhammad, who
has sat in court everyday watching and listening to the proceedings
told me he wondered if his little sister was making the right
decision. Given the chance, I think I would have also advised her
against speaking. Well thank goodness Dr Aafia ignored us all -
within minutes of giving evidence the prosecution wanted to shut her
up, Judge Berman looked like he was sucking on the bitterest of lemons
and the rest of the courtroom sat back aghast.
The Pakistan media, despatched into one of the two overspill rooms
frantically scribbled down their notes so as not to miss one single
word and her supporters sat back aghast watching a breathtaking
spectacle. One of the few community leaders who has been
outstandingly vocal in his support, El-Hajj Mauri' Saalakhan, probably
expressed himself better than any of the nitwits sleeping on the press
benches when he wrote: "She testified that after completing her
doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in
cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs
children. "During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that
the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from
mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be
deconstructed. The real Dr Aafia Siddiqui - the committed muslimah,
the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute
mujahid for truth and justice - began to emerge with full force". As
the evidence continued we learned that she didn't know where her three
children were - it was sensational content. She talked of her dread
and fear of being handed back to the Americans when she was arrested
in Ghazni and was held by police. Terrified that yet another secret
prison was waiting for her she revealed how she peaked through the
curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were
talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he
jumped up and yelled that the prisoner was loose, and shot her in the
stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second
person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the
room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.
This ties in exactly with what I was told by the counter terrorism
police chief I interviewed in Afghanistan back in the autumn of 2008 -
I remember him laughing as he told me how the US soldiers panicked,
shot and most of them ran out of the room in a panic. Hmm, no wonder
the prosecution didn't want him giving evidence in court. Instead
they chose to record his interview and voiced it over with a shoddy
translator who has a long distance relationship with the Pashtu
language ... defence team take note. Demand a real Pashtu translation
because what was given out in court was misleading and not the words
of the actual words of police chief - don't take my word for it ...
speak to someone whose first language is Pashtu. it's hardly rocket
science. Of course there's no way a bunch of soldiers are going to
admit they lost it, but according to those I interviewed for my film
In search of Prisoner 650 in Afghanistan that's exactly what happened.
But let's return to Aafia and the cross examination which followed.
When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals,
her response was, "only when required." As Mauri remarked: "This
opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice
producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being
charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism
has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling
case!" The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation
between Aafia and her now ex-husband being questioned by the FBI in
2002, and leaving the US a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn't
anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make
that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she
noted how she later returned to the US to attempt to find work in her
field. Mauri said one of the most heart-wrenching moments in the
cross-examination was when Dr Aafia described how she was briefly
re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been
her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that
time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result
she could not definitively (then or now) determine if that was indeed
her son, Ahmed. When asked whether she had incriminating documents in
her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the
bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to
her. She didn't know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively
determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not.
She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the
prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.
But the killer blow was delivered when Dr Aafia mildly challenged the
prosecutor in a calm, crystal clear voice that was heard throughout
her testimony: "You can't build a case on hate; you should build it on
fact!"
There were other sensation moments and revealing testimony and if
anyone thought that she hated Americans she removed that idea from
their minds when she talked of the "fake Americans, not real
Americans" who held and tortured her in the secret prisons. They were
fake, she explained because real Americans would not behave in such a
way to bring shame on their country. We also discovered how she was
instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was
secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which
repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor,
Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for
crimes they are not guilty of). It all got too much for Judge Berman
who ordered a brief recess. The plan to goad and incite Dr Aafia to
perform some incomprehensible, demonic rant had back-fired. When
testimony resumed, we learned through the star witness how she was
often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret
prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a
different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a
type of "game," she revealed of how she would be "punished" if she got
something wrong. Now, more than ever, this trial should be brought to
an end. And if Judge Berman wants to go down in history for
punctuating his lack lustre career as a member of the judiciary for
standing up in the cause of truth and justice now is the time to do
it. The truth will out and the US Government's case has been exposed
for what it is ... a sham. And it is a fitting tribute to the
endurance of Dr Aafia, mother-of-three, that the sham has been exposed
by her. Let's see justice being carried out in 500 Pearl Street in
lower Manhattan tomorrow. Over to you, your Honour Judge Berman.
* Award-winning investigative Yvonne Ridley and award-winning
film-maker Hassan al Banna Ghani produced the documentary In Search of
Prisoner 650 about the mysterious Grey Lady of Bagram who they
conclude is Dr Aafia Siddiqui. Yvonne Ridley is also a patron of the
human rights organisation Cageprisoner which first raised the issue of
Dr Aafia Siddiqui shortly after she went missing in March 2003. A full
report on the court proceedings can be seen on the website
www.cageprisoners.com

Read More “New York Media Misses out on Shock, Drama & Horror”

21st Century Islamic State - Central Principles

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

This book has been written with certain central principles that can be deemed as imperative to a meaningful discussion. The present discussion and dialogue on the Islamic state must follow some general guidelines. The following section will provide a start for such guidelines.

Sahih Muslim & Bukhari

The general attempt will be to use only hadith from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari as the basis for any discussion of the Islamic state. Using only the most authentic sources would enable us to keep the discussion from controversy and make obtuse arguments less likely. This in no way implies that the other books of hadith are not relevant or to lessen their importance or authenticity.

Example of the Sahaba

We will not take the example of the Sahaba blindly, noting that their interpretations may or may not be appropriate for all ages. Also noting that many decisions were made on the basis of pragmatism and political expedience. More controversially, noting that the Sahaba disagreed with each other on many points as to the nature of the state.

Reason Over Blind Faith

We must be able and willing to take up the intellectual challenge of creating an Islamic state and not be afraid of fatwa's and opinions of the traditional ulema.

Open Over Closed Society

We must accept that the state in Medina was not an authoritarian regime. Rather, it was an open society where differing opinions were tolerated, people where not arrested without charges and people where not forced to pray. Many people from the Quraish and Makkah accepted Islam when they saw the model state of Medina and how it was governed, with peace, justice and respect for all citizens, Muslim, non-Muslim and even the hypocritical.

Mechanism to Agree & Understanding Devolution

What is most important is not whether everyone agrees, but rather, it is finding a mechanism by which people can compromise. This has to be understood not only at the highest level but also at lower levels – at the level of the state, a province, a district, a city or village. The importance is of finding a mechanism by which each community can galvanize the collective will and intellect and implement them effectively. Thus, a community in X location may agree to certain policies and implement them, but one in Y location may think differently and implement their own interpretations and thoughts. We must be willing to accept that flexibility without being at each other’s throats. The extent of devolution will be part of the debate but the recognition that devolution is an issue must be universally accepted.

The practical expediency is figuring out what the mechanism is for agreeing (i.e. voting) and how the decision making levels are to be rationed.

Understanding Fate

We must agree that fate does not call us to inaction but presupposes our actions. Fatalism needs to be addressed for it can and is used by the Muslim clergy to create paralysis and inactivity amongst the Muslim people. The intricacies of fate, makes fate a tricky subject to handle. The concept of Fate and what is foretold does not call us to inaction. It presupposes our actions not necessarily because we believe in the prophecies but because as good Muslims witnessing now and openly before us, Palestine, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Kashmir, Philippines, Thailand and many more places, we need to act if we are to follow the example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Prophet (PBUH) never believed in fate in such a way as to sit back and relax but rather the opposite: he actively and in great earnest went about fighting against all the problems and issues that he came across. We must follow that example.

Japan Versus Turkey

Japan and Turkey provide two contrasting and diametric models of how to react to the rapid advancement of the Western civilization. Historically both Japan and Turkey faced the West and had to make a number of hard decisions as to how they can react, what to take and what to reject. They provide a classic case of comparison, ancient empires, facing a stark choice of change in a similar period in history, and yet made completely different choices.

Japan combined its tradition and progress in a way that reinvented its culture while Ataturk’s Turkey threw out their culture and belief system to transplant a Western imitation instead.

Our discussion and dialogue concerning the Islamic state will be set within finding the Japan Route for the Muslim world rather than the Turkey Route.

Dialogue with Civility

This dialogue must be held with the utmost civility. We do not want to be dishonorable in our conduct nor do we want to put a sword to the neck of those who disagree.

Free Market Over Planned Economy

While the free market will be restricted by Islamic laws and regulations and with welfare obligations that are ordained, the essential nature of the economic system must be that of a free market.

Non-Muslims Not Part of this Dialogue

No matter how well intentioned we would rather keep this discussion, so close to our hearts and so close to our religion, exclusively a Muslim affair. We thank all non-Muslims for their interest, but respectfully decline your contribution. Please allow us this space as a sign of mutual respect. As someone once memorably said, talking to a non-Muslim about an Islamic state would be like trying to convince someone that chocolate pudding is better than chocolate cake, when they dislike chocolate to begin with.


Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - Central Principles”

21st Century Islamic State Main Page

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful


21st Century Islamic State

Meinhaj Hussain
m.hussain@grandestrategy.com

January 31st, 2010

Version 1.6

Dedicated to You Allah, with all my love and all my worship

And to Allama Iqbal, Alija Izetbegovic, Muhammad Asad and Marmaduke Pickthall


Table of Contents

Preface (see below)

Introduction

The Case for an Islamic State

Two Opposing Sides – Both Wrong

A Model for an Islamic State

Political Model

Economic Model

Education

The Legal System

Understanding Problems of Sexuality & Society

Ideas on the Military

The Importance of Pakistan

A Case for Hijra for Muslims of the West

After The Revolution

In Conclusion

Central Principles

List of Muslim Leaders

Continuing The Dialogue Through Creative Commons

Creative Commons License

Glossary

Index

Preface

This book is written for Muslims who have woken up to the need for Islam, not as a passive force, but an active force that can transform society and deal with the present extreme circumstances of our peoples. It is written for those who seek to understand where we stand in history and how to make a workable and attainable plan to solve the problems that we face today. 

This book is not targeted at non-Muslims, "progressive"-style Muslims, or extremists and those who condone violence against innocents. Nor is this book a public relations or propaganda effort intended to showcase Islam before the world. It does not represent an inter-religious dialog or an inter-civilizational one. 

The thoughts and ideas expressed here are intended solely for our planning and analysis in dealing with the difficult and extreme circumstances that we Muslims face today. The thoughts and ideas that this book follows are not completely unique or original but represent a synthesis of thought. 

The line of thinking that this book follows, as much as this author would wish, is neither completely new nor totally original in all its contents, this line of thinking has been expressed in various forms throughout the Muslim world with increasing frequency over the last couple of hundred years. More specifically, this author's thoughts are built on the foundations of thinkers such as Allama Iqbal, Muhammad Asad and Alija Izetbegovic.

This author respects the views of Abul Ala Maududi but does not necessarily share them in their entirety and rejects outright many points including the use of the present clergy in politics. It is the view of this author that this class is part of the problem and thus cannot be a portion in the solution. 

Download:

Note: Version track changes has been terminated.

21st Century Islamic State Version 1.6MS Word

21st Century Islamic State by Meinhaj Hussain is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

Read More “21st Century Islamic State Main Page”

21st Century Islamic State - The Case for an Islamic State

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Islam is a complete way of life. It is vital for Muslims to deal with all that takes place around them. Islam is not merely a passive religion that we keep in our personal lives. For every Muslim there is a political component and, where appropriate, even a military component in the way of Islam. This is particularly true when we see oppression against Muslims. In such circumstances, a true Muslim, far from being a passive preacher, must have a more holistic approach to life. And this is reflected in the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions, all of whose lives are exemplified by social and political struggle as much as a spiritual struggle illustrated in prayer and fasting. Yet Muslims today have lost track of the need to strive socially and politically.

Where we stand today, Islam is being attacked, Muslims are being persecuted, and Muslim states are being dissected and neutered. This is a process that did not start now, but one that has steadily flowed throughout history, whenever our enemies found the opportunity, take for example, Spain in the 15^th century, The Maghrib under France, British India, Uthman Europe after World War I, Occupied Palestine, just to name a few. And in more recent times in Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, amongst others. Islam today, without doubt, is threatened.

From Morocco to Philippines, from Chechnya to Somalia, we are facing internal divisions and external threats that seem beyond the ability of the ummah to cope. How things stand today is visible to everyone. The vivid images of mass murder and imprisonment in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Philippines, Iraq, Afghanistan and more brings tears to the collective Muslim eyes. Yet, somehow the need is to hold our emotions and think clearly to fight back and regain our faith, strength and unity. The perennial question is, what can a Muslim do? Is it that Muslims must live under oppression and endure and hope that Allah (swt) will save us? Or is it that this is perhaps Allah's Will? Yet, Islam does not appear to be a passive religion:

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah. But if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.
(Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #193)

A doctrine of passivity and fatalism does not seem to hold. If one takes this principle of fighting oppression, and sees oppressors in powerful countries such as the United States and Israel, which as individuals we Muslims cannot fight, a Muslim is faced with a moral quandary. Clearly, in the singular, Muslims today are quite helpless today. As individuals Muslims can be locked up, tortured or simply eliminated. But as a people, united in faith to the idea of Islam, we can fight them. To do so, we need our collective strength. We need to be organized. We need to create a movement to establish a Muslim state that can project our collective will.

Yet, if we look at any map, we see a host of Muslim states. One may wonder, why establish an Islamic state when there are so many that profess to be Muslim states. Are not Saudi Arabia or Iran Muslim states? But what is a Muslim state? It can be said that there is no Islamic state because we do not see any country today that reflects a state in the spirit of Medina, even remotely so. No, it is not an ideal that we are seeking to run after. Broadly, a state that practices one of the four accepted madhabs, a state whose government is not oppressive, a state that does not provide lip service to Islam but also practices it in its laws and policies. A state that is not a client state of the United States.

The long and short of it is that today there is no state that comes remotely close to the ideal of a Muslim state as was established in Medina-tun-Nabyi. In some ways, perhaps Sweden is closer to a Muslim state than most professed Muslim states. It is plain to everyone with how much dignity Sweden treats its citizens, how it conducts itself in international affairs, and how it combines welfare and free markets, production and environmental consciousness, justice and freedom of speech.

An Islamic state is one where the state is based on the principles of the Quran and Sunnah. It is a state that reflects the spirit of the state of Medina. One where justice prevails. It is a state where tyranny does not reign and disagreements in government are not resolved through bloodshed. A state that follows the laws set by the Quran and Sunnah and interprets them with enlightenment and wisdom of true scholars, as opposed to for instance, the views of a local mullah or sheikh. It is also a state where corruption is banished and not considered a daily fact of life. Some of the central principles that we believe are important for an Islamic state today are given near the end of the book under the chapter titled Central Principles. Much of this book attempts to find one possible solution to some of the major issues including political model, economic model, education and various social issues.

As we see, there is no place on earth today where an Islamic state exists as in the spirit of the state of Medina during the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) time.  We would need to do the hard work, with our sweat and blood to create this Islamic state. We would also need to determine where such a state could best be conceived.

And such a state would need to be established while being besieged by our enemies; countries that today control the world and would do everything in their power to stop us. Supposing that we, by the Grace of Allah (swt), attempt such a state at a random location in the Muslim world, it is more likely than not that the United States or whoever else, would find some pretext to label us terrorists, twisting the truth and fabricating evidence. We have seen this course of events time and again most recently in Somalia recently as well as many times elsewhere. If Muslims attempted to, with the Grace of Allah, create an Islamic state, they would face the greatest military, political and economic might collected by the enemies of Islam today.

Now, like ants we would labor away, toiling away at a colony, only to see it destroyed. Clearly, even if such a state can attain massive economies of scale and scope with respect to a host of issues, creating such a state seems impossible and hopeless, in relation to the reaction we will face against us.

Thus, our choice would have to be careful indeed. First off, to fight oppression, this Islamic State would need to have the wherewithal to do so, that is, the ability to project conventional military might. There are few countries in the world that have this, and few Muslim countries that can compete, given the might of our enemies.

Today, we are at a crossroad, with three choices before us. One road will take us to assimilating into the Western civilization and relegating Islam to the role that Christianity today plays in the West or that the religion of the Romans played in their age. The second road leads us to reviving Islam in its true spirit and meaning. The third choice is to decay and die where we stand.

What is certain is that if we are to take the second road, to revive Islam in its true spirit and meaning, it is clear that the way forward is together, as the entire Muslim Ummah rather than in separate nationalisms. Divided into different nationalisms and cut across our petty differences, racial, cultural and otherwise, we are bound to fail as we did in Spain. The similarities are most striking, the politics of Muslim Spain to the politics of Muslims today. Each little principality nearsightedly fixated on their own, with each its own proud "Me First" slogan. Each of these states were taken down one at a time. Once Spain was conquered, Islam was razed out of every nook and corner of her. In contrast, consider contemporary history, from Ataturk's "Turkey First", we now have "Pakistan First", "Bangladesh First", "Iraq First", "Egypt First" and more.

Spanish Muslims allied themselves with Christians to fight fellow Muslims to guard their narrow and myopic interests. How different from this folly is what we are doing today? See the Pakistan Army fight the Mujahideen and aid Western Allies in Afghanistan. Remember that without Pakistan's strategic, political and logistic support, NATO and the US would be hard-pressed to maintain the presence there.

Come see the Muslims of the United States. Visit us, each in our own little petty masjid – the Arab Masjid, the Pakistani Masjid, the Afghan Masjid, the Bangladeshi Masjid, all lined up and ready to make their own nationalisms at home, while making the other feel alien. Allah knows best, but I do not see our Creator changing the conditions of our historical progression unless we change our ways.


Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - The Case for an Islamic State”

21st Century Islamic State - Introduction

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Islam today has over 1.5 billion adherents with an enormous wealth of resources and a near-perfect geo-strategic position. More than any of these, our greatest strength is Islam, the values and guidance from the One True Creator, Allah.

Islam came as a Mercy to mankind. It represents a shift in religious thinking and differs from all other belief systems, doctrines and philosophies preceding it, in that it advocates simultaneously  living in the material world and the spiritual, and provides a synthesis of relating the two. Buddhism, Taoism and Catholicism are inclined to the interior life, in rejection of the exterior. Confucianism and Calvinism (or its many intellectual offspring), and political systems such as Marxism and Capitalism, focus on the exterior life and are belief systems that are focused on the external and the material world. Islam provides an understanding and a solution in a complete and comprehensive understanding of the human paradigm, encapsulating simultaneously and in balance, both the internal and the external, the material and the spiritual. Islam can thus be explained as “religion without mysticism and learning without atheism”.

The success of this paradigm was exemplified in the rapid rise of Islam – moral, economic, political and military, as the central driving force in the world. Islam towered as the dominant civilization and political empire for over a thousand years. Yet today, Muslims are in a steep political and economic decline. The world has been in a state of great turmoil and change and Muslims are at a final crossroad to either fade away as a political force or re-energize and rejuvenate. The Uthman Empire is no more and its tiny fragments are now weak and subjugated by various foreign powers.

Beyond armies and the force of arms, these foreign powers are using their ideologies and world views to secure themselves in our lands and to keep us economically, politically, militarily and spiritually starved and dependent.

Today's state of subservience is a highly unnatural position for the Muslim world, given our history, and to correct such a position is not outside the realms of possibility, but rather one that would represent a natural progression of events, and correction of balance.

Islam has been and continues to be the most powerful and dynamic force in the Muslim World and the only pragmatic solution to our present crisis. What galvanized Muslim India to seek freedom as Pakistan? What inspired the Chechens, Bosnia and Afghanistan under Soviet occupation? What caused the emergence of Somalia’s Islamic Courts and the Hezbollah in Lebanon? The answer remains the same throughout.

The contention here is that this primary force within us can best be articulated and come to its full expression in the embodiment of an Islamic state. This book attempts to define how such an Islamic state can be created and sustained and the major issues that the Islamic state needs to resolve.


Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - Introduction”

21st Century Islamic State - A Model for an Islamic State

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

One of the great stumbling blocks to creating an Islamic state is that there is a shortage of intellectual work done to clearly define how exactly such a state should operate. The attempt in this chapter and in the following chapters will be to develop one possible framework within which insh’Allah a new consensus can be reached. The purpose here is to find a practicable solution to how we can have a viable Islamic state in the post-modern context.  As we have noted earlier, the Secularists/Modernists want to relegate Islam to the mosque and transplant themselves to the western Weltgeist. Conversely, on the other side of the spectrum, we have people who want to reject the present world and recreate the period when Islam was ascendant.


While these two groups of people have hijacked the debate and become two colossus fighting a battle to the death against each other, the common man on the street does not necessarily agree with either side. The common man seems to know instinctively that the answer lies in between the ideologies of the two groups, yet have not articulated and rationalized a path between the two. After all, an ideological compromise built only around the premise of moderation and taking the middle path is at best weak. What is in fact needed is a synthesis of ideas rather than a compromise.

Such a model is of essence to the present political situation within the Muslim World. This model cannot be a closed system, in that we cannot hope to create the "perfect solution". In these thoughts and ideas, there is no permanent cure for poverty, inequality, or a whole host of other evils. To attempt to create such a system is clearly beyond what has so far been achievable. If one attempts such a system and fails it often results in a far worse result as is amply exemplified in the former Soviet Union. This author will venture to say that there is in fact perhaps no perfect solution and one must aim to design a system that takes this into effect, that can adapt and has adequate "safety valves" and a mechanism to bring in emerging factors as they develop.


While this synthesis is a wider work and will involve a considerable amount of thought and time, this book will attempt to first build a skeletal structure for others to build on. The areas to be addressed will include the political system, the economic system, the legal system, the military and other such important topics. We cannot be encyclopedic but will aim to cover the most important.

It must be stressed that all elements of the Islamic state given here are interlinked and cannot work independently, or stand effectively on their own but rather, act together in balance. Lastly, within each subsystem, adequate checks and balances are essential.

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - A Model for an Islamic State”

21st Century Islamic State - Two Opposing Sides

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Purity, Piety and Dedication without Talibanism. Education, Technology & Industry without Secularism.

There are broadly two kinds of people that will stand in the way of an Islamic state and in Islam as not merely a religion. There will be what we can describe as Conservatives and Secularists/Progressives/Modernists. Conservatives are those that would want to pull Muslims back to the past while Secularists would want to move Muslims to a secularized future, with Islam relegated to the mosque. They may regard each other as opponents, but they share an important idea - that Islam is a religion.

Islam is not merely a religion. It is a complete way of life, centered on the belief in One God. Islam is the only belief system that does not enjoin blind faith; it combines faith with knowledge. Truth and evidence go together, as they should. Islam melds the spiritual and the natural worlds, in harmony and balance.

The Conservative banner is held high by a class of people, that strange as it may sound, are not supposed to exist in Islam: the clergy. Mullahs, Muftis, Sheikhs, etc are not sanctioned by any verse of the Quran or by any authentic hadith. Yet, they exist today, and have convoluted Islam to define themselves as the middlemen between Muslims and the Quran. On any question of Islam, Muslims are now told to get a nod from the local Imam, Sheikh, Mullah, Mufti, etc. These career theologians make their living out of Islam and yet stand by socially and politically silent to our disintegration. Beyond empty slogans and sooth-saying, this class has shown itself to be completely incompetent at addressing any of the issues that the Muslim body-politic faces today.

Perhaps one of the central problems arise because the clergy, and all those who seek education from them never develop critical thinking. They are taught to read, recite and memorize and the finest of them can reproduce the Quran, hadiths and even works of eminent scholars from memory, like a tape recorder or a computer program. But throughout their education, they are not taught to understand the Quran, to ponder over its meanings, to apply. They are shunned from questioning and inquiring. This leads to a deterioration in their mental capacities to think, reason, classify and analyze issues. It leads to them not knowing how to argue constructively or the ettiquettes of argument. This is one of the central problems and why billions of Muslims today produce such few scholars and thinkers.

It is not that there is anything wrong with memorizing and recitation, it is that everything has its place and proportion. Reason, argument and critical thinking cannot be shunned, and is as important today as it was during the Prophet’s (peace be upon him’s) time, when people actually accepted Islam on the basis of the same.

Islam is not a religion of theologians and we must stop them at all costs if we want to revive Islam. Islam is universal as it reaches out to all, able to do so because its concepts are easy to understand for those who seek Allah. One does not need to read obtuse works of scholars. The Egyptian Ulema asked Marmaduke Pickthall to translate Tabari instead of the Quran; yet you do not need to read Tabari to know Islam, let alone memorize it.

The Progressive-Secularist approach, on the other hand, is an extreme reaction to the Conservative paradigm and to the dazzle of the Western civilization. Their approach is built on the ascendancy of the latter and in seeing all solutions to our problems in reflection to the West. Replication over reinvention is their sine qua non. They see before them, the greatness of the West and in America and see solutions in transplanting these values over a culture that to them is backward, one that they do not understand or appreciate. They believe that the root cause of the backwardness is Islam and they seek to remedy this with the panacea of the Western culture.

Neither of the above mentalities offer an adequate solution to the challenges of the Islamic world. The aim of this book is to focus on innovative approaches to the emerging challenges we face, outside the paradigms of these two ideological groups. We seek to bring a third paradigm that broadly lies between these two positions, yet is not a compromise of the two, nor placed in a two dimensional plane between them, but rather a synthesis of thought and ideas built on an independent foundation.

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - Two Opposing Sides”

21st Century Islamic State - Economic Model

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Glossary of terms used is provided at the end of the book.

Economic System

The fundamental viability of any state is its economic system. The inability of the Muslim world in creating viable economic models that are not cheap replicas of Western economies is perhaps the biggest challenge that we face. Riba (interest) is central to the western economy and for Muslims this is unacceptable. Any models we develop on the lines of their system is therefore fundamentally unislamic. We have to be brave in breaking new ground, in finding a viable alternative framework rather than finding the latest trick in the book to put another name for riba, and somehow guise it as “rent” or “fee” or the many other terms we play with. Riba is wrong, there is no going around this.

Impact of Interest

If one looks at economies where banking dominates to a greater extent, it is my hypothesis that you will find that economic cycles are more volatile. Banking is responsible for much of the money supply in the economy and this money supply tends to fluctuate to a greater extent precisely because of its connection to banks; they accentuate the volatility of the money supply, which in turn emphasize the volatility in demand.

Removing fractional reserve banking and an interest-based economy is likely to make booms and busts far less of a problem as the money supply in the economy is less likely to fluctuate. Research could conclusively prove or disprove this thesis by doing a comparative study of economies where banking plays a greater role versus a lesser role and matching this to see how it correlates with the volatility of booms and busts in each group. Of course, holding everything else constant in an absolute puritanical sense will be difficult but this exercise may still be useful.

Not only is interest (or riba) wrong, but it is also not the be all and end all of a discussion of Islamic economics. There are many other fundamental issues that are intrinsically linked and are of equally greater importance. For instance, fractional reserve banking as well as the concept of limited liability are also key elements of the Western economic model, but are again essentially non-islamic. Fractional reserve banking allows money to be created out of no real economic activity but virtually out of thin air. Limited liability allows businesses to exist without proper assignment of risk to the constituents of the business. We cannot be blind to these elephants in the room.


Savings-Investment

The fundamental question for an Islamic economy, or perhaps any economy for that matter, is in defining how savings-investment will work in an alternative framework. That is, how would savings in the economy be turned into effective investments? By taking out both interest-based banking and limited liability (thus corporations as we know them, stock flotations and leverage) we appear to be taking out this important link between savings and investment. In the Islamic state, this function can be taken over by creating an alternative venture capital centered investment economy and by redesigning the corporation as we know it to incorporate liability.

Today western economies subsidize loans over investment in equity because interest payments are not taxable while dividends are. This puts investors at a disadvantage and gives banking a leg up. There does not seem to be any real rationalization for this without going into a conspiracy theory, but suffice it to say for intended or unintended reasons, this is the case. Within investments in equity, corporations created in limited liability (and the concept of the corporation as a legal entity) and by extension the stock market, dominate.

In addition, restrictions on investors in private equity and venture capital are also stringent and constricting. As a result, venture capital and other forms of private investing suffer a double jeopardy. We see that venture capital is greatly marginalized in western economies both in quantity and in quality, focusing narrowly on the highest yield opportunities which also involve the highest risk.

Our savings-investment vehicles would include:

1. Venture capital firms;
2. Investment banks;
3. Restructured corporations; and
4. Restructured stock market.

Corporations would be restructured to include liability. However, it would be the responsibility of the top management to make sure that information is provided accurately. If the company fails because the management was hiding information in any way then the shareholders will not be held liable for the losses beyond the value of the stocks. Any stocks that are showing poor balance sheets, income statements and cash flow statements could be de-listed from the stock exchange mechanism and moved to pink sheets. Investors investing in these pink sheet companies will be fully cognizant that they are dealing with companies that could default and fail, resulting in them being held liable for losses.

Derivatives need to be severely restricted and regulated by the markets to ensure that speculation does not reign. This is important to ensure that the financial system is subservient to the "real economy". Derivatives could be restricted to forwards and swaps of real assets, rather than fiat paper. The Islamic state would need Muslim thinkers and economists who can further analyze where else and how else this can be applied.

Derivatives inherently do not appear to be wrong when connected with real assets rather than paper assets and provides fundamental value for economic activity. They are particularly important in today's times when production activities are highly synchronized and dependent on a vast network of supply activity, all of which have to be made available within complex long-term planning and procurement.
Venture capital firms would need to play a key role in the economy, a role that will be far less restricted by regulation and the opportunity costs created by interest (riba) in Western countries. They will therefore need to be structured differently from the VC firms in western markets. They will be larger, more “bank-like” in their investment decisions and willing to take on lower yield investments.

This should be a natural adaptation and evolution for them given that there will be no competing interest-based system to take the lower yield and lower risk side of the market. The financial system will not subsidize interest based lending (as in the west and discussed earlier) and there will be no "risk-less interest" to artificially raise yield requirements for risk-sharing investing.

Money Supply

Money supply should be maintained at a rate that would approximately keep prices constant. Some leeway that is practical should be allowable. However, the aim of the Islamic State would be to maintain the value of money to its best ability. We have seen the negative impact of inflation coupled with loose government spending and an exploitative banking system, a sure recipe for disaster.

That the value of money should be maintained does not also somehow mean that a gold standard should be sought. A gold standard implies that the value of the currency remain constant to the value of gold, which has its own negative implications, as the value of gold can fluctuate independently to that of the goods and services bought and sold in an economy. Gold prices today can also be highly fluctuating. Instead, the value of the currency will be dependent on a basket of goods and services that is reflective of the economy as well as the value of a basket of currencies that would be represented by their level of trade with the Islamic state. Of these two factors, the former (a basket of goods and services reflective of the economy) should be weighted more than the latter (basket of currencies being traded with), given the importance of the Islamic state's own real assets and value to its citizens. This ratio of decision-weighting would need to be determined  and could perhaps be in the region of a 80:20 ratio, heavily in favor of maintaining the value of the currency for the local consumers.

Alternatively, the ratio could perhaps be equal to the proportion of foreign trade to domestic consumption, a more classical way to address the issue.

For this to work in practice, a completely independent monetary authority would be needed. If the US constitution has three branches that are independent of each other, the Islamic State will need many more than three. The central bank will be one such independent authority that will be in charge of maintaining the value of the currency. Another independent institution will deal with statistical data and this will also need to be completely independent of the other arms of the state. This is important and is mentioned here because it would be less useful to have an independent central bank if it depended on data that was manipulated by governments as a means to sway the central bank.

We have seen how Western governments have played with key statistics such as inflation and unemployment. The Islamic State should not repeat that mistake. An independent statistical arm of the state will provide statistics for all independent arms of the government to base their decisions on, including data needed by the independent monetary authority of the state.

Money Supply Expansion with Population

There is still the problem that a naturally increasing population would mean that keeping money supply per person constant would require a natural increase in the money supply. In the Western economy, monetary expansion principally and in its first incidence benefits the banking institution and the government rather than the people who are only benefited indirectly.

One possible alternative is for each individual that comes of age, he/she would be given an endowment equal to the amount that would result in keeping the economy in equilibrium (a value dependent on the consumption rate). This could also simultaneously be a source of financing for young men and women entering the economy needing an initial investment to get them going (i.e. for education, buying a starter home, etc). In addition, such an endowment would strengthen the meritocratic nature of the state, evening the playing field for all future generations.

The nature of the state however must remain fundamentally that of an open economy based on private enterprise and competition. We must not take the route of ever increasing government regulation and government supported welfare projects that take on a political power-base of their own. The low tax rate of an Islamic economy will perhaps prove to be a counter to such state-creep. Regulatory creep however needs to be watched and guarded against far more extensively. The importance of having a financial regulatory body, completely independent from the government of the day, is thus of vital import to the model we are attempting to develop.

In Transition

In the event of the establishment of an Islamic state, abolishing banking outright would be catastrophic. Money supply would shrink rapidly. Demand and investment would collapse, spiraling the economy into a recession. The knee-jerk reaction from the populace would be to increase savings, further reducing consumption, compounding the problem even further.

The correct solution perhaps would be to gradually impair banking. Just as the Communists created a socialist state to achieve Communism, so too must the Islamic state act in staging itself through a transition. Staggered increase in the reserve ratio of banks and changing the regulatory framework can go hand-in-hand in transforming today's banks from caterpillars to butterflies.

The aim, eventually, is to move banking towards a theoretical 100 percent reserve ratio; depositors would have to give the bank consent to invest their money. One option would be that such banks would offer liquidity options with time horizons such as three days, one week, one month, etc. Investments would not have a fixed guaranteed return but rather a risk sharing return. Because of the nature of the investments, greater liquidity options would still generally yield lower returns and thus still maintain those natural patterns of investment that economists have come to consider almost equal to the law of gravity.

For those depositors seeking 100 percent reserve and complete liquidity, the banks should be allowed to charge a service fee for holding the money in safety. After all, such a service would represent a clear service to the bank's customers with clearly identifiable costs to the bank.

Monetary and Fiscal Impact of Transition

We have already touched upon how liquidity would dry up in transition. Even with the most gradual transition it would result in recession, and the more gradual it would be the longer the recession would last and the worse would be its consequence. Let us consider three possible policy options: increasing the reserve ratio, curtailing interest-based banking through regulation and restricting and regulating the stock market. All would result in a rapid reduction in the money supply, and a rapid downward projection of the economy towards an inevitable crash; ceteris paribus, deflationary pressures would reduce investment and consumption expenditures and reduce national income.

Is this a necessary pain to create an Islamic state? One, impoverished and destitute already, would he or she be willing to dip even deeper into unimaginable poverty and hopelessness? No. For sure there is a solution. It may in fact be an ideal opportunity. Let us consider the possibilities.

Keynesian economics dictates that an (read non-Islamic) economy can be revived by public spending to boost consumption and thus inject the system with new demand and new money.

Y=C+I+G+X-M
C▼ and I▼ is counteracted by G▲
Where:
Y is National Income
C is Consumption
I is Investment
G is Government Expenditure
X is Exports
M is Imports

Because an interest-based Western economy is inherently cyclical and dependent on an ever increasing GDP & Money Supply, the Keynesian solution is often the last resort when all monetary and information options have failed. That is, for instance, when simply expanding credit and the money supply either becomes ineffective or becomes untenable.

The great downside of Keynesian fiscal expansion is inflation. Yet, this may not be a downside in deflationary times. Here is the opportunity within our framework of a transitioning Islamic state: if we attempted fiscal expansion during our earlier described banking and stock market transition, we would be ideally placed to carry out our expansionary fiscal policies without paying the price of inflation!

However, as with anything in life, timing and proportion is crucial. A cricketer (or a baseball player) perhaps understands this better than an economist. Yet for the economist, that mis-timed ball would result in far more damage than the cricketer (or baseball player) can fathom. Neither is it for no reason that Alan Greenspan played the violin; dreamers must be good and timely executioners, if their dreams are to succeed.

Post Transition

This period of fiscal expansion should not however go beyond the period of transition. Governments should not be allowed foot-loose monetary and fiscal policies. Balanced budgets would be hardwired into the constitution. Division of powers would ensure that monetary policy is conducted by an independent arm of the government that is autonomous of the political and administrative authority. This will ensure that the money supply is not abused and inflation is kept at or near zero percent. Combined with a hardwired balanced budget, this will ensure the stability of macroeconomic conditions in the country.

On the surface, such a setup appears grossly flawed. When a Western economy faces recession, not only does consumption decrease but so does government revenue. As a result, balanced budgets would do great harm in actually advocating reduced government spending during a recession. However, in our economic model we believe that the economy will be far less cyclic given the elimination of interest and fractional-reserve banking. Secondly, We can add a provision that the monetary authority will have the final say as to the amount and extent of any fiscal intervention in the case of a recession. Since in our form of government the central bank / monetary authority is a completely independent arm of government, the conflict of interest issue is resolved.

This solution effectively eliminates perhaps the greatest quandary of Western economies - the conflict of interest between political government and vested interests on the one hand, and the higher intellectual goals of managing booms and busts.

Our model makes a trade-off that enables us to have a more stable and less cyclic economic model at the expense being able to inject massive liquidity relatively quickly. This implies that such an economy, while more stable, will be unable to grow at spectacular rates as was observed with such countries as Japan, South Korea, China, etc. This represents the downside of the model, but within a Solow Growth Model context, would become less important as we reach nearer saturation levels in the long-term.

Meritocracy as the Central Theme of our Model

Let us consider the central principles of our Economic Model. Centrally, we seek free enterprise within the constraints of Islam making it philosophically an effort towards a meritocracy a welfare state within that which has been prescribed in Islam given the Muslim obligations of zakat and alms giving.

We observe the salients of removing riba, fractional reserve banking and inflation as a tax imposed by government. We find a defanged savings-investment system built around equity investing and freed from the injustices of regulation, double taxation and unfair competition that equity investments face today in the West, and an independent state bank to have complete control over the money supply with the central purpose of maintaining the money supply.

A central theme of meritocracy inevitably plays out, given Muslim requirements for alms giving and zakat (which incidentally is a wealth tax), Islamic redistribution laws on death, and if we are to pursue an endowment policy for the young. Linking with free education and a meritocratic political model, we see that the theme for meritocracy would become intrinsic to the Islamic state, politically, economically and spiritually; the Day of Judgment too will be meritocratic, each soul being rewarded by what it earned. That will be a Day of perfect Justice. Our meritocracy on the other hand, is a human meritocracy and flawed by our human limits, we must never forget that.

Economic Modeling & a New Science of Muslim Economics

Economic modeling will need to be rethought as many of the key models have interest (riba) as a key element in the models. Perhaps Tobin's Q could be a replacement for riba. We would need pioneers to create the building blocks of Islamic econometrics. Thus far, “Islamic Economics” has largely meant Microeconomic discussions of interest-free banking. This is a poor picture of what we need and perhaps reflective only of where we stand today.

Back to Main Page, 21st Century Islamic State

Read More “21st Century Islamic State - Economic Model”