Ramadan 2017: 9 questions you were too embarrassed to ask Saturday, May 27, 2017

....
Palestinians take part in a prayer called Taraweeh on the eve of the holy fasting month of Ramadan in Gaza City, on June 17, 2015. MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images

The Muslim holy month of Ramadan starts Friday evening, and most of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims will be observing. This means there's a good chance you might encounter someone — a friend, a co-worker, the barista making your latte at Starbucks, your child's teacher — who is celebrating Ramadan.

But what is Ramadan, exactly? And how can I make sure I don't accidentally offend my Muslim friends and acquaintances during Ramadan?

We've got you covered: Here are the most basic answers to the most basic questions about Ramadan.

1) What is Ramadan actually about?

Ramadan is the most sacred month of the year for Muslims — the Prophet Mohammed reportedly said, "When the month of Ramadan starts, the gates of heaven are opened and the gates of Hell are closed and the devils are chained."

Muslims believe it was during this month that God revealed the first verses of the Quran, Islam's sacred text, to Mohammed, on a night known as "The Night of Power" (or Laylat al-Qadr in Arabic).

RELATED London's new Muslim mayor has the perfect response to Trump making an "exception" for him

During the entire month of Ramadan, Muslims fast every day from dawn to sunset. It is meant to be a time of spiritual discipline — of deep contemplation of one's relationship with God, extra prayer, increased charity and generosity, and intense study of the Quran.

But if that makes it sound super serious and boring, it's really not. It's a time of celebration and joy, to be spent with loved ones. At the end of Ramadan there is a big three-day celebration called Eid al-Fitr, or "the Festival of the Breaking of the Fast." It's kind of like the Muslim version of Christmas, in the sense that it's a religious holiday where everyone comes together for big meals with family and friends, exchanges presents, and generally has a lovely time.

Eid presents!!! Cem Ozdel/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Despite the hardship of fasting for a whole month, most Muslims (myself included) actually look forward to Ramadan and are a little sad when it's over. There's just something really special about knowing that tens of millions of your fellow Muslims around the world are experiencing the same hunger pangs, dry mouth, and dizzy spells that you are, and that we're all in it together.

2) How does fasting work?

Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars — or duties — of Islam, along with the testimony of faith, prayer, charitable giving, and making pilgrimage to Mecca. All Muslims are required to take part every year, though there are special dispensations for those who are ill, pregnant or nursing, menstruating, or traveling, and for young children and the elderly.

The practice of fasting serves several spiritual and social purposes: to remind you of your human frailty and your dependence on God for sustenance, to show you what it feels like to be hungry and thirsty so you feel compassion for (and a duty to help) the poor and needy, and to reduce the distractions in life so you can more clearly focus on your relationship with God.

During Ramadan, Muslims abstain from eating any food, drinking any liquids, smoking cigarettes, and engaging in any sexual activity, from dawn to sunset. That includes taking medication (even if you swallow a pill dry, without drinking any water). Chewing gum is also prohibited (though I didn't find that one out until about halfway through my first Ramadan after converting — oops).

Doing any of those things "invalidates" your fast for the day, and you just start over the next day. To make up for days you didn't fast, you can either fast later in the year (either all at once or a day here and there) or provide a meal to a needy person for each day you missed.

Muslims are also supposed to try to curb negative thoughts and emotions like jealousy and anger, and even lesser things like swearing, complaining, and gossiping, during the month. Some people may also choose to give up or limit activities like listening to music and watching television, often in favor of listening to recitations of the Quran.

3) What is a typical day like during Ramadan?

During Ramadan, Muslims wake up well before dawn to eat the first meal of the day, which has to last until sunset. This means eating lots of high-protein foods and drinking as much water as possible right up until dawn, after which you can't eat or drink anything. At dawn, we perform the morning prayer. Since it's usually still pretty early, many go back to sleep for a bit before waking up again to get ready for the day (I certainly do).

Muslims are not supposed to avoid work or school or any other normal duties during the day just because we are fasting. In many Muslim countries, however, businesses and schools may reduce their hours during the day or close entirely. For the most part, though, Muslims go about their daily business as we normally would, despite not being able to eat or drink anything the whole day.

When the evening call to prayer is finally made (or when the alarm on your phone's Muslim prayer app goes off), we break the day's fast with a light meal — really more of a snack — called an iftar (literally "breakfast"), before performing the evening prayer. Many also go to the mosque for the evening prayer, followed by a special prayer that is only recited during Ramadan.

This is usually followed by a larger meal a bit later in the evening, which is often shared with family and friends in one another's homes throughout the month. Then it's off to bed for a few hours of sleep before it's time to wake up and start all over again.

(Note: There are good reasons for only having a small snack to break your fast before performing the evening prayer and then eating a bigger meal later. Muslim prayers involve a lot of movement — bending over, prostrating on the ground, standing up, etc. Doing all that physical activity on a full stomach after not having eaten for 15 hours is a recipe for disaster. Just trust me on this one.)

4) So do you lose weight during Ramadan?

Some of you may be thinking, "Wow, that sounds like a great way to lose weight! I'm going to try it!" But in fact, Ramadan is actually notorious for often causing weight gain. That's because eating large meals super early in the morning and late at night with a long period of low activity bordering on lethargy in between can wreak havoc on your metabolism.

But if you're careful, you can avoid putting on weight, and you may actually lose a few pounds. One meta-analysis of scientific studies on the effects of Ramadan fasting on body weight found that "[w]eight changes during Ramadan were relatively small and mostly reversed after Ramadan, gradually returning to pre-Ramadan status. Ramadan provides an opportunity to lose weight, but structured and consistent lifestyle modifications are necessary to achieve lasting weight loss." [Italics mine.]

So just like with any other extreme diet plan, you may lose a few pounds, but unless you actually make "structured and consistent lifestyle modifications," you're probably not going to see major, lasting results.

5) Why do the dates of Ramadan change every year?

For religious matters, Muslims follow a lunar calendar — that is, one based on the phases of the moon — whose 12 months add up to approximately 354 days. That's 11 days shorter than the 365 days of the standard Gregorian calendar. Therefore, the Islamic lunar calendar moves backward approximately 11 days each year in relation to the regular Gregorian calendar.

So that means that the first day of the month of Ramadan, which is the ninth month of the Islamic lunar calendar, moves backward by about 11 days each year.

This has a large impact on how people experience Ramadan from year to year. When Ramadan falls in the winter, it's much easier to fast: the days are shorter, which means you don't have to fast as long, and it's colder out, so not being able to drink water all day isn't as big of a deal, because you're not sweating as much.

Conversely, when Ramadan falls in the summer (as it has every year since I converted, because of course), fasting can be brutal. In many Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa, summer temperatures can reach levels usually reserved for the deepest bowels of hell.

And in some northern European countries such as Iceland, Norway, and Sweden (where, yes, there are Muslims), fasting can last an average of 20 hours or more in the summer. (And in a few places above the Arctic Circle, the sun never actually sets in the summer. In these cases, Muslim religious authorities have decreed that Muslims can either fast along with the closest Muslim country or fast along with Mecca, Saudi Arabia.)

6) Okay, but why is there always confusion every year about exactly what day Ramadan starts on?

There's a reason "Ramadan start date" is one of the most-searched phrases right now. That's because Muslims around the world do not know when exactly Ramadan is actually supposed to start. If you Google it, you'll see there's a little disclaimer under Google's answer that says "Dates may vary":

"Dates may vary." Thanks, that's super helpful.

That also has to do with the moon — as well as disagreements about science, history, and tradition, plus a bit of geopolitical rivalry.

The beginning of each new month in the Islamic calendar starts on the new moon. Which means the month of Ramadan starts on the new moon. Simple enough, right?

Wrong!

If it's been a while since your high school astronomy class, here's a reminder of what the phases of the moon look like:

Pictured: the source of much consternation and hilarity every single Ramadan. Griffith Observatory

Back in Mohammed's day, in sixth-century Arabia, astronomical calculations weren't as precise as they are today, so people went by what they could see with the naked eye.

Since the new moon isn't actually super visible in the night sky (as you can see above), Muslims traditionally waited to start fasting until the small sliver of crescent moon became visible. There's even a saying attributed to the Prophet Mohammed about waiting to start the fast until you see the crescent. (Some people think this is why the star and crescent is the symbol of Islam, but the crescent was used as a symbol long before Islam.)

This method was a bit messy, though, since things like clouds or just the difficulty of spotting the moon in some locations often led to different groups starting their fast on separate days, even within the same country. Each community, village, or even mosque within the village might send its own guy out to look for the crescent, with rival groups arguing over whether the other guy really saw it or not.

Today, however, we have precise scientific calculations that tell us exactly when the new moon begins, and we don't need to wait until someone spots a tiny crescent in the sky. (In fact, according to the Oxford Dictionary of Islam, "The need to determine the precise appearance of the hilal [crescent moon] was one of the inducements for Muslim scholars to study astronomy.")

So, problem solved! Except that some Muslim scholars believe we should still wait until the slight crescent moon is visible in the night sky, because that's what Mohammed said to do and that's the way we've always done it.

Others argue that Islam has a strong tradition of reason, knowledge, and science, and that if Mohammed were around today he'd choose the more precise scientific calculations over sending the guy at the mosque with the best eyesight outside to squint at the night sky.

To make things even more fun, some argue that the whole world should just follow the official moon-sighting decrees of Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam and the location of its holiest sites. But not everyone thinks that's such a swell idea — especially rival countries like Pakistan and Iran, which balk at the idea of treating Saudi Arabia as the ultimate authority on anything having to do with Islam.

All this means that each year Muslims around the world get to experience the delightful lunacy of "moon-sighting fighting." Indeed, it's such a familiar feature of Ramadan that there are memes about it:

Yes, Muslims use this meme too. There's really no escaping it.

7) Are there differences between how Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims observe Ramadan?

For the most part, no. Both Sunni and Shia Muslims fast during Ramadan. But there are some minor differences — for instance, Sunnis break their daily fast at sunset, when the sun is no longer visible on the horizon (but there's still light in the sky), whereas Shia wait until the redness of the setting sun has completely vanished and the sky is totally dark.

Shia also celebrate an additional holiday within the month of Ramadan that Sunnis do not. For three days — the 19th, 20th, and 21st days of Ramadan — Shia commemorate the martyrdom of Ali ibn Abi Talib, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammed who was both the revered fourth caliph of Sunni Islam and the first "legitimate" imam (leader) of Shia Islam.

Ali was assassinated in the fierce civil wars that erupted following the death of Mohammed over who should lead the Muslim community in his stead. On the 19th day of the month of Ramadan, while Ali was worshipping at a mosque in Kufa, Iraq, an assassin from a group of rebels who opposed his leadership fatally struck him with a poisoned sword. Ali died two days later.

Ali is a hugely important figure in Shia Islam. His tomb in nearby Najaf, Iraq, is the third-holiest site in Shia Islam, and millions of Shia make pilgrimage there every year. Although Sunnis revere Ali as one of the four "rightly guided" caliphs who ruled after Mohammed's death, they do not commemorate his death or make pilgrimage to his tomb.

The tomb of Ali ibn Abi Talib in Najaf, Iraq. Toushiro, public domain

8) What can I do to be respectful of my Muslim friends during Ramadan?

In some Muslim countries, it is a crime to eat and drink in public during the day in the month of Ramadan, even if you're not Muslim.

Of course, this is not the case in the United States, where we enjoy freedom of (and freedom from) religion. And most American Muslims, myself included, don't expect the non-Muslims around us to radically change their behavior to accommodate our religious fast during Ramadan.

I've had friends and co-workers who have chosen to fast along with me out of solidarity (or just because it seems "fun"), and that was sweet of them, but it's not something I ever expected people to do. (Plus, they usually last about four days before they decide solidarity is overrated and being thirsty for 15 hours is not even remotely "fun.")

All that said, there are things you can do — and not do — to make things a little easier for friends or colleagues who happen to be fasting for Ramadan. If you share an office with someone fasting, maybe eat your delicious, juicy cheeseburger in the office break room rather than at your desk, where your poor, suffering Muslim co-workers will have to smell it and salivate (if they even have enough moisture left in their bodies to salivate at that point).

Try to remember not to offer them a bite or a sip of what you're eating, because it's sometimes hard for us to remember that we're fasting and easy to absentmindedly accept and eat that Lay's potato chip you just offered us. But if you do, it's okay. We're not going to get mad or be offended (unless you're doing it on purpose, in which case, what is wrong with you?).

If you're having a dinner party and you want to invite your Muslim friends, try to schedule it after sunset so they can eat. Muslims don't drink alcohol or eat pork, but we usually don't mind being around it. (Contrary to popular belief, we are not scared of or allergic to pork; we just don't eat it. It's not like we're vampires and pork is garlic.) But do let us know if there's alcohol or pork in something so we don't accidentally eat it.

If you want to wish your Muslim friends or acquaintances a happy Ramadan, you're welcome to just say, "Happy Ramadan!" That's not offensive or anything. But if you want to show them you made an effort to learn more about their religion, the standard Ramadan greetings are "Ramadan kareem" (which means "have a generous Ramadan") or "Ramadan mubarak" (which means "have a blessed Ramadan").

Even something as simple as learning one of those expressions and saying it with a smile to your Muslim friends will go a long way toward making them feel comfortable and welcome.

9) So if you're not supposed to get angry or complain or gossip during Ramadan, how come terrorist attacks by groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda always seem to spike during Ramadan?

Because terrorists are assholes!

[Source: VOX | Updated by Jennifer Williams@jenn_ruthjennifer@vox.com | May 25, 2017, 7:57pm EDT]

Obama Hosts Muslim Enterpreneurs Friday, May 7, 2010

The US president has renewed his commitment to a "new beginning" with the Muslim world, vowing no easing in US efforts to promote Middle East peace, curb violence and boost economic development.

Seeking to build on his outreach to Muslims in a speech in Cairo last June, Barack Obama has used the Presidential Summit on Entrepreneurship - a US-hosted Muslim business conference - to underscore what his administration has done so far and to pledge further work to overcome mistrust.

While Obama has made progress towards mending America's image in the Islamic world, he still faces stiff challenges in his handling of the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process, the nuclear standoff with Iran and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "I knew that this vision would not be fulfilled in a single year, or even several. But I knew we had to begin and that all of us have responsibilities to fulfill," Obama told the gathering of 250 business people from more than 50 countries in Washington DC on Monday.

Business development

The focus on business development marked the Obama administration's strategy of trying to broaden the conversation with Muslims beyond the "war on terrorism" that dominated the George Bush-era approach and alienated many.

Obama announced a series of efforts, including exchange programmes for women in technology and for high tech leaders from Silicon Valley to share their expertise.

He said his global technology and innovation fund would "potentially mobilise" more than $2bn in private capital.

Participants in the summit's sessions include Gary Locke, the US commerce secretary; Hillary Clinton, secretary of state; Arne Dunca, education secretary; and other senior US officials.

The private sector is being represented by Jerry Yang, Yahoo! co-founder; Muhammad Yunus, founder of Grameen Bank; and Arif Naqvi, head of Abraaj Capital, the largest private-equity firm in the Middle East.

In his speech, Obama also waded into some of the contentious issues that he acknowledged "have often been a source of tension".

Many Muslims are especially disappointed by Obama's failure so far to advance Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking despite promising in his first days in office to make it a high priority.

Stalled peace talks

Obama assured his audience he would not abandon US diplomatic efforts, which have been stalled by a dispute with Israel over Jewish settlement building and divisions among the Palestinians.

"Despite the inevitable difficulties, so long as I am president, the United States will never waver in our pursuit of a two-state solution that ensures the rights and security of both Israelis and Palestinians," he said. But he offered no new initiative to revive the talks.

Obama also asserted that the US was "responsibly ending" the war in Iraq and "in Afghanistan, Pakistan and beyond, we're forging new partnerships to isolate violent extremists, combat corruption and foster the development that improves lives and communities."

Clovis Maksoud, former Arab League ambassador to the UN, said Muslims and Arabs are receptive to Obama's overtures.

"The Arabs feel, at least, that all sorts of initiatives might have certain positive results," he told Al Jazeera.

However, as long as the Palestinian-Israeli issue remains unresolved, it will "hang on as a weight on possibilities", Maksoud said.

Pakistan, 10.000 Jihadists A Year Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Pakistan is still producing an estimated 10,000 potential jihadis a year despite claims made by Islamabad of taking strong action against terrorists in the country.

"Pakistan is still producing an estimated 10,000 potential jihadis a year out of 500,000 graduates from Pakistan's 11,000 madrassas - young gung-ho boys, mostly 16-year-olds..." wrote Arnaud de Borchgrave, foreign affairs columnist and editor-at-large at The Washington Times.

"A true-green jihadi believes the enemies of Islam (principally the United States, India and Israel) are on a crusade to push back the frontiers of Islam and deprive the Muslim world of its principal means of defence - Pakistan's nuclear arsenal," Borchgrave wrote in hard hitting column.

Borchgrave said the motto of the Pakistani army is "faith, piety and jihad in the path of Allah." A military manual on jihad, "The Quranic Concept of War," is required reading at officers training schools.

"Mercifully, the United States is no longer seen as the enemy by most Pakistanis. Taliban, an organization originally patented by Pakistan's intelligence service (ISI), is now Public Enemy No.1," he said.

"The game-changer is the Pakistani army, whose volunteers came principally from the ranks of the poor. But the officers, if not the rank and file, now understand that religious extremists are no longer their allies," he wrote.

"With 3,500 killed by terrorists in a year and more than 10,000 injured and many small businesses closed, coupled with the government's neglect of their plight for lack of funds, and US aid spread thin over a multitude of unrelated projects, those who cherry-pick suicide targets to make matters worse are faced with an embarrassment of riches.

"The government, such as it exists, is left with a grim menu of inadequate medical and police responses, followed by vigils and commemorations," Borchgrave said.

Meanwhile, Daniel Benjamin, Coordinator of Office of Coordinator for Counterterrorism, has said that the threat of al-Qaeda has morphed despite the setbacks suffered by the group in recent times.

"Al-Qaeda has proven to be an adaptable and resilient terrorist group whose desire to attack the United States and US interests abroad remains as strong as ever," he said.

The group remained under pressure due to Pakistani military operations aimed at eliminating them in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, and as a result, it's had a number of leadership losses and is finding it more difficult to raise money, recruit and plan attacks outside the region, he said.

"Despite these setbacks, the al-Qaeda threat has morphed, which partially offset the losses suffered by al-Qaeda's core in Pakistan," Benjamin said.

Source: IndianExpress.Com | 5 May 2010


This report was responded by Robert Spencer (Jihad Watch) as follows;

Pakistan producing 10,000 active Misunderstanders of Islam every year

And of course, Faisal Shahzad may well have been one of these. One would think a Muslim country wouldn't have so much difficulty getting the Religion of Peace™ right! Everyone's favorite stomach-stapled beekeeper, Honest Ibe Hooper of CAIR, should head over to Pakistan immediately and explain to the Pakistanis how only greasy Islamophobes believe that jihad has anything to do with gratuitous violence against unbelievers!

"Pak producing 10,000 jihadists a year: Report," from Indian Express, May 5:

Pakistan is still producing an estimated 10,000 potential jihadis a year despite claims made by Islamabad of taking strong action against terrorists in the country.
"Pakistan is still producing an estimated 10,000 potential jihadis a year out of 500,000 graduates from Pakistan's 11,000 madrassas - young gung-ho boys, mostly 16-year-olds..." wrote Arnaud de Borchgrave, foreign affairs columnist and editor-at-large at The Washington Times.
"A true-green jihadi believes the enemies of Islam (principally the United States, India and Israel) are on a crusade to push back the frontiers of Islam and deprive the Muslim world of its principal means of defence - Pakistan's nuclear arsenal," Borchgrave wrote in hard hitting column.
Borchgrave said the motto of the Pakistani army is "faith, piety and jihad in the path of Allah."
A military manual on jihad, "The Quranic Concept of War," is required reading at officers training schools....

Posted by Robert on May 5, 2010 4:22 AM | 14 Comments

Amongst 14 comments that I found very interesting is the one that written by someone who named himself Hugh as follows;

For god's sake, you don' have to be Robert Pape to know that Islam had nothing to do with it. It was loss of status. It was poverty. Here was poor Faisal Shahzad, the son of a high-ranking Pakistani Air Force Officer, who no doubt got special treas a student for an initial look-see as a "student" in the first place.

And then he went back to Pakistan, only to return to the U.S. and finally obtain that long-sought thing, American citizenship, with that silly Oath of Allegiance those stupid Infidels insist on administering, and he was off to the races, he was in the goldene Medina, oops, wrong immigrants, the goldene Mekka, and nothing could stop him.

Nothing except he was, like so many Muslims, unused to real economic activity, but rather, on gaining money and status from whom he was related to, and in Pakistan he was the son of a relative big-shot. In America he was nobody. He had not learned the virtue of sustained effort, for he had grown up in a society suffused with inshallah-fatalism. He was not someone who could come up with a new idea, no matter how tiny, because bid'a, innovation, is despised in Islam. So he was left, to endure failure. He sent his wife back to Pakistan. His house was foreclosed on. And so -- it doth follow as the night the day -- Faisal Shahzad decided to first get training in Pakistan and return to set off a bomb in Times Square.

Yes, the Robert Papes of this world would have you believe that "if only" Fahsal Shahzad had not had his house foreclosed, he would not have tried to mass-murder Americans. And I have just provided for you a plausible version of this: Poverty Causes Muslim Terrorism. Except it doesn't. Not all Muslim terrorists are like Faisal Shahzad. Why, the last two who made the headlines were not poor at all. One was Umar Abdulmutallab, who was the son of one of the richest (and no doubt most corrupt) bankers in Nigeria. He did not come to America to seek his fortune and find he couldn't make it. He did not step on American soil at all, until the plane he had tried to blow up landed so that Federal agents could take him off. And as for Major Nidal Malik Hasan, he was a great success, wasn't he? He was in the army, as a doctor (albeit one whose superiors were deeply suspicious, even frightened, of, though they felt they could do nothing because he was in a "protected class" -- the class of Muslims, during the "War on Terror" that must never become, as Mayor Bloomberg so memorably put it the other day, an occasion for anti-Muslim bias, for every group, bien entendu, has "a few bad applies." And as an army doctor he was taking in $90,000 a year. Why, even if I were to receive only half that, I wouldn't mass-murder my fellow soldiers. Would you?

And so many of the terrorist leaders are from backgrounds of great privilege, and never did suffer a decline in economic status but, as a result of being "Islamic warriors," gave their lives of privilege greater meaning and acquired for themselves greater status. Osama Bin Laden is no longer one more rich kid of the Bin Laden family, but the world-famous Osama Bin Laden. And Ayman Al-Zawahiri, from a very famous Egyptian family, with a great-uncle who was Azzam Pasha, the first Secretary-General of the Arab League (the same Azzam Pasha who before the Arab armies attacked Israel threatened a "massacre" of the Jews that would be "unlike anything seen since the days of the Mongols") was a doctor, and as Egypt is run by a tiny ruling class, and Ayman Al-Zawahiri part of that class if he wished to be, something else made him become part of Al-Qaeda, and that something else was Islam, for there was no other way for him to express his alienation from the regime, or for that matter, from anything else.

Should the U.S. government now develop a special program of domestic aid for Muslims? Should it make sure that they all succeed, not only economically, but socially and in all other ways? Should it make sure that no Muslims have their houses foreclosed on, that Muslims are always the first hired, and never fired, so that they will never have cause to be sad, or feel in this country that they have lost status or, if they never had it in their countries of origin, enjoy the heady success that they assume should be theirs? Should we never prosecute any Muslims for tax evasion -- even though, at websites run by Muslims for Muslims, one can see casual references to the massive tax evasion of, for example, Pakistani taxi drivers in Canada -- so that no one takes it into his pretty little taxi-driving head to smash his taxi right into a crowd of Infidels waiting for a bus, or standing in line outside a theatre?

Why not? After all, wouldn't this simply be domestically what we have chosen to do in our foreign policy, in Iraq, and Afghanistan, and in Pakistan? In Iraq we have spent (or committed to be spent) two trillion dollars, in order to create what we thought at first might be a Light-Unto-the-Muslim-Nations project. That was then somewhat reduced in its ambitions, and became simply a project to "bring freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" in the Middle East. It hasn't worked out that way, and it won't, or rather, it will work out, and thus give the Americans the "victory" they sought, only when the Americans leave, and the sectarian resentments rise and rise. But that's another story. The story that counts is that the American government wanted Iraq to be stable, to be prosperous, so that it would not be a "breeding-ground" for terrorists. And the same goes for the sums poured into hopeless Afghanistan, and into endlessly meretricious Pakistan. And that goes for the billions poured as well into all those Muslim countries that forgot to be born with a silver spoon, or rather oil fields. Thus does the American government, along with West Europeans, pour billions into Egypt, Jordan, the "Palestinian" Authority, despite the obvious and continuing corruption, the diversion of funds, and the fact that this money makes not one whit of difference in diminishing hatred for, and cruelty towards, non-Muslims, whether it is Copts in Egypt, or Christians in Gaza or Bethlehem or Jordan, or the very Infidels who sent, and keep sending, the vast sums that keep these peoples and vicious polities afloat, and delay the day when they will have to recognize the connection between their own failures, political and economic and social, and Islam itself.

No, what is clear is something else. That Fahsal Shahzad no doubt -- like a certain Muhammad Atta, who was the son of a middle-class Egyptian family but in Hamburg, living as a student with a bunch of other Muslim students -- endured a decline in status and a failure to meet expectations. But so what?

Are we to ensure the wellbeing of Muslims so that their inculcated hostility toward us does not express itself as terrorism? Really? Shall we, the world's non-Muslims, spend our time worrying about the health and wealth of Muslims, in order that they won't be a threat to us? Shall we keep "nation-buildinig" abroad, and add to that burden being crazily solicitous of Muslims in this country, making sure they all stay happy or at least do not become unhappy enough to engage in you-know-what? Is that why the Obama Administration keeps telling Musliims what deep respect we have for them, how we will always be on their side, how impressed we are – or at least Barack Obama is – with the peace, tolerance, greatness, diversity, and so on and so forth, as was laid out, so memorably – but not in the way Barack Obama and his gleeful speechwriters think – at Cairo in June 2009?

And what did you think of that special meeting, all travel and hotel expenses paid by the long-suffering American taxpayer, for that meeting in Washhington for Muslim businessmen or would-be businessmen, who arrived from abroad for a special meeting, designed to encourage them,, help them make contacts among American businessmen, all to what end? Why should not Hindu and Buddhist and Confucian businessmen be given the same treatment? Or why not poor Christians from, say, Lain America and sub-Saharan Africa, who might want to be invited to Washington, and encouraged, in every way, to make useful contacts among American businessmen? Why do Muslims now get special treatment in this, as they are the objects of colossal spending, or rather squandering, by Infidel governments, and have been, for several decades, but never as much as now, with the colossal follies of Iraq and Afghanistan or rather, that insurance-ad sounding Af-Pak?

Here I shall re-post part of what I wrote about Zacharia Moussaoui ( remember him? Or has he been forgotten, he and his “unhappy childhood”?) at this site:
Lay it all out. Explain that yes, Moussaoui, like a few billion other people, may have had a "deprived" childhood. Yes, he was quick to sense any slight, and yes, he was quick to resent his treatment at the hands of Infidels, because, as a Muslim (one who grew to be more and more faithful and observant) he knew that Muslims should be on top -- not equal, but on top. Infidels lording it over him, or other Muslims, in France, were contra naturam, against the natural and just and right order of things, islamically speaking. The prosecutors should have explained that Moussaoui viewed the world through the prism of Islam, and the texts he read, the society he inhabited (both real, and virtual), taught him to blame, always and everywhere, Infidels.

Eventually this is going to have to be done. Eventually this is going to be unavoidable, if the United States and other Infidel countries are going to continue to use the criminal justice system as it is, and to continue to rely on untrained and inexpert juries who are the products of their age -- with all its sentimentality about mitigating circumstances because, you see, the blame for your behavior can always, always, be found in some part of your background, so that blame can be passed onto, say, one's upbringing.

But this misses the point. There are always people who have had unhappy childhoods, unhappy adolescences, unhappy adulthoods. As noted many times before, we who are Infidels may lose status, a job, a spouse, a girlfriend or boyfriend, or suffer setbacks or perceived slights. Did not Moussaoui think he was entitled to more than he received? Yet his inshallah-fatalism prevented him from simply working hard and doing what he could to overcome, as his brother did, that same background. Why? The answer is that he took Islam far more seriously, was far more of a deep believer, than his brother.

Infidels have a thousand things to blame. They can blame their parents -- just as many on that Infidel jury wanted to blame, for Moussaoui, his treatment by his parents. They can blame their aggressive or unpleasant siblings, their ungrateful children, the System, Racism, The Man, Amerikkka, Kapitalism, Fate, the stars, their cholesterol level, their serotonin level, anything and everything at all -- even, just perhaps, themselves. But Muslim Believers have one thing to blame always at the ready. And to the extent that one takes that belief-system seriously, it is likely that one will, viewing the universe through the grid, the prism, of Islam, blame the Infidel. And that is exactly what Moussaoui did.

Unless this is going to be understood by the usual "experts" -- including those complacent psychiatrists who appear not to have thought it necessary for them to study the doctrines of Islam and what might follow and has naturally followed from them (starting with the perceived behavior of Muslims conducting Jihad over 1350 years, wherever they were able to conduct it because of local conditions or circumstances) -- then there will be more miscarriages, with justice stillborn, the result of those thanatotropic bromides and thalidomides, sentimentality and ignorance.

And what do we conclude? We have two possible conclusions:
1) Moussaoui was and is simply following the tenets of Islam faithfully, and putting into practice the requirement that at least some Muslims must engage in Jihad (in order that others may, temporarily, be relieved of the duty).
OR
2) Moussaoui became depressed, as so many of us do, all over the Infidel world as well, but in the case of Muslims, the problem is that that depression, or any kind of emotional setback, can lead to blaming the Infidel. Viewing the universe through the prism of Islam makes one almost automatically ready to blame that Infidel, and to seek revenge.

Those are the two possible explanations.

And either one has immense implications for the Muslim presence all over Europe and North America. For the sake of the legal and social order and the physical wellbeing of the resident Infidels who created those societies and have no desire to see them islamized, these implications need to be faced.

No doubt Faisal Shahzad -- like a certain Muhammad Atta, who was the son of a middle-class Egyptian family but in Hamburg, living as a student with a bunch of other Muslim students -- endured a decline in status and a failure to meet expectations when he came to America. But so what? So do many non-Muslims, and they do not engage in violent Jihad or, for that matter, in the other forms of Jihad that are less attention-getting, more relentless and widespread and insidious, and thus more effective and more dangerous.

Islam was necessary for Faisal Shahzad to do what he did. And because he was one of those Muslims who takes Islam completely to heart, straight up and not on the rocks, and is willing to participate directly in violent Jihad, and does not understand how there are more effective ways to engage in the “struggle” or Jihad to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam, as others do, including those Muslims who are now expressing their dismay at the damage Fahsal Shahzad done to the “image of Islam.”

My, my. So much solicitude for, and expressed anguish about, the “image of Islam.” And not only from Muslims, but from contessa-brewer speakerines, and from a certain Mayor who, sitting on top of his uncle-scrooge moneybags, can apparently afford to be an utter idiot, and get away with it (proving that business success and intelligence as it should be understood do not always – and I suspect quite rarely – go toether), talking about how there are always “a few bad apples” in every group. How very true, but how very, in this case, misleading. The “bad apples” of Islam, according to Muslims, are those who jettison Islam and dare to tell about it to Infidels, and include such people as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan,Magdi Allam, Nonie Darwish, Ibn Warraq.Those are Islam’s “bad apples.” Faisal Shahzad, in Muslim terms, was not. His only mistake was in being incompetent and, in getting caught, “hurting the image of Islam.” For in Islam, the true object of worship is Islam itself.