Biden Campaign and Hitler's Hindus or Hindu Fascists 

By Dr. Aslam Abdullah
Joe Biden, aspiring to be the Democratic Presidential nominee, had appointed Amit Jani, a Hindu nationalist and the supporter of India's Prime Minister, accused of masterminding the Gujarat massacre of Muslims in 2002.
However, the voters objected to his decision, and on March 9, 2020, the Biden campaign nominated Farooq A. Mitha as the Muslim outreach coordinator. Biden, however, did not remove Jani. Why? Like a real politician, Biden wants to play safe and court Modi for getting Hindu votes.
Biden campaign may have miscalculated its appeasement of Hindu nationalists. Modi has already endorsed Trump. In Houston, in front of the world in the public rally in September 2019, Modi had declared, "four more years to Trump."
No matter how many Hindu nationalists Biden or any Democratic candidate appoint, Hindu American supporters of Modi and his organization, the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh, RSS, would not back him. The RSS is a fascist organization that believes in the supremacy of Hindu upper castes and wants to turn the secular and plural constitution of India into a Hindu nation with no equal rights to people of non-Indian faiths such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.
Amit Jani has close ties with RSS and its counterparts in the U.S.
The other reason could be the influence of RSS supporters in his own Delaware state, where Hindus are the second-largest religious group after Christianity.  Between 2000 and 2010, Hindus saw 116 percent growth in Delaware.  However, a vast majority of these Hindus are supporters of Modi and the RSS and send financial contributions to Hindu groups in India, many of them reportedly involved in promoting hatred and violence against minorities.
Hindu Americans claim 4.1 million adherents in the U.S. Not all are Indias, as one million of them are of ancestry other than Indian. But, only 35 percent of them, or 1.4 million are citizens.  The total number of Hindu voters is less than 600,000, and Hindus percentage in voting as 57 percent.
Biden campaign will alienate progressive and human rights activists by identifying with Hindu fascists and supremacists, and his continuous appeasement of such elements would alienate many other Indian voters of Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, and Islamic faiths.
Biden's new Muslim advisor is Farooq A. Mitha, who served in the Obama administration as the Special Assistant to the Director of the Department of Defense (DoD). Before joining, he DoD, he was a partner in the law firm
 Prior to joining the Obama administration Farooq was a partner in the law firm Geller Mitha, P.A., where he focused on civil litigation, business transactions, government affairs, and administrative law.
Mitha also served as the Executive Director of the Emerge USA, a nonprofit civic engagement organization.  He has a background in international policy and national security. In 2009, Mitha conducted research as a Fulbright Fellow in Amman, Jordan where he focused on Jordanian-Israeli relations. His research was published in the summer 2010 edition of Middle East Policy. Mitha also participated in the International Visitor Leadership Program, sponsored by the U.S. Department of State, where he co-led a discussion on election reform in Lebanon.
Mitha obtained his law degree from the University of Florida Levin College Of Law and held a B.S. degree in Interdisciplinary Health Sciences from the University of South Florida. He is fluent in Arabic, Spanish and Gujarati.
In the opinion of many election experts, his appointment would remain cosmetic as long as the Biden campaign does not distance itself from Hindu fascists.
 Hindu American supporters have created the impression that with about 500,000 voters, they may swing the votes in key battleground states. These states are Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
In battleground states won by Trump, the victory margin was between .1 percent to nine percent.
In Arizona, President Trump's victory margin in 2016 was 3 percent, in Florida, 2 percent, in Georgia, 5 percent, in Iowa 9 percent, in Michigan, a few thousand votes, in North Carolina, 4 percent, Ohio, 8 percent and in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, only a few thousand votes.
In battleground states won by the Democrats, the margin was between .1 to 3 percent. In Minnesota, 3 percent, in Nevada, 2 percent, and, in New Hampshire, only a few thousand.
These 13 battleground states will seal the fate of the next President of the United States. Democrats are secure in California, D.C. Rhode Island, New York, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, New Mexico, Mane,  Washington, Virginia, and Colorado. The Republicans will win Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky,  easily, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Southern Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming
In the battleground states, Muslims are more than one percent of the population.  They make up to 3 percent of the 13 battleground state electorates. Their votes would be crucial to secure victory for any Presidential candidate.
Muslims in 8 of the 13 battleground states, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Colorado can play a manor role in deciding who the next presidential candidates would be.
In the last general elections, President Trump won 307 electoral college votes. Out of that, 150 came from the Nine states.
Swing of states such as Florida, 29 votes, Pennsylvania, 20 votes, Michigan, 16 votes, Ohio, 18 votes, and Wisconsin, 11 votes, Colorado, nine votes, Nevada, four votes, and Minnesota 16 make 123 electoral college votes.  Of these 123 electoral college votes, President Trump won in the last election. If Muslim voters in these states cast at least 60 percent votes, a Democratic nominee would be able to add 123 votes to the safe Democratic votes of 207, making the total votes for either Biden or Sanders 330 out of 538.
Biden, if elected as the nominee, risks the Muslim support if he continued to pander to the supporters of Hindu fascists and nationalists. His mistake in appointing Amit Jani as the special outreach coordinator to Muslims has already cost him substantial Muslim support as some 60 percent Muslims are supportive of Sander compared to only 16 percent of Biden.
One hopes that the next Presidential candidate of the Democratic party understand the matrix of the battleground states and act wisely.

Is the Trump Administration getting closer to ban the Muslim Brotherhood

By  Dr. Aslam Abdulah

A possible executive order or a congressional bill that would have a severe impact on the Muslim American community is in the offing as President's special advisor, John Bolton, and the secretary of the State Department, Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, who as a member of Congress co-sponsored a bill to ban the Muslim Brotherhood are eager to ensure that the organization known as Ikhwanul Muslimeen in Arabic is declared as a terrorist organization and banned before the end of Trump's first term. Seemingly, Both seem to enjoy support for their crusade amongst pro-Israel lobbyists and evangelical Christians, the two major groups who have adopted the Trump agenda in totality.

Behind the move of banning the organization is the influence of religious ideas of evangelical Christians and the pressure on the Israeli Prime Minister. Of the two Pompeo reflect the religious ideas openly and loudly he is on a crusade to put it into action. Not long ago, he was reported to have told the well known Islamophobe Frank Gaffney "There are organizations and networks here in the United States tied to radical Islam in deep and fundamental ways, They're not just in places like Libya and Syria and Iraq, but in places like Coldwater, Kansas, and small towns all throughout America."

Pompeo is an evangelical Christian, and in an interview that he gave to a Christian broadcasting network in March this year, he responded to a question around a Biblical mythological story about a queen who saved Jews from a Persian official said: Mr. President Trump had been “raised to help save the Jewish people from the Iranian menace?” He further explained: "I am confident that the Lord is at work here.”

Later, while attending the American Israeli Public Affairs Council’s annual convention, the secretary of state asserted: “As secretary of state and as a Christian, I’m proud to lead American diplomacy to support Israel’s right to defend itself.

As an evangelical Christian, he believes that Israel fulfills a biblical prophecy because of God promised land to the Jews and that the gathering of Jews in Israel is foretold in the prophecy of the rapture — the ascent of Christians into the kingdom of God.

At a rally in 2015 on God and country, he said that  “We will continue to fight these battles, until “the rapture.” Pompeo believes that any territorial concession to Palestinians would violate the Biblical prophecy, hence he is opposed to a Palestinian state on theological grounds. He believes that the Muslim Brotherhood is the main Muslim organization that has kept the idea of a Palestinian state alive globally since 1947 interfering with the divine plan. He believes that a ban on the organization would weaken the Palestinian resistance for a statehood.

But this is not the only reason the Trump Administration is keen to ban the organization. The dictators and monarchs have also been advocating a ban on Muslim Organization in the US. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Russia, and the United Arab Emirates have already declared the organization as a terrorist organization. The dictators are apparently opposed to any movement that wants to restore democracy in their countries. Even though the US Administration vows to promote democracy in the region, it has sided with dictators and monarchs always, even when it was evidently known that pro-democracy elements were brutally crushed by them.

The case to ban the organization was made by Egyptian dictator General Sisi recently when he visited Washington recently. During a private conversation with Trump, General Sisi reportedly urged US President to join Egypt in designating the group a terror organization. Trump told Sisi that the plan would make sense, which some officials said could be interpreted as a commitment. Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization would mean that the members or supporters, as well as humanitarian organizations linked with it, would face economic and travel sanctions.  White House press secretary Sanders has acknowledged in a statement that the administration was looking into the designation. 

On the other hand, John Bolton is a hardliner and believes in flexing muscles to force the opponents to yield to the US. He believes that by exerting force against groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood, the US can dictate its terms of the Middle East. He believes that force alone will ensure continued U.S. dominance in the international system. He sees diplomacy and negotiations, particularly through the U.N., as a tactic for weak states to tie the hands of the stronger states.  

The two have the support of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his main supporters in the US, Evangelical Christians for their plan to ban the organization. The Republicans are 100 percent behind the plan while the Democrats have their majority congressional delegate supporting it.

The Muslim Brotherhood was formed in 1928 in Egypt by Hassan al Banna to challenge the military and monarchic powers and to introduce Islam as a way of life in a democratic setup. The organization was described by the Egyptian government as a violent group. However, the groups declared in its early years that it believed in nonviolence.  The organization has thousands of supporters and sympathizers all over the world including the United States. The possible ban would impact such supporters and sympathizers in the United States. The news circulating in Washington states that the Administration is identifying individuals, groups, and companies associated with Muslim organizations with close ties with the Muslim Brotherhood.  Seemingly, a task force has been established informally to define measures to be taken against such individuals and companies. There are several Muslim organizations in the US who reportedly identify with the ideas of Ikhwanul Muslimeen leaders or supporter and use their literature to create a better awareness of Islam. The Republican leadership has often accused many Muslim organizations as supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and sought to ban them. The Democrats are not as forthright but have their sympathy with the Prime Minister Netanyahu’s position on the Muslim Brotherhood.

If the organization is banned, it would pose a serious challenge to Muslims in general in the US as anyone can be identified as a supporter or sympathizer of the Muslim Brotherhood based on their attendance of mosques and Islamic centers run by people known for their support or ties to the organization. It would also impact those who have visited the web sites associated with the organizations and those who believe that their understanding of Islam is built on the ideas of Hasan al Banna, the founder of the group or Syed Qurb, its main ideologue.

It's an issue that should alert Muslim American organizations for a unified response in cooperation with leading civil rights organizations because if they failed to take action in defense of their constitutional rights, they and the Muslim community might face grave consequences whose limits cannot be imagined at this time because the hated promoted by the President under the influence of evangelical Christians and the Prop-Netanyahu lobbyists.   

 Congress passes a resolution condemning Islamophobia, racism, and antisemitism

 By Dr. Aslam Abdullah

When it came to voting, only 23, all of whom were Republican members of Congress voted a resolution condemning hatred and intolerance including Islamophobia and anti-Antisemitism. 407 congress members from both the parties created the history as for the first a resolution condemning anti-Muslim bigotry in America was addressed. Three Muslim members of Congress, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan, Omar Ilhan from Minnesota and Andre Carson from Indianapolis jointly celebrated the resolution by saying " we are tremendously proud to be part of a body that has put forth a condemnation of all forms of bigotry including, antisemitism, racism and white supremacy. At a time when extremism is on the rise, we must explicitly denounce religious intolerance of all kinds and acknowledge the pain felt by all communities. Our nation is having a difficult conversation and we believe this great progress. 

Several pro-Israel Democratic Congressmen and Republicans wanted to single out Ilhan Omar for her remarks that being critical of the policies of Israeli prime minister and occupation are not the same as being antisemitic. They wanted her to be removed from the congressional committee on foreign affairs and they wanted her not to be included in the intelligence briefing sessions.

It appeared that the pro-Israeli lobby was closer to achieve all this, but the support three influential senators offer to Ilhan changed the nature of the debate and the speaker of the House who at one time was willing to have a resolution condemning Ilhan for her statements changed her position and said that the tweets were not antisemitic. 

Ilhan Omar took a bold stand on the issue and in her defense argued that she should not be expected to have support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on the committee. She further wrote " I am told every day that I am anti-American if I am not pro-Israel. I find that to be problematic and I am not alone. I just happen to be willing to speak up on it and open myself to attacks. "

She was brutally attacked by the left and the right and even center. The pro-Israeli lobby mobilized hundreds of phone calls to congressmen urging them to vote Ilhan Omar out of the foreign affairs committee. However, they could not persuade 407 members who refused to single out her for her  criticism of Israel.It is a victory for freedom of speech and a defeat of racists and bigots who have been trying to stifle public opinions on matters that impact the nation.

Here is the text of the resolution.

Whereas adherence to these principles is vital to the progress of the American people and the diverse communities and religious groups of the United States;

Whereas whether from the political right, center, or left, bigotry, discrimination, oppression, racism, and imputations of dual loyalty threaten American democracy and have no place in American political discourse;

Whereas white supremacists in the United States have exploited and continue to exploit bigotry and weaponized hate for political gain, targeting traditionally persecuted peoples, including African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, and others with verbal attacks, incitement, and violence;

Whereas the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., taught that persecution of any American is an assault on the rights and freedoms of all Americans;

Whereas on August 11 and 12, 2017, self-identified neo-Confederates, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and Ku Klux Klansmen held white supremacist events in Charlottesville, Virginia, where they marched on a synagogue under the Nazi swastika, engaged in racist and anti-Semitic demonstrations and committed brutal and deadly violence against peaceful Americans;

Whereas a white nationalist murdered nine African American worshipers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, on the evening of June 17, 2015, in the hopes of igniting a nationwide race war;

Whereas on October 27, 2018, the perpetrator of the deadliest attack on Jewish people in the history of the United States killed 11 worshippers at the Tree of Life Synagogue building in Pittsburgh and reportedly stated that he "wanted all Jews to die"

Whereas anti-Semitism is the centuries-old bigotry and form of racism faced by Jewish people simply because they are Jews;

Whereas in 2017 the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported a 37 percent increase in hate crimes against Jews or Jewish institutions and found that attacks against Jews or Jewish institutions made up 58.1 percent of all religious-based hate crimes;

Whereas there is an urgent need to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities, including synagogues, schools, cemeteries, and other institutions;

Whereas Jews are the targets of anti-Semitic violence at even higher rates in many other countries than they are in the United States;

Whereas it is a foreign policy priority of the United States to monitor and combat anti-Semitism abroad;

Whereas anti-Semitism includes blaming Jews as Jews when things go wrong; calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or extremist view of religion; or making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotyped allegations about Jews;

Whereas Jewish people are the subject in the media and political campaigns to numerous other dangerous anti-Semitic myths as well, including that Jews control the United States Government or seek global, political, and financial domination and that Jews are obsessed with money;

Whereas scapegoating, and targeting of Jews in the United States have persisted for many years, including by the Ku Klux Klan, the America First Committee, and by modern neo-Nazis;

Whereas accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel or to the Jewish community than to the United States constitutes anti-Semitism because it suggests that Jewish citizens cannot be patriotic Americans and trusted neighbors, when Jews have loyally served our Nation every day since its founding, whether in public or community life or military service;

Whereas accusations of dual loyalty generally have an insidious and pernicious history, including—

(1) the discriminatory incarceration of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II on their basis of race and alleged dual loyalty;

(2) the Dreyfus affair, when Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish French artillery captain, was falsely convicted of passing secrets to Germany based on his Jewish background;

(3) when the loyalty of President John F. Kennedy was questioned because of his Catholic faith; and

(4) the post-9/11 conditions faced by Muslim-Americans in the United States, including Islamophobia and false and vicious attacks on and threats to Muslim-Americans for alleged association with terrorism;

Whereas anti-Muslim bigotry entails prejudicial attitudes towards Muslims and people who are perceived to be Muslim, including the irrational belief that Muslims are inherently violent, disloyal, and foreign;

Whereas Muslims and people perceived to be Muslim are subjected to false and dangerous stereotypes and myths, including unfair allegations that they sympathize with individuals who engage in violence or terror or support the oppression of women, Jews, and other vulnerable communities;

Whereas in 2017, mosques were bombed in Bloomington, Minnesota, and burned in Austin, Texas, Victoria, Texas, Bellevue, Washington, and Thonotosassa, Florida, and mass attacks on Muslim communities were planned against communities in Islamberg, New York, in 2019, Jacksonville, Florida, in 2017, and Garden City, Kansas, in 2016;

Whereas the Federal Bureau of the Investigation reported that hate crimes against Muslims or Muslim institutions in the United States increased by over 99 percent between 2014 and 2016;

Whereas attacks motivated by bigotry against those who are Muslim or perceived to be Muslim have substantially increased since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks;

Whereas the violation of an individual's civil rights based on his or her actual or perceived membership in a particular religious group clearly violates the Constitution and laws of the United States; and

Whereas all Americans, including Jews, Muslims, and Christians and people of all faiths and no faith, have a stake in fighting anti-Semitism, as all Americans have a stake in fighting every form of bigotry and hatred against people based on religion, race, or place of birth and origin:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) rejects the perpetuation of anti-Semitic stereotypes in the United States and around the world, including the pernicious myth of dual loyalty and foreign allegiance, especially in the context of support for the United States-Israel alliance;

(2) condemns anti-Semitic acts and statements as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States;

(3) reaffirms its support for the mandate of the United States Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism as part of the broader policy priority of fostering international religious freedom and protecting human rights all over the world;

(4) rejects attempts to justify hatred or violent attacks as an acceptable expression of disapproval or frustration over political events in the Middle East or elsewhere;

(5) acknowledges the harm suffered by Muslims and others from the harassment, discrimination, and violence that result from anti-Muslim bigotry;

(6) condemns anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against all minorities as contrary to the values of the United States;

(7) condemns the death threats received by Jewish and Muslim Members of Congress, including in recent weeks;

(8) encourages law enforcement and government officials to avoid conduct that raises the specter of unconstitutional profiling against anyone because of their race, religion, nationality, political, or particular social group, including the assignment of blame or targeting members of an entire religious group for increased suspicion, based on the conduct of a single individual or small group of individuals; and

(9) encourages all public officials to confront the reality of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, and other forms of bigotry, as well as historical struggles against them, to ensure that the United States will live up to the transcendent principles of tolerance, religious freedom, and equal protection as embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the first and 14th amendments to the Constitution.

Muslim American Leadership and Law Enforcement Agencies

by Dr, Aslam Abdullah

Some Muslim Americans are very angry with law enforcement agencies, especially FBI, consequently, they have taken a position boycotting any interaction or dialogue with its officials. Muslims are not unanimous on this yet, but some of their major organizations have taken this stand. Is this a pragmatic decision and what message does it communicate with law enforcement agencies and the country as a whole?

Doubtlessly, since 9/11, Muslim Americans and Muslim in general have often been viewed by many politicians, and even some law enforcement agents as suspects. The use of financial resources in monitoring Muslim organizations and centers is not uncommon in several states. Often, the right-wing leaders have promoted the idea that Muslims cannot be trusted as their agenda is to promote the domination of Islam in the country through clandestine activities.

Obviously, most of these are perceptions. But the absence of Muslim Americans from active dialogue and discussion with law enforcement agencies is a major factor in their continuation. Others who have different agenda have somehow influenced law enforcement agencies to accept their views, however biased, they are towards Islam and Muslims and since Muslims are not there to clarify these perceptions, the one-sided view prevails.

Muslims in the united states are not a monolith group. They are split in hundreds of ethnic communities with different experiences and conditions African Americans who make up the largest segment of Muslim Americans have totally different attitude towards law enforcement agencies, while Muslims from Afghanistan, Iran, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia or North Africa who came here as refugees to live a dignified life have different attitude towards such agencies. Muslims from the Middle East who came here at the beginning of the 20th century in places like Detroit have a different perspective while Muslims who came here from South Asia in the 60s mainly as students have different experiences.

These groups have not yet collated to develop a national agenda and perspective, hence each organization dominated by a particular ethnic group adopts a perspective based on its understanding. 

Also to be noted is the fact that many prominent Muslim American leaders, especially of immigrant backgrounds were active supporters of organizations such as Ikhwan ul Muslimeen, or Jamat Islam, etc. Similarly, many African Americans were once the members of the Nation of Islam that had a specific view on race relations. Many who became Muslims recently have aligned with those ideological groups that are politically influenced by despotic regimes in the Middle East promoting a very strict understanding of Islam with no openness towards non-Muslims.

Law enforcement agencies do not have the resources to figure out who is who in the Muslim community. Their research and intelligence gathering resources are poor. They do not have many agents who speak the languages of the immigrants. They do not have expertise in the cultures of such communities. They also lack a clear understanding of the diversity within the Muslim community in interpreting the religious texts.

Also, the law enforcement officials are recruited from society in general. Not every member of the society is exposed to religious diversity or an objective understanding of diverse belief systems. Many bring their stereotypical images of others with them in their work and no matter what is the level of professionalism, the images of the past often linger on.

Law enforcement agencies are not political. They are run on national resources. They are bound by the constitution and hence they are by law defenders of law and every law-abiding citizen. However, if communities are close and not interacting and having a dialogue with them, there is no way that a better understanding can evolve.

In the absence of Muslims from the dialogue with law enforcement agencies, other special groups have filled with information about Muslims that is often inaccurate and wrong.

The only way to correct that is that Muslims engage in an open dialogue with law enforcement agencies to learn their functions and to tell them about the community. Law enforcement agencies work on the basis of reasonable tips they get from the public or their contacts and unless they reach to the bottom of such tips, they continue to pursue. Muslims can be a source to clarify assumptions, accusations, and assertions without fearing that this would put them in jeopardy.

Similarly, law enforcement agencies also should show respect to Muslims the same way they show respect to other segments of American society. That means that they should not view the entire community as a monolith group engaged in some conspiracy against the US. When they hear such accusations against Muslim individuals, they should investigate that individual thoroughly and seek Muslim help to bring the case to a closure.

Law enforcement agencies have a general perception that most religious organizations are not transparent in their financial dealings. It's not only about Muslims, but it involves everyone. In religious organizations, a lot of cash dealing is involved, and no matter how careful one is, there is no system that tracks every cash transaction. The idea that cash can find itself in undesirable hands cannot be ruled out. Obviously, the only people who can satisfactorily explain things related to cash are those who handle them. This is just one issue, there are many more. Often people with special interests may want to influence the congregation with their ideas that may be a determent to public Only those people who are part of the congregation know about that.  If law enforcement agencies are tipped about such thing, they would investigate and if those who are part of the group are not there to respond, a  lot of assumptions would be made and that might not be accurate. We saw that recently with the Russian interference in our elections. Even though no one has investigated it yet, but the involvement with the Russians in our elections through religious groups cannot be eliminated.

It is imperative that rather than reacting in anger, Muslim leadership looks at the issue of having dialogue with law enforcement agencies in a pragmatic manner and openly develop a perspective that serves the interests of the country and the community.

Isolation is not the solution. It would exacerbate misgivings and create confusion. It is better than the Muslim leadership to review its stance towards law enforcement agencies and extend the hand of interaction for better relations.

And She Lost because most thought that her place was not in the corridors of power as a ruler.

There is silence everywhere. Only the Trump supporters are jubilant. With raised fists and renewed energy all over their faces, they are celebrating. In Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, and North Carolina, Hillary Clinton's supporters are stunned. How did it happen, they ask, yet they all fail to speak the most visible and plausible reason.
Not enough of them came out to vote. In all these battleground states, as well as in Wisconsin and Michigan, there were enough Democrats to give Clinton a resounding victory. But they did not come out to vote. While the Trump strategy was simple. Increase your voters in counties, Republicans always win.
The Trump base was excited.
Muslims, non-White immigrants, Latinos, Syrian refugees, Jewish influence, African American prominence in the country that has over 70 percent white Christian population were some of the targeted communities in Trump electoral strategy that he played well and created fear among his constituents that if he is not elected they would lose whiteness, Christianity and all that the country has stood for centuries.
People believed him. He questioned the legitimacy of Clinton in serving the nation and the people accepted his logic and when the FBI director reopened the investigation into her emails 11 days before the election, their condemnation of her character even grew stronger.
But all this could have been overcome if the traditional vote bank of the Democratic Party had come out in large numbers.
The African American vote shrank and their enthusiasm for Clinton did not match their zeal for Obama in 2008 and 2012.
Latinos registered in large numbers, but they were split between a religious dictate that many of their churches issued against Clinton and their own conscience that wanted them to reject someone who had questioned their legitimacy in the country.
Muslims were not as active as the seriousness of the election had demanded. Only in Nevada, they actively worked to ensure that they bring out the maximum number of their voters to the polling booth to ensure that Democrats secure a strong victory and they succeeded in that.
In Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania they were dormant. A large number of them did not vote as in their view voting was not permitted in Islam. Then a substantial number of them refrained from voting Clinton because she was a woman and then a good number of Muslims were too indifferent to the challenges that the country was grappling with.
Jewish voters were more concerned about the candidate's commitment to Israel policy and many of them were angry at the Iran deal that was one of the issues Trump exploited to the fullest. Their votes for Hillary were not as solid as they were in the past.
Women and yes, women in general were not convinced that someone from their gender could ever lead a nation. Some 54 percent of them belonging to evangelical churches accepted their pastor's advice to not vote Clinton because women are not meant to rule a nation.
And white male voters were angry because their jobs were shifted to abroad. A few of them bothered to question the Republican leadership for allowing this to happen. They blamed a black president and his cronies for that.
All this resulted in one thing and only one thing.
A woman was prevented from becoming the head of the world's most powerful nation. It could have been the most earth-shaking moment in world history. It could have settled the debate about women's qualities as commander in chief in a man's world forever. It could have proven once for all that women can no longer live as a second class citizen in their own country or religion.
It is this set back that the nation would not be able to recover for long.  Parties win and lose. Policies come and go. Leaders fail or succeed, but nothing was more important than to ultimately demolish the myth that women are not meant to lead nations. It was time to prove that the world was no longer in an outdated idea that the creation of God suppressed for centuries and reduced to the role of a glorified domestic servant would not be able to govern a nation and uplift it.
 I am not concerned about the wall, or Obamacare, Muslim ban or Nafta treaty or mass deportation because Trump and the Republicans know it well that they would plunge the country into a crisis from which the recovery would be impossible if they tried to pursue what was promised in the elections. I am confident that the majority of the country would stand against these policies, but what the majority of the country is not willing to elect at the moment is the election of a woman as head of the most powerful nation of the world.

The relationship between African Americans and Muslim Immigrants

Dr. Aslam Abdullah
If one wants to describe the nature of the relationship between Muslim American immigrants and African American Muslims one can use two words, "uneasy and insecure.
Regardless of the hugs, or the praise they offer to each other or the work they share, the fact is that socially, culturally, and politically as well as financially they behave as two distinct entities where race predominantly plays an important role. Even among immigrants from Africa, the socio-economic and political relations are determined differently.
If anyone wants to have a quick understanding of the nature of the relationship between the two communities, one may ask the following questions from the members of the two communities?
1. How many Muslim immigrant families have allowed their sons or daughters to have matrimonial relations with African American Muslims? Of course, there are some examples, but when you look into the details you find that some were solemnized for the purpose of getting green cards.
2. How many Muslims have opened their business in predominantly African American communities? Of course, many, but most of these are liquor and smoke stores.
3. How many African American leaders are invited to give Friday sermons on a regular basis in an immigrant dominated community? Not many.
4. How many African American Muslims in proportion to their population represent Muslims through organizations such as CAIR, MPAC, ISNA or ICNA or ITNA or MAS. You can point out to a few, but compared to their total number their participation is insignificant in immigrant dominated organizations. The same can be true about African American organizations. How many immigrants you would find in an African American dominated Masjid.
5. How many African Americans you find in the big conventions organized by major Muslim organization when you compare their participation with their population. There are only a few.
6. How many immigrant controlled Islamic centers have any program to rehabilitate African Americans in their own communities. Of course, when some of them are in prison, they are showered with the Quran, caps, scarfs and prayer rugs beside demands from the authorities to serve them halal food. But once they come out of the prison, not many masajid (mosques) or Islamic centers are willing to offer them any real support.
7. How many groups that seek active conversion among African Americans are willing to go beyond initial conversion? 
8. How many African Americans-Muslims are willing to socially and culturally integrate with the general Muslim community by asserting their presence in their gatherings? Not many
The data on all these issues is anecdotal but sufficient enough to form some basic assumptions.
1. They have a token relationship and at almost non-existent at social, economic and political levels.
2. The two communities feel insecure in their relations with each other.
Immigrant Muslims
Immigrant Muslims, by and large, mostly in their private gatherings, do not relate and do not want to with African American Muslims beyond the masajid or through some relief work in their localities, etc. Even most relief organizations operated by immigrant Muslims created in the name of Islam are focused on Muslims abroad and not in the USA. They are more concerned about Muslims in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Palestine, but the African American Muslims, especially those who have been in incarceration. Not many fundraisers are organized to seek help for the local Muslim communities. Obviously, Islam does not discriminate people on the basis of their origin, but Muslim organizations through their choice of serving the foreign Muslims have given the impression that in their view the life and dignity, as well as the needs of African American Muslims, are of less importance than Muslims in Somalia, Palestine, Kashmir, Pakistan or Iraq. How much of the relief organizations' budget is spent on African American needs in the US, not much.
Immigrant Muslims by and large feel that that financial and social status should be the basis of relationship. African Americans belong to lower or poorer economic groups and are not as educated as many of them are, hence they cannot identify with them socially.
Many in the immigrant Muslim community also feel that African American Muslims, in general, lack a proper understanding the faith, hence they cannot be elevated to a position of religious leadership. The often criticize them for faulty pronunciation or non adherence to some of the rituals.
African Americans
African American Muslims consider immigrant inexperienced, often arrogant and insensitive to their history and culture. They think that immigrants are bending backward to become part of a society that was genocidal and barbaric to them. They feel that immigrants do not understand the politics and culture of the country. 
In order to prove their commitment to Islam, and their dedication to the Muslim community the African American Muslims adopt the cultural practices of the Muslim community they usually attend the prayers with. They would immediately start dressing a long dress imitating the Arab culture or shalwar Qamez (trouser and shirt) imitating the Pakistani culture and would equate with piety and sincerity. They would use the Arabic phrases regularly regardless of their relevance. They would occasionally repeat the ahadith in English they may have heard from those who helped them discover Islam. The first question after taking shahadah (an article of faith) that many African Americans ask is "where can I buy the long dress or thob" They would often compare the western society with an imaginary Islamic society where Muslims are dominant. They would often refer to the United States as a country that promoted slavery but would be reluctant to refer to Muslim slave owners in general.
Many African Americans believe that immigrant Muslims have compromised their faith and initiated innovations that were not sanctioned by the faith. Their religious perspective in analyzing Muslims is often influenced by the group that helped them come closer to Islam. In this respect, at one point in time, the Saudi religious teachers were at the forefront. So those African Americans who are influenced by Saudi religious teachers would react to immigrant Muslims in a different manner if they do not happen to be from their school of thought. Those who accepted Islam through MAS or Tablighi or any other group would pursue the official line of that group. Ironically, all of them would have so much apathy towards each other that they would refuse to join each other's religious gatherings.
In both communities, the insecurity has reached to a level where, any time there is a difference of opinions the African American Muslims, in general, would say "you immigrants do not understand America and Islam and immigrants would tell them, "you are biased towards America and you do not understand Islam fully.
The fact that none of the two communities have ever made any effort to develop open communications between the two on each others sensitivities. Their leaders take a sadistic pleasure in criticizing each other in their private gathering and then coming to the stage and talking about unity in an artificial manner that can be discerned easily.
African Americans make up to some 35 percent of Muslim population, but in masajid that number is visible only in areas where African American Muslims re dominated. South Asians are about 35 percent as well. Arabs are 17 percent and the rest are from other ethnic and cultural groups. It is apparent that when the two communities leadership is often seen together, it is more for cosmetic reasons than anything else.
Even among the younger generation, this issue has not been tackled appropriately. Look at the number of interracial marriage among the children of immigrants and African American Muslims and you found not much progress there. Look at the number of emerging Muslim leaders in the Muslim Students Association and you would not find much progress.
Obviously, this issue deserves to be given a priority by Muslim leaders if they really want to have a meaningful presence of Islam and Muslims in the US. If not , the uneasy and insecure relations may reach to a point where the two communities would  have such a wide gap that they would be considered to separate religious communities.

Muslim American Voters

Financially, the Muslim Americans are perhaps in the top three religious communities, in education, the second most educated, socially, they may be the most diverse community, but politically, they may be the weakest group in America. Estimates of their population vary from 3 million to 12 million, depending on whom you are talking to. The number of registered Muslim voters also varies from half a million to 6 million. The number of those who regularly vote in elections also varies depending on the survey and the sponsors of the survey. Some suggest that 30 percent registered Muslims to vote and the others say that 70 plus percent vote.
In the forthcoming elections in certain states, the Muslim voters may play a significant role if mobilized properly.
Nevada, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Colorado are, some of the states where they may be effective in presidential elections.
In elections for the senate, in Nevada, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, their votes may decide the outcome.
In house elections, there are 38 congressional districts in New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Minnesota, Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania, California, and Texas, where their votes may count significantly.
But how can one make this analysis when the number of Muslim voters in these states is not accurately known.
There are two main reasons for this.
1. The victory margin in these states would be narrow and a few thousand extra votes might make a big difference.
2. The number of mosques and Islamic centers is significant in these states and congressional districts. One can assume that some 40 percent of all those who attend the worship services are registered, voters. If 60 percent of the registered Muslim voters vote, it can definitely impact the election outcome.
So what should be the Muslim electoral strategy?
1. To register as many Muslim citizens as voters as one can. It's important that in every public function that Muslims hold, voter registration should be given a priority.
2. To make use of the early voting facility in states where it is available. People can either send their ballots through the mail or submit them to designated agencies.
3. To ensure that every eligible voter comes out on the election day to vote.
4. To volunteer in the local electoral office the candidate they are supporting.
5. To precinct walk with others to campaign for the candidate.
An increased involvement would enable them to be part of the electoral process and may minimize their vulnerability to Islamophobes who might use election results to intimidate or harass them.
Doubtlessly, there is a significant section of the Muslim community, that does not believe in the electoral process and that regard election a useless activity. There is no need to engage them in any discussion on the issue on either religious or intellectual grounds. They have made up their minds and they would not change unless circumstances force them to review their point of view. It would be a waste of time and efforts  It is better to work with those who understand the significance of participation in elections.
Of course, there would be individuals and groups who would compare Islam and democracy and would argue that Islam is anti-democratic because sovereignty belongs to God only. The people who can make a distinction between an apple and a pear cannot be qualified to give their verdict on this issue. It is better to leave them to their own intellectual stagnation.
The November election is crucial for the country and the future direction of America would be set by the one who is elected. There are two distinct personalities and streams of thoughts. For someone who believes in the US constitution, the choice among the two candidates is not difficult to make. However, what is important is how the choice is reflected in ballots. What remains to be seen is who would take the time off to visit the polling booth to cast his or her votes, because, in electoral politics, this is what it means.

,

Speaking Against Terrorism

by Dr. Aslam Abdullah
In terrorist attacks, innocent lives are lost without any gain for those who perpetrate these unforgiving crimes against humanity and above all against God. The laws of God dictate that every human life deserves a dignified existence and protection from all acts of violence, yet the attackers invoking the name of God seem to be determined to take innocent lives at will and show their sickening happiness at every drop of blood, they shed in the name of their so-called ideology.
As a Muslim who believes in the absolute power and wisdom of the divine in giving His guidance to humanity, I am horrified when I read that person who confesses to be Muslim by name are involved in terrorist attacks. Surely such people do not understand what it means to submit to God to attain peace.
I feel outraged when I read that the killers used the name of Allah, the Sustainer of the universe, the most gracious and the most merciful for their nefarious acts. I feel enraged at their audacity to justify the killing for the injustices caused by others to their folks.
I would have felt the same rage and shame if the perpetrators were members of other religious communities. After all, the sufferings of human beings cannot be divided on the basis of their religious identities and tears cannot be selectively shed only for those who belong to my faith or my ethnicity. I cannot fulfill my covenant with God if I cry only for those who are like me and turn my face the other way when the victims are Jewish, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, atheists or any other faith.
I often wonder what I as an individual must do to stop these insane criminals from committing these acts. I have no way to communicate with them. Even if I get an opportunity to speak with them, I know they would not listen to me because they have not listened to even God, who demands that life must be protected from all harm. They do not realize the basics of their professed faith that says, God is the creator of all life, He is the Sustainer of each and every human, He does not discriminate among people in His mercy on the basis of their faith, He does not deny nourishment even to those who reject him and He describes taking the life of one person as a crime against all humanity.
I speak against terrorism in the places of worship when I am invited to give the Friday sermons. I write extensively against terrorists and I constantly remind my fellow Muslims that we must be at the forefront of our jihad against violence and terror and stand up for peace and justice. This is commanded by God when he says in the Quran,
O You who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it may be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk. Whether the person concerned may be rich or poor, God’s claim takes precedence over [the claims of] either of them. Do not, then, follow your own desires, lest you swerve from justice: for if you distort [the truth], behold, God is indeed aware of all that you do! (Quran 4:135)
I know that the people I speak with are absolutely against all forms of terrorism. I have not come across a single Muslim in my adult life who justifies violence because of the injustices perpetrated against Muslims anywhere in the world.
But, I also realize that governments and political parties and leaders use acts of terrorism to serve their political interests. They have an agenda that is often determined by their religion, ethnicity or political goals. They may claim that they care for human life, but when it is time to act decisively they often show their blindness to the reality and demands of justice.
If we all had cared for human life and dignity, we would have not allowed millions of Jews to suffer during the second world war, millions of Muslims in Central Asia to die as a result of brutal communist policies, thousands of Bosnian men and women to be killed and raped, millions of Rwandans to be slaughtered mercilessly, thousands of Darfurians to be brutalized, millions of Palestinians to be consigned to refugee camps, and millions of people in Iraq, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other places to live in miserable conditions.
We would have come together to show our determination to protect human life and human dignity. We would not have allowed hundreds of wars that have been waged during the last century in the name of ethnicity, nationalism and cultural and economic superiority. We would not have extolled the virtues of our nation to put down others. We would not have adopted a policy of economic and cultural imperialism to subjugate people.
Don’t forget the fact that the rulers of Muslim countries are not absolved from this prevailing insensitivity to human dignity. In fact, their brutality can match anyone else in the world. They have killed at will anyone who appears to challenge them. They have destroyed their own people because they were afraid of losing power. They have pitched one against another to serve their own corrupt agenda.
I realize all this and often wonder what can be done to stop this menace and insanity. Speak, I will write, I must confront those who advocate violence, I shall and use every opportunity to challenge terrorists, I do. But in a world where leaders and parties often use their self-serving agenda to define terrorism and the nature of the fight against violence and terror and injustice, I am left bewildered.
I know I am not alone. Almost everyone within the Muslim community thinks the same way as I do, except those faceless and nameless, secret groups and individuals who have refused to listen to the divine call for respecting all human life. Yet, we all find ourselves incapable of stopping this insanity. There are forces that are out there that we do not know and there are groups and individuals who are constantly plotting to hurt fellow humans. There are people who are waiting to pour more fuel to add to the fire and there are countries that are keen to see wars and destruction.
The Muslim community needs partners in the fight against terror in defense of human dignity and human life. We need people who are willing to stand up for the protection of every human life, regardless of its cultural, ethnic nationalistic and religious origin. There are many who say that they care for humanity as a whole. But where are they? Why do they speak only when someone like them is hurt? Where are their voices when human beings other than their own lose their dignity and life?
God describes himself as the guarantor of world peace to His creation. His guidance, speaks to this clearly. But people acting on his behalf has done everything possible to destroy it. Can we Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and everyone else come together to stand for each of us and fight the menace jointly rather than using religious or nationalistic labels to vent our anger and serve the political agenda of the power elite?
The Muslim community is waiting to hear a call of unity in action in defense of all human life and dignity in any part of the world.

Does Islam Really Hate America?

By Dr. Aslam Abdullah

There are many millions who identify them as Americans. Nearly, 40 percent of them have been living in this country for centuries.  They were persecuted, forced to change their faith, brutalized and badly humiliated. Yet none of them spoke a language of hatred against America. They consider America their home.

Then there are millions who left their countries of birth and adopted the citizenship of the new country giving all they have for this country.

Yet there are people in this country, who have turned their sacrifice and commitment to America as a statement of hatred against America. In fact, these are the people who are showing hatred towards America.

The Republican front runner, Donald Trump, all of a sudden discovered that Islam hates America. He did not know about it when he partnered with several big Muslim businesses in the Middle East to make millions. He did not know this when he came in contact with Muslim consultants who were advising him how to do business in the Muslim world. He did not know this when Muslim Americans tipped the FBI and other law enforcement agencies about individuals who were planning to harm others. He did not know this when millions of them were brought here as slaves and stripped of their humanity. 

He discovered it only when he realized that speaking against Islam and Muslims would excite and incite the Republican base and elect him to be the nominee of the party. If he were not running for the highest office of the nation on the Republican ballot, he would still be making deals with Muslim businesses all over the world.

Does Islam really hate America and do Muslims seek the destruction of this nation.

Islam is a universal faith and it believes in the unity of humanity as the creator of the entire universe is God: and God alone. "VERILY, this community of yours is one single community, since I am the Sustainer of you all: worship, then, Me [alone]! Quran- 21:92

To hurt the creation of God physically, emotionally, socially or spiritually is considered an act against God. Islam demands from its adherents total respect of others, regardless of what they say about the faith. It admonishes Muslims not to speak ill of others, let alone show hatred towards them: "But do not revile those [beings] whom they invoke instead of God, lest they revile God out of spite, and in ignorance: for, goodly indeed have We made their own doings appear unto every community  In time, [however,] unto their Sustainer they must return: and then He will make them [truly] understand all that they were doing. (Quran: 6:108)

A universal religion that claims to seek the welfare of all has no place of hatred in its teachings. The moment a faith starts showing hatred to others, it loses its universality and it becomes a faith of we and them, we are described as the privileged and chosen one. Islam seeks the welfare of all. It does not tell its followers to discriminate against others on the basis of their faith or ideologies. It even does not seek the destruction of those who oppose it because it believes in the freedom of opinion and expression. "Verily, We have shown him the way:[and it rests with him to prove himself] either grateful or ungrateful. Quran- 76:3

If Muslims have neglected this message of unity and respect of human life, they are the ones responsible for it and not the faith. If they have divided them, into sects, they should be held accountable for that and not God, the source of divine teachings. The problem lies with those who divide God into a God of Christians, Muslims or Jews or Hindus. God does not have a denomination. He is the God of all. To say Islam hates America or Americans is to say God hates Americans and God does not hate any of His creation. May be Jerry Falwell or Franklin Graham or Pat Robertson and among Muslims Zawahiri or Baghdadi may have said in the past that God's curse is on America. But  God did not. Many of clerics from all religions have fallen into the trap of speaking on behalf of God in times of calamities as they define the occurrences of natural disasters in terms of the deviation of a nation or a group of people from the divine guidance. But God assures people that the day of reckoning would come once, each one of us would be revived again and each one of us would be shown his or her life sketch.
God is not in the business of cursing a region or land or even people. The Arabic word, La'an that many translators of the Quran have often used to mean a curse need to realize that it means depriving oneself of the benefit of the divine guidance on the basis of one's own deviation.
He certainly dislikes those who violate their covenant with him, but he does not hate them. He would not hate his own creation. He says that the day of judgment would be the day when each one of us would bear the consequences of what we do. Before that day, the judgment cannot be passed by mortal beings. Those who commit acts of violence or hatred in His name are not worthy of His name. They, in fact, use His name to serve their interests no matter what label they have.
Islam would not be a divine faith if it taught hatred against America or any other nation because all of us, regardless of our attitude towards Him came from Him and He cannot make us fight against each other. He is not running a mafia. He is the one who reminds Muslims clearly  Those who spread hatred in His name are satanic no matter what label they wear. Islam would not be a divine faith if it taught hatred against America or any other nation because all of us, regardless of our attitude towards Him came from Him and He cannot make us fight against each other. He reminded Muslims in particular in His divine book "For, [true] servants of the Most Gracious are [only] they who walk gently on the earth, and who, whenever the foolish address them, reply with [words of] peace; - 25:63
Hatred is not part of Islam. In fact, Islam even does not hate those who show hatred towards it including Donald Trump, who seems to be crossing all limits in his anti-Islam rhetoric.