Younus Abdullah Mohammad Pleads Guilty to Threatening South Park Creators

I ran into Younus at the "Salute Israel" parade a few years ago. He called me a "douche bag." I challenged him to a debate via email, but he ended up saying some nasty things about my mom instead. The sad part is that, if you read the Muslim sources, you find that Islam encourages this sort of behavior.

VIRGINIA--A Muslim convert charged with communicating threats to "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker is pleading guilty.

The Thursday hearing in a Virginia federal court found Younus Abdullah Mohammad, whose real name is Jesse Curtis Morton, facing charges for the incendiary material he put on his website, Revolution Muslim.

The matter stems from an April 2010 episode of "South Park" in which the Prophet Muhammad was depicted in a bear suit, igniting threats from Morton and two of the website's co-operators. Both of the others were arrested and charged with terrorism a month later, prompting Morton to flee the United States that summer.

He was taken into U.S. custody in Morocco in October, and has since remained in jail, awaiting trial. One of his associates, Zachary Adam Chesser, was sentenced to 25 years in prison last year for the online threats and attempting to provide information to foreign terrorist organizations.

Morton's guilty plea includes admissions to conspiracy, communicating threats and using the Internet to intimidate.

Beyond taking aim at Stone and Parker, CNN reports a counter-terrorism official referred to Revolution Muslim as the "top catalyst for radicalization for violence in the United States" over the last several years. (Source)

Wife of Revolution Muslim's Zachary Chesser Ordered to Leave the United States

I have a question. How exactly did a cow tipping, NASCAR loving, "Hee Haw" watching, corn-cob pipe smoking, moon-shine drinking, square dancing, pickup truck driving, Rebel Flag waving, fiddle playing, banjo strumming, tobacco spitting, cowboy boot wearing, monster truck and tractor pulling toothless hillbilly straight out of "Deliverance" decide to join the Jihad? Most rednecks can’t stand terrorists, and any five half-drunk rednecks could lay the smack-down on all of al-Qaeda. So what happened to Zachary Chesser? Did the other kids from his backwoods trailer park in Alabama pick on him? Is that what led him to terrorism? Or could his terrorist activities have something to do with his beliefs?

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Naw. It must be something else. He must have watched too much wrestling as a child.

Alexandria, Virginia (CNN) -- The Ugandan wife of an American-born man who pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists entered her own guilty plea on Monday.

Proscovia Kampire Nzabanita, dressed head-to-toe in conservative Muslim dress with her face covered, pleaded guilty to making a false statement when questioned by a federal investigator about her husband, Zachary Chesser.

Chesser, 20, was accused of posting an online attack against the creators of the animated TV series "South Park" due to the program's depiction of the Prophet Mohammed.

On October 20, Chesser agreed to plead guilty to the terrorist support charge, as well as charges of communicating threats and soliciting crimes of violence. He will be sentenced in January, and is expected to receive a sentence of at least 20 years in prison.

As part of Chesser's plea agreement, federal authorities agreed not to seek charges of aiding and abetting against Nzabanita, 26, who faces sentencing on January 28 for her guilty plea Monday.

According to a news release from the U.S. Attorney's office for the Eastern District of Virginia, Nzabanita will serve no prison time but must leave the United States within 120 days and give up her legal status.

Federal Judge Gerald Bruce Lee allowed Nzabanita to remain free on bail of $250,000 and ordered that she reside with her mother as her guardian until the sentencing.

The news release from the U.S. Attorney's office said Nzabanita was questioned on July 21 by a Secret Service special agent outside her residence in northern Virginia.

In her plea agreement, Nzabanita admitted she lied in that interview by saying Chesser had attempted to fly to Uganda on July 10 to retriever her birth certificate, according to the news release. In reality, Chesser planned to ultimately make his way to Somalia to help the terrorist group al-Shabaab, the news release said.

According to an affidavit, Chesser tried to take his infant son with him on the trip, telling his wife it was part of his "cover" to make it less likely anyone would suspect he was trying to go to Somalia to join al-Shabaab. (Read more.)

Perhaps ABC News should do a 20/20 special claiming that this woman and her husband are America's first line of defense against terrorism.

ABC News Promotes Revolution Muslim as America's First Line of Defense against Terrorism

ABC News recently did a 20/20 special titled "Islam: Questions and Answers," with Diane Sawyer, Bill Weir, and Lama Hasan. The program drew attention to moderate Muslims who will serve as America's "first line of defense" against terrorism. Unfortunately, one of the moderate Muslims presented by ABC isn't so moderate.

Revolution Muslim in Times Square

Just a few hours before an explosive device failed to detonate, Revolution Muslim was preaching in Times Square. Where were all the peaceful, tolerant Muslims who disagree with them? (RM even won a convert.)



I wish these guys would quit playing hide and seek (showing up unannounced and then disappearing afterwards). I'd really, really like some Qur'an lessons. How about posting their Dawah location ahead of time? (And if anyone ever sees them starting their Dawah, send me a quick email. I might be able to get there before they finish.)

Come out, come out wherever you are!

Sami Zaatari vs. Revolution Muslim

It's no shock to anyone that I'm not a fan of Muhammad. Nevertheless, I also believe in being nice to people, unless there's a very good reason not to be nice. Thus, I don't go around calling Muhammad a "pedophile" or drawing pictures of him--not because I care about Muhammad's feelings (he's dead), but because there's no need to pointlessly upset people. The same attitude is held by most critics of Islam, as well as by most of the people who visit this blog.

Yet many of us believe that it is morally wrong to comply with terrorist threats. To back down when threatened is to encourage further threats. When terrorists are attacking our fundamental rights, the situation is even worse. The Founding Fathers of the United States were willing to lay down their lives so that future generations would have certain freedoms. Success for groups like Revolution Muslim would mean the end of these freedoms. Thus, when terrorists say, "Don't do X, or you'll end up like Theo Van Gogh," the natural response is to show the world what all the fuss is about, and how silly it is to want to kill someone over something like this:


(I posted the Danish cartoons several years ago here when the riots started.)

But Revolution Muslim got what they wanted. Comedy Central is now terrified of even mentioning Muhammad in a cartoon. Even Molly Norris, who suggested an international "Draw Muhammad" Day, backed down almost immediately. She's now going to Muslim meetings to show that she's repented of her sin (of standing up for free speech). Yet others aren't so quick to give up their freedoms, and there is a desire to teach terrorists a lesson when they try to intimidate people. The attitude seems to be: "If you threaten us for doing X, we're going to do X even more. Eventually you'll learn to quit threatening us."

Of course, there are many different positions one may take. On one end of the spectrum, there are people who want to draw cartoons of Muhammad simply to offend Muslims. Their desire to offend Muslims has nothing to do with the recent threats to Matt Stone and Trey Parker; they're simply using this as an opportunity to vent the anger they already had. On the other end of the spectrum are Muslims who want to slaughter anyone who dares criticize, insult, or draw Muhammad. Some of them are dying for an excuse to kill a kafir. Most of us, whether Christian or Muslim, are somewhere in between these extremes.

Take Sami Zaatari, who offers a different response to cartoons of Muhammad:



Consider some of the differences between Sami's method and Revolution Muslim's method.

(1) Sami's method is less likely to start a massive cartoon campaign against Muhammad. There's nothing in the video that would be considered a threat to free speech, and therefore nothing to upset people. The angry folks at the end of the spectrum are going to continue drawing pictures of Muhammad (just as Muslims at the opposite end will continue shouting threats), but the rest of the world will have no desire to go overboard.

(2) Revolution Muslim's method is more likely to cause networks like Comedy Central to back down. That is, like it or not, the threat of violence can be effective to a certain degree. In the long run, however, such threats may be counterproductive. Consider the Danish Cartoon Controversy. If Muslims of the world had remained quiet and peaceful in response to the cartoons, no one would even remember the cartoons, and South Park wouldn't have bothered responding.

(3) Both methods are in line with Muhammad's teachings. We have records of Muhammad enduring persecution without immediate retaliation, and we have records of Muhammad ordering the deaths of those who insult him. Indeed, since the position of Muslims in the West is similar to the position of the early Muslim community in Mecca (i.e. they are a minority), and since Muhammad didn't resort to violence when he was significantly outnumbered, one could argue that Muslims in the West should not resort to violence when Muhammad is insulted (at least until the Muslim population increases dramatically).

(4) If success is the goal (that is, if Muslims really don't want to see Muhammad insulted), threats certainly aren't the way to go. It's only a matter of time before people like Parker and Stone go on a cartoon rampage, and this wouldn't happen if Muslims weren't trying to intimidate people into giving Islam a privileged status.

(5) Sami's approach leads to further dialogue and investigation, while Revolution Muslim's approach leads to further threats (from Muslims) and insults (from non-Muslims). For instance, Sami proposes videos about Muhammad's wonderful teachings. I'll most likely respond to those videos, arguing that Muslims are ripping the teachings out of context, ignoring other teachings, etc., at which point Muslims will disagree with me, and I'll disagree with them, and they'll call me an islamophobe, and I'll do three episodes of "Jesus or Muhammad" on the issues, etc. But isn't this back-and-forth better than the threats-insults-more threats-more insults exchange?

With all of this said, I think it's too late. Sami will likely get a good response, but groups like Revolution Muslim will continue to threaten people, and people will respond with insults, and so on. I see a spiral starting.

Cartoonists Strike Back: Everybody Draw Mohammed Day on May 20th (Send Your Complaints to Revolution Muslim)

To clarify my position ahead of time, I'll say that I don't advocate offending people just for the sake of offending them. However, I don't believe in backing down from terrorist threats either. When terrorists threaten someone, and people do what the terrorists want, it only encourages further threats of violence. Thus, whether we find it tasteful or not, it's difficult to condemn cartoonists for standing up for their rights in response to terrorist threats.

If terrorists hadn't threatened to kill Trey Parker and Matt Stone, other cartoonists wouldn't be calling for the First Annual "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." This means, of course, that Muslims around the world should be blaming Revolution Muslim for the avalanche of Muhammad cartoons that will be coming next month.

Associated Press--After Comedy Central cut a portion of a South Park episode following a death threat from a radical Muslim group, Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris wanted to counter the fear. She has declared May 20th "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day."

Norris told KIRO Radio's Dave Ross that cartoonists are meant to challenge the lines of political correctness. "That's a cartoonist's job, to be non-PC."

Producers of South Park said Thursday that Comedy Central removed a speech about intimidation and fear from their show after a radical Muslim group warned that they could be killed for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

The group said it wasn't threatening South Park producers Trey Parker and Matt Stone, but it included a gruesome picture of Theo Van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker killed by a Muslim extremist in 2004, and said the producers could meet the same fate. The website posted the addresses of Comedy Central's New York office and the California production studio where South Park is made.

"As a cartoonist I just felt so much passion about what had happened I wanted to kind of counter Comedy Central's message they sent about feeling afraid," Norris said.

Norris has asked other artists to submit drawings of any religious figure to be posted as part of Citizens Against Citizens Against Humor (CACAH) on May 20th.

On her website Norris explains this is not meant to disrespect any religion, but rather meant to protect people's right to express themselves. Source.

WOOD'S PREDICTION: Despite the fact that the cartoons next month are a direct result of threats from Revolution Muslim (and the worldwide massacre that took place as a result of the Danish Cartoon Controversy), even "moderate" Muslims will be more upset about these cartoons than they are about the brutal murders that took place in the name of Islam.

Revolution Muslim: Who Are They Actually Willing to Debate?

No one doubts that South Park is offensive to practically everyone. But most people do not make a connection between (a) being offended by silly cartoons, and (b) butchering the people who make the cartoons. To make such a connection, we need a bridge between offending and killing. That bridge is Islam, which calls for the deaths of those who insult Muhammad.

However, the validity of this bridge depends on whether Islam is true. That is, if Muhammad was a false prophet, no one should be killed for insulting him. If, however, Muhammad was a true prophet, then his commands to murder critics should be followed today.

There's very little disagreement between me and Revolution Muslim when it comes to Islamic teachings. But there is a massive difference between me and Revolution Muslim when it comes to whether Islam is true. If I believed that Islam is true, I might be threatening Trey Parker and Matt Stone too.

It seems that much could be solved by resolving the question of Muhammad's prophethood. I'm perfectly willing to address this issue in public debate. Unfortunately, while Revolution Muslim loves to instigate their fellow Muslims to violence in defense of Muhammad, they refuse to defend Muhammad rationally.

If you watch Revolution Muslim's videos, you'll see them constantly challenging people to debate. Even in their response to criticisms over their threats against Trey Parker and Matt Stone, Revolution Muslim says they're ready to defend their views in debates. Yet Sam, Nabeel, and I are all ready to debate, and I've challenged Revolution Muslim to defend their prophet in public.

Why do they back down? Are they bluffing? Are they tossing around debate challenges because they don't think that anyone will actually debate them? Well, we're waiting. I live right down the street from them, and I'm ready.

Revolution Muslim Issues Media Release "Clarifying" Their Veiled Threat against South Park Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone

I'm sure everyone's now familiar with the infamous "South Park vs. Revolution Muslim" controversy. Let's review the details before addressing Revolution Muslim's "clarification" of their post.

Prior to the Danish Cartoon Controversy, a 2001 episode of South Park ("Super Best Friends") featured images of Muhammad:



Three Years Later, Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was brutally shot, stabbed, and practically beheaded for his role in producing the short film "Submission."



In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve cartoons, several of which contained images of Muhammad.


More than 100 people worldwide were killed over these cartoons, and one of the cartoonists barely escaped with his life when an axe-wielding Muslim invaded his house.

The following year, South Park again attempted to feature images of Muhammad, but the images were censored by Comedy Central.

This brings us to the past few weeks, when Trey Parker and Matt Stone yet again put together an episode featuring Muhammad, this time in a bear costume.


Enter Revolution Muslim, a Muslim Jihadist group (headquartered not far from my apartment), which produced a video suggesting that Trey Parker and Matt Stone should be killed for insulting Muhammad (the video and website have since been removed).

The media quickly picked up the story, with Anderson Cooper giving an uncharacteristically non-dhimmified presentation of the facts:



Bill O'Reilly, however, gladly brought the media back to dhimmi status, claiming that freedom of speech isn't really that important:



But O'Reilly wasn't the only one to submit to terrorist threats. Comedy Central bowed even further, censoring even the mention of Muhammad's name from future shows.

Now "South Park" can't even say the words "Prophet Muhammad."

After last week's episode of the Comedy Central series sparked a threat (and yes, it was certainly a threat) from a radical Islamic website, the network has cracked-down-for-their-own-good on creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone during last night's continuation of the show's storyline.

For those who missed the drama, the show's 200th episode last week mocked the one "celebrity" that the series has been largely unable to depict, the Prophet Muhammad, who was hidden from view in a bear costume. A U.S.-based website RevolutionMuslim.com then warned Parker and Stone they could end up like Theo Van Gogh (the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by Muslim extremists after depicting Muhammad on his show) and even posted the address of the show's production office. The site has since been shut down.

Last night, "South Park" continued the controversial Muhammad storyline, but with a key difference: every instance of the words "Prophet Muhammad" was bleeped out, making the episode practically incomprehensible, especially to anybody who missed the previous week.

The character of Muhammad was once again also hidden from view, covered by a large block labeled "censored."

A Comedy Central spokesperson confirmed it was the network's decision to bleep the words. Source.

So the network's decision was to submit to threats and intimidation, which will have two effects. First, Muslims worldwide will once again find out that they can prevent criticism of Islam by simply threatening to slaughter people. In other words, Comedy Central is encouraging other Muslims to respond with violence. Second, Revolution Muslim, a group that recruits Jihadists in the United States, just gained a great deal of respect from young Muslims looking to join a Jihadist group. Revolution Muslim has now single-handedly stopped a campaign of criticism against Muhammad, and has caused networks to self-censor even more than they were already doing. I can guarantee that Revolution Muslim's membership will increase as a result of their success (a success granted to them by Comedy Central).

Of course, no one should be surprised that Muslims are threatening violence in response to criticism of Muhammad. Such violence goes back to the time of Muhammad. Consider the following passages:

Sunan Abu Dawud 4348—Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas: A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it. He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up. He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her. Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.

Sunan Abu Dawud 4349—Narrated Ali ibn Abu Talib: A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Apostle of Allah declared that no recompense was payable for her blood.

Ibn Ishaq, p. 675—Abu Afak was one of the B. Amr b. Auf of the B. Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit and said:

“Long have I lived but never have I seen
An assembly or collection of people
More faithful to their undertaking
And their allies when called upon
Than the sons of Qayla when they assembled,
Men who overthrew mountains and never submitted,
A rider who came to them split them in two (saying)
“Permitted”, “Forbidden”, of all sorts of things.
Had you believed in glory or kingship
You would have followed Tubba.”

The apostle said, “Who will deal with this rascal for me?” Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the “weepers”, went forth and killed him.

Ibn Ishaq, pp. 675-676—“When Abu Afak had been killed she displayed disaffection. Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:

“I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit
and Auf and B. al-Khazraj.
You obey a stranger who is none of yours,
One not of Murad or Madhhij.
Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs
Like a hungry man waiting for a cook's broth?
Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise
And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?” . . .

When the apostle heard what she had said he said, “Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?” Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, “You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!” When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her”, so Umayr went back to his people.

These and other examples show that both Muhammad and other Muslims had a habit of brutally murdering people who criticized Muhammad or Islam. The violent response of groups like Revolution Muslim is therefore to be expected. Whatever else we want to say about Revolution Muslim, at least they take the Muslim sources seriously.

I ended up on Revolution Muslim's mailing list when I challenged them to defend their prophet in public debate (a challenge they backed down from immediately). So here is their story about what they really meant when they (1) said that Matt and Trey would probably end up dead for insulting Muhammad, (2) played a sermon calling for the deaths of those who insult Muhammad, and (3) gave the addresses of Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

Assalamualikum:

Unfortunately, the website is down after the host refused to continue working with us. We just want to say that the media is really exaggerating and turning a statement of prediction and warning into one of threat. In order to try to clarify we issued a release that follows and will work on hosting issues. For the time being, you may find us on revolutionmuslimdaily.blogspot.com as we will use that for now. Expect limited coverage until we can get some rest from the large amount of publicity. We hold to our views and believe that other Muslims and conscious people everywhere should be helping to spread them. Please read the article that follows.

Clarifying the South Park Response and Calling on Others to Join in the Defense of the Prophet Muhammad – RevolutionMuslim.com

In the name of Allah the Beneficent the Merciful, all praise is due to Allah the Lord of all that exists, and may blessings and peace be upon the Messenger of Allah Muhammad, and I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except for Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger,

As for what follows,

In light of the volume of attention being given to our response to the recent South Park episode we feel compelled to issue a statement clarifying the issue to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. We would like to point out that we are not against a rational dialogue with either group and would like to take this opportunity to ask all to read and respond with an objective mind. We live in an age of media concision, and a consequential reality which tends to afford very little opportunity for in depth discussion.

Our intention with this explanation is only, Allah willing, to create the possibility that a deeper and more productive dialogue may be initiated. We seek to create an opportunity for correction of wrongs and the alteration of behavior that many may suggest is insignificant, but nevertheless is a behavior which we hold to be not only sacrilegious, but which we feel typifies a cancer which bites at the root of global injustice. The cancer we are referring to is that of American imperialism and its coincident culture of pagan hedonistic barbarism, a culture which drives to dehumanize the intrinsic morality of the rest of the world. As it stands today the vast majority of the world has witnessed the cloud of American debauchery, and those whom it has not hovered over have at the very least been affected by its dust.

This past week South Park aired an episode which insulted three of our beloved prophets: Musa (Moses), 'Isa (Jesus), and Muhammad, peace be upon them all. Not only did they do this, but within the episode the makers of South Park made it very clear that they knew how the Muslims would feel and potentially respond to their show. In an effort to cover their actual intention to incite, the creators of South Park carefully contrived a plotline that they believed could only stump those Muslim extremists that may arise to defend the honor of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). They wished to degrade and mock a man who is held in highest regard by Muslims and many Non-Muslims alike, and indeed many have categorized Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the most influential human being that ever walked on Earth.

By placing the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in a bear suit, the creators of South Park sought to insult the sacred, and show their blatant and general disregard for religion. By insulting our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) without the outright depicting of his image, the creators of South Park thought that they had found some loophole in the Muslim faith for them to mock.

If you were to ask any American how many people had been killed in the Iraq war, then he would give you some number around 4,000. The reality is that many estimates put the complete death toll of this war at figures above 1,000,000. America is a country which murdered 500,000 Iraqi children in the decade before September 11th, 2001 under the Iraq sanctions. This is a fact which the American Secretary of State at the time Madeleine Albright admitted to. The attacks on September 11th did not even equal a week of the murder inflicted on the Muslim people by the American imperialist agenda, yet the United States unanimously viewed these attacks as a justification to kill additional hundreds of thousands of Muslims. America props up brutal dictators on our soil simply because they are friendly and they control the oil. America’s military supports the Israeli regime which stole the land it controls from Muslims. The closest thing it has done to helping the Palestinian people is to periodically give fewer munitions to Israel for them to kill Palestinians with. How can anyone possibly champion the values of such a people? In the last century only the Soviet regime and the Maoist regime murdered more innocent people than America. Not even the tyrant of the twentieth century, Adolf Hitler, beats out America on this list. However, for some reason the makers of South Park in their self-righteous obscenity feel compelled to impose upon Muslims the values of this regime. Furthermore, they felt compelled to do it through the mocking of the man whom we hold in the highest esteem, whose honor we would die for, the Messenger of Allah Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah (peace be upon him).

Furthermore this is a regime which openly says it is in a “battle of the hearts and minds” to change Islam in its policy papers, but then its leaders stand on the pulpit and deny this. For one to understand this literal war on Islam, then I refer you to the document, “Civil Democratic Islam” by the RAND Institute. There are many more documents of this nature even emanating from organizations such as the Air Force. If America was openly engaged in a campaign to change Christianity or Judaism, do you not think there would be outrage and sensitivity from these communities? It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but anyone with half an hour of free time can easily find these comments in any number of policy documents. Furthermore they can find evidence of America supporting certain scholars of Islam and hiding others with American taxpayer dollars. It is only natural for a group which is under an ideological assault from the United States to be hostile toward anything coming from an American citizen which is mocking this group.

While the makers of South Park are probably unaware of these issues, and they are merely pawns in a dangerous game, they are playing right into the hands of those who wish to change our religion. The destruction of the Islamic identity is not something which Muslims can tolerate, and this is something being directly funded by the American regime. It is no secret that America’s military uses American goods to spread its culture and propaganda in order to create docile societies. Just look at Somalia where the World Food Program refused to buy domestic food in favor of American food. How do you think Obama would feel if the flag of Al-Qa’ida was stamped on his coffee mug and there was nothing he could do about it? The issue of the honor of our Prophet (peace be upon him) is an issue of honor for this entire nation. Perhaps honor is a dead value in the West, but it will never die in the hearts of this Ummah (nation).

Free speech is a vital tool in the staving of oppression, but this function has its limits. It is hard to understand how one can feel self-righteous while defending somebody as an "equal opportunity offender." Such an illogical state of mind could only emanate from a selfish culture in which the suffering of the many is justified by the enjoyment of the few. And it may be an American "value" that all speech should be free including that which is obscene and aimed at emotionally oppressing a specific group of people, but this is not a value that the Muslims share with America as a whole. In fact, one of the major reasons there is such little opposition to American domination today is the reality that the principle of free speech, as envisioned by the founding fathers of the United States and by wise men and women throughout the ages, is a universal principle that may protect citizens from political, economic, or religious persecution. Today it is understood much differently; today “free speech” is interpreted as the right to promote pornography, homosexuality, slander, and libel against even that which is considered sacred. Indeed, it is in the shifting away from this conceptualization that America first deviated from its position as republic and assumed the role of global empire.

Is there a purpose, other than evil, in insulting something someone holds sacred? While insulting Jesus, Moses, or any other prophet would remove someone from Islam, we Muslims are also forbidden to insult the deities that other religions hold in high esteem. Allah says in the Qur'an:

وَلاَ تَسُبُّواْ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ فَيَسُبُّواْ
اللّهَ عَدْوًا بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ

Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance

Therefore, as Muslims we do not define speech which has no place in a moral society as "free speech." Furthermore, we will never tolerate the mocking or insulting of any one of the prophets, peace be upon them, from any source even if it was the Caliph (leader) of the entire Muslim world. It is truly sad that we did not speak out when they first insulted 'Isa (Jesus), Musa (Moses), or even the first time they mocked the final prophet Muhammad, peace be upon them all. However, simply because they have done something in the past and there was no outcry does not justify our silence in the present.

As for the Islamic ruling on the situation, then this is clear. There is no difference of opinion from those with any degree of a reputation that the punishment is death. Ibn Taymiyyah a great scholar of Islam says, "Whoever curses the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) -a Muslim or a non Muslim- then he must be killed...and this is the opinion of the general body of Islamic scholars.”

Likewise Ibn Mundhir, another classical scholar, said, "It is the consensus (ijma’) of our scholars that the one who curses the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) should be executed!"

This is also the opinion of Imams Malik, al-Laith, Ahmed, Ishaq, Shafi'i, and Numan Abu Haneefah.

This shows that taking this stance is virtually obligatory, but it does not mean that our taking this stance is in some way an absolute call toward the requirement that the creators of South Park must be killed, nor a deliberate attempt at incitement, it is only to declare the truth regardless of consequence and to offer an awareness in the mind of Westerners when they consider doing the same thing.

Many are proclaiming that the South Park episode’s insult was minimal and some might inquire about a situation where the insult is not that great. The renowned scholar Imam Malik said, "If someone says that the button of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is dirty, then he should be executed!"

And then Qadi I'yad says, "And we don't know any different opinion, this is a consensus and we don't know any different opinion!"

Before continuing it must be made clear that anyone who knows anything about Usool ul-Fiqh (the fundamentals of jurisprudence) knows that ijma' (consensus) is a hujjah (proof) as the Prophet, salaa Allahu 'alayhi wa salam, said, "My Ummah cannot have consensus on something that is wrong." This means that the above opinions are the accepted opinions and these statements are proof that this is the case. While the details of this conversation may have lost our non-Muslim audience in evidences from the religion we implore you to read on and advise you that the system of law in Islam, known as shariah, is the most amazing thing the mind could ever encounter.

In the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) two key events stand out that provide evidence for the permissibility and indeed preference for retaliation against those that insult him. In the first, a blind Muslim man who had a Jewish wife (and some say servant) assassinated his wife when she continuously cursed and mocked Muhammad (peace be upon him). In the other, a Jewish poet by the name of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf was killed for his poetry insulting the Prophet
even though he was living under peaceful covenant with the Muslims and was within his own territory. If anyone is in need of details and sources for these occurrences feel free to contact us and we will forward them to serious inquirers. At this point, it must be known that this is the position in Islam, that there is consensus in it and that for those that argue the harm coming as a consequence exceeds thebenefit, then they should know that this is at best an argument that entails a difference of opinion although the evidence suggests that adopting the platform that we ourselves have taken is best.

The law, known as shariah, in Islam is sacred and it is for no man to change, alter, or disregard when reacting to events like the recent degrading of the Prophet Muhammad (saws) on South Park. Indeed there is an Islamic ruling on nearly every affair and Muslims must seek their response in the religion and not in the personal desire and false manipulation of subjective introspection via philosophy or, as in most cases, emotional attachment to socialized norms.

Allah says in the Quran, “And do not clothe the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know (2:42).”

It is not for us to convey what we desire but to convey the religion in its entirety no matter the consequence.

Allah also says in the Quran, “Surely you can have no true faith until you refer to the Prophet Muhammad in all your affairs. (4:65).”

Thus the postings that have caused so much controversy on revolutionmuslim.com with regard to this matter were actually not the publication of the opinion of some Muslims but a referral and deferment to Islamic Law, thus fulfilling our divine obligation to command the good and forbid the evil by teaching and preaching the religion of Islam no matter how strange that way of life may seem to some. This is a divine order, obligatory for at least some Muslims in any community to fulfill. Allah says,

وَلْتَكُن مِّنكُمْ أُمَّةٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ
بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ
الْمُفْلِحُونَ

Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones to attain felicity. (3:104)

Ibn Kathir, in his renown exogenesis of the Holy Quran says that this is not restricted to people with official authority, or in this case is not restricted to those that are seeking appeasements with the American Empire who are in actuality from amongst its staunchest allies, those who despite this claim to be Muslim and have been granted positions of leadership here in this country. Ibn Kathir states, “The objective of this Ayah is that there should be a segment of this Muslim Ummah fulfilling this task, even though it is also an obligation on every member of this Ummah, each according to his ability. Muslim recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said,

مَنْ رَأَى مِنْكُمْ مُنْكَرًا فَلْيُغَيِّرْهُ بِيَدِهِ، فَإِنْ لَمْ
يَسْتَطِعْ فَبِلِسَانِهِ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْتَطِع فَبِقَلْبِهِ، وَذلِكَ
أَضْعَفُ الْإِيمَان

“Whoever among you witnesses an evil, let him change it with his hand. If he is unable, then let him change it with his tongue. If he is unable, then let him change it with his heart, and this is the weakest faith.”

Speaking out against ending this kind of insult toward the Prophet Muhammad is completely in line with the tenets of the religion. Indeed we find it to be a tragedy that there has been virtually no reaction from the so-called leaders of the Muslim community whom CNN and other organizations tout as representing “mainstream Islam.” We are saddened by the fact that this story is about what we have said rather than the impact it has on the Muslims as a whole.

Thus our position remains that it is likely the creators of South Park will indeed end up like Theo Van Gogh. This is a reality. The story is already getting international attention and the journalism oversees is not as objective as it is here. In fact, we can tell you with certainty that at least one Dutch newspaper has completely made up quotations to make their story more sensational. We are not trying to directly incite violence, but we are trying to explain the gravity of the situation and prevent this from occurring ever again. As stated in the words of the Prophet (peace be upon him) above, if one cannot alter the situation with their hand then they must speak out against it and try to change it that way.

We would also like Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone to understand the tastelessness of their portrayal, apologize and reflect on the words that follow. An apology or at least recognition of bad taste might not remedy the situation, but it would go a long way toward turning this situation from a gaping wound into an ugly scar. Any Muslim that condones this type of behavior or minimizes it does not fulfill the obligation of hating it with his or her heart and thus, as is stated emphatically in the hadith, may fall outside the necessary status of holding onto even the weakest of faith. Many conquered peopled become completely oblivious to the function of their oppressor in enslaving their minds so we seek no harm against them, but do hope that they may be inspired to adopt a proactive stance and work alongside us in the struggle to liberate Islam and Muslims from foreign control.

Individual Muslims may react in quite the same manner as those non-Muslims, claiming that we are making Islam look backwards and ancient, overreacting and bringing about more harm than good. These same individuals decry every act of so-called terrorism while remaining completely silent in the face of U.S. terror; every time a leader of those courageously defending occupied Muslim lands from occupation is killed or captured they applaud. They constantly sit silent as tanks and troopers are deployed and have little to say as the empire expands. In fact, they hurry to the American Empire to let them know they are with them, at least in some of the matter. Today, as Obama perpetuates a War on Islam, they perpetuate the tale that the United States is at war with a fringe group of extremists. Allah explains this phenomenon in the Quran by saying,

فَتَرَى الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ يُسَارِعُونَ فِيهِمْ
يَقُولُونَ نَخْشَى أَن تُصِيبَنَا دَآئِرَةٌ فَعَسَى اللّهُ أَن
يَأْتِيَ

بِالْفَتْحِ أَوْ أَمْرٍ مِّنْ عِندِهِ فَيُصْبِحُواْ عَلَى مَا
أَسَرُّواْ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ نَادِمِينَ

Those in whose hearts is a disease - you see how eagerly they run about amongst them, saying: "We do fear that a change of fortune may bring us disaster." Ah! perhaps Allah will give you victory, or a decision according to His will. Then will they repent of the thoughts which they secretly harbored in their hearts

Today Muslims the world over run and say that Muslims like us do not represent Islam, as if in some way speaking out against imperialism is in fact causing it. In order to survive, empires must conscript support, and they usually impose loyal indigenous elite over the lands they conquer. Oftentimes these loyal elite find ways of influencing the home front as well. Empire is primarily concerned with preserving political, economic, and military dominance and therefore tends to portray itself as tolerant and pluralistic of the cultures and customs of they come to conquer. However, a closer objective analysis always reveals that this tolerance is a guise of strategy and is only apparent where the conquered are willing to retain personal customs and control in exchange for the sacrifice of indigenous sovereignty over wealth, natural resource, and political decision. Thus while empires rape and extract the material wealth of the people they dominate, they grant the seeming retention of indigenous language, custom, religion and the like.

In reality, this focus on power and control leads to the actual loss of spiritual, psychological, and emotional health and, as an oligarchy is imposed, the educated class is granted modest concessions and then political and economic rights of the general people are violated for the long term. This requires that what a conquered people consider sacred must be portrayed as backwards. While this process tends to occur subconsciously it leads to a sense of power and privilege on the home shores of the imperialist, and that serves as a justification for the atrocities committed and thereby minimized on the frontier. The term “sand-nigger” or “camel jockey” did not start with American soldiers on the ground in Iraq, but was a phrase coined during Britain’s imperialist adventure in the Middle East. The ‘other’s’ culture and custom must always be degraded in order to retain a justification for physical domination. Media always plays a role in perpetuating these ideas.

The process of imperialism thereafter splits a conquered people up into two camps: the good and the bad. The good are those who accept domination and vie for safety by adopting the position that the Empire is not an imperialist entity at all, but rather a liberator – the bad are those that refuse to sacrifice autonomy and continue to fight on…Americans should be all too familiar with the process; the very foundation of their nation is built upon the genocide of the indigenous Native Americans. So too then in its occurrence, ‘good’ Indians collaborated with American settlers against the ‘bad’ Indians; they demonized them for fighting and not accepting defeat and were subsequently displayed by the imperialist power as proof for the benign nature of America’s early expansion. The genocide of Indians would have been impossible without their collaboration. We face similar situations as Muslims today.

This phenomenon is true of Babylonian, Greek, Roman, Persian, Dutch, and British empires as well. Indeed all imperialist powers employ the same means of control. The creators of South Park so too emulate this process in their work and in their own right contribute greatly to the passive acceptance of a sick status quo. The contemporary American Empire is dependent on a hedonistic, consumerist mindset that effectively numbs the general world populace and keeps them ignorant and oblivious to the imperialist reality.

We saw this clearly when the attacks on September 11th, 2001 occurred. Americans were told that this was due to Muslims hating their freedom and democracy, and they were never told that the perpetrators of the attack cited the death of millions of Muslims at the hands of U.S. foreign policy. With the help of media, Americans are kept oblivious to the heinous crimes of the empire overseas and especially in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past eight years by a complacent news media and garbage consumerist television shows like South Park which serve as the new opiate of the masses. All one has to do to see the impact Matt Stone and Trey Parker have had in spreading Islamophobia already is to go on any rightwing extremist website like the Jawa Report and count the number of times the words “Derka Derka Muhammad Jihad” are written. Furthermore, when one logs on to these sites they will see the inconceivable volume of people who call for the eradication of all Muslims around the world.

While we are often labeled a hate site, we do not call people to this type of filth. In the past some members did do that and we wish to distance ourselves from that at this point. The genocide of the Jews was a terrible event that should never be allowed to repeat itself. However, their genocide is not a justification to replicate the Warsaw Ghetto in the city of Gaza. Similarly it is a justification for neither imposing an apartheid rule on a people nor even forcing them to change their preferred system of government.

One of the only ways we could ever end American Imperialism would be to take away the ideological justification it finds through its mainstream media outlets. It should be apparent that we perceive this incident not in isolation, but as part of a broader narrative that is part and parcel of a much more complex and deeply seeded crisis.

Thomas Friedman, a proponent of this empire, explains the contemporary order is sustained by, “the presence of American power and America’s willingness to use that power against those who would threaten the system of globalization… The hidden hand of the market will never work without the fist,” but it is also true that the hidden hand of the market would never work without a mind-numbing American media that can help to pacify those that would otherwise stand opposed to the economic domination and the military domination it is dependent upon. The stance that we have taken is a derivative of this much deeper war, and our intention is not only to fulfill the command of forbidding evil in Islam but to engage both Muslims and non-Muslims alike in a much deeper discussion. Certainly, the mainstream media will never allow that to happen, but there are massive alternative opportunities in this era known as the Age of Information. It should be understood that we will not lie down and accept America’s imperialist conquest of Muslim lands. We will speak against any and all activities that lead to the perpetuation of this empire. The South Park episode does that by portraying the most important individual for Muslims, presently the predominant one’s being conquered, as backwards and irrational. This gives cause and justification to the narrative the empire is not conquering at all and instead is attempting to liberate and this reality must be addressed and confronted head on. Finally, Allah says in the Quran,

انْفِرُواْ خِفَافًا وَثِقَالاً وَجَاهِدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ
وَأَنفُسِكُمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ ذَلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُمْ
تَعْلَمُونَ

Go forth, whether light or heavy, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if you but knew.

In the end, we seek justice and preservation of Islamic religious beliefs and culture. We will not stand passive and silent in these tumultuous times. We implore conscious people everywhere to do the same and we are open to the advice, suggestions, and general conversation with all those that would like to engage in detailed discussion, we plan on hosting some open dialogue opportunities as soon as our website is back up and running. We call humanity to the solution that is the religion of Islam and to recognize the beauty of this fabulous religion given by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to the entire world.

We hope that the creators of South Park may read this and respond, that before sending hate mail and condemning us that we may partake in dialogue, and that the Western media’s degradation of the most blessed of men ceases. Otherwise we warn all that many reactions will not involve speech, and that defending those that insult, belittle, or degrade the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a requirement of the religion. As Osama bin Laden said with regard to the cartoons of Denmark, “If there is no check in the freedom of your words, then let your hearts be open to the freedom of our actions.”

--
Revolution Muslim

DISCLAIMER:

We hereby declare and make absolute public declaration that revolutionmuslim.com operates under the first amendment right to freedom of religion and expression and that in no, way, shape or form do we call for war against the U.S. government or adhere to the enemies of the United States elsewhere. We do however hold the belief, as stated honestly and openly in our mission statement, that the Muslim world should be permitted to unite under the banner of Islam. To suggest that this in some way implies that the reestablishment of the caliphate would require the dismantlement of the United States government is fallacy. We seek, rather, to witness the imperialist ambitions of the United States government and especially the private tyrannies (corporations, financial institutions, military-industrial complex) that control it subside in their quest for empire and "full spectrum dominance" and we call for the relinquishment of autonomy and respect for sovereignty across the Muslim world to the people and not in the hands of the dictators, and authoritarian regimes this structure keeps in power by continuing to engage in foreign policy we feel is the root cause of all the terrorism in the world. This statement is a disclaimer and any and all information published on this website is in accordance with all local, state, and federal law and all donations and funds distributed both domestically and to the island of Jamaica go solely to further the objectives of the organization and are operated in accordance with laws for nonprofit religious, educational and charitable organizations in the United States.

So observe the results. (A) People draw picture of Muhammad in a bear costume. (B) Muslims issue a veiled threat of violence. (C) American networks back down immediately and agree never to criticize Muhammad again. (D) Muslims hide behind the first amendment and face no repercussions for their threat.

Who won this battle over free speech? Revolution Muslim did. Who made it possible? Comedy Central.

"Revolution Muslim" Protests Shia Rally in New York

I just don't get these guys. They're willing to stand on corners and condemn the beliefs of their fellow Muslims, and they openly proclaim that Muslims are supposed to terrorize the enemies of Islam. But they are absolutely terrified of engaging in public debate and showing people that Muhammad was a true prophet.

It's easy to shout your views; it's something else entirely to defend them in a reasonable manner. You can write your views in magic marker on a piece of poster board ("Revolution Sharpie"?), but that does nothing to show that your views are correct.

I suppose that the most interesting thing about this video is that it shows how successful America is. Let's face it, in practically any Muslim country, this interaction would have ended in bloodshed. Here in America, however, we manage to keep a strained peace between groups that would otherwise annihilate each other.

PART ONE


PART TWO

"Revolution Muslim" Posts Our Video, But Refuses to Debate!

I just don't get it. They live in New York, I live in New York. They claim that Islam is true, I claim that Jesus is Lord. They like to argue, I like to argue. It would seem, wouldn't it, that some public debates would already be in the works? Not at all. I contacted them, but they didn't respond. And they're even posting our videos now!

Amazingly, while many liberal Muslims can't stand these guys because of their views, I actually respect them for proclaiming what Islam really teaches. I hope that they will eventually gain enough confidence to defend their views in public debate.

As things stand, they only seem willing to debate their fellow Muslims.



I think Sam and I will challenge them publicly next time on "Jesus or Muhammad."

*****UPDATE***** Well, I finally heard back from our friends at "Revolution Muslim." Yes, they refuse to debate, and they gave the classic "You-reject-Islam-so-there's-no-point-in-debating-you" excuse. Then the leader called me a "nigger" and threw many other insults at me (not to mention my mother!), in an email worthy of Nadir Ahmed's website. As it turns out, I was totally wrong about these guys. Based on the video I had seen, I assumed that they were intelligent young Muslims eager for dialogue and debate. After receiving a single email, I see that they are spoiled children eager for attention, but not knowledgeable enough to discuss their beliefs rationally. They have no business sharing the podium with anyone.

Revolution Muslim: Street Dawah

You have to respect their honesty concerning what the Qur'an actually teaches. (They seem to be in full agreement with Abdullah al-Andalusi on the Fort Hood Massacre.)



P.S. If anyone ever knows where these guys are going to be, please let me know. I'm only a subway ride away from them, and I wouldn't mind having a nice street debate.

*NOTE: This man clearly states that the Qur'an 8:60 is the justification for these terrorist attacks - do we really need to wonder what Islam teaches and what many Muslims believe?