liberal Muslims and liberal imperialists

The cartoon below - by the wonderful Brazilian, Carlos Latuff, - depicts the "difference" between the two pro-empire US candidates McCain/Obama. This should serve as a warning to Muslims. Already we are seeing so-called Muslim leaders hooking up with the liberal imperialists, in anticipation of an Obama (a liberal imperialist) presidency.

This change, from the neo-con imperialists to the liberal imperialists, will result in largely cosmetic shifts in how the US continues its atrocities against Muslims and Islam around the world, but it will have important ramifications for how we are going to continue the work of exposing the native informants. Expect many more Muslim "leaders" to hook up with the Obama team, and shamelessly pander to his policies.

Hamza Yusuf, for example, ignoring Islamic precepts that forbid Muslims to support anyone who has promised to attack other Muslims, at an ISNA conference, endorsed Obama:

The well-known preacher Hamza Yusuf, who is particularly influential among the young, received thunderous applause when he called on America’s Muslims to vote for the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, Barack Obama.


Obama’s pledge to withdraw US troops from Iraq is, according to Yusuf, reason enough to vote for him. Says Yusuf: “Iraq is the Arabic word for Vietnam.”

Since when did Islamic scholars think of their job description to include endorsing imperialist presidential candidates - who have promised to do nothing, other than to further strengthen the hands of the enemies of Muslims and Islam.

Sure, Obama has promised a reduction of forces in Iraq - but not a complete withdrawal, nor an end to the occupation. Giving Hamza Yusuf the benefit of the doubt, that he does not understand Obama's Iraq policies (most people don't), but did he fail to read up on Obama's other clear cut anti-Muslim policies?

Obama has promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and drop bombs on Pakistan (that he applauded Bush for doing)? If he is not reading up, or closely examining policy statements, then he might better serve Muslims by not making statements on topics about which he appears to be seriously naive.

US Presidential hopeful Barrack Obama has termed the cross-border raids by the US forces into Pakistan as a small step in the right direction.

Obama supported the raids but described them as “baby steps” by the Bush’s administration

Obama criticized the war in Iraq as a strategic blunder, not an act of aggression that has resulted in the slaughter of over one million innocent people. He presented the US occupation, which has shattered Iraq as a functioning society, as though the Bush administration was favoring that country at American expense. “Iraq has a $79 billion surplus while we’re wallowing in deficits,” he complained.

So Obama came to this year’s AIPAC conference determined to dispel all remaining doubts that he’s a Friend of Israel. “We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran,” he assured AIPAC.” I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything in my power. Everything and I mean everything.” He swore he wouldn’t talk to the elected representatives Palestinians, Hamas. To thunderous applause he declared, "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided,"

An even more troubling development is an endorsement by several liberal Muslim "leaders" of the repugnant violent attacks, and invasions of Muslim majority countries.

Following is from a report put out by the liberal imperialist group called "U.S. Muslim Engagement" (more on that group, and this report in the next few days but you can check out who is who in that group by clicking here ).

During the past several years, it has become clear that military force may be necessary, but is not sufficient, to defeat violent extremists in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, or to prevent attacks elsewhere.

The liberal imperialists (such as Obama) are very clear that they have no intention of stopping the violent attacks, and invasions. But what they want is a kinder, gentler, hypocritical face on these attacks, and a more efficient killing and propaganda machine.