Muslim Clothing

_

Archives

0

Zam Zam Water Miracles - Latest Scientific Research by Dr. Masaru Emoto of Japan

hanqie production 9/28/2010


Zam Zam Water Miracles - Latest Scientific Research by Dr. Masaru 
Emoto of Japan

After I read the attached newspaper clipping forwarded to me by a friend of mine recently, I was encouraged to research about it before forwarding/posting it blindly.
I found out that the mention of the research in the clipping is correct and is also available online @ http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/e_ome_home.html and http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/ediary200712.html#1229 (read question by Mr. Chris from USA) and http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/ediary200710.html#1012 (read question from Mr. Mahmood Dadgar from Iran).
Please forward this very interesting research to your friends & family as it certainly helps further strengthen our Faith in Allah.

0

Moslem film "My Name Is Khan"

hanqie production


My Name Is Khan



My Name Is Khan (Hindi: माय नेम इज़ ख़ान);[4] commonly referred to as MNIK,[5] is a 2010 Bollywood film directed by Karan Johar, with a screenplay by Shibani Bathija, produced by Hiroo Yash Johar and Gauri Khan, and starring Shahrukh Khan and Kajol,[6][7] who reunite after nine years (their last film together was Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham in 2001). It is overseen by both Dharma Productions and Red Chillies Entertainment and distributed by FOX Star Entertainment, which bought the rights for the film for a sum of INR 1 billion, thus becoming the most expensive Bollywood film of 2010.[8] It is also the highest buyover for any Indian film, breaking Ghajini's record of INR 900 million.

My Name Is Khan is the fourth directorial venture of Karan Johar. Cinematography is by Ravi K. Chandran, Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy composed the film's score, choreography is by Farah Khan, and lyrics were written by Niranjan Iyengar.[9] Visual Effects are by Red Chillies VFX.

My Name is Khan debuted in Abu Dhabi, UAE on 10 February 2010.[10] It released globally in cinemas on 12 February 2010.[1] It was also screened as part of the 60th Berlin International Film Festival's official selection the same month.[11] In the months leading up to its release, the film has also been involved in some controversy related to international airport security and Indian politics.

Upon release, the film broke many box office records, and became the highest-grossing Bollywood film overseas.[12] Within four weeks, the film crossed the INR 700 million mark in India and became the first film of 2010 to do so. In the overseas markets, the film grossed Rs. 90.34 crores ($ 19.25 million).[13] The film was released in India on DVD on 28 April 2010. Blu-ray in India, plus a DVD release worldwide followed on 10 August 2010.[14]

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Name_Is_Khan



0

Moslem film "My Name Is Khan"

hanqie production

My Name Is Khan



My Name Is Khan (Hindi: माय नेम इज़ ख़ान);[4] commonly referred to as MNIK,[5] is a 2010 Bollywood film directed by Karan Johar, with a screenplay by Shibani Bathija, produced by Hiroo Yash Johar and Gauri Khan, and starring Shahrukh Khan and Kajol,[6][7] who reunite after nine years (their last film together was Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham in 2001). It is overseen by both Dharma Productions and Red Chillies Entertainment and distributed by FOX Star Entertainment, which bought the rights for the film for a sum of INR 1 billion, thus becoming the most expensive Bollywood film of 2010.[8] It is also the highest buyover for any Indian film, breaking Ghajini's record of INR 900 million.

My Name Is Khan is the fourth directorial venture of Karan Johar. Cinematography is by Ravi K. Chandran, Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy composed the film's score, choreography is by Farah Khan, and lyrics were written by Niranjan Iyengar.[9] Visual Effects are by Red Chillies VFX.

My Name is Khan debuted in Abu Dhabi, UAE on 10 February 2010.[10] It released globally in cinemas on 12 February 2010.[1] It was also screened as part of the 60th Berlin International Film Festival's official selection the same month.[11] In the months leading up to its release, the film has also been involved in some controversy related to international airport security and Indian politics.

Upon release, the film broke many box office records, and became the highest-grossing Bollywood film overseas.[12] Within four weeks, the film crossed the INR 700 million mark in India and became the first film of 2010 to do so. In the overseas markets, the film grossed Rs. 90.34 crores ($ 19.25 million).[13] The film was released in India on DVD on 28 April 2010. Blu-ray in India, plus a DVD release worldwide followed on 10 August 2010.[14]

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Name_Is_Khan


0

Foreign News: INDIA

hanqie production

Slaves, Promises, Passions

By every sign & portent this would be India's year of decision—a decision that would be bitterly contested by all three partners to India's future: the British Raj, 256 million Hindus, 92 million Moslems.

Votes & Issues. As the year opened, Secretary of State for India Lord Pethick-Lawrence dutifully reiterated Britain's old promise: she would do all she could to help India reach Dominion status. For over three years, in one form or another, Britain had been offering just that—postwar independence inside the Empire (i.e., Dominion status), provided Indians could agree among themselves on what form of self-rule they wanted. Hindus wanted a united, free India; Moslems wanted a separate state for themselves (Pakistan) inside a free India. Both Hindus and Moslems wanted the British to get out.

Last week the results of the first election in eleven years for the Central Legislative Assembly were announced. Because of franchise restrictions, which made them among the least representative of India's elections, only about 600,000 voted. In this preliminary test, the predominantly Hindu Congress Party won all the non-Moslem seats (56) and the Moslem

League won all the Moslem seats (30); minor groups won 16, with 39 members still to be nominated.

Words & Moods. In the far more significant provincial elections (30,000,000 voters), to be held between January and April, the issue will be Pakistan—whether or not to slice off the four predominantly Moslem provinces in India's northwest corner, plus Bengal and Assam in the east, as a separate Moslem land.

The Moslem League's shrewd, elegant President Mohamed AH Jinnah put it coolly: "India has never been a nation. It only looks that way on a map. ... I want to eat the cow the Hindu worships. When the Hindu shakes hands with me, he must go wash his hands. Our religion is not all. Culture, history, customs, all make Moslem India a different nation from Hindu India. The Moslem has nothing in common with the Hindu except his slavery to the British."

The Congress Party's grim, potent boss, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, who hates Jinnah almost as much as he does the British, was openly scornful of both. The Moslem League, he said, had won electoral advantages during the war by stooping to aid Britain. "Do I think the British are sincere," he asked, "in their promise to leave India? They have been making promises ever since Queen Victoria's time, and they have always broken them."

While Hindus and Moslems were snarling at each other, Jawaharlal Nehru, ardent champion of Indian independence, summed up for them and for the world India's New Year's mood: "[We] will not willingly submit to any empire or any domination, and will revolt against it. It will be a continuing revolt of millions, with a passion behind it which even the atomic bomb will not suppress."



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,886832,00.html#ixzz10peQlJof
0

We are not invisible

hanqie production

As Fox News, the New York Post, and other right-wing media outlets are stirring up emotions over the so-called "terror mosque" planned near the site of the World Trade Center, I can't help but think back to the few days I spent in southern Ohio as a volunteer for the Obama campaign in November 2008.

It was there, in Fairfield County, that I committed one of the greatest acts of cowardice in my life. I allowed myself to stand by and say nothing while an entire creed was deemed violent, hateful, and un-American.

At the time, the Obama team was already concerned about the false rumor that their candidate, a self-identified Christian, was a closet Muslim. (According to a recent survey, nearly one-fifth of Americans continue to believe this). When approaching potential voters who believed the rumor, volunteers were instructed not to get in an argument over Muslims, their rights, much less what Islam really stands for. Instead, we were given pamphlets about Obama's faith in Christ and were told to talk about the then-senator's churchgoing habits.

On one campaign stop I knocked on the door of a middle-aged woman who was shocked to see her son's name on my list of potential Obama voters. "He had better not vote for Obama," she declared to me on her doorstep. When I asked her why, she leaned towards me and whispered in my ear, "Well, for one, he's a Muslim and I have the proof."

Although I was curious to see her "proof," I could already imagine what it was: The same old laundry list of hateful ideas that continue to divide American society. That Ohio mother was probably never going to vote for Obama, but what was of greater concern to me was the idea that being a Muslim automatically disqualified an individual from public service in the United States. Looking at me, my appearance and physical features, she might have guessed that I was a misguided but well-meaning New York, Jewish liberal. She had no clue that I was a Muslim.

What I wish Americans like her would understand is that the world's one billion Muslims are not a monolithic block hell-bent on the destruction of Christendom. Muslims are ethnically and nationally diverse; they are Arabs, Indonesians, Iranians, Canadians, and Americans. They converse in myriad tongues including Urdu, Russian, Turkish, French, and English. Like many Americans, many Muslims mourn the tragedy unfolding in Gaza; and just like many Americans, many Muslims could care less. Some are as religious as any weekly churchgoer; others couldn't tell you the difference between Mecca and McDonalds.

While proud of their coreligionists' past and current accomplishments, Muslims often discuss and try to fix their home and ancestral societies' ills. We curse the filth who throw acid at young girls simply because their parents sent them off to get an education. We organize to protest and prevent the hanging of men accused of being homosexuals. We speak up when historical catastrophes are denied. We deplore violence and terrorism, committed by anyone at home or abroad.

To many Muslims, particularly those living in the United States, the criticism of the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" to be built in lower Manhattan is a strange occurrence. "Haven't we," many wonder, "integrated fully into American life?"

I spent one glorious night in August 2001 shaking and grooving at the nightclub located on the top floor of the World Trade Center. At the night's conclusion I stood with friends in the Trade Center's plaza, in between those two magnificent towers. I thought about how half of my entire hometown could work in just those two buildings. "I can't believe," I told a good friend, "that those bastards tried to take down this whole complex."

A few weeks later, when the news broke, the first call I made was to my father. "Dad, Dad, they bombed New York! They bombed New York! Those Muslims! Those Muslims!" In my shock and sorrow, I failed to realize that the moment those men chose to take innocent lives, they ceased being Muslims. They were simply criminals. Terrorists.

Almost every American-Muslim will consistently condemn what happened on September 11. The real inconsistency lies with the American right. They organize and take names like the tea party and the Minutemen in honor of America's founders. Yet they ignore the words of President George Washington, who, in a letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island, declared that the United States, "gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens." They also ignore George W. Bush's reminder that Muslims thrive in countries like the United States "not in spite of their faith, but because of it." American conservatives spoke out in support of the Iranian youth who took to the streets and rooftops of Tehran to protest their government by chanting "Allahu Akbar," God is great. But popular opinion in America would not permit those same youth to pray in the vicinity of the World Trade Center even though the heinous act committed there had nothing to do with them.

If I could do it all over again and go back to that day in Ohio, I would ignore the pleas of the Obama campaign. I would stand up straight and declare to the misinformed woman that I am a Muslim. Not a "moderate Muslim," not a Westernized "good Muslim," but a Muslim like Mahmoud Darwish, like Shirin Ebadi, like Muhammad Ali, like some New York cabbies, and the bankers on Wall Street. But I am also an American, born in California with no other home in the world. I, like my fellow Muslims, love this country and have firm roots here. Spit on me and my faith if it makes you feel better, but our Constitution has given me my seat. I refuse to move to the back of the bus.

0

Muslim Americans have a history before 9/11

hanqie production

New York, New York - I live in Harlem on a street that is home to three churches and a mosque. The mosque is next door to one of those churches and when male congregants mingle on the sidewalk, it's impossible to tell who had just been in church and who in the mosque. It's only some of the women's headscarves that tell you.

Muslim Americans were not invented on 11 September 2001. Our history with New York, and the rest of the country for that matter, far precedes those attacks. Some of the earliest arrivals were on slave ships that crossed the Atlantic.

Yet the anti-Muslim hate metastasising across the United States these days is ferocious in its determination to drive a wedge between the "American" and the "Muslim" of our identities.

In just one week, a cab driver was stabbed in New York by a passenger who asked him if he was Muslim; a drunk burst into a New York mosque and urinated on prayer rugs; a brick was thrown at an Islamic centre in Madera, California; and a fire at the building site of a mosque in Tennessee was being investigated by the FBI.

"What's going to happen to me, our mom, sister-in-law, and all the women in the States who wear a hijab [headscarf] and don't need to be asked if they're Muslim first?" my sister Nora, a graduate student, asked.

It's not just about Park51, a proposed Islamic centre and mosque in Lower Manhattan, two blocks away from Ground Zero. There are at least four other planned mosques across the country, miles away from "hallowed ground", facing anti-Muslim opposition.

Some have tried to blame Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of Park51, for provoking still-hurt feelings over 9/11. But depicting him as the imam who kicked the hornet's nest would display unforgivable amnesia in the face of the manufacture of "Muslim" as a slur in this country.

Despite an appearance by US President George W. Bush at a mosque after 9/11 to show he didn't hold all Muslims responsible, his administration proceeded to do exactly that: military trials for civilians, secret prisons, the detention of hundreds of Muslim men without charge, the torture and harsh interrogation of detainees and the invasions of two Muslim-majority countries.

When Republicans "accused" US President Barack Obama of being Muslim during the 2008 presidential campaigns, Democrats didn't utter a single "So what?"

A one-time strategist to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, suggested she "go negative" on Obama in 2007 when she was campaigning for president – painting him as too foreign and exotic to lead America at war. She did not heed the advice but her campaign did leak photographs of Obama wearing traditional Somali clothes.

Those incidents and others were steps up a ladder of bigotry that is now delivered with the gravitas of political office. When a former vice-presidential candidate and ex-governor (Sarah Palin), a former House Speaker (Newt Gingrich), and various House members peddle in the most lurid caricatures of Muslims it is not difficult to understand the current crescendo of bigotry.

I have not forgotten acts of violence or attempted terrorism by Muslim Americans over the past year. The Muslim American community has not tiptoed around them. It issued several condemnations but also refused to be held guilty by faith affiliation.

And we refuse to disappear. We will not allow the bigots to pick apart the fabric that is America. Those Muslims mingling outside the mosque on my street are a microcosm of America. We vote – and our votes count, especially in swing states. That taxi driver stabbed in New York is one of the thousands of Muslims who comprise 50 per cent of NYC cabbies.

We're America's teachers, comedians and even its current beauty queen, Rima Fakih.

And we're also America's doctors. My sister-in-law, an obstetrician/gynecologist, and I were watching one of those medical dramas when she told me an anecdote that neatly sums it all up: "I was delivering a baby the other day and the father was watching via Skype cam. He was a soldier in Afghanistan. And I thought, here I am: a Muslim doctor in a headscarf delivering a baby whose father is an American soldier in Afghanistan, a Muslim country."

0

Regarding U.S. Muslims: A misguided debate

hanqie production

Laurie Goodstein's article, 'American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong?' was intended as a sympathetic reading of the concerns of U.S. Muslim communities facing increasing levels of hostility and fear. While generally insightful and sensibly written, the article also highlights the very misconceptions that riddle the bizarre debate pitting American Muslims against much of the government, the mainstream media and most of the general public.

This is how Goodstein lays the ground for her discussion: "For nine years after the attacks of Sept. 11, many American Muslims made concerted efforts to build relationships with non-Muslims, to make it clear they abhor terrorism, to educate people about Islam and to participate in interfaith service projects. They took satisfaction in the observations by many scholars that Muslims in America were more successful and assimilated than Muslims in Europe." (New York Times, September 5, 2010)

This argument is not Goodstein's alone, but one repeated by many in the media, the general public, and even among American Muslims themselves. The insinuation of the above context is misleading, and the timeline is selective.

True, it largely depends on who you ask, but there seem is more than one timeline in this narrative. The mainstream interpretation envisages the conflict as beginning with the hideous bombings on September 11, 2001. All that has happened since becomes justified with the claim that 'Muslims' started it. These same 'Muslims', some argue, are now twisting the knife by wanting to build a mosque not too far from Ground Zero, and they must be stopped.

The media fan the flames of this fear, while unknown, attention-hungry zealots propose to burn the holy book of Islam. Scheming rightwing politicians jump on board, fiery media commentators go wild with speculations, and the public grow increasingly terrified of what the Muslims might do. Even the sensible among all of these groups advise Muslims to basically try to make themselves more likable, to assimilate and fit in better.

That timeline and logic may be omnipresent in mainstream society in the U.S., but many on the fringes dare to challenge it. More, throughout Muslim-majority countries, in fact most of the world, September 11, 2001 was one station, however bloody, among many equally bloody episodes that defined the relationship between Muslims and the United States. Again, it all depends on who you ask. An Iraqi might locate the origin of hostilities with the Iraq war of 1990-91, and the deadly sanctions that followed, taking millions of civilian lives over the next decade. Some Muslims might cite the U.S. military presence in holy Muslim lands, or their intervention in Muslim countries' affairs. They may also point to the U.S. government's support of vile and brutal regimes around the world.

But the vast majority, while acknowledging all of these, will refer to the genesis of all hostilities - before Saddam Hussein existed on the map of Arab politics, and before Osama bin Laden led Arab fighters in Afghanistan, with the direct support of the U.S., to defeat the Soviets. It is the tragedy in Palestine that has continued to pain Muslims everywhere, regardless of their background, politics or geographic location. They know that without U.S. help, Israel would have no other option but to extend its hand to whatever peace offer enjoys international consensus. With every Palestinian killed, an American flag is burned, since the relationship has been delineated with immense clarity for decades. When U.S. General David Petraeus argued last March that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was fomenting anti-American sentiment, he spoke as a military man stating a fact. He was right, although many continue to ignore his remarks at their own peril.

True, timelines can be selective, but empathy requires one to understand another's perspective and not just one's own.

The Florida Priest on a mission to burn the Koran needs to see past his own terrible prejudices. Media commentators need to stop pigeonholing Muslims, and realize that there is no such thing as a Muslim polity in America. There is no truth to the idea that all Muslims hold the same religious values and political aspirations which are at constant odds with 'American values', and which need to be amended in order to make peace with their 'new' surroundings.

Needless to say, talks of 'assimilation' are misguided. Muslims have lived in the United States for generations and have become an essential part of American life. Millions of U.S. Muslims are also African American. Do they too need to assimilate? And if not, should we divide American Muslims to groups based on ethnic background, skin color, or some other criterion?

One cannot offer simple recipes by calling on the general public to adopt this belief or ditch another. Public opinion is formulated through a complex process in which the media is a major player. However, it is essential that one remembers that history is much more encompassing and cannot be hostage to our diktats and priorities. Such selective understanding will surely result in a limited understanding of the world and its shared future, and thus a misguided course of action.

That said, Muslims must not fall into the trap of victimhood, and start dividing the world into good and evil, the West and Muslims, and so on. How could one make such generalized claims and still remain critical of the notion of a 'clash of civilizations'? It remains that many Americans who have a negative perception of Muslims are not motivated by ideological convictions or religious zealotry. Most American clergy are not Koran-burning hateful priests, and not all media pundits are Bill O'Reilly.

There is no question that the conflict remains largely political. Misconceptions and misperceptions, manipulated by ill-intentioned politicians, media cohorts and substantiated by violence and war will not be resolved overnight. However, hundreds of interfaith dialogues and conferences will not change much as long as American armies continue to roam Muslim countries, support Israel and back corrupt leaders. Reducing the issue by signaling out a Muslim community in this country and then calling on frightened and fragmented communities to 'make more effort' is unfair and simply futile.

0

On September 11, a burned copy of the Quran was found at a mosque in Michigan.

hanqie production




Two Tennessee pastors also burned copies of the Quran on September 11, despite protest from members of their own families.

And last week, a partially burned Quran was also found outside a mosque in my home town, Chicago. Although sad, it is not entirely surprising there would be copycats.

As I read the reports of these sporadic burnings of the Quran, all I could do was lament that they very likely had little knowledge of the contents of this book, and the deep connections it has to their own faith. Had they taken a little time to read the book they wanted to burn, it is quite possible they would have changed their minds. And after all, if they had mustered enough effort to obtain a copy of the Quran, why not read it first?

I know if they would do so, they would find much with which they can relate. They would learn that both Moses and Jesus Christ are mentioned more by name in the Quran than the Prophet Muhammad himself.

They would read passages in the Quran saying Jesus was "strengthened with the Holy Spirit" (in at least three passages: 2:87, 2:253, and 5:110).

They would discover that the 19th chapter of the Quran is named for Jesus' mother, Mary. And they would read that the Quran holds up the example of the Virgin Mary as the ideal believer: "And [we have propounded yet another parable of God-consciousness in the story of] Mary, the daughter of Imran..." (66:12)

If they would read the Quran, they would find that some 73 passages of the Quran speak of Moses and his epic. And they would find that the Quran records two miracles about Moses: Moses' staff turning into a serpent and his hand glowing brightly after placing it under his arm. They would read that the Quran says that God bestowed His grace upon Moses and Aaron (37:114), that he was "specially chosen" by God (19:51) and that God bestowed on Moses "wisdom and knowledge" (28:14) as a reward for doing good. In addition, the Book of Moses in the Jewish Bible is described by the Quran as a "Light and Guide" (6:91).

If they would read the Quran, they would find this passage about the equality of humanity:

"O Mankind! Behold, we have created you from a male and female and have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another. Verily, the best of you in the sight of God is the one who is most conscious of Him. Behold, God is All-knowing, All-aware." (49:13)

They would read this passage about salvation:

"Verily, those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds -- shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have and neither shall they grieve. (2:62)

I can go on and on and on -- reciting verses from the Quran that touch the heart of the sacred beliefs of both Judaism and Christianity. And of course it does, because the Quran calls Muslims to be the spiritual siblings of Christians and Jews, as children of the God of Abraham.

Are there tough and belligerent verses in the Quran? Most definitely -- as there are in the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testament. Yet, like the verses in the texts of the Jews and the Christians, the verses in the Quran have a context and explanation.

But what is most important to focus on is that which is common to all three faiths in our country, and to use those common beliefs to bring people together, and to support the common good.

This summer has seen so much fear and hate-mongering for cynical political gain, and it has ensnared many Americans who are, in reality, good people who are simply misinformed. Once we learn the truth, we will realize that we are really much more similar than we are different.

All Post

Error: please install your flash : by moslem
 
Copyright 1999 Muslim Clothing