PewDiePie Is Innocent

This is Part Two: the explanation.

So, I have reasons to believe that this is not as big a deal as people are making it out to be.

Sure, there is antisemitism, and that's wrong and evil. But PewDiePie isn't a racist. Did he

apologize for his comments? Yes, I believe so.

Was his show cancelled on Disney? Yes.

Is PewDiePie paying for his understanding of the freedom of expression? Maybe.

Is he 'bitching' in this video? Nah.

Does he believe that there should be 'truth'? It seems so.

So, I wrote some things about this in comments sections on some You Tubers' channels or on people's shared videos.

"The Media wants to paint me as some sort of villain"..."unless you really know me and what I do... they just want to put those labels out there... that's all that matters, because that's how they get paid."

And more, which he says in his defense, in the video.

I am totally against "labels" which everyone who read my posts or comments, knows. I go on and on, and write (probably too much) about "labels". My biggest 'problem' is the use of words that used to be Muslims words and have been misappropriated, like the word "salafi".

So since PewDiePie, has the guts to do what he wants, and say what he wants, I'm also going to go out on a limb (what, no way?) and say that I'm a salafi and proud of it. Salafi, as you all should know if you have read anything about this I've previously written, is just a way to say a Muslim who follows the original teachings. It isn't some evil "terrorist" or evil "Salafist" (Salafist is a word that uses the Arabic root and is Anglicized, a very big deal today). It is like when Christian evangelicals or the Orientalists before them, use the name Mohamed, as a root word, and add "dan" and you have the unsightly label "Mohamedan" and if you add an 's' it's Mohamedans, which is us!! Wow.

Why can't Christians just call us Muslims?? I call them Christians.

Why use a "label" that is not something we appreciate, except that you want to instigate hatred and promote your 'world view' that is an old world view from the Dark Ages??

Here are some of the things I said in defense of Pewds.(Can I call him that, even though I don't know him and I would never (probably) subscribe to his channel?)

N Word!!

Is this funny? I don't think it's funny, because there's not much context to it, I just put it out there, without context. (I was talking about not labeling people, and then said the evil "N Word".)

I don't think PewDiePie did that with his videos.

He isn't a racist, nor is he promoting racism.

I don't think it's wrong for black people to say 'nigga' or whatever they say to each other, or their 'homies' or whatever. (Excuse my ignorance on the subject)

but I see some Mexican sounding name doing it too, and I guess that's also okay, being that I don't think most Mexicans in America are racist either. Maybe he is a 'homie' so it's, again, okay.

I know Holocaust denial is a big subject. No one wants to deny the Holocaust, although some do. But I mean most people don't deny the Holocaust or the number of Jews who died in concentration camps. I won't get into this except to say that I have always sympathized with the Jews and the victims of the Holocaust for the loss of lives and the torture that they or their families went through, and even for any present day suffering that they suffer due to hate.

*****

I hope he never targets my channel, because I'm the mom using my kids in videos! Usually they appear to be enjoying themselves, but not always. I haven't posted much content yet, but one of my daughters has some really good ideas, and we have a series of stories she want to make into videos. 

Please, don't judge me!!

"I'm not actually trying to offend people" he says, in his self defense. I believe him. Many people beieve him, because they say they know Piewdiepie.

Karim, another YouTuber, posted his take on the controversy, defending PewDiePie. 

In some comments, people were talking about the meaning of  "Semitic" and concluded that "Arabs are also Semite". They said, they don't think it has anything to do with the Abrahamic religions, like Karim was saying. 

I wrote,  

"Salam I could tell Karim didn't exactly know what he was saying. But he's a good guy." in reply to someone's comment. 

I had this to say about Pewdiepie, "He is always making stupid jokes" 

"Karim, ur right. Piewdipie gives to charity and that will affect his good work (probably) somehow. But he is still really well off so don't worry about him too much."

And then, I added my own original thought, because I like to do that:

"Disney has racist stuff and don't apologize. Why should Piewdipie apologize for a couple jokes? He is always making stupid jokes.

 Let's address the fact that two Indian boys will do something for five bucks without questioning what they are doing. Are they impoverished or just really ignorant of the English language?" 

Many people mention that Piewds gives tonnes to charity and is a really good guy who is not racist as the "click-bait media" would have everyone believe. 

My point about the "poor Indians" if indeed they are "impoverished" is true, is also that PewDiePie (I have since learned to spell his 'name') is a good guy who "gives" a lot (millions in fact, or so it says in comments).

Comments run the gamut from friendly and cute to nasty and even racist, or bordering 'racism'.

Perhaps there is some racist antisemitic stuff being posted since PewDiePie's recent efforts (funny videos). 

"Let me summarise it, the world is run by jews and companies like disney are against muslims...they wouldn't comment as much when muslims are oppressed. I am a semite Muslim also but Disney and the media are corrupt." 

Someone more recently posted a long rant in the comments section there. His name is Borat (very European sounding name, obviously, not sure which part of Europe). He writes about the Talmud, the Goyim, and Ben Franklin, in five long paragraphs. (I didn't get to reading the whole thing because I was searching for my comments and a few others there).

Some of the comments if not racist, might border on racism or more specifically "anti-semitism". 

Lots of people are in part against the corrupt media (the "click-bait" media and that mentality in general). PewDiePie is one of those people who is against "censorship" of "humor", "comedy" etc.

Some of the comments, however, border on "hate" or "racism".

But this might be a matter of "interpretation". 

Are people permitted (by freedom of expression) to post comments about their views regarding "propaganda", or "censorship" or "Disney" or "the media" or "American foreign policy" or "Hitler" or "the Holocaust" or anything else that's bothering them or which they believe to be true? 

 Not everyone is just defending Pewdiepie, but they are also expressing their anger (in many cases, justified) against the media. 

Another comment said, "Conspiracy Theorist" "created by the CIA to discredit government dissident." in reply to one Arab (Semite) comment. Seems they are in agreement about government control. 

Someone commented, "If somebody joke about Muslims, nobody care, if another race or religion become sensation!" The reply that came back seems  less than supportive but could also be seen as "accomodating" (interpretation, is also important), "actually Muslims are sensitive lol... [elipses are his/hers]" I noticed the use of the capital "M", a good sign. As well, he seems to be joking, not insulting IMO.

The reason to examine the context, is because there is a lot of "joking" and "trolling" on YouTube. Some content, by uploaders, as well as comments  is really hateful but lots isn't.

I don't want to dwell on the "moslems" here, lol. In short, let's say that there has been a lot more support for all religions on YouTube by people in comments, recently. It could be because Muslims also are being more vocal and the effect is "rippling" outwards. 

Maybe this is a sign of good things to come. 

There could also be seen to be a rise in anti-Semitism, so it's hard to tell. Maybe racism in general is still on the rise in many parts of the world. Especially Europe.  

*****

On another channel, there was this, about the accusation of racism (that Pewdiepie is antisemitic):

"The people disliking this video should change their names to Suq Madiq". I have no idea why that's funny or smart, but anyway it got more than a few thumbs up. 

It should be noted, that people generally disagree that the video was racist, and they also say that You Tube is a forum for off color jokes, satire, parody, etc. I concur. I also agreed with this sentiment, and commented that YouTube is not TV and it is the parents' responsibility to watch what their children are watching on the internet, and that surely they are more responsible for their children's welfare than a comedian or popular YouTuber who doesn't even have kids of his own (EVEN though he had a Disney deal)? Where do we draw the line at personal freedom vs civic responsibility? 

Even "MILO", who is at the centre of a bigger controversy, has certain freedoms and that can be a double-edged sword. (Note that I have no opinion to express about Milo here, due to the debate about what he really said vs what people say about him.) Some people are committing professional suicide with that sword, unfortunately (There must be some excellent examples but I can't think of any, lol) I mean besides the obvious, are there any that really stick out? I guess, the first that comes to mind for me, a while back, was George Galloway. He kind of got into hot water all the time, because he is pro Palestinian.  Being on one side in one problem, and on another side in another issue, can lead to labels (again) like "hypocrite" or "drunk". It is not as easy as some think to strike a balance between what one sees is moral and what is politically correct or just obvious (to most people). 

America does the same thing, siding with Israel on the one hand while denouncing terrorism on the other. The same thing happened to Galloway, apparently, when he said some "nice things" about Saddam Hussein, as the late Christopher Hitchens pointed out at the time.

Whether we like it or not, our words or actions will have some effect on others. It could be negative or positive. And there's no way to know which it is sometimes. 

Does Freedom of Expression have to give way for there to be improved humans rights and less persecution of minorities or some groups?  It's not easy to distinguish freedom from hate all the time. Haters like to hate and will protect themselves, or the person they love most. They won't offer you a sympathetic ear or an apology!

*****

I recently also defended the Quran and other religious texts. I believe they should have special status as books, protections against hate speech because of their religious significance to many people. I wrote an article a long time ago and also posted it on my blog much later, where it still remains. It's significant (to me anyway) that the UN Special Rapporteur to Palestine also wrote something similar (as a lawyer of some status) about this same question. He has a website, Transnational.org, I believe.                   *

In my previous post maybe, there was something about Americans and/or Christians being hateful. I DIDN'T mean All Americans or ALL Christians. Sorry if anyone was offended. 

"Where is Allah?" videos

I had a few questions for a Sheikh, Mumtaz ul Haq. But as I don't have his official channel, or email I just posted it at a sharing site, where maybe someone will pass it on, because they are the Hanafi channel, according to them, and probably they can help me out. Also, there is a lot of debate among some about the need to follow a particular school as opposed to the hadiths only. What I think is that when a Muslim doesn't follow a particular school, still they learn to pray and do the other obligations and learn the aqeeda, etc. from scholars. I studied and so do many others at schools, which may teach Islam by following a curriculum; if the curriculum is decided by following one of the madhabs isn't a problem, and each madhab has scholars or teachers who at least know something about what the other madhabs (of which he isn't a follower) also teach. Not all the teachers are experts in religion, some are more like dais but if they don't know, they ask another more qualified teacher or scholar and help the students with their questions. In an ideal world we would all have the opportunities to study with many different scholars and learn the difference between all the different madhabs before we decide if we want to have a madhab or which madhab to follow. 

********

Sometimes, one has to admit that there is no way to know everything, and without proof, or without knowledge especially, we should admit that we just don't know (about something).

It is wrong to accuse others of insincerity, however.

I hope people will be more aware of how they address questions of religious differences, even if the people or group you are speaking about or criticizing are wrong or astray.

Do not use the word "salafist" because it is just a label and doesn't mean anything in Arabic or in Islam. And don't say that Muslims who are saying wrong things or teaching wrong or deviant ideas are "salafis" (from the Arabic word for salafi, in the plural form, or meaning people who follow the salaf, the early Muslims.)

'Salafis' are supposed to follow the Messenger, pbuh, and the example of the early Muslims, too.

Salafi is not a school of thought, so speaking about "salafis" and comparing them to "hanafis" is like comparing apples and oranges.

There are four schools of thought, the hanafi, hanbali, maaliki, and shafii, they are all Muslims and the early scholars after which these madhabs were named were also salafi.

Do we need to call ourselves other than Muslims, even if we have a school of thought or if we only ask the scholars for their advice when we don't know?

I call myself Muslim and don't feel the need to follow a particular madhab/school, but I understand why others do, and I don't think it is wrong at all to do so.

And Allah knows best about this and related matters. May He guide us all to what is just.

Jane Dughatir

 Can I ask, if someone can ask the Sheikh Mumtaz ul Haq also about the verse he mentions, which is "Allah Istawa ala'al arsh, yudabiru al amr." Thank you for the video. Does this verse mean, turn-ing to the arsh, okay I understand; what is the word to say when the Muslims turned their qibla to another qibla? is it istawa or something else? Jazakum Allah. And finally, to istawa ala'a samaa (to "turn to the sky") doesn't it actually translate better as "established Himself above the throne" (the verse being, “istawa a’ala al arsh”, I should say) which is how I have always heard it translated? Not 'on' but 'above', just as He, SWT, is above everything, or also above the heavens and above us? Jazakum Allah. Allah bless the Sheikh and also the uploader.

Jane Dughatir

Can I ask, again - that the hadiths say that there is a great distance between the different levels of the heavens, some people will be in the highest level, others will be in other levels, the highest being Firdaus al a'ala. Also, ahadith mention that the distance between the different levels, is like we look at the stars in the sky, or in space, or like so many years (away), e.g. 50,000 years - I no longer remember the description in a time sense. Is it not only a meaning of being in a more special or honored place. Is this the case; that maybe there is a physical or a time/space meaning also? Then we should perhaps only say that God knows whether or not it is in a physical sense or only in the sense of "degrees of honor". Can you tell the wording in Arabic or English so we can understand about the hadith mentioning the distance between the different heavens? I am being sincere. Jazakum Allah khairun. #ilm   #asking   #Allah  [revised]

Where is Allah? He is "stawa a'ala al arsh" and I believe that, even if I don't understand what it means or how it is best translated.

What is the Sunnah wa al Jamah? What do they say about Allah?


I'm not finished reading the material on this site but it seems to be a good one.
Insha Allah I will revise or add a comment, if there is anything which doesn't seem to be right with the site, or if I hear anything about the site from others, either positive or negative.


The video is Where is Allah? by Sheikh Mumtaz ul Haq, which is easy to search. And there are other good videos with similar names, but you have to be careful about some of the channels, or also the opinions expressed by some in the comments sections of these video channels.

Is Tommy Robinson Moving Further from EDL and Closer to Islam?

My Comments on RT

Insha Allah means "God willing" or "if God wills". So does this mean Tommy R. is afraid of the Muslims saying something which is just a common form of acknowledging Allah's power over everything? Is he just offended by Muslims and their tendency to use Arabic Islamic expressions or is he afraid of just about everything? Is he afraid of the prayers of Muslims, even though he doesn't believe God will give the Muslims what they pray for? Because isn't Islam evil and isn’t Allah nonexistent, according to people like Tommy and people like some of those in the EDL?

Who Is The Real Tommy Robinson?

Yes, it isn't only Muslims who are labeled as extremists. But don't forget, it wasn't that long ago that there were grave problems within Britain between Protestants and Catholics, and so extremism or terrorism isn't anything new there. Maybe there are factions or groups within the society [which] haven't had enough time away from such conflicts [and] wars to be able to think outside the box, or in a more inclusive way, to figure out ways to find solutions and to get along. If Tommy and others his age still remember their parents having views against the Irish or English, for example, then no wonder they are not able to find peaceful solutions, they have not had enough time or good experiences in the short time since Sinn Fein disbanded, or since Margaret Thatcher led the attack on the Falkland Islands.

The founder of EDL who provoked me to say, F--k O-f.

If I could tell Tommy anything it is that, yes Muslims are victims of extremism. But this labeling Sunnis in particular as "Salafis" is part of the big problem. I don’t know if he knows this or not, so maybe he should learn some Arabic terminology. Salafis are Muslims, they are Sunnis, and that's why Shias are not called Salafis, nor are Sufis called Salafis, and if Tommy has read the Quran, he doesn't have to call Muslims Salafis, because it isn't necessary. Yes, Salafi isn't a bad word; Salafism isn’t a movement outside of mainstream Islam. Whether you say Islamist, or Salafist, Muslims who are mainstream do not appreciate these labels. We call ourselves Muslims. Labels are not necessary nor are they helpful. Muslims do not have problems with other Muslims because they are sufi or Sunni, or even shia. Hatred is a problem of not knowing others true nature.



Islamic Propagation & Why Idiocy and Lying Get Promoted

We all know where babies come from right? If you don't you are not even able to read this blog.

But just being able to read isn't going to get you off the hook with me.

+terente P [his comment follows]:

"Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The quran should be the highest authority in America and islam the only accepted religion on Earth"

Omar Ahmed, Chairman of the Board of CAIR...

                                                                     ********

The discussion follows a video, "New York on Islam".

+Jane Dughatir The definition of 'kindness' is the quality of being friendly, generous and considerate. If I wanted to use the word I would have. I didn't. It's ok for you to call others ignorant, but when I say you are arrogant and stupid, I become the troll? U need to buy a distortion-free mirror! Now American and Libyans are ignorant Muslims? Seriously??!! Your shoddy reasoning, thinking and interpretation of information needs some serious evaluation. I guess for you, it's your interpretation and brand of Islam or the highway. Anyone who disagrees with your interpretation (Muslim or non-Muslim) is wrong, weak, ignorant… The world is diverse and it will always be that way - diverse nature, cultures, religions, view points/ interpretations, etc. You and your singular, narrow, my way or the highway interpretation is dangerous and THIS is precisely why many non-Muslims have negative views on Islam. You do not help promote Islam, just like fundamentalist Christians don't help promote Christianity. It's a total turn-off!

Yourself and Zaha have disagreed with the majority interpretations, not my own. You yourself asked her to explain whether Islam punishes people for certain crimes, etc., which she avoided answering directly. I agreed with the common perception (and its true there are punishments for such crimes as sexual deviancy etc., in Islam) which is obvious to most ppl, and to +terente P who also commented on this post or similar posts. She is right that most Muslim majority states do not punish for such crimes. She fails to mention that there are such punishments in a true Islamic state. She is tip toeing around the issues.

I don't argue that Saudi isn't a perfect model of Islam however, but is there a perfect model of any system anymore? democracy? or communism? No.

Stop bringing up your silly childish quip about the word "nice".

Do you think Sufis are "not nice" but are also "good Muslims" then? What's your problem exactly? You are not making any sense [or I should say, he didn't address any of my points but is angry about my " " around the word "nice" thus, which is all he can think about, lol.]and anyone with a brain who reads your train of comments would see you have a problem with me and it is now getting to the point that you want it to be personal.

I told you I'm not interested in a dialogue with you because you are not being at all reasonable. I don't think you read my comments to you or you don't understand what I said. You said Sufism is so much better than Sunni Islam. [hope he finally understands that "nice" or whatever else he says promoting sufis, isn't the problem, it is his general attitude that needs an adjustment; who's being arrogant? Certainly it must be "he" and not me..] You see, Salafis are Sunnis, and Wahhabi is just a label attached to Muslims by America and haters, to make it seem as though there are more than one type of Sunni Islam. Labels like "salafists" or "Wahhabis" are to confuse you. Obviously, you are either confused or you are promoting hatred. Labeling people with words they don't accept is hate speech. Changing the meaning of words, such as what is happening when the word "salafi" is used to mean something it isn't e.g. it is used by Islamophobes and the media to mean some evil Muslims or an evil sect. But in the original usage, which goes back to the first century, Salafi meant a person who follows the correct teachings of Islam; the "salafs" were the first generation of Muslims and those that followed them in their traditions. So, to you it has an evil connotation, which is spreading, but the true meaning of Salaf is quite different and a positive thing, for Muslims who understand what it really refers to.

You equate Sufism with good and Salafis with evil. I'm not surprised you are ignorant of the Arabic and the original meaning of the word. I'm not being arrogant, just trying to set you straight on some things. I have nothing against sufis, but they are not the "perfect" models of a true Muslim. True Muslims don't accept labels, such as Sufi, or Shia, if they understand the religion properly. If they don't understand, then Allah will forgive them for what they did out of ignorance, insha Allah.

Also, I was indeed making some fun of the "little girl" Zaha, who tvee seems smitten with.

That's why I said what I did about her being Libyan American. It was a poke at her, because I know that many Americans and Libyans don't know Islam, and you can read millions of comments on the net by both groups, and believe you me, they are often stupid comments. I didn't say that "all Libyans and all Americans" are stupid, however. And I wouldn't say that. But IF I DID, I really and sincerely apologize here and now. As I say, I was poking fun, or "bugging" the Libyan American who doesn't know her own religion and keeps posting her ignorant comments, which ppl like tvee just love, because it gives the impression that we are all ignorant of Islam - even some honest non-believers defend Islam better than she did.

If Zaha takes offence with my calling her "weak" then she should try getting a backbone, or attempt to learn more about Islam than her non-hiijabi circle of friends (on the internet or otherwise). By lying about Islam she proves that she is weak, either in her religion, or in her personality, or maybe both. This isn't personal - I just call 'em like I see 'em.

I will post more about the discussion which happened, so readers can judge for themselves why I have greatly taken offence with this person's views. It isn't for my own sake that I'm offended, but for the sake of Islam, which is already maligned enough in the media and in public forums, so that we don't need to be inundated with more false information, especially by people who are Muslims and claim to be telling  the truth about Islam when they are doing the opposite of that.  

********

Above, in the first paragraph of my 'rebuttal' I mention that I agree with the "common perception" which is to say, I agree with Islam's position on some punishments for certian crimes, leaving aside issues about freedom, and that most ppl's understanding of the punshments meted out to criminals in Islam are often accurate vis a vis, beheading for drugs offences (capital punishment also happens in China for drug related traffficking) especially trafficking narcotics, as well, stoning for adultery, or stoning or throwing from a high place, homosexuals (who are caught in the act) which are two of the most serious and controversial we can easily think of. Rapists are also killed, which is not unusual or greatly despised, considering the nature of the crime. Women are not punished for rape, according to the sharia.