You are on page 1of 5


To SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence)
Recently I came across your lengthy diatribe against Mufti Taqi Usmani
in your so-called March 26, 2009 “letter” addressed to him. He was not
supposed to answer you personally because he is humble and polite
and because he is pretty far from cheap altercations. But I, as one of his
admirers, took it upon myself to take you on.
Just as you are serving your master David Yerushalmi, I am serving
mine. Your master teaches you to traduce and badmouth other people.
My Master, in contrast, commands me to “speak fair to people” (Al
Quran 2:83). He also commands His servants to say “peace’ in response
to the “ignorant ones.” (Al-Quran; 25:63). I therefore, say, “Peace!” in
response to your letter, because every sentence of your letter
demonstrates the ignorance against which we are directed by the Holy
Qur’an (25:63) to say “peace”.
No wonder! As John Monbiot says, - “one adult in five believes the sun
revolves round the earth; only 26% accept that evolution takes place by
means of natural selection; two-thirds of young adults are unable to
find Iraq on a map; two-thirds of US voters cannot name the three
branches of government; the maths skills of 1 5-year-olds in the US are
ranked 24th out of the 29 countries of the OECD.” (Guardian: October
29, 2008)
You seem totally ignorant of the maxim that one’s language reflects
one’s stock, breeding and schooling, -the way one is born and taught.
Please judge your language against this altruism. You did not take away
a whit from Mr. Usmani or Mr. Ranzini; you only gave yourselves away.
You say, “You, Mufti Usmani, have issued a fatwa for violent jihad
against the West to be conducted by Muslims living in the West.”
Although Mufti Usmani has never issued such a fatwa and you cannot
prove it through any of his writings, you don’t even know what a
“fatwa” is. You may profit by consulting the Columbia World Dictionary
of Islam, which states that, “It is a vulgar error to suppose that a Fatwa
is a ‘sentence of death,’ or some such thing, as Western journalists
sometimes imply.” Rather, “A ‘Fatwa’ (Arabic plural ‘Fatawa’) is nothing
more or less than the answer to a question on a matter of religion put
to a person qualified to deliver answers to such questions, who is
known as a mufti.”
In other words it is the expression of expert opinion. It is like an opinion
by a legal or medical expert. So, would you deny Mr. Usmani the free
expression of opinion, because, such freedom is the exclusive
prerogative of Zionists and Christians, and he is a Muslim?
Evidently you do not even seem to be aware of the true connotations
of “violent.” If you were you would know that “armed” jihad, -which is
what Mr. Usmani meant by jihad in some of his writings can NEVER be
“aggressive, brutal or cruel,” which is what violent is synonymous with.
The epithet would, on the contrary, apply admirably to Crusades.
Your observation “any wonder a Pakistani newspaper all the way
around the world takes notice of Bank and Ranzini going Shariah!?!”
exposes the lamentable extent of your ignorance. It is the very apogee,
because, the Pakistani newspaper, Pakistan Daily, you have made such
a brouhaha about, was not the original publisher of the news item. Nor
was it “all the way round the world.” Right in your own home a very
American ABC News telecast the detailed Associated Press story on
January 13. The Pakistani newspaper, on which you have vented your
misplaced rage, only published an excerpt of the story, full 18 days
later, on January 31. Anyone in your place would feel contrite at the
gaffe you have made.
The panic, that has overtaken the Shylocks due to shariah banking
having secured a foothold on what has been their exclusive turf, is
understandable. Hence, your vitriolic language, as if you would chew
Mr. Ranzini (and Mr. Usmani, too?) if you could lay your hands on them,
as the Crusaders chewed the flesh of Muslims and even Christians of
the Eastern Church who did not join them.
You taunt MF. Ranzini, saying, “Shariah is not quite as profitable as he
thought!’ But you are ignorant of the fact that shariah financing is not
about blind profit-making. This is what insulates shariah financial
institutions against collapse. “The total net income for this pathetic
excuse of a bank for the 9 months ending Sept o8 was $108,739” as
you say. But did it go bankrupt? Did it seek any bailout? Did it have to
lay off its staff? Compare that, please, with the “giants” that made
mountains of profits: Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
Lehman Brothers, Washington Mutual Bank, AIG, et al. By the way did
you know that the chief financial Officer of Freddie Mac committed
suicide recently? This would never happen to a shariah-based financial
So pathetic is your ignorance that you don’t even know what your own
Old Testament says on charging interest. “If you lend money to my
people, the poor with you, you shall not be as a money lender to him,
you shall not put interest on him,” is not an Islamic injunction; it is right
there in Exodus 22:25!
Your claim that Mr. Usmani is a “leader of the war against the West,” in other words, Christendom, is blatant calumny. It is true that he in
some of his writings supported armed jihad when the freedom and
honor of an Islamic state is in danger. But, as a “mufti,” he only offered
his considered opinion on a theological issue. How does that make him
a “leader?” But taking liberty with language only exposes your crass
Your fulmination against Dow Jones, too, is risible. The company only
demonstrated its vision and commonsense. It hired Mr. Usmani’s
services as an authority on Islamic theology which has no relation to his
views on jihad.
And, finally, jihad! With the level of knowledge you seem to have and
with your brains washed with a powerful anti-Islam detergent, you had
better leave the subject alone. It is far too profound a subject for you to
comprehend. However, the question “Is he who goes groping on his
face more rightly guided or he who walks on a straight path?” (Al
Quran; 67:22), illustrates the difference between Islam’s jihad and
Christian crusade.
For example, your Scriptures do not offer any guidance on how war is
to be waged, when and with whom. So you have Dresden, Hiroshima,
Nagasaki, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and so forth. You have Abu
Gharaib, Guantanamo, Bagram, My Lai, Deir Yasin, Sabra Shatila, Qana,
Mirwahim and, more recently, Gaza. And you have not only devastation
of property but also merciless destruction of foliage as in Vietnam with
Agent Orange.
Such practices are unthinkable in jihad which prohibits spilling innocent
blood. Islam prescribes strict rules of engagement. A mujahid enlists to
fight only to please God and for no personal gain. He would not
appropriate even a pin or a straw for himself. Unlike non-Muslims, who
are accountable only to their commander, a mujahid is answerable not
only to his commander but also to God.
No mujahid ever ate the flesh of his victim. Crusading Christians did.
They ate the flesh not only of their Muslim adversaries but even of the
Christians of the Eastern Church who did not join them. No Muslim
burnt Jews on stakes or in gas chambers. Westerners did. Muslim rulers,
on the contrary, offered sanctuary to Jews oppressed by Christians.
Moreover, mujahedeen will never cheat on an undertaking. Compare
this with what the Jews, -“Gorion son of Nicomedes, Ananias son of
Sadok, and Judas son of Jonathan did with the Roman commander
Metilius. They assured Metilius upon oath that they would allow safe
passage to the Roman contingent if the soldiers laid down their arms.
“But when, in accordance with the covenant, they had all laid down
their bucklers and swords and with no suspicion remaining, were taking
their departure, Eleazar’s party fell upon them.... Thus brutally
butchered, perished all save Metilius; he alone saved his life by
entreaties and promises to Judaize, even to the point of being
This happened around September 66 C.E and it was Josephus, a Jewish
historian who narrated this story. Ah! But you are ignorant even of your
own history. In contrast, when the Prophet of Islam entered into a
treaty with his foes, he stuck to it in letter and spirit, despite frustration
among his followers. History celebrates this event as the Treaty of
Hudaibiya. And, when he entered victorious into the city of Makka he
declared general amnesty instead of ordering a massacre. That is jihad.
Even today, you may contrast what Pfc. Steven Dale Green and his
companions did to 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, in Iraq, with
how Taliban behaved with the female Christian (Western) journalists,
whom they kidnapped. By your standards Green and his pals were
“civilized” guys and Taliban are “backward.” But the civilized ones gangraped a Muslim girl and then shot her along with her parents, while the
backward Taliban did not ever touch their Christian captives.
One such was Sunday Express reporter Yvonne Ridley. No wonder she
was so enchanted by the conduct of her captors that she took to
reading the Quran, converted to Islam and gave up drinking. You may
turn to the BBC news for the full story.
Indeed, if you sought Divine guidance and tried to learn and
understand the meaning of jihad and the precepts of Islam, you would
feel the change.
By the way your threat that David Yerushelmi has Mr. Usmani in his
“litigation sights” is no news. Shylocks will always drag innocent
Antonios to the court.

As to your challenge, “Bring it on,” it befits you. But Mr. Usmani desires
me to convey to you that in answer to your challenge, he humbly prays
to God that He may guide you to the Eternal Truth and the Straight
path, -that is Islam. Amen!
Dr. Muhammad Akbar