Previous month:
October 2006
Next month:
December 2006

Muslims Can't Handle Criticism

Kesher Talk:

Last week at Brown University, the cutting edge of the Ivy League, a speaker was canceled. Muslim students were too afraid of her to attend her talk and try - if they disagreed - to expose any weakness in her arguments. Unfortunately, this kind of cowardice and repression is is all too prevalent in Muslim organizations, especially on campuses. But in this case the Brown chapter of Hillel - the international Jewish campus organization - and the Brown women's center joined with the Muslim student organization in refusing her a forum. The Hillel Rabbi supported that decision.

What a twit. There's more to the story. From Kesher Talk: "The person who sent me this item [a NY Post story] added:"

This was the result of a very outspoken new Brown Sanctioned Muslim cleric who instilled anger and fear that such a speaker would undermine dialogue between Muslim and non-Muslim groups, and that such a speaker might result in "physical harm to his students who attended this speech".  This in combination with a Hillel Director Serena Eisenberg who choose NOT to encourage her students to stand up, but instead wanted to enpower her students to make their own choices. The result?  In the spirit of respectfulness and cooperation and dialogue, these students choose to cancel Nonie. They choose silence thanks to the leadership of the Hillel Director.

Read the rest.

I Can't Deny

Via Known Unknowns, comes this disturbing result:

What Kind of Reader Are You?
Your Result: Obsessive-Compulsive Bookworm

You're probably in the final stages of a Ph.D. or otherwise finding a way to make your living out of reading. You are one of the literati. Other people's grammatical mistakes make you insane.

Dedicated Reader
Literate Good Citizen
Book Snob
Fad Reader
What Kind of Reader Are You?
Create Your Own Quiz

I'm not an obsessive-compulsive bookworm! I only have 21 books on my bookshelf. I only have six books on my to-read pile. I am only reading through four books. I only read a few hours a day. I only have one book to review.

I do have a life!

*Runs out of the room, crying.*

I Slam Islam

Eteraz writes a post with the title "Self-Flagellating Apostates".

For a moment there I thought he was talking about apostates who're into S&M.

[...] people who come to Islam aren’t the only ones who are excessively obsessed with Islam. People who leave Islam are just as obsessed with the religion. My question is why? Why are apostates all about railing against Islam?

Because Islam is a demented cult built on the hallucinations of a psychotic, thieving, dishonorable, and a genocidal Arab.

Had I come to the West a few decades ago, I likely would have just said, "Good riddance!"; I wouldn't have bothered "railing" against Islam.

Why? Because at the time buildings wouldn't have fallen in NYC, Aussies wouldn't have been murdered in Bali, trains wouldn't have been blown up in Madrid, kids wouldn't have been raped and killed in Russia--the sickness that is Islam and, its evil son, Jihad would have largely been contained in the Islamic domain of the world. The West would have been free and I would have felt safe for myself and the future generation.

That is not the case in the 21st century. Not only have Muslims committed terrible atrocities in the West but many Westerners continue to see a sugarcoated version of Islam. An example: The Canadian province in which I live actually contemplated allowing Sharia law just a year ago!

I don't take pleasure in continually going over a wretched ideology. Just take a look at the categories I use for my blog. I want to write in detail about the Pakistani cricket team and the upcoming World Cup; the bad effects of a minimum wage, either local or global; the symbolic meaning behind the word marathon; how my early years in Lahore were so serene; who should be the villain for Kal-El in the sequel to Superman Returns; link to spectacular HDR images; talk about the motherboards that go well with the Intel Core 2 Duo (look at ASUS and Gateway, by the way) and so on.

I can choose to do all of that and ignore the daily misery that Islam brings. But I know that ignoring it won't make it go away. The war is here and now whether I like it or not. Westerners must be provided clarity on this great issue. That is the purpose of my voice. That is why I blog. That is why I rail against Islam. For it deserves a good railin'.

[...] why are apostates so intent on referring to themselves as apostates!?

Here is my thing: if you leave Islam, please call yourself a “convert to” X or Y, and that’s it. Isn’t it kind of strange that people who leave Islam refer to themselves with the words that Muslims would use to describe people who leave Islam?

Being a murtad or an apostate is part of the identity for an ex-Muslim. A mussulman who becomes a Christian can call himself a convert to Christianity as well as an apostate. Both terms are valid. Somehow, I don't think the rhetoric would bother him as much as the fact that Muslims want to kill him.

In my case, I didn't convert to another religion. Though, I do prefer to say that I reverted to sanity but somehow I don't think it'll catch on.

I understand why coverts-from-Islam do it though. They want to remind all the Muslims that Islam’s got this thing called “apostasy” and that one can be killed for being an apostate, and that Muslims should be ashamed (a sort of passive-aggressive diss intended to shame a believer).

A few points:

1. Some time ago a friend asked me in an email, "Have you ever thought about writing articles or stuff in Urdu?"

I replied: "My writings are directed at Westerners. I get about 2-3 [daily] visits from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on my blog. (Most come from Riyadh where someone almost always searches for "sexy".)

I can write in Urdu but I think that that effort would have little impact. And considering my views, most exclusive Urdu readers would likely shun me."

More broadly: what I write is not aimed at Muslims. I have little desire to remind any Muslim of anything.

2. However, if a Muslim does stumble upon my blog, then s/he should be ashamed when s/he reads about the Islamic view on apostasy (or for that matter most issues). In what moral universe should a Muslim feel happy about the death penalty for ex-Muslims?

3. Eteraz wishes to reform Islam / change the mindset of Muslims while not shaming Muslims?

Best of luck!

4. My dissings aren't passive.

There’s cats out there who are building their entire career on being an “apostate.” (Ibn Warraq). Same goes for bloggers.

Woohoo! I just got compared to Ibn Warraq.

This just in: Starting December 1, 2006, I will charge every reader One Hundred Pennies (*Dr. Evil expression*) for viewing my blog.

It's about time my career pays!

People who leave Islam should become advocates of whatever it is that they now are. This is why I like Razib. He says what he is upfront. Atheist. Bam. He drops the “a” word too, but it doesn’t define him. It’s good to see someone show their autonomy in an affirmative and assertive manner. All this explains why I haven’t bothered to engage the “apostate” critique of Islam.

I understand. You could easily take apart the "apostate" critique of Islam, it's just that you don't have enough space in the margins on your blog to write the devastating fiskings.

I TOTALLY get it, bro!

It’s not that someone who calls himself an apostate regularly can’t have valid critiques. It’s just that a critique without something affirmative thereafter is pure nihilism. I abhor religious nihilism. I equally abhor non-religious versions of it.

This is a most amusing logic.

I have written a few posts in the past days in which I have:

  • disapproved of gender apartheid in Muslim circles.
  • showcased and disagreed with the fact that a Muslim "scholar" openly rejects freedom of religion.
  • strongly opposed the Islam-respects-women view pedaled by feminists.
  • mentioned how the mutaween treat women like cattle.

Now, I think that my readers aren't stupid. (In affirmative-speak, I think they're smart.) So, in each case, the reader can see that I support the mingling of the sexes (gasp!), freedom of religion (astagfirullah!) and the view that Islam treats women like the property of men.

In each instance, the opposition of an Islamic view or ruling isn't nihilism but simple human dignity. I don't have to say that, it's obvious from the context (or so I thought).

The thing is: if the apostate crew are so concerned about the death penalty for apostasy, then why do they insist on continuing to use the evil term at all? Isn’t it the case that the more they refer to themselves as apostates, the more they help to reinforce the already incorrect vocabulary that Muslims are using? I think people who leave Islam should be the first to say: call me convert. That will be of incredibly importance to reformists as they try to do away with the apostasy category altogether.

That is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

Can you imagine this scenario: A man is on his knees about to be beheaded for apostasy. The gathered crowd is about to break into the uncouth Allah Akbar. The executioner raises his sword. The soon to be headless man shouts, "I'm a convert to X!" The butcher is shocked! He lowers his sword to the side, picks up the man and profusely apologizes.

"My bad. I thought you were an apostate."

Later, the public hugs the relieved man for his conversion to X. Everyone goes home happy!


It's not the bloody term that is evil but the fact that Islamic rulings call for murdering those who dare stray away. (A lot of people openly support the killing of Ahmadi Muslims. Oddly enough, those Muslims don't call themselves by the "evil" term.)

[...] people are welcome to leave Islam. They should, however, abstain from calling themselves “apostates.” Instead, they should simply call themselves whatever they are now.

Yes, ex-Muslims shouldn't refer to themselves by a term cooked up by Muslims. That suggestion brought to you by...a Muslim.

Uff, eteraz pe eteraz.

Allah is Insane?

From Egypt:

For the past 35 years or so, our girls were bombarded with the uncontested message that God wants them to cover their hair. Why does he want them to cover their hair? Because he wants so. Case closed. And there is nothing as powerful as the words "God wants so". Consequently, the mind of the girl has been terrorized into believing that she will go straight to hell if she met God with uncovered hair. A girl or woman who doesn't wear the hair cover is regarded as "less Muslim" or a Muslim who is not fulfilling everything the inhabitant of the blue sky requires. I have friends who smoke hash, have sex outside marriage, yet insist on marrying a covered girl because they regard her to be the "one who is following Islam and not missing out a huge requirement such as the hair cover".

"Less Muslim" is a very polite term for a burqa-free Muslim girl. Usually they're called naked or a whore--in public. The Mutaween in Saudi Arabia can arrest a woman who is not "properly" dressed; her owner guardian can take her out after signing a document which states that the woman won't "misbehave" in the future.

The Fitna Feminists


Muslim feminists from around the world vowed to create the first women’s council to interpret the Koran and overcome two stereotypes about their religion: Muslims are terrorists and Islam oppresses women.

The following excerpt doesn't jive with the one above:

Many in the newly formed group, the Women’s Islamic Initiative in Spirituality and Equality, or WISE, said strict sharia law was not divine because it was created by men and should be changed to incorporate women’s rights.

Wait a minute! I thought it was a "stereotype" that Islam oppressed women. One would only need to provide valid information about Islam to counter this "stereotype"--not change the woman-loving Islamic law.

It is inconsistent to call for the modification of the gender apartheid laws of Islam while simultaneously calling the Westerners, who say that Islam is indeed oppressive to women, misguided or uninformed.

Then one realizes that it's mostly about image, anyway:

“Two misconceptions about Islam are that it is associated with terrorism and that Islam is an oppressor of women. These are two myths that we seek to demolish. We need to change the perception of Islam in the West and this cannot be achieved without the participation of women,” said Abdul Rauf.

But, of course.

Baroness Uddin, the first Muslim woman to enter the House of Lords in Britain, agreed that women needed to take control of their own destiny, come together and empower other women.

“If Tony Blair and George W. Bush can get together and go to war, just imagine the power of peace that women can bring,” Uddin said.


The Land of Pure Chaos

Muslihoon wrote two in-depth posts about Pakistan.

Here everything from the ISI to the Pakistan-China cooperation is included.

[...] while Pakistan, per se, is not directly enabling things to get worse, the Pakistani government and military’s unwillingness to do what it takes to completely crush these terrorist networks indirectly enables them to operate with impunity. Furthermore, certain sectors of Pakistan (and, indeed, with the ISI, even the Pakistani government and military) are directly contributing to the resurgence of terrorists.

The second deals with the possible vacuum of power:

The worst case scenario would arise if Islamist generals gain control of Pakistan. This is most possible if they orchestrate a coup or assassination against Musharraf. An Islamist regime would end all assistance to allied forces and may even ally itself with and pledge to assist the Taliban and other Islamist terrorist forces.

That would be a nation of 166 million allying itself with the Islamists. For comparison, the combined population of Afghanistan and Iraq is under 60 million.

The Car-B-Q Effect


A crisis broke out between Israel and France following a United Nations General Assembly decision Saturday night to establish a ‘fact finding mission’ to look into the incident of the killing of Palestinian citizens in Beit Hanoun.

The Frogs are boiling:

The French were furious with the United States' veto on the Qatari proposal to condemn Israel for the Beit Hanoun incident at the UN Security Council last Saturday.

From Vichy to this:

Israeli diplomats have recently begun regarding France as a hostile force in the Security Council as well as the EU.

“It is truly an Arab extension,” one Israeli diplomatic source said.

Thanks to Raccoon for the link.

The Perpetually Enraged Are...Enraged

Holland bans burqa, Muslims enraged.


[...] the Netherlands' immigration minister Rita Verdonk, often called 'Iron Rita' for her tough approach to issues of race and immigration, said in a statement that her cabinet "finds it undesirable that face-covering clothing - including the  burqa  - is worn in public places for reasons of public order, security and protection of citizens".

She added, "From a security standpoint, people should always be recognizable and from the standpoint of integration, we think people should be able to communicate with one another".

The security reason alone is enough. Netherlands is right on this matter. The rest of Europe still has its head in the sand.

Decrypting the DMCA

Electronic Frontier Foundation via HardOCP:

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in New York, Paramount Pictures v. Load 'N Go Video, the MPAA member companies have sued a small business for loading DVDs onto personal media players (e.g., iPod Video) on behalf of customers.

According to the suit, Load 'N Go sells both DVDs and iPods and loads the former onto the latter for customers who purchase both. The company then sends the iPod and the original DVDs to the customer. So the customer has purchased every DVD, and Load 'N Go just saves them the trouble of ripping the DVD. The movie studios' suit claims that this is illegal, because ripping a DVD (i.e., decrypting it and making a copy) is illegal under the DMCA. The suit also claims that this constitutes copyright infringement.

Decrypting a legally-purchased DVD and simply making a copy is illegal? If so, then we end up with this:

Apparently, Hollywood believes that you should have to re-purchase all your DVD movies a second time if you want to watch them on your iPod.

2 + 2 = Islam

Real Islam, an Ahmadi website, offers an illuminating video in which:

The most popular Non-Ahmadi scholar known for his rational and logical approach openly says that the Non-Muslims will not be entitled to the most basic human right of “Freedom of Speech” in an Islamic State.

He goes on to say that that is in no way against human rights.

Muslims don't follow The Golden Rule. This is only the most blatant example of that horrid mindset.

Safety in Gender Apartheid

Shabana Mir:

We play it safe. We play to the tune of the conservatives. The conservatives want segregation: we offer it up. We play conservative roles. We are Other People in our individual lives, but in Official Islamic Spaces, we play the same roles. What else is it to be two-faced? All of us talk to both men and women; all of us shop, work, study, with men and women.

But we go to community spaces and pretend. “Oh no, I don’t see men. I am pure of gender. We have no gender. We have too much gender. We have no sex. We have too much sex in our minds.” Hai hai.

She lives in the United States.

[...] I met up with a woman here the other day. She’s a convert, a beautiful person. She hates the mosque. She hates going to community spaces. The segregation kills her soul. It makes her feel cheated. Why do they do this? It’s not the Islam she learned. The Islam she learned is about love, connection, wisdom, engaging with life in harmony and clarity. It’s about community. It’s about being who you are, no matter where you are. It’s not pretending here, and pretending there. It’s not irrational and obscurantist.

Ignorance ain't bliss.

I remember my days at Indiana, BEFORE women became more integral to the community and MSA. They thought they were playing it safe. The Gulf men and women were happy in “their” community. They didn’t see college kids except for the grad students. They didn’t see any mixed gender socializing, so it wasn’t a part of their world. And the whole time, some young men and women at college were experimenting, playing dangerous games, not a part of their religious community, confused, isolated. Safety was in the masjid, the masjid attendees thought: keeping the masjid “pure” of anything that didn’t belong in Riyadh, keeping the masjid “pure” of America and “American” ways, - and American Muslim kids.

Yes, so much emphasis is put on purity, both spiritual and physical, that one ends up with a stale and insipid community. The "impure" sphere of society is, in stark contrast, dynamic, fresh and bursting with energy.

She [her daughter] will want to know why ammi [mom] is a spare wheel in the mosque, why she can’t contribute to the public sphere in the mosque, why she and ammi are invisible, but abbu [dad] is in the public sphere. Raihana will want to know why the mosque has 1/3rd of the men’s space for women. Why, when women AND children mostly share that space? I counted the musalla spaces in the mosque the other day. It was about 30+ for women, and 100+ for men. Now this is not a “sister-we-are-helpless” issue: this is a structural feature that we have CONSTRUCTED.

Yup. It's mighty tough to blame the Jews for this one.

Early Releases for Islamists

Herald Sun via Western Resistance:

ALMOST 60 jailed Islamic extremists linked to such atrocities as the Bali bombings have been set free. They include 14 terrorists who have been quietly released in the past two months.

Many of those who walked free in October and this month had at least two months cut from their sentences under Indonesia's justice system.

The largest Islamic nation in the world is making sure that the price for mayhem and murder remains low.

Costly PS3

TG Daily:

According to iSuppli, Sony could spend $840.35 to purchase and assemble the hardware for the 60 GB Playstation 3 and $805.85 for the 20 GB model during the fourth quarter of this year. These numbers compare to retail prices of $600 for the 60 GB version and $500 for the 20 GB PS3 and reflect premiums of 40 and 61%, respectively. The manufacturing cost does not include shipping, a share for the retailer who actually sells the device and marketing cost, which typically are in the range of 5 to 10% of revenues.


Our War

Theodore Dalrymple on Islam:

As for its attitude toward polytheists and atheists, it is and has always been doctrinally abominable. In other words, Islam has nothing whatever to say to the modern world, and as yet has no doctrinal means of dealing constructively with the inevitable diversity of human religion and philosophy, beyond the violent imposition of uniformity or second-class citizenship.

And in the process killing human creativity.

What He Said


Nevada’s senators _ both winning leadership posts in opposite parties _ pledged Wednesday to stay close on issues of mutual interest, but not too close.

“He and I just like each other, and I think we set a good example here in the Senate,” Majority Leader-elect Harry Reid said of colleague John Ensign, who was chosen Wednesday by Senate Republicans to head their campaign fundraising operation.”

He’s a Republican, I’m a Democrat, we work together on issues that are important to the state of Nevada. And I wish other people had the same nonaggression pact we have,” Reid told reporters. ”It’s not a ‘Brokeback Mountain’ situation,” he added, referring to last year’s film about two gay cowboy lovers.

Harry Reid: "John Ensign, I can quit you."

John Ensign: "Slut!"

Link via Protein Wisdom.

The Dark Mind

It's not comforting to read something so explicit and utterly deprave from a Muslim in the United States:

Muslims, let me just tell you that integration and blending in with them [Americans] isn't always good. Most of the time it isn't. For someone to pass you by and not know whether you're Christian or Muslim or Jewish is one thing. Some classical scholars said don't even blend in with them in dress. But then to turn around and shave off all facial hair completely, campaign for an office in the political system of disbelief, hide your religion from the voters, support gay rights, and then to do so in a government that is openly killing Muslims is obvious kufr. Forget what I say, look at what classical scholars say. You participate in a system giving rule to human beings above or in place of Allah, you're committing acts of kufr, and if you know this and do it anyway then you're an apostate to be executed when caught.

There are no words.

Either Keith Ellison knows this or he doesn't. Once he knows, he needs to step down, even if he'll be replaced by someone openly against us. Once he knows and does not step down or openly advocate Shariah rule for the Muslims, he's an apostate. Might as well go to the synagogue and become Jewish.


A Sign of Progress

There is a movement towards amending the wretched Hudood Ordinance of Pakistan that has been in place since 1979. Glenn Reynolds:

Of course, not everyone is happy: "Addressing parliament on Wednesday, the leader of the six-party MMA Islamic alliance, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, said the bill would 'turn Pakistan into a free-sex zone'."

Mr. Rahman is a barbarian. It's nice to see civilization trying to assert itself.



We could "rescue" every oppressed Afghan woman who wants asylum by simply opening our doors to all female refugees from Afghanistan, and any other regime that doesn't afford full civil rights to women.

The message to patriarchal regimes: Keep this up, and we'll take all your women and children. Heck, if you don't knock off this tinpot dictator shit, we'll take all your scientists, all your engineers, all your doctors, and all your journalists--regardless of gender! Our gain, your loss.

The West is already taking in a lot of scientists, engineers, and doctors from the Muslim world. These people have one thing in common--they're all educated. Unfortunately, most of the women are not and it is they who truly need help.

Imagine their life: Likely illiterate and life revolves around the immediate and extended family. If someone in their circle is abusive in any way, then they rarely bring the matter into public view. Why? They don't have any alternatives and the all-important honor cannot be tainted.

Seeking asylum could possibly make the situation more deadly. The time lag between applying for asylum and getting the decision would be enough for the abuser and the family to get rid of the dishonor.

Do understand, I think that the idea is valid if implemented correctly and however many women the West can save is a moral good; I just don't think that the most oppressed women would be able to or want to utilize it.

I was thinking about how life is like for these largely uneducated women when Saudi Arabia came to mind. I think that women there are entering college in larger numbers than men. So, we have a situation where women can understand and take use of the mentioned refugee rules, right?

Not so. You see, women can't drive in Arabia. Plus, they need written permission of their male guardian to travel--and when they do so, they must have a male companion with them. Even though these women might well know about Western asylum laws, it would be mighty hard for them to simply arrive at an embassy.

In the Eye of the Inferno

Old War Dogs:

I'm going to have to be secretive about how I ended up with this but I still hope you'll take time to read it and learn a little more about how one of John Kerry's idiots (Columbia University, Class of '04) has been spending his time. I think you'll enjoy it.

I sometimes played cricket with my friends in Saudi Arabia. The temperature would often rise up to the high 40s. I remember once we all decided to stop the game and go home at around 10:30 a.m. because it was too damn hot.

Still, it could have been worse: Kuwait. Every time I watched the weather report of the Middle East, Kuwait would top the charts. We're talking about 48 to 50 degrees Celsius. The feeling one gets in 45+ is something like a headache + nausea + sensing the brain is being cooked.

It is thus quite impressive to see US soldiers in full gear in that frying pan.

Indecent Umma

The Daily Times:

The second-highest figure in the Church of England waded into the row over Muslim veils, saying they did not conform to “norms of decency” in Britain, in a newspaper interview published on Monday. Doctor John Sentamu, the archbishop of York, questioned whether Muslim women should expect public acceptance for wearing the veil in Britain.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Soon, the West will have to face most of the Muslims and tell them to stop on all these matters:

  • A full-face veil for women.
  • The, in effect, house arrest of females.
  • Physical punishments for kids.
  • Cousin marriages.
  • Sharia by increments.

Link via Dhimmi Watch.

The Land of Mordor

Saudi Jeans:

Saudi Arabia is terribly misunderstood, by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Let's see how enlightened we are at the end.

For many Westerners, Saudi Arabia is such a big mystery. They don't understand it. They don't know much about it. They know we have oil, much of it, and they think we charge them a lot of money for that, which is not true because we don't really control prices.

Really? OPEC can change the price of oil because it controls most of the supply. Saudi Arabia is, by far, the biggest member of OPEC.

It is astonishing how multiple tides of foreigners who flooded our country after and during the oil boom have failed to understand and/or open up our society.

Question: How can they open up your society? Unless, by "open up" you mean to put light on Saudi society. In that case, I've written a few posts. Also see this famous entry at Rants and Raves by a guy who lived in Saudi Arabia.

Most of the foreigners in Saudi Arabia are third country nationals (TCNs). Their workload is often harsh. I highly doubt that they would have the luxury to sit down and "open up" the Saudi culture to the world. Plus, why would they want to spend their little precious free time discussing such a depressing topic?

I don't know whose idea was to build residential compounds for foreigners where they can live behind high walls and closed gates. It was a cleaver idea in the past probably, but it had some very negative implications.

A few points on this matter:

  1. If Saudi society wasn't so xenophobic, then these mostly infidel foreigners could live outside.
  2. A foreigner can't own property in Saudi Arabia. What do you want these smart kaffirs to do? Rent apartments and move practically every year when the landlord jacks up the rent!
  3. The Muttawa, the religious police, are not to be found in the residential compounds. The foreign guys and gals can wear shorts (gasp!) in the summer without being physically assaulted by a Dark Age merchant.
  4. Have you not noticed the numerous times terrorists have tried to murder these infidels? The compound allows the regime to have cameras at every signal and check everyone at the entrances. Not to mention that the mini-city is protected by radar and what seemed to me to be surface to air missiles. Overall, I think it still is a "cleaver" idea.

More from Saudi Jeans:

The way many Muslims view this country as the model Islamic state has given the wrong impression to some Saudis that, considering the place of their country, they are better Muslims than the rest of Muslims in the world.

More like the rest of humanity.

With all this stereotyping, many of us find it very difficult to accept criticism, not even from ourselves, let alone from others.


Gul Returns


And though it doesn't happen as much as it should - especially when a batsman scores a near double century - for once a bowler got the match award and richly deserving Gul was too.

Two years ago, Umar Gul won the match award for his spectacular performance against India in Lahore. He seemed to be the next awesome bowler from Pakistan. Unfortunately, shortly afterwards, his back had three stress fractures. He was off cricket for a year. He has been back for a while and now he's at his peak, and his love affair with Lahore continues.

Badmash Desi

Umar Lee has discovered the super-secret world of desis. He talks about an incredible scene outside a club and asks a vexing question:

What I can comment on is the fact that a Muslim girl refused to take of her hijab at this event but got drunk and shook her ass on the dance floor, can anyone explain the logic of that one to me?

Islam ain't big on logic.

Many Muslim girls in the West have to counter the retrograde views in their circles. They know that they'll be called worse things than "uncovered meat" by the moronic males around them. So, they cover themselves with a hijab but in practically all other aspects follow an infidel lifestyle. The hijab acts as street-cred (or a "don't rape me" sign) within the umma--it says nothing about how Islamic the woman really is.

Still, it is odd that the pious lady would keep her hijab on in that environment. Perhaps, she wasn't wearing fashionable clothes or maybe she didn't want to risk losing the hijab.

Anyway, Lee's story reminded of this experience: During my first year in university, I came across a Muslim girl who was chatting on the phone. She was talking to her younger sister. Like a good Muslima, this girl was telling the little sis about neutralizing the smell of alcohol on her breath. Wouldn't want Abu and Ammi to know, now would we.

A few days later in the cafeteria, this same gal was pontificating about her order. A guy standing next to her said, "Try the beef burger, it's good."

She refused by saying, "It's not halaal."

I almost burst out laughing.