Newborns at a Khan Younis hospital need special care.

Gravestones at the Srebrenica genocide memorial

The other day I saw a Twitter post about the ongoing genocide in Gaza by a local doctor who was asking where all the human rights advocates were, the “moral architects” who “wept in Bosnia [and] marched in Darfur”. It made me write a short thread about the differences and similarities between the two situations. I was a teenager while the war in Bosnia was going on in the early 1990s, and I was not Muslim then (I converted in 1998). There is also a legal effort going on in the UK to revoke the proscription of Hamas, which makes it an offence not only to raise funds for them or for the organisation itself to operate here, but also to use words indicating support for them and such things as wearing their emblems. This has led to an outpouring of contempt from the Tories and the right-wing commercial media, with one of the lawyers asked how he slept at night on GB News over the weekend. There is no chance of the appeal succeeding, but it has at least opened up debate.

The atrocities in Bosnia were regularly reported in the press and on TV. There was no Internet to speak of in the early 1990s (it was only opened to public access in 1991; most people did not even have dial-up Internet, blogs were ten years away and social media fifteen), so the “mainstream media” as we now call it was the media. We saw footage of emaciated men behind barbed wire, we heard stories of camps where women were held and raped by Serb militiamen, some of whom had recently been their neighbours. The siege of Sarajevo, and later of Srebrenica, Žepa and Goražde, were in the news regularly, along with atrocities such as the Sarajevo bread queue massacre and the snipers who picked off civilians in the street from positions in the mountains. Later, the outright genocide at Srebrenica, a designated “safe area” (the UN had pointedly refused to call it a safe haven) in which men and boys from the captured town were taken away, under the noses of Dutch UN peacekeepers for “war crimes screening” and then massacred; this was the incident which finally prompted western military action agains the Serbs which allowed the Bosnian army to make advances and free long-besieged enclaves such as Bihać in the north-west of the country. Throughout the war, there was public support for military action to stop the atrocities, expressed in demonstrations, letters, opinion columns and calls to radio shows; the government was resolutely opposed, refusing to even allow Bosnian refugees in. Some of the people calling for action were prominent politicians, including Margaret Thatcher. The pressure was contemptuously rebuffed; “everyone knows you don’t interfere in a civil war” was the refrain. An arms embargo was in force, resulting in the Bosnian army being unable to maintain its supplies while the Serbs got theirs from Russia. This was all very well-known.

Back then, the Gulf War was a recent memory and there was still a certain amount of confidence in the power of humanitarian interventions, that a short intervention (that was always the word used, never war or invasion) could check the power of a tyrant (or overthrow him) and stop mass murder. At the time, there were two “no-fly zones” in Iraq where Saddam Hussain’s air force was banned from flying in order to protect the Kurdish and Shi’ite Arab minorities he had been persecuting. That was the Middle East; if we could do that in Iraq, surely stopping a genocide in the mountains of eastern Europe were well within our capabilities. While at university, when I did have Internet access, I recall a posting on a Usenet newsgroup by a woman who said she had received a letter from the government, on House of Commons headed paper, telling her that there would be no intervention on the side of the Muslims in Bosnia as their aim was to secure “Christian Europe”. I did not and still have no way of verifying the posting’s claims, but more recently, we have heard from American politicians such as Bill Clinton who said that European leaders expressed exactly this sentiment: that a Muslim state just didn’t belong in Europe and they had no intention of intervening to bring one about. However, British troops did serve (if ineffectively for most of the war) as UN peacekeepers and were not tarnished by the failure to protect civilians at Srebrenica; some individuals went to fight for the Muslims, not all of whom were Muslims themselves. We were free to speak about the situation and no side was off limits as a result of being classified as terrorists.

There have, of course, been protests against the genocide in Gaza. Politicians have gradually moved from blunt refusals to acknowledge that Israel is doing anything but defending itself to half-hearted demands that they obey international and humanitarian law, knowing full well that they have no intention of doing so. The mainstream media’s spectrum of opinion runs from open support, with flat denial that it is genocide, to a fearful omertà, every mention of genocide being met with a mandatory statement about Israel’s right to self-defence (eighteen months into an onslaught against civilians) and the matter of genocide being under consideration by the International Criminal Court, as if the matter was going to be decided by a jury rather than a panel of expert judges. There has been the same policing of ‘antisemitism’ as dictated by the same Zionist ‘mainstream’ Jewish organisations and the same newspaper columnists that led the campaign to destroy the Labour party during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership; there have been numerous incidents of people being told not to display ‘antisemitic’ posters, such as those comparing Israelis to Nazis, or arrested for calling Asian politicians coconuts, and one march on a Saturday was banned because a synagogue was nearby, while the protesters bend over backwards to avoid blaming the Jewish community.

However, the protests have been timid in terms of their demands. There is no call for military action, despite this being the only way to arrest a genocide. The Holocaust was ended when the allied armies captured the concentration camps; the Rwanda genocide ended when the Rwanda Patriotic Front routed the Hutu Interahamwe; the genocide in Bosnia ended when the international community finally stepped up after Srebrenica. Perhaps the reason is partly that the anti-genocide protests are partly led by the same anti-war forces as the 2003 anti-war protests who have an instinctive distrust of western military intervention, but without other Arab countries lifting a finger (Egypt, most obviously), I fail to see any other avenue. Yes, there were abuses by American forces especially during the recent wars, but they did not approach the viciousness or the death toll of Israel’s in 18 months. The only forces resisting Israel’s genocide are Hamas and the three other small armed factions in Gaza itself. An aspect of the history of genocide that isn’t often acknowledged is that a genocide can be arrested, or at least resisted, by forces whose other behaviour is unsavoury; the Red Army, in between raping their way across eastern Europe, liberated a number of the Nazi death camps while even the collaborationist fascist regimes either refused to submit Jews to Hitler’s ‘resettlement’ plans (as with Franco), or stopped once they learned that ‘resettlement’ meant murder. Rwanda’s forces under Paul Kagame have committed atrocities during their involvement with the civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Winston Churchill was known for breaking strikes in the UK and for colonial policies that caused famines in India. The list goes on.

We don’t have to support Hamas as such, or excuse their past behaviour (not only the suicide bomb tactic; they have long served the interests of the Israeli hard right, and both sides oppose any meaningful peace process) to acknowledge that they are currently the only people offering the slightest protection to Palestinians in Gaza from Israel’s murderous intentions. It shouldn’t have been left to them, or indeed to any local faction, to save mostly innocent people from a nation that cares nothing for human rights, as seen in the West Bank before and during the Gaza genocide, and thinks nothing of bombing hospitals, ambulances and tents and sniping children in the head. That is on the international community and the rulers of the Arab world. But the appeal to de-proscribe Hamas in the UK should succeed, because they are doing now is not terrorism; it is the defence of their people, and people should be free to say so, as they did the last time a genocide was being broadcast into our homes daily.

Finally, among the repeated reminders of past Jewish victimhood the state and corporate media has been drip-feeding us recently, there was a play on Radio 4 the other night called The Film, about the move to film the recently liberated Nazi concentration camps in 1945 (the lead characters are the director Alfred Hitchcock and future Granada TV founder Sidney Bernstein). I listened to it as long as I could tolerate, but there was a section where one of the two held the whole German nation culpable for the camps that were all over the place and which they said everyone knew about. If a nation is culpable by just doing nothing, living in a police state, what can we say about a community not dragooned by a police state that actively cheers a genocide on? A community whose schools inculcate children to support Israel regardless of a worsening human rights record or outright genocide, a media that issues propaganda for Israel, sowing false doubts and blaming victims of atrocities, the student groups that do the same, the mass letter-writing campaigns to silence criticism of Israel, the smear campaigns against any Muslims who achieve positions of influence (e.g. Shaima Dallali), the demands that they not be reminded of Palestinian existence (such as by children’s artwork), and most recently the doxing of anti-genocide protesters who are legal immigrants to the US immigration police. Of course, not every individual Jew is responsible for the crimes of the state of Israel and some actively oppose them but there are whole sections of it, major community organisations and mainstream community leaders, who fully support Israel’s genocide. If you are helping Israel’s settlers, snipers and other thugs and mass killers with propaganda and intimidation, you are no better than they are and it’s time you were treated as such.

Image source: Michael Büker, via Wikimedia. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licence.

Possibly Related Posts:

• The Drumlanrig jolly
• Why people are deserting the BBC
• Elephant in the echo chamber
• Reflections on the fall of Bashar al-Assad
• The benefits of learning Jewish history

Reading Time

• Summary Transcript: ~7 minutes
• Full Transcript: ~36 minutes

Learning Objectives

• Understand the significance of starting the day with the Sunnah of Fajr and its role in spiritual growth.
• Learn the appropriate duas for entering and exiting the masjid and their spiritual benefits.
• Explore the rewards of staying in dhikr after Fajr until sunrise and performing two rak’ahs of prayer.
• Recognize the importance of diversifying acts of dhikr, including dua, Qur’an recitation, praise, and reflection.
• Comprehend the virtues and timing of the Duha prayer as a valuable mid-morning act of worship.
• Identify the steps to erase sins through good deeds and the role of consistent repentance in spiritual refinement.
• Discover the types of good deeds, such as salah, fasting, and dhikr, that help purify the soul and bring one closer to Allah.
• Learn how to transform daily responsibilities into acts of worship through sincerity, honesty, and compassion.
• Understand the purpose and benefits of a midday nap (qaylula) in supporting physical and spiritual productivity.
• Appreciate the balance between worldly duties and spiritual practices as a framework for a fulfilling and meaningful life.
• Reinforce trust in Allah’s mercy and forgiveness, emphasizing the value of sincere repentance.
• Develop a practical, structured approach to daily worship and reflection, inspired by prophetic teachings.

Class Summary

In our fast-paced world, maintaining a meaningful spiritual practice can be challenging. Yet, the teachings of Islam provide us with a clear roadmap to balance worship, repentance, and daily responsibilities. Below, we explore timeless guidance inspired by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and classical scholars on organizing your day for spiritual growth and connection with Allah.

Begin Your Day with Purpose: Fajr and Early Morning Practices

The day starts with the Sunnah of Fajr. The Prophet, peace be upon him, taught that praying the Sunnah of Fajr at home before heading to the masjid is a highly rewarding act. Following this, one should engage in dhikr (remembrance of Allah) while walking to the masjid and make duas asking for Allah’s mercy and blessings.

Upon entering the masjid, say, “O Allah, open for me the doors of Your mercy,” and as you leave, ask Allah for His bounty. These simple acts align your heart with the purpose of the day ahead. Additionally, after the Fajr Salah, remaining in dhikr until sunrise and praying two rak’ahs can bring rewards equivalent to Hajj and Umrah.

The Power of Reflection and Dhikr

Morning dhikr is a cornerstone of spiritual focus. Spend this time alternating between supplication, Qur’an recitation, and reflecting on Allah’s blessings. Diversifying your worship helps maintain engagement and keeps the heart attentive. Allocating even a few moments for gratitude and contemplation can set a positive tone for the day.

Embrace the Virtue of Duha Prayer

The time between sunrise and midday is an opportunity for further spiritual enrichment. The Duha prayer, often referred to as the “forenoon prayer,” carries immense rewards. It serves as a substitute for charity on behalf of every joint in the body and symbolizes taking a pause from worldly distractions to remember Allah.

The Gift of Repentance: Erase Your Sins with Good Deeds

No one is perfect, and Islam acknowledges our human frailty. The Prophet, peace be upon him, taught that when we commit a sin, we should follow it with a good deed, which erases the sin. This can be as simple as praying, fasting, engaging in dhikr, or even shedding tears out of fear of Allah. Repentance is not just about seeking forgiveness; it is a continuous return to Allah, a sign of sincere faith.

Practical Tips for Balancing Worship and Work

Daily responsibilities are also acts of worship when approached with sincerity. Whether working, learning, or caring for others, performing these duties with honesty, trust, and kindness transforms them into acts of ibadah (worship). Adding a midday nap (qaylula) can help recharge energy for nighttime prayers, but balance is key—moderation in sleep and work leads to productivity in worship.

Conclusion: A Roadmap for Spiritual Connection

By structuring your day around acts of worship, reflection, and good deeds, you create a routine that brings you closer to Allah. The Prophet’s example reminds us to remain steadfast in prayer, consistent in repentance, and mindful of Allah’s blessings in every moment. This balance between spiritual and worldly commitments ensures a meaningful and fulfilling life.

Incorporate these practices into your daily routine to nurture a deeper spiritual connection, stay grounded in gratitude, and continuously draw closer to Allah. May He guide us all on the path of righteousness. Ameen.

Full Transcript

In the English translation, at least the first part of it is the inner secret of worship. Insha’Allah, we have been discussing the last portion of this segment, which is the adhkar—making dhikr and making dua. Last week, if you remember, we went through the different segments of the day, which Imam al-Ghazali, rahimahullah, divided into multiple segments, about seven of them.

Early Morning Worship and the Sunnah of Fajr

We covered the first one, which is the early time of the day, before even Fajr Salah. We discussed what dua and what adhkar need to be mentioned. Now, we will continue, insha’Allah, with that portion, bi’idhnillahi azza wa jal, starting from what he said to remind ourselves about what was covered—these supplications and words of remembrance.

Bismillah, let’s proceed. Bismillah wa salatu wa salamu ala Rasulullah, salallahu alayhi wa sallam. The author, Imam Ibn Qudama, rahimahullah, says: Before he sets out for the morning prayer, Salatul Fajr, he should pray the Sunnah prayer at home. After that, he heads towards the masjid and says this dua:

Alhamdulillahi rabbil alameen wa salallahu wa sallam wa baraka nabiyyina Muhammadin wa baraka. Imam Ibn Qudama, rahimahullah ta’ala, says that before setting out for the morning Salah, Salatul Fajr, one should pray the Sunnah prayer at home. Where is this derived from? It is taken from the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, who would typically perform tahajjud. When he was done with tahajjud, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, he would wait until he heard the adhan. When Bilal, radiallahu anhu, would call the adhan, the Messenger of Allah would pray two light rak’ahs—rak’atani khafifatan—because he had spent the night praying tahajjud.

Resting Before the Iqamah

When it came to the Sunnah of Fajr, he made them light. He would then go to the masjid, rest on his right side, and wait until Bilal came to call him for the iqamah. That resting position, after the Sunnah of Fajr and before the iqamah, is noted by Imam Ibn Hazm, rahimahullah ta’ala, as being mandatory, though others differ on this.

The Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, had Bilal call him, and he would go out to pray Fajr directly. It was also reported that there should be no prayer between the Sunnah of Fajr and Fajr Salah unless one arrives at the masjid and prays Tahiyyat al-Masjid. If someone decides to pray extra rak’ahs at this time, it is not recommended.

The Virtue of Sunnah and Fajr Salah

The Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, said that the two rak’ahs of Fajr are better than this world and all it contains. Moreover, when the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, traveled, he would not pray Sunnah except for the Sunnah of Fajr and Witr. Besides that, he would forgo other prayers until returning home.

The Supplications for Walking to and Entering the Masjid

So, after praying Sunnah at home, one should head to the masjid. On the way, one can say the following dua: “O Allah, I ask You for the blessings of this walk and that You do not allow me to walk in arrogance, hypocrisy, or vanity. I seek Your pleasure and refuge from Hell.”

However, scholars note that this hadith is considered weak due to certain statements. For example, the phrase “I ask You by those who ask You” has been critiqued as lacking proper adab with Allah. No one imposes upon Allah any obligation. Rather, He, subhanahu wa ta’ala, places obligations upon Himself out of His mercy. Despite the weak chain of narration, the general meaning of the dua is beautiful and worth reflecting upon.

When entering the masjid, one should follow the Prophet’s guidance: “When any of you enters the masjid, he should send blessings upon the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, and say, ‘O Allah, open for me the doors of Your mercy.'” And when exiting the masjid, one should say, “O Allah, I ask You for Your bounty.” These duas are appropriate for the moments they are recited. Upon entering, one seeks Allah’s mercy, and upon leaving, one asks for provision and blessing in their daily affairs.

Securing a Place in the First Row and Performing Adhkar

After entering the masjid, strive to secure a place in the first row and recite dhikr and supplications while waiting for the congregation. This assumes one arrives early, as recommended, to gain the khayr available between the adhan and the iqamah. Additionally, after Fajr Salah, it is encouraged to remain in the masjid in dhikr until sunrise. Anas, radiallahu anhu, narrates that the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, said: “Whoever prays Fajr in congregation, then sits in remembrance of Allah until the sun rises and prays two rak’ahs, will have a reward like that of Hajj and Umrah.”

The condition for this reward is praying Fajr in congregation. However, for women praying at home, it is hoped that Allah will grant them a similar reward if they remain in their prayer area and engage in dhikr. The essence of this practice is consistency and presence of heart. Remaining in one’s place fosters focus and a deeper connection to the act of worship.

The Four Types of Dhikr After Salah

The Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, emphasized that dhikr can take many forms: dua, recitation of Qur’an, reflection, and praising Allah. It is essential to diversify acts of worship to maintain engagement. If one has an hour until sunrise, divide the time between morning adhkar, Qur’an recitation, dua, and reflection. Organizing one’s time ensures a balance between spiritual and practical responsibilities.

The Time Between Sunrise and Mid-Morning (Duha)

The duties of the day continue with the time between sunrise and midday. During this time, one should strive to combine both spiritual and practical responsibilities. First, engage in making a living if required. Whether you are a merchant, laborer, or professional, ensure that your work is marked by honesty, trust, and care. Work with sincerity and compassion, remembering that your profession is also a form of ibadah when done with the right intention and conduct.

The Importance of Consistent Repentance

Now, turning to the importance of consistent repentance (tawbah): The hadith of the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, teaches us to follow a bad deed with a good one, as this will erase it. This is emphasized in the verse, “Establish Salah at each end of the day and in the first part of the night. Good deeds erase bad deeds.”

This hadith teaches us that righteousness is not defined by being free from sin but by returning to Allah with sincerity after committing a mistake. Continuous repentance is a sign of faith. The Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, assured that Allah forgives those who genuinely seek His forgiveness, even if they repeatedly fall into the same sin. This is demonstrated in another hadith where Allah says about a person who sins and seeks forgiveness repeatedly, “My servant knows he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for them. I have forgiven him.”

Acts of Worship That Remove Sins

For example, a companion who struggled with alcohol repeatedly faced punishment for public drunkenness. When another companion cursed him for his repeated offenses, the Prophet intervened, saying, “Do not curse him, for he loves Allah and His Messenger.” This demonstrates that while we may struggle with certain sins, our love for Allah and sincerity in repentance keep us within His mercy.

Additionally, consider that good deeds themselves can erase sins. Acts like Salah, dhikr, fasting, and crying out of fear of Allah are all means to purify oneself. The Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, described that praying between the prescribed Salahs erases the sins committed in between. Fasting out of faith and seeking Allah’s reward also cleanses sins. Hajj, performed sincerely, removes all prior sins. Similarly, dhikr such as saying “Subhanallah wa bihamdihi” a hundred times a day can erase sins as numerous as the foam on the sea.

Concluding Reflections on Worship

In conclusion, the teachings of the Prophet, salallahu alayhi wa sallam, and the practices of the righteous predecessors provide a structured way to balance worship, repentance, and daily responsibilities. Organizing one’s day around acts of ibadah, combined with a focus on sincerity and consistent repentance, ensures spiritual growth and proximity to Allah. As we navigate our daily lives, we should strive to remain conscious of Allah, seek forgiveness for our shortcomings, and engage in good deeds that bring us closer to Him.

May Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala make us among those who listen to the speech and follow the best of it. Ameen.

Q&A

1. What is the first act of worship recommended at the start of the day?
   • The Sunnah of Fajr, prayed at home before heading to the masjid.
2. What dua should be recited when entering the masjid?
   • “O Allah, open for me the doors of Your mercy.”
3. What dua should be recited when exiting the masjid?
   • “O Allah, I ask You for Your bounty.”
4. What reward is associated with staying in the masjid after Fajr until sunrise and praying two rak’ahs?
   • A reward equivalent to Hajj and Umrah.

5. Name the four types of dhikr that can be practiced in the morning.
   • Dua (supplication), Qur’an recitation, praising Allah, and reflection (tafakkur).
6. Why is diversifying acts of worship important?
   • It keeps engagement high and ensures attentiveness in worship.

7. What is the significance of the Duha prayer?
   • It acts as charity for every joint in the body and is highly virtuous.
8. When is the best time to perform the Duha prayer?
   • Mid-morning, during the busiest part of the day.

9. What should one do immediately after committing a sin?
   • Follow it with a good deed to erase it.
10. What are some examples of good deeds that erase sins?
    • Salah, fasting, dhikr, repentance, and crying out of fear of Allah.
11. What did the Prophet, peace be upon him, say about those who repeatedly seek forgiveness?
    • Allah forgives those who genuinely repent, even if they fall into the same sin multiple times.

12. How can daily responsibilities be transformed into acts of worship?
    • By performing them with sincerity, honesty, trust, and kindness.
13. What is the purpose of taking a midday nap (qaylula)?
    • To recharge energy and make nighttime prayers easier.

14. How does the Prophet’s guidance help structure daily life?
    • It provides a balance between spiritual duties and worldly responsibilities, ensuring spiritual growth.
15. What should one always remember about Allah’s mercy?
    • It is far greater than our sins, and sincere repentance is always accepted.

The post Study Classical Texts the Traditional Way | Session 30 appeared first on MuslimMatters.org.

Her smile was visible even behind her niqab as she weighed my bags at the check-in counter, the souvenirs from Makkah making them slightly heavier than allowed. “Han’adeeha,” she said, meaning “I’ll make an exception for you,” her young voice warm and friendly, eyes crinkling above the black fabric that concealed the rest of her face.

This small mercy from someone who perhaps understood the significance of the journey I had just completed felt like a final blessing, an umrah that, in an attempt to cleanse my soul, had now, apparently, earned me a reprieve from excess baggage fees. Allah’s Blessing, I reflected, manifests in unexpected ways, sometimes through the kindness of strangers.

As she processed my check-in, I noticed her discreetly reach for her personal phone below the counter after tagging my bags. With practiced subtlety, a movement likely invisible to less observant travelers, she angled her device toward my passport, then toward her screen, capturing images without comment or explanation. I caught a glimpse of her sliding the phone lower, likely taking my photo as well. Nothing in her demeanor acknowledged this surveillance; it was simply part of an invisible protocol, an unspoken routine.

I’ve come to recognize these moments. Many travelers remain unaware that airline staff often use unofficial WhatsApp groups on personal devices for rapid intelligence sharing, creating shadow systems of surveillance that operate alongside official channels. These digital breadcrumbs follow you from checkpoint to checkpoint, discussed in messaging groups beyond any oversight.

Then, as if confirming my suspicions about what was happening beneath the surface of our interaction, the boarding pass slid from the printer with four innocuous letters that made everything clear: SSSS.

Secondary Security Screening Selection.

She hadn’t flagged me herself; these systems operate beyond individual control, algorithmic machinery grinding beneath the surface of human interaction. Her kindness regarding my luggage was genuine; the system’s suspicion equally so. I deliberately ignored the SSSS designation, maintaining the same cheerful appreciation for her help with my overweight luggage. I smiled, thanked her again, and walked away with my heart already accelerating, though a calm voice inside reminded me: the One who had protected me through my journey to the holy lands would surely protect me through whatever indignities awaited. Still, the duality of this moment crystallized a fundamental contradiction in our security apparatus: the human face of bureaucratized suspicion, the velvet glove on an iron fist.

The Algorithmic Architecture of Discrimination

To truly understand the SSSS designation is to comprehend not merely a security protocol, but an intricate system of social control disguised as protection. This is not hyperbole; it is structural analysis. The enhanced screening selection process operates through multiple vectors of surveillance:

PC: Timeo Buehrer (unsplash)

Government watchlists constructed through often questionable intelligence merge with travel patterns deemed suspicious (one-way tickets, cash purchases) without contextual understanding. National origin and travel history become proxies for threat assessment, while algorithmic flags built on biased training data reproduce and amplify existing prejudices. This system represents not random selection but targeted surveillance masquerading as objective security. Its genius—and its danger—lies in its opacity. There exists no meaningful oversight, no pre-travel appeals process (Pre-TSA and Global Entry may not always work), and no transparency regarding selection criteria. The burden of proof is inverted: you must prove your innocence rather than the system proving your guilt.

When administrations change, particularly when one with explicit nationalist or racially biased tendencies takes power, these systems become weaponized with frightening efficiency. Historical data bears this out: during the Trump administration, CBP detentions of travelers from majority-Muslim countries increased dramatically following the implementation of Executive Order 13769, commonly called the “Muslim Ban,” which barred entry for nationals of seven Muslim-majority countries and suspended refugee admissions. This order, which sparked national protests and legal challenges over religious and national origin discrimination, was later superseded by Executive Order 13780, which maintained many of the same discriminatory provisions while adding more waiver guidelines.

The institutionalization of bias continued with Executive Order 13815, which restarted the refugee program with new, stricter “extreme vetting” procedures. While the Biden administration formally revoked these policies on January 20, 2021 (Proclamation Ending the Muslim Ban, 2021), the underlying infrastructure remained largely intact.

This represents a critical insight: the infrastructure of surveillance doesn’t require rebuilding; it merely needs recalibration. The architecture remains, only the targeting parameters shift. This explains the rapid implementation of discriminatory practices following administration changes; the foundation was already laid, waiting only for new operators to turn theoretical racism into practiced policy.

The Empirical Failure of Profiling as Security

The evidence is not merely suggestive but conclusive: profiling based on race, religion, or national origin fails as security methodology. This statement is not ideological but empirical. Behavior detection programs typically show “limited basis in science” and cannot be proven effective. The Government Accountability Office (GAO), which has been the government’s official watchdog since 1921 (yes, long before DOGE and today’s tech billionaires discovered government waste), has repeatedly criticized the TSA’s behavior detection program (SPOT) for lacking scientific validation. A 2013 GAO report recommended limiting funding until TSA could prove the program works, and a 2017 follow-up testimony noted that while TSA had revised and reduced funding for SPOT, it still lacked scientific evidence for its effectiveness.

TSA’s behavior detection techniques are no better than random chance, with less than 0.01% of flagged travelers posing actual security threats. The “hit rate” for finding genuine threats through racial or religious profiling is statistically negligible, while resources concentrated on demographic profiling create dangerous blind spots in security systems.

The security apparatus has constructed what experts term a “classification error” at a massive scale: false positives (innocent people flagged) overwhelm the system while potential false negatives (actual threats missed) slip through precisely because attention is misdirected toward demographic categories rather than evidence-based risk factors. What these systems actually produce is not security but security theater; performative rituals that create the illusion of safety while potentially undermining actual safety. This theater serves political rather than security objectives, a distinction critical to understanding why ineffective practices persist despite evidence of their failure.

The operational inefficiencies of these security procedures are further exacerbated by mismanagement within agencies like Customs and Border Protection (CBP). A 2022 DHS Office of Inspector General audit found significant evidence of poor operational controls and mismanagement within CBP. Additionally, the technologies supposedly supporting these security efforts often fail to function properly. Reports from 2024 found that nearly one-third of surveillance cameras on the U.S.-Mexico border were not working, highlighting the gap between the perception and reality of border security.

Does any of this actually help with security? The clear answer is no; it’s not reasonable, and it doesn’t truly help with security. Targeting people based on race, religion, or ethnicity creates a false sense of security while distracting from real threats. It wastes resources on innocent people while allowing actual risks to go unnoticed because they don’t “fit the profile.”

Data consistently shows that racial profiling leads to more false positives without improving the success rate of detecting genuine security threats. Beyond its ineffectiveness, it damages trust and cooperation with communities that could otherwise be allies in crime prevention efforts. People become less likely to report concerns or cooperate when they feel unfairly targeted.

The Multidimensional Trauma of Targeted Communities

For those bearing the weight of these policies, the impact transcends mere inconvenience, constituting a form of state-sanctioned traumatization that operates across multiple dimensions. The uncertainty principle becomes weaponized; never knowing if you’ll be detained, for how long, or why, creating a persistent state of anticipatory anxiety. This manifests as clinically significant symptoms: hypervigilance, sleep disturbances, concentration difficulties, and intrusive thoughts. Many develop what psychologists identify as “secondary traumatic adaptation”,  modifying behavior, dress, speech patterns, and even names to avoid triggering the system. It creates a profound spiritual contradiction that weighs on the soul.

My faith teaches tawakkul, complete reliance on Allah’s Protection and wisdom, yet the system forces me into a state of perpetual hypervigilance. I find myself caught between two realities. In one, I surrender to divine protection with absolute trust. In the other, I must constantly scan for threats, monitor my speech, curate my appearance, and anticipate others’ suspicions. This duality fragments the spiritual cohesion that the pilgrimage had just restored. It requires me to simultaneously inhabit contradictory states of being: trusting in God’s plan while strategizing against man’s prejudice.

The public humiliation functions as a disciplinary mechanism, reinforcing outsider status. Being singled out for scrutiny communicates a powerful subtext: “You do not belong here. Your presence is provisional.” Travelers describe the emotional impact in devastating terms: humiliation and shame from being searched, interrogated, or treated like criminals in front of others strips away dignity. Anger and resentment simmer, not just toward the officers, but toward the country or system they believed in. Many stop talking about these experiences out of embarrassment or fear, which leads to emotional suppression and disconnection from community support.

The body bears witness to this trauma as well. Long detentions, jet lag, missed flights, and sometimes lack of restrooms, all take a physical toll. Those with chronic conditions may be denied access to medication or medical support during lengthy questioning periods. The physical discomfort or violation of patdowns, bag searches, and digital strip-searches (phone and laptop scrutiny) can feel invasive, violating both bodily and digital autonomy. Stress hormones flood the system during these encounters, cortisol and adrenaline spiking with each additional security layer. Over time, this stress response becomes chronic, contributing to documented health disparities.

The material consequences cascade beyond the immediate encounter. Detentions and missed flights affect job opportunities, school admissions, and professional reputations. Some are denied visas or re-entry unjustly. Families watching their loved ones being mistreated suffer too, with children sometimes growing up fearing travel or resenting their parents’ countries of origin. Legal fees, rescheduled flights, or dealing with lost work days can lead to real financial strain. Most profound is the existential impact; what philosopher Frantz Fanon identified as the “ontological insecurity” of being perpetually suspect. The question becomes not merely “Will I be detained?” but “Am I ever truly a citizen? Will any amount of compliance ever be sufficient?”

The Coerced Complicity of Community Members

The most sophisticated aspect of this system is how it transforms potential resistance into reluctant participation. The young woman in niqab who printed my boarding pass embodies this contradiction, simultaneously part of a targeted community yet participating, however unwillingly, in the machinery targeting her own. This represents not personal failure but structural coercion operating through multiple mechanisms.

This dynamic raises a painful question: why would Muslim employees, themselves part of a targeted demographic, participate in the security apparatus targeting their own community? The answer lies not in individual moral failure but in structural coercion. At the individual level, employees face job pressure and fear of retaliation if they fail to comply with security protocols. Many feel trapped: “If I don’t report this person, I might be next.” Over time, even Muslim employees can internalize the biased security narrative they’ve been trained in, unconsciously beginning to see their own community through the lens of suspicion.

“The most insidious aspect of structural oppression: fracturing solidarity within targeted communities by forcing members to participate in systems that harm their own.” [PC: Charles de Luvio (unsplash)]

The mindset becomes particularly complex for employees from Arab or Muslim backgrounds working in airlines like Qatar Airways or Turkish Airlines. These companies, despite being based in Muslim-majority countries, frequently flag passengers who share their employees’ faith and cultural background. The question becomes even more pointed: why would airlines from Muslim and Arab-majority countries flag their own people?

The answer reveals multiple layers of power dynamics. Airlines from Muslim-majority countries flag their own people not out of loyalty to them, but out of political pressure, business interests, and fear of being targeted themselves. To comply with U.S. and Western security demands, airlines like Qatar Airways, Emirates, and Turkish Airlines must follow U.S. rules, even outside U.S. soil, sharing passenger data, implementing “enhanced screening” protocols, and sometimes adopting U.S.-style watchlists. They face a stark choice: protect passengers’ dignity or protect profits and partnerships. Business almost always wins.

Some governments in the region (especially those with authoritarian or Western-aligned leadership) want to appear cooperative with the West, even at their citizens’ expense, fearing being labeled as “harboring extremism” or losing favor in international intelligence-sharing networks. Major airlines, often state-owned or state-backed, view international approval as strategic currency affecting not just tourism but foreign investment, diplomatic relations, and trade deals. Flagging a few “suspect” passengers becomes a sacrifice to maintain broader global access.

Perhaps most revealing is that just because a passenger is Arab or Muslim doesn’t mean the system sees them as worthy of protection. Class, citizenship, and politics often matter more: a Qatari citizen may be treated better than a Syrian or Palestinian refugee; a Turkish diplomat’s child may fly through security while a Turkish activist is flagged. It’s not about shared faith or identity; it’s about power, image, and alliances.

At the personal level, some employees feel they must overcompensate to prove they’re not biased or are “loyal” to the institution, going harder on their own community to avoid suspicion themselves. Power dynamics and ego sometimes play a role, where individuals with limited power use their authority to feel important, especially if they’ve felt marginalized. Not all frontline workers realize that the system they’re upholding is flawed or discriminatory. They see themselves as doing their job, following instructions, and checking boxes, without understanding the impact.

This represents the most insidious aspect of structural oppression: fracturing solidarity within targeted communities by forcing members to participate in systems that harm their own. The young woman in niqab who processed my check-in was not my opponent, but my fellow captive in a system designed to divide us.

The Strategic Political Utility of Discriminatory Security

If empirical evidence consistently demonstrates that these practices fail to enhance security, why do administrations, particularly those with explicit bias, embrace them? The answer reveals the actual function of these systems: not protection but political utility. This utility operates through distinct mechanisms that serve specific political objectives beyond the stated purpose of security.

Security theater provides tangible evidence that the administration is “protecting” supporters from exaggerated threats, creating what political scientists call “performative governance”, policies designed not for effectiveness but for visibility and emotional resonance with core supporters. Economic anxiety, healthcare concerns, and social instability get redirected toward visible “others,” employing what rhetoricians identify as “transfer” technique, attaching negative emotions from complex systemic problems to simplified human targets. Creating an atmosphere where certain communities feel perpetually observed modifies behavior beyond direct encounters with authority. This produces what philosopher Michel Foucault termed the “panopticon effect”: self-regulation due to the possibility of surveillance, even when no actual surveillance is occurring.

Administrations empower such policies not because they are effective, but because they serve political, ideological, or strategic purposes. Harsh immigration or security stances often play well with certain voter groups driven by fear, nationalism, or misinformation, a way to show they’re being “tough” and “protecting the homeland,” even when the policies are misguided. Blaming immigrants or minority groups for economic issues, crime, or cultural shifts diverts attention from policy failures or deeper systemic problems by giving people a target. A stricter security apparatus creates an atmosphere of fear and obedience, sending a message, especially to marginalized communities, that dissent or deviation from the norm will be punished. This becomes a tool of authoritarianism.

Some administrations have staff or advisors with strong nativist, anti-immigrant, or even white supremacist views. They see immigration and diversity as threats to their idea of national identity and use policy to shape the country in their image. Once these policies are in place, they can be hard to undo. Empowering DHS, CBP, and TSA with unchecked authority weakens civil liberties, which can be used later to suppress a broader range of dissent or opposition.

Historical data reveals the pattern clearly. During the Obama administration, DHS focused resources on specific threat profiles rather than broad demographic categories, resulting in a reduction in secondary screenings while maintaining security protocols. The Trump administration reversed this approach with a 2017 executive order explicitly targeting seven Muslim-majority countries and internal CBP memos expanding “discretionary screening” protocols. The Biden administration partially rolled back these policies with Executive Order 140121, which called for the review and removal of barriers in the legal immigration process, but maintained much of the infrastructure. The administration also emphasized more humanitarian approaches through Executive Order 140102, which directed DHS and the State Department to examine the root causes of migration from Central America and improve asylum access.

Now, with security policies shifting again under new leadership, we see the pendulum swinging back toward demographic profiling. An executive order issued on January 20, 2025, required intensified security vetting of any foreigners seeking admission to the U.S. in order to detect national security threats. This order led to considerations of expanding travel bans to dozens of countries with “deficient vetting and screening information.” Although these orders did not explicitly instruct other countries to tighten their security measures, the implication was clear: to maintain their citizens’ access to the U.S., these nations needed to comply with enhanced security and information-sharing requirements. The resulting increase in SSSS designations for travelers from specific regions in just the first quarter of 2025 demonstrates how quickly these policy shifts translate to real-world impacts on targeted communities.

Perhaps most concerning is how temporary political movements embed their worldview into permanent structures through policy changes, personnel appointments, and procedural modifications that outlast administrations. This transforms fleeting political power into enduring institutional bias. The suffering of targeted communities becomes not an unfortunate byproduct but a central feature of the system, demonstrating the administration’s commitment to exclusionary governance. This suffering is the point; visible evidence that the machinery of the state has been turned against those defined as outsiders.

Control Through Fear and the Politics of Division

The political utility of discriminatory security extends beyond mere performance for supporters. It serves as a sophisticated mechanism of social control. By creating an atmosphere of fear and suspicion, it discourages dissent and political participation from targeted communities. Those constantly worried about their status or safety are less likely to engage in civic activities, organize politically, or challenge existing power structures. This suppression of political engagement serves to maintain existing hierarchies and prevent challenges to authority.

Discriminatory security also functions as a wedge issue, deliberately dividing the population along racial, religious, and ideological lines. By framing certain communities as inherently suspicious, it creates an artificial binary: those who belong and those who don’t. This division makes coalition-building between different demographic groups more difficult, preventing unified opposition to policies that might otherwise face broader resistance. The polarization serves political interests by ensuring that base supporters remain loyal through fear while potential opposition remains fragmented.

The Human Enforcers: TSA and CBP Officers as Players in the System

At the frontlines of this security apparatus stand the individual officers: the human faces of an inhuman system. Their participation in this “game” of security theater is neither uniform nor simple. To understand why CBP and TSA officers participate in practices that harm innocent travelers requires examining the spectrum of mindsets that exist within these agencies.

Some officers genuinely believe in the mission. They’ve internalized the post-9/11 security narrative so completely that they see their role as the crucial barrier between America and potential threats. Their training has convinced them that certain demographic profiles legitimately correlate with risk, and they view their scrutiny not as discrimination but as necessary vigilance. They take pride in their thoroughness and view travelers’ discomfort as an acceptable price for national security. “Better safe than sorry” becomes the mantra that justifies any level of intrusion.

Others participate with clear awareness of the system’s flaws but feel powerless to change it. These officers often experience significant cognitive dissonance, recognizing the ineffectiveness and injustice of profiling while following protocols that require it. They are officers who whisper apologies while conducting searches, who roll their eyes at having to confiscate innocuous items, who try to make the process less humiliating through small kindnesses. Officers who know that this isn’t what they signed up for, but they need this job. Many in this category develop coping mechanisms; focusing on procedural correctness rather than outcomes, mentally separating their personal values from their professional actions.

“For policymakers with explicit bias, the calculations are coldly political, they view certain communities as acceptable collateral damage in service to larger political goals.” [PC: Claudio Schwarz (unsplash)]

A third category includes those who find personal satisfaction in exercising authority over others. For these officers, the security checkpoint becomes a realm where they wield near-absolute power, if only temporarily. Psychological studies have repeatedly demonstrated how quickly humans can become corrupted by authority, particularly when that authority is exercised over “othered” groups. These officers may linger over searches, ask unnecessarily intrusive questions, or deliberately delay travelers they find “suspicious” or simply annoying. Their behavior often escalates when they sense resistance or when they believe their authority is being questioned. The lack of meaningful oversight or accountability structures within these agencies enables this abuse of power.

Perhaps most troubling are officers who openly harbor racist or xenophobic views and find in TSA or CBP a legitimate outlet for these prejudices. Internal investigations and whistle-blower accounts have exposed text messages, social media posts, and workplace conversations revealing deeply concerning attitudes within segments of these agencies. Under biased administrations, these officers often feel emboldened, sensing tacit approval from leadership for more aggressive enforcement targeting certain groups. One former CBP agent described a culture where “certain accents or names would trigger extra scrutiny” and where “making jokes about travelers from specific countries was normalized.”

The different perceptions among officers sometimes manifest in how they interact with travelers. There are situations in secondary screening where two officers conducted the same process with markedly different approaches: the first was mechanical and cold, avoiding eye contact, treating the traveler as an object to be processed; the second maintained a professional but human demeanor, explaining each step, acknowledging the inconvenience, preserving dignity within an undignified process.

The system creates perverse incentives that reward certain officer behaviors. Performance metrics often prioritize processing speed and “compliance” rather than actual security effectiveness or respect for travelers’ rights. Officers who flag more travelers or find more prohibited items (however harmless) may receive recognition, while those who focus on treating travelers humanely risk being seen as “soft” or inefficient. The culture within these agencies often discourages questioning protocols or raising ethical concerns, creating an environment where “going along” becomes the path of least resistance.

When administrations change, particularly when one with xenophobic tendencies takes power, subtle shifts occur within these agencies. Memos circulate emphasizing “heightened vigilance” toward certain groups. Training materials are revised to expand “suspicious indicators.” Officers who might have exercised discretion in favor of travelers suddenly find themselves under pressure to demonstrate stricter enforcement. Those with predispositions toward bias feel validated and emboldened, while those with more moderate views face the choice between compliance and career consequences.

The mindsets behind these systems vary dramatically based on one’s position. For policymakers with explicit bias, the calculations are coldly political, they view certain communities as acceptable collateral damage in service to larger political goals. For career security officials, the mindset often involves professional detachment, viewing travelers as risk categories rather than individuals, and procedures as merely protocols rather than experiences with human impact. For officers on the ground, perspectives range from those who embrace discriminatory policies to those who implement them reluctantly, believing they have no choice.

For travelers from targeted communities, perceptions of these systems vary based on personal experience, religious outlook, and resources. Some adopt a fatalistic view: accepting discrimination as inevitable and focusing on survival strategies. Others maintain righteous anger, documenting abuses and challenging the system at every opportunity. Many, like myself, find ourselves navigating between faith in divine protection and practical strategies for minimizing harassment.

What unites all targeted communities is the recognition that these systems operate not from evidence but from prejudice, not from security necessity but from political expediency. This understanding forms the foundation for resistance, for refusing to accept discriminatory treatment as normal or necessary.

The Moral Imperative of Resistance

As I walked away from that check-in counter, boarding pass in hand, I recognized that the young woman in niqab and I were both caught in this machinery, her as reluctant enforcer, me as perpetual suspect. This realization demands not resignation but resistance. The system thrives on normalization, the acceptance that certain communities must endure degradation for collective “security.” This premise must be rejected categorically. The question is not how to make discriminatory security more palatable but how to dismantle it entirely in favor of evidence-based approaches that enhance actual safety without sacrificing fundamental rights.

For those not directly targeted, moral clarity demands action: bearing witness to these realities rather than averting your gaze, using privilege to document and challenge discriminatory practices, and refusing the comfortable fiction that these systems protect rather than harm. For those within targeted communities, the path requires strategic resistance: documenting encounters through formal complaints, building community support systems to mitigate trauma, engaging legal and advocacy organizations to challenge systemic abuses, and preserving dignity through refusing the role of compliant subject.

When my name was called for special screening before boarding, I stood, conscious of the public spectacle being created. The process unfolded with mechanical predictability: the enhanced pat-down, the explosive residue testing. I felt a profound calm, the certainty that Allah’s Protection surrounded me regardless of what this system demanded.

Toward Justice and Human Dignity

The journey home from sacred spaces should not lead through the machinery of suspicion. Yet, for many of us, it does. Perhaps there’s wisdom even in this; a reminder that the peace of sacred spaces exists alongside the struggles of everyday life, that our faith must withstand not just the ease of worship but the trial of worldly systems. In recognizing this reality, and in refusing its legitimacy while maintaining trust in a higher protection, lies the first step toward a security paradigm that protects all by degrading none.

True security comes not from performative screening or algorithmic suspicion but from justice, dignity, and the recognition of our shared humanity. It comes from systems built on evidence rather than fear, on targeting genuine threats rather than entire communities. For those not targeted, the call is clear: Witness this reality. Speak against it. Recognize that a system that violates the dignity of some ultimately diminishes the humanity of all.

Resistance as Survival: The Way Forward

For those of us from targeted communities, navigating these systems is not merely a question of convenience. It is a matter of survival, dignity, and collective liberation. Our path forward demands both intimate, personal resistance and bold, collective action.

“True security comes not from performative screening or algorithmic suspicion but from justice, dignity, and the recognition of our shared humanity.” [PC: Mike Von (unsplash)]

Individually, we must perfect the art of dignity preservation. This means refusing with unwavering resolve to internalize the system’s judgment of our worth. When the SSSS appears on our boarding passes, when our bodies are searched, when our loyalty is questioned, we must recognize these actions for what they are: reflections of a flawed system, not reflections of our value. This internal fortification is not passive acceptance but active resistance. It is a refusal to surrender the sanctuary of our self-perception to the machinery of suspicion.

Yet individual resilience alone cannot dismantle structural oppression. Collective resistance becomes our oxygen, our sustenance. We must meticulously document every discriminatory encounter, building an irrefutable record that transforms isolated incidents into recognizable patterns. We must organize across ethnic, racial, and religious lines, recognizing that though the targets shift, the machinery remains constant. We must engage strategically with legal systems designed neither by nor for us, yet which contain tools we can repurpose for justice. Community healing circles, know-your-rights workshops, rapid response networks; these become our infrastructure of resistance.

The human elements within this system reveal critical pressure points for change. The TSA officer who refuses to make eye contact while conducting a “random” search knows what they’re participating in. The CBP agent who apologizes in a whisper while confiscating your phone recognizes the moral compromise they’ve made. These moments of human recognition, these fleeting acknowledgments of the system’s cruelty, reveal the fractures where resistance can take root.

Most telling are the encounters with officers from our own communities. The Black TSA agent who overcompensates with harshness toward fellow Black travelers, desperate to prove his allegiance to the system. The South Asian officer who slips into subtle solidarity through an extra moment of explanation, a discreet nod of understanding, recognizing the parallel between your experience and her family’s. The Latina agent mechanically following protocol while avoiding eye contact, the weight of her community’s similar scrutiny hanging between you. These interactions expose the system’s most insidious success: forcing the oppressed to participate in their own oppression.

These officers face impossible choices daily: between feeding their families and maintaining moral clarity, between professional advancement and community solidarity, between the safety of conformity and the risk of resistance. Understanding this complexity doesn’t excuse harmful behavior but illuminates the sophisticated machinery that transforms potential allies into reluctant enforcers.

In this recognition lies a profound opportunity. When we see these officers not as natural enemies but as potential collaborators trapped in impossible positions, we expand our vision of resistance. The most powerful challenge to unjust systems often comes from those working within them who choose, in critical moments, to bend rules, look away, warn, or whisper truths they’re not supposed to share.

Our resistance must therefore be as sophisticated as the oppression we face. It must operate simultaneously at the level of personal dignity, community solidarity, institutional challenge, and alliance-building with those inside the system whose humanity remains intact despite enormous pressure to surrender it.

This is not merely a strategy for survival but a reclamation of what these systems seek to destroy: our belief in the possibility of justice, our capacity for solidarity across difference, and our fundamental recognition of each other’s humanity.

The young woman in niqab at the check-in counter and I exist in the same system, both navigating its contradictions. Her kindness and the system’s cruelty coexist not as paradox but as evidence of the fundamental truth: human dignity persists even within structures designed to deny it. And above all, divine protection remains constant—whether manifested through the kindness of a stranger, the strength to maintain dignity under scrutiny, or the clarity to see these systems for what they truly are. This persistence is not merely resistance—it is the foundation upon which more just systems will eventually be built.

 

Related:

– Surveillance, Detentions And Politics of Fear: Managing Kashmir The Palestinian Way

– WATCH: Bloomberg Claims Mass Surveillance Of American Muslims Was “The Right Thing To Do”

1    Executive Order 14012, Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Inclusion for New Americans. (2021, February 2). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/05/2021-02563/restoring-faith-in-our-legal-immigration-systems-and-strengthening-integration-and-inclusion-efforts2    Executive Order 14010, Creating a Comprehensive Regional Framework to Address the Causes of Migration. (2021, February 2). https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-14010-creating-comprehensive-regional-framework-address-the-causes

The post The Theater Of Security: How Kindness And Cruelty Coexist At Our Borders appeared first on MuslimMatters.org.

Academy issued weak statements after Oscar winner was attacked by Israeli settlers.

A small demo against the Gaza genocide outside the closed Allders department store

Anyone remember the “Chav craze” of the early to mid 2000s? Early on in this blog’s history I wrote a piece called “Cursing the Darkness” which looked at websites dedicated to slagging off the poorly dressed kids who hung around some town centres; a site called ChavTowns allowed people to describe the ‘chavs’ in their town, or any town they liked (that site, and its parent site ChavScum, have long since disappeared). Croydon, the town in south London where I grew up, had an entry which described its main shopping centre as a “pikey temple” (using a racial slur for travelling people and lumping the two different types of people together), full of McDonalds and Burger Kings (which was inaccurate although there is a McDonalds, as there is in most town centres). All the websites which sprung up at that time, with names like Glasgow Survival, Sheppey Scum and Chatham Girls, are now defunct but the craze nowadays is YouTube videos focussed on everything that’s wrong with a place now compared to its golden age 40 or 50 years ago. 50 years ago, Croydon was a thriving retail centre which had a fairly new shopping centre which was busy on a Saturday and had few or no empty units. Nowadays the mall in question is a sad sight, with dozens of empty units, only a handful of big names still trading there, and whole sections cordoned off because of unsafe structures or leaky roofs. But who do the YouTubers blame? Immigrants, of course.

Croydon has been a diverse place as long as I’ve been alive. It’s South London. Old-timers will insist it’s Surrey, but it’s been part of Greater London since 1965 and was Surrey in name only before then (it was a county borough, i.e. county and district in one as were many big towns and cities). The southern part of the borough were always affluent and white; the north had big Black and Asian communities with the shops and places of worship that go with that. While Croydon’s affluent south was and remains “true blue” Tory, the north is nowadays a safe Labour seat and the central seat is marginal. Sadly, times have not been kind to Croydon, especially central Croydon. The borough put all its eggs in the retail basket, allowing an extra shopping centre to open the other side of the main shopping street from the Whitgift Centre, the bustling mall shown in the 70s footage. As well as Allders, a homegrown department store on six floors which had been around since the 1860s and at one point was Britain’s third-biggest department store behind Harrods and Selfridge’s and was the centrepiece of a nationwide chain, it had a House of Fraser, a Debenhams and an M&S, and was expecting a John Lewis to follow once Westfield opened up one of its shopping centres there. Then online shopping happened, and department stores suffered because although they offered “retail therapy”, people who just wanted to buy stuff found it easier to order it online, where you didn’t have to hunt through concession sections but could simply search for the garment you wanted in the size and colour you wanted. Then the 2010 Tory government happened, stripping local authorities of funds; then Covid happened, which resulted in the hotels some councils had invested in becoming unviable. Westfield and John Lewis never showed up; Allders and Debenhams went out of business or moved online, and Croydon council went bankrupt.

The videos, however, hold up Croydon’s woes as a sign of how Britain has declined, or been taken over by immigrants, or how society has gone to the dogs since some mythical golden age rather than as a result of the decline of the High Street more generally. One video included footage of the Whitgift Centre in the 1970s and pointed out that women in Croydon still wore skirts in the 70s and weren’t feminists. Mostly, however, the focus is on the apparent preponderance of Black and Asian people in Croydon now compared to in the past. Footage of groups of young Black men just hanging around (especially at night), various people (never white) acting ‘crazy’ with the suggestion that they are immigrants, a guy praying in an island in the middle of an empty dead-end road at night. Basically, people minding their own business, but because they’re not white, that’s scary. Then there is footage of areas with a lot of ethnic shops and Black and Asian customers going about their business, and that too is presented as a sign that they’ve “taken over”.

Having grown up in Croydon, I know there’s a lot to like about it. The town centre with its ugly concrete mini-skyscrapers has been widely derided since the 1960s but it is probably one of London’s greenest boroughs, with enormous acreage of public parks, some of it only walking distance from the town centre and most of it within an easy walk from anywhere anyone lives and an easy bike or bus ride for pretty much anyone else. Back in 1999, when I arrived back from spending two months of the summer in Cairo, I came across a letter in the Croydon Advertiser, opining that “the whole rotten apple needs condemning”; I wrote back saying that anyone who thinks Croydon is bad should spend some time there, where it’s hot all year round and it has a fraction of Croydon’s (let alone London’s) park acreage (they printed it). Most of it is every bit as safe as any other town of its size; there is the odd violent incident, but this doesn’t make it an “urban jungle” or “stab city” — the incidents make headlines precisely because they are not common. I once told an American friend that there had been a record number of stabbings in London that year, and the number was a fraction of what happened in her city (and as the average person cannot get hold of a gun, shootings are rare).

As for comparing it to the Bronx, that is also ludicrous because the Bronx is one of New York City’s five boroughs (London has 31) and roughly a sixth of the land area of New York City with a population of nearly 1.5 million (compared to Croydon borough’s population of 385,000), and while it does have a rough reputation, that stems from some of its housing projects in the south while the borough as a whole is very diverse, with richer and poorer neighbourhoods and it includes a zoo and botanical garden (which includes a tract of ancient woodland) and several universities. So if you lumped Croydon in with Sutton, Kingston, Merton and Richmond (where London’s botanical garden is located), it might merit that comparison. To call Croydon “the Cronx” because of a few stabbings and what you consider too many brown faces is an ignorant, racist slur on both places.

Possibly Related Posts:

• Axel Rudakubana is guilty, and nobody else
• Musk, Goodwin, racism and rape
• The benefits of learning Jewish history
• Racist thugs on the rampage
• So much for “war on the NIMBYs”

Emergency physician says the practice of medicine is at odds with Israel’s goal of complete destruction.

Condemning them as ‘sectarian’ is only adding to the clamour that they have no place in the west

A poll suggests that most British Muslims identify more with their faith than with their nation. The head of the Saudi-backed Muslim World League counsels British Muslims to talk less about Gaza and more about domestic issues. Labour MP Tahir Ali is criticised for campaigning for a new airport in Mirpur in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir; he claims the criticisms have led to “Islamophobic” attacks. After push-back, the BBC changes a headline describing converts to Islam as “reverts”, a term some Muslims use to suggest that Islam is the natural state of humankind.

Just a taster of debates about British Muslims over the past week. At the heart of each of these controversies is the question of how Muslims should relate to western societies, and western societies relate to them. For some, the answer is easy. On the one side, many claim Islam to be incompatible with western values and that allowing Muslims to settle here has led to what they regard as the degeneration of western societies. On the other are those who insist there is no issue, and those who raise concerns are bigots. Both are wrong. There are issues about Muslims and integration that need discussing, but those issues are rarely as presented in these debates.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 250 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at observer.letters@observer.co.uk

Continue reading...

When Hamid takes a balloon ride at the Eid picnic, an accident throws all his beliefs into doubt.

[This is part 1 of a two-part story. Part 2 will be published next week inshaAllah]

Too Poor for Tacos

The Eid-ul-Fitr picnic was jumping. Hamid found a spot at a concrete table and sat. The weather was fantastic for Sacramento – sunny and cool – and the park was packed with Muslims. It was a gorgeous spot with mature trees. There were food trucks – the usual shawarma and burgers, but also mini pancakes and smashed tacos, whatever that was, as well as games and rides. Overall, Hamid had to say the organizers had done a fantastic job, mashaAllah.

Parades of women passed by. Teenage Pakistani girls eating snow cones, Arab moms with babies in strollers, Afghan aunties sitting in a circle beneath a tree, chatting. African-American families in elegant, brightly colored clothes. Men standing in the sun, discussing politics and the government’s economic policies.

Hamid opened his messenger bag and took out his musallah, as well as the banana, blueberries, and chips he’d brought from home. There was no way he could pay the crazy prices these food stalls charged. He was a graduate student and teaching assistant. His salary was dirt. Well, alhamdulillah, he didn’t want to deny any of Allah’s Blessings. But still, he was poor. No other word for it. When you’re poor, you know it.

Litter

Someone had left trash at the table, and he took a moment to collect it, along with some used napkins on the ground, and take it to the trash can. Littering at such events was par for the course. It angered him. But he told himself that some of these folks came from countries with inadequate sanitation systems and had never learned to dispose of trash properly. He remembered, from visits to his native Afghanistan, how urban waste was dumped in the streets. They needed to learn how things were done here.

He ate the banana and started on the chips. There were a thousand conversations happening around him, blending into a sound like bongo drummers banging away randomly. A tall Latino brother wearing a turban carried an armful of cold cans of Dr. Pepper, trying not to drop any. Three teenage Afghan boys walked by, and one used a curse word. Hamid hesitated, considering whether he should jump up and grab the boy’s arm and tell him that was not how a Muslim spoke. But the boys were walking quickly, and were soon gone. No matter. He knew the boy’s father and could speak to him later.

The Vanguard

A recent African-American convert wore a thobe, kufi, and keffiyeh. Hamid knew him, he was a video producer, smart and easy to talk to. It was funny how many of the converts dressed more like “Muslims” than the Muslims. More Arab than the Arabs, more Afghan than the Afghans. In a way, Hamid admired them. He had often thought he should dress more traditionally to such events, but some part of him was embarrassed.

But the converts were all heart, they didn’t care what anyone thought. If they had worried about other people’s opinions, they wouldn’t have become Muslim in the first place. They attended all the masjid classes, and some even traveled to the Muslim world to study the deen. They were the vanguard of Islam in America. The future leaders, the beacons. The converts were the spiritual successors of the sahabah. Not the immigrants, nor the second generation like himself. The converts.

He imagined he would marry a convert one day. Who else? Certainly not one of his own people. Afghan women were so materialistic. They were all about the gold, beautiful dresses, Mercedes SUV,s and McMansion in the suburbs. Sometimes, he felt that his people had lost themselves in the transition to the new world. He remembered from his visits to Afghanistan how deeply kind people had been. Not only his cousins, who treated him like a king, but even ordinary people like the barber, shopkeeper, or taxi driver. All had been courteous and generous.

By comparison, the Afghans here in Sacramento often seemed petty, rule-bound, and overly concerned with each other’s doings.

Hamid had no gold or Mercedes SUV, and maybe never would. He was a botany major and would probably work for a food processor when he completed his studies. Or maybe as an agricultural consultant. Or perhaps for the State of California, if he was lucky. It was a decent profession, but not the kind that made a man rich.

Who wanted such a superficial woman anyway? No, give him a convert sister! Once again, they were all heart. Those sisters didn’t care how much money he had. They wanted a man with deen, iman, and a good heart.

A Connection

Oh, what did it matter? The only woman he’d ever loved had been stolen away by his own twin brother, Ali. His former brother, with whom he had no contact and never would. The snake, the traitor. They might share blood, parentage, and even a genetic code, but Ali was the worst kind of backstabber. They hadn’t spoken in two years, and as far as Hamid was concerned, Ali could get sick and die, and he wouldn’t attend the funeral.

A woman with three kids sat across from him at the picnic table. They had some of the smashed tacos, which did not look appealing. One of the kids, a little boy, eyed Hamid’s baked chips and said, “I want chips.”

Hamid poured out the rest of the chips onto the boy’s plate. The boy beamed and began gobbling them down. The mom muttered a quick thanks, but her tone was flat, and it occurred to Hamid that maybe she didn’t want her kid eating chips for lunch. Embarrassed, he packed up his stuff and went to a corner of the park, where he set down the musallah and prayed Asr.

It was during the salat that he had the sudden feeling that Ali was here. Goosebumps rose on his arms. This happened sometimes. He and Ali were identical twins, and yes, Hamid was aware of all the mysticism and nonsense regarding twins, but in this case, this one particular thing was true: he often knew when Ali was near.

He finished the salat and stood. He was tempted to leave. He absolutely did not want to see Ali, and even less to see Hala, the woman Hamid had loved, and who Ali had stolen and married. He did not hate Hala, but seeing her was a reminder of what he could have had. When it came to his opinions about Afghan women, Hala was the exception to the rule. She was unselfish, generous, and sweet-tempered.

To be honest, he wouldn’t have minded seeing his nephew and niece. But there was no way to engineer that without seeing the parents as well.

Chips of Turquoise

He peered about with a feeling of dread in his stomach, looking for Ali, Hala, and the kids. The park was large and crowded, and he did not see them. Only then, however, did he notice that at the north end of the park, bordering the Sacramento River ravine, a group of men and women were setting up a hot air balloon. It was still in the process of being inflated. Wow! He’d always been fascinated by balloons, zeppelins, and blimps. He’d dreamed of traveling to New Mexico one day for the annual balloon festival. Now, there was one right here in front of him. SubhanAllah! He didn’t care how much it cost, he would go up in that balloon!

He began walking across the park, threading his way around awnings and vendor stalls. As he did, he noticed people occasionally staring at him, and sometimes even doing doubletakes. He was used to it, especially in Muslim gatherings. He’d been told he had classically Afghan looks, with a square jaw and long nose, and thick eyebrows, and just over six feet in height. But that wasn’t why they looked at him. After all, he wore jeans and tattered sneakers, and a wash-worn “Free Palestine” t-shirt. He was no icon of good looks.

No, it was his eyes that caught people’s attention. Like some Afghans, his eyes were light, and in his case, they were almost ice blue. So blue they looked like chips of turquoise. Contrasting with his olive skin tone, the eyes caught a lot of people off guard. Hamid found it annoying. He was a curiosity to them. Not a real person with feelings.

Big Magician

He came across a magician doing an act. Hamid studied the spectators, who were mostly kids, for any sign of his niece and nephew. Nothing. He began to relax. His presentiment of “connection” had been wrong before. It might have been nothing more than the breeze coming off the river, blowing on his neck and arms, that had stirred up the goosebumps.

Curious, he watched the magician, a beefy Caucasian man in a purple suit with a curly purple wig. The guy was huge, like a lumberjack. He could have been doing a strong man act rather than magic. He lit a long match, then said, “Like Allah protected Abraham from the fire, He will protect me!” Flourishing the match, he lowered it into his mouth.

What the heck? Hamid thought. Isn’t that semi-blasphemous? He looked around, wondering if anyone else thought this was weird, but the crowd of kids and teens loved it, applauding and cheering.

The hulking magician said, “Just as Eve was created from Adam’s rib, I will bring a woman out of my own body.”

Okay, Hamid had to see this. The magician began to clutch at his ribs, as if in pain. A bulge grew in his side beneath his suit. This was wild. Suddenly, a cloud of purple smoke rose from the stage, obscuring everything. When it cleared, a small woman in a purple abayah and hijab stood beside the magician, looking around in wonder, as if newly born.

“Eve is born!” the magician proclaimed with a flourish.

A Horse Can Be A Horse

Hamid laughed out loud. It was entertaining, he had to give the man that. But definitely weird. Grinning, he walked away. Before he got to the balloon, he encountered brother Omair, a founding member of one of the three masjids participating in this carnival. He greeted him and gave him a quick hug.

“Have you seen this magician?” Hamid asked.

Omair shrugged. “I know. He is a new Muslim. Very recent convert. He promised us that every part of his act would relate to Islam in some way. We didn’t know this was what he meant.”

“Not everything has to relate to Islam you know,” Hamid remarked. “A magician could just be a magician. A horse can be a horse. It doesn’t have to be an Islamic horse.”

Omair looked around. “Are there horses?”

“No. I’m just saying.”

Behind them, the magician said, “Just as the Prophet Moses’s hand came out shining white, watch my hand!”

Omair raised his eyebrows.

“You should definitely do something about that,” Hamid said, and walked away.

Fifty Dollars for Two Minutes

There were no kids in the line for the balloon ride – only teens and adults were allowed, apparently. Which was fine with Hamid. Yet, the line was long. In fact there were three separate lines that merged at the front. The ticket cost a full $50. The ticket seller explained that the ride would last two minutes, not counting ascent and descent.

Fifty dollars was a lot of money, and two minutes seemed very short. But this was a lifelong dream, so he paid and waited in line. As the balloon went up for the first time, its reflective red and blue surface caught the afternoon sun. It looked like a star rising over the river valley. It was enchanting. Hamid found himself grinning widely.

The balloon went up, came down, and went up again. It was held in place by three tether ropes that reeled out on winches as the balloon rose, and retracted as it descended. Hamid noticed that the ride operators only allowed two to three passengers per trip, plus the pilot. If a passenger was alone, they had to share the trip with a stranger. That was fine, he didn’t mind.

He also realized that it would be more than an hour before his turn came. To pass the time, he took out his phone and began studying a PDF on the use of ionized water rinses in the postharvest handling of fruits and vegetables. It was something his team was working on in the lab, and could potentially be profitable for the university if they could develop a marketable product.

Rules and Accidents

He shuffled his feet and moved with the line like an automaton, and when he next looked up from his phone he was near the front of the line. Outside the balloon’s perimeter fence was a sign that read:

Safety Rules

1. No children.
2. Follow the pilot’s instructions.
3. Do not touch the burner or control lines.
4. No pushing, shoving, or horseplay.
5. Do not lean out or sit on the edge of the basket.
6. Do not bring large bags, sharp objects, or loose items that could fall or interfere with controls.
7. No smoking.
8. Stay quiet during ascent and descent so pilot can communicate with ground crew.
9. No intoxicated passengers allowed.
10. Hot air balloons are inherently dangerous. By riding this balloon, you accept all liability for any harm that may result, including and up to injury and death.

Darn. No large bags? Well, there was nothing in his bag but a notebook and pen, a book on postharvest practices, and a box of blueberries. He could leave the bag beside the fence and pick it up later. If someone stole it, he would be unhappy but not devastated.

Rule ten gave him pause: injury and death? Laying it on thick, weren’t they? Yes, as someone fascinated by balloons, he was aware of the infamous Alice Springs accident of 1989. It claimed 13 lives when one balloon struck another’s basket during ascent. The descending balloon deflated explosively and fell 1,000 meters in 51 seconds.

There had been other incidents, one of the most recent being the catastrophic accident over Egypt’s ancient city of Luxor in 2013, that took 19 lives. Investigators found that a fuel leak had caused an explosion, sending the flaming balloon plunging into the Nile River. The crash exposed lax safety standards in Egypt’s balloon tourism industry.

But this was Sacramento, not Egypt, and there was only one balloon here, so no one to crash into.

A Dream Gone Awry

His turn came. The balloon hovered several feet off the ground. Hamid handed over his ticket, climbed up a set of metal stairs, and greeted the pilot, a lean, fortyish woman with gray hair and blue eyes. She looked strong, experienced, and strict. She reached out a hand and helped Hamid into the basket. It swayed slightly beneath his feet, and he put a hand on the wall of the basket to steady himself. The wall was only five feet high, presumably so passengers could have a clear view. Hamid’s stomach turned over, and he thought he might be sick, but he pushed it down. This was his dream.

Thrilled in spite of his stomach’s misbehavior, he studied the balloon’s burner, which was suspended above his head, and the control handle that hung from it, as well as the other miscellaneous controls. He was not paying attention as another man stepped into the balloon.

“Alright gentlemen,” the pilot began. “My name’s Jean. Face me, and let’s go over the safety rules.”

Hamid turned and saw the other man who would be sharing the ride with him. His heart turned to ice in his chest. His eyes widened, and his nostrils flared. The other man in the basket with him was his brother, Ali.

Seeing Ali was like looking into a funhouse mirror that distorted reality and sent back an altered image. In contrast with Hamid’s casual American clothing, Ali wore a beautiful traditional Afghan outfit consisting of a long blue linen shirt, baggy pants, jeweled shoes with curled toes, and a black Afghan hat. Where Hamid had a goatee, mustache, and a bush of curly hair, Ali was clean shaven, with his hair cut short and sharp. Their features, though, were exactly the same. The same olive skin, square jaw, and blue eyes so light they might be holding a piece of the sky.

He raised his hands, waving them back and forth. “No, no, no,” he said. “Not with him. Get someone else. I can’t ride with him, it’s impossible.”

An Ultimatum

The pilot’s eyes narrowed as she looked back and forth between the two brothers. “You look exactly the same. Is this some kind of practical joke? ‘Cause I’ll tell you, I have zero patience for nonsense, and I will kick you both out of this basket before you can say, ‘Heaven help me.’”

Hamid turned his back to his brother, looking only at Jean. “It’s not a joke. Yes, this is my twin brother, but we don’t speak. I cannot ride with him. Let him go next and bring someone else, or let me get out and go next.”

Jean set her jaw. “I run this craft, not you. If you want to get out, that’s fine, but you will go to the back of the line. In fact, why don’t you go ahead and get out, and don’t bother getting back in line. I won’t fly you.”

“I have no problem riding with him,” Ali said.

Hamid felt his mouth go dry as he realized he was about to miss this chance to experience his dream. Licking his lips and swallowing his pride – and it was bitter in his mouth – he said, “I’m sorry. I’m fine too. Forgive me. There’s no problem.”

A long moment passed as Jean considered. Finally, she nodded, glaring at Hamid. “Fine. But not another word of nonsense from you.”

Hamid nodded quickly. “Of course.”

Only Takes One Idiot

“Alright. Now, I’ve been flying these things since y’all were learning to walk and chew gum at the same time. So trust me when I say: it only takes one jackass to kick a hole in a barn door. Don’t be that jackass.

Keep both feet planted, hands inside the basket. If you feel unsteady, sit. No leaning or climbing. You won’t like this next one, but keep your phones in your pockets. There are a lot of people down below. Phones go flying a lot faster than you think, and a falling phone could seriously hurt someone.

This is the burner. Do not touch it. Yes, it makes fire. No, you can’t try it. If you feel heat or hear the roar, that’s me doing my job—don’t panic.
See this red cord? That opens the top vent and lets hot air out. Also not yours to pull.

We’re tethered to three points. The ground crew will keep us stable, and we won’t go higher than seventy feet.

Last thing: this basket is small. Be polite. Keep your elbows in and your temper down. This is not the place to settle scores.”

Again, she narrowed her eyes at Hamid and Ali. “You good? Alright then. Let’s fly.”

Jean pulled on the burner cord. There was a whooshing sound as a tongue of flame shot up from the burner. The envelope – as the skin of the balloon was called – snapped full, and the balloon began to rise, nice and easy.

***

Part 2 will be published next week

 

Reader comments and constructive criticism are important to me, so please comment!

See the Story Index for Wael Abdelgawad’s other stories on this website.

Wael Abdelgawad’s novels – including Pieces of a Dream, The Repeaters and Zaid Karim Private Investigator – are available in ebook and print form on his author page at Amazon.com.

Related:

A Ramadan Quran Journal: A MuslimMatters Series – [Juz 17] Trust Fund And A Yellow Lamborghini

A Wish And A Cosmic Bird: A Play

The post Hot Air: An Eid Story [Part 1] appeared first on MuslimMatters.org.

Israeli bombing turns a celebration into a house of mourning.

How many ways can we say we are starving?

Ahmad Manasra, child prisoner subjected to torture by Israeli jailers, released after 10 years

At 18, Mustafa was told his only way out of prison was to join the regime forces. After 14 years, his past as one of Assad’s fighters could get him killed

By Ghaith Abdul-Ahad. Read by Mo Ayoub

Continue reading...

There is no willingness to learn from past failures.

Israel destroyed the northern Gaza football team’s training complex and killed its players and coaches.

Palestinian American teen gunned by Israeli fire while picking almonds.

Shaista Gohir questions Tell Mama’s use of public funds, creating debate over its role, accountability and future

A leading Muslim peer has called for an inquiry into the Islamophobia monitoring group Tell Mama over concerns about a “lack of transparency” on how it is spending public money.

Shaista Gohir, the chief executive of the Muslim Women’s Network UK, has also accused Tell Mama of failing to provide detailed data on anti-Muslim hate crimes, being “silent” when politicians have targeted Muslims, and questioned whether the Tories used it as a vehicle to monitor extremism.

Continue reading...

We talked about the new documentary “Kids Under Fire,” heard from a nurse on the horrific conditions in Gaza, discussed the latest on Mahmoud Khalil’s court cases and much more.

A monthly digest of key developments in Palestine showcasing powerful images by photojournalists.

Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Sikh women say bill has ‘insufficient safeguards’ to protect those who are vulnerable

The legalisation of assisted dying in England and Wales could create “a new tool to harm vulnerable women”, particularly those subject to domestic violence and coercive control, say female faith leaders from different traditions.

More than 100 women from Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Sikh groups have warned in an open letter that the terminally ill adults bill has “insufficient safeguards to protect some of the most marginalised in society, particularly women subjected to gender-based violence and abuse by a partner”.

In the UK, call the national domestic abuse helpline on 0808 2000 247, or visit Women’s Aid. In Australia, the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the US, the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines may be found via www.befrienders.org

Continue reading...