The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed: October 2023

Monday, October 9, 2023

Familial Disapproval versus the Divine Command

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Familial Disapproval versus the Divine Command.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.

CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Majid Al Kushi - Why do the Followers of The illiterate Prophet cry when we post their resources?!!!

Babatola Emmanuel Abioye - The truth is that certain truths about Islam and the 'holy prophet' hurt Muslims. They call such truths blasphemy, and have shed a lot of blood for it, and are ready to shed more.

Muhammad Rasheed - Babatola wrote: "The truth is that certain truths about Islam and the 'holy prophet' hurt Muslims"

Like what? 🤔

Muhammad Rasheed - The real truth of the matter is that Christians don't know their own religion as well as they should. The flock is unfortunately content to allow the self-serving clergy to spoonfeed them pre-packaged ideology loosely based upon the bible.

If Christians truly studied to show themselves approved as they were commanded, then they would find themselves reverting to Islam in a smooth logical transition.

Majid Al Kushi - M. Rasheed wrote: "Like what?"

like jumping on Aisha the 9 years old. Like lusting after his daughter in law and divorcing her from his son and taking her for himself

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "like jumping on Aisha the 9 years old"

What does the age of marital consent have to do with his prophethood and the religion? It's not even mentioned in the Qur'an. This is one of those items that can quickly become a hypocritical thing for you since it's based purely on subjective cultural norms, so I suggest you tread carefully.

Majid wrote: "Like lusting after his daughter in law and divorcing her from his son and taking her for himself"

You're interpreting the event from the position of an ignorant disbelieving outsider, so how would your opinion matter at all? Zayd was not a blood relation of the Prophet (pbuh) and Allah encouraged the union to enforce His commands about blood ties over friendship ties. Our human traditions treat "step-children" relations as if they are blood, but God said that's not a thing, because it creates unnecessary drama within the inheritance rights.

Majid Al Kushi -

Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.

Muhammad Rasheed - That's the one! lol

Majid Al Kushi - why was he hiding ii

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "why was he hiding ii[sic]"

Because it was human tradition to treat "step-children" as if they are actual blood ties and the Prophet knew that the people would have an issue with it and it would be a difficult sell. Allah revealed that there was no issue since the friendship tie pretending to be a blood tie is unacceptable in His Eyes, so He used the revelation to make the Divine Position clear on the matter, that's why Allah had His prophet go through with it so we would definitively know what the correct guidance about it was with Allah.

Muhammad Rasheed - Allah actually wants us to STOP calling adopted children "sons & daughters" and instead call them by their actual parents' names. If this is not possible, then call them our brothers & sisters in Faith instead.

People have a problem with this, and uphold human traditionalism over the commands of the One God.

Muhammad Smith -

What's your #HardTruth ?

Robert Asmar Pelaez - At least she expose the truth. It’s the sneaky hypocrites. That’s the worst but pork is not as bad as people make it to be. Its just Harram for those who know better. so there may be room for conversation with her about it maybe some intervention invention

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "but pork is not as bad as people make it to be"

God said don't eat it.

Robert Asmar Pelaez - @Muhammad... God also said make it 1000 excuses for your Muslim family but really the only reason I made the comment is because it’s a delicate situation when you’re dealing with your mother. And it’s not the port that’s bad as the disobedience to the Lord of all the world, and she may be innocent of that so there’s a reason for patience.

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "it’s a delicate situation when you’re dealing with your mother"

God also mentions several times to be kind to parents but DON'T let them pressure you into disobedience to God's commands.

Robert wrote: "And it’s not the port that’s bad"

God said not to eat the flesh of swine. It wasn't designed for human consumption. It sounds suspiciously like you eat it all the time and cooked up justifications for your own disobedience. Is this true?

Robert Asmar Pelaez - God also said don’t fornicate he also said don’t drink wine or bad. Things gonna happen, many ways, but life and death means nothing without the obedience of your Lord therefore, if you’re not at fault, and someone like your mother gave pork to them self, or to someone else, that’s not the main issue the issue is to get her on the side of the leash not to argue with her about how bad pork is

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "God also said don’t fornicate he also said don’t drink wine or bad. Things gonna happen"

The guidance is to repent and do it no more.

Robert wrote: "many ways, but life and death means nothing without the obedience of your Lord"

Agreed. God said don't eat it, so don't eat it.

Robert wrote: "therefore, if you’re not at fault, and someone like your mother gave pork to them self, or to someone else, that’s not the main issue"

The point of Bro. Smith's meme, is that a hostile relative made it known that she would disrespect the tenets of your faith. If you send your Muslim child to that household unsupervised knowing this, you are in the wrong.

Robert wrote: "the issue is to get her on the side of the leash not to argue with her about how bad pork is"

The issue is to guard the members of your household from the unrepentant hellbound.

The Holy Relics: Respect-by-Example versus Worship

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "The Holy Relics: Respect-by-Example versus Worship.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.

CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Majid Al Kushi - Jesus is alive today in heaven. Where is the founder of Islam?

Muhammad Rasheed - What an odd question. It is irrelevant where any of the prophets of the One God reside today. What matters is that the One God is watching us all in preparation for Judgment Day.

Majid Al Kushi - Read Quran 46: 9

Muhammad Rasheed - What does that have to do with my point? Even if Jesus is in heaven and it were true that Muhammad (peace be upon the prophets) is in the grave waiting to go to heaven, why would that be relevant to my own faith walk on earth today?

Majid Al Kushi - Muhammad didn't know what is his destinations or Muslims destinations?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why do you follow him??!!!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - lol I don't understand what all the exclamation marks are for. 46:9 is Allah telling His prophet to tell the people that he is preaching the enduring scripture of the ages and not a brand new religion. He's explaining that he is only preaching what was revealed to him by the One God. Just like the Deut. 18:18 prophecy said, Muhammad (pbuh) was only preaching what was put in his mouth by God and nothing extra. That's what 46:9 confirms.

Will you not then believe? Repent and bow down as a Muslim and save your soul.

Muhammad Rasheed - (46:9) Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear."

Muhammad Rasheed - (Deuteronomy 18:18) "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee [Moses], and will put my words in his mouth [i.e., Bismillah]; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

Majid Al Kushi - You better follow the Quran, which tells you about a claimed prophecy attributed to Jesus (a prophet will come after me named Ahmed) show it to me please in the Injeel

Muhammad Rasheed - The "Injeel" mentioned by Allah in the Qur'an was the revelation that the Christ Jesus (peace be upon the prophet) preached during his lifetime. This literature does not exist in the modern day (outside of what Allah quotes from Jesus in the Qur'an).

What the people of the book do have is the Christian version of 'hadith' about Jesus. Perhaps you mean to ask me for something else?

Majid Al Kushi - or the other possibility is Muhammad was a false prophet. He didn't know what he was talking about

Muhammad Rasheed - Why would a "false prophet" tell the pagan Meccans to stop worshiping idols and worship the one God of Abraham instead? 🤔That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

It's far more likely that this false prophet you're looking for was actually Paul of Tarsus, who encouraged people to perform the great sin of worshiping the very human final Hebrew prophet in the line of Isaac (pbuh) alongside the Lord thy God. That's clearly the culprit who deserves the charge.

Majid Al Kushi - He claims revelation, so he had to teach something new to the pagans. But he kept the worship of the black stone

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "He claims revelation, so he had to teach something new to the pagans"

Sure, it was new to the pagan Arabs, but it wasn't a new message. It was the return of the pure faith of Abraham himself (peace be upon him).

Majid wrote: "But he kept the worship of the black stone"

You don't seem to know what "worship" means. No one worships the Black Stone. It's regarded with respect as a relic from the smoking gun catalyst of the Great Deluge of Noah (pbuh), but it's not worshiped.

Majid Al Kushi - Muhammad kissed it during Hajj. He said it will come in the day of judgement and testify on behalf of the Muslim who worships it

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "Muhammad kissed it during Hajj"

So? Did he pray to it, asking it for favors and mercy? lol You need to look up the definition of "worship," bro.

Majid wrote: "He said it will come in the day of judgement and testify on behalf of the Muslim who worships it"

In the Qur'an, Allah said literally everything will be given the power to speak, bear witness and testify, including our very own individual body parts. Does that mean we worship them, too? 😏

Majid Al Kushi - read your answer and judge if it makes sense

Muhammad Rasheed - English is my mother tongue. How about you run it through Google Translate so you don't remain so confused.

Muhammad Rasheed - There were no doubt pagans from the days of ignorance who really did worship the Black Stone. We can reasonably expect the Stone to bear witness against those fools on the Last Day, sure. No Muslim worships it though, so you don't have an argument here.

What else do you have?

Majid Al Kushi - kissing a stone in the most holy place of Islam hoping it will testify for in the last day is pure paganism

Muhammad Rasheed - Kissing the Sign of Allah is an act of respect for one of the relics, it's not an act of worship. lol Do you worship your parents, wife & kids when you kiss them?

Majid wrote: "hoping it will testify"

I don't "hope" it will testify, I expect it to testify per the Word of the One God who sent the thing to earth to activate the Great Flood's destruction.

Muhammad Rasheed - "Pure paganism" is worshiping the very, very human son of Mary as a divine entity. You may want to knock it off.

Majid Al Kushi - I don't kiss them to forgive my sins. As for kissing Idols as an act of worship here is a reference

‭(I Kings‬ ‭19:18‬ ‭NKJV‬) Yet I have reserved seven thousand in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him.”

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "I don't kiss them to forgive my sins"

Me neither. I kiss it because my prophet kissed it as a sign of respect towards his Lord's relic. lol

Majid wrote: "and every mouth that has not kissed him"

What does kissing Baal's idols in actual pagan worship have to do with Muslims kissing the Black Stone in non-worshipful respect of the One God's holy relic? You appear to have confused yourself again.

Muhammad Rasheed - For example, the Ark of the Covenant contains the Rod of Aaron (pbuh), the Tablets of the Commandments and other relics of God. We Muslims would kiss all of them (if the Ark wouldn't zap us for the presumption) for the same reason we kiss the Black Stone. These are all Signs of the Supreme Creator and they deserve our respect as proof of our belief. That respect is not worship. lol

There are no people on earth more anti-idolatry than us Muslims. No one recognizes this more than you Christians, since we've been giving you guys flack over your very pagan worship of the final Hebrew prophet for the last 1400 yrs. Trust me, we know the difference between worship versus respect and certainly more than you do.

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "you better follow the Quran, which tells you about a claimed prophecy attributed to Jesus (a prophet will come after me named Ahmed) show it to me please in the Injeel"

lol You didn't want to follow up on this? I only asked you to rephrase it since nobody in their right mind actually believes that the collected letters of Paul the False with the anonymously-written four Pauline Gospels are actually the divinely revealed Injeel preached by Jesus. Those are two completely different works.

Thursday, October 5, 2023

A Flabby Flex Attempt

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "A Flabby Flex Attempt.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.

CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Q: Is it possible that the United States could have abolished slavery in a gradual manner that would have prevented a war?

Chris Bast - Anything's possible, but in this case it would have taken a much longer time. Like, multiple generations long.

Realistically slavery would have eventually faded away no matter what happened. Industrialization makes slavery inevitably unprofitable. But that would have taken so long we might have gone well into the 20th century before slavery finally ended for good.

To accelerate the process, we would have to engineer, essentially, an industrial revolution in the Southern states. Someone would have had to convince the South AND the North that a grand program of economic reform was necessary and practical. That could have, in theory, weaned the South off of slavery. But like I said, it would take a long time. A lot of elections would have to go right for this to work.

Although that doesn't address the cultural problem. Making slavery unprofitable doesn't make blacks and whites equal, socially speaking. You might have ended slavery but you'd probably still have something resembling Jim Crow for a very long time.

The Civil War was unfortunate, but compared to the several generations of work that could have gone wrong at multiple points, I think it was the lesser evil.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Realistically slavery would have eventually faded away”

Realistically, no one would willingly give up free slave labor. It would never just fade away; people have to be forced to stop doing wrong when they lack the moral fabric to do the right thing.

Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "Realistically, no one would willingly give up free slave labor."

Nonsense. There's no such thing as “free” labor. Even slaves have to be fed, clothed, and housed. Machines don't. They cost less money and take up less space. And they don't ever revolt.

People will absolutely willingly give up “free” slave labor when the alternative is probably cheaper.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Nonsense. There's no such thing as ‘free’ labor.”

That’s the formal definition. You’re right though that EVERYTHING costs something as your very misplaced pedantic point.

Chris wrote: “Even slaves have to be fed, clothed, and housed.”

True. So, the pre-Civil War version of U.S. chattel slavery was replaced with the mass incarcerate state, where the U.S. gov paid for the overhead of the convict leasing modern version of slave labor and businesses pay a fee to use that labor force.

Chris Bast - Oh please. A minuscule percent of the labor in this country is done by prisoners.

Knock that racial chip off your shoulder and join us in the real world.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Oh please. A minuscule percent of the labor in this country is done by prisoners.”

A minuscule percentage of the pre-Civil War populace owned slaves, too, but the nation still ran on the chattel slave economy. You don’t have a point. Checkmate.

Chris wrote: “Knock that racial chip off your shoulder”

I don’t actually have a “racial chip” on my shoulder, since the weaponization of African & Caribbean immigration reveals that America’s “peculiar” systemic racism legacy is actually xenophobe-based discrimination against my American Descendants of Slavery ethnic group and not racial after-all.

Chris wrote: “and join us in the real world.”

Based on the strength of your argument (such as it is), I can’t say I understand what you mean by that. I doubt it means you are a fan of the Tate Bros. lol

Chris Bast - Okay, you realize we can all see who you are replying to, right? You don’t have to keep repeating who you’re quoting like a child.

M. Rasheed wrote: "the nation still ran on the chattel slave economy."

Not even close to true.

M. Rasheed wrote: "I don’t actually have a 'racial chip' on my shoulder"

You’re only lying to yourself.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “You don’t have to keep repeating who you’re quoting like a child.”

This must be a form of the Tone Police Fallacy. lol

Chris wrote: “Not even close to true.”

It’s quite true.

Chris wrote: “You’re only lying to yourself.”

Since you’ve resorted to fallacies and willfully ignorance denials that we both know you have zero evidence for, it’s clear which one of us is actually lying to ourselves with a reddened face. lol

Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "This must be a form of the Tone Police Fallacy. lol"

That’s…not a fallacy.

M. Rasheed wrote: "It’s quite true."

I know you really want to believe that, but…

M. Rasheed wrote: "Since you’ve resorted to fallacies"

I’m convinced you don’t know what that word means.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “That’s…not a fallacy.”

Geez. Do you know anything at all? Your existence must be pretty sad living in a fact/knowledge/truth void.

Chris wrote: “I know you really want to believe that, but…”

…somehow you believe that no one wanted to use free slave labor in a free slave labor economy. smdh I think you have a ‘being wrong fetish.’ You love it. lol

Chris wrote: “I’m convinced you don’t know what that word means.”

hahahahaha At this point, you should delete your account.

Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "Do you know anything at all?"

Do you? Just because some idiot wrote it up on a blog and it got thrown into the google algorithm doesn’t make it a formal (or informal) fallacy.

Besides, you are not in a position to complain about fallacies since your every comment is full of them. Indeed, you are using that very “fallacy” (which is not really a fallacy) right now.

M. Rasheed wrote: "smdh I think you have a ‘being wrong fetish.’ You love it. lol"

Ad hominem fallacy.

M. Rasheed wrote: "hahahahaha At this point, you should delete your account."

Appeal to ridicule fallacy.

I guess you either really don’t know what fallacies are, or you really really like them.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Do you?”

I certainly know more than you do on the topic of U.S. race relations. You appear to solely rely upon a foundation of white supremacist emotionalism as your evidence sources.

Chris wrote: “Just because some idiot wrote it up on a blog and it got thrown into the google algorithm doesn’t make it a formal (or informal) fallacy.”

True. Fortunately for our purposely, this blog is actually the structured explanation of fallacies using the book Logically Fallacious by Dr. Bo Bennett as the source text. So, we don’t need to fear being taken by “some idiot” who doesn’t know what he is talking about, as the title is itself well-sourced and peer-reviewed in the proper fashion.

Chris wrote: “Besides, you are not in a position to complain about fallacies”

“Complain” isn’t the appropriate term here. “Amused” would be more accurate, since I’m watching you flip around like a beached fish desperately trying to save face. lol

Chris wrote: “(which is not really a fallacy)”

To be clear, “tone policing” is indeed an official logical fallacy, and described as such within every definition from any source you’d care to use, since you hate blogs published by the “idiot” at the top of my casual Internet search for the term.

Anyway, I’m not guilty of tone policing you at all and have managed to skillfully address your actual (weak) message content. I challenge you to demonstrate HOW I’m guilty of the charge, if ye are truthful. ;)

Chris wrote: “Ad hominem fallacy.”

For example, in order to successfully prove that I’m guilty of the ad hominem, you’d have to show where I purposely ignored the content of your claim to instead attack you as a person. At no point have I done this, and in fact, I instead fully addressed your content point-by-point, using my signature style that you attacked with your tone policing faux-complaint. After I made my counter-point, and it was clear you had nothing to offer to defend your position, then I was free to tease you all I liked. Were I to have committed the ad hominem fallacy, I would have attacked your person INSTEAD of addressing your point, while pretending I addressed your point.

You see, you’ll need to first take the time to understand what the fallacies actually are, and know what they mean, before you are able to use them to call out your opponent’s trip ups. Your argument level is not that advanced, I’m afraid. Did you somehow believe it was? Based on what exactly? I’ll admit bafflement at your misplaced confidence based on what you’ve demonstrated thus far.

Chris wrote: “Appeal to ridicule fallacy.”

Again, the fallacy claim is only true if the opponent ridicules you instead of addressing your content. I did nothing of the sort. All of my ridicule came after you proved incapable of defending your position and were thoroughly checkmated and thus, butthurted, as we see demonstrated here in your enthusiastic fish-flopping exercise.

Monday, October 2, 2023

Smearing Your Ethnic Crazy-Town on a Whole Race

Become an M. Rasheed Patreon Subscriber!

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Smearing Your Ethnic Crazy-Town on a Whole Race." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 02 Oct 2023. Water Soluble Marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.

CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

________________________________

Get a signed copy of M. Rasheed's first novel!

Sunday, October 1, 2023

Notes While Observing #20: Cosplay as a Social Engineering Tool

Elijah Muhammad mimicking Jiddu Krishnamurti (top)
and Shahid Bolsen mimicking Malcolm X

A few days ago, I saw a clip of this Shahid Bolsen character and my first impression was that someone told AI to mimic Malcolm X using a white dude's image. Everybody has spent sometime being fascinated with Bro. Malcolm — I'm certainly no exception — so, of course I would recognize an effort to deliberately mimic how he came across in his old 1960s television appearances. I went to this Bolsen dude's YouTube channel to investigate, to see if his account really was set up as an AI platform. It wasn't, but you can see, while scrolling through his video backlist thumbnails, the exact moment when the creative decision was made to begin deliberately mimicking Malcolm X in the aesthetic.

I felt an instant flash of anger, thinking at first this was yet another "Wallace Fard" agent trying to misdirect my people into some more bullsh*t. Did we come full circle? At first, real Islamic missionaries were prevented from converting the abused and dejected jim crow era American Descendant of Slavery (ADOS) ethnic group, and were instead replaced by a succession of grifters pretending to be exotic ideological gurus. That's why Elijah Muhammad's handlers had him mimicking Krishnamurti's accent and going on about the "Asiatic Black man" bit. So, is this Malcolm X impression a white dude's mimicry designed to make him a "guru" from the other direction?

According to Bolsen's channel description, the message is supposed to promote the interests of Muslim majority countries, he just decided to exploit a popular ADOS figure to do it. Unless, like Marcus Garvey, his intention is to attract a bunch of Muslim ADOS followers that he can exploit for his own foreign goals? To successfully pull that off, in addition to fabricating a familiar Malcolm X identity to attract the target group, he would have to build upon a generation of anti-USA/Western rhetoric as provided by the pan-africanists. So, in order to successfully build an ADOS army, Bolsen, like Garvey, would have to convince us that our own interests in our own country weren't worth fighting for, which is 100% how pan-africanists talk.

Interestingly, according to another video of his, Bolsen appears to believe that the racial issues that Malcolm X fought against were fictions invented by Western liberals even as he performs his cosplay of an anti-racism, civil rights leader. How offensive is that? Especially considering he readily admits that Malcolm was not only an influence upon him, but also led Bolsen to eventually accept Al-Islam. Noble enough, but why does he—and many other foreigners besides—think that it's okay to exploit our ADOS historical figure while joining white supremacy in downplaying/dismissing the ADOS freedom struggle? How come you can't use your own cultural heroes? In that, it's similar to whites fabricating a fictional 'white' version of Malcolm X's story to give white youth a socially engineered motivation, instead of using whoever their cultural figures are.

Spike Lee's Malcolm X film was studied to
make the plastic American History X,
because whites don't want to use
their own culture's figures for stuff.

I also wonder, if he is indeed trying to attract ADOS with this performance, if it's similar to white entrepreneurs (like DJ Vlad) who will often court the interest of ADOS to give their product a numbers boost to enable them to leverage into bigger investments later.

A sampling from hundreds of
white-owned, fake "black"
platforms infesting social media

________________________________
MEDIUM: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.

SUBSCRIBE and receive a FREE! Weapon of the People eBook by M. Rasheed!