Muslim Heretics Conference

Fighting jihadists with inkjet printers

You don’t need dodgy receipts to prove dodgy books are sold by certain dodgy Muslims. Likewise, we have no need for dodgy conservative thinktanks using dodgy excuses to hide their dodgy sectarian prejudices.

By Irfan Yusuf, December 16, 2007

Faking it?

I have a confession to make. I’m what we call in Australia a small-“c” conservative. It’s true. I admit it. There was a time when my small-“c” conservatism was a reflection of belonging to a typical middle class South Asian family. Then in 1993, I joined the New South Wales Branch of the Liberal Party, Australia’s answer to Britain’s Tories. I managed to reach various heights in the organisation, chairing 2 policy committees and sitting in numerous controversial pre-selections. I edited a conservative youth magazine for a while and was even endorsed as a federal candidate (admittedly in a seat the Libs knew they’d never win).
My own views haven’t really changed. But what used to be a centre-right party has now moved to the far right. In their wish to be seen as cultural warriors, Liberals have gone completely troppo. As have their supporters in media circles. And because they have become so right wing, it means that I am viewed by them as extremely left wing. But from that far right, even Nancy Reagan would look left wing.
Putting on a cultural jihad
Of course, these days Tories everywhere have found a new enemy. How sad it is that a group of people can only ever get worked up when inspired by hate. Yesterday, it was communism. Tories and wacko jihadists got into bed together on the Afghan battlefields, helping rid this poor hapless nation of nasty communists. And the real name of that dude with the big beard was Usama bin Reagan.
Now my old conservative allies have declared a jihad (or, to use the ”Team America" language, put a jihad) on me and anyone with even the most tenuous link to Islam. Some absolutely hysterical articles have graced the op-ed pages of American-owned Australian newspapers. One former senator even claims Australia’s “Muslim problem” is a bigger threat to it than climate change!
Not all conservatives are this hysterical. Recently, a centre-right thinktank in the UK calling itself Policy Exchange (let’s call them PE for short) published a report from an Australian newspaper columnist Dr. Gerard Henderson on the former Howard government’s approach to “dealing with its Muslims”.
It’s easy to be critical about Henderson’s report. Yet the report is not without its merits. Unlike other conservative writers and self-serving Muslim apologists, Henderson doesn’t buy into the notion that Muslims represent a single monolithic “community”. He also acknowledges that Australian Muslims are, by and large, as secular and irreligious as most Australian Christians. “Many Australians who regard themselves as followers of Islam do not attend a mosque.”
Henderson also acknowledges that the vast majority of Muslims “have settled in well”. He castigates other conservative commentators for their responses to the December 2005 Cronulla riots. “Such responses … were ill-judged and, if embraced, would have proved counterproductive … [I]t would be an act of folly to bar those of Muslim faith from entering Australia simply because they are Muslim”. In this respect, Henderson certainly cannot be described as a sectarian bigot or a racist.
Muslims as a security threat
Yet Henderson’s entire analysis is coloured by concerns about terrorism and national security. It doesn’t so much talk about Muslims as talk at them. PE’s press release claimed the study showed Australia’s 8-point “model” to “approach its Muslim population.” PE has joined other conservative cultural jihadists in presenting Muslim institutions as some kind of giant security threat.
Let’s not live in denial. There are quite a few thick-Sheiks living in Western cities trying their best of suck in Muslim youth and converts into their fringe ‘Islaam’. There are also plenty of crazy books being sold in various places. So when PE published their most recent study on hate literature being sold among English Muslims, I certainly wasn’t surprised. I’ve had a few run-ins myself with bookshops selling wacky material.
My battles against Islaam
In 2000, one salafi bookstore put on a huge book fair at the Youth & Community Centre then managed by the Islamic Council of New South Wales in south western Sydney.
The bookshop had a huge vinyl sign at the entrance. Inside were plenty of books on sale promoting “Islaam” and attacking mainstream Muslim groups (including the usual array of anti-Shia polemical work). I had little hesitation in making a unilateral executive decision and removing the poster from the entrance. The owners of the bookstore then had no hesitation of making threats of violence against me.
On another occasion, I went to a public meeting organised at the same centre. It was about Palestine. One ‘Thick-Sheik’, a graduate of the Islamic University of Madeenah, was shouting at everyone at the top of his voice, well exceeding the 10 minutes allocated to him. I was standing next to an equally irreverent South African chap, and whispered to him: “When’s this dude going to learn to speak English?” One of the thick-Sheik’s students overheard me and asked: “What did you say about my Sheik?” So as not to disturb the meeting, I suggested: “Bro, let’s talk about this outside the meeting.”
The Bro took my suggestion to mean: “Step outside and fight like a man!” Outside we have a rather heated conversation. From my recollection, it went something like this:

ME: Bro, what I was trying to say was …
BRO: You insulted my Sheik. What do you have a problem with him about? He follows the purified sunnah!
ME: Huh? Purified sunnah? Isn’t that a tautology?
BRO: Why are you using big words for? He’s a Sheik. I follow him.
ME: Wow, you are following his madhab? Masha-Allah!
BRO: Astaghfirullah! We don’t follow madhabs. We follow Allah.
ME: Who do you follow?
BRO: Allah! We follow Allah!!
ME: Wow, you even do loud dhikr!

OK, I admit I was asking for it. Thankfully, some other brothers held him back.
Exposing wackos
I’m always most grateful to anyone who exposes the nastiness of Muslim wackos (or indeed of wackos of any persuasion). But I’m not grateful to those who associate me with those same wackos. I might be somewhat conservative, but I’m no cultural jihadist. I might be Muslim, but I’m not about to wear a suicide vest. Further, nothing is to be gained by pretending a real threat doesn’t exist. At the same time, there is no virtue in overstating a threat. Let’s call a spade a spade, not a (non-Sudanese) teddy bear or a hijacked airliner.
Some of the allegedly dangerous books exposed in the PE’s most recent study are hardly a problem. For instance, the study refers to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Behishti Zewar, a classic book containing a mix of Hanafi fiqh (sacred jurisprudence) and nasihat (advice) written especially for women. My mother had an old copy of this book in her library. Like many South Asian Muslim women, she probably received it from relatives on her wedding day as part of her dowry. She takes it off her shelf to read maybe once a year.
I know the book contains crazy misogynist, sexist, anti-British material. There’s plenty in the book to laugh at. Just as there are plenty of other cheaply-printed books published (or pirated) in India and Pakistan filled with spelling errors, bad grammar and weird conspiracy theories. But to describe Behishti Zewar as a hate-filled jihadi tract of salafist extremism is really over-the-top.
Dodgy receipts and even dodgier researchers
Still, on the surface, the PE report does seem compelling. They sent a group of 8 or so Muslims to various mosques to purchase certain books and obtain receipts. The research was collected and the report was written by a former academic with extensive expertise in Islam and the Bahai faith. The report made front page news of various newspapers. BBC’s Newsnight program wanted to do an entire episode on the report’s findings, and were provided with evidence by PE.
But hiding amongst PE’s ‘evidence’ were some dodgy receipts. BBC could smell a rat, and found numerous rats. The results of BBC’s investigation can be seen here. It baffles me that such important research could be undermined by using partisan and dodgy researchers who were even prepared to use amateurishly forged receipts. What makes the matter even more baffling is that PE is actually standing by its researchers after they have been exposed.
Even more amusing was to watch PE’s research director referring to the researchers as “brave”. As if they were risking their lives by buying books and asking for receipts. I wonder if any of PE’s researchers would be prepared to join me when I walk into bookshops in downtown Lakemba and give their staff a piece of my mind for failing to stock Rumi books or Hamza Yusuf tapes.
You don’t need to use dodgy receipts to prove dodgy books are sold by certain dodgy Muslims. And we certainly now have no need for dodgy allegedly conservative thinktanks using dodgy excuses to hide their essentially dodgy sectarian prejudices.

Irfan Yusuf is an associate editor of altmuslim and a Sydney-based lawyer whose work has appeared in some 15 mainstream newspapers in Australia, New Zealand and South-East Asia

altmuslim - Fighting jihadists with inkjet printers

Leaving Islam can be fraught with difficulty.

Despite the well-known Quranic injunction "There is no compulsion in religion", issues of religious freedom have persisted into the 21st Century.

A recent report by the New York-based Human Rights Watch (co-authored with the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights) throws a spotlight on problems in Egypt.

Suppose a Christian woman converts to Islam, for example when she marries a Muslim man, but later wants to convert back.

Joe Stork of Human Rights Watch relates what happened in one case.

"We had one woman telling us how, when she converted to Islam, it was ‘Just hold on, when you’ve finished your coffee your documents will be ready’.

"But in trying to convert back to Christianity, she’s had to go to court - she’s been completely frustrated in those efforts."

Identity crisis

The problem was aggravated when the Egyptian state computerised identity documents over a decade ago.

Egypt’s Bahais find it hard to uphold their faith on official papers

Christians seeking to re-convert encountered bureaucratic hassle in getting their ID cards changed.

Another issue arose from the fact that the state officially recognises only three religions - Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

This put the small Bahai community in an obvious difficulty.

Human-rights groups have welcomed two recent court cases as steps in the right direction.

In one, Bahais were allowed to leave blank the entry for religion on their ID cards.

In the other, a group of Christians seeking to re-convert were told the state should acknowledge their change of status on their identity documents.

Root of the problem

Apostasy - the abandonment of one’s faith - is not just a problem in Egypt.

Some scholars favour the death penalty; others say the punishment should be left to God on the day of judgement

In 2006 an Afghan Muslim who converted to Christianity was sentenced to death and fled to Italy.

A new penal code that has been drafted in Iran would, if ratified, formalise the death penalty for apostasy.

The late Ayatollah Khomeini famously denounced the author Salman Rushdie as an apostate for his novel The Satanic Verses - and said he should be killed.

So what is the root of the problem? Why do some Muslim scholars favour such a severe penalty?

Abdal Hakim Murad, a lecturer at the faculty of divinity at Cambridge University, says Islamic law is extraordinarily diverse.

"There’s a few things on which everybody agrees - pray five times a day, fast in Ramadan - but, in terms of public law, on most issues there is no consensus."

So some scholars favour the death penalty; others say the punishment should be left to God on the day of judgement.

Dr Murad says he recently attended a conference of Muslim scholars from around the world - and only one took the hard-line view. The others said the death penalty should no longer be applied.

But, for now, the debate goes on - and individuals continue to suffer.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Islam and the apostasy debate

Journalist and filmmaker known as “Bin Laden’s worst nightmare”

Aleksey Shats

“Osama bin Laden’s worst nightmare” is coming to speak at Syracuse University.
Irshad Manji received the title from The New York Times after receiving death threats for advocating her democratic views and activism for Muslim reform. Manji will lead a discussion titled “Islam and Democracy: Do They Have a Prayer?”
John Palmer, former dean of the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs and an economics professor, said Manji challenges traditional Muslim views and practices.
“

We’re trying to provide a forum of different perspectives,” said Palmer, who organized the event. “We’re trying to bring in speakers that present a diversity of perspectives that are being debated in our country and internationally.”
This event is part of “The State of Democracy Lecture Series,” run by Maxwell School and will take place on today at 4 p.m. in Maxwell Auditorium. The series features speakers who offer different perspectives about democratic citizenship.  The forum will begin with Manji’s PBS documentary, “Faith Without Fear,” he said. The documentary traces Manji’s efforts through the Arabian Peninsula to reform Islam with democratic ideas of freedom.
The documentary will focus on Manji’s work and will be followed by an open dialogue in which the audience will be able to react to Manji’s views and ideas, he said.

Manji is the director of New York University’s Moral Courage Project. The goal of the project is to develop leadership by challenging unfair political practices and teach the skills needed for active democratic citizenship, according to Manji’s Web site. She is also the author of “The Trouble With Muslim Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith,” a book that confronts the issues concerning radical Islam. In the book, Manji calls for a reform in the Islamic countries in the ways they treat women and homosexuals.  Mehrzad Boroujerdi, an associate professor in Maxwell, said messages of reform in the Muslim world such as Manji’s are a step forward, but is not sure if they will be able to solve the current problems.

“There are a lot of Muslims who have been in search of thinking about what is wrong with the Muslim world, especially in a Western setting,” he said. “I think it’s always worthwhile to hear these types of voices, especially when it’s someone who doesn’t represent the mainstream view.” Manji carries the message the Western world wants her to state, Boroujerdi said. There is an audience in the West that is receptive to Manji’s message, because of its feelings about democratic freedom, including the current war in Iraq, he said.  “Her stand on homosexuality is something that sets her apart and allows her to attack this core orthodoxy from a different angle,” Boroujerdi said. “Her take on women, too, is something that’s an obvious problem in the Muslim world.”

However, the social and political atmosphere is different in the Muslim countries, where her message can be seen as a threat. The male elite who hold the power in many of the Muslim countries have put forth their own interpretations of Islam in their own interests, he said.  Governments have found different excuses and different rationales for maintaining their power and preventing their people from advancing beyond radical interpretations of Islam, he said.
Boroujerdi said a monopoly exists over interpretation of people’s faith in the Muslim countries. There are many kinds of Islam. Islam in Turkey or Indonesia is different from Islam in Iraq or Afghanistan, he said.  “The real test is not what The New York Times says about you, the real test is how the colloquium of these things changes Islam,” he said.

Muslim reform activist to speak about new democratic perspectives (The Daily Orange)

Muslim reform activist to speak about new democratic perspectives

Journalist and filmmaker known as "Bin Laden’s worst nightmare"

By: Aleksey Shats

Posted: 2/15/08

"Osama bin Laden’s worst nightmare" is coming to speak at Syracuse University.
Irshad Manji received the title from The New York Times after receiving death threats for advocating her democratic views and activism for Muslim reform. Manji will lead a discussion titled "Islam and Democracy: Do They Have a Prayer?"
John Palmer, former dean of the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs and an economics professor, said Manji challenges traditional Muslim views and practices.
"We’re trying to provide a forum of different perspectives," said Palmer, who organized the event. "We’re trying to bring in speakers that present a diversity of perspectives that are being debated in our country and internationally."
This event is part of "The State of Democracy Lecture Series," run by Maxwell School and will take place on today at 4 p.m. in Maxwell Auditorium. The series features speakers who offer different perspectives about democratic citizenship.
The forum will begin with Manji’s PBS documentary, "Faith Without Fear," he said. The documentary traces Manji’s efforts through the Arabian Peninsula to reform Islam with democratic ideas of freedom.
The documentary will focus on Manji’s work and will be followed by an open dialogue in which the audience will be able to react to Manji’s views and ideas, he said.
Manji is the director of New York University’s Moral Courage Project. The goal of the project is to develop leadership by challenging unfair political practices and teach the skills needed for active democratic citizenship, according to Manji’s Web site.
She is also the author of "The Trouble With Muslim Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith," a book that confronts the issues concerning radical Islam. In the book, Manji calls for a reform in the Islamic countries in the ways they treat women and homosexuals.
Mehrzad Boroujerdi, an associate professor in Maxwell, said messages of reform in the Muslim world such as Manji’s are a step forward, but is not sure if they will be able to solve the current problems.
"There are a lot of Muslims who have been in search of thinking about what is wrong with the Muslim world, especially in a Western setting," he said. "I think it’s always worthwhile to hear these types of voices, especially when it’s someone who doesn’t represent the mainstream view."
Manji carries the message the Western world wants her to state, Boroujerdi said. There is an audience in the West that is receptive to Manji’s message, because of its feelings about democratic freedom, including the current war in Iraq, he said.
"Her stand on homosexuality is something that sets her apart and allows her to attack this core orthodoxy from a different angle," Boroujerdi said. "Her take on women, too, is something that’s an obvious problem in the Muslim world."
However, the social and political atmosphere is different in the Muslim countries, where her message can be seen as a threat. The male elite who hold the power in many of the Muslim countries have put forth their own interpretations of Islam in their own interests, he said.
Governments have found different excuses and different rationales for maintaining their power and preventing their people from advancing beyond radical interpretations of Islam, he said.
Boroujerdi said a monopoly exists over interpretation of people’s faith in the Muslim countries. There are many kinds of Islam. Islam in Turkey or Indonesia is different from Islam in Iraq or Afghanistan, he said.
"The real test is not what The New York Times says about you, the real test is how the colloquium of these things changes Islam," he said.
ashats@syr.edu

The Daily Orange - Muslim reform activist to speak about new democratic perspectives

POSTCARD USA: Jihad industry — Khalid Hasan

Leaders of Salafi-jihadist organisations hypocritically preach about the benefits of martyrdom, but rarely, if ever, conduct suicide operations themselves, or send their loved ones on such missions. It is a fact that Al Qaeda and associated groups offer no vision for Muslims other than perennial jihad, hardly an appealing prospect
Jihad is now an industry among scholars, including those who masquerade as scholars but are actually in the service of more shadowy outfits, and those who believe that by blowing up people praying in mosques or families out shopping, they will not only serve God but win a point-to-point ticket to the pastures of heaven where seventy-two swooning virgins await their arrival.
The tabloid approach to jihad in particular and Muslims in general, being easy, is often employed by the Western media. There is also an epidemic of books aimed at denigrating Islam and simply ignoring or distorting its spiritual majesty, the magnificence of its history and its contribution to civilisation.
The easiest thing to do today in America is to publish a book on Islam, but the book has to be negative and it has to reinforce existing prejudices. The basic idea is to equate Islam with violence and to prove that it is not a religion of peace at all, as it advocates the establishment of a khilafat where the infidels will either be liquidated, or converted or reduced to the status of serfs.
Unfortunately, it is not the work of the serious scholar that now defines Islam in the West but the words and deeds of the lost tribe of jihadis. Islam has been hijacked by the prototype represented by Osama bin Laden and his like. They have become its image-makers and they are the ones viewed by the non-Islamic world as its real representatives. That is the fight, and it is a fight that Muslims first have to win from among their own ranks.
But to maintain that there is nothing rotten in the state of Denmark is to ignore reality. How can a remedy be found without first recognising that there exists a condition that needs a remedy?
One serious and scholarly publication that has come up with incisive analyses of the phenomenon of terrorism and what ails many Muslim societies is brought out by the Combating Terrorism Centre at West Point, the famous US military academy.
Its monthly publication, CTC Sentinel, declares on its masthead that it is “objective, relevant and rigorous.” Tall though the claim may sound, the Sentinel does make an earnest effort to be all three. The current issue carries two worthy articles, one on the “return of the Arabs” to Afghanistan and the other on Salafi jihad as a religious ideology.
Brian Glyn Williams, an American university professor who studied at SOAS, London, makes what he calls a preliminary effort to sift through vague rumours in order to gain a clear picture of Al Qaeda’s actual role in a Taliban guerrilla war that has, to all outward appearances, morphed into an Iraqi-style terrorist insurgency.
He concludes that while it is difficult to estimate the number of Arab fighters in the region, it seems obvious that Al Qaeda central is determined to play a key role as a fundraiser, recruiter and direct contributor to the military efforts in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Moreover, unlike the earlier generation of “gucci jihadists” who made little if any real contribution to the jihad against the Soviets, the current generation seems determined to remind the West that the “Lions of Islam” have not forgotten.
According to Williams, since 2002, one of Al Qaeda’s main roles has been diverting wealth from the Arab Gulf States to funding the struggling Taliban. One recently killed Saudi shaykh named Asadullah was described as “the moneybags in the entire tribal belt.” Men like Asadullah have paid bounties for Taliban attacks on coalition troops, provided money to Taliban commanders such as Baitullah Mehsud to encourage them to attack Pakistani troops and launch a suicide bombing campaign in that country, and used their funds to re-arm the Taliban. Local Pashtuns in Waziristan and in Afghanistan’s Kunar Province have claimed that the Arab fighters pay well for lodging and food and provide money for the families of those who are “martyred” in suicide operations.
But there are also tensions between the Arabs and the Afghans, to ease which, Mustafa Abu’l-Yazid, the Egyptian head of Al Qaeda’s operations in Afghanistan, has proclaimed that he recognises the authority of Mullah Omar.
Assaf Moghadam, an Islamic scholar, in his analysis of “Salafi jihad” argues that it is more akin to an ideology than to a religion because like other ideologies it is a by-product of the industrialisation that swept through Europe, beginning in the 19th century and is hence an outgrowth of modernity. It is intimately linked to the dislocating and turbulent effects of globalisation, which introduced rapid changes in the social, political and economic realms of life.
The Salafi-jihad is an ideology because its functions are essentially congruent with those of other ideologies. Analogous to the first, explanatory function of ideology, the Salafi-jihadists’ goal is to raise awareness among Muslims that their religion has been on the wane. Whereas Islam used to be at its peak during the first centuries of its existence, Salafi-jihadists urge Muslims to understand that the tide has turned, and that Islam is in a constant state of decline in religious, political, military, economic and cultural terms. Salafi-jihad provides a new sense of self-definition and belonging in the form of membership to a supranational entity.
Finally, according to Moghadam, like all ideologies, Salafi-jihadists present a programme of action, namely jihad, which is understood in military terms. They assert that jihad will reverse the tide of history and redeem adherents and potential adherents of Salafi-jihadist ideology from their misery. Martyrdom is extolled as the ultimate way in which jihad can be waged — hence the proliferation of suicide attacks among Salafi-jihadist groups.
Westerners are commonly described as infidels, while moderate Muslims and Arabs are labelled apostates. To the most extreme Salafi-jihadists, Muslims who reject the tenets of Salafi-jihad are tantamount to infidels, thus deserving of death. They interpret their violence on other Muslims as religiously sanctioned, ignoring sections of Muslim holy texts that prohibit internecine fighting or the killing of civilians. They single-handedly blame the West for each and every misfortune that has befallen Muslims.
Moghadam urges the United States and its allies to understand that they are not facing the religion of Islam as their main enemy, but an ideology, namely the Salafi-jihad.
It is equally a fact, he maintains, that leaders of Salafi-jihadist organisations hypocritically preach about the benefits of martyrdom, but rarely, if ever, conduct suicide operations themselves, or send their loved ones on such missions. It is a fact that Al Qaeda and associated groups offer no vision for Muslims other than perennial jihad, hardly an appealing prospect.
Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent. His e-mail is khasan2@cox.net

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - POSTCARD USA: Jihad industry — Khalid Hasan

Indonesia: Rich Hindu Past and Moderate Muslim Future

By Nick Gier, New West Unfiltered 2-09-08

INDONESIA: RICH HINDU PAST
AND MODERATE MUSLIM FUTURE
By Nick Gier, Professor Emeritus, University of Idaho ( ngier@uidaho.edu)
In 1991 I went on a two-week Smithsonian tour of Bali, the Indonesian island most famous for its dances, craft arts, and Hindu festivals. As I boarded a Garuda International flight in Los Angeles, I was impressed that a nation that is 90 percent Muslim would name its airline after a Hindu deity.
In every major building, we saw pictures of then President Suharto, the army general who ruled Indonesia with an iron fist for 32 years. This past month Suharto died after a prolonged illness.
Under the leadership of its first president Sukarno, Indonesia played a major role in the Non-Aligned Movement. Although Sukarno claimed to be neutral in the Cold War, the U.S. nevertheless was suspicious of his friends in the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), which increased its vote from 16.4 percent in the 1955 elections to 34 percent in 1957.
In the late 1950s, the U.S. had been secretly funding right-wing elements in the Indonesian military, and on September 30, 1965, left-wing officers, fearing that they would be purged, murdered six top generals, all of them U.S. trained.
Major General Suharto stepped in, took control, and planned a national-wide crack down on the PKI and the labor unions. Although there was no evidence that the PKI had anything to do with the military revolt, Suharto ordered his troops to track down leftists wherever they could be found.
Lacking sufficient intelligence, the CIA provided Suharto with a very long list of names, and, in addition, 50 million rupiah, arms, and ammunition. The best estimate of the slaughter is 500,000 dead. Another 300,000 civilians died in military action in East Timor and other places where Indonesians dared to protest Suharto’s rule.
When I asked our Balinese guide what he thought of Suharto, he expressed utter disdain for him. Comprising only 1.6 percent of the 1965 population, 50,000 Balinese were sacrificed to Cold War ideology. Some of those killed were members of our guide’s family.
Starting in the 7th Century A.D., Hindus and Buddhists from India established prosperous kingdoms in Indonesia, and the largest Buddhist stupa in antiquity is found at Borobudur on the island of Java.
Today Muslim shadow puppeteers entertain large audiences with night-long performances of the Hindu epics—the Mahabharata or the Ramayana—moving all the figures, reciting the verses, and playing a drum all at the same time—a single master artist working without a break.
Contrary to widespread belief, Islam did not spread in Indonesia by the sword. Primarily because of the effectiveness of peaceful Sufi missionaries, most Indonesian kings embraced Islam voluntarily.
The Balinese, however, were not willing to convert. As Muslim armies gathered on the western tip of Java, only several miles from Bali, our guide told the story, most likely apocryphal, that spies spread the rumor that Balinese troops had dipped their spear points in pig fat.
For whatever reason, the invasion of Bali was called off, and today three million Hindus preserve their rich culture on this beautiful island.
From 2002 to 2005 there were three terrorist bombings, two on Bali, specifically targeted at popular tourist locations. A total of 234 people were killed, but the perpetrators were arrested and they will be executed in a few weeks.
In a 2006 poll only 10 percent of Indonesians supported the killing of civilians for the reason of protecting Islam. Polling the citizens of another moderate Muslim nation, University of Maryland researchers found that 79 percent of Moroccans said that killing civilians was never justified. What is interesting, and not a little shocking, is that in the same poll only 46 percent of Americans said "never" to the killing of civilians.
Since 1998, when Suharto was ousted in nation-wide protests, Indonesians have had regular elections, and they even elected their first female president in 2001. Significantly, she was Megawati Sukarnoputri, Sukarno`s daughter.
In the 2004 parliamentary elections, parties that identify themselves as Islamist got 35 percent of the vote while the secular parties received 47.6 percent, but in 200 regional elections since then not a single Islamist candidate has won a seat.
The largest Muslim organization in Indonesia with a membership of 70 million has recently redefined an Islamic state as one that is “just and prosperous,” not one that follows Sharia law. They have also have decided to support Sukarno’s liberal policy of religious tolerance, one that accepts the existence of all faiths.
In December, 1992, Hindu fundamentalists in India destroyed a mosque that they claimed was built on the birthplace of the Hindu God Rama. I would like to contrast that with my last night in Bali, when I heard the chanting, 400 hundred voices strong, of Rama’s monkey army crossing a causeway to Sri Lanka to help recapture Sita, Rama’s wife who had been kidnapped by a demon.
The divine name Rama now divides Indian Hindus and Muslims, but for centuries the stories of Rama have brought Indonesians together in traditional theater and dance across this moderate Muslim nation of 235 million.
Nick Gier taught religion and philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years. Read or hear his other columns at http://www.NickGier.com Read about the destruction of the mosque in India at http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/ayodhya.htm.

New West Network | New West Network Topics Unfiltered | Indonesia: Rich Hindu Past and Moderate Muslim Future

Qaradawi No Hate Preacher: UK Muslims (By Emdad Rahman)

LONDON —British Muslims reacted Thursday, February 7, with dismay to the government’s decision to deny prominent Muslim scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi a medical visa, insisting he is no hate preacher but rather a moderation icon.

"Yusuf Al Qaradawi enjoys unparalleled respect and influence throughout the Muslim world," said Mohammad Abdul Bari, Secretary General of the umbrella Muslim Council of Britain (MCB).
"I am afraid this decision will send the wrong message to Muslims everywhere about the state of British society and culture."
Qaradawi, president of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, was discharged from the Hamad hospital in Doha on November 24, after recovering from a vertebral column crack he endured from a slipped disc.
In August, he was hospitalized in Algeria after suffering from a stomach ulcer.
London confirmed Thursday that Sheikh Qaradawi, 81, has been denied a visa to receive medical treatment.
"We made a decision based on the impact of a visit on communities in the UK," a Home Office spokeswoman said.
"The UK will not tolerate the presence of those who seek to justify acts of terrorist violence or disburse views that could foster inter-community violence."
The British Muslim Initiative (BMI) lauded Qaradawi, chairman of the European Council for Fatwa and Research and a trustee of the Oxford University Center for Islamic Studies, as an "eminent" scholar.
It regretted the government’s decision as "an unwarranted insult" to Britain’s two million Muslims.
"The negative impact of this ban is no less than that of banning the Pope from entering any of the Muslim countries," said Mohammad Sawalha, BMI president.
"We would have to go as far back as the medieval age when scholars were hounded and vilified in order to find a similar retrograde decision."
Anti-terrorists
"The negative impact of this ban is no less than that of banning the Pope from entering any of the Muslim countries," said Sawalha.
British Muslims saw the government’s argument defenseless.
Faisal Hanjra, spokesman of the Federation of Student Islamic Societies in the UK and Ireland (FOSIS), believes the government made a wrong decision.
"Dr Qaradawi is a respected mainstream scholar, well known for denouncing terrorism and related activities," he said.
"We shouldn’t let personal prejudices get in the way of allowing a respected individual seeking the best medical treatment."
Qaradawi is known for his moderate views and considered one of the most influential scholars in the Muslim world.
He has vehemently condemned all terrorist attacks in the West, including 9/11, Madrid and London, as well as the Bali bombing that targeted foreign tourists in Indonesia.
Qaradawi has also denounced terrorist attacks in Arab countries, including the recent bombing that targeted UN offices in the Algerian capital.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone has described him as a "leading progressive Muslim" and likened him to reformist Pope John XXIII.
He praised Qaradawi’s staunch support to democracy and efforts to bridge the gap between Islam and the West.
The British Muslim leaders regretted that Prime Minister Gordon has caved in to pressure from David Cameron, the leader of the opposition Conservative party.
"After one year of indecision the Labour Government has finally succumbed to neo-conservative pressure," said Sawalha, the BMI president.
"It is regrettable that the government has finally given way to these unreasonable demands spearheaded by the Tory leader whose government had in fact allowed Dr Qaradawi to visit the UK five times between 1995-97," said MCB leader Bari.

JTW News - Qaradawi No Hate Preacher: UK Muslims (By Emdad Rahman)

KUALA LUMPUR: Islamophobia among Western societies can be eliminated if Muslims hold rational dialogues with non-Muslim societies, said a French scholar. 

Professor in Islamic Civilisation Dr Mahmoud Azab of the La Sorbonne University in Paris said the spread of Islamophobia resulted from the actions of some Western media groups that promoted the fear of Islam and Muslims among Westerners, especially after 9/11. 

“This problem has been exacerbated by some segments of Muslims themselves, who fear changes and refuse to communicate with non-Muslims. 

“We should talk more with the non-Muslims and explain to them about Islam and provide insight into the greatness of the Islamic achievements in the arts and sciences. 

Stressing a point: Dr Mahmoud speaking to conference participants with Prof Abdul Shukor beside him in Kuala Lumpur yesterday. — Bernama

“As Muslims, we should give guidance to others in understanding more about ourselves instead of closing off our minds to the world,” he said, after presenting a paper at the third World Al-Azhar Alumni Multaqa (conference) yesterday. 

Ali Al-Sayyid Abd Rahman Al-Hashim, the judiciary and religious affairs adviser to the President of the United Arab Emirates, advised Muslims not to react emotionally to incidents such as the recent publication of a caricature of Prophet Muhammad in a Danish newspaper. 

“Holding protests and demonstrations is not the answer to the problems affecting Muslims,” he told the 1,000 participants from 69 countries at the conference which began on Friday. 

On Islam Hadhari, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia vice-chancellor Prof Datuk Abdul Shukor Husin said the concept being promoted by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was criticised by those who were jumud (having narrow minds). 

“Islam Hadhari or Civilisational Islam is the Government’s comprehensive approach in emphasising the development of the country’s human capital and promoting integrity among the people. 

“Islam Hadhari does not alter the fundamental and core values of Islam,” he added. 

The four-day conference is the third to be held outside Egypt, which is aimed to strengthen ties among former graduates of the prestigious Al-Azhar University.

Muslims must help fight Islamophobia, says French scholar (The Star Online) 

Iman Kurdi,

“I don’t hate Muslims. I hate Islam.” Of course, these are not my words and certainly not my sentiments. They are the words of a Dutch politician. I will not reveal his name, nor talk about the film he is allegedly making, because I do not wish to pander to his need for media attention, and I certainly do not wish to give his film free publicity. Besides, how can I have a meaningful view about a film that no one has seen?

But his words exist; they are in the public sphere. In a newspaper interview this week, he calls Islam “the ideology of a retarded culture” and goes on to say that “Islam is something we can’t afford any more in the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams…Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.”

I suspect this is hitting many readers like a red rag to a bull, but I am keeping my calm for the moment, aware that the man’s intention is to provoke me. Are his words offensive? Yes. Are they insulting? Yes. Are they lies? Yes. His words anger me, but what strikes me most about them is how familiar they seem. They are words we don’t normally hear from politicians or people in the public sphere, but they are words you hear if you listen carefully on European streets, and elsewhere too, I imagine.

So the first question I ask myself is this: If these views — as offensive as they are — exist, should they be aired in public so that Muslims can at least have a chance to counter them, or should they be outlawed? A second question is could a politician have uttered the same words about another religion, say Christianity or Judaism? And finally, could anyone seriously make a distinction between hating a religion and hating the people who profess its faith?

There is a fine line between expressing a view in order to open up a debate, and giving credibility to a view by making it part of public discourse. The sentence “I hate Islam” is one that will shock regardless of whether or not you are a Muslim. I suspect most Dutch people, even those who feel threatened by immigration or who hold negative views about Islam, will respond negatively to the strong emotive nature of the words used. It is not acceptable to hate a religion. If anything, the politician has scored something of an own goal by using these words. Far more worrying in terms of impact is the rest of his discourse, in particular the sentence: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims”. It is of concern because it is fast becoming a mainstream view.

So is it true? I say no without hesitating because in my mind those who commit murder in the name of Islam are not Muslims, but I concede that this is a facile argument. The academic answer I am assured is also no. If you do a head count of terrorists on the planet past and present, you will find that Muslims do not make up the majority. I have not done a head count and nor do I wish to. It is sadly a reality that we regularly see terrorist acts committed by people born Muslims and it is also sadly a reality that in the eyes of many, violence is becoming a significant part of what defines Islam. I may see Islam as a religion of peace but that is no longer a majority view in the West. So, to return to the question in hand, I prefer to see a sentence like this one out in the public domain, as it refers to an issue that needs to be debated and refuted. Do I think an intelligent debate is forthcoming? Possibly not, certainly not if we focus on being offended instead of focusing on explaining why such comments are offensive.

Could a European politician have made these comments about another religion? As a rule of thumb, laws are tough against racism and relatively more lenient toward attacking religious beliefs. Hence the politician would not only have committed political suicide if he had said he hated Jews, but would also have opened himself up to being prosecuted. Since Islam, and Christianity too for that matter, are religions but not races, offending Muslims or Christians does not carry the same weight as offending Sikhs or Jews. Add the current political equation to the mix and it seems evident that it would be unthinkable to see this kind of language used about any religion other than Islam in today’s political climate. Criticizing Islam is not the same as attacking Muslims. The first may be offensive to most Muslims but is acceptable to most Westerners. It may be unacceptable to many Muslims reading this piece but in countries where freedom of speech is a fundamental value, criticizing a religion is considered healthy.

Frankly, I sometimes find it hard to understand the knee-jerk reaction I often see at any hint of disagreement. Islam is far too great a religion to be damaged by a little debate. Reading points of view I disagree with does not cause even a hairline fracture in my religious beliefs. Quite the contrary. The more I challenge my beliefs, the more convincing they become and surely that is how faith should be.

But the Dutch politician was careful with his words. He did not say he hated Muslims, he said he hated Islam. In his view, he is merely criticizing an ideology, not attacking a people. But when I read his words I felt personally attacked. He is not criticizing my religion; he is expressing hate in the set of beliefs that makes me a Muslim. He is very clearly expressing hatred for Muslims and his affirming the contrary only makes it all the more offensive to Muslims. His words not only offend me but more importantly threaten me. I accept being offended. I do not accept being hated for what I believe in.

Hating Islam Is the Same Thing as Hating Muslims (The Arab News)