Muslim Heretics Conference

Mobashar Jawed Akbar, Canwest News Service

Published: Wednesday, August 27

The 21st century has given us almost everything we could dream of, but it forgot to give us peace. Peace is impossible without understanding, and understanding needs dialogue. Dialogue, in turn, requires equality.

Nations may be powerful or weak; societies may claim a heritage in the oldest civilizations or emerge from obscurity, but modern military technology has ensured that assault is no longer the exclusive preserve of the mighty. The mosquito can disorient the elephant; and if there is to be peace in our modern jungle then every voice must be heard.

A monologue tends to disguise its dominance in false morality. The world will not find equilibrium as long as it revolves on an Axis of Evil, or even an Axis of Good, for both are partisan phrases. The future must revolve around an Axis of Equals in the comity of nations.

Mass media take a superpower’s monologue into millions of homes. We think of mass media as a fractured range: oratory, print, radio, television, Internet. There is one common fact to this range, the word. The medium may be diverse but manipulation of the message is through the massage of words, and the disorientation between text and context. That is the key to mind-management.

Let me offer specific examples, if only because they are so widely prevalent in our contemporary international discourse. In the approach to the fifth anniversary of 9/11 U.S. President George W. Bush used a term that is still echoing through debate, “Islamofascism.” How old is Islam? Over 1,400 years old. How old is fascism? It entered the political dictionary only with Mussolini in 1920. So whatever else fascism might be it cannot be Islamic.

On the other hand it is perfectly legitimate to suggest that some Muslim rulers may be fascists. But why do we blame Islam for the sin of a few Muslims?

Do I blame Christianity for Hitler or the Vatican for Mussolini. Jesus never advocated genocide; he taught us to turn the other cheek. Jesus gave unto Caesar what was due to Caesar, and to God what was due to God: Jesus was a radical Sufi. Hitler and Mussolini were at best denominational Christians, not believers in Jesus.

Every day, somewhere in the think tank world, there is a seminar on “Islam and the West.” Think about the phrase, used so lavishly across continents and cultures. It is an absurdity. Islam is a faith, the West is geography. How do you compare a faith with geography? We can discuss the West and South East Asia, or the West and South Asia, or the West and West Asia and arc through, in the last case, the trajectory between Arthur Balfour and Jimmy Carter.

Or we can discuss Islam and Christianity and I could mention that the Virgin Mary is mentioned far more often in the Holy Koran than in the Holy Bible. And add that her virginity has been given a far more credible explanation in the Muslim holy book. I could note that Jesus is called “Ruh-Allah” in the Koran, almost equivalent to the essence of Allah, the highest form of praise accorded to a Prophet of Islam (which Jesus is). But how do you discuss Islam and the West unless there is a sub-text in which the West is synonymous with all that is modern, resplendent, scientific, rational, reasonable, educated, and Islam is equally implicitly synonymous with all that is backward, barbarous, medieval, irrational -and you half-expect me, a proud Muslim, to leap out from the page waving a menacing scimitar.

On the other side of the linguistic misunderstanding, perhaps the most counter-productive shift has taken place in the misappropriation of the term Jihad by those who believe in terrorism. Their motive is obvious; they want to project their violence as the “just war,” which is what Jihad is.

The Koran makes a very clear distinction between legitimate war, a Jihad, and terrorism, which is called “Fasad.” A Fasadi is one who “spreads mischief through the land.” It appears in Verse 32 of Surah 5, in the context of the first murder of an innocent, when Cain killed Abel. The verse is a powerful indictment of anyone who kills innocents: “That is anyone slew a person (through Fasad) it would be as if he slew the whole people. And if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.” An innocent’s death kills something in the whole community; and saving an innocent from a Fasadi is akin to saving the whole.

The worst mischief is, in the words of the great scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali, “treason against the state, combined with treason against Allah, as shown by overt crimes.” For this, “four alternative punishments are mentioned, any one of which is to be applied according to circumstances, viz., execution, crucifixion, maiming or exile.”

The Koran insists that while there are differences between faiths, it is up to Allah, and not man, to be the judge. For this life, there is an unambiguous principle: “La iqra fi al deen (Let there be no compulsion in religion: 2:256)” and “Lakum deen-e kum wal ya deen (Your religion for you and my religion for me).” It was not an accident that the Ottoman Sultans gave sanctuary and life to Spanish Jews after they had been driven out by the Inquisition.

Justice and equality are the heart and soul of Islam, and the Holy Book knows what justice would be for a Fasadi.

M.J. Akbar is an accomplished journalist and author of numerous books. He established The Telegraph, Covert and The Asian Age, the first Indian newspaper with an international edition.

An axis of equals

By Michelle Boorstein
Washington Post

Article Launched: 09/07/2008 12:02:54 AM PDT

Once upon a time, Sherry Jones was a Montana newspaper reporter who dreamed she could contribute to world peace with a novel about the prophet Muhammad and his feminist leanings. Then she wrote it.

Today? She’s the target of a Serbian mufti and a Middle Eastern studies professor with a lawyer.

Life has been a roller coaster lately for Jones, 46, who went from being a Book-of-the-Month Club pick to seeing her novel dropped by Random House, which said in a statement it had received “cautionary advice” that the fictionalized story of one of Muhammad’s wives might “incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment.”

A Random House spokeswoman said she could not think of any other time the company had canceled a book because of such fears. Jones and her novel, “The Jewel of Medina,” are subjects of debate from Egypt to Italy to Serbia, where 1,000 Serbian-language copies were printed before the local publisher backed out, too.

Plenty of blame

Finger-pointing abounds. Feminist Muslims are blaming censorship; Jones and her agent are blaming the Middle Eastern studies professor; and Random House is saying that Jones — who says she doesn’t fear Islamic retaliation — should honor a nondisclosure agreement and stop talking about their dispute.

Ironically, Jones began with a pro-Islamic mind-set when she began writing the novel in 2002. After the Sept. 11 attacks led her to an interest in the Taliban, she began to research the status of women under Islam. And she came to a conclusion: Muhammad supported more rights for women than do many of his modern followers.

“I wanted to tell the story of the women around Muhammad, and to honor them and him as well,” Jones said from Spokane, Wash., where she lives and writes about environmental issues for the Bureau of National Affairs. “What I see as the Islam Muhammad envisioned has, in crucial ways, been changed. I wanted to show people, especially in the West, about early Islam.”

She started writing a fictionalized story of Aisha, a young and much-beloved wife of Muhammad. Seven drafts later, in April 2007, Random House gave Jones a $100,000 contract for “The Jewel of Medina” and a sequel.

“Jewel” was a Book-of-the-Month Club selection for August 2008, and Random House’s imprint, Ballantine Books, named it one of their featured books. Jones gave Random House a list of people who might be interested in reviewing the book or writing blurbs for it. All was well until April 30, when one suggested reviewer hit the alarm switch. Denise Spellberg, who teaches Middle Eastern studies at the University of Texas and has written about Aisha, called her own editor — at Knopf, another Random House imprint — to say the book was inflammatory and problematic.

According to Natasha Kern, Jones’s agent, Spellberg hired an attorney and threatened to sue if her name wasn’t taken out of the book’s bibliography. “She said it would endanger her family,” said Kern, who said Spellberg then contacted several Muslim Web sites and told them to oppose the book’s coming publication. Earlier this month, Spellberg wrote in a letter to the Wall Street Journal that the book was “provocative” and followed a tradition of anti-Islamic writings that “use sex and violence to attack the Prophet and his faith.” She did not return a phone call or e-mail message for this story.

Jones says the book has no sex scenes, though it explores Aisha’s relationship with Muhammad in the first person and includes steamy scenes like this one: “Scandal blew in on the errant wind when I rode into Medina clutching Safwan’s waist. My neighbors rushed into the street. What they saw: my wrapper fallen to my shoulders, unheeded. Loose hair lashing my face. The wife of God’s Prophet entwined around another man.”

Publishing insiders are of two minds on the cancellation of “Jewel,” with many calling it alarming, despite the violence that followed the 2005 publication of Danish cartoons about Islam and the worldwide fatwah inspired by Salman Rushdie’s 1988 novel, “The Satanic Verses.” (Rushdie is alive, but one translator of the novel was killed and another injured.)

“It’s a commentary on the times we live in “… in this frightened time, it’s a much more loaded and charged time in history than it even was then (when Rushdie’s book was published),” said Sara Nelson, a blogger for Publishers Weekly, noting that Jones is not the literary figure Rushdie is or was.

“It’s understandable they would do it, but it still raises troubling issues about publishers’ responsibilities to free speech and noncensorship,” she said. Besides, “they commissioned this book and knew what it would be about, and it’s surprising to me that they didn’t think of this a long time ago.”

Moving forward?

Some progressive Muslims, including feminist journalist Asra Nomani, think too much emphasis is being placed on the notion of Muhammad and Aisha as sexual beings.

“OK, so this isn’t the next great piece of literature, but it pushes the ball forward in challenging dogmatic ideas about how you can relate to Islam,” Nomani said in an interview. “We need movement from this static relationship we have with Islam. “… Look, Mary and Mary Magdalene have taken hits and survived somehow.” Carol Schneider, the Random House spokeswoman, said that after hearing from Spellberg, the company called security consultants and Islamic scholars, “all but one of whom expressed strong concern.”

Though the book is fiction, Schneider said, Spellberg’s criticisms were relevant: “Denise is a historian, but what she brought up wasn’t historical inaccuracies but inflammatory passages.”

On May 21, Ballantine called Jones to say the Aug. 12 publishing date should be postponed. Days later, publication was canceled.

Recently, Jones got a boost when a Serbian publisher agreed to print 1,000 copies, but within 24 hours said it wouldn’t do another run after protests from a Belgrade mufti, or Islamic scholar. Soon, another mufti was quoted as saying the first one was using the book to pander to orthodox Muslims. Kern says publishers in Hungary, Russia, Italy and Spain have purchased rights to print the book, but are waiting to see what happens in Serbia.

“This has taught me something I’ve been trying to learn my whole life,” Jones said. “To accept life as it happens. I’m not in control of any of this.”

Too hot off the press: Author of Muhammad novel still mulling over book cancellation - San Jose Mercury News

Relationships based on worldly values can degenerate into baseness, as often happens in marriage. When people’s love and respect is based on these values, they can lose these feelings quickly when circumstances change. This is almost inevitable when love, respect, and loyalty depend on one’s beauty, wealth, health, job, or status, for when these temporary and superficial characteristics disappear, so will the other person’s love. Someone who follows such criteria will find no reason to continue to love and honor his or her spouse when the basis for those values is lost.
Belief, fear and respect of Allah, and decency of character are what make love, respect, and loyalty endure. Someone who loves his or her spouse for their belief and character will, in married life, be respectful, loyal, and decent. Losing one’s youth, health, or beauty will not affect the love and consideration among spouses for each other, and neither will losing one’s wealth or social status. They will not cause trouble or discontent to the other person because of their firm belief and fear and respect of Allah, whatever the circumstances. Believers will always be gentle and compassionate, as well as fair and tolerant, for they will consider this to be a responsibility entrusted to them by Allah. Islamic morality has a very high opinion of women and seeks to prevent them from suffering any difficulties or hardships. Thus, believing men safeguard the rights of women and are most considerate toward them.
So close is the marital relationship that the Qur’an says of the spouses: “They are clothing for you, and you for them” (Surat al-Baqara: 187). In this verse, Allah reminds people that each spouse has equal responsibilities. The word “clothing” stands for the responsibility of guarding and protecting one another and also suggests that men and women have complementary qualities.
Another verse states the importance of love and compassion in marriage: “Among His Signs is that He created spouses for you of your own kind, so that you might find tranquillity in them. And He has placed affection and compassion between you. There are certainly Signs in that for people who reflect” (Surat ar-Rum: 21). Believers consider their spouses to be gifts that Allah has given into their care, and therefore value one another greatly. They show affection and compassion when their spouse makes a mistake or falls short in some way, and know that behaving according to the Qur’an will help them overcome all difficulties and solve their problems. As a result, marriage helps both spouses find contentment and peace.
With the phrase “you have been intimate with one another” (Surat an-Nisa’: 21), Allah proclaims the closeness and intimacy of married life. The secret of this closeness, intimacy, and valuing of each other is their intention to create an everlasting togetherness that will extend into the Hereafter. True loyalty and love requires this attitude. Since their love is neither selfish nor temporary, but intended to be everlasting, they are completely loyal, close, honest, and intimate with one another.
Qur’an’s morality forms the basis for a marital relationship based on togetherness, one in which both parties fear and respect Allah and follow His morality. In such a relationship, each person’s loyalty, faithfulness, love, sincerity, tolerance, and modesty complement and support the other person. Such a marriage is stable and long-lasting. The marriages of people without these qualities, on the other hand, are short-lived.
Islam considers marriage to be a comfort for women, for in it she experiences love, respect, loyalty, and faithfulness in the best possible way. She is always respected, valued, and honored. The absence of any pride, superiority complex, and lies enables her to find peace and contentment.
Being Protective of Women
By proclaiming “We send down in the Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy to the believers,” (Surat al-Isra’: 82) Allah states that Islamic morality will always direct people toward the good and that the Qur’an’s verses are a mercy for them. These verses, revealed to create contentment and justice among people, guarantee the rights of women in both their social and family lives. And, the verse “We bring you the truth and the best of explanations” (Surat al-Furqan: 33) makes clear the fact that the Qur’an contains all of the knowledge needed to find the value, love, and respect that they deserve in every aspect of their lives.
This is a great mercy, comfort, and gift from Allah for women as well. When people behave according to the Qur’an’s morals, all disputes over the role and place of women in society, as well as the controversy surrounding them in unbelieving societies, will certainly come to an end.
We will now explore some of the verses that guard women’s social rights and reveal their importance and value in Islam’s moral system.
All true and lasting solutions to women’s problems are found in the Qur’an. Islam, which was revealed to guide humanity to salvation, genuinely values women. Many verses protect women and their rights, for the Qur’an eliminated the prevalent misguided stereotypes of women and gave them a respectable position in society. Our Lord teaches that superiority in His presence is based not on gender, but rather on one’s fear and respect of Allah, faith, good character, devotion, and dedication to Him.
Allah has revealed the steps that women need to take to ensure their protection and respect within society, and for them to find the love and dignity that they deserve. All of these measures benefit women and seek to prevent damage to their interests or any form of oppression and unnecessary stress.
Divorcing Women with Their Consent
The believers’ fear and respect of Allah, as well as their belief, cause them to obey their conscience and the Qur’an’s values at every moment. But for unbelievers, their base instincts and Satan are their guiding influences. Thus, they seek to satisfy their self-interest and their ego instead of acting fairly and nicely. This scenario is often seen when relationships end, such as a marriage based upon financial self-interest.
For these people, divorce means the end of all bonds based on mutual interest, for when these interests no longer exist, there is no longer any reason for them to value or respect the other party. As a result, they see no reason to do anything good for that person, and so move to protect their own interests regardless of the other person’s situation.
Believers display a totally different type of behavior in such circumstances, for their only goal in life is to win Allah’s good pleasure. Fully aware that following the whims of their self-interest or ego displeases Him, they adhere to the Qur’an’s morality and their conscience. Therefore, even in the case of divorce, they treat each other well and with justice.
Allah commands men to divorce their wives in the best possible way: “When you divorce women and they are near the end of their waiting period, then either retain them with correctness and courtesy or release them with correctness and courtesy” (Surat al-Baqara: 231). Pursuing only Allah’s good pleasure, they treat their ex-wives with tolerance, compassion, politeness, respect, and thoughtfulness, thereby continuing their former loving and respectful manner toward each other. Allah reveals the male believers’ correct behavior in such circumstances:
O you who believe! When you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have touched them, there is no waiting period for you to calculate for them, so give them a gift and let them go with kindness. (Surat al-Ahzab: 49)
Harun Yahya, whose real name is Adnan Oktar is a prominent Turkish intellectual who specializes in religious philosophy. More on the author at www.harunyahya.com

Muslim women in married life - Yemen Times

By Grant Swank
In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, B. Hussein referred to “my Muslim faith.”
Stephanopoulos tried to correct him immediately by stating “Christian faith” in place of “my Muslim faith.”
B. Hussein picked up on the correction and went on stating that he is a Christian, not Muslim.
But the insertion of “my Muslim faith” by B. Hussein has caused scores to wonder once again as to whether or not B. Hussein is in fact a mask Muslim.
It would appear as if he is.
He spent twenty years being tutored by pro-Islam Jeremiah Wright, B. Hussein not protesting once.
He has had close friendship and associate ties with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and hires on his staff Muslims from his Illinois political district.
B. Hussein went to a Muslim school, attended mosque, studied the Koran and praised its melodic cadence, even dressing in Islamic garb.
B. Hussein is close to an Islamic Kenyan political leader cousin, even encouraging the relative in his attempt to become Kenya’s president.
B. Hussein says he’s Christian — “a committed Christian.” That is impossible for he cuts through Christ’s New Testament ethics code by endorsing, for instance, sodomy and abortion.
B. Hussein is not that acquainted with the Bible for when asked about his position on homosexual practice, he told the questioner to read the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7.
There is no reference to homosexuality in the Sermon on the Mount.
B. Hussein has extolled Islam as a legitimate faith, even in his interview with Bill O’Reilly, saying that some devotees have ill-used the “faith of Islam.”
What is fact is that the “faith of Islam” is not being ill-used by a few but is basically a cultic murdering force impregnated with ill-use of the killing variety.
In other words, there is no legitimate, civil “faith of Islam” and B. Hussein knows this. George W. Bush may not know that, but B. Hussein knows that. Bush called it the religion of peace and even put the Koran in the White House library. However, B. Hussein knows better.
Much more could be cited regarding B. Hussein as a mask Muslim, but suffice it to say that at the top of his verbiage came out the “my Muslim faith” in his ABC interview.
His church membership in left-of-left theologically liberal United Church of Christ (Congregational) allows B. Hussein to claim any religion and still be considered “Christian.” That denomination permits any member to write his own definition of religion, even negating the divinity of Christ and the infallibility of Scripture.
B. Hussein takes full advantage of this license and thereby can consider himself both Muslim and “Christian.” Further, Islamics are instructed via the Koran to lie for Allah and therefore for B. Hussein to lie repeatedly is in keeping with his cult’s “holiness.”
“My Muslim faith” is no doubt fact when related to B. Hussein Obama. He is a Muslim, belonging to the Muslim faith. And he got caught in confessing that in an ABC interview.

B. Hussein: ‘My Muslim faith’

In a 2006 interview, Glenn Beck, the host of a CNN talk show, looked Muslim congressman Keith Ellison straight in the eye and said: “Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.” You have to wonder where Beck got the license to humiliate someone that way because he was connected with Islam.

Islamophobia is pervasive in public forums in the United States. Provocative commentary Web sites, culture-clash literature, biased reporting on the Middle East, end-of-time theological fiction, insensitive cartoons, terror-oriented video games and Christian Zionist sermons, all of the above and more, make many Arab- and Muslim-Americans - especially immigrants - feel alien, if not alienated.

Beck’s obsession with Islam reflects a trend. The US media persist in reporting on the growing numbers of American and European Muslims. These reports have unjustifiably raised public fears of the anticipated return of terrorism. Post-9/11 scare-mongers proclaim that America’s borders are “open and unprotected.” Agitated American communicators warn citizens to watch out for Muslim- and Arab-Americans who may be linked covertly to “terror cells” that have penetrated their homeland. An irrational fear of Muslims affects the way they are portrayed and perceived. A negative overload of information about Islam seems to overwhelm and confuse Americans. The compulsion to stereotype, to dissect, to classify, and to caricature Muslims is strong and growing.

Despite the avalanche of media output on Islam, there is a better way to understand the religion’s followers. Muslim-Americans want their neighbors to learn about their faith in the simplest way, through firsthand experience; a conversation over a cup of coffee would do it, an exchange or interfaith visit would help. What I and others learned about Muslim-Americans through exchange visits in our church community in Florida was informative, refreshing and encouraging.

Of the 6 million Muslim-Americans, 3 million are Arabs. Half of the Arabs in America are Christian. A sizable minority of the Muslim community is African-American. Muslims come to America from many nations and have varied political opinions on domestic and international issues. There is not a monolithic Arab or Muslim community in America.

Nor is there a unified or dominant Arab- or Muslim-American lobby. There are many civic and political tendencies. Muslims resist being on the defensive concerning their fidelity to America; they do not want to have to prove that they are loyal to their country. Muslims in America try their best to be a bridge between America and their countries of origin.

Bridge-making with the home country is not welcomed by alarmed advocates of controlled immigration or outright xenophobes. The demographic rise of Muslim-Americans has provoked culturally narrow-minded politicians to call for a tightly restrictive immigration policy. Proponents of such a policy point to the alleged threat of having too many aliens. In some circles, the debate has regressed to the level of asking “how many Arab or Muslim immigrants can America tolerate?”

Europeans ask similar questions about their Muslim immigrants. But the situation of Muslims in America is different. The unrest of Muslim youth in Europe is a result of socioeconomic factors, it is not religiously motivated. Many Muslim emigrants who came to Europe did so as cheap labor and never had the chance to assimilate.

In contrast, America’s Muslims have assimilated. The typical Arab- or Muslim-American is your real estate man in Miami, your grocer in Brooklyn, your student in northern Virginia, your doctor in Dearborn, your teacher in Los Angeles, your plumber in Chicago, your insurance agent in New Jersey, or your taxi driver in New York.

After 9/11 America’s fear of Muslim-related terrorism has remained steady, despite the domestic peace since the attacks that day. Yet, the media keep asking endlessly what if an Islamic terrorist hits this strategic port or that central chemical facility, this government office or that public health facility, this target or that. The recurring message for the American people is to remain on perpetual alert and to be conscious of Muslims.

The response of the Muslim Congressman Ellison to Glenn Beck’s verbal assault expressed the sentiments of all Muslim-Americans. He said: “Well, let me tell you, the people of the Fifth Congressional District know that I have a deep love and affection for my country. There’s no one who is more patriotic than I am. And so, you know, I don’t need to - need to prove my patriotic stripes.”

Ghassan Rubeiz is an Arab-American commentator. He wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.

The Daily Star - Opinion Articles - America’s Islamophobia problem

By Jerome Taylor
Monday, 8 September 2008

AP

Muslims at prayer at the Grand Mosque in Srinagar, India, during the holy month of Ramadan

Hindu and Sikh leaders have accused the BBC of pandering to Britain’s Muslim community by making a disproportionate number of programmes on Islam at the expense of covering other Asian religions.

A breakdown of programming from the BBC’s Religion and Ethics department, seen by The Independent, reveals that since 2001, the BBC made 41 faith programmes on Islam, compared with just five on Hinduism and one on Sikhism.

Critics say the disproportionate amount of programming is part of an apparent bias within the BBC towards Islam since the attacks of 11 September 2001, which has placed an often uncomfortable media spotlight on Britain’s Muslims.

Ashish Joshi, the chairman of the Network of Sikh Organisation’s (NSO) media monitoring group, which obtained the numbers, said many Hindu and Sikh licence-fee payers felt cheated. “People in our communities are shocked,” he said. “We are licence-fee payers and we want to know why this has happened. The bias towards Islam at the expense of Hindus and particularly Sikhs is overwhelming and appears to be a part of BBC policy.”

Indarjit Singh, the editor of the Sikh Messenger and a regular contributor to BBC Radio4’s Thought for the Day, said that the public broadcaster was focusing too much attention on Islam at the expense of other religious communities.

“I think it’s probably unthinking, or inadvertent, but the bias is there,” he said. “I do know that within the Sikh community especially there is a feeling of concern over the lack of portrayal of their religion on television. There is a feeling of being brushed aside.”

He added: “The wider community is missing out on what the different religions have to offer society. Of course it is important to educate non-Muslims about Islam but it is also important to provide informative, open and respectful programming on all religions.”

In a letter sent in July to the NSO, the head of the BBC’s Religion and Ethics, Michael Wakelin, denied that there was any bias. He said the demographic makeup of Britain meant that Britain’s 1.6 million Muslims outnumber Hindus and Sikhs by two to one. “Therefore,” he wrote, “if Muslims get 60 minutes a year, the Sikhs and Hindus should share 30 minutes each.” Further content on Islam, he added, was “no doubt sparked by the interest in the faith following 9/11″.

The latest row over the BBC’s cultural output follows a dispute raging at the BBC’s Asian Network radio service, where more than 20 former and current employees have written a letter of complaint alleging that the station ignores Muslim listeners and plays less Pakistani and Bangladeshi music than it should.

A spokesman for the BBC said the broadcaster was committed to representing all of Britain’s faiths and communities. “We reject any claims of bias,” he said. “In our religion and ethics content alone, we have covered Hindu and Sikh issues this year on The Big Questions, Sunday Life and Extreme Pilgrim. In the autumn we will be covering Diwali from a Sikh perspective and we have a major new series for BBC Two in early 2009, including features on Hinduism and Sikhism.”

But a number of MPs, including Rob Marris and Keith Vaz, called on the BBC to do more to represent Britain’s minority faiths. “I am disappointed,” said Mr Vaz. “It is only right that as licence fee payers all faiths are represented in a way that mirrors their make-up in society. I hope that the BBC … addresses the problem in its next year of programming.”

Sikhs and Hindus accuse BBC of pro-Muslim bias - Media, News - The Independent