|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rational Muslims should speak against the obscurantist, medieval and irrational ideas of Zakir Naik
December 5, 2009
It is surprising that the process of development of rational thinking among Muslims is very slow. Most middle class Muslims also treat this issue as that of identity. This is high time that educated, rational and secular Muslims should come out and speak against the obscurantist, medieval and irrational ideas being propounded by the likes of Mr. Zakir Naik. …
Hello, I am writing here because I want to opine about zakir naik and how he is distancing Muslims from others and vice versa. I grew up in a multicultural environment and grew up having best friends as Muslims Hindus both. I knew well that there are a lot of differences in our religions but we believed, live and let live. I don’t understand why zakir naik feels that peace can exist between Hindus and Muslims only if Hindus convert. Though he never mentions this, it’s very clear when u hear his lectures.
Drop Lashkar, Obama warns Pak president
AI condemns Islamophobic Swiss vote
Hindu-Muslim couple commit suicide
He was a Jew who converted to Islam while in college. He went from "holding liberal ideas about Islam to conservatism to militancy". He worked for the head of a Wahhabi organisation that the US government has since named a ’specially designated global terrorist entity’ with alleged links to al-Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba, the perpetrators of 26/11. As the FBI and the Indian investigative agencies work overtime to trace David Coleman Headley’s deadly terror trail in India, and as America seeks answers to the recent killing rampage by a US army major of Palestinian origin, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross writes for TOI-Crest on why he became a radical Islamist – as well as his journey back, post 9/11. Today, he is one of America’s foremost authorities on counter-terrorism and works with the FBI in its investigation of terror organisations, particularly on home-grown extremism.
Both Biswakumar and Gupta have a good word for Brown though. They feel the author has graduated from being a critic of the Freemasons (in The Da Vinci Code) to a virtual proponent of the fraternity in The Lost Symbol. Flipping through The Lost Symbol, the Grand Master tells you how public perception of the fraternity is not as bad as it used to be. "Earlier, we were seen as practitioners of black magic. One reason for opening up some of our ceremonies is also to tell, at least to our brothers’ families, that we are not into anything evil. Till some years ago, people used to identify Freemason lodges as haunted houses," he says. — Arun Ram
In a first, women offer namaz at Orissa mosque
Swiss Radicalization: A Sign of Things to Come?
December 5, 2009| Muslims and Islamophobia | |
| 05 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Swiss Radicalization: A Sign of Things to Come? | |
 ‘Minaret ban reminiscent of wars of Middle Ages’
European rabbis condemn Swiss minaret ban Religious Leaders Slam Swiss Minaret Ban Minaret Ban – Muslim Scholars Urge Swiss Muslims to Remain Calm Turkey regrets ‘rise in Islamophobia’ Indonesia says Swiss minaret ban obstacle to interfaith harmony Photo: Mosque in Aswan, Egypt, with minarets – Wikipedia URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2190 Swiss Radicalization: A Sign of Things to Come? December 4, 2009 Nestle. The United Nations. Rolex. Secure Banking. Toblerone. Yodeling. William Tell. Cowbells. Neutrality. Rousseau. Alpine Skiing. Heidi. These are a few of the things — mostly pretty — that come to mind when you say "Switzerland." But now thanks to a recent popular vote on a controversial referendum, things like "intolerance," "paranoia," and "limitations on freedom of religion" have joined the merry list. In case you have not heard already, 57% of Swiss voters approved a proposal Sunday to ban mosque minarets in a nationwide referendum sponsored by the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), a right-wing group long known for its anti-immigration campaigns. A complacent Swiss government subsequently stated that it will "respect the decision" of the people and will affect the ban on all new minarets in the country. 2009-12-02-swiss_minaret.jpgThe SVP flooded the tiny landlocked Alpine state with posters in which minarets appeared as missiles rising from the Swiss flag. They told voters that "the minaret is a sign of political power and demand, comparable with whole-body covering by the burqa, tolerance of forced marriage and genital mutilation of girls." This is not true of course. Most Muslims accept the minaret as an architectural conduit for the call to prayer, but most do not seek political power, subscribe to the burqa, tolerate forced marriages, or accept genital mutilation of girls. Forced marriages and female circumcision happen mostly in poor, uneducated parts of the world and have no foundation in Islam. The burqa is worn by less than 1% of Muslim women. How these three things are "comparable" with a minaret must be Switzerland’s dirty little secret because I cannot figure it out. Yet by casting the minaret, a mainstream symbol of normative Islam, as some kind of Trojan horse bearing the Achilles heel that will vanquish Swiss political and cultural hegemony, the SVP seems to have petrified people into a knee-jerk acceptance of a draconian ban that amounts to throwing out the baby with the bathwater. While the ban has dismayed Muslims, it should also embarrass Switzerland whose polished image will likely take a major beating. The Swiss logic here is as arbitrary and nonsensical as if Dubai were to ban skyscrapers because they "represent American corporate greed which is partially to blame for the misguided war in Iraq." Imagine the scornful reaction around the world then. Personally, I have vacationed in Switzerland many times. I have taken the famed glacier express from St. Moritz in the West to Zermatt in the East, climbed the Matterhorn in the Alps, enjoyed promenades in the Boulevards of Geneva, and walked among the rooftops of Zurich and Neuchatel. I found the Swiss to be generally pleasant (though somewhat aloof). It is beyond me why such a beautiful country would choose to take a turn for the ugly. Swiss Muslim Professor Tariq Ramadan says it is fear. Perhaps, but it is more than that. It is also cluelessness. Fear is not always such a bad thing; the Swiss had every right to fear the Nazis. But to ban an architectural form that scares you is a thing of prehistoric naiveté. Worse still, to be ignorant of what a minaret truly symbolizes — to the tune of some 57% of voters — signals that the wrong people are talking and a clueless majority are listening and following. The minaret has been around, appropriated in the unique architectural traditions of every culture, for 14 centuries. Sure there are minarets that surround the Taliban, but minarets also surrounded the scholars, philosophers and scientists of Baghdad, Damascus, Tashkent, Seville, Toledo, and Cordoba whose body of work helped jumpstart Europe out of its dark age and into its renaissance. They surrounded and still surround the students of the oldest surviving university in the world, Al-Azhar of Cairo. They dot the skylines of cities from Casablanca to Brunei, and Istanbul to the Zanzibar, calling their peaceful residents only to God-consciousness. They adorn the four corners of what is widely considered to be the most beautiful man-made structure on earth, the Taj Mahal of India. The short-sightedness of the anti-minaret campaign is fuelled by more than fear. It is fuelled by hate. For as long as most people living today have been around, Europe has enjoyed a stint as a tolerant, liberal hub of multiculturalism, personal freedoms, and all-around prosperity. But suffer from historical amnesia at your own risk, for history has a ruthless tendency to repeat itself. Before we get too comfortable and fully let our guard down, we may do well to remember that it was not so long ago that the tame territory of delectable delights, chocolate, wine, and cheese was engulfed by fascist ideologies that were anything but. Indeed, it was only as recent as two generations ago that those nations, who today fancy themselves as the defenders of freedoms around the world, were the purveyors of extreme brands of racism, uber-nationalism, and imperialism that launched the world into two destructive global wars and history’s most egregious genocide. Given the burden of Europe’s recent past, it is astonishing to note how readily Switzerland, itself a long-time haven of neutrality even during World War II (not exactly a great thing when you consider that human beings were being huddled into gas chambers North, West, and East), could teeter at the precipice of an eerily familiar abyss wherein citizens of a hapless religious minority are demonized and their rights freely limited. Sadly Switzerland’s minaret vote is not the only troubling omen facing Europeans today. While the winds of fascism are not exactly sweeping over Europe as I write, a few unwelcome breezes seem to be intensifying and cannot be ignored. The other Semites, Muslims, are in the eye of the storm this time around — Jews having borne the brunt of the last tempest. For Europe, "Never Again" seems to be a slogan for one religious minority at a time. Let me be clear, the situation of Muslims in Europe today cannot be analogized to that of Jews 70 years ago. But those familiar with European history know that the zenith of 20th Century anti-Semitism was not born overnight. It evolved over time eventually reaching grotesque proportions. At first, a vanguard of voices claiming unique insight and expertise on Jewish affairs sought to "wake society up" to "know" and "confront" the nature of the threat festering in their midst. This involved columnists, preachers, politicians, and yes cartoonists. Jews were caste as the other, foreign implants who can never be fully European regardless of whether or not they were citizens working and living side by side with everyone else. Their religion was judged as too exotic, too sinister, an anti-European ideology that could not be trusted. Their history was recast into a carefully crafted narrative of perpetual anti-Christian mischief. At first, their religious rights were curbed, and then they were rendered second class citizens. Things quickly dwindled thereafter. Today, I cannot help but wonder: had it not been for Germany’s tolerance of the demonization of Jews in the early decades when it then seemed mundane and uneventful, would a crime as outlandish as the "final solution" ever have found the mass acceptance that it did further down the line? Worth mentioning is that despite the lessons learned from the Holocaust, Europe’s only indigenous Muslim minority could not itself escape genocide a few decades later — the first and only genocide to occur on European soil since World War II. So what about today’s breezes of intolerance whisking through the continent? In the United Kingdom, the far-right British Nationalist Party (BNP), a splinter group of the Whites-only British National Front (BNF) is experiencing a new surge. The far-right Dutch Party for Freedom, whose leader Geert Wilders advocates banning the Quran and curbing Muslim religious freedom, placed second in a recent election in the Netherlands. In France and Austria, far-right political groups spouting anti-Muslim rhetoric are also gaining ground. The SVP, the group behind the minaret ban and a poster campaign depicting white sheep kicking black sheep out of Switzerland, is now Switzerland’s biggest political party. Reports show that racism is on the rise in Switzerland and elsewhere in Europe. Astroturf groups that openly call for the demonization for Muslims such as ACT! for America, SANE, SIOA, and SIOE are becoming a dime a dozen. Vandalism of Muslim cemeteries and mosques and hate crimes are happening more frequently. In Germany, a Hijab-wearing woman was stabbed to death in front of her three-year-old child while seeking justice in a German court against the perpetrator who had hurled racist slurs at her in a public playground a few days earlier. Stephan Kramer, General Secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany subsequently deplored the "largely unchecked hate propaganda against Muslims." Throughout Europe, anti-Muslim rhetoric expressed in editorials, columns, campaign ads, hate blogs, and political cartoons is on the rise. European leaders and intellectuals are rightly concerned about Muslim extremism and radicalization, but what are they doing to fight anti-Muslim extremism and radicalization? Is it even duly acknowledged? Cynics often deflect attention by pointing out human rights abuses in the Middle East or Asia. The West is right to call out abuses of freedoms in the Muslim-majority world, but it is wrong to pursue a campaign of reciprocity that betrays its own principles as a response. Western Intellectuals are wrong to turn a blind eye to such a farce when it occurs. The Swiss referendum raises an important question about the great conundrum of democracy: if a majority of voters opt for dictatorship, is the result a democracy or a dictatorship? The answer lies in a simple concept: the constitution. The constitutions of democratic nations enshrine the principles of freedom and democracy and act as the final say on what future action can and cannot be done. A vote that betrays those principles is a vote that ought not to take place. In other words, a referendum that seeks to curb religious freedoms presumably protected by Swiss high law is itself unconstitutional and should not have been allowed in the first place. Should the West choose to remain reactionary in how it deals with Muslim extremism — real or perceived — then it unwisely relinquishes its fate to the hands of terrorists who know that it would only then take a few more attacks to sink Western societies into self-defeating frenzy. Make no mistake about it, merely inflicting explosions that tear down towers of steel and glass is not terrorism’s ultimate goal or greatest threat, being a catalyst for Western self-implosion is. While the West needs to remain vigilant against physical threats, it needs to know that its greatest weapon against ultimate defeat is holding steadfastly unto its principles of democracy, freedoms and equal citizenship. Protecting and strengthening those traditions, integrating minorities as equals in society, and working academically to fight extremism, both Muslim and anti-Muslim, is our best assurance for future security and prosperity. Failing to do so spells the beginning of the end. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ahmed-rehab/swiss-radicalization-a-si_b_377242.html Minaret Ban – Iums Urges Swiss Muslims to Remain Calm Yusuf Al-Qaradawi 3 December 2009 The International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) has received with shock and surprise the results of the Swiss referendum on the proposed amendment to Article 72 of the Swiss Constitution, to include a new clause banning the building of minarets. As the results of the referendum show that 57.4% of voters approved of the amendment, it reveals a clear contradiction between the Swiss peoples’ flaunting and boasting of democracy and religious freedom, and the racist and "Islamophobic" content of this referendum, which contradicts with all human rights constitutions and conventions, religious freedoms, and cultural diversity. Today, they ban minarets, and tomorrow they may ban the mosques themselves! What could prevent it as long as the racist right wing movement that is intolerant towards foreigners is leading this campaign! It is well known for all that minarets only constitute a signpost for the places of worship and that they have no other significance, whether political or otherwise. Rather, they represent a beautiful architectural symbol that is a witness to the country’s tolerance and cultural and religious diversity. Indeed, those who drew up such a resolution among narrow-minded right wing extremists have taken advantage of the nurtured fear from Muslims by warning of the alleged expansion of their religious demands in the Swiss state, and went as far as claiming that Muslims work for "Minarets today, and the application of Shari’ah tomorrow!" Well, this is sheer delusion and a flight of fancy. If most Muslim countries themselves do not apply Shari’ah, how can a sound minded person believe that people in Europe, who are mostly non-Muslims, would apply Shari’ah? And though the current parliament and government did not approve of holding the referendum in the first place, and the church bishops opposed it, still the result of the referendum is disappointing for the Muslim minority living among the Swiss society who represent a bright example in their moral and humanitarian dealings through their integration, co-existence and openness towards all members of the Swiss society. Besides, such a result has thwarted all the expectations of Muslim minorities living in the West in general, and stirred their apprehension of such moves that could possibly be adopted by similar right-wing parties in other countries. Those right-wing parties, in turn, could follow similar steps as a means of applying more restrictions against Muslims in any European country, and exploit the Islamophobic environment that has intensified due to incessant instigation by the media machine that distorts the image of Islam and Muslims and portrays them in other than their true nature. Likewise, this result has frustrated the expectations of all Muslims around the world, and we think it will lead to substantial revisions and raise questions about the feasibility of dialogue and rapprochement between Muslims and non-Muslims in the Islamic world in general, and especially in the West, since the status of some Muslim religious symbols and places of worship in this cultural environment have become susceptible to debates, laws and referendums every now and then! So, what is then the point of holding dialogue, if it enhances the stance of extremist elements among Muslims who say that the West with whom you call us to dialogue and cooperate hates you and chases you away! Building on this painful reality and also on our responsibility towards these Muslim minorities, the IUMS maintains the following: http://allafrica.com/stories/200912040388.html Turkey regrets ‘rise in Islamophobia’ Dec 04 2009 by Gabriel Hershman Turkey’s foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu has expressed concern at the Swiss decision on November 29 to ban the building of minarets. "There is a rise in Islamophobia, in the concept of ‘the other’, as if they do not belong to society," said Davutoglu during an interview with the BBC. "It may be today Muslims, tomorrow Jews, the next day blacks, the next Africans. In this new global world we will be living together everywhere, so we need a new spirit of tolerance everywhere." Davutoglu also made clear that Turkey still desired to become a full member of the EU. "All the countries that start accession negotiations with the EU, they became members of the EU, except Norway which didn’t want it. Based on this statistical analysis, I can say, Turkey will be a member of the EU, 100 per cent," he told the BBC. Davutoglu said that Turkish admission to the EU was a litmus test for its development. "There are two ways in front of the EU," he said. "Either the EU will be a global power, a dynamic economy and a multicultural global environment, or a continental power with a less dynamic economy, with a more inward-looking culture. These are the two options." He added that Turkey’s entry into the EU would transform the organisation into a global power. "I am optimistic. I believe in the rationality of the EU approach. I’m sure Turkey will be a member, a contributing member – not a burden, but a big asset for the EU," he said. http://www.sofiaecho.com/2009/12/04/825689_turkey-regrets-rise-in-islamophobia Switzerland’s vote to ban minarets boosts European racists by Chris Bambery Pic: The far right SVP plastered the country with these racist posters and billboards Across Europe, racists have cheered the result of last Sunday’s referendum in Switzerland, which saw a vote to impose a ban on the building of minarets on mosques. “Switzerland forever white and Christian,” said Mario Borghezio, a member of the European Parliament for the anti-immigrant Northern League in Italy, as he hailed the result. The League is now calling for the cross to be added to the Italian flag, to affirm the country’s “Christian identity”. And in Holland, anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders is demanding a similar ban. “What is possible in Switzerland should also be possible here,” he says. The result shows the growing climate of Islamophobia in Europe that is feeding fascists and other bigots. This not just about words—it is leading to attacks on Muslims. Before the referendum the main mosque in Geneva was vandalised, and cobblestones were thrown at it, damaging a mosaic. Farhad Afshar of the Coordination of Islamic Organisations in Switzerland warned that, “Muslims will not feel safe any more.” The referendum over minarets was initiated by the far-right Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which forced a vote after collecting 100,000 signatures from eligible citizens. The SVP is the largest party in parliament and part of the ruling Swiss coalition government. It gained its biggest vote in the 2007 federal election where it ran an anti-immigrant campaign, saying “criminal foreigners” needed to be kicked out of the country. It used the referendum as a way to further this racist agenda. Posters The SVP was allowed to turn the referendum into a vote on the very presence of Muslims within the country. It focused on claims that Switzerland would be put under Sharia law. SVP posters urging a vote in support of the ban showed a menacing-looking woman in a black burqa posing next to missile-like minarets standing on top of the Swiss flag—a Switzerland which had been “taken over” by Islam. The anti-Muslim arguments found support beyond the far right. Prominent Swiss feminist Julia Onken backed the ban, claiming that failure to ban minarets would be “a signal of the state’s acceptance of the oppression of women”. She sent out 4,000 emails attacking Muslims who “condone forced marriage, honour killings and beating women”. Many of those Muslims facing discrimination in Switzerland fled former Yugoslavia in search of a haven. Now they are again targets. Switzerland has traditionally relied on migrant labour, but also has a long history of racism. After the Second World War, Italian “guest workers” were subject to racist discrimination, including being banned from public parks. The police were handed control over immigration policy, with a duty to prevent the “over-foreignisation” of the country. The SVP has now collected enough signatures for another referendum, which will allow foreigners convicted of a crime or falsely claiming welfare to be expelled from the country. It has also said it will move to ban the burqa. The referendum result will boost racist and fascist parties across Europe, with their claims that Islam wants to take over Europe. Yet Islam is an integral part of European civilisation. In the Middle Ages both Muslim Andalucía in Spain and Sicily in Italy were centres of learning and scholarship. Today, the Islamophobia which accompanied the US-led assaults on Iraq and Afghanistan has become intertwined with the anti-migrant racism that has grown with the economic crisis, creating a poisonous brew. Indonesia says Swiss minaret ban obstacle to interfaith harmony 04 Dec 2009 Jakarta – Indonesia on Friday criticized a Swiss referendum approving a ban on the construction of minarets, saying the move would not help efforts to promote religious harmony. The outcome of Sunday’s vote in favour of the ban on tall towers attached to mosques has sparked criticism across the Muslim world. "Indonesia strongly deplores any measures which are inconsistent with the promotion of religious harmony," Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said in a news conference. "This referendum has convinced us that there are still misconceptions and stereotypes against a particular religion," he said. The minaret vote surprised many in and outside Switzerland and left many Swiss concerned that the decision would make their country look intolerant. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has criticized the ban as "discriminatory, deeply divisive and a thoroughly unfortunate step for Switzerland to take." Religious Leaders Slam Swiss Minaret Ban By Lorena Margam Dec. 04 2009 Prominent religious and political leaders expressed strong disapproval of the recent ban on the construction of Muslim minaret towers in Switzerland. The Rev. Ishmael Noko, general secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, told Ecumenical News International that his organization “regrets that some sectors of Swiss society and politics found it necessary to take the issue of the construction of minarets in Switzerland to a referendum, and to force a decision for or against a ban.” “This action has framed this interest in explicitly sectarian terms vis-a-vis Muslims,” Noko stated. "It thereby undermines efforts at inter-religious understanding and harmony in Switzerland, and the Swiss reputation and heritage of tolerance and hospitality." The ban was approved on Sunday by a 57.5 percent vote from Swiss citizens, much to the shock of government officials. Heavily backed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party and other conservative groups, propaganda for the campaign included posters depicting minaret towers as missiles on top of a Swiss flag. The Swiss Council of Religions (SCR), a national body made up of Jews, Christians and Muslims, released a statement saying that their group “decisively rejects the Minaret Initiative.” Defining themselves as being “dedicated to protecting religious peace in Switzerland and to strengthening trust among the churches and religious communities, “ the SCR said that the minaret initiative “instrumentalizes religion for political aims and engenders mistrust among the populace.” The United Nations has also criticized the move, with UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief Asma Jahangir calling the ban a "clear discrimination towards the members of the Swiss Muslim community.” "I have serious concerns about the negative consequences of the outcome of this vote on the freedom of religion or belief of members of the Swiss Muslim community," Jahangir said in a statement released on Monday. Only four minarets actually exist in Switzerland, in the cities of Geneva and Frankfurt, while there are an estimated 200 mosques and prayer rooms throughout the country. Muslims account for about 4.5 percent of Switzerland’s 7.6 million-large population. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091204/religious-leaders-slam-swiss-minaret-ban/ European rabbis condemn Swiss minaret ban Kobi Nahshoni 12.04.09 During Moscow summit members of Conference of European Rabbis issue censure of Swiss referendum results endorsing ban on construction of minarets. ‘Europe cannot beat radical Islam by knocking down minarets; moderate elements should be supported,’ Rabbi Aba Dunner says Members of the Conference of European Rabbis (CER) issued a condemnation Wednesday of a minaret ban endorsed by the Swiss public. During a meeting in Moscow the rabbis declared the decision to be undemocratic for violating freedom of religion. Executive director of the CER Rabbi Aba Dunner commented on the rabbis’ statement and noted that he opposed the ban not only due to the legal issues it posed, but since it reflected a fear of radical Islam. The rabbi said that Europe could not triumph over Islam by taking down minarets and added that the right course of action should be supporting moderate elements within the Muslim community and cultivating dialogue between religions. In a referendum held in Switzerland on Sunday, 57.5% of voters approved a ban on construction of new minarets, a decision which prompted worldwide criticism. T The 47-nation Council of Europe said that banning new minarets in Switzerland "raises concerns as to whether fundamental rights of individuals, protected by international treaties, should be subject to popular votes." Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey expressed the government’s concern and said that the restriction of the ability of different cultures and religions to live side by side jeopardized the public’s security and could prompt violent reactions on the part of extremists. Calmy-Rey noted that the ban would come into force immediately, but indicated that it could be overturned since it contradicts the European Human Rights Convention. Jewish-EU collaboration The rabbinical censure was issued during a semi-annual conference held by the CER in Russia. Dozens of rabbis from across the continent attended the meeting and marked 20 years to the renewal of Jewish life in Russia. The conference was also attended by Chairman of the Russian Federation Council Sergey Mironov, Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, Israeli Minister for Jewish heritage Meshulam Nahari, as well as representatives from the European Council and the local Jewish community. European Council President Jerzy Buzek sent a greeting to the conference’s participants, in which he wrote that the meeting was a basis for serious dialogue between religions and illustrated the positive relations between Jewish representatives and EU institutes. He further added that the Jewish faith has contributed to the shaping of European culture and values and noted that cooperation alone would ensure that the events of World War II would not repeat themselves. During a meeting with the rabbis, Mironov promised that freedom of religion and contact with the Jewish community will be strictly upheld and pledged to fight any manifestation of anti-Semitism. Mironov further noted that he would promote a special memorial day for Holocaust victims to be integrated into the Victory in Europe day. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3814454,00.html ‘Minaret ban reminiscent of wars of Middle Ages’ 04 Dec 2009 Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu says a recent ban on construction of new minarets in Switzerland is reminiscent of sectarian wars of the Middle Ages. Davutoglu warned that the move could incite clashes on a global scale if sufficient measures are not taken, the Turkish Zaman newspaper reported on Thursday. “The issue is too serious to be dealt with by mere statements," Turkey’s top diplomat said. “I am very concerned. We must take this issue very seriously. It is not something to be underestimated as an individual case," Davutoglu stated. “Who can say for sure that mosques in Europe are safe now? Fifteen years ago, hundreds of mosques were burned down in Bosnia," he added. Following a weekend referendum, the construction of any new minaret was declared illegal in Switzerland, a move which drew sharp criticism from Muslim and European countries, as well as the UN and the Vatican. Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=112808§ionid=351020204 URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2190 |
Muslim Punk Rock: A Mashup of Piety and Politics
December 5, 2009| Islamic Culture | |
| 05 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Muslim Punk Rock: A Mashup of Piety and Politics | |
 For Knight, punk’s rebellious ethos echoes the rebellious spirit of Islam, which, when it began in 7th century Arabia, directly challenged everything from the Meccan economic power structures of the day to the prevailing tribal views on women. Knight’s novel opens with a poem, which Poursalehi set to music and which has become an anthem of sorts for the scene: "Muhammed was a punk rocker/ You know he tore s___ up/ Muhammed was a punk rocker/ Rancid sticker on his pickup truck." For Knight, now a graduate student in Islamic studies at Harvard University, the richness and elasticity of Islam has allowed a Muslim punk scene to develop and now flourish. "The energy of punk is about tearing down," he says. "But I don’t want to just be tearing something down. I want to build, to do something positive."
Photo: Basim Usmani of the Kominas rocks out in Chicago, in a scene from the documentary Taqwacore: The Birth of Punk Islam URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2192 Muslim Punk Rock: A Mashup of Piety and Politics Dec. 03, 2009 When Jimi Hendrix smashed his guitar in the 1960s, it was clear he was attacking the Establishment. When a Muslim punk rocker smashes up a guitar outside an American Muslim convention, the now-standard rock ‘n’ roll trope gains a few new meanings. These young punks are taking on every establishment going: Muslim, American and Muslim American. "In this so-called war of civilizations, we’re giving the finger to both sides," says the godfather of the Muslim punk movement, Michael Muhammad Knight, in Taqwacore: The Birth of Punk Islam, a new documentary by Pakistani-Canadian director Omar Majeed. As a mashup of piety and politics, hard-core music and anarchy, the Muslim punk movement makes the Sex Pistols look like Fleetwood Mac. The guitar-smashing episode occurred in 2007 after a crowd of Muslim punks were thrown out of the Islamic Society of North America’s open-mike night. They had shocked attendants at the meeting — North America’s largest annual Muslim gathering — not just by cranking up their amps, swearing and screaming their lyrics, but also by having a woman sing onstage. In the documentary, young women in hijabs are shown staring open-mouthed at first, then rocking out and yelling, "Stop the hate!" The concert then comes to an abrupt halt when the meeting’s organizers, backed by Chicago police, step in, deeming it "not Islamically appropriate." Afterward, the punks smash their guitars and begin an ironic, anti-authority chant outside: "Music is haram [forbidden]!" (See pictures of Muslims in America.) In their small but burgeoning scene — there are only a handful of Muslim punk bands in the U.S. and Canada — rebellion is an act of piety. Strident as their sound can seem, it is, in spirit, in harmony with other rebellious voices that are rising amid the breakdown of authority in the Islamic world. Whether they’re the voices of Muslim feminists going back to read the Koran and the Hadith as documents of liberation, gay Muslims working out a theology that embraces homosexuality or even the millions of Muslim youths trusting Islamic chat rooms — which one British Muslim leader has dismissed as "Sheik Google" — over the local imam, they, like Muslim punks, are expressing a growing dissent with the Islamic world’s mainstream theologians. It was Knight, an American convert, who first articulated a vision for a Muslim punk scene in 2002, when he wrote a novel about it called The Taqwacores. (The title combines the words taqwa, Arabic for "higher consciousness," and core, from hardcore.) He then received an e-mail from a 16-year-old Texan Muslim, Kourosh Poursalehi, who was in a band called Vote Hezbollah, asking how he could get in touch with the mohawked Sufis, skater punks, burqa-wearing riot grrrls and skinhead Shi’ites in the book. When Knight told him it was fiction, Poursalehi responded, "Well, then I’ll make it real." With Knight’s help, he began contacting like-minded Muslim musicians on the Internet. Soon, Muslim bands from across the U.S. and Canada decided to put together a tour in a green-spray-painted school bus. Among the performers were the Kominas, a Boston group fronted by Pakistani Americans, and Secret Trial Five, a Vancouver band fronted by a lesbian, Sena Hussain. (See pictures of Ramadan.) Given punk’s history and values, Muslim punk makes sense, says Majeed. "Punk tends to gravitate toward marginalized voices," he says. "So it’s no surprise that there are Afro-punks, Latino punks. It’s about questioning authority. The purpose of it is not to be a jerk, but to talk truth to power." The scene has certainly managed to rankle both Muslim and punk traditionalists. "There are Muslims who think you’re not supposed to be rude if you’re pious, you’re not supposed to be playing music," Majeed says. "Punks have told [Muslim punks] there’s no room for God or religion in punk. If there is, it’s like, ‘You’re a fool, you’ve been co-opted by the Man.’ " (Read "Jakarta: Punk’s Last Refuge.") For Knight, punk’s rebellious ethos echoes the rebellious spirit of Islam, which, when it began in 7th century Arabia, directly challenged everything from the Meccan economic power structures of the day to the prevailing tribal views on women. Knight’s novel opens with a poem, which Poursalehi set to music and which has become an anthem of sorts for the scene: "Muhammed was a punk rocker/ You know he tore s___ up/ Muhammed was a punk rocker/ Rancid sticker on his pickup truck." For Knight, now a graduate student in Islamic studies at Harvard University, the richness and elasticity of Islam has allowed a Muslim punk scene to develop and now flourish. "The energy of punk is about tearing down," he says. "But I don’t want to just be tearing something down. I want to build, to do something positive." Source: Time Magazine URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2192 |
Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America
December 5, 2009| Books and Documents | |
| 05 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America | |
 As the burgeoning and pernicious scourge of global radical Islam continues to proliferate in an unfettered manner, it is clear that within our borders the threat to our cherished democratic values and principles are all too real. The release of this book of paramount importance by authors Gaubatz and Sperry hasn’t come a moment too soon. To say that the information published in these pages is a real eye opener is an understatement of monumental proportions. It is a must read for anyone, the world over, who still clings to the hope of freedom, peace and liberty that Western civilization represents. – Fern Sidman
URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2191
Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America by Fern Sidman December 4th, 2009 Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America by P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry Published by World Net Daily Books (2009) P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry obtained more than 12,000 pages of confidential CAIR documents and hundreds of hours of video for their book Muslim Mafia. The Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-based Islamic terrorist organization, appears to be alive and well and cloaking itself in legitimacy in our nation’s capitol under the guise of a front group, say intrepid undercover agents P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry in their new book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America (World Net Daily Books 2009). Investigative journalism reaches new levels in doughtiness and concludes with a shocking crescendo in this tome, as Gaubatz, his son Chris and Paul Sperry infiltrate the shady Washington, DC-based organization known as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest and purportedly mainstream Muslim-American "civil rights" advocacy agency. The frightening facts published in this book are supported by more than 12,000 pages of confidential CAIR documents and hundreds of hours of video captured in this unprecedented undercover operation. Through painstaking and nuanced research of internal memos and documents, the authors establish that CAIR is the ideological cousin of the notorious Muslim Brotherhood and their leadership is inextricably tied to the promulgation of an explosively violent "jihadist" agenda. Utilizing double-speak and a wide variety of cleverly devised subterfuges, CAIR manages to present itself as a law abiding, pro-American organization; however, the authors expose their unbridled mendacity in its most egregious form. Mr. Gaubatz served for twelve years as a former agent with the US Air Force Office of Special Investigations and is a career military counterterrorism specialist as well as a US State Department-trained Arabic linguist. Joining him on this six-month long covert foray into the nefarious machinations of CAIR and its ties to Muslim terrorists of all stripes are his son Chris, who worked undercover as a convert to Islam, and Paul Sperry, a veteran investigative journalist and author of Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington. This book could effortlessly take its rightful place among classic hair-raising espionage thrillers if its tragic geo-political realities weren’t so terrifying. The authors scrupulously document CAIR’s foreign fundraising sources, including exceedingly large donations from the Wahabi-dominated Saudi Arabian government that helped birth the 9/11 hijackers. Not to be outdone, CAIR also assumes the role of benefactor, as the recipients of their financial largesse include such heinous terror organizations as Hamas. Moreover, the authors offer shocking revelations about CAIR’s infiltration of key US law enforcement agencies including local police departments, the FBI, the CIA and the State Department as well as their heavy handed influence operations against members of homeland security committees on Capitol Hill and their insertion of Islamic spies in congressional offices. According to the authors, FBI wiretaps reveal that, "During a secret Muslim Brotherhood meeting he organized last decade, CAIR founder and former chair Omar Ahmad expressed the need to strengthen ‘the influence with Congress.’" He argued for using Muslims as an "entry point" to "pressure Congress and the decision makers in America" to change US foreign policy in the Middle East and other policies." CAIR’s far-reaching tentacles have even permeated corporate America, say the authors, as they and their sister organization, the Islamic Society of North America, blackmail Wall Street firms who do not comply with Islamic financing principles. The authors also spotlight CAIR’s use of intimidation tactics in silencing their political opponents, as evidenced by their efforts to blacklist such media personalities as Bill O’Reilly, Dr. Laura Schlesinger, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage while pressuring the National Review to acquiesce to their demands. While elected officials from both sides of the aisle, including former President George W. Bush, have legitimized the dubious organization with governmental recognition and ceremonial gravitas, CAIR’s underlying credo remains seditious and rabidly anti-American until this very day. The authors remind us that in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, President Bush appeared alongside officials from CAIR and other outwardly benign Muslim groups that weren’t properly vetted at the Islamic Center of Washington in a display of "unity." The unsuspecting former President announced, "It is my honor to be meeting with leaders who feel just the same way as I do. They’re outraged, they’re sad. They love America just as much as I do." These words would come back to haunt the President as facts concerning CAIR’s zealous legal representation of Muslim-Americans charged with terrorist activities came to the fore and as history would record, certain members of CAIR’s own leadership would turn out to be unindicted co-conspirators in helping to finance terrorist organizations. As the burgeoning and pernicious scourge of global radical Islam continues to proliferate in an unfettered manner, it is clear that within our borders the threat to our cherished democratic values and principles are all too real. The release of this book of paramount importance by authors Gaubatz and Sperry hasn’t come a moment too soon. To say that the information published in these pages is a real eye opener is an understatement of monumental proportions. It is a must read for anyone, the world over, who still clings to the hope of freedom, peace and liberty that Western civilization represents. Source: www.intellectualconservative.com URL of this Page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamIslamicWorldNews_1.aspx?ArticleID=2191 |
What drew me to Islam
December 5, 2009| Islamic Society | |
| 05 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| What drew me to Islam | |
| One of my Muslim friends’ mother, who had helped me learn about Islam, was very kind to me and opened up her home to me during that time.
That kind woman who taught me how to pray, invited me to join her family in their Eid celebration, and made sure I had somewhere to go when my family had made it clear they didn’t want me so long as I was Muslim, soon became my mother-in-law. Although my family refuses to accept me as a Muslim, I am blessed to have a wonderful husband, in–laws and friends who have supported me and been there for me though the entire process. I am happy to be a Muslim. |
Suicide bombers assault mosque in Rawalpindi, kill 40
December 5, 2009Why Can’t Muslim Women Also Lead the Whole Community?
December 5, 2009| Islam, Women and Feminism | |
| 03 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Why Can’t Muslim Women Also Lead the Whole Community? | |
| Based in New Delhi, Zakia Nizami Soman is one of the founder members of the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan(BMMA), a movement of Muslim women across India struggling for their citizenship rights. In this interview with Yoginder Sikand, she talks about the BMMA’s work and reflects on the daunting challenges facing Muslim women in India today.
URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2185 Why Can’t Muslim Women Also Lead the Whole Community? Interview with Zakia Nizami Soman, Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan Based in New Delhi, Zakia Nizami Soman is one of the founder members of the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan(BMMA), a movement of Muslim women across India struggling for their citizenship rights. In this interview with Yoginder Sikand, she talks about the BMMA’s work and reflects on the daunting challenges facing Muslim women in India today. Q: How did the BMMA start? What made you and your colleagues feel the need for a separate Muslim women’s movement? A: The BMMA was formally inaugurated in Delhi in January 2007, but before that we — numerous Muslim women — were working in our individual capacities on issues related to Muslims, particularly Muslim women, in different parts of India. I was working in Gujarat, my home state, before that, with Action Aid, in the wake of the state-sponsored genocidal attacks on Muslims in 2002. In a sense, it was the Gujarat genocide that brought us Muslim women, scattered across India, together. We met at numerous conventions, rallies and public hearings that were held in different parts of the country in the wake of the genocide. We were all Muslim women who were deeply concerned with the plight of the Muslims, including and especially Muslim women, and the enormous danger of Hindutva fascism, and who were trying, in our own ways, to intervene. That was when we decided to form a loose collective of our own. We felt that the issues of Muslim women were somehow being sidelined in a climate of heightened Muslim insecurity. We urgently felt the need for Muslim women to speak out, not just against patriarchy within the community and unjust personal laws, but also against growing anti-Muslim discrimination, against Muslims being treated as second-class citizens in this country and against neglect, indeed, discrimination by the state and other forces. We felt the desperate need for a Muslim women’s voice at the national level. We began our work in 2005 by organizing meetings in various cities of India of like-minded Muslim women — in Delhi, Bombay, Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Lucknow and so on. In the beginning, we did not have any clear agenda. These meetings served as a means for us to get to know each other and to clarify our thinking on issues related to Muslim women, the Indian Muslims as a whole, as well as the larger society and the struggles of other marginalized groups for justice and equality. After considerable discussion and deliberation about our ideology and form of our collective, finally we announced the formation of the BMMA at our first national convention in Delhi in January 2007. Some 500 women attended the convention. Thereafter, our numbers rapidly grew, and now we have almost 20,000 members, with chapters in fifteen states across India. Most of them are volunteers, who take up Muslim community, particularly Muslim women’s, issues at the local level. Our name expresses our mission. We are ‘Bharatiya’, or Indian. We refuse to let the advocates of Hindutva monopolise the term. We are Muslim and not at all apologetic about it. We are ‘Mahilas’, or women. And, finally, we are an ‘Andolan’ or movement, not an institutionalized NGO, that seeks to mobilize and work with not just Muslim women alone, but also the whole secular and democratic movement in India, for the problems we all face are so deep-rooted that large scale people’s mobilization is the only way out. The BMMA is based on the values of the Indian Constitution as well as the Quran, both of which have given Muslim women equal rights. Our basic mandate is to work on issues related to education, livelihood, health and security and personal laws of Muslims in general, and Muslim women in particular. This also includes the struggle against communalism, against the stereotyping of Muslims and Islam and the tendency to link them with terrorism. Q: You speak of the Quran as gender-just, but what would you say about the very obviously patriarchal, and, in several aspects, patently anti-women, stances of the conservative ulema? A: Islam speaks of a God who is just. The Quran has given women equal rights and equal dignity. We are as much God’s followers as men are. The problem arises not from the Quran but from distorted, patriarchal interpretations of the Quran and other texts by some sections of the ulema. This is something that we have to fight against. Islam is a religion of justice. So, how, if it is interpreted properly, can it discriminate against women? For us, religion is something between the individual and God, a belief grounded in the faith that God cannot be unjust towards women. So, even if a thousand maulvis stand up and demand that women are inferior and that we should remain shut in their homes we will refuse to listen to them. Q: Why did you feel the need for a separate Muslim women’s voice? A: The experience of the Muslims of Gujarat in the wake of the 2002 genocide taught us one valuable lesson: that Muslims have to stand up on their own for justice for themselves. Thousands of Muslim men, women and children were slaughtered in cold blood. Three hundred Muslim women were brutally raped and then burnt alive, some in front of their children. With the exception of a few, the so-called secular Indian feminists did not dare to speak out against the Gujarat carnage. It is a shame that Gujarat is home to some of the largest women’s organisations and yet they chose to remain mute. Either they were too scared or else it was a case of them showing their hidden anti-Muslim prejudice. They maintained a deafening silence. They had shown their deep-rooted, often unacknowledged, pro-Hindu and anti-Muslim bias on several occasions before, as during the dastardly massacre of Muslims in Bombay in 1992. This made us realize that we could not depend on the women’s movement to take up our cause, to speak for us. We needed to speak for ourselves. Also, our multiple exclusion, just like that of Dalit women, has failed to find any real representation in the discourse of the so-called ‘mainstream’. To reflect this, we coined the slogan Jiski ladai, uski aguvai (‘She shall lead whose struggle it is’). Most self-styled Indian feminists are so-called ‘upper’ caste Hindus. Of course, there are individuals who are different, by and large, as far as Muslims are concerned, there is no difference, generally speaking, between a Brahmin woman and a Brahmin man. They are both part of the same patriarchal, hegemonic system. That is also how, for instance, Dalits or Adivasis, similarly oppressed communities, would view them. That said, we were, and still are, open to alliances with democratic, secular-minded women and men from other communities. Our membership is not restricted to Muslim women alone. Our membership is open to all, except those who are not secular and those who lack financial integrity. In fact, some 15% of our members are non-Muslims. We also have some male members. We also seek to build alliances with other groups and communities fighting for justice, because we see our struggle not just as Muslim women’s, or even a Muslim one, but, rather, as part of a broader movement for all secular-minded and democratic Indians. We often attend meetings organized by Dalits, women’s groups, and trade unions, and they, too, come to our meetings to express their solidarity. The second reason why we felt the need for an independent national-level voice for Muslim women was our objection to the fact that when it comes to discussing Muslims, only people with a certain sort of identity — and all males, incidentally, particularly conservative ulema or rabble-rousers — are projected as the representatives of the community. The fact is that the male Muslim religious and political leadership has completely failed not just Muslim women, but Muslims as a whole. Typically, they remain silent on the pressing issues of Muslim women — not just on issues related to outdated and patriarchal understandings of family law, but also on matters such as Muslim women’s educational and economic empowerment. Many of them even adopt patently anti-women stances, and, moreover, have done precious little, if at all, even for Muslim men. Muslims in India are victims of discrimination, including by the state, but a major cause of our plight is also the existing Muslim elite. We cannot accept them as our leaders. When the Sachar Committee Report talks of the all-round social and economic exclusion of Muslims, it is not a situation that has developed overnight. It is a tale of pervasive discrimination as well as the failure of the supposed Muslim leadership to enable the Muslims to participate in Indian democracy. It was not that we want to speak for Muslim women alone. Rather, we speak for, and highlight the concerns of, Muslims as a whole, men as well as women. Till now, those who have claimed to be the leaders of the Muslims have all been men. Why can’t it change? Why can’t Muslim women also lead the whole community — not just Muslim women? Q: Some women’s groups project the major concerns of Muslim women to be issues related to personal law — triple talaq in one sitting, polygamy, and so on. How do you look at this? A: These are definitely crucial issues that need to be addressed, and certainly I believe that the existing Muslim Personal Law in India needs to be reformed on gender-just lines and within the broad framework of the shariah, and then codified. But, I do not believe that they are the major issues facing the vast majority of Indian Muslim women. Their foremost concerns relate to endemic poverty and illiteracy that characterizes the Muslim community as a whole, including Muslim men, and anti-Muslim discrimination by the state and other forces. We do not see Muslim women’s issues in isolation from the issues faced by the wider Muslim community. Unless these issues are simultaneously addressed, you cannot expect Muslim women’s conditions to be ameliorated. The tendency to locate the sources of Muslim women’s marginalization solely within the community itself — blaming just Muslim men or the ulema and their patriarchal understandings of religion — is patently unfair. How can you expect Muslim women to be empowered and able to resist male domination if they are not educationally and economically empowered? A major responsibility in this regard is that of the state, which continues to marginalize and neglect Muslims, including Muslim women. How can you expect divorced Muslim women to be paid a decent sum as maintenance if the vast majority of Muslim men continue to wallow in poverty? Then, I must add, there is this marked tendency, even among so-called feminists, to stereotype Muslim women as hapless, helpless creatures, heavily oppressed by their men and religious leaders, as if Muslim women are unique in this regard. This is not the case at all. This stereotypical image of Muslim women can be very misleading. For instance, surveys have proved that a lower proportion of Muslim couples are polygamous than other communities in India, including Hindus, although, by Indian law, polygamy is possible only for Muslims. Likewise, there is such media hype about the burkha that feeds negative images of Islam and Muslims. In the BMMA we have several members who wear the burkha or hijab, some of who work outside their homes. It does not restrict their mobility. Some of these sisters are among our most vocal and outspoken activists. That said, to wear or not to wear the burkha is a woman’s personal choice, and nobody should force her against her will. Q: What has been the reaction of the ulema to the BMMA? Have you encountered any opposition or hostility from them? A: Contrary to what some of us had initially feared, we have faced no problems at all from the ulema. In fact, some of them have even addressed our meetings. The latest one to do so was Maulana Kalbe Sadiq, the Vice-President of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, who is a great champion of women’s rights and education. That said, I must also mention that we deliberately do not seek to court those ulema and their organizations that are communal and are known for their misogynist views. The BMMA is a non-sectarian group, and we have members from different Muslim sects — Shias, Sunnis, so-called ‘lower’ castes and so on, and so we do not work with any sectarian Muslim ulema groups. At the same time, I must also stress that we are not anti-religion at all. Personally, I see no contradiction between the Quran and equality and justice for women. I think that by providing positive models of Muslim women as social activists we are serving the cause of Islam at a time when its image is being sullied, being presented both by its foes as well as conservative and radical Muslims as anti-women. Q: What practical activities has the BMMA undertaken so far? A: We have formulated and published a model nikah namah or marriage contract, which, in contrast to the ones generally used in India, safeguards the rights of both spouses, and is fully in accordance with the Quran. It was framed by a team of Muslim women scholars, with the help of the well-known Islamic scholar Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer. Till now, almost three hundred marriages have been conducted, mainly in Maharashtra and Gujarat, using this nikah namah. Two years ago, we launched a national campaign to press for the implementation of the recommendations of the Sachar Committee Report on Muslims. The Congress-led Government, which had appointed the Committee, is doing nothing about it — true to form, it is simply hoodwinking Muslims with false promises — but still we need to keep up the pressure. Our members have been going around in their areas, asking local MLAs, MPs, bank managers and so on what they have, if at all, done for Muslims, and we plan to compile these findings and publish them as a report soon. Q: Personally speaking, what was the source of inspiration that led you to join this movement? A: My source of courage were the Muslim women of Gujarat, where I come from, whom I worked with in the course of the state-sponsored genocide in 2002. In the face of the barbaric criminality, not just of Hindutva mobs but also of the state itself, many Muslims felt it was best to remain silent, to accept things as they were, to remain low and subdued. But it was these women, whose husbands and children had been slaughtered in front of their very eyes, whose houses had been burned down, who refused to keep silent. They wanted to fight back, to denounce the criminals behind the carnage and those who backed them. They came in their hundreds to rallies and demonstrations, even before the Parliament House in Delhi. Many of them were burqa-clad, but that did not stop them from coming out in droves. They were not begging for relief or hand-outs. What they demanded was justice. These women lit a fire in my heart. If they could be so brave, so committed, why could I not be like them? I thought. Zakia Nizami Soman can be contacted on <zakiasoman>. Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore. This interview was conducted for TwoCircles.net. http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/sikand051109.html URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2185 |
Science, West and Islamic Origin of Science
December 5, 2009| Islam and Science | |
| 03 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Science, West and Islamic Origin of Science | |
 Thus it is not true that Islam ever came in the way of development of modern knowledge or science. In fact it was the springboard, if we believe Prof. Raju, of development of modern science. Prof. H.G. Wells, in his The Short History of the World calls the Arabs as foster fathers of modern knowledge. But it is only partly true. The Arabs were much more than foster fathers. Their own contribution was quite rich as we will discuss shortly.
It is true after 13th century there was stagnation in the Muslims world and for reasons not to be discussed here, the Muslim world was taken over by superstitious beliefs until the western colonization again awoke them from their slumber. The Muslim theologians also contributed to this stagnation a great deal. In order to maintain their hegemony they opposed great philosophers and scientists like Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avicena) or (Averos) (Ibn Rushd) and others and even condemned them as heretics. Also, persons like Ghazzali, had very different approach to knowledge which was based on certainty rather than uncertainties of philosophy and constant quest for knowledge of science and hence he also opposed philosophers like Averros and there was great debate between the two. — Asghar Ali Engineer URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2183 SCIENCE, WEST AND ISLAMIC ORIGIN OF SCIENCE Asghar Ali Engineer (Islam and Modern Age, December, 2009) Recently I came across an excellent monograph in the form of a small book Is Science Western in Origin? By Pof. C K. Raju, professor of philosophy who has written earlier a book on Time – a thick volume on philosophy of time. The later work is also of high academic standard. This monologue on origin of science is a significant contribution which tries to shatter the myth that science is western in origin. We would throw more light on it little later but to begin with it would be quite relevant to discuss whether Islam and science go together or, as many believe Islam is against science. Of course one can say this debate about Islam and science was more relevant to 19th century when the Muslim theologians (Ulama) opposed science as against Islam. What is its relevance today? Ulama no longer oppose science and its discoveries. This is largely true but still there are several problems in this debate which need to be discussed. Also, still some western scholars believe that Islam happens to be inherently opposed to scientific progress. Recently I came across a book Lost in the Sacred – Why the Muslim World Stood Still by Dan Diner published by Princeton and Oxford and the main theme of the book is how Islam and Muslims oppose progress. That is why it is necessary to throw light on Islam and modern science and the monograph by Prof. Raju tries to prove that science originated from India and the Arab world and the West simply imitated it and then cleverly manipulated and interpolated to show that modern science is of Greek origin. 1. Does Islam oppose science? Qur’an is the main source of Islam and hence we would like to first see what Qur’an has to say about this. In fact pre-Islamic Arabs both settled in urban areas like Mecca or Madnia or Bedouins who were basically nomads were not interested in knowledge. In fact according to Tabari, the noted historian, there were only 17 persons in Mecca before Islam who could read and write. What they were proud of was their pedigree which they knew by heart for several generations. Learning and knowledge was for them hardly of any use and hence pre-Islamic period was rightly referred to as period of jahiliyyah (ignorance). Qur’an, therefore, laid great emphasis on ‘ilm (knowledge) precisely because Arabs were not only ignorant but also looked at learning with contempt. What mattered to them was their distinctive origin, not learning. As it has been repeatedly pointed out the revelation to the Prophet (PBUH) began by the word iqra’ (recite or read). Thus the Qur’an says, “Read in the name of thy Lord who creates. Creates human being from a clot.” (96:1-2) Now this statement itself that read “in the name of the Lord who creates and creates from a clot” is an important scientific statement also as modern studies have developed how fertilization of man’s semen and woman’s eggs result in creation of human being. This science has developed now tremendously through modern technology. Of course the Qur’an is a book of moral guidance and basic knowledge. It is certainly not the book of science. However, it does invite the believers to reflect and think about the creation and about our universe. Knowledge, according to the Qur’an, is very basic if one wants to know ones God (Rabb, Allah) one has to have knowledge of this Universe as he is the creator of this universe. Thus the Qur’an says, “Those of His servants only who are possessed of knowledge fear Allah.” Lest one should think this knowledge Qur’an is talking about is knowledge of theology or deen the preceding verse makes it clear it is knowledge about the creation. It says, “See you not that Allah sends down water from the clouds, then We bring forth therewith fruits of various hues? And in the mountains are streaks, white and red, of various hues and (others) intensely black” (35:27). Also, in the second chapter it is stated that the believers believe in the unseen ghayb. Generally the theologians say that this unseen ghayb is all about the other world the world which begins after death. Well, that may be one of the interpretations and in those days when knowledge had not developed much it was perhaps the best available interpretation. But then divine scriptures use metaphorical and symbolic language which admits of multiple interpretations. Ghayb can also mean potential knowledge which is hidden from those who live in a particular period. But continuously developing knowledge keeps on bringing forth what was not known to those who lived in previous times. It was ghayb (hidden) for them. And what is known to us today, may be is quite advanced compared to what was known to our predecessors, may appear to be quite primitive to coming generations. Thus that is all ghayb to us. But Allah is described in the Qur’an as ‘Alim al-Ghayb as He has knowledge of all that is to come but to us – His servants – it is just ghayb. Thus what was known to the world when Qur’an was revealed to the Arabs, was quite primitive than what developed with few centuries during the Abbasid period and subsequently during the Fatimid period in Egypt. Great philosopher, mathematicians, chemists, geographers, astronomers and others discovered many things which was nothing more than ghayb just before two centuries. Thus requiring believers (mu’minin) to believe in knowledge of ghayb Qur’an inspired Muslims to continuously develop knowledge. Allah’s knowledge is without limits and so the believers should constantly pursue knowledge to infinity. No knowledge is final and more knowledge develops more one is bewildered about limitlessness of knowledge. The Prophet rightly said that a moment’s reflection by an ‘Alim is more meritorious than praying whole night. The Qur’an invites all believers to reflect about this universe and an ignorant person cannot be true believer. An ignorant person knows nothing about this universe created by Allah. If one tries to know this universe she/he realizes how wonderful this universe is and only she/he then realizes the greatness of the Creator of this universe. Today scientists, physicists and astronomers tell us how bewilderingly large are the dimensions of this universe. There is no single solar system as earlier believed. There are hundreds of solar systems each billions of light years away from each other. The age of our universe was fixed by some Christian theologians in sixteenth century as about 4,000 years. It was all ghayb for them then. Today the scientists fix the age of our universe as at least 20 billion light years. Every now and then new stars are discovered billions of light years. The Greek knowledge was basically deductive in nature and hence its limitation in understanding of the universe. The science develops with inductive knowledge i.e. through observations over a large period of time. Thus Iqbal points out in his lectures Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam that Qur’an lays emphasis on inductive knowledge and he quotes Francis Beacon to the effect that modern science developed through inductive logic. The Qur’an repeatedly invites believers to reflect over the creation of Allah and this itself could inspire believers to develop knowledge about this universe and for a period of time they did and contributed richly to the knowledge about this world. The first impulse came when the Abbasids started Darul Hikmah (House of Wisdom). By the way Qur’an lays great emphasis on Hikmah (wisdom). It is Allah’s name (Hakim) and Qur’an describes hikmah as khayran kathira (i.e. goodness in abundance). Thus the Qur’an says, “He grants wisdom to which He pleases. And whoever is granted wisdom, he indeed is given a goodness in abundance.” (2:269). Thus hikmah has great importance in the Qur’an because hikmah is not possible without knowledge and the Abbasids rightly called the place where books of knowledge from various countries as House of Wisdom. According to Prof. Raju this house of wisdom became epicentre of science and what we call western science today could not have developed without this house of wisdom. Thus it is not true that Islam ever came in the way of development of modern knowledge or science. In fact it was the springboard, if we believe Prof. Raju, of development of modern science. Prof. H.G. Wells, in his The Short History of the World calls the Arabs as foster fathers of modern knowledge. But it is only partly true. The Arabs were much more than foster fathers. Their own contribution was quite rich as we will discuss shortly. It is true after 13th century there was stagnation in the Muslims world and for reasons not to be discussed here, the Muslim world was taken over by superstitious beliefs until the western colonization again awoke them from their slumber. The Muslim theologians also contributed to this stagnation a great deal. In order to maintain their hegemony they opposed great philosophers and scientists like Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avicena) or (Averos) (Ibn Rushd) and others and even condemned them as heretics. Also, persons like Ghazzali, had very different approach to knowledge which was based on certainty rather than uncertainties of philosophy and constant quest for knowledge of science and hence he also opposed philosophers like Averros and there was great debate between the two. But after the attack of Helagu in 1258 the Abbasid Empire which was already on decline, collapsed and Baghdad ceased to be the centre of learning and development of science. Though other empires like that of Fatimid in Egypt survived a bit longer but it did not help much. Ghazzli’s approach of inner certainty found now much greater resonance and Muslims now began concentrating on ‘ulum al-Din (i.e. religious sciences) which goes on until today. Ghazzali’s Ihya al-‘Ulum al-Din (i.e. Revivification of Religious Sciences) indeed became symbolic of this revival. 2. In this background we would like to discuss here briefly the monograph of Prof. C.K.Raju Is Science Western in Origin? In this learned monograph Raju tries to show the science is certainly not western in origin but it owes much more to India on one hand, and Islamic centres in Baghdad and Spain. This monograph is part of the dissenting knowledges pamphlet series. According to Prof. Raju it is a sheer myth to say that science is of Hellenic origin. He says that “The story of the Greek origin of science postdates the Crusades. Before the Crusades, Christendom was in ‘Dark Age’” Prof. Raju also says that it was Roman Christian Emperor ordered burning down of the Great Library of Alexandria and he also says it was Justinian who ordered closure of all philosophical schools in 529 CE. In the footnote Raju refers to Edward Gibbon who discusses in his The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and dismisses the canard that burning down the Great Library might have been the work of Caliph Omar, or that it might have happened during a fire started at the time of Julius Caesar’s attack. Dr. Raju also makes an interesting observation that “Ironically, this Christian Dark Age coincided with the Islamic Golden Age.” Then he goes on to say that in sharp contrast to the book-burning tradition of Christendom, the Abbasid Caliphate had established in Baghdad House of Wisdom by the early 9thc. This led to such an explosion in the demands for books that, along the lines of the hadith to seek knowledge even from China, paper-making techniques were imported from China to set up a paper factory in Baghdad, which had a flourishing book bazaar. It is not true, according to him that books were brought only from Byzantine but also from Persia and India. Baghdad had scholars from all these countries and it became an important centre of intellectual debates and House of Wisdom, centre for transferring knowledge from these sources into Arabic. He also points out that apart from the contrast in knowledge, there was also striking contrast in wealth between Christendom and Islamic Arabs, Charlemagne’s emissaries were dazzled by the splendor of Haroun al-Rashid’s court, and the gifts they brought back were avidly imitated, and became models of Carolingian art. It was only post-Crusades that the Church realized the importance of non-Biblical knowledge. In sharp contrast to earlier behavior Church preserved the magnificent library at Toledo in the Muslim Spain when it was conquered during the proto-Crusades in 1085. Now the non-Biblical knowledge was accepted at the highest levels of the Church. Prof. Raju also points out that India had very advanced knowledge of arithmetic’s and astronomy. He says that while the Arabs valued the ‘theology of Aristotle’ for arithmetic, they turned to India, not to Greece. Arabs imported various Indian arithmetic texts, notably those of Aryabhata, Brahmagupta and Mahavira. These were digested and transcreated in the Bayt al-Hikma, by al-Khwarizmi, and became famous as Algorismus after his Latinized name. These ‘Arabic numerals’ use the place-value system which makes it very easy to represent large numerals. It also makes arithmetic very easy through ‘algorithmus’. In fact the legendry Barmakids (derived from barmak- pramukh), the viziers of Abbasides were instrumental in importing knowledge from Persia and India. Initially many texts in Baghdad came from Persia where the same practice of collecting world-knowledge was followed. But, even in Persia, knowledge of astronomy (translated as Zij-i- Shahryar) was imported from India. Raju then dwells on how of the secular knowledge nothing was available from Rome as otherwise Khusrau to him Justinian was paying him a hefty tribute for non-aggression would have imported it from there, not from India. Prof. Raju also exposes the myth of Euclides as the writer of Geometry Elements he points out nothing is known about Euclids as to who he was. He quotes to this effect the leading authority on Elements. Interestingly he also points out that the word Euclides is derived from Arabic iklid or klid which means key or here ‘key to geometry’. It could be because in Toledo translations were done either by those who knew Arabic but not the subject or those who knew Latin but not the subject and hence such howlers were common. Raju also throws light on Copernicus who is considered as having revolutionized the knowledge of astronomy. Thus Raju points out that Copernicus’s mathematical model is a carbon copy of an earlier astronomical model by Ibn as-Shatir of Damuscus (d.1375). Ibn Shatir used a technique due to Nasiruddin Tusi (whose advice to Melagu led to the downfall of Baghdad, and who was rewarded with the Maraghah observatory). The Maraghah school raised new questions, and offered novel solutions. Copernicus mimics both the questions and answers. Copernicus’s lunar model is identical to Ibn as-Shatir’s. The question therefore is not whether, but when, where, and in what form he learned of Maragha theory.” Prof. Raju of course provides answers to these questions though it is too technical for us to throw light on that. But suffice it to say that Copernicus is hailed as father of modern astronomy and in turn on it depends our knowledge of universe today. All further developments in the knowledge of universe, of stars, of solar system and so on, depends on Copernicus’s revolution. Prof. Raju raises one more important question and says, “The key questions, however, have never been asked: Could Copernicus have openly acknowledged his Islamic sources? Had he done that wouldn’t someone have denounced him as a heretic? Would that have helped his case for theological correctness? So, Copernicus followed the tradition: he used Islamic sources, but refused to acknowledge them.” However, according to Dr. Raju the western scholars have manipulated evidence in such a way as to hide this fact that Copernicus imitated the model of Ibn as-Shatir and maintain that it was original work by Copernicus. After quoting the sources that Ibn as-Shatir’s manuscript was present in the library of the Church, he observes, “Note a further subtle way in which the rules of evidence are being juggled. The appropriate standard of evidence for history is balance of probabilities, and there is ample circumstantial evidence that Copernicus’ model was entirely derived. So, the onus of proof is on Western historians to supply solid evidence that Copernicus did not see that text! Instead, they shift the onus of proof, and demand further evidence! So the great Copernican revolution is better called the great Copernican Quibble!” The pamphlet discussed here by Prof. Raju though, small in length, is much larger in significance. And more scholars would work on these lines. It is highly learned in its contents and unfortunately our universities do not have departments of history of science to carry on study on these lines. In the west history of science is an important area of study and it is high time we also carry on work in this important field. In conclusion I would like to say though what has been discussed here is historical truth Muslims should not only celebrate this but use it an occasion for serious reflection that though west borrowed much from the Muslim world, why Muslim world is in such pathetic condition today. For them Islam is nothing more than a set of rituals and only an instrument for najat (emancipation) for the other world and not for achievements in this world? Today Muslims are far behind western countries and depend entirely on the west for scientific knowledge. As the Christendom was passing through dark age when Islamic world was at its height of glory and achievements in the fields of science, mathematics and astronomy. Now it is just the reverse. Now the west (or Christendom) is at its height and the Muslim world is passing through dark age. The Muslim world now at best excels in religious knowledge (‘ulum al-Din). Ilm (knowledge) must be taken in its most comprehensive sense as this word has been used in the Qur’an and it should not be confined only to religious knowledge. The ‘Ulama should not mean only those who specialize in diniyat but all those who have expertise in modern secular sciences (all its branches). The ‘Ulama who have no knowledge of modern sciences have no right to lead us. Only those who have knowledge of modern world along with that of Islam have right to show us the way. Otherwise the ‘ulama would be nothing more than what Iqbal called them do rak’at ka imam (leader of prayer). URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2183 |
Rahul Gandhi to motivate Aligarh Muslim University students to pursue higher education
December 5, 2009Pakistan: What Obama left unsaid
December 5, 2009| War on Terror | |
| 03 Dec 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Pakistan: What Obama left unsaid | |
| Mr. Obama could not be very specific about his Pakistan strategy, his advisers conceded on Monday evening. U.S. operations there are classified, most run by the CIA. Any overt U.S. presence would only fuel anti-Americanism in a country that reacts sharply to every missile strike against extremists that kills civilians as well, and that fears that America is plotting to run its government and seize its nuclear weapons.
Yet quietly, Mr. Obama has authorised an expansion of the war in Pakistan as well — if only he can get a weak, divided, suspicious Pakistani government to agree to the terms. –David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt URL of the page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2186
Pakistan: What Obama left unsaid By David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt Barack Obama has authorised an expansion of the war in Pakistan — if only he can get a weak, divided, suspicious Pakistani government to agree to the terms. Active voices: The expanded operations in Pakistan could include drone strikes in the southern province of Balochistan where senior Afghan Taliban leaders are believed to be hiding U.S. President Barack Obama focused his speech on Afghanistan. He left much unsaid about Pakistan, where the main terrorists he is targeting are located, but where he can send no troops. Mr. Obama could not be very specific about his Pakistan strategy, his advisers conceded on Monday evening. U.S. operations there are classified, most run by the CIA. Any overt U.S. presence would only fuel anti-Americanism in a country that reacts sharply to every missile strike against extremists that kills civilians as well, and that fears that America is plotting to run its government and seize its nuclear weapons. Yet quietly, Mr. Obama has authorised an expansion of the war in Pakistan as well — if only he can get a weak, divided, suspicious Pakistani government to agree to the terms. In recent months, in addition to providing White House officials with classified assessments about Afghanistan, the CIA delivered a plan for widening the campaign of strikes against militants by drone aircraft in Pakistan, sending additional spies there and securing a White House commitment to bulk up the CIA’s budget for operations inside the country. The expanded operations could include drone strikes in the southern province of Balochistan, where senior Afghan Taliban leaders are believed to be hiding, officials said. It is from there that they direct many of the attacks on U.S. troops, attacks that are likely to increase as more Americans pour into Afghanistan. “The President endorsed an intensification of the campaign against al-Qaeda and its violent allies, including even more operations targeting terrorism safe havens,” said one U.S. official. “More people, more places, more operations.” That was the message delivered in recent weeks to Pakistani officials by General James L. Jones, the National Security Adviser. But the Pakistanis, suspicious of Mr. Obama’s intentions and his staying power, have not yet agreed. General Jones was one of a series of U.S. officials who arrived in Pakistan in recent weeks with the same message: No matter how many troops the President commits to Afghanistan, the strategy will founder unless the safe haven inside Pakistan is dealt with. However, the U.S. does not have much leverage and is counting on a new attitude and a huge acceleration of efforts from a weak government. Making matters worse, President Asif Ali Zardari is often at odds with the nation’s powerful military and intelligence establishment. The question about Mr. Obama’s Pakistan strategy is whether the new commitment of troops and resources can ultimately make America safer at a time of an evolving terrorist threat. Mr. Obama insisted that was his central focus. “This is the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaeda,” he said to the cadets at West Point, speaking of both Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the murky border area between the two that offers refuge to extremists of many stripes. The region was the birthplace of the September 11, 2001, attacks, he said, and “it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak”. Many times in the speech he returned to that threat, saying it was what made this war different from Vietnam. of nuclear weapons And he referenced another threat, one that focuses the attention of Mr. Obama’s national security team daily, but which it speaks about rarely. “The stakes are even higher within a nuclear-armed Pakistan, because we know that al-Qaeda and other extremists seek nuclear weapons, and we have every reason to believe that they would use them,” he said. Mr. Obama’s decision to raise the nuclear spectre was notable because a succession of U.S. officials have publicly stated recently that the Pakistani arsenal is secure. In private, however, they have commissioned new intelligence studies on how vulnerable Pakistani warheads and laboratories would be if insurgents made greater inroads, with one official saying recently, “It is the scenario we spend the most time thinking about.” Even if Mr. Obama is successful in lessening the terrorist threat in the region, many analysts say that al-Qaeda has changed into a transnational movement beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan. “There is no direct impact on stopping terrorists around the world because we are or are not in Afghanistan,” said Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, the former CIA officer who was sent into Pakistan after 9/11 to determine if Osama bin Laden had access to the country’s nuclear technology. The nature of modern terrorism, Mr. Mowatt-Larssen, now at Harvard, argued, is that a safe haven can be moved to many different states, and the bigger threat exists in cells, including in Europe and the U.S. Even Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acknowledged in an interview this evening that the steps announced by the President would not address al-Qaeda cells in Africa or West Asia, or even homegrown extremists. But she argued that he had to begin somewhere. “Can you totally eliminate the threat from al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda-types in Yemen or Somalia? No,” she said. “But what you have done is taken a major action to limit their ability out of this major theatre, from which their leaders and major actions emanate.” Reconciling contradictions Making the Pakistan plan even more complex was Mr. Obama’s effort to reconcile two seemingly contradictory messages on Tuesday evening. He had to convince the Pakistanis that he was not planning to leave the region — as the U.S. did 20 years ago, after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan — while reassuring the American public that after an 18-month build-up, he would begin to head for the exits. The U.S., he said, simply could not afford an open-ended war. Unlike President George W. Bush, he suggested, he would not set “goals that are beyond what we can achieve at a reasonable cost, and what we need to achieve to secure our interests.” — © 2009 The New York Times News Service Source: The New York Times URL of the page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamMuslimsAndIslamophobia_1.aspx?ArticleID=2186 |
Asadullah Syed
