Blogcritics Author: jamal

Announcement: Short-content feeds

Phillip Winn — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT

Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.

No American President Can Stand Up to Israel, but We Can!

jamal — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 04:17:28 EDT

If you have problems following what you're about to read then I suggest you watch 'Occupation 101', which focuses on the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and details life under Israeli military rule.Palestine will always pull the short-straw because of the seemingly unequivocal American support for Israel. Even after the events of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and 1949 Armistice Agreement, Israel continued to illegally capture land and expand into the West Bank. Many thousands of Palestinians lost their homes and lives, fleeing the conflict zone and becoming refugees. During the 1967 Six Day War, Israel further expanded into eastern Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights and has since continued it's land theft, expulsion, colonialism, occupation, apartheid domination and oppression of Palestinians, even celebrating these crimes at Yom Yerushalayim.Terrorism, invasion, demolition, land theft, ethnic cleansing, massacres, illegal occupation, separation, evacuation, ghettoisation, blackouts, mass imprisonment, air strikes on civilians, births and deaths at checkpoints, torture and murder of children, abuse and violation of human rights. These are just a handful of the atrocious acts that Israel has committed against Palestinian refugees who have no right to return to their homes after being evacuated by force, separated by barriers and controlled by threat of violence and death. Additionally, we cannot forget Israel's recent war crimes against Lebanon. Therefore, it is the responsibility of citizens of all countries with a interest in the region to demand that their governments stop aiding and supporting Israel until it ends its occupation of the Arab territories. With the use of sanctions where necessary, we must defend the Palestinian causes, denounce brutal Israeli crimes and criticise the disastrous Israeli policy of expansion and oppression in Palestine. We don't have to be diplomats or politicians to appreciate that any agreement must be enforceable with meaningful penalties, and should at least include the return to the pre-1967 borders, with Israel withdrawing from ALL occupied Palestinian territories (including the West Bank and East Jerusalem), allowing Palestine to control its own borders and recognising Palestinian rights, including the rights to life, freedom, movement and the return to homelands. Although we know that America may not be a successful peacemaker in the Israel/Palestine conflict, we must continue to demand to know when the United States is going to "stand up to Israel", cease providing Israel with financial and military support, and at least be "even-handed in its approach to Israel and Palestine".

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Surprised We've Not Yet Heard from an Ayatollah?

jamal — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 23:35:51 EDT

Robert Spencer, Michelle Malkin and Charles Johnson are among the many names in the blogopehere who have received negative comments due to their articles. It is my opinion that while bloggers such as Wolf Pangloss, World Ware, Haganah, Daniel Henninger and Pastorius report on the spread of jihadist propaganda and instructional videos on the internet, their only real success is in helping to misrepresent the true meaning of Islam.He may not be a Muslim, but if Salman Rushdie can be the target of a fatwa for writing The Satanic Verses, then Robert Spencer may also be on the fatwa nominee list for writing what could be considered a propaganda attempt against Islam; 'Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't'. Does Robert Spencer really expect us to pay attention to his deliberations of whether Christians are more of a threat to free societies than so-called 'Islamic jihadists', whether the Bible and the Q'ran contain violence, to consider whether the history of Christianity or Islam is more 'bloodstained', and why he believes Christianity is a religion of peace, but Islam is not. I suspect that Robert Spencer's writings on such issues will only serve to fuel Islamophobia and increase the segregation of communities and the isolation of Muslims.In Robert Spencer's own words he's already been listed alongside Daniel Pipes, Michael Scheuer, Steven Emerson, and 'the crusader-in-chief' George W. Bush as one of the "Zionist crusader missionaries of hate and counter-Islam consultants". Robert Spencer responded to this categorisation by 'inviting' his accuser to accept the Bill of Rights on a "framework within which people of differing faiths can live in peace, harmony, and mutual respect - provided that none of the groups involved cherishes supremacist ambitions to subjugate the others". Robert Spencer's hypocrisy is not just shown by the fact that he now fails to adhere to this by slandering Islam, but also because he has transgressed the bounds of his own disclaimer by seeking to elevate his own views, ambitions and religion (Christianity) over Islam. Therefore can it now be argued that he is no different from his enemy he accuses of similar deeds, al Qaeda spokesman, Adam Yahiye Gadahn?It maybe argued that Robert Spencer's only success here is conning his followers into paying $18.45 to read what may be found to be misrepresentations of Islam, distortions of Islamic text and use of fallible hadiths to argue a flawed concept. No matter how much he tries to put his arguments across, his ideas appear contradictory because we all know that Christianity has it's own problems with radicalism, fundamentalism, terrorism and rogue affiliates; just as we know that the bible makes reference to war and uses violent parables. Then there's the history of Christian atrocities to be considered! What Robert Spencer and his supporters (found here, here and here) fail to report on is the fact that the assimilation of Muslims in America is positive, the threat by Muslims in Europe is very limited, and that it is increasingly becoming evident that Muslims say no to violence, terrorism & bin Laden. Therefore one would be wrong to argue that Islam is not a religion of peace. Let’s be clear about a few things; I HAVE recently returned from the Middle-East and I AM promoting Jihad. However, the Jihad I promote is not the Jihad of twisted lunatics whose life ambition is to strap on bombs to kill innocent people on trains and planes, or of those who seek to distort religious teachings to encourage such behaviour. We only need to read the opinions of mainstream Islamic scholars to understand the true meaning of Jihad and Islam. The Jihad of us all is to teach ourselves and our communities in order to improve ourselves and communities. Jihad comes from the root word “al-jahd” (meaning exertion or struggle) and means that one fully exerts himself and struggles with himself to serve his Lord, as well as to perfect his interaction with others. This is the general and comprehensive meaning of jihad. Islam is the faith of peace and harmony and requires submission to the Will of Allah. As these meanings have been distorted by media pundits and politicians alike, the challenge of the Muslim commnunity is to develop a new vision of Islam, which includes continuing to educate ourselves to understand and promote the idea that the crimes of others are no justification for indiscriminate violence by non-Muslims or Muslims. Maybe then the long line of candidates seeking to secure fame and fortune through slandering Muslims, misrepresenting Islamic texts and serving disunity will end. Britain's new Prime Minister Gordon Brown is a leader in the way forward by banning ministers from using the term "Muslim" in connection with the terrorism crisis.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Slandering Islam

jamal — Mon, 7 May 2007 14:43:51 EDT

I’m aggrieved that Islam continues to be vilified, and causes some Muslims to respond by detaching themselves from the West that is their home. Too many Muslims who seem to have their voices heard at present are the ones either portraying themselves as extremists, cowering as 'moderates' or seeking to slander Islam. Nonetheless, it appears to many that there is a war being waged where Islam is denigrated and Muslims are demonized. The clash is not between civilizations, but both between and within nations as a result of differences in cultures and values. Following 9/11 the East ceased being known as a place of mysticism, intrigue and delight, and President George Bush secured this shift when he said on September 20, 2001 that “Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." On October 7, 2001 this speech was followed by a response from Osama Bin Laden stating that "These events have divided the whole world into two sides. The side of believers and the side of infidels, may God keep you away from them." Nearly six years later, Ayman Al-Zawahiri seeks to continue the divisions between East and West, Muslim and non-Muslim, started by Bush and Bin Laden by “prophesising” that there’s a big benefit for “a mankind liberated from the Caesars of the White House, Europe and the Zionists.” We expressed our sympathies for the dead of 9/11 and knew that any nation responsible would bear the wrath of the U.S. We also wondered why such an atrocity had not happened sooner in view of the many enemies we assumed America had created during its years of covert and overt invasions throughout the world. Subsequently we have witnessed the invasions into Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against Palestine and Lebanon, with Bush hunting his “Islamic fundamentalists”, overthrowing “rogue states”, identifying the “axis of evil” and fighting his “war on terror". Egotistical terrorist leaders like al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden and Bush have used any available strategy/reasoning to justify their unacceptable actions to the world publics. Al Qaeda kills innocent people and is finally losing its popularity and support, while Bush lost his support a long time ago. He can no longer hide from rising casualties in Iraq and the disastrous Israeli policy in Palestine. The American flag symbolizes freedom, civil liberties, and respect for human life, which we need to see, rather than the “blood and glory” it stands for at present. America is the most powerful nation on the earth and therefore must take the lead in resolving these conflicts by peaceful means. As this involves what is considered the “Islamic world” and as Bush has seemed, at times, to link terrorism with Islam, it is important that he encourage all people to recognise that the conflict is political and not religious, and that terrorists are criminals and not primarily identified or guided by religion. The separation of “Islam” and 'Terrorism' is an important step in stopping non-Muslims from blaming Muslims for terrorism, and in stopping misguided and easily influenced Muslims from being susceptible to deviant manipulation and respond to the distorted speeches or calls of the likes of al-Zawahiri and Bin Laden. On the same note, people must refrain from being susceptible to deviant manipulation to respond to the distorted speeches or calls of the likes Bush and Blair to join Western armies to fight in illegal conflicts. The Qur’an states: "If anyone slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people." - Qur’an 5:32 As Muslims, we may continue to find ourselves harassed, monitored and policed, but this does not mean we must allow ourselves to be marginalised, isolated and discriminated against. If we as Muslims live in the West then we must stop thinking that the “Islamic World” is confined to the East. The Muslim community is worldwide and involves inter-communal co-operation, discourse and solidarity with all mankind. The Qur’an states: “We have explained in detail in this Qur’ân, for the benefit of mankind” - Qur’an 18:54 We Muslims are all individuals and should not be considered either moderate or extremist, but simply as ordinary Muslims who live Islam as it suits us, differing from generation to generation, culture to culture. Some are more devout, others Muslim by name only. However, the prerequisite for Islam is that one should believe, and live accordingly and assume the responsibilities inherent in Islam - which makes it clear that we are not permitted to kill innocent people, become suicide bombers or declare war. To understand Islam in every aspect means to understand that a Muslim cannot be involved in terrorism, because Islam does not approve of killing people in order to attain a goal. Peace, submission and unity are messages of Islam, so we must stop thinking of 9/11, 7/7 and the Madrid bombings as an attack on the West, or of the sectarian violence in Iraq as a means to an end. The same as non-Muslims must stop thinking of 9/11, 7/7 and the Madrid bombings, or of the sectarian violence in Iraq as the responsibility and problem of Muslims alone. The countries of the East and West are all part of our “Islamic world” where Muslim/Islamic culture resides with other cultures and prospers therein, and it is the responsibility of us all to protect it. This is the way forward in correcting the distorted image of Islam created by Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden and Bush, and this is the victory of Islam.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Guns Don't Kill People... People Kill People

jamal — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:08:08 EDT

Virginia Tech, Iraq, Rio, Philippines, Afghanistan, Darfur and Somalia.... there's definitely too many people dying right now! Then there's the unacceptable fact that Iraq has two Virginia Tech-style attacks every single day. Unfortunately for mankind, with the aimless American war machine continuing, while elsewhere in the world there are reports such as that of the Taliban being accused of killing civilians and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatening his army will "cut off the hand" of any attacker, it doesn't appear that death and destruction is going to stop any time soon.Primordial man fought and killed with sticks and stones, progressing through what has been considered his development to master the use of swords, bombs, guns and missiles. We have now developed to become an advanced civilisation but man continues to fight and kill in the inner cities of America and England, slaughter in the ghettos, projects, townships and favellas, and massacre on the streets of Iraq and Afghanistan.As much as we try to fool ourselves, mankind today is no better than primordial man who fought and killed with sticks and stones. We just have better weaponry. Our culture of the gun was born with the Western civilisation and European domination that sucked the blood of the Third World at point blank range. As the “uncivilised world” was about to breathe its last breath we retreated, leaving our guns behind, allowing the indigenous people to continue the death and suffering on a daily basis. We thought we were far removed in our Western utopias until the War on terror forced us to adjust to the reality of violent death. Our armies and politicians have taught us to kill with the gun, our experiences have taught us to defend with the gun and popular culture has taught us to be cool with the gun. But we cannot blame it on Bush, Blair and Bin Laden alone, or on music, television and criminals, as it is the fault of us all and our acceptance of the culture of the gun. A famous man once said that "the condition of man … is a condition of war of everyone against everyone" … "Without a common power to keep them all in awe; they are in that condition called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man." There will be … "no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. The problem now is that the State, the Nation and the West are the “common power”, but they rule with the use of the gun and profit from the manufacture of the gun. We must stop seeking power with use of the gun, stop accumulating wealth with use of the gun, stop waging war with use of the gun and stop initiating peace with use of the gun. Maybe then the gangs on our streets will stop using with the gun, maybe the militia in the Third world will stop using the gun and maybe the next angry/jealous student at another Virginia Tech will not use the gun.We as citizens cannot stem the manufacture, supply and importation of dangerous weapons, nor is it our responsibility to tackle crime, particularly when government’s control the required funds, education reforms, welfare solutions and criminal justice policies to achieve a lasting effect. But we can change our views and opinions towards the legal and/or illegal use of the gun by our fathers, brothers, friends, neighbours, police and armies, while lobbying our leaders and politicians to change theirs. Whether we discuss this here, at home or on our blogs, it needs to be discussed and changes need to be made.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Islam, Radicalism and Government Foreign Policy

jamal — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:06:32 EDT

We can't expect Muslims in Britain not to react when Britain invades Muslim countries and kills thousands of Muslims. British foreign policy also unequivocally supports USA and Israel in continuous actions of bloodshed and slaughter on a mass scale. Meanwhile back in Britain there's the police's heavy handed tactics in dealing with innocent Muslims, as well as the inherent islamophobic undertones that pervade British society. While I do not ignore that the atrocities of 9/11 and 7/7 has impacted upon the scrutiny of Muslims in Europe, this is no reason for Muslims in Italy to be refused mosques, or the marginalisation of Muslims in Germany and Moscow, or the discontent of Muslims in France after the riots which was no fault of their own, nor the level of disadvantage received by those in Britain amidst claims that they've turned London into an epicentre of Islamic militancy. Many will ask how Muslims in Europe have been prevented from integrating into the nations they've joined, while ignoring the evident social inequality of areas where many people live, highlighting the need for the implementation of policies and interventions which seek to merge criminal justice policy, social policy and welfarism. As a result we increasingly hear about the self-instigation of transitionary sub-cultural identification as a response to the problems of the main society and culture which they are witness to. This can include blocked opportunities, contradicting norms and values, inadequately defined roles, and the sole occupational prospect of meaningless work. Rather then disfranchising Muslim youth with negative programming, the way forward is instead in providing positive images, role-models and increasing available support in addressing substance misuse, unemployment and housing problems.Some have questioned why well-off, middle-class Muslim teenagers could be seduced by the radicals. The answer is in the fact that Britain has a history of creating moral panics which encourage the nation to fear various groups within youth cultures, just as specific groups of teens in America have been feared in previous and current eras. I don't know what makes a well-off, middle-class Muslim teenager in Britain strap on a bomb, any more than you know why a well-off, middle-class Christian teenager in America shoots his school friends. Although we are constantly warned of the threat we face from these individuals, we must remember that generalising an entire group to create a moral panic is not always warranted, productive, or even correct.There is a view that Europe's Muslims have remained largely silent in the face of the terrorist attacks in Madrid, London and Amsterdam. It is true that the Muslim view can be defined as "these Terrorists aren't our folks and we're busy with our lives", influenced by an undercurrent of "speaking out gets one shunned by taking sides". However, this does not mean that the Muslims in Europe are not law-abiding citizens that have no obligation to speak out on these issues any more than non-Muslims would. Should all Irish Catholics have publicly condemned the IRA and looked for the "signs" within their families? Must all Jews condemn the Jewish Defence League? Must all Christians publicly condemn the Aryan Brotherhood? Must all Spaniards publicly condemn ETA? Must all Briton's publicly condemn the British Army in Iraq? If they do not, does this mean they are instead supportive of these respective groups and the fundamental cause of why the related hostilities emerged? In light of the above, the British government is a liar in its attempt to avoid blame by suggesting that terrorism is caused by an insufficient vigilance by Muslims parents and British Muslims in failing to spot "the tell tale signs", particularly when it would not extend this notion to the parents of the members of every non-Muslim army and terrorist organisation in the world today that has caused death, destruction and terror?Some call for the 'Moderate Muslims' to speak against those that complain about anything fundamentally Western who are then labelled as 'Radical' or 'Fanatical'. If Muslims complain with reference to Islam they are then labelled 'Extremist'. If Muslims hang with Muslims, pray 5 times a day and refer to the Shariah in public they are then labelled 'Fundamentalists'. If they protest against the Iraq war or the occupation of Palestine they are then labelled 'Islamists'. If they attended a Mosque and unknowingly prayed next to anybody that had links to fighters from Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan they are then labelled 'Jihadists'. The fact is that here is no such thing as a 'Moderate Muslim', as this is a term coined to define divides between differing reports of Muslim behaviour. We all follow the fundamentals and there should be nothing extreme about what we do nor do we take anything to an extreme. We are all 'Islamists': a believer or follower of Islam (dictionary definition) and most of all - we are all moderate because Islam is a moderate way of life, balanced to make life easier for us by doing that which is right. Those that perpetuate violence, terror, injustice and oppression, are not behaving Islamically.This view that Muslims in Europe are silent or not looking within their families, are mere attempts to delegate blame. The fact which the government and media appear to ignore is that it is a minority of Europe's Muslims that have committed such acts and many Muslims have already spoken out against them. Stopping the spread of unwarranted radicalism is a task for every Muslim in Britain. However, the government's own responsibility (in which it has failed) is to address the root of the problem by ensuring the integration of Muslims in Britain as equal citizens. A key factor in achieving this is to end its foreign policy which justifies the murderous crimes committed abroad by Britain, America and Israel as 'acts of war'.What I find shocking in all of this is that the government has taken no responsibility for the atrocities that have occurred. They have blamed Imams, youth culture, and now parents, when the fact remains that the London bombings were a direct result of Tony Blair's lie that the UK was under threat of a 45 minute attack by Saddam Hussain's Weapons of Mass destruction. Now instead of accepting responsibility and apologising to the Nation, Tony Blair would obviously rather shift the blame onto Muslims, as if WE are the ones that must be corrected.Professor Tariq Ramadan explains that some Muslims are odds with British society and must strive to include themselves into the mainstream to become truly Muslim and truly European at the same time. However, this does not mean that we must ignore or accept the atrocities committed against our brothers and sisters in other parts or the world, and it is important that our governments must support us by acknowledging our sentiments and incorporating this into its foreign policy if we are to truly feel appreciated as a part of British society.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Israeli Evil vs. Gaza

jamal — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:54:24 EDT

Cpl Gilad Shalit is the first Israeli soldier kidnapped by Palestinians since 1994. In contrast, Israel is believed to have about 100 women and 300 under-18s among the more than 8,000 Palestinian prisoners in its jails. As one blogger argues, we are learning that;"For Israel, the lives of many Palestinians do not add up to one Israeli. No wonder there is no peace."The world focuses on the fate of this one Israeli soldier when thousands of Palestinians have been imprisoned, detained or killed in their fight for independence. Such focus and international condemnation we do not see for the thousands of Palestinian hostages in Israeli prisons. Instead we continue to witness widespread support for Israel; examples here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here, rather then hearing the call for the cessation of the collective punishment of the fearful citizens of Gaza. The BBC reports that the White House said Israel had "the right to defend itself" but should ensure civilians were not harmed. If it is accepted that Israel has the right to violently invade Palestine, imprison Palestinians, and assassinate their leaders, then Palestinian militants are justified in attacking an Israeli military outpost and detaining an Israeli soldier. Operation Summer Rain is not just a response to the Palestinian tunnel raid, or aimed at prying hostage soldier Gilad Shalit free from his captors. Regardless of whether second and third hostages have also been taken, as Juan Cole states; "the force here is all out of proportion." With the hostage situation being a mere excuse for Israel to destroy Hamas and possibly Islamic Jihad also, since Tuesday, Gaza has been invaded and experienced air-strikes, deaths, and cuts in water and power. In fact, Israel has even stooped so low as to use the situation as an opportunity to provoke and threaten Syria! Omar sums up the reality of the situation with the sentence: "Releasing the soldier will cause nothing, the invasion will continue under another excuse no doubt, and keep hiding him will cause the invasion to be worse, it will force a door-to-door scan, a giant number of arrests, and most definitely will cause the Israelis to amplify the time needed for the completion of that invasion with whatever missions they want to accomplish under the surface there."When will the global community speak up and demand that the violence and oppression ceases?

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

Abdul Rahman: Infidel

jamal — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 02:09:12 EST

Under mounting foreign pressure to free Abdul Rahman, several Afghan authorities have suggested he could be released within 48 hours. Even Pope Benedict XVI has asked the Afghan president to show clemency, although I did not see him present at the rally. Obviously his grace is not going to travel to Washington DC, but he does need to do a lot more if he wants to avoid exacerbating the popular Afghan belief that Rahman is part of a plot to convert Muslims. "The courts should punish him and he should be put to death;" is the reported public opinion in Afghanistan, leading to concerns that Rahman will be forced to live in fear and forced exile following release. Some await the Left's support; others wonder about the Muslim response; while a few yearn the bugle of the West. What disturbs me is that while USA, Britain, Australia, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Canada and the UN voice their concerns about this single man, not much in comparison is being said about Police clubbing demonstrators in Belarus; violence in CAR; deaths in India; fatal clashes in Somalia; attacks in Baghdad; and lack of support in Sudan.Alongside the continued unrest and increase in opium production, Rahman's case is further evidence that Afghanistan has not been liberated? I therefore disagree with Dafydd Ab Hugh who implies that any outcome will be no stain on President Bush, but on the other hand I do not consider it Bush's duty to intervene either. From the Afghan point of view, America has already interfered far enough into their lives, politically, culturally and socially. In the West, opinions are festering in considering the Rahman case as evidence of an Islamic "threat" and a potential cause of "severe hardships" for Christians. Rather than fearing Islam and slandering the Shari'ah, people should instead follow Irfan's example and attempt to understand the political, cultural, theological and historical context within which the Rahman case unfolds. To simply condemn Islam or even Afghanistan, as many are doing, is too simple-minded when there is much more to this fascinating story as excellently detailed by Will who concludes:A movement to save Abdul Rahman must be indigenous and rooted in Muslim values. Otherwise, I'm afraid Abdul Rahman will either die for his beliefs or Afghanistan's legitimacy will be undercut. Afghanistan's government will be set back if he is saved from execution inorganically, meaning as the result of illegitimate external interventions. With reference to my own understanding as provided during discussion of a related article, there is not a single authentically recorded instance that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did treat apostasy as a prescribed offence under hudud (capital punishment) only for leaving Islam. No one was sentenced to death solely for renunciation of faith unless accompanied by hostility and treason, or was linked to an act of political betrayal of the community. As a matter of fact the Qur'an is completely silent on the question of death as a punishment for apostasy, which does not qualify for temporal punishment. The following is provided based on Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al-Misri's 'The Reliance of the Traveller' (from IslamOnline) with some amendments): In addressing the issue of apostasy it is important to keep in mind the time, circumstances and the conditions that existed at the time of a particular ruling or judgment. Most modern governments do not apply Shari`ah law. However, this does not justify individuals taking it upon themselves to kill people if they apostatize from Islam. If this were to happen, such reckless action would only lead to a vicious circle of murder and homicide in which case a great deal of innocent people would be injured. As it stands presently, the means for dealing with apostasy are appropriate. Muslims should know that Almighty Allah has promised the apostate a severe punishment in this life, and an even greater punishment in the next life.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

On Wafa Sultan's "There Is No Clash of Civilizations"

jamal — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:10:03 EST

Lately I have read many blogs and articles referencing Wafa Sultan, the secular ex-Muslim Syrian-American psychologist now receiving death threats. She recently spoke from Los Angeles on Al Jazeera, where she argued with the host and Dr. Ibrahim Al-Khouli about the Samuel Huntington Clash of Civilizations theory, scolding Muslims for treating non-Muslims differently and for not recognizing the accomplishments of non-Muslim society while using its wealth and technology. If she had incorporated a little history into her psychology doctorate, she may have learned that the Muslim world has given us many innovations that we take for granted in daily life. We know that she already knew this but probably considered its inclusion counter-productive in her attempt to slander Islam. Wafa Sultan's view does not surprise me as she has already stated her apostatasy from Islam, "I lost my trust in their god and began to question all our teachings. It was the turning point of my life, and it has led me to this present point. I had to leave. I had to look for another god."Although the Qur'an states,"Those who reject Allah, and hinder (men) from the Path of Allah, then die rejecting Allah, Allah will not forgive them (Qur'an: 47:34.)"Therefore this woman is another example of Muslims who have made their fame and fortune through supporting that which is against Islam, such as Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. It appears that these are the ones they call moderates. Those that slander Islam are considered heroes, and those that support it are considered extreme. I do not see what makes Wafa Sultan an expert on Islam, particularly when she generalises the entire Muslim community in her speech. With a display of extreme colonial undertones, when referring to the Muslim world she says,"It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality."I remember learning in history class that the white man invaded Africa to "lead the black man out of the darkness and into the light". Wafa Sultan speaks in a similar fashion, ignoring that barbarity and primitiveness exist in the USA where she lives, a country that executes prisoners, invades other countries to torture and slaughter the inhabitants. This woman who is educated to the doctorate level states, "the Muslims are the ones who began the clash of civilizations," when it is very clear that there has been a continuous series of atrocities throughout history, with their root in the 'Christian Atonement' theory.Wafa Sultan is merely using psychology, her chosen subject, to become accepted amongst non-Muslims and increase her status. I find her points very one-sided and an attempt to bring Islam into disrepute. Although Jews have stolen the entire land of Israel, murdered many Palestinian children, and openly fired inside mosques, Wafa Sultan states, "The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling" ... "We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people."We need only to refer to the exploits of Arial 'The Butcher' Sharon to show how out of touch these points are. Underneath all the headline points in her words, the message is that Islamic extremism merits condemnation until it is eradicated. An excellent message, which is overshadowed by her belittling statement that Muslims must earn respect by benefiting humankind. She ignores that 1. Muslim does not equal Terrorist, and, 2. If people want the respect of Muslims, then they must stop making these silly points. If it is the case that Wafa Sultan wants to impress the Christians, Atheists, and Jews to raise her profile and increase sales for her proposed book, The Escaped Prisoner: When God Is a Monster, to do it at the expense of the entire Muslim community shows her lack of good character. She does not deserve to die for her opinion, but is she a heretic and infidel? Well, she has denounced her religion because gunmen of the Muslim Brotherhood killed her professor in front of her. If this is not a weak level of justification, then I don't know what is, as she has evidently blamed Allah and Islam rather then blaming the gunmen. One of my university lecturers is now addicted to crack cocaine, but even if his supplier was the Ayatollah himself, it would not be any justification for me to leave Islam. If witnessesing the death of her professor at the hands of terrorists left Wafa Sultan to start "questioning every single teaching of our holy book," then why bother criticising the Muslim clerics, holy warriors and political leaders that she believes have distorted Islam, as people to be corrected. As the holy book pre-dates these people, if Wafa Sultan believes it to be a distortion, then she only has to provide her evidence. Rather then striving to correct those that distort Islam as she claims, Wafa Sultan's real intention is instead to express her view that the fundamental teachings of Islam are distorted, and Islam is not the religion provided to man by God. If she truly believes that the distorted religious teachings of Islam prompt young people to commit suicide, and that somebody has to help free the Muslim people from these wrong beliefs, then why is she not highlighting the distorters AND the distortions. It would have been more accurate for her to say that the Qur'an does not promote suicide, and therefore vulnerable Muslims should be informed of this fact. Instead Wafa Sultan's intention is that Muslims should be corrected until they become non-believers like her. The reality is that Wafa Sultan "had to leave (Islam)" .. and .. "look for another god" because she did not believe, and now she prospers by rallying the anti-Muslims with her cry of "Fear Muslims! Fear Arabs! Fear Islam!" Evidently, Wafa Sultan distorts the facts in order to fit a politically motivated inaccurate view of Islam. The world is full of good Muslims who understand Islam as a religion of peace, and it is a minority of Muslims, like the members of Al-Qaeda, that have misinterpreted the Qur'an. I am therefore not surprised that in response to Wafa Sultan's distortion of these facts, clerics throughout the Muslim world have condemned her, and her telephone answering machine has filled with dark threats causing her to go into hiding.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

It's Paradise Now at the Oscars

jamal — Sun, 5 Mar 2006 23:06:55 EST

More interesting than Ken Livingstone being described as using anti-Semitic comments to court the "Muslim vote" and stand up to "the Zionists", is the controversy over Paradise Now's Oscar nomination.Paradise Now depicts the story of two young Palestinians in Nablus who were chosen by a local terror group to carry out a suicide bombing in Israel. It was nominated for an Oscar and there was a petition demanding its removal on the grounds that it glorifies Palestinian suicide-bombers, there was a counter-petition too! I've not yet seen the movie, but I read that that the controversy stems from those who want us to think that any sympathetic treatment of Palestinians is anti-Semitic, when the reality is that "It is a story about the suffering of Palestinians and how a life of desperation can lead to an act of desperation."Nevertheless, in the current climate a film about suicide bombings was bound to be controversial, which evidently provides marketing value. Michael's review analyses the film as posing suicide-bombings as an emotional reaction rather than a legitimate form of political protest, and concludes with the message that terrorism is a road that leads to neither paradise, virgins nor lasting peace. Elie and SarcastiPundit make comparisons in asking whether films such as Mississippi Burning would have received an honour if they had shown an "even-handed approach, humanizing and understanding" towards the KKK. Such comparisons omit the fact that Israelis are not targeted for being victims, as were the oppressed peoples of pre-civil rights America. Director Hany Abu-Assad points out that Israelis are not targeted because of oppression or hatred for Jews, but instead for belonging to, supporting and fighting for a State that forces Palestinians to live in refugee camps. I read refreshing points from J.T who questions why we should not be allowed to explore why such violent protest is used by the people of Palestine, a country considered not to exist. It is oppressive in itself for their vilification, bulldozing and killing to be considered acceptable, while the understanding of their offensive/defensive motivations and strategies is considered unacceptable. The suicide-bomber uses a lethal and life wasting strategy, but then so did the frontline troops on the battlefields of WWI, as did the Kamikaze pilots of WWII.

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.

British Faith Schools in the Imagined Community

jamal — Wed, 1 Mar 2006 16:43:40 EST

While I was minded to share my thoughts about Yahoo banning the use of Allah in email names, the BNP's new campaign material, or cleric Maulana Yousef Qureshi and his followers putting a $1m bounty on Danish cartoonists, this more important issue came to my attention. The issues regarding faith schools in the UK have been simmering for some time. Faith schools were criticised last year for failing to give pupils an adequate understanding of other religions. Islamic schools were specifically focused upon and links were made to terrorism in that a more diverse system of religious education would combat extremism and promote respect for others. This was in fact an exaggeration and I have not yet heard of the same principles being applied to some types of faith schools that are renowned for being closed and alienating to outsiders (I will not pinpoint any particular type of faith school so as not to detract from the subject). In the usual display of subliminal messaging, it is pictures of Muslim girls in headscarves that accompany the many of the articles on this topic. It is high time the government decides it's stance on faith schools as it recently deemed them too selective, while also being of the opinion that the establishment of state-funded Muslim schools was a positive step. I do agree with part of the current proposals in that faith schools should be instructed to teach their pupils about the core beliefs of other religions besides their own. Knowledge is power, and in a multi-cultural society it is important to understand ones fellow citizens. However, lets not fool ourselves into thinking that for most people having knowledge of their neighbours religion will make them any more interactive with them. By way of the very same 'knowledge is power' rationale, I would argue that to give monotheists a greater knowledge of the ways of polytheists and vice-versa is in part a recipe for failure if the overriding objective is to develop respect and sensitivity to others.Another danger will be the potential for schools and their respective faiths to be ranked in terms of their compliance with these new policies. Where some Faith Schools will stop at an acceptable level of raising awareness of the core beliefs of the major religions, others will undoubtedly be more interactive with external religious productions and field trips to other religious establishments. Therefore, re-enforcing stereotypes and propagating negative connotations formed from the premise that particular religions are less inclusive than others. My opinion is that schools should be allowed to decide whether to teach about other religions or not. It should be noted (as it has) that a more diverse religious education can be benefiting to the child. However, as with those that consider placing their children in the more exclusive public schools that many of us cannot afford, the religions of others are relatively unimportant. This does not mean we should not respect others or their religions, but it does mean that we can do this without formally allocating time and resources that may be better spent learning about our own faiths and the other subjects on the curriculum such as Mathematics, English and Science. Seem similar articles at my blog, Opinionated Voice

I am a convert to Islam, with keen interest in current events.