Monday, February 8, 2010

An appeal to Muslims about Dr. Afia Siddiqi

An appeal to Muslims about Dr. Afia Siddiqi
Friday, February 5, 2010

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2010/02/appeal-to-muslims-about-dr-afia-siddiqi.html

Today a Manhattan jury found Afia Siddiqui guilty of all charges. Siddique is the Pakistani scientist accused of shooting at her US captors while in custody in Afghanistan. The defense team was counting on the lack of physical evidence against Siddiqui to lead to an acquittal.

My concern is what is floating on the net, “that she fought for Islam” that amounts to twisting the issue from Justice to “religious” one; I believe it is short-sighted and wrong. The issue is about justice, and it has been painful to read and watch the trial, rather the mis-trial and the apparent denial of justice to Dr. Afia Siddiqi.

I appeal to Muslim hallucinaters around the world to keep the issue to Justice otherwise, we will invoke the Neocons to cook up imaginary enemies and change the nature of the issue. It may cause further harm to Dr. Siddiqui’s appeal.

Our system of Justice and our Jury is fair, but we do make mistakes and the system is amenable to that and we need to have patience and honor it.

If you demonstrate, please do it peacefully and make an appeal to justice. Kindly avoid religious slogans, condemnations or other unproductive methods; you may harm the appeal for justice to Dr. Siddiqi by your demonstrations.

As Muslims please follow what the Prophet would have done; pray for the well being of Afia and appeal to the sense of Justice.

Mike Ghouse is a thinker, writer, speaker, optimist and an activist of Pluralism, Interfaith, Co-existence, Peace, Islam and India. He is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions to issues of the day. His work is reflected at three websites and 22 Blogs listed at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

References

The Terror-Industrial Complex - http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/08

Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aafia_Siddiqui
Please be aware that all that you see in Wiki is not truthful, finding the truth is your own responsibility.

Jury convicts Afia Siddiqui for attempted murder http://www.fsrn.org/audio/headlines-wednesday-february-3-2009/6156

LHCBA condemns verdict against Aafia
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=222575

New Yorker goes on a hunger strike to protest MIT trained Neuroscientist's guilty conviction - http://www.examiner.com/x-4459-NY-Muslim-Examiner~y2010m2d7-New-Yorker-goes-on-a-hunger-strike-to-protest-MIT-trained-Neuroscientists-guilty-conviction

The Curious Case Of Dr. Afia Siddiqui – http://www.countercurrents.org/versey060210.htm

Pakistan request US to release neurologist on humanitarian ground - http://www.unnindia.com/english/story.php?Id=5899

~~~

Here are three recent articles on Dr. Siddiqi:

1. By Yvonne Ridley
2. Saeed Qureshi.
3. Wikepedia Profile

Dr. Afia Siddiqi by Yvonne Ridley
THE TRUTH ABOUT US JUSTICE
By Yvonne Ridley

Many of us are still in a state of shock over the guilty verdict returned on Dr Aafia Siddiqui.

The response from the people of Pakistan was predictable and overwhelming and I salute their spontaneous actions. From Peshawar to Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore and beyond they marched in their thousands demanding the return of Aafia.

Even some of the US media expressed discomfort over the verdict returned by the jurors … there was a general feeling that something was not right. Everyone had something to say, everyone that is except the usually verbose US Ambassador Anne Patterson who has spent the last two years briefing against Dr Aafia and her supporters.

This is the same woman who claimed I was a fantasist when I gave a press conference with Tehreek e Insaf leader Imran Khan back in July 2008 revealing the plight of a female prisoner in Bagram called the Grey Lady.

She said I was talking nonsense and stated categorically that the prisoner I referred to as “650” did not exist. By the end of the month she changed her story and said there had been a female prisoner but that she was most definitely not Dr Aafia Siddiqui.

By that time Aafia had been gunned down at virtually point blank range in an Afghan prison cell jammed full of more than a dozen US soldiers, FBI agents and Afghan police.

Her Excellency briefed the media that the prisoner had wrested an M4 gun from one soldier and fired off two rounds and had to be subdued. The fact these bullets failed to hit a single person in the cell and simply disappeared did not resonate with the diplomat.

In a letter dripping in untruths on August 16 2008 she decried the “erroneous and irresponsible media reports regarding the arrest of Ms
Aafia Siddiqui”. She went on to say: “Unfortunately,
there are some who have an interest in simply distorting the facts in an effort to manipulate and inflame public opinion. The truth is never served by sensationalism…”

When Jamaat Islami invited me on a national tour of Pakistan to address people about the continued abuse of Dr Aafia and the truth about her incarceration in Bagram, the US Ambassador continued to issue rebuttals.

She assured us all that Dr Aafia was being treated humanely had been given consular access as set out in international law … hmm. Well I have a challenge for Ms Patterson today. I challenge her to repeat every single word she said back then and swear it is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

As Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s trial got underway, the US Ambassador and some of her stooges from the intelligence world laid on a lavish party at the US Embassy in Islamabad for some hand-picked journalists where I’ve no doubt in between the dancing, drinks and music they were carefully briefed about the so-called facts of the case.

Interesting that some of the potentially incriminating pictures taken at the private party managed to find the Ambassador was probably hoping to minimize the impact the trial would have on the streets of Pakistan proving that, for the years she has been holed up and barricaded behind concrete bunkers and barbed wire, she has learned nothing about this great country of Pakistan or its people.

One astute Pakistani columnist wrote about her: “The respected lady seems to have forgotten the words of her own country’s 16th president Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865): “You
can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some
of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time”.

And the people of Pakistan proved they are nobody’s fool and responded to the guilty verdict in New York in an appropriate way.

When injustice is the law it is the duty of everyone to rise up and challenge that injustice in any way possible. The response – so far – has been restrained and measured but it is just the start. A sentence has yet to be delivered by Judge Richard Berman in May.

Of course there has been a great deal of finger pointing and blame towards the jury in New York who found Dr Aafia guilty of attempted murder.

Observers asked how they could ignore the science and the irrefutable facts … there was absolutely no evidence linking Dr Aafia to the gun, no bullets, no residue from firing it.

But I really don’t think we can blame the jurors for the verdict - you see the jury simply could not handle the truth. Had they taken the logical route and gone for the science and the hard, cold, clinical facts it would have meant two things. It would have meant around eight US soldiers took the oath and lied in court to save their own skins and careers or it would have meant that Dr Aafia Siddiqui was telling the truth.

And, as I said before, the jury couldn’t handle the truth. Because that would have meant that the defendant really had been kidnapped, abused, tortured and held in dark, secret prisons by the US before being shot and put on a rendition flight to New York. It would have meant that her three children – two of them US citizens – would also have been kidnapped, abused and tortured by the US.

They say ignorance is bliss and this jury so desperately wanted not to believe that the US could have had a hand in the kidnapping of a five-month -old baby boy, a five-year-old girl and her seven-year-old brother.

They couldn’t handle the truth … it is as simple as that.

Well I, and many others across the world like me, can’t handle any more lies. America’s reputation is lying in the lowest gutters in Pakistan at the moment and it can’t sink any lower.

The trust has gone, there is only a burning hatred and resentment towards a superpower which sends unmanned drones into villages to slaughter innocents.

It is fair to say that America’s goodwill and credibility is all but washed up with most honest, decent citizens of Pakistan.

And I think even Her Excellency Anne Patterson recognizes that fact which is why she is now keeping her mouth shut.

If she has any integrity and any self respect left she should stand before the Pakistan people and ask for their forgiveness for the drone murders, the extra judicial killings, the black operations, the kidnapping, torture and rendition of its citizens, the water-boarding, the bribery, the corruption and, not least of all, the injustice handed out to Dr Aafia Siddiqui and her family.

She should then pick up the phone to the US President and tell him to release Aafia and return Pakistan’s most loved, respected and famous daughter and reunite her with the two children who are still missing.

Then she should re-read her letter of August 16, 2008 and write another … one of resignation.

Yvonne Ridley is a patron of Cageprisoners which first brought the plight of Dr Aafia Siddiqui to the world’s attention shortly after her kidnap in March 2003. The award-winning, investigative journalist also co-produced the documentary In Search of Prisoner 650 with film-maker Hassan al Banna Ghani which concluded that the Grey Lady of Bagram was Dr Aafia Siddiqui

~~~~-
Verdict on Dr Afia
By Saeed Qureshi

When Dr Afia was first picked up by the moles of intelligence in March 2003 in Pakistan against the charge of her association with the Al-Qaida terrorists. She was secretly kept in Afghanistan’s notorious Bagram prison for 5 years without any trial. Finally when a British female journalist disclosed her presence by hearing her screams as prisoner number 650, the concerned American authorities reluctantly moved her to the United States. Here too it took considerable amount of time for her case of abetment of Islamic terrorist to be initiated before the court.

But while the previous charge seems to have been pushed on the back burner, a new charge was framed and brought against her. She was accused of snatching a gun from an American soldier with a view to fire at him. Now when one looks at the hearing the whole case put up by the prosecution is replete with contradictions. It is utterly unimaginable for a delicate, educated women reduced to a skinny skeleton of bones after years of rigorous incarceration to first snatch a gun and then aim at some one. The whole incident took place behind a curtain with no direct witness.

The case otherwise calls for mercy to the defendant on humanitarian grounds. Someone from the American penal and legal system should have a heart and honest courage to point out the clumsy way she is being prosecuted in the American court. A totally mentally and physically broken women whose fault or crime is yet to be established conclusively, has been so much brutalized that one disdains the claims of the upholders of human rights and refinement of human civilization in the present age of enlightenment.

Even if there was scuffle that in normal circumstances can take place, did she deserve 5 years of unwarranted stay in one of the most horrifying prisons of wild land called Afghanistan? Have a heart and look closely at the credentials of the case that even a child can figure out is frivolous and is being blown out of proportion by the quarters who would in any case like her to be declared a convict. The justice stands totally wounded and abandoned by the people who are so powerful to get a convoluted verdict irrespective of the merits of the case.

Dr. Afia, a U. S. citizen and a refined woman did not actually hurt anyone, did not injure any one nor was implicated in any offence that would entitle her to such a long jail term without trial which she has already gone through. By all indications she is a law abiding US citizen with good academic record. What is called Christian mercy was not shown to her and where is the noble concept of benefit of doubt?

She has never been given a chance to give her point of view so that there would have been a clearer picture whether she was wrongly picked upon mere doubt or there was some substance behind that. After all she is an American citizen but perhaps her tag of being a Muslim American is an anathema to her tormenters who in any case wanted to prove them justified. Who is going to restore to her the 7 years of her life that this sophisticated women spent in the stinking and dreadful dungeon of Afghanistan and in U.S. prison.

Her children were not her accomplices if at all she came under suspicion of her abductors. How and why these innocent souls were made to suffer so enormously? Has the conscience of the entire world gone dead? What kind of war on terror is being waged when the pristine concept of justice is audaciously trampled to the extent that the future of the small kids of a suspect female also stands darkened?

The trust of fair trial for those who are rightly or mistakenly apprehended loses its validity when seen the crude and discriminate way all are targeted alike: the hardened and proven criminals and those with scant suspicion or drummed up charges like Dr. Afia.

Since Dr. Afia has already suffered immensely and perhaps unjustifiably she deserves a presidential pardon or reconsideration of the verdict handed out by an ambivalent jury which took two days to reach this otherwise controversial decision. The whole case is shrouded in unclear proceedings and is supported perhaps by doubtful and spurious evidence. For the human conscience, the American spirit of humanism, the constitution of the United States of America, for the sake of a fair legal system and for sanctity of the immortal Bill or Rights, Dr. Afia is eligible to be freed and rejoin her family and children also suffering trauma and agony all these years along with Dr. Afia’s harrowing afflictions and unspeakable tribulations.
~~~~

You are welcome to post your “thoughtful” comments on this link, knee-jerk responses will not be posted, our goal is to create positive change and not rhetoric.

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2010/02/appeal-to-muslims-about-dr-afia-siddiqi.html#comments

~~~

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Swiss antagonist of minarets embraces Islam

Note: I have never encouraged conversions, as I see the beauty in each faith and do not see the need for anyone to change the faith. However, I am firm believer in freedom, one must be free to choose his/her faith, clothes, friends, house, spouse or a car. And as a Muslim, rarely have I posted articles on conversions, indeed it is a big deal to Muslims, Christians and Hindus (new phenomenon), they make a festival out of it.

This conversion, still to be verified is amusing to me. However, some of the scholars in Islam have been those who were studying Quraan to find faults and exaggerate them to spew the venom of hatred, but instead, they have made U-turns and gone the other way and have become Muslims.

It is amusing because the famous Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders had made the movie Fitna based on 14 deliberate mistranslations and misquotes from Quraan, to which Imam Zia and I wrote an article pointing his falsities and have always wondered if he really believed in what he said, and then when I read this conversion, my immediate thought was, is Geert Wilders, next?

Mike Ghouse
~~~~

Swiss antagonist of minarets embraces Islam January 30, 2010

RENOWNED Swiss politician Daniel Streich, who rose to fame for his campaign against minarets of mosques, has embraced Islam.

A member of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and a well-known politician, Daniel Streich was the first man who had launched a drive for imposition of ban on mosques minarets, and to lock the mosques in Switzerland. The proclamation of Streich’s conversion to Islam has created furore in Swiss politics, besides causing a tremor for those who supported ban on construction of mosques minarets.

Streich propagated his anti-Islamic movement far and wide in the country, sowed seeds of indignation and scorn for Islam among the people, and paved way for public opinion against pulpits and minarets of mosques.

But now Streich has become a soldier of Islam. His anti-Islam thoughts finally brought him so close to this religion that he embraced Islam. He is ashamed of his doings now and desires to construct the most beautiful mosque of Europe in Switzerland.

The most interesting thing in this regard is that at present there are four mosques in Switzerland and Streich wants to lay the foundation for the fifth one. He wishes to seek absolution of his sin of proliferating venom against Islam. He is thinking of a movement contrary to his previous one to promote religious tolerance and peaceful cooperative living, in spite of the fact that ban on mosques minarets has gained a legal status.

This is the greatest quality of Islam that it comes up with even greater vigour, when it is faced with confrontation.

Abdul Majeed Aldai, the president of OPI, an NGO, working for the welfare of Muslims, says that Europeans have a great desire to know about Islam. Some of them want to know about the relationship between Islam and terrorism; same was the case with Streich.

During his confrontation, Streich studied the Holy Quran and started understanding Islam. He wished to be hard to Islam, but the outcome was otherwise. Aldai further says.

Recently the question of ban on minarets was put to voting in Switzerland, wherein the Swiss nationals gave the issue a legal status.

As per voting results 42.5 per cent people voted in favour of the minarets and 57.5 per cent supported the ban, while the Muslim population in Switzerland is only 6 per cent. The most wondrous thing in this regard, therefore, is the support of 42.5 per cent of population for only six per cent Muslims.

The analysts claim that ban on minarets and Islamic rituals has attracted the people towards Islam.

Streich was an important member of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP). His importance could be estimated from his influence on party’s policy making, in which he always had a prominent role. His movement against minarets was aimed at gaining political attention and interest. He won the slot of military instructor in the Swiss Army due to his popularity.

Born in a Christian family, Streich had a comprehensive study of Islam merely to malign and confront, but Islamic teachings had a deep impact on him. Eventually he de-linked himself from political activities and he embraced Islam. Streich has termed the SVO activities against the Muslims as satanic.

He says that he used to read the Bible and often went to chapel, but now he recites the Holy Quran and offers his prayers five times a day. He further says that he cancelled his party membership and made public his conversion. Streich says that he has found the truth of life in Islam, which he could not find in Christianity.

On the other hand the Swiss military authorities have feared that Streich, who was once a military instructor, might reveal army secrets to the Muslims.

An SVP National Council member says that Streich as military instructor could be dangerous.

However, a spokesman of Swiss Army while rejecting this impression said that the performance of our military was more important than that who instructed it.

However, from within their own ranks, a man is now working for the promotion of Islam and its teachings. The law of a country can ban minarets but not minds and hearts.

- Newsdesk

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online//International/30-Jan-2010/Swiss-antagonist-of-minarets-embraces-Islam

Islamophobia and Minaret Ban in Switzerland
Xenophobia in Europe and Fear of Radical Islam
Dec 2, 2009 Aimee Larsen Stoddard

The Swiss People's Party referendum banning minaret construction underscores European/growing Muslim population division, European fear of radical Islam and terrorism.
The Swiss ban on the construction of minarets on mosques accentuates the European cultural struggle with the growing Muslim population in Europe. The larger issue that is highlighted in the minaret ban is European xenophobia, which involves concerns over security and fear of loss of cultural identity.

What Does the Minaret Ban in Switzerland Do?

Passed by popular vote in November 2009, the Swiss constitutional ban prohibits the construction of minarets on mosques. Minarets are spires that were traditionally used to call Muslims to prayer.

The ban does not prohibit the construction of mosques, and the ban does not stipulate that the four existing minarets in Switzerland must be taken down.

Criticism of the Swiss Minaret Ban

The backlash against the Swiss minaret ban has been harsh. Other countries in and outside the European Union, the Vatican, religious individuals — Muslim and non-Muslim — as well as politicians, journalists, bloggers, and so on have criticized Switzerland, a country that has traditionally had a reputation for tolerance, for religious discrimination.

Expressing the sentiments of many, Egyptian Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said, “This proposal . . . is not considered just an attack on freedom of beliefs, but also an attempt to insult the feelings of the Muslim community in and outside Switzerland.”Read more at Suite101: Islamophobia and Minaret Ban in Switzerland: Xenophobia in Europe and Fear of Radical Islam http://religion-war.suite101.com/article.cfm/swiss_culture_war_islamophobia_jihad_minarets#ixzz0erIi5kkg

Xenophobia, Islamophobia, and Fears of Terrorism in Europe

Xenophobia, the fear of “the other,” in Europe is a growing problem. Much of the hostility is a consequence of Europeans’ exposure to radical Islam, including the concept of jihad (Islamic holy war), and Islamic terrorism.

The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, the 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, the 2005 bombings of London public transportation, and other smaller-scale terrorist attacks have caused some Europeans to maintain a wary attitude toward Islam.

Incidents of hate crimes and discrimination against Muslims have been on the rise in Europe. Many cases of violence have targeted Muslims themselves as well as Muslim places of worship, cemeteries, and businesses. Controversy surrounding European discrimination against Muslims came to the forefront in the 2004 ban of Muslim headscarves in France and calls in France for a ban on the burqa and in the 2006 Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten cartoons that took potshots at the prophet Muhammad and Islam.

The Swiss campaign posters supporting a ban on minarets draw attention to the fears of many Europeans, highlighting the negative impressions and stereotypes some Europeans have of Islam. The posters show minarets that look like missiles jutting up from the Swiss flag in the background with a completely veiled woman in a black burqa in the foreground.

Obstacles for Europe’s Growing Muslim Population and Europeans

Europe’s Muslim population has been steadily growing over the past decade. Muslims make up 6 percent of Switzerland’s population. Other countries in Europe have significant minority Muslim populations as well, with Muslims comprising more than 20 percent of the population in some major EU cities. In total, about 20 million of Europe’s 500 million are Muslims.

Muslims in Europe face many obstacles to assimilation from both within Islamic culture and from European culture. Muslims have come into cultural conflict with Europeans over Muslim segregationist tendencies, Muslim women’s wearing of the burqa, and some Muslims’ desire to implement Sharia law (Islamic law) in Europe.

Muslim segregation is both self-imposed as a result of the conflict of Islamic values with European cultural values, such as the Islamic prohibition against drinking, and a consequence of European discrimination against Muslims. The problem of assimilation is exacerbated by the fact that many Muslims live in neighborhoods with high poverty and crime rates.

What Does the Future Hold for Europeans and Muslims?
The Swiss ban on the minaret construction is indicative of a larger cultural war happening between western and Islamic ways of life in Europe. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Conference, said the Swiss ban was an “example of growing anti-Islamic incitement in Europe by the extremist, anti-immigrant, xenophobic, racist, scare-mongering ultra-right politicians who reign over common sense, wisdom and universal values.”
The growing European Muslim population has encountered many obstacles to assimilation from within and without. Muslims have butted heads with Europeans over issues of women’s rights and separation of church and state. Tariq Ramadan, Oxford University scholar, commented in the Christian Science Monitor: “Over the last two decades Islam has become connected to so many controversial debates . . . it is difficult for ordinary citizens to embrace this new Muslim presence as a positive factor.”

Islamic terrorism targeting Europeans, European violence against Muslims, and discriminatory practices by Europeans against Muslims are indeed difficult obstacles to peaceful European-Muslim coexistence.

Readers might enjoy reading about UK Faith Schools and Religious Labeling of Children.

You are welcome to leave your comments, hateful comments will not be posted, however objective and critical comments will be posted here at this link:

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2010/02/swiss-antagonist-of-minarets-embraces.html#comments

Sources:
Swiss People’s Party Poster Against Minaret Construction
Culture Monster: The Swiss Minaret Ban: Anxieties, Unveiled (Los Angeles Times)

Read more at Suite101: Islamophobia and Minaret Ban in Switzerland: Xenophobia in Europe and Fear of Radical Islam http://religion-war.suite101.com/article.cfm/swiss_culture_war_islamophobia_jihad_minarets#ixzz0erIyRMpF
~~~~

Monday, February 1, 2010

Can Women Be Imams?

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2010/02/can-women-be-imams.html

Dr. Krausen’s presentation evokes the God given intellect in us. She demurs, “if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.”, indeed, It is my observation over the last 10 years of work, debates and discussion forums, that it is a development. My comments follow the article - Mike Ghouse

Can Women Be Imams?
Halima Krausen

In the face of the controversy over Amina Wadud's Friday prayer, Muslim scholar Halima Krausen argues that we should have the courage to ask our own questions, to study the matter conscientiously and to reach conclusions which make sense in our times

Koranic traditions must be taken seriously, Krausen says, but it is also necessary to ask questions about their contemporaneity too. Following the Friday prayers led by Dr Amina Wadud in New York on 18th March and the emotional public debate to which that event led, I have repeatedly been asked for my view on the matter. I believe the issue may seem simple, but is more complicated than it appears. So I'd like to contribute a few ideas to the discussion, rather than put forward a clear opinion.

The first point to make is that it's absolutely unclear what we're talking about. Far from defining a clear "rank," the term "Imâm" is used for a wide spectrum of different meanings.

The word Imâm is related to the word umm, "mother"

In the Koran, the word is used in a more fundamental way and refers to leading exemplary figures like Abraham (Sura 2:124) or the judges of the Children of Israel (Sura 32:23-24) or the potential of all upright people in general (Sura 25:74; 28:4-5); but it can also refer misleadingly to characters like Pharaoh and others like him, who lead one "to the fire" (Sura 28:39-41).

The word Imâm stems from the root "amma" – move forward, lead, be in front – and is related to the word "umm" – mother – which goes beyond the biological aspect towards the meaning "Source, basis, being."

The second apparently unclear point in the current debate is one of methodology. Both supporters and critics of the Friday prayers in New York draw hasty conclusions either from specific traditions (since the Koran itself doesn't deal with the issue directly) or from assumed principles, without examining their background or taking account of their context.

"The gates of legal innovation are closed"

One of the most frequent arguments is that "this has never happened before and has never been considered possible in the past, and therefore should never happen."

There is indeed a methodological principle called Istishâb – the extension of a legal ruling – which applies in cases where the original conditions for the ruling remain the same. This prevents legal and social experiments from being carried out for their own sake, and requires urgent reasons for change, especially regarding prayers and services ('Ibâdât).

This principle has been tacitly overemphasised in Sunni schools of legal thought, and this overemphasis has been strengthened by the doctrine that allegedly "the gates of Ijtihâd (Islamic legal innovation) are closed" – a view which has often led to legal inflexibility.

The ontological equality of man and woman in the Koran

But there have been changes even in liturgical matters: while we assume that we are following the example of the prophet in such matters as ritual prayer (which in principle we no doubt do), in fact we follow the standardised instructions of Muslim teachers from the formative period of Islam, whose details can vary from one school to another. And at least in the diaspora, we tend to feel the need to simplify even those differences for the sake of Muslim unity, rather than to use the dynamic which they offer as a way of deepening the riches of our spiritual and cultural life.

On the other hand, the supporters of change cite the ontological equality of man and woman in the Koran and the fact that the same terms are used to refer to their practical and spiritual responsibilities (e.g. Sura 4:1, 33:35, 9:71 etc.). They overlook impatiently the development of Islamic tradition in the past and demand immediate reform in the direction of justice and equality here and now.

Islam knows no hierarchy of office. All the same, in the classical Fiqh, questions of priority regarding who should lead communal prayers were often not decided solely on the basis of knowledge, skill in recitation or piety. Issues of social hierarchy also played a role.

Women may lead prayers – for women

Within the patriarchal structures which ruled in the largest part of the Muslim world at that time, the idea that a woman might lead public prayer would have been seen as very strange.

Most schools of law consider that women can lead prayers for women. There are tendencies which discourage woman from doing so, and, in the case of Mâlikite school, prohibit them from doing so, evidently on the basis of a Hadîth according to which "a people which entrusts its matters to a woman can never win success."

It's an argument which is often called upon to support opposition to women holding positions of leadership, but it's an argument which neither fulfils the necessary criteria of authenticity, nor can it be brought to conform to the image of the Queen of Sheba as presented in the Koran, nor does it conform to the principle that men and women, as mutual friends and allies (Awliyâ'), "should offer each other good and deny each other evil" (Sura 9:71).

At the same time there are confirmed reports that the wives of the prophet certainly led prayers for women, which are verified by details such as that the (female) Imâm stood in the rows together with the other women.

Some scholars said women may lead mixed prayers

We are far from knowing all the debates of the past on this subject. We only have access to that which was recorded in writing and has been preserved. Indeed there were scholars who had nothing against women leading even mixed ritual prayer, among them Abu Thawr al-Kalbi (died 876), Abu Isma'il al-Muzani (died 879), al-Isfahani (died 884), the founder of the Zâhirite school, at-Tabari (died 923), or Ibn Taymiyya (died 1328).

We don't know many details of the arguments they used, but we also have no evidence that their positions called forth a storm of protest in their time or that they were condemned by their contemporaries. This could be because the cases they mentioned were regarded as exceptional (for example, that a woman may lead the Tarawîh prayers during the month of Ramadan when no man is available who knows the Koran by heart, or that a woman may lead her husband, their children and their slaves when she is the most learned of them).

One could argue that the Tarawîh prayers are not obligatory and that prayers with the family are not public, and that one should not transform exceptions into rules. On the other hand, one could understand such exceptions as confirmation of the theory that it's not reasons of theology or principle, but social reasons which are decisive in these rulings.

Between prejudiced doubt and uncritical approval

The case of Umm Waraqa is often given as a precedent in the current debate. In the various versions of her story, which all add a bit to the picture, we learn that she was one of the women who knew the Koran by heart, and that the Prophet called on her to be the Imâm of the members of her household (Ahl Dârihâ).

Critics have tried to prove that there are weak points in one or other of the Isnâd (chains of transmission) which put the authenticity of the tradition into doubt. On the other hand, the example is used uncritically to back the demand for equal rights for women in leading public prayers.

Between these extreme positions, a debate is taking place as to who the members of her household were and whether the situation was a private or a public one.

A Development Towards A More Rational Approach?

There seem to be no examples of women who led Friday prayers, but there were many women who became famous as preachers on other occasions. We only have to look in the classical collections of biographies to find them.

But we would be deceiving ourselves if we left it at that and simply ignored the many statements which say, for example, that the voice of women is seductive, that the welfare of a woman is dependent on the satisfaction of her husband, that a woman's memory and intellect are inferior, or that women cause temptation and disturbance (Fitnah). These views come from Koran verses taken out of context, traditions and general assumptions.

In fact I'm surprised at the fact that such arguments are scarcely to be found in the current debate, and I ask myself if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.

Islam's rich cultural variety

The debate over the role of the woman as Imâm is symptomatic. What we really need is a critical evaluation of the situation as required by the Muslim Ummah.

To start with, aside from the stereotypes, there isn't anything like "the position of woman in Muslim society." Parallel to the various possibilities for women in the service which are dependent on the views of specific schools of law and local customs, there are, between Morocco and Indonesia, between Central Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, varied climatic and economic and political conditions (which, to be sure, may not necessarily be just), historical experiences, and social and family structures, varying from a clearly patriarchal system to matrilineal structures with every shading in between. All are rooted in the same Koranic and prophetic sources and all make their own contribution to a rich cultural variety.

There's an astonishing contradiction between the high proportion of women students at universities in Muslim countries and the high proportion of illiterate women in the same countries, between the expression of high regard for women and the practical difficulties put in the way of giving women a bigger say in decision making processes, between the lip service paid to the delicacy of women and the off-putting ugliness of the women's areas in many mosques or the rough comments on the duty of obedience of a women towards her husband.

In my own daily work with Muslims in Europe, I meet people from different Arab countries, many of them students or refugees with different backgrounds as far as their education and political attitudes are concerned. Many of them insist on strict separation of the sexes, which may not always be a disadvantage, since it often encourages initiative and solidarity among women.

Does difference necessarily lead to fragmentation?

I am often surprised by the support given to daughters who want to study, and by the attempts in other families to restrict and control their daughters. There are Turkish migrants who are often strongly influenced by the clear role expectations of their rural background, while the next generation works its way through a labyrinth of values and norms between the cultures as they wrestle with their identity.

Many Muslims, especially women, are frightened. They are frightened of difference: they fear it may lead to the fragmentation of their society, to such an extent that they become incapable of dealing with contradictions and differences of opinion.

Many Muslims, especially women, are angry – angry about stereotypes from outside and ignorance and superstition inside the community to which they are repeatedly challenged to react. This gives them scarcely any time for constructive thought. They are angry, because they feel themselves cheated of their spiritual and cultural inheritance, and they are angry about the lack of any possibility of working at the development of a contemporary interpretation and application of the values they hold.

What are our options?

Should we, like uncritical slaves, obey everything which is declared in the tone of command, without questioning the sense of it? Or should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?

And on another level: should we make women's education and the improvement of women's position in society into a priority, both in the general society and in the Muslim community in particular? Or should we push forward with symbolic actions from which one might expect that they will have an influence on the situation? Or are there perhaps yet other ways to improve things?

Final comments

Currently there are more questions than answers. Ijtihâd is necessary in many areas, and there are many legal rules which have moved away from the spirit of the Koran, even if they are founded on some fragment of the text.

Aside from that, the teaching that Mohammed is the final messenger of God is not the same as saying that the situation of the past must never change. It's much more the starting point for a more mature way of contributing to the welfare of human society.

I certainly don't want to be misunderstood as meaning that I lack respect for any of the scholars of the past. Whatever their position, they have tried hard not simply to follow isolated statements or hasty conclusions from precedent, but to work systematically within the framework of their respective methodology, experience and society.

In the same spirit, we should not follow them blindly. We should have the courage to ask our own questions, to study the matter conscientiously and to reach conclusions which make sense in our times.

Halima Krausen is a Muslim scholar and lecturer for the Initiative for Islamic Studies in Hamburg, Germany. (Translation from German: Michael Lawton)

~~~~-

Mike Ghouse comments:

Dr. Krausen’s presentation evokes the God given intellect in us. She demurs, “if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.”, indeed, It is my observation over the last 10 years of work, debates and discussion forums, that it is a development.

My comments follow the article - Mike Ghouse

She asks, “ Should we, like uncritical slaves, obey everything which is declared in the tone of command, without questioning the sense of it? Or should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?” The Neocon Muslims usually are afraid of the freedom; they find safety and security in being uncritical slaves. A new thought frightens them; I wish God had made them angels, completely free from the burden of thinking and taking the responsibility.

I agree with her that most of “These views come from Koran verses taken out of context, traditions and general assumptions.” And, “One of the most frequent arguments is that "this has never happened before and has never been considered possible in the past, and therefore should never happen."

Women and men are created to be full partners in life, as Dr. Krausen quotes, “should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?”

Not all, but many a Muslims are afraid to speak up, even for the sake of discussion. The one who speaks up gets fiercely pounced, so he or she never speaks again. This is how the bullies shut out much of the freedom. I have consistently observed this among Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others. By the way, it is not about Muslims, it is about men, no matter what faith they wear, their phobias are the same.

For some men, the only source of feeling superior (false security) is by considering women to be inferior, a dumb logic, they are so weak that their whole being gets threatened by even feeling their spouse or other woman to be on par. Women are not inferior to men in any form or shape, on the Day of Judgment; it is their deeds that will be accounted for just as much as men’s deeds. A good deed is what you do to make Allah’s creation better; people and environment.

A generation or two from now, it may become a common thing for women to lead mixed gender prayers, Qur’aan orders men to lower their gaze and focus on piety, and pray to God and not look at women’s back. That is a ridiculous argument and those men should wear full Burqa with solid cover on their faces. Indeed, it is a test to those few men, to check their intention of going to the Mosque; to pray or to loaf.

~~~-
Mohsin Maqbool Elahi "Can women be Imams?" is an extremely difficult question to answer. Besides, I am no Islamic scholar to do that. However, I do know that it is NOT allowed for men to offer their prayers behind women due to various and obvious reasons.

However, where the question "what are our options?" is concerned, we should definitely make women's education and ... See Morethe improvement of women's position in society into a priority, both in the general society and in the Muslim community in particular. Pakistan lacks far behind many other Islamic states where these are concerned. Come to think of it even the men stand nowhere near in comparison.

The situation in our rural areas is even worse which is why entire families migrate to urban areas looking for labour. And those who can't find work or rather don't want to work turn to crime.

I am surprised that you being a Muslim scholar and lecturer for Islamic studies use 'Mohammed' for the Prophet's spelling when it should be Muhammad (peace be upon him). 'Mohammed' is an anglicised version which is not used anymore for his name. Besides, Muslims are always supposed to write 'peace be upon him' after his name in veneration which you have not. This is the least we can do to show our profound respect for the final messenger of Allah.
And, please, no offense meant.

Sadikha Hassain I strnongly beleive follow the rules and regulations of Quran and Huzoor Momammed sav. why to make changes and additions?

Amina Akram Faizan bhai ,the expereinces i ahve had last few days are so abrupt that , its sick and sick of people all around here.

Mike Ghouse - Women and men are created to be full partners in life, as Dr. Krausen quotes, “should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?”

Not all, but many a Muslims are afraid to speak up, even for the sake of discussion. The one who speaks up gets fiercely pounced, so he or she never speaks again. This is how the bullies shut out much of the freedom. I have consistently observed this among Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others. By the way, it is not about Muslims, it is about men, no matter what faith they wear, their phobias are the same.

For some men, the only source of feeling superior (false security) is by considering women to be inferior, a dumb logic, they are so weak that their whole being gets threatened by even feeling their spouse or other woman to be on par. Women are not inferior to men in any form or shape, on the Day of Judgment; it is their deeds that will be accounted for just as much as men’s deeds. A good deed is what you do to make Allah’s creation better; people and environment. ... See More

A generation or two from now, it may become a common thing for women to lead mixed gender prayers, Qur’aan orders men to lower their gaze and focus on piety, and pray to God and not look at women’s back. That is a ridiculous argument and those men should wear full Burqa with solid cover on their faces. Indeed, it is a test to those few men, to check their intention of going to the Mosque; to pray or to loaf?

41 minutes ago · Mike Ghouse - Mohsin, in academic circles, the name Muhammad is commonly written with or without (pbuh). Even in Quraan where ever Prophet's name has appeared, there is no (pbuh). It is our culture that we use. It is not a religious requirement. It is fully acceptalbe to just write Muhammad, he is our prophet, no matter how many suffixes or prefixes we add, it... See More is not enough. It is ok not to add them as well.

By the way, Muhammad is as anglicized as Mohammed. There is no international ruling to use one or the other. I understand it is only in Pakistan it is has to be written in certain way, that is not the case in other nations.
34 minutes ago · Mike Ghouse - I laud Dr. Amina Wadud for restoring the rights of the women, that Islam initiated to begin with. Dr. Wadud, Asra Nomani, and Naeema Ghafoor were on my Radio show on the day of the Juma prayers several years ago.

It was a shame and embarrassment that a few right wingers, intolerant and insecure Muslims held ugly placards outside the prayer.... ... See MoreThe women were afraid of doing the prayers in the Mosque, so they went to the church. Reminded me of the persecution the early Muslims endured in praying in public places and they hid and prayed.

Amina Akram We are thinking of women leading the prayer , when can the women be allowed in the mosque.

Mike Ghouse - Amina, it is a shame that we can pray together in Mecca and not our own mosques. Fortunately, in the US, women and men go to prayers together, but pray in two different separated areas.. it will change in a few years, when our girls will not put up with up it. Although a few men act ugly in Allah's house, but a few have dared to change it too. May Allah give the courage to women to stand up for their rights.

- Please watch Asra Nomanis Public Television documentary ... the Morgan Town Mosque or something like that.

- My late wife Najma and I were challenged to enter the Jumia Masjid in New Delhi, we went any way and the Nayab Imam was staring at us, we did our Nafl prayers together. ... See More

- Najma and I steppted into the Mosque on the left to Taj Mahal, the Imam stood in my way, I asked hm to produce a document of ownership or let me pray in Allah's house as I would pray in Mecca... Najma and I prayed together in that Mosque. He later came and we had a long chat... he was OK.
a few seconds ago

More comments at: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=285316480717#
~~~

MOHAMMAD IRTAZA ADDS:

Salamun Alykum.

Both believing men and women shall attend the Congregational Prayer as understood from this verse - "O you who believe, when the Congregational Prayer (Salat Al-Jumuah) is announced on Friday, you shall hasten to the commemoration of God, and drop all business. This is better for you, if you only knew." (Quran 62:9) Please note that this verse is addressed not only to believing man, but also to believing woman.

Leading a Congregational Prayer is a righteous work. The Quran recognizes that men and women are endowed with unique qualities (Quran 4:32). Yet, the Quran teaches us that men and women are equal and they can do any righteous work for which they will be rewarded - "Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female-you are equal to one another. Thus, those who immigrate, and get evicted from their homes, and are persecuted because of Me, and fight and get killed, I will surely remit their sins and admit them into gardens with flowing streams." Such is the reward from God. God possesses the ultimate reward." (Quran 3:195) Based on this verse, male and female are equal, and an woman may lead a prayer since it is a righteous work.

One of the purpose of the Congregational Sermon (Khutba) is to advocate righteousness and forbid evil. The believing men and women are allies of one another and they can advocate righteousness and forbid evil as understood from this verse - "The believing men and women are allies of one another. They advocate righteousness and forbid evil, they observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and give the obligatory charity (Zakat), and they obey God and His messenger. They will be showered by God's mercy. God is Almighty, Most Wise." (Quran 9:71) Since, this verse does not specify the type of audiences, a woman may deliver sermon or advocate righteousness or forbid evil to a group of male and female worshipers.

But, can a woman really take a leadership role ? The Quran detailed out the story of Queen Sheba (Quran 27:22-44). She represented a democratic leadership who consulted with her people before making decisions - "She said, "O my advisers, I have received an honorable letter. It is from Solomon, and it is, "In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful." Proclaiming: "Do not be arrogant; come to me as submitters."" She said, "O my advisers, counsel me in this matter. I am not deciding anything until you advise me." (Quran 27:29-32) After witnessing what God gave to Solomon, she became Muslim. The Quran does not indicate that her leadership role is offensive.

But, is it an innovation if woman leads a Prayer with men present in the Congregation? The Quran is a complete(Quran 6:38), perfect (Quran 18:1-2) and fully detailed (Quran 6:114) book. The Quran has no such ruling that leads us to believe that woman cannot be an Imam with men present in the congregation. Please remember that the Quran condemns religious innovations. Any religious ruling not authorized by God Almighty is an innovation as understood from this verse - "You do not worship beside Him except innovations that you have made up, you and your parents. God has never authorized such idols. All ruling belongs to God, and He has ruled that you shall not worship except Him. This is the perfect religion, but most people do not know." (Quran 12:40)

Can you imagine how many religious innovations were made up by our respected imams and scholars just by quoting religious edicts (fatwas) !? The ancient religious scholar manufactured the following religious edict which was falsely attributed to the Prophet to discourage women to go to a mosque.- "Narrated Ibn Umar: The prophet (p.b.u.h) said, "Allow women to go to the Mosque at night." (Vol 2, Book 13, No 22, Bukhari hadith translated by M. Muhsin Khan) !!!!! The following modern religious edict is fabricated by Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA) because they failed to resist the right of women to go to a mosque - "A unanimous consensus for the entire Ummah (Muslim community) in the east and west (is) that women cannot lead the Friday prayer nor can they deliver the (sermon). Whoever takes part in such a prayer, then his prayer is nullified, whether he was an Imam or a follower." !!!!!!!!! So, according to the new fatwa, woman may now go to a mosque but she cannot lead a prayer !!!!!

Is there any possibility that the ruling on "woman as imam" existed during the time of Abraham, since God Almighty taught him how to offer salat prayer (Quran 21:73) and Muhammed was enjoined to follow the religion of Abraham (Quran 16:123) ? We simply do not know how women were treated during the time of Abraham. We do not know if God Almighty decreed equality of law (Quran 3:195) for both men and women during Abraham's time. We even do not know if that ruling on "woman as imam" was relevant or premature during that time frame. Slavery is a relevant subject during Muhammed's time (Quran 2:177-178; 4:25) . But, is slavery a relevant subject during our time when it is universally recognized unacceptable practice !? The mathematical miracle of the Quran (Quran 74:30-35) is relevant during our time because the miracle can be verified with the help of a computer (Quran 27:82). But, could that miracle play any significant role during Muhammed's era when numerical system were not even developed and people used alphabets for counting !?

Only fifty years ago, women were not even allowed to pray in the mosque despite the fact that the Quran permits them to pray in the mosque (Quran 62:9). Today, it becomes a reality at a very small scale but with the segregation of men and women !!

Only God Almighty has the full knowledge of the past, present and future of all seven universes. Based on such knowledge, He designed His Quran such a way that it can be effectively applied to any situation for all the generations and generations to come.

Thank you and may God guide me,
Muhammed Irtaza
~~~~~

Saturday, January 16, 2010

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Mike Ghouse (214) 325-1916,
email: MikeGhouse@aol.com
event email: HolocaustandGenocides@gmail.com
Website: http://www.holocaustandgenocides.com/

III ANNUAL REFELCTIONS ON THE HOLOCAUST AND GENOCIDES

DALLAS – (January 14, 2010) –The Foundation for Pluralism announces the 7/7 speakers Panel to reflect upon the Holocaust and Genocides event at 5:00 PM on Sunday, January 24, 2010 at the Center for Spiritual Center, 4801 Spring Valley Road, Dallas, TX. 75244.

Each individual in the seven member panel would acknowledge the inhumanity in each one of us and reflect upon the solutions for co-existence. It is a purposeful event to learn, acknowledge and reflect upon the terrible things, that we humans have inflicted upon each other.

What can you do as individual?
Continue: http://holocaustandgenocides.blogspot.com/2010/01/press-release-on-holocaust-and.html
~ ~ ~

Friday, January 15, 2010

Haiti and Earthquake

Haiti - posted at the Foundation for Pluralism Blog

Haiti and Earthquake Theology
Dr. Jeffress, this is one of the most timely pieces, that we the people of faith need to read. I thank you from the bottom of my heart. It is time to get out and help, God is testing us and our intentions. Indeed, when we don't understand the calamities and its purpose, and we never will, it is good to trust in God. He is the creator and he knows his creation.
http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2010/01/haiti-and-earthquake-theology.html

Haiti, Voodoo's view on the quake
If you feel the temptation that your faith makes sense and others don't, ask yourselves, where does this arrogance come from? My comments follow the article
http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2010/01/haiti-voodoos-view-on-quake.html

Haiti needs one hundred helicopters
I urge each one of us living in the United States to make the call to the white house at the number given below. May God bless success to these initiatives and hope together we can save lives. Amen - http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2010/01/haiti-needs-one-hundred-helicopters.html

Faith in action: Haiti TragedyShare
It is the spirit of service, every religion is participating in the efforts to find relief to the victims in Haiti. This is what religion is all about; it is not me, me, and me, it is we, we and us.
http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2010/01/multifaith-action-haiti-tragedyshare.html

Seeking Harmony in Malaysia
I am pleased to see the following article by Imam Feisal. He has laid out how things are and then offered solutions. My comments follow the article
http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2010/01/seeking-harmony-in-malaysia.html

Mike Ghouse
~~~~

Thursday, January 14, 2010

The Islamists Are Not Coming

The Islamists Are Not Coming
Religious parties in the Muslim world are hardly the juggernauts they've been made out to be.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/issues/177/contents

BY CHARLES KURZMAN, IJLAL NAQVI JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2010

Do Muslims automatically vote Islamic? That's the concern conjured up by strongmen from Tunis to Tashkent, and plenty of Western experts agree. They point to the political victories of Islamic parties in Egypt, Palestine, and Turkey in recent years and warn that more elections across the Islamic world could turn power over to anti-democratic fundamentalists.

But these victories turn out to be exceptions, not the political rule. When we examined results from parliamentary elections in all Muslim societies, we found a very different pattern: Given the choice, voters tend to go with secular parties, not religious ones. Over the past 40 years, 86 parliamentary elections in 20 countries have included one or more Islamic parties, according to annual reports from the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Voters in these places have overwhelmingly turned up their noses at such parties. Eighty percent of these Islamic parties earned less than 20 percent of the vote, and a majority got less than 10 percent -- hardly landslide victories. The same is true even over the last few years, with numbers barely changing since 2001.

True, Islamic parties have won a few well-publicized breakthrough victories, such as in Algeria in 1991 and Palestine in 2006. But far more often, Islamic parties tend to do very poorly. What's more, the more free and fair an election is, the worse the Islamic parties do. By our calculations, the average percentage of seats won by Islamic parties in relatively free elections is 10 points lower than in less free ones.

Even if they don't win, Islamic parties often find themselves liberalized by the electoral process. We found that Islamic party platforms are less likely to focus on sharia law or armed jihad in freer elections and more likely to uphold democracy and women's rights. And even in more authoritarian countries, Islamic party platforms have shifted over the course of multiple elections toward more liberal positions: Morocco's Justice and Development Party and Jordan's Islamic Action Front both stripped sharia law from their platforms over the last several years.

These are still culturally conservative parties, by any standard, but their decision to run for office places them at odds with Islamic revolutionaries. In many cases, they're actually risking their lives. Almost two decades ago, even before his alliance with Osama bin Laden, Egyptian jihadist Ayman al-Zawahiri wrote a tract condemning the Muslim Brotherhood's abandonment of revolutionary methods in favor of electoral politics.
"Whoever labels himself as a Muslim democrat, or a Muslim who calls for democracy, is like saying he is a Jewish Muslim or a Christian Muslim," he wrote. In Iraq, Sunni Islamic revolutionaries recently renewed their campaign "to start killing all those participating in the political process," according to a warning received by a Sunni politician who was subsequently assassinated in Mosul.

What enrages Zawahiri and his ilk is that Islamists keep ignoring demands to stay out of parliamentary politics. Despite threats from terrorists and a cold shoulder from voters, more and more Islamic parties are entering the electoral process. A quarter-century ago, many of these movements were trying to overthrow the state and create an Islamic society, inspired by the Iranian Revolution. Now, disillusioned with revolution, they are working within the secular system.

But today's problems for Islamic parties may recall an earlier historical moment, the watershed period of the early 20th century when demands for democracy and human rights first gained mass support in Muslim societies from the Russian Empire to the Ottoman Empire. Then as now, violent Islamic movements such as the Ottoman-era Islamic Unity Society objected to electoral politics. But that was not what ultimately undermined democracy in Muslim societies. Instead, secular autocrats, such as Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in Turkey and Reza Shah in Iran, suppressed pro-democratic Islamic movements, driving Islamists underground and helping to radicalize them.

Today, too, dictators and terrorists are conspiring to keep Islamic political parties from competing freely for votes. Government repression has been successful in one sense -- Islamic parties have won few elections. In a broader sense, however, it is failing: According to the World Values Survey, which has polled cultural attitudes around the world, support for sharia is one-third lower in countries with relatively free elections than in other Muslim societies. In other words, suppressing Islamic movements has only made them more popular. Perhaps democratization is not such a gift to Islamists after all.

KHALIL MAZRAAWI/AFP/Getty Images

Charles Kurzman is professor of sociology and Ijlal Naqvi is a sociology graduate student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
~~~~

Monday, January 11, 2010

Ninth Church Vandalized in Malaysia

We appeal the Malaysian Government to reign in this immediately.

The 2nd Caliph had set and example of defending places of worship and Prophet Muhammad assured every one of his community freedom of religion. This is anti-Islamic activity and must be stopped at once. - Mike Ghouse

Ninth Church Vandalized in Malaysia as Tensions Rise
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/world/asia/12malaysia.html

BANGKOK — A ninth church was vandalized Monday in Malaysia in a series of arson attacks that have raised religious tensions surrounding a dispute over the use of the word “Allah” by Christians in this mostly Muslim nation.

“Allah” is the common term for God in Malay-language Bibles, but the government and many Muslim groups insist that the word should be reserved for use in Islam.

The attacks, which began on Friday, came after a court ruling on Dec. 31 that overturned a government ban on the use of “Allah” by Christians. That ruling has been stayed while the government appeals.

Only one of the churches has been seriously damaged, and some of the attacks were minor. In Monday’s attack, the Sidang Injil Borneo Church in the central state of Negeri Sembilan was slightly damaged when its door was burned, according to local reports.

Government officials condemned the violence Monday but defended their position, saying conditions are different in Malaysia from those in neighboring Indonesia or in Arab nations where “Allah” is the common term for God.

“These outrageous incidents are acts of extremism and designed to weaken our diverse communities’ shared commitment to strengthen racial unity,” The Home Ministry secretary, Gen. Mahmood Adam, told reporters after briefing foreign diplomats on the situation.

“They don’t understand the situation here,” he said of the diplomats. “They just want to know why it can be allowed in other countries and not here.”

He said he told them: “Be fair, you have to compare apples to apples, oranges to oranges. Our landscape is different from other countries. Malays here are different from other countries. The landscape here is different from Indonesia so we can’t compare.”

The violence has strained relations among Malays, who are mostly Muslim and who make up 60 percent of the population, and the Chinese and Indian minorities, who are Christian, Hindu and Buddhist.

Indonesia is less divided, with Muslims making up 90 percent of its population of 240 million.

Some Muslims in Malaysia say they fear that Christians are trying to win converts by using the word “Allah.” They say Muslim believers could be confused by the use.

On her blog last week, Marina Mahathir, a commentator and columnist, disparaged this view as a “copyright issue.”

She said a confident Muslim “will not walk into a church, hear a liturgy in Malay or Arabic where they use the word ‘Allah’ and then think that he or she is in a mosque.”

Business leaders have voiced concern that further attacks could threaten trade and investment.

The tourism minister, Ng Yen Yen, said foreign visitors could be frightened away, although the ministry had not received any information on the effects so far.

“This is the communication era, so information travels fast,” she said. “Tourists will choose not to visit a country faced with conflicts, especially religious conflicts.”

In a sign of the country’s racial and religious complexity, a leading Hindu organization said it would hold a candlelight vigil at a church in solidarity with the Christian minority.

Church officials urged their parishioners not to participate in the vigil.

“It sends the wrong message as if the non-Muslims are going against the Muslims,” Father Phillips Muthu of Assumption Church told Malaysiakini.com, an independent online news service.