on: An Ancient Game of Architectural "Tit for Tat", Interview with Jonathan M. Bloom

I am responding to the author's statement, "Jews called the faithful to prayer with the shofar (ram's horn)..." I am the author of a 3-volume compendium of shofar knowledge (see www.HearingShofar.com). While the shofar is certainly a distinctive motif of Jewish prayer, it is not used as a "call to prayer" in the way that the adhan calls Muslims to prayer or bells call Christians.

Since the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, the primary use of shofar has been as part of the prayer service during the Jewish High Holy Days of Rosh Hashanah (the New Year), Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) and during the month of Elul that precedes the New Year.

Instead of calling people to prayer, the shofar is not sounded until the latter half of the services, and sometimes at the very end of services.

Another difference is that the shofar is typically sounded inside the building where worship is taking place, not from the periphery of the building. The intent is for the participants in the service to hear the sound. While someone passing a house of worship might hear the sound through an open window, this is not the primary intent.

I am also an architect and found your account of the history of minarets quite fascinating. I love the sounds of worship regardless of the faith. The muezzin's cry, like church bells, mark the passage of time in both the temporal and spiritual realms. The action of any government to ban religious expression is unfortunate.

on: The Complicated Craft on Enlightenment, by Lewis Gropp

The biggest problem with Muslim scholars and theologians is that on one hand they regard the Qur’an as the infallible word of God and ultimate font of wisdom and guidance, and on the other, they claim the divinity/integrity of their theological discourses that evolved by the human agency in the early centuries of Islam. The case of Satanic verses is a glaring example.

The episode was first put together from oral accounts by Ibn Ishaq (d. 768), one of the earliest biographers of Muhammad (d. 632). Al-Tabari (d. 926), one of the earliest and most renowned exegetes, drew on Ibn Ishaq’s manuscript (not preserved for later times) to relate the story, which suggests that as Muhammad was preaching to an elite (Quraysh) audience, a revelation came down venerating the three most popular pagan deities (Lat, Uzza and Manat) in these words: "Have you considered al-Lat and al-‘Uzza (53:19), and another, the third (goddess), Manat (53:20). These are the exalted birds whose intercession is approved.”

The story further suggests that the venerating words (underlined) were later expunged from the Qur'an and replaced with what we find in the Qur'an today: “What! For you the male sex and for Him the female (53:21)? Behold, such would indeed be the most unfair division” (53:22)?

Ibn Hisham (d. 834), who edited and published Ibn Ishaq’s work, and the early compilers of the traditions (Hadith) who all succeeded Ibn Ishaq and preceded al-Tabari, make no mention of this episode, indicating their suspicion of its genuineness. More importantly, the story is not substantiated by the Qur’an and, in fact, contradicts its repeated assertion on the incorruptibility of its text (6:34, 6:115, 18:27, 41:42, 85:22), and is therefore not tenebale. Some Muslim scholars have, however, made a sweeping connection of this episode with the Qur’anic generic verses 22:52/53, which relate to Satan’s influencing the desires (tamanna) of the prophets and messengers in general and not to Satan’s tampering with the revelation. Salman Rushdie has treated the episode as a fantasy, as it veritably deserves.

Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa against Salman Rushdi might have been prompted by personal revenge, as Lewis Gropp observes, but it might as well have aimed at pre-empting enlightened scholarship from digging into the Islamic theology. As with all major religions, Islamic theological discourses are embedded with legends, fantasies and embellishments that were characteristic of the era in which they evolved. The problem with Muslim theologians is their veneration of these discourses and their reverential remoteness from the Qur’an. Thus for example, if the Muslims only knew the contents of the following two verses, they would refrain from any violent outburst over journalistic, scholarly or artistic works that overtly or covertly lampoon their Prophet: “Thus we made for every messenger an enemy - Satans from among men and jinn, some of them inspiring others with seductive talk (in order to) deceive (them), and had your Lord pleased, they would not have done it. Therefore, leave them and what they forge” (6:112).

“Thus we made for every messenger an enemy among the criminals - but enough is your Lord (O Muhammad,) as a Guide and Helper” (25:31).

It is high time that the Muslims are made cognizant of these clear Qur’anic declarations. The medieval Christian Literature has singled out Muhammad for hurling all kinds of satires, diatribes, and abuses and given the freedom of expression in the West, some writers and journalists may find an easy way to popularity and gains by picking from these materials to peck at Muhammad. The way things are moving against Islam, it will not be long before some audacious journalist takes to print a graphic version of Dante’s hell, for example, on the front page of any popular print media.

Unless the tolerance threshold of the Muslims is sufficiently raised in good time, they can go to any extent to vindicate their anger against such veritable assassination of their Prophet’s character in the name of freedom of expression, and the consequences could be disruptive of peace and harmony.

Since, for many Muslims, faith dominates even the fear of death, the foregoing injunctions of the Qur’an would stand far more effective than secular intellectual discourses or sermons of international human rights to bracing them against potential provocations, and to pre-empt Europe’s convulsions.

Finally, it may be added that probably Western world’s unremitting hatred of Muhammad - implicit, explicit or vicarious, in crude vocabulary or classical scholarship - stems from the same psyche as drives the Muslims to hate all that is Western: a strong inferiority complex (in spiritual/material domain). In historical perspective, the largely Christian West seems to be still seething with anger at Muhammad, perceived as a lecher, a debouch and an uncouth man of the most lowly character, deserving of the lowest pits of the hell and the company of the lowliest of beasts, who plagiarized the Bible to produce a patchy, unreadable book, sold it as a divine litany of unparalleled beauty to his gullible followers, found a faith and an empire that wrested away the Eastern domains of the Christian World, and has been casting long shadow across the centuries to this very era by winning admirers and converts including many luminaries from their very camp, and inspiring a fourth of humanity this very day to regard him as their most loved Prophet.

on: "Islam Was Always Part of Europe", interview with Michael Borgolte by Ralph Bollmann

This interview is a shameless example of politically correct-but factually wrong-Islamist propaganda and revisionist history. The website Qantera.de does itself a disservice even posting it. Islam was not always a part of European culture because Islam did not always exist, but aside from this inaccurate claim, historically Islam was only a part of European culture once invading Muslim armies carried the religion with them and forced it on the Christians who were already there. Let's remember that the majority of the Middle East and North Africa was Christian centuries before Muslim invaders conquered those areas. Muslim invaders then attacked and took over Christian lands in Europe too. These were religious wars against Christians in the name of spreading Islam. But to listen to Borgolte it's the evil, intolerant Christians who victimized and oppressed tolerant peace-loving Muslims. There are so many absurd statements by Borgolte here, but I will just point out this one. "With Christianity alone, it would have been impossible to develop tolerance in Europe." Is this guy serious? The scary thing is, I think he is.

on: "Islam Was Always Part of Europe", interview with Michael Borgolte by Ralph Bollmann

Smoothing things over - a counter debate!
"But Muslims ... had a decisive influence over the transfer of knowledge from ancient Greece, Rome and the East." Could one say that these were all the places Muslims conquered and adopted the knowledge as their own? As today - they are selective in what they are allowed to study/ learn and ultimately Islamic restrictions - brought achievements via - the Greek and Egyptian translations - to a crushing halt. Through Muslim warfare Christians were barred from travelling to the East. But once they were able to - Europeans largely discarded these rather bad Arab translations of Greek text - and started on the path of their own renaissance through these. Because Muslims were so extreme - they viewed much of their own achievements as un-Islamic - for this reason many of the early thinkers and inventors in Islam left the religion - but their achievements that were discarded by the Islamic world - were picked up by the West. "The return of Islam to Europe, this time through peaceful immigration, is bringing the continent back to this normal state." Where is the guy living? Muslims have entered several areas peacefully - and when they reach sufficient numbers they always seek to exact Islamic law - which calls for the subjugation of all who are non-Muslim [this can't be argued with ~ it's in the Koran]. Where people are not required to join Islam - many Muslims believe that they are required to live under Islamic law. Hence the problem today - the disregarding of EU laws. In the Middle Ages: - "My impression is even that Christian heretics were combated more strongly than Muslims and Jews." This is the thing - Muslim continue this practice of dealing harshly with their apostates - until today - and many expect EU laws to one day enforce this - medieval practice. As for anti-Semitism or anti-Judaism - it is very likely that it started when the Jews of the Middle East rejected Prophet Muhammad's new version of the old Kaaba religion - and this led to the death of 700 Meccan Jews - and the seriously cutting name calling that appears in the Koran. But also don't forget in the Balkans - Muslims took slaves - in fact today the offensive name for slave or non-Muslim still stands in places like Bulgaria. For many generations the southern coast of Europe was attacked by Muslims carrying out slaves - and when it was sufficiently fortified the Muslims turned to lower Africa for slaves. The Arabs of Arabia still call all Africans both N. & S. 'Arab' slaves. India though suffered the worst. I think that it is important - not to learn a glossy history but the real history - such as with the WWII and other Western atrocities - we must also learn the real history of Islam.

on: "Islam Was Always Part of Europe" of Europe", interview with Michael Borgolte by Ralph Bollmann

Living together by Muslims, Christians and Jews
Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together respecting each other's religions and religious practices. With the spread of education and modern facilities like internet the hatred for each other spread like wild fire instead of love and mutual respect. Inter-Faith dialogues are the only solutions to revert back to the old days. Not the 'Tolerance' but love and respect are the solutions.

on: "Islam Was Always Part of Europe" of Europe", interview with Michael Borgolte by Ralph Bollmann

And it will remain part of Europe not as an invading force but as a member of the family of the Abraham's belief. For me "The Jews, The Christians and The Muslims are colours of a Rainbow", the only requirement is dialogue and harmony within us, so that we can fight against our common enemy "all those creating the seeds of misunderstanding and hatred in our hearts and minds"!!

on: A Christmas Meditation, by William Dalrymple

William Dalrymple’s essay comes at a moment when the worlds of Islam and Christianity seem to be on a collision course, and is therefore worthy of wide readership in the Islamic world.

Muslims regard their Prophet (Muhammad) with inordinate love and devotion, as reflects in their vociferous and even violent reactions to attempts to lampooning him in the media or literary works. but there is hardly any visibility of their devotion to Jesus Christ. Islam not only venerates Jesus Christ and his Mother, Mary, as the essay amply demonstrates, it also asks Muslims to make no distinction between any of the Prophets (2:177, 2:285, 4:152, 57:19). Historically Muslim scholarship has remained silent about these complementarities, and instead, focused on the differences between the two faiths.

But today, when increasing gap, hatred and mistrust between Islam and Christianity is leading to terrorism and “Just wars” with terrible consequences, its time that Muslim scholarship takes notice of the common boundaries, and encourages the Muslims to visibly showing devotion to Jesus Christ by celebrating the Christmas, and praying for peace together with their Christian brothers.

on: We Urgently Need Religious Reforms!, interview with Muhammad Shahrur

I am familar with the good work Dr. Fadl has done to battle the fundamentalists. Yet, like many among us, he is misdiagnosing the disease. And, as such his prescription for the cure is wrong.

The fundamentalists are ultra-modern and they are already using all the advanced technology available and then some to spread their message of "oneness" of Islam under the sun.

My campaign to battle them is the opposite strategy. I am appealing to the reality of cultural diversity within the vast, wonderful world of Dar-ul-Islam.

Each Muslim community in the world has its own local cultural heritage, some centuries old and full of color and passion. We should celebrate our unique Muslim cultural character that were blended and bonded with other local cultures.

This was the glory of Islam. Not destroying the local cultures wherever it went was how Islam became a World Religion before Christianity could claim a global status.

on: In Turkey, a Novel Is a Public Statement‏, interview with Elif Shafak by Lewis Gropp

I am from India. Thanks for the interview with Ms Shafak. I have just finished her Bastard of Istanbul. It's a wonderful book. Having spent most of my life among the refugees of partition of India, my roots also go back to Bangladesh though my family migrated to Calcutta before independence and so I am technically not a refugee, to me the central theme of the novel is whether we should forget individual and social history to build up a better world.

on: An Argumentative Arab Enlightener by Kersten Knipp

Your identification of S.J.Al-Azm in your latest issue of qantara left the most important aspects out. For instance, you say he studied Philosophy in Beirut; that is true as far as his BA is concerned but he finished his Ph.D. at Yale University in Philosophy in the US. He is also a Kant specialist and published two books on Kant in English (one by Oxford University Press) in addition to several books in Arabic and countless articles. His book that you refer to is no doubt very influential but mentioning it alone does not give the correct overall profile. I realize there are limitations of space, but a better identification could have been done with the addition of one line or so.

on: We Urgently Need Religious Reforms!, interview with Muhammad Shahrur

Dear Editor,

The issue, often raised in the media and by scholars, is at times confused for a reinterpretation of the Qur'anic message in light with the present day realities. The present day realities are region specific: they greatly vary between an advanced urban setting (West), a backward rural setting (Somalia, Nigeria, rural Bangladesh) and a rugged and desolate mountainous terrain (Afghanistan) or desert wilderness (Arabian heartland). Thus, any notion to tailor the Islamic message to the ‘present era' will call for a multiple set of region specific interpretations, and we will come back to the square one: each Muslim community clinging to its own notions about Islam.

If the Muslims are to hold firmly to the revelation, as the Qur'an demands, they must probe into its message using all the advanced tools available to them and then have the moral courage to accept the outcome of their exercise, even if it were antithetic to the present day realities. Any effort to condition the interpretation to accommodate the ground realities will be tantamount to questioning the divinity and the infallibility of the revelation.

A recent work, under the title, Essential Message of Islam, addresses the issue in exactly the above line. It attempts to interpret the critical words and phrases of the Qur'an from their usage across the text, and draws primarily on the Qur'anic illustrations to explain the verses that have been traditionally interpreted to support patriarchy, promote hatred with rival faith-communities and legislate laws under the behest of Sharia law that do not accord with the Qur'anic dictates (capital punishment for apostasy and rape for example). Among other things, the work shows the purely historical genesis of Islamic law and much of the theological disciplines including the Hadith literature, and calls upon the Muslims to draw guidance primarily from the Qur'an.

The work was approved by al-Azhar al-Sharif, Cairo back in 2002 and finally after further refinement and restructuring, endorsed and introduced by Sheikh Khaled Abou El Fadl of UCLA, California. The concluding paragraph of Dr. Fadl's Introduction, quoted below, speaks for itself.

"For those who have the moral will, the book I introduce here will prove to be an invaluable reference source on the Islamic faith. For those who do not wish to be participants in the perpetuation of religious bigotry and hate, this book will provide an accurate, thoughtful, and reliable introduction to Muslim beliefs and practices? I wish we lived in a world in which this book would become a standard reference source for students of religion who are interested in an accurate introduction to the religion of Islam. The best thing I can say about this book is that it is the product of a labor of love that lasted for more than a decade. The authors do not offer a personalized view of their own religiosity; they explain in a very straightforward and accessible fashion what mainstream Muslims believe in and especially, what the Qur'an itself teaches. Non-Muslims will understand why well over a billion people call themselves Muslim and also how Islam inspires Muslims to deal with and improve upon the world in which they live. Indeed this book manages to translate the Muslim vision or the way that Islam heals the ailments of humanity in the current age and every age. Readers who wish to learn the theological and moral dogma of Islam will find this book indispensable. But this book is not just an informative tool for the fair-minded and interested reader. This book is an educational tool for both Muslims and non-Muslims—it is an authoritatively reliable text to teach young Muslims, or even Muslims who never had the time to study the Qur'an, or the fundamentals of their religion. The book is written with the kind of balance and fair mindedness that makes it equally valuable for Muslim and non-Muslim students of Islam. The least I can say about this text is that it was written by two ethically conscientious and principled Muslims in order to share their religion with every ethically conscientious and principled reader in the world. They must be heard."

In sum, the noted work deserves the attention of Islamic scholars and the world leaders keen on reforming the Muslims – who have now become an integral part of the global multi-religious community.

Mohammed Yunus

on: Barbarians of Batak, by Sonja Zekri

With all due respect to Sonja Zekri, I should beg to differ. To state an opinion in this attempt of an article, and to be an open supporter of two people who obviously in their quest for glory have chosen to speculate with the tragedy of a whole nation, which endured the Turkish tyranny for 500 years, might be considered by some people a credible spring of unmatched providence, but in fact it is a good calculated but poorly executed and principally biased few lines. It is sad, that a respected media should be the promoter of such "ideas". I am sure, however, that in due time a counterpoint will find its way to the pages of this paper and the readers of the same will be able to really see for themselves and make in turn their own objective conclusions!

"Survival is a privilege which entails obligations. I am forever asking myself what I can do for those who have not survived." – Simon Wiesenthal

on: Divided Scholars, by Alfred Hackensberger

The following write up under Ch. 28.4 of a recent publication, 'Essential Message of Islam', described as an authenticated text by Sheikh Abou El Fadl, Prof. of Law, UCLA, is fully supportive of the ban on niqab:

"The clear pronouncements of the verses 7:26 and 24:30 and the textual analysis of 24:31 as tabled above demonstrate that for any public appearance, the Qur'an asks, men and women to restrain their glances and cover their private parts (furujah). The Qur'an also takes account of a woman’s innate power to provoke the male sexual impulse by wearing revealing outfit. She is therefore asked to dress modestly, commensurate to the prevailing custom, and to bear herself in a non-provocative manner. Wearing of any external head to toe veil, covering of head, and gender-based segregation are not specified."

While I have nothing against niqab/hijab, so far as they are regarded as local fashion/ custom, but as far as the Qur'anic message is concerned, it does not impose any such restriction on women. The referred to work presents a textual analysis of the related Qur'anic verses to reach the foregoing conclusion. I suggest you get a copy of the book as it offers many eye opening / enlightening insights into the Qur'anic message.

on: Divided Scholars, by Alfred Hackensberger

True, the niqab is an old tradition and is not a coranique prescription but the hijab is mentioned in the sourat al nour (the light), verse no 31 which clearly calls for the covering of the head but not the face.

And this is not only an Islamic teaching as the religious Jewish women cover their heads as well as the Christian nuns, so it has its origins in Christianity, too.

Why do Westerners concentrate so much on the hijab and why do they not try to look into the mind of Muslim women who wear the hijab and how they live. Muslim women attend schools and universities and at the same time they work in professional jobs and get married and are, in many cases, financially independent from their husbands and fathers. They also get an the same salary as men, so in fact they are more emancipated than some western women.

on: Ibn al-Jawzi's Mysoginist Writings, by Stefan Weidner

Circumcision was never an Islamic teaching for women, it was a habit in some countries and the sunnah calls for circumcision only for boys for hygienic reasons and it has been proved scientifically recently that it's healthy and reduces the chances of a cancer in the genital area and, by the way, Jews also practice the circumcision for boys.

There are hundreds of hadiths by the prophet Mohamed (PBUH) who put women in a very high position like, for example, women are sisters of men, and the judgement by God for women and men is equal and that a religious woman is rewarded the same way as a believing righteous man (that's the reason that in Islamic countries women get the same salary as men) although in some western countries until now they are paid less. And that women can benefit and use their money and properties without any interference of their husbands or even their fathers or brothers (although this right has been given to European women in the 20th century. Only Britain was ahead of many other European countries in that matter.)

There is nothing in the prophet hadiths which prevents women from searching work or start a career. Total seclusion of women has nothing to do with Islamic teachings. Muhammad (pbuh) also said women are like the other halves of men and that it is only the generous in character who is good to women and it is only the wicked who insults them. Women were able to express their views on social and legal issues during the early time of Islam like in the time of the caliph Osman. Aisha, the wife of the prophet, was discussing many of his decisions openly and the prophet (pbuh) called for the right of education for both men and women. He said seeking knowledge is mandatory for any Muslim male and female and he said: search for knowledge even if it is in china.

Once a man came to the prophet and asked him who among all the people is the most worthy of my good company and kindness he said it is your mother. Then the man said who comes after that. Then Muhammad said again your mother. For the third time the man asked, who comes after that, then the prophet said it is still your mother because she carried your weakness upon weakness. So the man asked who comes after that, and so Muhammad said your father. He also said that paradise is under the feet of the mother.

The prophet (pbuh) was very kind to his daughter, Fatma, and he used to say Fatma is a part of me, her happiness is my happiness, and her anger is my hurt. He also said whoever looks after two girls until they mature he and I will on the day of judgment come as close together like this, showing his two fingers side by side. These are just few examples…

Unfortunately I think that some Muslims nowadays try to attain media publicity and make money by publishing such books which give a very negative impression about Islam and Muslim women.

on: Good Taliban, Bad Taliban, by Thomas Bärthlein

Dear editor,

Once again Qantara publishes an article, A New Wave of Violence in Pakistan - Good Taliban, Bad Taliban, by another armchair journalists like Thomas Bärthlein in which the author blames the Pakistani army and the secret service for building up the Taliban in the first place.

Such absurd claims verge on the border of anti-Pakistan propaganda and ignorance of history. The Taliban movement was created by the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies to counter the Soviet occupation because they did not want their own precious soldiers to die in Afghanistan.

The movement was supported by Saudi money and the USA arm-twisted Pakistan through its zealot President Zia-ul-Haq to train the young students coming out of religious schools established by the CIA on the Afghan-Pakistan border.

Denmark and many other European countries gave weapons, money and moral support to the Taliban movement which was called Mujahadeens – meaning noble warriors – at that time.

So please, Qantara, do not indulge in spreading false information and maligning Pakistan alone. The country has paid a heavy price for protecting Afghanistan and Western interests. You should be thankful instead of vilifying Pakistan. If you want to blame anyone, blame those whose interests are much larger than Pakistan’s, namely Europe's and those of the USA. Even Hilary Clinton, in a recent interview on CNN, acknowledged that, after Soviet defeat, the USA simply left the area and that Pakistan had to pick up the pieces in the shape of drugs, weapons and civil war in Afghanistan.

Bashy Quraishy
Chair-Advisory Council-ENAR - Brussels
Chair-Jewish Muslim Co-operation Platform - Brussels
Senior Advisor - COJEP International- Strasbourg
Mobile; 0045 40 15 47 71
Phone; 0045 38 88 19 77
www.bashy.dk

on: A Headscarf Affair, a Women's Affair?, by Nilüfer Göle

The recent outburst of debates about headscarf is reminiscent of an anecdote that occurred the day after the fall of Bagdad to the Mongols in the 13th century CE - some eight hundred years ago.

The city streets were awash with blood and littered with corpses, the drains were clogged with books, cries and wailing rose from every corner, a sepultural gloom filled the air, and destruction reined supreme, when a pious Iraqi Muslim approaches the Imam and asks whether he should cover his head while entering the Kaba precinct.

To put in a simple way for the naive mind, at a moment like this when Muslims are faced with death, destruction and grave problems and there is concerted movement to virtually ban them from the West (Watch 'Citizen Warrior' website), the intelligentsia has no bigger issue than the polemic about headscarf. What an irony. The letter may be red in conjunction with another letter sent a while ago.

on: Dismissal over TV Show, by Dirk Schümer

An un-academic prejudiced biased childish action by the University of Rotterdam. While many lecturers and professors work for Western and Eastern intelligence agencies, it is strange that a European university resorts to such actions or reactions. Let us read such news from Muslim countries.

But, about Mr Tareq Ramadan.

I am a great admirer of him. I find him as a true believer with a deep knowledge of the real Islam. But, I am shocked to learn that he works for an Iranian state-run TV. God!

This is the same Iran who condemned and condemns Ekhwanul Muslemin – The Muslim Brotherhood – in particular its moderate factions. This is same Iran who justified and supported the massacre of thousands members of the Ekhwan in Halab, Hums and Hamma by the Hafezul Asad Ba'thist regime in Syria.

This is a despotic, repressive regime. It is a racist regime. Look what is she doing with her own ethnic and religious minorities.

This regime bulldozes Sunnite Muslims mosques in Balouchistan and Turkaman Sahra. You can not find a single Sunnite mosque in Tehran while you find plenty of them in Moscow, Beijing, Tokyo, London, Paris, Bonn, Amsterdam, Washington, Rome, Israel and even one in Havana.

This is a racist regime.

How come Mr Tareq Ramadan works for a TV financed by such a hypocrite suppressive racist regime.

I hope both the University and Mr Tareq reconsider their decisions.

on We Dont Want to Establish a Muslim Republic in the Netherlands, Interview with Henny Kreeft

There is nothing wrong with the notion that people fight for their rights through a special interest party in a society where main stream parties either neglect issues important to ethnic and religious minorities or take minority votes for granted.There are many examples of single issue political parties.

Having said that it is important that such parties are inclusive and do not base their manifesto on a religion but on human rights, religious freedom and equality under the law.

There are many prejudices in all most all European countries concerning Islam and Muslim communities but the answer is not to have a political party for Muslims like NMP but for all ethnic and religious minorities who together face racism, discrimination and xenophobia on daily basis.

By the way, Henny Kreeft's statement: "Don't be afraid – we don't want to establish a Muslim republic in the Netherlands" is very childish because most Dutch people already know that such ideas come from Islamophbic politicians and not from Muslim communities. I would advise him not to make an issue out of nothing.

on: Dismissal over TV Show, by Dirk Schümer

Its quite a very very sad event which unfortunately will help those populists who have been involve in the Islam Bashing. They would declare this as a victory!

Both the City government of Rotterdam and the Erasmus University should have given Tariq Ramadan a chance to defend his case. But the decision was taken in such a rapid way that one has to doubt on the 'integrity of this decision'.

Since there have been a regular debate in the Netherlands about Freedom of Expression and Writing, this decision is quite confusing.

Dutch constitution guarantees this rights. At least I am not aware of any other precedent when a University Professor has been sacked due to his or her visit abroad and taking part in academic events or even TV talk shows. (mostly developing countries or military or undemocratic regimes are known of taking these sorts of actions against their opponents.That's why its quite disturbing that some institutions of democratic state had to take this action!

I still hope that he will be given a chance and if he is guilty of breaking the known rules and regulations of his employment then in that case no one has the right to criticise the decision any more,but if not, then he has the full right to be reinstated with full honour and dignity.

The Hague, Netherlands

on: In Solidarity with All Muslims, by Stephan J. Kramer

I want to send my thanks to this brave open minded man who supported Muslims though he is not, this really confirms his great statement "You don't have to be a Muslim to act against anti-Muslim behavior, and you don't have to be a Jew to act against anti-Semitism", and I want to do it if he does not mind, "It is enough to be a human to act against all sorts of racism."
Thank you again Mr. Kramer.

on: A Feeling of Powerlessness, by Günter Seufert

This German author should really analyze the treatment of Turks in Germany rather than criticise the Turks. Mr. Dink's murder was unforgivable. But the whole Turkish Nation didn't do it. Germans claim that Hitler was a nut case, but Garmans had nothing to do with the Holocost. I say to the writer, in West Virginian, "Herr Kraut look in the mirror!"

on: The Environmental Crisis is also a Spiritual Crisis, Interview with Sigrid Nökel

The Environmental Crisis is also a Spiritual Crisis but I guess it wasn't the case when I worked in Istanbul as we concentrated on progress tests and got excellent results. However, recently I received a newsletter from the British Council - in Turkey - and there is a lot more information on Europe and Environental concerns to date! So it spite of your article being all "doom and gloom" I believe Environmental concerns - are a lot brighter than you imagine!

on: An Uprising of the Marginalized, by Mai Yamani

This story mentions that the arrested included 15 minors. What in the hell are minors doing in this kind of situation? Why aren't they in school? No doubt they have been indoctrinated by some religous buffoons who really don't care about them. To hell with all religion and spend the energy wasted on this nonsense on education.

on: Deliver Us from the Return of Religion, by Lewis Gropp

Dear Qantara,

Thanks for all the great articles you bring to advance the cause of building bridges between the West and the Muslim world. Lewis Gropp' article; Deliver Us from the Return of Religion is a fresh breeze ushered by Robert Misik. I agree with Mr Misik when he explains the difference between criticism of religion just to provoke a minority and an inside development, a religion needs to move forward. But he is not fair when he says that religious groups repeatedly demand special treatment for their convictions and that religions claim that all kinds of criticism are automatically a demonstration of a lack of respect.

I can not speak on behalf of Christianity but in Islam, there is both a place for internal criticism and a tradition of religious debates with outsiders. Moorish Spain and Mogul India are just two examples. In my 30 years of work with minorities in Europe, I have never heard Muslims saying that people should not criticise Islam or Muslim communities. On the other hand what they actually resent, is demonising, insults and anti-Islam propaganda in the media, from politicians and in public discussions. In short criticism yes, insults no. This does not sound to me special treatment for their convictions.

The fact is that the modern day Western insistence that freedom of expression is not debatable to me, is close to an absolutist ideology which dares not open itself to criticism. Why can not I challenge the concept of this holy cow, called total freedom of expression and not be called an Islamist or an undemocratic person?

Coming back to Misik's statement that in Quran all of the moderate suras date from a period when Prophet Mohammed did not yet have the political power to disseminate his faith with force while the later suras, which originated at the zenith of the prophet’s political power, are permeated by a spirit of belligerence. Here again, there is a great need for correction. Mohammed is a historical figure and all his deeds are recorded – as a prophet, a statesman and a political leader. As a leader of Medina where he established a state, there was a need for laws, regulations and rules, like in every society.

Karen Armstrong in her famous book; Mohammed-Prophet of our time explains that he always sought compromise and negotiation than enforcing his will. Even if he could have used brute force to conquer Mecca, when he marched on the city, he came unarmed and showed mercy and spared even those who had kicked him out. Contrary to Christianity, Muslims have in most times been magnanimous towards minorities when they were in power.

Another important aspect to remember is that a person who is truly religious and is in tune with his creator does not need to show power and majesty. Submission to God is what makes a person humble and not arrogant. By the way, I am not a practicing Muslim but I admire those who have faith, peace and dignity.

Bashy Quraishy
Chair - ENAR Advisory Council-Brussels
Chair - Jewish Muslim Platform-Brussels
Mobile. 0045 40154771.
Tel&Fax. 0045 38881977
www.bashy.dk

on: Pointless in-Fighting, by Andreas Zumach

Your article suggests that Canada boycotted the Geneva conference because it might be subject to criticism over its treatment of its aboriginals. Some clarification is in order. Canada does have unacceptable levels of poverty, drug addiction, and crime among its aboriginal people. At the same time, billions of tax dollars each year are directed toward the aboriginal community; sufficient funds, in fact, to enable each aboriginal Canadian to live at a lifestyle level well above the Canadian average – if the money were to reach them.

The problem is that hundreds of millions disappear into the bureaucracy that administers the department, and most of the balance of the funds goes to the chiefs, and supposedly, on to the people. The problem is that many chiefs have assembled a cadre of parasitic family members and friends around them so that the general population sees little of the money.

Zimbabwe anyone? (That said, there are some outstanding chiefs who run against the tide and are positive examples not only for their people, but for the whole nation) When the government undertakes to change the rules so that the money goes directly to the people, the chiefs call out their hellraisers who blockade a road, the press hear about it, report the "tragic conditions" (true) that the aboriginals live under, and the government backs down. Until the laws and system can be changed, nothing else will or can change.

on: In Search of Moderate Taliban, by Martin Gerner

The philosophy and history of the Taliban suggests that bringing the hard core Taliban leadership into negotiations is the height of stupidity. First of all, the Taliban leadership understands that the Europeans will cut and run - even as they refuse to place their combat soldiers in combat. Secondly, the media has hyped the history of conflict in Afghanistan. No invader has ever subdued the Afghanistan people when, in fact, the people of Afghanistan don't want the Taliban to return to power (ABC/BBC poll). The Taliban will not change their basic philosophy, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand this. The Taliban will continue to fight because, in the long run, they don't believe that NATO has the will to win - and they are probably right.

on: Islam Challenges Our Ability to Make Distinctions, by Kersten Knipp

I wonder if this author has mentioned the Mu'tazila theology in his book. This method - and only this in my opinion - can lead Muslims out of the labyrinth they are entrapped in. If Weidner mentiones Mu'tazilism 'in extenso', it makes the book worth buying.

on: A Feeling of Powerlessness, by Günter Seufert

I was amazed at the lack of objectivity and the one-sided reporting of your article about the Armenians living in Turkey. Are they perhaps at unease because they have a guilty feeling, such as knowing that their brothers in Armenia show Mount Ararat (Agri Dag) on their flag? (How would Germans like to see Munich's emblem, the Monk, on the Austrian flag, for example?)

How would Germans feel if another country wanted land from Germany? You must be aware that the Armenians, whether they live in Armenia or elsewhere, are seeking land and compensation, as well as an official apology, from the Turks. Now, you can tell me that the Germans did give the Jews lots of money - in the form of "wiedergutmachung" and that they also accepted that they committed a genocide on the Jews during World War II. Of course, there were the Nuremberg Trials that proved that there was a genocide.

And, of course, the Germans paid the reparations. But then, the similarities between what happened to the Jews versus the Armenians end when one realizes that the Jews did not have an army; they did not attack German towns and villages, and they did not become a fifth column to the occupying forces.

Where is the verdict of an International court on what happened to the Armenians? A war-crimes tribunal was indeed held on the island of Malta after WW I, organized by the British Crown. !44 Turks were held on the island for about two years, during which time the Allies tried to find evidence that the Turks intended to exterminate the Armenians living in the Ottoman lands. No such evidence could be found, and the Turks were released.

Your article does not mention that the Turkish Government has opened its archives and offered to participate in a historical and judicial forum along with the Armenians and other interested participants. but the Armenians have thus far refused to open their archives in Yerevan, Lebanon, and Boston.

While the Turks deplored the murder of Hrant Dink, the Armenians tried to justify the killings of the Turks and were collecting money to defend the murderers of the dozens of Turkish diplomats around the world in the 1970's and 1980's.

Is this perhaps another reason as to why the Armenians are not at ease in Turkey?

Mrs. Erkin Baker
St. Louis - U.S.A.

on: Doubt about Muhammad's Existence Poses Threat to Islamic Religious Education, by Peter Philipp

It was a very informative article indeed. Now, I also know that there are about 3 million Muslims in Germany, not as many in France (5 million) but still quite a significant number. I also gather that most of German Muslims are of Turkish origins as opposed to Arab origins of French Muslims.

Something in this article really puzzled me. How come despite 3 million Muslims in Germany, Islam does not have the ''corporation status''? Any Christian church has official authority to determine the Christian academic teaching but Muslims do not have this fundamental right like Jews and Christians. I think it is very unfair.

Another confusing thing was that the article mentions 800,000 Muslim children in Germany were taught in ''Back street Koran schools''. I thought it was illegal in Germany to home-school children? Then how come 800,000 kids get schooled in ''Back street koran Schools''? What does it mean?

I think to bring Muslims to mainstream it is very important that Muslims are given the same constitutional rights in Germany as Christians and Jews. This would also mean that Muslims will have responsibility to integrate and cooperate with the German society and laws, they will not send their children to any ''back street Koran schools''.

Rajiv
Christchurch, New Zealand

on: No Compulsion in Islam, an interview with Irshad Manji

I think the debate whether Islam is in need of reform or not and whether Islam promotes extremism is a never ending dialog between western and eastern theologists. Let me start by saying this: I wonder if the interview conducted with Irshad Manji is meant to bridge the gap between the two view-points, western and eastern beliefs.

Consider this: would Islam be considered a hot topic if the conflict between Israel and Palestinians never existed? And I keep wondering if the Islamic States in the Gulf were not rich oil producers would the debate on Islam be in the forefront in western media? In the past Africa and parts of the middle east used to be colonized because western leaders considered for example Africans uncivilized and barbaric because their life differs from the British, the French and the Americans. Islam and Christianity as well as the Jewish faith have always preached forgiveness and obedience to God. So how come Islam now seems to be the one in need of reform when historic events have proven that humans have managed to cause destruction through "Holy Wars" in the name of freedom and democracy.

I wonder if people were stripped off their religious identity would there be peace on earth or will people find new ways to kill each other in the name of spreading world peace.

I think before anyone takes the liberty to talk about any faith, the first step toward reconciliation is to respect human rights by abolishing any right to start war or to develop any kind of mass destructive nuclear weapons.

Extremism is just a side effect of injustice out of desperate circumstances

on: No AKP Ban: Turkey Breathes A Sigh of Relief

Turkey's constitutional court will hear a case that could plunge the country into a political crisis with grave consequences for Europe and the Middle East.

The governing AK party and its leading members are charged with violating the secular principles of the country's post-Ottoman founding father Mustapha Kemal Ataturk.

The AK is a moderate Islamist organisation that has, in government, overseen a period of rare economic growth and stability. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has also succeeded where past governments failed, by starting membership talks with the European Union. But Mr Erdogan is also keen to accommodate in law the country's Muslim identity - by reversing, for example, a ban on women in public office wearing headscarves. The headscarf ban is a shibboleth for the Kemalist secular establishment and the army in particular.

on: No Geostrategy of Islam, a review by Loay Mudhoon

First of all, thank you Qantara for showing the courage and making an effort to debunk the myth of "Clash of Civilisations" by bringing articles such as Peter Philipp; "There is no clash of civilisations" and Loay Mudhoon's review of Olivier Roy's book; "The politics of chaos in the Middle East". There are however few points, I would like to add to bring the street version of realities to the intellectual discussions.

Muslim countries have no power – military, political, economic or social to indulge in a clash with the West. 95% Muslims across the globe are busy in living a normal life – work, family, education for their children, health care etc. Most of them have not even heard the terminology which is being used on their behalf. In a recent surveys – January and March 2008 – conducted by World Economic Forum and Gallup Poll, majority of the Muslims in the Islamic countries actually look to the West for democracy, development and rule of law and admire what the West have achieved. It does not make any sense for Muslims to have a clash with people they so admire.

On more theoretical level, Islam is not a civilisation, a nation or a country. It is a religion. Pure and simple. It has its moral codes like any other religion. If we have to discuss the possibility of competition (and not a clash), then it should be between Christianity and Islam as religions and not as civilisations. Any one familiar with the Muslim world knows that 60 Muslim countries have nothing in common - history, ethnicity, culture, language or even traditions. So how come these diverse group of nations are being lumped together as a civilisation. Unless there is a political agenda behind such assertion. Demonising, attacking or maligning Islam or any religion for that matter would only serve to help reactionary forces. This we should avoid at any cost. In this respect, my one request to Qantara is to avoid using terminologies such as; Islamic terrorists, militant Islam etc. in its coverage of Islam. Such words are offensive and useless.

Bashy Quraishy
Chair - ENAR Advisory Council-Brussels
Chair - Jewish Muslim Platform-Brussels

on "The Time Has Come to Invest in Iraq", Interview with Nuri al-Maliki

Nouri Al Maliki's tribalism is disgusting. Not only because it gives an insight into his clogged mind but also because that's the way it is with most of the troubled Islamic world .

If Muslims cannot even be friends with their own brethren, so to speak, how can they even dream of building bridges of trust, tolerance and friendship with the rest of the world?

Tribalism or ethnocentrism has always been the real cause of all of world's problems: massacres, genocides, slavery, persecution, wars and of course terrorism. For once, let's just be what we are: human beings.

Human beings and humanism are the shared central subject and ideal of world's two biggest religions: Christianity and Islam, not to mention the scientific, enlightened or secular world. Despite this glaring fact, why are we so blind?

Rajiv Thind, New Zealand

on The Boy Next Door, by André Tucic

Just a correction regarding your writing on Benzema and Kabylia. Kabylia is not the poorest region in Algeria but the richest and the nicest. Revise your geography please!
Thanks.

Ithri, France

on His Last Fight, by Regina Keil-Sagawe

I am so happy to see that Khair Eddine is finally getting the recognition he so much deserves and that was denied him during his lifetime. I once told him they would build statues of him in Morocco. I knew him very well and he was a very close friend.

Karilyn Collier, UK

on The Headscarf in the Intellectual Discourse, by Ahmed Farouk

I am really stunned about the absurd dimensions which the dispute about a piece of cloth has reached now.

For an average person it has become hard to find his or her way through the jungle of existing opinions and attitudes. It has been claimed that the scarf is a simple fashion accessory, a symbol of religious fundamentalism, of misogyny, of progress, of feminism, of solidarity, of traditionalism, of freedom etc.

The heated discussion has by now reached a point in which it becomes almost amusing to watch it; even people from Muslim countries tear each other apart while disputing this piece of cloth (e.g. in the article "The Headscarf in the Intellectual Discours"). Not to mention the international hysteria which started after the ban of the headscarf in French schools, or the more recent fuss about wearing it in Turkish universities.

I think it is time to become aware of the fact that such a ridiculous fuss is only made possible by religion. There are much more important problems than this one, but it seems typical for religions that they never turn to urgent and dangerous problems (like terrorism, global warming, Aids etc.,) but instead prefer heated and often violent disputes about absurd questions like which animals are permitted to eat and which aren't, when does a lump of cells develop a soul (dispute about abortion,) which kind of eternal punishment is in store for people who use contraceptives etc.

Europe is a secular continent, and we should be happy about it. We should be glad that there aren't any religious signs allowed in schools. By the way: not only headscarfs, but also crucifixes or any other religious symbols – so for instance Professor Abu Zeids statement (in the aforementioned article) that France would be racist against Muslims, is ridiculous. That's only another strategy often used by religions; demanding tolerance and accusing everybody of racism who dares to criticize them, but on the other hand not applying any tolerance themselves.

If anyone cannot accept Europe's secularism, then Europe is probably not the right place for this person to live in. If I lived in a Muslim or Jewish or Christian country, I would not constantly insult the religion of that country's inhabitants either (though nowadays every reasonable person becomes more and more obliged to do so). So it is probably not too much to ask the religious crowd not to pester us with ridiculous arguments which are constantly on the edge of becoming violent and dangerous.

Josef Matrai, Switzerland

on Still Need for Active Democratisation in Iraq, by Loay Mudhoon

Well there is too much wishy washy claim regarding the democratisation of the Middle East. Except in Iraq the invasion has ridden the Iraqis of Saddam only to be substituted by Saddams in plural. How many Saddams are now in Iraq? As i have commented long time ago on the same topic, that genuine democracy in the Middle East will be conducive ultimately to the rise of persona non grata. And that very outcome is not acceptable by the preacher of democracy under the pretext that the Middle East is either unprepared for democracy or has misunderstood it. And the idea of a domino theory has only resulted in total chaos. The neocons have tried to shake the old status quo according to the Pax americana vision of the world only to find themselves violating the main stay of the democratic values that they were eager to spread through out the Middle East. Abu Ghreib, Guatanamo and the list is too long to mention, are a clear indication of what kind of democracy the Americans wants to see taking place in the Middle East.
As the saying goes: the devil we know is better than that we don't know. This constitutes the very dilemma of democracy.

Mohamed Elgjini

on The Legacy of the Battle of El Alamein, by Frederik Richter

Dear Sir,

It is a pitty to find all these land-mines and A/C Bombs in El-Alamein. After all, we were not even part of this battle.I think it is only fair that Germany, England and Italy should provide funds to get tools and equipment to remove these sources of death from our land.

Best regards
Hany Tawfiq, Egypt

on Time for Clear-headed Thinking, by Emel Abidin-Algan

Dear Qantara Team,

For some reason, it was technically impossible to post my comment on the website, so I’m sending it this way:

I respect Ms Abidin-Algan's decision to decide against the Islamic clothing rules and thus also against the headscarf. It's wonderful that she’s working towards lifting the headscarf ban.

However, I do think that she tends to use too many generalisations and blanket judgements in her article.

Her accusation that millions of Muslim women who wear the headscarf have not studied the authentic Islamic sources, the occasions of revelation and the individual contexts of the verses critically enough is simply unfair.

The fact is, women like Abidin-Algan are marginal phenomena and the majority of confident, young, successful, educated Muslim women do not wear the headscarf as a symbol to display specific belonging to a group.

I was born in Europe, in an enlightened Western country. I live in an open and liberal family and was brought up with plenty of self-criticism and analysis. I have non-Muslim friends, attended German, American and English universities and read Islam Studies at secular institutions, studied the sources. How do I and millions of other confident Muslim women fit into that picture?

A true Muslim woman is also aware that she can never think herself better than women who don’t cover their heads. That is simply the basis of their belief. For God alone knows whose deeds harbour sincerity and quality, and I am certain our creator doesn’t judge that by a piece of cloth. That would be too simple.

For that reason, I can only condemn such statements when they are made. No one may presume to judge someone else's way of life. Ms Abidin-Algan accuses Muslim women, namely, of thinking themselves more valuable than women who don’t wear headscarves. Presenting her experiences as a yardstick for the entirety of the Muslim community is going a little too far.

In our present society, we have the phenomena of the protectors and the liberators. The former try and force us to wear the headscarf; in their opinion, we must be protected from all the evil looks and the others must be protected from our dangerous attractions. Then there are the latter, the liberators, who want to liberate us by force, from the headscarf and our so-called repression and the brainwashing we’ve been given.

So Ms Abidin-Algan can now join the ranks of women like Necla Kelek, Seyran Ates and Lale Akguen. Our so-called liberators by force, who want to convince us that everything that was manifest over thousands of years has now become humbug through their high fatwa.

Both sides, the liberators and the protectors, have been exerting force and repression for years, but no one asks us Muslim women with headscarves what we actually want?! It all seems a little schizophrenic to me.

I am in favour of self-determination for every individual. Just because the aforementioned women have decided against the headscarf, that doesn’t mean they have to force their decision upon us. After all, I don't presume the same thing in reverse.

With kind regards from the USA,
Zeyneb Salim
Master of Islam Studies

on The EUmans Are Coming!, by Muhsin Omurca

Good evening.
Excuse me for taking up your time with my email, but I just had to say something about your article.

It seems very respectful the way you try and defend the Turks, but I do find it slightly exaggerated. And especially the suggestions you listed... they made me laugh out loud.

With all due respect for your attitude and your views, but you can’t be serious, can you?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m Turkish myself and I’d want to defend my country with all I have too... but presenting Turkey as a wonderful place is an absolute cheek.

You know just as well as I do that Turkey is still a developing country and doesn’t belong in the EU yet. Apart from that, I’m against Turkey joining the EU anyway.

But that’s not what this letter is about.
Well anyway, thanks for the entertaining article.
Good evening.
Yours sincerely,
D. Atik

It is truly encouraging to have stumbled upon this website and its the insightful articles. I am especially appreciative of the self-reflective, commentary on issues and challenges facing the Islamic world. Most encouraging is the nuanced and complex way in which these issues are engaged. No broad generalisations are made, and critical comments are made without whitewashing the many virtues of the Islamic world.

It is important for members of ethnic communities to feel comfortable to engage in reflective self-analysis and self criticism without feeling that negative commentary represents a rejection of their culture in its entirety. Most importantly, members of those culture should feel comfortable to engage in such dialogue publicly, without feeling that such commentary will be "used as ammunition" against them by the rest of the world.

As a "citizen of the Jewish world", I try to engage in such self-analysis and self-criticism. This is not a denial of the inherent value of "Jewishness", though is often mistaken as such by the more insular elements of my community.

Unabashed, unapologetic and open critical enquiry is vital to the development and evolution of any culture, and people should feel comfortable enough within their own identity to engage in such enquiry.

Qantara is a terrific example of such an exercise.

on Half-hearted on the Hindu Kush, by Peter Münch

NATO is on the brink of failure in Afghanistan mainly because such a military alliance can never solve or adequatly reduce the ills of the country. What Afghanistan needs is a civilian mission, where most of the attention, resources and manpower can be put into civilian prospect, not into a military machinery. Some 300.000 Soviet soldiers lost the battle of Afghanistan in the 1980s and presently the ca. 50.000 NATO troops can impossibly accomplish better results. NATO is seen an alien and intruding force in Afghanistan and this impression coupled with the inherent fallacies of the alliance, and the Karzai administration is making it only a matter of time before NATO has to switch its mindset and pull out of the country. An international civilian effort for rebuilding Afghanistan, led by a true civilian mission and regional countries, is the only solution for the ills. In this context, Germany should advocate for this change, not continue on a path of more destruction and misery.

With regards

Atilla A. Iftikhar

Researcher, Islamabad

on the Dossier Reformist Islam

I would like to thank you for the Reformist Islam dossier. Thank you for introducing so many reformist Muslims. But I believe more needs to be done. Please present more detailed works of these authors including full translations.

Islam is at a cross road, the path Islam takes at this cross road is going to impact the rest of the world. Unfortunately at this point the Islamic Fundamentalist (anti liberal-democratic) voice is very strong. The voice of reformist Islam needs to be heard as well. Please help make the voice of the Reformist Islam heard around the world.

Books presenting the ideas of most of these Reformist Muslims are available, but these books are often published in the native language of the authors and are not available outside of the native country of the authors.

Since Islamic Fundamentalism (anti liberal-democratic Islam) is a global phenomenon, Reformist Islam needs to be helped to become a global phenomenon as well. The works of these reformist authors need to be presented to the world, i.e. to both the Muslim and the non-Muslim world.

With best regards,

Reaz Islam, Bangladesh

on Evolution under Pressure, by Dorian Jones

It seems that in this struggle to understand how we humans got here, and what we should teach about it, Turkey has much in common with the U.S. State of Nebraska. There they presently have a law forbidding the teaching of evolution, but rather promote the teaching of "intelligent design". In that state a political struggle continues to try to liberalize educational thinking in order to pay cognizance to the Darwinian explanations.

I have been the beneficiary of both a devout theistic education and an in-depth science education so I can speak to those in the opposing groups with confidence. Scientists of limited theology often are attracted to atheism because the religionists (of similar limited understanding) have pounded them through the years with platitudes and statements of faith that just don't fit reality testing. How can one accept that the "world is only a few thousand year old" when our observations and instruments tell us it is millions of years old?

Some religionists even go so far as to say, "If you don't say you believe this or that, we will expel you from the faith." or worse yet, "We will scourge you, or scar you, or cut off your hand."

Religionists, the devout, if you will, say they reject scientific theory, or even established fact, because science, in this case Darwinism, seems to undermine religious faith. Science "causes confusion". Their faith does, in fact blind them to the beauty and enlightenment of scientific teaching and progress. Thus the devout person, who suffers from limited education, in both science and religion, perceives that science is a threat to the holy life, the rich religious life. It need not be so.

Consider, from the religion side, how much we honor, and revere, the Being we call God (or Allah). Some people so respect this Being they dare not even spell out His name, writing it " G-d " instead. For that reason it seems to me to be disrespectful of that Supreme Being, in whatever language you address Him, to claim you know exactly how He brought one thing or another into being. It seems brash to say, "I don't need to investigate, all I need to do is read scripture." To make such a claim is to set one self equal to God, or equal to Allah, and that is blasphemy.

In some corners of religion it is prohibited even to study how certain processes have come about, as if a discovery by science could negate God. Can some of my readers recall how a recent Pope called physicists to Rome to discuss how the universe began, but then admonished them not to discuss "the first few seconds".

Steven Hawking reminded the Pope, "Those first few seconds were the only truly important part."

Believe me, if you truly believe in God, He has strength, and power and confidence in unlimited amount, He that He encourages the investigative process. In my small way, to study God's methods, His Way, though laboratory investigation, brings me closer to Him, and strengthens my faith.

Now I must address the scientists. I want to stress that, if one be honest, we humans do have a limit to our intellect. We don't know all the answers. That's why we study, and experiment, and share ideas. That's why we propose theories and then, in the light of new knowledge, we refine those theories. We should, in the recognition of the beauty and remarkable interrelationship of all we study, see there is an attractiveness, an awesome respect for what we find, in the lab., in the microscope, or the telescope, on in the, dare I say it, "creation" of DNA spirals. What we find is so awesome that some call it an "intelligent design." How does that put us in conflict with religion?

Why must there be any conflict at all between those of devout science, and those of devout religion? The basis for any conflict is of our own wanton creation. We, of limited understanding (and perhaps also of limited faith), find it easier to be in conflict with each other than to join together in our search for meaning.

Jim Hirschman, Miami

on Across Continents, exchange of letters between Charlotte Wiedemann and Ghazala Irfan

Dear Editor,

What inspires me to write these lines is the very interesting discussion between Charlotte Wiedemann and Ghazala Irfan.

Responding to Charlotte's astonishment about the two extremes that can be notices in the women of Pakistan, Ghazala has particularly mentioned two factors:

1. Education
2. Uneven distribution of wealth (hence lack of education in the poor)

Although I agree with Ghazala's opinion but would like to add a few words.

It is not much different in the West when it comes to the gulf between the 'haves' and 'have nots', but the actual difference is that in the West, there exists a policy in education.

The system of education in Pakistan is infected by double standards when it comes to curriculum. Even in the west, some children go to independent schools to get Elite standard of education, while the majority manages only to go the public sector, state run schools; but they are taught same facts about same things. Just as 2+2 remains the same for all social classes, so does a socio-moral issue.

In Pakistan (or South East Asia I should be saying) Two plus two remains the same for the poor as for the Elite, but when it comes to socio-moral issues, what they are told, differs. Islam's teachings about a girl in quest of knowledge and a career is different for pupils of a school in the villages of the North Western province (what still haunt Charolette) as compared to an independent school in the posh area of Gulberg or Defence or Clifton in the major cities of Pakistan (where Gahazala happens to be a resident of).

This is just one example, to pick from a vast range. It is the same with educating about underage marriages, underage pregnancies, opposite gender interaction, role in society.

Marx, Engels and alot more tried bridging the gulf between the wealthy and the poor, but not much seems to have happened. Trying to fix the double standard in education will prove be what you call Qantara (the bridge).

Asif Basit, UK

on A Security Policy Risk, by Erich Reiter

Strategically, politically, and economically, Turkey is a country that should be accepted into the EU. We need Turkey as a reliable NATO member, which so far has always fulfilled its obligations. A "no" to Turkey would be a "no" to the eastern world, which cannot be in our interest in the long term. A moderate and economically thriving Turkey with its large, young population would bring the potential for strong growth to the EU. We must therefore think and act with the long term in mind. Turkey's accession to the EU would open for us new paths and perspectives.

Önder Demir

on "We Should Take the Path of Religious Enlightenment", Interview with Hachem Saleh

I read your interview with Hachem Saleh with much interest and pleasure.

In a sense, Islam already has the seeds for its further development, namely the Sunna as well as Sharia, which would allow it to go beyond the Koran. Jurists have the foundations in disciplines such as theology that would enable them to interpret the Koran in light of contemporary situations.

Therefore I would like to expand the approach mentioned in the article for Sunna and for legal life (Sharia). Perhaps the possibility exists for the development of a new legal school with a religious enlightenment and reformation.

I experience Sharia more as the moral obligation of a believer, whereby – if necessary – God alone "punishes" (in the sense that behavior according to his will is good for the soul and behavior against is not). For example, I understand fire as the experience of the fervor of desire and man's hot-tempered nature. I am partly fascinated with the detailedness and precision of Sharia, passages of which I have read in the "Handbuch Islam" (Handbook of Islam, Spohr Verlag).

I have my problems with the claim that understands Sharia as a "secular law" in the conventional sense, since for me this would be equivalent to a self-administered justice of man over man, in which man places himself at the disposal of the one and only …. If I understand Sharia to be solely religious in the sense of "religio" – the relationship to God – and where "penalties" are reserved for God alone with his wonderful 99 names, it can be a treasure for developing moral sensitivity (in conduct and in relation to others).

Yours sincerely,
Gerd Steiner

on Christians and Muslims Locked in Dispute over Prayers in Córdoba, by Leo Wieland

Why should what is a good tradition in Syria not be possible in Granada: the joint use of a chapel by Christians and Muslims on different holidays? In Aleppo, this religious tolerance is quite natural – and has been practiced for a very long time, although occasionally interrupted by Christian intolerance and narrow-mindedness in the name of the "only beatific" faith. Why not also put the factual flexibility in Granada on the agenda?

Ernst-Friedrich Harmsen

on Heritage of the Past and Chaos of the Present, by Ahmad al-Saadawi

Unfortunately, the article reported only on the university culture in Baghdad and in the Arab part of Iraq. I hope that this was not motivated by Arab nationalism! Everything functions in Kurdish universities as Arab students wish. They are politically mature and can demonstrate and express their opinions in public in order to realize their right to study. Due to the lack of religious "hypocrisy," there is more freedom and room for change in Kurdistan than in Baghdad or anywhere else in Iraq. Your pages should report a little more on what has succeeded in Iraq and not only on the disasters that existed in the Saddam era.

Aras Marouf

on A Reappraisal of the Position of Women in Islam, Interview with Luise Becker

Dear Ms. Becker

I am very pleased to have run across this insightful interview. I see that equality is much more openly discussed in Islam than is perceived in Christian society (or than what they want to perceive). Equality among us is at times quite theoretical. In reality, there are deficits in many areas, especially in religion.

Yours sincerely,

Felix Sachs

on Mission of the Reformed, by Abdul-Ahmad Rashid

Dear neighbor in faith,

I gather from your article that the new organization of ex-Muslims wants to reform and enlighten.

I would like to say (as a Protestant Christian) that this modest undertaking will probably not be very successful, for reformations are only possible from within. That religions develop and have to discover themselves anew is quite normal.

This behavior of trying to provoke something by leaving reminds me of defiant children who hope to get affection or attention by walking or running away. This has happened to me even in an artists' organization over which I preside. You can only leave once, and then you have less influence than before. But if I value my religion, I can only change it from within – and several Muslims are doing this (for example, the Cologne Centre for Islamic Women's Studies and Women's Promotion (ZIF)).

Some of my friends have left the Roman Catholic faith. They did this not with the intent to reform their Papist "neighbors," but because they had found an alternative. They do not make an uproar about their departure, but have simply gone their way in life.

Even I pray for a reformation in Islam, for example, for the development of a European Islam, whose impulses can emanate into countries where this religion is understood in a more authoritarian way. There is much to do – let's start doing it!

on Creating a Culture of Emigration, by Mohamed Khachani

As you write, emigration, for instance, from Morocco to Europe has gained in significance. What if the churches used state money to send development workers as role models to Africa?

Since the African countries won their independence, they have not generated any net export surpluses. Africa has not kept pace with the modernization of agriculture. Also elsewhere there is a lack of industrial role models.

Yet we have many experts here between the ages of 50 and 60 who can find no jobs. Many of them would gladly work for another five or ten years in Africa for recognition and some pocket money. In many cases it would be possible to communicate in English or even in French. Otherwise the churches would have to hire the necessary interpreters.

This would take care of two flies with one blow: It would make Christian charity credible; and immigration of labor not needed here would be cut off.

Yours sincerely!

Gerd Neubronner

on Not an Enemy of Israel, by Guido Steinberg

Since when are Saudis an enemy of Israel? And since when is Saudi Arabia a major player in Middle East politics? Well, let's start with Israel's attack on Iraq's nuclear facilities. Israel then used the Saudi air space without notification about its objective in Iraq. The Saudi government protested to the US – as if America is the guardian of international norms…

Your article praises Saudi Arabia for not being the enemy of Israel. Of course Saudi Arabia has never been an enemy of Israel, despite the discontent with Israel's occupation of Palestine.

The 2002 Arab summit in Beirut had shown that the Saudis are short-sighted: Riyadh proposed a normalization of relations with Israel while at the same time Arafat was under house arrest and neither allowed nor able to attend the summit. The proposal of now King Abdalah was another blow to Arab political bargaining as was Camp David at the time.

These developments had left the terrain to Israel to set the rules for bargaining with the Palestinians instead of with all of the Arab world. Arafat became a persona non grata which made it easier for Israel to seek another more cooperative representative among Palestinians. In comes the master of weak political stands: Mr Abu Mazen (aka Mahmoud Abbas).

Saudi Arabia has never played a major role in Arab politics except for being a major oil exporter. To say that Saudi Arabia is not an enemy of Israel is too simple as a conclusion. It has never been anyway and it will never be, bearing in mind that both Saudi Arabia and Israel are US clients that serve American interest in the region (as many Arab states in the region do).

Mohamed Elgjini

on Green Light Is Signaled with an Export Credit Guarantee, by Antje Bauer

The Ilisu project is dubious not only on archaeological and political grounds. Much more serious is the fact that the region lies in a highly active earthquake zone; dams put a strain on the bedrock, and the resultant pressure also pushes water into the crevices of the rock. This increases the likelihood of slippage and, in turn, the risk of an earthquake.

That this is being secured with a Hermes guarantee is socially not very meaningful in this region of Kurdistan. Farmers are being resettled; they will probably migrate to the cities and increase social problems in the large eastern cities. Thus, in two ways, this can hardly be an outcome that the Turkish government really desires, unless it is deliberately aiming at heightening tensions in Kurdish areas in order to pursue more military solutions.

On the other hand, the project is also dubious in relation to Syria and Iraq, as water would be diverted from a common source, and Turkey would be assuming yet another position of power.

Do we really want to spend money on this and forget ethics?

Ernst-Friedrich Harmsen
Geographer and historian

Open Letter to George W. Bush

Mr. President,

You are the president of the world. You are the president of the most powerful country in the present time. We owe your country great debts in almost all aspects of life. Your country has contributed enormously to the world civilization. It is the United States of America that has made our world an easier place to live. It has made countless contributions to modern history.

When I was young, I dreamed of the United States as a land of milk and honey, a paradise of opportunities; as the song says: "If you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere." That was the attitude of many young men of my generation. Now, I am asking myself: "What happened to that land of my dreams? Why did the American soldiers, who were supposed to defend world democracy and human rights, become enemy number one to the world nations in general and to the Islamic one in particular?"

Something must have gone wrong. Since I have unbounded respect for your nation, I found it necessary to write to you, expressing my feelings and expectations for your respected country and wishing that the United States will become our Mecca again.

Most Arab intellectuals believe that United States supported the most brutal dictators in our modern history and such support has something to do with its economic interest in the Arab world. My question is: "Were there not other means of protecting the United States interest than supporting these dictators?" That will definitely save us the hardships we undergo! The United States had supported democracy in all Eastern Europe countries that were ruled by the communist dictatorships. We have the right as human beings to dream of freedom and liberation form our oppressive regimes.

We hoped that our turn for democracy had come when the Berlin wall fell and that the light of freedom would shine in the near future, but the dictators are still there, practicing their oppression, and on top of that we have the extremists who want to turn the clock back to the Middle Ages, to the dark periods of human history.

Being in Iraq, you have created another monster, and that is Iran. You have managed to oust the worst dictator in the world: Saddam Hussein; but we are now facing a stronger fanatic nation which could pose a serious threat to world peace and security. My question is: "Has not it been possible to eliminate Saddam's regime by using other means than force?" Iraq has been completely destroyed and hundred of thousands of people have been killed for no reason at all. "Is not there another means of solving this catastrophic situation", I ask.

We believe that the Palestinian question is the cornerstone of the struggle in the Middle East. Your country has adopted an unfair, subjective policy whereby you extend blind support to Israel. There is more than one Arab initiative which gives the right to Israel to exist and to normalize the diplomatic and economic ties but you have turned your back to them.

There are other means of sharing wealth. As we all know, few countries cannot own and spend all the oil of the world; we want to share it with other nations, including the United States, in return for peace and prosperity for our people. Now we are facing hate and a desire to burn oil and exhaust the most important source of energy in our world. Hate creates war, destruction and pollution; as a result many young innocent people die with no reason. It is your responsibility to save their lives.

We expect that reason will reign and that a fair solution will be worked out. The United States could lead the world to peace and prosperity. Then fanaticism would have no place to subsist; it would eventually disappear.

We believe that there is a dignified way for the United States to withdraw its forces from Iraq and, as a great nation, it would courageously confess that the war in Iraq was a mistake. The whole world would appreciate such stand and would never look down or downplay its role as leader of the world.

Hassan Osman Dahab, PhD
dahab1947@yahoo.com

on The U.N.'s Darfur Moment, by Mark L. Schneider

The "Moments" of the UN are legendary. Darfur is one of those that at the present is highlighted due to three never mentioned causes. Its richness in natural resources, the interest of the Chinese in the area, and the ever present one of the Israelis, and their supporters' interest – especially in the USA – to keep the UN focus on Arab/Muslims.

For the UN and assorted individuals to all of a sudden demand that the UN stand up for so called human rights when the organization did zilch in Rwanda and has done nothing to insist that refugees in Lebanon return to their homes in Palestine after some 60 years is another example of crying wolf for the umpteenth time.

Before coming to grips with Darfur's moment, the UN must first resolve the Palestinian refugees 60 years moment[s] in Lebanon and the Rwanda moment before it is taken seriously as a world organization interested in promoting peace and respect for all humans.

The beginnings of the 21st century demand that the UN's moment is now if it is expected to be relevant to tackle and resolve the moments of others.

on The Janus Head of of the Musharraf Regime, by Thomas Bärthlein

I largely agree with Boris Wilke, but please allow me to elaborate on following issues:

1) The "Islamists" are not only some remnant pro-Talibans in the tribal areas or even only to the religious MMA alliance. The "Islamists" are also fully a part of the Pakistani Armed Forces officers corp, other political parties in the Parliament and even Overseas Pakistanis. In particular, I would like to emphasise that the Pak Armed Forces currently chaired by General Ehsan-ul-Haq (Musharraf is the Army Chief) was largely "Islamified" under the former rule of General Zia-ul-Haq during the 1980s. This "Islamification" of the Armed Forces was mostly supported by Western powers because of the situation in Afghanistan. Today, when we speak of the "Islamists" kindly do not confine this "title" to some few remnants in the tribal areas or even the religious MMA alliance.

2) The educational system in Pakistan is very inadequate and the madrassas or religious schools offers an opportunity for poorer segements of the Pakistani population. While it is true that madrassas must fulfill a basic education curriculum which offers a diverse education for children (this is being done by the government), it is not feasible for the government at this stage to close down all these educational opportunities and not offer some alternative schooling free of significant charges.

3) Most of the international attention is devoted to the "Islamists" or "pro-Taliban" sympathisers in Pakistan, not the current ills of the ruling pro-feudal powers under General Musharraf. Fact is that both Benazir Bhuttos Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians (PPP-P) and the ruling Pakistan Muslim League Qaed-e-Azam (PML-Q) consists of some highly corrupt and inept leaders only interested in their own business or power interests. The ruling PML-Q leadership is seen as highly associated with the criminal Mafia-type groups originating in their own rural places of origins in the province of Panjab and the PPP-P leader Benazir Bhutto (with Husband) has embettled millions of dollars to Swiss bank accounts (recent development and verdicts in the Swiss bank scandal case goes against the Bhuttos). In this context, the MMA is seen more accountable and interested in good governance. Combined with the foreign policy dimension and the corrupt practices of the main two political parties (PML-Q, PPPP) it is understandable why even educated and urbanised Pakistanis will vote for the MMA in the next elections.

With the crumbling situation in Afghanistan where corruption in the Karzai administration, money extortion and abuses of Afghan civilians by warlords, military excesses by the US/coalition forces, booming drugs trading and street crime have turned most of Afghans belonging to all ethnicities (in particular the Pashtuns) against the Kabul/US-Coalition/warlords alliance. In this context, most Pakistanis are likely to support the Pakistani "Islamists" in continuing efforts against the US agenda in this region - inside or outside the Armed Forces and the government.

on For New Generations, Hijab Is Beautiful, by Firas Zbib

Salaam,

I was immensely pleased by your article. The hijab nowadays has become a subject of fashion which rather than distracting attracts more. We muslimahs should always keep in mind the sayings of our beloved prophet and the wrath of Allah before wearing hijab or practising modesty.

A confused Egyptian

Abd El-hak is a taxi driver in Cairo. I met him by accident, that is, as most Egyptians meet each other, and we spoke as if we knew each other for many years. He introduced himself as a building engineer working in one of the meaningless jobs in the governmental administration. He explained that his salary is not enough for his family and he had to work an extra job. I told him most people in the developing countries were doing the same, he agreed and we looked at what we called gloomy future.

I asked him why he was not an optimist then he turned his head and looked at me as I was sitting the left corner in the back seat of the car and asked whether I was maybe not from Egypt but from outer space. I felt worried as the man was not looking at the road in front of him but kept looking at me to convince me of his point of view.

I told him that the country was in the middle of a democratization process and that it was the first time to experience such a thing, but suddenly he stopped the car in the middle of the street and exclaimed, astonished: "You call it democracy!" I contorted myself and tried to let him talk; I wanted to give him the chance to let out the anger and aggression inside him; therefore I decided to listen to him.

Abd El-hak said that a civil war would break out if the Muslim Brotherhood took over political power in Egypt. They have no plans for the 8% Egyptian Christians. Islam is the solution, they say, and what about Christianity? Is it not a solution also? The Muslim Brothers do not have a solution for a great deal of people in Egypt. What is the Muslims Brotherhood anyhow? Is it a political movement or a religious one?

I must confess that my new friend had raised a set of important questions which hadn't occurred to me before. I smiled to indicate my consent, but my positive attitude toward him encouraged him to go on. "Look," he continued as most of Egyptians would, presupposing you understood their point of view, "the oldest political power in Egypt, Yes – the Wafid party". "What about Wafid," I replied. He asked me if knew the party's political program. As matter of fact I didn't.

In a very ironic way he said, "Can you imagine they want us to be fishermen, to hunt fish. Seventy-two million people, and they be want us all to be fishermen." I was not at all ready to believe this depressed man. He wanted to confuse me during my little trip to the heart of Cairo downtown.

I told him they might have a plan but that they were maybe short of time. He denied my excuse and mentioned the previous Wafid party leader Professor Numan Ashour and insisted that had it been for him all Egyptians would by now be hunting fish.

In order to relax him I said there were ten political parties in Egypt and that the rest are probably more reasonable and that they probably had solid plans to solve the economic crisis and lift the social burden.

At this, he was getting crazy. He stopped the car and asked me, looking at me sternly: "Are you sure you are Egyptian?"

I was about to tell him the truth but he would not let me. He was infuriated and spoke of "thieves" and "traitors".

He mentioned that one of them discovered the main problem of Egyptians laid in giving up their tradition.

I began to think about democracy in Egypt and came to the conclusion that it is true that we do not understand the real meaning of democracy in the political sense, or in our daily lives or, more precisely, within our own family. We need a great deal of time to understand and learn from other nations who have a priori knowledge of democracy and democratic processes – but such a learning process cannot happen unless we follow the basic steps.

We must work hard to eliminate illiteracy and learn to accept the opinion of the majority, even if the elite believe this might have negative consequences. Democracy is a learning process which has positive and negative aspects, but the most important is to learn to accept majority decisions.

Democracy cannot flourish unless we understand the principle of tolerance, and accept other traditions and ways of thinking.

Anyhow, I again turned to my new friend, smiled to him and told him that regarding the Egyptian ways I agreed with him and that my high-flying ideas have landed on the ground. I laughed and he finally laughed too and told me a joke as most Egyptians do to relax themselves.

A very sick man went to a doctor who suggested a surgery. The man told the doctor that he was afraid. "It is my first time to have a surgery," he said. But the doctor looked at him with a worried look on his face and said: "I know exactly how you feel – it is my first surgery as well."

This is the first time for Egyptians to have democracy and we should be happy as it is. And we should build it up according to the Egyptian way, not the Iraqi way.

Professor Hassan Osman Dahab
Monnet Group Copenhagen/Denmark

on Deserted in Western Sahara, by Saeed Taji Farouky

S. Farouky's paper on the Sahraoui Arab Republic is biased, unbalanced and smacks of simplistic or manicheist reporting of the under-developed reporting current during the Cold War era, to say the least.

At no time the disruptive role of the successive Algerian dictatorships during the last 30 years or so is mentioned, nor are their constant, blatant hegemonist policies questioned. Nor the fact that Algiers' successive dictators may have greatly varied in their often bloody styles of government, and that their dangerous, geopolitical goals never changed.

Without Algerian money – squandered among others on the grandiose ceremonies like the one that Mr. Farouky and the other 500 hundred journalist were invited to during the commemorative gathering of last February – the SADR, I say, would simply not exist, and the Maghreb would have made an extraordinary leap into modernity, and the North African entity would have gained more credibility as viable, cooperative socio-economic community.

Mr. Farouky's paper will most certainly com as a shock to any Moroccan that will read it.

Youssi Abderrahim, Professor

on Bomb in Turban, by Peter Philipp

Hypocrisy and ignorance, not press freedom

The controversy over the blasphemous cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten continues to go on. In the West it is being pitched as a battle for the freedom of the press, or even more broadly, a fight for a democratic way of living which the West has earned after many centuries of struggle against the church and all things religious. It would have been good if it were really the case. The fact of the matter is, nothing can be farther from the truth.

The controversy, in reality, is about two things, and freedom of the press is not one of them. First, it is about hypocrisy, and second, it is about sheer ignorance about who Prophet Muhammad really was. Let me explain.

It has been reported in the press (Guardian, 6 February) that Jyllands-Posten turned down the cartoons of Jesus Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny. In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to the newspaper.

Zieler received an email back from the paper's Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them." Presumably, the editor while doing so did not believe that he was hampering the freedom of the press. Then why should publishing of the cartoons about Prophet Muhammad be any differently treated? Some people might call this behavior hypocrisy and a case of double standards.

We can look at the issue of hypocrisy another way. Saying anything against Jews, including a mere questioning of the number of Jews killed during the holocaust, could land anyone in all sorts of trouble in most European countries, including a jail term of upto ten years (the British historian David Irving is a recent example). The legislation is obviously aimed at discouraging racism, and specifically anti-Semitism as has been exhibited in its ugliest form by Europe in the past. But shouldn't one also look at the spirit of the law and not just the letter of it? If anti-Semitism is bad and should be discouraged, why should anti-Islamism be good and nurtured, protected in the name of press freedom?

One newspaper editor may be forgiven for being blindly hypocrite but what happened to a stream of newspapers who cherished publishing the cartoons in various European countries without detecting the underlying hypocrisy? The answer lies in the second factor I mentioned above, which is complete ignorance about the man that Muhammad was, and the lack of intellectual honesty to research about him before criticizing or caricaturing him.

This ignorance is so comprehensive that a brief article can hardly throw light on all the aspects. I would therefore restrict myself to narrating a few incidents of Prophet Muhammad's life that are preserved in authentic history books which have been used as references by both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars. Let's examine if Muhammad and terrorism have anything in common.

Prophet Muhammad's greatness, according to Michael Hart who ranks him no. 1 ahead of Newton and Jesus Christ in his landmark book stems from the fact that "he was THE only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level" (The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, New York: Hart Publishing Company, Inc., 1978, page 33).

Muhammad started out as a single person in Mecca calling the idol-worshippers towards one God, preaching morality, universal equality of humankind and justice at individual and collective levels. After 23 years of struggle he ended up conquering a large part of Arabia, having created a new paradigm, a new society based on very different fundamentals, a new civilization and a new kingdom. And all this while exhibiting unparalleled sanctity for human blood; a total of 1018 people – Muslims and non-Muslims – lost their lives in various wars during this period.

Despite this extraordinary achievement when he entered Mecca as a victor, his head was touching the hunch of the camel he was riding in humility and reverence to Allah; he announced general amnesty and forgave those who tried to kill him and had caused him to migrate out of Mecca at one time. Does this behavior fit into the profile of a terrorist?

This was when he had assumed power but what about the 13 years of Meccan life when he was struggling against all odds? Did he ever use terror as a weapon then? On the contrary, he forbade his followers to resort to any kind of violent reaction in response to the torture committed by the idol-worshippers. During the initial years neither Muhammad nor his companions picked up arms, or even physically tried to fight the Meccans. It was only after assumption of power in Medina that armed Jihad was launched. It may seem unbelievable given today's scenario of indiscriminate suicide bombings everywhere, but it is true.

An incident is particularly worth mentioning. After several years of preaching Islam to Meccans Muhammad traveled to the nearby city of Taif in the hope that people there may be more receptive to his teachings. He was disappointed, however, when all the three main leaders of Taif ridiculed and rejected him. In addition they asked street boys to throw stones at Muhammad who received several wounds as a result and bled profusely. This was the harshest day of his life, as he later confessed, with no hope peeping from anywhere.

Despite this when the angel came to ask him whether he wished the people of Taif to be squashed between the two mountains, his reply was in the negative. He said that while their elders had rejected him, he hoped that their next generation would embrace Islam. Hand on your heart, is this picture of an extraordinarily compassionate missionary or a heartless terrorist?

When he assumed power after migrating to Medina and sent armies to different parts of Arabia his standing instructions were: Only fight with those that have taken up arms against you; don't kill women, children and elderly men; don't kill rabbis and priests (monks confined to their synagogues/churches); don't kill soldiers that are fleeing the battlefield; don't kill those who give up arms, don't even cut trees unnecessarily. History is witness to the fact that Muslim armies always followed these instructions.

Once a few non-Muslim children were killed during an armed conflict. Upon hearing this news Muhammad, usually calm and composed, became furious. Someone tried to argue that they were the children of idolaters. He retorted: "Are not the best among you children of idolaters?" (Referring to the fact that all his companions were born to pagan parents and later converted to Islam).

I have tried to show a few clips from Muhammad's life. Surely a man of his stature, with 1.3 billion followers in today's world, deserves some serious reading, a little bit of objective research and an unbiased mind before one makes an opinion on him. Newspaper editors, intellectuals and other opinion leaders need to do this more than others, before becoming self-proclaimed champions of freedom of the press. Intellectual honesty and professionalism demand that they know first who Muhammad really was, before maligning him or his religion. If not, they should at least stop using the name of press freedom to justify their actions.

Sohaib Umar & Naima Sohaib

on Us against Them, by Robert Misik

The article was good for those who want to understand the real conflict of those two groups. But I, as a Muslim, have a range of questions which most Muslims are not able to find their solutions. Before that, I would like to call into question the following definitions which have been used for a long time to divide up Muslims in groups. Who are the fundamentalists? Who are the radicals? Who are the moderate Muslims? Who are the traditionalist Muslims? Who are extremists? These are the common notions they usually used to describe Muslims.

I don't even know which group I belong to. And I can tell you that many Muslims ask themselves the following questions and they never get the answers: Why do Westerners want to change Islam? Does the western way of life really fulfil the conditions of the Muslims' way of life? If every Muslim followed the western way of life, would Islam still exist? Is western democracy and its idea of man really better than the one taught in the Koran? Is western civilisation really compatible with Islamic civilisation? Why don't westerners allow us to follow Islam? Could Islam be reformed? And if so, by whom? Those who are not even Muslims? Who has the right to reform Islam?

The Prophet, peace be upon him, taught us everything and the commandments of God are there to be followed. Only God knows Best. No matter what will happen, I don't think that the west will be able to destroy Islam.

Ethnic Women in Denmark

Last week I went to one of the Arabic shops in Nørrebrogade to buy special spices for my Falafel. While I was looking for fresh vegetables, and as I was examining the degree of freshness of my spices, I saw a woman – or at least I guess she was a woman because I could not see her face or anything from her forbidden body to decide whether she is a woman or something else. I got interested and I decided to start a conversation with her.

I presupposed she was an Arab and that there would be no language barrier to communicate with her. "Kif Al-hal ya-akhti," I said, or how are you, my sister? Indeed, she answered in Arabic, "Al-hamid lal-Laah," or thanks Allah. I got out with her as she was interested in talking with me. When she found out I could speak and write in Danish she asked me a favor, whether I could translate a letter form the municipality, and I was willing to do so. But before I did I asked her about her husband or relatives. Her answer was shocking to me as she was divorced – with two young boys who are attending an Arabic school, their Danish language limited and even their Arabic not on the level to explain a simple letter.

This woman's life is not different from many other ethnic women in Denmark; therefore, I thought it would be a good idea to talk about 20,000 ethnic women, living permanently in Denmark. The Danish government had decided to invest a great deal of money for the migrants, especially for the migrant women.

What are the main characteristics of ethnic women in Denmark?

Most of ethnic women are living in areas in Copenhagen in areas which are mainly inhabited by ethnic minorities. As a result there is no interaction between Danes and migrants, or to be more precise, a lack of influence of Danish culture and way of life. The ethnic minorities have been outsiders of Danish society for a long period of time. They are an undesired group of people neglected by Danish politicians on the one hand, and discriminating by a great deal of the population on the other. Here, we might describe various aspects of discrimination in the fields of education, work, and access to counseling.

Men whom brought these women to Denmark in many cases left them when of their behavior did not fulfill the expectations. Their children are then brought up without the possibility to integrate. Hate and jealousy among the second immigrant generation from Danish children is growing as they have nothing ahead of them but an empty life with isolated families.

This problem will be very crucial and hard to deal with in the future, unless the politicians take it seriously and work out a strategy in order to integrate the migrants into society. No one claims that there is a magical solution, but it does not mean that a viable solution is not possible.

We can for instance help ethnic women by spreading information concerning society's values and principles and demonstrate a willingness for conditional acceptance. If ethnic women tried to get out of isolation by participation in courses and show interest in learning about the Danish way of life that would integrate them into Danish industrial life and would gradually increase acceptance by Danish society. However, such step would not be done without a real initiative by Danish government.

Immigrant consultants are a very import step forward. Academic immigrants working as consultants in municipalities have a responsibility to help their fellow people in the process of integration. They know about the background and the reasons behind the problems of integration. We have often observed Danish social advisers that are not interested in the problems, they only provide material help because they are not willing to become involved in the solutions.

Danish authorities must find a special way in dealing with these problems. One of the means of solving these complicated problems is financial help. But I would like to give an advice to the Danish authorities: do not pay money without getting something in return. Do not finance free housing without having the respective families prove their willingness to integrate.

Dr. Hassan Osman Dahab

on Bomb in Turban, by Peter Philipp

Can the Muslims understand the strength of feeling on the opposing side?

If a Muslim person kills or threatens to kill a journalist or a writer or a politician, in the name of Islam or their idea of Islam, then this sends a message to all those who might like to express an opinion on Islam, to either not express one, at all or to be extremely careful of what one says.

Islamic people should come to grips with the fact that other people may see this as a form of censorship – and one under the threat of Islamic violence.

In Europe this kind of censorship had not been seen since the WWII. And these cartoon drawings were created specifically as a protest against the self-censorship, which many artists and writers and politicians were and are now having to impose on themselves as a precaution against, provoking some Islamic violence or outrage or whatever.

Anyone who is bold enough to get up and openly criticize an issue regarding Islam, almost without a doubt will soon need police protection.

As it is with the cartoonists – all who say that the western media should be 'responsible' with its freedom of speech – in other words – don't offend Islam PLEASE, say nothing at all, of the fatwas issued or paid death threats against these working men – the cartoonists.

Do they deserve to die over this?

If Islam is asking the western media to be more 'responsible'; then can we in turn ask that Islam be more responsible also and place more controls on the types of messages issued by the mosques?

By just, allowing these cartoonists – or men with jobs – to move about freely with their lives – would mean that they will be killed. And then Islam wonders why people think it is violent!

In a free society Islam practices violence to achieve its ends, to demonstrate its cause and to suppress details which it does not want others to know about itself [Salman Rushdie].

There is a punishment for speaking about the treatment of women in Islam, for speaking about the violence that is apparent everyday, in Islam, for challenging Islam's push for control of the many free countries, which it now inhabits.

In fact to say anything outside of the "Islam Means Peace" dictate and of course to willingly join the faith – is absolutely forbidden and anyone who tests these boundaries, could very well pay for it with their lives.

Today's Islamaphobia should be placed squarely in the hands of Islam itself. It is rather Islam that should be more 'responsible'.

Roxanne Hall
London UK

I found your article A Question of Decency and Tact by Mohammad Kalisch very interesting and would like to make a few comments.

Constructive criticism of the Muslim societies is a necessity and cannot be ignored. The many different problems of Muslim societies cannot and should be pardoned away, however there is need for balance and nuances in the critic of Muslim societies. I fear that the cartoon crisis only reflect the destructive approach chosen by some agitators unwilling to promote a balanced approach.

Freedom of expression means not that minority communities are exposed to harassment by the representatives of the media. In Austria, the notorious Holocaust-historian David Irving was given a prison sentence for uttering controversial opinions about the tragedies of the WWII. The medias in the EU have mostly shown sympathies with the Austrian court verdict against Irving in spite of the freedoms of expression.

My point is very simple: the EU media should avoid selective morality in this context! Freedoms of expressions also present responsibilities and harassment of the Muslim minority communities is not good.

Kindly,

Atilla A. Iftikhar
Analyst

on Bomb in Turban, by Peter Philipp

The letters to the editor regarding the Danish cartoon controversy exhibit a clear misunderstanding of Freedom of the Press, the concept of a principle and the concept of a "right".

In the US, and in much of Enlightenment Europe, rights are inalienable. That is, they are principles that underpin and delimit the governments right to govern and are rights of the people and not favors dispensed by the government. As such, they can be limited by consent of the governed and not, except in time of war, by unilateral fiat of the government.

Principles cut both ways, and a principled person acknowledges their validity whether they favor or oppose his opinion. The freedom of the press derives from the right of free expression. The right of free expression is considered essential for economic and political efficiency and for the survival of a multi-cultural society. It applies to all the people and not just to the press.

There are many cartoons and articles in the West that criticize Christianity, Judaism, the US and Europe. To say that there isn't is an expression of failure to check the facts. The media often reprint articles, speeches and cartoons in Muslim media that are very unflattering and intolerant of others.

Since freedom of the press is a principle, then it cannot be compromised unilaterally by outsiders. To put these principles and traditions into question because of objections by a Muslims, who do not recognize these principles and explicitly oppose them is an act of submission and not of respect. A respectful posture begins by acknowledging differences and then proposing means to bridge these differences in a mutually respectful and beneficial way.

Some differences are fundamental and all that can be done is to acknowledge differences and agree to try to minimize the number of offending acts and their impact.

There are many people in the US, and presumably in Europe too, that base their allegiance to government on the existence of their freedoms. The present appeasement by Western governments and the media will only encourage more demands. This will, in turn, lead to more back pressure from those people in the West that take their rights very very seriously, that have the tradition of standing up for their rights and thus increase the chance of a real armed conflict between Islam and the West.

As much of recent history has conclusively demonstrated, the short term gains of appeasement are never ever worth the price. It is far better to assert the simple reality that there are principles millions of Europeans and Americans live for and have fought and sometimes died for, and that Muslims need to accept them as real and negotiate a mutually acceptable political modus-vivendi.

Regards,
Joel Dubow
Alexandria Virginia USA

on The Reactions Are Themselves Caricatures, by Raja Ben Salama

Raja Ben Salama has ignored many issues on the cartoons subject.

As a Muslim, these cartoons are not offending but the message behind them are. Portraying Islam as violent and terrorising is not acceptable.

Europe is supposed to promote harmony with their local ethnic communities. This is the way forward, not depicting the prophet Muslims believe in.

Offending other people's religion should be made an offence, it is racism and ignorance.

Raja Ben Salama doesn't live in Europe or worst in Denmark, so she doesn't have the knowledge the about the real issues Muslims live in.

I am very disappointed at her views about Marx and others, since those do not insult Islam or its prophet directly.

These cartoons have escalated the Muslim/West divide by ignorant and irresponsible media.

The media in Europe feel free to attack Muslims in portraying them as terrorists but are not allowed to depict Jews or Israeli's policies in Middle East or express doubt about the Holocaust for fear to be accused of anti-Semitism. This is a sign of the media's double standards, or is it selective freedom of press?

The Guardian in Britain has revealed recently that the same Danish newspapers has previously refused to publish cartoons of Jesus in fear of offending his readers. How hypocritical is this?

Muslims around the world have the right to express their anger peacefully and the Europeans to feel responsible for not taking this issue seriously and the media to be responsible in their approach in the future towards their own Muslim communities and the leaders to take firm actions on those ignorant elements in stirring up race hatred.

Abdel Hammas
Manchester UK

on "I Was a Sinner for Years", by Nadia Riaz

May Allah, the Great One, continue to guide and keep in the right path, the path of Allah, Junaid Jamshed. That was the will of Allah. Music, as he said, is forbidden in Islam as it is something wich can disturb you, like gambling, so that you can forget to live in 24 hours time the way of Islam.

His example could be used by other singers to know that what they are doing is Haram, i.e. forbidden. But, the writer has written something which shows her positions towards Islam. She used the word "radical" which is used by most anti-Islamic media and western politics.

Regards,

Rajabu R.

on Bomb in Turban, by Peter Philipp

The depiction of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in Danish press seems to keep the clear intention to offend and provoke around 1793.12 million Muslims population across the globe. Islam is a faith and hope for this population. If Islam is not respected out of ignorance, it should not be a subject of insult out of prejudices and stereotyped image of Muslims.

I have seen these pictures and must say that they are truly problematic, especially when one considers that the foundation of Islam is based on the fact that "There is no divinity but God and Muhammad is his prophet.

Of course if a democratic state preserves the right to the protections of freedom of speech and press, it also encompasses the right to respect religious faith of the people.

Democracy is of no avail if civil liberties, like religious rights are not recognized and protected by the state. They are secured to promote social progress.

Carsten Juste, the editor of Jyllands-Posten, repeated late last week that the daily will not apologise for publishing the cartoons: "We will not apologise, because we live in Denmark under Danish law, and we have freedom of speech in this country. If we apologised, we would betray the generations who have fought for this right, and the moderate Muslims who are democratically minded."

Such remarks are unhealthy for social and cultural understanding, it is rather an arrogant and conservative view. If they (Jyllands-Posten) have the right to provoke people, then those people have the right to be offended and express boycott peacefully.

Media should enjoy freedom of speech in its absolute to express opinion, but it should have special concern in sensitive issues which is known to elicit such a large outcry among the human population, I don't see any help to anyone by such publication rather a bad image more hate and more communal divide is created, keeping a neutral view on this issue do we think even it is ethically good?

Since media drives our world opinion, we should now at least be aware of "good media" and "bad media".

on "Bomb in Turban", by Peter Philipp

I have rarely seen similar offensive caricature of e.g. Jewish people in German, Danish or even the British mainstream media-outlets and when such offensive illustrations occur, politicians and governments are eager to position themselves against such illustrations.

Since, I have some knowledge of Germany I can confidently claim that neither Jews, Gypsies, ethnic Russians are portrayed in the way as Turks and Muslims. Offensive generalisations are mostly against Turks/Muslims: e.g. "Muslims support forced marriages, honour killings". Turkey's EU membership process also highlighted some of the highly unbalanced and prejudiced approach of the EU press.

I think that the root cause why many Muslims reacted against Jyllands Posten is the combined tone of the Danish society and the fact that Muslim collectivity is associated with terrorism. After years of the abuse, Muslims think and feel (myself included) that these drawings are the last drop and intolerable.

The harsh reactions reflect this pressurised position of Muslims and the repeated connections of Islam with terror. It is important to understand the Muslim reactions against the JP and Danish government by ambassadors and Islam organisations from this background.

Anyway, I hope the circumstances will cool down and I am against flag-burnings, or any treats against Scandinavians in Muslim-dominated countries. I also hope the European media carefully avoid portraying the Muslim holy symbols in any degrading manner. Harmony of faiths and people require our ability to respect eachothers symbols such as flags, faith symbols etc.

Kindly,
Atilla Iftikhar

on Cartoons ignite cultural combat in Denmark, by Dan Bilefsky (International Herald Tribune)

For years, we have witnessed the rising tide of Islamophobia in the West and especially in Denmark and how media misuses the concept of freedom of expression to insult and degrade not only the Muslim Communities but to a larger degree the religion of Islam, its holy book, Quran and even Prophet Mohammad.

Danish politicians, the media and the man in the street has no qualm in calling Islam Nazist, terrorist, fascist and many other uncomfortable names. Even Parliament's podium is being used for such attacks.

But the largest daily newspaper, Jyllands Posten went one step further in September 2005 when it instigated the commissioning of cartoons of Prophet Mohammad. 12 well known artists drew very insulting sketches of the Prophet and the newspaper published these on 30th September.

The Muslim communities in Denmark peacefully protested against this uncalled for provocation and many ambassadors from Muslim countries requested a meeting with the Prime Minster of Denmark on this issue. The response of the Danish authorities and the media has been an arrogant defence of the newspaper and its right to insult whom ever it pleases. Muslim communities were politely told to shut up and accept the treatment they are given.

This matter has been taken up in Al-Azhar University, United Nation's Commission for Human Rights, EU Commission vice President Mr Frattini, 22 retired Danish ambassadors, 250 Danish intellectuals, writers and priests and Organisation of Islamic conference. Even the former boss of the present Prime Minster has admonished the government for acting, undiplomatically. Nothing seems to work. No one knows what the consequences of this provocation will be for the future of minorities in Denmark and Denmark's trade and cultural relations with the Muslim world. The Arab League was so angry at the Danish government, that it threatened Denmark with trade boycott.

International media has also taken notice of the Danish Islamophobic atmosphere. Besides the huge outcry in the Arab and other Muslim countries, the media all over the world criticise Denmark. The latest to join this endless line of criticism are International Herlad Tribune (31 Dec 2005),The Economist (7 Jan 2005), New York Times (8 Jan 2006) and Swedish newspaper Aftenbladet (17 Jan 2006).

The Danish government’s response is its old and usual mantra: "The surrounding world do not understand us. We are democratic and want to protect our freedom of speech."

We are afraid that this Islamophobic atmosphere in Denmark is damaging the inter-ethnic and inter-cultural relationships in the society. Since we find ourselves helpless in this respect, we have no other recourse but to appeal to the international opinion.

We wish to say to those who have a desire to use or have used in their comments, uncivilized language about Quran, Prophet or Islam or other religions, please use your logic and not ignorance. By abusing Islam, you would not serve the purpose of a dialogue between different communities in Denmark or the Western World.

There is a big difference between criticism of Muslims, Islamic practices and even the religion of Islam and publishing insulting cartoons of Prophet. Since he is not around to answer (we are sure, he would have forgiven Jyllands Posten), it falls to his followers to react. It is very logical. They have a right to react in a peaceful manner, which they did.

Bashy Quraishy
President - ENAR (European Network Against Racism)
Belgium Member EU Commission's High Level Group on Integration

on Islam Needs to Evolve, by Tahir Alsam Gora

Gora is out of touch with the real issue. And it also seems that it is a fashion if one wants to make some easy money, he criticises Islam. Therefore by allowing this kind of pseudo-intellectualism to be published on this website, you are eroding automatically what this site is standing for.

I do not think that this is the way to promote dialogue between cultures. Islam needs to evolve from within but not necessarily as some money-maker preachers want it to be.

The more articles of the sort are published here, the more dubious the site and what it stands for becomes.

Regards,
Mohamed Elgjini

on Islam in Russia, by Shireen Hunter

I liked this article and that it elaborated on important issues regarding Islam and Muslims in Russia.

Due to the fact that all problems that were created by Russian imperialism and Russia is the largest colonial power in the world of today, the tens of colonized nations (Muslims and others) are still unable to restore their freedom and independence, which this forum website would give an idea about some of the atrocities that occupied nations suffer.

on Double Standards and Hypocrisy, by Nelly Youssef

As horrible as honor killings are, considering the Egyptian population, 1,000 women is a small number. I am not minimizing the ignorance displayed in these killings, but more cultural analysis needs to take place. Where are they happening? With what families? I am sure educational background plays a large role in whether or not a woman is viewed as "damaged" because of this loss. We need to do more rigorous research and more accurate representation of Arab culture. This sort of representation only reiterates the Western backward view of Arab people and our culture.

What are the real double standards? Who are the real hypocrites? Women in the United States should fear for their lives since every two minutes a woman is raped in the U.S. There are so many Iraqis dying in Iraq right now. What are we going to do about the horrible plight of Palestinians inside Israel and in the occupied territories? Why don't we concentrate on bigger atrocities? Will this whole question of honor killings divert our attention from the real enemies of Arab people?

I hope I am not offending anyone, but let's engage in a conversation about how/why these subjects (the one in this article) tend to take a central role vs. other more global issues of wider concern.

Salamat,
D. Alkamano

on Islam Needs to Evolve, by Tahir Aslam Gora

Yes Muslim countries do not even behave justly with each other, but Gora very deceivingly tries to connect that with Islam to promote his own personal ideology of a water-down Islam. His stance may appeal to a western audience who do not have inside knowledge, but in fact Pakistan dominating Afghanistan or Syria invading Lebanon has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Islam and everything to do with geopolitics. The fact is that mullahs have never won more than 5% seats in Pakistan's parliament until the American invasion of Afghanistan which caused a backlash, and since the mullahs are the most hawkish in condemning the invasion so people elected them in large numbers.

I have lived in Pakistan for 18 years, I went to the Friday khutba (address) virtually every week and I swear by God that I have never heard any Imam condemn people's of other faith or say that we're supposed to kill or persecute people's of other faith. I never heard it in school, I never heard it from my parents, I never heard it on TV. I read the whole Quran with translation many times and that never occurred to me. I have read Muhammad's biography and the belief was quite the opposite. It was only when I came to Canada that I learnt from western media that we're supposed to kill others of different faith!

The truth, which may surprise many, is that our problem is not that we take Islam too seriously, it is in fact that we don't take Islam seriously enough! Let me explain:

In Pakistan, my home country, for example, I knew of no one in my immediate or extended family, no one amongst my friends or their friends who tried to become an imam or went into formal religious studies. Yes, no one in the middle class or the elite goes for becoming an imam because there's no money or prestige there. Parents want their children to become doctors, engineers and accountants and would frown if their child decided to become an imam. In fact the whole community would regard you as staid or backward if you took a prominent religious role. That role is reserved mainly for people from the villages or other backward/economically disenfranchised classes.

As you know people from such backgrounds are conservative and more into religion. Moreover, a man from the economically disenfranchised classes knows he can't make a high-flying living anyways, so there's nothing keeping him from becoming an imam. Most of them are pious people, but due to their backwards non-scholarly backgrounds they don't exactly interpret the religion very enlightendly! Their opinions are swayed by emotions, a sign of ignorance! Real scholars and imams are extremely few.

By God, I have found more real Muslim scholars in Canada than in Pakistan. That's because the ones here have at least some real education and are from the middle classes, the imam of my mosque IMO (Toronto) for example is doing PhD in some Islam related field! You don't get that almost ANYWHERE in Pakistan and most Muslim countries!

When the interpretation of religion is in the hands of the ignorant and conservatives, can you really blame Islam for it? No, it is us the general Muslim populace that is to blame for having becoming careless with regards to our religion! But Gora comes up and wants us to reject our religion instead of targeting the real issue of apathy! It is because he has complexes just like the people I mentioned who are allergic to religion because the backward conservative domination of it has made it seem "uncool" or averse to anything modern!

It is not Islam that "needs to evolve", it is Muslims who need to evolve and embrace its high principles, which include, some may be surprised: peace, freedom, rule of law, and dispassionate regard for justice! We need the institutions and environment that can churn out real Islamic scholars and imams, rather than amateurs from a select background! It is misleading to argue that Muslims must dilute their religion to progress just like the west, our history and experience with religion is entirely different! We were the torchbearers in every field of human endeavour for 1000 years whilst religion was strong!

The greatest thing in the West is rule of law, and early Islamic history especially has demonstrated that rule of law and equal treatment of others is achievable in spite of, and in fact, due to religion! It was not a coincidence that a Muslim qadi (judge) gave a court ruling against the Caliph Ali and in favour of a Jew about a shield stolen from the caliph!

Concerning the death threats received by Gora, it is again due to lack of rule of law in Muslim countries – a situation common in all third world countries – and of course since we love our religion a lot, there are some ignorant simple-minded people who go to extremes and try to take the law into their own hands, both because the courts themselves are incapable of dealing with any malice justly, and because they cannot catch the ones levelling such threats because of their inefficiency! It doesn't have anything to do with Islam because Islam absolutely prohibits taking the law into one's own hands! Islam requires absolute justice, and if real Islamic scholarship and law could be revived, it would deal absolutely justly and not emotionally with people like Gora!

Mere words can only be countered by mere words unless they have led to bloodshed or other harm, or if that which Gora says is proven to be a patently false accusation then he will face punishment that is proportionate to his crime, just like in the West libel is punished!

On the other hand, if the accuser is wrong then it is possible under Islamic law to punish him too, otherwise everyone would be scared of expressing their opinion! But, if you have no system of justice that people have confidence in then anyone can get up and interpret the law and religion arbitrarily and level death threats! They are absolutely illegal and punishable as far as Islamic law (shariah) is concerned! No one can take the law into their own hands! However, no one can prevent them until there are well-educated and well-respected imams in place in the local mosque to guide the simple-minded people as to right and wrong!


Regards,

Salman Shuaib
Toronto, Canada

on Emergency Relief in a Military State, by S. Akbar Zaidi

Certainly, the Pakistani armed forces should learn from this disasterous earthquake and develop capabilities which are more effective and adequate. This means also that both the federal and local civilian authorities must be better funded and qualified for such disaster relief missions. More and better spending on civilian and military disaster relief infrastructure is a necessity in Pakistan.

However, I think that critics of the Pakistani armed forces should remember that thousands of Pakistani soldiers also perished in the earthquake. Officially the military statistics say that approximately 2000 soldiers died, but nearly all relief groups, international experts, media and independent defence experts claim that tens of thousands of soldiers perished.

My point is that this earthquake even wiped large part of the Pak military infrastructure in the Azad Kashmir region. It took the Pak armed forces weeks to even reedeploy basic troops for border security. After the people of Azad Kashmir, the Pak military is the one institution which suffered most severly from this disaster. Many seem to undermine this unfortunate reality.

Atilla Iftikhar

Well, who likes violence! And what is new if through history minorities are used as a scapegoat for bad policies followed by some! Do Muslims communities have the choice? I do not think they have alternatives except to denounce violence and distance themselves from the "bad Muslims".

But what causes violence? No editorial is keen to tackle it or at least have the audacity to portrait it clearly.

Islam is peace, therefore the problem lies somewhere else rather than within ritual practices that one may say are out of touch with what is considered as modern. A real answer to this problematic issue needs a host of approaches rather than a simplistic "with us or against us".

Mohamed Elgjini

on New Rules for Muslims in German State Blasted , by Sonia Phalnikar

I think this rule is completely racial and unjust against the Muslims living in Germany needing naturalization. Filling up certain queries would never help to know someone's attitude towards understanding laws of nation, every foreigners' loyalty to the country's values and social system should be unbiased and irrespective of religious faith, instead of judging someone on her individual faith, it is better to make people more aware of someone's faith.

It makes no sense to create wall between Islam and state in country like Germany. Let's unite and respect faith irrespective of religion. Let people become more aware of the true teachings of Islam. As a Muslim even I feel people are living with prejudices, one needs to know more about the historical and political views of Islam. This is high time to know more about faith and followers, a nation-wide awareness program is more appreciated than making rules against "equality for all", in Germany.

Regards,

Danish Nadeem

You have a wonderful website. One of the best I've seen. Please keep up the excellent work. I'm encouraging my students to visit it regularly.

Regards from Chicago,

Nader Hashemi

Andrew W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow
Department of Political Science
Northwestern University