By Mohamed Khodr
01/11/2001
The U.S. and Britain, the bombers of Baghdad and Kabul, under intense public pressure to respond with force for the September 11 terrorist attacks are finding out that when the going gets tough, the tough get confused.
Conflicting messages between U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair as to the end game, the post-Taliban government, the future bombardment of Arab or Muslim states such as Iraq, Indonesia and Malaysia, as well as their tepid attempt to comfort Arabs that they will work toward a "Palestinian" state, is surely the "weakest link" in this war on terrorism.
The final attitude to problems as they arise seems to be we can always bomb them away. The problem is more acute for Bush. Within his own administration there seems to be tremendous conflict between Secretary of State Colin Powell and the war loving pro-Israeli camp represented by Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and their leader Paul Wolfowitz, the number two man at the Pentagon, and Richard Perle, director of a defense advisory group.
Bush is also hampered with overwhelming pressure from media editorials and columnists strongly pressing for an expanded war against Israel's Arab enemies and Islam. The Israeli and Jewish lobby could care less if Americans die fighting Israel's wars against weak Arab nations and Palestinians unable to defend themselves. They could care less if America is subjected to more terrorist acts or by bio-terror weapons. As long as Israel's interest is served, damn the poor Americans, Arabs, or Christians of Bethlehem.
Americans should ask themselves the right questions: "Why do Israeli's and their Jewish American lobby hate us?", "Why are they desperate for a Christian-Muslim war?", "Who will benefit from such a world war?"
The media is not only the most important source of information and opinions for the American public; it is the single most effective influence on America's government and policies. It's sad to see congressmen ignorant of Islam and the Middle East simply parrot what they hear or read in the media or repeat "talking points" they receive from powerful interest groups, especially America's most powerful, dominant, and intimidating Jewish group, AIPAC, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, whose sole reason for existence is Israel's interest above all else.
Through AIPAC's use of millions of dollars in campaign donations (carrot) for intimidating support in funding congressional candidates and blacklisting congressmen who dare vote against Israel, even once, (stick), through its working relationship with a pro-Israel media, the organization can make or break a politician's career. Without a strong American/Arab/Muslim lobbying group to oppose Israel's domination of Congress, hapless congressmen have no choice but to follow the money.
This hijacking of America's democracy and government underlies the foundation of the biased, double standard, and hypocritical foreign policy that supports, rewards, protects, and absolves Israel of any international responsibility for its brutal illegal occupation and freelance murder of Palestinians.
The Muslim world needs to understand that there are two America's. The America of Washington D.C. with its White House, Congress, Think Tanks, and Media all promoting the interest of Israel above all other American interests in the Middle East or the Muslim world, and the America of the American people, a people naive and disinterested in politics but whose sole source of information about the outside world is the media (the very same media that paints Israel in white sinless democratic colors, and the Arabs in inferior, violent, uncivilized colors driven by a terroristic intolerant faith - Islam).
The American people are some of the most gentle, generous, caring, and peaceful people in the world, with a tolerance of other faiths and nationalities in the world. But they are entirely disconnected from their government, allowing special interest groups from Jewish groups to business lobbyists dictate domestic and international policies. They distrust their government and hold the media in low esteem but have no other alternative source of information. Their educational system is lacking in teaching their own history much less the world's. They are impatient, individualistic, and want answers spoon-fed to them rather than doing their own research. But when they are informed, and moved to stand up to injustice, they are a force for good in this world. Americans are truly beautiful, but their government is not.
Hence the enormous power of the media in presenting Islam in negative and inaccurate stereotypical caricature of truth. The tragic terrorist attacks of September 11 present an enormous opportunity for Muslims to present Islam and their world in a positive, comprehensive and media savvy public relations campaign in both the U.S. and Europe.
The impotent and failed strategy of sending a few Muslim and Arab leaders to speak to U.S. government officials has not worked for 53 years and won't work now. The government responds to money, votes, and media pressure. Muslims must for once be intelligent enough to understand the culture and language of the American people if they ever expect a chance to counteract the negative perception of Islam, Arabs, and their culture. Hey, Muslims, don't go to Washington DC, go to Madison Avenue.
Israel, however, knows the power of public relations and thus hires public relations firms in New York to package and advertise the murder of Palestinians as forced self-defense. And for its part, the U.S. is hiring public relations firms to advertise its case of killing Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan, as forced self-defense that will ultimately benefit Muslims, and that present hostilities are not a war against Islam.
What do Americans see on television? They see an Arab ambassador in Washington D.C. rationalize that its "okay" for his government to steal $50 billion if it then spends $350 billion on its people. In other words, corruption is okay in an Islamic nation. They see a billionaire Arab showcase his mansion, four black-veiled women, his beautiful Western secretary, and common people lining up to kiss his hand and present their requests for handouts, all the while his money is in Western banks, not Islamic banks.
They see 57 Islamic leaders (the OIC) and 22 Arab leaders constantly "meeting" to discuss the "issues" without any courage, unity, or plan of action, except to "meet" again. They see Arab and Muslims leaders proud of their "secular" governments that fight "Islamic fundamentalists" and kill their fellow Muslims. They see a world of "Islam" that only preaches violence in our mosques. In other words, the definition of "Globalization" for the West and its Muslim puppet leaders is the "subjugation or eradication of Islam".
Didn't Allah (SWT) order us to perform jihad (struggle) against our own weaknesses and against injustices committed against Muslims by internal or external enemies with "our wealth and bodies"? Can the 57 Muslim nations spare one day's income from oil, expenditure on cigarettes and alcohol, on Western videos, on satellite dishes, Western fashions and shoes, hamburgers, Pepsi and so much more, to promote Islam in the West in its true picture?
That money could easily amount to hundreds of millions of dollars that an organized Islamic effort could utilize to hire professional public relations firm to promote Islam in the Western media: from television, movies, newspaper advertisements, radio commercials, magazine ads, Islamic video distribution and materials to libraries, schools, churches, and synagogues.
Can we spare one day of wealth for Allah's (SWT) Islam? Most Americans are NOT the enemies of Islam. In fact, despite the horror committed against the country, a large majority reached out to American Muslims with love, peace, understanding, protection, and assistance. In fact, they were more active in protecting and helping American Muslims than American Muslims or Muslim nations themselves did. Americans are searching for answers, for understanding, for explanations from the Islamic world. They are sincere, genuine, and good hearted.
How will the Muslim world react to such a peaceful outreach for understanding may determine future relationships for centuries. Please stop listening to our hypocritical leaders and their media lies and reach out in peace to America. Forget about foreign policy and the biased American media and launch a people to people campaign to foster understanding. Don't miss this opportunity to miss an opportunity. All of humanity are God's people deserving of love and respect. That's what the Holy Qur'an teaches us. Let's put it in practice.
If our weak governments won't work toward this public relations fostering of interfaith dialogue and a people-to-people outreach, then I recommend that Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi launch this grassroots effort by asking Muslims around the world to donate money to a worldwide dawah (religious teaching) of Islam in the West. Americans and Europeans are demonstrating in the street against the Afghan war more than Muslims are. They deserve an explanation on Islam and our culture. Let's be strangers no more. (Islam Online)
The Case for an American Muslim Identity
Barriers to American Muslims' political cohesiveness are largely internal.
by Muqtedar Khan
The growth of Islam in America, driven by migration and conversions, has created a diverse and multicultural Muslim community. While scholars are busy studying how this community is faring in the pluralist and multicultural environment of the U.S., very little attention has been paid to the fact that the American Muslim community itself is a multicultural community. Composed of people from all races, and from nearly every country on the planet, American Muslims have rapidly become a microcosm of the global Muslim community. The politics of identity and identity formation that are shaping the American Muslim community cannot be fully understood until the internal diversity within the community itself is fully appreciated.
The two issue areas which have the greatest impact on the development and politics of the American Muslim community are religious development and political goals. The community has been struggling to build Islamic institutions like mosques and Islamic centers, Islamic schools, and Islamic societies for Dawah (religious outreach) and religious development of the community. In these endeavors they have succeeded to a great extent.
Preserving Islamic Identity
Islamic movements like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) are well seconded and are serving their purpose amicably. Today there are nearly 2,000 Islamic centers and hundreds of Islamic schools that are also toiling to defend against the erosion of Islamic identity, as well as doing Dawah to sustain one of the fastest growing religions in the West.
But in the arena of American politics, American Muslims have yet to make an impact proportionate to their size and potential. In spite of the growth of the Islamic organizations designed for political mobilization and education, Muslims have yet to enjoy the fruits of political victories.
Like its markets, America's political environment has very high entry barriers. But more than external barriers, there are certain characteristics of the American Muslim community itself which have erected internal barriers to political cohesiveness and effective mobilization. The single most important barrier to political cohesion is the inability of the community to prioritize its political goals and evolve a widely accepted short list of political goals. American Muslims came from many parts of the Muslim world, and with the growth of the community many subgroups have emerged. The two biggest represent Muslims from the Arab world and from South Asia.
Each subgroup is attempting to organize itself to pursue parochial rather than the overall goals of the community. However, it is fortunate to have many leaders who have a vision of a strong and cohesive American Muslim community and who have to a great extent succeeded in preventing its fragmentation. The Pakistani Americans are the best organized subgroup. They have as many political action committees as all the rest of the American Muslim community. While on purely Islamic issues, such as building mosques or Islamic schools, Pakistanis remain an integral part of the general American Muslim community, on political issues they have charted their own separate territory. One can understand that the political challenges that the Pakistan homeland faces affect Pakistanis more than other Islamic subcommunities. And clearly they have concluded they cannot afford to wait for American Muslims to become sufficiently powerful to deal with all political issues in which its subgroups are interested.
But if all subgroups pursue their own goals separately, they will not only weaken the American Muslim community as a whole by redirecting meager resources, but they will also prevent the emergence of a cohesive American Muslim community. The challenge facing American Muslims is the classic dilemma of collective action. If all subgroups cooperate in building strong political institutions of a unified American Islamic community, these institutions will serve as a public good that will serve all their interests.
A Hold on Parochialism
A well-established and well-funded American Muslim community can have a greater influence on issues than can its smaller constituent communities on their own. But in order to create this powerful community, each subgroup must put a hold on its immediate parochial ambitions in the interest of strengthening the American Muslim community.
At present, many subgroups are reaching a critical mass that can enable them to have some rudimentary forms of separate institutions. The temptation to break away from the mainstream on political issues while cooperating on religious issues must be resisted in the interest of the larger community. If American Muslim leaders fail to prevent emerging subgroups from breaking away, they will become a community of communities rather than a single multiethnic and multiracial community.
The task of achieving political unity is difficult since there are many interests, sometimes even competing interests, within the community as a whole. It is going to be very difficult to get all Muslims to agree upon the same political goals.
This will not happen until all Muslims in America have the same identity--American Muslim. As long as many of them continue to think of themselves as Arab-American, African-American and so on, the community will remain divided. However, it is possible for enlightened leaders to at least agree on one unified goal--to strengthen the American Muslim community. As we succeed in this, everything else will slowly fall into place as we wait for the next generation of American Muslims to grow up with a more unified and more homogenous outlook.
Skewed views of Islam after attacks in US
Islamic scholars say the image of Islam is wholly undeserved for a faith which bans suicide and the killing of innocents
September 18, 2001, 08:39 AM
CAIRO (Reuters)
For many in the West, Islam conjures up images of gun-toting militants, sinister mullahs and homemade bombs. Wherever they look, it seems alleged Muslim radicals are rigging explosives, blowing up ancient statues, hijacking planes or kidnapping tourists. In some of the Western press, sometimes intentionally, "Islam" seems to go hand-in-hand with "terrorism".
But Islamic scholars say this image is wholly undeserved for a faith which bans suicide and the killing of innocents. After 1,400 years, Islam remains a mystery to most non-Muslims, laced with connotations of evil.
Last week's airliner suicide attacks in the US have again put Islam in the spotlight after Washington claimed a prime suspect is Islamic activist Osama bin Laden, the "guest" of Afghanistan's Taliban regime.
Muslim scholars say that in the court of public opinion, Islam has already been convicted. Few realize that a billion people around the globe, from Asia to America, are Muslim. "Islam is a religion with vast dimensions...while terrorism is something that is carried out by irresponsible groups," said Andrea Riccardi, a religion historian and founder of Italy's Catholic Sant' Egidio peace group.
Analysts say ignorance and misconceptions about Islam are rampant, particularly concerning its teachings on violence. They say Islam is a peaceful religion based on tolerance and respect which has been demonized by centuries of misinformation.
The Arabic word "Islam" means submission to the will of God, and comes from the same root as the word for peace, "salaam".
Judging Islam by suicide bombers, hijackers or the Taliban is akin to basing an understanding of Christianity on the crusades, Spanish Inquisition, or sects like the Branch Davidians, experts say. "There's a verse in the Quran that says anyone who kills another person is considered to have killed all of humanity. Anyone who saves one person, is considered to have saved mankind," said Mohammed Serag, professor of Islamic Studies at the American University in Cairo, adding that suicide was also forbidden.
"The Quran says that if anyone shows any inclination towards peace, even if you fear they may not be sincere, then you must accept their offer," he said. "This shows that human life is very important in Islam."
Muslims say attacks contradict Islam
Muslim clerics throughout the world, including religious leaders of activist groups, have condemned last week's attacks as horrific acts which contradict Islam.
Saudi Arabia's top judicial official, Sheikh Saleh Bin Mohammed Al Luhaidan, spoke for many when he said: "Islam does not condone murder except (to punish) those who kill or who attack Muslims, and therefore, such crimes which do not differentiate between a baby, woman or elderly person...are considered one of the greatest crimes."
The head of the Islamic World League, Abdullah Bin Abdul Muhsin Al Turkia, said in Sarajevo on Monday: "Islam does not recognize terrorism and its history proves it...It also does not recognize injustice and aggression against other peoples."
Like the Old Testament call of "an eye for an eye", the Quran does condone some forms of retribution. But Muslim scholars emphasize Islam only allows violence in self-defense, and never permits innocent casualties or suicide.
"We are horrified by these attacks, which no religion, human logic or political justification can sanction," said Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a top Shi'ite cleric and former spiritual mentor of the Hizbollah movement. He said no religious teaching could justify the attacks.
In the name of Islam
Considering the official views, why do some Muslim activists like kidnappers in the Philippines believe they are following God's orders?
"There are fanatic people who feel they have been humiliated, who seek any justification for their wish to take "revenge". The nearest thing to their mind, the only philosophy we have, is Islam. So they draw their justification from their misunderstanding of Islamic principles," one theologian said.
Analysts say certain concepts in Islam such as martyrdom, "Jihad" and defense of the faith lend themselves to misinterpretation, and some movements using the name of Islam have hijacked these concepts to further their particular cause.
They say many of these ideas, particularly martyrdom, are not uniquely Islamic, and have, for example, led centuries of Christians to commit unspeakable crimes and support racism and anti-Semitism in the name of Jesus Christ. "The misuse of religion is not uncommon. People who have a base and contemptible motive try to give it some nobility and respectability by covering it with a religious color. Such people just say they are Muslims. But they are not," said Zaki Badawi, principal of the Muslim College in London.
"They also use religion as a mobilizing force. If you remember, even (Josef) Stalin, an ardent atheist, mobilized the (Russian) Orthodox Church to try to get the people to fight against the Nazis," Badawi said.
Detractors frequently cite the concept of "Jihad" as proof Islam is a violent faith. Often translated as "holy war," which corresponds somehow to the word “crusade” that American President George W. Bush used on Monday to describe the war the US is considering in response to last week’s attacks.
Moreover, the accurate meaning for the word “Jihad” is "holy struggle", and can refer to internal as well as external efforts to be a good Muslim.
Scholars said anything striving to help the community or the restraint of personal sins would be regarded as Jihad. "The well-known term Jihad is a religious term which is addressed above all to Muslims themselves and not primarily as an aim against others. There have been holy wars in the past, and they can be fought again, but this is not what the overwhelming majority of Muslims want," Riccardi said.
Badawi, whose graduate school of theology seeks to dispel some of the misconceptions of Islam, indicated that some people were pushing fabricated ideas about Islam, but he didn't specify whether he was referring to misled Muslims or outside powers.
"Islam is a religion that accords every human being, regardless of their color or creed, the dignity and respect and protection of their life, property, honor and freedom of thought and freedom of worship," Badawi said.
"Anyone denying any person in the world the right to life, or the right to practice their own religion in freedom, or to think freely, would be demeaning to Islam and acting against Islam itself." (Arabia.Com)
Still a dangerous time
James J. Zogby
SOMETIMES IT feels as if we are living on the edge. The wounds of Sept. 11 are still open, the anthrax scare continues to grow, and now the nation's leaders are warning of credible threats of new terrorist attacks.
If this were not enough, Congress has just passed and the president has signed into law a new anti-terrorism bill that poses significant threats to civil liberties, and some law enforcement officials are discussing new forms of ethnic-based profiling. Both the bill and the renewed use of profiling would seriously compromise the rights of Arab Americans and Arab residents in the US. Just when we had hoped that we had brought an end to the backlash that plagued Arab American and American Muslims in the aftermath of the terrorist attack, we are confronted by new threats and reminded that the hate didn't go away — it just went temporarily underground.
I was reminded of this last week when, for two consecutive nights, I engaged a conservative congressman in a televised debate on CNN on the issue of airport profiling. This issue is one: should airline security personnel be permitted to single out Arabs for special searches and security procedures before allowing them to board planes? The congressman with whom I was debating was strident in his defence of this practice. He noted that the Sept. 11 terrorists were all Arabs, as were the 120 individuals on the Justice Department's terrorist watch list. "Of course", he concluded, "we should single out Arabs." I made clear my disagreement, noting that the practice of racial and ethnic profiling is both discriminatory and bad law enforcement. The job of law enforcement, I stated, was to secure the plane and all materials that are placed on the plane. If procedures are followed — the pilot's cabin is locked, all baggage is inspected, passengers are searched for weapons and an armed sky marshall is on board — then there should be no need to single out or humiliate any individual group of passengers.
Because there has been a focus on Arab passengers, many mistakes have been made and many innocent people have been victimised. I noted the example of a Republican congressman, an Arab American, who only three weeks before had been denied access to a flight because of his last name. I gave other recent incidents of discrimination resulting from profiling: two instances where pilots refused to fly with passengers named Mohammed in first class; and two separate cases where Hispanics and South Asians were removed from flights because they were thought to be Arabs. In each of the above cases, and many others, ethnic-based profiling has proved to be ineffective, discriminatory and hurtful.
Can ethnicity legitimately be part of a profile? Of course it can. But in too many cases, it has been used as the only category in the profile, and this is when profiling is wrong.
What troubled me was not the stridency of the congressman, but the flood of hate-filled e-mails I received during the two days of the debate. I was called a “traitor” and a “terrorist”. I was told to go back to my country (which happens to be the US, since I was born here), and I was derided as a “hater of America”. When, at the same time, a number of major US newspapers ran a story quoting me suggesting that it would be advisable for the US to consult with its Arab and Muslim allies before deciding to continue its bombing of Afghanistan during Ramadan, more hate mail poured into my office.
What both of these episodes taught me was that while incidences of hate crimes have died down, the hate is still there, ready to rear its head at the slightest provocation.
I feared that I had been premature in assuming that the backlash had receded. Another issue, even more dangerous than the backlash, is the recent behaviour and the rhetoric of federal law enforcement agencies. The attorney general has twice spoken about his intention to arrest terrorist supporters. According to law enforcement officials, the number of those “arrested or detained” is now over 1,100 and growing rapidly each day.
The new anti-terrorism act gives law enforcement unprecedented, and I fear, dangerous new powers to: arrest and detain suspects for indefinite periods of time, without traditional protection of due process (i.e., no evidence needs to be given and no right to defence); conduct secret searches; conduct wiretaps “without probable cause”. The result of all of this has been the growing number of arrests. What is both unclear and troubling is who the 1,100 are and why they are being held. I directly asked these questions to the attorney general, urging him to provide Americans with more details. Many civil libertarians are concerned that the very large majority of those detained has nothing to do with the terrorism investigation. Most, we believe, are simply individuals caught up in the web of the very large net cast by law enforcement. Some might be guilty only of visa overstays, while others are simply being held, with no charges, waiting to be investigated.
My fears were not calmed when the attorney general spoke last week about this investigation and noted: “Let the terrorists among us be warned: if you overstay your visa — even by one day — we will arrest you. If you violate a local law, you will be put in jail and kept in custody as long as possible.... In the war on terror, this Department of Justice will arrest and detain any suspected terrorist who has violated the law. Our single objective is to prevent terrorist attacks by taking suspected terrorists off the street. If suspects are found not to have links to terrorism or not to have violated the law, they are released. But terrorists who are in violation of the law will be convicted, in some cases deported, and in all cases prevented from doing further harm to Americans.”
By conflating visa violators with terrorist suspects and failing to distinguish between the two, the impression has been created that they may be one and the same. What is especially troubling here is that after six weeks of telling Americans that they should not treat all Arabs and Muslims as suspects, the practices of profiling and massive detentions are sending the exact opposite message.
Of course, I hasten to add here my observation of a few weeks back when I noted how angry I was at the terrorists who committed the Sept. 11 atrocities, and those who still may be in the US, intending to commit more heinous acts of murder. It is they who have created the fear and put all of us at risk. But having said this, it is of critical importance to note that we must not allow law enforcement to fall into the trap of victimising a segment of the Arab American community as they attempt to ferret out a small group of evildoers.
We live during a dangerous period. And this situation may become worse before it gets better. Arab Americans still have great respect for the enormous goodwill of the large majority of our fellow Americans. But we face a difficult challenge. We must continue to make clear our absolute abhorrence of terrorism. We must, at the same time, fight to defend our constitutionally protected rights against the continuing dangers of backlash that can occur when we raise our voices to object to bad policies that we know threaten to weaken our country, both at home and abroad. Jordan Times)