It chills my blood

When the hypocrites come unto thee, they say, "We bear witness that thou art indeed God's Apostle!" But God knows that thou art truly His Apostle; and He bears witness that the hypocrites are indeed false [in their declaration of faith]. They have made their oaths a cover [for their falseness], and thus they turn others away from the Path of God. Evil indeed is all that they are wont to do: this, because [they profess that] they have attained to faith, whereas [inwardly] they deny the truth - and so, a seal has been set on their hearts so that they can no longer understand [what is true and what false].~ the Qur'an 63:1-2, The Hypocrites

You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain.~ Exodus 20:7, the Third Commandment

It chills my blood to hear the blest Supreme rudely appealed to on each trifling theme.~ Cowper

It chilled my blood tonight as I travelled home in a train to find a misguided Muslim employ the name of God and the f-word in one sentence. I, too, once used the f-word unthinkingly, back in school, but there's a difference. How can one use it alongside that of God? This noise did perturb me no less, these gangs who take the name of God in vain. I don't understand this. Why does the establishment continue to cover for male disregard for modesty? Where a woman is appointed a reference of tradition while a man can do as he pleases. Instead of using missionary, poorly argued evangelical-style da'wah, why not just express it through good behaviour? Good behaviour cannot be separated from belief -- the Qur'an enjoins them together. What message are they sending to the non-Muslim travellers? I fear that non-Muslims who cross paths with this sort of behaviour will never look into Islam, Islam held ransom to cultural realisation than a rational, moral and personal commitment to the Undefinable and the Teachings. Again the again the name of God used in vain. God has said they will not be held guiltless. Indeed they do not realise "what is true and what is false". They may proclaim the name of the blest Supreme most loudly as they commit the lewdest acts known to man, but that doesn't make them believers. Not at all. My solidarity as a Muslim is with believers, I cannot make any excuses for hypocrites.

The New Breed

Another riot. Fundamentalism or what is being described as Salafist violence by coarse-bearded hypermasculine thugs in Libya is the new breed. The beard, once the symbol of philosophical and moral male enlightenment, is like something that might cut the world under the chins of criminals who have no knowledge about faith but claim much, rushing through and breaking laws and smirking. Some people wonder whether the beard will look good on them, but the answer is that the beard will look good only on those who are good.

The question is: where have these demons who corral women and prevent education of girls arisen from? The sickening tribalism, the brutishness, the sexism, it all comes together. Lao Tse once said that when there is no goodness there is morality. When there is no morality there is ritual. Ritual is the husk of true faith, and the beginning of chaos. These thugs who do not even know the rituals of Islam much less morality, who blashpheme against the name of God, and sodomise (with a knife) and literally beat to death their enemies spell the end of the beginning of the so-called change, which has empowered the most hypermasculine and violent, it is not surpising that the hegemonies of Saudi Arabia etc. fund and support these infernal elements. What is good for my tribe is good for me, what is good to retain my unmerited power is good for me, they say.

The Last Prophet, upon whom be peace, condemned such people, He is not of us who proclaims the cause of tribal partisanship (asabiyyah); and he is not of us who fights in the cause of tribal partisanship; and he is not of us who dies in the cause of tribal partisanship. In fact, the job of any believer is to stop a criminal from committing a crime. Too bad that those in a position to spread education for children, particularly disadvantaged girls, instead distribute guns to these morally vacant criminal males. The traditional establishment is weak and splintered, it has been weakened by the very same Puritans who claim to speak for Islam. We are left with mere rituals which, too, are impossible, after all we must eat meat every day and overcrowd animals. Out of these fires march hypermasculine male thugs, the new breed. Muslim men and women who think, who cry, who feel for others are trodden under. And what of children? What will they learn? Muhammad Asad once rightly lamented that we Muslims have made no use of the Great Gift given to us. That is not the fault of the Muslim meek, may they inherit the earth, but we have been convinced by uneducated leaders to not educate ourselves because if we did we would choose someone educated over them. So this facade of "revolution", a concept that has been damaging to our theology, is being used to replace one uneducated tribal leader with another uneducated tribal leader and the customary gang of male hypermasculine thugs.  

I would add that we have been as adept if not more in breaking laws as the ancient Israelites, from our cruel treatment of animals to how we have not contributed invidually or collectively to improving ethics or even how the object of the state has come to supervise over the lives of men and women which are not given by the state but by God (good on Asma Barlas for charging this exploitation of whole populations, particularly religious and ethnic minorities, as blasphemy; this is ironical since the very same forces that charge religious minorities and certain individuals with blasphemy are in fact themselves the blasphemers as they privilege the state over God consciousness and forgiveness), which lie in the dust to be stepped on, for the last hundred years or so. How sad indeed. Yet it is my great hope, and this can be achieved through the hardwork of ethical teachers and those who have actually read the Qur'an, for God has dedicated His book to "to those who think". I fear for the next generation of Muslim children but know one thing: change will be slow but come insha'Allah. So start working right away, from your own family to the family across the road. Spread the Word by being good and seize His grace that falls as gentle as the rain. The harsh do not feel it because it is not for them and I'm glad that their punishment has already begun even though they may feel powerful and push others around.

Ziauddin Sardar and Originality

I hold much agreement with Ziauddin Sardar - his largely stimulating, healthy reading of Islam; and also disagreement over other issues, e.g. his promotion of Amina Wadud, poster woman of the "Progressives", whose convoluted activism is best expressed through one of her blog titles: If Music is Haram, then Allah Made a Mistake. Rather than contextually pointing out that music can be both positive and negative in straightforward language, the "Progressives" feel a need to provoke. Although I very rarely listen to music these days, mainly while driving on weekends, I had a similar experience years ago when a fellow Muslim passenger on a bus, on learning of my faith, felt the need to "educate" me while I had my headphones on. When I refused his advice, quite out of adolescent zing and a somewhat stubborn streak which has been a fault many a time, he started to chant prayers next to me. It appears to me that this provocation and coercion is the hallmark of the "Progressives" and the Puritans respectively. The "Progressives" openly ridicule "tradition". The "Progressives" and Puritans are both out of touch and have not made any serious contribution to the regeneration of traditional ethics. The self-righteousness and judgement is astounding. Compare this to Muhammad Abduh's critique of the contemporary practice of polygamy in the language of traditional ethics by arguing that polygamy had been a sound practice among early righteous believers but had degenerated into a corrupt practice of lust devoid of justice and equity toward women. He didn't write an arrogantly worded treatise, but used his critical mind which had been given to him and to all human beings as a result of God's grace. Abduh showed that as a consequence of this social change and lack of moral integrity in men, polygamy was only permissible in certain circumstances. Now compare this to how Puritans and "Progressives" have warred over polygamy, one justifying it on unreasonable grounds, the other ridiculing the former for "backwardness", all in all a failure to humbly and critically engage with the issue. Abduh's critique of the traditional establishment can be vindicated by the high level of sexual harassment against women in Egypt, which the traditional authorities have failed to address and stop. Abduh may have stood outside the traditional establishment but he was wholly traditional in the sense of the ethics of Islam as imparted by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

This brings me to my point of contention with Ziauddin Sardar. In an interview he was asked: "Among the next generation of Diaspora Muslim public intellectuals, Tariq Ramadan's ideas are perhaps closest to yours. Notwithstanding 9/11, why do you think it has taken a quarter of a century for your ideas to resurface in the public sphere?"

Sardar answered: "Well, better late than never. When The Future of Muslim Civilisation was first published, I remember my friend Jerry Ravetz saying, dont expect anyone to understand it; it will take decades for many of the ideas in it to filter down. I think it is the job of reformers to be ahead of their time. Moreover, I am asking Muslims to transcend centuries of historical baggage and overturn deeply entrenched obscurantism. I have always seen this as a multi-generational task. Sometimes you need a crisis for certain reformist ideas to come to the fore. I think the total failure of the notion of Islamic state and the Islamic movement, as well as intellectual movements such as Islamisation of knowledge, has generated a sense of crisis. 9/11 has given this crisis an urgent spin to this crisis. So the time is now ripe for many of my ideas to come to the fore. Indeed, it is gratifying to see how so many of my ideas sometime with acknowledgement, mostly without acknowledgement have now been embraced in places like Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and in various European Muslim circles. But I do not believe that Tariq Ramadan and others have still caught up with the true import of my ideas."

Do I sense some unhealthy competition with Ramadan? I have not read Ramadan and not extensively read Sardar either. But what is the point in claiming originality? There is very little originality in this world, particularly theology. Ramadan humbly acknowledged the influence of Muhammad Asad in 2010 whose thinking was growing on him, and Asad was inspired by the scholarship of Abduh in his best critiques and by reactionaries like Maududi in his worst (which he fortunately swiftly discarded) and Abduh by those before him. In fact, Abduh, too, walked the misleading path of "Revolution" with Al-Afghani once before turning away toward "the Straight Path". The exact call for Muslims to transcend "centuries of historical baggage and overturn deeply entrenched obscurantism" was originally made by Muhammad Abduh, not Sardar. Muhammad Abduh was himself inspired by Muslim thinkers of the past, that era of learning which came to a tragic end in the tenth century or so. Abduh made this call after surveying what had happened in between. It also was not Abduh who was brilliant in himself but all good was from God, for all scholars have imperfections and the best learned men are open to sincere inquiry of their understandings. The roots of honest understanding come not from us but rather the Qur'an and the example of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, that propelled Muslim men and women to seek knowledge and be fountains of good behaviour and piety and which indirectly paved way to that era of learning called the Renaissance in Europe. It was there in Europe that Abduh sat in the libraries and read great books and he realised the dearth of knowledge in Muslim lands. He saw his task to inculcate that tradition of learning and of Islam. He correctly saw that God was the Teacher and how it all connected with the world, of what Islam truly meant. It is possible Sardar had a similar experience but he was not the first. Back to Adam!

Qaddafi's executioners break the Third Commandment

There is no doubt that Qaddafi was a dictator and a ruthless human being. However, as I watched the video of his death I thought of the Third Commandment, revealed to the Prophet Moses, peace be upon him, at Mount Sinai:

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

The Ten Commandments also show how Allah guided mankind in small albeit profound steps.

Qaddafi's executioners dropped on him in a blood-thirsty mob chanting Allahu Akbar (God is Great). The cruelty of the scene is beyond words, not simply in the act itself but also in the signal that moral progression of the nation would not come easily as those who aim to stand in Qaddafi's stead have shown themselves to be opposed to tribunal justice, and subscribe to naked violence, much like the dictators they shun. Their racist violence against black members of their continent in the so-called Libyan revolution has been well recorded. They considers themselves Arabs, true Muslims, haughty in their tribal disregard for Allah's family. Thus one dictator follows another, cruelty continues, the strongest, the hyper-masculine victimise and brutalise without pondering Allah, they use His name as a slogan, squeezed tight in their rage.

At Asr I sat down to read the Qur'an to assuage and get an answer for why things were as they were, why were these Muslims behaving contrary to Islam, what were we to do, and then it came -- in fact it says all over the Qur'an -- for indeed the Book endears itself not to Muslims but "believers who do righteous deeds". And in the faces of many Muslims all around the worlds there is light, for it has to be if they help the poor and infirm, take care of their parents, be kind and encourage and be full of love toward their husbands and wives, and struggle for social justice for everyone and be good to Allah's creation. That is proof that they have understood His message.

Titles

An extract from Yahya Emerick's article The Confusion of the Scholars:

So where does the stupidness come in? There are several areas to look at and the first is on the issue of who is a "Scholar" or "Shaykh?" Allah is very harsh against the Jews and the Christians for considering their priests and rabbis as people who could make religious judgments without consulting Allah's revelations. The priests made the eating of pork allowed for Christians, with no authority from Allah or from Prophet Jesus, while the rabbis made laws such as a woman could not be in the house during her period and that milk and meat could not be eaten together. In this respect, the people "worshipped" their leaders besides Allah.

Sadly, this is exactly what Muslims have done for the last thousand years. In the early days of Islam, no one went around with ostentatious titles, as if they were somehow set apart from the rest of the people. Everyone was usually addressed as brother or sister. No one earned overly glorified titles, either, just because they studied with a Sahabi. The only real special term that I have ever come across which was frequently used by the Prophet to describe others is 'Alim (learned person). And this term was never used in the sense of a "priest" or Holy man. It was just that: a person who is learned.

In Madina, everyone was "learned" to one extent or another. The trader knew how to practice Islam, the housewife knew how to practice Islam and the traveler knew it too. If someone needed to ask a question about Islam that they didn't know, they would go to a friend or neighbor. For really detailed questions, they might consult someone who was known to be a teacher. But they wouldn't fawn all over the teacher nor would the teacher dress or act in such a way as to set him or herself apart from the rest of the believers.

Centuries passed and a funny thing happened. The Islamic world spread in so many different directions and millions of people were becoming Muslims. The common knowledge of Islam was not so common anymore. If a Muslim teacher went to any area where Islamic knowledge was scarce, suddenly, everyone was wanting to be around him. The teacher became special. (Think of Sufi-style Shaykh worship for example.) Fast forward many more centuries. There are millions of Muslims, but few know much about Islam. Teachers have become "holy" men and have such titles as "Shaykh" or "Maulana". They are a special class, or caste, of people who are sought after and revered by people who want to see their "god" in the flesh because the concept of an unseen Creator is too intellectual for most. (Hence, Muslim "Saints!")

So what of the world today? Any person who learns a few dozen ahadith and one or two ajza is calling himself a scholar and making pronouncements about Islam to his flock who knows little. I have met people who knew little about Islam calling themselves Imam, or Shaykh or whatever. Who made them Imam? Who promoted them to the role of a guardian of the Deen? Was it their ignorant followers? Was it by virtue of the fact that they attended some madrasa in another culture? Is it because they're rich? Who knows? All I know is that a real scholar doesn't call himself by a title. He doesn't need it. A real knower of Islam realizes he knows so little and is humble. A title makes him feel uncomfortable. That is a real Muslim leader. But what we have mostly is a clergy class. (Think of that hadith about the Day of Judgment where the pretentious scholar is thrown in Hell.)

And what do the self-appointed scholars say? The stupidity is amazing! These are all actual Fatwas One scholar will say that chewing gum does not break the fast. Another says that using a fork is haram. A third says that eating McDonald's meat is okay while a fourth says of it, no way. One scholar says human cloning is halal, while another says it's haram. One local scholar in New York says the Sunnah is not important and that most ahadith are fabricated. One in Egypt says that wife-beating is okay if the wife doesn't make an effort to look pretty while another says that mortgages are allowed under duress. (Have you ever heard the Fatwa that living in America is haram? It's there.) Each one of these scholars backs up their arguments with Qur'an and hadith, in a usually twisted way, and then says anyone who does otherwise is a kafir.

"Beauty" is Irrelevant in Theology

Some Muslims place a great emphasis on what they consider to be "beauty". Beauty, of course, is a subjective marker and there's nothing wrong with it. How we treat others is an entirely different matter. It is with grace that the world began and it is with grace that we must move. The fondness of relaying how physically beautiful the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was is entirely irrelevant. The claim that he was the most handsome man is an unnecessary slogan of cultural realisation than anything touching the message of the Qur'an or the pious, humble way of the prophet.

When the ambassadors of Bani Amir went to Muhammad, they said, "You are our master." He said, "God is your master." Then they said, "You are most excellent of the highest degree." And when he heard this he said, "Say so, or less, and do not exceed reasonable bounds in praise."

In many ways it signals the poverty of theological discussions. To follow anyone based on his/her appearance or eloquence bears no weight upon truth. While there could be a genuine historical need to draw up the physical characteristics of individuals from the past to situate them more firmly within the narrative, anything outside it seems to be to be of no use at all.

In all honesty we do not know what prophets and their disciples looked like other than scant written descriptions. Given present-day celebrity obsessed media culture, it is not a bad thing. In a nutshell, it does not matter.

A moral of the story of the Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him) is not that he was "beautiful", though some prevalent gossip totally obscures the moral with elaborations on his "beauty", but the power of Divine guidance and his will to resist the power of seduction. It was his grace that was beautiful, the preservation of his "beauty" through the strength of his will which drew upon Divine grace.

When people say this or that person is beautiful, it implies something purely physical and in relation to others. Yet true beauty is not referential. It does not deny others equal worth and is not oppressive. This is but one pearl of wisdom from Muslim theology that explores this issue:

Muhammad said, "That person will not enter Paradise who hath one atom of pride in his heart." And a man present said, "Verily, a man is fond of having good clothes, and good shoes." Muhammad said, "God is Beautiful and delighteth in the beautiful; but pride is holding man in contempt."

There are many others that enlighten the seeker, from the Prophet's response to Lady Aisha when she commented on Lady Safiyyah's short stature to the complete absence of aesthetic morality in the Qur'an. To believe is to love all of Allah's creation and to undertake a path of critical self-reflection of the ideas we inherit from forces that we meet and are surrounded by, from bogus eugenics to friendly dialogues. To believe is to respect each human being and to fall in love with good everywhere. It is to compare our own beliefs and values as Muslims with the sublime truths expressed in the Qur'an and to sincerely face the unfortunate fact that we linger far, far away from "beauty".

The Covenant of Allah / Times of Confusion

Two days ago I inadvertently chanced upon a discussion concerning one of the most popular Muslim bloggers who had apostatised. Of course, I was not a reader of the site (was directed to it once by someone).

The discussion on how this byword of Muslim blogging turned atheist, as some claim, is very interesting though not in the positive sense. Eventually I did locate the person's new blog, for I thought it was important to have a sense of her arguments and not what people were claiming about her. There were good points and bad points. It made me realise the great problems facing many Muslim converts, especially women, who are rushed off into marrying strangers as soon as they make the declaration of faith.

One of the experiences shared by the person rings true from my own observation. For example, I have never agreed to distribute dawah pamphlets on Islam Open Day at university. This Marxist-inspired tactic, with use of apologetics in its contents is appalling, in my view. We cannot state that women have rights in Islam while being silent on domestic violence and other tragedies in the community. We cannot call for justice for Aafia Siddiqui incarcerated in the United States while saying nothing about the thousands of nameless Indonesian maids abused by their employers in Saudi Arabia. Muslims must critique these facts. In fact, this story appeared in Crescent Times, an Australian Muslim paper, so there are definitely right-minded Muslims, and those anti-Muslim commentators who speak of a nefarious "Muslim mind" are clearly wrong.

It was so disturbing to read that the Indonesian women who go to work in Saudi Arabia feel the trust and are happy that they are working for fellow Muslims. But covenant is never shared between humans. And this is where I politely disagree with the lady who left Islam from what it appears are experiential realities, gauging from a handful of entries on her blog.

Islam teaches us that covenant is made solely between Allah and man. Not between human beings.

I do not think we own the right to judge a person who writes that she married a virtual stranger and was then swallowed up by a conservative establishment that looked straight through her when it came to her needs as a human being, whether it was getting served after all the men had eaten at a food stall or the inability to get a contract that stipulated that the marriage be monogamous. But here I am not speaking so much of this lady who at least has a voice, but for perhaps other women who are not fortunate either. Allah is the Best Judge, and He will take each atom into account, whether good or bad.

But that Muslims may treat each very badly is not news. Aren't we Muslims because our covenant is with Allah? Life drags many people through hot degrees, and some, even innocent ones can end up scared of "Islam" (Divine Revelation) because of what they "experience" (man-made discursive practice of ethics). And Allah is the Best Judge.

I have often asked myself if our personal experiences define our realities. In Tao Te Ching the first verse goes that the Way lies beyond what we experience. In The Road to Mecca, Muhammad Asad presses a shell to his ear, curious to behold a new sound. From my own life I can safely say that Islam was a choice, not a need. It became the Way the moment I understood the Qur'an, and though it made me pledge my allegiance during the first reading of the chapter 'The Prophets', it is only since early last year that I have gotten a fuller, richer understanding after some extensive research on how to internalise and converse with its ethics. I mention this because experience itself is never enough. To learn about Islam, to accept it, you must first read the Qur'an, its purpose, to make a covenant with Allah after you recognise His Voice. Even if you become a Muslim, you are not a believer until you consciously submit yourself after reading and learning, unto Allah alone. When you enter Allah's covenant, you must also be kind, gracious, for these are not merely qualities that are "good" but signify "surrender" and appreciation of His sermons. You will make mistakes, may be get a little political (though I have never understood those who support the Taliban, and there's something wrong to begin with) or make everything into right and wrong, but eventually you will come around to the realisation that it is all inconsequential before the simple and deep teachings of the Ultimate Reality, the Teacher, the One God.

Once I imagined I was on the Isle of Man, this fantastic place, and there were no believers, and I was sinking on my knees in hopelessness. Only Allah knows what I would have become or done. But if I truly believe, I would never disbelieve. And Allah knows what is true and untrue in our head, heart and hands.

It is recognising that Ultimate Reality, "His signs" as the Qur'an puts it that explain faith, not a symbolic identity of it.

There's no doubt that Muslims are in a terrible state. But along with the darkness, there's light. There are pious Muslims, wholly dedicated to the Message, who work diligently for goodness, who wish to bring Muslim life up-to-date with socio-economic conditions of the nation state. This Muslim ethical project (note: I didn't use the word "Islam"; this distinction is often not understood by Muslims who would rather deal with symbols and banners than actual meanings) is a necessity, because three or four centuries after the Prophet's death, peace be upon him, reliable theological discourse had been abandoned. It was only in the nineteenth century that a great scholar by the name of Muhammad Abduh diagnosed this amnesia. Wikipedia incorrectly calls Abduh a "liberal", a "Mutazili" and a "modernist". [A separate post is required for an exposition of these terms, and I will only say that an analysis of Abduh by a particular writer was flawed to the very centre in its assumption that "Islam" is a time-bound commodity which Abduh tried to mask with a "synthetic" reform - this perhaps has been the general loop-holing of religion by post-Darwinian, secular writers. Many modern anthropologists dispute this formulation which has its roots in the Enlightenment schematisation of progressive time and is frankly an 18th century Victorian evolutionary idea]. True to the spirit of Islam, Abduh was a, to use the diction of the secular tradition, a "liberal" on some matters and a "conservative" on others. Mark Sedgewick, his biographer explains:

None of these! I think he must have had some sympathy for the Mutazili, but he knew that they were different people from a very different age. The problems of his age were not theirs. Intellectually, he was certainly interested in some ideas of the Shia and the Sufis, but I don't think he ever identified with them, at least not after his youth, when he certainly considered himself a Sufi for a while. After that, I can't imagine him wanting to go to Tanta for the mawlid, or to Karbala! That thing was not his style at all. In the end, he was more of a regular Egyptian Sunni than anything else. Though he was never just a regular anything.

Muhammad Asad and his magnificent translation of the Qur'an were directly influenced by Abduh's scholarship. Abduh honoured all people, he did not consider the West as alien as Maududi did (whose ideas permeate contemporary Muslim polemics). Abduh respected women (for their social wellbeing and he also drew upon the Qur'an and scholarship to argue that polygamy was only permissible in certain circumstances), he outlawed slavery with the ideas of the Qur'an (a great achievement for contemporary Muslim life), he was a staunch opponent of colonialism (but did so through legitimate means, and parted ways with Al-Afghani on his "pan-Islamism" which has proved disastrous) among many other little and great things. Until his dying days he was working on the commentary of the Qur'an, with his prodigal expertise in theology and the Arabic language. He is quoted as stating that the Qur'an is "its own best commentary".

No scholar since Ghazali has been as influential as Abduh (for the right reasons). (For the wrong reasons) the demeaning of Islam by political ideologues like Maududi and medieval ravages by Muslim empires to consolidate worldly power in place of humility and faith have also defined thoughts and attitudes. A number of logical criticisms of Abduh can be made, if one chooses to, but casting aspersions on his belief are entirely without evidence.

As a number of intellectuals have argued, God-elected men like Muhammad and Abraham and Moses, peace be upon them, cannot make us feel as they felt. It could be elaborated that what can bind us to their ageless faith and humanity is the visibility of good ethics as taught by Allah in His Book, in allegorical and literal forms. And the example of the Prophet Muhammad, the Last Prophet, peace be upon him. But for us ethics would also mean the modernisation of social institutions in Muslim nation states, research, and dialogue. After all knowledge is the bedrock of spirituality. The pastoral, good, ethical mode of living of the prophets is absent in our age's organisation. The Qur'an (Chapter 56, Verses 10-14):

But the foremost shall be [they who in life were] the foremost [in faith and good works]: they who were [always] drawn close unto God! In gardens of bliss [will they dwell] - a good many of those of olden times, but [only] a few of later times.

Contrary to the theory of moral relativism, the Qur'an is clear that there is regression in man's faith and actions through history. Yet a little later in the same chapter, the Qur'an (Verses 27-40) provides further hope for us.

Now as for those who have attained to righteousness - what of those who have attained to righteousness? [They, too, will find themselves] amidst fruit-laden lote-trees, and acacias flower-clad, and shade extended, and waters gushing, and fruit abounding, never-failing and never out of reach.

And [with them will be their] spouses, raised high: for, behold, We shall have brought them into being in a life renewed, having resurrected them as virgins, full of love, well-matched with those who have attained to righteousness: a good many of olden times, and a good many of later times.

In the context of those who initially stumble and sin but eventually attain righteousness, there will be "many". This is a definite reality of our times. It is in contrast to the "foremost" of the first quotation, those "always drawn to God", of whom there are a "few" in times that follow the Last Revelation (Commentary by Asad, The Message of the Qur'an).

In today's environment, communication is either impersonal or absent. How do we get there? How do we bring knowledge to people that is articulate, intelligent and authentic? The well-travelled journalist Chris Hedges argues:

The debasement of language, which Shakespeare understood was a prelude to violence, is the curse of modernity. We have stopped communicating, even with ourselves. And the consequences will be as extreme as in the Shakespearean tragedy....The Arabic of the Qur'an is as poetic as the intricate theology of Islam. It is nuanced and difficult to master. But the language of the Qur'an has been debased in the slums and poor villages across the Middle East by the words and phrases of "political Islam". This process is no different from what has taken place with Christianity in the United States. Our mainstream churches have been as complacent in fighting heretics as have the mainstream mosques and religious scholars in the Middle East.

Hurdles line our path. For example, during his reign the Pakistani dictator General Zia instituted a law, in the name of Islam, according to which a woman who was raped could be charged with adultery. Imagine! On the subject of improvements, can't we introduce discursive practices that condemn racism, discriminatory attitudes, sexism, and intellectual laziness in religious scholarship? We do that in the spirit of Islam. For through history and by many Muslim power-brokers, it was never about Islam.

Our covenant is with Allah only, that's why we are Muslims. We must criticise such blatant disregard for human welfare, which is one of the very founding stones of Divine and prophetic discourse. We know that many bad things have been committed in the name of Islam and will continue to be done. Sometimes we may feel like the Companions of the Cave, afraid that we will be stoned by our own brothers. But this world was never ours forever.

May we stand against injustice, against evil words spoken by those in our midst, and strive to be good. For to Allah we belong and unto Him we will return. Believers will be tested, and each time they fall they will pick themselves up again. This is faith. It's all around us, and even its fragments in other prophetic lines in lands lost as far as the tribes we have never encountered or empathised with, albeit not as clear as the Qur'an, can be found in the good ethics practised by their members. Because there is something bigger than all of us, though we all will know it - the obvious conclusion of a rational, conscious specie (man) appointed as a deputy on earth and obligated to express the virtue of righteousness toward all that lives on earth - the Ultimate Reality we call Allah, though man has sought to haplessly define the Undefinable (Chapter 21, Verses 18-22).


Photo of Muhammad Abduh

Tall Towers

It's in today's news that Barj Dubai is now the tallest man-made structure ever. One of the signs of the Hour, as the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) related, is that shepherds will start building tall towers. This should not be understood as a religious derision of the achievements of the desert Arabs to whom it particularly refers to, for achievements of man are commendable. Rather it is a very literal prophecy. Muslims who have criticised the superfluous building constructions in Mecca have used this narration to attack the Saudi establishment. This has been a traditionalist critique, which is quite valid, but short of looking at the effect this may have on local, small industries. In fact, the latter should be the primary concern. In the Dubai case, however, it is intended to attract tourism. On the other hand, the first argument unwittingly implies that faith is a treasured past which is being intruded upon by modernity. As such, faith becomes a relic, an identity rather than a timeless message from God. What's for sure is that the competition to build tall buildings is proof that humanity, indeed the entire earth, is in a new age which will lead to the Last Hour. Only God has the knowledge of its exact time and occurrence.

Vegetarianism & Compassion

I am thinking of turning to vegetaranism or something close to it. I feel that the meat industry is against the teachings of Islam and the conscience. No, Islam does not prohibit eating meat, but the Last Prophet "has placed the killing of animals without a justifiable reason as one of the major sins".

Animals in Islam

Avoid ye the seven obnoxious things {deadly sins}: polytheism; magic; the killing breathing beings! Which God has forbidden except for rightful reason. (Narrated by Abu Huraira. Sahih Mulim - Kitab-ul-Imam (Ref. No. 46); Chapt. XXXIX, Vol.I; p. 52. Bukhari, 4:23. Also Awn, (Ref. No. 32); Hadith No. 2857.

The continual killing of animals as a food supply -- and the outward manifestation of faith lacking the particular teaching within Muslim circles is rather stupefying. Despite Islam's emphasis on good treatment of animals, Muslims -- like Christians and everybody else -- can be observed "living off " the suffering of animals. We are only allowed to eat meat in moderation. Now we have turned animals into an industry. This is what happens when you do that:

Action of the Month

Desperately sick and injured pigs were discovered at Longerong piggery with no attempt made to provide them with veterinary assistance. Footage of a moribund pig with thousands of maggots crawling out of a wound has shocked even the most experienced animal advocates.

This is happening at a piggery in Tasmania, and it's happening to all animals worldwide. In Islam we are fortunate to have the rules but there has been no application of those rules -- in fact, it is no coincidence that some of the Muslim countries that sell themselves out for being "Islamic" while breaking every single rule and enforcing twisted interpretations that directly target women, for one, do not enforce these basic yardsticks of faith, even a twisted one.

Also:

Our Holy Prophet(s)'s overwhelming concern for animal rights and their general welfare would certainly have condemned (La'ana) those who practice such methods (factory farming), in the same way as he condemned similar other cruelties in his days. He would have declared that there is no grace or blessing (Brakah) - neither in the consumption of such food nor in the profits from such trades.

As the meat certainly comes from factories, even Muslim ones, I think there is enough reason to go green. What do you think?

On a side-note: Regarding pigs, Dr. Rajab Abu Mleeh, Shari `ah consultant at Islamonline.net website, states that "we are required to show mercy to this animal and not to cause it pain or harm. Indeed, it did not commit any fault or offence. Rather, it is an animal which glorifies Almighty Allah Who has created it whereby to test us and see which of us is best in deeds..."

Related Post: Food for Thought by Tim.

Kindness in Islam/Views on the Taliban/A Message of Peace

There are a group of Muslims - fanatical, tribalist, nationalist - that are in the habit of telling other Muslims that they are not following Islam, and they're a general offence in the sense that they spread hatred and violence against non-Muslims. The most extreme example of this group is the Taliban: long bearded, short-sighted, fascist to say the least. And the most common trait of this group is that they are unkind. Seriously, you'll hear of them beating women, throwing acid into the faces of girls who want to get an education, torturing boys and men. In short, the Taliban and its like-minded followers love nothing more than raping humanity. In the Islamic view, if you show inhumanity and unkindness to others, you don't have faith. You have lost it. There is one thing that is fundamentally incompatible with Islam: inhumanity. Islam's last prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him), has said: "Kindness is a mark of faith: and whoever hath not kindness hath not faith." How universal: "All God's creatures are His family; and he is the most beloved of God who doeth most good to God's creatures." How significant: "Who is the most favored of God? He from whom the greatest good cometh to His creatures." How lovely: "What actions are most excellent? To gladden the heart of a human being, to feed the hungry, to help the afflicted, to lighten the sorrow of the sorrowful, and to remove the wrongs of the injured." How wise: "Verily, God is mild, and is fond of mildness, and he giveth to the mild what he doth not to the harsh".

It will be hard for many non-Muslims to recognise Muhammad's voice in these messages - with his lament for God's creatures. But that's how it is. That's how he was. He was not like what the Danish cartoonists or Orientalist fantasists made him out to be or what al-Zawahiri makes himself out to be. The Prophet was not just an important figure in Islam but a great figure of humanity. By concentrating solely on the wars he fought against people who wished to kill him (and then blame him for their moral weaknesses) or making the Prophet a perfect deity of sorts - such as the false mystical belief that he was the first act of creation and a sort of inspiration for what followed - we do our faith a great injustice. We need the Prophet's words more than ever. He walked on earth and taught his brothers and sisters because he was human. Especially now that we find men in religious robes using a vulgar image of Islam to destroy the societies around them, brutalising countless innocent people.

We must listen to the Last Prophet (and the Prophets before him); to educated, intelligent Muslims; to wisdom and knowledge; to share our common legacy with all of God's creatures; to honour God (for to honour God you must first love your fellow man).

We don't need senseless violence; sectarian strife; terrorist atrocities against Muslims and non-Muslims; and trivialising "the West" as a darkened place of mere material longing (which is the sister of Orientalism: Occidentalism). Separating the world into the pure and impure is itself unacceptable. Who decides that? Good and bad people are dispersed in every land. There is nothing like "Islam and the West" in Islam. It's all God's beautiful earth. Do they ever pause by a rolling river or a mist-covered mountain? They madly say it's just "science". Respect others! Moreover, in Islam there is no room "for revolution, only evolution" (Muhammad Asad).

Let kindness be our first step, let faith be our heart's rest, let the conscience be the staff in our hands and let the everlasting rainbow of God - stretched from the East to the West, North to the South - humble us...before we say an unkind word or lift a callous hand to strike another human being. One day all of us will return to God and answer Him for what we said and did. It is the choice each one of us must make: to either be on the side of what's good or what's prohibited.

There is no system of honour killing or concept of revenge killings or holy war in Islam. "What the West did" is a popular refrain. I dare al-Qaeda to say this truly, for it has itself partaken in the retardation and destruction of decent Muslim societies. Muslims must address their own history of colonialism and distance themselves from the vain glories of the past. They must emulate the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), not the time in which he preached. Islam must not be confused with Jahiliyah, which is what the Prophet fought against. We must fight against it, too.

We must first build an ethical, God-fearing house, because it is well-known that murder and debauchery do not breed faith. They are an abuse of faith.

It's the Prophet Muhammad against the Taliban. It's Islam and humanity against superstitions, barbarity and thoughtlessness. And may the Taliban perish with the ashes it beholds for our future. May we fight them and regain the golden sands of learning, reason and knowledge. Where God is worshipped in peace, for that's what Islam means.

Monotheism

God is the only one we may serve and praise....We may not act in this way toward anything beneath God, whether it be an angel, a star, or one of the elements.....There are no intermediaries between us and God. All our prayers should be directed towards God; nothing else should even be considered.

- Maimonides

Note: Anything that diverges from this is not monotheism. No prophet or pope or saint possesses the honour of Almighty Allah.

The Many Salafisms

Yes, I know what you must be thinking: misogynist, arrogant and supremacist. This in fact is the dreary picture painted by the sociologist Riaz Hassan in his book Inside Muslim Minds of what he labels "Salafibism". Fortunately, mortal muse is never that wholly encompassing of truth. Take for example the Muhammadiyah Association. Reporter Amy McQuire who toured East Timor and Indonesia with the Asia Pacific Journalism Centre in July came into contact with Muhammadiyah, the second largest Muslim group in Indonesia. What did she find? That it runs hospitals and schools in urban, regional and remote Indonesia. And "it does not discriminate in providing services to all sectors of society. Muhammadiyah also has an active women’s branch called Aisyiyah, which is involved in several charitable works aimed at empowering women."

All this good from a group which if we have been told is an inherently evil form of expression colluding with sectarian fantasists of old?

From the Muhammadiyah website:

On 25th May 1957 a group of students from Madrasah Raudatil Atfal and students of the late Ustaz Abdul Rahman Harun, Ustaz Rijal Abdullah and Ustaz Amir Esa had organized an Eid Adha Hari Raya Gathering. In that gathering the students had unanimously agreed to strengthen their group and officially established a Sunnah/Salafi movement in Singapore.

I'd argue there is nothing uncommon about a humane, tolerant Salafism. Just like there are many Sufisms, there are many Salafisms. Some of them are dubious, some of them are not. The routine mutual slander (as occurs on the blogosphere) is neither here nor there. Moreover, an individual humanity supersedes prejudice.

The task of a contemporary Muslim, in my view, is also to struggle with labels and meanings. In order to achieve that, we must first emotionally distance ourselves from group-thought, and then, come to common terms.

I'd like to voice my own personal disagreements with a lot of what is established, but it'll probably cause more division. I have come to the realisation that dialogue and everything sounds good but at the end of the day we're going to disagree. Let us live together and clog the hurt. Sectarianism is one of the biggest problems facing Muslims.

It doesn't help when Irfan Yusuf blames all terrorism on the "Wahhabis". There is more to it and more to a range of a peoples than meets the eye. Terrorism, in fact, is the legacy of Sayyid Qutb who subscribed to the colossal Leninist irony that killing of innocents on whatever scale is justified in a quest for earthly utopia. This ideology lies at the heart of Al-Qaeda's error: "there is no hope". The actions of terrorists suggests that God is unable to govern with fairness and permits debauchery and killing in the service of depraved, elitist maniacs. Certainly not the God of Islam. Not the God of man. In Islam triumph is always of unrelenting faith, of good, of meekness, of patient labour and of small kindnesses.

Salafis, Sufis and Shias must stop fighting and start building.

We are mortals, of course, balancing immortal revelations. Separated by land and sea and culture and viewpoints. Yet, there is no excuse for slander.

If Things Must Change...

I just read a disturbing story of a thirteen-year-old Somali girl who was raped and then -- by a form of twisted logic -- stoned to death by "Islamic militants". There is no denying that the judges were Muslims acting in the name of Islam. Once again, we must look at this news from a different angle first. Somalia has been invaded by Ethiopia at the behest of the United States. This report like all others also serves as a propaganda by Uncle Sam as it tries to incriminate the enemy. You can bet your bottom dollar that Ethiopia has been stoning teenage girls as well, but you never hear of that as it besmirchs the status quo. The establishment feels no sensitivity toward the rape victim. It is merely to garner outrage from the public.

For those who sincerely care about incidents like these (divested from politics) in Muslim countries, there is one solution. Islam has witnessed the death of the "activist scholar", those knowledgeable Muslims who championed the causes of the poor and disfranchised. Instead, a scholar now speaks what the congregation wants to hear. Muslims are now indulging in lashing out at others for their misfortunes. This has given rise to progressive groups and other groups sunk in the quagmire of tradition in response to the literalists, all of them unable to seize the spirit of classical Islam. Hence, now is a need for scholars to speak up against the thousands of cases of injustice against thirteen-year-old girls like Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow. Islam can only move forward with the participation of conscientious scholars. I even believe that if all the scholars in Iraq united and condemned the sectarian violence, Iraq would be free. Islam has been let down by effective leadership.

Muslim Judeophobia: A Disease

I've always planned to address this issue, which is propagated by some Muslim speakers, namely that Jews are our enemies. This is wrong. Jews are not our enemies. There are numerous Jews who stand in solidarity with Muslims on Palestine. It is true that there are Jews who are Zionists and puritans. But it is also true that there are Muslims who are Mawdudists and puritans who support the oppression meted out to insiders and outsiders of their respective nation states, out of a disjointed sense of loyalty, blinded by tribal partisanship to right and wrong. Progressive or liberal Muslims will not find in me a friend either because I identify a similar ideological pattern in their blindness toward neoliberalism and wars waged by their countries, usually Britain and America. Both these groups respresent extreme factions within the Muslim body. While Mawdudists decry "Western evil", the proggies correct that through their own selective ideology. They are two faces of the same coin. Islam has always proposed a middle path. This path is enshrined in the Qur'an, an intelligent, discoursive reading of which reveals that Jews and Chrisitans are the People of the Book. They are to be respected. And not just them, we have an obligation as Muslims to respect the rest of humanity. And this can be achieved by an emphasis on those traditions that bind us together as a people. Love knows no context. It is true that there has been antipathy and even wars between Muslims and Jews. But there is no theological basis for an iota of contempt. The Qur'an offers theological critiques of both Christianity and Judaism to warn of making the same mistakes, and the New Testament and the Torah both do the same of those gone before them, and the Qur'an forbids oppression and discrimination. It is and always has been political. Indeed, Muslims are one body, but humanity is one family.

Once the Prophet was seated at some place in Madinah, along with his Companions. During this time a funeral procession passed by. On seeing this, the Prophet stood up. One of his Companion remarked that the funeral was that of a Jew. The Prophet replied, “Was he not a human being?”

We find that even during the Prophet Muhammad's time, Judeophobia was rife in Arab Muslim society. Like in today's world, it originated from politics. We also find that the Prophet's other wives ridiculed Safiyya bint Huyayy who was formerly Jewish. This thoroughly displeased the Prophet. Therefore, any amount of irrational fear or loathing of Jews should displease each one of us who calls himself a Muslim. On another occasion when Lady A'isha made some remark about Lady Safiyya's short stature, the Prophet replied: "You have said a thing that if it were left in the sea, it would mix with it (and make its water dirty)." And when we Muslims express prejudice, ignorance and downright hatred toward Jews on the basis of mad politics (on which we aren't heroes either - look at the despotic Arab countries which fly the flag of hatred and nationalism, and their overweight rulers), it is like we have said and done things that would make the sea the colour of our loudly professed albeit tainted humanity.

http://www.islamonline.net/english/In_Depth/mohamed/1424/kharitah/article09.shtml
http://news.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=168205

"If You Could Kiss the Cheek of the Child in the Sweatshop That Made Your Shoes"

"If you could kiss the cheek of the child in the sweatshop that made your shoes...." (David Rovics)

Consider this blood-freezing extract from We Shop Until Chinese Workers Drop by Johann Hari:

Over the past decade, an old word once used in the Maoist gulags has come back to China. It is "gulaosi" - and it is used to describe the men and women who are literally being worked to death producing clothes, electronics and toys for you and me.

Wie Meiren was a standard-issue gulaosi, the kind you can find in every Chinese town. She was a 32-year-old woman with three kids who left her hungry village and travelled to Dongkeng, where she got a job assembling the toy cars for the British kids' market.

There, she was expected to work 360 days a year, from 7.30am to as late as 9.30pm, with only a half-hour break for lunch and fines for taking too long on the toilet. As in many Chinese factories, military drills were often yelled: "Long live the company!" If anybody argued back to the managers, they could be punched in the face.

One day, Meiren had a family crisis at home. She was forbidden by her bosses from going to take care of it - so she became angry and fainted. She forced herself to keep going to work for the next fortnight, but eventually she became so exhausted she collapsed - and died before she reached the hospital. The autopsy indicated gulaosi - heart and organ failure caused by extreme exhaustion.

Some 50,000 fingers are sliced off in China's factories every month. Tao Chun Lan was a 20-year-old woman from Sichuan province at the heart of China who moved to Shenzhen and got a job working in a handicrafts factory. One night, she discovered the factory was filling with smoke - and the workers were locked inside. Some 84 workers were burned or trampled to death. Lan jumped out of a window, irreparably damaging her legs. She has received no compensation. "They don't care if I am crippled for life," she says.

I will recommend the following documentary to anyone wanting to understand the abuse meted out to sweatshop labourers by both Eastern and Western corporations: The New Rulers of the World. What the above article has overlooked is the existence of Eastern corporations as well. For if you have walked into a $2 Chinese store, it is clear that there are indeed Eastern companies in the business as well. Now as I smooth the white strings on my brand new diary, I know that some bloodied hands tied them together. I got them cheap and I suspected and I must be strong next time. We all should be strong and demand better conditons for sweatshop labourers who work till death and their blood lends comfort to us. Here's to a savage human race. May Allah guide us and comfort those who are in pain.

In the Same Boat

Recently, I joined a pen pal site. As I wanted to talk to other Muslims, I typed the appropriate keyword in the search box. Lazily skimming through it, I came across some non-Muslim names. The one that I clearly remember was of a girl who had added a note that "blacks and Muslims" needn't write to her, while another was of a Danish youth saying that Muslims shouldn't boycott Denmark's goods and that it was the government's fault which was very bad and racist (I agree with him). Anyway, I didn't feel like writing to anybody -- the mood was gone -- and I believe I even blinked my eyes twice. But I got around to writing to a Muslim profile which claimed that nobody should send her pictures because she was blind. I was curious so I wrote to her to ask who read her all the letters and may Allah bless her.

Today in the morning I received a letter in my email from "Roy" and he had written to be my friend. But what struck out were his words, haunting as they are -- a testimony to what viles plague our common sense of humanity:

I'm happy to be your friend if you don't mind being friends with an African.

With a few corrections, that's what he just about said. And immediately my mind traced back to the "no Muslims and blacks" entry. To make him smile, I replied that the question was not whether I wanted to be his friend but whether he wanted to be mine. I'm not very passionate to regulary converse with "Roy" because he wants to improve his English and this venture is bugging (as I've learned from the second letter which I received a few minutes ago), but I think I will write to him once in a while. We are in the same boat: blacks and Muslims and Arabs; and yes, Europeans and Americans, too. It's sort of like Noah's ark where all creation is delivered to the Lord's refuge.

What Can Be Believed?

Some say Muslims don't believe in freedom of speech and expression. Some say they are uncivilized and supporters of "terrorists". Some say Muslims are the Other. Some say let's lock up the Roma People in the Beltzec death camps because they don't belong. Some say it's all about manifest destiny and we are there to win. Some say it's all a big mistake, that they've come down to take our temples and churches and mosques and we've got to make a stand, a tired stand against these nomads. And I hear them...the leaders holler about their kind and their blood and their race under a shower of confetti. The dictators of the East and West don't understand now.

I say, don't be absurd. Look at your image in the mirror. Is it defined by the dehumanization of the Other? Is your image so frail that it can only exist by your screwed up patriotism. I say, some Muslims are indeed wild but just like the killers of Haditha -- not more. I say, some Muslims are indeed ignorant but just like the politicians in Washington -- not more. You talk of "Enlightenment" and throw heavy words like "civilization" and "freedom" into the faces of poor people while shooting them down. What with the beast and what with the armour!

You say it is all a plan to "Talibanize" the virginal West by the "new-caught sullen peoples, half devil and half child" (Kipling). You say I am not living up to the Bill of Rights because that's when the majority bites. You say I am an anti-American hoodlum who'd like to strap a bomb and go up in a "blaze of glory". I say I am afraid to die and afraid to kill; I may die but I won't kill. I say, everyone has a right to life like you and yours. And I won't stand still until your tanks and guns fall. You play your national anthems, and I mean all the nations, and while you play your anthems and you hang your flags, East and West, I'm left to think what with the pride...the pride that oozes from the wounds of your victims.

And I ask, what can be believed. That I am to conclude like Goethe that patriotism "ruins history", but what nation is free when her sisters lie confined. And I have been and I have seen the blood on her sleeves. Isn't it time we had a universal expression of solidarity that is kind and true? How about One God? One humanity will follow.

Yellow Skin and Slanted Eyes

This is a very interesting bit of news, with undertones of classic Orientalism, from Haaretz which reports the words of the Israel ambassador to Australia:

The Foreign Ministry on Friday condemned remarks by the Israeli ambassador to Australia in which he told Haaretz that the two countries are white sisters amid "the yellow race" of Asia.

"If the article is accurate, this is a grave and unacceptable remark," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. The ministry said it will not return to business as usual if an internal examination confirms that the ambassador, Naftali Tamir, in fact made the comments attributed to him.

Tamir said that due to what he characterized as the racial similarities between Israel and Australia, the two countries should work together to enhance ties with other Asian countries.

"Israel and Australia are like sisters in Asia," Tamir said in an interview with Haaretz during a visit to Israel this week. "We are in Asia without the characteristics of Asians. We don't have yellow skin and slanted eyes. Asia is basically the yellow race. Australia and Israel are not - we are basically the white race. We are on the western side of Asia and they are on the southeastern side."

Racism in my view is the never-ending fulmination of the most evil. It is that sin coupled with extreme disobedience for which Iblis was/is punished by Allah:

And surely, We created you (your father Adam) and then gave you shape (the noble shape of a human being), then We told the angels, "Prostrate to Adam", and they prostrated, except Iblis (Satan), he refused to be of those who prostrate. (Allah) said: "What prevented you (O Iblis) that you did not prostrate, when I commanded you?" Iblis said: "I am better than him (Adam), You created me from fire, and him You created from clay." S. 7:11-12

Even though Iblis refused to obey his Creator, Allah the Lord of the Worlds, the reason he gave seems to be more convincing (if we're to take the line of racists) than theirs within the human race. I wonder what some of them would say if Allah had made them djinns among men. Whether it's Irshad Manji bad-mouthing and demonizing the Palestinians and clicking photographs with two smiling children from the same camp to show her "humanity", the little ones having no idea what she conceals in real and how she advocates their present state; or George Bush saying that Iraqis are "tolerating the violence" (655000 dead!) in their bloody war for freedom which the so-called liberators said they would get. Never mind the fact that the first place the US military captured in Baghdad was the Oil Ministry. Never mind dead bodies found drifiting in the Tigris everyday. Who are they? What are their names? Did they have families? Were they happy when they last left home? Was there a real need to go out? Did they have aspirations, dreams and a simple imagination? Did they think of the fleeting pleasure on the faces of their grandparents when they were young?

Dig Here!

Robert Fisk writes in a recent article entitled "If You Want the Roots of Terror, Try Here":

So I sat on the carpet in my living room and watched all these heavily armed chaps at Heathrow protecting the British people from annihilation and then on came President George Bush to tell us that we were all fighting "Islamic fascism". There were more thumps in the darkness across Beirut where an awful lot of people are suffering from terror - although I can assure George W that while the pilots of the aircraft dropping bombs across the city in which I have lived for 30 years may or may not be fascists, they are definitely not Islamic.

And there, of course, was the same old problem. To protect the British people - and the American people - from "Islamic terror", we must have lots and lots of heavily armed policemen and soldiers and plainclothes police and endless departments of anti-terrorism, homeland security and other more sordid folk like the American torturers - some of them sadistic women - at Abu Ghraib and Baghram and Guantanamo. Yet the only way to protect ourselves from the real violence which may - and probably will - be visited upon us, is to deal, morally, with courage and with justice, with the tragedy of Lebanon and "Palestine" and Iraq and Afghanistan. And this we will not do.

Of course, it is up to us to draw the conclusions. Methinks he has hit the bull's eye. Let's also look at Juan Cole's previous reaction to this bit of hate speech i.e. the phrase "Islamo-fascism" or "Islamic fascism":

It is hard to see the difference between the bigotry of anti-Semitism as an evil and the bigotry that [Michael] Medved displays toward Islam. It is more offensive than I can say for him to use the word “Islamo-fascist.” Islam is a sacred term to 1.3 billion people in the world. It enshrines their highest ideals. To combine it with the word “fascist” in one phrase is a desecration and a form of hate speech. Are there Muslims who are fascists? Sure. But there is no Islamic fascism, since “Islam” has to do with the highest ideals of the religion. In the same way, there have been lots of Christian fascists, but to speak of Christo-Fascism is just offensive.

The Separation of Lovers

The following is a moving excerpt from the article "Crimes in Iraq: Lest We Forget Thirteen Years of Sanctions" by Felicity Arbuthnot:

Then there was Jassim. In the same ward as Ezra, he lay with his huge eyes and glossy hair, listlessly viewing the barren ward. He had been selling cigarettes on the streets of Basra to support his family until he became ill. “This is Felicity and she writes for a living,” said Dr.Haddad. Jassim was transformed; he glowed and showed me the poems he spent his days writing, when he still had the energy. He collected phrases, too, to incorporate where he thought appropriate. I told him all writers collect words and phrases, they are our tools. He glowed again, delighting that he was being understood and that his instincts were guiding him correctly along his passionate path. “I asked death, ‘What is greater than you?’ Death replied, ‘Separation of lovers is greater than me,’” was one of his collected phrases. He was 13."

One of his poems was called “The Identity Card.” In translation, it reads:

The name is love,
The class is mindless,
The school is suffering,
The governorate is sadness,
The city is sighing,
The street is misery,
The home number is one thousand sighs.

He watched my face for reaction. Lost for words, eventually I said, “Jassim, if you can write like this at thirteen, think what you will do at twenty.” I asked him if I could incorporate his poem in articles from that visit and said I would send them back to him, so he would see it in print. Some weeks later, I did just that and sent cuttings back to him with a friend and imagined him glowing again. He had fought and fought, but lost his battle just before my friend arrived. He never saw his poem in print and became just another statistic in the “collateral damage” of sanctions by the most inhuman regime ever overseen by the United Nations, which arguably condemned the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child - the most widely signed convention in history - to the dust, to the mass of graves of Iraq's children, resulting from the embargo years.