FOLLOW US:

The War Within Islam (22 Mar 2011 NewAgeIslam.Com)
Islamo-Fascism and Islam-Supremacism feeding Islamophobia worldwide: Sultan Shahin tells UNHRC

 

United Nations Human Rights Council, 16th session, Geneva - 28 February 25 March 2011:

Agenda Item 8: General Debate on Follow-up and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action

Oral Statement by Sultan Shahin, Editor, New Age Islam

On behalf of International Club for Peace Research

Madame President,

Even though The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action called for elimination of all kinds of human rights violations almost two decades ago, we find that in some areas the situation is only worsening. Article 15 asks us to work against xenophobia and article 19 calls upon governments to protect all human rights of minorities. But xenophobia, particularly in the form of Islamophobia, is growing in several European countries and partly feeds upon the flagrant violation of the human rights of religious minorities in several Muslim-majority countries.

Petrodollar Islam has injected the poison of Islam-supremacism in Muslim societies worldwide.  Even exemplary moderate countries like Indonesia, Malaysia are now infected with this virus. But the worst case scenario is evolving in the only Muslim nuclear power, Pakistan. Jihadi vigilantes including members of security forces are hunting down and killing all those who oppose their version of Islam. The country is drowning in a sea of violence but civil society, media or elected parliamentarians dare not condemn the wanton killings in the name of Islam. The educated middle class regards these murderers as heroes.  Many in the security apparatus support the Talibani goal of a takeover of Pakistan to be followed by that of other countries in the region and beyond. Their goals maybe insane, but their insanity is not unlike that of the Nazis and Fascists in early 20th century Europe.

Muslims in Pakistan and elsewhere have to understand that the radical Islamists world over make use of emotive issues that would capture the imagination of Muslim masses and make them react irrationally, unthinkingly. In order to capture the minds of the Muslim masses, fanatical Mullahs are raising sensitive issues like those of members of other religious communities insulting Prophet Mohammad or the Holy Book, the Quran. The issue of blasphemy has been raised to such a high pitch, particularly in Pakistan, but also in other countries that the masses of Muslims are just not allowed to see reason. As in the case of Aasia Begum which has raised the present storm in Pakistan, there is not a shred of evidence, except the allegation of a woman with whom she had a personal fight earlier. But not many in Pakistan are demanding any evidence. Not many even want to know what if anything Aasia Bibi is supposed to have said or done. Mullahs are telling them in televised addresses that the Quran asks them not only to kill the blasphemers but also to kill them with relish. They present the picture of an extremely sadistic God and His prophet who relish torturing and killing and ask their followers to do so too. They do that while also referring to Allah as kind and compassionate and the prophet as a mercy to mankind, mind you mankind, the entire humanity, not just the Muslims, completely oblivious of the dire contradiction involved.

The result is a sort of free for all in the society. Any thinking Muslim can be a target. The latest case in point in the case of Pakistan is the Taliban latching on to the issue of blasphemy and making it appear as if the moderate elements among Muslims are either blasphemers themselves or support blasphemy. The result is the complete impunity with which they have been able to assassinate the only Christian minister of the Pakistani government and earlier the powerful governor of the state of Punjab in Pakistan.

These murders have taken place as these people were campaigning against the notorious blasphemy laws of Pakistan under which religious minorities like Hindus and Christians can be sentenced to death without even being told exactly what crime they have committed. This is what had happened recently in the case of Aasia Bibi.  These two government leaders were killed because they were sympathetic to the hapless lady and were trying to get her death sentence reduced to life imprisonment as there is no evidence of any wrongdoing on her part. A mere allegation of blasphemy is enough to condemn members of religious minorities to death in Pakistan. No judge can dare impart real justice, even if he wants to, as he himself can get killed in the court room itself.

To get a little perspective one needs to recall the circumstances in which these laws were instituted. In 1984 the then military ruler General Zia ul-Haq, made it a criminal offence for members of the Ahmadi sect to claim that they were Muslims. Two years later he instituted in the existing laws the death penalty for blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad. These laws have since been widely used to victimize the now some five million strong Ahmadi sect as well as Hindu and Christian religious minorities.

Some statistics may help us understand the enormity of the problem. Almost half of the thousand people charged under this law since 1986 belonged to Ahmadi and Christian communities though together they do not account for more than five per cent of Pakistan’s population. Higher courts are known to have generally dismissed blasphemy charges, recognizing that they were false, arising mostly from disputes over land or family feuds.  But the emotive value of the laws is such that 32 people who were freed by the courts were subsequently killed by Islamist radicals and so were two of the judges who freed them without any one launching much of a protest. Thus once a blasphemy charge is made, this could inevitably prove to be a death sentence. Not only can no government dare to repeal these laws, they cannot even condemn wholeheartedly the murders of even their own leaders committed in its name.

Madame President,

Even the Pakistani Parliament consisting of freely elected members has not been able to condemn either of these assassinations. The valiant civil society that has been campaigning against the blasphemy laws and demanding human rights for religious minorities for decades is now on the back foot. Its prominent members are saying publicly that they are just waiting to be assassinated. They are afraid because there is not a single institution in the country that is either not compromised or scared.  Incitement against them is allowed to continue with complete impunity. All political parties are following a policy of appeasement of Jihadis. Assassinated Punjab Governor Salman Taseer had got removed banners calling for death to members of civil society campaigning against extremism. But after his assassination, banners justifying his own murder and hailing his murderer have sprouted all across the state and there is no one left now to stop that. Large sections of the popular print and electronic media are part of this incitement against the civil society.

Different Islamic sects including those like the Barelwis who were once considered moderate have now come together on an extremist platform. The killer of Governor Salman Taseer belonged to the majority Barelwi sect; 500 clerics of his Jamaat Ahle Sunnat Pakistan (JASP) sect supported him in a joint statement. This statement is probably the height of blasphemy in itself as it paints Islam as a traditional religion of killers and God as a sadistic entity who would encourage killing of innocents merely on the accusation of blasphemy. While issuing a death threat to anyone who attended the funeral prayers of the slain governor, the clerics’ statement said: “The punishment for blasphemy against the Prophet can only be death, as per the Holy Book, the Sunnah, the consensus of Muslim opinion and explanations by the Ulema…this brave person (Qadri, the bodyguard-assassin) has maintained 1, 400 years of Muslim tradition, and has let the heads of 1.5 billion Muslims of the world be held high in pride.” This is extremely offensive to mainstream moderate Muslims as there is no statement in the Holy Quran, the e authoritative sayings of the Prophet or even Islamic jurisprudence prescribing death penalty for the blasphemer. But after the clerics’ intervention in his support, this dastardly killer of the very person he was being paid to safeguard has now become a popular hero and is being lionised even by the educated middle class. The interior minister of Pakistan who is supposed to maintain the rule of law in his country said that he would have personally killed the blasphemer, of course, without waiting for a trial. He continues to hold his post even after making such an offensive statement.

The few liberal voices that continued to be heard even after the assassination of the governor are now falling silent, particularly after the killing of cabinet minister for minority affairs Shahbaz Bhatti, another crusader for moderation. As human rights defender Tahira Abdullah pointed out the vigils human rights bodies organised after the murder of Salman Taseer didn’t attract more than 100 or 200 people in the capital of Pakistan, Islamabad, which has a population of one million highly educated people and they got only about 500 people to come to those organised in Karachi, the largest Pakistani city with a population of 18 million.

Madame President,

Barring a few pockets moderates are losing the war within Islam everywhere. The massive injection of petrodollar-funding to radicals throughout the world since 1974 has virtually changed the nature of the religion. Islam-supremacism is now the rule not only in the Muslim majority countries but also in countries where Muslims live as a minority. Millions of Muslims now look down upon people of other faiths and consider them permanently hell-bound.

According to the Holy Quran and Islamic traditions, we Muslims must believe in all the 124, 000 prophets who have spread the divine message to humanity in different parts of the world and must treat them all as equal to prophet Mohammad in status. We have to treat the followers of all these prophets as People of the Book [Ahl-e-Kitab] with whom close social including marital relations are allowed in Islam. But the concept of Ahl-e-Kitab has now been rendered completely meaningless. Instead Muslim children in religious seminaries [madrasas everywhere] as well as in government-run schools [in the case of Pakistan and some other Muslim countries] are now being taught to look down upon other religious communities.  Many of us already have developed contempt for followers of other religions. The so-called religious scholars tell us that people of other religions may be ahl-e-kitab but they are nevertheless kafir (non-believers, infidels). They never explain how they hold and reconcile these two contradictory positions in one breath. Any community holding others in contempt is apparently not likely to be able to live peacefully in an increasingly globalised multi-cultural world.

Even if we Muslims constitute a simple majority in a country, we want to impose man-made Sharia laws calling them of divine origin which they are not. Now even in countries where Muslims are a minority they want to be governed by the Sharia laws. Apart from India, no other country allows this and no society is prepared to do so. This is leading to avoidable tensions and increasing Islamophobia in some societies. 

Madame President,

When the term Islamofascism was used for the first time, many of us in the civil society considered it a vast exaggeration. But that no longer looks like the case. Islamofascism is even more dangerous because it is sustaining and encouraging a wave of Islamophobia, creating dangers for the religious minorities in several countries of Europe.

This makes it imperative for the world community to urgently work out a strategy to fight this growing menace. It also makes it incumbent on the moderate elements in the Muslim community to take the ideological war within Islam more seriously. Let us remind ourselves of the last sermon Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in which he said:

“All of mankind is from Adam and Eve (Hawwa), an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; a white has no superiority over a black nor does a black have any superiority over a white, EXCEPT BY PIETY AND GOOD DEEDS.  Do not therefore do injustice to yourselves.  Remember one day you will meet Allah and answer for your deeds. So beware: do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.”

As one can see, the Prophet did not say a Muslim has any superiority over a non-Muslim. For him superiority was entirely a matter of “Piety and good deeds”. That is all. Let us remember that and fight the growing power of the pernicious ideology of Islam-supremacism which renders us unfit to live as a worthy component of the present-day globalised multicultural world as a peaceful community that we mainstream Muslims have always been.

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/the-war-within-islam/islamo-fascism-and-islam-supremacism-feeding-islamophobia-worldwide--sultan-shahin-tells-unhrc/d/4318

 


COMMENTS
  • Dear Sultan Shahin, I completely agree with your views that so-called preachers are projecting wrong image of Islam. Earlier, they had influence only on illiterate class of the Muslim society but now a large section of the middle class are following them proudly. That was the worst example when assassin of Governor Salman Taseer was welcomed by Pakistani lawyers in court campus. Salman Taseer never committed blasphemy; he was only against the draconian law which was being used against the minority community in Pakistan.
    In madarsa, our children memorize Quran in Arabic, the language which they don’t understand. Then, how they will come across with the exact and real message of Quran? If we recall the days of General Ziaul Haq, it was the time when foundation of hundred of madarsas had been laid down with Saudi fund. And it will not be wrong to say that it was pioneering era when seed of hatred was sown in Pakistani civil society.
    I believe, the gloom will keep on pervading until the crusaders like Sultan Shahin stand firm against these fanatic Mullahs who can go to any extent to spread their own interpreted Islam'
    By khaleel - 10/24/2012 8:24:10 AM
  • Aeneas, there is far too much appmaseeent going on in Europe. Only this morning, I read this article in 'Die Welt', , stated by Schauble, the Interior Minister. The titlle, translated, reads 'Islam is part of our future'! How stupid is that?
    By Janet - 2/23/2012 8:11:13 AM
  • My Reply to Mr. Bashy Quraishy:

    I genuinely disagree with your view point Mr. Bashy Quraishy. I will mince no words and there shouldn’t remain any ambiguity that I disagree.  And reading your write-up, I guess you should be more interested in knowing whether Mr. X agrees or disagrees because you have proved yourself to not change your mind for decades.

    I am sounding bit impolite and undiplomatic, because I do not want to waste my hopes on someone who think he has the most correct picture of things.

    Your way of telling who you are and doing it repeatedly and then adding to it that it isn’t meant to impress is an over smart way of presenting your mediocre research work with silver wrappings.

    To not embarrass Mr. Sultan Shahin, let me add a disclaimer that I am not his relative nor I write at his instruction. I am a right wing Muslim who is so much right that the rightest ones are left behind by miles.  I am a practicing Muslim, and ritualistic as well. And by the Grace of Almighty, I have avoided falling in trap of many who advocate my concerns but push their Islamist agendas instead.

    All your definitions of what Islam means what way is something that I have no issues with. However I have issues where you suggest to not blame Muslims or Muslims alone. This is a covert way of mishandling my case - a Muslim’s case, by pretending to be someone who is balanced and also who will not let Muslims’ honour belittled.  You know such an insidious work is nothing but sabotage.

    I mean for 40 years you have been advocating that Muslims aren’t at fault! It is like not diagnosing the real problem in a genuine incapable ways or if not, then not acknowledging after identifying it in a deliberate way, either with the belief that such an acknowledgement will harm Muslim interest (political supremacy) or who knows, the real intention could be as bad as to let Muslims sleep for some time more till it will be too late.

    I can point out line by line what you have mentioned and what does it mean, but I think I can defer it for later as there is no urgency. You will Inshallah, struggle here to get your viewpoint across for another 40 years. People like you buy the theory of West – Clash of Civilization and then get Muslims involved into that clash and then very cleverly climb atop some Muslim-Christian-Jewish dialogue forum to say that everybody should listen to everybody projecting yourself on masses as some kind of great visionary who believes in dialogue.

    Sir, if you believe in dialogue and as you said you have some association with Muslims of India and Pakistan however non-religious you are (in your own words) then the dialogue is needed more amongst Muslims than non-Muslims. Because non-Muslim's most lethal question is that shouldn’t you practice what you preach? If you preach universal brotherhood, then why are you still divided into 72 sects? On sidelines, let me tell you, this usage of ‘72’ sect is also an indicative that how much you have overdosed yourself with cheap Islamic literature. I know where it comes from. 

    May be Mr. Sultan Shahin will be more polite in his response if he chooses to give, but I have no such bindings imposed by Islam that I do not tell in a straight language which I am sure you will not find difficult to understand given your command over Urdu/ English mannerism. You chose to give snide remarks, I chose to say straight, in a firm Muslim way, that even as you are not religious, you want a position where you would be seen amongst Muslims as someone who has soft corner for them but at the same time that shouldn’t upset your non-Muslim constituency so you disguise yourself. You un-ritualistic ways support your need to appear un-ritualistic and thus be more appealing to them. You are playing a double game. Perhaps you will be able to fool many Muslims and non-Muslims alike, but not all of them. Also, Allah sees the truth and he will take notice of your lip services. And as for me, this stunt of yours to my eyes is nothing more than that of the king with no clothes.

    Before I end this, I tell you, that Dr. Zakir Naik whom you see as some kind of most correct version, and your God-father, is one of them who has fallen in such a trap in spite of his possible good intentions. People like you provide him his arsenals. He isn't unlike the routine low intensity mullahs who do not listen to people like you. His fellows show him various websites including this one and he reacts on the stage.  However not all Muslims subscribe to his rote 150 solved questions of Islam kind of Islam. Islam encompasses so much more than the 150 odd simple question answer that his session meant for non-Muslims to listen and Muslims to get impressed about their 'Mighty' and 'Scientific' religion is insufficient to cure Muslim's lethargy to practice what they preach. No surprises then that Muslims outnumber non-Muslims in his monologues sessions and then they go back home with a feeling of freshness in their imaan, at the same time non-Muslim feel humiliated without provocation thereby getting more distanced from Islam. Actually what you fear doing, you, I mean your type get it done through Dr. Zakir Nayak without losing your face in front of non-Muslims if nothing else. Imaan wise, you already admit to be hollow. So if you are coming here with Dr. Zakir Nayaks coins in hand, then for your kind information, it values here naught.


    By sadaf - 5/23/2011 4:28:07 PM
  • Dear Sultan Shahin

     

    A close friend ofmine sent the contact of your Blog. Since I work with Islamophobia and humanrights of minorities in the western world, he wanted me to look at yourarticle; The War within Islam (22 Mar 2011, NewAgeIslam.Com) and correct someof your outrageous claims like; Islamo-Fascism and Islam-Supremacism feedingIslamophobia worldwide. It seems that on behalf of International Club for PeaceResearch, you also sent a letter to the United Nations Human Rights Council,16th session, Geneva - 28 February 25 March 2011, where you lambasted Pakistanand its so-called connection with terrorism and extremism as well as warned theUNHRC against Jihadi vigilantes and Islamist radicals originating inPakistan. 

     

    Then you go on toargue that barring a few pockets, moderates are losing the war within Islameverywhere. In the end, you very conveniently link the issue of Sharia and thedemands of few Muslim minorities who wish to live by its dictates in non-Muslimmajority countries.

     

    Interestinglyenough, you have addressed your blog article to Madame President.

     

    Let me inform youthat the High Commissioner for Human Rights is Navi Pillay from South Africaand Mr. Sihasak Phuangketkeow is the President of the Human Rights Council,Fifth Cycle (2010 - 2011). He is from Thailand.

     

    Before I go furtherand refute some of your assertions, let me tell you, who I am. Not to impressyou but to present myself, since we do not know each other but seem to work forthe same cause. If you check my credential, on my web : www.bashy.dk,  you will see that I have worked tirelesslyagainst anti-Semitism and Islamophobia for the last 30 years. I am againstextremism, violence and terrorism of all kind – religious and secular. I amnon-religious person with Muslim background with Indian/Pakistani roots.

     

    Mr. Shahin, in yourblog article, you have raised many issues, which I can sigh under and agreethat these must be tackled but then some of your views and terminology, is veryproblematic, not only for me but ordinary Muslims in the west and people, likeDr. Asgher Ali Engineer and Zakir Naik. I have no doubt if Allama Iqbal and

     

    Allama ShabbirAhmad Usmani  were alive, they would bereally cross with too.

     

    Reading andanalyzing your text, I think that you mean well but know very little about Islamophobiain the West. It is difficult to assert what lies behind your generalizing wayof blasting Islam, , painting ordinary Muslims with one dark brush andespecially being poisonous towards Pakistan. Could it be because you live inIndia or perhaps you have a particular political agenda? Please pardon me if Iam stepping on some soft spot. This is not my intention.

     

    So let me discusswith you the term Islamophobia, which you actually but erroneously blame onIslamo-Fascism and Islam-Supremacism in the world.

     

    One of the topicswhich is increasingly and heatedly discussed in the Western societies is, Islamand the challenge it poses, not to the Christianity or Judaism as divinereligions but to the norms of the European cultures, the Western way of livingand the humanistic values, the Western civilisation is built on. If thesediscussions were taking place in a civilized manner and with the Muslimminorities, then it would be a healthy development, which I would also supportand work for.

     

    However thisdiscourse has found its way, right into the top political leadership, massmedia and down to the population in general. This mindset has produced an atmospherewhere freedom of expression is misused to vent abusive opinions and hatespeech. This has in turn given rise to Islamophobia and cultural racism.

     

    It is manifested innewspapers, on the radio, on television, in church sermons and in literature.Even in entertainment magazines for men and children's books, one can findanti-Islam stories and remarks. The media constantly portrays non-Europeancultures, especially cultures from different Muslim countries as inferior andprimitive.

     

    Islamophobia is nowa reality and not a fiction.

     

    During my manyyears of collecting information on religious dialogue between Islam,Christianity and Judaism, I have tried to make some sense, out of this massivenegative description, which the Western media utilizes in its coverage of mostreligions, especially Islam. I am also struck at the liberal use of concocted terminologyand doctored images; I find my self-facing multifarious problems but fewuseable explanations as to why derogatory words are used, in relation to Islam.

     

    Why Islam is infocus?

     

    My qualified guessis that after the fall of the Soviet Empire, the only remaining ideology orsystem, which stood in the way of the total Western dominance – commercial,political and to some extent religious, is Islam and the Muslim communities.Another factor is the historical rivalry and competition between Islam andChristianity for geographical dominance and getting new followers. Islam hasnow 1.7 billion followers worldwide and is the majority religion in nearly 57countries. It is also said to be the fastest growing faith, in Africa, USA andin Europe.

     

    Most of the oilresources are under the control of the countries, which profess to be Muslim.Furthermore, in order to physically occupy, oil rich Middle East or to startany future confrontation, between Christianity and Islam, demonizing Islam andits followers would be a useful tool in the hands of political forces. They wouldneed to win a majority public support in the West, to carry out ”A clash ofcivilizations”.

     

    And such publicbacking can only come if Islam is portrayed as a terrible enemy. Some observersmay find this rationale, far fetched or at worst, my prejudice against theWest. I wish that my feeling was only an individual case, but the reality isthat I have heard of such scenarios from people, right from Morocco toIndonesia, as well as from many concerned Western citizens. Invasion of Iraq isa classic example of this tactic; demonize and destroy. Now Iran is in thepipeline. Weapons of mass destruction and atom bomb program are being used asan excuse. Interesting enough both countries is rich in oil and gas resources.

     

    Historicaldevelopment of Islamophobia

     

    By the way,anti-Islam hatred in the west is not new. A hostile view of Islam began in the8th century when Muslims expanded into the Iberian Peninsula. Islam as a faithwas rejected as a fundamental religion and seen as a direct challenge toChristianity; Muslims were seen as heretics and their prophet a diabolicalfraud.

     

    By the time of theCrusades, Muslims were viewed as a geopolitical threat and military means wereseen as the only ways to address the danger to the Church.

     

    This massiveanti-Islam propaganda resulted in formation of a mindset, which resulted incolonialism and the conquest of most Muslim lands. When the

     

    French General HenriGouraud, entered Damascus in July 1920, he stood over Saladin's tomb next tothe Grand Mosque, kicked it and said, "Awake, O Saladin, we have returned.My presence here confirms the victory of the Cross over the Crescent."

     

    As we all know orat least should know, that Salahudin Ayubee was the great Kurdish general andking who defeated the Crusaders in the last Crusade and expelled them from theHoly Land. On top of his battlefield brilliance, he was so gracious as topardon the defeated soldiers and let them return to Europe.

     

    Double standardspracticed against Islam

     

    • When anindividual does something that is repugnant to humanity at large, and if hehappens to be a Muslim, then the media describes him by his religion.

     

    By contrast themedia and history does not single out Hitler who massacred Jews as"Christian", or more recently, the Serbs and their atrocities againstthe Bosnians as "Christian ethnic cleansing".

     

    • When in Rwanda anact of genocide took place, although almost all, Rwandan nationals are ofChristian faith, no one was presenting the atrocities as religiously inspiredacts, although even some priests or nuns also participated in the killings.

     

    • While Bin Laden’scall for the destruction of the United States is described, in the name of Allah,one never hears of the US bombing of Iraq in the name of Christ. That is thedifference. Although many neo-cons who were in power - right up to PresidentBush himself - in Washington openly consider it as a kind of a religious battleor duty. We have also heard both President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blairopenly admitting that they did have divine intervention in their decision to goto war in Iraq, meaning that God has Himself sanctioned their actions.

     

    Mr. Shahin, Igather from your name that you have a Muslim background. If it is so, then am Ijustified to deduce that terminology such as Islamo-Fascism andIslam-Supremacism also applies to you. The same goes for the terminology, youuse such as; Islamist and Jihadism. These terms were manufactured by diehardBush loyalists who wanted to malign Islam. You of all people should be able to know better.

     

    Islam by the way,is not a nationality or an ethnicity but a simple religion, practiced by 1.7billion people divided in to 72 sects, 60 countries and hundreds of cultures.To lump all these diverse groups as Muslims is not only stupid but is a goodneo-con argument.

     

    Islam can be usedin many different ways

     

    ·Spiritually, toattain a higher state of mind and to be a better human being

     

    ·Dogmatically, byfollowing the traditions blindly and obediently for present worldly and futureheavenly rewards

     

    ·Progressively, tocreate social harmony in the society and advance human dignity and universalrights

     

    ·Politically, tobring an administrative change in the country to help the disadvantaged and thepoor

     

    ·Economically, tobuilt a non-exploitary financial order

     

    ·Ideologically, tocompete with other faiths for obtaining influence, recruit followers andexercise power

     

    ·Practically, toprovide a framework for life for those who prefer boundaries and order in theirdaily lives

     

    In the end, I wouldsuggest that you focus on denouncing and criticizing a tiny fraction ofextremists, no matter they are Muslims, Christians, Jewish or Hindus.

     

    When it comes, toextremism among Muslims, it is important to, not only distance us from it inthe strongest possible terms but also analyze the reasons, why people commitviolence. When American interference in Muslim lands and oppression of Muslimsin non-Muslim countries will be tackled, I am sure people will have no need totake up extremism. In Pakistan, there was no violence and suicide bombingsuntil USA started attacking Afghanistan and other Muslim countries.  This is a fact. The same goes for Kashmiristruggle. People in Kashmir were never violent until Indian military startedkilling thousands. Just read Amnesty reports, Human Rights Watch and evenaccounts from Arundhati Roy. Maybe you should also write something aboutit. 

     

    Sorry that thisletter became a long one, but some of your ideas are very anti-Islam and Icould not help but reflect on it. In short, the only way forward lies in ourability to listen and act rationally. Acting on our emotions may satisfy ourshort-term need or allow us to get some funding from the state, but it will nothelp the Muslim communities to be respected and accepted.

     

    My experience of 40years in the West tells me that no matter how bleak the future looks; there isalways a ray of hope and a tiny candle of light burning to showus the way.Faith in the best in humanity can move mountains and if we do not loose sightof our goals, the journey will one-day be completed. But it is imperative thatthe progressive forces must wake up, because to those much is given, is muchrequired.

    Kind regards

    Bashy Quraishy

    Secretary General -EMISCO -European Muslim Initiative for Social Cohesion - Strasbourg/Copenhagen

    Chair-AdvisoryCouncil-ENAR - Brussels

    Chair-Jewish MuslimCo-operation Platform - Brussels

    Mobile; 0045 40 1547 71

    Phone; 0045 38 8819 77

    www.bashy.dk


    By Bashy Quraishy - 5/21/2011 10:30:02 PM
  • Sultan Shahin Saheb, thanks for your comment, but I like to make a distinction between a possible troll and a confirmed troll. The latter is here to disrupt all discussions with deliberately inflammatory comments and would ordinarily be kicked out by most websites.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 5/16/2011 2:27:10 PM

Compose Your Comments here:

Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the below text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.