Dialogue with Brad - Part II

Hi Irfan

Thank you for taking the to respond promptly, and to review my questions in due course. I will check the links you provide. I take your point about variations of expression within the same faith group, often they appear to be based upon culture and interpretation of the various holy books.

Yes, this is true within the Christian faith as it is within Islam.

I guess the underlying reason for my email and the issue at the core of my questions is to really understand the 'heart' of Islam.

Men (typically) have performed acts of torture, murder and violence in the name of both the Christian and Islamic faiths. (and also in the name of Atheism as well!)

When I look at the person of Jesus, as the founder of the Christian faith, he never carried a weapon, he submitted to the violence of those who opposed him, and offered words of forgiveness for those who killed him in his dying breath. It would be reasonable to conclude therefore, that those people who took up the sword and killed innocent people in Christ's name were not acting in accord with either his teaching or his life example.

When I consider the Prophet Mohammed, from what I read I understand that he led an army in unprovoked attacks against neighboring peoples, he is reported to have killed prisoners, and approved of assassinations. When I see Islamists performing terror attacks today, if what I have read about Mohammed is true, then they are behaving in a way that is consistent with his example, and I guess his teaching?

I ask these questions not to be provocative, but to understand how as a Muslim you rationalize these things about Islam and the Prophet if indeed they are true.As I said, we have helped resettle Muslim refugees and I employ an Egyptian Muslim as part of our small business. As his employer I don't feel I can ask him these questions.Thank you for your time.

Kind regards,
Brad
19/08/08

****

Hi Irfan

I have read both of the articles in the links provided.

The first one essentially proposes that our religious, cultural and political expression is made up from a mixture of influences, and that you cannot provide a 'one size fits all' label of 'Muslim' or 'Catholic' on any group of people and be sure to have clearly defined them.

Implicit in this approach is the notion that you cannot 'blame' all Muslims for the behaviour of (say) a radical minority.

To some extent this is true. I believe we all have a 'world view' that is shaped by all of these influences. To the extent that someone's world view is shaped by Islam, the teaching of the Prophet and the Hadith, then they would tend to be 'Muslim'. I think what we are seeing with the renewed world wide cultural confidence of Islam, is that increasingly more Muslims, including those in the west, define themselves by their Islamic faith first and foremost, possibly their land of birth secondly, and their adopted home country features a distant third in their sense of personal identity.

So while there are cultural differences in how Muslims express their faith, as is also true with Christians, there appears to be a growing sense of pan-national Islamic identity which is visible in the West today which was not visible even a decade or more ago.

There is also a sense that there is a reasonably militant minority within this grouping. Rather than integrate, this minority prefers to highlight their Islamic difference, either by means of dress code, or instance on prayer rooms at so called secular State schools, or closed sessions at public pools so Muslim women may swim apart from the general population.

Your second article seeks to address the same question using the book as a basis for discussion.
In it you say:

"The irony is that when extremist groups set out to harm the “infidel”, they include in this category ordinary Muslims who refuse to join their pseudo-jihad. It’s little wonder the survey confirms results from other studies of Muslim opinion – that many Muslims may sympathise with the causes cited by terrorist groups (Palestine , Kashmir etc) but they strongly oppose the methods used by these groups."

Most of us observing the situation in Palestine for example would wonder at what 'strongly oppose' looks like for those Muslims in the West who disagree with the methods (presumably suicide bombing etc) used by Islamists in those geographies?

Does 'strongly oppose' manifest itself in street marches by "Moderate Muslims against violence in Palestine?" or similar public condemnations every time a suicide bomber kills innocent civilians in Israel? I saw a TV interview on youtube recently where the head of the Canadian Islamic Council stated on public television that every Israeli citizen over 18 years of age was a legitimate military target. I assume this gentleman gets voted into this position by all the local Canadian Muslim community, which one assumes is predominantly moderate?

While I have no doubt moderate Muslims exist, and hopefully my employee is one, it appears that for the most part, their alignment with the cause (if not the methods) of their fellow (Islamist) Muslims ensures that for the most part their 'strong opposition' is a silent protest.
As a result, like it or not, it is the radical minority of the Muslim community is driving the agenda for all Muslims.

I can understand why moderate Muslims remain silent. To speak up in opposition brands you as an Infidel, and with that a possible death sentence. It is no doubt doubly hard to speak up if you agree with the underlying cause supported by the militant Islamists.

Right now, western governments seem determined to pursue a corse (publicly at least) of promoting the "Islam is a religion of peace" line to their people, in the face of the many obvious contradictions, in the hope that the silent moderate Muslim voice will ultimately prevail, while behind the scenes they are increasing surveillance and improving security .

In your view, do we have cause for optimism? Or, are the very obvious demographic and immigration changes that are taking place in Europe and other parts of the world, going to provide a resurgent Islam with the encouragement it needs to keep pressing its claims upon the (so called) secular liberal west?

I would be interested in your thoughts on this.

Kind regards,
Brad
20/08/08

****

G'day, Brad,

The issues you have raised are interesting, and I'd like to place our discussions on my blog Madhab Irfy. Naturally, I won't identify you by full name or e-mail address.

I'll try and address each of these issues ...

The first one essentially proposes that our religious, cultural and political expression is made up from a mixture of influences, and that you cannot provide a 'one size fits all' label of 'Muslim' or 'Catholic' on any group of people and be sure to have clearly defined them.

Especially when followers of each faith come from a variety of different ethnic and sectarian backgrounds and define their faiths in different ways.

Implicit in this approach is the notion that you cannot 'blame' all Muslims for the behaviour of (say) a radical minority.

To some extent this is true.

To some extent? I'd have thought this would be self-evident. Do we blame all Christians for the foreign policy disasters of the Bush administration? Do we judge the attitudes of all Catholics to child sexual abuse by the appalling record of the Catholic church? Are all Jews as racist as the inhabitants of Jewish settlements like Kiryat Arba in Hebron?

I believe we all have a 'world view' that is shaped by all of these influences. To the extent that someone's world view is shaped by Islam, the teaching of the Prophet and the Hadith, then they would tend to be 'Muslim'.

Their worldview may have only an incidental relationship to scriptures. Different aspects of the same scripture may leave different influences on different cultures.

I think what we are seeing with the renewed world wide cultural confidence of Islam, is that increasingly more Muslims, including those in the west, define themselves by their Islamic faith first and foremost, possibly their land of birth secondly, and their adopted home country features a distant third in their sense of personal identity.

Do you have any empirical evidence to support this view?

So while there are cultural differences in how Muslims express their faith, as is also true with Christians, there appears to be a growing sense of pan-national Islamic identity which is visible in the West today which was not visible even a decade or more ago.

Again, where is your empirical evidence?

There is also a sense that there is a reasonably militant minority within this grouping. Rather than integrate, this minority prefers to highlight their Islamic difference, either by means of dress code, or instance on prayer rooms at so called secular State schools, or closed sessions at public pools so Muslim women may swim apart from the general population.

How is asking for a prayer room to be used for a maximum of once a day (at lunch time) in a state school evidence of militancy or a lack of integration?

And what are they integrating into? What is the dominant culture in New Zealand? Is NZ culture a static or dynamic phenomenon? Is it still developing?

Further, what example have non-Muslim European settlers provided of integration? What evidence is there that non-Muslim settlers in Australia displayed the kind of respect of indigenous Australian cultures as shown by Indonesian fishermen or Afghan cameleers? What example did non-Muslim European settlers show of integration with Maori culture?

I'd have to say that non-Muslim Europeans showed a far greater degree of militancy and lack of integration in our region. Show me Muslim migrants who fought the Maori tribes or who stole Aboriginal children from their families.

Your second article seeks to address the same question using the book as a basis for discussion.
In it you say:

"The irony is that when extremist groups set out to harm the “infidel”, they include in this category ordinary Muslims who refuse to join their pseudo-jihad. It’s little wonder the survey confirms results from other studies of Muslim opinion – that many Muslims may sympathise with the causes cited by terrorist groups (Palestine , Kashmir etc) but they strongly oppose the methods used by these groups."

Most of us observing the situation in Palestine for example would wonder at what 'strongly oppose' looks like for those Muslims in the West who disagree with the methods (presumably suicide bombing etc) used by Islamists in those geographies?

My quote was not limited to Muslims living in Western countries. In fact, you might notice that the article refers to substantial loss of support of Islamist parties as evidenced by election results in places like Pakistan and Indonesia.

What evidence do you have that NZ Muslim migrants as a whole support suicide bombings?
Does 'strongly oppose' manifest itself in street marches by "Moderate Muslims against violence in Palestine?" or similar public condemnations every time a suicide bomber kills innocent civilians in Israel?

Are we to presume that the absence of street marches by Jews after each excess of the Israeli army in the occupied territories or a neighbouring state means that all Jews necessarily support each and every action of the Israeli state? I would regard such an insinuation as anti-Semitic and deeply offensive.

I saw a TV interview on youtube recently where the head of the Canadian Islamic Council stated on public television that every Israeli citizen over 18 years of age was a legitimate military target. I assume this gentleman gets voted into this position by all the local Canadian Muslim community, which one assumes is predominantly moderate?

What evidence do you have that all Canadians of Muslim background or faith or heritage vote in the CIC elections? Can you tell me how CIC elects its executive members?

Can you provide me with the url of the YouTube clip? All I know from your quote is that the "head" of the CIC said that any Israeli aged 19 or over is "a legitimate military target". That in itself doesn't show support for HAMAS or Islamic Jihad or for suicide bombings.

While I have no doubt moderate Muslims exist, and hopefully my employee is one, it appears that for the most part, their alignment with the cause (if not the methods) of their fellow (Islamist) Muslims ensures that for the most part their 'strong opposition' is a silent protest.

I can see why you don't discuss these issues with your employee. Some of the points you have raised, and the manner in which you have raised them, suggest to me a deep underlying mistrust of anyone even remotely linked to Islam. Further, you appear to be applying one set of standards to Muslims and a completely different set to other persons. If you said this kind of stuff to your employee, his lawyers would have a field day.

As a result, like it or not, it is the radical minority of the Muslim community is driving the agenda for all Muslims.

I think you shouldn't believe everything you read in Investigate magazine or on Daniel Pipes' various blog sites. Where is your empirical evidence that ...

a. there is a uniform agenda for all Muslims?

b. there is a uniform radical fringe that has consensus on what this allegedly uniform Muslim agenda should be? and

c. there is such an entity as "the Muslim community", either in New Zealand or elsewhere?
I can understand why moderate Muslims remain silent. To speak up in opposition brands you as an Infidel, and with that a possible death sentence. It is no doubt doubly hard to speak up if you agree with the underlying cause supported by the militant Islamists.

Can you please tell me how you define a "moderate Muslim"? What are the characteristics of a "moderate Muslim"? Can you provide some examples of prominent "moderate Muslims"?

Also, how do you define being "silent"? Would writing articles for newspapers constitute silence? Would issuing press releases constitute being silent? What bare minimum of activity is required before so-called "moderate" Muslims are no longer deemed silent?

Right now, western governments seem determined to pursue a corse (publicly at least) of promoting the "Islam is a religion of peace" line to their people, in the face of the many obvious contradictions, in the hope that the silent moderate Muslim voice will ultimately prevail, while behind the scenes they are increasing surveillance and improving security .

What evidence do you have that Western governments are taking any "corse" of action that involves promoting Islam or indeed any other faith?

In your view, do we have cause for optimism? Or, are the very obvious demographic and immigration changes that are taking place in Europe and other parts of the world, going to provide a resurgent Islam with the encouragement it needs to keep pressing its claims upon the (so called) secular liberal west?

Why do you say "(so called) secular liberal west"? It seems to me you aren't as devoted to liberal democracy as you make out.

The biggest threat to liberal democracy in the West is the rise of religious fanaticism. The Christian Right have hijacked much public discussion about a range of moral and social issues to the extent that US Presidential candidates are openly courting extremists. Thankfully, there are a large number of progressive and sensible voices within Christian communities seeking to counter this stupidity. Amongst them are Australian PM Kevin Rudd and others who argue that Christianity is about social justice.

Similar movements exist within Muslim and Jewish communities. There is Muslim and Jewish extremism. No one can deny this. But the problem extremists face is that their solutions are so simplistic that they can never really resolve anything. Hence we see Islamist parties being voted out of power in places like Indonesia, Malaysia and Pakistan. In Turkey, meanwhile, former Islamists are being forced to transform themselves into mainstream centre-right coalitions and adopt a liberal free market agenda.

I am optimistic by nature, but I fear that hate-mongers are alive and prospering. The onus is on people of faith and no faith to join forces against those who want to promote civilisational war.

Regards
Irfan
20/08/08

Dialogue with Brad - Part I

Recently I started a discussion with a Kiwi reader named Brad (I've changed his name to protect his anonymity). With his permission, I want to share that dialogue with readers uncensored. I'll be doing this in a number of instalments. I'll start with his initial inquiry to AltMuslim.com and my response.

****

Hello

I have read articles by Irfan Yusaf in the NZ Herald and I wonder if he would be able to answer the 10 questions about Islam (or perhaps just the first 9) posed by the writer here.

Our extended family has assisted with the resettlement of Muslim (and other) refugees in New Zealand, we have eaten together and prayed together, however I\'m aware that inter-marriage and at times developing friendships outside of the Islamic community is actively discouraged. I sense this will lead to a ghetto type isolation for Muslims in our communities which will lead to the possibility of fear and resentment from both \'sides\'. How do you think both the Islamic community and host communities can resolve this?

****

Dear Brad,

Thank you for your e-mail.

Let me start by saying that all of us have multiple layers of identity. Religious affiliation is just one layer.

If you were to ask different Muslims why they regarded themselves as Muslim, you would receive many different answers. Some would say it was because they have Muslim parents. Others would say it was because they believed in Islam. Yet many of them would probably believe in different things, and their beliefs may even conflict.

We all need to stop pretending Muslims are some kind of uniform monolith. We also need to stop pretending that Muslims are a recent addition to Europe and the West.


I know of Muslim families who have lived in New Zealand since the 1920's. I know of Australian Muslims whose families have lived in Australia since the 1850's. Muslims have lived in Bosnia since the 12th century, in Europe's heartland. Yet in many parts of Indonesia, Islam only became the dominant faith 2 or 3 centuries ago.


If you took an Indonesian Muslim to Turkey, he probably wouldn't recognise Turkish Islam as Islam.


If I were to say that Catholics all nail themselves to crosses at Easter time, you would probably think I was nuts. Yet this is what many Catholics do in the Philippines. Does this mean all Catholics do this?


If we studied each other's faiths seriously, we would realise we have more in common than we think. Although I believe Judaism and Islam have more in common that Islam and Christianity. That might explain why the reasons cited by many allegedly conservative Christians to object to a Muslim presence in the West are almost identical to the objections their ancestors had to a Jewish presence.


I'll have to read the questions you have linked to carefully and then respond. However, you might some answers to your questions here and here.

Regards
Irfan

COMMENT: Tibetan terrorists? Don't hold your breath ...

On pp2-3 of the Weekend Financial Review on August 9-10 2008, there was a story by Andrew Burrell reporting from Beijing headlined "Beijing: the greatest security ever!". Here is an excerpt ...

Look fown from a high-rise building and Beijing's eerily quiet streets are being patrolled by more than 100,000 bristling police and soldiers prepared for terrorists and human rights protestors.

So there is a distinction between the two groups - terrorists and human rights protestors. Is the distinction based on the actions of the two groups? Or on their cause? Or on their ethno-religious background?

The article continues describing the tight security in Beijing.

With such a suffocating security presence, moving around the Olympic city can be a nightmare.

But that still doesn't answer the question - how do we distinguish between human rights protestors and terrorists? Perhaps an example might explain ...

Yet a US group that monitors militant organisations released a new video made by the Turkistan Islamic Party, which is seeking to create an independent state in China's heavily Muslim Xinjiang province. In it a masked, turbaned speaker warned Muslims to keep children away from the Games "or any place Chinese are".

A US group? Which US group? Why not name the group? Why can't we know whether this is a proper monitoring group or just another sectarian or evangelical front? And what is the difference between wishing to establish a separate state in Xinjiang and desiring the same in, say, Tibet?

As always, you can get away with assuming that all terrorists are Muslim and vice versa. This kind of imbecilic simplistic thinking manages to seep into even the reporting of sensible papers like the Fin Review. The people of Xinjiang might have their villages bulldozed, their women raped and their children murdered by the Chinese military machine. But when these people campaign for independence, it is always presumed they are terrorists. Why? It isn't hard to guess.

More thoughts on this media hypocrisy can be found here.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

COMMENT/VIDEO: On faith and dishonesty ...

I watched this video on the Dutch-Somali neo-Conservative activist Ayaan Hirsi Magaan/Ali. The video provides a thought-provoking discussion on the background to her memoir Infidel. The main issue of the review is whether Hirsi Magaan/Ali should be the subject of negative judgments because she was not truthful to Dutch immigration authorities.

I can't help but wonder whether Hirsi Magaan/Ali would agree with the reviewer's assessment if he were talking about another asylum seeker. Hirsi Magaan/Ali's term in the Dutch Parliament was characterised by what could only be described as extreme disdain for asylum seekers. She supported the expulsion of a Bosnian asylum seeker who had been less than truthful in her application.

But there's more to this story than meets the eye. There are many more incredible stories of Muslim women who faced horrific cultural experiences and who overcame amazing odds to secure freedom. However, these women chose not to attack their religious beliefs or the religious beliefs of others. However, their books haven't been promoted so heavily by rightwing thinktanks with religious scores to settle.

Hirsi Magaan/Ali's lies about her migration status may be forgiveable. But when she lies about the beliefs of 1.3 billion Muslims, pretending that her experience is necessarily reflective of the experiences of others, and when she uses those lies to incite hatred against ordinary people with some link to Islam, her lies become unforgiveable.

People should ask themselves this simple question: If Hirsi Ali/Magaan had chosen to expose the evils of the cultural practices she grew up in WITHOUT inciting virulent hatred against other Muslims, would she have been taken so seriously?

We don't see far-Right thinktanks promoting Shirin Ebadi or Irene Khan or Mukhtar Mai. We don't even see them promoting Waris Dirie, a Somali woman with a similar story. I certainly won't be holding my breath waiting for the Centre for Independent Studies inviting Shirin Ebadi or Waris Dirie to speak about Islam or the enlightenment or women's rights.

Why is this so? Think about it.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT: Jewish union leader negotiates religious holiday for American Muslim workers ...

The New York Times reports that a poultry plant in the American state of Tennessee has decided to award Muslim workers a paid holiday for its 1,200-strong workforce, a large proportion of whom are of Somali Muslim background.

Unfortunately, the move has been met with prejudice by some ...

“You are a union that is proud of achieving a Muslim holiday and prayer room?” one person wrote the union. “A union in the U.S.A., a country based on Christianity. You call yourselves Americans? Have you forgotten 9/11?”

Another wrote: “You had no right to drop Labor Day. Muslim employees must integrate Labor Day into THEIR lives if they are going to live in America.”

The move to allow Muslim workers to take Eid as a holiday instead of Labor Day was negotiated by Stuart Applebaum, who also serves as President of the Jewish Labor Committee. It only applies in one of Tyson's many hundreds of factories.

The usual array of far-Right fruitloops, including chronic Muslim-hater Robert Spencer, have condemned the move. Read this paragraph and wonder ...

The problem is that the accommodation of Islamic holidays and practices abets, however unwittingly, an avoudly supremacist agenda that is directed toward supplanting American laws and mores and imposing Islamic law here.

Using this logic, any legal accommodation to American Muslims must be opposed. Next, Spencer will be calling upon planning authorities not to grant Muslim groups with permits to build mosques. But more than that, Spencer is actually accusing the President of the Jewish Labor Committee of being a conduit for the imposition of Islamic law in America. Applebaum should get legal advice about commencing defamation proceedings against Spencer.

You can read echoes of Spencer's imbecilic rants in the comments section to this article. You can read more such comments here. Adolf Hitler will be smiling in his grave.

One so-called Christian questions whether Tyson's Foods can still call itself an American country. Don Swarthout , President of Christians Reviving America's Values (Crave), provided this hysterical response ...

What makes this particularly upsetting is that Tyson is replacing a secular holiday with an Islamic Religious Holiday. If we wanted to replace a secular holiday with a Christian holiday the company or the courts would not allow us to do such a thing.

That may be true, except that Christmas day is already a public holiday! The last time I checked, American Jews weren't lining up to celebrate Christmas day.

After all this hysteria, the company issued this press release. The press release sets out the background behind the decision ...

This change came about as a result of union demands brought to the negotiating table, and was agreed upon by Tyson in an effort to reach a contractual agreement with the union. The contract that calls for this change was unanimously recommended by the 12-person union bargaining committee, which included three Somali employees. The contract was then overwhelmingly agreed to by 80 percent of the rank and file membership of the union at the Shelbyville plant.

Imagine that. Four out of five union members supported this proposal. Democracy in action. But don't expect cyber-fascists like Spencer and Schlussel to have any respect for democracy.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

EVENT: Islamic Awareness Week across the Tasman ...

While the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has just about completed yet another round of expensive litigation, across the Tasman New Zealand's peak Muslim body is spending its money on organising a nationwide Islamic Awareness Week. The theme of the IAW 2008 is "Strong Families - Better Society", hardly the sort of theme which far-Right allegedly conservative fruitloops (such as the nutters that produce Investigate (or should that be Investi-hate?) magazine) could complain about.

Among the events being held are a women's fashion parade and a number of dinners for students and staff hosted by various Muslim Students Associations (MSA's). A number of prominent New Zealanders will also be awarded for their contributions to relations between Muslims and the broader community. For some reason, nobody thought of providing an award to someone in the NZ media.

And in case you wondered who were the first recorded Muslims in New Zealand, read this ...

The first identifiable Muslims resident in New Zealand are 15 Chinese gold diggers working in the South Island, recorded in the government census of April 1874. Little is known of them and it is assumed they either moved on to Australia or returned to China.

The Muslim Heritage part of the website includes biographies of prominent Muslims, among them Mazhar Krasniqi, a Kiwi of Albanian origin who (if I am not mistaken) has a very prominent son-in-law.

Well done, dear Kiwistanis!

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

VIDEO: Tribute to an Indian sufi master

The following video is a tribute to the great Arab scholar Muin ad-Din Chishti, who is believed to have travelled from Baghdad to India after seeing the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) in a dream. The Prophet is said to have instructed Shaykh Muin ad-Din to take the message of Islam to a place in the wilderness called Ajmer. The Shaykh established a centre there, where he focussed on alleviating the near-chronic poverty of that area. He and his disciples set up a kitchen where vegetarian food was served (out of respect for Hindu sensitivities).

Because of his devotion to the poor, the Shaykh was given the title of Gharib Nawaz (literally "succour to the poor"). His grave at Ajmer has become a place of pilgrimage for people of all faiths. Gharib Nawaz is loved by Indians of all faiths, and his Urs (death anniversary) is attended by millions.

The music in this clip was produced by Allah Rakha Rahman, perhaps India's greates living composer. The music is taken from the soundtrack of the movie Jodha Akbar which deals with the marriage of the Mughal King Akbar to the Rajput Princess Jodha.



Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

HUMOUR: Boycott ...

As part of the belated response to the publication of a dozen cartoons, I now call upon all Muslims to boycott Danish beer and pork products!




Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT/EVENT: Hirsi Magaan on enlightenment ...

The (to-the-right-of-) Centre for Independent Studies is holding its big ideas forum tomorrow night at the Sydney Opera House. I'm going, as is a mate of mine with left-of-centre leanings. Hopefully, he'll be buying me some Turkish pide afterwards since I managed to secure him a ticket!

The topic of this forum is Protecting the Legacy of Freedom: The Ideas of The Enlightenment in the 21st Century. Among the last minute entries is pseudo-refugee queue-jumper, self-confessed migration fraudster and disgraced former Dutch far-Right MP Ayaan Hirsi Magaan (or, as she falsely wrote on her asylum application, Ayaan Hirsi Ali).

Ms Magaan's first book, The Caged Virgin, consists largely of speeches and articles written during her term as a Dutch MP. It's hard to tell how much of this is her own work. We all know that MP's often don't write their own speeches or even articles, but rather delegate this task to their staff. It certainly would be an interesting issue for a literary sleuth like Malcolm Knox or Hanifa Deen to investigate.

I interviewed Magaan during her last visit to Australia as a guest of the Sydney Writers' Festival. She has become a darling of the far-Right, lavished with praise by bloggers who would otherwise have despised her as a dangerous "Islamist". Cultural warriors have also treated her as the final word on the experiences, cultures and religious views of 1.3 billion people who regard themselves in some way as Muslim.

I'd be interested to see how this woman, whose presence in Europe is based on defrauding Dutch migration law, will talk about enlightenment. It will be interesting to know whether she still believes that faith schools should be closed down altogether and that those wishing to teach intelligent design be imprisoned.

Among other speakers at the forum are former speechwriter for former PM Gough Whitlam and now Chief Justice of the NSW Supreme Court Jim Spigelman and rightwing commentator apologist for the Iraq debacle Arthur Herman.

Also appearing are a Christchurch-based academic in music and an English sociologist who, like so many other cultural warriors, castigated the Archbishop of Canterbury in a manner which showed he clearly hadn't bothered to read Rowan Williams' speech first.

I doubt all the speakers will agree on exactly what the enlightenment was, is and should be. I'd love to see Arthur Herman defend the Iraq war before an Australian audience. Even more humorous will be seeing him call for the United States to become Israel's proxy by invading Iran. I guess his kids won't be risking their lives in any such military adventures.

If I am not mistaken, Justice Spigelman has a relative who has served on the front line in the Middle East. His Honour's views certainly don't reflect the kind of intellectual siege mentality so many on the alegedly conservative side are affected by. Indeed His Honour was one of the first Australian judges to publicly criticise the military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious