OPINION: Terror Recuitment by Remote Control ...

One of my all-time favourite movies is The Naked Gun. For those who can’t recall the plot, an LA businessman (played by the late Ricardo Montalban of Fantasy Island fame) is hired by terrorists determined to have Queen Elizabeth II assassinated. His solution? A special key ring with a button that, when pressed, will turn anyone into an unwilling assassin.

And in case you thought this only happens in hilariously bad comedies, now al-Qaeda is using the same strategy in its jihad against anyone who isn’t them. Al-Qaeda’s slaughter of tens of thousands of Muslims in Somalia, Iraq, Iran and Pakistan obviously hasn’t convinced Muslims to join its cause. Hence it has had to resort to
remote control non-Muslim wingnuts in the United States to help things along.

One of them is a goofy pastor from Florida named Terry Jones who wanted to gather his flock to burn copies of the Quran on the anniversary of September 11. Jones thought this crazy act would somehow send a message to crazy suicide bombers.

President Obama agreed. Except that he thought the event would be a “recruitment
bonanza for al-Qaeda” and similar groups looking for even more people crazy enough to “blow themselves up” in American, European, Middle Eastern, Asian etc cities. As if the Americans bombing Middle Eastern and Asian cities isn’t enough incentive.

Of course, Muslims who understand their faith will understand that no amount of burning Qurans will have any effect on the book’s appeal to its believers. They believe the promise contained in the Quran’s text that God will preserve and protect the Quran.

Muslims who understand their faith will know this. But here’s the bad news. There are lots of Muslims who don’t understand their faith very well at all. There are Muslims whose dictators, kings, emirs and presidents-for-life hold special key rings. At the press of a button, thousands are transformed into nutty crowds that behave like attendees at a KKK rally.

We all saw how much damage these crazies did in response to the Danish cartoons. And - in a touch of irony - the Danish cartoonist who drew the most offensive one - depicting the Prophet wearing a bomb for a turban - has also come out and condemned the Florida pastor.

In fact, it’s hard to find anyone who won’t condemn the nutty pastor. Sarah Palin has
refudiated him, as has Angela Merkel of Germany and David Cameron of Britain. One Indian politician has even asked media not to print or broadcast images of the event.

Perhaps the wisest words came from a French government spokesman who declared the event would be a grave insult to the 9/11 victims and their families.

For one victim, this especially rings true. On the morning of September 11 2001, Baraheen Ashrafi joined her husband Mohammad Chowdhury for morning prayers and recitation of the Quran. He then left for his work as a waiter at the Windows of the World restaurant, on the top floors of Tower One. Reciting the Quran was one of their last acts together.

Pastors burning Qurans and wingnuts protesting outside proposed mosques won’t reduce Baraheen’s pain. Still, those who share the same types of hatred as terrorists would hardly care for the sentiments of victims.

First published in the Crescent Times Issue 23, September 2010.

Words © 2010 Irfan Yusuf

Bookmark this on Delicious

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: Here come the moderates ...

The Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council, a thinktank I've never known to have ever published anything even mildly critical of any decision or action of any Israeli government, has invited a "terrorism researcher" to inform it that there are some "moderate" Muslims emerging in a place called "the Islamic world".

As we all know, terrorism is a purely Muslim phenomenon. The Columbian group FARC are just an example of how far and wide nasty Muslim terrorists have spread. And we all know that FARC wants to establish an Islamic state in Columbia.

Further, one can only understand Muslims through the prism of national security. Hence AIJAC has decided that instead of inviting a Muslim social scientist or even someone with a proper understanding of Muslim societies (e.g. Professor Ira Lapidus), they'll get some "terrorism researcher" promoted by a neo-Conservative speakers bureau.

The Australian Jewish News reports on July 8 2008 that Muslim "moderates" are "making their voices heard". As if their voices were never heard before. Unlike the universe (which only began with a big bang), the "Islamic world" has just been a constant loud bang lasting fourteen centuries until recently.

And who are these recently-emerged "moderates"? Apparently, there is one Egyptian chap named Sa'ad Ed-Din Ibrahim. His moderate credentials arise from him declaring that he was ...

... seen on Egyptian TV stating that Israel had become a technology powerhouse with a strong economy because it was a democracy.

Amazing. So what you need to do to be declared "moderate" is declare that Israel's IT industry and economy has been caused not by it being the largest recipient of US foreign aid or to the fact that Israeli Jews live longer and lower infant mortality rates to Israeli Arabs. Rather, you attribute it purely to the idea that Israel is a democracy.

Now there's no doubt that Israel is a few trillion times more democratic than most of its Arab neighbours. But does that mean democracy is unknown among Muslim-majority states. Is Indonesia a theocratic regime? Is Bosnia Herzegovina on the verge of returning to absolute monarchy? Is the Ottoman Caliphate about to be restored in Turkey?

Then there is Ali Ahmed Said, described as "a voice in Syrian affairs". What the ...? What kind of affairs is he involved in? Does Mr Said sleep with lots of Syrian women? Does he run an antique store in Aleppo?

Said is regarded as a moderate because he ...

... has publicly targeted radical interpretations of Islam and also campaigned against corruption.

So if you don't campaign against corruption, you must be an extremist. I guess on that basis, some of these Arab countries lining up to establish embassies in Tel Aviv are led by some rather nasty people.

Then there is the poster girl for every Muslim-phobe, far-right cultural warrior and wacko, Dr Wafa Sultan. The AJN report describes Sultan as ...

... a Sunni Muslim living in California ...

Someone should tell Dr Sultan that she is a Sunni. I'm sure it will be news to her. Just about every credible report about Dr Sultan says that she grew up in a Syrian Alawi/Nusayri family. Anyway, what makes Dr Sultan so moderate? Apparently, it is because ...

... she has challenged her own religion in numerous forums ...

Actually, she doesn't regard Islam as her religion. She has openly declared that she no longer regards herself as a Muslim. That's her choice, of course. Yet for some reason, AIJAC and/or AJN persist in describing Sultan as a Muslim.

That's a bit like me describing Maryam Jameelah (Margaret Marcus) as a Jew. The fact that she doesn't believe in Judaism and openly describes herself as an ex-Jew doesn't matter. The fact that she adopted the Islamic theocratic religion and politics of the Jama'at-i-Islami is irrelevant. The fact that she has written that Judaism treats God as "a real estate agent for the Jewish people" and has called for the destruction of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state is inconsequential.

Even more absurd are claims by this "terrorism researcher" that in

... the Islamic diaspora ... there is a secularist influence but it ­hasn’t touched the core.

Where did that remark come from? Do Muslims living in countries like Australia, New Zealand and Canada regard themselves as a "diaspora"? Do they regard their real home (spiritual or otherwise) as somewhere else? And in what sense has secularism not touched the core of these communities? Do they all refuse to vote? Do they boycott secular political parties? Do they refuse to pay taxes? Do they live in Amish-style settlements and drive horse-drawn carts?

I almost fell of my chair when I read this "researcher" described as describing "Sufism" (by which I resume he means what Muslims refer to as zuhd or tasawwuf or ihsan or even irfan) as

... a form of Islamic mysticism that is seen as a moderate stream of Islam.

A form of Islamic mysticism? How many other forms are there? Has a type of Muslim kabbalist emerged? Have Jesuit Muslims set up their first monastery in Lakemba?

If this is the best AIJAC can do to understand Muslims, Allah/G-d help them.

UPDATE I: One anonymous reader has pointed out that the AIJAC speaker, Nir Boms, also spoke at the Limmud Oz Festival of Jewish Learning & Culture. The official Limmod Oz website gives a preview of Boms' lecture. I'm not sure whether Boms wrote this preview. That preview is as follows:

A war of civilizations? A battle of faiths? A peaceful Jihad? The dawn of the new millennium has brought the words “terrorism” and “Islamic Radicalism” much closer to our lives. New York, London, Madrid, Bali and Melbourne have ‘tasted’ these new realities and have been forced to provide some answers. Using video presentations, the session will provide an introduction to some surprising and uncommon voices. It will further explore the questions presented by this new era with a particular focus on Islamic radicalism and on some of the unique and brave voices within Islam that seek to counter it.

According to the anonymous reader, Boms' presentation was limited to the Midle East. Yet the preview reproduced above clearly refers to "unique and brave voices within Islam", not "within the Middle East". Further, I'm really not sure why these voices are described as unique. The implication is clear: that "terrorism" and "Islamic Radicalism" are the norm and everything else is "unique and brave".

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT: Hirsi Magaan and the loopy bloggers ...

I have a google alert on the name "Ayaan Hirsi Ali". I'm interested to find out what kind of publicity can be gained by abandoning Islam and adopting far-Right pseudo-liberal politics. Each day, I receive at least 3 places where Hirsi Magaan (her real name) is referred to. Mostly these mentions are in far-Right blogs where she is promoted as some poor suffering brave woman forced to seek sanctuary and faced with the burden of counting so much cash from her best-selling autobiography.

Yep, it's a tough job but someone has to do it.

One such blog mention sent to me today is at this blog. I almost vomited when I read the references to bravery. Seriously, what planet are these loopy bloggers living on? I couldn't help but leave this response ...

There is nothing brave about people like Ibn Warraq and Ayaan Hirsi Magaan (Hirsi Ali is the false name she used to defraud Dutch immigration authorities).

The fact is that Ms Hirsi Magaan travels freely around the world, with little or no threat from anyone.

I myself interviewed Ms Hirsi Magaan when she was in Sydney for the Sydney Writers' Festival. I sat within 30 cm of her, and no guards were present.

However, ultra-Right cultural warriors determined to generate war with anyone not as culturally chauvinistic as them will always paint the Hirsi Magaans as brave.

There are Muslims working within Muslim communities seeking genuine reform.

They risk their lives trying to work within the communities. They don't take the easy (and lucrative) option of just giving up on their faith and communities and seeking (often by dishonest means) "refuge" in Western countries.

I myself have received death threats because of stands I have taken. What do I do? Do I go crying to Daniel Pipes begging him to write a column about my bravery? Do I seek refuge in the EU under a false name? Or do I quietly struggle on?

Real struggle is carried on without behaving like a drama queen in a neo-Conservative pantomine. But I doubt readers of this and other far-Right blogs will appreciate that.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

CRIKEY: Yes, Jesus was indeed a "sand nigger" ...

In 1998, I visited Brazil. In the world’s largest Catholic country, I saw icons of Jesus and Mary everywhere. There was one not-so-subtle difference between these and the icons I see in Australia. For millions of Brazilian Catholics, the Blessed Virgin with child both had black skin.

Of course, we all know that Jesus wasn’t a negroHe was, after all, born in a place called Beyt Lahm, an Arabic/Aramaic phrase meaning literally "House of Lamb Meat" or 'House of Bread". He spoke fluent Aramaic. His mother wore (at the very least) a traditional head scarf worn today by many orthodox Jewish and Muslim women.

A delegation from Jesus’ town is currently visiting Australia. All delegation members are Christians. All are accused of being terrorists. All no doubt look like Middle Easterners. All look like Arabs. Usama bin Ladin is a Middle Easterner. The Mayor of Bethlehem is a Middle Easterner. Jesus was a Middle Easterner. No doubt Jesus probably bore some resemblance to other Middle Easterners.

Yet for some reason, American-owned tabloids in Sydney and Melbourne are behaving in a very Middle Eastern fashion over one entry to an art prize. One that shows Jesus' mum in traditional arab garb (see right). Even the PM joined the fray, telling journalists ...

The choice of such artwork is gratuitously offensive to the religious beliefs of many Australians.

Yes, it is offensive if you believe Jesus looked something like Merv Hughes and Mary looked like Jennifer Hawkins. Yet the fact is that Mary wore something on her head (and, given her noble ancestry and her cultural heritage, quite likely something over her face).

What all this shows is how far the far-Right evangelical view of Christianity has strayed from the reality of Jesus. Allegedly conservative mono-cultural fruitloops keep referring to Australia’s Christian heritage. Yet how would they react if the real Jesus returned and arrived in Australia?

Well, for a start, they’d probably think he was a terrorist. He wouldn’t be speaking English, and would suddenly appear from the wilderness looking rather dishevelled.

Jesus’ photo would be splashed across our American-owned metropolitan tabloids. Piersed Akumen and his colleagues would be waxing unlyrical about this latest foreign threat. Gerard Henderson would attack the "civil rights lobby" for defending Jesus. Janet Albrechtsen would castigate lawyers and judges for defending a man who wants to establish the Kingdom of God (read sharia law) in Australia. The Australian Federal Police wouldn’t understand a word Jesus was saying but would charge him anyway. Some magistrate would grant Jesus bail, and the good Catholic Kevin Andrews would cancel Jesus’ visa and send him back to … um … er … God The Father?

As William Dalrymple keeps reminding us, Christianity (like Judaism and Islam) is a Middle Eastern religion. And Jesus was a Middle Easterner. Just accept it.

First published in the Crikey daily alert on Thursday 30 August 2007.

Words © 2007 Irfan Yusuf