Hanging Dirty Linen on the Line - Part 1

“Irfan, why are you hanging our dirty linen on their line!”

I have lost count of how many times I have heard this statement being made. Especially now, with Muslims really feeling the pressure over terrorism. It seems everyone is ready to blame Muslims for the acts of a few lunatics. And many Muslims see their institutions as a barrier between themselves and the rest of the broader Australian community.

For some Muslims, public criticism of Muslim community bodies is akin to treachery. It is indicative of a siege mentality in which the Muslim “us” is forever at risk of being overrun by the broader Australian “them”. It perhaps presumes that non-Muslim Australians have sinister or even hostile intentions toward Muslims.

What it does not, however, seek to do is recognise why “they” may not be all that favourably inclined toward “us”. Further, it locks “us” into a marginalised fringe. It creates suspicion and paranoia which drives Muslims to search for conspiracies and other unrealistic explanations.

Already, such conspiracy theories are being rattled off about my not-so-good self. I have had a fairly good run so far in the press. At least four of my articles have been published in the Daily Telegraph, two in the Financial Review, two in the Canberra Times and one in the Sydney Morning Herald.

I have been interviewed twice on Channel 9’s Today Show and once on the prestigious ABC current affairs program Lateline. I have also been interviewed by 5 talkback hosts in Sydney and Canberra.

For some, this is evidence that I am a Freemason or a Zionist agent. After all, a Muslim Australian is not allowed to be published in mainstream media, nor is s/he allowed to be given a fair go by the allegedly Jewish-controlled media. After all, being a lawyer and former Liberal candidate for a safe Labor seat is bad enough.

But my worst crime is that I have dared to speak about internal Muslim community politics. I apparently have a personal agenda and am abusing my role as spokesperson to pursue personal vendettas.

Let’s examine some of the underlying assumptions. Firstly, there is the notion of “internal Muslim community matters”, of “our dirty linen”. There are strong suggestions that the London bombing was the work of locally recruited and trained British Muslim youths. These were not necessarily youths with a history of radical activity (although some did attend training camps in Afghanistan).

We are all familiar with the scenario. Young Muslim kids disillusioned with their community and national leadership. Youth ignored by community organisations and with little outlet for their talents. Their aspirations and ideals are constantly challenged by hypocrisy they see all around them.

These young kids are then recruited by radical organisations. They feel empowered by these fringe groups who encourage them to speak out. And their rhetoric becomes more hostile and extreme.

Many of these young people suffer from all kinds of illnesses, especially untreated depression. It is well known that depressed youngsters are often suicidal. Combine depression and suicidal ideation with radical rhetoric and a bit of military training.

Why do these young people get sucked in by extremist fringe groups? Where are these groups coming from? What is their ideology? Who funds them? How did they end up active and resourced in countries like Australia?

And if a bomb does go off in Sydney or Melbourne, where will law enforcement officials be looking to first? Where will media focus be? Where will the trails lead?

Yes, we know that Muslims are not the only terrorists. After all, we all saw recently images of Israeli Muslims mourning their dead killed by a Jewish terrorist who boarded a bus and opened fire. We also know that this terrorist was part of a wider movement opposed to the dismantlement of heavily fortified Jewish extremist camps in Gaza. We also know that some Australian Jews are supporting and bankrolling this extremist fringe.

But how many Australians would blame Jewish extremists and their Australian backers for a terrorist act? How many associate Jewish chauvinism with suicide bombings? How many Jewish Australians openly espouse the views of Israel’s Jewish Ayatollahs? How many Australian rabbis do we see describing the Jewish terrorist as “a great man”?

Jewish institutions are well-oiled and powerful. And this is not related to any conspiracy or infiltration. It is just plain hard work and a willingness to understand the sources of anti-Jewish prejudice. When Jewish community spokesmen speak, it is in a language and using terms mainstream Australia understands and related to.

What language do Muslim spokespeople speak in? Why is it that we are always embarrassed by what our people say? Why is it that a radical youth like Wasim Dureihi sounds more credible than Sheik Hilali or the President of AFIC or the chairmen of any one of three competing Islamic “pizza” councils in NSW?

Some two weeks ago, the Islamic Council of NSW was approached with a proposal for a media committee to be delegated the role of talking to the press. A list of names was presented. Little was done until the writer decided to publish a few home truths about the dominance of one family on ICNSW affairs.

Now a meeting has been organised. And when will it be? On Thursday 11 August 2005. At what time? 10am.

As a colleague of mine said: “Mate, it looks like only people with workers comp claims will attend!”

To be continued …

© Irfan Yusuf 2005

Servants of al-Qaida

I was sitting in a TV studio in Ultimo when a brainwave hit me. I was all painted and covered in make-up, my hair severely gelled, my suit feeling hot and uncomfortable, cameras staring at me. Maxine was looking and talking a million dollars, I didn’t feel like I was contributing 2 cents and I was lost for words (not because of Maxine but because I was nervous!).

Then it hit me. Out of nowhere. I was talking about conservative rhetoric needing to get beyond Islam-bashing. And then I saw the image in my mind.

It was Usama. Usama bin Ladin sitting in his cave, watching me on the TV. Usama reading Aussie newspapers and planning his next attack. Usama generating a desirable result for al-Qaida. Usama trying to think of ways to push the reluctant and sceptical Muslim mainstream in his general direction.

Usama’s Jihadi Salafite vision of Islam is regarded as the stuff fruitcakes and breakfast cereals (as in fruitloops) are made of in the Muslim world. The overwhelming majority of Muslims regard his rejectionist thinking as worthy of people with heads plonked firmly in the sand. Usama is the archetypal Muslim ostrich, ready to be slaughtered and eaten. Except that his ideological flesh is simply not halal!

Young disillusioned Muslim kids (such as the Dureihi brothers of the Sydney branch of Hizbut Tahrir) may find this rhetoric attractive. They might even get a few hundred kids to turn upto the Auburn Town Hall to listen in. But they are on the fringe, almost universally ridiculed when not pitied.

But the real allies of Usama are not the Hizbos (as they are known in the broader Aussie Mossie community). The real allies of Usama are allegedly conservative columnists and commentators who demonise Islam and anything or anyone even remotely associated with it.

When you want to fight the enemy, you can use a scud missile. This large and clumsy creature usually misses its target. Sadly, unintended others are often hurt. In the war against terrorism, neo-Con columnists are like ideological scud missiles. They miss the target but end up hurting others unnecessarily if not unintentionally.

One of my closest friends never met her Muslim father. She works behind a bar. When she told me about her father, I somehow doubted whether this would lead to her feeling passionate about her background and faith.

Then one day, we spoke for an hour about Feiz Mohamed and his comments on rape. I told her I had published something in this newspaper about it, my first foray into mainstream journalism. Her response left me stunned.

“I am so glad someone has spoken out about it! I’ve been up here in Newcastle arguing with people about it. They keep teasing me about it!”

My friend is not the most observant Muslim on the planet. She enjoys mixing champagne with her orange juice. She looks even better than Maxine did on Lateline. And she gets so hurt when she hears or sees someone give her father’s faith a bad name.

My friend gets even more upset when she reads Dr Janet Albrechtsen claiming that her late father would have taught her brothers to rape white women. Or when Piers Akerman claims Muslim citizens are answerable for the actions of terrorists. Or when she logs into the blog of Peter Faris QC and reads stuff that would make Pauline Hanson look like Mother Teresa.

And this young barmaid reads this stuff and gets pushed into the direction of the broader Muslim community. But even here she finds no succour as Muslims condemn but refuse to speak out. She might then begin to believe that there is no hope.

Many isolated irreligious Muslims are angry and frustrated. I know how they feel. I used to be one of them. The first time I published a letter to the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, I was criticised by an uncle of mine, an Indian doctor.

“Irfan, you are just a law student. Wait until you have finished your degree and are at the top of your profession. Then do something!” he advised.

“But uncle, you are at the top of your profession. What are you doing?” I responded.

If my uncle was just another Macquarie Street general surgeon, his concern might be justified. But he was the Vice President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, the national body whose very constitution mentions community advocacy as one of its goals.

When people like my uncle refuse to speak out, inexperienced naïve kids like the Dureihi brothers take their place. And the more silent or incoherent Muslim voices are, the louder the voices of Islam-bashers grow. Social discord and loss of liberty result. The only beneficiary is a beady-eyed terrorist hiding on a cave.

Between Muslim leadership silence, Muslim youth frustration and pseudo-conservative hate-columnists and shock jocks, the only beneficiary is Usama bin Ladin.

The author is a Sydney industrial lawyer. iyusuf@sydneylawyers.com.au

© Irfan Yusuf 2005

The Smile of Islam

Terrorists are hijacking Islam. Islam is the victim of terrorism. Islam is being killed, and Islam is being blamed.

In London, that became apparent when a young British girl and those riding with her were mercilessly killed whilst travelling to work. She was a young bank clerk, the pride of her migrant family. She was a devoutly religious girl, and yet her sweet smile and gentle demeanour revealed the face of a truly modern British woman.

She was British. She was young. She was smiling in her published photograph. She was on her way to work. She was contributing to her society, to her economy and to her nation. She died at the hands of terrorists. At memorial services across the UK, she was being remembered and prayed for.

Tony Blair and George W Bush and John Howard and others paid tribute to her. As did other western leaders. Even those otherwise hostile to her could not help but remember her bravery.

If anyone was a martyr in this terrible tragedy, it was people like her. She was the symbol of modernity, of civilisation. Her death inspires us to fight on, to address the scourge of terror.

When we speak out against terror and its ideology, we will remember her name. When we face and address the emotions of our confused and frightened non-Muslim neighbours, we will be doing her proud.

God tells us that we should not regard martyrs as dead. They are alive. God is providing for martyrs, even if we do not perceive it.

She is a martyr. Her name and what it represents is being martyred. But her name and what it represents is not dead. Indeed, it is alive, sustained by God in ways only people of wisdom will understand.

We must fight terror so that her death not be in vain. We must fight terror so that her parents’ tears are wiped dry and replaced with the joy of knowing their daughter is a martyr and will enter paradise insh’Allah.

Our theology teaches us that martyrdom is not an automatic ticket to paradise. We are taught that amongst the first people to be judged on the day of judgment will be a martyr. He will be brought before God and questioned on why he died.

“I died to serve you and to make your Name respected and your Greatness acknowledged”, the martyr will say.

“No you most certainly did not!”, will be the Divine response. “You died so that people would say how great you were, so that people would write songs and poems and eulogies devoted to your bravery. And they did this. You have been rewarded. Today, there is nothing for you but the Hellfire!”

This is what he, the martyr, will be told before being dragged to hell.

He. Not she.

She had no intentions of glory or fame. She just intended to go to work. She was one of millions of anonymous Britons leaving the safety and comfort of their homes for the uncertainty of economic activity.

Now, in death, she has attained fame and glory. And her name deserves to be remembered and mentioned again and again.

She is from our family. We are from her family. She may be British, but she is also from the family of Islam.

The family of Islam are a British family. They are as British as the Blair family. They are as British as Prince Nassim or Nasser Hussein or other establishment figures. They are as British as Tim Winter and Zaki Badawi. And as Cat Stevens.

She shares her surname with the adopted name of the Cat. She is Shahara. She is the daughter of Britain, the daughter of the West, the daughter of progress and civilisation. And how fitting that she be the daughter of Islam.

Because Islam is not the enemy of progress, of civilisation, or indeed of the West. When terrorists attack the West, they attack Islam. They maim and murder Islam.

And they murdered Shahara, a daughter of Islam.

We will not allow her death to be in vain. We must fight for the family of Islam, for the name of Islam, for the reality of Islam. We will continue our fight.

We will not frown at our neighbours when they question our loyalty. But like Shahara, we will smile in the face of death. We will face the hatred of Islamophobes and their terrorist allies with the smile Shahara left us with, a smile that millions across the world saw.

We see her smiling face and we learn that the murder of Islam inspires some people to smile and others to weep. When Islam is murdered, we weep. When Islam is murdered, her enemies smile and cheer and dance.

When Islam is murdered, conservative columnists and professional Islam-haters cheer and congratulate each other. They tell the world to fight and kill Islam just as Shahara Islam’s murderers killed her. For indeed, Islam-haters and terrorists are both out to kill Islam.

But Islam will not die. God will preserve Islam. That is God’s promise. Islam can only be martyred. Islam doesn’t die.

Yes, we will say it. The London bombings were about martyrdom. Islam was martyred. British values and culture and traditions were martyred. British peace and liberalism were martyred. These British values are steeped in Islam. And they will not die. We must not let them die.

Lest the argument be spoilt by lengthy repetition, I end with the words of Shahara’s brother-in-faith and in humanity. Her brother Yusuf, also from the family of Islam, sang these words years before he ever thought of joining the family of Islam. These words are a virtual second national anthem for the people of London. We will remember these words as we simultaneously mourn and rejoice the martyrdom the smiling Shahara …

Oh I’ve been smiling lately,
Dreaming about the world as one
And I believe it could be,
Some day it’s going to come.

Cause out on the edge of darkness,
There rides a peace train
Oh peace train take this country,
Come take me home again.

Now I’ve been smiling lately,
Thinking about the good things to come
And I believe it could be,
Something good has begun …

Now I’ve been crying lately,
Thinking about the world as it is
Why must we go on hating,
Why can’t we live in bliss.

Cause out on the edge of darkness,
There rides a peace train
Oh peace train take this country,
Come take me home again.

© Irfan Yusuf 2005

Islamic ATSIC?

On Perth talkback radio, the President of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC) announced a proposal to fight terrorism. The announcement was made after the PM and other mainstream leaders called upon Muslim leaders to speak out about terror. The PM also signalled his willingness to involve Muslim communities in discussions on national security.

The PM is acting smartly by having all Australians involved in the discussion. He has learnt from experience that sidelining particular communities from major national debates does more harm than good to our social cohesion.

Excluding Aussie Mossies will only breed further resentment toward liberal democracy. And it is just plain illiberal to exclude people just because of their ethnic or religious background.

So you would think that AFIC’s proposal would be greeted with open arms by both governments and the Muslim communities. Think again.

Dr Ameer Ali, AFIC President, asked the Federal Government to give AFIC legislative powers and funding with a view to fighting extremism. He wanted Canberra to recognise AFIC as the official peak body and to contract out Muslim affairs to AFIC.

The response from Muslims on e-mail groups and discussion forums was swift. And the responses had one common feature – Muslim Australians don’t trust their leaders.

Many Muslim Australians (like many Australians) may not trust the PM. But they know that the PM was elected in a free and fair election. They know that there is an independent electoral commission which carries out voting.

They know that state and local government elections are also free and fair. The PM does not directly interfere or intervene in state affairs. Because if he does, there is a constitution and an independent High Court to test the legality of his intervention.

In short, Muslim Australians are aware that there are checks and balances in the system. But in the structures of Muslim organisational leadership, similar checks and balances do not exist.

In NSW, over the past 5 years, AFIC has had arguments with 5 state councils. In 3 states, it has set up dummy state councils to replace existing ones. In NSW, when AFIC had a dispute with the Islamic Council of NSW, it argued the matter in the Supreme Court. It then created another body called the “Supreme Islamic Council of NSW”.

Within 2 years, AFIC were fighting with the Supreme Council. They then set up a 3rd body to represent Muslim New South Welshmen. When Aussie Mossies got wind of this, their good humoured larrikin nature came to the fore. There was talk of the new Council being called the “Super-Supreme Islamic Council”.

Hence a new phrase in NSW Muslim circles – the “Pizza Councils”.

In the last 20 years, AFIC has not had a single female on their executive. Women make up over 50% of the Muslim communities. Further, Aussie Mossies are a young community. The largest ethnic group are Muslims born in Australia. The largest age bracket is those aged between 25 and 40. It is hard to find a single person in these categories on the AFIC executive.

In short, AFIC represents old men from overseas. Women and young people (including those disillusioned young people tempted to join terror networks) are excluded. That’s fine. But AFIC should stop trying to kid the government into thinking they are representing all Muslim Australians.

Many, if not most, Muslim Australians have even heard of AFIC. And it took AFIC 20 days to write a letter to imams telling them to condemn terrorism.

A key plank of the government’s anti-terrorism strategy is to get all Australians on board. That includes Muslim Australians. AFIC and similar peak bodies have a role to play. But AFIC and the Pizza Councils don’t represent all Muslim Australians.

AFIC should not be turned into a Muslim ATSIC.

iyusuf@sydneylawyers.com.au

© Irfan Yusuf

Cadbury AFIC - Full of Nuts!

Take a walk down George Street Sydney or Collins Street Melbourne. Ask the average Catholic if they have heard of Cardinal Pell. Ask the average Buddhist if they have heard of the Dalai Lama. They will both say yes.

Ask the average Muslim - the banker or lawyer or accountant or public servant – if they have heard of AFIC.

“AFIC? What’s that? Has Cadbury released a new chocolate-coated ice cream?”

After watching the hopeless display of the AFIC Chief Executive Officer, you would think it was an ice cream. Except the colour of the chocolate is irrelevant. Just know that if you are allergic to nuts, you should not taste it.

Some 20 days after the London bombing, the AFIC website still has no press release or announcement or message of condemnation of the terrorist attacks. Indeed, the last terrorist attacks I read AFIC condemning were the ones in Turkey. On that occasion, the AFIC press release advised that Istanbul was the capital of Turkey.

And these are just some of the indications that AFIC is hopelessly out of touch with mainstream Muslim Australia. Turkish Australians make up perhaps the largest single ethnic group among Muslims. Yet AFIC is so out of touch with Turks that it does not even know that Istanbul has not been the capital of Turkey for over 6 decades.

And now, AFIC has decided to write to Australian Imams ordering them to condemn terror. So which language will the letter be written in? Arabic? Swahili? Fiji-Hindi? After all, AFIC has overseen a mosque management system which has ensured that most Imams in Australia do not speak English.

What steps has AFIC taken to communicate with young people? What support has AFIC given to youth? The last time AFIC arranged a Muslim youth camp was in 1987. Since then, it appointed an Imam aged over 60 to be its youth adviser.

What steps has AFIC taken to understand its community? Is it aware of the age, ethnic, gender and cultural composition of the Muslim communities? Has it bothered to study what Muslims think of key social and political issues?

In the last 5 years, a large number of Muslims have migrated from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. The bulk of these have been Shia Muslims. What representation do Shia Muslims have in AFIC?

Then there is the issue of mismanagement. Where do we start? Over the years, AFIC has received millions of dollars in donations from wealthy private and governmental donors in the Middle East. Where has that money gone? How has it been accounted for?

One such donation was channelled into a secret account. The amount involved was around $500,000. No one on the executive committee knew of the existence of the account for at least 3 years. No one, that is, except the CEO of AFIC.

Not even the auditors of AFIC knew of the account. It was finally discovered when AFIC changed auditors. The existence of the account involved AFIC in breaches of taxation laws and threatened its tax-exempt status.

Mr CEO may deny all this. He can deny until he is black and blue in the face. I have a copy of the legal advice from AFIC’s then lawyers in which they describe this and other misdemeanours of Mr CEO.

So now this inept and bumbling organisation wishes the Federal Government to accredit it as the official Muslim peak body with special legislative powers, a kind of Muslim ATSIC. The CEO claims that AFIC is most suited to this role as it has a democratic structure.

Let’s look at New South Wales, the state which has the largest number of Muslims in Australia. Let’s see AFIC democracy in action. In 2000, AFIC had a falling out with the Islamic Council of NSW. In reality, the CEO had a falling out with the Roude family empire. AFIC showed its commitment to democracy by setting up a rival council, the Supreme Islamic Council of NSW.

Some years later, AFIC had a falling out with the Supreme Council. So they formed another council. When Muslims in NSW heard about it, some speculated that the name of the new body would be the “Super-Supreme Islamic Council of NSW”. Hence the three councils being known collectively as the “Pizza Councils”.

AFIC is but one of numerous peak bodies that have failed to represent the views and interests of mainstream Muslim Australians. It has little commitment to democracy, and has no record of structured consultation with ordinary Australian Muslims. It does little for young people. Its internal management structures are appalling.

Can the government afford to invest legislative powers in so unrepresentative and undemocratic body? Can a body which functions like a crackpot Arab regime be entrusted with government funds and powers to fight against threats to national security?

And can Muslim Australians now afford to sit back and allow this unrepresentative swill to take control of their collective destinies?

© Irfan Yusuf 2005

Monty Python Muslims Fight For Control Of The Fringe

In 2000, Muslim students in Sydney organised a conference at the University of New South Wales. The guest speaker was Abdullah Idriss, a respected American Muslim speaker who has helped bring the disparate Muslim communities there under a single network.

Idriss organised a gathering of various Muslim factions, from mainstream to fringe, to discuss their differences in a private forum. He hoped to focus on the fact that Muslims agree on most things, and that these were of far greater importance than any sources of division.

Amongst the speakers was a representative of the radical Hizbut Tahrir (HT), the Muslim equivalent of campus Marxism. HT believes that political and economic systems are only fit for Muslim participation if they meet HT’s narrow definitions of “Islamic systems”.

The HT have never been all that popular. Even those sympathetic to their rhetoric regard them with disdain, if only because they cannot provide any blueprint for achieving their goals.

When a leader of Indonesia’s largest Muslim party, Nahdatul Ulama, visited Sydney as a guest of the Centre for Independent Studies, he stunned his audience with the revelation that most Indonesians associated sharia with commercial dispute resolution and banking. Other mainstream Muslim legal thinkers such as Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl of the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) have found strong commonalities between sharia and common law systems.

Australian understandings and discourse on sharia are perhaps best reflected in 2 books published by Australian authors. At the beginning of the 20th century, Imam Imamovic of Brisbane wrote his “Outlines of Islamic Doctrine”, and included a detailed analysis of mainstream Sunni views of Islamic law.

In more modern times, UTS academic Jameela Hussain has had the second edition of her book “Islam Its Law & Society” published by mainstream legal publisher The Federation Press. The first edition of her book quickly sold out, and her undergraduate course on Islamic law has proven popular with students wishing to supplement their law degrees with an element of comparative law.

Muslim approaches to western legal systems tend to accommodate and encourage Muslims to use and participate in these systems. Such participation is seen as justified in Islamic law.

But in HT ideology, sharia (Islam’s broad legal tradition) is narrowly defined. Sharia is treated simplistically, almost as a software program, with Muslims being the hardware. The download process is the establishment of an international caliphate. And how does one reach caliphate? Who knows? HT certainly don’t.

Returning to the 2000 seminar, another participant was Sheik Abdus Salam Zoud. Sheik Zoud was trained in Saudi Arabia and follows the fringe salafist cult. He regards shias and sufis as being outside the pale of Islam. He also rejects mainstream Sunni Muslim beliefs on the nature of God, as well as rejecting Sunni Muslim insistence on following one of four orthodox summarised legal “checklists” (known as “madhab’s”) for their personal and social liturgy.

Zoud’s views are also on the fringe. I believe his views are more dangerous than those of HT. Though he agrees with their rejectionist stance, he and his salafist cult have always opposed the HT groups.

Zoud gained notoriety in Muslim circles after overseeing a series of video nights at his musalla (prayer hall). These included “jihad” videos showing Arab salafist fighters in Chechenia decapitating dead Russian troops and kicking their heads like soccer balls. Muslims were horrified by this clear breach of sharia laws forbidding desecration of human bodies.

While addressing the 2000 conference, Zoud told delegates that he had sought special dispensation from the Australian Electoral Commission. He had written to the AEC advising that his understanding of Islam made it sinful for him to vote and participate in a democratic political system.

The cynicism with which Sheik Zoud’s views were greeted at the seminar were summed up by a question from one delegate who asked Sheik Zoud why he was prepared to accept social security payments from the same political and governmental system. Zoud responded that taking money from the system was permitted, but voting was not.

The views of HT and Zoud are regarded by Muslim Australians as ugly and disgraceful. This explains their inability to gather large crowds at their events, despite having sophisticated and slick marketing campaigns running for weeks before each event. Muslim Australians have become accustomed to smelling an HT or salafite cultist rat a mile away.

Perhaps most promising is the fact that these two fringe groups are ripping each other apart, competing for their narrow fringe market much like competing factions in Monty Python classic The Life of Brian.

A visit to the forums of the islamicsydney.com website will show what most mainstream Muslim youth think of these fringe elements. Their simplistic logic and “Microsoft Sharia 2000” approach to complex legal and political issues has made them the laughing stock of Sydney Muslims.

(The author is a Sydney industrial lawyer, former president of the Macquarie University Muslim Students Association and former president of the Islamic Youth Association of NSW. iyusuf@sydneylawyers.com.au)

© Irfan Yusuf 2005

REFLECTION: If a bomb hits Sydney ...

If a bomb hits Sydney, I will be blamed. People will point the finger at me. And at that time, it will be too late for me to pass the buck. So I may as well start pointing fingers now.

If a bomb hits Sydney, Islam will be placed in trial. And those persons claiming to represent Islam, the imams and sheiks, will be powerless to defend it. They will be unable to articulate the views of their flock because most of them cannot speak English. They will be unable to speak properly because they will have been hamstrung from developing skills they need for an advocacy role.

These imams will be hamstrung by their executive committees who have insisted that imams must solely concentrate on ceremonial tasks or taking sides in some useless debate over moon-sighting. They will not know the issues of the day, and will not be able to handle media inquiries.

If a bomb hits Sydney, mosque committee members will not be able to speak for their congregations and members. Most of them are uneducated and unable to speak proper English. They have spent much of their time and money litigating over halal meat certification dollars. They will be too busy deciding which one of three Islamic councils they wish to be part of.

If a bomb hits Sydney, Islamic school administrations will not be able to cope. They will be too busy mismanaging their facilities, mistreating their staff and becoming embroiled in litigation. The few schools doing anything useful will be forced into litigation, with little support from peak Muslim bodies.

If a bomb hits Sydney, His Eminence the Mufti will be blaming Iraq and Palestine and Afghanistan but not his inability to learn English after living in Australia for so many years. His executive will continue to exclude non-Lebanese members from holding membership, even though they make up a large portion of the congregation.

If a bomb hits Sydney, fringe salafist lunatics will repeat their infantile performances. They will bask in the attention and will regard themselves as heroes whilst stabbing the rest of us in the front and back. They will enjoy a limelight they simply don’t deserve. And their young students will continue to talk terror and show utter contempt for the nation which gave them freedom.

If a bomb hits Sydney, Muslim bookshops will be caught out again selling nonsensical (and usually pirated) nonsense. Their shelves will contain the stuff which, if directed at them, would be condemned as islamophobic. They will justify their display of such items using language that is clearly anti-semitic.

If a bomb hits Sydney, ethnic Muslim leaders will blame the Jews, the PKK, the KGB, the CIA, the FBI, MOSSAD, SAVAK, the NAB and perhaps even the ANZ. Not to mention the NRL and the AFL. They will blame everyone except themselves.

If a bomb goes off in Sydney, the peak national body will allow its website to remain speechless on the matter for at least 2 weeks. They will issue no alert or press release or condemnation. They will have no political clout to handle the barrage of pressure on Muslims to agree to further erosion of their civil liberties. And they will probably declare the attack a tragedy by claiming that Sydney is the capital of Australia just as they declared Istanbul to be the capital of Turkey. Or they will be too busy setting up yet another Islamic council in New South Wales.

If a bomb goes off in Sydney, prominent Muslims will be targeted. Professionals, partners of commercial law firms, big business people, students, academics, senior public servants, anyone with any relation to Islam regardless of how tenuous will be watched and targeted. They will wonder why people are so ignorant about their faith, despite having missed hundreds of opportunities to inform people about their faith.

If a bomb hits Sydney and a few young Muslims are found to be responsible, it will be the fault of all the above. If a bomb hits Sydney, we will all be blamed. And we will all deserve the blame.

Sydney-siders have shared with us the things they value – a strong economy, a beautiful city, economic opportunities, education, fresh water, harbour views, heavenly beaches and much more. We have gladly taken of these precious things.

And what have we given of what we value? What have we given of our morals? Our ethical code? Our family structures? Our love for God and God’s creation? What contributions have we made to this community, to this beautiful city?

If a bomb hits Sydney, it will be too late for soul searching. Let’s start searching our souls and correcting our attitudes. Let’s get our house in order. Because if we don’t, and if a bomb hits Sydney, we are doomed.

Words © 2005 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

Hate-Filled Books Stay On The Fringe

Last week, I visited a good friend. She is of Muslim background, and works in medical research. She loves reading spiritual books, be they poems by Rumi or discourses of the Dalai Lama. She also enjoys a good laugh.

I wanted to buy her an early birthday present, and I knew exactly what she would like. I purchased 2 books on traditional medical sciences as taught by the Prophet Muhammad. I also bought her a DVD entitled “Allah made me funny!”.

Like most Muslim Australians, I know exactly where to get my devotional books. Frequently, I shop at mainstream bookshops like Dymocks or Kinokunya. Sometimes I visit spiritual bookstores like the Adyar Bookstore, or specialist Muslim bookstores.

There are perhaps 4 Sydney Islamic bookshops I frequently visit. I know the range and quality of their books and multimedia materials is good. They stick to respected mainstream scholars and avoid fringe cultish groups. And they respect Islam’s spiritual and legal heritage as enshrined in Sufism.

So when I opened the Daily Telegraph the other day and saw a familiar shop window photographed under a headline “Books of hate in Sydney shops”, I was not surprised. I am not sure how this shop stays in business since they have gone out of their way to alienate so many mainstream Muslim youngsters with their fringe salafist materials.

Some years back, I visited that store and saw a lovely children’s book of stories by the famous Sufi Rumi. I went to purchase it, but was quickly advised by the shop assistant that this book was not for sale. He went to where a small pile of the books sat on a display table and lifted them all.

I asked him what objections he had to a book by Rumi, perhaps the most popular spiritual poet in the world and whose work has been translated into numerous languages. “We will not sell any sufi books here as they are deviant”, I was advised.

Sufism is the spiritual heart of Islam. In the Sunni school, it is called “tasawwuf”. In the Shia school, it is called “irfan”. Sufism is the spiritual side of Islam, teaching the importance of loving God through loving God’s creatures. It has inspired numerous artistic and philosophical movements among Muslims including the famous Whirling Dervishes of Turkey.

But in the eyes of the fringe salafist cult, Sufism is regarded as evil. This attitude toward Islam’s spiritual heritage is one of many reasons mainstream Muslims reject salafist cults as heterodox.

Muslim Australians are at the heart of mainstream Australian life. When the National Australia Bank appointed a young executive to be its CEO, most commentators focussed on his relative youth and expertise than his migrant Muslim background. And I have never heard anyone refusing to buy a mobile phone from Crazy Johns because of the owner’s background.

But salafist cults teach young Muslims to emphasise differences and to treat Australian culture as alien. Some salafist imams have even claimed a special religious dispensation from the Australian Electoral Commission which allows them not to vote on religious grounds. These salafist imams claim that democracy and Islam are incompatible.

Are these cults dangerous? You would think so after reading their books. But the reality is that most young Aussie Mossies never buy these hate-filled books. Very few decent books on Islam are published in Australia. Islamic bookshops are forced to import most of their stock. And most mainstream Islamic books are published in the UK, US, Canada, India or Malaysia. The most popular authors are Europeans or Americans such as Tim Winter, Michael Wolfe, Hamza Yusuf Hanson and Feisal Abdul Rauf, authors whose work Lakemba’s salafist “Islamic Bookstore” refuse to even display.

But most salafist cultish materials are published in Saudi Arabia and are poorly translated. The tone and message of these books is regarded as ugly. And because they sit on the very edges of the Muslim communities, salafist books are often filled with venom toward mainstream Muslim groups such as Sufi and Shia Muslims.

At university, many campus Marxists used to write and sell pamphlets and books calling for violent overthrow of capitalism. Campus communists were loud and irritating. But how many people took them seriously? I certainly different.

Similarly, most Muslim Australian readers take little notice of bookstores which insist on selling only hate-filled ugly material which seeks to marginalise Muslims and alienate them from mainstream Australian values. And Muslim Australians are a community that simply will not put up with being marginalised.

© Irfan Yusuf 2005