Category Archives: Terrorism Issue

Don’t Debate, Rehabilitate.

“Don’t debate religion with fundamentalists: what they need is rehabilitation”

by Saad A Sowayan

Fundamentalism is a cultural phenomenon, though it dons religious garbs. It is a mode of consciousness shaped by cultural values, not religious principles. Thus we can understand it only if we examine it in its cultural context as a sociological rather than a theological question.

So, I will begin by taking a close look at the social incubators most likely to hatch fundamentalism.

I understand by fundamentalism strong adherence to an archetypal point of view and a fierce conviction of its fundamental truth, to the exclusion of any other alternate idea. Any alternative is resisted by a fundamentalist and treated not as a legitimate substitute stemming from a rational free choice, but as a detrimental antithesis of the fundamental truth of the archetype. The archetype is a model to be emulated and reproduced, not dissected or scrutinized. Continue reading Don’t Debate, Rehabilitate.

Open Letter to a Democratic President

by Richard W. Bulliet

January 21, 2009

Congratulations on your inauguration. May history remember your term in
office as the greatest political turn-around in American history.

Now to Iraq, the puzzle your predecessor has left for you to solve:

1. Compounding one botched war in Iraq with a second one in Iran would
sink your presidency before it starts. President Ahmadinejad of the
Islamic Republic of Iran will be up for reelection in seven months (August
2009). The Iranian people must be given an unfettered opportunity to
retire him to private life and elect someone of more liberal temperament.
His unpopularity in Iran already points in that direction. So, the United
States should do nothing that would enhance his prospects of reelection.
Diplomacy must replace saber rattling, and the “axis of evil” rhetoric
must be retired. Let us do what we can to give the Iranians a chance to
change leaders through their own electoral system.

2. Begin immediately the relocation of combat units to bases outside the
major cities of Iraq as a first step toward the withdrawal of ground
forces from the country. Announce that combat operations will henceforth
be restricted to fighting against those who attack American troops, supply
lines, or physical assets. Open negotiations with the Iraqi government
about the possibility of leaving a small number of combat units in the
country for a fixed and limited period to interdict the infiltration of
foreign fighters and — in joint operations with the Iraqi army — combat
groups that both the United States and the Iraqi government agree are
primarily composed of foreign terrorists. Continue reading Open Letter to a Democratic President

Interfaith Understanding: Not Islamo-Fascism

With reference to “Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week” (the week of October 22-26, 2007), it is alarmingly odd to hear that there persist to be individuals and so-called neoconservatives in university campuses who claim to be more knowledgeable than that the rest of society [and claim the right] to justify their prejudice against Islam and Muslims.

Instead of hate rhetoric aimed at teaching American students how to stigmatize Islam as fascist, the effort should be made to bring Muslim, Christian, Jewish and other religious communities together to increase dialogue, understanding, and peace. We have many examples of those who were misguided by naïve teachers before and after the tragic events of September 11. Continue reading Interfaith Understanding: Not Islamo-Fascism

On the Jihadwatch Watch

by Vernon Schubel, Kenyon College

I have been working on a book on Humanism in Islam and in an introductory chapter I dig deeply into Jihadwatch because I believe it is primarily designed to deny the humanity of Islam by reducing it to a totalitarian political system. I feel I need to bathe whenever I read Jihadwatch. Robert Spencer, David Horowitz and his compatriots often assert that they are not against Islam only “Islamo-facism.” But they in numerous places identify the two as the same. On its banner head, Jihadwatch.com has a link to a remarkable article by the author and film maker Gary P. Davis called “Islam 101,” which he describes as a summary of the ideas in his book, Religion of Peace? Islam’s War Against the World, and film, the equally ominously titled, Islam: What the West Needs to Know –an Examination of Islam, Violence and the Fate of the Muslim World. According to Davis, “Islam 101” is designed “to help people become better educated about the fundamentals of Islam and to help the more knowledgeable better convey the facts to others.” Davis warns his readers that Muslims and Muslim apologists will try to tell them that Islam is a “religion of peace.” But he tells them that this is not true. Instead he presents Jihad defined narrowly as armed warfare against non-Muslims as the core of Islam. And he argues that this is the case because Islam is not “a personal faith.” It is instead “a political ideology” that exists in a permanent state of war with non-Muslims. In fact Davis equates Islam with fascism saying:

The misbegotten term “Islamo-fascism” is wholly redundant: Islam itself is a kind of fascism that achieves its full and proper form only when it assumes the powers of the state.

In another place he states:

It is important to realize that we have been talking about Islam — not Islamic “fundamentalism,” “extremism,” “fanaticism,” “Islamo-fascism,” or “Islamism,” but Islam proper, Islam in its orthodox form as it has been understood and practiced by right-believing Muslims from the time of Muhammad to the present.

So it should be clear “Islamo-fascist awareness” is designed here to identify Islam with Fascism.

The fact that these people have access to power, media, and political campaigns is extremely serious. This needs to be challenged at every turn by pointing out that Islam cannot be reduced to isolated verses in its primary texts. Instead, Islam arises as the dialogue of Muslims with the Qur’an, the life of the Prophet and the events of its early history as they use those events to think and respond to their own current circumstances. Muslims are as diverse in their responses to their religious sources as any other religious tradition.

Image Wars and Westernization

[On the sixth anniversary of the September 11 tragedy, it is worthwhile revisiting comments made soon after the event. The following is an excerpt from a commentary by Michael Sells, reflecting on events before Afghanistan was invaded and Iraq was occupied. His full reflections are available by clicking here.]

I’m been giving talks on the various components behind the current situation. Today’s rumination is sparked by an 8th grader question at a forum I was giving: “why can’t we find Bin Laden if he’s always on TV.” The question knocked me out. The 8th grader had hit upon a core problem.

Bin Laden is a guy living with the Taliban who have banned all images (except for identity card photos), blown up ancient Buddha’s, but who invite Western camera crews in to make videos of them themselves smashing TV’s, tearing up video and audio cassette film, and stomping on photographs. At the same time they encourage Bin Laden to make regular videos of himself to be shown throughout the world on a regular basis. And they invite Western media in to photography and image both Bin Laden and their ritual destruction of images and media. Continue reading Image Wars and Westernization

Bin Laden: Another Sequel

Probably the last pre-October surprise that President Bush wanted as we approach the sixth anniversary of the tragedy of 9/11 is a new videotape from Osama Bin Laden. The bearded man who still appears on the White House “Wanted: Dead or Alive” poster has defied attempts to find him and bring him to justice. Billions of dollars and far too many sacrificed American, Iraqi and Afghan lives later, the icon of those who despise American foreign policy in the Middle East will not disappear. Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Rove have been jettisoned to the neocon mash potato lecture circuit, but the lame duck president may very well leave office while Osama is still sitting in front of the cameras. What does a man like Osama think about in exile? Continue reading Bin Laden: Another Sequel

Debating Islamo-Fascism

[The message below was written by Marieme Hélie-Lucas, long time coordinator of the European Bureau of Women Living Under Muslim Laws, and was originally posted to the Women in Black (WIB) international list and reposted to ISLAMAAR, the discussion group on Islam of the American Academy of Religion, on September 6, 2007. Following her commentary is a response by Mohammed Fadel, who is on the faculty of the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. Both are commenting on the call by David Horowitz for an Islamo-fascism Awareness Week in October, posted upon earlier on Tabsir.]

Dear friends in WIB,
In response to the mail alerting us about this event against ‘islamo fascism’ led by conservative forces, I think there is a need for clarification from us, who lived under ‘islamo fascism’ :

First of all, let me say that the term ‘islamo fascism’ has been initially coined by Algerian people struggling for democracy, against armed fundamentalist forces decimating people in our country, then later operating in Europe, where a number of us had taken refuge. For us, it has never been equated to Islam, but it points at fundamentalists only : i.e. at political forces working under the cover of religion in order to gain political power and to impose a theocracy ( The Law – singular – of God, unchangeable, a-historical, interpreted by self appointed old men) over democracy ( i.e. the laws – plural – voted by the people and changeable by the will of the people). Continue reading Debating Islamo-Fascism

Another Debate (Debate?)

Watching the Fox News comedy-not-so-central Republican debate last night, it seemed to me that the gentlemen (and they were, of course, only men) behind the podiums were more intent on smiling through their election-year platitudes than engaging with the messy realities of the government each seeks to head. Apart from Ron Paul, the interloping libertarian, each candidate apparently (a word that John McCain stubbornly refuses to use in his vocabulary) hoped that supporting the troop surge would lead to a surge (even a blip for those hanging on only by their televised sound bites) in their respective pre-season ratings. There was a lot of puffing and fluffing about family values, with Hizzoner begging (the question) to have his private life left private (‘fat chance’, as they say in the Big Apple) and another don’t-remember-the-name tossed out the Pottery-Barnyard we-broke-it-so-we-gotta-fix-it mantra that treats premature evacuation (Iraqis Interruptus) as one of the seven deadly sins. Mercifully, there was no gay bashing and one candidate (does it really matter who said what at this stage?) insisted that Republicans or better than Democrats because they ‘come clean’ and resign after a scandal. I wonder if Larry Craig was taking notes. Fox News should have stationed an embedded reporter in a stall in the Minneapolis airport just to be on the safe side. Continue reading Another Debate (Debate?)