The rector and the head of faculty of Darul Uloom (Waqf) Deoband said attacks by 'vigilantes' in which innocent people died was not jihad but 'individual zulm (oppression)'.
KARACHI: Senior clerics of India's top seminary whose version of Islam the Taliban claim to follow have denounced the actions of the hardline militia, saying the group does not qualify to enjoy affiliations with the historic madressah.
In an interview with a correspondent of the BBC Urdu Service, the rector and the head of faculty of Darul Uloom (Waqf) Deoband said attacks by 'vigilantes' in which innocent people died was not jihad but 'individual zulm (oppression)'.
Seen in this light, attacks on shrines, barber shops and educational institutions were all un-Islamic. Maulana Saalim Qasimi went to the extent of characterising the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which was ousted by the US forces in 2001, as 'un-Islamic'.
He said the Taliban did not comprehend fully the tenets of Islam even though much was made of their 'Islamic government'.
He said Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who supported the Afghan regime, was not a religious scholar. 'He is more of a politician than a scholar.' 'However, his father, Mufti Mehmood, was a scholar,' he said.
Maulana Aslam Qasimi, great grandson of Qasim Nanotvi, the founder of the madressah, said the recent statement by Sufi Mohammad that judiciary in Pakistan was un-Islamic was based on misconceptions and ignorance.
He said that Islam embraced concepts like democracy. 'The spirit of democracy is very much there in Islam, though concepts like democracy have been taking new shapes and forms.'
PAS, a prominent Islamist political party in Malaysia, has asked the National Fatwa Council to declare the group Sisters in Islam "haram." Pas also asked the Fatwa council to investigate the sisters, and "to introduce special programmes to rehabilitate members of the organisation so that they could come back to the right religous track."
There are probably still some old Khmer Rouge training camps around Malaysia, where the CIA along with China and Britain and Thai intelligence helped that group 're-educate' inductees who went on to help sustain Utopia in Cambodia. The old camps could be put to use in the same way by the well-intentioned Islamists of Malaysia (not that I'm attempting to draw a comparison between the Khmer Rouge and this proposal on the part of the Malaysian Islamists or anything...).
But something bothered us yesterday: did Bumiller and her editors consider the possibility that a six-year stay Gitmo could actually create terrorists? That an innocent Afghan man embittered after being scooped up by the United States and unjustly imprisoned for years might actually become a terrorist?
....
Bumiller and her editors seem to have realized the possibility that they might have gotten spun -- though too late to change the front-page story in the print edition.
The paper has changed the lead and headline of the Web version of the story to reflect the uncertainty. The new headline reads: "Later Terror Link Cited for 1 in 7 Freed Detainees." And the lead: "An unreleased Pentagon report concludes that about one in seven of the 534 prisoners already transferred abroad from the detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, are engaged in terrorism or militant activity, according to administration officials."
Compare that to the original version: "An unreleased Pentagon report provides new details concluding that about one in seven of the 534 prisoners already transferred abroad from the detention center in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, has returned to terrorism or militant activity, according to administration officials."
A young boy cries as he waits for his father, in a truck at a refugee camp in Mardan.
ABC News tonight reported that the Pakistani military's assault on the Taliban has engendered the largest refugee crisis in South Asia since the partition of British India.
I interviewed a large number of refugees in Swabi, but I did not meet a single person who actually saw the army and the Taleban as members of opposing camps. Instead, I heard, they were "two sides of the same coin".
The tent cities are growing in the district of Swabi, in north-west Pakistan: swelled with the thousands fleeing the fighting in nearby Buner district.
Last month, Taleban from the troubled district of Swat moved south into Buner and overran it, occupying government offices and police stations, and closing down locally popular Sufi shrines which they oppose.
The army moved in a couple of weeks ago to counter them, and is now engaged in heavy fighting in the area.
According to Shahram Khan, the head of Swabi district government, around 150,000 people have fled Buner during the last few days. This is three times the figure of 40,000 previously provided by the federal government.
Most of these people have ended up in about a dozen refugee camps set up by the government in Swabi.
'Pouring in' Many of these camps are funded by private individuals. Others are supported by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Food Programme, others by foreign and local NGOs.
The government of North West Frontier Province has already earmarked money to take care of the refugees, and it is now reaching most camps.
One such camp is located in Chhota Lahore town of Swabi district. There are rows of tents supplied by the UNHCR. Most are family shelters, but some also house one school each for boys and girls, as well as a medical dispensary.
"Tents are in short supply, and we also expect food shortages in coming days as refugees from Buner continue to pour in," says Kabir Khan, the administrator of the camp.
The refugees are, in the main, happy with the supply of food and other necessities, but nonetheless they say they cannot live in a refugee camp forever.
....
'Same coin' I interviewed a large number of refugees in Swabi, but I did not meet a single person who actually saw the army and the Taleban as members of opposing camps.
Instead, I heard, they were "two sides of the same coin".
"The Pakistani army has hurt us badly - but while they have killed civilians, I swear I haven't seen a single shell directed at the Taleban," says Shahdad Khan, a refugee sheltering at a camp in Swabi's Shave Ada area.
Others question the Pakistani military's stated commitment to "eliminating" the Taleban.
"No way," Siraj tells me. "The army brought the Taleban to our area! It's politics. The Taleban and the army are brothers."
Farrukh Rehan writes: Now that the Pakistani army is finally engaging the Taliban, there is one question on everyone's mind: Is Pakistan serious about this fight this time, or will it cut a deal with the militants, as it has done in the past with disastrous consequences?
The answer to this question depends on the outcome of a larger battle for Pakistan's soul which is raging across Pakistan's cities, homes, television channels, newspapers and in heated conversations in people's living rooms. The fight for the hearts and minds of the ordinary Pakistani is the most important fight going on in Pakistan, as its outcome will determine whether the cancer of Talibanization can be localised and ultimately rooted out, or whether it will continue to metastasize and further destabilize a country which is already reeling from economic, political, and leadership woes. As in most battles there are two adversaries - in this case two competing views of Pakistan, and the nature of the challenge facing it.
The conservative view held by many Islamist parties, populist politicians, retired army brass and hyper-nationalistic television anchors is that the Taliban are a reflection of the people's desire for an Islamic system of governance, with quick justice, order and compliance with God's will as the hallmarks of public life. Proponents of this view maintain that the excesses of the Taliban are greatly exaggerated, and that the real threat to Pakistan is from the US, which has destabilized the whole region with its Afghan war and its drone attacks on Pakistan. According to this view, the real aim of the US is to undermine Pakistan's sovereignty and deprive it of its cherished nuclear weapons. To date, the conservatives have been more vocal, and gained more traction with the Pakistani public - drowning out the concerns about the Taliban by pointing fingers at George Bush, the US and India.
On the other side are people derided as "Liberals" and "Western apologists" by the conservatives. These liberals, many of them western educated, secular and belonging to the professional urban classes, have been reminding whoever will listen that while Pakistan is a Muslim majority country, it was created as a constitutional republic with the ideals of an independent judiciary, a parliamentary system of government, and representative democracy. Liberals argue that letting parts of the country become theocratic enclaves run by armed gangs of religious extremists undermines the ideals on which Pakistan was built, threatens its territorial integrity and is a recipe for disaster. Liberals insist that the Taliban, and their policy of "Islamicization at gun point" is the real threat to Pakistan, not India or the United States.
Which narrative ultimately prevails is crucial to Pakistan's future because it determines whether the people of Pakistan see the fight against the Taliban and extremism as their own fight, or whether they will continue to see it as a US manufactured Global War on Terror into which Pakistan has been sucked. If Pakistanis see the fight in Swat as their own, then there will be public support for a continuing military offensive, there will be more latitude given to the bumbling civilian government of Asif Zardari, and there may even be some tolerance for the drone attacks which normally cause deep resentment among Pakistanis. But if the dominant narrative in Pakistan continues to be that Pakistanis are victims of global conspiracies, that the Taliban threat is exaggerated, and that Pakistan should have no part in fighting "America's war", then the military will most likely be forced to sign a truce with the Taleban, the civilian government will probably collapse under the weight of its unpopularity, and Talibanization will continue unchecked, one district at a time.
The most unusual and unexpected Muslim blogging community: Muslim children. In my own conception of the online 'Islamsphere', I don't think of Muslim children as being a part of it, but they are as I keep running across Islam-focus blogs being published by kids who may not be in junior high school yet. Obviously, this is a development limited to the economic class of Muslims who have computers or have enough money to give their children computers.
Aside from questions of parental due diligence, and whether children should even be online in this manner, such blogs give us an insight into minds of the next generation of Muslims when their topics stray out of the realm of childish concerns - though we need to be able to put aside our inherent adult bias against childish modalities of communication to listen. Hal786 for example, was concerned about suicide and depression among nonMuslims and was motivated to Dawah activism among them. And this girl had a complaint about the lack of images of 'action hijabis' online.
Anecdotally, all of the Muslim children's blogs I've stumbled across so far have been published by girls, and I have no idea why such a phenomenon might be 'gendered.' But one could certainly imagine that children with blogs are getting early practice on expressing themselves and community building. To the extent that any are motivated to engage in online activism, as adults they may be more likely to move on to other forms of off-line activism and community leadership.
South Asia and the 'flyover states' of the US share a common problem that has fallen out of the media recently but remains an ongoing issue: abuse of methamphetamine, or yaba (yabba) as it is known in South Asia. From reports, yaba seems to be making it's greatest inroads in the Muslim community in Bangladesh. From Time Asia, here's a photo-essay of Thai yaba users from 2001.
Two new books just out investigate the rise of meth in both regions. Methland chronicles the struggles of a small town in Iowa as it reports on the development of the larger problem in 'flyover country.' In Merchants of Madness two Thailand-based reporters document the rise of yaba in South Asia and the criminal enterprise behind it.
Prominent Christianist Gary Bauer suggests in this editorial that US textbooks are flummoxed by political correctness in their portrayal of Islam, and that publishers are 'whitewashing Islam.'
One of the themes at the 2007 CUFI conference (whose attendees included Santorum, Delay, Lieberman, and Gingrich) was the threat of Islam and-in an appropriation of the language of fear promoted by neoconservative writers like David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes-"Islamofascism." "The lure of a sympathetic crowd and the chance to trade pieties with the most popular televangelists in the nation attracted Sen. Joe Lieberman and ex-senator Rick Santorum," the American Conservative reported. "Each preached to the converted: Islamic-fascism is the most dangerous threat facing the United States, and Israel is the frontline."'
In the editorial linked above, Bauer has pulled in his claws somewhat as he is engaged in advocacy to a general public that is more indifferent than sympathetic, but there is no doubt his agenda continues to be enemy-formation and war-mongering against Muslims.
Apparently what is happening is that the Pakistani army is ordering the civilian population out of Swat and Buner, in hopes of having a clear shot at the Taliban, who thereby would be deprived of civilian cover. In turn the latter are trying to close the roads out, to keep the civilians inside so as to use them as human shields or as anonymous throngs into which they can melt where they are defeated by the army.
On the May 7 edition of CNN's American Morning, co-host Kiran Chetry asked radio host Michael Savage about his July 16, 2008, statement that "I'll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out." Savage then said to Chetry: "That's an absurd statement that was said in jest. They understand that." After Media Matters for America highlighted his comments, which generated extensive criticism, Savage claimed that the comments were "take[n] out of context," a claim Media Matters rebutted.
On the July 16, 2008, broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Savage claimed that autism is "[a] fraud, a racket." Savage went on to say, "I'll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they're silent? They don't have a father around to tell them, 'Don't act like a moron. You'll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don't sit there crying and screaming, idiot.' " Savage had previously described autism as a "phony disease."
Omer Butt, 32, told a man he would not register his family at his Lancashire practise unless his wife covered her head, it was alleged.
Two years ago Mr Butt was reprimanded by the GDC for telling an Asian mother-of-two he would not register her unless she wore the Muslim hijab.
Now he faces another two charges relating to a further two women who complained about their treatment in 2006 and 2007.
One patient had to leave the Unsworth Smile Clinic in Bury in pain in June 2007 because she would not wear the religious headdress, it was said.
Her family, who had been searching for a dentist since moving to the area a year earlier, were all refused treatment, it was claimed.
The woman's husband, known only as Mr C, was called into a private room at the surgery where Mr Butt asked him to impose a dress code on his wife, the GMC heard.
When Mr C asked to see an admissions policy backing up the request, Mr Butt could not provide one, the hearing was told.
The study did not produce detailed data on attitudes of American Muslims on this subject. But Mogahed said that in the United States Muslims enjoy relatively good relations with the rest of society, and suffer less from economic inequality.
LONDON - Joblessness and poverty are a more potent source of tension between Muslims and wider European and U.S. society than religious differences, one of the first major studies of Muslim integration since the Sept. 11 terror attacks claimed on Thursday.
Attacks by Islamic extremists on the United States and European capitals such as Madrid and London have sparked debate on whether a failure of Muslims to integrate into Western society has fueled extremism.
But a study of around 30,000 people in 27 countries by the Gallup polling company claims non-Muslims - including the public and lawmakers - have misunderstood the attitudes of most Muslims in the West, stifling attempts to promote understanding.
These Muslims are more patriotic, more tolerant and more likely to reject violence than the rest of Western society believes they are, the study claims. It suggests most European Muslims, for example, are as happy as other Europeans to live alongside people of other faiths and ethnic backgrounds, and share broadly similar views with their neighbors.
The findings appear to contradict the impression created by angry protests across Europe following the 2005 publication in Denmark of 12 cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, and recent rallies in which small groups of British Muslims have disrupted homecoming parades for soldiers returning from Iraq.
But Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the London and New York-based Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and a faith adviser to U.S. President Barack Obama, said the survey shows most Muslims welcome closer ties to the rest of society. The study focused chiefly on European Muslims, and the mistaken perceptions about their attitudes in wider European society.
"Many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration couldn't be more wide of the mark," she said. "European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute to society."
The study did not produce detailed data on attitudes of American Muslims on this subject. But Mogahed said that in the United States Muslims enjoy relatively good relations with the rest of society, and suffer less from economic inequality.
Blogger Saudiwoman, who was misquoted and misidentified by the Arab News hacks in the article linked above, writes about this new development (I've edited one sentence in this quote for grammar and clarity.)
Women only sports clubs have been popping up everywhere and their fees are now within reach of the average woman. They offer aerobic classes, self-defense and even salsa dancing. However they have no legal licensing umbrella because according to the government all forms of exercise are for men only. So the owners of these clubs get a license for a salon or a child activity center and then expand from there. Ultra conservatives are dead against these establishments because they believe that they lead Saudi women to sin through the influence of and interaction with unsavory feminists, and sometimes they even go so far as to claim lesbians work there and frequent the clubs (according to the muttawa sexually repressed wild imagination). Moreover they believe that exercise goes against femininity and that it is an exclusively manly domain.
"Exercise goes against femininity" - yeah, sure. Exercise is important to overall mental health and helps stave off or improve control over mental illness. Such 'ultra-conservatives' must consider madness and poor mental health to be expressions of "normal" feminity, since they are more likely to be present among the women in their families who, no doubt, are prohibited from exercise.
In Malaysia, one blogger has developed his own pantheon of comic book characters in a satiric send-up of the Islamist/anti-Islamist divide in that country. It is roughly based on the X-men mutants series of comic books.
Here are a few of the characters:
PEDOman
This superhero archetype has powers of special touch that only work on pre-pubescent kids. PEDOman is actually the only superhero that transcends religion, as evidenced by various news reports in the past. In fact, PEDOman is believed to be a bodiless being, manifesting different religious teachers at different times, of various faiths and fetishes. Using the clever guise of religious disciplining to exercise his special touch, PEDOman will jump from host to host to avoid capture, and is truly the most bizarre (and perverted) of the Mutant Mullah archetypes.
This mutant archetype will typically infuse Arabic words (which many people don't understand) into their dialog and writing, dress as Arab-friendly as possible (even in humid Malaysia), and believe that the way to God is to become Arab. This archetype could actually be classified as the mutant-precursor archetype, as most other archetypes typically go thru this stage of mutant development at some point (much like Gamma ray bombardment was the stimulus precursor to Bruce Banner becoming the Hulk). Arabic words make one sound more Islamic is the belief; apart from making one more unintelligable.
And then there's this anti-archetype, in opposition to the mutant mullahs:
Secularist avengers
Mutant Mullahs believe that the only way to live life is in an Islamic Theocracy. No other form of government will cut it. Secularist Avengers (even Muslim ones), on the other hand, believe that what God brought forth in scripture is already a complete way life, to get closer to God (the Quran does not spell out the actual mechanics of an "Islamic State" per se as it is generally understood and practiced, merely the characteristics of a just government - the notion of Islamic statehood came a lot later after the death of the Prophet Muhammad), and therefore religion and statehood can be two coexisting but separate entities - one for the individual or collective soul, and the other as a means of governing the people - provided, of course, the state exercises fairness and equality. The Secularist Avengers are the usual targets of the Apostacizers, the Mutant Mullahs' hitmen. "To be secularist", say the Apostacizers, "is to be an apostate". We can only surmise that God spoke to the Apostacizers Himself at some point, granting them the power to create apostates.
'Secularist avengers' reminded me of this story from altMuslimah: Do sex taboos contribute to sex trafficking? The author raises the question of why Muslims in some countries aren't more proactive in battling sex trafficking, especially when there are such clear Quranic grounds to oppose it. Instead, the groups that are most front and center on the issue are secular and operate out of the dreaded human rights moral framework. Dam those secularists and their hegemonic you know what....
