Miracle in Turkey: How the Road to Peace Can Be Islamic

Turkey has long been seen as something of a "bridge" between The West and The Islamic World, even as those 2 cultural worlds have undergone major changes and political transformations. But none of those transformations can rival that of Turkey.

Before Prime Minister Erdogan's AK Party came to power, Turkey was almost manically secular, thanks to the tradition began by Kamal Ataturk, who sought to erase what he believed to be the "backwardness" of religion, including Islamic culture. Of course, "cultural revolution" sounds rather like many of the socialist movements, including China's, that became government tyrannies under the guise of enforcing social justice. With this same style of heavy hand, Turkey also became rabidly nationalistic, and embarked on a long and brutal cultural and political suppression of ethnic Kurds and others. The AK party, branded "Islamic" (ooooh, danger! orange!) by the West, has undertaken a total rejection of such oppressive and wasteful policies. One rarely hears in the press about how the Islamic-leaning AK party has turned from war and suppression to diplomacy and reconciliation in their dealings with the Kurds as well as their neighbors. There are no calls for antagonizing or attacking those of non-Muslim or other religious persuasions, not to mention nationalities. Note that this is in stark contrast to the stereotype of Muslims as being always on the jihad warpath against enemies - religious, ethnic, or those who diverge from some dogma du jour.

Under the old nationalist government much-adored-but-not-befriended by the West, the Turkish lire was famous for being almost worthless. Twenty years ago, you could go into Istanbul, for example, and need cash for bribes just to get around, meet lots of destitute and unhappy-looking people, see run-down buildings beside crumbling historical sites, wonder how people managed to live, and generally notice a sense of general desperation, corruption, over which the human spirit of the people had to struggle to rise.

Now it is as if Turkey has awakened from a bad dream. Landfills have been transformed into gardens with recreational areas for children and sports facilities for others. Bridges, tunnels, sewers, new roads, tram lines have been built. Hospitals, schools, libraries, training facilities, sports facilities, playgrounds, clinics, elderly care facilities and more have been established and are functioning not only in Istanbul and Ankara, but cities around the country. The government has invested $22.6 billion in five years for civil services such as health care and infrastructure in Istanbul alone. At the same time, crime and punishment have been revamped to provide equal enforcement of the law and to make public officials just as accountable as private citizens, and to strengthen and enforce anti-bribery laws. Corruption has died down while political life has been encouraged in many ways, including the establishment of centers where people can discuss political issues.

Both the government and Turkish charities have revived efforts to help the poor, including subsidized bread, access to health care, and money for immediate needs. Local councils have been established to which people can address their needs.

Importantly, money that would have been spent on the military and on skirmishes with neighbors is being spent on the needs of Turkish society. Taking after this same attitude, a more balanced approach in terms of religious freedom is worth looking at.
The previous nationalist government tried to use religion against freedom in an inverted way, by making religious expression illegal and socially "anti-Turkish". Erdogan had many problems to overcome in changing the status quo.

The one that caused the most problems for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was the lifting of the headscarf ban. A relic of the Kemalist era, the ban on headscarves in Universities has deprived millions of female students of the right to education. While espousing values like freedom of choice and expression, the Turkish secular establishment saw nothing contradictory in not allowing students to cover their hair if they wished to. Erdogan’s measure that promoted true secularism was derided as Islamism by his critics. His choice for the President too was condemned as the future First lady preferred to wear a headscarf. Erdogan resigned in the face of such criticism and called for fresh elections to seek a direct mandate from the people. He returned to power with the greatest margin ever in Turkey. This only served to infuriate the opposition who almost succeeded in having his party disbanded by the Constitutional Court.

Which Turkey would serve as a better role model for the Muslim World?? A nationalist and oppressive regime which emphasizes military aggression and almost fanatic secularism? Or a government that favors Islamic principles of democracy and justice and fairness without making dogma and military enforcement of such the centerpiece of their power? A government that prefers cooperation and peaceful development over military might should be a role model not just for the Muslim World, but for the West, and in fact, for the planet and all its political players, east or west.

Pres. Obama promised to make domestic development superceded the international adventurism of Republican nationalism and cultural evangelism. Those same "forces" have influenced his hand in Afghanistan and driven him from the hope of a promised change of agenda. Maybe he should take a good look at Turkey.

Jihad: Another Right-Wing Tactic?

Abukar Arman's insightful article, "Jihad Against the Abuse of Jihad" spotlights problems on both sides of the "jihad" issue, and how this concept is abused by both Muslims on the extreme "right-wing" (my term) and their right-wing counterparts, sworn enemies in the West.

In light of the rampant extremism and militarism around the world, nothing proves more dangerous than the manipulation of truth for political ends. This tactic facilitates the demonization process that blurs ideologies and beliefs in both the West and the Islamic world. And, no concept is more abused by both sides than the concept of Jihad.

To Muslim extremists and their cronies, Jihad is a narrowly defined license to fight their perceived enemies (including Muslims, as is the case in Somalia) even if that leads to atrocities against civilians. And to Western extremists and their cronies, Jihad is a religiously sanctioned, perpetual holy war led by militant non-state actors sworn to destroy Western values and civilization.

As Robin Wright wrote in Newsweek, a "soft Islamic revolution" is afoot among Muslim masses, seeking a more centrist (?), socially modern way to both be Muslim and a reasonable participant in the world and its trade, views, education, science, etc. That means being true to one's principles, but otherwise, neither Western nor extremist.

So in describing the meaning of the word "jihad", Mr. Arman goes for the heart of the issue:

While the concept carries different relevance for different people, the Arabic word means to strive or struggle toward achieving a higher aim, which includes the "struggle in the way of God." It can also mean to defend oneself, or to strive against injustices. Finally, Jihad means the attainment of the ultimate goal of Tazkiyatul Nafs, or purification of the soul - morally, spiritually and ethically. Indeed, it is this latter aspect, the Jihad with oneself as one resists temptations and strives against his/her evil tendencies, which Prophet Muhammad referred to as "the Greater Jihad." The purification of the soul, or simply self-purification, is an around-the-clock process of deep introspection.

Despite great achievements in the fields of science and technology; in the compilation and standardization of knowledge; and, yes, in the art of its dissemination, humanity still remains in an embryonic, if not an imbecilic, stage when it comes to morality and ethics.

As for that last point, witness the GOP...

And their creation of The Perfect Enemy out of the Muslim world would be Exhibit A for total imbecility.

In the past eight years of global political discontent, one persistent warning has been systematically ignored: When militant politics takes over the stage, reason makes a run for the exit. This was a period when people were generally herded toward one side of the argument or the other. Two nihilistic manifestos dominated the political discourse and brought the world closer to a self-fulfilling prophecy known as the "clash of civilizations": the global war on terror and the global Jihad.

The former was based on an erroneous premise that "political Islam" in all its manifestations is anti-democratic and anti-Western, and, as such, should never be afforded a space in the marketplace of ideas. Proponents of this view insisted that such movements were dangerous fronts for Muslim militants with sinister "Jihadist ambition," intent on destroying the West because of its freedom and economic success. Therefore, they were to be met at their incubation place: with "preemptive" force if they were based in foreign lands and by draconian policies if they were stationed in the West.

And Muslims didn't do any better, falling for the same sort of right-wing lies:

The concept of "global Jihad," on the other hand, was based on an opposite yet equally erroneous premise - that the West is collectively bent on destroying Islam by occupying the Islamic world: exploiting its natural resources, oppressing its peoples and Westernizing Islamic values. And as such Jihad against them is not only right, but the moral thing to do.

The proponents of this manifesto, such as Al Qaeda, selectively use the confrontational rhetoric often used by their counterparts in the West - secularist and evangelical Zionists - to lend credence to their claim. And they, too, work hard to conceal two particular realities: that Muslims are afforded more rights in the West than in most of the so-called Islamic countries when it comes to practicing their religion freely and establishing Islamic institutions; and that the Obama administration is adamant about its desire to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Note that both sides are male-dominated drives to simplify all life to a fight-to-the-death struggle against ideological Enemies. Maybe it's time for women to not only take more of the helm, but to show men that, well...

Real Men talk before they shoot. And if they do poetry, so much the better. At some point, don't men prefer to live with women and children, too? It's time to change what "jihad" means on all sides of all fences.

Obama Prayer Leader "Linked" to Hamas; So Is Jimmy Carter, I Presume

Fox News and other right-wingers are now playing gotcha with what they see as a vulnerability in an otherwise almost invulnerable celebration/inauguration - drawing a "connection" between someone on Obama's lineup of religious leaders, hence his "side", and .... lots of ooohs and ahhhs and looks of fear and loathing, please ... TERRORISM.

Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, is one of many religious leaders scheduled to speak at the prayer service at Washington's National Cathedral.

Mattson has been the guest of honor at State Department dinners and has met with senior Pentagon officials during the Bush administration. She also spoke at a prayer service at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. Mattson, who was elected president of the society in 2006, is a professor of Islamic studies at Hartford Seminary in Hartford, Conn.

But in 2007 and as recently as last July, federal prosecutors in Dallas filed court documents linking the Plainfield, Ind.-based Islamic society to the group Hamas, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization.

Neither Mattson nor her organization have been charged. But prosecutors wrote in July that they had "a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking" the group to Hamas and other radical groups.

Note that it says "federal prosecutors" were the sources for this alleged affiliation. Then note that Hamas, named as a "terrorist organization" by the United States, also happens to have been the political party that was voted into power by the Palestinians in a "free and fair election" that was overseen by none other than former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. Yes, Jimmy Carter, the right-wing's favorite whipping boy, who also happened to have overseen a number of other foreign elections, to the approval of the United States, or at least, certainly not to his condemnation.

Yet clearly, by this, and by his inflammatory book entitled - wouldn't he be booted off dailykos for this? - "Peace, Not Apartheid" - Jimmy Carter is obviously linked to Hamas and linked to terrorism. How dare he make such inflammatory statements against Israel as accusing them of apartheid? How dare he criticize Israel? Israel is our friend, right or wrong. Wasn't the invasion of Lebanon "conducted" with impunity? Never mind that Lebanon is a sovereign nation. Flying in the face of national sovereignty is a Neocon Calling Card, or should I say right of passage. And Israel's government is the quintessential neocon's dream. Security always trumps compassion, or even cooperation. Compassion is always there basically, or so it appears, for PR.

In fact, Jimmy Carter's links to Hamas and terrorism are stronger than those of Ingrid Mattson, that - do we shudder at the word? - Muslim. She wears a terrorist hijab, in solidarity with terrorism and Islam, which are of course, one and the same. But she never wrote a book entitled Peace Not Apartheid. She did not oversee the election that put Hamas in power. And the allegations are against her organization, not her personally. Never mind that her organization is widely considered to be the most moderate mainstream organization for Muslims in America.

And Jimmy Carter's association with Hamas was not just the allegations of a prosecutor. And nobody even knows the "basis" on which those allegations were made. Jimmy Carter actually wants Palestinians' rights to be considered in negotiations regarding middle east peace in the region. Now that's a tie to terrorism, since Palestinians' rights are right there on Hamas' charter, along with the destruction of Israel. So by these "ties", Jimmy Carter is clearly asking for the destruction of Israel.

And of course, Obama, by having a Muslim give a prayer, is giving in to terrorism. And since any Muslim can probably be linked to terrorism with the flick of a switch, sort of at will, he should have known. But you know, maybe we can forgive him.

After all, Ingrid Mattson also has "ties" to anti-terror efforts.

Law enforcement agencies have used the organization's annual convention as part of its outreach to the Muslim community. The group has provided religious training to the FBI, according to court documents. Karen Hughes, a former Bush confidant and under secretary of state, called Mattson "a wonderful leader and role model for many, many people."

And to Jewish groups. And to the U.S. government.

Mark Pelavin, director of inter-religious affairs for the Union for Reform Judaism, another organization participating in the prayer service, called Mattson "a really important voice denouncing terrorism."

"Clearly, Dr. Mattson has been welcome throughout the government," he said. "I haven't found anyone anywhere who's found anything Dr. Mattson has said that's anything other than clearly denouncing terrorism in quite explicit Islamic terms."

Pelavin's group has a partnership with the Islamic Society to encourage members of mosques and synagogues to build ties nationwide.

Attorneys for Mattson's group wrote in court documents that it is not a subject or target of the Holy Land investigation. The group has worked with the Bush administration's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, according to court documents.

Wait! Isn't that what neocons and other Islamophobes are always taunting Muslims to do? Denounce terrorism? Then when someone actually does, some prosecutor is dragged out to create a damning "link" to terrorism, thus undercutting the efforts of the terrorism-denouncer and harming their credibility. How can you expect Muslims to come out and denounce terrorism when that in itself could create a "keyword" that would be picked up by "echelon" or some other spying "entity" and would brand that already-under-suspicion Muslim as a "terrorist"? If someone like Ingrid Mattson, who has been praised for her efforts by people from all sides of the equation, can be "linked" to terrorism, what about the rest of us?

This heavy-handedness only makes the situation worse and keeps moderates in hiding while extremists have lots of fuel for the fire. Extremists have nothing to lose, basically. Moderates have everything to lose.

As to the prosecutor "source", that may be about to disappear:

According to e-mails filed in the court case, one of the prosecutors seemed willing to ask the judge to remove the group from the list.

If this is some sort of tactic to dampen down the Obama inauguration's high ground and excitement, it's also typical of the previous 8 years' path toward destruction that wants to use smear tactics and lies to prevent goodwill and cooperation.

The whole world needs more goodwill and cooperation, and Ingrid Mattson, a woman convert to Islam and Islamic scholar - talk about breaking down barriers! - is the kind of leader we need more of. Obama and his team should be proud, not wary, of their choice. It's not like he's the first one to recognize Mattson's importance and beneficial, outspoken stance.

Coordinated Terror Attack on Mumbai

Terrorists used machine guns and grenades in well-coordinated attacks in Mumbai, India, against 2 luxury hotels, the city's largest train station, a theater, and a hospital, killing over 80 (death toll not yet final...) and wounding about 240 ... so far...in what Christine Amanpour described as

the worst attack in India in the last 20 years, where Islamic militants have been stepping up their assaults on Mumbai, which is not just the center of its filmmaking but the economic and financial hub of India.

According to the New York Times,

Even by the standards of terrorism in India, which has suffered a rising number of terrorist attacks this year, the assaults were particularly brazen and drastically different in scale and execution. The attackers used boats to reach the urban peninsula where they hit, and their targets were sites popular with tourists.

It appears that the attacks were run like a military operation rather than the usual suicide attack, using a group of "soldiers" and the element of surprise to take out unarmed civilians - to what purpose, God only knows.

Some guests, including two members of the European Parliament who were visiting on a trade delegation, remained in hiding in the hotels, making desperate cellphone calls, some of them to television stations, describing their ordeal.

Alex Chamberlain, a British citizen who was dining at the Oberoi, told Sky News television that a gunman had ushered 30 or 40 people from the restaurant into a stairway and, speaking in Hindi or Urdu, ordered them to put up their hands.

“They were talking about British and Americans specifically,” he recounted. “There was an Italian guy, who, you know, they said, ‘Where are you from?’ and he said he’s from Italy, and they said, ‘Fine,’ and they left him alone.”

Sajjad Karim, 38, a British member of the European Parliament, told Sky News: “A gunman just stood there spraying bullets around, right next to me.”

Others who escaped from the ordeal confirmed that gunment asked for people with US or British passports. As for Mr. Karim,

Before his phone went dead, Mr. Karim added: “I managed to turn away and I ran into the hotel kitchen and then we were shunted into a restaurant in the basement. We are now in the dark in this room, and we have barricaded all the doors. It’s really bad.”

No word yet on the fate of Mr. Karim, whose name would suggest he is Muslim, but whose passport may have sealed an undeserved fate at the hands of complete idiots imagining themselves carrying out some sort of Islamic "jihad". Their "jihad", which according to the Qur'an, is supposed to involve the use of the mind, apparently went AWOL into the netherworld of "underground" gangs where "action" replaces "thought" and "faith" is defined as "totally willing to kill targets, including self-targeting" - as long as the word "Islam" is used to justify the "action".

Consequences... await the living... as the body count goes up, as civil society falls apart, as both sides seek some sort of balancing between revenge and peaceful coexistence, mostly the former, and as "Muslim" extremists increasingly perform group lobotomistic rituals that is turning the world against them and against their religion. A religion which is classified in many minds as "terrorist", while nothing could be farther from the truth.

Another great excuse for the war on terror. Another gushing wound on the hope for human cooperation. Unless thinking people can see beyond it, to the inevitable failure of "terrorism".

Terrorism Against Muslims Hits Ohio in Ramadan

This disconcerting news about terrorism against Muslims is just in (quoted in full):

Baboucarr Njie was preparing for his prayer session Friday night, Sept. 26, when he heard children in the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton coughing. Soon, Njie himself was overcome with fits of coughing and, like the rest of those in the building, headed for the doors.

"I would stay outside for a minute, then go back in, there were a lot of kids," Njie said. "My throat is still itchy, I need to get some milk."

Njie was one of several affected when a suspected chemical irritant was sprayed into the mosque at 26 Josie St., bringing Dayton police, fire and hazardous material personnel to the building at 9:48 p.m.

Someone "sprayed an irritant into the mosque," Dayton fire District Chief Vince Wiley said, noting that fire investigators believe it was a hand-held spray can.

According to fire dispatch communications, a child reported seeing two men with a white can spraying something into a window. That child was brought to the supervising firefighter at the scene.

Wiley would not discuss that report, but said the investigation has been turned over to police. Police were not commenting.

The 300 or so inside were celebrating the last 10 days of Ramadan with dinner and a prayer session, but the prayer session was interrupted so those suffering from tearing, coughing and shortness of breath could receive treatment.

Wiley said an adult and juvenile were taken to area hospitals and others had their eyes or faces washed on the scene. He did not know how many people were treated at the scene.

Ismail Gula, ISGD secretary, said people were praying during the weekly service when some in the audience began to cough and experience breathing troubles, then left the building. Once outside, several of them called 911, Gula said.

Tarek Sabagh, a member of the ISGD board, wasn't present when the incident occurred.

He said his daughter called and told him to stay away because of the possibility of remaining fumes. Sabagh arrived shortly after and watched from the mosque's steps as members were allowed back inside about 11 p.m. to collect belongings.

"It's very disturbing," Sabagh said. "Something like this has never happened before."

Sabagh said members moved to a Beavercreek school to finish their prayer session as police continued to investigate.

"I don't know if people will have the feeling of trust to come back tomorrow or next week or next month," Sabagh said. "I don't know how people will feel."

Ramadan is the ninth month of the Muslim calendar. During the month, Muslims fast (do not eat) from sunrise to sunset. In the evening and in the morning before the sun comes up, they eat small meals. During this month, they take extra time for family, inner reflection, and spiritual growth.

This shows the anti-Muslim sentiment which is a direct result of the so-called Global War on Terror. You can't have a war based solely on ideology and win. It's always ultimately a lose-lose.

One loss is participation of Muslims in American politics and society, an important way of mitigating terrorism. In fact, it's the only real solution. Yet here's the reaction of one Muslim on dailykos after this incident:

Keep in mind, as many of you know, Muslims in america are well assimilated, mainstream moderate people, often times professionals who contribute greatly to the communities in which they live.

But because of Fox News, because of right wing organizations, like the Clarion FUND and their viscious attacks on islam, because of daniel pipes and ohers like him, Islam has been maligned to the extent thathate crime is an acceptable part of the rights tradition. They believe that Muslims are out to destroy America.

No matter the facts, no matter the reality, all that matters is the propaganda they listen to on Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, etc....

Cal Thomas editorials are in my local paper virtually every day. The man rants against muslims all the time. And there are many others like him. Michelle Malkin. This Kathleen Parker who has recenltly called for Palins resignation has viciously attacked muslims in the past.

So many of them. And so, the regular people believe this crap, and they believe it is their duty to defend america against this Mortal enemy.

And when attacks like this happen. Nothing much is done, BECAUSE, muslims are ignored by and large. Their situation their suffering EVEN their votes dont seem to matter much.

Fortunately, a large and sympathetic response from the site assures us that not everyone has that divisive, partisan, emotional, fear-mongering, and unthinking attitude. Now we need more conscientious men and women of conscience in the media reporting an incident like this, and more public outcry.

McCain's Preacher Says America's Mission is to "Destroy" Islam

Here's a Warning - Non-Armageddonists Beware the McCain Thing:

During a 2005 sermon, a fundamentalist pastor whom Senator John McCain has
praised and campaigned with called Islam "the greatest religious enemy of our
civilization and the world," claiming that the historic mission of America is to
see "this false religion destroyed." In this taped sermon, currently sold by his
megachurch, the Reverend Rod Parsley reiterates and amplifies harsh and
derogatory comments about Islam he made in his book, Silent No More, published
the same year he delivered these remarks. Meanwhile, McCain has stuck to his
stance of not criticizing Parsley, an important political ally in a crucial
swing state.

If this is not right in line with the Armageddonists' Principles of shaking up the mideast with war and then "fighting the good fight" against the "false religion" of Islam, and all those sick religious self-proclaimed Doomsday Generators ... then what is? McCain himself is probably more about political expedience. He coddles religious extremists because that's what he needs, as he sees it, to win the nomination and later, the election. That "later" clause may prove to be his undoing, though.

Public Opinion Polls show:

"...evangelicals remain just 7% of the adult population. That number has
not changed since the Barna Group began measuring the size of the evangelical
public in 1994....less than one out of five born again adults (18%) meet the
evangelical criteria."

"...the number of Protestants soon will slip below 50 percent of the
nation's population." National Opinion Research Center's General Social Survey,
2004.

Of those who claim to be Protestant, most presumably are not Armageddonists.
Actually, he might do well to give a nod to less traditional religion.

The fastest growing religion (in terms of percentage) is Wicca -- a Neopagan religion that is sometimes referred to as Witchcraft. Numbers of adherents went from 8,000 in 1990 to 134,000 in 2001. Their numbers of adherents are doubling about every 30 months.

OK, so you need millions. Ok, so Muslims in America number about 1,558,068, as "estimated" in 2004. But in the world, their numbers get a bit larger: 1.61 Billion, as estimated for 2007. Does that give them the right to protest in the world court? Well, there's no Muslim nation that can veto the United States in the U.N. But even so, isn't it extremely irresponsible for a nominee for President of the United States to endorse and praise a guy who calls on America itself to destroy Islam? Say, why didn't we hear about this, but Wright/Obama was bleeding all over the media?

In March 2008—two weeks after McCain appeared with Parsley at a Cincinnati
campaign rally, hailing him as "one of the truly great leaders in America, a
moral compass, a spiritual guide"—Mother Jones reported that Parsley had urged Christians to wage a "war" to
eradicate Islam in his 2005 book. McCain's campaign refused to respond to
questions about Parsley, and the presumptive Republican presidential nominee
declined to denounce Parsley's anti-Islam remarks or renounce his
endorsement.

At a time when Barack Obama was mired in a searing controversy involving
Reverend Jeremiah Wright, McCain escaped any trouble for his political alliance
with Parsley, who leads the World Harvest Church, a supersized Pentecostal
institution in Columbus, Ohio. Parsley, whose sermons are broadcast around the
world, has been credited with helping George W. Bush win Ohio in 2004 by
registering social conservatives and encouraging them to vote. McCain certainly
would like to see Parsley do the same for him—which could explain his reluctance
to do any harm to his relationship with this anti-Islam extremist.

It may also have something to do with this:

If Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright were white, he'd probably have his own church
show on television.
Maybe even his own network.
...
If he were white, Rev. Wright could stand up before the cameras and make
his nuttiest statements -- that the U.S. government deliberately spread AIDS in
the inner cities, for example -- and most white Americans wouldn't be so
shocked.

So is it all about racism? Not exactly. But after his singing debut in "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran", you'd think McCain would be a little more careful. Maybe he thinks Karl Rove's got his back. Ahhh, McCain... For those who love More of the Same.

U.S. Aggression Led to "Worst of All Worlds", Says Archbishop

In an interview with a UK Muslim magazine

THE Archbishop of Canterbury has said that the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday.
Rowan Williams claimed that America’s attempt to intervene overseas by “clearing the decks” with a “quick burst of violent action” had led to “the worst of all worlds”.
In a wide-ranging interview with a British Muslim magazine, the Anglican leader linked criticism of the United States to one of his most pessimistic declarations about the state of western civilisation.
He said the crisis was caused not just by America’s actions but also by its misguided sense of its own mission. He poured scorn on the “chosen nation myth of America, meaning that what happens in America is very much at the heart of God’s purpose for humanity”.

Williams went beyond his previous critique of the conduct of the war on terror, saying the United States had lost the moral high ground since September 11. He urged it to launch a “generous and intelligent programme of aid directed to the societies that have been ravaged; a check on the economic exploitation of defeated territories; a demilitarisation of their presence”.
He went on to suggest that the West was fundamentally adrift: “Our modern western definition of humanity is clearly not working very well. There is something about western modernity which really does eat away at the soul.”
Williams suggested American leadership had broken down: “We have only one global hegemonic power. It is not accumulating territory: it is trying to accumulate influence and control. That’s not working.”
He contrasted it unfavourably with how the British Empire governed India. “It is one thing to take over a territory and then pour energy and resources into administering it and normalising it. Rightly or wrongly, that’s what the British Empire did — in India, for example.
“It is another thing to go in on the assumption that a quick burst of violent action will somehow clear the decks and that you can move on and other people will put it back together — Iraq, for example.”
In the interview in Emel, a Muslim lifestyle magazine, Williams makes only mild criticisms of the Islamic world. He said the Muslim world must acknowledge that its “political solutions were not the most impressive”.
He commends the Muslim practice of praying five times a day, which he says allows the remembrance of God to be “built in deeply in their daily rhythm”.

The above is all a quote from that article. Check the above link for the entire interview. His critique of the Muslim world is called "mild" but worth hearing.

Richard Posner Favors Surveillance of All US Muslims

"There, but for the grace of God, go I." Under surveillance, Sheikh Posner! To the Kangaroo Court you go!"

The title is a link to this brainboggling article, which is the culmination of all things Orwellian where reason is replaced by the knee-jerk notion, "Have you screwed bin Laden today?"

Of course, it speaks volumes for the "First Freedom," freedom of religion. Which was right up there in the First Amendment along with freedom of speech until Mr. Posner came along and saw fit to class all Muslims with UBL, who has been trying hard to repent, but we just won't let 'im, folks.

Now bear in mind that Richard Posner is a possible Supreme Court Justice contender, and considered a "libertarian" or "liberal" as opposed to an "authoritarian". The Aussie article where this story broke, reports:

" Melbourne QC Tim Tobin said it was a shock to hear such hard and isolationist positions coming from a judge known as a liberal thinker. While he was disturbed by the judge's proposed crackdown on US and Canadian Muslims, he suspected the sentiment would be welcomed by the Howard Government.
Judge Posner raised the prospect of secret trials as a "tailored regime" to prosecute terrorists in cases where there was a concern about classified information going public.
Queensland SC Glenn Martin said he had been "jolted" by the address: "I hope we never have secret trials in Australia." "

It sounds like the notion of Big Brother and Kangaroo Courts is resonating in the supposed halls of justice. These guys no longer believe in justice. For justice cannot be meted out on the basis of fear, or on the basis of emotions. Maybe he never heard of the Salem witchcraft trials. Maybe he forgot about the Spanish inquisition. When emotions, especially fear, are running high, well, it's hard to really believe in due process. Ask any crime victim. On the other hand, shall we give up 200 years of due process for which our founding fathers fought so hard because some old guys are so whipped up into a state of fear that they forget the cause of all their terror in the first place?

And what's that "cause"? It's their own demons: greed, blindness, power-lust, oppression, cruelty, and prejudice. Withdraw the troops from invasive ill-begotten wars, stop financing the eternal Israeli occupation of the Palestinians (with oppression and murder and bulldozing rampant), take care of our own Americans, hold together our respected and free Republic, give what we can to the hungry and downtrodden, and the "terrorists", especially the "Islamic terrorists", will vanish into the sunset, quite suddenly. Leaving a struggling but peaceful, and terror-free landscape. Not a dream, not a promise, but an obvious, glaring truth.

One species, too many lies. Truth endures.

Record number of Chinese Muslims making pilgrimage to Makkah

Many people do not know that Islam is alive and well in China. Oh, yes, and that it's universal, and has nothing to do with being of one ethnicity or another. Contrary to popular opinion.

Just some stats:

To prevent possible accidents, China's Regulations on Religious Affairs,
which was promulgated in 2004, stipulates that all outbound pilgrimage
activities of Chinese Muslims should be organized by the national Islamic
association, referring to the IAC.

China has more than 20 million Muslims, mainly living in Xinjiang,
Qinghai, Ganshu, Ningxia, Yunnan, Shaanxi, Inner Mongolia and Henan. Starting in
1985, nearly 100,000 Muslims have fulfilled their pilgrimages.

Islam v. Theocracy

Bridgethought of the Day: Neocon strategy - If you can't win, hype some enemies.

It may seem incongruous to those taken in by the anti-Islamic hype, but Islam should be right there on the forefront of the fight against theocracy. Of course, Muslims themselves can be blamed for much of, albeit not all of, the bad rap, what with this Bush-touted "caliphate" thing and such well-known "Islamic" (sic) theocracies as Egypt (run by dictator/pharoah Mubarak) and Saudi Arabia, right down to the Sultan of Brunei. In fact, most of the Islamic world are run by brutal dictatorships, and the dictators set themselves up as demi-gods, claiming rights to the natural resources of their respective nations. But they have nothing to do with Islam as a religion, except insofar as they unfortunately claim to adhere to it.

Remember that Hitler claimed to adhere to Christianity, but no one ever called him a "Christo-fascist". His regime is a prime example of theocracy in action. He was the absolute leader, a demi-god. But whatever he was or did was never considered representative of Christianity. Even the Spanish Inquisition did not taint the name of Christendom the way a few terror cells have been used to characterize Islam.

The Qur'an actually demands freedom of religion: "No compulsion in religion." And "no" here means "forbidden", verboten, no can do. "Compulsion" means any kind of force or favoritism. And "religion" actually refers to a broader sense of "way of life". In fact, other ayat (verses) call for the best kind of language being used in discussion with those one disagrees with and no aggressive action against any person or group based only on their religion or lifestyle. No prohibition of music here. The basic rules mentioned in the Qur'an regarding dress do not mandate a "burqa" for all women, nor do they prohibit it. And there certainly should never be a "state religion" or "state sponsored religion" because this would be in direct disobedience to the above injunction.

People will ask, "What about the sharia?" First of all, the number of Muslims who really understand what the Sharia is are few and far between - so what about the non-Muslims world's impression about it, derived mostly from much-publicized radical views on it? There is much room for discussion and change in application of certain laws, contrary to the view of many. In fact, the Qur'an gives us this injunction: "The rule of law is (to be applied by) mutual discussion and agreement between you." And the "you" is not gender-specific, but is plural. This is certainly a directive towards democracy, not autocracy. And theocracy is autocratic, as are most "Muslim" rulers today. In fact, much of sharia law actually promotes human rights (e.g., women's property rights, anti-slavery recommendations, orphan's and children's rights, the rights of the disabled to some extent, and dispute-resolutions that favor the weaker party, etc.). The fact that rules do not adhere to most of their own religion's ethics reflects very badly on their societies.

In fact, Islam is almost impossible to be practiced in the world today in many Muslim countries. Many have come to the U.S. specifically in order to freely practice Islam. And since theocracy really means setting up the leader as a demi-god, this should be universally recognized by Muslims as anathema. For the U.S. not to make the extra effort to protect this first freedom at a time when it is under assault from all sides is unconscionable. And Muslims should join with all others, believers, non-believers, atheists, you name it, in protecting and promoting that basic right. The Qur'an really emphasizes the use of the mind. And in this case, I think all humans could work harder to put the sapiens in homo sapiens.

Think Fear, Think Obliteration, Think Armageddon

Bridgethought of the Day: What is more terrifying - walls that are too low, or weapons that kill too much?

As usual, spending my time reading people whom I can hardly stand, such as the immutable Cal Thomas and his weird, but frighteningly popular, rants. Oh no! I read it on "Cal": "Free world is Letting Its Guard Down." A study in Britain showed teachers reluctant to "covering the 11th-Century crusades, when Christians fought Muslims for control of Jersalem, because the lessons contradict what Muslim students are taught in mosques. The sacrifice of truth in favor of propaganda for fear of violence is the first step on the road to enslavement."

Now that latter bit of wisdom is great advice for the Bush administration. Yes, it IS true! We do sacrifice truth in favor of propaganda, although for more reasons that here stated, and it definitely is the first step on the road to enslavement. All that's really promoted these days in the way of news is propaganda and selective news-revealing, something akin to the avoidance of discussions of the crusades in British schools. And the cause is the same, albeit in a different flavor - fear of Islam and Muslims.

The difference is in Cal's scenario in Britain, they fear an imagined "Muslim backlash" if their presentations are perceived as anti-Islamic, while here the Bush administration fears Islam and Muslims in general and "Islamic" terrorists in particular and hence produces propaganda that, rather than trying to avoid Muslim anger, shows the "Big Stick" and "Big Brother" factors to strongarm potential "Islamic terrorists" into submission, backing off, or fearful hesitancy and, it is hoped, ultimate weakness and/or defeat. In Britain and Europe, according to Cal, the public desires retreat from international and military involvement that they see as incendiary to the testy Islamic element abroad. But here in the US of A, the public supposedly - or at least good ol' Cal - wants or needs more international and military intervention and involvement to protect us against the Islamic and Mongol hordes that are ever on the march to our doorstep.

He hates the propaganda of retreat, but loves the propaganda of aggression and war, because he views the latter as the road to security. Oh, really? as my 10-yr-old would say...

In all propaganda camps, it seems, the real enemy is still Islam and Muslims. They are to be feared - it's just an issue of how to respond to that fear: retreat or aggression? Yeah, who's the biggest, baddest macho on the rock? What d'ya think we're gonna do? Back out when our enemies are on the attack?

Nobody asks - are they even on the attack? or are they even the enemy??? Why do we always insist on oversimplifying things? When the going gets tough, we go back to childhood: good guys vs. bad guys, and guess who always wears the good guy outfit? Right, Rove: The Big Guy! The Bully! By Machiavelli, you're right! But does wearing the good guy outfit make a guy good??? And putting a bad guy outfit on another guy - does it make him bad? Why don't people ever use their minds????

Let's just get into Cal's mind for a moment, to be fair and fruitful. Here's fodder for the flames of fear: "In Belgium, a newspaper has published a copy of the Koran in French and offered free coupons for a Flemish language translation of Islam's holy book. The paper also published a book called 'Islam Now,' which presents a history of the religion up to the modern era. I haven't seen it, but would be willing to bet it contains little, if anything, about the terrorism carried out in the name of Islam by fanatics."

Gee, Mr. Thomas, if you're willing the bet that the Qur'an, even in translation, carries little or nothing about terrorism carried out in the name of Islam, then what the hell are you worried about from other Muslims? I know, of course, that you don't really mean that the Qur'an does not promote terrorism in any shape or form, or that fanatics don't represent Islam, but that's what you said, sir. And, for once, I think you've got something there. And if the Qur'an doesn't promote terrorism or even mention it, even in passing, let alone promote it, then why should you have this all-out fear of Islam and Muslims?

What, after all, makes "terrorists"? Is it religion? NO! Is it oppression? OBVIOUSLY. Oppression is one of the most grievous crimes against humanity - hey, murder is a form of oppression, one used rather liberally by right-wing dictators, including those who call themselves, coincidentally, "Muslim". Are they right-wing dictators because of the Qur'an or because of Islam? God forbid! There's an emphatic NO again. Are terrorists from Al-Qaeda or otherwise doing what they do because of the Qur'an or Islam? Absolutely NOT. All of these reactions, rather Newtonian, I might add (for every action - oppression - there's an equal and opposite reaction - terrorism, the reactionary form of oppression), are caused by social, political, and economic dynamics. Religion is just dragged along for the ride. Yes, there's a fatwa here, and a Bible verse there, but it does not form a unified front, does not form a Mongol horde, and is not coming to a skyscraper near you.

In fact, maybe Cal would like to know, or maybe not, now that I think of it, why, oh why, hasn't Mr. Bin Laden come up with another big Spectacular terrorist Show. The answer is easy - well known - and eminently true: because some people more knowledgeable in the Qur'an and in Islam than him advised him that this was simply wrong. In other words, other Muslims advised UBL that the Qur'an actually does not promote terrorism, but rather condemns it, and therefore, he acquiesced, stopped the show, and the terror level gradually slipped back to where it is today: orange.

Basically, the fanatics, and oppressed Muslims as well, have gone back to what they do usually: kill each other.

So Cal was right after all - the Qur'an and Islam have nothing but condemnation of terrorism, and say nothing about the terrorist fanatics and their plans, because these are not religious plans. In fact, the more that is known about the Qur'an and Islam, and the more that is taught, the less terrorism, fanaticism and war there will be, and the safer the world will be for democracy, Western or Eastern or even Centrist... But the West does not want democracy or peace. Far be it from them to want such a thing. They consistently promote the diametrical opposite: supporting tyrants and their tyrrany, building up and interfering militarily with everything they can get their hands on, for which they have even an outside chance of imposing false impunity, even in the short term. Tyranny and oppression - this is the cause of terrorism, not Islam, not the Qur'an, not some religious groups talking about the return of the Caliphate, like the Return of the Jedi, NO! It's your tyranny, or tyranny you tolerated, promoted, turned a blind eye to, etc., that's coming back like that old Newtonian reaction again.

Don't blame God, blame physics.