Hard things

Looking for answers

Muslims are looking, too

I used to dislike the term, too, for some of the same reasons, but then I considered how when you get to the bottom of the issue it is indeed fear that motivate many "critics", just as fear motivates many homophobes and xenophobes. Hate and hostility often arises out of some kind of fear (fear they'll take your job, fear they'll turn your kid gay, ad infinitum).
I agree that one must distinguish between prejudice and legitimate criticism. (I say "legitimate" because non-Muslims have a God-given, Islamic right to constructively share their reasons for not being Muslim, even if the shariah establishment has only recently begun to come to grips with that fact.) The problem today is that this geopolitical climate makes it so that 1) many non-Muslims mix the two when discussing Islam and 2) Muslims find it difficult to see the distinction in this climate -- when it is made at all -- and treat everything as an attack (e.g., this nonsense about Rushdie's knighthood).
Having said that, our main concern here is Islamophobic sensationalism and propaganda. As I envision it, an effort such as this would focus on relatively simple facts as opposed to ideas or extended arguments. The power of Islamophobia is something like "death by a thousand cuts" -- it's the accumulated effect of a large number of trivial arguments that are in themselves fairly insignificant. But when you seem them all together or hear them repeatedly unchallenged incessantly, they're lethal

I try to be helpful

I am pessimistic by nature, and not really a friend of Islam, but this would be a good project for serious Muslims.
For about 4 years I have been trying to find an Islamic site that can/will tackle criticisms of Islam and Muslim behavior, topic by topic, point by point.
I do not think, however, that the folks at Eteraz have any idea of the task you propose they do. It is not a "handful of subjects" but a wide range of very valid criticisms that covers
1. Hundreds of passages in the Quran that promote hate and violence toward non-Muslims (not 'supposedly' promote)
2. Countless actions of Islam's prophet and his merry band of men, as narrated in the ahadith
3. The many dubious deeds by Islam's prophet from the very early biographies (also in the hadith).
4. Modern Muslim attitudes about these three preceding items.
5. The state of Islamic dominated societies and the role of Islam in these.
6. Treatment of minorities and women in Islamic societies, including apostasy.
7. Questions of logic relating to religion in general and Islam in particular
8. Questions relating to the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, particularly in the West.
9. The relationship, if any, between modern terror and Islam.
and so on... Of course, most of these items are interrelated.
     These are not trivial issues. We are talking about human rights, equality, freedom of speech and conscience, and most of all, truth.
     You should do this 'wiki' for your own sake and for all of us. Give it your best try. Being the pessimist I am, I doubt anything will come of it. I don't even think you will even reach any consensus about what to address much less on how to respond - but I would love to be wrong.
     You know, if I weren't so cynical, I would say you Arabs are related to the darn (2 people, 3 opinions) Jews. I still remember reading Josephus 50 years ago and marveling at a people that would divide into three factions and fight/kill each other while Titus and his Roman Army encircled Jerusalem. As if they didn't have any problems. I digress.

Islamophobia

     I went to Nouri’s blog, and it does not accept comments - so I will make an important point here.
     He says: “Most discriminatory behavior at ground level in the “Islamophobic” context is motivated by the physical features of the victims”
     On the other hand, what he calls islamophobia could just be a reaction to the violence we see in Muslims, or the hate in the Quran against non-Muslims. Think about that, instead of the “Islamophonia is racism” excuse that is so popular among Muslims. Islam is an ideology, not a race. Duhhhh.
     If people dislike Islam, it could just be because of what Muslims do and the way they treat people. It could be, because where Muslims dominate, they discriminate, oppress and teach hate. Of course, to look at ”islamophobia” based upon the actions of Muslims means having to think about these actions and would require one to examine the soul of Islam. Blaming others is so much easier.
     Here is a better discussion on this topic from a Muslim blog. http://archive.eteraz.org/story/2007/6/30/13276/9600
     Read the comments, please. One person writes about ‘islamophobia’:
     Quote: I used to dislike the term, too, for some of the same reasons, but then I considered how when you get to the bottom of the issue it is indeed fear that motivate many “critics”, just as fear motivates many homophobes and xenophobes. I agree that one must distinguish between prejudice and legitimate criticism. (I say “legitimate” because non-Muslims have a God-given, Islamic right to constructively share their reasons for not being Muslim, even if the shariah establishment has only recently begun to come to grips with that fact.) The problem today is that this geopolitical climate makes it so that 1) many non-Muslims mix the two when discussing Islam and 2) Muslims find it difficult to see the distinction in this climate — when it is made at all — and treat everything as an attack… End of quote.
     So, according to Muslims like Nouri and most others, if a person dislikes Islam, he/she is either a racist or afraid. Simple, isn’t it? The hate and violence done by Muslims has nothing to do with it. Nothing at all. Also, anybody that says anything unkind about Islam is immediately said to be misinformed or ignorant.
     This same topic is also found on another good blog. Note my post. http://akramsrazor.typepad.com/islam_america/2007/06/using-the-wikip.html
     Muslims will not accept that people have a right to criticize Islam. This is why Muslims are bigots and hypocrites. That is why Islam is synonomous with terror, violence and repression. That is why basic concepts such as freedom, equality and human righst are alien to Islamic societies.
     I have read the Quran and the hadith. It have also read most of the early works of Islam, including Hisham and Kathir. It took me 3 months to get through the 30+ volumes of Tabari. I can say with absolute certainty that Islam is full of hate and violence. I can also say that according to Islam’s own traditions, Islam’s great prophet did countless vile things that any person would condemn in a minute if the man’s name were not “Muhammad”. Oh yes, these things were written by his friends and followers, not his enemies. Many of these passages can be found online, if one cares to look.
     Who knows, maybe, this may be why people don’t like Islam.
     Does this statement make me an islamophobe? No, it makes me a critic of Islam. I dislike it as an ideology. Am I afraid of Islam? Obviously not. Most Muslims are not violent, but they are also not honest about Islam or realistic about its many problems. This is why things will get worse, much worse.
     Kactuz

Another comment on apologetics, from a Muslim site

Until now Muslims in the West have not demonstrated that they understand clearly the fiqh of free-speech, nor the freedom, which allows for critique and the responsibility that comes with that freedom. Despite our illiteracy in these areas of fiqh some of us endorse ideas that claim to be critical but which in fact contribute to, fuel and lead to the disintegration of the Muslim community in the West.

A Muslim talks about 'critics of Islam'

My problem with "critics of Islam"      I can accept criticism of my faith and religious beliefs. Muslims do have the moral and intellectual resources, across the religious, political and social spectrum to be able to meet any such challenges that might be posed. Tough questions have been asked in the past and it is no different today (that is how a tradition develops). There are obvious pitfalls to responding to all criticism, however fiery, with demands for legal protection; conversely Muslim critiques of cultural practices and beliefs would look hypocritical.
     However, what some critics of Islam engage in is something else altogether. It is not criticism, to which at least Muslims might be able to respond, but an attempt to portray Muslims as Untermenschen. This is especially true of those who set their sights on Europe's Muslim minorities. Everything, from a lack of housing to rising rape statistics are attributed to the Muslim presence in Europe. If someone commits a crime or struggles at school then the broader questions are asked. If a Muslim does the same, the problems are reduced to the person's faith (which may only be nominal). If Muslims aren't terrorists then they're practicing dissimulation.
     The biggest myth pushed by some of these critics is attributing vast political power to Muslim minorities. Laws and policies, foreign and domestic, are said to have been created just to placate the 'angry hordes' of Muslims from London to Rome. I notice this delusion is pushed most heavily by the array of pseudo-conservative commentators across the pond, backed up by bigots on this side of the geographic divide. Even the most harshest critic of Islam should stop and think at this point: Can it really be that marginalized, underachieving, politically weak, socially divided sets of communities, who routinely receive negative media coverage (whether this is their fault or not is besides the point), are in a position to influence the agendas of governments that rule some of the most powerful, stable and prosperous nations in the world today? Well, can it be true?

Perhaps the violence in the Quran and Islamic traditions explain the 'terror' thing. Perhaps the terrorism we see today is just Muslims doing what Mohammad did long ago.

     You say "I can accept criticism of my faith and religious beliefs. Muslims do have the moral and intellectual resources, across the religious, political and social spectrum to be able to meet any such challenges that might be posed. Tough questions have been asked in the past and it is no different today..."
     Oh well, that is nice. So now, at last, I have somebody that can either answer some simple questions about Islam or give me some links where answers can be found. Great.
     The issue is simple. The hadiths tell us that Islam's dear prophet, Mohammed, did many very vile things. I am talking about such things as murder, torture, raids, plunder, rape, slavery and even wife beating. Yes, they are all there in the 'strongest' traditions. I would hope you do not deny this or ask for references. If you want these, I will provide them - no problema.
     So, this being the case, why should I or anyone trust or believe a Muslim when I see how much they love and respect their prophet - when he did the things the hadiths say he did, as recorded by his friends and followers? Why don't they condemn these actions as described in their own writings? Perhaps this explains the 'terror' thing. Perhaps 'terror' is just Muslims doing what Mohammad did.
     Some may not agree, but I think this issue is very relevant to current events.
     I have asked about this time after time, with links to Muslim texts on Muslim sites, and I am usually ignored (90% of the time). I think Muslims don't want to think about these things. The rest of the time (10%) they call me a racist, or say the texts are poorly translated, out of context, not meaningful, falsified, or that I am just ignorant. Oh yes, there have been a few threats.
     And once in a while I get some really strange answers, like the explanation about the prophet hitting his young wife. A Muslim told me that in reality it means "he hit her but did not beat her, he caused her pain but it did not hurt." This was from the "Comment is free" (Guardian) blog in June. I am still trying to figure that one out.
     Well, that it... I'll check back for your answer. Come to think of it, I think I even left a few posts here at "under progress". Never once have I got a straight answer.
     Thank you, John 'old man' Kactuz

Another Muslim speaks about the 'Muslim dilemma'

     Judging from much of the Muslim reaction to the latest Islamist outrage -- last month's attempted bombings in London and Glasgow -- the community seems to have talked itself into a default position in relation to violent Muslim extremism. The same old arguments are being flogged again betraying an unwillingness to acknowledge either the scale of the problem or its nature. The fear of making the community or Islam look bad has created a strange silence around issues that lie at the heart of the Islamism debate.
     Broadly, the Muslim argument is that it is all down to a host of external factors. Top of the list is the western foreign policy, especially with regard to the Palestinian issue, compounded by the invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq. Then there are social and economic reasons such as lack of education and high rate of unemployment in the Muslim community -- again attributed to external causes such as racial or religious discrimination.
     In other words: don't blame us; it is all other people's doing. We are only the victims. As someone who feels the same pressures as other Muslims, I wish this were true. But it isn't. It is not all other people's doing. We are not just the victims. I used the term 'default position' as a euphemism. There is a more robustly appropriate term, which is being increasingly used to describe the Muslim position: denial. The view that Muslims are in denial of the extent of the problem and their own responsibility in dealing with it is no longer confined to right-wing Muslim-bashers. Even liberal opinion has started to shift.
     ... Hassan Butt, a reformed British extremist, recalls how "we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy." Writing in The Observer, he said if he was still stuck in his old ways, he would be "laughing once again" at suggestions that the June 29-30 failed attacks were motivated by anger over British foreign policy.
     Mr Butt criticized Muslims and liberal non-Muslim intellectuals and politicians for failing to recognize the "role of Islamist ideology in terrorism" -- an ideology that, according to another lapsed extremist Shiraz Maher, preaches a "separatist message of Islamic supremacy" and seeks to establish a "puritanical caliphate." Mr Maher knew Kafeel Ahmed, the Indian who tried to blow up Glasgow airport and is now fighting for his life in a hospital in Scotland.
     First and foremost, Muslims must acknowledge what Ziauddin Sardar, one of Europe's most prominent Muslim scholars, calls the "Islamic nature of the problem." Islamist extremism has not descended from another planet or been imposed on the community from outside. It breeds within the community and is the product of a certain kind of interpretation of Islam. And, in the words, of Mr Sardar, terrorists are a "product of a specific mindset that has deep roots in Islamic history."
     In a seminal essay, "The Struggle for Islam's Soul" (New Statesman, July 18, 2005), Mr Sardar argued that Islamists were "nourished by an Islamic tradition that is intrinsically inhuman and violent in its rhetoric, thought and practice" and this placed a unique burden on Muslims as they tried to make sense of what their co-religionists were doing in the name of Islam. "To deny that they are a product of Islamic history and tradition is more than complacency. It is a denial of responsibility, a denial of what is happening in our communities. It is a refusal to live in the real world," he wrote.

Said that, and strongly disagreeing with the propagandistic and sophistic use of the terminology which Mr Horowitz and for Spencer employ, we, as intellectuals and scholars have to recognize that within the Muslim world (and not within Islam as they advocate) there are troubles which cannot be adduced uniquely to the Palestinian issues, the War in Iraq, and the USA’s new, dangerously right wing, political approach. So, I welcome Mr Horowitz, Spencer, Kramer, and Pipes’ efforts to raise awareness of the issues we face. Yet I totally deplore and strongly criticise their approach and their views.

Deleted Dialogue

This may explain everything

"O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if ye ask about things when the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be made plain to you, Allah will forgive those: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most forbearing" (surat Al-Ma'idah, verse 101).

The usual suspects, the usual excuses

1. The verses or text are out of context
2. You are a racist or Islamophobe
3. You don't know Arabic. It is a bad translation. You can't understand Islam unless you speak Arabic.
4. You are not an expert on Islam. Go talk to somebody that knows Islam.
5. The Qur'an and Islam are too complex for non-Muslims to understand
6. What about the Crusades and other violent Christian actions of the past?
7. What about the violent verses in the Bible?
8. Bad Muslims are not “real” Muslims
9. It is not Islam's fault. The cause is imperialism, colonialism, foreign policy, Israel, Hollywood, Bush, Bugs Bunny.
10. This has been refuted hundreds of times, and thoroughly discredited (with no references, of course)

Talking about Islam in the media

     Such pictures as this one (in Newsweek) are akin to the performances of the Muslim women, usually Pakistanis, who come to elementary schools to "talk about Islam." They bring pretty postcards of mosques and a prayer rug that can be turned Meccawards, and are eager to share information about "family-centered" Islam. Everything concentrates on the trivial (for Infidels) rituals of worship: Shehada, zakat, salat, hajj, and especially Ramadan, which allows for all kinds of wide-eyed wonder at the depth of feeling which Muslims must have to stick to a daytime fast for a whole month.
     And then of course the discussion can be all about not only what good things there are to eat at the breakfast Iftar dinner, but how various are those things -- because, you see, "Islam is not monolithic."
     Add to this a few phrases about how Islam is one of the "three great abrahamic faiths," that Jesus and Moses are "revered in Islam" (well, not quite, but respected, as long as they are understood to be the Muslim Jesus, and the Muslim Moses, part of a long line of prophets who were not quite the real thing, until the real thing, Muhammad, came along). There may also be a quoting of 5.32 without 5.33 (Bush has done it, Blair has done it, every Muslim apologist and non-Muslim apologist for Islam has done it), and of course, the usual citing of "there is no compulsion in religion" (2.256) without any discussion of what that phrase must mean. Such discussion could venture into uncomfortable realms, given that under Muslim rule the treatment of non-Muslims is one of official humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity, such that over time many, to escape this fate, converted to Islam. In other words, they were forcibly converted not by the sword, but by the need for more secure, less unpleasant and imperilled lives.

Islamic Portals, Resources and References

Lies, Ignorance, Denial, and Deceit

Islam recognizes the rights of the minority. To ensure their welfare and safety, Muslim rulers initiated a tax (Jazia) on them. Prophet Muhammad (P) forbade Muslim armies to destroy churches and synagogues. Caliph Umer did not even allow them to pray inside a church. Jews were welcomed and flourished in Muslim Spain even when they were persecuted in the rest of Europe. They consider that part of their history as the Golden Era. In Muslim countries, Christians live in prosperity, hold government positions and attend their church. Christian missionaries are allowed to establish and operate their schools and hospitals. However, the same religious tolerance is not always available to Muslim minorities as seen in the past during Spanish inquisition and the crusades, or as seen now by the events in Bosnia, Israel and India. Muslims do recognize that sometimes the actions of a ruler does not reflect the teachings of his religion.