Ilyas Mohammed

We are necessarily different from each other, occupying discrete points in various domains, be they physical, emotional, or influential. It makes sense that our value system be elastic enough to account for the differences this reality entails. We are also necessarily similar to each other, sharing common spaces, be they spiritual, moral, or metaphysical. It also makes sense that our value system be unified to attest this singular reality. These two value systems may appear complementary but are commonly seen as antagonistic, one being hedonistic and self-centered, and the other being hidebound and ideological. History is littered with different philosophies and “isms” that have tried to explain reality and influence human behavior, but none have harmonized the two to the extent that shariah, the jurisprudence of Islam, has done. This claim requires justification regarding the universality and practicality of shariah.
The aims of shariah—it linguistically means “a trodden path” to life-giving water, spiritually referring to life-giver that is divine—are five-fold; protection and promotion of every individual’s faith, life, reason, property and honor. Therefore, all the rules and laws that hold true, protect and promote: (i) everyone’s right to their faith, worldview, rituals, and places of religious practice, (ii) life by nourishing and securing it and holding it sacrosanct, (iii) freedom of thought and reason through various forms of expression, (iv) wealth and its dealings, individually and collectively, and (v) honor and dignity through presumption of innocence and freedom from slander are considered part of shariah. Conversely, any law that doesn’t guarantee preservation of the above five universals is not a part of shariah and is rejected.
It is easily seen that these five shariah principles are in common with most if not all of the purported value systems practiced today, though weighing of one principle against another may vary. For example, shariah prohibits intoxicants because it considers their use detrimental to protection of reason (third principle), whereas other systems may consider this a matter of individual liberty (first principle). Conversely, shariah would allow different faiths to practice their law through their own courts (first principle), whereas other systems recognize only secular law.
One of the common misunderstandings is that shariah is a constant and there is no room for different interpretations. In fact, shariah has constants and variables, and this is in harmony with the human nature. We are both physical and spiritual. Our physical realms are varied, and shariah is flexible to reflect this variety. The laws derived by Islamic scholars have varied depending on people, time, location, or condition, and are subject to modifications. For example, a person who is sick need not fast, a society may elect leaders in whatever method they see fit, a victim is entitled to different types of compensation according to his/her wishes, etc. The differences of opinion are encouraged in shariah by promising celestial rewards even for scholars who reach wrong conclusions despite best efforts. This worldly portion of shariah has jurisdiction only if the society chooses it as its law. Hence, the resolutions on ballot in various states to exclude shariah make no sense and reek of scaremongering. This ignores the commonality that already exists and demonizes everyday Muslim religious practice.
On the other hand, our spiritual realm is unified and timeless, from realizing that there is One God (The Real) to knowing that being truthful, generous, helpful, etc. is right. To reflect this reality, shariah has constants. For example, loving and worshipping God, being merciful by preferring others over oneself, taking care of parents, fighting against evil, etc. cannot change. These are some of the loftiest human qualities and lead to spiritual perfection. These laws of shariah will always be applicable because the human spirit is the same at every place and time. Naturally, their accountability is in the hereafter, the timeless domain.
Therefore, the goal of shariah is not only harmony and growth in physical realm through choice and freedom, but also ennoblement and perfection in spiritual realm through exhortation and religious teachings found in Quran and practices of God’s Messenger, Muhammad. The same goal existed for shariahs of previous Messengers, Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus, peace and blessings be with them, and numerous other Messengers from around the world. In this relativistic age where timeless human values are being eroded and human worth is measured in materialistic terms, shariah offers pristine universal realities and means of spiritual perfection while promoting wholesome life, intellectual liberty, and pursuit of contentment.

By Dean Obeidallah

Editor’s note: Dean Obeidallah, a former attorney, is a political comedian and frequent commentator on various TV networks including CNN. He is the editor of the politics blog “The Dean’s Report” and co-director of the upcoming documentary “The Muslims Are Coming!” Follow him on Twitter: @deanofcomedy.

(CNN) – Newsweek’s cover story “Muslim Rage” has inspired a comedic rage.

The magazine’s newest issue features an article by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who purports to lecture the West on how to best handle Muslim rage. Newsweek, in an effort to promote the article, turned to Twitter, asking people to tweet their thoughts on the article, followed by the hashtag #MuslimRage.

What happened next was not what Newsweek or Ali could have anticipated or wanted. Instead of an academic discussion about the article, or hate-filled diatribes by Islamophobes, it turned intosomething extraordinary.

Thousands of tweets bearing the hashtag #MuslimRage filled Twitter, showcasing satire at its best — the type, by definition, which uses “wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.”

The tweets — posted mostly by Muslims it seems — are a comedic roast of the specious proposition that was peddled to us by Newsweek and Ali. Here are just a few samples:

Danya Hajjaji ‏@DanyaHajjaji

When everyone in history class turns to you once 9/11 is brought up. #MuslimRage

AidWorkerAfghanistan ‏@petey_jee

I told my shrink I was feeling suicidal and he reported me to the FBI #muslimrage

Dalia Mogahed ‏@DMogahed

When I wear a white hijab to a TV interview with a white backdrop. #floatingHead #MuslimRage

Juan Cole ‏@jricole

Television ‘experts’ saying Iran is an “Arab” country. #MuslimRage

Efe Ozturk ‏@Efe_Ozturk

Couldn’t toss football around since the ball was made of pigskin #MuslimRage

And as University of California professor Reza Aslan poignantly and instructively tweeted:

Reza Aslan ‏@rezaaslan

Memo to those few violent MidEast protesters, this is how you fight Islamophobia. You make fun of it. #MuslimRage

We know that some Muslims were truly outraged by the anti-Islam video uploaded to YouTube that sparked protests in the Middle East. Some of those protests were peaceful, while others turned violent and deadly.

We also know that plenty of Muslims were horrified by the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Libya. The U.S. government is looking into whether this atrocity was premeditated or not.

What is disheartening is that some of the media coverage of the protests embodies the worst form of sensational journalism. There were headlines and stories that made it seem as though millions of Muslims across the world had taken to the streets, with Muslim countries in riots and businesses closed.

One of the most outrageous comments came from MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who said on Monday that Muslims hate us because of the religion itself. Scarborough, to the deafening silence of his co-hosts, further commented, “If you gave every street vendor, from street vendor to prime minister in that region, a chance to throw a rock at the U.S. Embassy, they would.”

How is this different from a radical Muslim cleric telling his followers that every American hates them — from street vendors to the president — because of their faith?

Scarborough would be right if a majority of Muslims in the world had been protesting. But that is far from the truth.

In Indonesia, a nation of over 200 million, several hundred people took part in protests. Just a few months ago, 50,000 Indonesians bought tickets to see a Lady Gaga concert before it was canceled. So, what does this say about Muslims in Indonesia?

In Egypt, a nation of over 80 million, about 2,000 people protested on Friday. Of those protesters, a few hundred were arrested by the police.

In Lebanon, no protests occurred until Monday. Why? Because the pope had been visiting the country, and the leader of Hezbollah, which the U.S. has labeled as a terrorist group, didn’t want to do anything to interfere with the pope’s historic three-day visit.

A small number of protesters should not define the entire Muslim population of over a billion. The media should know this and report the truth accordingly.

Let’s look closer to home. Monday was the one-year anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street movement. It was marked by protests in a number of cities. In New York City alone there were over 1000 protesters, with 185 getting arrested. Do these protests imply that all Americans are protesting? Of course not.

And remember the Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day this summer, which was held to support the fast-food chain amid a debate over its president’s opposition to same-sex marriage? It set sales records for the chain and attracted over 600,000 supporters on its Facebook event page. Would it be fair for a foreign news media outlet to report, “Americans rage against gay marriage”? No.

The U.S. media — and we’re not just talking about Newsweek or Joe Scarborough — need to act in a more responsible way. It appears that our media are more focused on ratings than facts and accuracy. While the media jump on the story and then quickly move on to another story, their impact in defining a people and a culture can be lasting. Let’s hope the wave of #MuslimRage responses prompts the media to think twice before they react.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/19/opinion/obeidallah-muslims-rage/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

9/14/2012

By Aziz Junejo

On a recent drive to a mall, I was abruptly reminded that Islamophobia still exists.

Eleven years after 9/11, there are still folks who are either unfamiliar with Islam or who believe the many misrepresentations about it, yet I remain optimistic our nation will overcome this.

Based on the feedback and questions I get from my public speeches about Islam, a lot of people who fear Muslims seem to know very little, if anything, about Islam.

Many people have reacted with fear to anything related to Islam, without ever having had a conversation or interacted with an American Muslim.

Today, Muslim women in scarves are the targets of this xenophobia.

On that drive to the mall, I had two young Muslim girls with me, both wearing headscarves, when a man pulled up on their side of our car and started pointing, yelling expletives and then spitting on their window.

The children were visibly shaken and looked away, but I did not confront the person.

I waited until he drove forward, then took his license number and a description of his car and reported the incident to the King County sheriff and to CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations).

They confirmed this was one of many similar incidents reported recently and that it would be investigated.

When the officer asked if I wanted to press charges against the driver I said no, but I did ask that police please speak to the driver in the hope it would raise his awareness about how hurtful and offensive his actions were. I later learned that police did do that.

I wish my fellow Americans could understand our beliefs are much more similar to theirs than different — that our common values lend themselves to all of us working together for issues like peace, equality, serving the poor and pursuing justice.

According to a 2010 Time magazine poll, 62 percent of Americans say they have never met a Muslim. We are good citizens, proven to be good neighbors and are involved in community organizations.

I see American Muslims as hard workers, increasingly well-educated and affluent, striving to assimilate with non-Muslims friends and neighbors, and celebrating American values.

A 2010 report by the Rand Corp. found that “a mistrust of American Muslims by other Americans seems misplaced.” It’s because mistrust exists that we must work to further an understanding about Muslims and combat bigotry.

Folks need to know American Muslims care about our country’s safety and longevity. We contribute to society, proudly serve in our armed forces and love our families.

I am always encouraged by the fruits of our interfaith efforts.

Consider, for example, the Jewish community that recently opened its doors to members of a nearby mosque that could not accommodate its growing Muslim population. That happened when Rabbi Michael Holzman of the Northern Virginia Hebrew Congregation welcomed the All Dulles Area Muslim Society, offering to let them pray in the synagogue on Fridays.

Today, cooperation between Jews and Muslims like this could only happen in America. But this collaboration must move beyond the doors of our synagogues, mosques and churches and into the general public.

Muslims have become more proactive, not reactive, reflecting an awareness that showing patience and kindness to fellow citizens can make a world of difference in fostering an understanding about the true character of Islam.

American Muslims dedicated themselves to interfaith work pre- and post-9/11, and now, more than ever, must focus more on the hearts and minds of every American.

America remains the greatest melting pot of cultures in the world and my hope is that Americans who are not Muslim will come to view Americans who are Muslim not as a threat, and not with disrespect, but as peaceful and contributing members of our nation.

Aziz Junejo is host of “Focus on Islam,” a weekly cable-television show, and a frequent speaker on Islam. Readers may send feedback to faithcolumns@seattletimes.com

Source: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019160295_junejo15m.html

By Omar Baddar

The attacks on the U.S. embassies in Cairo and Benghazi that took place last night were deplorable, and the murder of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his staff in Benghazi was particularly outrageous. Yes, the anti-Muslim movie of the allegedly Israeli-American filmmaker in California that sparked the riots was repulsive and offensive; but no insult, no matter how grave, justifies even the murder of the offender, let alone the murder of innocent bystanders.

Of course, what I just did was too easy. It is just as easy for me to condemn these horrific murders as it is for someone in the middle of a Benghazi protest to condemn that repulsive anti-Muslim film. But building a better future where these types of incidents are less likely to occur takes more than condemnations and enhanced security measures (without taking anything away from their importance). The speculation that there was a political agenda behind the timing of the film’s release, or the signs that Al-Qaeda planned the Benghazi embassy attack and merely took advantage of the chaos, doesn’t change the need to address the deeper societal problems at play.

The relationship between the Muslim fanatics who whip up into violent frenzy and the Islamophobes who incite them is very similar to the relationship between a violent and emotionally troubled school kid and the schoolyard bully who taunts him. But there is no school principal to send the bully to detention and the troubled kid to a therapist. What we have are bigots who are rightfully protected by the First Amendment and religious fanatics who, for a variety of factors, have a damaged moral compass and an unhealthy worldview.

What is required both here and abroad is a campaign of education, as well as a campaign of marginalization. Rightwing circles in Muslim societies should undertake a serious effort to educate people about how counterproductive and outright criminal it is to respond to insults with violence. When I went to school in several Arab/Muslim countries in the Middle East, I learned about how Muhammad was taunted and abused by his neighbors in the early days of Islam, and how he only responded with kindness. The rioters who claim to be Muslim would do well to remember things like that. And because no campaign of education could ever eliminate fanaticism entirely, societies themselves should shun the fanatics and marginalize them so that no misguided youth could hope to gain admiration for taking up violence “to defend the faith” in this abhorrent fashion.

Here at home, Islamophobia has grown into a serious problem. We have to undergo a campaign of education, particularly on the right, to bust the myths that anti-Muslim bigots spread, from the imaginary threat of Sharia to misleading terrorism statistics. But, again, no campaign of education could ever root out bigotry altogether; the bigots should be marginalized so that no one can get a short-cut to fame by uttering bigotry against Muslims. The media plays a crucial role here: as long as people like Ann Coulter, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are given airtime on major newsoutlets, the battle to keep anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bigotry out of the mainstream will be an uphill one.

It is also just as important that politicians not play politics with tragedies of this sort, and fan counterproductive sentiments for their narrow political gain. Mitt Romney was quick to exploit the legitimate outrage over these events by attacking the statement released by the U.S. embassy in Cairo as evidence that Obama was “apologiz[ing] for America’s values,” when the statement (which the administration actually distanced itself from) did no such thing. It would have been fine if Romney raised legitimate criticisms of Obama’s handling of the crisis, but to manufacture a grievance in order to play partisan politics is not only distasteful, but also counterproductive in the long term.

Those of us who value building a better and more peaceful world for future generations outnumber those who seek to exploit divisions for personal gain. The only question is: are we willing to put in the work to achieve the needed progress in our societies to bring that better world about?

By Sumbul Ali-Karamali, Special to CNN

(CNN) – My father always told me never to talk about religion, politics, or other people’s children. He was part of a generation of American Muslims who wanted to stay quiet and assimilate into American life and not rock the boat. Growing up in Southern California, I tried to follow his advice.

But after 9/11, I found that I, along with other American Muslims,  have had little choice but to talk about religion.

Although countless Muslims have condemned the acts of 9/11 in the United States and worldwide, American Muslims became objects of suspicion.

The 9/11 terrorists broke numerous laws of Islam and were denounced as mass murderers by Islamic religious leaders.  Even so, Islam is viewed as a religion preaching violence.

In the aftermath, amidst the fear and anger, many American Muslims realized that the reason Americans were so quick to believe the worst about Muslims after the horrific attacks of 9/11 was that Americans knew little about even the most basic tenets of Islam.

And we realized that if we didn’t explain our beliefs and traditions, then other people would write our stories for us.

Despite our efforts, that’s exactly what has happened.

Although 9/11 did compel some Americans to learn more about Islam, it also triggered a wave of anti-Islam feeling that has burgeoned.  And though there have been interfaith initiatives, books on Islam, documentaries, education efforts, and shows like “All-American Muslim,” polls show that Americans’negative views of Islam have increased since 9/11, not decreased.

Such trends cannot help but discourage even the most optimistic of American Muslims; many of us are more fearful now than a decade ago, and entire Muslim communities feel besieged.

Anti-mosque incidents have escalated in recent years. Earlier this summer, a mosque in Joplin, Missouri, burned to the ground. Last year, Roger Stockhamwas arrested with explosives outside the Islamic Center in Dearborn, Michigan. An arson fire seriously damaged a mosque in Wichita, Kansas, last year. And incidents of mosque vandalism have become more common.

Hate groups have been on the rise, too; one of the most horrific hate crimes was the murder of Shaima Alawadi, a young mother who had received anonymous notes calling her a terrorist.

Almost every Islamic studies professor or speaker I personally know – whether they are Muslim or not – receives hate mail and sometimes death threats.

How has this happened in our country? There are many reasons. It is not simply a lack of information about American Muslims, but also misinformation and, in many cases, outright fabrications about what Islam entails and what Muslims believe. An example of one of the most ridiculous is the assertion that Muslims cannot abide dogs; we are so evil, apparently, that man’s best friend is our enemy. (See Muslims with Dogs, a website that flippantly dispels this nonsense.)

The Center for American Progress issued a report in 2011 which documented a small but extremely well-funded network of anti-Islam fear-mongers who have worked diligently to spread misinformation about Islam. Directly or indirectly, these fear-mongers fomented the “ground zero mosque” hysteria, promoted the film “The Third Jihad,” which the New York Police Department showed as a training video – and was strongly criticized for doing so – and have been responsible for Islamophobic advertisements on public buses all over the country.

This anti-Islam rhetoric has been connected to violence, too: Anders Breivik, who murdered more than 70 people in Norway, cited anti-Islam bloggers numerous times in his manifesto, in which his stance against “Islamization” was a clear theme.

It’s not just a lack of information on Islam that American Muslims have had to battle, it is an increasing body of vitriolic myths and tall tales about Islam and Muslims that we continually have to explain or dismiss.

Particularly frightening is the eagerness with which public figures and political officials have leapt onto the Islamophobia bandwagon. Peter King’s “Muslim radicalization” hearings,  Michele Bachmann’s baseless accusations of public officials being linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the NYPD’s long-term spying on Muslim communities (which produced no leads) are just several examples of the increasing demonization of every Muslim and, increasingly, the entire religion of Islam.

Rising anti-Islamic sentiment in America troubles Muslims

Islam is the second-largest religion in the world, and Muslims comprise more than one-fifth of the world’s population. No religion can flourish for 1,400 years  without being flexible and adaptable.

The defamatory rhetoric directed at Muslims and Islam in this country has little to do with the actual religion or its adherents and everything to do with fear of the Other.

For American Muslims, the past decade has been tumultuous. We have emerged from private life to public life, into the public sphere in an effort to aid understanding between the communities of our multicultural country.

We do it not only for ourselves, but because irrational fear of Islam and Muslims is bad for all Americans: it frays the social fabric of our society; it creates divisions between Americans; it affects the health of our democracy; and it affects the wisdom of our policy choices.

In the last decade, I have encountered numerous Americans who understand this and who, despite the fear-mongers, have made remarkable efforts to connect with Muslims.

Recently, I spoke at a Jewish temple as part of their educational series.  They broke into spontaneous applause during my talk on Islam and women,  and gave me a standing ovation at the end.

They were one of the many moving examples of generosity and openness I have encountered in the past decade. And that, despite the discouragement and fear, is what gives me hope for the future.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Sumbul Ali-Karamali.

Source: http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/11/opinion-american-muslims-live-in-fear-11-years-after-911/?hpt=hp_bn1

By Sumbul Ali-Karamali

I am an American Muslim, and like every other American Muslim I know, I am horrified and disgusted by the recent attacks on U.S. Embassies in Libya and Egypt. I stand with President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and numerous American Muslim organizations in unconditionally condemning these attacks. And I extend my utmost sympathy to the victims and their families.

The violence was incited by an anti-Islam amateur film that gained prominence when Terry Jonesincluded it as part of his September 11th message. But, however inflammatory a film or a book or other speech might be, Islam never allows for the taking of a life in response. From the beginning of Islam, killing civilians (noncombatants) and arbitrarily destroying property has always been absolutely prohibited and severely condemned. Even in the earliest times. The Muslims who attacked our embassies and caused deaths have committed heinous crimes under Islam.

Every Muslim should recall how Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, was reviled and persecuted in his hometown of Mecca for over a decade during the early years of his preaching. He never responded with violence.

In fact, the historical records describe a famous incident that nearly all Muslim schoolchildren learn. Every day, the Prophet Muhammad walked along a certain street. As he passed beneath a certain window, the woman inside would throw garbage out the window, which landed with unwavering aim onto his head and shoulders. This scenario occurred on a daily basis. He never paused in his journey and he never reprimanded her. One day, as he passed beneath her window, nothing happened; he was struck not by garbage, but by the absence of it. This time he did break his journey to go inquire of a neighbor as to the woman’s well-being. Upon learning that she was ill and in bed, he offered to see to her needs.

This is the model that Islam gives us, and this is the model that Muslims must follow. No insult is worth the cost of a life. There is nothing in Islam that requires the repression of freedom of speech. There is absolutely nothing that allows for violence in the face of an insult. Violence begets violence.

Morever, Muslims need to remember that all Americans do not harbor the ridiculous, vitriolic views in the anti-Islam video that provoked this violence, just as non-Muslims should remember that the Muslims undertaking these horrible attacks represent no more than a fraction of a fraction of Muslims worldwide.

Bigotry begets bigotry, as well as violence. We have seen this in our own country, with the recent shooting of the Sikh temple and the arson fire that burned the mosque in Joplin, MO down to the ground. If we are to stop this senseless cycle of violence, we must set aside violence and bigotry, and remember that in our new smaller, global world, minor actions can have massive repercussions.

Update: New evidence is now indicating that the attacks might not have been due to a reaction against the film, but to a previously planned terrorist attack, possibly to avenge the death of al-Qaeda’s second-in-command killed a few months ago. Either way, they were reprehensible and violative of the most basic rules of Islam.

Sumbul Ali-Karamali is the author of The Muslim Next Door: the Qur’an, the Media, and that Veil Thing and Growing Up Muslim: Understanding the Beliefs and Practices of Islam

By Niraj Warikoo

Speaking to an overflow crowd at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, noted Muslim scholar Tariq Ramadan criticized extreme Islamists known as Salafis, saying that the Arab world needs to develop political systems that reject both theocracies and dictatorships.

But he added that Arab countries should develop their societies in ways that are unique to their own cultures.

“Every single country should find its own way,” Ramadan said to a crowd inside a classroom at the university’s law school. “We can’t impose models” on the Arab world from the West and elsewhere.

Ramadan, who teaches at Oxford University in England, is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the group that took power in Egypt this year after the Arab Spring and democratic elections. Ramadan was born in Europe because his father, a Brotherhood leader, was forced to flee Egypt at a time when it was cracking down on the Islamist group. Ramadan believes that Islam and democracy are compatible.

In his talk, Ramadan slammed politicians — whether Salafis in Egypt or the Tea Party in the U.S – that he said played to emotions instead of reason.

“Democracy is about critical thinking,” not fear and emotions, Ramadan said. “Populism is a danger, a universal danger,” including religious populism.

Ramadan also criticized the Arab world for its poor record of educating women and its divisions. He said there’s a “polarization between secularists and Islamists” in the Middle East that can’t be blamed on the West. He also bemoaned divisions between Sunnis and Shias, the two main sects within Islam.

“I was shocked” at a recent meeting with Sunni leaders when I heard some of their anti-Shia rhetoric, he said.

Ramadan, who has lived his entire life in Europe, also told the Muslim crowd that they should not just talk about their rights, but also meet their “responsibilities towards the community.”

At the same time, they shouldn’t “have to apologize for being Muslim.” He criticized Muslims who were embarrassed to use Islamic terminology in public. “Jihad is not a dirty word,” referring to a Muslim world for struggle. “Sharia is not dirty word,” he added referring to a Muslim world for Islamic law or code.

Regarding the Arab Spring, Ramadan said it was good to see dictators being overthrown, but he cautioned that outside powers in the West, China, and other countries are playing roles in the Middle East for their own “economic and geostrategic interests.”

Ramadan’s talk Monday night was his first he’s given in Michigan since he spoke in Dearborn in 2010. In 2004, Notre Dame University offered Ramadan a teaching position, but he couldn’t accept it because he was banned by the Bush administration from entering the U.S. for six years for alleged ties to terrorists, a claim Ramadan has said was baseless. In Jan. 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lifted the ban on Ramadan.

In an interview with the Free Press after his talk, Ramadan said of the Palestinians: “The situation is worse, and it’s worsening. I really don’t see any positive.” He also said the Arab world can’t blame the West for its failure to create better educational and intellectual institutions.

“We can’t blame the West for our failures.”

Contact Niraj Warikoo: nwarikoo@freepress.com or 313-223-4792

Source: http://www.freep.com/article/20120910/NEWS06/120910071/Muslim-scholar-says-Islam-democracy-compatible?odyssey=nav%7Chead

By JEFF KAROUB

WEST BLOOMFIELD, Mich. — On a prime piece of real estate in suburban Detroit stands a large, vacant elementary school with no vestiges of life – save for a tiny sign that identifies the building as the “future home” of the Islamic Cultural Association.

But the proposal to establish a new mosque and community center has thrust this quiet site into the center of a battle between a prosperous Muslim community and a Christian legal advocacy group that wants to derail the project as part of its goal to confront the “threat of Islam” in the United States.

The effort is “targeting innocent Americans because of their faith and willingness to engage in the community and to contribute,” said the Islamic association’s attorney, Shareef Akeel. “They’re targeting a people simply because of their faith.”

The Islamic association bought the school in upscale West Bloomfield Township last year. Then some residents made a legal bid to have the $1.1 million purchase thrown out over allegations that the deal was somehow corrupt and hidden from the public.

In the process, they gained the support of the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center. Among other things, the center and residents accuse the school district of negotiating with the association behind closed doors and accepting illegal campaign contributions from an association official.

A judge dismissed the residents’ case, saying the plaintiffs had no standing to file a complaint. But they are appealing that decision, and the law center in June called for a grand jury to investigate.

Michigan Attorney Bill Schuette has yet to decide on the request, but the law center says it’s confident he will empanel a grand jury because he made corruption a priority of his administration.

Outside court, the center’s allegations go beyond the purchase of the building. It accuses Islamic organizations in the United States of taking advantage of the American legal system to wage a “stealth jihad” that aims to transform the U.S. into an Islamic nation. The center also alleges that the Islamic association has ties to terrorism because of its links to other Muslim groups.

The confrontation in West Bloomfield and similar clashes have made Detroit “an active front in a kind of culture war,” said Andrew Shryock, a University of Michigan anthropologist, author and expert on the city’s Islamic presence.

The Detroit area is home to one of the nation’s largest Islamic communities, with 150,000 to 200,000 Muslims living in the city and its suburbs, many of whom emigrated from the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere. The population has sometimes drawn anti-Muslim protesters, such as members of the Westboro Baptist Church and missionaries who demonstrated at Dearborn’s 2010 Arab International Festival. The missionaries were arrested for disorderly conduct and later acquitted.

The Islamic Cultural Association – composed of more than 100 families, including many doctors, lawyers and other professionals – is “threatening to people who see Muslims as alien,” said Shryock, who wrote a book called “Islamophobia/Islamophilia.”

To their critics, the social and economic advancement of Muslims in the Detroit area is seen as “somehow anti-American,” he said.

The clash is another example of the Thomas More center entering a dispute on behalf of Christian groups that attack Islam. The center has also represented Terry Jones, the minister who in 2011 burned a Quran at his Gainesville, Fla., church – an act that led to violent protests in Afghanistan that killed more than a dozen people.

Jones sued the Detroit suburb of Dearborn in federal court, alleging that asking him to sign an agreement before a planned protest outside that city’s large Islamic Center of America was a violation of his free speech rights.

Richard Thompson, the law center’s president and chief counsel, did not return messages left by The Associated Press.

Attorney Erin Mersino, who assisted in the center’s investigation, said she could only speak to her role, which included going through documents alleging “a backroom deal” that “was never open to the public” and summarizing the evidence for submission to the Michigan attorney general.

One person who said he is trying not to take sides in the dispute is Jim Manna, who sits on the West Bloomfield Planning Commission, which will consider the mosque proposal in October.

Manna, a Catholic from Iraq who is part of Detroit’s large Chaldean community, said he will base his decision solely on whether features of the project, such as a 45-foot minaret, conform to the township’s rules and regulations.

So far, Manna said, the proposals for a mosque have “substantially better curb appeal” than “a vacant school, doing nothing but rotting away.” But that hasn’t stopped him from asking questions about whether the Islamic association has received money from outside groups, whether it would accept money from an Islamic government or what kind of message the imam will preach.

“We have every right to be cautious,” he said.

___

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/07/west-bloomfield-mosque-michigan-school-christian_n_1864267.html?ir=Religion&ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, August 21, 9:00 AM

By Alex Seitz-Wald

While leaders like Speaker Boehner and Sen. John McCain were rightly praised for taking a strong stand against Rep. Michele Bachmann’s witch hunt against Muslims in the U.S. government, don’t give the party of Lincoln a pass on Islamophobia just yet. In Tampa this week, GOP leaders adopted a plank to their platform supporting a ban on foreign law and aimed at Shariah, the Islamic religious law that many conservatives insist is secretly insinuating itself in the U.S. The platform still has to be approved by the entire convention in a vote next week, but generally, most things approved by the platform committee make it into the final platform.

TPM’s Ryan Reilly reports that the man behind the effort to add the amendment is none other than Kris Kobach, Kansas’ secretary of state who moonlights as an anti-immigration activist. Kobach wrote Arizona’s infamous SB-1070 “papers please” immigration law, and advised a handful of other states on their similar laws cracking down on undocumented migrants. Kobach is (or at least was during the primary) an adviser to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, and likely the man behind Romney’s “self-deportation” immigration policy.

But Kobach is nothing if not prolific, and apparently he has now taken up the fight against Shariah. Critics charge that just as the threat of undocumented immigration is used to justify discrimination against Hispanics, the spectre of Shariah is used to justify discrimination against Muslims.

“I’m not aware of any court that’s accepted the argument, but in cases involving either spousal abuse or assault or other crimes against persons, sometimes defenses are raised that are based in Shariah law,” Kobach said, explaining the need for prohibitions on Shariah. “We actually put a provision affecting Kansas statute this year and I think it’s important for us to say foreign sources of law should not be used as part of common law decisions or statutory interpretations by judges in the lower state courts as well.”