Salam Al Marayati

Winning the Ideological Battle Against Terrorism

2013-06-03T15:57:09-04:00

In President Obama's counterterrorism speech at the National Defense University, he said, "The success of American Muslims" is the antidote to al-Qaeda's narrative and that of its affiliates.

On the one hand, the U.S. is winding down its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and shrinking those theaters as major front lines in the fight against terrorism. On the other hand, the front line has shifted to the U.S., where lone wolves get captivated by Internet theater, luring them with false promises of delivering justice in exchange for their self-destruction. In that line of thinking, a moment has arrived for American Muslims -- prevail or perish, not in a physical sense, but in terms of relevance to America and to young American Muslims, in terms of winning the "battle of wills and battle of ideas" against Muslim extremism, and in terms of overcoming fear about Islam along with intimidation towards its adherents.

Success for many American Muslims has been realized through economic prosperity, but the president has added to our agenda leadership in combating violent extremism. American Muslims have also been in partnership with law enforcement and successful in foiling four out of 10 terrorism plots in the post 9/11 era. But that's not enough. We now need to enter the ideological battle with online predators.

The line, "America is not at war with Islam," is not sufficient to counter to al-Qaeda's rhetoric. American Muslims are best equipped to provide content to the counter-narrative, which includes Islam's call for life against the extremists' call for death, the power of pluralism against exclusivism, and the need to infuse hope for constructive change toward justice against the extremist cries of despair that justice in this life is unachievable.

Every sane person dreads war and American Muslims shudder to take responsibility for actions of extremist groups overseas. Millions of American Muslims fled war-torn regions to escape the madness of dictatorships and extremist groups spawned under their tyranny. While American Muslims are not responsible for the actions of a few terrorists, we must embrace our civic responsibility when called by our duty toward justice and the president to help in leading the country out of this war. We do not choose wars, but wars choose us.

As President Abraham Lincoln stated in his second inaugural address: "Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came."

Al-Qaeda made war rather than let Muslim communities survive, and mainstream Muslims must accept this challenge rather than let the union of God's religions break up and let extremists define Islam.

Our role should be working on the front lines against extremism, not with armies and military might, but with ambassadors who speak out against the vile rhetoric of violent extremism wherever it rears its ugly head. Our responsibility is to win against extremism as our duty to humanity, a victory that can only be achieved with a non-military approach. Amplifying mainstream Muslim voices is the most critical component to marginalizing terrorists rather than being marginalized by them. As American citizens, we must step forward in a time of need, a choice that is an honor for our country and that can help end the war.

Michael Adebolajo, the Woolwich butcherm, Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev the Boston Marathon bomber, changed the state of our current successes in the West. They are symptoms of a problem -- ideological violence led by those who sit on empty thrones of self-righteousness, sending young people to death. These manufacturers of maniacal outbursts want to define Islam for us. This struggle is not just for America, but also for Islam.

The time for complaining has ended. A moment in American history has arrived at our doorstep. It is time to answer the door that can open a channel for us. It will be a difficult strait, but one that can take us to clear and calm waters for our continuing prosperity. We cannot let it slip away, or we will only have ourselves to blame for losing this opportunity to fight. We cannot afford to be viewed as only villains or victims of extremist actions. We are determined to be victors in this ideological battle, for the identity of Islam and Muslims can only be defined by the winners in this war.

Living Within an Interfaith Framework

2012-12-24T17:29:45-05:00

By Salam Al-Marayati, President of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and Rev. Ed Bacon, Rector of All Saints Church and author of '8 Habits of Love'

A historic convention recently took place involving American Muslims and All Saints Church in rosy Pasadena, Calif., the first national Muslim convention at a church. We talked about how to collectively work for a cultural climate change that ends the paradigm of polarization.

America's religious diversity must be transformed into kinetic energy for positive work -- a change from the history of houses of worship being the most segregated places in America, and from religions at odds with one another to inter-religious cooperation.

Here are the challenges for Muslims: We are told that we are silent to extremism. When we speak out and establish a presence on any public stage, however, we are tarred with the typical attack that we have "ties to extremism." Building a community center in lower Manhattan gets us the "Ground Zero Mosque" crisis. Working in the State Department and the White House for American interests gets us accusations of the "Muslim Brotherhood infiltration and takeover" of America.

Yet, within the American Muslim community there are Nobel laureates and academicians and public servants and professionals and scientists who can build a bridge to the Muslim world for mutual understanding between the U.S. and Muslim-majority countries.

This bridge will not necessarily be destroyed by anti-Muslim bigots -- they have been around for a while and will continue to be around. It is destroyed by the belief that having Muslims work in the public affairs arena is meaningless. Muslims are rendered irrelevant, and so no one should bother to engage them other than by offering a few ceremonial treats during Ramadan.

It is time to shift our focus from the lens of extremism to the lens of the mainstream.

For Christians, we must overcome our fears and prejudices of Muslims. If all we can reference is the violence in the Middle East when we discuss Muslim-Christian relations (or any relations between Muslims and non-Muslims), then we will never progress from the misery we see all too often in news reports. We destroy our own hopes for any solution and instead devolve into bloody rivalries and geo-political exploitations of the Middle East.

What we are trying to do is establish a new inter-religious framework for understanding. We are part of the solution to the problem of our respective communities' fear of one another. And by joining together in the quest for dealing with religious extremism, by addressing what the future will bring for Christians and Muslims alike, we -- along with our Jewish allies -- can help build a peacemaking constituency for our president.

At this point, President Obama has no peacemaking constituency. He deals with diplomats who have no answers. He deals with staff that has only political calculations. And he deals with special interest groups who have only financial and political gains to consider. Yet we are part of his solution, even if he is not aware of it.

For religious communities in America, our message is simple: To be religious in the 21^st century means you have to be inter-religious. Our theological purity to the essence of our respective revelations can only be preserved by pursuing the principles of our faiths: mercy, compassion and justice, not just within our own communities, but more importantly in our relations towards the other.

From Religious Polarization to Religious Peacemaking

2012-12-11T17:57:47-05:00

This week, a historic convention will take place involving American Muslims and All Saints Church in rosy Pasadena -- the first national Muslim convention at a church. We will move to how we collectively work for a cultural climate change that ends the paradigm of polarization. America's religious diversity must be transformed from the largest potential energy in the world to kinetic energy for positive work -- a change from houses of worship being the most segregated places in America and from religions at odds with one another to inter-religious cooperation.

Here are the challenges for Muslims. We are told that we are silent to extremism. When we speak out and establish a presence on any public stage, however, we are tarred with the typical attack, that we have "ties to extremism." Building a community center in lower Manhattan gets us the "Ground Zero Mosque" crisis. Working in the State Department and the White House for American interests gets us accusations of the "Muslim Brotherhood infiltration and takeover" of America.

Yet within the American Muslim community there are Nobel laureates and academicians and public servants and professionals and scientists who can build that bridge to the Muslim world for mutual understanding between the U.S. and Muslim-majority countries. It is not destroyed necessarily by anti-Muslim bigots. They have been around for a while and will continue to be around. It is destroyed by the belief that Muslims working in public affairs is meaningless. They are rendered irrelevant so no one should bother to engage them, other than a few ceremonial treats during Ramadan. It is time to shift our focus from the lens of extremism to the lens of the mainstream.

For Christians, we must overcome our fears and prejudices of Muslims. If all we can reference is the violence in the Middle East when we discuss Muslim-Christian relations, or any relations between Muslims and non-Muslims, than we will never progress from the misery we see too often in news reports. We destroy our own hopes for any solution to bloody rivalries and geo-political exploitations of the Middle East.

What we are trying to do is to establish a new inter-religious framework for understanding. We are part of the solution for our respective communities' fear of one another. And by joining together in the quest for dealing with religious extremism, and in addressing what the future will bring for Christians and Muslims, we can help, along with our Jewish allies, in building a peacemaking constituency for our president. At this point, he has no peacemaking constituency. He deals with diplomats who have no answers. He deals with staff that has only political calculations. And he deals with special interest groups who have only financial and political gains to consider. We are part of his solution, even if he is not aware of it.

For religious communities in America, our message is simple: To be religious in the 21st century means you have to be inter-religious. Our theological purity to the essence of our respective revelations can only be preserved by pursuing the principles of our faiths: mercy, compassion and justice -- not just for our own communities, but more importantly toward the other.

Muslim and Copts Unite Against Hate and Violence

2012-10-02T12:50:39-04:00

On Sept. 17, Muslim and Coptic Christian leaders stood shoulder to shoulder at Los Angeles City Hall, condemning both the hate of the anti-Muslim video,"Innocence of Muslims," and the violent reactions to the video. The imagery and prose were inspiring.

The following are some thoughts:

We stand here on the steps of this angelic City Hall, praying for God to bring His spirit of love to this city, to this nation and to the world. Our two communities, Coptic Christian and Muslim, have lived side by side for over a thousand years. And yet, we see turmoil here and abroad over a video that dishonors the honorable tenets of our two faiths.

With technology advancing, we grieve over how rapid misunderstandings can spread, both between and about our two communities. Thus, before our Creator and before the people of this great city, we vow to speak out against hate, the hate of a film that denigrates Islam and desecrates its Prophet.

Moreover, we speak out against the violence as a reaction to hate. Indeed, our faiths preach that only love and forgiveness are the proper responses to hate. Jesus and Muhammad were both persecuted, and their response to mockery and insult was simple: Work for peace. Their impact on human civilization was profound. So today, we remind ourselves, our communities and our nation the following:

The video is abhorrent and does not deserve the dignity of any response.

The producers and propagandists of this video speak only for themselves and not for any religion.

The reaction to this video should follow the traditions of Jesus and Muhammad -- love for humanity, forgiveness for the ignorant, and peace for our future generations.

The relationship between Coptic Christians and Muslims should continue to be based on cooperation and coexistence, in the United States and in Egypt.

Our convergence of faiths is to please God, and God is displeased when violence is instigated in His name. God is pleased when we are protectors of one another, when guests are welcomed and treated with hospitality, and when people work to serve humanity with mercy, compassion, and justice.

We believe in one God and we believe in one human family. Our belief is manifested through our actions. Our good work and good speech are the only legitimate response to hate.

Blasphemy Laws Are Against Islam

2011-03-16T09:48:27-04:00

Blasphemy laws or laws prohibiting defamation of a religion are incompatible with Islamic thought and philosophy. The concept of Defamation of Religions denies a person their free will to choose -- one of God's greatest gifts to humanity -- and deprives individuals of their right to free speech and expression. It also creates a climate of intolerance that can breed discrimination and violence.

This was the message I delivered last week during a Human Rights First panel discussion in Geneva, where the United Nations Human Rights Council is expected to discuss a resolution seeking this week to criminalize "defamation of religions," as it has done several years for the past decade. However, this year's debate comes at a unique and particularly tumultuous time.

Earlier this month, Pakistan's Minister for Minority Affairs, Shabbaz Bhatti, was murdered for speaking out in favor of amending the nation's blasphemy laws. His assassination came less than two months after the murder of Governor Salmaan Taseer, who was assassinated by one of his own body guards. Taseer's killer tried to justify his act by citing Islamic law. Taseer was an outspoken defender of a Christian woman who sentenced to death in Pakistan after being accused of blasphemy. The assassin, now in custody and facing murder charges, has been called a "hero" by a vocal and influential minority of Pakistanis who echo his misguided reasoning and support brutal blasphemy laws.

Blasphemy laws were first introduced to Muslim countries during the days of colonialism and are now a major obstacle to Islamic reform. Often used to restrict freedom of expression and to settle personal scores, these laws have led to devastating consequences for religious minorities and others whose views differ from the majority. It has become all too common and acceptable to file an accusation of blasphemy, claims that can include insulting the Quran or Prophet Muhammad, and to condemn those who speak out against such abuses.

Those who support the "Defamation of Religions" resolution first introduced at the United Nations over a decade ago by the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), argue that it serves to combat the rise of hatred and discrimination against Muslims in the world. They are wrong. In fact, this resolution does the opposite. Its implementation would illustrate Muslim suppression of Western standards of freedom of speech

The Quran mandates "there shall be no coercion in matters of faith" (2:256). This Quranic injunction is meant to protect freedom of religious belief and expression for all people; it is also meant to prohibit any government or group of people from intruding on the private lives of its people. Islam calls for the freedom, not for the suppression, of free speech and it condemns violations of fundamental human rights.

In fact, the Quran documents the criticism of Islam by poets and political leaders at the time of its revelation. Though the Prophet was accused of sorcery and mania, in each and every case, God did not order him to punish the blasphemers. Instead, His order to the Prophet was to respond to their hate speech with good speech and good work. In other words, Islam calls for freedom of speech and for competing freely in the marketplace of ideas. No one has the right to play the role of God on this earth.

In the Quran, there is no provision for the absolute protection of (any) religion nor any punishment mandated for those who defame religion. Just like current standards of international law, the Quran calls for the protection of individuals and their rights. It is this protection that should be at the heart of any resolution proposed to combat religious intolerance and discrimination.

People of all faiths need states and international bodies to protect them when they are discriminated against based on their religion. Unfortunately, they are not getting any such protection. For example, Europe has not faired well on guaranteeing freedom of religion for its Muslim citizens. A recent referendum voted on by Swiss citizens banned the construction of minarets on mosques, and government intrusion on religious practices in France has become pervasive.

By contrast, in the United States where secularism means neutrality of government on religious matters, Muslims are protected by the government, especially when discrimination occurs against women who decide to wear a headscarf. When Rep. Peter King held a hearing on "radicalization of American Muslims" attempting to stereotype all American Muslims, many elected government officials, opinion leaders and civil society organizations collectively called out his behavior and rhetoric as counter to American values and protections for all its citizens.

The proposed U.N. resolution on "Defamation of Religions" will certainly not prevent discrimination against Muslims, nor will it fight religious intolerance. Its passage would only further fuel anti-Muslim stereotyping and hatred.

We must earn our respect as Muslims by working for the prosperity of our societies. We must seek essential reforms that, along with our own honorable actions, will protect and exalt the name of Islam. The Quran provides a response to defamation in general: "Good and evil are not equal; so repel evil with something good and better so that the one with whom there is enmity will become a close friend."

5 Questions Swirling Around the 'Ground Zero Mosque' Debate

2010-08-22T10:29:09-04:00

Most of those opposed to the Park51 Muslim cultural center -- known as the "Ground Zero mosque" despite being neither a mosque nor at Ground Zero -- have understandable apprehensions about Muslims. The questions raised by opponents of the cultural center deserve clear, unambiguous answers about Islam in America. That's the least we as Muslim Americans can do for our fellow citizens.

1. What about Sharia (Islamic law) in the U.S.?

If what you mean by Sharia is what is practiced in the Muslim world -- no! Many Muslims fled the Muslim world because of corrupt regimes, injustice, misogyny, and downright discourtesy. I love the Muslim peoples throughout the world, and to borrow from Thomas Jefferson, my heart trembles for the Muslim world when I reflect that God is just. Sharia, to me, means living up to God's will of establishing justice. It is driven by five noble goals (as agreed upon uniformly by Muslim scholars throughout the ages), namely to secure and promote individuals' rights to life, expression, faith, property and family. When we see stoning of women in Afghanistan or Nigeria, or child marriages in the Arabian Peninsula, that is not Sharia. It is an exploitation of Islam to oppress people, especially women. (See Abusing Women, Abusing Islam.)

In reality, the U.S. Constitution fulfills my obligation as a Muslim to achieve the five principles of Sharia. When I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, I make a pledge with God to uphold liberty and justice for all. Among our vast challenges today as Muslim Americans is the urgent need to develop a corpus of thinking and action that promotes a progressive approach to applying Islam in the modern era. We must find a way to keep the principles but do away with customs, cultural biases, and archaic traditions.

2. Are Muslims a liability or an asset to our national security?

Al Qaeda's ideologically driven violence has been rejected by Muslim Americans. We aim to promote and protect life, to enrich and enlighten our pluralistic societies, to promote constructive engagement with others, and to preserve God's will of racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. What Al Qaeda stands for is a cult of domination and death, leading them to send young people to die as an expression of their anger and victimhood, while its leaders sit on their empty thrones of self-righteousness. Muslim Americans have worked diligently to form partnerships with local, state and federal law enforcement. We suffered with all other Americans on 9/11, and several hundred Muslims were killed at or around the Twin Towers when they were attacked by 19 terrorists.

3. Where's the funding of Muslim organizations coming from?

My organization, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, only accepts donations from American citizens and residents. If a foreign group or government wants to financially support us, we decline. We have done this since our inception more than 20 years ago because we want to preserve our Muslim American identity and maintain our intellectual independence from any foreign influence. Our challenge as Muslim Americans is to ensure complete financial transparency and accountability to our American constituents. The board of Park51 may not follow our policy, but that's their prerogative. They have at least committed to an audit of all financial transactions to ensure that no funds come from anti-American sources.

4. Is terrorism ever justified?

No. Terrorism is evil. You need to see a new video featuring nine major Muslim American religious leaders, entitled "Injustice Cannot Defeat Injustice." Yet, when terrorists tape video messages from the caves of Afghanistan or the jungles of Somalia, they get free publicity in all US markets. When we condemn terrorism, it is barely recognized. Regardless, our job as Muslim Americans is to state clearly our loyalty to America and our commitment to serve her interests.

5. Are Muslims anti-American and anti-Israel?

No. We Muslim Americans aspire to see democracy flourishing and human rights restored throughout the Middle East. Democracy and human rights are pleasing to God; dictatorship and oppression are not. We oppose any military option to resolve the conflicts in the Middle East. We support non-violent resistance to Israel's ongoing occupation of the Palestinian territories. We do not seek Israel's destruction. We are concerned about the destruction of Palestine and the deterioration of Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem. It is the ongoing destruction wreaked by war that is radicalizing the region along with ideological violence that is causing so much suffering to innocent people.

These answers are intended to help elucidate our religious, social and political views. It is intended to promote a future of mutual respect, not mutual suspicion. I hope that the Park51 Muslim cultural center issue is resolved amicably between the sponsors of the project and the local community in Manhattan. As for the overarching issues involving Islam in America, they will need further discussion. If you wish, you may email me at salam@mpac.org to continue this dialogue. I only ask that you be polite and constructive.

Anti-Muslim Is Anti-American

2010-07-27T12:43:32-04:00

From New York to Tennessee to California, mosques and Muslim community centers are meeting a small but fierce swelling resistance from an increasingly vocal minority of local citizens' groups who charge that mosques represent a major threat to America's way of life and central values. Such baseless and hateful attacks are at the heart of a dangerous miscalculation, particularly since many mosque founders and leaders today share a common commitment to promoting an authentic and mainstream vision of Islam that coexists with other faiths in America. In a mid-term election year, and as presidential candidates get ready for 2012, anti-Muslim prejudice is ripe for political pickings.

The anti-Muslim rage-aholics, however, feel that Islam cannot exist within America's pluralism. Ironically, their view is shared by Al-Qaeda -- making right-wing groups and former Republican speaker of the House Newt Gingrich closer to the Al-Qaeda narrative than the local Muslim communities they are fiercely protesting. The vitriol from these anti-Muslim groups plays right into the hands of Al-Qaeda, a group that works tirelessly to prove that America is at war with Islam.

Here's the paradox I and many other Muslim Americans are living. We have to demonstrate our efforts against extremism by amplifying our mainstream majority voice, yet when we build institutions to help expand our capacity, we become targets of virulent and bigoted xenophobes who characterize any and all Muslims as extremists and radicals.

Secondly, when we meet with policy makers in the Obama administration and both federal and local national security teams at the White House and within law enforcement agencies, we are told that a counter-narrative to the "West is at war with Islam" is critical to winning against Al-Qaeda. So how can we defeat Al-Qaeda when these anti-Muslim groups within our own country have subscribed to this narrative of a war against Islam? Recently, I was on a talk show by a local NPR affiliate in Los Angeles, and I debated a pastor of a Riverside, CA church who was protesting the expansion of a local mosque because he had problems with the "nature of Islam," which he described in cult-like terms as a force that is antithetical to Christianity.

In Tennessee, groups carrying American and Israeli flags recently protested the development of a new mosque in Nashville. And this weekend, the state's Lieutenant Governor said "You could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion or is it a nationality, way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it."

When segments of other Abrahamic faith communities would like to see the marginalization of Muslim Americans, then we're faced with our real problem in defeating Al-Qaeda, in preserving our pluralism, and in preserving our freedoms.

Yet we Muslim Americans are struggling just to keep up with the internet war against Al-Qaeda. For example, the Muslim Public Affairs Council recently released a video that is gaining praise from Congresswoman Jane Harman, a member of the House Homeland Security subcommittee. The video is entitled "Injustice cannot defeat Injustice."

Any time a group of people represent change in their society, they are branded radical, extremist, fringe or -- one of my favorites -- suspect. Outside of criminal courts and without probable cause, there is no national security value in labeling someone a suspect, but it sure does delegitimize whole groups and whole communities.

Such is the central challenge for Muslim Americans today; labeling Muslim American a suspect community goes hand in hand with excluding Muslim Americans from a place in the public square.

So we have a choice: do we succumb to intolerance and ignorance or do we embrace Muslim Americans as full and equal partners in our communities and our country? Muslim American successes count for America, not against her. Alienating them from mainstream America is propaganda feed for Al-Qaeda. And our collective national silence on open bigotry toward Muslim Americans and their institutions will be a stain in our history books -- one which we cannot afford. Take your pick.

Freedom of Speech for Some but Not All

2010-07-13T11:59:05-04:00

White House correspondent Helen Thomas and CNN Middle East expert Octavia Nasr recently lost their jobs because of their controversial statements related to the Middle East.

Yet there is no outrage, let alone calls for resignation, when two members of Congress commit similar if not worse offenses. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) advocates for "economically strangling" the people of Gaza, and Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA) demands that the non-violent humanitarian activists involved in the Gaza flotilla be prosecuted by the Attorney General.

What Schumer and Sherman advocate for amounts to killing more Palestinians and forcing more of them to leave their homes--i.e. ethnic cleansing. That is much worse than what Thomas and Nasr stated or more accurately, did not, as they were never given the chance to clarify what they meant.

Senator Schumer exposed his lack of knowledge when speaking to an Orthodox Jewish organization by stating that Palestinians do not believe in the Torah or in King David.

Palestinians, many of them Christian and Muslim, accept the Torah and King David. Imagine turning the table on Schumer, asking him if he accepts Jesus or Muhammad and if he accepts the Gospel and the Quran. Ridiculously offensive question, isn't it? Schumer's ignorant blabber about Palestinians, Islam and Christianity is equally offensive.

The Quran actually includes the story of Moses and the Children of Israel's liberation from the Pharoah along with stories of King Soloman and King David. The Quran also acknowledges the Torah and Gospel as divine messages.

Regardless of Schumer's twisted version of history, more Americans should be disturbed by his campaigning to "strangle [Palestinians] economically" as a form of collective punishment because Hamas is in power in Gaza. Isn't that the same argument extremists assert, that as Americans we deserve collective punishment for electing leaders responsible for Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, rendition, torture, and the supporting of Christian fundamentalist military leaders who believe that they have a "bigger God" than the people of the Middle East?

Now, let's look at Brad Sherman. His view is that any American involved in the Gaza convoy be prosecuted by the Attorney General for violation of the 1996 Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. Many commentators questioned, if not criticized the Supreme Court for banning political and humanitarian assistance to groups designated as terrorist organizations, even if the aid is intended to promote non-violent methods of resistance. Why, then, is there a mute response to Sherman's assault on humanitarian relief? A handful of protesters gathered in front of his Capitol Hill office to demand that he prosecutes those who killed the humanitarian activists.

The crisis of malnutrition and human suffering is well-documented by Amnesty International. But Israeli leaders are in denial, touting that the humanitarian crisis is a figment of our imagination.

The whole world, except for the United States and Israel, saw Israel's attack on the humanitarian convoy as piracy (Israeli commandos attacked the ship in international waters) and a violent assault against a non-violent humanitarian convoy. Just like the Goldstone Report on Israel's war crimes in Gaza was whitewashed, this latest incident will be whitewashed by US influentials. Just like there was never an investigation of the USS Liberty attack by Israel's air force back in 1967, there will be no independent investigation of the attack against the Gaza flotilla.

At the very least, America needs to begin clearing its conscience on what our tax dollars have done to the Palestinians. It's time to set the truth free.

Stop lecturing the Middle East about free speech when the tar-and-feather political lynch mobs tear apart our media. End the hypocrisy now and protest Schumer and Sherman for advocating the dehumanization of Palestinians, the demonization of Islam, and the staining of America's moral conscience.

Free 11 Muslim Students Representing America's Conscience

2010-02-15T13:14:39-05:00

Civic and Political life at the University California of Irvine (UCI) will never be the same after 11 Muslim students chose to speak out at a UCI event sponsoring Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren.

The Orange County Register reported on the incident:

Eleven people were arrested Monday evening during a raucous lecture at UC Irvine where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren came to talk about U.S.-Israel relations. (UCI earlier said that 12 were arrested.)

Oren was interrupted 10 times Monday while trying to give his speech before 500 people at the UCI Student Center, where there was heavy security. Oren took a 20 minute break after the fourth protest, asked for hospitality and resumed his speech, only to be interrupted again by young men yelling at him every few minutes. Many members of the audience also applauded Oren.

After the 10th interruption, several dozens students who opposed Oren's talk got up and walked out and staged a protest outside. It is not clear whether they were members of the UCI Muslim Student Union, which issued an email earlier in the day condemning Oren's appearance on campus.

(See video below.)

One may disagree with the style and tactics demonstrated by the 11 students, but the central issue is not responding to the disruption by the students. Rather, the main focus should be on understanding what led to that action. The protest of Ambassador Oren's speech did not occur within a vacuum, but rather as a reaction to a string of numerous attempts to stigmatize Muslim students of UCI and squelch their free speech.

In May 2006, FBI Agent Pat Rose, head of the Al-Qaeda Unit, told a group at the Pacific Club in Orange County that her squad was monitoring Muslims students at UC-Irvine. Rose was quoted as saying, "We live in Irvine. I can't tell you how many subjects' names come up, and they live right down the street from me." She was garnering support for the Patriot Act.

In response, FBI Assistant Director Stephen Tidwell had to make a public appearance at the mosque in Irvine to announce that there was no profiling of Muslims by the FBI. I arranged a meeting between Mr. Tidwell and the Muslim students and thought it could help develop mutual understanding and cooperation.

At the same time, the Zionist Organization of America was applauding the Department of Justice for launching an investigation of Muslim students for anti-Semitism. Any criticism of Israel and its policies is consistently connected to anti-Semitism. The students and human rights activists in general speak out against Israel's policies, not against its people and not against Judaism. If anything, the best of what it means to be a Jew or Muslim is lived when speaking for justice.

In May 2007, Muslim students at Irvine complained of nearly being run over by a car later determined to be driven by an FBI agent.

An FBI informant named Craig Monteilh announced in 2009 that he set up video cameras in Orange county gymnasiums frequented by young Muslims to monitor their activities.

A member of congress singled out the Muslim Student Union for supporting George Galloway's humanitarian convoy into Gaza even though the campaign was gaining national and international support without opposition by many in the government.

The university needs to acknowledge the history of institutional harassment of Muslim students as they engage in campus activism. Muslim students complain that their requests for Palestinian speakers to be hosted by the university, similar to the hosting of Ambassador Michael Oren, are typically rejected or ignored.

In contrast to the treatment of Muslim students at UCI, anti-abortion hecklers against the President of the United States do not receive the same scrutiny as pro-Palestinian Muslim students at Irvine. Two individuals heckled the President at Notre Dame's commencement last year when President Obama resided as principal speaker. "Abortion is murder!" and "Stop Killing Babies!" they yelled, after which they were escorted out. They were opposing Obama's pro-choice stance, and no arrests were made. Over 100 protesters demonstrated at Notre Dame as well.

No doubt the Palestinian-Israeli discourse is volatile and many political leaders shy away from the discourse. But the lack of discourse on the issue requires more engagement with the students, not arrests and threats of expulsion or failure in their classes. Each side, Muslim and Jew, pro-Palestine and pro-Israel, have had their share of firebrand speakers, agitating and provoking the other side. The Muslim side has no institutional support for addressing their concerns. In fact, they have dealt with institutional marginalization and prejudice in the form of selective enforcement of policies and heavy-handed repercussions.

Our government leaders are concerned about the alienation of young people in our country, especially young Muslims -- who are offered no platform for voicing their concerns and views. Shunting student voices, especially when it is presented in a non-violent manner, tells them their opinions are disconnected and irrelevant to the mainstream discourse. I've met with government officials who "protested and took over buildings" in their college lives to get attention for their causes.

Suppressing the voice of these students by threatening them with failure and arrest in order to prohibit them and future students from expressing their views on Palestine is tantamount to telling them not to be American. The Muslim students' actions at UCI epitomize the confrontation against institutional injustices by means of peaceful exercise of free speech, a great American tradition.

The 11 Muslim students took a stand for another people's human rights, for what the best of America represents, and for what millions of people around the world admire Americans. So I thank the students for reminding me of why I am a proud American -- because I have the responsibility of celebrating my freedom by demanding it for others.

Email the Chancellor of UCI and the Dean of Students now to offer your support for free speech of the 11 Muslim students -- chancellor@uci.edu and deanstu@uci.edu. Then call the District Attorney of Orange County at (949) 476-4650 to drop all charges against the students.

Hate Speech Can Be Countered With Truth, Leadership

2010-01-12T18:45:46-05:00

The Quran encourages Muslims to promote religious freedom and counter religious bigotry. However, it also upholds the importance of the freedom to express one's own thoughts, even when they may be seen as distasteful or disrespectful by others. The Quran documents the countless attempts to defame the Prophet as a "madman," "magician" and as one who spreads discord. The Quran also chronicles accusations that it is not part of the divine messages and actually challenges its accusers with producing verses that are better in style and substance.

The Prophet tolerated defamation against himself, and the Quran responded to defamation with a challenge. In neither case was free speech curtailed.

Countering religious persecution in Islam is a mandate, according to the Quran: "And how could you refuse to fight in the cause of God and of the utterly helpless men and women and children who are crying, "O our Sustainer! Lead us forth [to freedom] out of this land whose people are oppressors, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, a protector, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, one who will bring us succor!" (4:75). Indeed, the biblical prophets were on a mission to deliver a message to believe in One God and to deliver people from darkness to light. Hence, religious freedom and human rights are indistinguishable.

At the same time, the Quran calls for freedom of religion and expression: "Let there be no compulsion in matters of faith." (2:256) It calls for the free marketplace of ideas, especially when dealing with Christians and Jews (People of the Book): "And do not argue with the People of the Book unless it be in a way that is better, save with such of them as do wrong. But say, 'We believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you. Our God and your God is One; and it is to Him we submit (in Islam).'" (29:46)

In Islamic law, there are five permanent goals agreed upon by all jurists to secure the rights of all people: they are the rights to life, expression, faith, family and property. Hence, neither freedom of expression nor freedom of faith can be compromised.

Countering anti-Muslim rhetoric, like opposing anti-Semitism, is a noble cause. But there's a fine line between hate speech and hate crimes. We need to ensure that any legislation dealing with religious freedom does not curtail free speech. If certain speech incites violence, then legislation should be based on the crime and not the speech.

Therefore, Islamic teachings direct humanity to protect both religious freedom and free speech. The only means to effectively oppose bigotry and intolerance is through social, political and cultural programs educating people about the truth. We cannot impose the truth on others but we can be examples of what the truth manifests. That requires leadership in all sectors of society. Without leadership, we are left with two bad options -- ignoring religious persecution or curtailing free speech.

This article was originally published on www.America.gov.

Fort Hood: A Defining Moment for Muslim Americans

2009-11-12T11:40:06-05:00

To my fellow Muslim Americans,

A moment of truth has arrived for us. We now must demonstrate, beyond the condemnations and condolences, that we are working for America, not merely taking seats on the margins of our society. Are we an integral part of the American fabric or are we simply visitors to America? Whether we were born in the United States or immigrated here, whether we are of Arab, Indo-Pakistani, Anglo, African or any other background, it is time to amplify our Muslim American identity.

For those who immigrated here, home is not where our grandparents are buried; it is where our grandchildren will be raised. For those who were born here, the psychological ghettoization of our identity and schizophrenia of living in two worlds must come to an end.

America is our home, and it is our country to defend. It is in our hands to define who we are. No one else has that right, nor do they have the right to question our patriotism.

Unless we clearly define who we are to the rest of America, the pre-existing vacuum will be filled with the only image available to the public: a Muslim American member of the U.S. military gunning down other soldiers on American soil. The terrorist attack of 9/11 was about foreign agents infiltrating our open society. Fort Hood was about an American-born Muslim acting out his anger and frustrations on other Americans, leading to a killing spree. The loss was our loss. Those Americans who were killed at Fort Hood dedicated their lives to defend our democracy. They do not decide where they will be deployed. They go where our political leaders decide our military priorities reside.

There is very little confirmed about Maj. Nidal Hasan's motivation for the shooting spree. It is very likely that he had a complete psychological breakdown and resorted to shooting anyone around him. What triggered the murderous act remains to be determined by investigators. But don't think that he fell under the military's radar because the Department of Defense is "politically correct" about scrutinizing troubled soldiers, especially troubled Muslim soldiers. I was part of a Pentagon delegation to Guantanamo Bay two years ago. Sensitivity and political correctness are simply not characterizations we can realistically attribute to the military. Our military is professional, and it concerns itself with the mission at hand and successfully executing the plan delivered to them by their superiors.

Speculative and unconfirmed news reports have left an indelible impression that Maj. Nidal Hasan was influenced by Al-Qaeda via the internet. Regardless of the veracity of these stories, ideologically motivated violence continues to occur at an alarming rate in Muslim countries. That this cancer could have rooted its ugly head in the form of a disgruntled Muslim American and the potential for any more should be a cause of concern for all of us.

It is time to determine what is more relevant to the world at this painful moment -- the handful of violent extremists or the overwhelming majority of mainstream, moderate thinking Muslims. Right now, one person who opened fire at Fort Hood is relevant to American society, and his image invokes fear and harm.

We have only one option available to deal with ideologically motivated violence: the Islamic theology of life must overcome the cult of death. No more justification for violence against the innocent or the defilement of jihad in order to lead young men and women to their death, while Muslim leaders sit on their hollow thrones.

We, as Muslim Americans, are the answer to this frightening phenomenon of terrorism and violent extremism. We own our own destiny, and it is fundamentally intertwined with our nation's destiny. Terrorism will be defeated with our work on the frontlines, not in the battlefields, but in our mosques and community centers and youth associations. By standing up and working for change, we are acting on the best and guiding principles of Islam and of America.

"O you who have attained to faith! Respond to the call of God and the Apostle whenever he calls you unto that which will give you life; and know that God intervenes between man and [the desires of] his heart, and that unto Him you shall be gathered." Quran 8:24

Dear Capitol Hill: We Confess, Muslims Want to Serve America

2009-10-19T10:39:59-04:00

This week, four Republican members of Congress (Sue Myrick [R-NC], John Shadegg [R-AZ], Paul Broun [R-GA] and Trent Franks [R-AZ]) called on the U.S. House of Representatives' Sergeant-at-Arms to investigate a national Muslim American civil rights organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), for encouraging young Muslim Americans to intern in Congressional offices. The accusation, based on an internal incriminating document, is that CAIR has a secret strategy of trying to plant "spies" into Congressional offices through, that's right, planting spies in congressional internships.

I confess. I've met with Presidents Clinton, Bush and advised them on counter-terrorism strategy. I've met with the FBI Director and discussed what helps partnerships with Muslim communities and what hurts. I've spoken before the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security and at the Secretary of State's Open Forum. I am guilty of civic engagement.

What's next? Muslims trying to infiltrate the Congress by scheduling lobby days, or by simply meeting with their members of Congress? It's a testament to how far some right-wing conspiracy theories have come that even the normal behavior of any advocacy group can be used as so-called evidence of a dangerous, seditious and destructive "plot".

In a bizarre McCarthy-era like press conference on Monday, the four lawmakers quoted from a yet-to-be released Islamophobic publication entitled, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America. Published by right-wing conspiracy headquarters WorldNetDaily, the publication is co-authored by Dave Gaubatz, who has repeatedly accused members of Congress and the President of trying to implement sharia (Islamic law) in the United States.

The authors of this book and their four GOP stooges on Capitol Hill have one major characteristic in common with Al-Qaeda -- they all believe in conspiracy theories. They hope to repeat a lie aggressively until it becomes a fact in the public consciousness.

The Republican House leadership must follow in the footsteps of Rep. John Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Loretta Sanchez to condemn this vicious and unfounded attack, and restore some sense of integrity in the U.S. Congress. In a clear statement yesterday, Rep. Conyers said:

"It shouldn't need to be said in 2009, and after the historic election of our first African-American president, but let me remind all my colleagues that patriotic Americans of all races, religions, and beliefs have the right -- and the responsibility -- to participate in our political process, including by volunteering to work in Congressional offices, Numerous Muslim-American interns have served the House ably and they deserve our appreciation and respect, not attacks on their character or patriotism."

What is more astounding is that this group of Islamophobes sent a spy (Chris Gaubatz, the son of Muslim Mafia co-author David Gaubatz) into CAIR's national headquarters to gather documents to accuse Muslims of spying on the Congress. Sounds fitting that conspiracy theorist neocons use the very tactics they accuse their "enemies" of.

But, don't feel sorry for Muslim Americans. We are not the victims in this absurd episode. The real victims are the sorry folks who promote this type of racist un-American propaganda and actually believe in it. They need therapy. They need our forgiveness for making America look so bad.

For Iran--Think Long Term, Not Immediate Self-Gratificaton

2009-10-04T11:01:33-04:00

As in every Middle East crisis the United States has dealt with during the last century, the available options are limited to military confrontation or diplomacy. What gets lost in both options is the most critical factor in the future of the Middle East -- the people. We certainly learned this the hard way in the six years we've been in Iraq.

Do we launch a military strike against Iran or allow the Israelis to conduct one themselves? Initial reports from the Geneva talks between Iran and the major powers indicate that diplomacy will be given a chance before any military option will be employed.

What we can expect in the near future is a cat and mouse game. Iraq went through the same game and, as a result, endured Desert Storm in 1991 and 'Desert Disaster' in 2003.

There was a strong Iraqi opposition to Saddam rooted in popular movements against the Baath from the 70s. They represented religious, secular, and ideological views from a wide political spectrum. But the US did not effectively manage relations with the opposition. Instead, it chose some as the darlings of the US that presented themselves as secular options. The U.S. then armed and financed them, as they entered Iraq in the aftermath of the 2003 Gulf War. The results were disastrous.

If the U.S. proceeds with the same game plan in Iran as it did in Iraq, the damage to U.S. interests will only be more severe. If we want democracy, then we must consider the will of the masses of the Muslim world whom President Obama left expecting a change in U.S. foreign policy during his historic speech in Cairo. The momentum he developed with one speech will be eliminated with mistakes made in Iran. We must learn from the popular uprisings of Eastern Europe during the Cold War in determining our relationship with the masses of the Muslim World today. We did not select the opposition of Romania against Nikolai Ceasescu. They chose us.

The powerful elite of Iran's establishment is divided on how to proceed ever since the disputed presidential election results. The same applies for their relationship to the rest of the world. Playing games by dividing the opposition groups based on their agreement with Western policies
will also be to our detriment or even failure as a world leader. Finally, any military confrontation against Iran will undermine the opposition.

Implementing sanctions against Iran would also play right into the hands of the theocracy. At this time, rising food and energy prices are a major grievance of the common Iranian. By imposing sanctions, the US will hand the Iranian government a card it does not have at this time--blaming the increase of prices on foreign powers. Iran will also continue to blame dissent on foreign manipulation, but now with more evidence to leverage.

Nuclear non-proliferation is an important priority, one which will ultimately be judged by how it is achieved. For this reason, selective denunciation of third-world countries beginning to develop nuclear energy while turning a blind eye to U.S. allies like India and Israel who already have nuclear weapons, sends the wrong message to the international community. Ending the threat of nuclear war needs a comprehensive strategy, with popular sentiment as an important factor in US decision-making.

Pause, reflection and patience are not typical prescriptions in US policy-making. Yet in the case of Iran, as in the cases of many countries in the Muslim world, thinking long-term as opposed to indulgence in immediate self-gratification will serve our interests. The days of authoritarianism are on the decline in the Muslim world. We have to place more trust in the Muslim peoples throughout the world.

Closing Our Open Society is a Victory for Terrorism

2009-09-05T13:34:08-04:00

The case of a diverted Air France flight involving Paul-Emile Dupret, a legal counselor to the European Parliament, is causing a stir over the Atlantic even though it's not a story in the US. Dupret opposes US policy on globalization, and for that reason, he is on the No Fly List. The case exposes a serious flaw in our national security programs--denying travel to political dissidents. The flight was detoured over the Caribbean and was delayed in Mexico. Many of the passengers missed their connecting flights. European hearts and minds were lost in this small incident.

Some of you believe that if we want to catch the terrorist who wants to blow us up, then all of us have to deal with inconveniences. But let's make a distinction between inconvenience and insanity.

The No Fly List may include suspects of terrorism, but the list also includes political opponents. Flawed or corrupted intelligence undermines our national security -- it makes us Americans look incompetent and/or arrogant.

Other Europeans of Muslim background have been prevented from entering the United States. Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens) is a citizen of the UK and was blacklisted. He has been recently cleared to re-enter the United States.

Another high-profile case involves Tariq Ramadan, an Islamic scholar who resides in Paris. His visa to enter the United States was revoked even though the University of Notre Dame offered him a teaching position in peacemaking studies. Both Yusuf Islam and Tariq Ramadan were accused of supporting extremist Palestinian groups. No evidence has undergone the scrutiny of the public eye. Yusuf Islam was cleared recently to enter the United States. Tariq Ramadan's case is under appeal and recently received a favorable opinion by a federal court.

These exploitations of current anti-terrorism laws affect American citizens as well. In October 2008, the Maryland State Police classified 53 nonviolent political activists as terrorists, and entered their names and personal information into state and federal databases, with labels indicating that they were terror suspects. The protest groups were also entered as terrorist organizations. During a hearing, it was revealed that these individuals and organizations had been placed in the databases because of a surveillance operation that targeted opponents of the death penalty and the Iraq war.

I have received several reports of harassment at airports of humanitarian workers or shutting the door on diplomats and scholars. The only common denominator in all these cases is that these individuals have taken stands that are non-violent but are politically controversial. None of their cases involved ties to Al-Qaeda or a connection to 9/11. They were victims of political profiling. For Mr. Dupret , it's about the right to dissent on the policy of globalization.

On a positive note, the Obama Administration is opening up reviews to demonstrate more transparency in its searches and investigations of individuals traveling to and from the United States. Our input is needed.

Yes we all need to be more vigilant and support our law enforcement in protecting our country, and even take off our shoes during airport screenings and cooperate with law enforcement. But to divert planes and stop people from entering the United States because they disagree with our government policies undermines the principles underpinning our open society. If we close our society, terrorism wins.

Our government is concerned about global relations and the US global image. But in the words of Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, "To put it simply, we need to worry a lot less about how to communicate our actions and much more about what our actions communicate."

Rifqa, the Reverand and Apostasy

2009-08-18T12:43:42-04:00

Fathima Rifqa Bary, who goes by Rifqa, is a 17-year-old from Columbus, Ohio who ran away from home -- not an uncommon occurrence for 17-year-olds. But the circumstances surrounding her story have opened a host of legal, cultural and theological issues.

Her Muslim parents moved the family to the U.S. from Sri Lanka in 2000, seeking medical attention for Rifqa, who had lost her right eye playing with a toy. Rifqa, who the Columbus Dispatch reports was a cheerleader at her high school, joined a Bible study group on Facebook earlier this year and was baptized at a local church.

See the story here.

Last month, she hopped on a bus to Orlando to meet with Rev. Blake Lorenz, who she met through a Facebook prayer group for the couple's non-denominational Global Revolution Church.

Her parents reported their daughter missing and local news covered her disappearance for a full two weeks before police were able to trace her to Lorenz's Orlando church.

Here's what happened when Rifqa was found: Lorenz decides to remain silent and displays Rifqa to a local television news station. She launches into an emotional plea to save her life from Islam. She claims that her parents "love God more than me" and therefore have to perform an honor killing on her. She argues "it's in the Quran". No it's not, sweet little Rifqa. It's not in the Quran. Whoever told you that is either ignorant or a liar. You should look it up yourself before claiming it's in the Quran.

Rev. Lorenz is then quoted in a local television station report saying that if a Muslim leaves his religion and does not return to Islam in a couple of days, then he must be killed. He claims that someone showed him the verse. There is no such verse, Rev. Lorenz. In every faith, apostasy is shunned but ultimate judgment is left to God, not people.

Religious conflicts occur in some countries where there are volatile and tense relations between faith groups, particularly where war and ethnic conflicts occur (the Balkans, the Middle East, South Asia). The United States of America is different. Let's preserve the tradition of American religious pluralism and not fall into religious or cultural warfare.

The issue of apostasy is actually addressed in a controversial and oft-misunderstood law. Centuries ago, the apostasy law was actually a treason law, created to address what should happen when a soldier in a Muslim army converts to the other side and then fights against a Muslim country. That's the equivalent of an American working for the Soviet Union during the Cold War, or for the Nazis in World War II. Under U.S. law, treason is punishable by death.

Now, state authorities in Florida and Ohio will have to clear up the mess and determine Rifqa's residence. Her father, Mohamed Bary, has a strong endorsement by Sgt. Jerry Cupp of the Columbus Police Department. Cupp told the Associated Press that Bary "comes across to me as a loving, caring, worried father about the whereabouts and the health of his daughter."

For his part, Bary told the Associated Press: "We love her, we want her back, she is free to practice her religion, whatever she believes in, that's OK. What these people are trying to do is not right -- I don't think any religion will teach to separate the kids from their parents."

Mohamed Bary allowed his daughter to become a cheerleader and says she can practice any faith she wants -- clearly, he is not a fundamentalist.

He is a concerned father who believes his daughter was brainwashed and kidnapped. Let's see how this story unfolds.