Showing posts with label MAB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MAB. Show all posts

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Orwell's Britain is Halal Toast

I would say the UK is simply toast, but "halal toast" is a much more appropriate description given the facts.

The problem that the UK is having with the radicalization of its Muslim population is so severe as to be the worst of any nation in Europe. The problem got that way through years of Britain's practice of a virulent type of multiculturalism in accordance with which Britian uncritically tolerated the radical sects of Salafi / Wahhabi / Deobandi Islam. And even now, the Labour government is showing no intention of changing its approach.

Labour is burying its multicultural head deep into the dhimmi sands. Specifically, the Labour government has decided to stop calling Islamic terrorists "Islamic terrorists." Instead, the UK government will henceforth label Islamic terrorist activities as "anti-Islamic." One would be hard-pressed to find a better example of Orwellian doublespeak.

Labour is completely out of touch with reality. To judge this - and to see the potential ramifications of Labour's latest foray into doublespeak - all one need do is juxtapose the recent article in the Daily Mail in which the Home Office announced this new policy with a few other articles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the UK Home Office:

Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism. In future, fanatics will be referred to as pursuing "anti-Islamic activity".

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

Wish as the Home Secretary might, the truth is of course the exact opposite. Wahhabi / Salafi Islam, exported from Saudi Arabia to all four corners of the world with billions in petrodollars to become the dominant form of Islam in the West, has also become the driving force behind the Pakistani variant dominant in the UK, Deobandi Islam. According to Dr. Tawfiq Hamid, a former Salafi terrorist and member of Ayman al Zawahiri’s Jamaah Islamiyah, their faith in the medieval dogma of Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi Islam is what drives their violence:

The goal of Salafi Islam is "complete Islamic dominance." Salafi dogma holds that the duty of every Muslim is to wage "jihad against non-Muslims and subdue them to Shari'a - the duty of every true Muslim . . . [It is] to engage in war against the infidels, the enemies of Allah.

And as Zuhdi Jasser explains, terrorism if far more than a mere anomaly as the Home Office is suggesting:

[Citizens] need to understand that this is not a conflict against a tactic but rather a common ideology which utilizes a radical interpretation of Islam and is a natural off-shoot from political Islam.

NRO Interview of M. Zhudi Jasser
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the UK Home Office:

Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

If you consider radical Salafi Islam mainstream, than the Home Office may have a point. Otherwise, this is a bit of dhimmi insanity.

The only people who complain of being alienated when terrorists motivated by the Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi ideology are identified as "Islamic terrorists" are the Salifists and, by orders of decibels, their enabling organizations. You often hear them decrying it is a form of Islamophobia. For example, it is the Salafi organization CAIR that asked all news organization not to mention the Islamic ties of the six terrorists who planned to strike Fort Dix in the name of Allah. And in the UK, it is the Deobandi organization the MCB – the organization with terrorist ties that wants to see Sharia law imposed in Britain - that does not want Islamic terrorists described as Islamic.

You do not hear other Islamic group complain of this. To the contrary, they want the brightest light possible shown on the Salafists. Indeed, the term Islamofacism was first coined by a Muslim, David Sulyman Schwartz, who is the director of the Center For Islamic Pluralism – a site that even has a section dedicated to "Wahhabi Watch."

As to the average non-Muslim – and Muslim – in the UK:

Conservative MP Philip Davies said no Muslim constituent had ever complained to him about the use of the term "Islamic extremism". The Shipley MP added: "Whenever anyone refers to Islamic terrorism, they are not saying all Muslims are terrorists.

The Daily Mail. This complaining is all a tactic of radical Islamists to keep their activities in the dark and to forestall any criticism by portraying it as Islamophobia. But, the West buys into that bit of dissimulation at its own great peril, as Zhudi Jasser explains:

[The greatest challenge facing Western Muslims] is not Islamophobia. If anyone is to blame for the existence of the concept of Islamophobia, if it even exists, it is Muslims who have been unable to articulate a manifestation of Islam which is free of a political state which threatens the sovereignty of the states in which Muslims reside. I don’t subscribe to the existence of the notion of Islamophobia because I believe that we are in just the beginning of a global conflict of political ideologies (Islamism vs. Americanism), and the conflation of "Islamophobia" is intentional by Islamists to deflect . . . the free world from the necessary debate of political ideologies.From where I sit, as a devout anti-Islamist Muslim, the greatest challenge facing Muslims today is an intellectual victory over the Islamists. . .

NRO Interview of M. Zhudi Jasser. And as Tawfiq Hamid explains, the onus for the problems of radical Islam lie with Salafism. "Salafi ideology is what is largely responsible for the so-called ‘clash of civilizations.’" And indeed, Hamid notes that Salafists see "any criticism" of their dogma as a sin "punishable by death and eternal damnation."

The problem with the Home Office, and indeed, the entirety of Labour’s reaction to radical Islam is that it is based on the wholly failed premise of multiculturalism. As one Muslim leader in Britain, Manzoor Moghal, chairman of The Muslim Forum, recently noted:

Multi-culturalism has backfired spectacularly. . . What we really need is not special treatment for Muslims and endless appeasement, but genuine equality. That is supposed to be the bedrock of our modern democratic society. We should turn it into a reality before our society fractures even more.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the UK Home Office:

In one passage [the Home Secretary] said: "As so many Muslims in the UK and across the world have pointed out, there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorise, nothing Islamic about plotting murder, pain and grief."Indeed, if anything, these actions are anti-Islamic'.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

This is simply a refusal to acknowledge reality. It is pretending the situation does not even exist, let alone taking stock of how far reaching it is in Britain. According to a recent report in the Times:

Almost half of Britain’s mosques are under the control of a hardline [Salafi / Deobandi] Islamic sect whose leading preacher loathes Western values and has called on Muslims to "shed blood" for Allah, an investigation by The Times has found.

The Times, Hardline Takeover Of British Mosques
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the UK Home Office:

[The Home Secretary] referred to enlisting the Muslim community against "anti-Islamic activity".

The Daily Mail

But . . .

The result of Britain's brand of multiculturalism is that it makes no cricial assessments or value judgements about the differing sects of Islam. Thus, the Home Office is not turning to "moderate Muslims" to help the community, but rather to the large, well funded radical organizations that are the apologists for Islamic terrorism in the first place. This only makes any sense if you believe the total fantasy Labour is positing, that terrorism and radicalism are simply anamolous anti-Islamic acts. That is the only way to explain Labour's decisions a few weeks ago, when they established Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board (MINAB), a board to oversee the appointment of foreign Muslim clerics and the to establish the standards for educating Muslims in the mosques. Instead of appointing "moderates" to head this board, two of the four organizations Labour chose were the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) and the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB). Both are radical organizations with strong ties to terrororist organizations. Both organizations promote seperatism, espouse Islamic triumphalism, and have clearly stated a desire to see Sharia law enacted in Britain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the UK Home Office:

The strategy emerging across Government is to portray terrorists as nothing more than cold-blooded murderers who are not fighting for any religious cause.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

What chance does any doctor have to diagnose and treat cancer if they refuse to acknowledge that cancer exists? As Tawfiq Hamid explained the Salafist religious motivation behind his desire to slaughter non-Muslims:

Jihad against non-Muslims seemed to me to be a win-win situation. The following verse, commonly cited by Jamaah members, validated my duty to die for Allah: "Allah has purchased the believers, their lives and their goods. For them [in return] is the garden [of paradise]. They fight in Allah's cause, and they slay and are slain; they kill and are killed... it [paradise] is the promise of Allah to them" (Koran 9:111).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the UK Home Office:

Sir Ken Macdonald, the Director of Public Prosecutions, has also said phrases which liken London to a " battlefield" will no longer be used.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

This is like something out of Harry Potter with "he who shall not be named." But Harry Potter is a children’s fairy tale. Believing in it will not lead to bloodshed and turmoil. The same cannot be said of the fairy tale being spun by Labour. Whether or not the government will name the problem, the truth is that radical Muslims are turning areas of Britian into Muslim fortresses:

Islamic extremists have created "no-go" areas across Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter, one of the Church of England's most senior bishops warns today.The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester and the Church's only Asian bishop, says that people of a different race or faith face physical attack if they live or work in communities dominated by a strict Muslim ideology.

The Telegraph

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali's warning that Islamic extremism is creating 'no-go' areas in parts of Britain has provoked a predictable barrage of outrage. He has been condemned for making 'inflammatory' remarks, distorting the truth about our inner cities and 'scaremongering' against the Muslim population.

But, paradoxically, this reaction from the politically-correct establishment is an indicator of the weight of his case. If our ruling elite were not so worried that his views would strike a chord with the public, it would not have been so anxious to condemn him. His statement about the dangers of the rise of radical Islam matches the reality of what people see in our cities and towns, where the influence of hardliners is undermining harmony and promoting segregation.

Manzoor Moghal, chairman of the Muslim Forum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the UK Home Office:

[The Home Secretary] will meet members of the online industry in the next few weeks to decide how to crack down on Al Qaeda inspired sites.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

Britain in fact has already started an internet crackdown. The UK government intends to arrest a UK blogger, Lionheart, for his criticism of Islam on the internet. That is an insane silencing of free speech. It is the government's means of forcing multiculturalism on Britain's population by the government's police powers. And it is directly aimed at silencing any criticism of Islam in the UK. It is a travesty.

As to radical Islam, the problem there is only partly on the internet. The big problem is in the UK’s mosques themselves - yet that problem is being studiously ignored:

Pamphlets advocating jihad by force, hatred for insufficiently observant Muslims, Christians and Jews, and segregation" are readily available at hundreds of the UK’s mosques, according to a recent report.

The Telegraph
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the UK Home Office:

Mosques will be helped to root out extremism, with imams encouraged to learn English.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

Expecting the radicalized mosques of Britian to police themselves is simply a dangerous fantasy. Here is a bit of what goes on in a large number of Britain’s Salafi / Deobandi Mosques:





For the rest of the show, go here and scroll down to the bottom.

Labour has no chance whatsoever of meeting the problem of radical Islam if one of the centerpieces of their strategy is to enlist the Mosques in voluntary cooperation. And this nonsense about having Imams learn English ignores the scope of the problem completely. The Labour government has allowed the problem of radical Islam to fester so long that radical Deobandi Imams are now home grown in the UK:

Seventeen of Britain’s 26 Islamic seminaries are run by Deobandis and they produce 80 per cent of home-trained Muslim clerics. Many had their studies funded by local education authority grants. The sect . . . has significant representation on the Muslim Council of Britain . . .

The Times, Hardline Takeover Of British Mosques
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the UK Home Office:

Youngsters will be taught about all faiths in schools, and £2million will be spent "twinning" schools of different faiths.

The Daily Mail

But . . .

If you read Tawfiq Hamid describe how he became a Salafi terrorist, you will find that it had nothing to do with his interaction with people of other faiths while growing up. Indeed, the opposite is true. He had numerous friends that were not Muslim and he attended a Catholic school in Egypt. The problem is in the Salafi / Deobandi mosques.

This Home Office idea is just more multicultural insanity under a slightly different heading. It will have no effect whatsoever on whether Muslims become radicalized. It seems designed more to promote a positive view of Islam among non-Islamic children than to do anything about the reality of radical Islam. And as Manzoor Moghal, chairman of the Muslim Forum points out:

Yet still, even after all the lessons of recent years, the Labour government has refused to abandon multi-culturalism. Instead it has merely presented this outlook under a new name, describing it as "multi-faithism".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I hope the above makes clear, the ramifications of the Home Office's embrace of Orwellian doublespeak goes far beyond mere semantics. The Labour government is attempting to appease the radical Islamists that it has nurtured like a viper in its midst through the practice of multiculturalism. It is an incredible disservice to the Muslims in Britian who accept Western values and do not want their faith radicalized by the ever increasing influence of Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi Islam. Yet the Home Office’s actions almost assure the opposite. The government has no chance of dealing with the problem of radical Islam so long as it fools the nation by pretending the problem of terrorism is completely separate from Salafi ideology.

Possibly the most important thing we can do in the West is shine a spotlight on the radical dogma of Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi Islam in the hopes of supporting true moderates, such as Tawfiq Hamid and Zhudi Jasser, as they attempt to evolve their faith. As Jasser said in a recent interview at NRO:

I and so many others of the majority of Muslims who are at home in Western pluralistic society are living modern interpretations of Islam which can if given a chance and the resources can directly counter the radical interpretations of fanatical Muslims which have abused so many in the world.

But the Labour government is not supporting people like Jasser. To the contrary, Labour is supporting the well-funded Salafist organizations and, with this foray into Orwellian doublespeak, has just gone the further step towards extinguishing the last bit of candlelight on radical Islam in the UK. This of course poses an equally grave danger to the non-Muslim population of Britain who need to fully comprehend the beast in their midst. Again to quote Jasser in a different interview:

[A] better informed . . . citizenry can hold Muslims and non-Muslims alike . . . accountable for their facilitation of the radicalization of Muslims. Once this process is understood the contribution to jihadism of political Islam and the dreams of the Islamic state will become clearer to every [citizen] and the ideological threat will be realized.

That is clearly not happening in Britain. Instead, as the threat increases, the Labour government is feeding its non-Muslim citizens disingenuous pablum worthy of Neville Chamberlin.

Radical Islam will only be defeated when the ideology of Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi Islam is marginalized and Islam itself made to evolve through its own Period of Enlightment. No one knows this better then the former Salafi terrorist turned reformist Tawfiq Hamid. Let’s give him the last word:

The civilized world ought to recognize the immense danger that Salafi Islam poses; it must become informed, courageous and united if it is to protect both a generation of young Muslims and the rest of humanity from the disastrous consequences of this militant ideology.

Tawfiq Hamid (emphasis mine)


Update: Brits at Their Best have a post that relates directly to the issues raised above. And Soccer Dad has a post that supplements these issues. As he notes in his post:

Islamist hatred of the West is not a grievance we can address. Attempting to accomodate the demands of Islamists only encourages them. For there to be peace between Islam and the West, there needs to be a change of heart in Islam. Anything else is useless.


Read More...

Friday, December 7, 2007

An Apostate Marked for Death in the UK

Any suggestion that Salafi Islam and its Deobandi counterpart are "moderate" forms of Islam continually runs up against that wall commonly called reality. To the extent that there are moderate practitioners of those faiths, they are better called "partial" Muslims as their moderation is founded upon a refusal to honor, whether consciously or in the breech, all the tenents of their faith. In public, you will hear the Islamists proclaim that the Prophet said that there should be no compulsion in religion. That one always runs up against the part about killing apostates who leave Islam. I wait to hear the MCB on this one.

This story below is just one more among countless showing Britain's refusal to address their problem with a significant portion of the Muslims living among them.

The daughter of a British imam is living under police protection after receiving death threats from her father for converting to Christianity.

The 31-year-old, whose father is the leader of a mosque in Lancashire, has moved house an astonishing 45 times after relatives pledged to hunt her down and kill her.

The British-born university graduate, who uses the pseudonym Hannah for her own safety, said she renounced the Muslim faith to escape being forced into an arranged marriage when she was 16.

She has been in hiding for more than a decade but called in police only a few months ago after receiving a text message from her brother.

In it, he said he would not be held responsible for his actions if she failed to return to Islam.

Officers have agreed to offer her protection in case of an attempt on her life.

Last night the woman said: "I'm determined to live my life the way I want to because I should have that freedom in this country.

"If you make the choice to come to this country, as my parents did from Pakistan, you have to abide by the laws of this country and that means respecting the freedoms of other people.

"I know the Koran says anyone who goes away from Islam should be killed as an apostate, so in some ways my family are following the Koran. They are following Islam to the word.

"But I do not think every Muslim would act on that.

"My situation is frightening, but I'm not going to let it frighten me to the extent I can't live my life.

"I pretty much feel like I've lost my family and that's very hard.

"Some days I feel very low and what my father might do preys on my mind. But I regularly change my phone number to avoid him catching up with me.'

Hannah was born in Lancashire to Pakistani parents who raised her and her siblings as strict Sunni Muslims.

She prayed and read the Koran, wore traditional Muslim clothes and was sent to a madrassa, a religious Muslim school.

She ran away from home at 16 after overhearing her father organising her arranged marriage.

Hannah was taken in by a religious education teacher and decided to convert to the Christian faith.

Although unhappy, her parents tolerated their daughter's dismissal-of Islam as a "teenage phase".

But when she opted to get baptised, while studying at Manchester University, her family were incensed and the death threats began.

Her father arrived at her home with 40 men and threatened to kill her for betraying Islam.

"I saw my uncle and around 40 men storming up the street clutching axes, hammers, knives and bits of wood," she said.

"My dad was shouting through the letter box, "I'm going to kill you", while the others smashed on the window and beat the door.

"They were shouting, 'We're going to kill you' and 'Traitor'.

"It was terrifying. I was convinced I was going to either die, but suddenly after about ten minutes the noise stopped and the men suddenly went away."

. . . No one has been arrested or charged in connection with the death threats, but officers have put her on an "at risk" register and have given her a panic number to call if she fears for her own safety.

Yesterday Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, told delegates at the launch of a religious charity that Muslims in Britain who wished to change faiths were living in fear of their lives because of Islamic hostility to conversion.

A study this year found that 36 per cent of British Muslims between 16 and 24 believe those who convert to another religion should be punished by death.

Read the entire article. This woman has no business being in police protection. She should be able to live her life without the least concern. It is her family that should be ejected from Britain or jailed. Under no circumstances should Britain tolerate such an instance at this for even a second. But, unfortunately, not only will that not happen, the Labour government has now put the institutions of radical Islam in a postition to exercise significant measure of influence over all of the country's Mosques. Insanity.


Read More...

Saturday, December 1, 2007

Of Islamist Foxes and British Chickens

One could analogize the utter insanity in Britain this week to putting the foxes in charge of the hen house, but that comparison falls far short of reality. The only danger of that fact pattern is that the farmer is out a few chickens. One needs instead to analogize to a fact pattern where the foxes radicalize the chickens and establish a heniphate on the entire farm.

The background to this story is that Britain has the most radicalized Muslim population west of the Danube. The reasons for that are fourfold. The UK is being innundated with Wahhabi Salafi Islam via countless sources; Britain's multicultural ethic forestalls any reasoned criticism of Islam; Britain has made criticism of Islam potentially criminal by passage of the Hate Speech laws; and, Britain's permissive immigration laws have allowed "radical" Islamists into the country. Polls taken last year show that “nearly 25% of British Muslims said the July 7, 2005, terror bombings in London, which killed 52 innocent commuters, were justified. Another 30% said they would prefer to live under strict Islamic Sharia law rather than England's democratic system.”

In a country that has a Muslim population of almost two million and growing, that is a real problem. There needs to be reform. But things break down right there for Labour. What will they reform? The multicultural ethos will not allow the chattering classes to analyze the problems presented by Islam and make critical judgments. Labour assumes that the problem cannot be systemic to Islam – because by default the culture itself must be equal to Western culture - and therefore must be the result of some anamoly. Thus unable to identify why their population is becoming increasingly radicalized, Labour has acted out of sheer, suicidal ignorance.

What I am refering to is yesterday's launch in Britain of the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board (MINAB). This highly influential group created by the government is supposed to help Labour get a handle on its Mosques. Specifically, MINAB is tasked with advising the government on the “suitability of Imams and scholars coming from abroad for employment in the UK” and producing the Islamic religious educational “standards.”

So who does Labour appoint to lead MINAB?

Two of the four organizations appointed to the MINAB are the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). They are the Islamic foxes just set down amongst the British chickens.

The MAB was founded by Dr Kamal Helbawy, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood – itself a “Salafi jihadist organization” and the precursor to al Qaeda. The differences between the Brotherhood and al Qaeda are not in philosophy, goals, or objectives, but rather just methods (Walid Phares, Future Jihad, p. 64-65). Dr. Helbway is one of many Islamists Britain has welcomed with open arms whom the U.S. will not allow to enter the country. As to the leader of the MAB today, it is Dr Azzam Tamini. He is an equally qualified person to preside over all of Islam in Britain. He is a proponent of Hamas who has praised suicide bombings.

The MCB is no better. It is run by Dr. Mohammed Bari, a man about whom I have blogged recently for his outrageous remarks in an interview published in the Telegraph. His organization actively seeks to keep Muslims from integrating into British society and he is a proponent of implementing Sharia law in Britain, to include outlawing the public sale of alcohol and the stoning of adulterers. Moreover Dr. Bari and the leadership of the Muslim Council are linked to conservative Islamist movements in the Muslim world and in particular Pakistan's Jamaat-i-Islami, a radical party committed to the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan ruled by sharia law. Jamaat-I-Islami is itself an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood (Phares, Future Jihad, p. 65).

And these are the people that Labour has just put in charge of the nation’s Muslims in an attempt to stop the process of radicalization? The sheer insanity of this is mind boggling. The only way to make the MINAB more of a radicaling force would be to add bin Laden to the board.

What the Labour government is missing is that there is no such thing as a “moderate” Muslim. The issues that are "radicalizing" a substantial minority of the British Muslim population are systemic to the dominant forms of Islam. They are not anamolies. Ayaan Hirsi Ali talked about this recently, and it is perhaps the most critical point our leadership on both sides of the pond needs to understand. When asked about “moderate” Muslims in a recent interview, she said:

‘I find the word “moderate” very misleading.’ There’s a touch of steel in Hirsi Ali’s voice. ‘I don’t believe there is such a thing as “moderate Islam”. I think it’s better to talk about degrees of belief and degrees of practice. The Koran is quite clear that it should control every area of life. If a Muslim chooses to obey only some of the Prophet’s commandments, he is only a partial Muslim. If he is a good Muslim, he will wish to establish Sharia law.’

Read the interview. I believe that is true, at least in as much as her observations pertain to Salafi Islam and Khomeinist Shia'ism. If you talk to "moderate" Muslims - the people you want as your friends and neighbors - they invariably talk about the "essence" of Islam as being both good and positive. I believe them completely. But it is clear that they are looking to the generalities and ignoring many of the orthodox interpretations. The black letter of the Koran and methods of interpretation of Salafi Islam go beyond this "essence" and lead directly back to 7th century Arabia. As I have written extensively here, if the systemic issues are ever to be addressesd, Islam must evolve and go through its period of Enlightenment.

Assuming the polls are accurate, the good news for Britain at the moment is that a majority of her Muslims fall into that category of “partial Muslims.” But putting the MAB and MCB in a position to influence Britain’s Muslim population is a sure guarantee that there will be no evolution of Islam in Britain, but there will be an ever growing population of “good Muslims.”

There are Muslims in the world today like Tawfiq Hamid and Zuhdi Jasser, voices in the wilderness at the moment, who are trying to evolve their faith. They need our full support. And they need to be the people who are appointed to MINAB. What Labour has just done is compound its problems with Islam exponentially. A few more decisions like that and, well, it may be time to get sized for that burkah.



Update: Robert Spencer makes a point similar to Ayaan Hirsi Ali in this article.

Update: And Ed Husain, a former member of Jamaat-i-Islami and friend of terrorist spiritual leader Omar Bakri, makes a similar point in an essay written in the Guardian stating:

. . . in Muslim scripture there are some unpalatable references. But these are to be seen in the context of their time. What remain valid are the eternal truths that Shatibi, Locke and others enunciated. Our humanity must transcend adherence to scriptural literalism, especially if it leads to mayhem and loss of innocent lives. . .

Read the article here. I do not know if Husain's suggetion of just ignoring parts of the Koran is workable, altough that is precisely what the "partial" or "moderate" Muslims do today. Those who seek a true evolution of their religion seek to do it through a formal process of ijtihad.

Update: And here is yet another article speaking to the problem of Koranic interpretation. This from the Washington Post about a young cleric in Egypt who is challenging the traditional interpretation of the Koran:

Masoud advocates adherence to prayer five times a day, peace toward all and abstinence from alcohol, sex outside of marriage and violence. Beyond those principles, he said, Islam is suffering from a "crisis of interpretation."

Read the article.


Read More...