Muslims must stand together against the scourge of radical Islamism.

/in , , , /by

Asia Times

http://www.atimes.com/muslims-must-declare-blasphemy-invented-crime/

JUNE 22, 2017 2:24 AM (UTC+8)

Author: M. Zuhdi Jasser

In the past few years and especially the past few months, radical Islamism has been accelerating its influence among Indonesians. In May a bomb exploded in Jakarta, killing three and wounding 10. This incident, which occurred one day after the horrific attack at a concert in Manchester, England, was not the first time the world’s most populous Muslim country has experienced terror.

Indonesia has long had a reputation for being a model of Muslim moderation and pluralism, yet its problem with radical Islamism is real. From soaring rates of female genital mutilation to violent protests against authors and artists who offend religious hardliners, the country is undergoing an ugly and dangerous radicalization that will traumatize its citizens and leak across its borders, threatening global security.

Ahok abandoned by moderate Islamic scholars

Ahok was accused because of his analysis of a Qur’anic verse which offered a more modern and tolerant apologetic. He claimed that a more modern interpretation of the Qur’an did not prevent Muslims from being led or governed by Jews or Christians. He was not protected and defended by moderate Indonesian Islamic scholars (ulema).

Indonesia, which supposedly is based on a constitution that separates mosque and state, finds itself slipping slowly into the quagmire of theocracy like a frog slowly boiling to death in a kettle of water as the temperature increases daily.

Ahok lost his bid for re-election in April and despite claims by many that his blasphemy case would disappear after he lost the election, he now sits in a Jakarta jail as a troubling example to any who would consider using free speech to counter Islamists.

Islamists are winning on many fronts. Aware that pursuing his own freedom could mean an even more severe sentence, Ahok has withdrawn his appeal of the blasphemy sentence. It is important to note that Ahok was an elected politician and was rich with the social and material capital many Indonesians simply don’t have. Yet he was targeted, has not been able to successfully defend himself, and has not received sufficient public support. If this is the fate of an elected official, what does it mean for everyday people who don’t have his resources?

Popular student killed for his beliefs

Pakistani Mashal Khan was just such a person: a student, a budding poet, a sensitive soul beloved by friends and popular on social media networks. Yet, for online postings some deemed “disrespectful to Islam,” about 20 university students in April stripped him naked in public, beat him, taunted him and tortured him until finally, one shot him dead.

While Mashal was not nearly as well known as Ahok, stories like his are terrifyingly common. Many people in Muslim-majority societies around the world believe, either privately or openly, in punishing those they believe to have insulted Islam.

In the United States, Islamists may not physically lynch “blasphemers,” but they harass, stalk, threaten and bully those they believe have gone beyond the bounds of their interpretation of Islam. This more insidious tactic — of scaring truly moderate Muslims into silence — means that clueless Westerners allow Islamists access to the halls of power, and grant them social legitimacy.

The core of this threat is Islamism — a theopolitical ideology, distinct from the personal faith of Islam, that seeks to establish Islamic states and a caliphate. It’s a system that cannot exist without the censure of dissident voices and the subjugation of anyone — Muslim or non-Muslim — who opposes it. Those who jailed Ahok and those who murdered Mashal Khan are simply taking Islamism to its natural conclusion, and doing the dirty work of non-violent Islamists.

Blasphemy laws violate the very spirit of Islam

We Muslims have nothing to lose by opposing blasphemy laws and the culture that fosters them. After all, we are among its targets, and the failure to address these issues head-on also cultivates mistrust between ourselves and our non-Muslim neighbors. It is my view, as a devout Muslim, that blasphemy laws violate the very spirit of Islam: if faith is professed under duress, but not held by choice it cannot be sincere.

We at the Muslim Reform Movement do not believe that any ideas or religions, no matter how sacred we may perceive them, have any rights whatsoever, but that individuals — those of faith and those who choose to profess no faith — have rights that must be protected at all costs.

We stand in solidarity with Ahok, and with the Mashal Khans everywhere. We call attention to the intellectual, social, cultural, and legal battles being waged for free speech across the planet from Indonesia to the United States. It’s time for all free-thinking peoples to confront the scourge against free speech and individual rights which Islamism poses. To read our declaration and join us, click here.

6/19/2017: Zuhdi Jasser joins Martha MacCallum debating the mission of ISIS, terror attacks and how its impacting Islamic reform.

/in , , /by

6/19/2017: Zuhdi Jasser joins Fox & Friends to discuss the attack on Muslims leaving Finsbury Park Mosque after prayer service in London

/in , , /by

6/19/2017: Zuhdi Jasser shares his thoughts with Fox & Friends about the van attack on Muslims leaving Finsbury Park Mosque after prayer service in London

/in , , /by

May 10, 2017: Is Tawhidi the Imam Australia’s been waiting for?

/in , , , /by

Asia Times

MAY 10, 2017 8:57 PM (UTC+8)

Is Mohammad Tawhidi the Imam we’ve been waiting for?

Author: M. Zuhdi Jasser

Shaikh Mohammad Tawhidi hits all the right notes as the ideal Australian Muslim media darling: a website full of condemnations of ISIS; a friendly visage at rallies, vigils and in the media; and a smattering of criticism from militant Sunnis. He has expressed opposition to unregulated madrassahs (Islamic schools), and says he “doesn’t want burqas running around.” He also insists that Muslims in the West should assimilate, saying that had his father known “so many extreme Muslims” would one day be in Australia, he would never have moved there. He says all of these things while wearing a robe and beard, providing a veneer of legitimacy so appealing to Westerners eager to hear these words in a suitably “Islamic” package.

So, is Tawhidi the imam we have been waiting for? The one who sincerely seeks to advocate for critical thinking within the “house of Islam,” who will work to abolish sectarianism, promote gender equality, combat anti-Semitism, and bring about the reformation many have discussed – but so few have meaningfully supported?

In a word, no. In a few more words: not even close.

Let me be clear: I wish he were. I would welcome such an imam, and offer him my full support. I would use every platform at my disposal to promote his views, and pass the mic to him and his colleagues whenever and wherever possible. I wish I were readying myself to do just that, rather than coming to the unfortunate conclusion that I must instead ask that he be denied this empowerment.

The unfortunate reality of this instantly famous imam seems to be something more than simple opportunism. Rather, things seem much more sinister: Tawhidi may not be the reformist imam of our dreams – but rather simply a radical of a different flavor. Rather than espousing the radical ideology of ISIS, which draws from an extremist interpretation of Sunni Islam, Tawhidi subscribes to its reflection – a nefarious interpretation of Shia Islam. And because the West is so hungry for figures such as the one he appears to be, they are none the wiser.

Archived tweets made by Tawhidi reveal extreme views held by a minority of Shias with regard to the Prophet Muhammad’s family: in them, he calls Aisha (Muhammad’s wife) a “b*tch,” talks about her “experience with semen,” and other vulgarities. He has not only called for a “review” of Islam – but specifically the banning of most Sunni teachings. His is not a reformist project: it is a sectarian project. He is troublingly quick to jump on far-right bandwagons – not because he agrees with their concerns about Islam as a whole – but because aiding them would rush the end of Sunni Islam. His religious and educational programming originates in Bashar al-Assad’s Syria and radical Shia strains in Iraq and Iran. It should cause significant pause that his criticisms extend only to Sunni Islamists – never the Islamists within his own community – and never the regimes of Iran and Syria, the heart of radical Shi’ism.

If Tawhidi wishes to prove his reformist bona fides, we urge him to indicate his clear support for the Muslim Reform Movement declaration, retract his hateful comments that stoke sectarianism, and issue swift, thorough and regular condemnations of Shia radicals and their movements by name as well. He must disclose and sever any ties with the Iranian and Syrian regimes or their supporters in Iraq, commit to the active opposition of sectarianism, and embrace the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

There’s a distinct reason that our work at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is directed at the need for reforms against all forms of Islamism – “political Islam” and all its attendant permutations of an Islamic state mentality. At AIFD, our work is blind to Sunni or Shia with a clear universal mission statement to defend liberty through the separation of mosque and state. Whether Sunni or Shia, all forms of the Islamic sharia state and its admixture of Islamic law and state are doomed theocracies and plagues upon humanity. It makes no difference whether Islamist theocracy has a Sunni or Shia flavor, it is a theocracy and thus supremacist. Tawhidi’s positions, while appealing to many in the West as an apparently bold and courageous “Muslim cleric” against Sunni Islamism, is grotesquely and conveniently unilaterally anti-Sunni Islamist.

Understanding this whole dynamic is, if anything, a distinct teaching moment.

The defeat of Islamism and its movements will never happen if one side of the Sunni-Shia sectarian battle of the Islamists is favored over the other — with the ends justifying the means. The only path towards modernity and defeat of all radical Islamism in Muslim communities is the advancement of liberal ideas against both cancers of Sunni and Shia Islamism. Anything short of that is an exercise in deceptive sectarianism, which will actually only continue the cycle of global Islamism. As the old adage goes, Australia’s Sheikh Tawhidi proves once again that if something is too good to be true, it often is.

5/21/2017: M. Zuhdi Jasser pens “My take on President Trump’s speech to the Riyadh Summit”

/in , , /by

In grading the speech, I am holding President Trump accountable to the standards of his own brand of being “anti-establishment” and fearlessly speaking “truth to power”.

So with that on this speech, I give him a C.

In this landmark speech for the Presidency of Donald J. Trump, I give you some “Hits” and “Misses”. Take a breath and read my praise as well as my critique.

HITS and MISSES:

Yes, even with a crystal clear understanding of the diplomatic dance and needles he needed to thread as a guest in Saudi Arabia, there is most definitely a way an American President, the leader of the free world, can lead the world and the people these tyrants supposedly represent into the 21st century holding on to our own values at home and abroad without needing to apologize for that. Yet, President Trump sadly had to say, “we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do who to be, or how to worship. Instead we are here to offer partnership, based on shared interests and values to pursue a better future.” I think the legions of persecuted free citizens in the streets, homes and jails of these regimes were saddened to hear that. America CAN both respect their independence, their culture and religion while ALSO holding them accountable to universal human rights.

1. HIT: Greatest sound bite and hit of the speech was “The nations of the Middle East will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their country, and frankly for their families, for their children. It’s a choice between two futures, and it is a choice America cannot make for you. A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and drive out the extremists.” Sadly and more truthfully, the hall should have then almost emptied except for Tunisia, Indonesia and a few others. Great sound bite but missed the follow through on these tyrants living off the root cause theocratic Islamist ideology that creates these global Islamist militants and their viral movements.

2. HIT: Second best hit was the call to isolate the regimes of Iran and Syria: The Iranian regime’s longest suffering victims are its own people. He poignantly said, “Iran has a rich history and culture, but the people of Iran have endured hardship and despair under their leader’s reckless pursuit of conflict and terror. Until the Iranian regime is willing to be a partner for peace, all nations of conscience must work together to isolate it, deny it, funding for terrorism, cannot do it, and pray for the day when the Iranian people have the just and righteous government they so richly deserve”. I wish he had added Syrian people in there and called for an end of the Assad regime. But without a doubt this statement was a wonderful end to the 8 years of Iranophilia at the fabricated alter of the deceptive Iranian nuclear agreement.

3. HIT: President Trump healthily rebooted the process of reestablishing unwavering American leadership with the regional governments and rebalancing the power with a long overdue tilt away from Iran in the Middle East. In fact it was wonderfully refreshing to hear him begin the process of isolating Iran.

4. Bonus HIT: Moscow cannot be happy at the strengthening of the US-Sunni axis against radical Islamists and Iran.

5. HIT: President Trump spoke positively of Muslims being 95% of the victims of terrorism and needing to lead this fight. He spoke positively of Islam as a leading religion among leading global faiths. Regardless of where anyone is on political correctness issues, all relationships of value are built on tough love. This is important.

6. HIT: Finally, finally…the end of empty, Presidential “Obama-like” apologetic rhetoric in reference to the “blame America” crowd on the Left that wants every presidential speech to begin and end with the USA asking for forgiveness in looking out for its own interests while advancing freedom and liberty and universal human rights abroad. It is beyond refreshing to see an end to that self-flagelating manifestation of American weakness and appeasement vis-a-vie apologies for what America does and has done. We often sacrifice our blood and resources for other nations while these tyrants sit on their hands and actually radicalize their own peoples.

7. MISS: (speaking to the people) President Trump spoke to the corporate Islamist dictators as if they represented Islam, Muslims and the people of their nations. They do not. After he set the stage on the above and called for an official gathering of a new coalition against ISIS and radical Islamists, he should have paused and then spoken directly to the aspiring people of these nations. He missed the opportunity to speak to the people of these Muslim majority nations who are now roiling in a nascent Arab Awakening and striving for revolutions and freedom against these very tyrants. He should have spoken past these tyrants whose ideology, Islamism, theocracy, tyranny and corrupt governance is THE primary cause of radicalization within their nations. After giving them hundreds of billions in arms deals and lip service, he had the credibility to be directive. He missed an opportunity to put all these dictators on notice that, yes, in the short term we will work with you against the chaos of radical Islam, but you must begin to own up to what your theocratic sharia states do in creating these radical Islamist movements. This was a big miss and will need to be inserted ASAP into any hope for a successful long term Trump Doctrine. I was very disappointed that the words freedom, democracy, and liberation were not used in his speech. It was as if the Arab Awakening had never happened. For all practical purposes this speech could have been give in the 20th century by any of our Republican establishment Presidents. Ushering in a new era of defeating both the viral radical Islamists and the corporate governmental Islamists was missed.

8. MISS: (Change of language to “Violent Islamism”) For a candidate that campaigned as an anti-establishment disrupter, he missed a profound opportunity to abandon the empty paralytic language of “violent extremism” and replace it with “violent Islamism”. That axis shift in national and global security focus is essential for a global strategy against radical Islamism and unfortunately, President Trump reverted to “establishment-speak” of CVE (Countering Violent Extremism).

9. MISS: (putting the Islamist establishment on notice) opportunity to take the Trump brand of anti-establishment and speaking truth to power to call out the “Islamist” establishment by name and name the OIC based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia as a “neo-caliphate” and ask that they change the paradigm of their nations from “Islamic” to “democratic” and “freedom” and “unalienable universal human rights’. All he needed to do was ask them how they would perceive an OCC (Organization of Christian Cooperation)? That’s the Trump I wanted to see.

10. MISS: (identifying Islamist, sharia laws) opportunity to call out by name and specifically as a root cause of radicalization the existence of Islamist and Salafist blasphemy laws, apostasy laws, hudud punishments, and other theocratic restrictions on religious liberty and free speech have upon indoctrinating millions of Muslims that such are the real ways of Islam and not freedom and liberty.

11. LAST… Some sound bites from my twitter feed (https://twitter.com/drzuhdijasser)

* Our only real allies in the region are the people, masses,who dream for freedom and revolution. @POTUS ignored them today for the most part
* @POTUS should have taken time to speak past this Arab Islamist mafia of the @OIC_OCI and speak to their peoples who dream of freedom
* As has been said- no @POTUS can address Islamist radicalism and terror without confronting corrupt evil governance of @OIC_OCI nations
* @POTUS should have taken time to speak past this Arab Islamist mafia of the @OIC_OCI and speak to their peoples who dream of freedom
* These countries are roiling with fears of democracy, liberalism and revolutions – I would have wanted @POTUS to speak to those values
* Strong speech-but run of the mill US establishment speech spoken to run of the mill global Islamist establishment..back to the 20th century
* Trump: directly confronts Iran, Syria, @khamenei_ir @Presidency_Sy Assad directly as terror states without mincing words. Refreshing.
* Wait he just hastily said “Islamic and Islamist terror” I think they all including are pretending he didn’t say it. Sorry doesn’t count.
* Trump “we will seek gradual reform not suddenly intervention” – uggh that sounds like the Saudi MO of delay delay delay, deception.
* Trump: “drive them out of this earth” – well then the room he’s speaking to should now empty?
* Trump “refugees shouldn’t flee but flock back” … well most of the tyrants you are speaking to treat their people like slaves and animals
* Trump: “center for battling extremist ideology” … “conquer extremism” — he has yet to say ISLAMIST EXTREMISM” disappointing