Tag Archive for: M Zuhdi Jasser

AIFD Summer Newsletter: a Dispatch from Voices for Reform | June 20,2014

/in /by

Dear Friends,

First, we want to let you know that we have been following the situation in Iraq very closely. Our written analysis will follow, but you may be interested in my recent media appearances on the topic, which are available on our YouTube channel. Click here for my recent appearance on Fox Business, discussing the troubling rise of ISIS.

We at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are excited to share updates with you from the start of our tenth year engaging directly in the battle of ideas against Islamism.

As we reflected on the past ten years, with its many successes and challenges, we recognized that it is time to re-visit the values that drive our work. While we remain committed to our foundational values and core principles, we recognize the need to set forth a set of universal values to expand the reach of our work. The following guiding principles will be the focus of all of our public outreach and community engagement as we move forward:

1. AIFD seeks to build a national consensus on political Islam. Our goal will be to “Unite the American Spirit” around the concepts upon which this nation was founded: individual liberty, freedom of conscience, and the promise that each individual has a chance at reaching his or her fullest potential. Political Islam, or Islamism, is the antithesis of American values. Recognizing this is not a partisan act, it is an American act. When all Americans – Muslim and non-Muslim – unite to recognize and combat the threat of political Islam, we are recognizing and respecting every individual’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

2. AIFD will advance reform from within the house of Islam. For too long, Islamists have intimidated Muslims out of voicing the need for reform within our faith. By painting “reform” as anti-Islam and anti-Muslim, they have worked hard to guarantee that one interpretation of Islam – their interpretation – gets the most airtime. As Muslims who recognize the need for reform within our faith, we refuse to be bullied by Islamist interpretations of Islam. As liberty-minded Muslims, we embrace a pluralistic interpretation of Islam that works in synergy with, not in opposition to, universal human rights and individual freedom.

 3. AIFD is committed to ending gender-based violence. To Islamists, women are public enemy number one. While gender-based violence is a global problem, we Muslims must address issues far too common within our community: honor-based violence, domestic violence, forced and child marriage, marital rape, female genital mutilation and more. To Islamists, the responsibility of representing piety and respectability falls predominantly on women’s bodies, and controlling them is considered a divine mandate. At AIFD, we believe that women are entitled to bodily integrity, personal autonomy, and freedom from all forms of psychological, emotional, physical and sexual abuse and control.

4.  Freedom of religion is the first right in the U.S. Constitution because without it no other right can stand.  AIFD stands firm in our commitment to advance that right and the right for all to have freedom of conscience, which must also include freedom of expression and the freedom to leave one religion for another or to choose not to embrace any faith at all. We reject the practice of “takfir,” or the declaration of a person as non-Muslim as practiced by Islamists. This practice has been used by Islamists both to chill speech about political Islam and to signal to vigilantes that those targeted are worthy of death. We accept as Muslim any person who identifies him or herself as Muslim, and believe the veracity of an individual’s faith is a matter between the individual and God. 

5.  We seek to empower non-Muslim allies in working to eradicate radical Islam. We recognize that the threat of political Islam affects all of us – not just Muslims. All too often, non-Muslims are made to feel that they are not welcome to ask critical questions, express concerns, or speak frankly about these issues. We are committed to creating not just safe spaces for liberty-minded Muslims, but also for non-Muslims interested our mission.  We also recognize that without non-Muslim allies, our movement cannot succeed. The support and input of our non-Muslim allies is essential to our success and to meaningful change.

6.  We will continue to identify, engage, support and empower other Muslims and Muslim organizations who share the above five goals.

Our team continues to be at the forefront of championing these principles and challenging those forces within our community who stand against them. A few highlights:

Some of the attendees at our 2014 retreat

We recently held our fourth annual retreat for liberty-minded Muslim youth. This retreat brought both youth and adult leaders together to strategize on how to strengthen our core community. To see pictures from our retreat, click here.

Dr. Jasser continues to be a leading voice on Islamic reform, national security, and the battle against political Islam (for footage and audio of interviews, please click here). He recently traveled to the UK, where he participated in the prestigious Oxford Union’s “Thursday Debate.” These formal debates have been taking place since 1823 and were founded on “an ideal of the freedom of speech.” Dr. Jasser was asked to debate whether or not the religion of Islam is compatible with gender equality. He argued that Islam as a personal faith can indeed be compatible with gender equality, if Muslim take the necessary steps to engage in reform and combat misogyny within our communities. His side won the debate by a landslide. Please see here for pictures of Dr. Jasser at the event, and stay tuned – we will send audio of the event if we are able to. (Videotaping was not permitted.) While in the UK, Dr. Jasser was also honored to speak at the Henry Jackson Society, where he gave a talk entitled “Whose Islam? Which Islam? Reformists vs. Revivalists, or why the West Must Take Sides within the House of Islam.”

Raquel Evita Saraswati appeared in the widely acclaimed documentary Honor Diaries, which features women’s rights advocates working to end gender-based violence in Muslim communities. The film has brought urgently needed attention to the issue of women’s rights in Muslim majority societies and communities. She also appeared on Fox News’  The Huckabee Show to discuss the kidnapping of nearly 300 schoolgirls in Nigeria by the Islamist group Boko Haram. To watch, click here. To follow Raquel on Twitter, click here.

AIFD Fellow Ahmed Vanya authored a ground breaking article on Traditional Islam and the Challenge of Modernity. The article looks at the compatibility of Islam with modernity. To learn more about Ahmed and our fellows program, click here.

Victory in the Battle for the Soul of Islam will come when Muslims and Non-Muslims alike engage the fallacies of the Islamist ideology and embrace for all people the principles that define America – the sanctity of individual human rights and inalienable rights to liberty.

We would appreciate your engagement and support our shared mission to safeguard individual liberty and freedom. To follow us on Twitter, please click here; and to like us on Facebook, please click here. To make a tax-deductible contribution, please visit this link.

 

Yours in liberty,

 

 

 

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser

CAIR Attacks AIFD through Russian Media

/in , /by

Earlier this year, Dr. Jasser was interviewed by Fox News regarding the Department of Justice’s decision to embrace greater flexibility for its religious members, specifically by permitting certain types of religious dress or appearance to be maintained while in uniform. To see that interview, click here.

Following that interview, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) began another shameful round of attacks against Dr. Jasser. To see those attacks and our full response, click here. 

Despite our many refutations of CAIR’s baseless attacks, they continued (and continue to) smear our work. We even invited CAIR to a public debate on “Islamophobia in America,” with a neutral moderator and venue. They declined our invitation. To see that exchange and our analysis, click here.

Most recently, Dr. Jasser was contacted by Voice of Russia, who had spoken with CAIR about the Department of Justice’s policies. Most revealing was CAIR’s choice to attack Dr. Jasser and AIFD through Russian media, even attempting to pose a question to Dr. Jasser through them.

To read what Voice of Russia published, please click here.

Since the final piece was understandably brief, we thought we would share Dr. Jasser’s interview in its entirety. Below, we have posted Voice of Russia’s questions to Dr. Jasser and the full responses he sent back.

 **

Voice of Russia]: Questions for: US Commission on International Religious Freedom, Vice Chair for the organization Dr. Zuhdi Jasser

Dr. Jasser: First note that ethically you do not define the capacity in which I act during a media interview. I do. During the Fox interview in question and during this interview I am speaking to you on my own behalf as well as President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. If you are interested in our work specifically during my past two years of service on USCIRF, you are welcome to contact USCIRF and avail yourself of the publicly available work there which I have participated in during my tenure thus far as a USCIRF commissioner since 2012.

[VOR]: The Council on American-Islamic Relations released a press release after Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser appeared on Fox News. The council was disgusted by the words that you (Dr. Jasser) said on national TV … as according to CAIR, the International Religious Freedom Vice Chair did not think it was a good idea to broaden the religious freedoms for Muslim military personnel— to what degree is it fair to allow any type of religious follow practice their faith in the US military?

The Council on American-Islamic Relations welcomes the new policy which has broadened the religious rights, Dr. Jasser, how come CAIR states that you are so much against this policy?

Dr. Jasser:  CAIR claims that I am against religious rights being granted for Muslims in the military because they have a very flexible relationship with the truth. My words stand on their own merit. Any honest human being that reviews my comments will know that not only am I not against this new policy, I actually welcomed it publicly – both in the Fox interview over which they attacked me, and in multiple publications and statements after the fact. Unfortunately, the only way CAIR knows how to advance their agenda is to maliciously misrepresent my position in order to defame me in the eyes of other Muslims. It is a desperate and obvious attempt to damage AIFD’s work as we gain more support in the Muslim community. Rather than confront the issue of Islamism and its threat to Islamic reform and true religious freedom, CAIR operates under the premise that any Muslims who call them out and disagree with their Islamist agenda must be “anti-Islam” or “Islamophobic” and thus not a “good Muslim” by their standards. Their behavior smacks of takfirism (the insinuation that other Muslims are not devout enough and thus anti-Islam).

VOR]: It has been noted that you are a devout Muslim which means you actively practice your religion.  To what degree would you be alright with Muslims in the military growing out their beards as a way of showing dedication to their faith?

Dr. Jasser: As was stated in our response to CAIR’s attacks which I hope you read, religious accommodations must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis with priority given to mission readiness and unit cohesion. As a veteran of the U.S. Navy and as a practicing Muslim, I found no conflict between practice of my personal faith (including fasting, praying, abstention from alcohol and dating) and my service in the military. Whether or not a beard is an absolute religious requirement is something we Muslims should be able to discuss reasonably.  The beard as described in the sunnah is not even worn by many in CAIR’s leadership, so it is curious that they are so adamant about it as a religious requirement. I will point out that in that interview I did not even explicitly say that men should be forbidden from having beards.  One thing many seem to be forgetting is that a career in the military is not one for those who want limitless personal expression through their appearance. I applaud the military for looking at these more inclusive policies, but also understand that the uniform is meant to create some amount of visual uniformity. I continue to ask that commanding officers be protected from organizations like CAIR who will insert themselves into command decisions to either allow or deny any special religious dress request.

VOR]: During an interview I had with Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesperson for CAIR, he has posed the question to you: How can you defend religious freedom in this organization while decrying religious freedoms for Muslims in the American military?

Dr. Jasser: It is truly stunning – and revealing – that a CAIR official asked me, another American, to defend my position on religious liberty by asking me a question through Russian state media- a foreign media arm of an autocratic state which by the way has great incentive in misrepresenting my positions due to the stance I have taken against the Assad regime and Russia’s support of their genocide from the beginning of their Revolution in 2011.  The simple answer is: Mr. Hooper, as any person with basic literacy and comprehension skills can easily verify, I have never “decried religious freedoms for Muslims in the American military.” This is a dishonest assertion, but as I have said before, CAIR’s inability to engage with integrity is not unexpected, and their desire to silence the urgently needed ideological battle within the Muslim community is legion. I not only stand behind my comments but my eleven years of service in the US Navy as a proud American Muslim.

VOR]: It has been over a month since CAIR has made its press release public, can you give a reason or reasons as to why you have not given any direct response to the organization?

Dr. Jasser: I wonder if Voice of Russia has verified this allegation, or if you have simply taken CAIR’s word for it? First, CAIR’s press release was just that – a press release, a public attack. They were not entitled to a personal response from me, but my organization did indeed publish a response within a few days. A link to that response is here, and is posted prominently on our website. CAIR officials have been made aware of our response. Various members of their staff have taken to social media to attack me, calling me an “Uncle Tom” and even a “monkey.” You can in fact follow my twitter timeline and see that engagement with their leadership. You could easily find my organization engaging CAIR officials on these very issues, and you could also easily find interviews in which I address these issues. Not a one has engaged me on substance – they have merely resorted to ad hominem attacks and untruths. Finally, I have challenged CAIR to a thoughtful public debate on multiple occasions and have received no response. Private conversations with leaders of an organization whose modus operands are through the dissemination of fabrications and deception are a waste of time and do nothing to hold them accountable and honest. We have always been willing to engage their leadership in public substantive conversations.

VOR]: Can there ever be a truce or common understanding between your involvement with religious freedom organizations and CAIR’s activities within the Islamic community?

Dr. Jasser: As long as CAIR continues to lie about my relationship to my faith and my community, and as long as they continue their malicious attacks against Muslims who seek to advance liberty and freedom,  no, there cannot be a “truce.” By the way, intra-faith “truces” within an American faith community over deep ideological disagreements are not best broached by the state media apparatus of a foreign autocracy like Russia. It would seem that CAIR feigns being focused on domestic civil rights of Muslims in the U.S. while spending most of its time engaging foreign media of autocratic states from Saudi Arabia to Iran and now Russia to perpetuate false information about other American Muslims.

VOR]: Islam is said to be a religion of peace, how can opposing organizations (in this instance the one you stand for and CAIR), promote peace and harmony for the same exact cause if there is so much conflict between the two groups?

Dr. Jasser: This is a peculiar question, as it seems to suggest that Muslims ourselves are a monolith. As I have explained repeatedly in my decades of work for religious freedom and peace, there is a conflict within the “House of Islam,” between those who truly support the separation of mosque and state both when we are minorities in a country and in countries where we are a majority — and those who would ultimately welcome an Islamic state or global caliphate. I delve into this in my 2012 book, A Battle for the Soul of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot’s Fight to Save his Faith. I do not believe that CAIR stands for “the same exact cause” as I do. An organization like CAIR which sends letters to corrupt thuggish dictators like Muammar Qaddafi, fawning over him and what they called his exemplary Islamic behavior is hardly an organization with which I am going to find much common ground. As I said in my response to CAIR’s press release: if we want the military and the broader American community to truly embrace the contribution of American Muslims, we must reject the bullying tactics of organizations like CAIR, who claim to advocate for civil rights but really peddle a narrative of ceaseless victimhood while denigrating and libeling any Muslims who seek balance against the threat of Islamist ideologies.  Their approach belittles true transgressions against religious liberty and in fact ostracizes those Muslims who bravely serve our country. Millions of liberal Egyptian Muslims protested the Muslim Brotherhood leadership and their Islamist theocratic policies last year. Rational observers would not say that those liberal Muslims who rose against the Islamists last June were “anti-Muslim”. Those anti-Islamist Muslim voices deserve respect and honest debate whether in Egypt, the United States, or Russia.

 

List of “Most Influential Muslims” Illustrates the Problem – and Presents Opportunities

/in /by

The 2012 edition of the “500 Most Influential Muslims,” as determined by Jordan’s “Royal  Islamic Strategic Studies Centre” is especially interesting this year: it is dominated by Americans.

Instinctively, one might think that Muslims promoting the ideals of individual liberty, freedom of conscience, and universal human rights might therefore dominate the list. Indeed, having such a significant amount of our own citizens on such a list would be a tremendous opportunity to showcase how the United States allows Muslims to lead in every arena, while embracing a pluralistic interpretation of our faith.

Sadly, it seems that this opportunity has been missed. The United States is represented instead by individuals like Nihad Awad of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR);  Imam Siraj Wahhaj (vice-president of the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA], former national board member of CAIR, defender of The “Blind Sheikh”, etc); Imam Mohamed Magid (current president of ISNA);  Sheikh Hamza Yusuf (founder of Zaytuna College), etc. These are, to say the least, not the best representatives of Islam in America.

On a broader scale, the picture of those considered the “most influential” Muslims is even more grim. Holding the top spot of most influential Muslim in the world is King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who, while certainly not admired by the majority of Muslims we know, absolutely heads the global Islamist enterprise with his kingdom’s petro dollars. Others in leading positions on the list include Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister of increasingly Islamist Turkey; Dr. Mohammed Badie, the “supreme guide” of the Muslim Brotherhood; Ayatollah Khameini, Yusuf Qaradawi, and Muhammad Morsi (the new president of Egypt).

The creators of the list disclose at the start that these are not necessarily individuals they endorse – but that they are individuals they’ve determined to hold the greatest influence worldwide. While we wonder about the likelihood of some people having influence over those not on the list (for example, another American – Sheila Musaji  – makes the cut, but not Fatima Mernissi, legendary and widely loved Moroccan feminist? Further, we know from the Abu Dhabi Gallup Center’s polling that American Muslims simply don’t feel represented by groups like CAIR and ISNA);  we know that regrettably, those Muslims who have the most political and financial influence worldwide are Islamists.  We also must note that the list itself was the brainchild of Prince Gazi bin Muhammad of Jordan; it is produced by a Jordanian think-tank bearing the name “Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre”; and Harvard’s John Esposito has served as a chief editor of the publication in the past – and so while its creators claim to be presenting only the objectively influential voices from within the Muslim community, such a claim is dubious at best. In fact, we find it both puzzling and troubling that Omar Sacirbey, whose write-up on the publication appeared in the Washington Post, called this a “respected think-tank.”

Even if the list itself were listing individuals based on reasonable and objective measures of influence, the devil is, as they say, in the details. The only individual listed as influential in Syrian politics is Bashar al-Assad, the mass murderer responsible for the slaughter of roughly 40,000 Syrians, and the torture, mutilation, rape of countless others. The paragraph about Assad is eerily neutral:

“Al-Assad is an Alawite Shi’a and president of the Syrian Arab Republic. Because of its strategic position in the Middle East, Syria is regarded as a major player in any peace agreement in the Middle East. The violent crackdowns on protests in 2011 have lead to what is now a civil war. Claims of atrocities and misinformation abound on both sides.”

Describing “claims of atrocities” in a way that suggests that there is any comparison in scale or scope of violence between the murderous and bloodthirsty regime of “Bashar the Butcher” and the many Syrians who seek to oust him is despicable – and reflects the overall quality and tenor of this report on “Muslim influence.”

We do recognize that the list isn’t entirely problematic. Listed also are individuals like Waris Dirie, a Somali model, author, actress, filmmaker and courageous fighter against female genital mutilation. A survivor of both FGM and forced marriage, Ms Dirie went on to found the Desert Flower Foundation, which works to end FGM with no exceptions for culture or religion. Naser Khader, former member of the Danish parliament, critic of Islamism and defender of free speech also made the list. So did Dr. Hawa Abdi, Somalia’s first female gynecologist and founder of the Dr. Hawa Abdi Foundation, whose work means over 90,000 Somali refugees have a place to live. Her foundation also works on education, agriculture and healthcare issues.

Whether the list is biased toward Islamists or not, it reveals what we at AIFD already know: liberty-minded Muslims have a long road ahead of us if we wish to overtake Islamists when it comes to having more influence than they do in the public sphere. While many of us are well respected in our personal and professional circles, and often have many Muslim friends and colleagues who think the way we do and support us in our work, the fact is that most majority-Muslim organizations (and countries!) are run by theocrats who see pluralism, liberty, and freedom of conscience as threats to be defeated rather than as the life forces of any healthy society.

Three-minute video blog: Dr. Jasser on the Muslim Brotherhood and how to push back to achieve real liberty

/in /by

Dr. Jasser sat down to share his thoughts on the latest news from Egypt, including the new Islamist, anti-freedom constitution. He says that it may take a while to defeat the well-organized machine of political Islam, and that the answer is in non-Islamists organizing like never before.

Click here: Dr. Jasser on the Muslim Brotherhood and President Morsi.

John Walker Lindh: A Terrorist Manipulating Islam, Aided by Western Islamists and their Sympathizers

/in /by
 

John Walker Lindh

John Walker Lindh, infamously serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding the Taliban, is now seeking new ways to insult the United States, including insulting the many liberty-minded Muslims who value our nation’s freedoms.

The prison where Lindh is held has had a generous policy for its many Muslim prisoners. Until they were disciplined for not responding to a fire alarm, the prisoners were permitted to gather in congregation for three of the five daily prayers. Now, the prisoners are only permitted to gather for the Friday afternoon “jummah” prayer.

Lindh is not satisfied with this accommodation of his religious beliefs and practices. He has asserted that the prison’s restriction on gathering for prayer is an infringement on his religious rights, and that he must gather with other Muslims for the daily prayers. He has even brought his case to court, suing the Federal Bureau of Prisons for the right to pray in congregation more than once per week.

Islam does not require Muslims to perform their daily prayers in congregation, and allows for Muslims to miss the Friday prayers if circumstances make attending them impossible. Imam Ammar Amonette of Richmond, Virginia has commented on Lindh’s case, affirming this widely-known Islamic guideline. Despite this, Lindh continues to insist that he receive special treatment.

This kind of arrogance is no surprise coming from a notorious terrorist convicted of numerous crimes against the United States and innocent people everywhere. It is also a hallmark of the Islamist mindset, which seeks to use the freedom and reason of the West in its quest to defeat it. Islamists relish the opportunity to demand even accommodations well outside of mainstream Islamic practice: niqabs (face-veils) in the courtroom, extra congregational prayers for terrorists. Islamists make these absurd demands with full knowledge that they act against both non-Muslims and the majority of Muslims worldwide. They view their mission as a holy war, in which they seek to defeat all people who believe in freedom and the preservation of human rights. To them, no sacrifice is too great – and those Muslims who won’t fight alongside them are primary targets.

This is not the first time Islamists in the prison system have petitioned for special privileges: in 2009, Randall T. Moyer (a former spokesman for the Muslim American Society, or MAS and member of the “Virginia Jihad Network”) was housed in the same prison as John Walker Lindh, and also sued the Federal Bureau of Prisons for additional congregational prayer rights. Louay Safi, former director of leadership development for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), backed Moyer’s request, saying that Moyer’s demands followed the “prophetic tradition,” and that Muhammad promised greater rewards to those who pray in congregation. (Read more about Safi and his career in ISNA’s leadership here and here.)

The ACLU is defending Lindh, and they may be well-intentioned in doing so. We certainly support protecting civil rights for all Americans.  By choosing to support Lindh, however, the ACLU seems to be trying to support an identity group – Muslims – but are instead supporting Lindh’s Islamist interpretation of Islam, which actually subjugates individual Muslims and restricts their rights. Islamism doesn’t value individual liberty, freedom of expression, or civil rights.

As liberty-minded Muslims, we are intensely grateful for the freedoms granted we enjoy in the United States, where we are freer to practice our faith than we would be anywhere else in the world. We believe that John Walker Lindh’s demands for greater privileges are not just unreasonable, but also dangerous. He, like other Islamists, seeks to define Islam as a faith utterly incompatible with modernity, freedom, and human rights. We urge those who may be swayed by Lindh’s argument to recognize that they may be setting a dangerous precedent by helping to advance a jihadist’s interpretation of Islam, which seeks to strip us of the very liberties that make us who we are.

**

Disturbing: a jihadi song in in honor of John Walker Lindh, aka Mujahid Sulayman al-Faris.