Summary and Direct Links to So-far Posted "High-Profile Converts to Christianity from Islam"
1. Dr Mustafa( Now Mark Gabriel) Former Muslim Cleric, Ex-Professor in Al Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt(Most prestigious Islamic school of theology )
2. Dr. Muhammed Rahoumy(now Dr. Samuel Paul) - former Dean in Al Azhar Islamic University in Cairo Egypt.
3. Rev KK Alavi - Son of a staunch Islamic cleric, India - The preacher Muslim extremists love to hate, one of the bravest Christians in India
4. Walid Shoebat - A Former PLO Islamic Terrorist
5. Reverend Khalid Soomro - Pakistani ex-Muslim
6. Reza F.Safa - Iranian Ex-Muslims, Now Christian Evangelist (Post was removed because of Copyright issue)
7. Rev. Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo - Pakistani, International Director of UK-based Barnabas Fund.
8. El-Faqi, an ex-Imam and lawyer
9. Taysir Abu Saada "Tass" - Islamic Fatah fighter trained to kill Jews.
10. Hajji Husman Mohamed - a former ethiopian Muslim Imam
11. Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner - Turkish ex-Muslim, Now Dean of Liberty Theological Seminary in Lynchburg, Va
12. Zachariah Anani - Lebanese Islamic Ex-Militant
13. Hamran Ambrie - Indonesian Ex-Muslim Priest
14. Mohammed Amin - Former Ethiopian Islamic Cleric
15. El-Akkad - Former Muslim Preacher, Egypt
16. Mohammed Altaf( Now Simon Altaf) - Pakistani ex-Muslim - Abrahamic Faith Ministries
17.Reverend Donald Fareed - Iranian Ex-Muslim
18. Ibrahim Abdullah - former PLO Terrorist
19. Bilquis Sheikh - former wife of a Minister of the Interior, in Pakistan
20. Ak-Beket - former Imam, Kazakhstan
21. Mullah Assad Ullah - Former mullah, Afganistan
22.Indonesian Imam Left Islam, He also led 3000 Moslems to Christ
23. Mullah finds Jesus in Afghanistan
24.Mullah's supernatural conversion - becomes church planter
25.Sudan: Moslem Imam converts to Christianity
26.Kosovo - Converted Muslim leads Mullah to Christ
27.Imam decides to follow Christ after seeing Jesus film
28. Former Mosque Teacher Launches Christian Radio Ministry
29.Salah - Ex-Muslim Palestinian, Now Gospel Musician
30. Rev. Mawlawi Dr. Imad ud-Din Lahiz - Prolific Islamic Writer, Preacher, Quranic Translator
31. Khalif Majid Hassan - Former Islamic Preacher, Minister in the Nation of Islam
32. Jeremiah Fard Muhammad - Muslim minister, now Christian evangelist
33. Dr. Abraham Sarker - Former Muslim, Bangladesh - Now christian Evengelist, Founder of "Gospel for Muslims" Ministries.
34. Rev. Hamid Pourmand - Former Iranian army colonel
35. Pastor Hormoz Shariat Ph.D(in Computers) - Iranian Ex-Muslim, Former Research Scientist in Artificial Intelligence, Now Tele-Evangelist, Bringing the Gospel to Iran.
36. Saleh Hussaini - Former Nigerian Muslim Cleric
37. Sam Solomon - a former Muslim scholar
38. Yusuf Roni - Former Islamic Dawah Missionary, Islamic Youth Organization Chairman, Indonesia - Now Christian Preacher
39. Emir Caner - Turkish Ex-Muslim. (Brother of Dr.Ergun Mehmet) Dean of The College at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
40. Jamal Zarka - Former Muslim Imam, Now Evangelist
41. Bishop John Subhan - Former Sufi Muslim
42. Abdul Saleeb - Former Sufi Muslim from Middle East, Now Christian Missionary to Muslims.
43. A Kurdish leader, writer, historian finds God through Bible translation
44. Gulshan Esther - Pakistan Ex-Muslim, Smitten with typhoid - then crippled by polio as a teenager , Healed by Lord Jesus Miraculously, Became Christian Preacher
45. Pastor Matthew Ashimolowo - a former Muslim, Now leads the largest and Fastest growing church in England.
46. Abdullahi Jibril - Former Muslim Extremist Now Faces Persecution in Nigeria
47. Francisco Castro - Former Islamic Terrorist, Philippines
48. Dr. Nasir K. Siddiki - successful Muslim businessman, Now Christian Preacher
49. Sheikh Mohamed Mansour - Prominent Egyptian Muslim Sheikh and Islamic Scholar
50. Hamza - former Islamic scholar
51. Rev. Majed El Shafie
52. Timothy Abraham - Former Muslim preacher, Fundamentalist. Now Christian Preacher
NB : Here, "High-Profile" refers to former muslims who are now prominent Christians(at the level of Pastors, leading evangelists, reverends etc), former muslims such as Mullahs, Imams, Scholars, Islamic Terrorists, Extremists who were once strong in Islamic faith later converted to Christianity.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Friday August 10, 2007
MALAYSIA: UPROAR OVER ‘ISLAMIC STATE’ CLAIM IS SILENCED
Government gags media discussion of minister’s claim.
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, August 10 (Compass Direct News) – A government halt to media discussion of whether Malaysia is an “Islamic state” last month was one indicator of how close to the surface strong religious feelings are raging.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak drew such protest and counter-protest from religious groups for claiming that Malaysia is an “Islamic state” that the Internal Security Ministry felt compelled to issue a gag order on media coverage of the issue.
At the International Conference on the Role of Islamic States in a Globalized World, organized by the Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia, Najib said on July 17 that Malaysia was an Islamic state and had never been a “secular nation” according to Western definition, since governance has “always been driven by our adherence to the fundamentals of Islam.”
He qualified his remarks, however, by saying that the Federal Constitution guarantees religious freedom to non-Muslim minorities, who make up about 40 percent of the population.
The deputy prime minister’s claim drew immediate protests from religious, political and civil society groups who fear restrictions on religious freedom, especially in the wake of a recent Federal Court decision unfavorable to Lina Joy, a Christian convert who tried unsuccessfully to remove “Islam” from her identification card.
Bishop Dr. Paul Tan, chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia, responded to the comments by issuing a press statement voicing his concerns and appealing to the deputy prime minister to retract his remarks. He claimed that use of the term “Islamic state” is unacceptable to Malaysians of other faiths on three grounds: The term is not used in the Federal Constitution; the founding fathers of the country’s independence never intended for Malaysia to be an Islamic state; and non-Muslim coalition parties that make up the ruling government never consented to, nor officially endorsed, the term “Islamic state” to describe the country.
Ong Ka Chuan, general secretary of the Malaysian Chinese Association, a political party that is part of the ruling coalition government, noted documents prepared by British authorities before granting independence to Malaysia in 1957 clearly stating that “members of the Alliance delegation … had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy” and affirming that Malaysia “would be a secular state.”
Fearing that continued discussion on the matter would cause tension between different religious communities in the country, three days after Najib’s remarks the Internal Security Ministry issued a gag order to all mainstream media prohibiting them from publishing on the matter. Interestingly, the gag order did not apply to statements coming from Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi or Najib himself.
Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, a former prime minister, expressed support for Najib’s declaration via a web-based news agency, Malaysiakini, on July 24. In September 2001, Mahathir had made a similar declaration that was hotly debated, though discussion on it fizzled out over the years.
In an attempt to quell non-Muslim concerns on religious freedom in the country, Prime Minister Abdullah said on Sunday (August 5) that Malaysia is neither a secular state nor a theocratic state. He said Malaysia practices parliamentary democracy, and that the government gives due attention to all races who enjoy religious freedom as provided for in the constitution.
Religious Freedom Concerns
To many, the prime minister’s statement is insufficient to address mounting concerns many have about religious freedom in the country.
In May, the highest court in the land delivered its judgment against Joy, the Muslim convert to Christianity who sought to have the word “Islam” deleted from her identity card. In a 2-1 majority decision, the court ruled that the National Registration Department was right in requiring her to obtain an exit certificate from the sharia court before it could do so.
Joy did not regard turning to the sharia court as an option, since she is no longer a Muslim and the sharia court has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims.
Earlier in January, Revathi Masoosai – an ethnic Indian born to Muslim-convert parents but raised by her Hindu grandmother – was sent to an Islamic rehabilitation camp for six months when she applied to change her name and religion at the sharia court.
Revathi had married a Hindu, Suresh Veerapan, according to Hindu rites in 2004, and they now have an 18-month-old daughter. While she was in detention, Islamic authorities seized her daughter and handed the child to her mother to be raised as a Muslim.
Released from detention, Revathi maintains that she is a Hindu. She is not allowed to live with
her husband since she is legally still a Muslim while he is not. In Malaysia, Muslims can marry only Muslims.
Over the last two years, some grieving families have had to fight legal battles with Islamic authorities over burial rites for their loved ones following claims that the deceased family members had converted to Islam. Also, some women have had to turn to the courts for custody of their children when their husbands converted to Islam. In at least one case, a non-Muslim wife was told she had to seek redress from the sharia court.
Jurisdictional Conflict
Jurisdictional conflicts have arisen due to Malaysia’s dual legal system, whereby civil courts apply to all, while sharia courts are binding on Muslims in certain family and personal matters.
These conflicts are complicated further by the constitution’s Article 121(1A), which states that “the [civil] courts … shall have no jurisdiction of any matter within the jurisdiction of the sharia courts.”
In a July 25 Federal Court judgment involving a dispute over monies between the deceased’s third wife, Latifah Mat Zin, and the daughters of his second wife, Rosmawati and Roslinawati Sharibun, Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamed said that issues of jurisdictional conflict must be resolved by Parliamentary amendments to existing laws or the making of new laws. The justice thus affirmed that the role of the courts is only to apply the law.
He clarified that if one of the parties is a non-Muslim, the sharia court has no jurisdiction over a case even if the subject matter falls within its jurisdiction. Likewise, he said just because one of the parties is a non-Muslim does not mean that the civil court will have jurisdiction over the case if the subject matter does not fall within its jurisdiction. To determine jurisdiction, he said, both courts must look to the statutes.
Ambiga Sreenevasan, chairperson of the Bar Council, commended the high court for clarifying issues that have long plagued Muslims and non-Muslims and for emphasizing the importance of conforming to the constitution.
She noted, however, that the judgment highlighted that there could be situations where there is no remedy in either court – something that must be “comprehensively addressed.
http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&lang=en&length=long&idelement=4983
MALAYSIA: UPROAR OVER ‘ISLAMIC STATE’ CLAIM IS SILENCED
Government gags media discussion of minister’s claim.
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, August 10 (Compass Direct News) – A government halt to media discussion of whether Malaysia is an “Islamic state” last month was one indicator of how close to the surface strong religious feelings are raging.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak drew such protest and counter-protest from religious groups for claiming that Malaysia is an “Islamic state” that the Internal Security Ministry felt compelled to issue a gag order on media coverage of the issue.
At the International Conference on the Role of Islamic States in a Globalized World, organized by the Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia, Najib said on July 17 that Malaysia was an Islamic state and had never been a “secular nation” according to Western definition, since governance has “always been driven by our adherence to the fundamentals of Islam.”
He qualified his remarks, however, by saying that the Federal Constitution guarantees religious freedom to non-Muslim minorities, who make up about 40 percent of the population.
The deputy prime minister’s claim drew immediate protests from religious, political and civil society groups who fear restrictions on religious freedom, especially in the wake of a recent Federal Court decision unfavorable to Lina Joy, a Christian convert who tried unsuccessfully to remove “Islam” from her identification card.
Bishop Dr. Paul Tan, chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia, responded to the comments by issuing a press statement voicing his concerns and appealing to the deputy prime minister to retract his remarks. He claimed that use of the term “Islamic state” is unacceptable to Malaysians of other faiths on three grounds: The term is not used in the Federal Constitution; the founding fathers of the country’s independence never intended for Malaysia to be an Islamic state; and non-Muslim coalition parties that make up the ruling government never consented to, nor officially endorsed, the term “Islamic state” to describe the country.
Ong Ka Chuan, general secretary of the Malaysian Chinese Association, a political party that is part of the ruling coalition government, noted documents prepared by British authorities before granting independence to Malaysia in 1957 clearly stating that “members of the Alliance delegation … had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy” and affirming that Malaysia “would be a secular state.”
Fearing that continued discussion on the matter would cause tension between different religious communities in the country, three days after Najib’s remarks the Internal Security Ministry issued a gag order to all mainstream media prohibiting them from publishing on the matter. Interestingly, the gag order did not apply to statements coming from Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi or Najib himself.
Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, a former prime minister, expressed support for Najib’s declaration via a web-based news agency, Malaysiakini, on July 24. In September 2001, Mahathir had made a similar declaration that was hotly debated, though discussion on it fizzled out over the years.
In an attempt to quell non-Muslim concerns on religious freedom in the country, Prime Minister Abdullah said on Sunday (August 5) that Malaysia is neither a secular state nor a theocratic state. He said Malaysia practices parliamentary democracy, and that the government gives due attention to all races who enjoy religious freedom as provided for in the constitution.
Religious Freedom Concerns
To many, the prime minister’s statement is insufficient to address mounting concerns many have about religious freedom in the country.
In May, the highest court in the land delivered its judgment against Joy, the Muslim convert to Christianity who sought to have the word “Islam” deleted from her identity card. In a 2-1 majority decision, the court ruled that the National Registration Department was right in requiring her to obtain an exit certificate from the sharia court before it could do so.
Joy did not regard turning to the sharia court as an option, since she is no longer a Muslim and the sharia court has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims.
Earlier in January, Revathi Masoosai – an ethnic Indian born to Muslim-convert parents but raised by her Hindu grandmother – was sent to an Islamic rehabilitation camp for six months when she applied to change her name and religion at the sharia court.
Revathi had married a Hindu, Suresh Veerapan, according to Hindu rites in 2004, and they now have an 18-month-old daughter. While she was in detention, Islamic authorities seized her daughter and handed the child to her mother to be raised as a Muslim.
Released from detention, Revathi maintains that she is a Hindu. She is not allowed to live with
her husband since she is legally still a Muslim while he is not. In Malaysia, Muslims can marry only Muslims.
Over the last two years, some grieving families have had to fight legal battles with Islamic authorities over burial rites for their loved ones following claims that the deceased family members had converted to Islam. Also, some women have had to turn to the courts for custody of their children when their husbands converted to Islam. In at least one case, a non-Muslim wife was told she had to seek redress from the sharia court.
Jurisdictional Conflict
Jurisdictional conflicts have arisen due to Malaysia’s dual legal system, whereby civil courts apply to all, while sharia courts are binding on Muslims in certain family and personal matters.
These conflicts are complicated further by the constitution’s Article 121(1A), which states that “the [civil] courts … shall have no jurisdiction of any matter within the jurisdiction of the sharia courts.”
In a July 25 Federal Court judgment involving a dispute over monies between the deceased’s third wife, Latifah Mat Zin, and the daughters of his second wife, Rosmawati and Roslinawati Sharibun, Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamed said that issues of jurisdictional conflict must be resolved by Parliamentary amendments to existing laws or the making of new laws. The justice thus affirmed that the role of the courts is only to apply the law.
He clarified that if one of the parties is a non-Muslim, the sharia court has no jurisdiction over a case even if the subject matter falls within its jurisdiction. Likewise, he said just because one of the parties is a non-Muslim does not mean that the civil court will have jurisdiction over the case if the subject matter does not fall within its jurisdiction. To determine jurisdiction, he said, both courts must look to the statutes.
Ambiga Sreenevasan, chairperson of the Bar Council, commended the high court for clarifying issues that have long plagued Muslims and non-Muslims and for emphasizing the importance of conforming to the constitution.
She noted, however, that the judgment highlighted that there could be situations where there is no remedy in either court – something that must be “comprehensively addressed.
http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&lang=en&length=long&idelement=4983
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Yes, this is about Islam..
Very well stated by none other than Salman Rushdie himself. Please read on:
November 2, 2001
Yes, This Is About Islam
By SALMAN RUSHDIE
LONDON -- "This isn't about Islam." The world's leaders have been repeating this mantra for weeks, partly in the virtuous hope of deterring reprisal attacks on innocent Muslims living in the West, partly because if the United States is to maintain its coalition against terror it can't afford to suggest that Islam and terrorism are in any way related.
The trouble with this necessary disclaimer is that it isn't true. If this isn't about Islam, why the worldwide Muslim demonstrations in support of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda? Why did those 10,000 men armed with swords and axes mass on the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier, answering some mullah's call to jihad? Why are the war's first British casualties three Muslim men who died fighting on the Taliban side?
Why the routine anti-Semitism of the much-repeated Islamic slander that "the Jews" arranged the hits on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, with the oddly self-deprecating explanation offered by the Taliban leadership, among others, that Muslims could not have the technological know-how or organizational sophistication to pull off such a feat? Why does Imran Khan, the Pakistani ex-sports star turned politician, demand to be shown the evidence of Al Qaeda's guilt while apparently turning a deaf ear to the self-incriminating statements of Al Qaeda's own spokesmen (there will be a rain of aircraft from the skies, Muslims in the West are warned not to live or work in tall buildings)? Why all the talk about American military infidels desecrating the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia if some sort of definition of what is sacred is not at the heart of the present discontents?
Of course this is "about Islam." The question is, what exactly does that mean? After all, most religious belief isn't very theological. Most Muslims are not profound Koranic analysts. For a vast number of "believing" Muslim men, "Islam" stands, in a jumbled, half-examined way, not only for the fear of God — the fear more than the love, one suspects — but also for a cluster of customs, opinions and prejudices that include their dietary practices; the sequestration or near-sequestration of "their" women; the sermons delivered by their mullahs of choice; a loathing of modern society in general, riddled as it is with music, godlessness and sex; and a more particularized loathing (and fear) of the prospect that their own immediate surroundings could be taken over — "Westoxicated" — by the liberal Western-style way of life.
Highly motivated organizations of Muslim men (oh, for the voices of Muslim women to be heard!) have been engaged over the last 30 years or so in growing radical political movements out of this mulch of "belief." These Islamists — we must get used to this word, "Islamists," meaning those who are engaged upon such political projects, and learn to distinguish it from the more general and politically neutral "Muslim" — include the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the blood-soaked combatants of the Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group in Algeria, the Shiite revolutionaries of Iran, and the Taliban. Poverty is their great helper, and the fruit of their efforts is paranoia. This paranoid Islam, which blames outsiders, "infidels," for all the ills of Muslim societies, and whose proposed remedy is the closing of those societies to the rival project of modernity, is presently the fastest growing version of Islam in the world.
This is not wholly to go along with Samuel Huntington's thesis about the clash of civilizations, for the simple reason that the Islamists' project is turned not only against the West and "the Jews," but also against their fellow Islamists. Whatever the public rhetoric, there's little love lost between the Taliban and Iranian regimes. Dissensions between Muslim nations run at least as deep, if not deeper, than those nations' resentment of the West. Nevertheless, it would be absurd to deny that this self-exculpatory, paranoiac Islam is an ideology with widespread appeal.
Twenty years ago, when I was writing a novel about power struggles in a fictionalized Pakistan, it was already de rigueur in the Muslim world to blame all its troubles on the West and, in particular, the United States. Then as now, some of these criticisms were well-founded; no room here to rehearse the geopolitics of the cold war and America's frequently damaging foreign policy "tilts," to use the Kissinger term, toward (or away from) this or that temporarily useful (or disapproved-of) nation-state, or America's role in the installation and deposition of sundry unsavory leaders and regimes. But I wanted then to ask a question that is no less important now: Suppose we say that the ills of our societies are not primarily America's fault, that we are to blame for our own failings? How would we understand them then? Might we not, by accepting our own responsibility for our problems, begin to learn to solve them for ourselves?
Many Muslims, as well as secularist analysts with roots in the Muslim world, are beginning to ask such questions now. In recent weeks Muslim voices have everywhere been raised against the obscurantist hijacking of their religion. Yesterday's hotheads (among them Yusuf Islam, a k a Cat Stevens) are improbably repackaging themselves as today's pussycats.
An Iraqi writer quotes an earlier Iraqi satirist: "The disease that is in us, is from us." A British Muslim writes, "Islam has become its own enemy." A Lebanese friend, returning from Beirut, tells me that in the aftermath of the attacks on Sept. 11, public criticism of Islamism has become much more outspoken. Many commentators have spoken of the need for a Reformation in the Muslim world.
I'm reminded of the way noncommunist socialists used to distance themselves from the tyrannical socialism of the Soviets; nevertheless, the first stirrings of this counterproject are of great significance. If Islam is to be reconciled with modernity, these voices must be encouraged until they swell into a roar. Many of them speak of another Islam, their personal, private faith.
The restoration of religion to the sphere of the personal, its depoliticization, is the nettle that all Muslim societies must grasp in order to become modern. The only aspect of modernity interesting to the terrorists is technology, which they see as a weapon that can be turned on its makers. If terrorism is to be defeated, the world of Islam must take on board the secularist-humanist principles on which the modern is based, and without which Muslim countries' freedom will remain a distant dream.
Salman Rushdie is the author, most recently, of "Fury: A Novel."
http://216.33.240.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=aa14c4dee2396612d31112d54eb68c68&lat=1005450799&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2001%2f11%2f02%2fopinion%2f02RUSH%2ehtml%3fex%3d1006444528%26ei%3d1%26en%3db8a931974b12cb95
November 2, 2001
Yes, This Is About Islam
By SALMAN RUSHDIE
LONDON -- "This isn't about Islam." The world's leaders have been repeating this mantra for weeks, partly in the virtuous hope of deterring reprisal attacks on innocent Muslims living in the West, partly because if the United States is to maintain its coalition against terror it can't afford to suggest that Islam and terrorism are in any way related.
The trouble with this necessary disclaimer is that it isn't true. If this isn't about Islam, why the worldwide Muslim demonstrations in support of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda? Why did those 10,000 men armed with swords and axes mass on the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier, answering some mullah's call to jihad? Why are the war's first British casualties three Muslim men who died fighting on the Taliban side?
Why the routine anti-Semitism of the much-repeated Islamic slander that "the Jews" arranged the hits on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, with the oddly self-deprecating explanation offered by the Taliban leadership, among others, that Muslims could not have the technological know-how or organizational sophistication to pull off such a feat? Why does Imran Khan, the Pakistani ex-sports star turned politician, demand to be shown the evidence of Al Qaeda's guilt while apparently turning a deaf ear to the self-incriminating statements of Al Qaeda's own spokesmen (there will be a rain of aircraft from the skies, Muslims in the West are warned not to live or work in tall buildings)? Why all the talk about American military infidels desecrating the sacred soil of Saudi Arabia if some sort of definition of what is sacred is not at the heart of the present discontents?
Of course this is "about Islam." The question is, what exactly does that mean? After all, most religious belief isn't very theological. Most Muslims are not profound Koranic analysts. For a vast number of "believing" Muslim men, "Islam" stands, in a jumbled, half-examined way, not only for the fear of God — the fear more than the love, one suspects — but also for a cluster of customs, opinions and prejudices that include their dietary practices; the sequestration or near-sequestration of "their" women; the sermons delivered by their mullahs of choice; a loathing of modern society in general, riddled as it is with music, godlessness and sex; and a more particularized loathing (and fear) of the prospect that their own immediate surroundings could be taken over — "Westoxicated" — by the liberal Western-style way of life.
Highly motivated organizations of Muslim men (oh, for the voices of Muslim women to be heard!) have been engaged over the last 30 years or so in growing radical political movements out of this mulch of "belief." These Islamists — we must get used to this word, "Islamists," meaning those who are engaged upon such political projects, and learn to distinguish it from the more general and politically neutral "Muslim" — include the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the blood-soaked combatants of the Islamic Salvation Front and Armed Islamic Group in Algeria, the Shiite revolutionaries of Iran, and the Taliban. Poverty is their great helper, and the fruit of their efforts is paranoia. This paranoid Islam, which blames outsiders, "infidels," for all the ills of Muslim societies, and whose proposed remedy is the closing of those societies to the rival project of modernity, is presently the fastest growing version of Islam in the world.
This is not wholly to go along with Samuel Huntington's thesis about the clash of civilizations, for the simple reason that the Islamists' project is turned not only against the West and "the Jews," but also against their fellow Islamists. Whatever the public rhetoric, there's little love lost between the Taliban and Iranian regimes. Dissensions between Muslim nations run at least as deep, if not deeper, than those nations' resentment of the West. Nevertheless, it would be absurd to deny that this self-exculpatory, paranoiac Islam is an ideology with widespread appeal.
Twenty years ago, when I was writing a novel about power struggles in a fictionalized Pakistan, it was already de rigueur in the Muslim world to blame all its troubles on the West and, in particular, the United States. Then as now, some of these criticisms were well-founded; no room here to rehearse the geopolitics of the cold war and America's frequently damaging foreign policy "tilts," to use the Kissinger term, toward (or away from) this or that temporarily useful (or disapproved-of) nation-state, or America's role in the installation and deposition of sundry unsavory leaders and regimes. But I wanted then to ask a question that is no less important now: Suppose we say that the ills of our societies are not primarily America's fault, that we are to blame for our own failings? How would we understand them then? Might we not, by accepting our own responsibility for our problems, begin to learn to solve them for ourselves?
Many Muslims, as well as secularist analysts with roots in the Muslim world, are beginning to ask such questions now. In recent weeks Muslim voices have everywhere been raised against the obscurantist hijacking of their religion. Yesterday's hotheads (among them Yusuf Islam, a k a Cat Stevens) are improbably repackaging themselves as today's pussycats.
An Iraqi writer quotes an earlier Iraqi satirist: "The disease that is in us, is from us." A British Muslim writes, "Islam has become its own enemy." A Lebanese friend, returning from Beirut, tells me that in the aftermath of the attacks on Sept. 11, public criticism of Islamism has become much more outspoken. Many commentators have spoken of the need for a Reformation in the Muslim world.
I'm reminded of the way noncommunist socialists used to distance themselves from the tyrannical socialism of the Soviets; nevertheless, the first stirrings of this counterproject are of great significance. If Islam is to be reconciled with modernity, these voices must be encouraged until they swell into a roar. Many of them speak of another Islam, their personal, private faith.
The restoration of religion to the sphere of the personal, its depoliticization, is the nettle that all Muslim societies must grasp in order to become modern. The only aspect of modernity interesting to the terrorists is technology, which they see as a weapon that can be turned on its makers. If terrorism is to be defeated, the world of Islam must take on board the secularist-humanist principles on which the modern is based, and without which Muslim countries' freedom will remain a distant dream.
Salman Rushdie is the author, most recently, of "Fury: A Novel."
http://216.33.240.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=aa14c4dee2396612d31112d54eb68c68&lat=1005450799&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enytimes%2ecom%2f2001%2f11%2f02%2fopinion%2f02RUSH%2ehtml%3fex%3d1006444528%26ei%3d1%26en%3db8a931974b12cb95
Fed-up
Okay, I am getting totally pissed off when Muslims and others try to walk the thin line and constantly recite the mantra "that Islam is a religion of peace". Now, tell me seriously - where in the history of Islam was there peace. Muhammad started his entire religion with his sword and the money from his dead wife. He attacked village after village with his followers, killing all the men and acquiring the women and children as his concubines (the pretty ones) or slaves (fate befallen on the not-so-pretty).
So, to those Malaysian Muslims who are going about saying the same thing, please open your eyes and read what other former-Muslims who have found the light and truth are talking about. Please see my sidebar and read for yourselves.
So, to those Malaysian Muslims who are going about saying the same thing, please open your eyes and read what other former-Muslims who have found the light and truth are talking about. Please see my sidebar and read for yourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)