Author Topic: What About Muslim Moderates?  (Read 7090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
What About Muslim Moderates?
« on: July 16, 2007, 10:46:30 PM »
London does a better job than Washington reaching out to them.

BY R. JAMES WOOLSEY AND NINA SHEA
Sunday, July 15, 2007


Islamist terrorism has led the American and British governments in the past month to launch separate public-diplomacy programs aimed at engaging Muslims at home and abroad. A quick comparison shows the two initiatives are headed in opposite directions. At least the Brits have finally got it right.

The Bush administration is building bridges to well-funded and self-publicized organizations that claim to speak for all Muslims, even though some of those groups espouse views inimical to American values and interests. After years of pursuing similar strategies--while seeing home-based terrorists proliferate--the Blair-Brown government is now more discerning about which Muslims it will partner with. Stating that "lip service for peace" is no longer sufficient, the British are identifying and elevating those who are willing to take clear stands against terrorism and its supporting ideology.

Thus, in a major address at a two-day government conference early last month (titled "Islam and Muslims in the World Today"), then-Prime Minister Tony Blair, with Gordon Brown in attendance and hosting a reception, vowed to correct an imbalance. He stated that, in Britain's Muslim community, unrepresentative but well-funded groups are able to attract disproportionately large amounts of publicity, while moderate voices go unheard and unpublished.

Mr. Blair emphasized that Islam is not a "monolithic faith," but one made up of a "rich pattern of diversity." The principal purpose of the conference, Mr. Blair stressed, was to "let the authentic voices of Islam, in their various schools and manifestations, speak for themselves." He was as good as his word.

Invitations to participate in the assembly were extended to the less-publicized, moderate groups, such as the Sufi Muslim Council, the British Muslim Foundation and Minhaj-ul-Quran. Notably absent from the program was the Muslim Council of Britain, a group that claims to represent that nation's Muslims but is preoccupied with its self-described struggle against "Islamophobia"--a term it tries to use to shut down critical analysis of anything Islamic, whether legitimate or bigoted.

Also dropped from the speaking roster was the leading European Islamist Tariq Ramadan, who, while denied a visa by the United States, has been a fixture at official conferences on Muslims in Europe. The grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr. Ramadan is fuzzy on where he stands on specific acts of terror--and he infamously evaded a challenge by Nicolas Sarkozy to denounce stoning.

Mr. Blair committed funds to improve the teaching of Islamic studies in British universities; announced a new effort to develop "minimum standards" for imams in Britain; and, most significantly, declared that henceforth the government would be giving "priority, in its support and funding decisions, to those leadership organizations actively working to tackle violent extremism." Routine but vague press releases against terrorism would no longer do.

A few days later, British backbone was demonstrated again with the knighting of novelist Salman Rushdie. Since 1989, when Iran's mullahs pronounced one of his works "blasphemous," Mr. Rushdie has lived under the shadow of a death threat, the first fatwa with universal jurisdiction against a Muslim living in the West. With the news that Britain would honor him, extremist Muslims rioted. But many Western Muslim reformers, increasingly threatened by death threats and murderous fatwas themselves, cheered the Brits. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch parliamentarian who was born a Muslim in Somalia, wrote: "The queen has honored the freedom of conscience and creativity cherished in the West."

On the eve of his departure from office, Mr. Blair gave a television interview taking on those he once courted--British Islamists who have been quick to level charges of Islamophobia and oppression against Britain and the United States: "The reason we are finding it hard to win this battle [against terror] is that we're not actually fighting it properly. We're not actually standing up to these people and saying, 'It's not just your methods that are wrong, your ideas are absurd. Nobody is oppressing you. Your sense of grievance isn't justified.' . . . Some of what is written on this is loopy-loo in its extremism."

Contrast this with the Bush administration's new approach. On June 27, President Bush delivered his "Muslim Initiative" address at the Washington Islamic Center in tribute to the 50th anniversary of that organization's founding, by Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism is the state religion of Saudi Arabia, and its extremist ideology often flows with the kingdom's money. The Islamic Center is not an exception.

A few years ago when we were with Freedom House, concerned Muslims brought us Saudi educational material they collected from the Washington Islamic Center that instructed Muslims fundamentally to segregate themselves from other Americans. One such text stated: "To be dissociated from the infidels is to hate them for their religion, to leave them, never to rely on them for support, not to admire them, to be on one's guard against them, never to imitate them, and to always oppose them in every way according to Islamic law."

Though Mr. Bush's remarks were intended for all American Muslims, the administration left the invitation list to Washington Islamic Center's authorities. Predictably, they excluded the truly moderate, who are not Saudi-founded or funded: the Islamic Supreme Council of America, the American Islamic Congress, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, the Center for Eurasian Policy, the Center for Islamic Pluralism, the Islam and Democracy Project, the Institute for Gulf Affairs, the Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia and many others.

These organizations are frequently shut out of U.S. government events and appointments on the basis that they are considered insignificant or "controversial" by the petro-dollar-funded groups. The administration makes a terrible mistake by making such Wahhabi-influenced institutions as the Washington Islamic Center the gate keepers for all American Muslims.

The actual substance of Mr. Bush's mosque speech--particularly good on religious freedom--was overshadowed by the announcement of its single initiative: America is to send an envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference. Based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the OIC was created explicitly to promote hostility to Israel, and its meetings largely consist of ritualistic Israel-bashing. At one last year, Iran's president called for the "elimination of the Zionist regime." It has no mechanism for discussing the human rights of its member states, and thus has never spoken out against Sudan's genocide of Darfuri Muslims. It is advancing an effort to universalize Islamic blasphemy laws, which are applied as often against speech critical of the governments of OIC member states as against profanities. Last month the OIC council of foreign ministers termed Islamophobia "the worst form of terrorism." Currently no Western power holds either member or observer status at the OIC.

The Bush administration is now actively considering whether its public diplomacy should reach out to Muslim Brotherhood groups. While such groups may pay lip service to peace, they do not denounce terror by Hamas, a Brotherhood offshoot. It keeps as its motto: "Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." By choosing those whose definition of terror does not include the murder of Jews, honor killings and lethal fatwas against Muslim dissidents and reformers, the U.S. government makes them look strong--particularly in the shame-and-honor culture of the Middle East--and strengthens their hand against the real moderates and reformers.

Great Britain, as we have been reminded recently, has much work ahead in defeating Muslim terror, as well as in overcoming the misguided form of multiculturalism of its recent past. Not all of Britain's measures will be right for America, with our First Amendment. But the British Labour Party socialists appear to have done one major thing right that this American Republican administration has not: Reach out to Muslim leaders who are demonstrably moderate and share our values, even though they may not have petrodollar-funded publicity machines.

While we don't have a Queen to dub knights, Americans do have distinct way of honoring our heroes. Mr. President, confer the Medal of Freedom on one of our own outstanding Muslim-American citizens. For a selection of honorees, look at who was not invited to your recent speech. If Islamists charge "Islamophobia," repeat after Tony: "Loopy loo. Loopy loo."

London does a better job
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2007, 11:09:59 PM »
Ludicrous.

As if any Muslim organization could gain respect and stature in the eyes of Muslims by accepting praise and cash from the U.S.A. 

Let's look at it realistically:  a U.S. administration renowned for its close ties to the fundamentalist Christian right, for its invasion of two Muslim countries, for its numerous crimes and atrocities against Muslim prisoners and Muslim civilians, decides to single out a Muslim organization, pat it on the head, give it a shitload of cash and tell it - - in front of the world - - "Oh, but you guys are GOOD Muslims.  We LIIIIKE you.  You're OUR kind of Muslims." 

Ever hear the phrase "kiss of death?"

If there's to be any outreach to any Muslims, it has to be under cover, out of the public eye.  Any agreements they reach, can't be publicized.  That's just the way it is.  Because of Bush, respect and affection for the U.S.A. are at an all-time low all over the world, and most of all in the Arab and Muslim world.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2007, 08:32:36 AM »
Quote
If there's to be any outreach to any Muslims, it has to be under cover, out of the public eye.



I expect you are right , I wouldn't be surprised if this were already happening.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2007, 09:20:15 AM »
<<I expect you are right , I wouldn't be surprised if this were already happening.>>

I'd be amazed if it weren't.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2007, 11:19:08 AM »
I do believe in Tee's pervasive effort to demonize anything & everything America, he fails to address the issue of the authors.  Whether it's done publically or "undercover", it's the WHO they're reaching out or not reaching out to, that is the issue.  They could be working out of the public eye all hours of the day, but if they're publically appearing to reach out to those organizations that are not just not moderate, but routinely bash American interests abroad and Israel, doesn't bode well in expecting said groups to then turn around and denouce militant Islam terrorist organizations and their tactics.

And as the article accurately references, its the Brits who are doing a much greater job in the role of WHO to reach out to
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2007, 01:34:26 PM »
I stand by my opinion.  A public recognition by the British or American governments of ANY Muslim organization is bound to wreck its credibility in Muslim eyes.  It's the exact equivalent of an award for righteousness and probity bestowed upon an American organization by Osama bin Laden or al Qaeda.

If the issue is WHO they're reaching out to and the reaching out is all done in secret, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.  The discussion was initiated because of a very foolish article claiming that the British government's PUBLIC overtures to "moderate" Muslim organizations was some kind of brilliant policy advance.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2007, 01:47:47 PM »
The discussion was initiated because of a very foolish article claiming that the British government's PUBLIC overtures to "moderate" Muslim organizations was some kind of brilliant policy advance.

No one claimed "brilliant", simply from a public standpoint, the Brits are doing it right, compared to the U.S.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

The_Professor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2007, 01:53:17 PM »
I concur with Sirs. At least the Brts are reaching out. Many in the West do not.

And on a related note, Muslim moderates should exert control over their more radical brethren on a range of issues if they expect positive action from the West as in increased immigration quotas (A friend of mine works at State and several Muslim countries are pushing hard for this). Quietly is perfectly acceptable if that is what is required to get this accomplished.
***************************
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide."
                                 -- Jerry Pournelle, Ph.D

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2007, 03:21:32 PM »
<<No one claimed "brilliant", simply from a public standpoint, the Brits are doing it right, compared to the U.S.>>

"Brilliant" was a little bit of sarcasm on my part.  There is nothing particularly "right" (let alone "brilliant") in having the British government anoint a "moderate" Muslim organization with its seal of approval.  Any Muslims who are already moderates may be encouraged in their moderation, but as far as "reaching out" to those Muslims who are suspicious of the British and American governments (with excellent reason, I hasten to add!) that move is not going to convince any of them of the bona fides of the "moderates" so honoured.  When the killers of hundreds of thousands of Muslims and the invaders and occupiers of Muslim lands and Muslim oil fields confer their blessings on those Muslims they consider to be "good Muslims," this is going to be an obvious problem for the recipients of such blessings and will create real credibility problems for them.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2007, 03:29:45 PM »
<<No one claimed "brilliant", simply from a public standpoint, the Brits are doing it right, compared to the U.S.>>

"Brilliant" was a little bit of sarcasm on my part.  There is nothing particularly "right" (let alone "brilliant") in having the British government anoint a "moderate" Muslim organization with its seal of approval. 

No one is "anointing" anyone, or is that more of your sarcasm?  It is absolutely right to reach out and support those moderate muslim organizations that don't share in the ideology that permeates militant Islam and its egregiously violent acts, targeting innocent men, women, & children.  Why you're trying to "pfffft" the effort being demonstrated by the Brits, tends to give the impression you're actually supportive of said ideology.  And that just can't be true, right
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2007, 03:33:39 PM »
I am merely suggesting what seems to be the obvious, that any British government support for any Muslim organization is the "kiss of death" for it in the eyes of any Muslims who are not already moderates.  So it's not reaching out to anybody who isn't already on their side, in fact it's needlessly pissing  off the already pissed-off.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2007, 03:39:17 PM »
I am merely suggesting what seems to be the obvious, that any British government support for any Muslim organization is the "kiss of death" for it in the eyes of any Muslims who are not already moderates. 

You mean Islamic terrorists or radical muslims might be offended??  Say it ain't so.       ::)      Getting back to reality and practicality, the notion of supporting moderate Muslims who don't think blowing up mosques and killing innocent women and children is a good thing, is the right thing to do, both publically and behind the scenes
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2007, 03:45:38 PM »
No, I mean that Muslims who are angry over the invasion of Muslim lands and the killing of hundreds of thousands of Muslims and the support given to the 40-year military occupation of the West Bank might be offended.

Oooops, I seem to have forgotten - - any Muslim who is offended by Bush and Blair's actions in the Muslim world must be a terrorist or a radical Muslim.  Must be true because Bush says it's true.  sirs says it's true.  Who could now doubt this?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2007, 03:49:26 PM »
Oooops, I seem to have forgotten - - any Muslim who is offended by Bush and Blair's actions in the Muslim world must be a terrorist or a radical Muslim. 

Actually, any muslim who practices the act of targeting and killing innocent women & children, including blowing up mosques, and those who advocates/supports such are terrorists or radical muslims.  A distinct difference, I'm afraid to say
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What About Muslim Moderates?
« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2007, 03:59:07 PM »
<<Actually, any muslim who practices the act of targeting and killing innocent women & children, including blowing up mosques, and those who advocates/supports such are terrorists or radical muslims.  A distinct difference, I'm afraid to say>>

Well, I don't really believe that Brown thought he was going to convert many of THEM with his approaches to moderate Muslim groups.  He was aiming at the larger Muslim community, obviously

Unfortunately most right-wing fruitbats seem to think there is no difference between the people Brown was aiming at and the people you call "terrorists" or "radical Muslims."  But in the real world, there IS a difference, and the tactics Brown was using were actually pretty stupid.  These folks may not be out there planting bombs and blowing up schools and mosques, but they are well aware of Brown's, Blair's and Bush's invasions of Muslim lands, killing, maiming and torture of Muslims and their continuing support of the 40-year-old Israeli military occupation of three million Arabs.  And they are NOT going to be impressed with any Muslim organization that receives Brown's blessing as an organization of "good" Muslims.