All Comments (108)

for Georgia Son Responses to your questions:
1.Does Islam allow for the separation of church and state? YES WE DON'T HAVE CHURCHES. But it depends what you mean by "Islam" and "the State"... I am not trying to avoid your question but these terms have evolved in meaning since the seventh century, nationalism and colonial occupations etc etc. This has to be a longer conversation but basically yes Islam can be adapted to a pluralistic society.

2.Does Islam allow for the full legal equality of women?

YES equal in justice and rights but not in an identical way to men. Again, there are plenty of careful reformers. Fund them!

3.Does Islam allow for religious pluralism? For example, if a Muslim male married a Christian female...

This happens all over the world all the time! No religious leaders (including in judaism and most christian sects) like to see folks leaving the fold. A family having two religions is not simple but can be compared to speaking two languages.

But what needs to happen is a definition of Islam that is based on the spirit of the Quran and the essentials of faith-- not on rote and literal minded readins. Being a Muslim would mean maintaining virtues and a love of God not wearing a hijab or not. But we also have to work patiently with the orthodox in all faiths.

4.What does Islam say (according to the above authoritative voices) should be the fate of heretics? ...what do the authoritative voices of Islam say should be his fate?

Look up ISNA's Horizon Magazine this year--an excellent scholarly article. The issue is if the "heretic" makes him or herself a danger-- then one may treat them as such.

5.Does Islam allow for the publication of a scholarly book alleging that Mohammad was a fraud?

IE Salman Rushie stuff? Many Muslim leaders would get their knickers in a twist. But as Muslims it is better for them to embody Mohammed's forebearance-- when angry people threw garbage on him, he forgave them.

(Alternatively, instead of imagining these questions posed to the authoritative voices of Islam, imagine the question is, “What would Islamic textbooks used in the teaching of Muslim students in America say in answer to the following questions?”)

Of course Debbie Almontaser's text books were Department of Education textbooks--standard issue-- just to remind us all. For more on this whole case(you have made some real errors in your understanding of the Khalil Gibran school issue) please see www.kgia.wordpress.com

Great article. Like many on the far right,Pipes does not care about facts if they get in the way of his agenda. With his campus watch and other witch hunt tactics, he takes things out of context, conflates and misreads. This is the rigid and extreme ideology we do NOT need in the next administration!

One notes that Pipes targets "progressive" and moderate and visible Muslims, not those few that may have dangerous views and interpretations. If you target moderates you will have no one to work with-- but perhaps all the better for the "clash of civilizations" and the business of fear.

The Truth about Eboo Patel

I attended the Interfaith Youth Core conference in October of 2007. This conference was lead by Eboo Patel, and I was very excited about it. That is, until the political agenda became very clear. The conference centered on the superiority of Islam.
Every "interfaith" group or event carried this message. The keynote speaker was an Islamic convert, the interfaith prayer room was covered with Islamic prayer rugs, the keynote professors, one a Muslim convert, from the University of Chicago, claimed that there was no such thing or threat of "Islamofascism"
Eboo's opening address talked about the faith line. He created this idea that there were 2 types of people, interfaith and fundamentalists.
The implied message was that anyone who disagreed with Eboo and the conference agenda was a fundamentalist.
The last event I attended was a panel of Jewish activists that were facilitating meetings with leaders of Hamas. To portray any of these leaders as "spiritual" guides with only a hard-line approach, is simply lies. No one questioned any of these programs because they were under this facade of "interfaith."
I found the entire event very disturbing. The next month, I received Eboo's journal, "The Review of Faith and International Politics." Same agenda. The topics included the weakness of Zionism, convincing Evangelicals not to support Israel, and extremism in Judaism.
Patel even has blog post denouncing Ayaa Hirsi Ali as a money-grubbing capitalist! Well, at least she escaped the "infidel" charge. Quite a step up. Women are now not allowed to question Islam because they want to make money through the medium of selling books.
Daniel Pipes is a scholar who is highlighting the true activities of "moderates" to allow the public to decide. In the USA we have transparency, and if you want to call that a smear, I am truly questioning which side you are on, Mr. Patel.

IBRAHIM MAHFOUZ Re. your May 8, 2008 11:57 AM posting:

Are you aware the Ottoman caliphate was abolished on March 3, 1924? That's 84 years ago. Therefore, assuming the average age for development of political consciousness to be around 16 years of age, for your assertion that "The older generations (of Muslims) are not as enthusiastic about that prospect (living under Sharia law) as the younger ones because they are more aware of the impact the last Ottoman Caliphate had upon the Muslims in general and the Arabs in particular." to be correct, it would require the existence of a generation of centenarians. I would suggest it is more likely that as most people grow older, having experienced the vagaries of life they tend to see things less as in black or white and more in shades of gray. More simply put, if it's their son who steals a bicycle, they are less likely to accept having his hand cut off under Sharia law.

As regards the Ottoman Caliphate, in the 84 years since they abolished it, the Turks have gone on to create a flourishing multi-party democracy and have separated religion and state. In fact, even the Islam practiced in Turkey today is by and large moderate and flexible (like everywhere else occasionally there are some misguided zealots, but they are the exception to the rule). I would refer you to the following interesting article which appeared in the press only a few days ago:

The question is, if the Ottoman Caliphate was at the heart of all the problems the Arab states had for over 500 years as your posting seems to suggest, what have the Arab states done in the last 84 years to improve themselves? How many are true democracies and how many continue to be ruled by kings, sheiks, emirs and other despots? How many of these countries claiming to be democracies continues to oppress their own people (ex. Egypt)? How many have officially separated religion from the state?

It is easy to blame others for one's own ills, but the Arabs were no less colonizers than any other major civilization. When the Islamic African Moors occupied the Iberian Peninsula starting in 711 AD, it was almost six centuries before the Ottoman Empire came into existence. Before holding others responsible for their plight, one should look at one's own self.

Uzma Ahmad says:
“The word "Islam" means "peace’”
Wrong! It means submission.
He says:
“My religion taught me to love others”
Wrong again. It exhorted the Believers to fight those who do not believe in the message of their prophet.
He says:
“My religion taught me to love others and be tolerant“
He must be talking about a religion other than Islam. Islam is the most intolerant religion in the whole world

Ted Baines says:
“I find the burkha and hijab obscene because they are imposed on women through an alleged ruling by an alleged god named Allah.”

The vast majority of women I know who veil their faces in public, and I know many, are doing the environment in general and men in particular a great favor. Trust me.

KMAN says:
“Forty percent of Muslims between aged 16 to 24 said they would prefer to live under Sharia law in the UK, compared to only 17 percent of those over 55.”

You need to add that those who call for adopting the Sharia laws are implicitly demanding the resurrection of the Caliphate. The older generations are not as enthusiastic about that prospect as the younger ones because they are more aware of the impact the last Ottoman Caliphate had upon the Muslims in general and the Arabs in particular.
Below is a snapshot of that phenomenon presented here as a public service.

The Turkish Caliphate that went down the tube during World War I, ruled all the Arab states and parts of Eastern Europe for over 500 years. What has that caliphate accomplished for its subjects? It taxed them back into the Stone Age to support the lavish lifestyle of its Caliphs and their cronies. It used their children as cannon fodder in the Sultans’ endless wars of aggression. They were colonists of the worst type since they were more primitive than their subjects. They took out and never put in. They went as far as cut down fruit trees from the plains of Palestine and Egypt and hills of Syria and Lebanon to fuel their trains. That was happening when the West was moving from the Exploration Age into the Colonization Age into Religious Reformation, into the Age of Enlightment and the Industrial Revolution. The Greeks, Serbs and Christian Lebanese revolted against the Turkish misrule but none of the Muslims, Arabs and non-Arabs, had. Because the Muslim believe or made to believe that raising a hand against the Sultan is equivalent to fighting against their prophet. Those same people revolted against the French and British at least three times within thirty years span in accordance with their prophet‘s exhortations “Not to allow a non-believer have authority over a believer“. You never hear Muslim subjects blame the Caliphate and its Sharia laws for any of their ills, yet are quick at blaming all their shortcomings on the West in general and Britain and France in particular. Those two powers, who colonized the Arab countries for only a decade or two after liberating them from 500 years of subjugation and humiliation at the hands of ruthless and ignorant hordes, had, at least, opened them up to the rest of the world, built their present day infrastructure and tried to teach them build modern states with modern institutions. What had the Turkish Caliphate ever given its subjects; both Arabs and non-Arabs besides grief and destitution? I don’t know which is worse; this half millennium scourge called Turkish Caliphate or someone’s yearning for its return. Why would any man in his right mind wants the return of a Caliphate? The Turks themselves do not want its return despite its many obvious rewards for them as plundering colonizers. Those who yearn for the days of Turkish subjugation and exploitation are doing so simply because they are of the mindset that believes the Turks ”ruled” according to Allah’s “Divine” law. i.e. Sharia; a code derived mostly from the Muslims’ holy book, the Koran, and the tradition of their prophet. Both are anchored in the nomad culture of 7th Century Arabia and to a large degree the Sharia laws perpetuates that culture.That is why they seem to move around a cycle and are heading nowhere.

The problem for an average person like me is that I look at the European Union and the problems they are having with the immigration of so many Muslims. Their call for "sharia" law, and other changes in the way the governments work in the EU, their apparent lack of desire (or ability) to do as immigrants have done for generations, integrate themselves into their new society, and finally, their terrorist attacks on their own countries, makes one wonder is any of them can be trusted. In a sense, my fear is that they are going to do anything they can to CHANGE EUROPE to what they want it to be, and that WILL NOT happen in the US.

When I see writers murdered for their writings and cartoonists vilified for their cartoons, and riots because somebody says something the Muslims don't like. Where are the so-called "real" Muslims when these things happen? They are hiding and afraid to say anything, and until Muslims stand up to the bigots and terrorists who are Muslims, DO NOT ASK me to take on the issue. They can clean their own house before they ask me to clean mine.

I do not agree with Daniel Pipes in many of his rants, BUT look at the Middle East, look at Europe, look at parts of Asia, and I say "NOT HERE, NOT IN THE US".

The problem is not with Mr. Pipes and his ilk (such as the people who yak about the "Jewish conspiracy," the "Black Church," the "Liberals," etc.). These people are spreading lies and it's obvious with a moment's thought.

The problem is that the moment's thought doesn't happen. The problem is the millions of Americans who don't bother to expend the effort to think critically and who swallow this tripe and repeat it. Why do we do this? Because it's easier to blame Someone Else. Because there is some comfort in having someone to blame about why my life doesn't live up to the American Dream, why my earning power has steadily lost ground for the past 40 years, why I feel less safe and less secure, why I fear the future.

If I can blame Muslims or Jews or blacks or Mexicans or terrorists, I don't have to accept my responsibility for my contribution to my problems. I don't have to admit that I have been hoodwinked into electing people who serve the interests of the already rich and powerful and not the interests of the middle class and the folks who earn even less. I don't have to admit that the American Dream has been tarnished from within by the very people who have benefitted the most.

I am a first generation American of Pakistani descent. I have always been proud to be a Muslim in America because Islam is so consistent with the values and principles on which America was founded. My religion taught me to love others, help the oppressed, be humble,
be grateful, be tolerant, and above all promote peace. Peace in the home, peace in the neighborhood, peace in society, peace in the world. The word "Islam" means "peace" and that is what a Muslim should strive for in all aspects of life. People like Mr. Pipes are bringing the intolerance that has existed in extremist Islamic countries for years to America. This is what Muslims, like my parents tried to escape when they immigrated to the United States.

"Common sense:
Not all muslins are terrorist but all terrorist are muslins!"

So Timothy McVeigh and his white supremist cohorts are/were Muslims?

How about the Irish Republican Army (IRA), who bombed London many times and even killed one of the Queen's in-laws? Muslims?

Basque separatists fighting for independence from Spain?

This one doesn't even pass the laugh test. Learn some history.

Not all muslins are terrorist but all terrorist are muslins!

That's better. Here comes Halozcel, Donttypelies already. Only waiting for Arif, A Kafir, Ibrahim Mahfouz et al. Let's hear you out and more. We're all ears. It only takes a scratch.

Cheers
"J"

Muslims smear themselves and need no help.

Watch a Muslim woman in the US wearing the burkha or the hijab as she flaunts these ridiculous costumes at non-Muslims as if daring them, knowing fully well that the laws here give the right to wear the stifling dress. I find the burkha and hijab obscene because they are imposed on women through an alleged ruling by an alleged god named Allah. A woman in burkha in the 90 degree heat does not evoke respect, it evokes derision. Why do Muslims not allow non-Muslim women to wear shorts in teh stifling heat in most Muslim countries.

Then one cannot forget the riots over the Muhammad cartoons and a remark, a truthful remark, by the Pope about Muhammad. More riots and protests, more killing of Muslims by Muslims. These riots did more to smear Muslims than anything non-Muslims can or could do.

Then there are the Islamic laws. One classic example is the Islamic financing which is based on "profit sharing" which is nothing more than interest in another form.

Then take the apartheid practiced in Saudi Arabia in Mecca and Medina, a issue that Eboo refuses to address.

No . Mr. Patel non-Muslims do not smear Muslims. Muslims smear Muslims.

Dear NAT, When I wrote ' When you are in Rome live like a Roman' I quoted an English idiom. But I fear I bungled the words. Just now I checked up the net and it says 'When in Rome do as the Romans'. Either way I think I did convey the meaning. It only means that you should adapt yourselves to the life wherever you are living instead of sticking out like a sore thump. ( Please don't ask me whether I have sore thump. I don't have. Otherwisse I won't be typing this.) What I mean is that Muslims should adapt themselves to wherever they are as all others are doing. Don't go to McDonald and ask for "halal" sandwich. If only ham is there it is better to start eating it.
PS. I did not know that in the present day Rome all those beastly things are there.

No one has to smear muslims. They do a very good job of it themselves.

Who smears Muslims ?

The latest news from Malaysia,

Malaysian women should get *written permission* from their masters/husbands or dads if they travel abroad alone.
For example,if a sukut paper trader businesswoman intends to visit Dubai,she has to get a written permission from her master.

Dear Readers,
Without golden and silver coins,so-called *islamic banking and financial services* can not be spoken.Besides,*Reeba* had been prohibited in islam,not Bank interest.
It is not reasonable to compare Bank Muamalat with Citibank or HSBC

Your last statement exposes why Pipes and others have a valid point. In this time of religious war, (and that's what it is) it's America against some crazy Muslims. If your "very clear" statement had read, I am for AN AMERICA where people from all backgrounds live in equality, I could agree with you. But to put everyone in some amorphous mass is exactly why I don't trust you.

Scepticus--

About living like Romans: The Romans, you SHOULD recall, practiced slavery, denied rights to women, and had gladiators fight to the death in order to entertain the masses.

And you think that this sort of thing should be condoned. I dare you to deny it.

When you are in Rome live like Romans. One should leave the religious beliefs in their house and when you step out of your house one should be just another another human being.
It is not necessary to ask the cafeteria to prepare a special food. Take whatever is available or prepare onself.
I remember to have read that in a prestigious institution some hours has been allotted to the Muslims. In my opinion it is not proper.

One should try to integrate with the society you are living with not to show too much of unwanted exhibition of a skewed individuality.

Mr. Patel once more takes off the shelf a bunch of abstract multicultural cliches designed to obscure, not clarify, the issue at hand. Yes, America is a tolerant society. No, that does not mean we must tolerate every special interest group or fanatic that washes up on our shores. I have a distinct feeling that Mr. Patel has not told the whole story. What about Ms. Almontaser's ties to that pro-Islamist extremist T-shirt? What curriculum does she intend to teach in her school, apart from Arabic? Is the curriculum publicly available?

Muslims simply cannot be compared to any other minority or immigrant group in America. Muslims are unique and Islam is unique. None of the other immigrant groups arrived armed with a desert-based religion locked in a 7th Century time warp.

Mr. Patel is being intellectually dishonest when he bases his argument on abstract multicultural cliches. What we must first of all do when considering issues like this is to look at the conditions in Muslim countries. Look at the empirical evidence of what Islam leads to. Look at the religious bigotry, the intolerance of other religions, the callous overt discrimination against women, the lack of civil liberties, and the repressive regimes. Then tell me how any rational human being could say we should treat Muslims the same as any other minority group. Or tell we Americans that we should welcome with open arms and complete tolerance the people who practice a religion that produces the above evils.

Reform and enlightenment in Muslim countries, not multicultural nonsense from the likes of Mr. Patel, would do wonders to make Americans more tolerant of Islam.

Of course, Mr. Patel himself demonstrates every day that Muslims like himself just do not get it, just don't understand what America is all about. He shows that by his refusal to engage the participants in this forum in dialogue. He is good at dishing out his one-sided views but hides behind cyberspace anonymity rather than meet his critics head-on. In short, he clearly reflects the close-minded culture from which he comes. Mr.Patel and the King of Saudi Arabia obviously have the same approach to dissenting viewpoints.

This attitude, Mr. Patel, is what makes many of us wary of allowing too many Muslims in or of giving them free rein to propagate their ideas--which are so alien to the spirit of America.

Here is my standard response to people like Mr. Patel:
What would the most authoritative voices of Islam say in answer to the five questions posed below. That is, don't give me your personal viewpoint. I want you to tell us what the most authoritative voices of orthodox Islam would say.

Here are the questions:
1.Does Islam allow for the separation of church and state?
2.Does Islam allow for the full legal equality of women?
3.Does Islam allow for religious pluralism? For example, if a Muslim male married a Christian female, would the husband and wife be able to say to their children, “We will attend the mosque on Friday and the church on Sunday and consider ourselves a bi-religious family. When each of you is 18 years old, you will be free to choose. You can continue our bilateral approach; or, you can choose one religion over the other; or, you can choose another religion altogether.”
4.What does Islam say (according to the above authoritative voices) should be the fate of heretics? For example, if a member of the Egyptian soccer team got up tomorrow morning and announced he was converting from Islam to Christianity and changing his name from Mohammad Ali to Cassius Clay, what do the authoritative voices of Islam say should be his fate?
5.Does Islam allow for the publication of a scholarly book alleging that Mohammad was a fraud?

(Alternatively, instead of imagining these questions posed to the authoritative voices of Islam, imagine the question is, “What would Islamic textbooks used in the teaching of Muslim students in America say in answer to the following questions?”)

The answers to these questions will reveal whether there is some debate among Muslims over the future of their religion. Or whether even orthodox Islam can be accommodated to a Western liberal, pluralistic society.

Forty percent of Muslims between aged 16 to 24 said they would prefer to live under sharia law in the UK, compared to only 17 percent of those over 55. Thirty-six percent of the younger group said a Muslim who converted to another religion should be "punished by death," while only 19 percent of the older group agreed.

The perefence for sharia in the younger UK muslims is very disturbing - I wonder how the same poll would read in the US?

come on patel. calling nelson mendela a terrorist is just like calling zionists nazis.

nelson mendela is a terrorist -- didn't you know?

how can i analyze, comment on and even challenge the statement that "nelson mendela is a terrorist"?

i'm just an american, sorry.

seriously, is nelson mendela really a terrorist?

Hello Mr. Eboo Patel:)

Not much use piping up on Pipes too much. But, why not.

Well, you can tell Mr. Daniel Pipes that Islamic banking and financial services is the "silent jihad" or "soft jihad" for Muslims to take over the whole world and impose an Islamic caliphate and Shariah everywhere from Peoria to Pyong Pyang.

You can tell Mr. Daniel Pipes to put Citibank and HSBC on his list too, as "jihadist dissumulating" organisations. This should keep him really busy writing, writing, writing about the new approaches, tactics, techniques, strategies of the "other side" to undermined civilisation as we know it.

As for Mr. Daniel Pipes asking whether Muslims "..are they on our side or are they on the other side?” Well, he puts Muslims on the "other side" in all his essays. But, we are not petty-minded about him echoing President Bush, "Either you are with us, or are against us". He spoke glowingly and proudly of his Judeo-Christian heritage and civilisation. Bravo to him for knowing which side's he on and what his heritage is.

All the same, we are only to happy to lend a hand and infuse our funds to help keep the "other side" afloat so the "other side" will not sink economically, and sunk the whole world with them while they do use some of the funds for ways to harm and kill some on the "other side". We are most willing to sacrifice some of us at "this other side" for the peace of mind, benefit, and security of the "other side".

We will continue to derive pleasure on what Mr.Daniel Pipes said about the "other side". All three of us who have heard of him but not really care for what he said so far away. After all, he is merely talking to those on the "other side" about those of the "other side".

Do I want to laugh or cry? Laugh of course. Daniel Pipes has become a fanatic he is so against. And for quite a while now too. Never have taken what Daniel Pipes said and do seriously. Of people on the "other side", I do take what the Pope said and do, or did not do, seriously. If and when I heard what the Pope said. Oh yes, POTUS too, especially when he spoke and seek to act unilaterally in my region to "bring freedom and democracy" to me.

Well, never mind. Everyone got their own pipe dreams that becomes nightmares for others and themselves too.

Cheers
"J"

Arlene: We're still waiting for you to back up your fightin words. Where's the beef, baby? Otherwise, I'm going to have to conclude that you was just being ornery messin with that muslim school marm ...

In case you missed my earlier message to you yesterday (May 7, 6:45 PM) because of all the other frustrated folk, here it is again -

"Arlene: with regard to the assertion in your previous posting that (Debbie) 'Almontaser MADE A STATEMENT SUPPORTING A HAMAS-LED TERROR MOVEMENT (intafada)', please provide us with the exact statement and reference it (where it was quoted).

That way we can all judge for ourselves. Otherwise I would have to say you are all hat and no cattle darlin'

http://www.freethinker.co.uk/2008/02/27/laughing-religion-off-the-planet-an-interview-with-pat-condell/

Anybody who hasn't heard Pat Condell's patter can hear it at the above. He is very funny. Even Spiderman will laugh.

Alex David suggested that one way the Muslims need to do to improve their 'acceptance' in the larger society is:

.............. begin by doing charitable works not just for other muslims but for everyone in their larger community.

This suggestion makes lots of sense, especially doing charitable work for EVERYONE in the community.

Alex David suggested that one way the Muslims need to do to improve their 'acceptance' in the larger society is:

.............. begin by doing charitable works not just for other muslims but for everyone in their larger community.

This suggestion makes lots of sense, especially doing charitable work for EVERYONE in the community.

Not only Muslims are smeared; Arabs are too. Whether iraqia, syrians etc are arabs is of no importance in today's world.

the meaning of Arab is akin to the meaning of American; it is an identity that subsumes other identities.

There are no 'TRUE' or 'AUTHENTIC' ethnic group; it is a false assumption

Not only Muslims are smeared; Arabs are too. Whether iraqia, syrians etc are arabs is of no importance in today's world.

the meaning of Arab is akin to the meaning of American; it is an identity that subsumes other identities.

There are no 'TRUE' or 'AUTHENTIC' ethnic group; it is a false assumption

Patel requests tolerance. Fine, we are a tolerant country. Were we not, we would have arrested and deported every last Muslim after 9/11. U.S. Muslims were largely silent on the events of 9/11. A few expressed opposition to the crime, but a surprising number said nothing. The Mosque of New York condoned the acts of terrorism, which resulted in its imam getting kicked out of the country.

Patel, if you truly want Muslims not to be smeared, you might start by admitting that some Muslims behave very, very badly and you do not condone their behavior. Unfortunately, people's patience with Muslims is at a low point these days and probably the majority of non-Muslims in the U.S. don't want to be lectured on tolerance right now.

Patel, one last point: visit Egypt and write a column in the local paper advising the Muslim Brotherhood to adopt more tolerant language in its charter. Visit Gaza and West Bank and tell the Arabs there to stop portraying Jews as blood sucking monsters in their children's schoolbooks. Go to Iran and tell their great leader to stop denying the Holocaust happened. Oh, and put some flowers on the grave of that UNWRA headmaster in Gaza who was a bombmaster by night.

If you can survive all of these experiences, then come back and write us another column about how we should be tolerant of Muslims becoming schoolmasters.

Hey Somali, chill. There are filters on these blogs . Don't take it so personally or start swinging your sword at some unseen infidel.

Just rewrite your blog a different way and keep trying until you figure out what the word or words filtered are.

Muslims have "smeared" themselves with the blood of their terror victims and very little outrage from "mainstream" Muslims and their clergy.

Your article acts like there is no attempt by radical Muslim and Arab organizations to impose religion on a secular culture, and strip people of their individualism. Islam mostly from the Arab world is the most intolerant and restrictive form of life on the planet, making life a sin and death in the service of Allah a virtue. Your cute little attempt to link Nelson Mandela and "Debbie" into your story, as if she is being "oppressed" in America falls short of the mark. The treatment of women in the Arab world is nothing more than indentured slavery under the cover of duty to Allah, something overlooked in your appeal to social justice.

R.S.Newark says:
"Surely, I can't be the only person who knows that Khalil Gibran is not arabic, nor was he Muslim...doesn't anyone know that Gibran was a Lebanese Christian. How can anyone with intelligence name a Muslim school after a Lebanese Christain?"

Of all Arab speaking people who originated in Africa and the Middle East, only those who hail from the Arabian Peninsula are true Arabs. The others are Arabised people; people who adopted the Arabic culture, language and many the Arab religion of Islam. Khalil Gibran is no more or less Arab than any of those whose roots are in the Arabic speaking countries of the Middle East and North Africa. The present day people of Lebanon are the descendents of the Phoenicians as the people of Syria are Arameans and the Iraqis are descendents of the Babylonians etc.

Smear Muslims? Wouldn’t dream of it – as long as they behave in a civilized manner. I don’t think it counts as “smearing” to call a barbarian a barbarian.

Smear Islam? How do you smear an ideology that responds with such enthusiastic violence to even the barest suggestion that its followers take a step or two into the twenty-first century with the rest of us? It appears to smear itself. Religion of peace, my arse.

"Smearing Muslims" is the title of this harangue. But considering that 9/11, bombings of innocents, beheadings, floggings, and other assorted atrocities are committed by Muslims invoking an Islamic justification, is the reason why Muslims are smeared. It is not reason enough to smear every Muslim, but given the volume and diversity of atrocities committed by Muslim populations world wide, why should the rest of the world's population not feel beset by Muslim horrors.

There are millions upon millions of good Muslims, but there are also substantial numbers of young Muslim men ready to pillage, bomb, kill, maim, etc. in the name of Islam, and the good Muslims do not raise their voices loud enough in unequivocal condemnation.

If Catholics, Buddhists, or Hindus did something on a similar scale using religious justifications, they and their religion certainly would be condemned, and deservedly so.

Daniel Pipes is clear and simple one of the most prominent bigots in America. That he holds the title of 'professor' is a blot on the country's academia, since his scholarship is mostly composed of hatred, untruths and crackpot ideology.

Daniel Pipes is clear and simple one of the most prominent bigots in America. That he holds the title of 'professor' is a blot on the country's academia, since his scholarship is mostly composed of hatred, untruths and crackpot ideology.

Arlene's response to DZ still consists of generalities.

Arlene: with regard to the assertion in your previous posting that "(Debbie) Almontaser MADE A STATEMENT SUPPORTING A HAMAS-LED TERROR MOVEMENT (intafada)", please provide us with the exact statement and reference it (where it was quoted).

That way we can all judge for ourselves. Otherwise I would have to say you are all hat and no cattle darlin'

There is MUCH more to the story about the NYC Arabic-English school than what Eboo Patel wrote in this article. Read Pipes' side of the story before you swallow the hook Patel is using as a lure.

EBOO PATEL,

What exactly DO MEAN BY MUTUAL LOYALTY ?

DZ,

When I said that "it's obvious what you are" I wasn't referring to your religion. I was referring to the extremist and hateful language that you repeatedly use. It comes right of the Hamas propaganda play book.

Extremism, violence, hate. Look at yourself.

DZ wrote: "...You don't have a clue about me, and you've demonstrated clearly that you don't even know the history of the thing you support.".

I love it when stupidity is unveiled so eloquently.

Arlene, if you're going to post here, get used to people calling you on your obvious ignorance.

Craig

Arlene:

I just reread your post. Don't you dare impute your hatred and racism to me. I oppose all violence including that by Israel and Hamas and whoever else. So, what are you? An ethnic cleansing supporting, war crime supporting, torture supporting bozo trying to confer your hate onto other people? You don't have a clue about me, and you've demonstrated clearly that you don't even know the history of the thing you support.

Quinn:

From what I can tell, no, Debbie Almontaser never made a statement in support of Hamas. If you believe she did, show me the evidence. I can't find it.

Arlene:

More pathetic nonsense. The first intifada ran from 1987-1993. The second one strated in September, 2000. Both were initiated by the PLO. After Israel began its brutal retaliation against stone throwers and others in 2000, then, and only then, did Hamas and the others take part. I hold no book for Hamas, certainly not Islamic Jihad, but your fact-free argument is pure BS.

You have no idea about me. I'm a Jew and quite content to be.

DZ,

It's obvious where you're coming from and what you are.

"Intafada" is the term widely used to refer to the Palestinian terrorist violence that was initiated in Sept., 2000. It has been executed by several groups including Hamas, the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades (Fatah) and Islamic Jihad. It has been targeted at unarmed civilians.

Those who support such violence and hatred, such as you, should be ashamed of themselves.

DZ : Well, DZ did she make make the statement or not? Arelene's point is she made it on behalf of Hamas. Hamas does not collect funds on behalf of endangered butterflies.

It’s unfortunate that ideologues like Daniel Pipe hold so much weight in our society.
I’d like to say that I hope everyone joins your side, Eboo, but what I really hope is that one day we live in a world where there are no sides at all!

Arlene:

That is some of the most pathetic bigoted drivel that I've read in a while. Intifada means uprising. It is not a movement, it was two separate sets of activity against Israeli ethnic cleansing and repression. It had nothing to do with Hamas. The intifadas were PLO sponsored, not Hamas. It would be nice if you had even one fact before you pontificate.

Again, the fatal flaw of this article is that Patel purposely omits the core cause of the controversy: Almontaser MADE A STATEMENT SUPPORTING A HAMAS-LED TERROR MOVEMENT (intafada). It was NOT that she simply was working in a place where intafada t-shirts were made.

I would love to hear Patel try to refute it. It's a fact. It does not fit into Patel's anti-Muslim theme so he left it out. This is a bogus article.

that's the point rs newark- it's not a muslim school- it's an arabic language school.
the lebanese people speak arabic, and consider themselves to be mostly arabs.
but lebanon has been so overrun by so many different groups so many times-
arab does not equal muslim.
and muslim does not equal arab- (the muslim world is only 18% arabic)

Surely, I can't be the only person who knows that Kahil Gibran is not arabic, nor was he Muslim...doesn't anyone know that Gibran was a Lebenese christian. How can anyone with intelligence name a Muslim school after a lebenese christain?

SOMALI said:

In fact, in North America, I find it very peculiar that minorities are SOOOOOOO hard on each other while being easy on the white guy. I see black, Indian, Chinese cops all the time who PLAY tougher than the white guy. And they get tough on their fellow minorities in order to impress the white guy!!!

Somali, many minorities - not all - being SOOOOOO hard on each other while being the perfectly wonderful person to the whites, being the paragon of virtue and generosity towards the whites while being mean to their own, is prevalent in all Western countries. Picking up the worst in their host country and practicing it in a worse manner on their own people...is their idea of adaptation and survival.

You don't know how Mr Patel treats other Indians or minorities. Hold your opinions until you do. New migrants tend to suffer more acutely from the problem. Mr Patel is born in the US.

Mr Patel has nothing to do with your comments disappearing. It has to do with the technology playing up. No person is filtering your comments.

Next column should expose the smearing of Catholics by Dear Sally Quinn.

The Facts:

From Wikipedia:

"Guerrilla activities
In 1961, Mandela became the leader of the ANC's armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (translated as Spear of the Nation, also abbreviated as MK), which he co-founded. He coordinated a sabotage campaign against military and government targets, and made plans for a possible guerrilla war if sabotage failed to end apartheid. A few decades later, MK did wage a guerrilla war against the regime, especially during the 1980s, in which many civilians were killed. Mandela also raised funds for MK abroad, and arranged for paramilitary training, visiting various African governments."

Conclusion: At one time, Mandela was to be watched as a possible terrorist threat. No more!! A State Department oversight by keeping him on a watch list. This and nothing more.

The important issue: Islam and its "fems":

The "fems" aka the flaws, errors, muck and stench of Islam for your perusal:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3 That Shiites are less than human or Sunnis are less than human depending on what Islamic cult you belong to.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

Ms. Almontaser is a Muslim so called moderate by some but still a Muslim thereby she suffers from the "fems" and from the Three B Syndrome i.e. Bred, Born and Brainwashed in Islam. And with these problems, the Mayor of NYC was correct in removing her as the principal of a tax-supported institution.