by Salman Hameed

If you are interested in a thoughtful conversation about Islam and secularism, you should spend about an hour with Talal Asad here. Among other books, he is the author of Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity and the highly influential Geneologies of Religion: Disciplines and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam. This is also an antidote to the often simplistic (and sometimes crass) discussions of religion, in particular Islam, in the European and American public spheres. The interview below starts with Talal Asad's background, and I was surprised to know that he spent his formative years in Pakistan.

Yes - the interview style is a bit from the 70s, but the content is very good. Also, you should know that this interview was conducted in 2009 - before the Arab Spring(s).

This comes via Tabsir.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

If you are in the area, join us for Wednesday lunch talk hosted by the Center for the Study of Science in Muslim Societies (SSiMS) and the School of Cognitive Science at Hampshire College. Here are the details:

 Islamic structures of science and society

by 

Lydia Wilson

Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at the Graduate Center, CUNY

Wednesday, December 4th, 2013

at Noon

Adele Simmons Hall, Hampshire College

Abstract: I will argue that an analysis of the relationship between science and Islam can provide a fresh lens through which to look at the functioning of modern political Islam and contemporary Muslim societies. In analysing contemporary critiques of science in the Muslim world, echoes with the situation under totalitarian regimes were hard to ignore, most obviously in: 1) treatment of dissenters; 2) other forms of political interference; 3) a creation and defence of an alternative scientific epistemology; and 4) a definition of, and attacks on, an enemy. This last gives an insight into political and social attitudes more broadly. The definition of the enemy under Soviet theory was class-based (bourgeois or capitalist); under the Nazis it was race-based (non-Aryan and in particular Jewish); in certain Islamic science discourses today it is geopolitical (Western science, often conflated with “modern”). There have been various characterisations given of “Western” science in the Muslim world, and a variety of responses, from total rejection to complete assimilation. But even within societies creating an Islamic epistemology for science, scientists play a high profile role, including within extremist movements, both violent and non-violent. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood appointed an engineer to be Prime Minister, and engineers are vastly over-represented in jihadist attacks in the past 20 years. This ambivalence to science can be seen as one instance of the ambivalence to Western culture more generally.

Biographical statement: Lydia Wilson is the Mellon postdoctoral fellow at CUNY Graduate Center. After completing a PhD in medieval Arabic philosophy (University of Cambridge, UK), she shifted to the modern Middle East, building on previous journalism experience to pursue anthropological research, particularly anthropology of conflict. Lydia reviews regularly for the Times Literary Supplement, and edits the Cambridge Literary Review.

In the Adele Simmons Hall (ASH) Lobby at Hampshire College.          

A light lunch will be available at noon.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The super-hero animated series, Burka Avenger, was broadly covered in the press when its first episode aired in Pakistan back in August. The creators of the show argue that the burka superhero would empower young women by serving as a role model. Furthermore, one of the main goals of the show is to emphasize education for women - especially young girls. The first episode had the shades of Malala versus the Taliban.

So how successful has the show been in achieving its goals beyond publicity and the selling of show-related merchandize (while I haven't yet found any follow-up episodes, I know I can shell out $20 for aBurka Avenger t-shirt - something that I doubt most women in Pakistan would be wearing)?

I don't know the answer, but I think it would be an interesting project to see the show's impact, if any. Here are two articles that talk about two different aspects of the show: education and the use of burka as a costume.

Here is Hani Yusuf in Valerie magazine talking about Burka Avenger's goal of spreading education:

While Burka Avenger may be a valuable addition to local television entertainment, it is far from an effective education awareness program. With its lack of understanding of the nuances and complexities of regional politics, culture and economics, it falls short of reaching its target audience in Pakistan.

Burka Avenger aims to raise education awareness in a country where half the population is illiterate and over a quarter lives below the poverty line. According to the media brochure, the TV show offers “positive social messages and morals.”

But Urban Pakistanis who speak Urdu and English are often those who already have access to formal education. And, English is only really spoken by a small fraction of Pakistanis who can afford private schools.

Government schools in Pakistan suffer from various budgetary and infrastructural problems. The current government’s spending on education is an abysmal 2 percent of its total spending.

So any effective education awareness campaign must target parents and government officials as well and must be region-specific, as the country’s micro regions have very different economic, cultural and social concerns.

Instead, Burka Avenger targets its education awareness campaign at children, but it is only able to reach children in urban centers.

And here is Daniel Martin Varisco at Tabsir on the use of burka as a super heroine costume:

At first glance this seems like a sound idea, importing a Western theme and inserting a Muslim character. There are quite a few video games that do this for men. But does it really work? As I watched the online first episode, it seemed like the Burqa Avenger was more like a Halloween witch, flying without the broom but decked out in black, than anything else. It may work as comedy, but I doubt this really empowers women who choose to wear a burqa. If the point is to show that there are tough Muslim women, would it not make more sense to show some real life examples? The make-believe aspect of the Burqa Avenger suggests that it could not happen in real life, like the Kuwaiti women in the wake of Saddam’s invasion back in 1990. The veiled cartoon heroine works as fantasy, but this only serves to reinforce the stereotype that there is a disconnect between the Islamic rhetoric about the value of women and the cultural practices that sometimes do not allow women any choice. 

The commercial interest of the site is quite evident. The marketing is clearly for young people who like hip hop, as can be seen in the music videos, which are in English… So here is an in-your-face dj-type saying “Don’t mess with the lady in black, when she is on the attack.” I kind of doubt this will empower young Pakistani girls, but it may scare the hell out of young Pakistani males.

I think both Hani and Daniel have raised excellent issues with the show, and I share these concerns (and as mentioned above, find marketing campaign quite over-the-top). However, I do not want to dismiss its impact out of hand. Popular culture, after all, has a long reach and carries weight in both urban and rural areas of Pakistan. I think some of that will have to depend on the quality of story-telling as well - especially if the writers can move beyond "message" stories to tales that resonate with deeper human connections (I guess, I'm wishing for a more literary Burka Avenger…). Based on the one episode we've had, the prospects are not that great on this account - but then Marvel and DC Comics have also crossed many cultural boundaries to have become a global phenomena.

But the question of impact is an empirical one. I think it will be a neat (and useful) comparative project to do focus-groups and/or individual interviews with women and men of the intended target age-group across different areas of Pakistan (there is a huge variation within urban centers as well, and I would throw in diasporic Pakistani community as well) to see how they view Burka Avenger and its goal of empowering and educating women with this female superhero.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

While we are waiting for some sort of resolution to the nuclear talks (and yes, it will be an absolute shame if the US Congress ends up sabotaging the talks by imposing new sanctions at this time), here is a fascinating Fresh Air interview with Hoomad Majd, the author of The Ministry of Guidance Invites You to Not Stay.

There are three things that I want to highlight. First, he talks about the "Death to America" chant. He attributes it to the problem of translation. Yes, it does literally mean "death to America" - but it would be more accurate to translate as "down with America". And that this term for death "marg" is actually used quite frequently in colloquial Persian when someone is upset at something (he gave the example of "death to potato").

Second, I'm fascinated by the political use of sulking in Iran. Here is a small excerpt from the interview:

When we were in Iran, President Ahmadinejad — not being able to get his way on one particular thing he was trying to do, which was to fire an intelligence minister — engaged in a sulk. He decided to go home and say, "I'm not coming to work," and he did that for about 12 days. And it reminded me of this characteristic that we have in Iranian culture where people do sulk, whether it's for something as simple as a social sulk or a family sulk, or ... it's political.

And it goes all the way back in Iranian history and, most famously, [to] Prime Minister [Mohammad] Mosaddegh, who was overthrown by the CIA and British intelligence in 1953, who was constantly engaging in sulks in order to get his way, and if he didn't get his way he would suddenly fall ill or faint and cry and take to his bed, and even have meetings from his bed wearing pajamas.

Oh - I have to so adopt it at Hampshire College. Too bad I'm no longer chairing the faculty committee. Otherwise, I would have definitely used a sulk to faculty on board on contentious issues.

And the last point is about trash in Tehran. Hooman points out that Tehran is a very clean city of 14 million people and that trash is picked up 7 days a week. Here is an excerpt about the city of Tehran:

The city of Tehran is a very modern metropolis, and there's an emphasis in the Islamic republic on science and advancement and technology. We see that with the nuclear issue. So you do see there's industry, there's heavy industry; they make everything from cars to refrigerators to electronic goods. So it's a very modern place and very European-looking in many ways. That emphasis is something you don't see in a lot of other Islamic countries as much as you do in Iran...


[Tehran is] superbly maintained, as well as it can be, given that it's a sprawling city of 14 million people. They collect the trash every single day, seven days a week. It's remarkably clean ... even though there's heavy, heavy pollution.

Okay sign me up: I would love to visit Tehran. Iran was actually part of NSF evolution survey. However, because of the tensions after the 2009 elections, we dropped the idea of going to Iran. But if the relations between Iran and the US thaw a bit, I will definitely be seeking a way to visit the country. 

Listen to the full interview here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is fantastic that the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) - the largest Muslim organization in the US - has come out in support of employment anti-discrimination act. This must have been a contentious issue, but it is great that they ended up on the more progressive side. Here is the article (tip from Amina Steinfels):

Last week, one of the clearest shifts in the decades-long debate over Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) came into light from the largest U.S.-based Muslim organization, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), joined a broad interfaith coalition, calling ENDA a “measured, common sense solution that will ensure workers are judged on their merits, not on their personal characteristics like sexual orientation or gender identity.”



In a historic advancement for the LGBT rights movement, the Senate on Thursday approved ENDA, a bill that protects against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Despite advances in anti-discrimination in the workplace, Muslims continue to face unfair job discrimination. Our shared experiences of discrimination can provide a common basis to work with one another to mold a more inclusive America.

Commenting on the shift of tone, Dr. Sharon Groves, Director of HRC’s Religion and Faith Program, regarded ISNA's support of ENDA as a major step in right direction.
“LGBT Muslims both in the U.S. and abroad need to hear from organizations like ISNA that their experiences as Muslims are recognized in the spirit of Islam’s emphasis on compassion and respect for all humanity,” said Groves.

The movement for greater acceptance of LGBT people in Islam is growing. LGBT Muslims continue to be at the forefront of cutting edge scholarship at the intersection of Islam and issues affecting the lives of LGBT Muslims. Around the nation and the world, LGBT Muslims and their allies are working to build an inclusive faith — and having some notable success.



And here is is the Pew survey on attitudes of American-Muslims on homosexuality:

 While their levels of acceptance are lower than the general population, the numbers in support are clearly on the rise, and not surprisingly, the youngest group is also the most receptive.

You can find the Pew report on American-Muslims here.

Also see this post from earlier: Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) and a Washington imam for gay marriage.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The last two weeks has been incredibly busy - and hence the lack of posts here. I blame the government shutdown. I guess this was a sympathy shutdown here on Irtiqa. But lets start the things rolling again. So first, here is a call for papers in the journal, CyberOrient, for a special issue on History of Modernity and Telephony in the non-West. Here are the details (tip from Tabsir).

Call for Papers for CyberOrientVol. 8, Iss. 2, 2014
Submission deadline: 30 April 2014 (Full Papers)
Special Issue: History of Modernity and Telephony in the non-West
Guest Editor: Burçe Çelik 

Aim 

For the past few decades, history of modernization began to be written by focusing on how technologies as components of modernization processes change the lives of humans, their daily practices and imaginations, and the ways in which they construct and express their identities. Telephony, which functions in both public and private spheres and witnesses social and political changes in private as well as professional relations, is regarded as especially important for historical analysis. Functioning on multiple levels, social history of telephony can unearth the ways in which technologies obtain meanings and values in changing cultural contexts and the dynamics of social, political and cultural transformations. The history of modernization in the non-western societies is often studied by focusing on the projects of the rulers and on the discourses of the ruling parties that aim a social/political change in accordance with a particular Occidentalism – where modernity is imagined with a model of the western modernization processes. Yet, the question of how people of these landscapes contributed to the modernization processes and how they produced their own modern practices in daily organizations, relations and experiences, did not receive enough scholarly attention.
This special issue of CyberOrient invites articles that focus on the history of modernity and telephony in the non-west that take the user perspective to the center. Topics could include the daily practices of users with telephone technology, the meaning and values that have been attributed to this technology by users, the role of telephony within the social, cultural and political struggles of users, and the effect of the ownership or non-ownership of telephony in social, cultural and political lives of individuals and collectives. We welcome submissions from across disciplines and methodological approaches that are empirically and critically grounded. 

SubmissionArticles should be submitted directly to Burçe Çelik (burce.celik@bahcesehir.edu.tr) and Vit Sisler (vit.sisler@ff.cuni.cz). Articles should be between 6,000 and 8,000 words (including references), and follow the AAA style in referencing and citations. Upon acceptance, articles will be published online with free access in autumn 2014.

And to give you a flavor of the journal, here is the latest issue of CyberOrient that is available online:


Articles
Online and Offline Continuities, Community and Agency on the Internet
Jon W. Anderson
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8355

The Earth Is Your Mosque (and Everyone Else’s Too): Online Muslim
Environmentalism and Interfaith Collaboration in UK and Singapore
Lisa Siobhan Irving
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8336

Telling the Truth about Islam? Apostasy Narratives and Representations
of Islam on WikiIslam.net
Daniel Enstedt and Göran Larsson
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8459

Comments
Digital Images and Visions of Jihad: Virtual Orientalism and the
Distorted Lens of Technology
Raymond Pun
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8391

Reviews
Review: Arabités numériques. Le printemps du Web arabe
Luboš Kropáček
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8352

Review: Media, Power, and Politics in the Digital Age. The 2009
Presidential Election Uprising in Iran
Zuzana Krihova
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8386

Review: iMuslims: Rewiring the House of Islam. Islamic Civilization
and Muslim Networks
Vit Sisler
http://www.cyberorient.net/article.do?articleId=8385

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The Egypt Independent has a nice profile of the growing number of atheists in Egypt. Instead of just relying on second-hand accounts, the members of the newspaper staff met with 15 atheists at cafe in downtown Cairo. The stories they tell are familiar and heartbreaking: families disowning kids,  parents resorting to violence, and even companies firing individuals for their (non)religious views.

So couple of general comments: It is not surprising that atheists exists in deeply religious Muslim countries. But even within atheism, there are all sorts of different shades - from the more familiar agnostics and atheists, to those who consider themselves not-religious but may still pray regularly (a case of cultural conditioning) to those who cognizantly embrace the surrounding Muslim culture and its affiliated religious customs. But overall we are seeing a increasing trend of self-expression especially when it comes to religious beliefs ("it is my belief") and this comes from the spread of university education as well as an exposure to broader debates via the internet and satellite television (there is also a trend of increased religiosity based on personal interpretation of the Qur'an - and it is shaped by the same self-confidence from education and worldly experience). As much as I disagree with Dawkins' Islamophobia, he does deserve credit for making atheism an acceptable "religious" position worldwide. Not surprisingly, the article also
noted the fact that most of these "open" atheists are young - in their 20s. It is the same generation that has been behind the movements for democratic representations as well.

Where will it lead to? Indeed in the short run there is going to be a backlash. But overall, we are looking at the early stages of the development of religion as a matter of personal belief. While much of these atheists and cultural Muslims may belong to a privileged or upwardly mobile middle classes, there still exists enormous socioeconomic and education disparities where religion can be used as a weapon. This is something we are seeing in Bangladesh right now (see this earlier post: Standing with Bangladesh's Secular Bloggers), where Jamaat-e-Islami has been "accusing" their young rivals of being atheists and has been successful in shifting the focus away from their own atrocities in the 1971 civil war.

So stay tuned on this issue.

Now back to the Egypt article. Here is the bit where these young atheists talk about the consequences of coming out as an atheist:

Those who have come out publicly as atheists have been not only isolated by their friends and families, but also society in general. However, others who turn down their familial religion have faced many worse trials than mere isolation.

Asmaa Omar, 24, who has just graduated the Faculty of Engineering, said that once she revealed her beliefs to her family, they began to physically and mentally torture her. Her father slapped her in the face and broke her jaw. She was not able to eat properly for seven months.

Both her immediate and extended families began to insult her. “You just want to have free relations with boys,” they would say, or “You used to be the best girl in the family,” and “Now you’re a prostitute.”

By now, she said, most of her friends have cut their ties with her and other girls no longer speak to her after she took off her veil.

Milad Suliman, or better known as Evan, was fired from his company over his beliefs. His boss confronted him with the ideas he shared on his Facebook page and told him the company could not have an atheist among its employees.

His family was not happy either. They told him his ideas were shameful and this was the reason their home was no longer blessed.

Another atheist, Sarah al-Kamel, 24, fears this very isolation, thus has chosen not tell her family of her beliefs after her newly adopted ideas created a wedge between her and her friends.

Despite the risks of coming out, many atheists I spoke to claim their numbers have slowly been on the rise following the 25 January Revolution. The rise in atheism could be seen as a by-product of the revolution pushing the boundaries of commonly-held belief systems and breaking down previous political, social and religious restrictions.

Read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Here is a short, insightful, and entertaining article from the Magazine section of NYT by Sahahan Mufti, about being mistaken for a Mufti:

 The first time I received such an e-mail, I assumed it was a mistake and ignored it. I ignored the next few e-mails as well, but I began to wonder if someone was playing a prank on me. The e-mails kept coming, sporadically, and without any hint of a setup or any sign of a punch line. Eventually I discovered the explanation. 

My surname, Mufti, is an Arabic word meaning “one who gives a fatwa.” 

And his name shows up quite high on Google searches. Okay that part is not that interesting. However, he provides an example that nicely illustrate what many people expect from fatwas:

This e-mail with the pushy subject line was unlike any other I had received. “My friend, who lives in Sweden, wants to get married to a Swedish woman,” it began in Latinized Urdu. “But this marriage will be a fake marriage.” Tahir, the sender, explained that his friend was already married to a woman in Pakistan but wanted to marry a Swedish woman to obtain Swedish citizenship. Tahir’s friend wanted him to deliver fake Pakistani divorce papers by forging both his and his wife’s signatures. Oblivious to the forgery, the Swedes would allow Tahir’s friend to marry, putting the secret bigamist on a path to Swedish citizenship and all that it offered. I doubted that either of the women were privy to the elaborate scheme. 

It was Tahir’s heedlessly narrow question at the end that surprised me the most: “If I forge the signatures on the divorce papers, will that really mean my friend will be divorced from his wife?” It was this small, rather arcane detail about God’s view of the marital bond that nagged his conscience — not the various international and domestic laws and criminal codes that he would break. “Would you do me a favor and resolve this problem?” 

For his answer, you have to read the article here. However, I was wondering about two things. First, often times people make so much of some crazy fatwas on the internet. Well, in the absence of a centralized authority and the easy of issuing a fatwa, this is exactly one would expect, for better or for worse. Second, I know the point of the article was to point to mundane nature of the question, but it is also about seeking a justification (approval) from an authority - any authority - and the bar for the qualification of being such an authority can be set quite low (for example, whatever google brings up first).

In case you are interested in the subject matter, also check out this project on internet fatwas and new trends in authority.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

It is easy to target a minority. History, unfortunately, is full of such examples. We are seeing one of the extreme cases unfolding in Pakistan. Just recently, a bunch of religious "scholars" got together to celebrate the 39th anniversary of the second amendment to Pakistan's constitution - the amendment that officially declared Ahmadis non-Muslims. There once was a time, when an imam or an a'lim was expected to talk about compassion, charity, and other actions that could potentially help fellow human beings. But not today - at least not the ones that were gathered in Lahore. The "scholars" that were celebrating the second amendment primarily offered provincialism, scorn,  and hate. It is a shame that their interpretation of religion has left them with this sad and tragic courses of actions. But they are also being egged on by a majority of Pakistanis (see the Pew survey results below).

It is fantastic that Express Tribune has provided the quotes from this "alim". Here is a sampling:

Several clerics called for further persecution of the Ahmadi community at conferences held on Saturday night to mark the 39th anniversary of the passage of the Second Amendment, which declared Ahmadis to be non-Muslims.

The speakers branded Ahmadis enemies of Pakistan, called for their social and economic boycott, and demanded that they be banned from taking up any government or military jobs.

 For the actual quotes, lets start with head of the Moon-sighting committee:

At the Markazi Khatm-i-Nabuwat Conference in Johar Town, Ruet-i-Halal Committee Chairman Mufti Muneebur Rehman said that he and his followers were prepared to make sacrifices for Khatm-i-Nabuwat. He alleged that Ahmadis were involved in “suspicious activities” and “serious measures” were needed against them. 

Dr Amir Liaqat Hussain, of Geo TV fame, defended Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. He said that the Ummah needed to unite in support of the laws. He said that they would not allow any amendment to the laws. 

Maulana Muhammad Azam Naeemi said there was a need to mobilise the common man against Ahmadis. Maulana Raghib Hussain Naeemi termed Ahmadis and their leaders “stooges of the West”.

Oh - and we haven't even gotten to the real vile comments yet. And again, I should remind you that these are folks who are representing some form of religious organization or, in some unfortunate cases, are religious celebrities. Here are some more highlights:

Pir Muhibullah Noori, caretaker of Baseerpur, said that Ahmadis should be banished from Pakistan. He told the audience that if they truly loved the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), they would not let Ahmadis live their lives freely. 

Allama Raza-i-Mustafa said Ahmadis should be chased till death.

So the love of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) translates into not letting Ahmadis live lives freely! And if "Allama" holds any meaning, the latter is openly calling for the killing of Ahmadis (a genocide?)! Note that this is being reported in a mainstream newspaper.

And here is a retired judge:

Justice (retired) Mian Nazeer Akhtar said that the time for speeches against Ahmadis was over and it was now time to do something practical. He said everyone should play their role against Ahmadis to tighten the noose around them. 

The participants in the conference passed a resolution demanding a ban on Ahmadi publications and legal action against their publishers; the removal of all Ahmadis from government jobs; government-sponsored celebrations of September 7 at a national level; and for the introduction of a new oath of office for holders of important posts affirming that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the last prophet.

I forgot to mention that all of the above was from just one of the gatherings. Here is a sampling from another one:

The 26th annual International Khatm-i-Nabuwat Conference, organised by the International Khatm-i-Nabuwat Movement, was held in Chenab Nagar, whose population is mostly Ahmadi. 

The speakers at the conference made derogatory remarks about Jamaat-i-Ahmadia leaders and blamed them for terrorism in Pakistan. 

Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) Secretary Maulana Abdul Rauf Farooqi said it was time to pounce on Ahmadis. He called them apostates and said that they deserved “extreme steps”.
Allama Muhammad Younas Hasan said that a “massive search operation” should be launched across the country to identify all of them. He said that he and his followers were willing to make “any sacrifice” for their cause. He said all sects of Islam were united in their opposition to Ahmadis. He said that Muslims should boycott Ahmadis socially and economically to make it harder for them to live in Pakistan. 

Maulana Qari Shabbir Ahmed Usmani said that the struggle against Ahmadis would continue “till its logical end”. He said all Ahmadis and their leaders should convert in order to gain Allah’s blessings. 

Maulana Asadullah Farooq demanded a ban on Ahmadis joining the armed forces as they were “traitors”.

Read the full article here. This is not just shameful, but here we are looking at the calls for severe persecution and extermination of a group based on their religious identity. We should not be witnessing something like this in the 21st century.

Pew also looked at the views of Pakistanis on Ahmadis. Here is what they found:

Now Pew didn't ask the question, but I'm wondering what fraction of the 66% would go along with the calls for persecution of Ahmadis. Perhaps, it is good that the Pew survey didn't ask that question as I fear the numbers would be too depressing.

But they did find that there is widespread support for Pakistan's Blasphemy law, which has been used to persecute minorities on so many occasions:

The poll also found that a majority of Pakistani Muslims support the country’s blasphemy laws, which predate Pakistan’s independence in 1947 but have since been expanded. The laws, which carry a potential death sentence for insulting Islam, have been frequently invoked against Ahmadis and other religious minorities in Pakistan; although formal criminal prosecutions are rare, social discrimination and harassment of Ahmadis is widespread. Fully 75% of Pakistani Muslims say blasphemy laws are necessary to protect Islam in their country, while 6% say blasphemy laws unfairly target minority communities, and 19% express no opinion on the issue.

Read the Pew report here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

By now you have been saturated about the causes for last week's bombings. And yes - things are more much more complicated than "Islam is the motivation for bombings". I would like to point you to two articles that provide a nuanced analysis of the reasons why some young Muslims living in western Europe or in the US turn to violence. The first article is by Olivier Roy - who I think is one of the most interesting thinkers on the topic of Islam and globalization. If you have a chance, you should definitely read Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. The second article is by Scott Atran. He also has been fantastic work investigating the reasons for radicalization amongst younger Muslims. He was also our speaker for our Science and Religion Lecture Series at Hampshire College and you can see the video of his talk For Friend and Faith: The Paths and Barriers to Political Violence.

Here is first an intro of Olivier Roy's work in The New Republic:

Roy’s view is relevant in understanding the alleged Boston marathon bombers. A decade ago, Roy was pointing out that al Qaeda was drawing many of its recruits from Western Europe rather than from Saudi Arabia or Palestine or Pakistan. He saw al Qaeda as a product of the failure of Arab nationalism and Marxism-Leninism to establish viable popular societies. Its tactics and outlook derived from the Red Army Faction or Red Brigades or the secular Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine rather than from the Koran or from religious factions within Islam. Al Qaeda, Roy wrote in The Illusions of September 11, is “a junction of a radicalized Islam with a shrill anti-imperialism reshaped by globalization.” 

Accordingly, Roy rejected the idea that al Qaeda’s adherents in Europe were simply products of Islam and that their motivation should be seen as religious. Instead, he believed, they sought what he called an “imaginary Ummah,” a radical community of belief that was not strictly speaking part of the ordinary world of Islamic belief. That’s where I thought Roy’s analysis might be relevant to understanding Boston and the Tsarnaev brothers. 

It seemed to me that the suspected brothers could be understood as further extensions of Roy’s thesis. Like the Fort Hood terrorist, Nidal Malik Hasan, they don’t appear to be products of organized religion or organized politics. They represent, in effect, the reductio ad absurdum of al Qaeda’s global politics, which never had a realistic objective to begin with. A new caliphate? With Hasan or the Tsarnaevs, the act itself becomes the objective – an awful theaterical spectacle in which the terrorists are directors and stars.

And here is the direct response from Roy Olivier:

I wanted to ask you about the two brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who allegedly set off the two bombs at the Boston Marathon.  In your book, Globalized Islam, you recounted how many terrorists who act in the name of Islam were brought up in Western Europe rather than in the Middle East and who are often provoked by events outside the Middle East. Are these two brothers, who were largely raised in the United States, more evidence for your thesis? 

Yes, my idea from the beginning was that Al Qaeda and the people who used the mark of Al Qaeda were not really concerned with the core—with the Middle East, the Middle East of Palestine. They were more concerned by the periphery of the Middle East than the core of the Middle East. They were usually more concerned with Bosnia and Afghanistan, Chechnya at the end of the ‘90s; it is now Mali, Mauritania and Yemen, which is the only place where they are strong. Most of these guys have a global trajectory, they were born in one place, they go to fight somewhere else. These guys were born in Kyrgyzstan, they went to Dagestan, they speak Russian, they came to the United States very young,  they were educated in the United States, they speak English without an accent and so on. 

And they seemed to have discovered Islam in the United States rather than in Dagestan or Kyrgyzstan? 

Same thing with Mohammed Merah, the killer in Toulouse last year. They are self-radicalizing in a Western environment.

And this is the key point:

In your book, and also in your previous book on political Islam, you describe a transition from the nationalist and Marxist-Leninist movements in the Middle East after World War II to a stateless movement like Al Qaeda. Now we have something beyond that, where the terrorists may not even belong to, or be under orders from a specific group, but may only have been influenced by a radical preacher they heard. I am thinking of the Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan who killed thirteen people at Fort Hood in 2009. 

Yes, globalization and individualization are the two terms. Instead of organization, they connect through the Internet. They connect to a virtual Ummah not to a real society. For instance, most of them didn’t socialize in a Western community. They may have gone to mosques, but they were never an integral part of a congregation, they have no real life, social life. Their social life is through the Internet, all of them.

Read the full article here.

Scott Atran, overall, gives the same reasons. However, he is also concerned about the over-eaction of the media and the US. Here he is writing in Foreign Policy:

Under sponsorship by the Defense Department, my multidisciplinary, multinational research team has been conducting field studies and analyses of the mental and social processes involved in radicalization at home and abroad. Our findings indicate that terrorist plotters against Western civilian populations tend not to be parts of sophisticated, foreign-based command-and-control organizations. Rather, they belong to loose, homegrown networks of family and friends who die not just for a cause, but for each other. Jihadists pretty much span the population's normal distribution: There are very few psychopaths and sociopaths, few brilliant thinkers and strategists. Jihadi wannabes today are mostly emerging adults in transitional stages of their lives -- students, immigrants, in search of jobs or companions -- who are especially prone to movements that promise a meaningful cause, camaraderie, adventure, and glory. Most have a secular education, becoming "born again" into the jihadi cause in their late teens or 20s. The path to radicalization can take years, months, or just days, depending on personal vulnerabilities and the influence of others. 

Occasionally there is a hookup with a relative, or a friend of a friend, who has some overseas connection to someone who can get them a bit of training and motivation to pack a bag of explosives or pull a trigger, but the Internet and social media are usually sufficient for radicalization and even operational preparation. 

The result is not a hierarchic, centrally commanded terrorist movement but a decentralized, self-organizing, and constantly evolving complex of social networks based on contingent adaptations to changing events. These are no real "cells," but only clusters of mostly young men who motivate one another within "brotherhoods" of real and fictive kin. Often, in fact, there is an older brother figure, a dominant personality who mobilizes others in the group. But rarely is there an overriding authority or father figure. (Notably, for these transitional youth, there's often an absence of a real father). 

Some of the most successful plots, such as the Madrid and London bombings, are so anarchic, fluid, and improbable that they succeeded in evading detection despite the fact that intelligence and law enforcement agencies had been following some of the actors for some time. Three key elements characterize the "organized anarchy" that typifies modern violent Islamic activism: Ultimate goals are vague and superficial (often no deeper than revenge against perceived injustice against Muslims around the world); modes of action are decided pragmatically on the basis of trial and error or based on the residue of learning from accidents of past experience; and those who join are not recruited but are locally linked self-seekers -- often from the same family, neighborhood, or Internet chat room -- whose connection to global jihad is more virtual than material. Al Qaeda and associates do not so much recruit as attract disaffected individuals who have already decided to embark on the path to violent extremism with the help of family, friends, or a few fellow travelers. 

And here is the possible reason for their radicalization:

 Like the young men who carried out the Madrid and London attacks, most homegrown jihadi plotters first hook up with the broad protest sentiment against "the global attack on Islam" before moving into a narrower parallel universe. They cut ties with former companions who they believe are too timid to act and cement bonds with those who are willing to strike. They emerge from their cocoon with strong commitment to strike and die if necessary, but without any clear contingency planning for what might happen after the initial attack. 

For the first time in history, a massive, media-driven political awakening has been occurring -- spurred by the advent of the Internet, social media, and cable television -- that can, on the one hand, motivate universal respect for human rights while, on the other, enable, say, Muslims from Borneo to sacrifice themselves for Palestine, Afghanistan, or Chechnya (despite almost no contact or shared history for the last 50,000 years or so). 

When perceived global injustice resonates with frustrated personal aspirations, moral outrage gives universal meaning and provides the push to radicalization and violent action.
But the popular notion of a "clash of civilizations" between Islam and the West is woefully misleading. Violent extremism represents not the resurgence of traditional cultures, but their collapse, as young people unmoored from millennial traditions flail about in search of a social identity that gives personal significance. This is the dark side of globalization. 

And of course, this also reminded me of Mohsin Hamid's wonderful book, The Reluctant Fundamentalist (the film version by Mira Nair is being released in the US next week).

Here is Atran again:

Take Faisal Shahzad, the would-be bomber of Times Square in 2010, or Maj. Nidal Hasan, who killed 13 fellow soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009. Both were apparently inspired by the online rhetoric of Anwar al-Awlaki, a former preacher at a Northern Virginia mosque who was killed by a U.S. drone in Yemen in 2011. Although many commentators leapt to the conclusion that Awlaki and his ilk deviously brainwashed and recruited Shahzad and Hassan, in fact they sought out the popular Internet preacher because they were already radicalized to the point of wanting further guidance to act. As Defense Department terrorism consultant Marc Sageman notes: "Just like you saw Major Hasan send 21 emails to al-Awlaki, who sends him two back, you have people seeking these guys and asking them for advice." More than 80 percent of plots in both Europe and the United States were concocted from the bottom up by mostly young people just hooking up with one another. 

Especially for young men, mortal combat with a "band of brothers" in the service of a great cause is both the ultimate adventure and a road to esteem in the hearts of their peers. For many disaffected souls today, jihad is a heroic cause -- a promise that anyone from anywhere can make a mark against the most powerful country in the history of the world. But because would-be jihadists best thrive and act in small groups and among networks of family and friends -- not in large movements or armies -- their threat can only match their ambitions if fueled way beyond actual strength. And publicity is the oxygen that fires modern terrorism. 

Read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

Globalization and modernity are bringing issues of freedom of speech and religious freedom to the forefront everywhere, including in Muslim societies. There is and will be an intense debate about the shaping of "the" Islamic response to these changes. However, as has been the case historically, we are going to see a variety of responses. The focus in much of the discussions will be on the nature of faith - public versus private. The new trend of using "insult to Islam" to persecute a broad range of opposition - from non-orthodox sects to atheism - is one of the battlegrounds on the nature of contemporary faith in Islam. The issue of homosexuality, certainly, is another location where we are doing to see an intense debate over the meaning of faith in the 21st century. But even apart from such hot-buttion topics, Muslims are taking diverse stands on a whole variety of issues. Can and should women lead men in prayers? Is it necessary to sacrifice animals for Eid al Adha? And of course, then we have also Punk Islam - and all bets are off with punk!

In the US, there is now group called Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV). They are being equated with Reform Judaism and with Unitarian Universalism. They have nine chapters so far and I think they are have a tremendous potential to grow and to address some of the contemporary issues in religion and society. Perhaps, most importantly, they provide an inclusive umbrella to Muslims with diverse values. This is how they define their mission:

Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) is an inclusive community rooted in the traditional Qur’anic ideals of human dignity and social justice. We welcome all who are interested in discussing, promoting and working for the implementation of progressive values — human rights, freedom of expression, and separation of church and state — as well as inclusive and tolerant understandings of Islam. 

It is absolutely refreshing to see the presence of such a group!

One of their members is an Imam in a mosque in Washington, D.C. He is gay and supports gay marriage in the US. This is phenomenal! About a year ago, I had a post about a French imam who supervised the wedding of two Muslim men. I thought at the time that this cannot be the only place incident of this nature, when there already are Muslim LGBT groups (such as The Muslims Alliance for Gender and Sexual Diversity) and outspoken activists like Irshad Manji.

The Washington Imam's support for gay marriage fits perfectly in this context. It is also a nice contrast to the low-level of discourse (predominantly from the Republicans) on gay marriage in the US. Here is the story from the Washington Post:

Imam Daayiee Abdullah arrives by bus, sweaty and lugging a green bag stuffed with a

Koran, two books of poetry by Persian mystic Rumi and three Islamic prayer rugs. Tonight, he’s speaking to a room full of young, gay activists and progressives after a screening of the documentary “I Am Gay and Muslim” at the Human Rights Campaign’s bright white Equality Center in downtown Washington. 

But when the openly gay imam takes the stage, he stuns even this audience.
“I think we’re at the start of a movement: a more inclusive Islam in America,” says Abdullah, who runs Washington’s Light of Reform mosque and is thought to be the only publicly gay Muslim leader in the Western Hemisphere. 

“So if you have any same-sex marriages,” he says with a soft smile and a shrug, “I’m available.”

Some young Muslims in attendance mumble, “Wow!” and “Seriously?” 

As more states legalize same-sex marriage, it’s easy to forget that segments of society, particularly in immigrant communities, regard homosexuality as a potentially deadly secret — one rarely revealed to relatives in places like Sudan or Saudi Arabia, where being gay can be punishable by death. 

For many gay immigrants, the values of their adopted and native countries are at odds. The gay Muslim Americans who live relatively public lives in the Washington area are a case in point. They date openly, and are often out at work, but when it comes to getting married, they don’t dare share the news with family back home, who could become targets of abuse or economic boycotts — and even jailed — if it became common knowledge. 

Abdullah, an African American convert to Islam who is part of a national network of progressive Muslims, is the keeper of their secrets. He quietly helps gay Muslim couples get married, counseling them beforehand and keeping the ceremonies low-profile.

Read the full article here.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The organization of Turkish creationist, Harun Yahya, is apt at creating controversies in Europe. Be it ads on buses, anti-evolution lectures on campuses, or the mailing of an 800 page creationist tome to public schools in France, Switzerland, etc. The reaction in the media is also predictable: Muslims in Europe are considered backwards and a problem for the broader education system, and Harun Yahya is labeled as the leading proponent of Islamic creationism. This is a win-win situation for Harun Yahya and for those who want to paint Muslims as a problem for Europe as both validate each other's extreme viewpoints.

Now we have Hamza Tzortzis - and his organization Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA). The purpose of the organization is proselytization. Up until a few months ago, I had not even heard of Tzortzis. But then first I heard of the controversy surrounding his "debate" with Pervez Hoodbhoy in Lahore, where Pervez walked out when Tzortzis started accusing Pervez of "hating the Muslim world" (you can watch the YouTube of the whole event here. You will notice that there is not much dialogue, as Tzorzis' goal is simply to incite and provoke. Pervez walks out towards end after Tzortzis' incendiary comment. You can find the incident at around 1:47:30 and after).

Then last month iERA made it in the news big time. At UCL Hamza Tzortzis debated Lawrence Krauss on the topic of "Islam or Atheism: Which makes more sense"? As you can guess from the title, propelled the event into newspapers. The organizers (iERA had rented the room at UCL) decided to have the event gender segregated (or at least divide it in three groups: men, women, and coed) - and that propelled Krauss to initially walkout from the event and Richard Dawkins to weigh in, "Isn't it really about time we decent, nice, liberal people stopped being so pusillanimously terrified of being thought 'Islamophobic' and stood up for decent, nice, liberal values?", and called the segregation as "sexual apartheid".  Now, I'm not a fan of gender segregation either, but this is going a bit too far (there is a series of recent articles on the Islamophobia of the New Atheists, and I will be posting on it in the next day or so. In the mean time, you can read Glenn Greenwald's article here: Sam Harris, the New Atheists, and anti-Muslim animus). The UCL ended up banning iERA from hosting events on campus because of their forced gender segregation policies.
the point of these debates is to rile up the base on both sides. But then, a controversy

But now University of Leicester is also investigating an event for gender segregation. The rest of the story is a bit murky for me. The event happened on February 20th (though some reports say that this was related to an event in March) but has been brought to attention by an article in the Guardian just yesterday. It is now covered all over the internet. This is what the article said:

The University of Leicester has launched an investigation into gender segregation at a public lecture held by its student Islamic society. 

The talk, entitled Does God Exist?, featured a guest speaker Hamza Tzortzis as part of an Islamic Awareness week. Seating at the event was segregated, with different entrances into the lecture theatre for men and women. 

It follows news that a London university, UCL, has banned an Islamic organisation from campus after concluding that it attempted to impose segregation at a debate which also featured Tzortzis. 

In Leicester, more than 100 students attended the segregated event, which took place last month. A photograph passed to the Guardian shows signs put up in a university building, directing the segregation. 

A message on the group's website says: "In all our events, [the society] operate a strict policy of segregated seating between males and females." The statement was removed after the Guardian contacted the society. 

A spokesman for Leicester said: "The University of Leicester does not permit enforced segregation at public events. The university will investigate whether entrances to the hall for this event were segregated by the society and will ensure there is no recurrence of this.
"The University will not interfere with people's right to choose where to sit. If some people choose to sit in a segregated manner because of their religious convictions then they are free to do so. By the same token, if people attending do not wish to sit in a segregated manner, they are free to do so." 

He added: "To our knowledge, no-one was forced to sit in any particular seat. If there is evidence of enforced segregation, that would be a matter the university and students' union would investigate." 

But a Leicester student told the Guardian he believed segregation was common practice at the society's events to avoid offending those with strong religious beliefs.

So reading all this, there a couple of things that come to my mind. Just from this news item, we don't even know if the event violated the university policy or not. But it has already become a big news and commentaries have already implicated Islam - and not even just some Muslims (here is Jerry Coyne's post on this: "Okay, Peter Hitchens, Glenn Greenwald, et al.: do you really think that Islam is no more pernicious than other faiths?"). Some of it reminds me of the way the rejection of evolution by some Muslims (and even that was an anecdotal side-remark by biologist, Steve Jones) became a major story (see an earlier post on this here). But on the flip side, I can also see a group like iERA imposing gender segregation at their events. This matter can serve as a clear boundary against the dominant culture. When the media and the blogs conflate this position with Islam's, the iERA cam then become a default spokesperson. The cycle is then complete. In many ways, this is how Harun Yahya came to represent the Islamic position on evolution - at least in media coverage in Europe.

But I hope that the voices that that drive these debates are those that are between the likes of Hamza Tzortzis and the New Atheists.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

If you haven't noticed yet, there are varieties of ideological battles taking place in much of the Muslim world. Most of these involve the young and educated battling over the future direction of their culture, religion, and their country. The broad contours are often the same, but details vary from place to place. In some instances, it failed completely, whereas in others it achieved various degrees of success. So we had the Lawyers Movement in Pakistan, the Green Movement in Iran, and the Arab Spring in north Africa and a few of the countries in the Middle East.

Now Bangladesh has joined in as well with the Shahbagh Movement. The recent controversy started with young secularists protesting and seeking capital punishment against those who were found guilty of war crimes in the bloody civil war with Pakistan that ultimately created Bangladesh. The target in this case are some members of the

Jamat-e-Islami - ah of the same flavor that is demanding the Islamization of Pakistani curricula as well. Some of the leading spokesperson for this secular movement were bloggers. Well, the religious parties have responded by labeling some of them atheism and blasphemy. This is the new weapon in the hands of the political Islamic parties. Just yell "Insult to Islam" and the mob will take care of the rest. And it seems that atheism - whether real or imagined in the minds of these pious beardy's - has become an "insult to Islam".

One of the blogger accused of atheism was stabbed and killed in February. But that wasn't enough. By yelling "insult to Islam", they can distract the focus from the war crimes of 1971. Now these gentle bearded fellows want Bangladesh to follow the example of Pakistan and include a blasphemy law in Bangladesh - yes the same blasphemy law that has led to the destruction of so many innocent families in Pakistan.

But kudos to Bangladeshi prime minister, Sheikh Hasina. She ruled it out and defended the constitution as is!

Bangladesh’s prime minister has ruled out a new blasphemy law despite a mass campaign by Islamic groups to introduce the death penalty for bloggers whom they accuse of insulting the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh). 

As part of their push for a change in the law, the Hefajat-e-Islam group on Monday forced the closure of schools and businesses and barricaded inter-city motorways and railways across the country in a general strike. 

Police said at least 30 people were injured in clashes between pro-government activists and Islamic groups, already infuriated by the recent convictions of leading opposition figures for war crimes. 

But Sheikh Hasina, who has been leading a secular government in the Muslim-majority country since 2009, said existing laws were adequate to prosecute anyone accused of insulting a religion. 

“Actually, we don’t have any plan to (bring in a new law). We don’t need it,” Hasina told the BBC in an interview broadcast Monday.
“They should know that existing laws are enough,” she added, before stressing that “this country is a secular democracy”.

Here is a bit from NYT:

 The bloggers, who deny they are atheists, are seeking capital punishment for those found guilty of war crimes during the nation’s 1971 war of independence against Pakistan. They also want a ban on Jamaat-e-Islami, the country’s largest Islamic party, for campaigning against Bangladesh’s independence more than four decades ago. The party is an important partner of the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, which is led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. 

Top Jamaat-e-Islami leaders are accused of crimes against humanity during the 1971 war, and two senior party leaders were convicted this year by a special tribunal. Bangladesh says as many as three million people were killed and 200,000 women were raped by Pakistani troops and collaborators during the war. 

While Hifazat-e-Islam said its rally was nonpolitical and not aligned with the opposition, Ms. Zia’s party backed the demonstration. The group listed 13 demands, including reinstating “absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah” in the nation’s Constitution, which is largely secular, and passing a law providing for capital punishment for maligning Allah, Islam and its Prophet Muhammad. 

The group’s other demands includes banning “all foreign culture, including free mixing of men and women.”

Ok wait. What? Hold on. Lets look at all of the 13 demands. Here they are (from Al Jazeera): 

1. Restore the phrase "Complete faith and trust in the Almighty Allah" in the constitution and repeal all the laws contrary to the holy Quran and Sunnah. 

2. Pass a law in parliament keeping a provision of the maximum punishment of death sentence to prevent defaming Allah, Prophet Muhammad and Islam and smear campaigns against Muslims. 

3. Take measures for stringent punishment against self-declared atheists and bloggers, led by the so-called Shahbagh movement, and anti-Islamists who made derogatory remarks against the Prophet. 

4. Stop infiltration of all alien cultures, including shamelessness in the name of individual’s freedom of expression, anti-social activities, adultery, free mixing of male and female and candle lighting. 

5. Make Islamic education mandatory from primary to higher secondary levels cancelling the anti-Islamic women policy and anti-religion education policy. 

6. Officially declare Qadianis (Ahmadiyyas) as non-Muslim and stop their propaganda and all conspiratorial ill-moves. 

7. Stop setting up sculptures at intersections, schools, colleges and universities across the country. 

8. Lift restrictions on saying prayers in all mosques across the country, including Baitul Mukarram National Mosque, without any hassle and remove obstacles to carrying out religious activities. 

9. Stop evil efforts to spread hatred in the mind of the young generation regarding Islam through the misrepresentation of religious dresses and cultures in the media. 

10. Stop anti-Islam activities by NGOs across the country, including in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, and evil attempts of Christian missionaries for conversion. 

11. Stop attacks, mass killing, oppression and indiscriminate shooting on Alem-Ulama, devout followers of the Prophet and towhidi janata (revolutionary people). 

12. Stop threatening teachers and students of Qawmi madrasas, Islamic scholars, imams and khatibs and conspiracies against them. 

13. Free immediately all the arrested Islamic scholars, madrasa students and towhidi janata and withdraw all false cases filed against them, compensate the victims and bring the assailants to justice.

Hmm...well I seriously hope that Bangladesh does not follow the example of Pakistan. We have to raise our voice in defense of this secular movement and against such blasphemy laws that we know are used to persecute minorities and political opponents. My praise for Bangladeshi Prime Minister aside, the government has arrested four bloggers due to bearded pressure. From BBC:

At least eight popular Bangladeshi websites used by bloggers have been blacked out in protest over the arrests this week of four online writers. 

Those being held have been accused of hurting the religious sentiments of the country's

Muslim majority. 

The government has been accused by liberals of appeasing Islamists calling for tough blasphemy laws. 

Hardliners want those they perceive to be anti-Islamic bloggers to face the death penalty.
But liberals say that bloggers' freedom of speech must be preserved. The sites are mostly run by individuals or small teams. 

"Bangla Blogosphere begins blackout in protest against harassing and cracking down on bloggers," reads a notice on the home pages of one of the protesting sites inaccessible fro 24 hours from noon (0700 GMT) on Thursday. 

Detectives on Wednesday arrested blogger Asif Mohiuddin, who was attacked in January following alleged postings on the internet suspected of being derogatory to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. 

Mr Mohiuddin was remanded in custody by a court on on Thursday for three days to enable police to question him. His blog is suspended. 

His arrest came a day after police arrested three other bloggers in Dhaka facing similar allegations. 

In February blogger Ahmed Rajib Haider was killed outside his home for allegedly insulting Islam. 

Critics say that the authorities have been bullied into carrying out the arrests following threats from radical Islamist organisations. 

They have threatened to unleash anarchy if "atheist bloggers are not hanged". 

This is a political ploy to silence dissent. We have to stand up for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Most of the bloggers have denied that they are atheists. But even if they were, their lack of belief alone cannot be considered as an "insult to Islam". If you want to see an insult to Islam, then you can find bigots like the Florida pastor who repeatedly wants to burn the Quran or the guy who made the movie Innocence of Muslims. These bloggers have done nothing of the sort (otherwise these beardys would have been paraded that evidence). These issues of freedom of speech and religion, gender equality, and gay rights will repeatedly come up in the Muslim world in this coming decade. There is going to be a backlash from the conservatives. But please go and take a closer look at the 13 points to see how the backlash is going to look like. But I think the tide of history will create Muslims societies that may still be deeply religious but that will honor individual rights (including the right to take hijab and the right to refuse it). But we will have a bumpy road getting there.  

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

There is a battle going on in much of the Muslim world on the place of religion in a modern state. We are seeing an increasing number of people (mostly young) testing the boundaries of free-speech and freedom of expression. But there is also another trend where an "insult to Islam" is being used as a broad and blunt weapon for the purposes of silencing various kinds of oppositions. I wouldn't call this a backlash to free-speech debate, but this gained its own momentum from the Danish cartoon controversies and other such events. I will have a longer post on this in a few days. In the mean time, I want to highlight couple of things that are happening in Bangladesh and Egypt.

In Bangladesh, there is currently turmoil that brings together history (as per related to its bloody independence from Pakistan), politics, and the role of religion in public sphere. But within that context, the religious groups are going after "blasphemous" blogs and actually killed an atheist Bangladeshi blogger. The story is quite complicated (thought you can get the gist of it in this fantastic article), but the Islamic parties in Bangladesh are now going after "blasphemous" websites (however, they define it):

Bangladesh has widened a crackdown on allegedly blasphemous blogs after a threat by Islamists to march to the capital demanding the prosecution of atheist bloggers, an official said on Wednesday. 

The telecommunications regulator ordered two leading Internet sites to remove hundreds of posts by seven bloggers whose writings it said offended Muslims, according to its assistant director Rahman Khan. 

These writings have defamed Islam and our prophet.
The two sites — Somewhereinblog.net and Amarblog.com — have removed most of the posts, Khan said. Khan said the regulator was scrutinising other sites to identify and erase “blasphemous blogs” in an attempt to ensure religious harmony in the mainly Muslim nation. 

The move comes after Islamic groups and clerics, who have staged a series of deadly protests against atheist bloggers in recent weeks, threatened to march en masse to Dhaka on April 6 unless the bloggers are prosecuted.

In Egypt, an atheist from a Coptic Christian was sent to jail for 3-years on "blasphemy charges":

Mr Saber was initially accused of circulating links to a 14-minute trailer for the film, Innocence of Muslims, which denigrates the Prophet Muhammad. 

But he denied promoting the video and later faced charges relating to other statements critical of Islam and Christianity which police investigators allegedly found online and on his computer at his home. 

Human rights groups have called for Mr Saber's release.
There has been a proliferation of prosecutions for blasphemy in Egypt in the nearly two years since Hosni Mubarak was overthrown. Many of those targeted are Copts, who make up about 10% of the population. 

Although blasphemy has long been a criminal offence, Article 44 of the draft constitution contains a specific article prohibiting insulting prophets.

But on the flip side, you can also find this case of a former Muslim Brotherhood member putting religion on hold, and he has been able to avoid the jail (tip from Michael Murray):

What would prompt a former youth member of the Muslim Brotherhood to declare that he is putting his belief in Islam “on hold”? What would convert young people to become not only non-religious but extremely anti-theist following long periods of activism with Egypt’s ultra-conservative Wahhabi club, the Salafis? 

What I said may be surprising for many, but not for others. The past several years have witnessed every single young man or woman with a shred of critical thinking to leave the Islamist movement. Starting with the Egyptian revolution and the Islamists’ shameful position against it, young middle class educated members have ever since continued to trickle out. 

But this mere organisational friction is not the subject of this article. What I intend to expound on is more far-reaching. It’s about those often-silent people who decided to abandon faith completely as a result of their faithful experiences. 

“I’ve decided to put Islam on hold as a religion,” wrote former Muslim Brotherhood activist Osama Dorra in his blog post. “For the conflict I’ve found between some of its details and what I think is sanity, justice, and logic has reached an inconceivable limit.” 

The young Islamist dropout was courageous enough to come out with these views publicly on his blog. For days comments and shares continued to fuel the discussion. Islamists and their acolytes, who may have one day been shoulder to shoulder with Dorra, were unable to discredit his opinion as simply a fake conspiracy against Islam. Hence, I guess, they were more than cautious not to take him to court. 

In any case, Dorra’s “Flying high above religion” blog post was later followed by other articles that suggested more revisionist takes on his initial position.

All that brings to Egyptian Satirist, Bassem Youssef:

The popular Egyptian satirist Bassem Youssef has been released on bail, after questioning by prosecutors over allegations he insulted Islam and President Mohammed Morsi. 

He was ordered to pay 15,000 Egyptian pounds ($2,190; £1,440). 

Mr Youssef had spent five hours at the public prosecutor's office, a day after a warrant was issued for his arrest. 

He has faced several complaints over his show El Bernameg (The Programme), which satirises many public figures. 

On his Twitter feed, Mr Youssef said the bail conditions were related to three lawsuits, while a fourth was still being investigated. 

The case has highlighted worries about press freedoms in Egypt. 

At one point during his arrival at the prosecutor's office Mr Youssef donned an oversized academic hat, mocking one which Mr Morsi wore recently when he received an honorary doctorate in Pakistan.

Oh - boy. It is really hard to keep Pakistan out of any news even tangentially related to blasphemy. Bassem's show is based on the style of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. And sure enough, Jon Stewart   has come to his defense and has a fantastic segment that gets to the hypocrisy of Morsi (there is even an evolution joke in there). Here it is:



Actually this segment has led to a diplomatic tiff as well:

The American comedian Jon Stewart’s criticism of the Egyptian government briefly escalated into a diplomatic incident on Tuesday, as the United States Embassy in Cairo shared a link to a “Daily Show” segment on Twitter, causing the office of Egypt’s president to react with anger.

The Lede has the details and it has been following Bassem related happenings in Egypt.
And just for a taste, here is Bassem talking about charges against him in January - and he is quite funny!



This battle will continue. We should and we must support support others in the fight for freedom of speech and expression. Respect of religion is also essential. But this is where open debates are essential. But many of the recent cases of "blasphemy" or "insults to Islam" are actually based either on flimsy evidence and/or have political motivations behind them.

Read More »

by Salman Hameed

The Catholic Church had a chance to move into the 21st century, but it looks like it will wait another few decades to take that plunge:

But Cardinal Bergoglio is also a conventional choice, a theological conservative of Italian ancestry who vigorously backs Vatican positions on abortion, gay marriage, the ordination of women and other major issues — leading to heated clashes with Argentina’s current left-leaning president.

He was less energetic, however, when it came to standing up to Argentina’s military dictatorship during the 1970s as the country was consumed by a conflict between right and left that became known as the Dirty War. As many as 30,000 people were disappeared, tortured or killed by the dictatorship, and he has been accused of knowing about the abuses and failing to do enough to stop them.        

Read the NYT analysis here. Now it is still possible that the new Pope may change his stance on social issues ranging from women's clerical equality and gay marriage to issues of stem cells, abortion and contraception. I think one of the 19th century Pope's, Pius IX, moved from a relatively liberal position to a conservative one - so why not move the other way this time around? Otherwise, the Church will be taken over by the tide of time - as has been going on for the past several decades. All of this is of interest as the Muslim world also faces similar issues but without a comparable institutional structure. The lack of such an hierarchy is probably good as it may be more compatible with the fragmentary nature of the modern world. On the other hand, a religious leader like the Dalai Lama can also speed up the incorporation of a religion into the modern world. We'll see how things will go - but the Church certainly seems to be in no hurry.

And if interested, now we know how the white and black smoke is produced. The Vatican has given up its recipe - and now even you can make the announcement:

Both recipes are fairly standard pyrotechnical formulas. The white smoke, used to announce the election of a new pope, combines potassium chlorate, milk sugar (which serves as an easily ignitable fuel) and pine rosin, Vatican officials said in a statement. The black smoke, which was used Tuesday evening to signal that no one in the first round of balloting received the necessary two-thirds vote of the 115 cardinals, uses potassium perchlorate and anthracene (a component of coal tar), with sulfur as the fuel. Potassium chlorate and perchlorate are related compounds, but perchlorate is preferred in some formulations because it is more stable and safer. 

The chemicals are electrically ignited in a special stove first used for the conclave of 2005, the statement said. The stove sits in the Sistine Chapel next to an older stove in which the ballots are burned; the colored smoke and the smoke from the ballots mix and travel up a long copper flue to the chapel roof, where the smoke is visible from St. Peter’s Square. A resistance wire is used to preheat the flue so it draws properly, and the flue has a fan as a backup to ensure that no smoke enters the chapel.

Read about the recipe here.        

Read More »