Ground Zero Mosque is a “Trojan Horse”:  Potential platform for the Islamist agenda

Sat, 21 Aug 2010 07:55:50 -0400

Farzana Hassan
AverroesPress.Com

As the controversy around the Ground-Zero Islamic Centre rages in New York and the rest of the USA, the response from the traditional leadership of the Muslim community has been predictable. Belligerence and arrogance.

There comes a time in a religious community’s life when it must face its demons thoughtfully and honestly. For North American Muslims that time has long passed. They have shied away from much needed introspection on lingering issues, resulting in their failure to recognize the sure threat of radicalism within.

For starters, Muslims must ponder the meaning of religious moderation. They must reflect on why certain categories of Muslims fail to meet that criterion.

Any Muslim who upholds Sharia, a man-made system of religious stipulations cannot be deemed a moderate. Nor is anyone intending to establish a version of an Islamic state in North America a religious progressive.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the man behind the construction of a gigantic Islamic Centre near Ground zero is one such Muslim.

One must question why the Imam deliberately chose a site so close to the 9/11 site. Is he so naive as to think people do not, at least in part, blame radical Islam for 9/11? What about the sentiments of Americans who lost loved ones in the brutal AlQaeda attack nine years ago?

Though the Imam claims to promote moderate Islam at the centre, Muslims of all persuasions--radicals, conservatives, orthodox, and self-proclaimed progressives will undoubtedly congregate at the mosque.

Imam Fasial Rauf should pay heed to words of wisdom coming from the 85-year old Indian Islamic scholar, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan. In his book, Indian Muslims: The Need for a Positive Outlook, the respected Muslims scholar writes:

“Muslims are commanded by God 'to endure their persecution' (14:12), so that a congenial atmosphere may be maintained between them and non-Muslims. How it is possible then that Islam could approve of such acts on the part of believers as would ultimately vitiate mutual relationships. For the above reason, it is incumbent upon Muslims to refrain totally from building a mosque at a site which could become, today or tomorrow, a controversial issue between the two parties.”

And even before its birth, the Ground-Zero Islamic Centre has become much more than the “controversial issue” the Indian Islamic scholar warns of.

If and when the mosque is built, will Imam Rauf screen every Muslim entering the mosque for possible radical opinions? Does he plan to develop a set of criteria to determine who is or isn’t a radical? How is he so sure he will be able to keep radical Muslims out of the mosque?

Those who bristle at such suggestions may wish to consider the following:
It is a commonly known fact that orthodox Islamic organizations and mosques receive major funding from Saudi Arabia.

The Wahabbi ideology exported by Saudi Arabia endorses the doctrine of violent jihad. No wonder the Imam enjoys support for his project from people like Nihad Awad of CAIR, an organization designated as an unindicted co-conspirator by the US Justice Department in the Texas Terror Trial where all the accused were convicted on all charges.

How will Imam Abdul Rauf live up to this claim of fostering a culture of tolerance and dialogue in the Islamic centre?

Also worrisome are the Imam’s own pronouncements on the funding of the project. In a statement to Ashraq AlAwsat, an Arabic newspaper, he declared that the project would receive funds from ordinary Muslims as well as from various Islamic countries. Will the donors who lavish heavy sums on the mosque not wish to impose their ideologies on the mosque organizers and those they serve?

The Imam has set the stage for a Trojan Horse, with all its financial and ideological infrastructure, to be established in the heart of a primary Western centre of tremendous media and socio-economic consequence. He has undoubtedly provided the means and cover for more formidable and hostlie forces to gain credibility, respectability and influence there.

In light of all this, one can only dread the building of a thirteen-story Islamic centre with such genuine potential for radicalization. Imam Abdul Rauf must reevaluate his objectives for the mosque. Goodwill, compassion and empathy demand that he withdraw his plans to construct an Islamic centre near ground zero. Prudence demands he anticipate the many pitfalls of constructing an enormous Islamic centre—one that can easily turn into a public platform for radical Islamists. Both overtly and surreptitiously, these goons will use the venue to propagate their hate-filled agenda.

The contemplated Islamic center near ground zero is an ill-conceived idea. ----------
Farzana Hassan is the author of Islam, Women and the Challenge of Today. She sits on the board of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

Pakistan’s senior scribe Irfan Hussain on the NYC Mosque: Is it Faith or Fitna?

Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:46:34 -0400

By Irfan Husain

Imagine, for a moment, that a group of Christians asked for approval to build a church close to the site of an iconic building in Pakistan some of their fellow-believers had destroyed, killing thousands. How would we have responded?

Actually, this scenario is so implausible so as to be practically meaningless. The sad reality is that non-Muslims in Pakistan live on sufferance, and it would be unthinkable for them to even dream of expanding their places of worship, let alone constructing new ones. A few years ago, I recall writing about the trials and tribulations of Christians trying to build a church in Islamabad despite having received official permission. They were bullied by a local mullah, and found no support from the city administration. Since then, things have got worse for the minorities.

The ongoing furore over what is being called the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ is another reminder of how civilised societies treat those citizens who do not subscribe to the majority faith. Much to his credit, New York’s Mayor Bloomberg (a Jew, by the way) approved the project, despite opposition from right-wing groups. It is President Barack Obama who has been a disappointment to liberals with his equivocation over the issue: after endorsing it at an iftar event for Muslim ambassadors, he backtracked swiftly in the face of shrill and expected criticism from the right.

In a controversial article that appeared recently in the Ottawa Citizen (Mischief in Manhattan; 7 August), Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah, two Muslims who live in Canada, argued that proceeding with the project is tantamount to fitna, or mischief-making, an act prohibited in Islam. The authors have been attacked for their stance on the Internet, with readers accusing them of taking a reactionary line.

The truth is that the issue has become a highly divisive one, with 70% of Americans opposing the project. Before readers think this reflects poorly on secular attitudes in the country, Raza and Fatah remind us that there are presently some 30 mosques in the New York area. The point the authors make is that the location of the proposed Muslim community centre gives offence to many Americans as it is a couple of blocks from where the Twin Towers stood before 9/11:

“Let’s not forget that a mosque is an exclusive place of worship for Muslims and not an inviting community centre. Most Americans are wary of mosques due to the hard-core rhetoric that is used in pulpits. And rightly so. As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.”

For weeks now, this controversy has been in the news with talking heads on TV from across the political spectrum reviling or defending the project, initially dubbed the Cordoba Initiative. Critics have attacked the name of the centre for serving as a reminder of Muslim conquests in Europe. In response, the developer has said the name has been changed.

In such an emotionally charged debate, it’s hard to be rational. Logically, the location should be immaterial: after all, there is already a mosque in the area, not far from Ground Zero. So why should another make any difference? The truth is that the 9/11 attacks continue to resonate deeply in America, so what’s the point in insisting on a project that is like a red flag to a bull?

The project is expected to cost around $100 million, and many think the bulk of the money will come from Saudi Arabia, even though the source of the funds has not been made public yet. If this is indeed so, Raza and Fatah consider this would be a slap in the face of Americans as “nine of the jihadis in the Twin Towers calamity were Saudis.”

More to the point for me is that the Saudis have been funding mosques and madresas around the world, in addition to paying for chairs for Islamic studies at major universities. All these have been used to project the country’s official Wahabi version of Islam that has fuelled the rising tide of extremism and jihadi fervour. Against this backdrop, the question to ask is whether we need yet another such mosque.

Another question has been posed by Raza and Fatah: why can’t the $100 million be put to use to help people in Darfur and Pakistan? This is especially relevant in the context of the floods that are devastating much of Pakistan today. The third question is about reciprocity: if the Saudis can aggressively spread their ideology abroad, why can’t other beliefs build their places of worship in Saudi Arabia?

Currently, it is illegal to build a church, synagogue or temple in the country. Even importing copies of the Bible or the Torah is forbidden. Granted, Saudi Arabia is not an example of tolerance and freedom of worship. In fact, it is one of the most benighted societies on the planet where the royal family rules with an iron hand in partnership with the clergy. Nevertheless, every time the government or individual members of the ruling House of Saud wish to fund a religious centre abroad, they should be asked to open up their country to other faiths.

Liberal Americans will respond – to their everlasting credit – that their constitutional guarantee of freedom of worship should not be hostage to medieval attitudes in Saudi Arabia or elsewhere. Ironically, given the choice between living in a theocracy or in a secular country like America, Muslims have voted with their feet in the hundreds of thousands. Most of them are happier in their adopted home, and are free to worship as they please.

This is America’s major strength, and it would be a pity if the events of 9/11 were to erode it. Despite the strong religious strand in American society, it welcomes all faiths. All the more reason, then, for everybody in this melting pot to be respectful of others.

As Raza and Fatah remind their co-religionists, “The Koran commands Muslims to ‘Be considerate when you debate with People of the Book’… Building a mosque at a place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive; it is undoubtedly an act of fitna.”
------------
Irfan Hussain is a columnist for Pakistan’s leading English language daily, DAWN. He also writes under the pen name Mazdaq

The Burka is to the Female Face what Graffiti is to the Taj Mahal - Tarek Fatah

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:01:49 -0400

July 28, 2010

Poll finds most Canadians want to Ban the Burka

Laura Payton
The Toronto SUN

OTTAWA - Canada should ban burkas in public, according to more than half of the people polled exclusively for QMI Agency.

The Leger Marketing online poll found 54% of people surveyed said the government should follow France's lead and not allow women to wear burkas in public for safety and transparency reasons.

Only 20% of respondents said Canada shouldn't consider a ban because it's an issue of freedom of religion and freedom of expression, and 15% said it didn't affect them either way.

Older Canadians were more likely to agree with a ban, with 71% of those 65 years and older choosing that option. Only 40% of Canadians 18-34 years old said burkas should be banned.

Leger Marketing vice-president Dave Scholz said the poll surprised staff at the research firm. "This is Canada -- we don't ban anything," he said.
Sentiment was particularly strong in Quebec, where the debate over reasonable accommodation for new Canadians has been raging, with 73% of respondents saying they want a ban.

Morton Weinfeld, a sociology professor at McGill University, said the strong response in Quebec could be a result of spending 50 years cutting down the place of Catholicism in the province. "Why should they fill that void with Islam?" he said. "Quebec is perhaps the most strongly feminist place in Canada and the burka is a strongly anti-woman phenomenon."

Weinfeld said people should be careful when interpreting the survey results because the burka is the most extreme Islamic covering. He said nobody knows how many Canadians wear the burka.

The survey question didn't explain the difference between the burka, which covers the entire face, the niqab, which has a slit for the eyes, and the hijab, a headscarf.

The poll shows there's a need for more outreach and education, said the executive director of the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations.
"It's understandable that practices that might be unfamiliar to people cause tension and unease," said Ihsaan Gardee, adding it's a minority within a minority who cover their faces. "When it's a woman's choice to practise a sincerely held religious belief ... it must be protected under the charter, provided it does not infringe on the rights of others," he said.

Muslim Canadian Congress founder Tarek Fatah, however, has been pushing for a ban on burkas. "Progressive and liberal Muslims have been leading the fight against this abomination for the last 100 years," he said. "This is one of the ugliest aspects of political Islam that has been imported into Canada and other western countries," Fatah added.

The web survey asked 1,526 people to choose the statement that best reflects their view of France's move to ban women from wearing a burka in public. The survey was conducted July 19-22. Leger doesn't measure margin of error in online surveys because it's not a random sample.

QUESTION: Which statement best reflects your view on France's government trying to ban burkas in public?

54% Canada should follow France. Nobody should be able to cover their faces. It is a matter of public safety and business transparency.
20% Canada shouldn't even consider banning burkas. It's an issue of freedom of religion and expression
15% It doesn't affect me either way
11% Not sure
1% No answer

Percentage of population who think burkas should be banned:

Quebec - 73%
Atlantic Canada - 54%
Ontario - 53%
Alberta - 45%
Saskatchewan, Manitoba - 43%
British Columbia - 39%

Due to rounding, not all figures add up to 100%

Richard Landau interviews Tarek Fatah about his book Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State

Thu, 15 Jul 2010 04:46:09 -0400

Prof. Janice Stein at the University of Toronto says, “Tarek Fatah has written a provocative and challenging book, which is a must-read for anyone who cares about these issues,” while Prof. Pervez Hoodboy of Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan writes, “Fatah argues passionately for universalism instead of exclusivism, integration instead of ghettoism, and makes a powerful appeal for the silent majority of Muslims to speak out before it is too late. This work of courage and daring needs to be read widely.”

In this interview, Richard Landau, host of the CTS-YV show, Faith Journal talks to author Tarek Fatah about his book Chasing a Mirage and the difference between An Islamic State and A State of Islam

The case for barring Dr. Zakir Naik: Rob Breakenridge chats with Tarek Fatah

Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:27:12 -0400

Friends,

On June 18, 2010, some Muslim Canadians wrote to the government of Canada asking Ottawa to not allow the Indian Islamist televangelist from entering Canada. This was after the British government also told the Indian cleric, he was not welcome to Britain.

On Monday, it was confirmed that Dr. Zakir Naik had been informed by the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi that his visa for Canada had been cancelled.

To discuss this and other issues, I chatted with Calgary Radio host, Rob Breakenridge of 770AM.

Have a listen.

Tarek

The Slaves of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates: Will a Flotilla sail to save them?

Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:01:24 -0400

For months, the BBC’s Ben Anderson hung out around the glittering, insane towers springing up in Dubai trying to infiltrate the community of expatriate workers who are putting them up. What he found when he finally got in was that the jewel of the Arab world is almost entirely built upon imported slave labor.

Watch this painful documentary.
http://www.vbs.tv/watch/vbs-news/the-slaves-of-dubai

Pictures of Prophet Muhammad: Four Muslim Canadians discuss the challenges facing the followers of Islam on TVO

Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:13:54 -0400

Friends,

Recently, Comedy Central censored a South Park episode's featured depiction of Prophet Muhammad.

To understand the complexities of the issue and why Muslims react with such violence when their Prophet is depicted in any form, the TVO Network in Ontario, Canada invited four Muslim Canadians to discuss the issue with host Steve Paikin.

Joining me in this discussion were Raheel Raza, Hussain Hamdani and Yasser Haddara

Enjoy the debate.

Tarek

Mass Murder in Pakistan: MCC urges Ottawa to list Jamaat-e-Islami and Muslim Brotherhood as terrorists

Sat, 29 May 2010 17:43:53 -0400

Muslim Canadian Congress urges Islamic organizations, they must repudiate the charge of heresy hurled at Ahmadiya Muslims

http://www.MuslimCanadianCongress.Org

TORONTO - The Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC) has urged Islamic organizations in Canada and the USA to declare without any ambiguity that Ahmadiya Muslims are part and parcel of the Islamic fabric and just one more sect among the hundreds that make up the Ummah.

In a statement condemning the slaughter on Friday of nearly one hundred Ahmadiya Muslims in two mosques in Pakistan, the MCC said, the time for ritualistic denunciations of terrorism is now over. "It is time for Muslims in Canada to step up to the plate and recognize the fact that by demonizing minority Islamic sects as non-Muslim, they have contributed to the crimes against humanity being committed by death-cult jihadi terrorists acting in the name of Islam," said MCC vice president Salma Siddiqui.

Only a day earlier, Siddiqui and MCC founder Tarek Fatah had met with leaders of the Canada's Ahmadiya Muslim community to discuss questions of security and safety in light of rising anti-Ahmadiya propaganda not just in Pakistan, but right here in Canada. "It is sad that within hours of our meeting we were faced with the nightmare unfolding in the so-called Islamic republic of Pakistan," Ms. Siddiqui added.

The MCC statement said Islamic leaders in Canada have not only declared the Ahmadiya Muslims as heretic, they also refer to the Ismaili Muslims as not real Muslims and mock their practices as unislamic and unworthy of respect.

The MCC statement said, "It is a pity that the only two sects of Islam that have committed themselves to peace and reconciliation are today labelled 'unislamic' by the mainstream mosque establishment in North America and their mentors in Saudi Arabia and Iran."

In the statement, the MCC also blamed the major media outlets in Pakistan for inflaming the rhetoric against Ahmadiya, Ismaili and Shia Muslims. In particular, the MCC pointed out GEO Television that is seen across the USA, Canada and the UK. This network has become the voice of al-Qaeda and the Taliban and spreads hate against these communities as well as against non-Muslims and is spreading this message inside Canada. GEO Television has created an incendiary climate of fear among Pakistan’s Muslim minority sects as well non-Muslim religious minorities.

The MCC statement said it is also deeply troubled by the links between Pakistan's fanatic jihadi outfits and the Muslim Brotherhood, the Jamaat-e-Islami who have affiliates in the USA and Canada. It called upon the Canadian government to declare the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Muslim Brotherhood along with Jaish-e-Muhammad, Sipah Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi as terrorist organizations for their support of Al Qaeda and the Taliban

The MCC urges Ottawa to bar the entry in Canada of anyone associated with these groups and to ensure their Canadian affiliates are monitored to ensure they do not pose a threat to liberal and progressive Muslims as well as Ahmadiya and Ismaili Muslims in Canada. The Jamaat-e-Islami in particular has a network across Canada and is spreading a harsh and hostile attitude among Muslim Canadian youth towards non-Muslims and Canada.

"The Canadian affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Jamaat-e-Islami are no less hostile towards minority Muslim sects and the West, but have developed the ability to watch what they say as they build their power base through their infiltration of the media, political parties and their takeover of this country's mosque establishment," said Ms. Siddiqui.

- 30 -

For more information:
In Toronto, call Tahir Gora at 905-320-0906
In Ottawa, call Salma Siddiqui at 613-864-4306

Expelled from Spain to Turkey:  Guler Orgun’s journey from Judaism to Islam.

Tue, 25 May 2010 19:05:10 -0400

Friends,

This is a film, narrated in the traditional Ladino language of the Sephardic Jewish people. Güler Orgun tells us how her family found a new home in the Ottoman Empire after being expelled from Spain in the late 15th century.

We learn why her parents converted to Islam, and how Güler herself later came to find her Jewish roots again - before she married a Muslim man.

Enjoy the 18-minute film.

Tarek

Ground Zero Mosque is a “Trojan Horse”: Potential platform for the Islamist agenda