&uotAbout two years ago, I walked into a large bookstore, which shall remain unnamed, that had a wide variety of Islamic books in Arabic and English. The owner had gone through some trouble to make displays of book collections around various topics. One such collection had a book at the top that caught my eye, mainly because it had the out-of-place visage of Adolph Hitler on the cover. A closer look revealed that it was an Arabic translation of "Mein Kampf". I confronted the owner and asked why such a book was on display. An embarassed look followed, then silence.

Unfortunately, this isn't an isolated case. A few of us went through various online Islamic booksellers looking for similar books that had questionable content (racism, violence, etc.). While most bookstores passed our little test with flying colors, one did not. This store not only carried one such offending book, but it ws listed in their ;Top Five" list. (The good thing is that, when confronted by us, they removed it from their catalog immediately.)

Now we hear news from Australia that some irresponsible booksellers were selling books with racist views and one promoted terrorism - complete with an endorsement by Osama bin Laden on the cover. And a small Islamic bookstore in Leeds where two of the London bombers were known to have met has been found selling jihadi videotapes. Especially in the wake of the recent attacks in London, these kinds of materials in Muslim-owned bookstores is more than just irresponsible - it perpetuates the views and violence we all claim to oppose and leaves us open to accusations of intolerance once the media finds us red-handed with these books in our hands.

So why are books like these offered for sale? Some, like the bookstore in Leeds, really want to promote violent jihad. Most, however, I found to be simply ignorant of the items they are carrying. While the typical American bookstore is staffed with people steeped in the literary arts, I found that most Muslim bookstores are run by businesspeople rather than bibliophiles. Unfortunately, they tend to place orders for a variety of books from distributors without being selective, and stock their shelves with whatever shows up. This can result in offensive books being put on display by otherwise well-intentioned people. The good news is that having a community with bad businesspeople, however unfortunate, is preferable to having a community with people who support terrorism. The bad news is that there's still a lot of trash to clean up.

Our community has two choices - we can let organizations like Freedom House rummage through our bookstores and mosques, holding up the most incriminating material they can find as evidence of "Muslim hatred", or we can be informed consumers that police our own institutions and insure that racist or violent material doesn't pollute our community.

Salaam aleikum,

While the gist of the article is somewhat valid, buying these types of books/paraphernelia should be looked at similarly as if one was hooked on drugs or addicted to gambling. Simply eliminating the supply is NOT enough, one must work to curtail and extinguish demand (something that is much harder and that takes much more time). Simply banning these books from shops wouldn't stop someone from buying them (or even downloading via file sharing programs) online.

Equally, if u wanna eliminate the jihadi mentality and acts work to eradicate and eliminate the causes and injustices that help fuel it and give it the necessary oxygen for life.

salaam aleikum,
g

Salaam aleikum,

another excellent British article which u would *never* find in cheerleading american newspapers or magazines:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1532132,00.html

You really think these bombs are a result of books and "extremists" promoting certain acts? So, what do you attribute the acts of American soldiers carrying out killings of civillians all around the planet, along with torturing some to add to the spice? Maybe it has to do with University education they've gotten, maybe we should close down the American University system that creates such a millitaristic attitude.

How absurd - but then maybe not too absurd - lets shut down these American University/Madressas that produce such horrendous killings of millions over the past few decades --- why do you not advocate that? Oh - well, those killed were "g**ks" and "sand n*****" so they don't count.

People like you who think that by getting rid of a few books, and attacking "extremists" (read: anyone these days who strongly critiques the American/British/Israeli axes) - you are going to solve these problems --- are either totally naive --- or are just plain reactionaries, reacting to every major event.

That is a good article on the guardian - and you might want to seriously begin to understand root causes and begin to address them. Otherwise, the only thing you are doing is pushing more and more people to violence as the only way that they will be heard. That is a reality, and if you don't understand that - you are just as irresponsible, incompetent, and intolerant as your counterparts that you criticize. But you are worse - because you are abdicating your responsiblity as a supposed "moderate voice." Salma Yaqoob has some good advice for people like you:

"...if Muslim leaders succumb to the pressure of censorship and fail to visibly oppose the government on certain foreign policy issues, the gap between the leaders and those they seek to represent and influence will widen, increasing the possibility of more dangerous routes being adopted by the disillusioned."

Salaams

In my view, it's not what Muslim bookshops include that's the problem, its what they DON'T include - books about Islam written by Muslim (and non-Muslim) academics working within secular Universities. I don't mean rubbish like Bernard Lewis - what about some of the social science materials or even religiously orientated texts by Islamophiles like W Montgommery Watt. Sometimes, this kind of work is better researched, better written and more readible than some of the equivalent titles published on Islamic presses.

Maybe some Muslim bookshops DO carry these kind of materials. If you know of one, let me know.

Wasalaam

Yakoub

Years ago I had an experience in a Muslim bookstore that I'll never forget. It was in East Jerusalem. Being curious I went into the store. Immediately the shopkeeper began to follow me around, very closely keeping an eye on what I was doing.

I engaged him and figured out that he was worried I would (as a non-Muslim) touch a Qur'an in an unpurified state. I've since learned more about wudu and what it means ... but at the time it was a very strange experience.

>I engaged him and figured out that he >was worried I would (as a non-Muslim) >touch a Qur'an in an unpurified state. >I've since learned more about wudu and >what it means ... but at the time it was >a very strange experience.

1. having had their land stolen, their kids shot at by rubber bullets, and their scholars assasinated via apache helicoptors -- all paid for by U.S. tax dollars - doesn't this individual also have a right to be a bit apprehensive around u?

2. Given the fact that some of your more enlightenend American brethren were busy flushing qurans down toilets in the name of protecting "freedom" and "democracy"-- can u blame him for being suspicious of you?

regards,
g

Whoa, publicdebate - what makes you think I don't understand "root causes"? Do you think that Muslims are 100% right and the West is 100% wrong? Both sides have much to change - just because this article focused on the Muslim side doesn't mean that it is incompatible with believing that "root causes" need to be addressed in the Muslim world.

There is a sickness in our community that I want to see gone - whether or not there is occupation in Iraq & Palestine, etc. There's nothing wrong with calling for a higher standard for ourselves.

gambina is an expert on making friendly da'wa!

Gambino, I think you misunderstood my tone. I was not being hostile at all.

By the way, this experience happened sometime between 1996-1999. This was before 9-11 or the issues with Guantanamo Bay. At that time I had a multitude of experiences where Palestinian Muslims showed their incredible hospitality towards me and in fact I lived in a Palestinian village for the last six months that I was there.

Guys I think somebody needs to make a clear distinction of Jihad and what took place in London. What happened in London was in my opinion against the principles of Islam but at the same time we should not forget those brothers and sisters who are wagging genuine Jihad around the world.

It seems to me that after the attacks in London anything that carries the word Jihad is suddenly forbidden and no muslim should utter that word.

Salaam aleikum,

publicdebate wrote:

>So, what do you attribute the acts of >American soldiers carrying out killings of >civillians all around the planet, along with >torturing some to add to the spice? Maybe >it has to do with University education >they've gotten, maybe we should close >down the American University system that >creates such a millitaristic attitude.

actually there *is* a terrorist training camp in the U.S. here is a link describing its purpose and function:

http://www.newhumanist.com/soa.html

and how, due to European press coverage, they tried to hide it here:

http://www.lossless-audio.com/usa/index0.php?page=2049138216.htm

sadly, only non-Muslim priests and victims of the terrorists produced from here are calling attention to it (the so-called toothless American Muslim organizations, "groups", and sufi "sheikhs" never said anything about this in the jingoistic run up to bombing Afghanistan or since then).

also, danithew most of the radicalization happened long before 9/11 -- there was a planned genocide in Bosnia (with an arms embargo put on to expedite the process, 1991 Desert Storm, and 12 years of sanctions (with one Iraqi child dying every 5.5 minutes throughout the 1990s). Not even worth mentioning the $20 billion or so funded to israel to build throughout the 1990s for the very same settlements which are now being "renegotiated". Indeed, Bin Laden's "Declaration of War" letter first appeared in 1996 actually and should be understood with all of this as a backdrop.

What all of these elements have in common is that rather than empty rhetoric of "freedom", "democracy", "tolerance" and "human rights" they show that power is predicated on human beings still weighing less than oil, profits, power, and money.
Stripping away their humanity, rationalizes one's conscience in killing them off and watching them die a slow, painful death.

Funny it sounds like the same logic as the 9/11 hijackers or the London train bombers - no?

salaam aleikum,
g

Gambino, I don't deny that much was happening in the years leading up to the events of 9-11. You are right about that.

Just the same, I feel that there is an entirely new level of hatred and anger towards the United States that arose after the U.S. changes in foreign policy that took place to 9-11. The invasions of Afghanistan and more particularly Iraq, have changed the tone of things in a substantial manner. And certainly Ariel Sharon's rise to the prime-ministership in Israel and the U.S. continued support of Israel during that time have also contributed to a new level of vitriol.

>>What all of these elements have in common is that rather than empty rhetoric of "freedom", "democracy", "tolerance" and "human rights" they show that power is predicated on human beings still weighing less than oil, profits, power, and money. Stripping away their humanity, rationalizes one's conscience in killing them off and watching them die a slow, painful death.
Funny it sounds like the same logic as the 9/11 hijackers or the London train bombers - no?<<

Interesting point. The logics - namely, the projection of power by whatever means - are comparable in methodology, and arguably in ends, but not, i think, in their practical consequences. The more i read, the more it seems to me that the moral equivalency between the acts of the hegemonic powers and those who seek the establishment of a different, reactionary theological hegemony, is only resolvable in terms of practical outcome. In other words, at the systems level: what sort of political system would be the result of a "victory" by either side?

I am deeply biased given my history and where i have resided. I have to say that i would prefer the messy pluralistic knot that is the western ideal, over the reassertion of any sort of false 'purity', be it religiously, ethnically, geographically, and/or politically defined. This alone would cause me to prefer the 'victory' of the hegemony over its challengers.

But at what cost? It seems to me that either 'victory' would be hollow indeed if won by force and bloodshed.

Is this a series of battles between those who wish the dissolution of nation-states into a pluralistic global brotherhood and those who wish for the safety of the reestablishment of boundaries? Or is that merely another way of saying Empire vs. its unwilling subjects? I think these may in fact be two different conflicts, too often conflated by both sides, each taking place within both systems.

The west obviously has a few of its own issues with 'purity' yet to be worked out as well.

(cont'd)

My sense is that many Muslims also would prefer the 'messy knot' of pluralism. Islam contains within itself a blueprint for the structuring of such a society.

So, how to obtain justice? What is truly tragic is that the easy militarism of Bush (who lightly joked about those to be executed on his watch in Texas, who lightly joked about the missing WMDs at a press dinner,) constitutes, in its practical effect, a too-easy relationship with the death of others. The principles of democracy which make it great: universal respect for the rights of persons; a dispassionate ambition to fairness by the state; full participation and input by the governed, have been done violence by his acquiescence to the degradation of prisoners' rights; by the paternalistic secrecy and doublespeak practiced by his administration in its implementation of policy; by the quick invocation of military power to solve a problem far more subtle and complex than arms could ever handle, by doing even that poorly and thus with disastrous consequences for the innocent.

These and other variances from principle have the same effect as Qaeda's departure from a rigorous and self-scrutinizing understanding of Islam: good causes, horrifyingly inappropriate means.

The Muslim world has plenty of internal challenges to occupy it; these have been mentioned plenty on this site in both articles and posts, and don't need to be rehearsed yet again.

As for the west, it desperately needs to find a way to summon from itself a commitment to justice that is commensurate with its power. This is not simply altruism. The best-kept non-secret about this Empire is that, when it is run the way it was intended to be, its edges are soft. By design, it contains within itself the seeds of its own demise - or better put, its decentralisation. Witness the vulnerability of the dollar to the value of the yuan, the dependence of domestic political choices made in Washington upon those made in Delhi. The commitment to justice, or lack thereof, formed by those with the power at the moment will either be beneficial to all or a curse to all down the road.

Western history is littered with the strange and terrible spectacle of blood shed for high principle. This is a cycle whose time is now, and has always been, come and gone.

I don't see anything wrong with Islamic bookstores carrying objectionable material. I mean, you can get copies of 'Mein Kampf', almost anywhere (like Amazon.com) these days. The problem is with Muslim booksellers glorifying such a book, instead of saying "this is terrible but let's know about and understand it as such, then work to dispel hatred, bigotry, violence, priviledge, etc as Islam emphatically directs us to do".

Two points that stuck out:
1.
>The best-kept non-secret about this Empire >is that, when it is run the way it was >intended to be, its edges are soft

I believe this policy planning quote by George Kennan (the father of the containment policy and Marshall Plan) sums it up best:

"We have about 60% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about such vague and unreal objectives as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratisation. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better."

- George Kennan [Director of Policy Planning U.S.State Dept.]

So to claim that this militarism is something that is recent or simply a product of Bush is a gross oversimplification. Actually, he is following the blueprint which has been laid down since the U.S. left it's "splendid isolation" phase in post WWI.

2.
>I am deeply biased given my history and >where i have resided. I have to say that i >would prefer the messy pluralistic knot that >is the western ideal, over the reassertion >of any sort of false 'purity', be it religiously, >ethnically, geographically, and/or politically >defined. This alone would cause me to >prefer the 'victory' of the hegemony over >its challengers.

I guess u could simply say that i, as a Muslim, am biased for my own reasons and history in preferring an alternative to this hegemonic nonsense, especially when:

a. Islam had a functioning system of govt. which stayed in existence (despite irregularities) for nearly 1400 years. This system at it's zenith delivered the world
Andalusia spain (where Christians, Jews, and Muslims lived in peace, unlike the colonial cancer of israel), gave the world algebra, geometry, physics, and arabic numerals (the very basis for the 0s/1s of the Internet) and which led the world out of the dark of the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance.

(cont'd next post)

(cont'd from previous post)

It's perversion in its current state by these practitioners of violence in its name, is eclipsed only by the monumentous decline of what is vs. what was.

a bit on it's history:

http://www.islamicity.com/Mosque/ihame/Sec3.htm

and the structure and function:

http://www.islamic-state.org/

b. Besides material benefits, what is never mentioned is that as a trade off democracy has given us WWI/WWII (hitler being "democratically" elected), the use of atomic weapons, poison gas, Jim Crow, agent orange, a black man being 3/5 of a white person, AIDS, the 'right' for legalized sodomy, the exploitation of women, famine, mass conflicts around the globe, and an economic system that simply cannot exist but for exploitation of resources and people to feed an appetite that is never quite satiated (something Marx was horrifyingly accurate in describing even though his solution was bankrupt). Indeed these quotes sum it up best:

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do." -

Samuel P. Huntington, Clash of Civilizations

"... somehow we find it hard to sell our values, namely that the rich should plunder the poor."

- former US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles

ÏA democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.Ó

- Thomas Jefferson

"Islam is the best chance the poor of the planet have for any hope of decency in their lives. It is the one revolutionary force that cares about humanity."

[1998] - Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark

Again, reading the Oxford historian, Niall Ferguson, one should expect more, not less, violence to come as he says that empires need it to perpetuate their influence and ensure their continued existence.

In this context, it is only natural that a hegemonic empire such as the U.S. would initiate wars and demonize any potential rival, be it communism, islam, or even China.
What is needed is blunt and straight talk on this subject to the American people, fully discussing all of its ramifications (which corp. controlled media is not likely to do anytime soon).

salaam aleikum,
g

There is exreme enmity between much of the Islamic world and Israel. So it seems to be a deliberately spiteful act for an Islamic bookstore to sell a book by the man who led the movement that killed the most Jewish people.

"Kampf", like the Arabic word "jihad", is often translated into English as "struggle." It isn't difficult to imagine that some Muslims make a deliberate connection between Hitler's "kampf" and their own "jihad" against Israel's Jewish people (or perhaps, for some, Jews in general).

An Islamic bookstore is supposed to represent certain values. I would be appalled and amazed if an Islamic bookstore displayed pornography. It should be just as appalling that an Islamic bookstore would prominently display a book by one of the ultimate symbols of genocidal hatred.

Amanullah: You cannot deal with the sickness without understanding the reasons for that sickness... your article only addresses the sympthoms - nothing else.

Iraq, Afghanistan and other United States terrorism (should be blame the American University system for those, or the war books at Barnes and Nobles - that are nothing more than fancy versions of the "war texts" you found in Islamic book stores).

These forms of terrorisms are just the latest in decades of extreme injustices. And if Freedom House can do its business - why can't Alt.Muslim take a tour of Barnes and Nobles and Borders and identify the pro-war trash that is floating around over there... You are American are you not? There is a very deep sickness in America - deal with that as well, and then you'll get some crediblity.

If you want to actually have any impact, then you have to begin with addressing the causes - and then give alternatives that Muslim youth and not so youth - can engage in. What is your alternative?

You call yourself "alt.Muslim" but all you offer is narrow criticism - without talking about well, what should we do now? Hundreds of thousands killed in just Iraq, in just two years. What is your solution to that extremely dire and dangerous situation?