Sometime in February 1989, about a dozen or so Muslim community leaders from around the country met in New York City to discuss the controversy caused by Salman Rushdie's postmodern screed called The Satanic Verses. After long discussion, delegates crafted a statement affirming "the freedom of thought and expression guaranteed to all people in this country," yet claiming that "it is hightly imprudent and inconsiderate for an individual to completely ignore the religious sensitivities of his fellows in humanity while exercising his freedoms." The statement went on to say that Islam "does not condone violence or the incitement to violence directed against [The Satanic Verses'] author and those associated with its publication." This meeting, I was told, was an idea thought of and largely paid for by a wealthy businessman.

Sometime afterward, a committee was formed to further discuss the essence of the Rushdie controversy. After a couple of weeks of occasional conference calls, the committee concluded that the person and life of Prophet Muhammad was not very well represented in the English language and that the impact The Satanic Verses would potentially have on the public understanding of the Prophet and Islam in general is empowered to a large degree by this dearth of relevant literature. The available body of literature in English on the life the Prophet, besides the incendiary portrayals in many public school history texts, was either of orientalist vintage (mostly academic and crusading in tone) or of Muslim-world vintage (mostly third-world in production, menancingly weak in language and style, and long on sermonizing, short on soul and depth), the notable and peerless exception being Martin Lings' biography of the Prophet, which many committee members never heard of. I was on this committee. And its "findings" were hardly stunning, uneffecting the earth's rotation. But the solution the committee prescribed�to produce authentic source materials about the Prophet Muhammad�unearthed for all to see a more important, if not pathetic, "finding," namely, the existence of an authoritarian notion that a committee can come to a conclusion, push a button, and expect the faithful to run to their word processors and write a book or books�produce literature, in other words.

While this committee focused on the Prophet, the attitude, as I have seen it throughout my Muslim committee life, pervades deeply through a generation of Muslim institutional leadership that is, thank God, starting to dissipate. Meanwhile, the impact on the literary front is remarkably stunting. I felt then, as I feel now, that my brothers on the committee were living with a contemptible notion of the relationship between religion and culture. Like a snowflake in Hell, the committee evaporated. Nothing was accomplished. The sun rose as expected.

Now cartoonists have had their day. The cartoons are indeed disfigurements of the Noble Prophet. So they offended a lot of Muslims. Because these Muslims were offended that someone would carelessly associate the Prophet with violence, many Muslims went out and made violence. Now, it could be me, but I find that odd.

The overreactions to these cartoons that I have seen show an unsightliness that is antithetical to the personality and message of Prophet Muhammad. But what the intense dudgeon does reveal is a funk uncovered by the cartoons, a funk perhaps associated with a variety of things, like economic and political cul-de-sacs systemic in the Muslim east. The intelligentsia of the Muslim world needs to honestly unpack the meaning of the reactions to these cartoons because clearly something else is afoot.

Nearly every Muslim knows that disparagement of the Prophet of Islam is hardly new. Just as Medieval Europe created fear-fantasies about Jews, "Christ-killers" who apparently ate children, so too did they produce a miasma of animus directed toward the Prophet Muhammad.

Karen Armstrong points out, in her biography of the Prophet, that the energy against the Prophet Muhammad was not so much as a reaction to the marshal and political prowess of the world Islamicate as it was a theological quandary: "How had God allowed this impious faith to prosper? Could it be that he had deserted his own people." An explanation was required as to how this religion could have been so triumphant, producing a civilization of incomparable breadth that was at once prayerful and cosmopolitan.

Eighth century "biographies" of the Prophet Muhammad appeared at the outset of Islam's spread. The polemics kept coming, penned along the way by such venerable names as Dante, Voltaire, and, more recent, translators of the Muslim scripture, such as Rev. Rodwell. If the polemics failed to reach the level of theology, they at the very least have become a cultural meme that has survived to this day. Armstrong says, "In the West we have a long history of hostility towards Islam that seems as entrenched as our anti-Semitism, which in recent years has seen a disturbing revival in Europe. At least, however, many people have developed a healthy fear of this ancient prejudice since the Nazi Holocaust. But the old hatred of Islam continues to flourish on both sides of the Atlantic and people have few scruples about attacking this religion, even if they know little about it."

The Muslim response to the Medieval venom was, in the main, intellectual, secure, and civil - a reaction that reflects not weakeness but "psychological invincibility" of Muslims of the time, as the late Prof. Fazlur Rahman (University of Chicago) so aptly observed in his book Islam. The violent reactions to these cartoons today reflect, I'm afraid, vincibility.

Now this needs to be explored.

FallenChristian: I am sure you are most capable of using Google (as much as it censors). I am sure you can use a library. I know you are not stupid, far from it you are obviously intelligent.

The point being made here is that of DIVIDE & CONQUER... and no I won't paste a link. The Muslims are being divided up and conquered, piecemeal. There are those who are joining the bandwagon without actually engaging their own common sense, and others who are actually making an effort at Unification of the believers.

The establishment of an Israeli state in Palestine was about as justified as establishing such a state in Ireland. The Israeli Jews are Ashkenazim Kazhar Jews who converted to Judaism in the 8th / 9th Centrury, from the Black Sea, Eastern Europe and the Caucuses as opposed to Sephards. They have as much claim over that land as any European has.

Justanothervoice: You said The over arching point of contention is that the rest of the world is suppossed to say or not say, behave or not to behave in accordance with the Islamic faith!! There is no tennent of Islam that is contrary to any rule of law within any Islamic or non-Islamic country. If so, quote it.

We ask for free speech, so does the law. The limit of free speech is when it abuses or insults others... as also states the law. If you are in the US, check your constitution; if in Europe, the Human rights conventions which are embodied in Statute within every European country.

>I am sure you are most capable of using Google (as much as it censors). I am sure you can use a library. I know you are not stupid, far from it you are obviously intelligent.

Well...I did try googling this top for about an hour in different ways with different searches and came up with nothing. Since Trevor seems so familiar with the Nazification of Isreal, I would think he would have SOME evidence to support his claims.

>We ask for free speech, so does the law. The limit of free speech is when it abuses or insults others... as also states the law. If you are in the US, check your constitution;

The First Amendment of the US Constitution reads as such: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This is actually a large issue in the US besides cartoongate because of the puritanical crackdown by the FCC. They think that Janet Jackson's breast is far worse than pictures of Muhammed and as such fined a TV station $500,000 for showing it. As far as I know, there have been no fines for derogatory religious images here in the States.

Venger, nice side step of reality. The reality of clerics/immans of Islam calling for the beheading of the cartoonist. Is that a tennant of Islam?? I still have yet to find where in the Quran it states not to depict mohammed in a cartoon?? Yes, I have read parts of it and am slowly getting through most of it. The hadith and surrah....thats next.

Lets just talk a little about shariah and how one example of it is very contrary to a law with-in a non-islamic/governement country.

Adultery is punishable by death under shariah.........

This just might be another example of how shariah (tennants of Isalm) is contrary to existing laws in a non-islamic controlled government country.

British born Norman Kember, two unnamed Canadians, and an undisclosed American have been taken hostage in Iraq. They were part of a Christian peace mission to Iraq. If they have been taken hostage by a Salaafist organization (such as al Qaeda or Ansar al Sunna) with a Shura council they will certainly be put to death. The penalty for proselyzing under Islamic law is death.

You guys are here just to spread your propaganda....

Avenger's comments are 100% right.

What cleric asked for the beheading of the catrtoonist? Stop talking rubbish. Even if someone did it would be contrary to Shariah. Adultery was punishable by death under ALL the people of the book's law. This was even true at the time of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (pbuh). He was told AT THE TIME that they were to no longer stone adulterers. Look it up if you dare.... it's in the Quran.

Gay marriage, sodomy, drug taking, free sex, alcoholism, pig-eating, gambling, pornography - all condemned by ALL the holy prophets and ALL utterly allowed in the US with complete permissiveness - none of it is unlawful. The people of the US seem to forget the lessons of history in the Torah, Bible and Quran where God just keeps on wiping people of the Earth who just didn't listen and thought they knew better! Keep going... keep going...More fool you! Hilarious.

Lastly, according to Shariah, prisoners of war are meant to be treated like guests. Any variance from this is CONTRARY to Shariah.

You guys don't know what the hell you're talking about!!!

>Lastly, according to Shariah, prisoners of war are meant to be treated like guests. Any variance from this is CONTRARY to Shariah.

You mean like the treatment of Nick Berg?

A Pakistani cleric on Friday announced a $1 million bounty for killing a cartoonist who drew Prophet Muhammad, as thousands joined street rallies across the country and authorities arrested scores of protesters. http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=4287

I retract the statement of a cleric calling for the beheading, he just called for killing them.......

And your point is....

its all contrary to Islamic Law... their provoking was wrong and the calling for heads to roll is also wrong.

And ??? Oh right.... the point is that Divide and Conquer strategies work.... thanks, WE KNOW we have seen the British Empire in action. It's well documented. At the end of the day, if one party is willing to stoop low enough in stirring the pot, you can pretty much get anyone to kick five shades of sh*t out of somone else.

Question is... will the Muslims prove "them" wrong?

>its all contrary to Islamic Law... their provoking was wrong and the calling for heads to roll is also wrong.

I am glad that you agree then. What are you and other Muslims doing to stop these people that are misusing the name of Islam?

Lol Fallen,

You show your true colours. Your agenda is to get "us" to agree with you and then to get "us" to fight amongst oursleves!!!!

For the record...I'm doing absolutely f*ck all.

A family, even though some members are a little more hot headed than others... is still a family; I would sooner stand with them whilst they ask for your head, then standing with you - ANY day of the week. Good for them and good on any Muslim with the guts to fight your evil Satanic fire with fire. Gandhi and Rev ML King Jr style peaceful protesting only gets you so far.... DEAD.

There's only thing you idiots understand and respect .... a bloody nose.

Ansar, what's with all the swear words?! You have got to get a handle on that anger!

>>I would sooner stand with them whilst they ask for your head

Eventually, they will come for *your* head as well the first time you disagree with them... are you that willing to sacrifise yourself on thier altar?

No anger... just expressing myself. I trust you understand the concept?

And in answer to your question:

You're boring me kiddo. Got any interesting views?

I fully understand the concept of the angry person expressing him/herself. I used to do it, too. But, I found it could never get me closer to Allah if I got angry over what *other* people did in thier own lives, especially when it wasn't against me.

>>Got any interesting views?

Got any *useful* views...?

Ansar,

You wanna kill me too? If so, why?

Not asking for anyone's head.. nor to kill anyone. Careful with your paraphrasing.

What I did say was this....

"You show your true colours. Your agenda is to get "us" to agree with you and then to get "us" to fight amongst oursleves!!!!

For the record...I'm doing absolutely f*ck all.

A family, even though some members are a little more hot headed than others... is still a family; I would sooner stand with them whilst they ask for your head, then standing with you - ANY day of the week. Good for them and good on any Muslim with the guts to fight your evil Satanic fire with fire. Gandhi and Rev ML King Jr style peaceful protesting only gets you so far.... DEAD.

There's only thing you idiots understand and respect .... a bloody nose."

Why do so cut and paste from old replies? Are you really a person or a quote-a-matic machine?

>>There's only thing you idiots understand and respect .... a bloody nose.

Yup, that's exactly what I said about fundamentalist political extremists, and I gave them plenty of bloody noses while I was in the *my* military in the good ol' US of A...

Ansar,

I would suggest that blind faith in ANYONE can kill you.

As for always standing with family, I'd just note that family members quite often kill each other. And isn't the whole Sunnni-Shiite controversy have its origins in a family feud about succession?

"Are you really a person" er... no of course not.

Just for OmarG, here's a blast from the past:

"Gay marriage, sodomy, drug taking, free sex, alcoholism, pig-eating, gambling, pornography - all condemned by ALL the holy prophets and ALL utterly allowed in the US with complete permissiveness - none of it is unlawful. The people of the US seem to forget the lessons of history in the Torah, Bible and Quran where God just keeps on wiping people of the Earth who just didn't listen and thought they knew better! Keep going... keep going...More fool you! Hilarious"

What a time in history.... when, if you follow the examples of the prophets, follow the teachings of God and follow his scriptures - you get ridiculed and persecuted.

Oh... that'll be the end of days then.

Is there any collective of people on this Earth who follow the teachings of the Old, New and Final Testament, the examples and teachings of the prophets more closely than the Muslims?

Oh, so now that things aren't going your way, it must be because Judgement Day is near, huh...? any more predictions for us?