When Irshad Manji penned her volume "The Trouble with Islam: A Muslim's Call for Reform Within Her Faith", she was promoted to instant stardom. Here, finally, was a Muslim who told the Western world what they wanted to hear. Joyous in their discovery, the Western media enveloped her in a loving embrace of publicity, adulation, and unquestioned faith. But that was three years ago. Since her initial entrance into the Islam reform marketplace, the field has become notably more competitive. Not least of Ms. Manji's problems is the increasingly recurrent critique that both her arguments and her rhetoric lack legitimacy among Muslims themselves. Not surprisingly, Manji � now a skilled entrepreneur in packaging the rhetoric of Muslim reform to suit the Western public � has restyled her arguments to suit the changing demands of the market. A version of this new and only arguably improved Manji was available for consumption at the recent Secular Islam Conference organized by the Intelligence Summit this past weekend in St. Petersburg, Florida.

At the Conference, whose dubious organizers and sponsors could nevertheless muster enough cash to invite not one but several "ex-Muslim reformers", Manji's keynote address presented an argument designed calculatedly to attack the very lack of legitimacy that is now possibly having an impact on Ms. Manji's checkbook. Delivered in a well-rehearsed, oft-tested "let me connect with you" manner and peppered heavily with buzzwords like "courage" and "justice" � time tested to evoke positive reactions among audiences � Manji's address represented a break from the less nuanced rhetoric of the preceding speaker, the now public ex-Muslim Ibn Warraq. Clearly aiming her speech at the wider Western media rather than the motley crew of ex-Muslims, random intelligence consultants and conservative press that constituted her immediate audience, Manji repeatedly announced her own credentials as a believing Muslim. Quoting a verse from the Koran, she emphasized the necessity of the reconciliation of faith and freedom. Deftly attempting to deconstruct criticisms of her own lack of theological knowledge or training, Manji insisted that it is the Koran itself that supports a separation of Church and State, since the Koran does not itself recommend a particular form of Islamic government. Even more convincingly, she denounced not only the zeal of religious fundamentalists but also of "missionary atheists" who promote disbelief with the same dogmatism as fundamentalists belonging to a particular faith. In an attempt to distance herself from the blatant generalizations of her co-panelist Ibn Warraq (who only minutes earlier had unequivocally stated "Islam is the problem") Manji's speech went far in claiming the trajectory of legitimacy borne out of quoting the Koran and waxing poetic about the liberating power of her spirituality. In a near Clintonian sound byte, she concluded that "religion is like technology - [it] can be used in myriad ways for good and bad."

Ms. Manji's project is certainly a worthy one, and few Muslims, especially (but not only) among those living in the United States, would argue against the need to reconcile faith and freedom or disagree with the precept that the spirit of critique needs to be revived. Even Ms. Manji seemed to recognize this, as she quoted ISNA's President Dr. Ingrid Mattson as a potential ally to her own project. What seemed curious, then, was Manji's repeated remonstrance touting her own persecution at the hands of the very Muslims she is hoping to unite under the umbrella of her brainchild "Project Ijtihad". It is in this dual rhetoric that Manji's potential for duplicity emerges to the forefront, and her prioritization of what Western audiences want to hear over what Muslims need to hear becomes blatantly obvious. If, indeed, she intends to be a community activist and provoke Muslims into her "radical traditionalism" that questions tradition and re-energizes the spirit of critique within Islam, then perhaps she needs to abandon her rhetoric of persecution by the same Muslims she is now courting.

Capitalist ambitions by themselves are hardly reprehensible. What is more problematic is the collusion of the mercenary-reformer that Ms. Manji represents. A brief look at her website on Project Ijtihad quickly reveals the extent to which she is interested in supporting reform over seeking profit. In the three years since the initial publication of her book, Ms. Manji claims to have furthered this project of critique by � you guessed it � having her book translated into various languages. The Urdu and Farsi translations are available for free on the website, quite possibly because the devalued rupee and rial would hardly render much in terms of profit in Canadian dollars. The website lists no mention of any other sources for furthering critical exchange among Muslims other than Manji's own book. As for what she does with the ample royalties from this "reformist" project she herself says, "Paying my mortgage, buying hazelnut coffee (several sugars)�"

In the final portion of her speech at the Secular Islam Conference, Ms. Manji introduced a "novel" idea in the realm of promoting critical exchange among Muslims - a "website" which she hopes to launch as part of her "grassroots" project. Perhaps unaware of the many existing ones already devoted to this task (and who do so without simultaneously pursuing profit), Manji went on to describe who would be featured on this promised website. It's star would be "Kamran" (too dangerous of course to use his real name) � none other than an "ex-terrorist" who was inspired to leave the terrorist lifestyle by � you guessed it � reading an interview by Irshad Manji! Such self-glorification is hardly rare among public intellectuals; if anything it is perhaps a necessity of their chosen trade. Where Ms. Manji departs from the mold is in her desire to pretend to be a grassroots reformer while constantly cashing in on the very problems she consistently deplores. Certainly, the Muslim world is bereft with problems: the manipulation of Islamic doctrine to justify the subjugation of women, the appropriation of Sharia law as a tool to legitimize illegitimate rulers, the disregard for human rights, the punishment of dissenters, and others. All are problems plaguing the Muslim world which undoubtedly deserve the attention of every Muslim. The issue posed by Ms. Manji's initiative, however, is whether someone who profits from the very existence of these problems can also claim the title of reforming them while doing nothing concrete other than promoting her own book.

The remaining presenters at the Secular Islam Conference made no pretense of their distaste for Islam. Ibn Warraq's presentation vacillated between his regular brand of fear mongering detailing the incipient "threat" Muslims pose (an argument the intelligence consultants in his audience must certainly like, since it insures their livelihoods) to blatantly racist and illiberal statements such as "not all religious traditions are worthy of respect". More entertaining was the presentation of Tawfiq Hamid, who filled the role of the ubiquitous "ex-terrorist". Like the American and French Worlds Fairs of the 1800s made spectacles of "oriental" specimens often held in captivity for Western gawking and consumption, intelligence consultants now seem to hunger for the "ex-terrorist" as a venue for satiate their lascivious curiosity. In keeping with the persona he was hired to project (or perhaps disappointing those who expected him to be a kinder gentler Osama look-alike), Mr. Ahmed entertained his audience with antics deigned to please. Among these was a particularly ludicrous theory regarding suicide bombings based entirely on the individual terrorist's desire for sex. Shiites terrorists, Mr. Ahmed explained, are far less likely to engage in suicide bombings because they have the institution of mu'taa marriages which allows them to have sexual relations without long term commitments. Sunnis, on the other hand, do not have this institution. Hence the ease with which Sunni Muslim youths can be duped into chasing paradise (and hence sex) through committing suicidal acts of terror.

A recurrent theme that dotted nearly every single presentation was the litany of abuse that the speakers insisted they routinely face from the Muslim community. Inflated thus with this rather deluded sense of self-importance, each one spent considerable time detailing their undaunted courage in the face of such terrible adversity. One could not help but wonder the number of hours each one of them spent scanning fatwa factories of dubious origin and even more questionable authority in the hope of finding one that even remotely mentions them. After all, a fatwa is the ticket to fame in their industry.

Another painfully recurrent theme in the presentations, one that was echoed in the "St. Petersberg Declaration" issued at the end of the meeting, was the treatment of Islamophobia as a "myth" constructed to outlaw critique of Islam. The speakers' consequent ignorance of the frequency of hate crimes against Muslims in Europe became thus yet another glaring act of partisanship fracturing their already minimal credibility. A report by the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia provides empirical evidence in this regard and proves the inaccuracy of their position. It includes reports of vandalism on Muslim businesses and desecration of Muslim graveyards in Denmark, racist graffiti on Muslim mosques in Germany and Greece, repeated attacks on Muslims by Neo-Nazi groups in Spain, and desecration of mosques and vandalism of homes of Muslim politicians in France. In one of many incidents in the UK, a Muslim woman wearing a headscarf was harassed with the slogan "Barbarian with no culture, go back home" and "you certainly bought your visa, you terrorist". Added to this are recent studies which state that British Muslim youths have twice the rate of unemployment as their white counterparts and that the chances of getting a job in France are reduced by half if you have a Muslim name.

I document this data not to promote the image of a victimized Muslim minority justified in its reticence to address the problems of growing extremism, intolerance of critique, or inattention to women's rights. Instead, the aim is to demonstrate that the problem lies not in demonizing one or the other but instead in recognizing the complex dimensions of the issue and the need to recognize the counterproductive nature of the mercenary rhetoric found at the Secular Islam Summit. In this sense, the criticism leveled at the speakers at the Secular Islam Conference should be directed not at the fact that the speakers chose to critique Islam. Indeed, they are free to voice their opinions, however misguided, hateful, and factually incorrect they may be. Instead, the criticism focused toward them should expose how they have reduced the necessity of dialogue between Muslims and Westerners to a profiteering activity that dupes their audience with perversions and generalizations, and cashes in on fear and intolerance.

Thanks for your link to my blog post about Tawfiq Hamid. The sex theory of suicide bombing is simply stupefying.

When she first gained popularity I actually believed that Irshad Manji could represent a breath of fresh air & a means of rapprochement bet. Islam & the west. But it appears that she, like Hirsi Ali have allowed themselves to be hijacked by the Islamophobes.

What, you mean Walid Shoebat wasn't available??

>> Delivered in a well-rehearsed, oft-tested "let me connect with you" manner and peppered heavily with buzzwords like "courage" and "justice"

Thats subjective and lessens the weight of your argument.

>> The Urdu and Farsi translations are available for free on the website, quite possibly because the devalued rupee and rial would hardly render much in terms of profit in Canadian dollars.

Possibly true. But the fact could be established in other ways too.

I think that Irshad like terrorists has good intentions peppered with a self staisfying logic. As wrong as she is, she can still be helped.

Nasty bunch of characters. I saw Manji on some US cable show a while back and IMHO the woman is an obnoxious con artist. Whatever Islamic reform is, its something which should be decided and defined by authentic Muslim voices themselves, and not crooks looking for a career.
Nice blog, Richard.

Did you see at the conference website that the event was filmed by Pajamas Media? And who are the featured conference guests on said video?

"The video includes interviews with - Walid Phares, Ibn Warraq, Irshad Manji, Nonie Darwish, Tawfik Hamid, Wafa Sultan and Michael Ledeen."

Michael f*&#(n' LEDEEN??? What does he have to tell anyone about Islam, secular or otherwise?

These people aren't fooling anyone but themselves.

Sorry for monopolizing the comment thread, but has anyone done any research on where the group's funding comes from? If they're a U.S. non-profit they have to file an IRS 990 report. I'm not sure whether those are available online but they might be. You'd have to know the name of the non profit entity.

>>and defined by authentic Muslim voices themselves,

And the *irony* of a self-professed non-Muslim insinuating who is or is not an authentic "Muslim" voice for us was too funny for me not to laugh about...

While everyone seems to beat up on Manji for either her rightist views or her sexual preferences (the only things people really go after her for!), there is an interesting, no intriguing exchange and commentary going on with her and about her on eteraz.org; she may not be nearly as bad as you think!

>And the *irony* of a self-professed non-Muslim insinuating who is or is not an authentic "Muslim" voice for us was too funny for me not to laugh about...<

I doubt an authentic voice would say that the religion is itself the problem and collude with those who seem just as extreme as Bin Laden and his followers in their own way. It doesn't help that a jewish extremist warmonger like Ledeen is promoting this either.
If you can't see that, they're the ones having the last laugh.

My comment was not aimed at that non-event nor was iy meant to defend it. I am aiming it at any outsider who thinks they should chime in and do the exact same thing they themselves criticize. That's all.

>I am aiming it at any outsider who thinks they should chime in and do the exact same thing they themselves criticize.<

Outsider(way too polite) would also describe pretty much everybody at this conference pretending to be authentic Muslims while in fact they are not. I don't have to be a Muslim to see that these nutjobs are promoting a clash of civilizations at everyone else's expense, including mine.
Just as Muslim moderates have to do their part, so too must non-Muslim moderates avoid being manipulated by such criminals.

>>pretending to be authentic Muslims while in fact they are not.

Well, "Ibn Warraq" and I think Wafa Sultan claim to be atheists and not Muslims. Why the remain connected to Islam even now, I do not know. Manji claims to be a Muslim and yo believe in the One God and so on, so then she is Muslim, and authentic too in any definition of real Islam and not "Idenity Islam", irregardless of who sleeps with or which side of the Israel-Palestine conflict she is on. As for other than her, yes, they do seem to simply want Islam to go away, so the name "Secular Islam" for thier conference is a misnomer.

Myy issue with Irshad Manji is where she is playing her cards, she has a right to her opinions but when she aligns herself with those whom she knows despise Islam and actively work to promote hatred and violence against Muslims, I cannot believe that she has any noble intentions.
Truly, dialogue is needed, but it has to come from those who love Islam and understand that our problems stem from those Muslims who misunderstand and/or misuse our faith, not from Islam itself.

peace4all you hit the nail on the head. I understand that Manji did not sign the Declaration but she was on Glenn Beck promoting the Summit like mad. Was it for her own publicity? I am not sure.

But it was painful to watch her feeding into all of Glenn Beck's prejudices. "Yes, most Muslims are like slaves-ignorant and illiterate." Okay-so are we going to target poverty and illiteracy with a double-edged critique of both American foreign policy and domestic oppression over seas. Absolutely not.

Instead of a more rigorous critique Manji simply talks about project Ijtihad- as if Ijtihad can solve the geo-political issues that lie at the foundation of her critique of Muslims and Islam. This is what confuses me. Manji is trying to produce "rational Muslim responses" to the irrationality of racism, global injustice and violence. This is why in the declaration that she did sign against the "new threat" --the Islamist she calls for Muslims to respond rationally even at times of despair. Okay. So let's extend that concept to Western nations-who use cluster bombs that children will pick up for years after a conflict is over. If we're going to talk about suicide bombers --let's also talk about the suicidal impulse behind nuclear weaponry possessed by the nation-state.

You have made some good points about the motives and credentials of some of the participants.

However, nowhere in your article or on your website do you discuss the specific points made in the "St. Petersburg Declaration." As a non-Muslim watching world events, it would be helpful to know if there are any points of agreement with that document. Yes, some of the things the declaration opposes (such as genital mutilation and honor killing) are tribal practices not necessarily associated with Islam. But what what about support for Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, sectarian education, freedom of expression? What about separating political Islam from Islam as a personal faith? These are the real issues of the Secular Islam Summit, and regarding them, you are silent.

I hope Rafia responds to your comments Chris. But if you have not already, please take a look at the articles that Rafia has contributed to alt.muslim: this might clarify her position on issues of freedom of expression and human rights as she is active in women's rights and human rights. From my reading she seems to be unabashedly critical of oppressive Muslim practices. I do not agree with all of her opinions but I respect her right to express them.

I think that there are numerous Muslims championing freedom of [removed]alt. Muslim is an obvious example) yet these Muslims are not given a voice from the mainstream media. It seems like you have to be anti-Islam to be given a seat at the table. This is what I think a lot of us do not like about the Secular Islam Summit. It is a summit that at heart is not about Islam but about defending neo-imperialism.

>What about separating political Islam from Islam as a personal faith?<

Are you advocating that Muslims stay away from politics? Why should they comply with your requests? This sounds more like an ultimatum from those who are silent and supportive of political Christianity and political Judaism.
The same people who violate human rights on a daily basis all over the world are ill equipped to demand compliance from others.

Dear Chris:

Thanks so much for your comments. Throughout the article you will find that I reiterate that the fact that people choose to malign Islam does not serve as an excuse to ignore the problems within Muslim communities.
To be completely honest, not discussing the St Petersberg Declaration was an issue of space. As Anisah has correctly pointed out, I have addressed issues you mention in my other writings.
The problem, as I see it, is that the supposed "dialogue" ( attempted by the Secular Islam Conference) with Muslims is engaging people who have scant credentials as either reformers or activists within Muslim communities. In that sense, summits like this one are little more than a sham designed to affirm existing prejudices and do nothing to make inroads toward mutual understanding.

If you get the chance, please do take a look at my other articles which address issues of honor killings and other forms of oppression in detail and focus on the desperate need for internal reform within our communities.
Rafia

O, thou with the most creative name,

>> Why should they comply with your requests?

Because we desire to. Let me get this straight: you, the non-muslim is telling us that we *must* be political?? Sorry, but the days of Leftists trying to get Muslims to sign on to communist agendas is not only over, it never really took off. Please, let us be and mind your own house.

Salam Rafia,

It would be hepful if you defined what the credentials are for someone not to be "people who have scant credentials as either reformers or activists within Muslim communities." I've grappled with this as well, and most definitions seem to boil down to "you know one when you see one" which is prone to causing conflicts over who is or is not sufficiently credentialed. Some clarification, please fir the sake of public knowledge.

wassalam Omar:
As I say in the piece, you don't have to have any special credentials to be a public intellectual...but to claim to be a "grassroots reformer" well...its pretty simple you should have a record of some "grassroots reforming" whether it be through community organizations, advocacy, a myriad of ways that do not directly benefit you but are for the betterment of the community.
To give you particular examples ( and this is by no means exhaustive) take the example of IMAN in inner city Chicago which is working to provide services to inner city Muslims, or Turning Point in New Jersey which is providing services to Muslim women facing abuse...just some examples. Other ways could be working for or with organizations that promote critical exchange within the community rather than restricting oneself to paid engagements funded by dubious sources.
I am not sure I share your suspicion of negative definitions, (perhaps because I am a lawyer) very often definitions are based on negative conceptions....in this case what a "reformer" is not would be someone whose prime objective is the pursuit of profit. Consequently meaning that to call oneself a "reformer" one would have to prioritize the pursuit of "reform" over other things.
Hope this clarifies things a little. Just because a definition is based on negative conceptions doesnt mean it is automatically invalid.
In sum, its a simple proposition, if you call yourself a reformer, do something other than promote yourself and something more concrete than a project whose entire aim is to sell your book. Surely, there is huge amounts of work to be done in our communities.
Rafia