As the crisis that has emerged in the aftermath of the publication of the infamous cartoons that claim to depict the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him, escalates, we would do well by stepping back and attempting to analyze the situation as dispassionately as possible. By doing so, as Muslims, we can hopefully formulate a more productive and meaningful response, and avoid being exploited by either side in the ongoing conflict. Saying this, I do not mean to imply that Muslims are not justifiably angry over the caricatures. However, I would agree with those who argue that responses that involve wild outbreaks of frenzied violence are inappropriate, and they only affirm what the cartoonist is trying to imply. Namely, that Islam is a religion that encourages obscurantist violence and terrorism.

The current crisis shows the extent we Muslims are vulnerable to media manipulation, superficial shows of piety, and counterproductive one-upmanship militancy. If we start with the issue of media manipulation, it is clear that Western and Eastern media outlets played a large role in stirring up Muslim, and now Western sentiments. When the crisis initially broke in September, it was barely a blip on the media radar. Few outside of Denmark even knew of the cartoons. The Danish Muslim community, appropriately, by and large ignored the story.[1] It was only after a campaign undertaken by a delegation of Danish Muslim community activists to stimulate greater interest in the issue led to the "cause" being undertaken by some of the Arab satellite channels, such as Iqra, and then the reprinting of the cartoons by several European newspapers, months after their initial publication, that the crisis developed into the proportions we are currently witnessing. In light of that reality, it would be hard to deny the role the media has played in sparking and now perpetuating the crisis.

A question we must ask is if these cartoons, which are an example of hundreds of other anti-Islamic slights occurring daily in Europe and America, were not brought to the attention of Muslims by the media, would we be undergoing the current brouhaha? - Clearly not. That being the case, what does this say about our strategic vision? What does this say about our level of political maturity? And what does it say about our ability to engage in meaningful proactive work? The answers to these questions are obvious. We get angry about Israeli troops breaking the bones of Palestinian children, as long as it is in the media. When it disappears from our television screens, our interest vanishes with it. We raise millions of dollars for those affected by the Tsunami, as long as the images of death and destruction are beamed into our homes by the media. However, when the coverage shifts to other issues, the donations dry up. As for those crises that do not make the news in a big way, such as the ongoing famines in Mali, Niger, and the Horn of Africa, we are hardly stirred to action. Furthermore, we go on living our lives oblivious to the ongoing abuse of Islam and our Prophet, peace and blessing of God upon him, until it becomes a major media event. At that point based on urgings issued by parties, the origins of their dubious agendas unknown to us, we are expected to drop everything and hastily rush into the fray. In many instances, our ill-conceived actions only make the situation worse.

Sometimes, those actions may constitute superficial shows of piety emanating from the mob hysteria underlying them. In the mob we are empowered, and find it easy to confront our opponents, defy the rule of law, behave with wanton abandon, or engage in other acts which under the proper circumstances we may view as supporting Islam. In terms of more constructive mass actions, such as emerging into the streets by the tens of thousands to protest the brutal, authoritarian regimes that make a mockery of the prophetic ideals of justice, mutual consultation, and service to the oppressed and downtrodden of society; or by forming credible anti-defamation organizations to bring effective legal action against transgressing organizations and individuals, on a fulltime proactive basis, we come up terribly short. As individuals, we find it difficult to support the Prophet by adorning ourselves with His lofty character traits, or reviving His Sunnah in our daily lives.

On the other hand, as mentioned above, it is all too easy to get swept up into the mob hysteria generated by the crowd, and then engage in outrageous actions that only affirm the offensive claims of the transgressing cartoonist. It is as if we are saying, "We'll show the Kafirs our Prophet, peace upon him was no terrorist! We'll defame the symbols of their religion,[2] burn their embassies, murder their unsuspecting innocents, and behead the bloody cartoonist if we get our hands on him."[3]

This brings us to my third point, that of counterproductive, one-upmanship militancy. It is during these crises that all Muslims are supposed to drop everything and join the latest "Jihad" fad. Those of us who urge restraint are mocked as not being militant enough, or ridiculed as cowards who are afraid to "stand up to the real enemies of Islam." No differences in understanding, interpretation, or strategy are allowed, because there is only one correct approach, the one the militants have stumbled upon with the aid of modern, sensationalizing media.

Such an ad hoc, haphazard approach is counterproductive for a number of reasons. First of all, it destroys the basis for proactive work based on the existence of a strategic vision. As long as the enemies of Islam know that they can mobilize the Muslims to chase after an unimaginable number of distracting issues, divide our ranks by those issues, and diffuse our energies through their debate and the pursuit of their resolution, they will possess a trump card that will affect our ability to unite and work more effectively towards creating and implementing an agenda capable of effecting meaningful change in our circumstance. It also blinds us to the underlying agenda that reckless spontaneous action might be unwittingly serving.

For example, it is interesting that these events have come to a head in the immediate aftermath of the stunning landslide victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections. That victory has rekindled, both in the East and the West, the debate around the implications of supporting democratization in the Muslim world when the biggest winners will be Islamic parties and movements. There are secularists in both the West and the Muslim world who advocate ending the democratizing experiment on that basis. However, they know that denying the democratic will of the Muslim peoples cannot be done without the support of the masses of people in Europe and America. These masses, especially in Britain and America, are increasingly wary of their governments' nefarious agenda for the Middle East. However, the frightening images of crazed crowds rampaging, looting, and burning provides a powerful justification for the extreme, repressive policies being advocated by the far right for dealing with Islam and Muslims, both domestically, and internationally. Democracy in the Muslim world, they argue, will bring the advocates of mob rule to power.

If brutal draconian measures, such as those employed to end the democratization process in Algeria, are employed elsewhere, the Western public will be psychologically prepared to accept those measures, because of the fear that has been created around the "Islamic" alternative. That fear can not only be used to justify denying the democratic will of the Muslim peoples, it can also be used to justify denying their legitimate strategic ambitions. A recent editorial in the Jerusalem Post links the fanaticism of the cartoon protests to the lawful nuclear ambitions of Iran. It states, "If anyone wants to appreciate why the West views with such suspicion the weapons programs of Muslim states such as Iran, they need look no further than the intolerance Muslim regimes exhibit to these cartoons, and what this portends."

This crisis has also occurred in the immediate aftermath of the appearance of the latest "Bin Laden" tape, intensified warnings of an imminent major terrorist attack in the West, something on the scale of 9/11, and it coincides with the escape of the alleged mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole from a Yemeni jail. The fear associated with the latter two events, combined with the images of hysterical protesters, work to create a climate that can support unprecedented measures if another major terrorist attack were to occur in the near future �whoever the perpetrators may be.

In addition to the setbacks on the psychological front, the current crisis indicates just how bad we are losing in the Jihad of ideas. It is not without significance that the ultimate objective of Jihad is linked to ideas, the word. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was asked about a man who fought to display his bravery, another who fought out of fealty to his tribe, and a third who fought to show off. Which had fought in the Way of God? He replied, peace and blessings of God upon him, "The one who fought to make the Word of God uppermost has fought in the Way of God."[4] Is the nature of the current campaign working to make the word of God uppermost? Every Muslim needs to ask that question.

As Muslims, we are carrying the Word of God in an increasingly secular, militarized, and alienated world. What it means to carry that word is not an unknowable abstraction. We carry it by following the concrete example of our Noble Messenger Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him. In carrying the word, he endured unimaginable abuses and he persevered through them because he was inspired by a grand vision. That vision was to see his people saved by the life-giving, life-affirming message of Islam. No greater illustration of this can be given than the story of his expulsion from the city of Ta'if, after the arrogant leaders of that town unleashed the fools, slaves, and children against him.

In the aftermath of that onslaught, the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, humbly raised his hands towards the sky and prayed:

O, God! Unto you alone do I plead my lack of strength, the paucity of my efforts, and my humiliation before the people. O, the Most Merciful of all! You are the Lord of the oppressed, you are my Lord. Unto who have you dispatched me? To a distant host who receives me repugnantly? Or to an enemy you have authorized over my affair? If you are not angry with me, I care not. It is only your goodness I seek to be covered with. I seek refuge with the Light of your Face, through which the darkness is illuminated and all the affairs of the world and hereafter are rectified, that you do not cast your anger down on me, nor cause your wrath to settle upon me. I will remain pleased with you until you are pleased with me. There is neither strength, nor power but with You. [5]

Two significant events are then related after this prayer was uttered by the Prophet, peace and blessing of God upon him. First of all, when presented with an offer by the Angels that God crush the city of Ta'if, the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, refused saying that perhaps from the offspring of the offending hosts, there would emerge those who would worship God. This came to pass. This incident is well known. A lesser known incident associated with the journey to Ta'if occurred when the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, was preparing to reenter Mecca, in the company of his companion Zaid b. Haritha. Zaid asked, "How can you reenter their presence when they have expelled you?" The Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him replied, "O, Zaid! God is bringing about through these events you have witnessed a great opening. God is most capable of assisting His religion, and manifesting the truth of His prophet."

One of the most disturbing aspects of the current campaign to "Assist the Prophet," for many converts, like this writer, is the implicit assumption that there is no Dawah work being undertaken here in the West, and no one is currently, or will in the future enter Islam in these lands. Therefore, it does not matter what transpires in the Muslim East. Muslims can behave in the most barbaric fashion, murder, plunder, pillage, brutalize and kidnap civilians, desecrate the symbols of other religions, trample on their honor, discard their values and mores, and massacre their fellow Muslims. If any of that undermines the works of Muslims in these Western lands, it does not matter. If it places a barrier between the Western people and Islam, when many of those people are in the most desperate need of Islam, it does not matter. If our Prophet, peace be upon him, had responded to those who abused him in Ta'if with similar disregard, none of the generations of Muslims who have come from the descendants of those transgressors would have seen the light of day.

These campaigns of desperation also implicitly display a lack of confidence in God's ability to protect his religion and defend the honor of His Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him. We do what we can do within lawful limits, and then we depute the affair to God. Despairing of help from God and finding ourselves with limited strategic resources, we sometimes press forward with the most desperate tactics imaginable, taking little time to assess the compatibility of those tactics with Islamic teachings, nor their long-term implications for the cause of Islam, especially in the West.

There are certainly more constructive and productive ways to defend the honor of the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him. Why are we calling for a "Day of Outrage" when our Prophet has instructed us repeatedly not to become angry? There are surely times when we should become angry for the sake of God. However, under the current circumstances, are anger and outrage appropriate responses? Why not a "Day of Familiarization," where we teach people who the Prophet was and what he really represents, peace be upon him? Why not a "Day of Sunnah," where all vow to revive a Sunnah we have allowed to slip away from our religious life. Such a day could also include the Sunnah of showing concern for ones neighbors? We could visit them and tell them about Islam and our beloved Prophet, peace be upon him.

Whatever we do, as Muslims in the West, we may be approaching the day when we will have to go it alone. If our coreligionists in the East cannot respect the fact that we are trying to accomplish things here in the West, and that their oftentimes ill-considered actions undermines that work in many instances, then it will be hard for us to consider them allies. How can one be an ally when he fails to consult you concerning actions whose negative consequences you will suffer? No one from the Muslim east consults us before launching these campaigns. No one seeks to find out as to how their actions are going to affect our lives and families. The confused incompetence of the Muslim countries around the issue of moon-sighting, a situation that has painful consequences for Muslims here in America is bad enough, the added pressures generated by these reoccurring crises is becoming unbearable for many.

We have a generation of Muslim children here who have to go to schools where most of them are small minorities facing severe peer pressure. During these crises they do not have the luxury of losing themselves in a frenzied mob. Their faith is challenged and many decide to simply stop identifying with Islam. Is that what they deserve? If they are largely lost to Islam, what is the future of our religion here? We have obedient, pious Hijab wearing women, who out of necessity must work, usually in places where they are the only Muslims. Should their safety, dignity, and honor be jeopardized by the actions of Muslims halfway around the world?

I reiterate that I am not saying these cartoons, and other denigrations of our religion and our Prophet, peace be upon him, should be ignored. Imam Shafi'i stated that anyone who is angered and does not respond, he is a jackass. However, our responses should be weighed on the basis of a strategic calculus we construct. Their timing should be determined by that calculus, not by media sensationalizing. They should be undertaken in consultation with those who will be directly affected by the responses they generate. And their long-range implications should be deeply considered.

In conclusion, one should not see the ongoing crisis as a clash of civilizations. Phenomena as deep and complex as civilizations cannot by thrown into conflict overnight by media-driven campaigns. A clash of civilizations would also involve the overwhelming majority of people identified by a particular civilizational nexus. The current crisis is the result of a regrettable incident that has been exploited by an uncivilized minority of provocateurs both in the West and the East to advance their conflicting agendas. As long as that exploitation continues, the crisis could aptly be called the clash of the uncivilized.

[1] We say appropriately because the measured response of the Danish Muslim community killed the story. Certainly part of the defense of the Prophet's honor is to keep these images out of the media. The initial response of the Danish Muslims did just that.

[2] The Danish flag prominently displays a cross, the symbol of Christianity. Hence, every time a Danish flag is burned or trampled on, the symbol of Christianity is desecrated. A similar transgression against Islam would occur if the Saudi flag, which contains the Name of Allah, and the declaration of Tawhid La ilaha illa Allah were burned or trampled. The question here is has the entirety of Christendom transgressed against the Muslim people in a way to justify an attack on the symbol of their faith?

[3] Protestors in Britain this past Friday threatened suicide bombing attacks in European cities, and the beheading of the offending cartoonists. Insightfully, the British Muslim youth protesting wearing a mock suicide bomber's vest turned out to be a convicted heroin and crack dealer, out on parole. It is a lot easier to mobilize the Muslim youth for the anti-cartoon Jihad than to deal with the rising rates of incarceration, mental illness, failing schools, dysfunctional homes, and the drug addition and alcoholism that are ravaging the British Muslim community.

[4] Al-Bukhari, no. 7458, and Muslim, no. 1904.

[5] This prayer and the incident precipitating it are related in the various books of Prophetic biography, both ancient and modern. It is quoted here from Dr. Muhammad Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti, Fiqh as-Sirah (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 2001/1422), pp. 150-151.

Dear Sir
Yours is indeed very well written piece on the current cartoon crisis. You have, as well, successfully expressed your concerns and presented your proposed solutions to the problem from a Muslim's viewpoint. But, I would like to draw your attention to few further issues;
One, try to look at this issue from the traditional centuries old notion of euro-centricism. The West, in its euphoria of civilization and being civilized tends to view the 'other' of the Europe, i.e. the rest of the world, as uncivilized, uncultured and unworthy of attention. Why is that if the Western modern Christians are willing to make fun of their religious icons, they are unable to understand that their are people in this world who just do not consider their religion and religious icons funny? Why the non-Western non-Christian people's considering their religion a bit more seriously and dearly is considered bigotry and uncivilized? I have a feeling that your article smacks a bit of euro-centric ideas. You are just not willing to understand a person's plight when his religious icons are being mocked at.
Two, you protest at the protests the Muslims have made the world over. You would have found some sense in this if you had lived in these countries. 'Violent' protests in third-world Muslim countries in the cartoon controversy have had two aims; one to pressurize their own governments to take some stand before the world on the issue so that a formal apology be obtained; and two, to exert pressure on the Western countries so that they may understand the gravity of the issue. An embassy, in law, is an island of the parent country. If a protest against a country is aimed at its embassy in antoher country, there is nothing wrong in it per se - albiet it remains the responsiblity of the host country to protect it. You, in your article, however, do not criticize the inability of Syrian, Iranian et al governments in failing to protect Danish embassies - instead, you are against the protest per se, which I do not find a very cogent position.
Three, your reverse-analogy of a contemporary Muslim's being anguished on the insult of the Prophet (PBUH) with the Prophet's (PBUH) not getting angry during his visit to Taif is bad in logic.

Four, it appears that you have written this article to represent the perspective of a post-9/11 expatriate Muslim living in the West. You do not seem to be concerned with the millions of Muslim's problems who live in the rest of the world.
Five, even if the issue above were wrongly identified, I am unable to understand how a Muslim's violent protest in New Dehli or Manila over the cartoons' publication prevents you from solving the problem of alcoholism & drug abuse in Muslim community in UK.
Six, I am unable to see how one form of protest excludes other forms of protest, or responses. Your suggestions of observing a 'day of familiarization' et al are indeed very noble and respectable. But, as we call can see, in the politics of protest, all strains and strands go together and none precludes the other. I may agree with your idea of a 'tongue-in-cheek' response to Prophet's cartoons in the Danish newspaper, but I disagree with your disagreeing with millions of Muslims' protest the world over. After all, participation of one drug dealer in a protest march does not mar the whole protest agenda.
And last but not least, I invite you to write your next article on how the Huntingtonian 'clash of civilizations' is proceeding in the last few years. I agree with you that we should not see these minor clashes between Islam and the West as clash of civilizations. Agreed that these are rather the bigots in one camp clashing with the bigots in the other. But, on a wider scale, can't you sense that slowly and steadily, the USA's war against whatever is engulfing the whole of the West in its camp. Yesterday, on 8th Feb, a French magazine has re-published all 12 cartoons along with a 13th one in which (sic) Prophet (PBUH) is shown having both his hands on his face and saying 'it is too hard to be loved by so many fools'. Are you not amazed at how the French have jumped into this fray, and how Ms. Rice a la State Deptt. connects the cartoons with war against terrorism? Well, at least, I am not.

Wow. Zaid makes some very insightful points. The timing of this row could not have come at a worse time with respect to US confidence in Muslim democracy. There are comparisons of Hamas winning the election in Palestine to the Nazis winning the elections in Germany in 1933. A democratic government formed by a totalitarian regime isn't viewed as a true democracy. I can only hope the Hamas proves to be as true to its word as it was in the past, and doesn't hoard the billions of dollars in aid that the old PA did.

>Why is that if the Western modern Christians are willing to make fun of their religious icons, they are unable to understand that their are people in this world who just do not consider their religion and religious icons funny?

As far as I have seen a Muslim person's life is entirely devoted to their religion. As I have seen in other threads on this website, every time a non-muslim tries to move away from religion in a discussion, it is somehow related back to the Qur'an and the ways of Islam. Judaism and Christianity are not that all encompassing any more. This stems from the many reformations the both churches have had over the years. History has shown time and time again that when a religion dominates a society, that power inevitably gets abused. That is why there is a distinct separation of church and state in the US(although that is blurring under the current administration). That is why Americans have large doubts about Fundamentalist Muslim societies actually having a real democracy. At least in the US, fundamentalists in general are viewed with a little bit of pity or scorned(an example of this would be the people that keep trying to teach creationism in science classes). While religion should be taken seriously, fundamentalists take religion TOO seriously.

But why DO Christians tolerate the ridicule of their God? Well. God has a sense of humor. He created the duck-billed platypus, didn't He? I think He can roll with a few jabs from lowly humanity.

Muslims are paranoid. Westerners do not give a damn about Muslim beliefs, rituals, or traditions. God only knows that most religions have their own taboos and traditions. I am not a Muslim. But I have read many Muslim websites and part of the Koran. Just to be an educated and cultured individual. But Western religions don't believe that individuals should be brutally and barbaricly mutilated for religious heresy. I can't say that's the same in the Muslim world. At least as far as the party line of the theocrats goes. Westerners have no ethical or moral reason to buy into a culture that breeds murderers who shout 'allah akbar' as they brutally chop off the heads of innocents, and justify killing muslim women and children who happen to be at a Mosque or market, saying they are "martyrs' in a Jihad. I doubt their loved ones feel that way. So where are the mass protests about that?? The Cartoons were as benign as any political cartoon on any editorial page around the world. I'm sure most of you have seen them on the web. After all, you are the elite educated of the Muslim world, and don't have much in common with your barely literate coreligionists. What sort of culture reacts against nations because of the action of single individuals?? The West is free - sorry if you find thoughts and words hurtful. But they are not actions....murder and destruction are. And who cares if you mock the West's Gods?? Your thoughts mean nothing to us....only your behavior counts. So enjoy your religious beliefs.....we don't really care. But don't think you can brutalize innocents because of those beliefs.

Because, Zaid, a variety of groups and governments find it convenient to abuse our religion by politicizing it. Let's cut ourselves off from them and thier dishonesty; otherwise I fear we'll go down on the same ship.

By the way....Zaid.......your analysis sounds like that of a Rabbi.......well done. Unfortunately, logic and analysis like yours seems to be suppressed in the Muslim world. Unfortunately, the brutes rule. Much to the detriment of the Muslim culture.

I'm not a Muslim but my questions is the main reason people were offended. Was it the drawing an image of Mohammed or was it the explosives turbin implying he was a suicide bomber? My question is that if it was the turbin cartoon then was it really offensive or is it a reflection of what most Muslims and their leaders endorse and therefore not offensive? From what I understand the majority of Muslims and their religous leaders endorse suicide attacks against civilians. If Muslims come out and say that it is Islamic and legitimate to intentionally target civilians with suicide attacks then surely a cartoon depicting this should not be offensive but a reflection of what they believe to be just. If however the vast majority of Muslims and their Imans denounce suicide attacks on civilians and show their opposition tangibly then I would agree that the cartoons would be unfairly labeling an entire religion based on the actions of a few.

Brian, I wish I could answer, but I've given up trying to figure out what my co-relgionists iare thinking n other parts of the world. I'm Western by birth and heritage, so it would seem that simply having the same religion isn't enough for me to understand them; we are worlds apart...

Brian,
"From what I understand the majority of Muslims and their religous leaders endorse suicide attacks attacks against civilians"
This is not true. I am a muslim I am from Turkey. I believe 95 percent of Turkeys population does not approve suicide bombing. In my opinion atleast 90 percent of muslims all around the world against it. It is wrong! It is against our belief. Not only attacking civilians but also suicide is condemned and forbidden. Why it is being done? I believe it is the power comparison between clashing forces. One is so weak that has very little to do against other. Triying to find alternative ways to stand against the other. The other power has military superiority, educational superiority, economic superiority, politic superiority. Muslims know it is not right to do that just like stealing. But they do it just like stealing food to not to die from hunger. If you were a muslim seeing some government accusing other goverment being a threat to civilisation and attacking a country kiling hundreds of thousands.

At the same time ironically judgeing this dictator for killing 140 people!!! Have you ever lost a family member. Have you ever experienced unjust unfair threatment. Have you ever felt you are so out of options. DO you know how politics manipulate people either their own or their point of interest by using some sychological war tools to justify their actions and reach their goals?

That is why!

So my friend. Remember old days of Klu Klax Klan. Lets say it is happening now and some powerful muslim societies making fun of Jesus by picturing him killing some nigger just because they are nigger. And wrongfully showing your religion a part of that neither you nor your religion approves. And assume this muslim society is so dominant in the world. This way you can understand the feelings I believe. I was born and raised between two civilisation and I believe Ican understand both.

Hi Fatih

When it comes to Turkish Muslims you are completely right. The Turkish people that I have met are amongst the most down to earth, friendly, tolerant and decent people I've met.
I agree with your statement that if a nation is being attacked and they have no means of self defense then what else can they do.
Where I disagree is whether nations and people supporting suicide bombings are doing it under justified reasons or if they are being motivated to do so under false pretenses. What if America (I'm South African and not American by the way) had invaded Iraq and removed Sadam Hussein and there had been no suicide bombings. Would the Iraqi people be better off not having resorted to suicide bombers? Even though America's motives were not necessarily completely pure, I think Iraqis were better off being liberated by America if there were no suicide bombers even if America did it for the wrong reasons (eg oil). Another case in point is Israel. If the Palestinians hadn't had suicide bombers would they have been worse off? As far as I am aware the majority of Israeli's support a Palestinian state next door as long as they can live in peace with Israel.
I look forward to the day when people are not divided onto sides based on religion and look forward to the day when good Muslins, Christians, Hindus and Jews stand together and fight against the unjust regardless of the nationality, race or religion of the unjust. But a key factor to fighting injustice is understanding the full and true story. Men with good intentions but bad information are used as tools for evil.

There is a misconception about the endorsement of terrorists and suicide bombers. The Bombers seem to all congregate in relative proximity to the Muslim Holy Land. They also appear (in the Western media) to operative within the jurisdiction of Muslim governments and that implies with their consent.

To the Muslims reading this, does that summary make you understand why it might be possible for the West to think that the core of Muslim society supports these fundamentalist ideals? If there were radical Christians located in Rome calling for the death of Islam, wouldn't that concern you?

To the non-muslims. There is a difference between Fundamentalist-Arab Muslims and moderate western Muslims. They don't stand for the same things.

A follow-up question to Muslim readers:

Do fundamentalist Muslims embarrass you as much as fundamentalist Christians embarrass us?

Example of an embarrassing fundamentalist Christian site:

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/science/geochallenge.htm

"Do fundamentalist Muslims embarrass you as much as fundamentalist Christians embarrass us?"

FallenChristian: It depends on how you are defining "fundamentalist" :)

Faith makes an argument that has been often been used to rationalize terrorism - 'the powerless vs. the powerful'. Who were the powerful at the Muslim wedding in Amman? Who were the powerful at the attacks at mosques in Iraq. Who were the powerful among the simple working people seeking a job as a local traffic cop in an Iraq city? And I believe the majority of Turks find this reprehensible. But many governments in the Middle East have glorified Shahada (suicide 'martyrdom') as a matter of policy in the press and mass media. And also schoolbooks for the next 'seek death' generation. (funny how the leaders never do it). See for youself at [url=http://www.pmw.org]http://www.pmw.org[/url] Humans inately avoid death. If their religious leaders didn't convince them this was glorious and Allah approves and is waiting for them in Paradise, would they do these heinous actions?
The US incursion into Iraq had nothing to do with religion.....just geopolitical hegemony. The Muslim religious leadership has made it into the false issue of 'The West' against the Muslim ummah. And the illiterate and unsophisticated buy into it. By the way, I have had relatioships with Turkish and Iranian women....both doctors. They were as hot as any California blonde. But according to Muslim websites ( like [url=http://www.islamonline.net]http://www.islamonline.net[/url] ) they are whores. The Ummah should get out of the 9th and move to the 21st century.

Sorry - that's http://www.pmw.org.il/index.html

I guess I define a fundamentalist as anyone that takes their religion WAY too seriously and, as a result, turns everything into a theological issue.

On of the issues we Muslims need to address is the ignorance re our own religion.

Most Muslims do not even now what they are saying when they pray because they do not understand Arabic.

We often read the Quran in Arabic, again with no understanding of what we are reading, because we do not know the Arabic language.

Islam is a beautiful religion but how can we profess to follow it when we do not even know what it is. When we do not take the time to learn its basics, beyond the rituals.

Good points Dakota. The Qur'an Institute is making a small contribution in this area. People (Muslims as well as non-Muslims) can go to our website and request a free searchable data DVD of Lane's Lexicon. Even the shipping is free within the United States. Check it out:

http://www.quraninstitute.org/archives/quran/arabic_lexicon_projects/index.html

Peace

Because we do not know the basics of our own religion. We often resort to responding to our anger and desire for revenge.

Yet if we study the life of Muhammad (PBUH) we find that he strongly cautioned against acting on anger or for revenge. And he set the example of how we should behave with kindnes, forgiveness and tolerance.

If we do not attempt to act in a manner similar to how Muhammad (PHUH) would have responded, then what religion are we following? Certainly not Islam.

It is very easy to act on anger, revenge, hatred, etc.

It takes a person of courage and faith to restrain himself when he is angry, to forgive when he has been wronged, to follow the clear examlple set by Muhammad (PBUH).

Hamza Yusuf also has some excellent audio CDs at Zaytuna.org for those who are primarily english speaking. One of my favorites is "Vision of Islam"