altmuslim this week - october 6, 2008 - This week, Sarah's pallin' around with anti-Muslim imagery, Jewel of Medina hits the shelves, and the Brass Crescent Awards kick off for the fifth year running.
|
Call for submissions for new gender blog - We're looking for submissions of articles and commentary for a new gender-focused online magazine that we're looking to launch soon, in partnership with some of the nation's leading Muslim American women activists.  (September 14, 2008)
Looking at the RNC through Muslim eyes - It is upsetting that speakers at the RNC feel they need to resort to declarations of war to get Republicans elected, and saddening that they are oblivious to the very real damage the cause to decent Muslim American citizens.  (September 6, 2008)
|
altmuslim review 030 - Free speech - is it something Muslims can live with? In this episode, we talk about how Muslims cope with (and benefit from) free speech in Western societies. Also, an extended interview with Jewel of Medina author Sherry Jones discussing her controversial book. (October 10, 2008)
altmuslim review 029 - A vibrant Muslim media could have an opportunity to restore balance to the Muslim public image - if it can get on its feet. In this episode, we explore the state of the Muslim media. Also, an interview with the creator of "Muslim Cafe", Navid Akhtar. (July 5, 2008)
|
|
Recent and upcoming talks and offsite articles by altmuslim contributors
The Republican red scare, Wajahat Ali, The Guardian (UK), Comment is Free (October 11, 2008)
Heritage was mixed a long time ago - Irfan Yusuf, Sydney Morning Herald (September 30, 2008)
Shahed will be a guest on BBC Radio 4's " Sunday" programme speaking about the Jewel of Medina controversy (September 28, 2008)
Dangerous liaisons, Wajahat Ali, The Guardian (UK), Comment is Free (September 27, 2008)
Another attack - in the name of whose Islam? - Irfan Yusuf, The Age (Australia) (September 22, 2008)
Violence against women won't stop until men speak out - Irfan Yusuf, New Zealand Herald (September 12, 2008)
Shahed will be participating in a panel discussion, Sourcing Islam, at the Religion Newswriters Association conference in Washington, DC (September 20, 2008)
Muslims have nothing to fear from this book - Shahed Amanullah, The Guardian (UK), Comment is Free (September 9, 2008)
Rushdie is no believer in free speech - Irfan Yusuf, The Age (Australia) (August 8, 2008)
Shahed will be participating in the Progressive Revival group blog at BeliefNet (July 29, 2008)
Western civilization? What a good idea that would be - Irfan Yusuf, New Zealand Herald (July 22, 2008)
Shahed will be speaking about the role of the Web in promoting Muslim civic engagement at the ISNA South Central Zone Conference in Houston, Texas (July 5, 2008)
Shahed will give a presentation, Shaping the Public Debate About Muslims, at the Center for American Studies in Rome, Italy (May 12, 2008)
Zahed will be a guest on BBC Radio 4's " Sunday" programme speaking about religious podcasting (May 4, 2008)
Rafia and Shahed will be guests on South Africa's Channel Islam, speaking about interpreting Islam in the modern world (March 28 & April 4, 2008)
Shahed will be speaking at the CAMP International Leadership Summit in Princeton, NJ (March 29, 2008)
Shahed will be a guest on Radio Tahrir, airing on WBAI 99.5 FM in New York, speaking about the Muslim block vote (April 1, 2008)
Shahed will be appearing on The Agenda with Steve Paikin for a recap of altmuslim's SXSW panel "Online Extremism" (March 26, 2008)
altmuslim is hosting a panel discussion at 2008 SXSW Interactive, "Online Extremism (And The Muslims Who Fight It)" (March 9, 2008)
Count blessings, then tally taxes - Hesham Hassaballa, Chicago Tribune (February 24, 2008)
|
|
Media appearances and analysis featuring altmuslim editors
Domestic crusader - An associate editor of the publication AltMuslim.com—“it’s neither too apologetic nor too antagonistic”—Wajahat exhorts wealthier American Muslims to invest in their own future by creating think tanks and scholarships in art and media instead of collecting luxury cars. “We have to break out of our culturally isolated bubble,” he says.
(October 11, 2008)
National publisher kills Spokane journalist’s book - [Amanullah] sent e-mails to about 200 graduate students in Islamic studies, telling them of Spellberg's "frantic" call and asking if they had heard about the novel. "What I got back was a collective shrug of the shoulders," says Amanullah. "The thing that is surreal for me is that here you had a non-Muslim write a book, and you had a non-Muslim complain about it, and a non-Muslim publisher pull the book." (August 20, 2008)
Self censoring Muslims - "But Amanullah says he never wanted the book pulled. 'I'm upset the book wasn't published,' he said, 'not because I agree or disagree with the book.' For him, 'I don't want to be in the position where we are stifling speech. Preemptive censorship is not in our interest. That's worse than even censorship. We're not going to silence our way out of problems.'" (August 12, 2008)
You still can’t write about Muhammad - "But Ms. Spellberg wasn't a fan of Ms. Jones's book. On April 30, Shahed Amanullah, a guest lecturer in Ms. Spellberg's classes and the editor of a popular Muslim Web site, got a frantic call from her. "She was upset," Mr. Amanullah recalls. He says Ms. Spellberg told him the novel "made fun of Muslims and their history," and asked him to warn Muslims." (August 5, 2008)
Why the silence? - "Both reactionary religion and militant secularism are on the rise, with both displaying a rigid certainty and a desire for power that will do nothing to benefit society. In this context, it is vital that people with open-minded faith speak up and demonstrate alternatives. [altmuslim.com has] set many good examples in this regard." (January 8, 2008)
|
|
We are proud to share content, resources, and strategy with the following media partners:
|
|
|

Pakistani Politician Imran Khan
“Unless we change strategy, the future is in danger”
Correspondent Wajahat Ali manages to speak to Pakistani opposition politician Imran Khan on Monday's parliamentary elections, the first in a post-Benazir Bhutto age.
By Wajahat Ali, February 18, 2008

After nearly a month’s delay due to Benazir Bhutto's assassination, Pakistan’s contentious - some say "historic" - parliamentary elections were held on Monday amidst a sea of violence, unrest, and political instability. One anonymous insider tells me that "these elections are completely rigged, yaar. The results were already in last week. I really pray for Pakistan. There’s going to be a lot of trouble tomorrow." His voice is dejected, cynical, and yet passionate and straining for hope.
Another more popular and influential Pakistani voice is that of Imran Khan. One of Pakistan's most well known personalities of the past twenty years, Khan first made his name as Pakistan's winning cricket captain and sophisticated socialite. He then emerged as a worldly humanitarian and founder of Pakistan’s first cancer hospital.
However, his newest role as the head of Pakistan's Tehreek-e–Insaaf [the Movement for Justice political party] has cast him as one of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf’s most vocal and animated critics. He passionately - some say naively - advocates for Pakistan’s political reform and progression towards an enlightened democracy. After five hours of phone tag on Monday, I was able to speak with Imran on Pakisan's political future after the ballots have been cast.
The polls in Pakistan for the general election are now officially closed. Here's the question on everyone's mind around the world: First, will these elections be free and fair? Second, will the results represent the pulse and wishes of the people?
KHAN: Number one, they are certainly not free and fair. Because the greatest pre-poll rigging ever in our history was done, where the whole State administration was pushing the pro-government, pro-Musharraf candidates. Every party has every day listed the ways the elections have been rigged for the past month. Secondly, it is the lowest ever voter turn out. In fact, I would say that 75% of the people have rejected the electoral process. They did not feel that if your Constitution is suspended, if 60% of your judges have been unconstitutionally sacked, your Chief Justice is under house arrest, then you cannot have free and fair election when the pre-conditions are not there. So, basically, people have rejected the election. If the people have come out to vote, then it is against pro-Musharraf candidates.
So, you're completely convinced that it's rigged against the pro-Musharraf candidates?
KHAN: You can just do any random sampling. You can see that people who are coming in – the PML-Q [Musharraf’s party] if it wins, no one will accept the results. No is going to accept the results.
Ok, so no one is going to accept the results. Here is the natural follow up question. Should we expect much violence and bloodshed following the announcement of the results?
KHAN: I think, As I said, there was a poll conducted and 58% of the people said that they would not accept the result if the PML-Q comes to power. Fifty eight percent! And they would go out and demonstrate. This is from a poll done recently.
I need your thoughts on today's quotation by Musharraf, where he said, "Whatever the result, whatever the result, we will accept it with grace. Whoever is the prime minister, I will work with that person in a reconciliatory mode. We should end the confrontationist politics. Let's enter into a conciliatory politics." Do you believe him? Should the world believe him?
KHAN: No one in Pakistan believes him, because everyone knows he has gone back on his word so many times. He has no credibility. In the first election, in 2002, he said, "All I'm interested in is someone becomes Prime Minister, so I can play golf." And, he did actually anything but that. Again, again, he's making these statements, but he's going to rig these elections to the point where he thinks his party can still win. There was a statement out in the paper in an interview he gave where he said he thinks MQM [a Pakistan political party not expected to win] and PML-Q will win the majority seats and will win the elections.
Well, according to the polls, that's ridiculous.
KHAN: Absolutely. What I'm saying is what he says and what he's trying to do is two different things. We've heard all this – he's made these false promises so many times that no one trusts him anymore.
The two main opposition parties, now this is a rumor, suggested they unite against Musharraf’s party. This again is Benazir Bhutto's PPP led by her husband Zardari and Nawaz Sharif's [Pakistan's former Prime Minister recently returned from exile]. They said if they could capture two thirds of the seats in parliament and form a coalition, then they would win a two-thirds majority in parliament and take steps to impeach Musharraf. Is a united front going to be successful against Musharraf? Or, like you said, all is rigged and all is lost?
KHAN: Well, if there was a two-thirds majority, if they were free and fair elections, they would get it. But, they are not free and fair elections, I'll doubt they’ll get the majority. But, there’s always a fear in our minds that People's Party [Bhutto's party] might for the fourth time bail out Musharraf by doing a power sharing deal with him. Now, really, this is the next step. Are they going to do a power sharing deal with him?
That's the question on my mind and most policy experts and pundits as well. Is Zardari going to do a power sharing deal? Will a power sharing deal be engineered between the United States, Zardari’s PPP, and Musharaff?
KHAN: Well, look, if [Zardari] does so, remember, not only will the People's Party be destroyed, but anyone who now does a deal with Musharraf will destroy himself. If the U.S. backs Zardari - and people will know that if Zardari does a deal with Musharraf, they will know he’s doing a deal to get off his corruption cases [Zardari is affectionately known as “Mr. 10%” in Pakistan due the steep kickbacks he allegedly pocketed during his wife's tenure]. And so, he will destroy his own party. I don't think even People's Party will accept him. [The] People's Party won’t accept that deal.
Let's ask a question for the layman. What are the results going to be tomorrow? What are we going to see?
KHAN: Well, I don't know what the results are. It’s the lowest turn out. But, as we know, Musharraf did a referendum, and there was no one out to give votes, but Musharraf showed, and the election commission showed a 75% turnout! That’s even more than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s turnout! [Benazir Bhutto’s father, who was Pakistan’s popular and controversial Prime Minster, was hung by General Zia-al-Haq following a bloodless coup]. Therefore, no one trusts the results that the elections commissions are going to come up with. That's why we feel it should’ve been an independent election commission. This election commission – no one has any faith in it.
"The West" has popularized the image of Benazir Bhutto and her party, The PPP [Pakistan People’s Party], as saviors of democracy in Pakistan. What is the truth behind that image?
KHAN: Well, I'm afraid [the] People's Party has already bailed out Musharraf three times when he was sinking. They actually went against the democratic movement. We were all wanting the Constitution and the re-instatement of [the illegally sacked] judges, and People's Party bailed him firstly by not resigning from their assemblies - so they legitimized his Presidential elections. Number two, they did not boycott the elections when Musharraf held this illegal, unconstitutional State of Emergency [in November 2007, Musharraf sacked critical judges, jailed attorneys, and shut down NGO's and independent media] and he held elections under the Emergency. And number three, when Benazir was assassinated, all parties wanted to boycott the elections and first find out who killed her. And Zardari wanted to go ahead with the elections again to save Musharraf. If they save him, this will be the fourth time they will save Musharraf, so I don’t think the rank and file of People's Party will accept it. He will damage the People's Party if he does a deal now.
You're an insider to Pakistan's political scene. I want your opinion on this. What is America's interest in supporting Musharraf, and not only him, but also in supporting a power sharing deal between him and Zardari's PPP?
KHAN: Because Musharraf has sold the idea to the Americans – he has sold the myth that he is the only one who can fight the U.S. "war on terror" and he is indispensable. Therefore, the Bush Administration is blindly backing Musharraf, and as a result, you see the situation where Musharaff is completely unpopular in Pakistan. Everyone wants him out. What we’re seeing is that the U.S. administration is backing Musharraf and wanting a civilian façade, which is why they wanted a People's Party deal with him.
Here's what everyone says in America: "If not Musharraf, then it’ll be the Taliban or Al Qaeda taking over Pakistan, so we should choose the lesser of evils."
KHAN: This is an example of Musharraf propaganda. He's selling himself to the West that he is a bastion against fundamentalism and Taliban-ization. It is a complete myth. If you look at Pakistan’s electoral history, even the religious parties were not extreme; even they have hardly got any votes. Whenever we’ve had general elections, they've always been beaten. Today, Maulana Fazlur Rahman fighting in the name of MMA [the right wing, conservative religious party], he's taking a bashing, he's going to barely survive according to the opinion polls. So, people in this country are moderate. Actually, who's fostering extremism has always been military dictatorships. Whenever we've had growth in extremism it's always been under a military dictator. Whenever you’ve had people who have been allowed to vote, the free and fair vote has always marginalized the extremists.
You know Pakistan's image in the world. CNN labeled it as "Terror Central" and the Economist called it "The Most Dangerous Nation on Earth." You have bomb blasts and attacks last week and this week at polling stations, you have kidnappings and disappearances of your diplomats, etc. So how do you convince the world that extremism and violence is not the real face of Pakistan? That Pakistan is indeed moderate under the weight of all this evidence?
KHAN: First of all, the United States backed a dictator [General Zia, Pakistan's ruler under Martial Law from 1977 to 1988] who took us into the Afghan jihad – never consulting the people of Pakistan. CIA and Pakistan's ISI trained these people to fight the Soviet occupation in the art of terrorism. Once the Soviets left, Pakistan was lumbered with these people, these guerilla fighters. Then, this other dictator [Musharraf] then takes us to start eliminating these people. We never went in the first Afghan jihad with the backing of the people of Pakistan. We never went into the second, front line state against terror with the backing of the people of Pakistan. Both were military dictators.
Now, thanks to the way Musharraf has participated in the U.S. war on terror, where Pakistan is killing its own people through helicopter gun ships and bombing villages in the tribal areas – there is a backlash. And that backlash is what’s making Pakistan a dangerous place. The moment we have a genuine, democratic government, and they start talking to people and they start negotiating with people and holding dialogue rather than talking with these bullets and bombs, we will again go back to a normal country.
And I'm sad to say that it is the U.S. backing of a military dictator that has gotten us into this mess. It's the military dictator that got us in there. If we had a democratic government, we wouldn’t have been in this, because our decisions would've been much better than what Musharraf has done. Of course, we should've always backed the U.S. in this war against terror. But, not the way, blindly following every dictate and now getting ourselves into this situation where our country’s own existence is in threat. Now Pakistan, a country that had nothing to do with 9-11, we now are fighting for our existence. And unless we change strategy, the future is in danger.
The natural question then is how can one get autonomy for Pakistani citizens? How do you bring democracy to this country that is currently under the world's microscope?
KHAN: The only way, the only way forward is to have the judges reinstated. Then, they give independence to the media and the election commission. Free and fair elections. That’s the only way out for Pakistan.
How do you get out under the thumb of the military? Is it at all possible?
KHAN: If you have an independent powerful judiciary - that is the way you get out of the military's thumb. They will make the military act according to the Constitution.
Several critics of Pakistan say all this is an example of Pakistan acting as a failed state, and this proves that Pakistan should have never undergone the 1947 Partition with India. Because, well, look at them, Pakistanis are now killing themselves. Is this an accurate assessment?
KHAN: Absolute nonsense! Pakistan is a very viable state. We’ve had a problem because the military kept interfering in our democratic process. We never went through a trial and error period where we could have evolved, where our democracy could have evolved. Now, I think we have, in a way, a very fortunate situation where it looks as if we are finally going to move towards a democratic system the moment our judges are reinstated. And then, Pakistan has a very bright future.
Pretend by some magic, you've become Pakistan's Prime Minster, and you’re given control and autonomy. What would be the first immediate steps and actions you would take to change Pakistan's current course?
KHAN: I would first of all have rule of law and institutionalize the independence of the judiciary. Secondly, I would have an education emergency in Pakistan. Thirdly, I would have an employment emergency. Finally, I would change the economic policies to change it from an elitist system, but change it to make sure that the priority becomes the common man: the bottom 40% of the population. Ok?
Can I get a last question?
KHAN (voice trailing): Ok, I've got to go. Khuda Hafiz [May God protect you].
Khuda Hafiz [May God protect you].
Wajahat Ali is Pakistani Muslim American who is neither a terrorist nor a saint. He is a playwright, essayist, humorist, and recent J.D. whose work, "The Domestic Crusaders," is the first major play about Muslim Pakistani Americans living in a post 9-11 America. His blog is at http://goatmilk.wordpress.com. He can be reached at .
We try to remove any comments that do not conform to our netiquette guidelines. If any comments remain that are in violation, please let us know. The presence of offending comments does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of altmuslim.
Hola.
Imran Khan. Now there is what we call in Mexico a STUD. Brrrrr. He is HOT, HOT, HOT.
Jeez, if I was a Pakistani woman, I would cast all my HALF-VOTES for Imran Khan. Oh Yeah. The country is gone to the dogs, its a failed state. Its gone. Atleast the ladies get to look at a real horse on TV for a few years. Ummmm, life's little pleasures.
I figure if all 100% of the illiterate Pakistani women cast their half-votes for Imran, he should squeak thru as PM, just about.
- Posted by hajibaba on February 18, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Hope you'll followup in about a month so Mr. Khan can demonstrate how to eat humble pie - starting with his certainties about the electoral outcomes. Hope dialog with the militant radicals works out, but suggest care be taken not to burn too many bridges, too soon, with those whom Musharraf cultivated and snookered into helping Pakistan defend her integrity as a nation from the borderland bandits of AlQaida and Taliban.
- Posted by emjayinc (USA) on February 21, 2008 at 10:49 PM
Page 1 of 1
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
|
|