A Muslim speaks out against the deceptive accusations of “Islamophobia”

John Esposito’s Deceptions on ‘Islamophobia’
Posted By Hasan Mahmud On August 22, 2011

John Esposito

In most cases, a patient won’t even realize, let alone resist, when a doctor betrays him.

I am a Muslim. I believe that accepting our (Muslims’) share in creating “Islamophobia” in the West will help eliminate it. Dr. John Esposito’s recent article in the Huffington Post, “Islamophobia: A threat to American Values?” puts the entire blame on Western “media commentators, hard-line Christian Zionists and politicians.” He even neglects to mention the huge contribution Muslim societies have had on the issue. Esposito ignores that in our global village the West is regularly flooded by violence coming from Muslim societies; violence which is perpetrated in the name of Islam while citing Quranic verses and the Prophet’s examples. The list is long. Here are some examples:

1. A Sharia court stoned to death a gang-raped girl, who was a minor at the time.
2. A Sharia court flogged another girl to death for having an affair.
3. Punishing raped girls/women by Sharia courts is continuing.
4. Wife-beating is openly preached.
5. Child-marriage is openly preached.
6. “No rape in marriage” is openly preached.
7. Female genital mutilation (FGM) is supported by many clergics including some of Al Azhar University.
8. Women are instantly divorced – there is no maintenance in such cases.
9. A woman appealed to a Sharia court to order her husband to beat her not every day but once a week.
10. Sharia-police (Hisba) are invading people’s lives.
11. The persecution of Muslims with different ideas is reaching a frightening level.
12. Non-Muslims are arrested for carrying their holy books.
13. The persecution of non-Muslims is continuous and reaching a disturbing level.
14. Hate preaching against non-Muslims in media is common.
15. Indoctrination of children with such hate is open and alarming.
16. School syllabi are full of hatred directed at “The Other.”
17. Non-Muslim places of worship are destroyed regularly.
18. Lying and deceiving are supported.
19. Civil rights are violently suppressed by “Islamic” governments — often by hanging.

With such phenomena and experience, what else does Dr. Esposito expect from the West except “Islamophobia”? He also blames the West for resisting the Ground Zero Mosque. I wish he knew how many Muslims around the world are opposed to the proposed Islamic center, not because we don’t want mosques, but because before its construction, the notion of the center created “fitna” (division) and violently divided the whole nation.

Esposito is also utterly wrong to state: “Today, opposition to mosque construction with claims that all mosques are ‘monuments to terrorism’ and ‘house embedded cells’ in locations from NYC and Staten Island, to Tennessee and California, has become not just a local but a national political issue.” I wish he knew that only last month a new mosque, Baitul Gaffar, was constructed in New York without a shadow of resistance, or how many euros European governments are pouring into the construct of new mosques. By the way, women were barred from attending the opening ceremony of Baitul Gaffar (House of Creator) in New York.

Throughout his article, Esposito, a respected scholar, uses mini-exceptions as general examples. Despite overwhelming support for Muslims among politicians, he cites a few bad apples. For instance, Esposito says, “Politicians use fear of Islam as a political football.” He also states that “Justice Kagan is being accused of being ‘Justice Sharia.’” Accused? Knowing about widespread violence sanctioned by Sharia law, as the dean of Harvard Law School, Justice Kagan tried “to promote a deep appreciation of Islamic law” with the blessing of Saudi money. If such a person is not “Justice Sharia,” who is? Aren’t there Islamists trying to establish Sharia courts in the USA? Yes, the blueprint of American Sharia courts was created as early as 1993 by TAM, The American Muslims. Plus, who is breeding the home grown terrorists? Are they Western media commentators, hard-line Christian Zionists and politicians?

I wish Esposito mentioned the hate-tsunami against Jews and the West that roars in the media and throughout the pulpits of the Muslim world, constantly in Himalayan magnitude. One cartoon against our Prophet (SA) caused chaos to break loose, but during my long years in the Middle East, I saw many dozens of worse cartoons in the media about Jews and their holy book. No government contained that, nor was there a sane Muslim voice against these cartoons.

Esposito also states that “all Muslims have been reduced to stereotypes of Islam against the West, Islam’s war with modernity, and Muslim rage, extremism, fanaticism, and terrorism” and “all leaders of that [American] society look at all Muslims with suspicion and prejudice.” These are hyperbolic overstatements. I am a Muslim; I live in Canada and often travel to the US – there is a general sense of concern, but in general, Muslims are doing well, living well and are treated well. The overwhelming support and protection of Muslims by common North Americans and churches after 9/11 is on record, but is sadly overlooked.

Yes, “We all [governments, policymakers, the media, educational institutions, religious and corporate leaders] have a critical role to play in countering the voices of hate, the exclusionary theologies and ideologies.” Esposito should give the same advice to the leaders of Muslims world.

Once again, in our global village, the West is continuously bombarded by the news of serious violence from the Muslim world against women, non-Muslims and Muslims of different Islamic ideas, in the name of Islam. This is the main reason for “Islamophobia” — and a logical one.

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/08/22/john-espositos-deceptions-on-islamophobia/  

Pro-sharia lobby shifts into high gear in the USA

Sharia Lobby Shifts into Fifth Gear
Slow down, moving too fast, got to make the U.S. last...
Alyssa A. Lappen
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10318/pub_detail.asp

Sharia advocates desperately want to convince legislators and the public that Islamic law is plain vanilla --- and totally nonthreatening to existing U.S. legal codes. Notwithstanding a nationwide Muslim Brotherhood-backed pro-sharia push, nothing could be further from the truth.

“There are many unpleasant doctrines within Islam,” including its “repugnant” criminal code, honor killings, female genital cutting, and a Quranic verse Muslim clerics often cite, proclaiming “wives as a tilth unto you” (2:223), to deny the existence of marital rape. [1]

So allowed sharia professor Sadiq Reza at an Aug. 25-26 New York Law School (NYLS) conference. Any attempt to enforce its criminal code, he added, “would violate Constitutional law.” He insisted, though, that western Muslims don't “favor” these aspects of Islam and none seek to impose them. Evidence that they do abounds (here, here, here, here, here) but Reza said his broad web search found none.

Northwestern University Islamic law professor Kristen Stilt, too, disdained sharia criticism as “lunacy.” And University of Toronto Islamic law professor Mohammed Fadel referred the audience to a glossy, Soros-funded condemnation of skeptics, breathlessly entitled “Fear, Inc.” to persuade the gullible.

Soon afterward, journalist Joseph Klein recalled some points of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood “scholar” Yusuf Qaradawi, revered by the Islamic world --- and “Fear, Inc.” co-author Wajahat Ali. Qaradawi identifies fully with sharia as described by former CIA director R. James Woolsey and fellow so-called hate mongers headed by Center for Security Policy CEO Frank Gaffney, not Ali and his co-detractors. Qaradawi considers charity “jihad with money, because God has ordered us to fight enemies with our lives and our money,” as I noted in fall 2007. Like the MB-backed Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Qaradawi also seeks to internationally criminalize insults to Islam or Mohammed.

CSP's sharia description is quite correct --- not the “hate” or “lunacy” that Reza, Ali, Stilt and Fadel call it. Sharia is indeed a

“complete way of life” (social, cultural, military, religious, and political), governed from cradle to grave by Islamic law… Shariah is, moreover, a doctrine that mandates the rule of Allah over all aspects of society.”

Despite all sharia's sobering negatives, orchestrated campaigns to hype it and smear its critics --- with Reza in a vocal role --- have worked their expected magic. Days after NYLS's pro-sharia confab, in a Sept. 2 New York Times op-ed, Yale assistant professor Eliyahu Stern dutifully parroted the line of former Harvard Custodian of Two Holy Mosques prof. Frank Vogel, who thinks sharia “quite brilliant.” (On Sept. 3, its shine likewise compelled an unasked Dutch cleric, to “invite” Queen Beatrix to Islam.)

One might think a Yale assistant professor or the Times would check their facts prior to publication. One would be wrong. True enough, over 12 U.S. states are currently considering legislation that would outlaw using laws alien to U.S. foundational precepts in American courts. But Stern misspoke. A “bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote 'the destruction of the national existence of the United States',” he incorrectly groused.

Stern cited the summary of a proposed Tennessee bill version not actually passed into law. The real banana, Material Support to Designated Entities Act of 2011 (House Bill No. 1353), signed into Tennessee law Jun. 16, 2011 to amend its criminal code on terrorism, never once mentions the words “sharia,” “Muslim,” “Islam,” or “Islamic law.” Nor does American and Tennessee Laws for Tennessee Courts, House Bill No. 3768, signed into Tennessee Public Chapter 983 in May 2010, to address foreign laws containing discriminatory or unequal precepts or clauses otherwise alien to U.S. and state civil, criminal and Constitutional laws and public policies.Yet --- evidently, without any independent study of sharia --- Stern admonished its U.S. critics to forgo their Constitutional rights to free speech, and worse, allow and accept U.S. court recognition of Islamic law.

But also on Sept. 2, the American Islamic Leadership Coalition (ALIC) endorsed Michigan's proposed HB4769 version of American Laws for American Courts.

Though apparently oblivious, in assuming a pro-sharia position, Stern effectively accepted a 7th century sharia dictate intended to suppress second class, non-Muslim subjects (dhimmis): Islamic rule prohibits non-Muslims especially, at dire risk, from criticizing Mohammed, Islam or sharia, what most Muslims project as divine, perfect, immutable --- and indivisible --- laws. (Several conference speakers unwittingly echoed Qaradawi and, while lauding sharia, also noted Islam's total ban on its criticism.)

Put another way, the professors want American non-Muslim critics to comply with sharia and shut up.

Many women suffer real “oppression” in Muslim majority lands, for example, especially rape victims living under zina (extra-marital sex) or other sharia statutes, U. of Wisconsin law professor Asifa Quraishi admitted. Yet at every opportunity, including the NYLS conference, Quraishi has pushed hard to integrate sharia for Muslims into U.S. courts. Meanwhile, she's advised international women's rights advocates in Muslim majority countries that they would serve best “not to mention Islamic law at all.”

Quraishi blamed overseas human rights opposition to “sharia legislation (and sharia in general)” for exacerbating the plight of Muslim women. They “created an unwinnable and unnecessary war, of 'sharia vs. women’s rights'.” That again said Muslims will not adapt, and infidels must follow sharia.

Here is the 7th century dictate to second class, non-Muslim subjects (dhimmis), write large: non-Muslims' criticism of Mohammed, Islam or sharia equals blasphemy. Such efforts to silence legitimate discussion render exceedingly troubling any consideration of separate and unequal sharia practices for use in U.S. courts. Already, too many U.S. Muslims ask and expect fellow citizens to censor themselves on sharia-related questions --- or suffer bullying, and name calling best limited to pre-schoolers.

In 19th century Europe, Stern wrote, both political elites and philosophers embraced “fear that Jewish law bred disloyalty.” Immanuel Kant “argued that the particularistic nature of 'Jewish legislation' made Jews 'hostile to all other peoples',” Friedrich Hegel opposed Jewish dietary and other Mosaic laws as limits on an ability to identify with “fellow Prussians” or provide dutiful civil service and Bruno Bauer demanded that Jews renounce private religious rules in exchange for “full legal rights” and citizenship.

However, European Jewish history offers no logical reason for U.S. sharia critics to forgo their “full legal” and Constitutional rights to free speech or to allow Islamic law in secular courts. All citizens, including Muslims, already hold full rights, which no one seeks to revoke. Freedom requires no fixing.

To Muslims, sharia means justice, we're told. Ironically, accepting such law in U.S. courts would create injustice, by making American Muslims more equal than others. They'd get exclusive rights, namely civil court access to religious cannon, not allowed to anyone else. This would substantially differ from the right to privately adhere (within the law) to religious cannon, which America has always allowed. Reinforcing this truth, the courageous U.S. men and women of AILC have clearly enumerated,

“the law should treat people of all faiths equally, while protecting Muslims and non-Muslims alike from extremist attempts to use the legal instrument of shari‘ah (also known as Islamic jurisprudence, or fiqh) to incubate, within the West, a highly politicized and dangerous understanding of Islam that is generally known as “Islamism,” or “radical Islam.”

“We see no evidence that statutes like HB 4769 will adversely impact the free exercise of our personal pietistic observance of Islam, which is not in conflict with the U.S. or Michigan constitutions. We recognize that not only Muslims, but also Jews, Christians and all people of faith need the government to protect their right to peaceful assembly, mediation and arbitration free of coercion, ... within the bounds of American constitutional principles. Therefore, we stand together as a diverse coalition in support of any legislation that serves to protect and integrate our communities into the fabric of this great nation, by strengthening our accountability to the laws of the land, and the constitutions of the various states in which we live.”

If sharia were advanced, progressive, wonderful and “brilliant,” its truth and beauty could withstand all criticism and questions. But sharia raises a major reg flag, in banning free speech and inquiry. How it would play out in the U.S. is perhaps best examined by looks at Britain and Germany, where all sharia's ills stand fully exposed. One needs no PhD or LD to realize that officially accepting any part of a legal system so often demonstrably at odds with our own would, yes, prescribe genuine national disaster.

If anything, intense pressure from closet Muslim radicals for U.S. sanction of sharia should push every state that can to pass its own bill as quickly as possible.

NOTES
[1] Andrew G. Bostom, “Sharia-sanctioned marital rape in Britain---and North America,” American Thinker,Oct. 15, 2010,, citing “Is there such a thing as marital rape?,” AMJAonline Jurisprudence Section, Association of Muslim Jurists in America, May 30, 2007, (first viewed 10/15/2010). Based on sharia, the influential Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America insists that marital rape is not a crime. The imams actually approve of felony attacks on wives. In 2007, a husband asked AMJA,“Is there such a thing as marital rape in the shariah?...is a man permitted to FORCE his wife to have sexual intercourse with him? ... she is naashiz and unwilling to have coitus.” Fatwa # 2982 replied,

“For a wife to abandon the bed of her husband without excuse is haram [forbidden]. It is one of the major sins and the angels curse her until the morning as we have been informed by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). She is considered nashiz [rebellious] under these circumstances. As for the issue of forcing a wife to have sex, if she refuses, this would not be called rape, even though it goes against natural instincts and destroys love and mercy, and there is a great sin upon the wife who refuses; and Allah Almighty is more exalted and more knowledgeable.”

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Alyssa A. Lappen is a U.S.-based investigative journalist focusing on the Middle East and Islam. She is a former Senior Fellow for the American Center for Democracy (2005-2008); former Senior Editor of Institutional Investor (1993-1999), Working Woman (1991-1993) and Corporate Finance (1991). She was previously an Associate Editor at Forbes, where she worked upwards of 12 years (1978-1990), and an editor and staff writer at several other publications. She is also a poet. Her website is http://www.alyssaalappen.org. 

Sharia law rampant in Germany, Britain

Over two years ago, a UK Daily Mail article reported that sharia law courts were far more prevalent in Britain than people realized, with 85 sharia courts operating.

The Muslim Council in Britain’s response was that the report was “stirring up hatred.” That’s the same tired refrain we’re hearing in the U.S.

Now see the latest stunning report, below, from Germany (highlights added). 
.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s information warfare and plan to subvert the West and impose sharia law is so well advanced in countries like Germany and Britain that it may well be too late for them to reverse it.

But it isn’t too late for us. We are fighting back. We are turning the tide. We are winning legislative victories to stop sharia law, and we’re going to fight to win more. Our opponents are running scared and are on the defensive.

Now is the time for us to re-double our efforts and not let up—but we need your help to do so. 
.

Click the image above to see a two-minute clip.

Log on here to become a $19 per month Patriot Partner and we’ll send you the never-before-released resource “Unmaskingthe Enemy Among Us: Information Warfare and the Muslim Brotherhood.”
.
We are now 40% of the way to our goal of 400 new Patriot Partners. Please, if you are able to do so, join us today as a $19 a month Patriot Partner.
.
Isn’t 63 cents a day worth protecting our country from what’s happened to Britain and Germany?

---

.
Islamic Sharia Law Proliferates in Germany
by Soeren Kern
.
September 8, 2011 at 5:00 am
.
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2397/islamic-sharia-law-germany
.
The spread of Islamic Sharia law in Germany is far more advanced than previously thought, and German authorities are "powerless" to do anything about it, according to a new book about the Muslim shadow justice system in Germany.

The 236-page book titled "Judges Without Law: Islamic Parallel Justice Endangers Our Constitutional State," which was authored by Joachim Wagner, a German legal expert and former investigative journalist for ARD German public television, says Islamic Sharia courts are now operating in all of Germany's big cities.

This "parallel justice system" is undermining the rule of law in Germany, Wagner says, because Muslim arbiters-cum-imams are settling criminal cases out of court without the involvement of German prosecutors or lawyers before law enforcement can bring the cases to a German court.

Settlements reached by the Muslim mediators often mean perpetrators are able to avoid long prison sentences, while victims receive large sums in compensation or have their debts cancelled, in line with Sharia law, according to Wagner. In return, they are required to make sure their testimony in court does not lead to a conviction.

German police do investigate cases involving serious crimes. But parallel to that, special Muslim arbitrators, also known as "peace judges," are commissioned by the families concerned to mediate and reach an out-of-court settlement.

In an interview with the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Wagner said political correctness in Germany is contributing to the problem: "I've studied 16 recent crime cases here with Muslim citizens involved. In almost 90% of all cases where Muslim arbitrators were commissioned, the perpetrators were acquitted by German courts or the cases were dropped altogether by the prosecution for lack of evidence. It's an alarming finding, and it throws a bad light on our courts."

In fact, German judges often refer and/or defer to Sharia law. For example, the Federal Social Court in Kassel recently supported the claim of a second wife for a share of her dead husband's pension payments, which his first wife wanted to keep all to herself. The judge ruled they should share the pension.

In another case, the Administrative Appeals Court in Koblenz granted the second wife of an Iraqi living in Germany, the right to stay in the country. She had already been married to him and living in Germany for five years, after which the court said it would not be fair to send her to Iraq alone.

A judge in Cologne ruled that an Iranian man should repay his wife's dowry of 600 gold coins to her after their divorce – referring to the Sharia which is followed in Iran. A court in Düsseldorf arrived at a similar verdict, forcing a Turkish man to repay a €30,000 ($43,000) dowry to his former daughter-in-law.

In March 2007, Judge Christa Datz-Winter, a judge at Frankfurt's family court cited the Islamic Koran in a divorce case involving a 26-year-old German woman of Moroccan origin, who was terrified of her violent Moroccan husband, a man who had continued to threaten her despite having been ordered to stay away by the authorities. He had beaten his wife and he had allegedly threatened to kill her.

Judge Datz-Winter refused to grant the divorce, arguing that a woman who marries a Muslim should know what she is getting herself into. In her ruling, the judge quoted Sura 4, verse 34 of the Koran. She wrote that the Koran contains "both the husband's right to use corporal punishment against a disobedient wife and the establishment of the husband's superiority over the wife." [Editor’s Note: This is essentially the same reasoning used by a New Jersey judge in 2009 when he denied a restraining order sought by a Muslim woman against her husband who was sexually assaulting her several times a day.]

In February 2011, Germany's Federal Labor Court ruled that a Muslim supermarket employee can refuse to handle alcohol on religious grounds. The case in question involved a Muslim man who was employed in a supermarket in the northern German city of Kiel. He refused to stock shelves with alcoholic drinks, saying that his religion forbade him from any contact with alcohol, and was dismissed as a result in March 2008.

In an interview with the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel, Wagner described the Islamic shadow justice system in Germany as "very foreign, and for a German lawyer, completely incomprehensible at first. It follows its own rules. The Islamic arbitrators aren't interested in evidence when they deliver a judgment, and unlike in German criminal law, the question of who is at fault doesn't play much of a role."

When Der Spiegel asked why it was wrong for two parties to try to resolve a dispute between themselves, Wagner replied: "The problem starts when the arbitrators force the justice system out of the picture, especially in the case of criminal offenses. At that point they undermine the state monopoly on violence. Islamic conflict resolution in particular, as I've experienced it, is often achieved through violence and threats. It's often a dictate of power on the part of the stronger family."

Wagner's findings largely confirm a report published by the German Interior Ministry in 2009 which warned that Islamic groups in Germany want to live under Sharia law in Germany.

(Continue reading full article here) 

9/11 REMEMBERED

9/11 REMEMBERED – THE CHALLENGE TO THE WEST FOR THE NEXT DECADE

A decade after 9/11 what has changed? And what are the challenges facing the West?

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali argues that while the West has been traumatised by 9/11, there has been a growing radicalisation of Muslim communities worldwide.

Writing for Idea magazine, he warns that inflammatory teaching is fostering a worldview that seeks the restoration of lands lost to Islam and the Caliphate, as well as the abolition of the nation state in the cause of a united Ummah.

Under this worldview acts of terrorism are portrayed as blows for the liberation of oppressed Muslims and vengeance for past wrongs.

In response, Bishop Michael urges the vigorous defence of freedom of belief and expression, along with the freedom to change one’s beliefs. He believes moves to make religion coercive must be opposed, while the right to persuade must be vigorously defended, along with freedom of opportunity for women and girls.

Those opposed to harsh fundamentalism must be willing and able to ask ‘tough questions about freedom, integration and equality’. He encourages Christians to engage in advocacy for the victims of discrimination and to support the persecuted.

On the Western response to the Arab Spring, Bishop Michael writes: ‘The best protection for the West from terrorism is the encouraging and the establishing of freedom in Muslim countries together with democracy and the rule of law.’

 Statement in full, as published in Idea magazine, Sept / Oct 2011

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, director of the Oxford Centre for Training, Research, Advocacy and Dialogue, looks back at 9/11 and forward at what the Christian response should be…

Ten years on from the ghastly atrocity of 9/11, and all that followed it, it is worth asking about 'the stagnant and fetid waters' that have given birth to terrorism on such a vast and well-organised scale. Commentators have drawn attention to the seething, and growing, resentment in the Muslim world at the dominance of the West, the experience of colonialism, the creation of Israel, the Kashmir dispute and, of course, the casus belli of so much, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

This resentment, however, has not just been the usual one of the weaker against the stronger or of the subjugated against the oppressor. It has also been informed by a world-view which expects 'manifest victory' for Islam, has not been reconciled to lands 'lost' to Islam, whether India, the Iberian peninsula or, indeed, Palestine, seeks the restoration of the Caliphate and the abolition of the nation-state in the cause of a united Ummah or Islamic nation.

Resentment in itself is not enough, even if it is supported by an unfulfilled world-view, to lead to extremism and then to terrorism. What has happened, rather, is that there has been a succession of movements and leaders who have turned the world-view and anger into ideology.

The emergence of Islamic ideology, Sunni or Shia, has led to the rapid Islamification of nearly every Muslim community. Indonesian or Malay Islam, for example, which sat at ease with the Hindu and animistic heritage of people has quite quickly been transformed into recognisable orthodoxy. Even though Sufism, or mystical Islam, has been influential in countries like Pakistan or Egypt for centuries, the public face of Islam increasingly resembles a Wahhabi-Salafi profile.

One of the effects of this process has been the revival of teaching of suspicion and of hate directed against Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims. In some situations, this has been disseminated through text books, in various subjects, and other aspects of the educational system. The increasing and widespread radicalisation of the madrassas and seminaries has meant that newly-emerging religious leaders are themselves immersed in such ideological propaganda. The mass media, and particularly new technology, has also contributed with the ether being dominated by ideological rather than moderate Islam.

The net result of all this has been a growing change in the mindset and expectations of large sections of the population who are encouraged to see bombings, assassinations and other kinds of terroristic activity as being in the cause of liberation for oppressed Muslims, as vengeance for past wrongs and even as victory for Islam which Muslims should expect. At the same time, 9/11 and other acts of terror have had a profound influence on the American and European psyche. It is not an exaggeration to think of it as a traumatisation. The non-Western is seen less and less as 'the exotic' and the 'ethnic' which should be investigated and sampled and more and more as a threat to be avoided and, if necessary, repelled.

In such a highly polarised situation, what should be a properly Christian approach? We must firstly attempt to distinguish between Muslims, Islam and Islamist ideology. We can never lose sight of God's love for Muslims, as for all of His creation, and of our obligation to love them as well. Although we will not agree with everything in the faith of Islam, we can study it with profit to better understand our neighbour and to be able to converse with our Muslim friends, to witness more effectively to them of God's love for them revealed in Jesus Christ and to seek to serve them in his name.

Islamist ideology, however, may need to be opposed if, for example, it seeks to reduce freedom of belief, expression or the freedom to change our beliefs. Christians will also wish to defend freedom of movement and of opportunity for women and girls and to resist punishments that demean the human person, are cruel and do not have rehabilitation and reformation, as well as retribution, included in their overall aim. Although they will want an appropriate role for the spiritual dimension in public life, they will oppose what is coercive and theocratic and promote what is persuasive and democratic. Alongside this, they will want protection for fundamental freedoms and for the rule of law.

Although we need carefully to distinguish between Muslims, Islam and Islamism, we must also recognise that there is considerable overlap here. A devout and pietistic Muslim can be influenced by extremist ideology, and Islamism certainly uses much in the fundamentals of Islam to argue its case.

In witnessing to Muslims, how far can we work with 'the logic of Islam' and when do we have to be not only counter-cultural but also counter-theological? How far can we affirm what the Qur'an teaches, for instance, about Jesus and when do we need to challenge Islam on its doctrine of God, sin, salvation and grace? Dialogue with moderate Muslims is always a pleasure but we have to be realistic in asking whether it will be able to deliver on the hopes invested in it. Any dialogue should avoid being 'kissy-kissy' and ask tough questions about freedom, integration and equality.

Islamism has brought particular hardship, discrimination and persecution for many non-Muslim communities in the Islamic world and even for some Muslims. One aspect of Christian ministry which has come greatly to the fore is that of advocacy; of being a voice for the voiceless and of support for the persecuted Church.

The best protection for the West from terrorism is the encouraging and the establishing of freedom in Muslim countries together with democracy and the rule of law. Narrow self-interest should not lead us to abandon the women and children of Afghanistan or the Christians and Ahmadiyya of Pakistan or the Baha'is of Iran to their fate. If we do this, we can be sure that our turn will also surely come.

For specific comments on the Arab Spring, please follow this link to Bishop Michael’s recent article in Standpoint magazine:

http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/3876

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali is President of Oxtrad, the Oxford Centre for Training, Research, Advocacy and Dialogue, and was the 106th Bishop of Rochester for 15 years, until 2009.  Please follow this link to his website:

http://michaelnazirali.com/

Islamic coalition announces support for Michigan legislation! Bill would prohibit courts from using foreign and sharia law

NEWS   FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MEDIA CONTACT:

Gregg Edgar Gordon C. James Public Relations gedgar@gcjpr.com 602-690-7977

American Muslims speak out against the enforcement of shari‘ah law in America
Islamic Coalition announces support for Michigan legislation that will bar state courts from enforcing ‘foreign law’ above U.S. and state constitution

Washington, DC (August 31, 2011) – A coalition of diverse American Muslim leaders has announced support for a proposed bill in the Michigan State Assembly, HB 4679, that is intended to bar Michigan courts from enforcing any foreign law, if doing so violates any rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and/or the state of Michigan’s constitution.

Like many Americans, members of the American Islamic Leadership Coalition (AILC) have been observing the efforts of a growing number of state legislatures, which are seeking to address the incompatibility of various shari‘ah court systems around the world with the principles and foundations of our Constitutional republic and its laws. As American Muslims, we believe that the law should treat people of all faiths equally, while protecting Muslims and non-Muslims alike from extremist attempts to use the legal instrument of shari‘ah (also known as Islamic jurisprudence, or fiqh) to incubate, within the West, a highly politicized and dangerous understanding of Islam that is generally known as “Islamism,” or “radical Islam.”

We see no evidence that statutes like HB 4769 will adversely impact the free exercise of our personal pietistic observance of Islam, which is not in conflict with the U.S. or Michigan constitutions. We recognize that not only Muslims, but also Jews, Christians and all people of faith need the government to protect their right to peaceful assembly, mediation and arbitration free of coercion, but also within the bounds of American constitutional principles. Therefore, we stand together as a diverse coalition in support of any legislation that serves to protect and integrate our communities into the fabric of this great nation, by strengthening our accountability to the laws of the land, and the constitutions of the various states in which we live.

As American Muslims we are conscious of the fact that Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups and other Islamists and their surrogates in the U.S. are trying their best to portray any opposition to manifestations of shari‘ah law as “racism” and “discrimination against Muslims.” However, as a coalition of traditional, liberal and secular Muslim Americans, we denounce this fear-mongering and playing of the race card, which only serves to mask the Islamists’ highly politicized agenda. According to AILC member C. Holland Taylor, “the Islamist agenda threatens not only the well-being of the United States and its inhabitants, but also undermines and distorts the highest principles of Islam itself.”

“Michigan House Bill 4769 seeks to ensure that American Muslims can live in freedom and safety, in accordance with our constitutional principles, and not be enveloped by the tentacles of medieval, man-made laws that have been falsely accorded divine status,” said the AILC.

“To equate Bill 4769 to racism is not only dishonest, but is a poor and clumsy attempt at making ordinary Muslim Americans feel alien in their own homeland, while creating a rift between Muslims and the rest of our country,” said AILC member Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

Michigan House Bill 4769 states:

“[To] ...limit the application and enforcement by a court, arbitrator, or administrative body of foreign laws that would impair constitutional rights; to provide for modification or voiding of certain contractual provisions or agreements that would result in a violation of constitutional rights; and to require a court, arbitrator, or administrative body to take certain actions to prevent violation of constitutional rights.”

The AILC statement reinforces the American Muslim community's commitment to the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and the separation between religion and state. Unfortunately, Islamist groups would like to compromise this separation and provide cover to medieval, misogynistic and homophobic laws that no Muslim is obligated to demand as public law.

“Shari‘ah law, wherever it has been applied in the public domain, be it in Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, has resulted in untold misery and oppression of Muslims, in particular Muslim women, by Islamists and dictators who invoke shari‘ah law to justify their rule,” said AILC member Manda Ervin. “Many of us fled the Muslim world to escape shari‘ah law and to practice Islam in our personal lives, by moving to the USA and other western countries. We do not wish these laws to follow us here,” she concluded.

The Michigan state senators are not alone in expressing concern about foreign laws creeping into North America under the guise of religious freedom. Many Muslim academics, religious scholars and human rights activists have voiced their concern.

The contrast between what has occurred in Britain and in Canada provides a roadmap for how the U.S. may address these legal issues. In Britain, shari‘ah arbitration courts have been allowed to assume virtually unchecked control of legal arrangements in many Muslim communities. This is creating a ghettoized, medieval and separatist state within Britain. In Canada, however, local Muslims led strong opposition to the Islamists’ shari‘ah agenda and were successful in preventing its implementation, thereby sparing our Northern neighbor the fate of so many Muslims in the United Kingdom, where women are commonly subjected to forced marriage and the denial of basic human rights.

“We Muslims in Canada defeated an attempt by Islamists to sneak shari‘ah law into Ontario,” said AILC member Tarek Fatah, who has been on the front lines of this struggle for many years. “We recognized the damage shari‘ah had inflicted on Muslims in the UK, and its oppressive nature in Muslim-majority countries, and decided to oppose it. We urge American Muslims not to succumb to the Islamists’ propaganda, and to back the Michigan Bill, which will protect Muslims and non-Muslims alike from the impact of foreign laws that violate the U.S. or Michigan constitutions.”

About the American Islamic Leadership Coalition (AILC)
The American Islamic Leadership Coalition (AILC) is a diverse coalition of liberty-minded, North American Muslim leaders and organizations. AILC’s mission advocates for defending the US Constitution, upholding religious pluralism, protecting American security and cherishing genuine diversity in the faith and practice of Islam. AILC provides a stark alternative to the Islamist organizations that claim to speak for what are diverse American Muslim communities. For more information on AILC, please visit our website at http://www.americanislamicleadership.org/.

AILC Coalition Signatories

Bahman Batmanghelidj Founding Member Alliance for Democracy in Iran Virginia, USA	Manda Zand Ervin President Alliance of Iranian Women Maryland, USA	Tarek Fatah Founder Muslim Canadian Congress Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Jamal Hasan Council for Democracy and Tolerance Baltimore, MD	Farzana Hassan, Ed.D. Past President Muslim Canadian Congress Toronto, Ontario, Canada	M. Zuhdi Jasser, M.D. President American Islamic Forum for Democracy Phoenix, AZ
Hasan Mahmud Member, Advisory Board World Muslim Congress Dallas, TX	C. Holland Taylor Chairman & CEO LibForAll Foundation Winston-Salem, NC	Jalal Zuberi, MD Associate Professor of Pediatrics Morehouse School of Medicine Atlanta, GA

Time for the Anti-Abortionists to unite!

Personhood Ohio Seeks to Stop All Abortions Statewide

September 6, 2011

Personhood Ohio is a group whose mission is to ensure equal protection for every preborn child's right to life. Their goal is to obey the Lord's command to love "the least of these" through ending the dehumanization and murder of preborn children in this state.

The group is collecting signatures for a petition to get a Personhood Amendment on the ballot so Ohioans can vote to protect ALL preborn human beings by law.

The Ohio Constitution, Article 1, Section 1 currently reads:

"All PERSONS are, by nature, free and independent, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and seeking and obtaining happiness and safety."

The Personhood Amendment would add this one sentence:

"The word 'person' or 'persons' applies to every human being at every stage of the biological development of that human being or human organism, including fertilization."

The first step is to get 1,000 signatures and submit the legal language of the amendment to the Ohio Attorney General's office for approval.

Director of Personhood Ohio, Zanesville family physician Dr. Patrick Johnston says, "We've had forty years of legal child-killing in America. Why haven't pro-life forces united to put the issue before the voters? Why do we continue to respect the immoral and unconstitutional Roe v. Wade decision? Ohio has the right and obligation to protect all innocent children within our jurisdiction. There will be no lasting mercy and blessing for us until there is justice for the preborn."

Personhood Ohio solicits volunteers through their website www.PersonhoodOhio.com.

They are aiming to get the amendment on the 2012 ballot.

Contact: Dr. Patrick Johnston, Personhood Ohio, 740-453-9173 

DON’T PRAY FOR THOSE IN DEBT!

Here is yet another example of the increasing secularisation of the nation that was once referred to as Great Britain, but which has been downgraded to Britain by the failure of the Nation's Watchdogs over successive governments, a process which has been speeded up with the inclusion of the Liberals in the current government. The following report comes to me from Christian Voice.

• Militant Atheism,
• Persecuted Church

by Stephen

A Christian group has been ditched by an umbrella group of advice lines for offering to pray for people with debt problems.

Christians Against Poverty (CAP) has been forced to leave AdviceUK, an umbrella group representing the interests of thousands of advice workers, after it was decided that praying was ‘incompatible’ with membership.

The decision has been described by campaigners as an ‘extraordinary curtailment of freedom of expression’. It follows a series of similar cases involving Christians whose freedoms have been curbed following the introduction of controversial equality laws.

Steve Johnson, chief executive of AdviceUK, described the offer of prayer by CAP as an ‘emotional fee’. Asked to explain what he meant, Mr Johnson replied that CAP was effectively expecting clients to ‘pay’ for their advice by agreeing to pray with the counsellors. ‘Advisers must not offer or impose their values,’ he added.

However, CAP has been a member of AdviceUK for six years and says it has never made prayer a condition of its free service.

In a statement, it said: ‘While CAP is committed to providing impartial help and advice to all members of society, as an expression of our care for clients we do offer to pray with people.

‘In discussions around ethos and purpose, AdviceUK made it clear that they saw any form of promotion of faith to be incompatible with membership criteria.

‘In order to protect the integrity of both organisations, it was amicably agreed that CAP would not continue to be an AdviceUK member.’

CAP said that its counselling service would be unaffected by AdviceUK’s decision. A spokeswoman added: ‘Given the right support, people can and will pay off what they owe.

‘We help people in debt regardless of age, gender, faith or background. In our most recent questionnaire of more than 1,000 clients, 88 per cent said that prayer was appreciated or OK.’

AdviceUK, which has 870 member organisations, boasts of being ‘in a unique position to influence Government departments and other bodies’. It says it ‘provides a voice to funders and supporters’.

Christians Against Poverty is hardly a group we should have expected to be thrust into the front line of defending the Christian faith in our land. Motivated by a Christian desire to help others, they have simply gone about doing good, taking no payment for their services, declining to become involved in politics. Butprayer is a central part of their ministry, as you would expect of a Christian agency.

A common question asked of Christian Voice by secularists is ‘Why are you spending all your time protesting against what you see as evil?  Why aren’t you out helping the poor and needy?

Christians Against Poverty is doing exactly that, but even that is not good enough any more, except if they deny their faith and the Lord Jesus Christ.  No longer do our good works shine before these men, who will contrive to find something evil to say about Christians whatever we do.  Truly, every Christian agency and every church involved in social work is now in the front line.

READ: 1Sam 2:30  Wherefore the LORD God of Israel saith … them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.
Luke 12:8  Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:
Matt 5:16  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Titus 2:7  In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity, 8 Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.

PRAY: For Christians Against Poverty that they will stand strong. Pray that God will honour their stand and make them an even more powerful force to help people out of debt.

EMAIL: info@capuk.org to let CAP know you are praying for them.  If you want to invite CAP to speak at your church, email mattsanderson@capuk.org

EMAIL: steve.johnson@adviceuk.org.uk to protest at his treatment of CAP. You could also let him know you are praying for him!

Broken Britain : National Prayer Tour by Premier Radio

As a result of the recent riots and unrest in our nation we are conducting a National Prayer Tour across Britain.

We are calling Christians in each of these major cities to join with local church and civic leaders to pray over recent events.

• North East - Sept 13th - Bethany Christian Centre, Hetton Road, Houghton Le Spring, Tyne and Wear, DH5 8PF
• Manchester - Sept 14th - University Place, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL
• Birmingham - Sept 15th - Birmingham Christian Centre, Parade, Birmingham, B1 3QQ
• Bristol - Sept 16th - Christ Church Clifton, Clifton Down Road, Clifton, Bristol, BS8 3BN
• Liverpool - Sept 20th - Liverpool Lighthouse, Oakfield Road, Anfield, Liverpool, L4 0UF

Reflection: Peter Kerridge (CEO Premier Christian Media)
Prayer: Jonathan Clark (Premier Lifeline) 
Worship: Graham Kendrick
Contribution: local leaders

The last few weeks have seen turmoil on our streets and in the financial markets. We live in a time when our nation truly needs our prayers. Premier Love Britain is calling people across our nation to join us for "Premier's Prayer for Our Broken Nation", a Prayer Tour including Graham Kendrick leading worship. Key local leaders will lead prayers for the healing of our communities and visit five areas:North East, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristoland Liverpool. Be part of this strategic event at this crucial time.

These events are free and no booking is necessary.

'Persecuted Christians in the Muslim world' : new article from Barnabus Fund

New Article by Dr Patrick Sookhdeo

Persecuted Christians in the Muslim world

Blessed are the peacemakers

In 1991 I was the pastor of a church in east London at the outbreak of the first Gulf War, when the far right had threatened to attack British Muslims. Members of my congregation went unprompted to the local mosque and surrounded it, to protect it and the Muslims against any violent attacks.
Our Lord says that the peacemakers are blessed (Matthew 5:9). His disciples must live at peace among ourselves, and with non-Christians too as far as we can. We should also try to make peace between other people and seek to resolve conflicts.
So Christians today must seek to make peace among people of different religions, including Islam. This may involve joining in conversations with Muslims to build good relationships with them, or between them and others. And we must firmly confront fear and hatred of Muslim people.
But a response from the Muslim side is required too. There can be no real peace while many Christians in the Muslim world are persecuted for their faith.

Christ’s broken body

In most Muslim-majority countries Christians have a lower status than Muslims, and they are subject to discrimination and restriction. These may leave them locked into poverty, illiteracy and poor employment, without even the basic necessities of life. And as a despised and disadvantaged minority, they are vulnerable to more severe persecution.
Often this is initiated by the state. In Saudi Arabia the government forbids non-Muslims from practising their faith publicly. In Iran the regime has arrested and detained many converts from Islam. In Pakistan the “blasphemy law” demands a death sentence for “defiling the name of Muhammad”, and Christians are at particular risk from malicious and false accusations.
I am a convert from Islam. The Islamic law of apostasy prescribes the death sentence for me and any adult male Muslim who leaves his faith. Although the penalty is rarely imposed, the apostasy law generates such intense hostility towards converts that they often face persecution and violence. In Afghanistan, TV footage showing converts being baptised triggered a frenzied anti-Christian response last year and calls for them all to be killed.
Physical violence against Christians by Muslim militants is also common. Homes and churches may be destroyed by mobs, and whole Christian communities driven from their villages. Individuals are raped or kidnapped, beaten up or imprisoned, and many are murdered. The last two years have seen a sequence of horrific massacres by Muslims against Christians in Nigeria.
The recent revolutions in the Arab world, which many have hailed as an “Arab spring”, may turn out to be a Christian winter. Democracy may produce more strongly Islamic regimes and the fuller imposition of sharia law in Egypt, which will restrict Christian worship and witness and endanger converts further. In Syria, the fall of the regime could lead to an anti-Christian bloodbath.

Hope and aid for persecuted Christians

Barnabas Fund supports our Christian brothers and sisters in the Muslim world (and elsewhere) where they suffer discrimination, oppression and persecution because of their faith. We channel donations from Christians and churches into a wide range of projects run by local churches and Christian ministries.
Recent projects have included food for Iraqi Christian refugees in Syria, emergency relief for flood victims in Pakistan, Christian schooling, training for Indonesian church leaders, self-sufficiency projects in Egypt, care for converts in the Arab world and victims of violence in Nigeria, and many others.

Aasia Bibi is currently on death row in Pakistan

The service of Christ’s people in their need is part of our service to Him. “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me,” says Jesus in Matthew 25. We would like Christians in Islamic countries to be able to live at peace with their Muslim neighbours without fear. But while they still suffer because of their love for the Lord, it is our calling and our privilege to stand with them.
The fifth-century theologian Augustine said that hope has two daughters: anger at the way things are and courage to see that they do not have to remain that way. And Dr Martin Luther King said, “You know, my friends, there comes a time when people get tired of being trampled down by the iron feet of oppression... And we are determined to work and fight until justice runs down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Aasia Bibi, a Christian mother of five, is currently on death row in Pakistan, falsely accused under the blasphemy law. If her appeal fails, she will face execution later this year. Two Pakistani politicians who took up her case have been assassinated, and many Muslims, even in the West, believe that she should be killed. It is Christians such as Aasia, persecuted for their faith and without other help, whom Barnabas Fund exists to support.