This post has been co-authored with Rabbi Jack Romberg, Temple Israel, Tallahassee, FL.

We write this as two friends, a Jew and a Muslim, both with leadership roles in our respective communities. Together we have broken bread, facilitated interfaith dialogue, and come to the realization that we have the same goal of peace, understanding and respect for people of all faiths and backgrounds. The recent spate of violence between Hamas and Israel presents a new test for us. Yet, in the end, even as we might have some disagreement on the details, or in parsing the conflict, we find that we share the same hopes, ideals and values. We both must wrestle with some inconvenient truths.

Whether the blood spilled is Israeli or Palestinian, it is red. Responsibility for spilling that blood is on the hands of both Israel and Hamas. Both of us recognize that while the rocket attacks on Israel are a despicable act of terror, we also both recognize it is the civilian Palestinian population that is paying the steeper price with its blood. In looking for reasons why this situation exists, one of us would first point to Hamas’s refusal to accept the existence of Israel, its constant use of terror tactics, and its indiscriminate launching of rockets against Israeli civilians. The other would emphasize the brutal blockade of Gaza that has created shortages of the basic necessities of survival for the residents of Gaza, the refusal of the current Israeli government to work seriously towards a two-state solution, and the horrifyingly high level of civilian deaths, especially children, with each Israeli reprisal.

Despite our obvious deep connections to different sides in this conflict, we both are appalled by the never-ending cycle of violence — rockets get fired, Israel responds. Israelis keep running to shelters, Palestinian civilians keep dying. Both of us are appalled by the evidence that Hamas is placing innocent Palestinians in harm’s way to score sympathy points. Both of us are appalled by Israel’s shelling of four Palestinian teens playing on a beach while professing not to be targeting children. We are both tired of narratives that cast one side as “good” and the other as “evil.” We both believe that Israelis and Palestinians have a right to exist in peace, prosperity and freedom.

Neither of us are politicians. Neither of us are experts in foreign policy. We do not have any understandings of the palace intrigues that take place in the great halls of power. So we offer no long term diplomatic solutions. But we do have opinions that are aspirational without being utopian. Start with an immediate cease fire. The warring parties need to cease and desist immediately. No more Hamas rocket fire. No more Israeli shelling. And most importantly, both sides need to not cheer the death and destruction of the other. War is never holy. Perhaps sometimes war can be just, but there is nothing holy or just about Hamas targeting Israeli civilians or the death of Palestinian children caused by Israeli bombardment.

Next, the borders of Gaza must open and the blockades by Israel and Egypt must end. Hamas must be disarmed and if necessary, peace monitors can be put in place to insure both sides abide by the agreement. Let us recognize that Hamas is a failed organization whose rockets have not purchased one ounce of improvement for the Palestinians of Gaza. Given the tools to create a workable economy and government in Gaza, they have chosen violence and despair for Palestinians. Let us recognize that by perpetuating the blockade of Gaza, in essence creating a large open air prison, Israel has created a situation that breeds violence.

Both of us believe that peace will come to the Middle East only when all sides love their own more than they hate their adversaries. Peace will come when the benefits of living with each other exceeds the cost of killing each other. Peace will come when our own country, the United States, acts as a true neutral broker and not heed those voices that marginalize Arabs and Muslims and sees further militarization as a solution to the conflicts in the region. Israelis and Palestinians both have a proud history of survival and heroism against all odds. Both need to recognize that an eye for an eye only makes the world go blind.

Parvez Ahmed a Fulbright Scholar teaches at the University of North Florida. Rabbi Jack Romberg is with Temple Israel in Tallahassee, FL.

Also on Patheos, July 5, 2012.

Nearly 4 in 10 Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam and Muslims. That number has remained steady since 9-11. Several factors contribute to this negative perception, certainly none greater than Muslims, albeit a few, committing terrorism in the name of Islam. The media exasperates this negativity, as aptly noted in Edward Said’s 1981 classic Covering Islam. However, some media outlets are more egregious than others. A 2011 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) found that the majority of Fox News viewers perceive that Muslims want to establish Shari’a law in America and express the distressing view that Muslims are NOT an important part of America’s religious fabric. Nearly 7 in 10 viewers of Fox News believe that the values of Islam are at odds with American values. In contrast fewer than 4 in 10 viewers of Public Television hold such negative perceptions.

The difference between Fox News viewers and those who watch Public Television is palpable. Spurring the gulf of difference is the content of programming. Fox News did not find anything morally objectionable with airing the virulently Islamophobic movie “Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam.” While cognizant of the threat from those who kill in the name of Islam, public television and radio has better grasped the importance of providing viewers and listeners with the opportunity to develop a more holistic view of Islam. The fact that 4 in 10 Americans have never socially interacted with a Muslim, necessitates such holism.

On Friday, July 6 at 9 pm EST, PBS will nationally broadcast a documentary titled, “Islamic Art: Mirror of the Invisible World” narrated by Susan Sarandon. The documentary is a timely reminder about the many contributions made by Muslims to art and culture. As an educator, I am looking forward to this documentary as it adds to a growing collection of well-made documentaries that provide a semblance of balance to the general propensity in the media to stereotype Muslims.

Recently I was conducting a Sunday school class for a group of Muslim teenagers at my mosque. To my great disappointment, but not surprise, I found that the Muslims are almost as ill-informed as my non-Muslim elderly students who attend my continuing education class on Islam that I teach at my university. Both groups did not have an appreciation for the many innovations that the Muslim world has given us, which we take for granted in our daily lives. The word coffee has its genesis in the Arabic qahwa, which became the Turkish kahve then the Italian caffé. The game of chess originated in India but it was introduced to Europe by the Moors in Spain during their tenth century rule. The word rook comes from the Persian rukh, which means a chariot. A millennium before the Wright brothers, Abbas ibn Firnas made several attempts to build a flying machine. He had constructed a device that allowed him to stay in flight for over 10 minutes. He crash landed and correctly concluded that he had forgotten to give his invention the tail it needed to stabilize while landing. Shampoo was introduced to England by a Muslim who was appointed Shampooing Surgeon to King George IV. Many of the modern-day surgical instruments are nearly the same design as devised by a Muslim physician named al-Zahrawi in the 10^th century. Almost half a century before Louis Pasteur, children in Turkey were being vaccinated to inoculate against small pox.

The British non-profit and non-religious organization the Foundation for Science, Technology and Civilization through their 1001 Inventions exhibits and research is helping to reintroduce these facts to not only the Western world but also to Muslims. They have held exhibitions and film shows from New York to Istanbul.

Criticism of Muslims, when warranted, is a legitimate exercise in public discourse. But our national interests are ill-served if we only criticize and never appreciate. We are still paying the price of our many adventures in the Muslim world often initiated on a foundation of misguided views about the beliefs, history and culture of Muslims. Recently TIME magazine ran a cover story asking the rhetorical question “Is America Islamophobic?” I do not believe so. PBS airing yet another documentary about Islam suggests that a small but critical mass of Americans remain open minded about better understanding other cultures and religions. Critics of public radio and television, I am sure, will accuse PBS of a pro-Islam bias. And many Muslims may hastily conclude that the negative attitude of Fox News viewers is representative of the general unawareness of Islam in America. PBS’s Friday night national broadcast provides both critics countervailing facts to reconsider their stereotyping.

As it was in 2008, the campaign for the Presidency of the United States has turned ugly over the question of religion. Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum has attacked President Obama over his “phony theology,” which he later said was in reference to President Obama’s “radical environmentalist” agenda. That environmentalism, even if supposedly radical, is being confused with theology is beyond bizarre.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney accused President Obama’s administration to have “fought against religion,” a reference to the Obama administration asking all employers, including faith-based (but not churches), to cover contraception in their health insurance drug plan. President Obama’s compromise, which allows women to receive contraceptives without religiously affiliated organizations having to directly pay for it, has earned the support of many Catholic employers and women’s health providers. But it was not enough to stop Mitt Romney from making ludicrous accusations. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich, not to be outdone, has accused President Obama of “infanticide.”

During the contraceptive controversy, a few religious leaders accused President Obama for allowing the state to interfere with religion, certainly a line that should never be crossed. But this principle should be equally applicable to both state and religion. Religious leaders should not interfere in matters related to state.

While many religious leaders act responsibly by refusing to use their pulpit to sway voters, some have waded into the thicket of political fights by acting as surrogates to political candidates and parties. Franklin Graham, a well-known evangelical preacher, recently cast doubt about the president’s faith. The candidates for president all remained silent, suggesting a tacit encouragement for using doctrinal purity to determine eligibility for political office. Such silence seems paradoxical given that three of the candidates are religious minorities, two Catholic and the third a Mormon. Moreover, why has religion been narrow-casted so as to revolve around a few hot button political issues of abortion, contraception and gays, to the exclusion of arguably more important topics such as poverty, justice and corruption, issues that all religions discuss at length?

Had Mitt Romeny, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich been consistent in their defense of religious liberty, one may have been slightly forgiving of their hyperbolic rhetoric. But they chose to wave the flag of religious liberty only when it suited them politically, after all Catholics make up nearly one quarter of the electorate. Disconcerting is their silence when other religious minorities are subject of government intrusion of their constitutionally protected rights.

A recent Associated Press investigation has revealed that the New York Police Department monitored Muslims in New York and surrounding states for no other reasons except their faith. According to the AP,

“Police trawled daily through student websites run by Muslim student groups at Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Rutgers and 13 other colleges in the Northeast. They talked with local authorities about professors in Buffalo and even sent an undercover agent on a whitewater rafting trip, where he recorded students’ names and noted in police intelligence files how many times they prayed.”

No wrongdoing was alleged for any of the monitored students. The AP report shows a disturbing infringement of the constitutional rights of freedom of religion (First Amendment) and freedom from illegal search and seizure (Fourth Amendment). Silence from the Republican presidential candidates, including the libertarian Ron Paul, is deafening.

President Obama’s silence is also disconcerting. However, in the past his Justice Departmentassured Muslim leaders that the Obama administration will remain vigilant against religious profiling. Following an investigative report in the Wired Magazine, which showed material being used for training law enforcement contain many falsehoods about the American Muslim community, FBI Director Robert Muller met Muslim and Arab leaders. He assured them that the Bureau is removing from the curriculum any material that contains factual errors or stereotypical depiction of Muslims and their faith. Recently, President Obama apologized when reports surfaced of Qurans being mistakenly burned at the U.S. military bases in Afghanistan.

Religion is very close to the heart of all who practice their faith. Making religion a wedge issue is a great disservice to our nation, where diversity of religious views is our strength. The great poet Rumi pricked our conscience best when he asked, “Why do you stay in prison, when the door is so wide open?” Why take a narrow view of religious liberty and only express outrage when it is politically expedient? Such opportunism undermines the pluralistic fabric of our nation, which requires all of us to work together to solve our problems, even while holding dear our deepest differences.

Good evening. Shalom, Peace and Salaam-

It is my great honor and pleasure to be here today.

Today is a day whose memories are seared into our individual and collective consciousness.

Today is a day that is profound and yet instructive.

Today is a day that is solemn but also a reminder of our capacity to triumph over tragedy.

Rabbi Alvin Fine in his celebrated poem, “Life is a Journey” wrote:

“Birth is a beginning and death a destination.
…..
From innocence to awareness
And ignorance to knowing;
From foolishness to discretion
And then, perhaps, to wisdom;
From weakness to strength
…
From offense to forgiveness,
From loneliness to love,
From joy to gratitude,
From pain to compassion,
And grief to understanding –
From fear to faith….”

The good Rabbi in poignant words reflected eternal truths. Such sentiments are not only part of his Jewish spirituality but are also at the heart of all other great religious traditions. Rabbi Fine could have read this from the pulpit at a mosque or a church and the congregation would have nodded approvingly.

Such commonality between the essential core of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, what we often call the Abrahamic traditions, ought to be our springboard to transform ourselves “From Fear to Faith, From Grief to Understanding.”

Grief, fear, ignorance, loneliness, pain, weakness and foolishness are all part of our human existence. These emotional responses sometimes are useful defense mechanisms, allowing us the means to cope with tragic situations. And yet if such feelings linger then they can also be debilitating.

And so with the passage of time and by reaching deep into our indomitable human spirit we hope to arrive at place where we develop understanding, gratitude, compassion and love. In this journey to rebuild and renew, we stand in need of God and we stand in need of each other.

On the 10th anniversary of the fateful terrorist attacks against our country, it is fair to ask – have we overcome our fears and regained our trust in humanity. Have we overcome our grief and gained new insights about the world we live in?

While we had no choice in being attacked we did and do have a choice on how we respond. Ten years ago we asked questions such as – Why us? Why they hate us? Where were you when you heard the news? What did you feel?

Today the relevant questions are we safer? Are we freer? Are we better off? And finally, where do we go from here?

The fact that there has been no large scale attack since 9-11 creates a perception that we are safer. And yet Americans continue to die at the hand of terrorists. Sometimes the terrorists are foreign born, such as the 9-11 attackers.

Sometimes they are people who we entrusted to protect us, such those who bombed a federal building in Oklahoma in 1995 or the Army major who gunned down his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009. And sometimes the terrorists are our neighbors, such as the gunman who went on a rampage in Arizona killing several innocent people and nearly killing a U.S. Congressman.

Terror comes in many forms. While being vigilant we must also restrain ourselves from applying superficial narratives, which can do more harm than good.

The lingering fear of another attack has caused us to significantly change our lifestyle. In our effort to guard against any and all possible attacks, we have sacrificed essential liberties and accepted cosmetic security measures. Even if we accept the argument that we are safer, we are not the same America we used to be. In the words of my friend David Cole, professor at Georgetown University, we are less safe and less free. Benjamin Franklin’s prophecy that those who trade away liberty to be more safe deserve neither has sadly come true.

But are we better off today?

In 2001 the U.S. GDP per capita was second in the world and the U.S. economy the undisputed and unchallenged leader in the world. In 2011 U.S. GDP per capita is 9th in the world with several major economies closing in fast. China was ranked 129th in 2001 is now ranked 24th.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average was around 9600 on September 10th 2001. On Friday the Dow closed at a little below 11,000. This represented an anemic 1.4% annual growth rate in the decade after 9-11. In the decade preceding 9-11 the Dow grew at the rate of about 22% per year.

In 2001 the U.S. had a 128 billion dollar budget surplus. In 2011 we have a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit. Gas was about $1.50 per gallon in 2001 and is nearly $3.60 per gallon today. Unemployment rate was 4.9% and today is it 9.1%, more than doubled.

It is true that not all of the economic problems are related to 9-11 or even connected to it. Much of the bleak picture is attributable to the economic recession and financial market troubles that started in 2007. Yet it is undeniable that the costs of 2 ½ wars (Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya) has crossed 1.24 trillion dollars and has had an indelible impact on our life at home and our image abroad.

The changing face of the world after 9-11, is most easily recognized every time we go to the airport to take a flight. The changing face of the world after 9-11 is most readily felt by the military families who bear the disproportionate burdens of keeping us safe. The human toll from the death of soldiers to soldiers returning with life altering wounds has been staggering and yet as a society we have mostly paid lip-service to their plight.

Today we are also less tolerant of each other and generally uncivil in our public discourse. One minority community, the American-Muslims, have been particularly challenged after 9-11. In addition to the things that worry all Americans, Muslims have to put up with increased scrutiny of their activities and constant second guessing of their motives, not to mention discrimination or profiling. Last year, a survey released by Time showed nearly six in ten Americans held an unfavorable view of Muslims. A Gallup poll released the same year revealed four in ten Americans admitting to “feeling at least ‘a little’ prejudice” towards Muslims.

The tragedy of 9-11 naturally evoked fear and many of our fellow citizens mistakenly felt that reducing the freedom of others will increase our safety. During difficult times we need the courage to understand others. Mutual respect is the cornerstone of great civilizations. All great religions of the world teach us this.

In the Jewish tradition, one of the basic teachings of Avot, understood to be Ethics of the Fathers, is the necessity of respecting others – respecting their space, their property, their right to opinions and their humanity. Respect for humans is a distinctive Torah value, as respecting human’s leads to appreciation and reverence of the Almighty Himself.

The Christian tradition asks that honor and dignity be afforded to everyone. “For in the image of God has God made man.” (Genesis 9:6)

In the Islamic holy text the Quran we read – “O mankind! Surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other; surely the most honorable of you in the sight of Allah (God) is the most righteous of you; surely God is Knowing, Aware of all things.” [49:13].

And yet many times throughout history, people of faith have fallen short of these ideals. A small minority among all faith groups have developed a militant form of piety. The genesis of such militancy is the world view, common to extremists, that God is on their side. They fail to heed the common sense sentiment of Abraham Lincoln that rather than falsely claiming whose side God is on, it is far better that each one of us strive to be on God’s side.

Unfortunately many of my fellow Americans have mistakenly concluded a link between terrorism and my faith of Islam. A closer scrutiny reveals that such heinous actions are a misrepresentation of core religious teachings. The Quran emphasizes sanctity of life, “and do not take any human being’s life (the life) which God has declared to be sacred.” (Chapter 6:151).

The Islamic traditions honor Christians and Jews as People of the Book and states, “Those who believe (in the Quran), and those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures), and the Christians, and the Sabians, and who believe in God and the last day and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.” (2:62)

Terrorism is not a result of any religious teaching. Equating terrorism with any religion makes a community of faith doubly vulnerable – to both the random acts of terror and the ensuing backlash.

All of us can make a difference. We must regain the best of our faith traditions and our core American values. In my faith tradition there is a famous saying: “Do you want to love God? Then start by respecting those you live with.”

Such inward introspection will help us live up to Rabbi Fine’s optimism that from within the depths of unimaginable tragedy can arise the best of our collective and common values.

I will leave you with a poem from my native India, from a poet named Tagore who in his Nobel Prize winning work the Gitanjali (Ode to God), wrote,

In desperate hope I go and search for her in all the corners of my room; I find her not.
My house is small and what has gone from it once, can never be regained.
But infinite is Thy mansion, my Lord, and seeking her I have to come to Thy door.
I stand under the golden canopy of Thine evening sky and I lift my eager eyes to seek Thy face.
I have come to the brink of eternity from which nothing can vanish–no hope, no happiness, no vision of a face seen through tears.
Oh Lord, dip my emptied life into that ocean, plunge it into its deepest fullness.
Let me for once feel the lost sweet touch – the allness of the universe.

Thank you.

May God bless you. May God bless the United States of America.

Published in Khaleej Times, September 1, 2011.

Last year, during a raging controversy over the building of an Islamic center in Lower Manhattan, Time Magazine ran a cover story titled, “Is America Islamophobic?” Shortly thereafter, a poll released by Time showed nearly six in ten Americans held an unfavorable view of Muslims. A Gallup poll released the same year revealed four in ten Americans admitting to “feeling at least ‘a little’ prejudice” towards Muslims.

The Gallup poll indicated that these adverse attitudes are likely the result of most Americans (62 per cent) personally not knowing anyone who is Muslim. The incessant headlines about violence in the name of Islam have led nearly one in two Americans to erroneously conclude that the faith of Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence.

But beyond the headlines lurks another reality.

A recent study by the newly established Abu Dhabi Gallup Center concluded, “Muslim Americans are satisfied with their current lives and are more optimistic than other faith groups that things are getting better.” Muslims in America continue to profess a positive attitude despite being misunderstood by many and demonised by a few.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, an American non-profit civil rights organization dedicated to combating bigotry, wrote in a recent report that “…certain Americans, [who have been] prodded into paranoia by clever activists, opportunistic politicians and guileful media players, seem downright eager to deny Muslims the guarantees of religious freedom and the presumption of innocence.”

In New York, educator Debbie Almontaser was compelled to resign from a secular Arabic-English public school after she was misquoted in the New York Post, which “clever activists” exploited to insidiously imply she supported violence. However, when a similar cast of characters tried to rile up a controversy by selectively misquoting me to derail my nomination to the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission, they were effectively thwarted after influential leaders stood up to condemn the witch-hunt, which lead to the City Council voting in favor of my candidacy.

This year, extreme right-wing activists rallied voters in Oklahoma to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting judges from making rulings based on sharia, the source of Islam’s religious and moral laws. A federal judge blocked the implementation of this referendum, but more than a dozen states are considering “banning” sharia. Meanwhile Congressman Peter King of New York continues his series of unbalanced congressional hearings about the “radicalization” of American Muslims, which negatively stereotype the Muslim community with the imprimatur of the US government.

Despite the efforts to marginalize this community, Muslim life in America remains vibrant, youthful and nuanced. According to Gallup, the average age of American Muslims is significantly lower than people of other faiths. This youthfulness explains why Muslims are least likely to vote despite having the most positive attitude towards American democracy, although they also have the least positive view of law enforcement and US military engagement abroad.

One of the most common complaints about Muslims is that they do not condemn terrorism as much as they ought to. Following the London bombings in 2005, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote, “To this day, no major Muslim cleric or religious body has ever issued a fatwa [a non-binding religious opinion] condemning Osama bin Laden.” Such spurious statements help solidify the misperception of Muslims being sympathetic to terrorism. University of Michigan Professor Juan Cole and Professor Charles Kurzman from the University of North Carolina have documented many fatwas and statements from Muslim scholars and groups condemning terrorism. One only need enter the phrases, “Muslims Condemn Terrorism” or “Islamic Statements Against Terrorism”, in any online search engine to read the multitude of statements against terrorism.

In fact the latest Gallup survey shows nine out of ten American Muslims saying that they do not sympathize with Al Qaeda and view themselves as loyal Americans. Survey results also show that Muslims are the least likely of all religious groups to say that there is ever any justification for attacking civilians. However, most of their fellow Americans do not see Muslims as being patriotic. To win the hearts and minds of their fellow Americans, Muslims must spend more time not only educating others about their faith but also increase their commitment to endeavors that promote the common good.

Recently, mainstream media and civic groups have begun to question the means and motives of the anti-Muslim network. A report from the Center for American Progress, a progressive research and advocacy organization, shows that from 2001 to 2007 a handful of wealthy donors poured nearly $42 million in financing anti-Muslim activities. Although the money trail is unprecedented, in many respects the challenges facing Muslims are no different from those faced by other religious minorities as they struggled to integrate in America. This gives hope because eventually the marginalized groups found acceptance and respect in mainstream society.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 30 August 2011, www.commongroundnews.org

MEMO TO OSAMA BIN LADEN, NOW DEAD
Parvez Ahmed

Although rejoicing death is not part of the religious traditions of Muslims, Christians or Jews, I cannot help but feel a sense of joyful relief now that you are no longer capable of plotting your evil. Your elimination as a terrorist threat is a victory for peace and justice. Thousands of people from different nationalities, ethnicities and religions around the world have reacted with understandable emotions. Capital markets have reacted by bidding oil prices down and stock prices up, indicating that they are hopeful of greater stability in the Middle East.

You have caused untold misery to people who had no enmity with you. You have dragged the good name of Islam through the mud by wrapping your heinous actions with the banner of Islam. Your views and your methods have long been discredited by credible and mainstream Muslim scholars. But that did not persuade you from ceasing to poison the minds of gullible and vulnerable youths. You took our children brainwashed them into being maniacs and then used them as weapons against us. And in the end you did not even prove your self-proclaimed warrior mantle. You hid behind a woman and used her as a human shield. You are not a martyr. You are a criminal who deserves to be punished by death, under American, international and Sharia laws.

The cancer that you have left behind will still be with us. We will still have to deal with terrorists like you. But we hope that your death will inject rationality in the discourse about terrorism. It will allow our policy makers and leaders to see terrorism less as a political football and more as a criminal activity undertaken by mafia figures like you. Instead of criminalizing a faith, our leaders will use sensible method to go after the criminals without stigmatizing the faith group they belong to.

We are hopeful that your demise will bring some measure of comfort to all the families who have to contend daily with the loss of their loved ones. We are also hopeful that your departure provides renewed opportunities for building stronger bridges of understanding across faiths and cultures.

As peace loving Muslims, we unequivocally reject terrorism and reiterate that no grievances can ever justify the taking of innocent human lives. Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives. Any group that imitates your methods is just as guilty as you are of crimes against their faith and all of humanity.

We are heartened by the fact that no Muslim country took the responsibility of your burial. It is permissible, in fact recommended in Islam to not afford terrorists full burial rites. Terrorists are considered deviants and thus denying them the opportunity for burial rites that seek mercy and forgiveness for the deceased are religiously accepted.

President Barack Obama has eloquently reminded the world that you were not a Muslim leader. He went on to say, “Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.”

In your death you have united us as Americans once more, the same way we were in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Today, like that ill-fated day, people of conscience are once again ready to rediscover the value of peaceful coexistence, so jaded by your rhetoric of war. Even when lamenting or protesting unfair and unjust conditions, we do not want to forget our Prophet’s teachings of seeking peace and forgiveness even in the midst of our harshest hardships. Your fellow Arabs are increasingly rejecting your messianic worldview. In Egypt and Tunisia they have peacefully overthrown dictators. What your violence never achieved, their peace did.

It is my hope that your life and death serve as a lesson to all who ever contemplated using the shortcut of violence to satisfy their desires and needs. In your death as in your life, you have failed. You have dishonored your family and the over one billion Muslims from whom you hijacked the good name of Islam.

There is nothing especially unusual about awards or appreciating the good works of outstanding individuals.

But it is unique to have the sponsoring organization celebrating the audience. That is what happened last Tuesday night during “An Evening of Gratitude” by the Muslim community.

The sentiments were so touching, the positive energy in the Hyatt Regency ballroom so powerful, that it left participants grasping for words.

The Islamic Center of Northeast Florida gave a series of awards at the benefit that in a broad sense were aimed at all the people of good will in the community.
And the sponsors made it clear that this good will did not start recently, but from those days about 30 years ago when there was just a handful of Muslims here.

Speakers from the Islamic Center said thanks for the support they have received from Christians, Jews, Hindus and many others. For instance, help was provided to purchase land for a mosque, for architectural work, for legal work.

And during the unfortunate opposition in the community to the appointment of Parvez Ahmed to the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission, many people of good will stood up and spoke out.

As Imam Joe Bradford said, Jacksonville’s “gracious nature” turned negative energy into a positive.

John Delaney, president of the University of North Florida where Ahmed serves as a professor, said that his support was easy compared to the incredible patience and grace shown by Ahmed.

Mayor John Peyton said that Ahmed was “amazingly unflappable,” that his grace was an inspiration during a grueling confirmation process.

“A lot of good came from this,” Peyton said, by mobilizing the right-thinking people in the community.

But shouldn’t the right-thinking people speak out? What a tragedy if they had not. Times-Union Editor Frank Denton described the coverage as the “journalism of hope.”
To quote the Quran: “By no means shall you attain righteousness unless you give of that which you love” (3:92).

It was a beautiful night that made us proud to be living in Jacksonville.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/editorials/2011-04-25/story/three-cheers-turning-tables#ixzz1KZCXMEMv

Convergence of interests and values
by Parvez Ahmed*

It happens once in a blue moon — the convergence of Western military action with Arab and Muslim public opinion. The last time we witnessed such convergence was during the US-led interventions in the Balkans, which stopped an ethnic cleansing and eventually brought peace to a troubled region of the world. Contrary to assertions from some, Libya 2011 is not Iraq of 2003.

Whereas the war in Iraq lacked any international legitimacy, the military intervention in Libya has legal authority in the form of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. In addition, enforcement of the no-fly zone in Libya also has the support of the Arab League, symbolic as that support may be. But most importantly, unlike 2003, there are no mass demonstrations either in Arab or Western capitals opposing another Western military adventure in yet another Muslim majority country.

The lack of opposition should not be mistaken for a lack of concern. The history of Western military interventions in the region has been largely perceived as neocolonial imperialism. The fact that Iraq remains a bloody mess and Afghanistan a quagmire adds to the anxiety. And yet the hope that has sprung from the peaceful revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt gives us reason to believe that military intervention in Libya, as abhorrent as the idea may be, was the right thing to do in order to thwart the brutality of yet another Arab dictator. Something has fundamentally changed in the Arab and Muslim world. The rest of the world is now being forced, albeit reluctantly, to contend with that reality.

Speaking to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, US Sen. John Kerry gave voice to the optimism being felt by many, despite lingering concerns. “If liberation can be translated into lasting democracy, then the new Arab awakening will carry a vital message: simply, that ordinary people everywhere have the ability to determine for themselves how they are governed. The developments in Egypt and Tunisia also represent a dramatic blow against the extremism that we have been struggling with this past decade or more — a blow against extremism that we could not have dealt ourselves.”

Sen. Kerry went on to say, “But just as the Berlin Wall could not be rebuilt, so we know that the old order of the Middle East cannot be restored.” To stop the restoration of the old order, military intervention in Libya became necessary. If the Muammar Gaddafi regime had overrun Benghazi, as they were poised to do, the Arab spring could have prematurely ended amidst deep suspicion that the West could have stopped the massacre but chose not to. This would have further emboldened the brutal repressions already under way from Yemen to Bahrain. In Yemen the defection of a senior military leader provides hope that if Western powers abandon their realpolitik and finally align their interests with their values, not only the people but also the extant power establishment may reject their brutal overlords.

Michael Gerson, speechwriter to former US President George W. Bush, in a recent op-ed to The Washington Post wrote: “When a government engages in genocide, ethnic cleansing or crimes against humanity — effectively waging war against its own citizens — other nations have the right and duty to intervene. In Libya, this abstract norm became a basis for action. The Obama administration deserves credit for its part in establishing this precedent.” The Arab spring has offered a Sputnik moment for US foreign policy. It appears that President Obama is slowly warming up to the idea that transformative change not only requires moral leadership of words but unfortunately necessitates the use of force when force becomes the only way to stop crimes against humanity. Rwanda still haunts us.

The reticence of emerging democratic powers such as Turkey, Brazil and India to join hands in this effort remains a source of concern. Although negotiations remain the preferred way to end this standoff, Gaddafi’s intransigence coupled with his threat to go door to door to clean out “rebels” offers scant hope for a peaceful resolution.
The extraordinary convergence of Western policy and Arab/Muslim public opinion needs further cementing. Sen. Kerry wants to introduce legislation to financially support “new and fledgling democracies in the region.” Sen. Kerry asserts, “We ought to be helping governments reform their security sectors, building transparency into the fabric of government ministries, strengthening the rule of law and helping leaders to incorporate the views of their public in the day-to-day work that they’re engaged in.”

Turkey, with its long history of democracy and its experience as part of its European Union accession process as well as with enacting changes that brings laws and policies to the standards expressed by Sen. Kerry, must play a pivotal role going forward. Only then can Turkey’s aspiration of zero problems with its neighbors become a sustainable policy.

Ahmed, Romberg and Schlakman: Rep. King’s unAmerican hearings
Published: Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 1:46 p.m.

Before assuming the chairmanship of the House Homeland Security Committee in January, U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) announced his intention to hold congressional hearings on “the radicalization” of the Muslim community. The hearings begin on Capitol Hill this week.

According to a recent poll, while a majority of Americans support King’s hearings, a larger majority says the hearings should focus upon extremism generally rather than upon the American Muslim community exclusively.

Some have observed that leveraging Congress this way is, “akin to racial profiling…that would unfairly cast suspicion on an entire group,” and that these hearings offend America’s proud tradition of religious pluralism and inclusion.
Others say this harkens back to congressional hearings in the 1950s that afforded Senator Joseph McCarthy a platform to exploit the public’s fears by brandishing lists of alleged communists in what he characterized as his patriotic quest to ferret out unAmerican activities, with little regard for civil rights and civil liberties.

King contends, “When I meet with law enforcement, they are constantly telling me how little cooperation they get from Muslim leaders.” But law enforcement professionals may not be called to testify. Perhaps he is unwilling to subject his underlying premise to their scrutiny in open proceedings.

King also asserts that, “Over 80 percent of the mosques in this country are controlled by radical imams,” but Pew survey data indicates Muslims are “decidedly American in their outlook, values and attitudes” and that Muslims in America are “largely assimilated, happy with their lives, and moderate.”

Moreover, a two-year study by Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy and the University of North Carolina concluded that American mosques actually deter the spread of extremism by building youth programs, sponsoring antiviolence forums and scrutinizing the curriculum being taught.

It was a Muslim street vendor who thwarted the Times Square bomber, and Muslims in Irvine, California, concerned about the conduct of a fellow Muslim and his apparent efforts to incite violence reported him to the police, only to learn that he was an FBI informant. The so-called underwear bomber was reported to authorities by his father, who worried that his son posed a threat, and placed the safety of others over his own paternal instincts.

Such examples of intervention prompted U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim elected to serve in the U.S. Congress, to note “about a third of all foiled al-Qaida-related plots in the U.S. relied on support or information provided by members of the Muslim community.”

Can the Muslim community in America do more? Certainly, but this is not a one-way street. It will take more than congressional hearings to encourage American Muslims to be more proactive. Government officials must place additional emphasis upon developing relationships that build trust and confidence.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder tasked America’s U.S. Attorneys to prioritize this kind of engagement. Pamela Marsh, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Florida, has taken a number of constructive steps toward this end. Secretary Janet Napolitano has established similar priorities for the Department of Homeland Security. So have others. However, many members of Congress haven’t even visited their local Islamic centers.

These issues are not limited to the federal government. State and local officials also have important roles to play.

The irony is that King’s congressional hearings conceivably could result in more significant repercussions than Pastor Terry Jones’ rather bizarre “International Burn A (Quran) Day,” the fringe group event that was to take place at Dove World Church in Gainesville, FL, on September 11 last year, or his “International Judge the (Quran) Day” that is slated for March 20th.

While Pastor Jones’ actions test the limits of free speech in America, King’s congressional inquiry runs the risk of stigmatizing an entire community and carries the imprimatur of the U.S. government and misses a significant opportunity to explore meaningful and appropriate policy options to deter all forms of extremism by focusing exclusively on American Muslims.

The vast majority are presumably outraged when extremists commit heinous acts of terror in the name of Islam, and increasingly vulnerable to backlash in the aftermath.

Parvez Ahmed, is a Fulbright Scholar (2009-10) and associate professor at the University of North Florida and a frequent writer the American Muslim experience. Rabbi Jack Romberg leads Temple Israel (a Reform congregation in Tallahassee) and is a commentator on a range of social justice issues. Mark Schlakman is a lawyer and serves as senior program director at The Florida State University Center of Advancement of Human Rights.

Listen to a radio interview on WJCT’s First Coast Connect. Listen to the Dec 6, 2010 show.

A group called the ACT! For America, which by most accounts is a hate group, organized a smear campaign to oust me from the Jacksonville Human Rights Commission, to which I was confirmed just a few months ago. You may remember the contrived controversy my nomination generated at that time. If you need a refresher, visit my blog. Most of April 2010 entries on my blog are about that controversy.

Unfortunately, once again the media played into ACT’s ploy and gave legs to the unfounded allegations made by ACT. The local NPR station, on their show First Coast Connect analyzed the situation. Click on Fri show of First Coast Connect.

On Sunday Dec 5, 2101 the Florida Times Union today, published a summarized version of my speech stating, “We are running excerpts from the speech on this page so readers can judge for themselves. The entire speech can be read on our Opinion Page Blog: jacksonville.com/opinion.”

Guest column: Is Islam compatible with American democratic values?
Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2010-12-05/story/guest-column-islam-compatible-american-democratic-values

In 2005, a Danish newspaper printed a cartoon depicting Muhammad, who Muslims believe to be the last Messenger and Prophet of God, with a bomb in his turban. This set off an international row as protests erupted from Europe to Asia.
In some Muslim countries, newspapers that reprinted the cartoon were closed. European countries evacuated staffs of embassies and Muslim countries withdrew ambassadors. The fallout also had economic repercussions. According to the Gulf News, Danish exports began to fall as consumers in Muslim countries shunned Danish products in protest.

This provoked the question: Is Islam incompatible with Western values? Are Islam and the West destined to have a clash of civilization?

Those who answer yes point to events like 9/11 or the cartoon controversy as proof positive of the inherent incompatibility of Islam and with the West.

Others who are more knowledgeable about Islam and Muslim societies say that neither 9/11, nor the cartoon controversy, are indicative of any inherent clash of values. The antecedents of such events are socio-political. Religion may at best be a contributing factor.

While people debate the place of Islam in American society, another reality is taking shape right before our very eyes.

According to The New York Times, a record number of Muslim workers are complaining of workplace discrimination ranging from being called “terrorist” to being barred from wearing headscarves or taking prayer breaks.

According to federal data, discrimination complaints by Muslims are up 20 percent from last year and up 60 percent since 2005. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has found enough credibility in these complaints that they have filed several lawsuits on behalf of Muslim workers.

This summer we have seen tensions boil over as a pastor attempted to burn the Quran and many opposed to building of an Islamic community center in New York descended to embarrassing levels of incivility.

Unlike you, who are attempting to dialogue and learn, most Americans choose to remain ill-informed. As a result, today more people have a negative view of Islam than in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Our media outlets, mostly cable news shows and radio talk shows, are major contributors to this trend that bodes ill for the long-term sustainability of our national interests.

A few politicians and religious leaders have only exasperated the situation by trying to ride the coattails of fear of Islam to electoral victories.

The situation has gotten so out of hand, that Time magazine ran a cover story, “Is America Islamophobic?” with the following comment: “In France and Britain, politicians from fringe parties say appalling things about Muslims, but there’s no one in Europe of the stature of a former House speaker who would, as Newt Gingrich did, equate Islam with Nazism.”

So how do we go past this rancor? By doing exactly what you are doing today. Trying to learn and attempting to dialogue.

President John Kennedy summed it best, “Tolerance implies no lack of commitment to one’s own beliefs. Rather it condemns the oppression or persecution of others.”

To the question: Is Islam compatible with American values? The answer is yes.
Why? Because in a normative sense (Excerpted from Michael Wolfe’s The Next American Religion):

Islam is democratic in spirit. The Quran, on which Islamic law is based, enjoins Muslims to govern themselves by discussion and consensus.

Islam is tolerant of other faiths. Like America, Islam has a history of respecting other religions. In Prophet Muhammad’s day, Christians and Jews in Muslim lands retained their own courts and enjoyed considerable autonomy. It was the Muslims who made it possible for Jews to return to and live in Jerusalem after centuries of being outcasts.

Islam encourages the pursuit of religious freedom. The Quran clearly states that there is no compulsion in matters related to faith and religion.

Islam emphasizes individual responsibility. Every person is responsible for the condition of her or his own soul. Everyone stands equal before God. America is wedded to an ethic of individual liberty based on righteous actions. For a Muslim, spiritual salvation depends not just on faith, but also righteous actions.

Islam is egalitarian. The Pledge of Allegiance (one nation, “under God”) and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (all people are “created equal”) express themes that are also basic to Islam. If you visit mosques in America, you will find them among the most racially integrated congregations of faith.

Democracy and Islam

I would like to spend a little bit more time on the issue of democracy and Islam with particular emphasis on Sharia.

The former deputy prime minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim wrote:
“It is true that the founding principles of constitutional democracy, as we know it today, have their antecedents in the political philosophy of John Locke, which entered France through the writings of Voltaire and then deeply influenced the framers of the U.S. constitution.

“But the fact that these principles of political freedom and democracy were first articulated in the West does not preclude them from universal application, nor can it be asserted that they have not been expressed in other contexts.”

A majority of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims live in democracies, ample proof that there is no inherent discord between Islam and democracy.

But what about those Muslim majority countries, most of them in the Middle East, which are not democracies?

Is Islam the reason for them being held back?

The Council of Foreign Relations concludes that “a mix of historical, cultural, economic and political factors – and not Islam as a religion – explain why democracy has failed to take root in many Muslim countries.”

In fact, surveys by Gallup and Pew show that clear majorities in the Arab world would favor democracy as a form of government. The people most animated about this are the so-called Islamists.

Outside of the Middle East (which accounts for fewer than 20 percent of the global Muslim population), Alfred Stepan in the Journal of Democracy argues that Muslim nations are on par with – or outpace – comparable non-Muslim developing nations in terms of civil liberties and free and fair elections.

The democracy deficiency in the Arab world is more a function of oil than religion.
State ownership of oil has stifled the development of market economies and government transparency. Oil has allowed the monarchies in the Middle East to make a Faustian bargain with their citizens.

That bargain: Governments will not tax its citizens (oil revenues pay for government budgets) and in exchange the citizens will not demand voting or representation.
Let me quote Anwar Ibrahim, the erstwhile deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia: “If democracy is about giving dignity to the human spirit, then freedom is the sine qua non.”

Within Islam, the great Andalusia jurist Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi in the 14th century, articulated a perspective on the Maqasid al-Shari’a (the higher objectives of the shari’a), demonstrating the central role of freedom as a higher objective of the divine law. The very same elements in a constitutional democracy are moral imperatives in Islam – freedom of conscience, freedom to speak out against tyranny, a call for reform and the right to property.”