Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Black_Grass

Pages: [1]
1

Irshad Manji - a fairly well know ( at least in Canada) Canadian-Pakistani Lesbian Muslim Journalist

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/lets-analyze-fort-hood-not-sanitize-it/article1357062/

--------------------------------------------------

Irshad Manji

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published on Monday, Nov. 09, 2009 5:35PM EST
 
Last updated on Tuesday, Nov. 10, 2009 4:09AM EST
 

.Only hours after news broke of a mass shooting at Fort Hood, the largest military base in the United States, I began receiving e-mails from agonized Americans. “What does it mean that the suspect has a Muslim name?” asked one.

“Does it matter that he seems to be a Muslim?” asked another. Overnight, more such messages poured in, their tone being confused instead of confrontational.

The fact that these Americans are posing questions rather than rushing to judgment is a sign they're not all bigots. They're genuinely wrestling with how to react beyond immediate shock and grief.

The grappling surely intensified after reports that Major Nidal Malik Hasan visited radical Islamist websites, chatted approvingly of suicide bombers and shouted “Allahu akbar” as he let loose on comrades. Video of him roaming a convenience store in traditional Arab garb, days after having told the store clerk he didn't want to fight fellow Muslims, offers another reason to reflect on the role of religious affinity.

Let's be clear: If an alleged criminal merely happens to be a Muslim, then religion may well be immaterial. But if his crime is committed in the name of Islam, then religion serves to motivate. In that case, the suspect's Muslim identity absolutely matters. Words, gestures and images should be analyzed – fully, openly and honestly.

Not just in America. Three years ago, police arrested young Muslim Canadians for reportedly plotting to blow up Parliament and behead the PM. The Toronto 17, soon to number 18, dubbed their campaign Operation Badr. This refers to the Battle of Badr, the first decisive military victory achieved by the Prophet Mohammed and his ragtag followers, who were outmanned and outarmed by the other side.

The seventh-century story of triumph against all odds is the stuff of legend in Islam – proof, we Muslims are often reminded, that God intended the Prophet to be a warrior and not merely a statesman. As Iranians could attest during their war with Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Badr provides potent religious inspiration to generations of Muslim soldiers the world over.

Admittedly, this is uncomfortable for millions of Canadians to hear. So uncomfortable that, on arresting the Toronto 17, police didn't once refer to “Islam” or “Muslims” during a press briefing. At a second presser, police boasted about avoiding the words “Islam” and “Muslims.” They characterized their omission as an exercise in sensitivity. I considered it an exercise in denial about the role of religion in the alleged plot.

Later, when I raised my concern at an RCMP conference on communication, assorted staff and members of the force confided that their lawyers prevented them from mentioning the offending words.

Of course, Canada is hardly alone in avoiding this most public of questions. Some European countries are electing ultra-right politicians precisely because mainstream elites fear touching the “Muslim problem,” thereby creating a vacuum for vulgar populists to fill.

Media are among the worst culprits. In the wake of the 2005 London transit bombings, respectable journalists repeatedly quoted ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan railing against British foreign policy. But, in the same video, he emphasized that “Islam is our religion” and “the Prophet is our role model.” Tellingly, he made these statements before bringing up the invasion of Iraq.

Religious mythology also manifests in unexpected ways. Consider Mohammed Bouyeri, the Dutch-born Moroccan Muslim who murdered artist-turned-satirist Theo van Gogh on the streets of Amsterdam in 2004. Mr. Bouyeri pumped several bullets into Mr. van Gogh's body. Knowing this would be enough to finish him off, why didn't he stop there? Why did he pull out a blade to decapitate Mr. van Gogh?

Yet again, we must face the religious dimension. The blade – or sword – is an implement associated with seventh-century tribal warfare. Using it thus becomes a tribute to the founding moment of Islam. Even the note stabbed into Mr. van Gogh's body, though scrawled in Dutch, had the unmistakable rhythms of Arabic poetry. Small wonder that, at his trial, Mr. Bouyeri proudly confessed to being animated by “religious conviction.”

The past few days have revealed much about the complex Major Hasan: a patriotic American dissenter, a brooding recluse, yet a kind neighbour, occasionally taunted by fellow soldiers but more frequently haunted by his conscience and the religious direction in which it turned. While we should be careful not to reduce the story to Islam, let us be equally alert not to erase Islam altogether. Understanding is served by analyzing, not sanitizing.

Irshad Manji, author of The Trouble with Islam Today, is a scholar with New York University and the European Foundation for Democracy.

2
Not sure if this the right tread to post but I though you all would find this interesting. This is from the globe and mail a national newspaper in canada. A kirpan looks like a kerambit without the ring.

Supreme Court rules kirpans okay in school
RICHARD BLACKWELL

Globe and Mail Update

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Sikh students can carry ceremonial daggers to class and that doing so does not pose a undue danger to others in the schools.

The top court overturned Thursday morning a Quebec Court of Appeals ruling that had barred the kirpan from schools in the province. The Quebec court had said a limit on religious freedom was reasonable, given the safety concerns from carrying the daggers to school.

"Religious tolerance is a very important value of Canadian society," the top court judges wrote in their decision.

"A total prohibition against wearing a kirpan to school undermines the value of this religious symbol and sends students the message that some religious practices do not merit the same protection as others."

If the kirpan is sealed inside clothing the risk of it being used for violent purposes, or being taken away by other students is very low, the judges said. "There are many objects in schools that could be used to commit violent acts and that are much more easily obtained by students, such as scissors, pencils and baseball bats."

Several other provinces have long ago reached compromises with the Sikh community, allowing the carrying of the kirpan ? a requirement for baptized followers of the Sikh religion ? as long as it is safely sheathed and concealed.

The 2004 ruling from the Quebec appeal court, however, dismissed any possibility of a compromise in that province.

The specific case that went to the Supreme Court involves Gurbaj Singh Multani, now 17. Five years ago, he accidentally dropped his kirpan in the schoolyard of a Montreal elementary school.

Parents of other children pressured the local school board to ban the dagger, because of a zero-tolerance policy concerning weapons.

Gurbaj's parents sued, and the case wound its way through the courts for several years.

When the Supreme Court heard the arguments last April, several organizations ? including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and the World Sikh Organization of Canada ? intervened to support the family.

They noted that there have been no examples of any violent acts in schools as a result of wearing of the kirpan.

The youth transferred to a private school soon after the controversy erupted in 2001, and some of the intervenors were concerned that there would be a mass exodus by Sikh students from public schools across the country if the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the ban.

In its intervention, the Quebec government supported the ban, arguing that any potential weapon can cause a unnecessary risk in the schools.

Pages: [1]