Category Archives: Politics

Islamophobia

Posted on by
1


Islamophobia

The standard definition of Islamophobia is “prejudice against, hatred towards, or irrational fear of Muslims.” Islamophobia is enshrined in many hate speeches in the United States as well as in Europe. Just as some people are anti-Semitic or hate the evangelical Christians or African Americans, today in the West some are Islamophobic. Famous evangelist Franklin Graham told NBC news following the 9/11 attacks: “We’re not attacking Islam but Islam has attacked us. The God of Islam is not the same God. He’s not the son of God of the Christian or Judeo-Christian faith. It’s a different God, and I believe it is a very evil and wicked religion.” Pastor R. Parsley of the huge World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio, a spiritual adviser to John McCain, said: “The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion [Islam] destroyed, and I believe 9/11 was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.” Though many Christians have expressed hate against Islam, today in USA there are blunt critic of Islam, behaving as an enemy of Muslims living in the West. Though President Barack Obama was impelled to take aim at nativism in his final State of the Union address on Tuesday, January 12, 2016, offering a not-so-veiled jab at politicians, specifically GOP presidential candidates, who called for keeping Muslims from entering the country and have denigrated other minorities. President Obama said:

[The U.S. needs] to reject any politics that targets people because of race or religion, [not as] a matter of political correctness, [but to maintain the country’s values.] It’s a matter of understanding what makes us strong. …The world respects us not just for our arsenal; it respects us for our diversity and our openness and the way we respect every faith. …When politicians insult Muslims, when a mosque is vandalized, or a kid bullied, that doesn’t make us safer. That’s not telling it like it is. It’s just wrong. It diminishes us in the eyes of the world. It makes it harder to achieve our goals.

Noam Chomsky, the noted activist and MIT professor emeritus, remarked in an interview on January 25, 2016 with The Huffington Post, “The Republican Party has become so extreme in its rhetoric and policies that it poses a serious danger to human survival. … Today, the Republican Party has drifted off the rails.” Chomsky said the GOP and its presidential candidates are “literally a serious danger to decent human survival.” GOP presidential candidates have been aggravating the situation in their debates by making commitments that if they are elected, Muslims would be banned from immigrating to the United States; and that those already living, even as citizens, would be sent back to the countries from where they came. Muslims in the United States are seriously concerned whenPresident Trump issued an executive order to ban the immigration of Muslims from 7-Muslim majority countries, which, though has been temporarily suspended by the Federal Appeals Court. Such rhetoric is creating unrest amongst Muslims, and what we see in Western Muslims and the impact of conflicts in Muslim world, is consequentially going to be a dangerous situation as visualized by Professor Chomsky.

Efforts to deny any link between violent acts of terrorism and the religion of Islam are widespread in the news media as well as government circles. It is a well acknowledged fact that terrorism in the West is usually perpetrated by a handful of misguided individuals, who happen to be Muslims with connections to radical networks abroad, as has been proved in the case of the woman terrorist Tashfeen having connections in Saudi Arabia. Many experts in foreign affairs do notbelieve that Islam is on a collision course with the West or that it is inherently inimical to the modern age. It is, rather, the negative attitude of the Western media towards Islam which has created Islamophobia, scaring Western Muslims. The media, spreading fake news and articles on partly quoted Qur’anic verses, creates an atmosphere of “backfire effect.”

Is Something Going Wrong with the Muslims?

We are aware that billions of Muslims are not motivated by their faith even to hate, let alone to kill those who do not fully share their religious outlook. Many Muslim religious scholars teach that Islam is a religion of peace. But we cannot ignore that terrorists today are mostly Muslims who justify their atrocities on religious grounds. Rodney Stark argues in The Triumph of Faith:

Responses to Muslim terrorism have long generated confessions that terrorism exists because Americans, and Westerners in general, have offended Muslims in many ways, including by supporting Israel, that they really have only themselves to blame. In the immediate wake of the 9/11 attack, former president Bill Clinton cited the Crusades as one of “our crimes against Islam.” More recently, while speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, and in the aftermath of televised beheadings by ISIS terrorists, President Obama also stressed Christian guilt for the Crusades.

But it also seems important to point out that most Muslim terrorism is against other Muslims. It seems unlikely that even the most ardent apologists for Islam would suppose that either Western or American misdeeds are the reason why Sunni Muslims kill and are killed by Shi’ite Muslims. It is time to raise an important question: Is something going wrong with Muslims that every terrorist act points towards them? One of many other reasons is that the rise of a far more intense and militant Islam—justified and promoted as the need of the hour during America’s proxy war with the Soviets—seems primarily to have been a source of modern terrorism. Traditional Islam, isolated during European colonial rule until the end of the nineteenth century, was relatively lax and accommodative to worldliness. When modernity broke down that isolation and oil money enriched the Saudi Arabs, the result was not the proliferation of a new rational “enlightenment,” but the rise of national and international Islamic religious leaderships. These new religious leaders and scholars of Islamic Shari’ah, partly in a reaction against secularism and partly in response to Muslim economic/industrial backwardness, generated a kind of militant commitment to a variety of intense forms of Islam. It appeared in the form of intensification rather than a regression into a peaceful and pious past. We can say that modernity in the world of Islam resulted in an increase of religiousness instead of a modernity of rational and scientific enlightenment.

What is in Store for the Muslims!

The prospects for a harmonious relationship between Islam and the West seem uncertain. A period of cordial relations between the fanatically intense and militant Muslims and the allied American and British Westerners lasted for a very short period of a decade or so. Soon after the fall of the Soviet Union, voices were being raised by thinkers and politicians in the West that this was the time to take care of “Islamic Civilization.” It was being argued by the socio-political experts that after the demise of Marxism the only ideology that could pose a threat to American supremacy was Islam. Works and interviews with Bernard Lewis appeared, followed by the famous book of Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Making of World Order, and many debates and discussions. Before a well-planned clash of civilizations could be ignited, the “Desert Storm” campaign against Saddam Hussein was administered as a testing ground. For me it is neither pride nor a matter of glorification—as since my childhood I have hated war from the core of my heart—that the concept of “Jihad for war” is so powerful in Islam that within a short period it shattered two great empires soon after the advent of Islam, and went a long way towards bringing the Soviet empire to its knees. It took ten years for the U.S. think tanks to find a new way to tackle the jihadi ideology by turning the mujahedeen into terrorists, engaging them to destroy their own believers of liberal and traditional Islam. The West has created an atmosphere of uncertain chaos in the Muslim world by adopting a careful and safe role for themselves and the deadly start of a horrible World War for the Muslims, right from the footage of September 11, 2001.—

MIRZA ASHRAF

“We Committed Intellectual Suicide After 9/11” Pankraj Mishra

Posted on by
Reply

Did Osama Bin Laden’s 9/11 attack set in motion dominoes that is leading to destruction in the Muslim world and self destruction in the West? Worth reading interview on Pankraj Mishra’s book, Age of Anger. f.sheikh 

Historian and intellectual Pankaj Mishra’s latest book Age of Anger: A History of the Present, published earlier this month, presents what Mishra calls “an emotional history” at a time of “worldwide emergency” when rage fills the global political sphere. Mishra locates the core of our chaotic condition in the Nietzchean concept of “ressentiment,” a creative force that animates the rebellion of the poorest and most disenfranchised against the ruling class. It is this very force, Mishra argues, that is animating those most marginalized, its power whetted by the contradiction between the equality promised in prose and exalted in rhetoric but never delivered in reality.

Mishra recently traveled to the United States, during the pause between President Trump’s first travel ban on the citizens of seven Muslim countries, and all refugees, and the striking down of his new one. A few days after we spoke, the President’s new budget pledged to do away with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts. The budget for the U.S. State Department is to be slashed while the U.S. Defense budget will be augmented by billions of dollars. It certainly seems that the world is at the brink of even more war, more destruction, more displacement, and more turning away. In our conversation, Mishra and I spoke about the prescience of Age of Anger and his framing of our bleak and divided global moment.

Rafia Zakaria: The very first page of your book describes its stages of production: beginning at Modi, writing through Brexit and published with the election of Donald Trump. When you were at the beginning of this intellectual journey, did you foresee how it would proceed, both in terms of the books and the politics it aspires to explain?

Pankaj Mishra: I wish I could claim that kind of prescience. I knew that things were going very wrong in Europe and that inequality was an issue in the U.S. I did not know Brexit would happen or that Donald Trump would be elected. I just thought that there would be very large number of people who would vote for him, but I hoped that not enough would go as far as actually electing a maniac and a troll to the White House. I wrote my book obviously taking into account the state of dissatisfaction, but I could not predict the political outcome.

RZ: A dominant theme in your book is dislodging the post 9/11 assumption that terrorism as a phenomenon must be pinned on Islam and Muslims. You write: “The experts on Islam who opened for business following 9/11 peddle their wares more feverishly after every terror attack.” Who are these “experts,” and to what extent do you see their cultivation as a threat to those they seek to represent? 

PM: We, and by that I mean “the intelligentsia,” made a catastrophic mistake after 9/11 when we located the roots of terror in Islam, saying that there is something peculiar in their political tradition that explains an eruption of violence. That perspective looked past the mixed history of terrorism, and we now see that regardless of whether it is in Burma or Thailand or India, militancy and terrorism emerge out of a confluence of socio-economic factors. It is a sign of desperation and despair. This idea that it belongs to Islam in particular is a very dangerous idea; it was made mainstream and it was legitimated not just by the far right who are in charge of policy today (and have been engaging in this puerile debate), but also by the liberal intelligentsia.

Francis Fukuyama, for instance, said there is something intrinsic about Islam which is just not compatible with modernity. Then there is Salman Rushdie and even Martin Amis, talking about mass deportation as part of a thought experiment that he offered to a journalist. In sum, all sorts of mainstream figures were advancing this Islamophobic discourse in very holistic and dangerous ways, and in the guise of teaching Islam or understanding Islam or helping the Muslim moderates. This is why we are where we are today.

 

Now we see that when bigotry leads the West, and the leading bigot in the U.S. is President, it becomes impossible to explain it in relation to Islam or Christianity. So we are looking at the dislodging of a whole interpretive paradigm that has proven an utterly useless way of understanding the world. We need an analysis that compares the fundamentalists of today, whether they are Muslim or Christian or Jewish supremacists; their misogyny, their antipathy to multiculturalism, is markedly similar.  It is what links them that needs to be explored, the shared experience of disruptive social change, psychological disorientation, scorn, and humiliation.

I just returned from Myanmar where Buddhist monks have become ethnic cleansers. I would challenge anyone to explain their violence from the content of Buddhism. None can be found; it is socio-economic. A large number of the monks feel their power is being in a globalized capitalist economy, and you have to understand that to explain how Buddhists are becoming terrorists. We committed intellectual suicide soon after 9/11 when we started thinking of Islam as a generator of violence.

Read more

The curious cases of MQM in London

Posted on by
Reply

-The curious cases of MQM in London

Aftab Siddiqui

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. This is probably the most appropriate description of how 2016 ended for Altaf Hussain and the MQM. It brought greatest relief as the investigation in the money laundering case was stopped in the UK. On the other hand, his infamous speech in August literally sounded the death knell for the MQM as we know it. With this background what can the Interior Ministry of Pakistan do now to overcome the shortcomings of the past years and help bring successful prosecution in the UK against the MQM and its dear supreme leader in 2017?
The fact of the matter is that the reasons which led to the decision to eventually drop the money laundering case largely reside in Pakistan. It has been observed that the main defendants submitted large numbers of documents including but not limited to private undertakings from individuals from Pakistan stating that they gave money to the MQM and Altaf Hussain. Personal undertakings in the form of affidavits made in Pakistan were given by people connected to the MQM, industrialists and businessmen based in Karachi. These undertakings provided the cover for the amount of cash recovered from various properties connected to the MQM in London.
The veracity of these undertakings was never questioned. No efforts of note were made to find out who gave these undertakings, were they given under duress or voluntarily, and what were the sources of income of the signatories of these undertakings. This lack of interest by Pakistani authorities is alarming as all of this evidence originated from Pakistan. None of the many agencies under the command of the interior minister were able to provide high quality evidence to Scotland Yard to raise sufficient doubt in their minds on the overall genuineness of these undertakings. As a result, they were received as part of acceptable evidence by the UK investigators.
However, most recently, the money laundering case has taken a new turn. The UK authorities are confronted with multiple claimants and hence are not able to close the inquiry due to this dispute. If the Interior Ministry has the will to act, they have an opportunity now. They should intervene, submit new evidence based on professional investigations of all the personal undertakings and the circumstances in which they were made and collected in Pakistan. This evidence, alongside other proof, should then be submitted to Scotland Yard so it can initiate further investigations which could lead to successful prosecution in the money laundering case.
The Interior Ministry has two more opportunities to redeem its reputation. The first is the Charity Commission UK’s inquiry into the transfer of approximately £180,000 from MQM Pakistan to the ‘Society for Unwell and Needy’ UK (SUN Charity). The violation in this instance has been committed by MQM in Pakistan. Over the years they never disclosed this huge amount remitted abroad in their annual accounts submitted to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). On the other hand, SUN charity has always declared these as funds received from MQM Pakistan. The breach of electoral laws in this case has been committed by a registered political party in Pakistan. The leading UK newspaper ‘The Daily Sun’ published a story on SUN Charity and the MQM connection in its edition of March 21, 2016.
However, despite this story being widely cited in the UK and Pakistani media, no representations from the interior ministry or the ECP has been made to the Charity Commission, UK or to the media group to obtain the background information.
Authorities in Pakistan it seems have not conducted any legal action about these falsified annual accounts, how this huge amount was collected and eventually transferred to the UK by MQM Pakistan. And now MQM Pakistan on the surface appears to have parted ways with Altaf Hussain. They should demand their money back immediately. They can use this money to provide some relief to the poor people of Karachi rather than spending this amount in the Somerset area of the UK. If this amount is not returned to them on demand they can institute legal action in the UK to get the amount back. This is the least Farooq Sattar and party can do to show that they have changed their ways and the welfare of poor Karachites is now their top priority.
The other important case is the incitement to violence arising from the infamous speech of Altaf Hussain delivered from London on August 22, 2016. An inquiry is being conducted by the Counter Terrorism Command, UK. This is one other opportunity for the leadership of the interior ministry to prove that they are neither complicit nor incompetent in relation to the lack of success achieved by them in these cases. As reputable investigators, they now have to provide irrefutable evidence in the shape of unedited audio, video, photos, statement of victims and witnesses, the murdered person’s medical reports, circumstantial evidence and the confessional statements of individuals involved. All this evidence should unambiguously connect persons resorting to violence and murder directly to the content of the speech.
One aspect which cannot be ignored is that Altaf Hussain has engaged the world’s leading law firm to defend him in the money laundering case. It will be an important game-changing step for the interior ministry if they also engage a reputable law firm in the UK to assist them. This law firm should be tasked to review evidence collected by the Pakistani agencies. Such a firm should help the Pakistani authorities improve the standard of evidence collected to the extent that they fully meet the highest standards of proof required by the Crown Prosecution Service and British courts. The law firm should liaise at every step of the way with UK investigators. They should submit evidence officially to them on behalf of the Pakistani authorities. This critical measure would eliminate benefit of doubt as an excuse to dismiss these cases by the UK investigators. It will also greatly reduce the influence that the anti-Pakistan lobby can exert on these cases.
Needless to say, it is a legal and moral responsibility of the interior ministry to provide some closure to the family of Arif (son of Abdul Saeed), a Karachi’ite who was only 42 years old when attacked and murdered after the speech. The ministry is duty bound to act professionally and deliver evidence which make the cases prosecutable in the UK justice system. This will ensure that common citizens, the media personnel and media houses attacked as a result of Altaf Hussain’s incitement to violence get the justice they fairly deserve.
The announcement by the MQM London group to hold a public rally in Karachi has sent the local police and the rangers into overdrive. This culminated in the arrest of many ordinary workers. Similar efforts over the years by the LEAs to arrest workers have not yielded positive results for the city. It has in been of great help for Altaf Hussain and other MQM leaders. They play it as a victimization card and use it to support their separatist agenda among their followers. The interior ministry needs to change their strategy now by stopping giving ammunition to their anti-Pakistan agenda. Ordinary political workers should not be persecuted in any way and form. The ministry should focus on pursuing the successful prosecution of the leaders who plan and promote anarchy and have plundered the wealth of Karachi.
Tailpiece: The Dr Imran Farooq murder case is being investigated in the UK. An FIR has also been registered in Pakistan. It’s a unique situation that inquiries in two different jurisdictions have been registered for the same crime. At present there seems to be minimal possibility of a successful prosecution in the UK in this case.

The writer is founder of the online Facebook forum “Dialogue of the Civilisations” and is an independent senior analyst for South Asia and is based in London. He tweets @siddiquiaftab

—
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Bitter Truth” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitter-truth+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bitter-truth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bitter-truth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Advanced technology, that made America and West prosperous, will it be responsible for its undoing and reversing immigration pattern? Brief Thought By F. Sheikh

Posted on by
2

“ the looming technology tsunami that will hit the U.S. job market over the next five to 15 years and likely destroy tens of millions of jobs due to automation by artificial intelligence, 3-D manufacturing, advanced robotics and driverless vehicles — among other emerging technologies. The best research to date indicates that47 percent of all U.S. jobs are likely to be replaced by technology over the next 10 to 15 years, more than 80 million in all, according to the Bank of England. Jobs at risk include a diverse range of service and professional positions. Retail and fast-food jobs will be almost entirely automated. Manual laborers and construction workers will be replaced by robots; long-haul truck drivers by self-driving trucks; accountants, clerks, paralegals, telemarketers and customer-service reps by artificial intelligence; and security guards by robots and drones. Even professionals in the fields of accounting, law, finance, consulting, journalism and medicine are at risk of losing their jobs to smart machines” Writes economist and business professor in one of his columns in WP.

The well-paying job situation is already so dire that the public is willing to elect demagogues who are selling them nothing more than a snake oil. Despite all the threats, bullying, and shouting insults at Mexico and China, the effect of policies on well-paying jobs will be marginal. Just focusing on job loss to developing countries and tearing up global agreements will not do it.  

If current job loss is creating such a chaos and havoc, it is going to get worse, and imagine what it will be like in next few years. It is a critical time to come up with a plan and policies that will seriously address the jobs loss in the new automated age.. To make matters worse, we are electing leaders at this crucial juncture, who seriously lack the foresight and wisdom to address this core problem. We are already way behind the curve, and we have not even started seriously addressing the core issue of loss of jobs due to advanced technology, especially automation. It has already created a significant portion of population, which is permanently either unemployed or underemployed. Rather than focusing on the underlying causes, we are scapegoating immigrants and greedy corporations as well as wall street is happy to finance this diversion.   

In this coming fully automated age, the underdeveloped countries may fare better, as their labor may still be cheaper than installation of expensive automated machinery especially in service industry. They will still be manufacturing cheap products that West and its increasingly poor population will need to survive. It may impact immigration patterns also, decreasing immigration to West and increasing reverse immigration to the underdeveloped countries.  

F. Sheikh