September 11 has not been a disaster for Europe's Muslims

On her way to a conference in Brussels recently, the Israeli historian Fania Oz-Salzberger travelled on a tram packed with Muslim schoolgirls in headscarves. One smiled at her, and she smiled back "wholeheartedly though perhaps a little wistfully; she was Europe's future and I was Europe's past". The future to which she refers is one in which the Muslims of Europe prosper in a continent which does not repeat, on however reduced a scale, the mistakes and crimes of earlier times.

Ever since Muslims became a substantial presence in European countries, the shadow of the older anti-semitism, directed against Jews, has hovered over the newer one, directed against Muslims. This is something acknowledged by the Jewish intellectuals who campaigned for intervention in Bosnia. September 11 gave that danger a new edge. Could that edge be a cause of recent successes for the extreme right? Has there been a "September 11 effect" in European politics?

When trials start almost weekly of Muslims accused of plotting outrages in Europe and America, when boys from little towns in the English Midlands or from the suburbs of Paris turn up in Afghanistan, when hijackers are seen to have been living apparently normal lives in student flats in Hamburg, a sense of betrayal in the host nations would be a normal reaction. After all, it has become more and more obvious that the Islamist extremism which led to the attacks in America was incubated in Europe, even if it did not originate there. Yet on the whole the European reaction has not been to characterise Muslims as dangerous but to try to puzzle out, Muslims and non-Muslims together, why such things could happen and how to prevent them in the future.

September 11 led to an explosion of interest in Islam and the Muslim world. Soon, hardly an educated household was without its volumes on fundamentalism and terrorism, volumes which almost all made a careful distinction between these forces and the typical forms of faith and ordinary life of the great majority of Muslims, whether in the Islamic world or in Europe and North America. Books like Karen Armstrong's Islam: A Short History lay on many coffee tables, and it may be that some nominal Christians in Europe, who have paid little attention to their religious tradition for years, now know more about Islam than they do about their own faith.

Ingmar Karlsson, a Swedish diplomat who has written extensively on the subject of Islam in Europe, says that the effect of September 11 in Sweden has been almost entirely positive. "Interest in Islam is at a peak not seen before," he says, "and acceptance of Muslims - and we have 350,000 in a country with a small population - is as normal among ordinary people as it is among the highly educated."

Other reports from Sweden, for instance of increased hostility to asylum seekers, are not so sanguine, but it is certainly a better picture than that in Denmark, where the government proposes restrictions on immigration that represent a serious departure from its liberal traditions. It is important that the fate of the far right in the two countries in the 1990s was very different. The established parties united against the new rightwing party in Sweden, whereas in Denmark the Social Democrats were influenced by its Danish equivalent and, crucially, September 11 coincided with the run-up to the general election.

The difference between Sweden and Denmark suggests that the key to any September 11 effect lies in where relations between majority and Muslim minority lay before that date. In one country it was positive, in the other negative. A study being completed for the EU on the impact of September 11 on relations with Muslim minorities is said to rank Britain and Spain as the countries where there was the least adverse reaction, with Denmark and Italy - the latter no doubt because of Silvio Berlusconi's forcefully expressed feelings about the superiority of Christian civilisation - at the bottom of the list.

Professor Jorgen Nielsen of the University of Birmingham's Centre for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations compares the general process over the years in different countries to that of tectonic shifts in an earthquake zone. Some countries, such as Britain, exhibit lots of small explosions and incidents that, paradoxically, release tensions and lead to reports and reforms. Others, such as Germany, show more surface orderliness but pressures may be building up underneath. France may stand somewhere in between.

References to September 11 and terrorism have not played as large a part in the campaigning of far-right groups in Europe as some expected. It may be that there is confusion on the far right, which in many countries has to reconcile an anti-Americanism which is also part of the tradition with anti-Muslim and anti-migrant elements, and which also has to juggle two anti-semitisms.

Far-right groups have also shown contradictory impulses to reach out to reactionary forces in both the Arab world and Israel. But the probability is that, on the ground, experience suggests that tangible issues like unemployment on the one hand and assertions of white rights on the other work better than terrorist themes. British graffiti, Professor Nielsen notes, are still mainly of the old generally abusive variety; those touching on terrorism are relatively rare.

Among the positive effects of September 11, perhaps, can be rated greater engagement between majorities and Muslim minorities than before. The new emphasis on integration in Britain, with which there are parallels in other countries, at its best represents a recognition that an uneasy and semi-voluntary separatism would be the worst way of continuing. Add to this the effect on opinion of the intensified struggle between the Israelis and the Palestinians. This week's ICM poll, showing that British support for the Palestinians stands at twice the level of those whose primary sympathy is with Israel, was a British indication of another trend which runs counter to any rise in hostility to Muslims. Muslim students in Britain, even though only a small minority are of Arab origin, are showing an intense interest in the Palestinian issue.

It seems that Muslims and non-Muslims are ready to ask more of each other. Still, as one academic put it, it is hard to resist the impression that things could easily go "in an adverse direction" in any of the European countries. A major attack in Europe, to take up the most obvious possibility, would surely have a serious effect on the position of Muslims, particularly as an implicit part of the new understanding is that in future Muslim communities will play their part in the detection and prevention of terrorist acts. A major assault on the lives and rights of Muslims, as might occur in the heat of rioting, would also be very dangerous.

The September 11 effect has probably given the far right no more than a slight push forward in some countries, and in others it may actually have helped arrest it. Le Pen's luck in France may have pumped up the problem beyond its true size. But it is there, and it deserves the most careful attention.

Er...well, yeah- but:

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

Islam: the Facade and the Facts

By Abdullah Al Araby

The Facade
The "Islam" Muslim activists introduce to the West these days is completely different from the Islam we knew and experienced in the Middle East. This is a new edition - revised, modified, expanded and abridged - of the real Islam. A major facelift operation has been taking place here.

To their credit, I must acknowledge that the international Islamization movement, in recent years, has grown much in both intelligence and sophistication. They lacked power, so they decided to be smart. Since they could no longer use the sword to conquer the world, as they once did, they decided to use more cunning methods.

The following are some of the methods Muslim activists are now adopting:

Change of Identity,br> They avoid referring to teachings that may offend the Western citizen, such as the Islamic code of punishment.

They stress that they believe in Moses and Jesus. They refrain from calling Jews and Christians "infidels", nor would they call them "Zionists" or "Crusaders".

The last thing they want to do is to shock people. They once had a Muslim host on their TV. program with a Christian name, "Paul"; names like Mohammed, Mustafa and Omar were too strong to swallow they thought. They use the term "Sunday School" in place of "Friday Class", and they end their speeches with the Christian expression "may God bless you".

They brag about being Americans, and have the American flag cover the background of their program set. This is the same flag Muslims in Iran used to burn in their daily rituals, calling America "The great Satan".

Change of Vocabulary
They are using now a completely new terminology. Words like love, grace... are now part of their vocabulary. Theological Christian terms such as : Salvation, Justification and Sanctification are now part of their teachings.

They change Quranic translations to hide some of Islam's harsh teachings.

An example is the new French translation of the Quran which has caused tremendous furor among Muslim fundamentalists. The translation attempted to please Jews by modifying some verses of the Quran that condemned Jews. An example is a verse that used to read "The people of Israel, after sowing corruption twice on earth for the purpose of dominating other people, will push themselves up into a position of extreme power before being punished by God."

The new translation reads just the opposite: "The people of Israel will be twice destroyed as an innocent victim, and God will reward them by elevating them to great heights."

Change of Strategy
Their new strategy lies in trying to be accepted, included and involved in all activities; religious, social and political.

They are now becoming active in partisan functions in order to have a say in parties platforms. They conduct letter compaigns to members of Congress to influence legislation. They run for public offices in hope of reaching a position of authority. They make full use of their voting power to get concessions in their favor. They try to be represented on educational programs to go in line with their beliefs.

The stage of weakness and the stage of Jihad (Holy War)

It seems that these new tactics we discussed are not without precedent in Islamic history. Mohammed Hassanein Heikal, the noted Egyptian author, refers to this concept in his book "Autumn Furor". He states:

"So the element of Jihad emerged in the ideology of Abul Aala Almaudoody. He went on to differentiate between two separate stages a Muslim community goes through: "The stage of weakness - In it a Muslim community is unable to take charge of its own destiny. In this case - according to his thinking - they must withdraw for the purpose of preparing themselves to be capable of executing the second stage.

"The second stage is the Jihad stage, and it will come when the Muslim community has completed its prepardness and is ready to come out of its isolation to take charge, through Jihad.

"In this, Abul Aala Almaudoody was making a comparison between the two stages of weakness and Jihad on the one hand, and on the other hand, Mohammed's struggle in Mecca then in Medina."

Mohammed in Mecca and Mohammed in Medina

Historians agree that there is a big difference between Mohammed's personality in Mecca and his personality after his migration to Medina.

In Mecca Mohammed was weak, struggling to be accepted, often mocked at and ridiculed. He tried to appeal to the people of Mecca by being compassionate and loving. His teachings condemned violence, injustice, neglect of the poor. However, after he moved to Medina and his followers grew in strength and number, he became a relentless warrior, intent on spreading his religion by the sword.

This change in Mohammed's personality becomes apparent by comparing the Meccan and the Medinan surahs. The following are some examples:

In surah 73:10 God tells Mohammed to be patient with his opponents "Be patient with what they say, and part from them courteously." While in surah 2:191 God orders him to kill his opponents "Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out..."

In surah 2:256 God tells Mohammed not to impose Islam by force "There is no compulsion in religion." While in verse 193 God tells him to kill whoever rejects Islam "Fight (kill) them until there is no persecution and the religion is God's."

In surah 29:45 God tells Mohammed to speak nicely to people of the Book (Christians and Jews) "Argue with people of the Book, other then evil doers, only by means of what are better! and say, we believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you. Our God is the same as your God, and we are surrendered to him." While in surah 9:29 God tells him to fight the people of the Book, "Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day...and fight People of the Book, who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute by hand, being inferior."

To justify this sudden change in the Quran's mood from peaceful to militant, conciliatory to confrontational, Mohammed claimed that it was God who told him so. It was God who abrogated the peaceful verses and replaced them by harsh ones.

However the truth of the matter, as Almaudoody puts it, is that Mohammed became strong enough to move from the stage of weakness to the stage of Jihad.

Today, in the West, we are witnessing the Islamic stage of weakness, but lets not be fooled, the stage of Jihad is coming sooner or later. This meek little lamb will turn out to be a ravening wolf, the sweet melodious "Baa Baa" will change to a thunderous roar.

The Facts
The following are some real teachings of Islam:

Men are superior to women (surah 2:228).

Women have half the rights of men: in court witness
(surah 2:282) and in inheritance (surah 4:11). A man may punish his wife by beating her (surah 4:34). A man may marry up to four wives at the same time (surah 4:3).

A wife is a sex object for her husband (surah 2:223). Muslims must fight until their opponents submit to Islam (surah 9:29).

A Muslim must not take a Jew or a a Christian for a friend (surah 5:51).

A Muslim apostate must be killed (surah 9:12).

Stealing is punished by the amputation of the hands (surah 5:38).

Adultery is punished by public flogging (surah 24:2).

Resisting Islam is punished by death, crucifixion or the cutting off of the hands and feet (surah 5:33).

Fate decides everyone's eternal destination (surah 17:13).

Every Muslim will pass through Hell (surah 19:71).

Heaven in Islam is the place where a Muslim will be reclining, eating meats and delicious fruits, drinking exquisite wines, and engaging in sex with virgins (surah 55:54- 56) & (surah 52:17,19).

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/facade.htm

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.