Archives

Your letters - posted March 15, 2006

Posted in Q & A on Mar 15, 2006

Posted March 15, 2006

Violence alert

Friends: By now you know about the Manifesto of 12: Together Facing a New Totalitarianism. I signed it, as did Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Taslima Nasrin and several others. On March 11, we received a serious death threat from a chat thread on ummah.com, an Islamic website in Britain. Click here to see evidence of the threat.

The text is crystal-clear:

“Excellent - makes killing the kuffar [infidel]
all the bit easier… [N]ow we have drawn out a hit list of a ‘Who’s Who’ guide to slam into. Take your time but make sure their gone soon - oh and don’t hold out for a fatwah it isn’t really required here.”

Unlike daily threats, this one comes from a place of ‘authority,’ since ummah.com is known to attract many radicals. That’s why the Manifesto signatories need you to fight back with us. If you support freedom, pluralism and secularism, click here and put your name on our petition. We’ll publish the petition in the coming days.

Please send this message to your friends, colleagues and list-servs. Now more than ever, we need your courage. And we thank you for showing it.

—
THE MANIFESTO OF 12:

Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global totalitarian threat: Islamism.

We — writers, journalists and public intellectuals — call for resistance to religious totalitarianism.

Instead, we call for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values worldwide.

The necessity of these universal values has been revealed by events since the publication of the Muhammad drawings in European newspapers. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the arena of ideas. What we are witnessing is not a clash of civilizations, nor an antagonism of West versus East, but a global struggle between democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The preachers of hate bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a world of inequality. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred.

Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of greater power imbalances: man’s domination of woman, the Islamists’ domination of all others.

To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed people. For that reason, we reject “cultural relativism,” which consists of accepting that Muslim men and women should be deprived of their right to equality and freedom in the name of their cultural traditions.

We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of “Islamophobia,” an unfortunate concept that confuses criticism of Islamic practices with the stigmatization of Muslims themselves.

We plead for the universality of free expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on every continent, against every abuse and dogma.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

Signed,

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Chahla Chafiq , Caroline Fourest, Bernard-Henri Lévy, Irshad Manji , Mehdi Mozaffari, Maryam Namazie, Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, Antoine Sfeir, Philippe Val, Ibn Warraq

—

Journalists’ most common questions - and Irshad’s answers - about the “Manifesto of 12″

* Why shouldn’t Muslims - or any other group - be protected from offence?

Irshad replies: Civilizational progress happens when individuals transgress, even blaspheme. Galileo offended the Church. So did Darwin. Spinoza royally offended many rabbis. The concept of universal human rights offends most religions. Without offence, there is only silence — and therefore groupthink.

* How did the manifesto come into being for you?

Irshad replies: The idea was brought to me by Caroline Fourest, an award-winning French journalist and author (and one of the 12 signatories). Through my website, she followed the debates and dialogues I’ve been having with my readers about the cartoons — and she noticed that I argue for freedom of expression based on the Quran itself.

For example, the Quran tells us that “there is no compulsion in religion”. Which means that nobody should be forced to treat Islamic norms as if they’re sacred. Moreover, the Quran states that there will always be non-believers, and that it’s up to God, not Muslims, to deal with them.

So when Muslims say “we would never depict the Prophet Muhammad this way!” I say that’s your right. But according to our own holy book, non-Muslims have no obligation to abide by that tradition. And we have no moral authority to force them to.

* Can you defend faith and secularism at the same time?

Irshad replies: Secularism gives space for religion while asking that religion not take over the public sphere. There’s no contradiction here. As a faithful Muslim who’s working hard with others to restore a critical spirit to Islam, I can at once embrace faith and promote a proper role for it.

* In light of your security situation (bullet-proof windows at home, for example), did you agonize over the decision to sign?

Irshad replies: Despite an increase in threats to me, the decision was not at all difficult. I’m passionate about promoting democratic values over theocratic ones, and universal human rights over cultural relativism - the attitude that claims what’s done in the name of a culture cannot be questioned, no matter how heinous it may be. Pluralism does not amount to “anything goes.” Tolerance of intolerance is a betrayal of our basic and shared humanity.

* What has the reaction been so far in America?

Irshad replies: The “blogosphere” (the world of web logs) is, for the most part, breathing a sigh of relief that silence is being broken over the need to address Islamist intimidation head-on.

On Feb 25, the New York Times ran an editorial entitled “Silenced by Islamist Rage.” The said, “It is time for moderate Muslims to abandon the illusion that they can placate the Islamists by straddling the fence… They must do so because their future is at stake - not Denmark’s.” That’s a key message of many of the blogs writing about this manifesto.

* What reaction do you expect from Muslims?

Irshad replies: I anticipate a mixed reaction from Muslims - hostility on the one hand (as one Muslim put it to me last week, “you and that bastard partner Rushdie”) and gratitude on the other (I’ve received many, many emails from younger Muslims who want to reconcile religious belief to free expression). My expectation of a mixed reaction is good news — only five years ago, such a manifesto would have been almost universally condemned by Muslims. Now, more and more reform-minded Muslims are discovering their voices.

* Critics are saying that the “Manifesto of 12” condemns Islam, not Islamism. Your response?

Irshad replies: “Read!” as the first word of the Quran itself goes. Read the Manifesto. We state forthrightly that critiquing Islamism should not be confused with stigmatizing Muslims. We also emphasize that Muslims are not to be denied equality and freedom. All of this amounts to a defense of those who practice Islam peacefully. It’s those who impose Islamism — on Muslims no less than on non-Muslims — whom we are challenging.

* Isn’t this about a clash of civilizations?

Irshad replies: No, not in the sense of a showdown between “Islam” and “the West.” As I mentioned above, there are many in the new generation of Muslims who advocate free expression and are hungry to hear interpretations of Islam that put a premium, not a fatwa, on originality of thought. These young people are in the world of Islam, so the neat and tidy demarcation of Islam versus the West breaks down right there. That’s why we make it clear in our manifesto that this is a battle between democrats and theocrats, examples of which can be found in both civilizations. That’s also why we appeal to the “free spirits of all countries.”

—

We Demand A Dozen Apologies Too
By an anonymous Iranian woman now living in the West

Indignant Muslims all over the world justify the violent reactions to cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad by emphasizing the sanctity of Allah’s messenger. Islam’s devotees argue that these cartoons have desecrated a symbol of their faith, a pillar of their belief.

As members of free, democratic and civilized societies, we too have our sacred principles: liberty, dignity and humanity (including the right to be secure against cruel and unusual treatment). We believe that ALL human beings not only are entitled to these rights, but are obliged to respect and protect these basic values.

Muslims demanded apology, prosecution, and even assassination of artists and editors who allowed the publication of these cartoons. I too demand the apology and prosecution of those who are behind the belligerent violation of human rights in Islamic nations.

I demand appropriate actions to be taken against those responsible for the arrest, torture, and death of political and religious dissidents. Where is our rage after William Sampson and Zahra Kazemi were subjected to medieval torture and, in the case of the latter, murdered viciously in the prisons of Islamic world?

I demand apology for the amputations that are carried out in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Nigeria. Severing hands and legs and removing eyes as forms of punishment are deeply offensive to the collective conscience of humanity; it is a desecration of dignity, and it fills us with disgust.

I demand prosecution of all those who commit heinous crimes in the name of honor. I want accountability from the parents of the Jordanian girl who burned and disfigured their own daughter “because she was dating a boy.” I want the father of Nobahar, the young Iranian woman who gave birth to a baby boy out of wedlock, to be tried for torching his own daughter to death, and poisoning his own infant grandson.

I demand that all prisoners of conscience be released from the dungeons of Islamic countries where they are kept in dreadful and inhumane conditions.

I am outraged by clerics in the Middle East and elsewhere who preach violence against Westerners. The cartoons in question are harmless (unless, of course, the offended Muslims decide to bring harm upon themselves by resorting to violence). Preaching death and violence, as has been proven by the deadly terrorist attacks, is going to cost the lives of innocents.

This is but a small fraction of abuses committed almost daily by governments and people in the Muslim world. These actions are far more ruthless than depicting a sacred character in a few cartoons. It is time we stood up to these perpetrators of brutality.

I am offended. And I demand justice.