In The Name Of Religion

It was a fairly chilly Wednesday on that fateful day in April back in 1995. The date was the 19th. I remember this because it was the same year I began keeping a diary. Many interesting things take place when you're 21 years of age, and some require their own space in history.

Between random entries titled "She'll call, I know she will" and ""Hot Dang It's On Like Donkey Kong" was one which stood out in bold capital letters:

"Fuck Me! What Have They Done Now?!"

A bomb had gone off in America, and since this was pre-24hour CNN in South Africa, it was pretty much on all the radio stations and on the breaking news on crappy government TV. All the fingers were being pointed in the direction of Muslim terrorists, and this annoyed me for no reason other than the fact that I had just started dating a Christian girl. Neither my hormones nor my testosterone would condone this bombing, and the first telephone call I had with Amy was rather terse. I found myself suddenly anti-muslim in the hope that this would win favor with her.
It didn't.
She agreed with her dad that my religion was one of violence and intolerance.
In light of what had just transpired in America, how could I argue with either of them?

While the dust was settling and the investigations were beginning, I found an interesting awakening taking place within myself and those of the Muslim faith around me. There was a level of introspection taking place which I had never witnessed before. Questions were being asked amongst us all. A microscope had just been focused on every single one of us, and what we were seeing left much to be desired.
There was almost this sense of blindness to what was happening in the rest of the world.
A sense that we were living in a cocoon, totally unaware to how the religion we loved was being tarnished by extremists, and the media was only too happy to oblige and play conductor to the orchestra of terror being played out in the name of Islam.

                                   
Timothy McVeigh was finally convicted and given the death sentence for the Oklahoma Bombing which killed 168 men, women and children. Then and now, very little mention was ever made of his faith. His biography on Wikipedia makes no mention of his Christian beliefs. Ironically it does mention the initial suspects being Islamic Terrorists.

So you can imagine my surprise when I called upon Amy at her home a few weeks later, feeling absolved of any sense of responsibility for the atrocious bombing that had gripped the world.... absolved because it was clear that this madman was not a member of my clan, but rather hers... a skip in my step because I would now be able to tell her dad "Ha! He's one of yours!" ... as I said, imagine my surprise when she responded with "No but he's not a Christian, we don't do stuff like that!"

So it was OK to assume that this was done by an Islamic Terrorist...
and then assume that all muslims are terrorists, hence I too must be one...
But when it transpires that he is in fact not a Muslim but rather a Christian, we shall declare him persona non grata and wash our hands of laying blame on religion?

It was this single response that made me become so much more aware of social and religious injustices which I was completely naive and blind to previously.This was my true awakening.

Fast-forward 16 years and we find ourselves in a similar position.
Norway, Oslo. 94 Men, women and children killed.

Fox News and other media outlets had us believe this was an act of terror carried out by an Islamic organization. They had a vile bucketful of 'experts' spewing their opinion, and one group kept coming up as the most likely suspects : Islamic Terrorists.
When a blue-eyed blonde Christian was eventually arrested, suddenly his religious beliefs were no longer worth a mention.
For more on how the media contorted the facts, read this.

Now I had this discussion with a friend of mine, and him and I regularly debate matters of race, religion and politics. He happened to mention an oft-repeated lie which the western media first propagated. This being that Islam is the most violent religion in the world, and has killed more people than any other religion or country.
Hhmm... really?
Let's have a look at the breakdown of wars in the last 150 years, shall we.

First, the worlds religions as per 2005.

Wars in last 150 years

1860-65: American civil war (360,000)

1886-1908: Belgium-Congo Free State (3 million)

1899-02: British-Boer war (100,000)

1904: Germany Vs Namibia (65,000)

1904-05: Japan Vs Russia (150,000)

1910-20: Mexican revolution (250,000)

1911: Chinese Revolution (2.4 million)

1911-12: Italian-Ottoman war (20,000)

1912-13: Balkan wars (150,000)

1915: the Ottoman empire slaughters Armenians (1.2 million)

1914-18: World War I (8 million)

1917-21: Soviet revolution (5 million)

1928-37: Chinese civil war (2 million)

1931: Japanese Manchurian War (1.1 million)

1934: Mao's Long March (170,000)

1936: Italy's invasion of Ethiopia (200,000)

1936-37: Stalin's purges (13 million)

1936-39: Spanish civil war (600,000)

1939-45: World War II (55 million) including holocaust and Chinese revolution

1946-49: Chinese civil war (1.2 million)

1946-49: Greek civil war (50,000)

1947: Partition of India and Pakistan (1 million)

1948-1973: Arab-Israeli wars (70,000)

1948-: Kashmir's civil war (40,000)

1949-: Indian Muslims Vs Hindus (20,000)

1950-53: Korean war (4 million)

1954-62: French-Algerian war (1 million)

1958-61: Mao's "Great Leap Forward" (30 million)

1960-90: South Africa Vs Africa National Congress (?)

1961-2003: Kurds Vs Iraq (180,000)

1962-75: Mozambique Frelimo Vs Portugal (?)

1964-73: USA-Vietnam war (3 million)

1965: second India-Pakistan war over Kashmir

1965-66: Indonesian civil war (200,000)

1966-69: Mao's "Cultural Revolution" (11 million)

1966-: Colombia's civil war (31,000)

1967-70: Nigeria-Biafra civil war (800,000)

1968-80: Rhodesia's civil war (?)

1969-79: Idi Amin, Uganda (300,000)

1969-02: IRA - Northern Ireland's civil war (2,000)

1969-79: Francisco Macias Nguema, Equatorial Guinea (50,000)

1971: Pakistan-Bangladesh civil war (500,000)

1972-: Philippines Vs Muslim separatists (120,000)

1972: Burundi's civil war (300,000)

1972-79: Rhodesia/Zimbabwe's civil war (30,000)

1974-91: Ethiopian civil war (1,000,000)

1975-78: Menghitsu, Ethiopia (1.5 million)

1975-79: Khmer Rouge, Cambodia (1.7 million)

1975-89: Boat people, Vietnam (250,000)

1975-90: civil war in Lebanon (40,000)

1975-87: Laos' civil war (184,000)

1975-2002: Angolan civil war (500,000)

1976-83: Argentina's military regime (20,000

1976-93: Mozambique's civil war (900,000)

1976-98: Indonesia-East Timor civil war (600,000)

1976-: Indonesia-Aceh (GAM) civil war (12,000)

1979: Vietnam-China war (30,000)

1979-88: the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan (1.3 million)

1980-88: Iraq-Iran war (1 million)

1980-92: Sendero Luminoso - Peru's civil war (69,000)

1980-92: El Salvador's civil war (100,000)

1980-99: Kurds Vs Turkey (35,000)

1982-90: Hussein Habre, Chad (40,000)

1983-2002: Sri Lanka's civil war (64,000)

1983-2002: Sudanese civil war (2 million)

1987-: Palestinian Intifada (4,500)

1988-2001: Afghanistan civil war (400,000)

1988-2004: Somalia's civil war (550,000)

1989-: Liberian civil war (220,000)

1989-: Uganda Vs Lord's Resistance Army (30,000)

1991: Gulf War - large coalition against Iraq to liberate Kuwait (85,000)

1991-97: Congo's civil war (800,000)

1991-2000: Sierra Leone's civil war (200,000)

1991-: Russia-Chechnya civil war (200,000)

1991-94: Armenia-Azerbaijan war (35,000)

1992-96: Tajikstan's civil war war (50,000)

1992-96: Yugoslavia's civil war (200,000)

1992-99: Algerian civil war (150,000)

1993-97: Congo Brazzaville's civil war (100,000)

1993-: Burundi's civil war (200,000)

1994: Rwanda's civil war (900,000)

1995-: Pakistani Sunnis Vs Shiites (1,300)

1995-: Maoist rebellion in Nepal (10,000)

1998-: Congo/Zaire's war - Rwanda and Uganda Vs Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia (3.8 million)

1998-2000: Ethiopia-Eritrea war (75,000)

1999: Kosovo's liberation war - NATO Vs Serbia (2,000)

2001: Afghanistan's liberation war - USA & UK Vs Taliban (25,000)

2002-: Cote d'Ivoire's civil war (1,000)

2003: Iraq's liberation war - USA, UK and Australia Vs Saddam Hussein (14,000)

2003-: Sudan Vs Darfur (70,000)

2003-: Iraq's civil war (100,000)

Notice anything interesting?

Out of the total number of around 160 million dead, more than 135 million have been killed in or by countries that are now the five big powers of the world, namely China, the US, the UK, France and Russia. The killings by or in Muslim countries form a very small percentage of the total killings, despite the fact that Muslims form about one fifth of the world population.

For more on the stats listed above, read this interesting blog.

If these facts and figures prove anything, it proves that religion can be used as a vehicle to carry out evil just as easily as it can be used to carry out good.
If we removed religion from our interaction with each other, I'm of the belief that this world would be a better and safer place. I'm not saying religion has no place in our daily lives. What I am saying is that it need not be an aspect of our lives which we need to force-feed on those who believe differently.

Every religion has it's fair share of extremists. Every religion.
What we need to do is accept that those extremists are not spokespeople for nor an indication of the rest of those who believe in peace, love and tolerance for all.

That's why I like what this guy says in his letter to the editor of an online newspaper. It's plain, it's simple, and it's honest.

Fundamentalists vs Fun-Da-Mental-Lists

For those of you who haven't seen the video causing all the ruckus, here it is in all it's 3-minutes of glory. Who knew that a comedy-skit poking fun at Osama Bin laden would get all these religious zealots and fundamentalists so hot and bothered, they would border on declaring a fatwa against a comedian?

I admire Late Nite News and especially Riaad Moosa for pushing the boundaries on this one.
I had a Twitter debate with the Cape Town branch of one of the groups leading the charge against Riaad Moosa. There were a few issues I took up with them, and I concluded that there seemed to be a greater understanding of the need for open dialogue with the Cape Town branch than there was for the Jozi branch. I found the response's to Riaad's open letter to their accusations loaded with the kind of diatribe reserved for the arrogant and pompous.

Here are a few excerpts of their blog post, to which I have aired my opinion.

Muslimah : So it really does come as a surprise when Muslims are being rather lenient with ‘comedian’ Riaad Moosa whose latest antics have landed him in hot water with the Muslim ‘extremist’ public.Really Muslimah? You're surprised that the rest of the educated Muslim public is not as narrow-minded and obtuse as you are? You seriously cannot grasp why Muslims are being 'lenient' with Riaad Moosa? What would you prefer them do? Join your extremist ranks and declare a fatwa? Is the world as we know it not dangerous enough with fanatics and zealots already?
 

Muslimah : Secondly, the beard may be seen by many to be a representative quality of Al Qaeda. Whether this is true or not, the beard is a salient feature of Islam. Parodying a person wearing the beard is to parody the Sunnah.I've watched the video numerous times, and at no point did I hear Riaad Moosa mention 'Islam' , 'Sunnah' , or the 'Prophet'. I'm curious to know how you drew this link. Was it a backdoor incitement to rile the Muslim public, since these words justifiably incited anger in Muslims worldwide against the Danish cartoon issue? To draw parallels between the two, as you have done further in your blog, was an error in judgement and a rather dubious if not dangerous claim. The beard is a salient feature of Islam just as it is of Judaism and amongst the Afrikaners. Arabic is the salient language of Middle-Eastern terrorists. Does this mean anyone speaking Arabic is by default a terrorist?


Muslimah :Making people laugh is your own business and you may do it in whatever way you please except when making them laugh involves even a single aspect related to Islam.So in effect what you are saying is that Islam is a religion void of people with a sense of humour? My question to you then is, when did the Muslim public decree you as the bastion of all that is moral and just in this beautiful religion we call Islam? When was the edict passed that made Muslimah the gatekeepers to Islamic virtue? I don't ever recall having asked your group of extremists to safeguard a religion lived and enjoyed by millions against question and debate? Maybe if you took a long and serious look at your mandate and what it is you hope to achieve by your actions, you will realize that you are a lone force with minimal support fighting an extremist cause with no justification.


Muslimah : We await your response video with great anticipation. Due to the fact that you have taken it upon yourself to step into the domain of Islamic academic discussion by making a direct reference to the Sunnah and Shar’i principles in what can only be deemed a parody of worthless taste surpassed only by ignorance of the subject matter, we request the following:

1. Valid, authentic, authoritative, academic Shar’i proof that your actions on the Late Night News show are perfectly okay in light of the Shari’ah.

2. Clear, simple academic proof that a parody involving the shaving of the beard carried out by a Muslim is permissible in Islam.

3. Valid, academic proof that mockery of the burka falls within the confines of ‘fun’ in Islam.

A simple response to the above three questions would be highly appreciated. A request to readers: We have very little time for sad and emotional rants, ‘freedom of speech’ issues, ‘light-hearted’ banter and fun, open-minded entertainment etc. If you cannot provide us with valid, academic proof justifying the actions we have mentioned, do not even bother contacting us or commenting.Is it just me or does this response by Muslimah reek of arrogance and pompousness? Before they attacked Riaad Moosa for his video, I don't recall them having contacted Riaad first to discuss the issue. I don't recall them attempting some form of dialogue to fully understand his intentions. I don't recall them portraying the part of 'Bastions of Morals' by showing some humility and understanding in an effort to educate. All I saw and read was a bully towering above a single individual and screaming down at him "We are right, you're wrong, and that's that!" Interesting to note that Muslimah finds issues like 'Freedom of Speech' an emotional rant. I wonder where they were when the struggle heroes of this country were fighting for the very freedoms they now enjoy; freedoms which allow them a platform to hurl insults at an individual who in my opinion, has done more to engage the youth in dialogue to better understand issues which affect them.

I'd like to ask Muslimah how much they have done outside of their small demographic of extremists to promote dialogue and debate on matters of religion, politics and society in general. I'd hazard a guess and say that their response would probably be "Anything outside of religion does not concern us." Really? If the youth and your demographic in particular suddenly finds themselves in a state which does not allow freedom of religion and freedom of speech, would they still maintain that issues outside of religion are of no interest to them?

The same 'freedom of speech' they balk at today is the very 'freedom of speech' they are exercising themselves. Hypocrisy?


I could mention numerous other points which are at best laughable in their article, but I guess it's up to the reader ultimately to decide if the video Riaad Moosa posted was one deserving of such harsh criticism from a religious minority group.

In my opinion, part of the problem regarding religion today is that each religion believes themselves to be absolutely correct and anyone not subscribing to their beliefs is doomed to hell.

Religions all have one common goal: To promote peace, love and understanding amongst it's following. Do good and be good, so that good may come to you. It's when people start twisting and turning the religious code to fit their own agendas that all the good goes out the window.

In conclusion I would like to add that I am no religious scholar by any stretch of the imagination, but what I lack in religious academic study I more than make up for in common sense... and that's what extremist groups are afraid of, that people will start applying common sense to their beliefs.

The Ground Zero Mosque

Ok I'll admit it's not every day that I watch Keith Olbermann's show, and it's an even more rare occasion when I recommend you watch it too.
This is certainly one that had me sitting up straight and paying attention.

I'm not sure what the state of New York decided to do about the "Ground Zero Mosque" issue, but I do recall seeing the map of it's location and for the life of me couldn't understand what all the fuss was about.

Maybe after watching this 12 minute clip, you can tell me what I'm missing. Or maybe not.

The Institution Of Religion

My blogger friend Azra, whom i've never met but writes captivating posts and is never afraid to push the envelope, recently wrote about religion and fanaticism. Her post can be found here.
http://azras-adventures.blogspot.com/2010/08/living-islam-some-moderation-please.html

This inspired me to share my own personal opinion on religion, in as brief a manner as I can.
While intelligent debate is healthy and whole-heartedly welcome, please note that my blog is a Bigot-&-Fanatic Free Zone.
I know zealots who know zealots who could hunt you down and stone you to death if you try that shit on my blog!

As mentioned in a previous blog post, i've been fortunate to have an upbringing smothered between a deeply religious Christian grandmother, and an equally religious Muslim grandfather.
My mom is an amazing woman who walked us through this religious maze, showing us kid's that it was a thing of beauty, of love and of tolerance; not something to be feared or be dogmatic about.
Much like the poppy field, it could be admired for it's beauty just as easily as it could be frowned upon for it's narcotic effect.
Religion in my opinion is a thing of beauty.
Something to be treated with the respect it deserves.
And therein lays the challenge.

I learnt at an early age to respect all religions, just as I would expect others to respect mine.
How then was I to agree with some of these religious zealots who only preach hate and fear and detest for anyone who's belief system differed from their own?
Had they not heard of tolerance?
What kind of religion would promote hatred over love, fear over respect, and segregation over unification?

How easy it is to judge and criticize that which we don't understand?
I was seven or eight when I first fully understood being in a Masjid.
I was eight or nine when I first fully understood being in a Church.
The message in both was exactly the same.
Looking beyond the names and labels, and taking out only the lessons to be learnt in the preachings, I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the Masjid and the Church.

So when a guy I knew from the neighbourhood saw me leaving Church one Sunday, and recalled seeing me in the Masjid the Friday before, he called me a traitor. At ten I didn't fully understand what a traitor was, but the venomous way he spat it out when he said it made me instinctively realise it couldn't be a good thing.
True story. It would be eight years later before I saw him again, in a club, with his girlfriend.
I think her name was Thirusha.
Farouk just smiled at me, took his beer and his girlfriend and scuttled off.
Did I mention this was a true story?

A few years ago my mom opened a franchised fast-food outlet.
A popular chicken franchise actually.
Needless to say, the topic of being certified "halaal" needed to be addressed.
She was advised to go with a certain "Halaal Certifying Authority" as they were very prominent in the Muslim community and it would be good for her business.
Good for her business?
Anyways, I 'd rather not mention their name except to say that it rhymes with "BANHA".
About two years later she was in the process of changing her bank, and subsequently needed to change all her debit order details.
"BANHA" hadn't been updated in time and the debit order for that particular month bounced.
Next thing she knew, her store "could no longer be certified halaal".
Really?
They based that on a bounced debit-order instead of a site inspection?

Ever since that day, I make it my duty to listen to public announcements of what "BANHA" in their infinite wisdom have deeemed haraam, as the list is updated on a daily basis depending on who's debit order has bounced, and then I go out and buy all those "haraam" products and have a huge illicit feast.
It's my way of saying "Up yours BANHA."

*ok you can start the fatwa and send your henchmen at this point, you religious zealots you!*

I mentioned on Azra's blog, an incident that happened to me whilst still a student a good many years back.
I'm too lazy to re-type so here's the cut-&-paste.

As a student travelling by bus I once came across a fanatic who I befriended with a view to trying to understand him better.
One hot Friday afternoon, with the bus filled to capacity, a pregnant black lady boarded and headed toward the back where we were sitting. There was easily enough space for her between us, but he simply pretended like he never saw her and left his satchel on the seat.
I offered her my seat which she graciously accepted, and when she disembarked few stops later, I asked him why he was such an ass.

His response, and my recollection of it more than 15 years later, still infuriates me!
He said she was an infidel, and he felt no pity on her as she was bringing another infidel into this world!

The gall of those who deem themselves holier than the moderates has forever made me steer clear of their words, their preachings and their company.

I guess what i'm trying to say really, is that we spend so much time arguing over who's right and who's wrong, who's going to heaven and who's going to hell, who's a saint and who's a sinner, that we totally forget to just live and let live.
If there's one lesson i'd honestly love to have my daughter Sabreen learn from me as regards religion, it's that it's more important to be good than it is to be holy; more important to be respectful and tolerant than it is to be pious and religious.

St Peter Cleared Of Blasphemy

This article appeared in todays News24 Online.
My question is this.... is it not irresponsible journalism to publish this joke in a widely circulated magazine?
Or is this Freedom of Speech in action?

My personal viewpoint is, if we treated each other with respect, we would treat religions other than our own with respect, and we'd never get to a point where we'd need to ask these questions.

I'm interested in finding out your views on this....

From News24.com
Cape Town - St Peter was expressing his feelings, not swearing or blaspheming, when he urged Jesus not to "fuck around" in a golf game, the office of the press ombudsman ruled on Monday.

The ruling followed a complaint by a member of the public against an article in the March edition of the Sports Illustrated magazine, about the pursuit of sporting perfection.

Deputy ombudsman Johan Retief said the article included a joke about St Peter and Jesus playing golf in heaven.

He said the joke went that when Jesus hooked his first tee-shot, an angel guided the ball back into play, the dove of peace caught the ball in its beak and dropped it on the green, from where the holy spirit blew the ball into the hole.

"So St Peter said to Jesus: 'Do you wanna play golf or do you wanna fuck around?'"

Retief said the complainant, André Williams, maintained the article went too far by telling a joke about Jesus, and that the word "fuck" was a swearword that amounted to blasphemy.

Williams had asked what would happen if the names of St Peter and Jesus were replaced with Muhammad and Allah.

However Retief said that in the joke, St Peter felt done in, and that Jesus was not playing fair.

"The phrase 'fuck around' is used to express this feeling, and does not as such amount to swearing. 'Fuck you' would have been swearing."

"Although it can be said that the use of the phrase 'fuck around' constitutes bad taste, it does not, by definition, amount to a breach of the Press Code."

He also said the context of the joke in the story - that technology could turn sport into a joke in its pursuit of perfection - was of vital importance.

The fact that the joke had been published many times all over the world indicated a moral climate that tolerated it.

The question of what would happen if the names were replaced with Muhammad and Allah was hypothetical as each case had to be considered on its own merits.

Retief dismissed the complaint.

- SAPA