1. Comment #433974 by pipsy on November 22, 2009 at 10:43 pm

"Divine mysteries"?

Other Comments by pipsy

2. Comment #433978 by alessamendes on November 22, 2009 at 10:57 pm

Why is she speaking so ill of those who voice their concerns against Muslim extremism? She should agree, shouldn't she?

If an Atheist group conducted in, what I considered, immoral acts, I would side with those opposing such acts.

I know that not all Muslims are violent, but I reject the ones that are, and gentle Muslims should direct their energy on them as well, not people like me.

I don't know if that made any sense...

Other Comments by alessamendes

3. Comment #433981 by Sally Luxmoore on November 22, 2009 at 11:07 pm

She sounds to me like a very confused woman.
I am inclined to agree with whoever it was who emailed her.
It seems to me that any organisation called 'Muslims for Secular Democracy' has no chance of succeeding at all. She acknowledges herself that prominent muslims will have nothing to do with her.
She says,"Supporters of this organisation came out in central London last week to protest against sharia law and anti-democratic, anti-women Muslim groups." -- So that would be all muslim groups, then?
She doesn't belong with this religion.

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

4. Comment #433984 by Paula Kirby on November 22, 2009 at 11:15 pm

Yasmin rather makes our point for us. She acknowledges that Islam poses a threat: that the biggest threat to our society comes from Islam.

As I once heard a politician say in a radio interview, of course not all Muslims are terrorists; but over the last 10 years or so all terrorists in the UK have been Muslim. (OK, it was a soundbite: you'll be able to think of exceptions, but it is still true enough to make a valid point.)

And if more of the innocent Muslims Yasmin talks about were to stand up and be counted, and actually denounce what’s being done in the name of their religion, their claims of innocence might carry more weight. It would help, too, if they would publicly reject the dogma that every syllable of the Koran is literally true, since it is impossible to recognise in the Koran the peaceful, loving, innocent philosophy that Yasmin wishes to portray. But they won’t do this. They won't disassociate themselves publicly from the fanatics - yet they still expect the rest of us to do so.

Yasmin’s article reminds me of the Catholic apologists who wave away the child abuse scandals with ‘Yes, yes, isn’t it terrible’ but then talk about Catholic charities instead, as though that made everything alright again.

‘If only I could explain where this violence comes from’, she writes – but has she never actually read the Koran? That’s like a Christian claiming they wished they could explain where homophobia comes from.

It's no good: inasmuch as religious people are generally kind, decent and good citizens, this is purely because they have evolved the same generally moral impulses as the rest of us. Of course Muslims can be gentle and compassionate: they are human, after all, and these are classic human traits. But where religion takes over, that's when the real horrors begin. It is precisely because Yasmin would appear to be a gentle and kind person that we can legitimately ask her why she does not find her religion disgusting.

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

5. Comment #433986 by Bonzai on November 22, 2009 at 11:22 pm

I wonder who was the well known atheist that emailed her.

Other Comments by Bonzai

6. Comment #433987 by Sandra S on November 22, 2009 at 11:26 pm

I thank him for his genuine concern and pity his inability to understand those elements of human nature - like love, tenderness and jealousy too

That's nice, assume he's incapable of understanding emotions because he's an atheist.

Northeast Intelligence Network in the US writes: "The latest murderous rampage should be enough to illustrate that Islam is totally incompatible with freedom, democracy and the western culture."

No, islam is no less incompatible with western culture and democracy than christianity. However, this doesn't mean that christianity is fully compatible. It wouldn't work if it wasn't at least somewhat secularized.

I've known plenty of muslims in my own country who are far better compatible with democracy than many your average voter. However, they don't wear any kind veil, though, so clearly they're not fundamentalists of any kind. This doesn't mean that islam is good for democracy. Infact, a fundamentalism of islam, as well as fundamentalism christianity, I firmly believe would use the very rights democracy has given them to get rid of those rights.

But why do educated, high-achieving Muslims fall into nihilism? Hassan and the Algerian scientist had everything going for them. Their adopted countries delivered all they could have wished for. We do not know the answers to those questions.

I'm sorry, but we do know; the love of martyrdom, which comes from the Koran. That is in any case what I've heard those "failed martyrs" talk about.

Brave academics are linking up western politics with the explosive anger all across the Muslim world.

Come on. Yes, it's despicable and terrible in many ways and I'm sure it angers many, but where are the tibetan monks blowing themselves up in crowds of chinese civilians?

Those who then blow up themselves and the innocent who happen to be nearby. It is unfair that when Muslims commit horrific acts we are all held responsible.

No, of course all muslims shouldn't be held responsible, it would be easier, though, if some of them were to stand up and condemn the bombings. "Innocents that happend to be nearby"? Happend to be nearby? No, the suicide bombers didn't exactly just decide to commit suicide via a bomb strapped to their body and then people just happend to walk by when he did it. No, they didn't happen to be nearby, the very point of those suicide bombings were to kill as many as possible.

I do however agree with what I think Yasmin Alibhai-Brown alludes to. That is to stop trying to freeze out muslims and treat them like they had the plague. Isolation breeds extremism. From what I understand they out produce westerners in general in any case. No, the only real solution that I can see is to get them to assimilate. That is what I think has happend to a certain extent in Sweden, I very rarely see anyone wearing any kind of burqa. I don't live in an immigrant heavy area, though.

Other Comments by Sandra S

7. Comment #433991 by Azven on November 22, 2009 at 11:29 pm

Religion warps a persons priorities, providing a presumed reward (where none exists) for actions that are abhorent. I don't see what the big mystery is?

And it's "If only I could explain from where this violence comes".

Other Comments by Azven

8. Comment #433992 by PaulEmecz on November 22, 2009 at 11:31 pm

I think the comment she makes is valid:

"The more contemplative commentators are asking if illiberal measures need to be brought in to identify and control this one troublesome, religiously profiled community. A yellow star you might call it, for our times."

I'm sure there have been Jews taking part in Zionist conspiracies, but that should not justify anti-Semitism. If you described people who are Jewish as 'disgusting', you would rightly be rebuked by any rational person. And the truth is that we don't really need the yellow star. People discriminate against some Muslims purely on the basis of their appearance.

There are Muslims who are terrorists. I cannot abide them. There are atheists who are terrorists. I have no time at all for them. It isn't that I find Islam and Atheism disgusting, it is that I find terrorism disgusting.

Other Comments by PaulEmecz

9. Comment #433994 by black wolf on November 22, 2009 at 11:36 pm

Her article, taken as a whole, exemplifies the deep incapacitation people face who are at once inclined to hang on to religious faith for no reason they can make clear, even to themselves, and also uphold their conscientious and intellectual conviction that secularism makes for a better society.

I can only pity the mind that must hold fast to a religion that makes no secret of its strong aspiration to political dominance, the driving force being a purpotedly supernaturally ordained system that declares all living beings its subjects from birth - and right along hush the thought, push it back into the box so heavily guarded by the mental forces of denial.
We might be seeing sincere attempts at finding a way to truly make Islam compatible with secular democracy, but I cannot find much hope there.

There is too much written in black and white, uneraseable and unquestionable by its most holy words, and too much legendary and mythical historisation of those whose lives have been dedicated to the cause of uniting the planet in submission. Sometimes people must just let go.

Yasmin seems to have no answer she can convince herself of. My question to her would be, has she taken a good hard look at herself and asked, 'why hold this any longer, I could be using both hands to drag myself forward'.

Other Comments by black wolf

10. Comment #433995 by Bonzai on November 22, 2009 at 11:37 pm

Islam is disgusting, even if there is no Muslim terrorist.

She alludes to the internment of Western citizens of Japanese origin. While I understand her warning against mass hysteria, but the comparison is invalid. Being Japanese is not a belief and one cannot stop being Japanese even if he/she so wishes.

Other Comments by Bonzai

11. Comment #433997 by BroughtyBoy on November 22, 2009 at 11:41 pm

The opening sentence gives us a clue to Ms Alibhai-Browns well documented self regard. I remember her using a phrase to the effect of = "because I am a muslim, it makes me humble" and thinking, - well it certainly doesn`t make you modest.
Does anyone else find her general output irrevocably skewed? The constant insinuation that the West is ultimately to blame for all the worlds ills is something I find more and more tiresome.

Other Comments by BroughtyBoy

12. Comment #434001 by Bonzai on November 22, 2009 at 11:55 pm

I think this article highlights why there is such widespread unease with Muslims.

I have read some of Ms. Brown's articles before. I find her to be a very reasonable and secular person, her being Muslim not withstanding.

However, when push comes to shove, instead of denouncing the fundamentalists and admitting that there is a real problem with Islam, she decides to close rank with fellow Muslims and direct her anger at the society that supposedly have unjustly treated all Muslims with suspicions (She actually may have a point there)

That wouldn't be so bad if she could at least acknowledge that there is a problem with Islam, but instead she is serving us the usual bs that Islam is a beautiful and liberating religion and it is only some Muslims who commit terrorism etc.

It doesn't look good on her.

Let's be honest, Islam has a major problem and it is not just terrorism.

It is a disgusting religion even without terrorism.

Christianity has at least been dragged screaming and kicking into the modern world,--or at least the 19th century. But Islam is still in the Dark Age judging by the teachings of all its major schools. The fact is, next to the Mullahs the Pope looks like a great liberal.

Islam is still a medieval religion soaked in barbarity and ignorance in most places where Muslims are a majority. This is a fact that no platitude of how beautiful 'true Islam' is can whitewash away. One also wonders why so few Muslims get the essence of 'true Islam'. Did Allah have a speech problem?

If she can honestly acknowledge these problems, then maybe people would be more willing to listen to he plea for a more nuanced approach towards Muslims,--which is a sensible recommendation.

Edited for grammar and spelling

Other Comments by Bonzai

13. Comment #434002 by Linda Ward Selbie on November 23, 2009 at 12:01 am

This remark seems pointed at Dawkins so Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, why not admit it if he emails you?:

I thank him for his genuine concern and pity his inability to understand those elements of human nature - like love, tenderness and jealousy too - which cannot be precisely measured or validated by rationality alone.

What an ignorant thing to say about any person. Surely if Richard Dawkins is not a man that loves and is loved by family and friends it would be public knowledge and the topic of chatty tabloid scorn.

Do study the reasons for Islamic violence and find that the perpetrators are most likely emotionally dysfunctional and sexually repressed men. They come from lawless, backward tribal cultures in which bloodshed and cruelty are entwined with archaic religious beliefs. They are conditioned in the womb.

Islam does not declare for the common good, human rights, gender equality and personal freedom. It is a litany of oppression.

Modernizing developing cultures will take time however there can be no accommodation for Islam (or other religion special interest groups) in OUR communities and government policies.

Other Comments by Linda Ward Selbie

14. Comment #434003 by Steve Zara on November 23, 2009 at 12:05 am

Comment #434001 by Bonzai

Excellent comment.

I wish that Alibhai-Brown would explain just what it is about Islam that keeps her loyal to it.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

15. Comment #434007 by BroughtyBoy on November 23, 2009 at 12:12 am

Not so Bonzai. She is not reasonable at the core. She is a sophist defending a more and more untenable line because it suits her contrary mentality of victimhood. I sincerely hope that we prevail in this debate, but I fear our cause will not be assisted by using Ms Alibhai-Brown as a conduit.

Other Comments by BroughtyBoy

16. Comment #434011 by robotaholic on November 23, 2009 at 12:43 am

she's a retard and just completely wrong- about everything-

Other Comments by robotaholic

17. Comment #434014 by God fearing Atheist on November 23, 2009 at 12:47 am

Muslims for Secular Democracy and their constituency are caught between a rock and a hard place - the BNP and the mad mullahs. Neither side will take prisoners.

So whick UK political party is capable of sorting it out? Who has the velvet glove and iron fist? Who can treat the innocent with understanding, yet crush the guilty?

Its certainly not Denham, if this is accurate:- http://richarddawkins.net/articles/4644. Sucking up to the mad mullahs indeed!

Other Comments by God fearing Atheist

18. Comment #434015 by Pobjoy on November 23, 2009 at 12:47 am

Well said Paula and Bonzai.

Other Comments by Pobjoy

19. Comment #434019 by bethe123 on November 23, 2009 at 1:11 am

"But why do educated, high-achieving Muslims fall into nihilism? Hassan and the Algerian scientist had everything going for them. Their adopted countries delivered all they could have wished for. We do not know the answers to those questions. " -- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown

Come on.
From what I have read, Hassan was not particularly high-achieving nor well educated.

But he apparently did know enough to shout "Allahu Akbar!" — "God is great!" in Arabic before his rampage, and he also had previously sent emails to Al Qaeda.
Pretty much says it all.

Other Comments by bethe123

20. Comment #434020 by Demotruk on November 23, 2009 at 1:13 am

"I thank him for his genuine concern and pity his inability to understand those elements of human nature - like love, tenderness and jealousy too - which cannot be precisely measured or validated by rationality alone."

I'm noticing that "you can't intellectualize love" notion a lot these days...

What do these people believe, that because you prefer to have beliefs that are rational, or because you use your brain to think a lot, that you somehow can't appreciate or have emotions? Do they think because we reject their superstitious beliefs, that we're robots?

Other Comments by Demotruk

21. Comment #434021 by Ania on November 23, 2009 at 1:14 am

Why is Islam disgusting?

She seems to answer her own question, rather in depth and comprehensively. Including:

"obscurantist Islamic doctrine that, if allowed to prevail, will obliterate progress and human aspiration. We can see this in Pakistan already, even in highly cultured places like Lahore. And in Europe too."

uh yeah, that would be a problem.

If you denounce Burkas and drink wine then you're not a Muslim in the eyes of most Muslims. You're statistically insignificant, you don't represent Islam, you're a hybridized belief system that cherry picks the elements of Islam that comply with western democracies. Now, unless enough Muslims start behaving the way Kirby described above, you don't count!!

Other Comments by Ania

22. Comment #434023 by Logicel on November 23, 2009 at 1:21 am

Despite her intelligence and many good qualities, Brown is a god belief junkie who refuses to accept that her particular cut of heroin is laced with a deadly poison. She keeps on saying, but it is so pure, keeps me aloft, is my greatest comfort, I will just keep taking it, this lovely thing can't me adversely affecting me or others. Oh yes it is, Brown, since you pity Dawkins for the dumb-arsed reasons you give, it does appear that your addiction is screwing with an otherwise decent brain.

And, I pity you for being a god belief junkie.

Other Comments by Logicel

23. Comment #434025 by The_Intangible_Fancy on November 23, 2009 at 1:27 am

There are a lot of things that annoyed me about this article but I can only articulate a couple at the moment.

It seems to me that this writer has trouble distinguishing between criticism of Islam and criticism of Muslims. The "well-known atheist" who emailed her made a point to distinguish between her ("a good, kind and intelligent woman") and her religion which he found to be "disgusting". He was criticizing Ms. Alibhai-Brown's IDEOLOGY not her as a person. Religions/ideologies don't have feelings and believers need to stop getting hurt/offended on their behalf.

I was mildly annoyed when she brought up how Japanese people were detained during WWII because it seemed that she was making the classic error of confusing Islam for a racial identity. Islam is an ideology not a race. The sooner people stop making this error, the easier it will be to criticize Islam without having to dodge charges of racism.

Major Hassan embodies these pressures, and his solution was to gun people down, emulating American mass murderers to discharge Muslim derangement.

This line really made me angry. "Emulating American mass murderers"? It seems to me he was emulating ISLAMIC mass murderers. But I guess I forgot that Americans have trademarked mass murder.

It is frustrating because I agree with her that there is way too much hate directed at Muslims and that ultimately this hate is just going to drive more young Muslims away from the West and from secular ideas. But it is hard to ignore the fact that there are all too many Islamic radicals waiting in the wings to prey upon these disillusioned youth. Bigotry is a problem, but so is Islamic fundamentalism. And moderate Islam continues to shield fundamentalism by defending irrational faith and religion.

Other Comments by The_Intangible_Fancy

24. Comment #434030 by -ID62- on November 23, 2009 at 1:58 am

@ Logicell #434023

Brown is a god belief junkie who refuses to accept that her particular cut of heroin is laced with a deadly poison.

Thank you for putting it that way. I have read the analogy of addiction/religion, but somehow the way you put it helped it sink into my brain....man like wow!

No really, the drug addiction analogy is good.


Thanks

Other Comments by -ID62-

25. Comment #434035 by BigJohn on November 23, 2009 at 2:38 am

Once again, Paula nails it for us. Bonzai adds a few tacks. Either that or this a Poe.

Other Comments by BigJohn

26. Comment #434041 by TIKI AL on November 23, 2009 at 3:51 am

Just another delusional god whisperer who desperately wants to misplace blame.

Other Comments by TIKI AL

27. Comment #434050 by Crazy_Steve on November 23, 2009 at 5:36 am

disappointing she doesn't come to the obvious conclusion that is right in her own text: Islam, as practiced in most of the world, is a destructive and hateful religion.

Clearly, many muslims can lead moral and productive lives, such as the author. But in doing so, like the author, they must leave large enough parts of the religion behind so that they are not considered true muslims by others, again like the author. And yet she can't recognize that to become a moral person she had to stop obeying islamic law...

If Islam was a religion of peace, then there would be massive protests against the evils done in its name by the most important people in the clergy. Instead, we have either silence, or encouragement. It's disgusting.

Other Comments by Crazy_Steve

28. Comment #434051 by ronfac on November 23, 2009 at 5:37 am

When I read first TGD, I thought, WOW!here is someone who felt and thought as I did on the subject, the difference being that RD had the eloquence, wit, knowledge and training to put it out there.
To read Paula Kirby's occasional comments on this site is to recognize those very same talents and abilities. It would be my humble suggestion that Paula produce a volume of her observations as soon as possible, because I have no doubt whatsoever that it would make a remarkable contribution to the debate. My apologies if this was a little off topic.

Other Comments by ronfac

29. Comment #434060 by Jos Gibbons on November 23, 2009 at 7:16 am

Rationality doesn't make demands on any aspects of her life other than her beliefs. Love? Tenderness? Jealousy? Why doesn't she bring up "fun" while she's at it? Either one has at least one belief not supported by sufficient evidence, or one is sensible. Which is it in her case? Well, she's a Muslim, so there's our answer. There is literally no excuse for believing things that make you feel good. Those of us who live in reality do just fine. We also constitute less of a danger to others.

Other Comments by Jos Gibbons

30. Comment #434065 by atp on November 23, 2009 at 7:50 am

Freedom of choice, means freedom for women to be whores and for men to be drunk.

Any "good" Muslim must those oppose this "immoral" western freedom. Any moral person believing in freedom as a human right must oppose Islam

In this lies a struggle that will not end before the whole world is educated enough to see that religion is based on nothing but dogmatic statements, and holds no truth at all.

Other Comments by atp

31. Comment #434066 by AllanW on November 23, 2009 at 7:56 am

I feel sorry for Yasmin. Does that sound condescending? I don’t mean it to; I want to encourage her to continue the journey she is obviously on and reach the end-point. As many posters here have remarked, her piece reflects the personal angst that thinking and conscientious individuals who have been brought up as Muslims are going through.

She is plainly a sensitive and caring woman, how else to explain her condemnation for those aspects of her ideology that we also see as homophobic and misogynistic? I applaud her effort, commitment and objective in trying to square the circle of making Muslims realise that secularism and equality of opportunity are valuable and laudable facets of western democracy that should be accepted at the expense of jihad, Sharia and isolation.

I’m equally pleased that she articulates and re-echoes our point that the ignorance of individual adherents should not prejudice our dealings with any other self-labelled Muslims (I wish she would do the same by understanding that not all of us in the West supported the disastrous foreign policy decisions undertaken by Bush and Bliar but maybe that will come over time). For this means that she has much more in common with western secularists (as many have noted on this thread) than the vast majority of literalists of her own religion.

She is so close, soooo close to turning the final corner and realising that freeing herself from the grip of childhood indoctrination far from being a dangerous and frightening step is in reality a liberation. I wish her well and hope she will continue taking one step at a time away from dogma and towards critical acceptance of rational values.

edit.

Other Comments by AllanW

32. Comment #434067 by Lisa Bauer on November 23, 2009 at 8:07 am

Hmmm...just to play devil's advocate a bit, I admit I might be a bit put out and defensive if I got an email calling my religion "disgusting." On the other hand, even when I belonged to that same "disgusting" religion, I could completely understand why others might think that way.

I suspect that some or all of the following are coming into play for Yasmin Alibhai-Brown in this attempt to defend her religion:

1. Muslim solidarity -- "I must stand up for my religion and my Muslim 'brothers' and 'sisters' from these awful attacks. They don't understand Islam like I do!" Bonzai above makes a good point about how some apparently "moderate" Muslims prefer to make excuses for fanatics or tacitly or verbally support them against outside attacks rather than openly denounce them or admit to any problems with Islam or the Qur'an. I suppose it makes sense if you feel that Muslims everywhere are constantly "under siege" and must be defended -- sort of. (Why would anybody defend the Taliban, though -- that's certainly not going to improve the image of Islam in the eyes of its critics!)

2. No doubt she's been taught, or believes herself, that Islam is perfect, peaceful, equitable, and so on; all ugly effects must be the result of gross distortion or hijacking of Islam's "essential", peaceful nature. This sentiment will often hold even if the person no longer really believes in the religion -- think of the various "fatheists" who defend the "positive core teachings" of religions that they no longer believe in.

3. I wonder if there's a bit of a feeling of "up yours!" involved, since I felt a bit of that myself. It went something like this: "How does it feel to encounter an intelligent, self-confident Muslimah who shatters your crude stereotypes? Contrary to what you might think, belief in God is as strong as ever and there are plenty of us intelligent, reflective, tolerant theists and even Muslims out there to deal with! If you don't like it, kiss my ^&*% -- it's my life." The fact that it's Islam might make the "screw you" aspect even more delicious, in the believer's sight.

I suppose Alibhai-Brown's sentiments make some kind of sense if she believes all that stuff about how "true religion" and "true Islam" are, at base, forces for good, encouraging charity, caring for the needy, building love and brotherhood between believers, and all of that. Liberal Christians and Jews might say the same of their religions, that they're "really" all about peace, love, charity, and all that good stuff, and the misogyny, violence, hatred for outsiders/disbelievers, silly rules, and so on are distortions of the heavenly message. Of course, this is difficult to pull off unless you either throw out or tacitly ignore most of your sacred texts!

In any case, I wonder what Alibhai-Brown might say about Islam when she's NOT in a defensive mood? How would she respond to a friendlier email, I wonder?

Other Comments by Lisa Bauer

33. Comment #434071 by Enlightenme.. on November 23, 2009 at 8:27 am

Paula K:
"And if more of the innocent Muslims Yasmin talks about were to stand up and be counted, and actually denounce what’s being done in the name of their religion, ..
..But they won’t do this. They won't disassociate themselves publicly from the fanatics - yet they still expect the rest of us to do so."

I can't help thinking that if I was one of the majority secular, or even more so just a cultural Muslim, I would most likely be hunkered down, wishing it would all go away, but also thinking; "What have I done to deserve this"
"I just want a quiet life, why should I have to make time to go marching around on streets disowning the nutters?"


-----

Why aren't there enough Catholics denouncing the Vatican on condoms?
Why aren't there enough Jews denouncing the Zionist Lebensraum?
Why aren't there enough Anglicans denouncing the Bishop of Carlisle's blaming the floods on faggot-lovers?

(we know - It's not their Catholicism, Judaism, Anglicanism)

Why Haven't I got time to go out on the streets denouncing Nick Griffin or Geert Wilders?

Other Comments by Enlightenme..

34. Comment #434075 by Richard Dawkins on November 23, 2009 at 9:04 am

I wonder what Alibhai-Brown might say about Islam when she's NOT in a defensive mood? How would she respond to a friendlier email, I wonder?

I see what you mean, and I agree that 'disgusting' is a strong word, maybe even strident. On the other hand, my email was only a brief covering note. The main purpose was to send Yasmin that infamous YouTube film of various Egyptian 'clerics' egging young men on to become martyrs. We've discussed it before on this site, but here's the reference again because Yasmin ignored it in her piece, even though she purported to be replying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uK7k4KBta0&feature=player_embedded
Now that's disgusting, and I don't think it is unduly strident to say so. If she had mentioned it, Yasmin would have had to resort to a "No true Muslim . . ." defence. In fact, she ignored it. We don't know whether she even watched it.

The trouble is, as Sam Harris has said, many of these people "actually believe what they say they believe." Of course most individual Muslims don't put into practice what they are taught to believe. But it only takes a minority to want to be 'martyrs', and a disturbingly large number admire those who do. The fact is, they are all taught to believe that the Koran is the literal word of God, and polls suggest that the majority do, even in Britain.

Please view that YouTube film again, if you haven't already done so, and reflect that thousands of children are being fed similar stuff, in Egypt, in Pakistan, in Afghanistan, in Saudi Arabia, even in Britain. Timothy Garton-Ash, in the Guardian ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/aug/10/comment.race), remarked that

Shockingly, one in three British Muslims aged between 18 and 24 said they would rather live under Sharia law than under British law. In a Pew poll of Muslims worldwide, a gob-smacking 81% of British Muslims said they thought of themselves as a Muslim first and a citizen of their country only second. This is a higher proportion than in Jordan, Egypt or Turkey, and exceeded only by that in Pakistan (87%)

Shahid Malik, British Member of Parliament, said (http://www.shahidmalikmp.org/Issues-and-Campaigns/Files/NOWJul06)

Apparently 13 per cent of British Muslims think the 7/7 suicide bombers should be regarded as "martyrs". It is the Islamic responsibility of individuals and groups across the country to confront that alienated 13 per cent and disabuse them of this twisted thought.

It is Yasmin Alibhai-Brown's responsibility too, and, to be fair, it is one she has not shirked. But "If only I could explain where this violence comes from"? The answer is staring her in the face.

Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

35. Comment #434077 by Nunbeliever on November 23, 2009 at 9:16 am

I read the article TWICE... but I could not find a real argument there. Yes, she said we should not blame islam for islamistic terrorism... She just could not find a single argument WHY!

Other Comments by Nunbeliever

36. Comment #434078 by Paula Kirby on November 23, 2009 at 9:17 am

Enlightenme..: "I just want a quiet life, why should I have to make time to go marching around on streets disowning the nutters?"

I think you're right about the likely emotional response, but at the same time non-extremist Muslims (and, as you rightly suggest, Catholics, Jews and Anglicans) still have a responsibility to speak out against the nutters.

For one thing, they have more in common with the nutters than you do (I am assuming) with Nick Griffin or Geert Wilders. Every interview I have ever seen with a failed Islamic terrrorist has referred to Allah, the Koran, martyrdom, the infidel, Jihad, etc. These are concepts that all Muslims at least pay lip service to (given that the Koran is full of them, and it is a core tenet of Islam that every syllable of the Koran is literally true). You do not pay lip service to the motivators that drive Nick Griffin or Geert Wilders.

And the need for moderates to speak out against the extremists can only increase if, despite valuing the same underlying principles that are driving the extremists, they are going to publicly wring their hands and lament being lumped in with them. When we have terrorists publicly attributing their actions to Islam and believing that their actions are commanded and approved by Islam, and will be rewarded by Allah, it is inevitable that people will come to see Islam as a threat. If it is not, then Yasmin and others need to do more than whinge about it: they need to demonstrate why it is not.

If you are being falsely lumped in with people you wholeheartedly disapprove of, don't you do everything in your power to disassociate yourself from those people? You may regret or even resent the necessity, but it is a necessity all the same. And what we are repeatedly failing to see, from any of the religious (or from non-religious believers-in-belief either, for that matter) is an honest engagement with the extent to which core Muslim teachings - as written in the Koran and the Hadith and repeated Friday after Friday in mosques around the world - genuinely are fuelling this wave of terrorism. Of course there are those Muslims who let it wash over them and are not infected by it (though in so doing they are being inspired by their humanity, not by their religion); but this does not for one moment let the teachings themselves off the hook, or lessen the incongruity of decent people continuing to go through the motions of supporting them.

Other Comments by Paula Kirby

37. Comment #434079 by Jeremy Anglesea on November 23, 2009 at 9:29 am

The problem here is that if she drinks wine and actively opposes the wearing of the burka and the imposition of the sharia then in what sense can she claim to be a muslim? She is blinded by her moderation into imagining that no thinking person can actually believe what the koran tells muslims to believe, thus her confusion when educated people commit acts of suicide murder. She and her fellows at Muslims for Secular Democracy are no doubt working to build a better world but they are very much on the losing side of the theological argument, and the extremists know this. She refuses to say it bluntly but if you connect the dots throught this article you see a tacit admission, im sure unconsciously, that the more "muslim" a person becomes (in the sense that they subscribe to the worldview mandated by the koran and the hadiths) the greater a threat they are to national security. No one in power is willing to acnowledge this as the implications are too dire to face.

Other Comments by Jeremy Anglesea

38. Comment #434080 by Stafford Gordon on November 23, 2009 at 9:34 am

Comment 4; Paula Kirby:

Spot on!

I've always been conscious of the deafening silence within the Muslim community apropos of all the murders which have been committed in their name; conscious and suspicious I'm afraid.

As I write there's a Muslim apologist on Radio 4s Start The Week, and what he's saying is, to my mind, a deliberate distraction from or a wilful refusal to admit the reality that his community has yet to faces up to; in effect, the silence continues.

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

39. Comment #434082 by Mark Jones on November 23, 2009 at 9:43 am

Two quotes from Alibhai-Brown:

I can see how a hard-wired scientific mind is programmed to reject divine mysteries and inner faith which cannot be verified.
...
I am trying, with a reputable therapy institute, to raise money to work with convicted educated terrorists to get a better understanding of what tipped them over into giving up on life, their own and that of others.

If she could only join the dots she could better understand (without a reputable therapy institute) *how* people end up taking action based on mistaken beliefs. And that is surely all it is - mistaken beliefs. Why can these people not see that *that* is what must be eliminated from, or, at least, reduced to a minimum in, our societies? If one allows 'divine mysteries' and 'inner faith' then one cannot dispute the beliefs of the extremists.

Every idea must be subjected to the illuminating analysis of public discourse, not shut away in the darkened rooms of individual mindsets.

Other Comments by Mark Jones

40. Comment #434084 by modano on November 23, 2009 at 9:47 am

The reaction from muslims towards the mohammed drawings i a danish newspaper were massive. And violent.
How come we don't see any of these reactions when a 20 year old girl from Somalia get stoned to death for having sex?
This is not a minor group of fanatics. It is the law of a nation

One can only assume it is because also so called moderate muslims condone these kind of actions.


In her article, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown says she demonstrates against sharia law and anti-woman muslim groups.

Well, why don't you become an unbeliver, an atheist. You have the same opportunity to fight for the rights of
women and demoracy. Even better I would say.
Why cling to these people who you apparently have a lot against?

Your agenda seems to be human rights. That is is not compatible with any religion.


geir aune

Other Comments by modano

41. Comment #434086 by Mark Jones on November 23, 2009 at 9:52 am

Incidentally, well done to Richard for questioning the generally admirable Yasmin Alibhai-Brown for her choice of religion. As others have said, perhaps this will give her the impetus to examine her 'inner faith' more closely. Or perhaps it will entrench her beliefs? Worth the risk if it keeps moderate believers thinking about why their religions are the drivers of such atrocious behaviour.

Other Comments by Mark Jones

42. Comment #434087 by Richard Dawkins on November 23, 2009 at 9:53 am

It's worse than a deafening silence from 'moderate' Muslims. In some cases it is active encouragement. One of Britain's most respected Muslim leaders, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, was knighted by the Queen in 2005, on the recommendation of the Blair government, "For services to the Muslim community, to charities and to community relations." 'Sir' Iqbal is notorious for having said, of Salman Rushdie,

Death, perhaps, is a bit too easy for him . . . his mind must be tormented for the rest of his life unless he asks forgiveness to Almighty Allah.

If that is what their leaders are saying, leaders who are regarded as 'moderate' enough to be knighted, how can Yasmin Alibhai-Brown keep a straight face when she says, "If only I could explain where this violence comes from"?

Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

43. Comment #434088 by gcdavis on November 23, 2009 at 9:55 am

That otherwise intelligent people can still believe in god is one of life’s big mysteries. But an even bigger one is why they continue to subscribe to the dogma of particular religion. I can only find one convincing explanation and that is that they keep their faith behind a psychological firewall that denies access to reason.

When confronted with some of the revolting incantations found in the quran and of the barbaric acts of her co-religionists, Yasmin withdraws from reasoned thought into a world self deceit where her faith is allowed to cast a spell over her, yes this is brainwashing but of a very specific kind.

Religion has had centuries in which to perfect this spell by embedding itself in the culture of a believer so that in the end a persons very identity is so fused with their religion that they cannot escape from it.

So ubiquitous is religion in the life of a “secular” nation like the UK that much of goes unnoticed. When I hear a news report that states in a matter of fact way that “prayers were said” for a soldier killed in Afghanistan I have to pinch myself to believe that I heard it. Substitute “goats were slaughtered” for “prays were said” and you begin to see what I mean. Prayers are magic! That the likes of the BBC continue to treat the practice of magic as unremarkable shows what a lot of work we have to do to unweave the spell of religion.

Other Comments by gcdavis

44. Comment #434089 by quisquose on November 23, 2009 at 9:58 am

I feel for Yasmin.

It should be pointed out that I have heard 'moderate' Muslims single her out for more vitriol because of her secular views, than they have for any atheist.

Other Comments by quisquose

45. Comment #434092 by Barry Pearson on November 23, 2009 at 10:04 am

#433981 by Sally Luxmoore:
She sounds to me like a very confused woman....
She doesn't belong with this religion.

I have an analogy which will probably be taken the wrong way (and certainly invokes Godwin's law!)

It is as though a child was brought up by Nazi parents, and sees only good things about it (such as loving parents indulging in community activities; I'm struggling here!) To the child, it appears unfair that merely being a Nazi (or even the child of Nazi parents) is sufficient to incur condemnation. "Why do people hate us - why don't they look at us all individually and see that we are not all bad?" But sometimes "the brand" has bad things in scope that can never be hidden, and even good people who carefully cherry-pick will for ever be tainted, because no one can be confident that they are not tainted too.

It would need some sort of re-branding of Islam to enable people to separate themselves from the bad bits. If there was "Enlightened Islam", clearly a revised doctrine that people could accept as not tainted in the same way, and if people were prepared to say "I am not a Muslim, I'm an Enlightened Muslim", perhaps it would work. (Perhaps after a few generations!)

The point is that people can't get away with saying "I am a Muslim, but Islam isn't a bad religion - some Muslims just interpret it wrongly". No - they interpret it just as validly as the good people. People will have to be prepared to deny the simple terms "Islam" and "Muslim", because those will always carry baggage. (The fact that this will be considered to be apostasy, perhaps with a death penalty in some places, is a bit of a problem!)

ps: Obviously what I would really prefer them to do is see the supernatural beliefs, remaining even if the bad bits were stripped out, for the delusions they are. But for some people that is a step too far, or perhaps they already know this but want the sense of community that comes with a religion.

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

46. Comment #434093 by Jeremy Anglesea on November 23, 2009 at 10:05 am

Richard, thank you for bringing this up with Yasmin. Her article is a classic example of a muslim in denial about the true nature of faith based suicide murder. It seems that the current government definition of an islamic moderate is a muslim who does not actively engage in acts of violence, or recommend them too often. If anyone disagrees I would be more than happy to have my opinion corrected on that one.

Other Comments by Jeremy Anglesea

47. Comment #434095 by Steve Zara on November 23, 2009 at 10:08 am

Comment #434078 by Paula Kirby

I think you're right about the likely emotional response, but at the same time non-extremist Muslims (and, as you rightly suggest, Catholics, Jews and Anglicans) still have a responsibility to speak out against the nutters.

It's rare that I disagree with you, but I do about this. When someone is born into a culture, as against actively choosing it as an adult, I don't think they do have a responsibility to speak out against the nutters. They have the same responsibilities as anyone else - to live a decent life, providing they don't make an issue of their culture. If people live quiet respectable lives then then why should they have to accept any responsibility of the actions of others who share their identity by accident of birth?

On the other hand, someone like Alibhai Brown who chooses to speak up about her culture/religion certainly does have the responsibility you speak of, as do other moderate Muslims who choose to identify as representatives of their religion.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

48. Comment #434096 by Jack Rawlinson on November 23, 2009 at 10:14 am

For some reason I can't get the Indy to successfully register me so I can comment on that piece. Here's what I wanted to say:

The spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain would not join us because I personally object to the burka and openly drink wine.

There you go. So many of us have a major problem with Islam today because Islam today is, far too often, like this. We also have a problem because we notice how relatively infrequently the much-vaunted "moderate Muslims" remain mysteriously silent about what we regard as vile outrages against the liberty and liberalism we hold dear. It makes us wonder about Islam. A lot.

Twenty years ago I had not seen a burkha outside of a book and one visit to Tunisia. Now I see women in burkhas every single day on the streets of Streatham. Lots of them. So yes, I have a big problem with Islam as it is today. If this worries you, Yasmin, I would suggest that it falls to you and your fellow "moderate Muslims" to direct most of your concern in the direction that really matters: towards your fellows, not towards those of us who oppose the very prevalent illiberalism we plainly see in contemporary Islam.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson

49. Comment #434100 by Stafford Gordon on November 23, 2009 at 10:47 am

Of course, the precedent of internment set during the world wars should not be followed, and I agree that many people are worried about that.

You can't change your parents or where you were born or your skin colour (Michael Jackson had a "skin condition" of course) but you can change your mind, your address, your shirt and your religion; they are all elective.

I know individuals who've been changing from one cult creed or religion to another all their lives, in search of... what?

None of my business, they're entitled to their beliefs; what they are not entitled to do is dictate to others what they should believe.

What I think is the most alarming and dangerous element in all this, is the denial of scientific facts; people are entitled to their own beliefs and opinions, but no one is entitled to their own science.

As far as I know, no one is deliberately keeping scientific findings secret; there are books on it, lots and lots of books!

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

50. Comment #434102 by mmurray on November 23, 2009 at 11:20 am

I thank him for his genuine concern and pity his inability to understand those elements of human nature - like love, tenderness and jealousy too - which cannot be precisely measured or validated by rationality alone. I can see how a hard-wired scientific mind is programmed to reject divine mysteries and inner faith which cannot be verified.

What on earth has rejecting`divine mysteries and inner faith which cannot be verified' got to do with being unable to understand `love, tenderness and jealousy'. These are totally different things. I'm reall tired of this athiests as vulcans or athiests as aspergers thing the theists seem to be trying out lately. Madeline Bunting is pretty keen on this approach. Perhaps we should borrow from the Bard:

I am an Athiest. Hath not an Atheist eyes? hath not an Atheist hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a theist is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die?

Live long and prosper

Michael

PS: Good comment by mphil in the comments section of The Independent below this article.

Other Comments by mmurray