I generally avoid commenting on aricles in forums on the web because I believe seldom a meaningful dialogue is possible because the person who has written that rabid, anti-islam article is unlikely to change his views even if someone proves his premises are invalid.
But this article in New-York Times was such that I had to comment. Because while I ignored it in NYT, it was published next day in the Times Of India, a paper I read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/opinion/07ali.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
It is sad that the TOI will so blindly print an article from a foreign news-source(NYT) without verifying details.
The author is introduced as a former member of Dutch parliament. The fact is Miss Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a lady who has openly renounced Islam and yet will openly call Islam 'her religion' for her benefit and for publicity's sake. Her remarks to an extent in the past have been openly Islamaphobic and border on xenophobia. She was a member of the far-right in Dutch parliament and was disqualified when it emerged that she had lied while appealing for asylum in 92. Any other citizen would have been deported but because she is so openly anti-Islam , a special allowance was made so that she could remain a dutch citizen.
It is very easy to condemn and to vilify. The fact that the author has a muslim sounding name makes it appear as if a Muslim is confessing no moderates exist. Because Miss Ali does imply so very clearly.
I ask, should the TOI have given her legitimacy by printing her article?
The author uses generalizations when scope for none exist. Saudi- Arabia has laws that even many orthodox muslims are not very comfortable with, let alone the moderates. Why does she not see the example of India where despite hiccups Muslims are a very progressive lot. Or Turkey which despite being a Muslim majority state enforces secularism to a point that even America ad Europe do not.
The problem is Islam suffers from bad public relations. Newspapers will scream about the injustice in Saudi Arabia or the sentencing of the teacher in Sudan. They will search for people who support the act and print their comments in bold. Maybe unintentionally, but a feeling percolates through that the problem is Islam. It is not.
However the fact that many Muslims have condemned the act vociferously is seldom reported. Even if it is printed it becomes a footnote, just a small paragraph at the end. Many Muslim, yes Muslim bloggers have vociferously condemned the trial judgement in Saudi-Arabia and other such acts.
Why do moderate muslims need to apologize for what they are not guilty of ? The author intentionally turns a blind eye to many wonderful people trying to in their own small ways encourage dialogue and make the world a better place. And that is the fatal flaw in the article
3 comments:
My Dear friend,
I do not question your claims regarding the fact that many Muslims have condemned the act vociferously but it is hard to imagine the plight of the teacher, where she claims there was a mob outside the prison demanding her to be hung to death (I think i read it on the Guardian's feed) I feel melancholic to think that while there were people condemning the act, there was a group of people still despising her. I do not wish to argue with you, for its neither worthwhile (cause u always beat me hands down) nor is this the right place to do so. All i have to say is that there haven't been crazier times than this. There was also this sketch in newspaper where a couple nursery rhymes had been aptly renamed to three visually impaired mice and Bah bah coloured sheep. I guess one has to be really careful with ones choice of words these days.
I think you hit the nail on the head [i][b]there haven't been crazier times than this[/b][/i]. In fact I believe they will get even crazier in the next couple of years.
Anyway I have been following the teacher's case in Sudan and I think it was one idiotic instance of blind execution of law. It was apparent to everyone the lady meant no offence. Thankfully it all ended on a happy note except for the fact that she had to undergo 8 days of imprisonment.
The point that I actually was trying to make was this that the piece that Miss Ayaan Hirsi Ali had written was not a fallacious article meant only to get cheap publicity.
I am all for the freedom of speech but the question is whether the person expressing the opinion is willing to listen. I do not support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie and I hate the attitude in India where even a small thing can be offensive like the Daler Mehndi controversy or the recent aaja nachle one.
However the reason why I got so pissed off was because Miss ALi's article as poor as it may be but still to the average person who has not met a muslim Miss Ali's article would seem like an confession of guilt. And Miss ALi is not a believer.She tries to speak for all Muslims but she never can.
Well... I totally agree with you when you say that it was a case of blind execution of the law... And it's not the "Islamic Justice" that is at fault. There was also this case somewhere in the US where this Judge got pissed off by a cell phone ringing and ended up imprisoning all 46 of the people witnessing the trial. Sometimes I guess even justice needs justification. And with the growing transparency due to global media, it is only that more of these cases are coming forward.
As for your Ms Ali... pardon my ignorance, but i hadn't really heard of her until u mentioned her. And i don't think you should let her piss you off for trying to speak for all Muslims, because from what i have read about her, she is openly atheist.
Post a Comment