Muslims Against Sharia burst onto the scene last week with its announcement of a counter-bounty on the head of the probably-imaginary Abu Omar al-Baghdadi (al Qaeda’s own version of Keyser Soze). Bearing the slogan “Acknowledging Mistakes, Accepting Responsibities, Moving Forward” they seemed almost too good to be true. Unfortunately, they almost certainly are - as it is not clear that any of their members are actually Muslims!
The MASh manifesto sets out their stall quite explicitly:
- “We, as Muslims, find it abhorrent that Islam is used to murder millions of innocent people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.”
- “Twenty-first century Muslims have two options: we can continue the barbaric policies of the seventh century [...], or we can reform Islam to keep our rich cultural heritage and to cleanse our religion from the reviled relics of the past.”
So far so good. MASh appears to do exactly what it says on the tin: they are Muslims, and they are against sharia.
So it was surprising to see, buried away in their Blogger profile, that one of their main “Team Members” was Atlas Shrugs (aka Pamela Geller) - the right-wing, Bushier-than-Bush blogger who only last month was calling for Islam to be banned. Had Pamela “reverted” to the one true religion?
And why would MASh take on such a high-profile blogger and keep her hidden away? Did they think having an anti-Islam neocon on board might undermine their credibility? Or are they actually anti-Islam neocons themselves, and they simply forgot to cover their tracks by tidying up their Blogger profile?
The Freethinker asked MASh spokesman “Khalim Massoud” outright: “Are you in any way connected with American neocons?” - thereby giving him the chance to come clean and explain the Atlas connection. He answered:
Neocon is a vague term. If it means that neocon is a former Liberal who
became a Conservative after 9/11, then, in a way, we are all neocons. We get
blamed from both sides. There are people that see us as Islamic conspiracy
to decrease non-Muslim vigilance. Others see us as a neocon conspiracy to
divide the Ummah. There is no point in trying to convince either; they
already made up their minds. But since most of those people probably believe
that Bush and the Jews orchestrated September 11 attacks, we don’t want to
waste our time alleviating those concerns.
Oh dear. Concerns not really alleviated, Khalim. Concerns somewhat intensified.
What about Atlas herself? Although a prominent Team Member, she had made no mention of them on her blog - and she is prolific, to say the least - in spite of their headline-grabbing counter bounty earlier in the week. Why so coy?
The Freethinker: I notice that Muslims Against Sharia is one of the 4 Blogger blogs you administer [actually, 'author' is more accurate]. Was it your idea?
Atlas Shrugs: NO but I love it.
The Freethinker:How did you become involved with them?
Atlas Shrugs: They asked me …
The Freethinker: What exactly did they ask you for?
Atlas Shrugs: Uh… to join them. What is it you are getting at?
Uh… just wondering what a conservative Jew was doing in a group called Muslims Against Sharia.
An hour after that first question was answered, Atlas Shrugs broke its silence on MASh with a hasty post:
Why didn’t Khalim mention his high-flying team member when he was given the opportunity? He responded much later in the day (hey, it was Sunday - maybe he was in church):
We consider Ms. Geller an exemplary anti-Dhimmi and are honored by her involvement with Muslims Against Sharia. If every American felt about terrorism the way Ms. Geller does, we would be much farther ahead in the fight against terror than we are now. So, to make it absolutely clear, we would be happy to publicize our association with Ms. Geller.
Well, there you go. It’s public now.
I received a invitation to contribute to the MASh blog yesterday evening. I joined, but I won’t be contributing. It seems the only qualification necessary to join this group is to be “against sharia” - but it does raise the question of what the “Muslim” part of the name is for.
The latest member of the team is Ted Belman of Israpundit. Whatever their true motivations, MASh are laying themselves wide open to accusations of being a “Zionist conspiracy” - and a fair proportion of Muslims need no prompting to throw that one about.
Whether they really are brave reformists or just the product of some neocon fantasy is impossible to say. Only one thing can be stated with any certainty: Muslims Against Sharia is a misnomer.
NEXT WEEK: The Freethinker investigates “Atheists Against Secularism” - what exactly is Pope Benedict XVI’s role in this organisation?
UPDATE: (11th Oct) MASh founder Khalim Massoud is interviewed here by All American Blogger.
25 Comments
What exactly is their definition of “Muslim”? They believe all these verses should be removed from the Quran: http://www.reformislam.org/verses.php ? Please…
There are plenty of REAL muslims who are against shariah, myself included. Their silly attempt to deceive people has failed.
If it walks like a muslim, talks like a muslim, and blows things up like a muslim, its still a terrorist! Who are you trying to fool? Muslims are terrorists, plain and simple! You want to change? Then assimilate, not infiltrate!
Heh. Satch is such a tool.
Freethinker,
We invited you be a contributor to the blog; we did not invite you to become a group member. You a basing your assumptions on your political views. Doesn’t sound much like free thinking, does it?
Leena,
If you do not consider statements like “kill them wherever you find them” or “slay the idolaters wherever you find them” or “do not take the unbelievers for friends” repulsive and that verses containing them should be removed or marked as outdated, how can you in good conscience call yourself good anything, especially a good Muslim?
Freethinker,
I went over your posts and the only logical conclusion I could come up with is that you are suffering from anti-Islamic bigotry. You seem to relish the fact that most terrorist acts are committed by Muslims, while not challenging their faith. However, when you hear a Muslim voice condemning terrorism, you dismiss it as a fake. I know it is a difficult task, but try to consider the possibility that not every Muslim is a bloodthirsty monster. Maybe then, it would be easier for you to accept reality.
Disappointedly,
Khalim Massoud
Muslims Against Sharia
Khalim, How *could* I be a good Muslim if I reject part of “God’s book”?
If one has progressed enough to knowingly reject some of “God’s words” mightn’t they go ahead and be an atheist and live by their own rules? You would be smarter than God. Why call oneself a “Muslim” if that is the case?
I disagree that the verses need to be removed/marked. The traditional (and misleading) definitions and ideas behind several terms need to be changed.
Also, if most Muslims do believe in the whole Quran and believe in “slaying ‘them’ where they find them”, wouldn’t that make all Muslims bloodthirsty monsters? Are those that reject parts of the Quran the only good ones?
Khalim
I am quite aware that the majority of Muslims condemn terrorism, and that there exist many genuine and brave reformist Muslims, including several groups. However I have seen very little evidence to justify counting Muslims Against Sharia among their number, and quite a lot of evidence against.
Your accusation that I am suffering from “anti-Islamic bigotry” is not only wide of the mark (the above is my first post on Islam), but actually quite hilarious when you consider that one of the main contributors to MASh has called for Islam to be banned - something I wouldn’t dream of doing.
My conclusion regarding your group is not based on either bigotry or my “political views”. Muslims Against Sharia is misleadingly named because its only identifiable members (or contributors, if you insist) are manifestly not Muslims.
Leena,
Let’s deal with facts, not emotions. The Koran contains verses that call for murder or subjugation of non-Muslims. There are Muslims who either misinterpret those verses or take them too literally. Whatever the reason is, the result is obvious: an ongoing and growing conflict between Muslims fundamentalists and the rest of the world. We can discuss theological concepts including whether or not those were Allah’s real words in the first place (remember that the Prophet himself admitted that some of what he thought came from Allah, in fact came from Shaitan), whether or not, those words were recorded properly, or whether or not those words were not changed over the years. We will never know the definite answer. If you change traditional (and misleading) definitions and ideas behind several terms, there still will be Muslims who will disagree with new definitions. We just trying to be practical; we believe removing/marking those verses is the most effective avenue.
As for Muslims who believe in whole Koran, we find it a rather difficult task. How can you reconcile the Koranic concept of mandatory murdering of all non-Muslims with Koranic concepts of respect for a human life and respect for the People of the Book (Christians and Jews)?
Dave,
We found no record of Pamela Geller calling for Islam being banned. However, even if she did, she must have meant its fundamentalist version, which wouldn’t be such a bad idea. Even before Muslims Against Sharia went public, Ms. Geller was very supportive of Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, an American, a veteran, and … oh yeah, a Muslim.
I won’t spend any more time on trying to explain the difference between a member of a group and a contributor to the group’s blog; it is not important. What IS important is that we are a group of MUSLIMS who oppose radical Islam, but if someone wants to think of us as a group of PEOPLE who oppose radical Islam, that’s just fine.
The site didn’t fool Muslims for a second. Too many errors in terms of assumptions of what constitutes Islamic traditions.
http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143826
Actually, the Quran has nothing on “murder or subjugation”. Two of the prophets wives were non-Muslim, and were not treated any differently from others. The Quran acknowledges and speaks on war, and it is in that context that harsh dealings with the enemy is spoken about.
This is a bit of a joke. It’s cowardly to use the cover of claiming to be a Muslim, and then bash Islam as though the rhetoric was meant to seem like a ‘dialogue amongst peers’. The objection that the site’s author has with criticisms of the Bible, as well as his view that the Crusade (which featured the massacres of both Muslims and Jews) clearly shows this guy is actually a Christian. The “Islam says kill all unbelievers” bit is remarkably stupid, very Ann Coulterish.
And the bible is loaded with violence, and even rape. The NT admittedly is relatively free of actual violent acts (Jesus speaks of them though) but that can be attributed to the fact that the Biblical Jesus didn’t live long.
The site’s author made several other mistakes which I won’t bother responding to. It’s a dumb website.
I’m Muslim, and I’m vehemently opposed to Shariah. That there are over a billion Muslims on this planet and yet only 2 countries come even close to implementing shariah proves that most Muslims do not want to be governed by Shariah.
Neither the Quran nor Muhammad spoke of implementing a particular code of governance. Shariah is based on the notion that the practices of those who succeeded Muhammad as leaders are the examples to be followed. The truth of history was that the Khilafa was a failure soon after its onset. Only 1 of the 4 first Caliphs died a natural death. War an infighting between Muslims went on relentlessly. Its a system that failed, and was soon replaced with monarchy.
The application of shariah is supported by those who are ignorant of history and religion. It stems from the notion that wisdom began and ended ed in the middle ages, and all we can hope to do is imitate them. This is the perspective of stone-headed Islamists/Islamic extremists, which most Muslims shun.
I don’t know why Freethinker’s post sounds ‘anti-Islamic’ = it is a perfectly natural set of questions to ask and investigate.
Muslims Against Sharia Poll:
Does Islam Need to Be Reformed?
Shariaphobia amongst Muslims is common amongst people who would prefer hundreds of years of islamic scholarship of sacred law and allied disciplines to be abandoned and for the members of the ummah to neatly dovetail into something less rooted in revelation, trendy and transient.
Such a line, and its an understandable line, though a wrong one… thats what id call ‘Anislamic’, as in without the light of Islam. Whether its used as a weapon against Islam is a slightly different matter though quite obvious in the behavioural pattern of the use of the discourse.
fugstar,
Unfortunately, vast majority of proponents of Sharia are just too stupid to realize that they are in violation of multiple Sharia tenets.
It doesn’t matter if MAS are Muslims. They are against Sharia, that is what is important. I have no doubt there are Muslims involved. In any case, to any degree, they speak for all the Muslims WHO ARE against Sharia. Yes, of course it is true that most Muslims are peaceful, moderate, reasonable, secular and against Sharia. Most Muslims aren’t terrorists but most terrorists are Muslims. Probably 99% of them.
There have been over 10,300 acts of Islamic inspired terrorism since 9/11. Check the religionofpeace.com, they document ALL of them.
These peaceful Muslims against Sharia can not speak out publicly without harassment from Radicals, often death threats.
The media and the Governments suck up to the ‘taqiya’ Muslims, the liars and apologists like CAIR, the moderates are left out in the cold.
Imagine if all the violent passages in the Koran had never existed. Or even had not existed for the last 100, or 50 years. In other words, had been removed years ago.
When radicals take over a country. They shove all the anti-Sharia Muslims and non-Muslims around. What are they supposed to do?
Rewriting the Koran is certain to piss off the radical wackos. How can that be a bad thing?
I am looking forward to hearing that The New and Improved Koran has hit Amazon and Barnes & Noble, or Lulu.
What’s wrong with taking out the bad and violent passages? How might things be different in 50 or 100 years if those violent passages don’t exist for next few generations of Muslims?
http://www.reformislam.org/verses.php
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
HAPPY NEW YEAR Infidels
ignore the threat of Jihad
just keep sleeping like sheep
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
behead homosexuals
while screaming GOD IS GREAT
and The Left will defend you
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
don’t understand terrorists
ignore their roots of hatred
political religions
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
ignore creeping sharia
don’t believe Jihadists
want world domination
http://haltterrorism.com/
.
Khalim, or whoever he is has taken to spamming my blog by publishing comments there linking to his own trash, er blog. Imagine, he doesn’t even do me the favor of a trackback which at least would promote both of us.
Interesting that this person is using Tennis School of Omaha as his e mail domain. I hope to God he’s the owner of that business (in which case some enterprising person should be able to unmask the “real” Khalim by researching who owns that business). Or else Khalim is an employee & in that case could get himself in a lot of trouble publising homophobic slurs as he did in my blog’s comment section while using his employers computer server.
Dave, get in touch w. me if you need any further documentation of what I’ve got.
Oh, damn. I thought we had this guy. I just Goggled the business & tried to access the website tennisschoolofomaha.com & nothing comes up. I’m guessing Khalim is smarter & more devious than I gave him credit for.
“publising homophobic slurs” (not our spelling)
Dick, if someone commented on you performing an unspeakable act on a person of the same gender it is probably a description, not a “homophobic slur”. We might want to poke some fun at a dick like you, but why would we offend our gay members?
When one changes something fundamental, then one is radical. These people need to be debated live, in person.
I am an anti Islamist, but I’m annoyed by MASh’s childish tactic of masquerading as Muslims. Lying gets us nowhere, in the long run.
Aksel, you might be an anti-Islamist, but you are also a moron. What if one idiot claimed that you are lying about being anti-Islamist and second idiot took that claim at face value? How would be second idiot different form you?
Ok “Muslims Against Sharia”, I might have guessed wrong. Maybe you sincerely believe you’re Muslims. But you are deceiving yourself.
A Muslim is one who submits himself or herself to Allah or the version of God in the Koran. If you want to pick and choose the parts of Allah’s book that you think acceptable you’re not submitting to Allah; therefore not a Muslim.
Maybe you could say you’re a Mumakas, or one who haggles with Allah. Unfortunately, unlike the gourd seller in The Life of Brian, I don’t think Allah is keen on haggling.
-Aksel
“If you want to pick and choose the parts of Allah’s book”
Since the Koran is full of contradictory verses, it is impossible not to “pick and choose.” Unless you can respect the “People of the Book” while “kill[ing] them wherever you find them,” you cannot accept the Koran as a whole.
3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
“Muslims” Against Sharia…
Muslims Against Sharia claims to be a group of muslims who believe,
- “We, as Muslims, find it abhorrent that Islam is used to murder millions of innocent people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.”
- “Twenty-fi……
[...] atheist blogger — Freethinker — has done research into the origins of this group (as well as engaged in correspondence) and found that they are connected to a [...]
[...] (Unlike some critics, I don’t believe shariah = Islam.) I’ve discussed the group elsewhere and even gotten in touch with the group’s president but I’m not really much closer to [...]
Post a Comment