Friday, May 25, 2007
Haaretz, Last update - 18:34 24/05/2007
Report: Nobel laureate cancels U.K. trip over 'widespread anti-Israel,
By Haaretz Service
An American Nobel prize laureate has withdrawn from a speaking engagement
at a London university, citing anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment in
the United Kingdom, a British newspaper reported Thursday.
According to The Guardian, Professor Steven Weinberg of the University of
Texas told the Imperial College that his decision was motivated by a move
by Britain's National Union of Journalists to boycott Israeli products.
Weinberg had been due to honor Pakistani physicist Abdus Salam, a
co-winner of the 1979 Nobel Prize for physics, The Guardian said.
The paper quoted Weinberg as telling the college that he believes the
NUJ's move stems from the "desire to pander to the growing Muslim minority
In his letter of withdrawal, Weinberg wrote that, "given the history of
the attacks on Israel and the oppressiveness and aggressiveness of other
countries in the Middle East and elsewhere, boycotting Israel indicated a
moral blindness for which it is hard to find any explanation other than
The Guardian said that Weinberg also pulled out of a 2006 conference at
Durham University due to a boycott of Israeli academics imposed by
lecturers' union NATFHE.
2. Mikey Lerner's Moonbat Black Anti-Semite Friend:
3. Leftist Uber-Moonbat Aviad Kleinberg, history prof at Tel Aviv
University, finds some subversion:
4. The Kassamization of Israeli Arabs:
5. Chozer B'tshuva:
May 25, 2007
Wall St Journal
How to End 'Islamophobia'
By TAWFIK HAMID
May 25, 2007; Page A15
Islamic organizations regularly accuse non-Muslims of "Islamophobia," a
fear and disdain for everything Islamic. On May 17, this accusation
bubbled up again as foreign ministers from the Organization of the Islamic
Conference called Islamophobia "the worst form of terrorism." These
ministers also warned, according to the Arab News, that this form of
discrimination would cause millions of Muslims in Western countries, "many
of whom were already underprivileged," to be "further alienated."
In America, perhaps the most conspicuous organization to persistently
accuse opponents of Islamophobia is the Council of American Islamic
Relations. CAIR has taken up the legal case of the "Flying Imams," the six
individuals who were pulled from a US Airways flight in Minneapolis this
past November after engaging in suspicious behavior before takeoff. Not
long ago, CAIR filed a "John Doe" lawsuit that would have made passengers
liable for "malicious" complaints about suspicious Muslim passengers.
In an interview at the time, CAIR spokesman Nihad Awad accused Rep. Peter
King (R., N.Y.) of being an "extremist" who "encourages Islamophobia" for
pointing out what most people would think is obvious, that such a lawsuit
would have a chilling effect on passengers who witnessed alarming activity
and wished to report it. We can only assume that Mr. Awad believes flyers
should passively remain in a state of fear as they travel and submissively
risk their lives. In this case, Congress is acting appropriately and
considering passing a law sponsored by Mr. King that would grant
passengers immunity from such lawsuits.
It may seem bizarre, but Islamic reformers are not immune to the charge of
"Islamophobia" either. For 20 years, I have preached a reformed
interpretation of Islam that teaches peace and respects human rights. I
have consistently spoken out -- with dozens of other Muslim and Arab
reformers -- against the mistreatment of women, gays and religious
minorities in the Islamic world. We have pointed out the violent teachings
of Salafism and the imperative of Westerners to protect themselves against
Yet according to CAIR's Michigan spokeswoman, Zeinab Chami, I am "the
latest weapon in the Islamophobe arsenal." If standing against the violent
edicts of Shariah law is "Islamophobic," then I will treat her accusation
as a badge of honor.
Muslims must ask what prompts this "phobia" in the first place. When we in
the West examine the worldwide atrocities perpetrated daily in the name of
Islam, it is vital to question if we -- Muslims -- should lay the blame on
others for Islamophobia or if we should first look hard at ourselves.
According to a recent Pew Global Attitudes survey, "younger Muslims in the
U.S. are much more likely than older Muslim Americans to say that suicide
bombing in the defense of Islam can be at least sometimes justified."
About one out of every four American Muslims under 30 think suicide
bombing in defense of Islam is justified in at least some circumstances.
Twenty-eight percent believe that Muslims did not carry out the 9/11
attacks and 32% declined to answer that question.
While the survey has been represented in the media as proof of moderation
among American Muslims, the actual results should yield the opposite
conclusion. If, as the Pew study estimates, there are 2.35 million Muslims
in America, that means there are a substantial number of people in the
U.S. who think suicide bombing is sometimes justified. Similarly, if 5% of
American Muslims support al Qaeda, that's more than 100,000 people.
To bring an end to Islamophobia, we must employ a holistic approach that
treats the core of the disease. It will not suffice to merely suppress the
symptoms. It is imperative to adopt new Islamic teachings that do not
allow killing apostates (Redda Law). Islamic authorities must provide
mainstream Islamic books that forbid polygamy and beating women. Accepted
Islamic doctrine should take a strong stand against slavery and the raping
of female war prisoners, as happens in Darfur under the explicit canons of
Shariah ("Ma Malakat Aimanikum"). Muslims should teach, everywhere and
universally, that a woman's testimony in court counts as much as a man's,
that women should not be punished if they marry whom they please or dress
as they wish.
We Muslims should publicly show our strong disapproval for the growing
number of attacks by Muslims against other faiths and against other
Muslims. Let us not even dwell on 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali and countless
other scenes of carnage. It has been estimated that of the two million
refugees fleeing Islamic terror in Iraq, 40% are Christian, and many of
them seek a haven in Lebanon, where the Christian population itself has
declined by 60%. Even in Turkey, Islamists recently found it necessary to
slit the throats of three Christians for publishing Bibles.
Of course, Islamist attacks are not limited to Christians and Jews. Why do
we hear no Muslim condemnation of the ongoing slaughter of Buddhists in
Thailand by Islamic groups? Why was there silence over the Mumbai train
bombings which took the lives of over 200 Hindus in 2006? We must not
forget that innocent Muslims, too, are suffering. Indeed, the most common
murderers of Muslims are, and have always been, other Muslims. Where is
the Muslim outcry over the Sunni-Shiite violence in Iraq?
Islamophobia could end when masses of Muslims demonstrate in the streets
against videos displaying innocent people being beheaded with the same
vigor we employ against airlines, Israel and cartoons of Muhammad. It
might cease when Muslims unambiguously and publicly insist that Shariah
law should have no binding legal status in free, democratic societies.
It is well past time that Muslims cease using the charge of "Islamophobia"
as a tool to intimidate and blackmail those who speak up against
suspicious passengers and against those who rightly criticize current
Islamic practices and preachings. Instead, Muslims must engage in honest
and humble introspection. Muslims should -- must -- develop strategies to
rescue our religion by combating the tyranny of Salafi Islam and its
dreadful consequences. Among more important outcomes, this will also put
an end to so-called Islamophobia.
Dr. Hamid, a onetime member of Jemaah Islamiya, an Islamist terrorist
group, is a medical doctor and Muslim reformer living in the West.
URL for this article: