In the Name of Bigotry

I am incensed by this article that I have read last week, April 28th.

Before I delve further into my anger, I'd like to record my commendation to the writer for her impartial, factual reporting on this controversial issue. By exploring and balancing the opinions from both camps, the author helps to shed the light on, what seems to me, a trivial matter that has been overblown out of proportion by some educated bigots (now isn't that an oxymoron?). However, judging from the online comments on the article itself, some people beg to differ and think that the author is siding with the 'protagonist'. Alas, the subtleties of the language were lost on a neophyte like me.

The story centers on Ms. Debbie (real name Dhabah) Almontaser whose dream of opening an Arab-language-oriented public school was shattered by cruel political maneuverings and a deliberate, twisted exposé. Critics of the school accused Ms. Almontaser of harbouring terrorist-laden agendas with her emphasis on Arab language in the school curriculum, and that she is out to convert the students into Islam. Some ill-informed and foolish people went so far as equating the school with its Arabic equivalent 'Madrassa', the word which presently carries a negative connotation in the press as a training ground for terrorists in post-9/11 times. But the truth of the matter is Madrassa is just an Arab word for school. Let's call a spade a spade, shall we?

Apparently, these opponents of Islam - or rather of having Muslims in the public realm - rely on new strategies in getting rid of Pan-Islamic excesses that have crept up amongst them in recent years. And Ms. Almontaser is just one of the convenient platforms to unleash their bigotry and hatred for things that are perceived as a threat to their hegemonic existence. The scars left by the 9/11 tragedy only aid to propel their prejudiced causes.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, critics of radical Islam focused largely on terrorism, scrutinizing Muslim-American charities or asserting links between Muslim organizations and violent groups like Hamas. But as the authorities have stepped up the war on terror, those critics have shifted their gaze to a new frontier, what they describe as law-abiding Muslim-Americans who are imposing their religious values in the public domain.

Mr. Pipes and others reel off a list of examples: Muslim cabdrivers in Minneapolis who have refused to take passengers carrying liquor; municipal pools and a gym at Harvard that have adopted female-only hours to accommodate Muslim women; candidates for office who are suspected of supporting political Islam; and banks that are offering financial products compliant with sharia, the Islamic code of law.

The danger, Mr. Pipes says, is that the United States stands to become another England or France, a place where Muslims are balkanized and ultimately threaten to impose sharia.

Now, doesn't that make you feel sick to your stomach? Nowadays, moderate Muslim citizens like you and me, are being branded as 'lawful Islamists' with a 'soft jihad' agenda - whatever that means. And however loopy that sounded, misguided Americans were still buying it and had pressured Ms. Almonaster, through a series of unfortunate circumstances, to resign from her post as the school's principal.

I seriously don't understand how the beautiful Arab language which is chosen to record God's beautiful words in the Qur'an (or the Koran) could be construed as inviting people to become Muslim fundamentalists. It is like saying if you were to study Latin, you'd become a Christian evangelist! By the by, I should remind these ignorant people that a majority of Muslims in the world now are NOT Arabs. So probably they are picking their fights with the wrong folks?

Also, what more disturbing to me is that the so-called leader in this Stop the Madrassa Coalition, Mr. Pipes has a doctorate in History from Harvard and has authored 12 books! But it seems that he's still living in the Medieval times from the way he behaves and the words he chooses to spout. The kind of rhetoric he engages in will only widen the rift further between the U.S. and the Arab nations. In turn, this mindset helps to reinforce the insular attitude that some Americans have consistently demonstrated towards those who either do not subscribe or pose a threat to the 'great American way of life.'

Without knowing heads or tails about the nature of this public school, Mr. Pipes blindly wrote in the New York Sun:

Conceptually, such a school could be “marvelous,” Mr. Pipes wrote, but in practice, it was certain to be problematic. “Arabic-language instruction is inevitably laden with Pan-Arabist and Islamist baggage,” he wrote, referring to the school as a madrassa, which means school in Arabic but, in the West, carries the implication of Islamic teaching.

Utterly rubbish!

A major part of the NYT article dealt with the McCarthyism-like, convoluted tactics used by Mr. Pipes and his allies, especially the sleazy media which ratcheted up the suspicion towards Ms. Almontaser's motivations that eventually led to her resignation as the principal of Kahlil Gibran International Academy.

Reading some of the comments and responses attached to the article, I am finally able to grasp the level of understanding that some Americans have about Muslims and their religion, Islam. I would like to emphasize that Islam does not condone violence of any kind, unless of course it were provoked from outside parties. The differing ideologies held by Muslims of varying cultural backgrounds do not call for a blanket discrimination to all practicing Muslims. How about those who were involved in the Crusades to annihilate foreign threats? Is it fair to say they - the Christians - have violent tendencies?

I would also like to refute the claims of our so-called soft jihad agenda, involving for instance a gym class solely for Muslim women usage and so forth. Some universities have long implemented women's-only classes such as the one taken by a Hijabi friend of mine for swimming. As for the cab driver who declined to pick up inebriated passengers and those bearing alcohols, it is within his rights to do so, not unlike store owners who won't sell liquors on the 'resting day' of Sunday and clinic attendants who refuse to perform selective abortions.

And what about those concerned citizens who complained over the suggestion of serving Halal meat in the Kahlil Gibran school's cafeteria? Unless it is laden with germs and bacterias, Halal food is a much better deal than the fast food diet available at schools that teenagers thrive on these days. This particular gripe recalls to my college days where I had requested for Halal meat to be served for me while eating in the common dining hall. I informed them - the University's Food Service - the nearest place to source for Halal meat which at that time was in Devon Street of Chicago. I'd have my Halal food 2-3 times a week and must collect it in the kitchen area from this quirky African-American chef, Mike. He is such a sport, always coming up with a variety of ideas on how to cook the chicken or beef for me. A few times, as I emerged from the kitchen to the line forming for the predictable buffet, someone would quip "Hey, I want to have what she's having." I must say this accomodation to my special diet is praiseworthy for a Catholic university.

As for the objection against universities scheduling classes around the Muslims' prayer times and allocating a prayer room for Muslims, need I remind them that all Abrahamic faiths preach tolerance towards other human beings? Back in the pre-9/11 days, my college-going husband used to attend his Friday prayers in the makeshift surau or musalla in the basement of a Church!

Lastly, the accusation that this 'Soft Jihad' is part of the Muslims' masterplan to proselytize non-Muslims (or to take over the world - take your pick), I have to reiterate that Muslims, like any others, just want to live in accord with their religion - buying Sharia-compliant financing products, abstaining from alcoholic influences, respecting one's parents and the elders and the list goes on - with no intention whatsoever to encroach their beliefs on other people. My husband's Parish-run primary school experience came to mind here where some Christian classmates persistently invited him to Sunday school on the pretext of going to a 'fun party' with a lot of singing and sumptuous food. With the tables turned, should he feel being proselytized?

In that case, I too experienced such brain-washing incidents involving a college professor who insisted on saying a Prayer at the start of his pre-requisite Biology class, and the two Theology classes that I must take attending a Catholic University, which had opened my mind not only to the differences of our religions but most importantly to our similarities. And how about those who chided me for not being more like 'one of them' - drinking and partying the weekend away or dressing a certain way to fit in?

I believe it is one thing to integrate the foreigners to the community as a whole, but another to lose one's ethnic identity in the process. I also think that patriotism exists regardless of creed and race, and it does not necessarily correspond to the number of years you've been in that country (or the number of generations who have lived there), nor does it depend on the wealth you've amassed. It's either you love and identify with the country you live in, or you don't.

If you have the time, please read the article above in its entirety in order to understand the depth of my sorrow.

That portrait (of Islam as a major problem), Muslim and Arab advocates contend, is rife with a bias that would never be tolerated were it directed at other ethnic or religious groups. And if Ms. Almontaser’s story is any indication, they say, the message of her critics wields great power.

I bid you peace.