Democracy and Islam, are they at odds?

Introduction

The ideal way to run a state is a question that has been debated by many Muslims, including Australian Muslims, since the start of the Arab Spring. Some Australian Muslims have expressed that Democracy is a system that is at odds with Islam. They argue that many democratic systems around the world are unjust capitalists systems where wealth and decision making is restricted to the elite. They also argue that in these systems the right of people to self determination is nothing but a fictitious concept to keep the masses content. But going one step further, they argue that democracy and Islam are fundamentally incompatible because of the difference in the concept of sovereignty. In Islam, sovereignty belongs to God alone. According to them, democracy breaches this concept as it gives sovereignty to people over God. However, many Australian Muslims don’t subscribe to this discourse.I argue that Islam and Democracy are not at odds and that the apparent conflict is really about the definition of democracy and the use of the term. If we use the term “Democracy” in its pure and literal sense, then I don’t see any conflict with Islamic principles. It is possible to build an Islamic system of government which is based on the structure of democracy and is much better than some of the current Western democracies.

Democracy

Democracy is generally defined as a form of government in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives[1]. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law[1]. It can also encompass social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.While there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy', equality and freedom have both been identified as important characteristics of democracy. These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes. Democracy is not one. There are several varieties of democracy, some of which provide better representation and more freedom for their citizens than others. Some are closer to the intent of Shariahh than others. Some of these are: Constitutional democracy, Representative democracy, Parliamentary democracy, Presidential democracy, Liberal democracy, Direct democracy, Inclusive democracy and Consensus democracy. There are some common features of all the different types. One of the features common to all types of democracies is the concept of “Separation of powers”. If any democracy is not structured so as to prohibit the government from excluding the people from the legislative process, or any branch of government from altering the separation of powers in its own favor, then a branch of the system can accumulate too much power and destroy the democracy. They all offer a structure of governance with fairly well defined roles of responsibilities for each authority in the system.

Islam

On the other hand, our Shariahh (Law) prescribes a set of values and principles for its followers when running a state to reach an ideal Islamic system. Many of these requirements are obligatory but the details of application are left to Humans. Most of these values are actually general values for living rather than limited to governance. Some of these are:

- Shura (consultation)
- Justice. Pursuing justice through social cooperation and mutual assistance
- Establishing mercy and compassion and protection of the weak
- Human rights including equality and Freedoms
- Prohibition of monopolies
- Rulers are servants of their people

Shariah has prescribed Shura, however, it did not specify how it should be applied. Therefore, Islam has left it up to humans to choose how to apply this concept in the manner that best suits our needs at a specific time, place and context. This is indeed a feature that makes the Quran applicable to all times. Most Jurists suggest that consensus is required in the process of Shura and that the consensus opinion is prescriptive on the executive authority. There is no prescription as to whether consensus should be obtained through majority vote or through other methods. We also see that in Islamic history, different rulers have applied the concept of Shura in different ways. What is definite is that the concept most certainly did not refer merely to a ruler’s solicitation of opinions from notables in society; it signified, more broadly, resistance to autocracy or oppression.Islamic jurists have articulated rules on the application of these principles and what are their priorities. The concept of priorities in Islamic jurisprudence is indeed an amazing science. For example, that one’s freedom stops where someone else’s start. That community needs are a higher priority than individual needs, if they conflict, and individuals are fairly compensated.Offcourse, Shariah also has more specific legislative requirements associated with finance management, economic management, family law, criminal law etc. But these are not many in a relative sense. Often, details of application for most of the above are left to people.

Are they at odds?

It is fair to say that many Islamic values need to be detailed in state constitutions and legislations to a level of detail that can be applied with equality in modern societies. When doing so, the general rule is that no specific legislation can contradict a clearly understood and confirmed Islamic text. However, the details of how the Shura (consultation) process occurs? who has the final say? Who is consulted? What issue require consultation and to what level? Etc etc are all details that need to be articulated. This articulation process into law by no means diminishes the concept of sovereignty of Allah swt.Islam did not prescribe separation of executive authority, Judicial and legislative authorities in the way it is done in Western Democracies today. But doing so is one way of serving the intent of Shariahh in terms of justice and prohibition of monopolies. Separation of powers certainly does not contradict Islamic principles. Infact, separation of legislation and executive authority is inherent to Islam in that legislations come from a source other than the executive authority – the Quran and the tradition of the prophet. In Islamic Jurisprudence, there are areas where there are differences of opinion. This is a great feature of our religion that makes things easier to individuals. When it comes to a state, the legislation authority may sometimes have to ‘select’ one of these opinions and add governance details to it in the form of legislation to ensure equity in issues that affect the running of the state without interfering into the private lives of individuals. It is indeed possible to maintain the requirement of sovereignty to Allah swt in a democratic system through legislation. The constitution can reaffirm this concept and outline that the Quran and Sunnah are the main source of legislation. In doing so, legislation that directly contradicts clear Islamic text becomes non-constitutional.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is possible to create an “Islamic democracy”. The key differentiators of an “Islamic Democracy” is that its legislative authority is guided and restricted by Shariah (through the constitution) while its executive authority is guided by the moral code of Islam. Indeed a constitutional democracy can be a good starting point for an Islamic democracy. Therefore, it is quite plausible for a state to apply the democratic mechanisms of government and claim it to be an Islamic system. Islam is not at odds with the ideals of democracy. Such a system, in my view, would be a much superior democracy to what we see today.

1-Larry Jay Diamond, Marc F. Plattner (2006). Electoral systems and democracy p.168. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006

Positives from the freedom convoy disaster

Turkey's friendship is as strong as its animosity

Israel's attack on the freedom convoy was an act of terrorism. Not only does it need to be strongly condemned, but Israel needs to be punished for its act of piracy, murder and kidnapping of civilians in international waters. If this act goes unpunished, then the world's community is sending a message that: terrorism, piracy and murder are not considered so, if the perpetrator is powerful enough. As such, lawbreakers only need to seek to become mighty enough to avoid scrutiny for their illegal actions. I don't want my children to live in such a world.

Years of negotiations and peace talks by high powered officials from US, Egypt, Saudi and many other countries have not led to a an end to the siege. But 600 civilians have achieved in days what high powered officials could not do in years – and possibly could or would never have done.

This event has proved again to the world that civilians, despite the grave cost and limited resources, have and can break the siege. Civilians and common people can cause change, even if few in numbers. This action will not and must not deter more human rights activists from seeking to break the illegal siege on Gaza.

Despite the human cost of this venture, there are many positive outcomes. It could be argued that these activists have achieved their objectives more effectively. They have made Israel score a disastrous own goal. I see the following as positive outcomes:

1- It has been demonstrated to the world without reasonable doubt, what kind of evil entity is Israel. Overnight, the arguments of Hamas have been substantiated and the arguments of Israel have been rebutted by their own doing.

2- The pressures on Israel have mounted to not only allow the ships into Gaza but to lift, completely, the illegal siege on Gaza. A siege, I might add, that the world have become used to as a fact of life and maybe accepted as a right of Israel.

3- Turkey, with its might, has been brought into the central stage of the Palestinian / Israeli conflict. A country, which a few months ago could have been considered a "friend" of Israel, is now taking a stern stance against Israel’s siege on Gaza. Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted "Turkey's friendship is as strong as its animosity". This is a massive win for the Palestinian struggle.

4- Turkey has now assumed moral leadership of the Middle East, and possibly soon, much more than just moral leadership. This is expected given the strong leadership and clear positions taken by the Turkish government. It is also expected due to the shear lack of any hint of leadership from all Arab regimes who have simply become spokespersons from Israeli and the US interests. Watching Aljazeera, you could see people in all Arab countries carrying the Turkish flag as they seek to fill this massive leadership void.

5- This event has placed weak and unstable regimes of the Arab world, led by Egypt, under significant pressures and further exposed their lack of action and their inability to take any real decision or clear position. The never ending pursuit of peace talks as the only strategic choice has now been clearly exposed against Israeli’s only strategic choice to fulfil self-interest.

6- It could now be expected that there will be renewed calls to talk directly to Hamas in order to reach a resolution. This can only be a positive step forward, to recognize the only democratically elected Government in the Arab world.

This event may spark a series of history changing events, possibly beyond what the peace activists could have ever hoped for.

Leadership and Islamic Organisations

..one of the most important aspects of leadership is the leader's ability to produce other leaders.

One of the secrets I discovered about leadership is this: Do not judge your leadership skills by how the organisation performs when you are leading it, but rather how the organisation performs when you leave it.

This statement is so important because it highlights one of the most important aspects of leadership and that is the leader's ability to produce other leaders. In the corporate world, it is normally referred to as 'succession planning'. In the not for profit world, it is about the leaders ability to extract the best out of people around him or her. It is the leaders ability to empower others. It is the leaders ability to loose control and feel comfortable doing so. It is the leaders ability to share a vision so well that others own and champion it and, in the process, become leaders themselves. It is the leaders ability to focus, not on him or herself, but on the vision and the people around him / her.

A leader should be asking: How much did I facilitate others to excel, lead and be empowered. How much higher and better did I help others to be. How many people did I share the vision with?

This point is so forgotten in many Islamic organisations in Australia and this is so sad. Many people in authority are self focused on their image and their own private achievements. Forgetting that the best thing they could do is to empower others to lead. One sad example of this is ISOMER.

Gaza carnage video censored by youtube

Gaza - Israel kills children of Gaza

Howard picked on the wrong guy

In February 2007, Mr Howard was reported to have said that al-Qaeda should be "praying as many times as possible" for an Obama victory in the 2008 elections.

Howard, racially thinking Obama's chances are Nil, thought he could
slam Obama and win over Bush's heart (now voted the most unpopular president in the history of US).

For Bush, CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said "No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president's disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark".

Mr Howard banked on the wrong horse. Mr Obama has won the US elections in a land slide. Had Mr Howard remained as prime minister of Australia, we would have been in an embarrassing situation now, to say the least, with the new US administration.

Now, all leaders who called and pushed for the invasion of Iraq have all lost elections and history will remember them with bitterness. Bush will always be associated with war, bloodshed and the darkest times in American history.

US soldiers rape their own comrades

Women serving in the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq." - CNN Thurs 31st July,08

Reports have been coming out in the last month about the epidemic of sexual assault and rape crimes by US male soldiers. These cases are not crimes against Iraqi women...they are committed against female US soldiers - comrades.

A congresswoman said "Women serving in the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq". The report says that 41 percent of the female veterans seen in the Veterans hospital say they were victims of sexual assault while serving in the military. Last year, Col. Janis Karpinski caused a stir by publicly reporting that in 2003, three female soldiers had died of dehydration in Iraq, which can get up to 126 degrees in the summer, because they refused to drink liquids late in the day. They were afraid of being raped by male soldiers if they walked to the latrines after dark.

The Department of Defense refused to allow the senior civilian in charge of its Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO) to testify in the August 2008 hearing on sexual assault in the military.

The difficult question that I would like to ask is: If this is what US soldiers do to their own female comrades, what do they do to the 'enemy' - the Iraqi women?? What are the statistics? Why is it not reported? What are the soldiers of 'freedom' bringing to the women of Iraq? I hate to think!!!

Islamic Finance comes out ahead

Dow Jones's Islamic financials index, in contrast, rose 4.75 per cent

Following the global financial crisis, the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) published a very interesting article titled 'Islamic finance rides the storm'. I quote: "Sharemarkets in London and New York are a third off their peaks. Dow Jones's Islamic financials index, in contrast, rose 4.75 per cent in the most recent September quarter..".

So what is the Dow Jones Islamic Finance Index? Answer: 'The Dow Jones Islamic Market Indexes were introduced in 1999 as the first benchmarks to represent Islamic-compliant portfolios. Today the series encompasses more than 70 indexes and remains the most comprehensive family of Islamic market measures. The indexes are maintained based on a stringent and published methodology. An independent Shari`ah Supervisory Board counsels Dow Jones Indexes on matters related to the compliance of index-eligible companies.'

So I was quite interested to find out what were the criteria that allowed a company to be listed in this Index. The SMH article touched on it, but I looked into it and found the following:

1 - It excluded companies that represent the following lines of business: alcohol, tobacco, pork-related products, interest based financial services, defense/weapons, gambling and pornography. In other words, only companies that deal in wholesome business.

2- It excludes companies whose gross interest bearing debt to total assets exceeds the percentage permitted under Islamic Shariah (33%). In layman's terms: it limits the amount of debt (and therefore greed) that a company can get into. Therefore, it limits the risk exposure of the business.

3- It generally excludes companies that deal in unethical behaviours including internal corruption and others.

4- It generally excludes companies that hold monopolies. Islam forbids monopolies by outlawing the hoarding of wealth (Al-Ihtikar).

The ban on interest based finance companies is because Islam encourages partnership in dealings as opposed to interest based dealings. Basically, the criteria are based on Shariah fundamentals of business dealings.

There is already talk about restructuring the global finance system having been deemed - failed. So may be, there is an opportunity here to adopt some of the Islamic criteria for finance and business.

The free Gaza Movement

It has been quite a while since I wrote on my blog. Many events have happened over the last few months that moved me but I could not find the time to write about them.

Most notably, was the recent heroic project by a group of activists who shipped to Gaza with small boats and broke the siege on Gaza. That was truely an impressive effort that proved to the world that individuals can stand up and make a difference against oppression in the world.

This website has covered the trip in detail: http://www.freegaza.org/

Again, the Egyption Government has proven how low they became when they refused entry from Gaza to a couple of the activists who were on the ship and stayed behind. Shame!!

Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land: Israel & Palestine

Egypt on shaky ground

Egypt has recently witnessed an unprecedented strike action in a regime that leaves no room for human rights or freedom of expression. It was described as the start of the 'revolution of the hungry".

Egypt is now on the verge of a major change; why:

1- Egyptians are now facing severe poverty and food shortage. According to the UN food program, 40% of Egyptians are below the poverty line.

2- Al Hizb al watani, the party that forms government, and its president Mubarak are failing to provide a uniting vision for the country. No vision or direction is offered to the nation. With no vision, people loose hope and the country continues to spiral down.

3- Corruption is now rampant and all governmental institutions are failing and disintegrating. The ruling party is offering no solution to the corruption problem. On the contrary, they are indeed an integral part of it.

4- A continuous agenda of using force and military courts to punish anyone who dares to challenge or speak against the government. This is particularly the case against members of Muslim Brotherhood who present the strongest political opposition to the ruling party and offer a vision to the nation.

5- The Egyptian government is viewed by many in the middle east as a corrupt and pro-US administration government. This was recently reinforced again by their recent response to the siege on Gaza and the Rafah / Gaza border incident.

Despite the years of fear and oppression that the Egyptians have been trained to accept, there is now the start of an obvious movement to resist oppression in Egypt. The recent action across the nation and particularly in Mahala is an indication of what is to come and what it will take to change Egypt from corruption to equality and from oppression to justice.

Australia is sorry

Emotions, tears and cheers marked one of the most historic moments in the history of this country.Today, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, said sorry to the indigenous people of Australia. He said “"For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.”

I say thank you Mr Rudd for your stance of justice and courage. Today, I feel proud to be an Australian. I feel proud to be part of this nation.

Kevin Rudd has shown an exemplary model of leadership. He demonstrated courage to change the direction of the nation. His speech was so strong, refreshing and honest. Today the parliament met "To remove a great stain from the nation's soul and in the true spirit of reconciliation to open a new chapter in the history of this great land Australia.''

Today, all living ex-prime ministers of Australia attended this historic moment in the parliament, except for one - John Howard. John Howard did not want to apologize to the indigenous people. John Howard was responsible for targeting and scapegoating of the Muslim community. John Howard was responsible for causing a rift within our communities and for leaving the country with a feeling of lost hope. John Howard did not attend the apology speech today. Shame!!

I hope that Australia takes this day of reconciliation as an opportunity for reconciliation with all communities in this country.

Break the siege, not the legs

The Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmad abu al-Ghait, recently threatened to break the legs of any Palestinian if they tried to cross the Egyptian border again. His comments came days after Palestinians from Gaza broke through the Egyptian Rafah border seeking temporary relief from the siege that the occupying forces have been imposing on the Gazans.

The brutality of Abu al-Ghait's comments amazes me. Instead of advocating breaking the siege, he threatens to break the legs of those under siege.

This same government is one that recently had to apply to Israel to seek permission to increase the number of border patrol on the Egyptian border. The application was refused!! Ironically, this initiative by the Egyptian government was in response to Israel's request to better control the borders to prevent the siege on Gaza being breached.

So in the midst of this humiliation and lack of control over his country’s border, Ahmad abu al-Ghait decides to attack an easy target. He announces the gruesome threat to cut the legs of anyone who violates the Egyptian border. It takes no genius to work out that he is referring to the Palestinians and not Israelis. Israelis, under the Camp David peace accord, are free to enter Sinai with no visas.

Mr Ahmad abu al-Ghait, it is time to make a stance of courage, a stance of humanity a stance of justice. Break the siege ….. don’t break the legs of those under siege.

Bush belongs in Guantanamo

The Bush administration appears to have pressured the Iraqi judicial system to ensure that Saddam Hussein sentence is issued prior to the US congressional elections with the hope of Republicans winning some votes. Despite that, the republicans have suffered a major blow in a clear statement from the American public that they are not happy with the Government's foreign policy in Iraq.

The first face saving action that Bush took was to sack his man of war: Donald Rumsfeld. Now there is talk of investigating and possibly sueing Rumsfeld for torture and other possible war crimes. That is indeed excellent and provides hope that George Bush will also be trialled for war crimes when he ceases to be in power. And trialed he should be, and in Guantanamo he belongs. It would be great to see Bush sitting side by side with the people he put in Guantanamo. At least, he will get a trial and access to legal representation.

Modesty, truth and Leadership

Last week, I attended a media training course run by a recognized university in Melbourne. Two experienced academics were running the course and both had extensive hands-on experience in the media. One of them insisted that we should always treat Journalists as “raptors” and that we should never trust them. She said “We (journalists) don’t treat our own friends as friends” if they stand in the way of a story and that the moto of many journalists is never to let the truth ruin a good story. While this is not news to me, it was an eye opener to come from someone within the industry.

“O People who Believe! If any miscreant (afasiq) brings you some tidings (some news), verify it, lest you unknowingly cause suffering to some people, and then remain repenting for what you did.”[Hujurat 49:6]. And a miscreant indeed is Richard Kerbaj who published the article about Sh Hilali and just two weeks ago published an article titled "Prophet not perfect, says Islamic scholar".

I now compare this to the official response made by the Islamic Council of Victoria as well as radio and press responses from members of the ICV and also members of the Islamic Women's Welfare Council of Victoria (IWWCV). The ICV were quick to attack Sh Hilali and requested his immediate resignation. IWWCV were quoted on the Age saying "The average Muslim realises that these are not comments that represents Islam, and certainly don't represent Muslim Australia,". How quick were we to accept the opinion of Richard Kerbaj and attack one of the most knowledgeable Muslim scholars in this country. If Sh Hilali’s comments do not represent Islam, then what does????

The ICV’s response to Sh Hilali’s comments was ill considered and sought a short term exit from an immediate attack with no consideration for the future. I now wonder, how will the ICV respond when Hijab is banned in public schools!

John Howard says that it is the responsibility of men to control their sexual urges and not the responsibility of women. It is indeed the responsibility of men to control their urges and Islam advocates that. But this is not the full story. Islam asks men and women to lower their gaze. Islam asks men and women not look or listen at things that they are not entitled to see or hear. Islam also prescribes a heavy punishment for rape and adultery. In other words, Islam advocates for you to drive carefully but also to put your seat belt on.

Islam has a principal of demonizing sin. It is a principle of building communities with high morals and values. How do you ensure that all men can control their urges? There will always be the odd few who, for some reason, can not; possibly for a mental disability or the like. It is a matter of closing all gaps. It is fasting the seat belt as well as driving carefully. The Werribee incident is an example of that and I would like to note here that the perpetrators were not Muslims (when some media hoped it was).

Sh Hilali was simply demonising a sinful act to the Muslim community and encouraging modesty within this same community. He did not enforce it on anyone else. While, the delivery was questionable and probably irresponsible, the intent of the message is on good moral grounds and is worthy of support from anyone who opposes promiscuity within our society.

Mufti Hilali comments about dress code and assault

The Australian has reported on October 26th that Sh Hilali has made comments during a Friday sermon in the month of Ramadan that indicated that he “blamed immodestly dressed women who don't wear Islamic headdress for being preyed on by men and likened them to abandoned "meat" that attracts voracious animals.”

I can’t confirm or deny the accuracy of the translated version of his speech. However, I would like to make the following comments:

1- Islam encourages and prescribes modesty in dress (including Hijab). At the same time, Islam views rape as the most heinous of crimes and prescribes a severe punishment for rapists.

2-I have no doubt in my mind that Sh Taj never meant to rationalize the act of rape nor to suggest that rapists should not be exposed to the full force of the law. However, he should have been careful about how he presented his view so not to risk the slightest chance of being misunderstood by youth that he is rationalizing rape. He made a grave mistake by making such irresponsible comments.

3- I think that some of the words of the Sheik have been intentionally mistranslated like the use of the word "meat" instead of "flesh" to make the comment sound even more degrading than it already is. "Exposed flesh" is a word used commonly by Australians.

4- This view (suggestive dress encourages assault) is still used in courts of law by defence lawyers of raping offenders. It is also a view held by some church groups.

5- If you asked me: Does Hijab / conservative dress reduce the risk of being sexually assaulted? I would say: Probably yes, although it does not prevent it. Rapists are sick people anyway and may not only be sexually motivated for example elderly women are also raped in Australia. However, I would advocate (as Islam does) maximising of personal safety.

6- I am surprised that the comments were published more than 2 weeks after being made and their release was timed with the Werribee incident in Victoria. It is suspicious because the author of the article is Richard Kerbaj, the same guy who claimed that Dr Amir Ali said that the prophet had "character flaws" last week (see previous posting).

UPDATE: ICV and other Islamic organizations have asked for Sh Hilali's immediate resignation. We will see what happens.

References:
The Australian article.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/muslims-pan-muftis-speech/2006/10/26/1161749253946.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200610/s1773857.htm

Lecturers asked to spy on Muslim Students

The Guardian has reported on October 16th that the British Department of Education has produced an 18 page proposal asking Lecturers and University Staff across Britain to spy on “Asian Looking” and Muslim students. The document, reportedly, talks about students of "Asian appearance" being suspected extremists. The document, reportedly, urges monitoring of the activities of Islamic societies on campuses including monitoring guest speakers. It claims that Islamic societies at universities have become increasingly political in recent years and discusses monitoring their leaflets and events.

Offcourse, the Australian media has picked up on this within less than 48 hours and the debate is now open in Australia on this same topic.

ABC News Online reported on an interview with Professor Gerard Sutton, who is the president of the Australian Vice Chancellors Committee (AVCC). The article quotes Professor Gerard saying "I think if the Government asked us to monitor particular groups of students then there would be outrage from academics about that,". He was also quoted saying: "We are about centres of learning, not about monitoring private activities of individual students." The same ABC article also suggests that Lecturers’ groups in the UK are worried about being lured into an "anti-Islamic McCarthyism".

While the stance of Professor Sutton is admirable and worthy of respect and support, I am not sure how long it will stand in the face of pressure from John Howard's and Pro-Zionist lobby groups' efforts of inciting hatred against Muslims.

There is history behind this. This issue has been brewing for a while within Pro-Zionists lobby groups (UK and Australia). There is evidence to indicate that Pro-Zionists lobby groups in the UK and Australia have a hand in this saga, possibly, in response to Muslim students being vocal in their criticism of Israel over the war on Lebanon and occupation of Palestine. Also in response to Muslim students collaborating with left wing groups over the same issue.

The Guardian describe the document saying “…Islamic societies at universities have become increasingly political in recent years”. I always thought that making Muslim students politically active is one good way of ensuring the integration of Muslims students, a good way of fighting terrorism (as students find a legitimate way of self expression) and an integral part of democracy and human rights. But then….I may be naïve. Does political activism for Muslims now constitute extremism??

For John Howard, this claim of “extremism on campuses” will came as favourable material to defend the “war on terror” and the War on Iraq.

Such a proposal to ask Academic staff to spy on Muslim students will come as a severe attack in the civil liberties of all citizens and the freedom of Muslim students who are already threatened enough as it is. Such a proposal will further alienate Muslim youth rather than help to build bridges.

My view is that there is no evidence of extremism in Australian University campuses and people who advocate for university staff to spy on people with “Asian appearance” and Muslims MUST first provide evidence of extremism.

40 US Soldiers killed in Iraq since start of October

Al-Jazeera has reported that 40 US soldiers of occupation have died in Iraq since the start of October. Also, acts of aggression against Iraqi civilians are steadily increasing, leading to mounting numbers of civilian deaths.

When is George Bush going to wake up to the fact that his misguided foreign policy has led to this human tragedy? When is he going to look outside his self-centred arrogant way of thinking?

The US and its allies are directly and indirectly responsible to the state that Iraq is in and the death of Iraqi Civilians.

US intelligence organizations have released a study stating that the war on Iraq has not decreased the threat of terrorism in the world and that the opposite has happened. A statement that many balanced people around the world have been saying for the last three years.

Today....most Iraqis now wish for the Saddam days to be back....

North Korea has done it

North Korea has allegedly carried out its nuclear test yesterday. I now fear a spiralling increase in global armament. The US administration has only itself to blame.

I view this event as another milestone in the weakening of the US dominance over the world and its coming down from the "super power" status. More and more countries are standing up to the bullying tactics and going ahead with their own policies against the will of the US administration.

However, this comes at a cost of an increased amount of nuclear capability around the globe putting all humanity at risk. I say: No to Nuclear weapons for all (including US and Israel).

George Gallway says to Tony Blair: Time to go!

ozmuslim