Kamal Nawash Quotes
The government does not talk with most Islamic institutions in America. It does not cooperate with them, and does not want to cooperate with them. Our institutions in America have utterly failed, and we must be clear and say it honestly.
One of the many difficulties that Muslims have in understanding America is their perception that Islam is snubbed by the government. Separation of church and state is the exact opposite of the basic doctrines is Islam which holds that everything in society including government should be driven and controlled religiously. While that view was true of the Roman Catholic church at one time as well as some of the National Protestant churches, America is the antithesis. In general, where there is a ceremonial role that religions are given by government like prayer at the start of Congressional sessions, there are very few consultations of government officials with specific religions about government civil and secular policy and legislation. There are just too many religions in America and it would be impractical even if it were not against American tradition and even law in some cases.
Kamal Nawash, Chairman of Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism, Interview, Al-Jazeera TV, July 18, 2005
Sourced by: Eigen's Political and Historical Quotations
Al-Omar is one of Saudi’s leading clerics and the Saudi Arabian government—supposedly is a major ally of the United States—not only tolerates this type of inflammatory rhetoric but it makes no effort to repudiate this and other radical Islamic statements. There is no freedom of Speech in Saudi Arabia, and people are arrested all the time for saying things that are displeasing to the Royal Family. But no attempt to suppress this kind of virulent anti-American attack.
While not in the Koran, this attributed statement is the basis for the ban on non-Muslims going on a Hajj and going to the most holy Muslim places—Mecca, Mina, Muzdalifa, and Arafat as well as the anti-religious hostility to all religions but Islam which is present in some Muslim countries.
In one of the historical ironies of the 12th century, a Christian sect preferred the rule of the Muslims than their Christian brethren—on the grounds of religious tolerance. It illustrates the changes that take place over time. By the 21st century, it was the Christians who were thought of as tolerant and the Muslims as the opposite.
In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim fatal riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.
It is this verse that for some Muslims justifies terrorism against non-Muslims. See {584354} for a specific example. There are similar provisions in the Old Testament which a few extremely conservative Jews and Christians have used to advocate for blasphemy being a capital crime. Note that if an unbeliever repents and becomes a Muslim, he should be spared.
This sura illustrates why peace treaties between Islamic and non Islamic countries are difficult to negotiate and enforce. For some fundamentalist Muslims, even making a peace treaty with Israel would constitute a transgression of the word of God. Nonetheless, the first treaty that the United States ever made was with a Muslim nation—Tripoli.
If they … attack your religion with disapproval and criticism, then fight the leaders of disbelief …
This quotation is used by some Islamic fundamentalists to justify attacks on people who criticize or disapprove of Islam. They see this as an instruction from the Prophet. The same quotation is used by critics of fundamentalist interpretations to show that literal interpretations eliminate any kind of criticism and provides no freedom of speech.
In 2005 Rose published a number of cartoons some of which depicted the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad which offended many fundamentalist Muslims who had a tradition who had a tradition of never depicting the visage of the Prophet. A delegation of clerics demanded an apology from Rose and the country of Denmark, claiming that they and Islam, like other religions, were entitled to respect.
The mullahs had a great deal of power in Iraq and were among the most vocal opponents of democracy and freedom and instead argued for a Theocracy under Islamic law—Sharia which allowed almost no freedoms for the individual.
This quotation is used by many to illustrate the discrimination that Muslims face in America. The President and almost all other national leaders rejected ideas like this.
In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Many in the Middle East protested vehemently because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. Momani reprinted the cartoons and wrote this editorial arguing that the cartoons insulted Islam far less than the terrorism and murder—especially a recent murder of Muslims in Amman attending an Islamic wedding ceremony, He was fired by the newspaper owners and then actually arrested by the Jordanian authorities for “Insulting Religion.”
The place of non-Muslims in an Islamic country, if any, has been a point of great anxiety among Christians, Jews, Bhais, and others. These have been persecuted and expelled from numerous Islamic countries while in others such as modern Turkey there is no problem. This particular cleric is seen as more “modern” and “liberal” than most. Even he has little concept of equality and freedom of religion.
Kamal Nawash is a Palestinian born American lawyer from Ain Karem-Jerusalem. He works for the Nawash Law Office in Washington, D.C.
