Francais

VIEW VIDEO: Heal The World

There’s a place in
Your heart
And I know that it is love
And this place could
Be much
Brighter than tomorrow
And if you really try
You’ll find there’s no need
To cry
In this place you’ll feel
There’s no hurt or sorrow

There are ways
To get there
If you care enough
For the living
Make a little space
Make a better place…

Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

If you want to know why
There’s a love that
Cannot lie
Love is strong
It only cares of
Joyful giving
If we try
We shall see
In this bliss
We cannot feel
Fear or dread
We stop existing and
Start living

Then it feels that always
Love’s enough for
Us growing
So make a better world
Make a better world…

Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

And the dream we were
Conceived in
Will reveal a joyful face
And the world we
Once believed in
Will shine again in grace
Then why do we keep
Strangling life
Wound this earth
Crucify its soul
Though it’s plain to see
This world is heavenly
Be God’s glow

We could fly so high
Let our spirits never die
In my heart
I feel you are all
My brothers
Create a world with
No fear
Together we cry
Happy tears
See the nations turn
Their swords
Into plowshares

We could really get there
If you cared enough
For the living
Make a little space
To make a better place…

Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

Heal the world
Make it a better place
For you and for me
And the entire human race
There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

There are people dying
If you care enough
For the living
Make a better place
For you and for me

You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me
You and for me

My dearest mum has congestive heart failure. One of the side effects is shortness of breath.

When I see her going through these excruciating episodes, it reminds me of my own challenges with breathing.

It all started the day that my family and I were sitting around the TV watching the 25th Anniversary of Motown. I was 13 and not prepared for what I would see next.

Michael Jackson came on the stage singing Billie Jean. He was mesmerizing. It was the first time in my life that I would experience the sensation of losing my breath.

That moment changed me forever. It was the start of what I would experience many times over the course of my life-a feeling of total other worldliness when being deeply inspired, of feeling the presence of my creator.

Ironically, Michael himself experienced shortness of breath in the last moments of his life. He was was declared dead at 2.26pm, June 25, 2009.

Maybe the earth did not stand still at this news but it did grind the internet to a halt, crashing Google and sparking an internet meltdown. People across the planet were trying to find out if the news was true. Who could blame them-he was the most famous person on earth.

Growing up, Michael Jackson’s music was my ultimate escape. I was lucky to have a brother who was a D.J. and so I had an infinite amount of music at my fingertips. When feeling bad, I would escape to his basement room, shut myself in and dance for hours. It always made me feel better.

Michael Jackson knew the effect that his music had on people, “I want to give the world escapism through the wonder of great music and to reach the masses.”

Michael Jackson’s incredible talent was a reminder of God’s transcendent creativity. He was aware of this responsibility, “I’m a visionary and a creative person. God blessed me with certain talents. I’m very honored to have been chosen.”

It was only a few months ago, as I was reading his biography, that my children asked me who he was, why he looked so different, what his life had been like.

We talked about his difficult childhood; what it must have been like to be a misunderstood soul, his loneliness, his escape towards music to shut out the pain and isolation of his life. He once said, “People think they know me, but they don’t. Not really. Actually, I am one of the loneliest people on this earth. I cry sometimes, because it hurts. It does. To be honest, I guess you could say that it hurts to be me.”

He also talked about much sadness in his early life, “My father beat me. It was difficult to take being beaten and then going on stage. He was strict; very hard and stern.”

Despite all his early tribulations, I explained to my children that Michael Jackson had been able to go beyond his tribulations to make a difference. He was the American dream come true, a natural born dancer, blazing the trail forever by changing pop culture and how we consumed music and entertainment.

I talked about how he reached across racial and cultural barriers, how his music was universal and touched people everywhere.

It was important that my kids understood something which had been such a big part of my life, my personal history. I especially wanted them to hear the songs which talked about social justice, of being a conduit for change, for trying to make the world a better place. 

Transformational songs such as the Man in the Mirror “I’m starting with the man in the mirror, I’m asking him to change his ways, and no message could have been any clearer, If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself, and then make a change.“

We watched his videos, glued in front of the computer for several hours, swaying and trying unsuccessfully to do the moonwalk, falling all over ourselves and laughing our heads off. This memory with my children is something I will cherish forever.

His moonwalk dance was a symbol of his brilliance, his innovation. With these steps, he had taken “one small step for mankind, one big step for humanity” and music would never again be the same.

Although my daughter was traumatized after seeing the Thriller video, I don’t regret them having experienced who he was.

After, I heard rumors on the internet that Michael Jackson had become a Muslim.

He is said to have been encouraged by Canadian songwriter David Wharnsby and Phillip Bubal, a producer, who both approached him after he appeared a bit down.

His brother Jermaine had also spoken to Michael about Islam and had once said, “When I came back from Mecca I got him a lot of books and he asked me lots of things about my religion and I told him that it’s peaceful and beautiful. He read everything and he was proud of me that I found something that would give me inner strength and peace. I think it is most probable that Michael will convert to Islam. He could do so much, just like I am trying to do. Michael and I and the word of God, we could do so much.”

A source explains how eventually Michael did become a Muslim:

“The singer converted to Islam in a ceremony at a friend’s house in Los Angeles on last November 21.He is said to have sat on the floor and worn a small hat while an Imam of a local mosque officiated. An Imam was summoned from the mosque and Michael went through the ‘Shahada’, which is the Muslim declaration of belief.”

The question of whether Michael Jackson was a Muslim or not will soon be answered when he is buried.

The death of Michael Jackson had given a dilemma to the media, the ones who had tried to expose Michael Jackson as a freak. How could they reconcile his past? Should they talk about his failings, his troubled life, his debts, his legal problems, his eccentricity?

As one MTV personality commented, “Think of the biggest stars, they all had their ups and downs, that was part of their artistry, their creativity and why it makes their iconography even bigger.”

It was Michael Jackson’s weaknesses that made him just so much more human, he himself recognized this in his song Human Nature, “If they say why, why, tell them that is Human Nature, I like livin’ this way, I like lovin’ this way.”

It would be the masses however who would guide the media in what spin this story of a lifetime would have. As people gathered on the streets and capitals around the world, they played his music, affirmed that his life should be celebrated, not for the controversy, but for the goodness it inspired, for what he had contributed to the world as an artist.

I was shocked then to see the Celebrity website, TMZ still calling him the derogatory name, “Jacko,” continuing the cruelty, right till the end.

Barry Gordy, the founder of Motown and Michael Jackson’s life long mentor provided insight into Michael’s life:

“As a kid, Michael was always beyond his years, an innovator, a genius in what he did. He seemed like he had been here before, he had knowledge about life. Michael was absolutely brilliant; he had a hunger to learn. I saw that when he first danced- he was moving, talking and thinking at the same time. He always wanted to be the best and was willing to work as hard as it would take to do that.”

Recently, we were hearing a lot in the news about the “The Greatest show on Earth, ” Michael Jackson’s comeback. He died before that could happen.

Many people are wondering now whether the stress of his upcoming tour is what brought upon his death or perhaps it was the prescription drugs. The answer is that his time had come.

“And there is no living creature on earth but depends for its sustenance on God; and He knows its time-limit [on earth] and its resting-place [after death]: all [this] is laid down in [His] clear decree. The Message of the Qu’ran, translation by Muhammad Asad)

Michael Jackson’s death is the ultimate comeback that he so longed for. It has brought him back to life, revitalized what he really means to people as they focus again on his music, his brilliance, his talent and the incredible legacy he left behind. A second renassaisance in the making.

His children and family should feel extremely proud of that.

Jermaine Jackson, during the press conference at the hospital said at the end of his statement. “May Allah be with you, Michael, always. Love you.”

That moment reminded me of words from the We are here to change the world song, “Were on a mission, in the everlasting light that shines, a revelation of the truth in chapters of our minds. So long, bad times, were gonna shake it up and break it up, were sharing light brighter than the sun. Hello good times, Were here to simulate, eliminate and congregate, illuminate.”

As the surreal image of his body being taken away was broadcast live, Michael Jackson was no longer a creator but was now with his creator, forever continuing to take so many people’s breath away.

(This tribute to Michael Jackson is dedicated to my children, Sarah-Mecca (10) and Alif (7), may you always achieve what you set out to do, in the service of humanity).

The issue of Palestinian suicide bombings has become a familiar topic to many people throughout the world. It is easy for people to either quickly and forthrightly condemn it as a primitive and barbaric form of terrorism against civilians, or condone and support it as a legitimate method of resisting an oppressive Israeli occupation that has trampled Palestinian dignity and brutalized their very existence.

As a Christian, I know that the way of Christ is the way of nonviolence and, therefore, I condemn all forms of violence and terrorism, whether coming from the government of Israel or from militant Palestinian groups. Having said that clearly, it is still important to understand the phenomenon of suicide bombings that tragically arises from the deep misery and torment of many Palestinians. For how else can one explain it? When healthy, beautiful and intelligent young men and women set out to kill and be killed, something is basically wrong in a world that has not heard their anguished cry for justice.

The Palestinian resistance to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip took a very important turn since the early 1990s. Young Palestinian men, and more lately women, started to strap themselves with explosives, make their way to Israeli Jewish areas and blow themselves up, killing and injuring dozens of people around them. Between the beginning of the second intifada in September 2000 and February 22, 2003, Palestinian militants carried out 69 suicide bombings in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank including Jerusalem, as well as inside Israel, killing, according to Israeli statistics, 341 Israelis including soldiers, men, women, and children. In the same period, the Israeli army killed 2,106 Palestinians including police, men, women and children.

For the last 35 years, the Palestinians have been engaged in resisting the occupation of their country. For many years they have worked through the international community to bring an end to the Israeli occupation, but they have been unsuccessful.

Historically speaking, the Palestinians did not begin their resistance to the occupation with suicide bombings. There were no suicide bombings before the Oslo Peace Process. It is the result of despair and hopelessness that started to set in when an increasing number of Palestinians became frustrated by the deepening Israeli oppression and humiliation.

Breeding ground for suicide bombers
Besides the basic political injustice and the oppressiveness of the occupation, there are four major areas that constitute the breeding ground for suicide bombers. To begin with, many young men have become permanently unemployed.

Moreover, it is the young men more than others who are humiliated, harassed and provoked by the Israeli soldiers.

Furthermore, there is hardly any Palestinian family in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip that has not experienced some kind of pain or injury. Many families have lost their loved ones. Almost every aspect of Palestinian life is controlled by the Israeli army and many people have lost the ability to dream of a better future or envisage a better life.

There is another group of young Palestinian men and women that must be mentioned. Many of these have been arrested and tortured in Israeli prisons and “concentration” camps. In fact, Israeli prisons have become the “factories” for creating and “manufacturing” collaborators. Young men are detained for indefinite periods of time and are pressured into becoming spies and collaborators. They are simply trapped and some of them do not know how to shake it off. This phenomenon causes some of them to exist in constant self-contempt and scorn for having betrayed their own people. They are ready to become suicide bombers in order to purify and redeem themselves and express their utmost loyalty and patriotism for their country and people.

For these young people, daily life has become an experience of death. Indeed, many of them feel that Israel has practically pronounced a death sentence on them. They feel they have no options and very little to lose. Consequently, they are willing to give themselves up for the cause of God and the homeland (watan), believing that with God there is so much to gain.

From the perspective of those who believe in and carry out these suicide operations, there is a simple and plain logic. As Israeli soldiers shell and kill Palestinians indiscriminately, Palestinian suicide bombers strap themselves with explosives and kill Israelis indiscriminately.

Muslim perspectives
The suicide bombings become a more powerful phenomenon when their religious underpinnings are emphasized. It is difficult to determine whether the religious dimension followed and enhanced the political decision for its use or whether the religious significance preceded and prompted it. It is most likely that both went hand in hand, since any Palestinian killed by Israel, whether a militant or an innocent bystander, was regarded as a martyr. Consequently, groups like Hamas were referring to these acts not as suicide bombings but as “martyrdom operations” and “martyrdom weapons.” Nationalism and faith have been fused together and imbued with power. People regarded the suicide bombers as martyrs and believed that paradise awaited them.

Other Muslims argued strongly that Islamic law forbids the killing of non-combatants and, therefore, the killing of innocent Israelis is wrong.

Effects of suicide bombings
Although Israel was deeply hurt by suicide bombings, the consequences that the extremists were hoping would happen did not take place.

First, Israel had many more options than the Palestinians thought they did. As it turned out, Israel had a good number of military options; and due to its successful media campaign, everything it did was justified as self-defense.

Second, the West Bank is not southern Lebanon. Hizballah was, indeed, successful in driving the Israeli army from southern Lebanon after 22 years of occupation (May 25, 2000). The West Bank is different. Religious Jewish settlers and right-wing Zionists find strong biblical and historical roots in the West Bank and it will not be easy to evict them from there. The presence of the illegal settlements is one of the most difficult issues in the struggle for peace.

Third, the U.S. is the only great world power today and has an unflinching commitment to the well-being and security of the state of Israel. It will come to its rescue politically, militarily, and economically whenever it is needed.

Fourth, Israel was successful in its media campaign internationally. Many countries in the world are against suicide bombings.

Fifth, the Israeli society did not crumble economically in spite of hardships.

And sixth, the vast majority of the Israeli people, perceiving the struggle as a fight for the very existence of the state of Israel, supported Sharon and his right-wing policies.

Palestinian condemnation
Although suicide bombings were condemned by some Palestinians, including the Palestinian Authority, they were accepted popularly by many as a way of avenging the Israeli army’s daily killings of resistance fighters and innocent Palestinians. And while the American government rushed to condemn suicide bombings and expected the same from the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s killing of Palestinian leaders and ordinary civilians did not abate and was not condemned publicly by the U.S.

Be that as it may, it is important to reiterate clearly that the Palestinian community is not totally in support of the suicide bombings. On Wednesday, June 16, 2002, 58 Palestinian men and women, Muslims and Christians, among whom are well-known personalities, signed a public statement published by the most read Arabic daily, Al-Quds, asking for a halt to all suicide bombings. They made it clear that such operations only widen and deepen the hate and resentment between Palestinians and Israelis. They also destroy the possibility for the two peoples to live in two states side by side. The statement mentioned that the suicide bombings are counterproductive and will not lead to the fulfillment of the Palestinian national aspirations. They only allow Israel to justify its increasing vicious attacks on Palestinian towns and villages. The statement was published in the paper on five consecutive days before it was transferred to the website with hundreds more signatories.

Israeli reaction
There were voices inside Israel that were calling for more drastic and severe measures to curb the suicide bombings. One of those was Gideon Ezra, the deputy public security minister who openly on television on August 19, 2001, called on his government to execute the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He argued that if potential suicide bombers know that their families will be wiped out then they will refrain from committing the act. Apparently, Ezra was basing his suggestion on a Nazi practice that used to arrest and inflict suffering on the families of those who were suspected of undermining the state. Shockingly, Ezra’s words did not draw any protest or criticism from the Israeli government.

By contrast, there are courageous voices that called on their Israeli government to examine its harsh policies against the Palestinians that breed suicide bombings. In one case, Rami and Nurit Elhanan lost their 14-year-old-daughter who was killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber in September 1997. In spite of the tragic loss, the parents became actively involved in peacemaking. They blamed the Israeli occupation, saying, “Our daughter was killed because of the terror of Israeli occupation. Every innocent victim from both sides is a victim of the occupation.” The couple established the Bereaved Family Forum with Izzat Ghazzawi, a Palestinian whose 16-year-old son Ramy was killed by Israeli troops.

Was Samson a suicide bomber?
In discussing suicide bombings from a religious perspective, it is worthwhile to reflect on the story of Samson in the book of Judges (13—16). It is a story of a strong young man who rose up to save his people who were oppressed by the coastal powerful neighbor, the Philistines. Obviously, from the perspective of the Israelites he was regarded as a hero and a freedom fighter while from the perspective of the people of power, namely the Philistines, he was, in today’s language, a terrorist.

According to the story, Samson was very successful in his brave adventures against his enemies. Eventually, he was captured by the Philistines and tortured. They pulled out his eyes and kept him in jail. In order to celebrate their victory over their archenemy, Samson, the Philistines brought him to a big event attended by 3,000 men and women, including their five kings. His final act of revenge took place when he pushed the two main columns of the building and pulled it down, killing himself and all the attendees. Samson’s final prayer seems very similar to the prayer of a suicide bomber before he blows himself up. “Lord God, remember me and strengthen me only this once, O God, so that with this one act of revenge I may pay back the Philistines for my two eyes.”

Read in the light of today’s suicide bombers, how do we evaluate the story of Samson? Was not Samson a suicide bomber? Was he acting on behalf of the God of justice who wills the liberation of the oppressed? Was God pleased with the death of thousands of men and women of the Philistines? Is it legitimate to tell the story today by substituting the name Ahmad for Samson? Is the dynamic under which God operates that of Jew versus other people or is it that of oppressor versus oppressed? Is the story of Samson legitimate because it is written in the Bible while the story of Ahmad is rejected because it is not and therefore he is condemned as a terrorist? Do we have the courage to condone both as acts of bravery and liberation or condemn both as acts of violence and terror? Or do we hold a theology of a biased God who only stands with Israel whether right or wrong?

Why we condemn suicide bombings
Although some people in our Palestinian community admire the sacrifice of the suicide bombers and although we understand its deeper motivation and background, we condemn it from both our position of faith as well as a legitimate method for resisting the occupation.

First, we condemn suicide bombings because they are a crime against God. Ultimately, it is only God our creator who gives us life and who can take it. Those who love God do not kill themselves. Moreover, those who love God do not kill themselves for the sake of God. Indeed, they should be ready to die and even be killed for God’s sake, but they will not do it themselves.

Second, we condemn it because we believe that we must refrain from inflicting suffering or death on others. From a Christian point of view, the tragedy lies in the fact that these young men and women do not only kill themselves, they cause the death of others, many of whom are civilians and innocent. We must hasten to add that we equally condemn the state of Israel’s killing of Palestinians. Indeed, it constitutes the underlying cause of the conflict. Be that as it may, from our position of faith we say that even when the cause for which a person kills himself/herself is noble, as it is in the case of Palestine, nothing justifies the killing of innocent people. Christ accepted suffering on himself and did not inflict it on others. In fact, from a New Testament perspective, when Christians suffer, it should make them more compassionate for the suffering of others rather than bitter and vengeful. In the struggle for civil rights in the U.S., Martin Luther King, Jr., recognized the heavy price that needs to be paid for freedom but refused to accept any violent method to achieve it. He said, “Rivers of blood may have to flow before we gain our freedom, but it must be our blood.” King insisted on the teaching of Jesus and Gandhi that unearned suffering is redemptive. Furthermore, for the Christian, suffering endured can serve as evidence of Christ’s victory over suffering and death. It can also be a way of exposing the evil and the injustice that must be resisted.

Third, we condemn it because we believe that when we are confronted by injustice and evil, we must resist it without using its evil methods. We bear it but do not accept, submit or succumb to it. Some Christians have developed nonviolent direct action as a method of resisting unjust governments and systems. Martin Luther King, Jr., expressed it well when he wrote: “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it.”

It is our faithfulness to God that drives us to work for justice and for the ending of the occupation of Palestine. But it must be carried out through nonviolence, no matter how long it takes. It is only nonviolence that can guarantee the restoration of the humanity of both sides when the conflict is over. Moreover, nonviolent resistance contributes to a speedier process of reconciliation and healing because it does not violate human dignity.

Fourth, for the Christian, the supreme example is Christ. “When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly” (1Peter 2:23). This is not passive resignation. It is total surrender to the God of justice who established this world on justice and who is going to make sure that injustice does not have the last word.

We condemn suicide bombings because they are trapped with the same violent logic exercised and perpetrated by the Israeli government. It is based on the law of revenge expressed in “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” Although it is very difficult for us as humans, we are still encouraged as Christians to seek a higher law.

Fifth, it is probable that Prime Minister Sharon (and the right-wing religious extremist ministers and settlers around him, including some Christian Zionists) believes that the war against the Palestinians can be justified biblically because he is doing exactly what Joshua did in the Old Testament. Therefore, as Joshua’s actions (Joshua 1—11) pleased God so must Sharon’s actions. Similarly, the suicide bombers believe that by blowing themselves up and killing those around them they are fighting in the cause of God by ridding their land of the injustice inflicted on it by “infidels,” and so earning for themselves a place in paradise.

Our basic problem with both lies in their concept of God. We reject any understanding of God that reflects war, violence or terrorism. God is a God of justice, but God’s justice is not expressed in violence or in terrorizing people. God’s justice is expressed supremely in love, peace and forgiveness.

Sixth, in the midst of the injustice, suffering and death inflicted on us, we believe that God in Christ is there with us. Christ is not in the tanks and jet fighters, fighting on the side of the oppressors (although many Jewish and Christian Zionists believe that). God is in the city of Gaza, in the Jenin camp and in the old city of Nablus, Ramallah and Bethlehem suffering with the oppressed. God has not abandoned us. We reject suicide bombings because, from a Christian perspective, they reflect feelings of total despair and hopelessness.

Seventh, we condemn suicide bombings because they practice, in essence, collective punishment against people, many of whom are civilians. They are guilty of the very things Palestinians detest in the Israeli government. When suicide bombers commit collective punishment, they become what they loathe. When the Israeli army incarcerates whole towns for long periods of time or a suicide bomber blows himself up in a market place and indiscriminate killing ensues, both are collective punishment directed at largely innocent people.

Eighth, although people may be ready to die for their faith or even for their country, they need to do everything they can to stay alive and witness in life rather than kill themselves. So long as they are alive, they have the opportunity to witness to the truth. Indeed, they need to remain faithful until death but they must not give up on life and kill themselves. We reject suicide bombings because we believe in life before death as well as life after death. In spite of the despairing situation, these young men and women deserve to live.

There cannot be room for hate if we want to live together. And live together we must. Ending the occupation will certainly end the suicide bombings. All peace-loving people, whether people of faith or not, must exert greater concerted effort to work for the ending of the occupation.

The Rev. Naim Ateek is often called the “Desmond Tutu of Palestine” for his leading role in promoting Palestinian nonviolent resistance. Rejecting the misuse of scriptures by Jewish and Christian Zionists, he has written a new book offering theological insights to biblical texts that help Palestinian Christians living under Israeli occupation.

His most recent book, A Palestinian Christian Call for Reconciliation presents a very human Jesus who will appeal even to non-religionists (if they are peaceful ones), while also honoring the Jesus Christ of the Christian faith. Ateek also reaches back to Old Testament figures to debunk problematic Christian and Jewish theologies and uncovers ancient biblical teachings relevant to today’s Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

This article was originally published in 2005

One man spoke to the world, and the world listened.

He walked onto the stage in Cairo, alone, without hosts and without aides, and delivered a sermon to an audience of billions. Egyptians and Americans, Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Arabs, Sunnis and Shiites, Copts and Maronites – and they all listened attentively.

He unfolded before them the map of a new world, a different world, whose values and laws he spelled out in simple and clear language – a mixture of idealism and practical politics, vision and pragmatism.

Barack Hussein Obama – as he took pains to call himself – is the most powerful man on earth. Every word he utters is a political fact.

“A historic speech”, pronounced commentators in a hundred languages. I prefer another adjective:

The speech was right.

Every word was in its place, every sentence precise, every tone in harmony. The masterpiece of a man bringing a new message to the world.

From the very first word, every listener in the hall and in the world felt the honesty of the man, that his heart and his tongue were in harmony, that this is not a politician of the old familiar sort – hypocritical, sanctimonious, calculating. His body language was speaking, and so were his facial expressions

That’s why the speech was so important. The new moral integrity and the sense of honesty increased the impact of the revolutionary content.

And a revolutionary speech it certainly was.

In 55 minutes, it not only wiped away the eight years of George W. Bush, but also much of the preceding decades, from World War II on.

The American ship has turned – not with the sluggishness everyone would have expected, but with the agility of a speedboat.

That is much more than a political change. It touches the roots of the American national consciousness. The President spoke to hundreds of million US citizens no less than to a billion Muslims.

The American culture is based on the myth of the Wild West, with its Good Guys and Bad Guys, violent justice, dueling under the midday sun. Since the American nation is composed of immigrants from all over the world, its unity seems to require a threatening, world-encompassing evil enemy, like the Nazis and the Japs, or the Commies. After the collapse of the Soviet empire, this role was taken over by Islam.

Cruel, fanatical, bloodthirsty Islam; Islam as the religion of murder and destruction; an Islam lusting for the blood of women and children. This enemy captured the imagination of the masses and supplied material for television and cinema. It provided lecture topics for learned professors and fresh inspiration for popular writers. The White House was occupied by a moron who declared a world-wide “War on Terrorism”.

When Obama is now uprooting this myth, he is revolutionizing American culture. He wipes away the picture of one enemy, without painting another in its place. He preaches against the violent, adversary attitude itself, and starts to work to replace it with a culture of partnership between nations, civilizations and religions.

I see Obama as the first great messenger of the 21st century. He is the son of a new era, where the economy is global and the whole of humanity faces the danger to the very existence of life on the planet Earth. An era where the Internet connects a boy in New Zealand with a girl in Namibia in real time, where a disease in a small Mexican village spreads all over the globe within days.

This world needs a world law, a world order, a world democracy. That’s why this speech really was historic: Obama outlined the basic contours of a world constitution.

While Obama proclaims the 21st century, the government of Israel is returning to the 19th.

That was the century when a narrow, egocentric, aggressive nationalism took root in many countries. A century that sanctified the belligerent nation which oppresses minorities and subdues neighbors. The century that gave birth to modern anti-Semitism and to its response – modern Zionism.

Obama’s vision is not anti-national. He spoke with pride about the American nation. But his nationalism is of another sort: an inclusive, multi-cultural and non-sexist nationalism, which includes all the citizens of a country and respects other nations.

This is the nationalism of the 21st century, which is inexorably striving towards supranational, regional and world-wide structures.

Compared to this, how miserable is the mental world of the Israeli Right! How miserable is the violent, fanatical-religious world of the settlers, the chauvinist ghetto of Netanyahu, Lieberman and Barak, the racist-fascist closed-in world of their Kahanist allies!

One has to understand this moral and spiritual dimension of Obama’s speech before considering its political implications. Not only in the political sphere are Obama and Netanyahu on a collision course. The underlying collision is between two mental worlds which are as distinct from each other as the sun and the moon.

In Obama’s mental world, there is no place for the Israeli Right or its equivalents elsewhere. Not for their terminology, not for their “values”, and still less for their actions.

In the political political sphere, too, a huge gap has opened up between the governments of Israel and the USA.

During the last few years, successive Israeli governments have ridden the wave of Islamophobia that has spread throughout the West. The Islamic world was considered the deadly enemy, America was galloping grimly towards the Clash of Civilizations, every Muslim was a potential terrorist.

Israel’s right-wing leaders could rejoice. After all, the Palestinians are Arabs, the Arabs are Muslims, the Muslims are Terrorists – so that Israel was assured a central place in the war of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness.

That was a Garden of Eden for racist demagogues. Avigdor Lieberman could advocate the expulsion of the Arabs from Israel, Ellie Yishai could enact laws for the revocation of the citizenship of non-Jews. Obscure Members of the Knesset could grab headlines with bills that might have been conceived in Nuremberg.

This Garden of Eden is no more. Whether the implications will become clear quickly or slowly – the direction is obvious. If we continue on our path, we will become a leper colony.

The tone makes the music – and this applies also to the President’s words on Israel and Palestine. He spoke at length about the Holocaust – honest and courageous words, full of empathy and compassion, which were received by the Egyptians in silence but with respect. He stressed Israel’s right to exist. And without pausing, he spoke about the suffering of the Palestinian refugees, the intolerable situation of the Palestinians in Gaza, Palestinian aspirations for a state of their own.

He spoke respectfully about Hamas. Not anymore as a “terrorist organization”, but as a part of the Palestinian people. He demanded that they recognize Israel and stop violence, but also hinted that he would welcome a Palestinian unity government.

The political message was clear and unequivocal: the Two-State Solution will be put into practice. He himself will see to that. Settlement activity must cease. Unlike his predecessors, he did not stop at speaking about “Palestinians”, but uttered the decisive word: “Palestine” – the name of a state and a territory.

And no less important: the Iran war has been struck from the agenda. The dialogue with Tehran, as a part of the new world, is not limited in time. As from now, no one can even dream about an American OK for an Israeli attack.

How did official Israel respond? The first reaction was denial. “An unimportant speech”. “There was nothing new”. The establishment commentators picked out a few pro-Israeli sentences from the text and ignored all the others. And after all, “these are just words. So he talked. Nothing will come out of it.”

That is nonsense. The words of the President of the United States are more than just words. They are political facts. They change the perceptions of hundreds of millions. The Muslim public listened. The American public listened. It may take some time for the message to sink in. But after this speech, the pro-Israel lobby will never be the same as it was before. The era of “foile shtik” (Yiddish for sneaky tricks) is over. The sly dishonesty of a Shimon Peres, the guileful deceits of an Ehud Olmert, the sweet talking of a Bibi Netanyahu – all these belong to the past.

The Israeli people must now decide: whether to follow the right-wing government towards an inevitable collision with Washington, as the Jews did 1940 years ago when they followed the Zealots into a suicidal war on Rome – or to join Obama’s march towards a new world.

Uri Avnery is a Jewish peace activist, a outspoken critic of official Israel. He lives in TelAviv.

Image entitled: music note, hope 2

To go to Uri Avnery’s blog, Gush Shalom, click here:

We are used to nice words and many, in the Muslim majority countries as well as Western Muslims, have ended up not trusting the United States when it comes to political discourse. They want actions and they are right. This is indeed what our world needs. Yet, President Obama, who is very eloquent and good at using symbols, has provided us with his speech in Cairo with something that is more than simple words. It is altogether an attitude, a mindset, a vision.

In order to avoid shaping a binary vision of the world, Barack Obama referred to “America”, “Islam”, “the Muslims” and “the Muslim majority countries”: he never fell into the trap of speaking about “us” as different or opposed to “them” and he was quick to refer Islam as being an American reality, and to the American Muslims as being an asset to his own society. Talking about his own life, he went from personal to universal stating that he knows by experience that Islam is a religion whose message is about openness and tolerance. Both the wording and the substance of his speech were important and new: he managed to be humble, self-critical, open and demanding at the same time in a message targeting all of “us”, understood as “partners”.

The seven areas he highlighted are critical. One might disagree with President Obama’s reading and interpretation of what is happening in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in Palestine (and the US role in these conflicts), but he has clearly avoided shying away from addressing these issues and has called all the parties to take their share of responsibility by putting an end to violence and promoting respect and justice. He clearly acknowledged the suffering of the Palestinians and their rights to get a viable and independent State. It is a first necessary step: the future will tell us if the new President has the means to be strong and consistent when dealing with the Israeli government. He left open some channels as to the dialogue with both the Palestinian authority (calling for unity without sidelining Hamas) and Iran. These were and remain critical issues and there will be no future without addressing them with consistency and courage. Expectations are immense and Barack Obama has still to show his true practical commitment to justice and peace.

President Obama made an important distinction between democratic principles and political models. Rule of law, free choice of the people, duty of transparency are universal principals while the political models are depending on historical and cultural factors to be taken into account. We hope the Obama administration would put this vision into practice by both promoting democratisation everywhere and scrupulously respecting the choice of the people: it would be good to start with Iraq and Afghanistan. As to the undisputable principals of democracy, this is a good reminder to be uttered… in Egypt, to the Egyptian Government, where the President was delivering his speech.

Barack Obama mentioned seven issues to be addressed. He started by the more political issues and quite intelligently ended with the critical areas of “women” and “education”. This is where, he recalled, we all have to do much better. In these two areas he came with practical solutions and presented future interesting projects. Facing economic crisis, doubts, fears, and global threats, the world needs women to be more involved and education to be promoted everywhere. These commons challenges helped the President, once again, to talk about an inclusive us, a “new we” so to say, where we are partners sharing the same concerns, facing up to te similar challenges, exposed to common enemies.

This speech is not only directed to the Muslims around the world. The West and non Muslims should listen. Barack Obama spoke about acknowledging the historical Islamic contribution to sciences, development and thought. He wants his fellow American citizens to learn more about Islam, to be more humble and he expects from all the “liberals” not to impose their views on practising Muslims, men and women. No one can impose a way of dressing or a way of thinking and we should learn from one another: the implicit reference to the French controversy around the headscarf was indeed quite explicit. He quoted religious texts that were coming from the three monotheistic faiths, everyone of them delivering a universal message. As if true universalism is about educating one’s self, listening to and respecting the other. Two days before his speech in Cairo, Obama surprisingly stated that America was a great “Islamic country”: it was a way for him to remind the Americans, as well as all the Westerners, that the Muslims are their fellow citizens and Islam is a religion which is part of their common national narrative.

A powerful speech which was not only ” a speech”: it embodies a vision both positive and demanding. Something has surely changed. As Barack went from personal to universal principles, we are waiting for him to go from ideal to practical. He is young, he is new, he is intelligent and smart: has he the means of being courageous? For it is all about presidential courage as one wonders if it is possible for the United States to be simply consistent with its own values. Could one man tackle and reform this extraordinary tension that inhabits the contemporary American mindset : on the one hand, promoting universal values and diversity while on the other nurturing a spirit that still has some features of imperial attitude (intellectually, politically and economically). He will not be able to achieve it alone and maybe his greatest challengers so far are more Indian and Chinese than Muslims. Yet, it remains critical to acknowledge the positive sides of a speech announcing “a new beginning”: it is imperative for the Muslims to take Obama at his word and, instead of adopting either a passive attitude or a victim mentality to contribute to a better world by being self–critical and critical, humble and ambitious, consistent and open. The best way to push Barack Obama to face up to his responsibility in America, in the Middle East or elsewhere is for Muslims to start facing up to their own without blindly demonising America or the West or naively idealising a charismatic African-American US President.

P.S.: A personal note : President Barack Obama wanted us “to speak the truth”. It happens that once I spoke the truth as regard to the illegal American invasion of Iraq and the blind unilateral support of America towards Israel. I have been banned from the States and still remain. It may be one of these inconsistencies that make some of us still doubt the very meaning of political words. Once again a question of consistency.

The Islamic position on homosexuality has become one of the most sensitive issues facing Muslims living in the West, particularly in Europe.

It is being held up as the key to any eventual “integration” of Muslims into Western culture, as if European culture and values could be reduced to the simple fact of accepting homosexuality. The contours of this de facto European culture is in a state of constant flux, shifting according to the topic of the day. Just as some insist, as do the Pope and certain intellectuals—often dogmatic and exclusivist defenders of the Enlightenment—that Europe’s roots are Greek and Christian (thus excluding Muslims), so several homosexual spokesman and the politicians who support them are now declaring (with an identical rejection of Muslims) that the “integration of Muslims” depends on their acceptance of homosexuality.

The contradiction is a serious one: does Christianity, which forms the root structure of European culture, and which purports to embody European values and identity, not condemn homosexuality? A curious marriage. Unless the contradiction is intended to stigmatize Islam and Muslims by presenting them as “the Other”… without fear of self-contradiction.

We must reiterate, as does Isabelle Levy in “Soins et croyances” [1] that all the worlds’ major religions and spiritual traditions—from the majority view in Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism to Christianity and Islam—condemn and forbid homosexuality.

The great majority of rabbis hold the same position, as do the Pope and the Dalaï Lama, who condemns homosexuality. For these traditions, as for Freud (who speaks of “perversion”), homosexuality is considered to be “against nature,” an “expression of disequilibrium” in the growth of a person.

The moral condemnation of homosexuality remains the majority opinion of all religions, and Islam is no exception. It would be senseless to wish to deny the facts, to contradict the textual sources and to force believers to perform intellectual contortions so that they can prove they are in tune with the times.

But the question is not whether one agrees with the religious texts, the beliefs and the convictions espoused by individuals. It is to determe what is appropriate behavior in the societies in which we live together.

For more than twenty years I have been insisting—and drawing sharp criticism from some Muslim groups—that homosexuality is forbidden in Islam, but that we must avoid condemning or rejecting individuals. It is quite possible to disagree with a person’s behavior (public or private), while respecting that person as an individual. This I have continued to affirm, and gone further still: a person who pronounces the attestation of Islamic faith becomes a Muslim; if that person engages in homosexual practices, no one has the right to drive him or her out of Islam. Behavior considered reprehensible under the rules of morality cannot justify excommunication. There is no ambiguity, and ample clarity:

European Muslims have the right to express their convictions while at the same time respecting the humanity and rights of individuals. If we are to be consistent, we must respect this attitude of faith and openness.

Today we are witnessing an upsurge of unhealthy, ideology-driven movements. To affirm one’s convictions and respect others is no longer sufficient. Muslims are now being called upon to condemn the Qur’an, and to accept and promote homosexuality to gain entry into the modern world. Not only is such an attitude doomed to fail (the majority trends in both traditional and reformist Islam, as in other religions, will never waver on this question) but it also reveals a new dogmatism—and a whiff of colonialism, not to mention xenophobia—at the heart of so-called modern, progressive thought.

Certain prominent intellectuals and lobbies have ordained a new form of political correctness; they would like to force everyone to be “open” or “liberal” in the same way. At first glance, this open, liberal thought would seem to warrant respect; but it reveals a troubling tendency to impose its own dogmas, leaving little or no room for the convictions of traditional philosophical, spiritual or religious world-views.

Betraying the ultimate goal of modernity, which should help us manage freedom and diversity, we are now told that there is only one way to be free and modern. Both dogmatic and dogmatizing, this trend, in the name of liberal thought, is a dangerous one, and should alarm all women and all men, whether atheists, agnostics, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians or Muslims. It strikes at the very heart of our freedom of thought, of the most intimate aspects of our lives, of the ways we strive for social and intellectual emancipation.

Let us not delude ourselves. These developments, along with recent tensions surrounding the return of religion, its accompanying fears, and the social visibility of homosexual “believers” is directly related to the presence and new-found visibility of Muslims in our Western societies. We, as societies, can choose to exacerbate these sensitive issues and to exploit the natural stresses created by the arrival of new immigrants to demonstrate the impossibility of integrating Muslims, and the danger they are said to represent.

There are political parties that may win elections by playing on these themes. The long term outcome will be to exacerbate social divisions, and will ultimately prove counterproductive. Social cohesion will become impossible, and daily life will be undermined by mistrust and insecurity. It is time to stop playing this harmful game, and return to a more just and reasonable approach.

The good news comes from the younger generation: cultures and religions cannot stop them from getting to know one another, from living together, and from sharing both spaces and hopes. They are the future; there can be no doubt that they will leave our past fears far behind.

[1] Isabelle Lévy, Soins et Croyances, Guide pratique des rites, cultures et religions à l’usage des personnels de santé et des acteurs sociaux, Editions Estem, Paris, 2002, p.149

The Canadian Muslim community continues to agonize over their religious leaders.

In a recent study done by Karim H. Karim for the Institute for Research on Public Policy, he found that Muslims in Canada and other Western countries “seek religious leadership that can guide them as they navigate spiritual and worldly matters in a knowledgeable and insightful manner. They expect their imam to have not only an intellectually sophisticated understanding of Islamic sources but also a keen appreciation of the Western contexts in which they are living.”

Very recently, the congregation of the main mosque in Ottawa, the Ottawa Muslim Association, has been caught up in a debate around such issues as a result of the choice of a new Imam.
 
The Imam, who was brought in from Al Azhar University in Egypt, is being criticized by segments of the community for his communication skills, his lack of experience and familiarity with Canadian social conditions.
 
The debate has become very public with the articles being written in the local press and even eliciting an editorial in the Ottawa Citizen.

The Ottawa Citizen editorial identifies the crux of the community’s wrangling as due to the lack of religious leaders in Muslim institutions who possess both Islamic knowledge and knowledge of the Canadian context.

 

“Is there anything I can do for you? Do you need something?” asked the calm, serious, bespectacled Imam, who towered above me in height at about 6.5 feet.

The last time I met Imam Jamil al-Amin was when I was in Washington, DC on behalf of the Kosova Task force, USA. A Masjid was trying to raise funds for Kosova. I found Imam Jamil sitting there. That’s when he asked me this question.

When I think back to all of my meetings with Imam Jamil, I remember him asking me the same question.

It was not just me. He asked everyone he worked with. He was always looking for ways to help people. A regular speaker at almost all Islamic conferences, I shared the stage with him many times. Not anymore though. All those who used to invite him seem to have forgotten about him.

Be mindful of Allah not fearful of the FBI

If the secret evidence law, cases against Muslim leaders and organizations, and a Grand Jury investigation of The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), etc are designed to intimidate Muslims then they are working.

ISNA’s former president Dr. Ahmed Zaki Hammad’s Quran Literacy Institute’s assets are frozen, but neither ISNA nor the two largest Masjids in Chicago where he was an Imam have hardly done anything about it. Hammad has difficulty even raising funds for his legal defense.

One of the four top most leaders of Muslims in North America, Imam Jamil, has been in prison for a year now but hardly anything is being done for him by Muslims. It is as though we have declared him and others in his situation guilty and we are trying to forget about them. For Muslim workers and leaders, the message seems to be, “serve us until you are free” then you are on your own. Thank you very much.

Why is the Muslim community so willing and ready to forget the universal principle Allah has established for all humans: everyone is innocent until proven guilty?

Or is everyone listening to the kind of advice being give to me: “Br. Mujahid you don’t want to do anything about this. The FBI is going to come after you.” Whereas not all of us agree with every Muslim’s agenda and rhetoric, we must not allow the fear of human beings to stop ourselves from helping Imam Jamil and others seek justice in their time of need. It goes against the Islamic principle of fearing no one except Allah.

Imam Jamil’s efforts for Muslim unity

I first met Imam Jamil when Bosnia Task Force, USA called the historic rally of 50,000 Muslims in Washington DC in 1993. I was national coordinator of the task force, which was an alliance of ten national organizations of Muslims in America.

Here was a former leader of the Black Panthers standing up for “white” Bosnians, leading people of all color. I requested him, along with three other national leaders, to be the only speakers at the rally. He recruited the famous civil rights comedian Dick Gregory to be one of the speakers on the spot. At the time, he was vice president of the American Muslim Council (AMC) as well as the Amir of his community. I found him to be a humble, calm and silent person. That’s where I heard his question first, “is there anything I can do for you,” although he was my guest.

Imam Jamil always welcomed every move for Muslim unity. When I called the initial meeting to propose the idea of the Islamic Shura Council of North America, Imam Jamil responded wholeheartedly. Imam Jamil became the second chairman of this Shura Council.

There is one Shura Council meeting I attended with Imam Jamil which I will never forget. Dr. Syed Muhammad Sayeed, Secretary General of ISNA, Imam Plemon Al-Amin, Chairman Shura of Muslim American Society (led by Imam W. D. Mohammad), and I were present. The meeting was in Imam Jamil’s community mosque in Atlanta. That is where I saw what a Masjid of poor people in America is like.

While waiting for people to arrive he picked up a broom and cleaned the Masjid. We sat down and ate one of the most simple suppers with other members of the Shura Council. I don’t remember all the proceedings of the meeting. But I do remember one of the resolutions which he presented and all members supported was for the better treatment of Omar Abdul Rahman, the blind Egyptian scholar currently imprisoned in America. None of us probably thought at that moment that Imam Jamil would be charged with something and sent to prison.

On another occasion, I met him at his provision store where there was no proper place to sit except a hard wooden bench. I remember asking him, “were you involved in the robbery before you became a Muslim for which you went to prison?’

“No, I was not involved in that,’ he told me.

While I was in the store, not a single customer came. There were really only a few things to buy in that store. Imam Jamil is a supporter of natural, healthy products, and I could see a lot of material selected based on that criteria. While no customers came to the store, several young and old people did, asking Imam Jamil to give them some money. And a person who probably didn’t have much to give, gave them anyway. He gave me a gift of honey syrup with ginseng in it.

I kept meeting him in different programs, mostly on stage, while waiting for our turn to speak. When we could talk to each other, he would always ask the question: “Is there anything I can do for you?”

In the end, it’s about justice and personal responsibility

No, my reaction to Imam Jamil’s plight is not an emotional response. I wanted to do something for him as soon as it became clear that he was subject to the same sort of “leading while black” phenomena.

I thought there is the Shura Counciil, ISNA and ICNA. They have always invited him to be their speaker as long as I could remember. They will do something for him. I waited and waited. I did not hear anything except the complaints by Muslim civil right activists about how difficult it has been to get their issue on the agenda of these organizations. The immigrant leadership of Islam is once again failing to lead and develop alliances with other people who are suffering in society.

So where do I stand, as someone already involved in so many things, an Imam in Chicago, leading Sound Vision, and coordinating the Kosova Task force, a father of six and a husband? I waited hoping others will stand up for Imam Jamil. But no one did much.

“What can I do for you Br. Mujahid?” The Imam’s words echo in my head.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty

In this world, there is a legal system which will decide in its own way whether Imam Jamil is guilty or not. In the Everlasting World, the One Who already knows the Truth will distribute true Justice. But on that day we will be also asked the question: did we stand up for justice or not?

And that’s the day I will be asked what I did for Rodney King, Amadou Diallo, or Imam Jamil al-Amin. That’s the Day when we’ll also have to answer if we were just standing up for Imam Jamil because he is a Muslim, or were we standing up for the principle of justice for our brother and others who have been wronged like him?

It doesn’t matter whether the victim who has been denied this right is Amadou Diallo or a white police officer. It makes no difference whether someone has a complex history or a non-existent police record. In this world justice is difficult. But we can try, with the help of the One Who already knows the Truth, Who will always judge people with Truth. We must ensure that we live just, principled lives, and that we take a stand when it is needed.

Remember: it can happen to you

If any of us think we are immune from the injustice now being faced by Imam Jamil, we are being blissfully ignorant. Tomorrow, you could be the next victim. Your crime: being Muslim. Or black. Or brown. Let me give you a personal example.

I and some friends were once driving to the funeral of a friend’s father from Chicago to St.Louis, Missouri when we were stopped. Not by one police officer, but by a group of them. These were no traffic police.

When they questioned us, they surrounded all three sides of the car, their hands close to their guns. Where are you going? they asked. A funeral, I told them. Why aren’t you dressed for the funeral, they asked. Muslims don’t dress up for funerals, I responded.

We later found out that there had been an alert out in the area asking police to look out for and stop bearded men and women in Hijab on the highway. Target: Muslims.

Another example is harassment at airports. Even before racial profiling became ‘law’, I had been subject to it at the airport a number of times. And I’m not an African-American. I can only imagine what I would have to face if I were.

Think about it: you’re calmly waiting in line, getting ready to get your luggage and just get home to see your family and relieve your jet lag. Suddenly, you’re pulled aside in front of everyone, your luggage opened up for public scrutiny. Humiliating at best, degrading at worst. Your crime: you’re the wrong color.

The cases of the Quranic Literacy Institute and Dr. Ahmad Zaki Hammad, as well as Chicago’s Imam Khalifah are just two examples of Muslims whose rights and property (in the former case) have been unjustly taken away. Few Muslims, individuals or leaders, have spoken up in their defense.

Secret evidence is another tool which is used in America that destroys the principle of innocent until proven guilty. And yes, there are Muslims in prison in America right now, in this country that considers itself a paragon of human rights because of secret evidence. They have been proclaimed guilty until proven innocent.

Muslim civil rights = rights for all

In the end, this is an issue of Muslim civil rights. But Muslim civil rights are not exclusively for Muslims: they mean justice for all, for every human being.

And by pursuing the rights of Imam Jamil al-Amin, Muslims can not only learn about the suffering of other minorities (i.e. African-Americans) in the American judicial system. We can also do our duty of standing up for justice.

We can stand up for justice for all, justice that is bias free and guarantees, not just with words on paper, but in practice, that a person is innocent until proven guilty. From there, we can help other countries develop laws for civil rights and justice.

At this moment Muslims are isolated in their struggle for civil rights. As one of the Jewish attorneys of one Muslim victim recently told me, Muslims are the new “niggers” of America. They have to pay the price and lead other Americans. Otherwise, more of this will continue to happen to Muslims.

What can I do for you Imam Jamil?

Imam Jamil, our brother, is now in need. He is a fellow human being, who needs us. He needs us to stand up for justice, not just for him, but for the principle of innocent until proven guilty.

He has asked me and others: What can I do for you? Now we must ask ourselves what we can do for him and answer him with support and action.

Abdul Malik Mujahid is president of Sound Vision and coordinator of the Kosova Task Force, USA.

Next Page →