Was the Ottoman Caliphate Terminated on the 3rd of March, 1924?

On this day, the 600 year old Ottoman Caliphate was formally abolished. The date should resonate in the Islamic world, invoking a sad loss, representing a significant turning point in Islamic history, but it does not, around the Islamic world it’s a normal day like any other. But why is that? Given that Muslims in general are still committed to Islam, it is unlikely that they have lost interest in their history, essential part of a nation’s identity. The only other explanation that comes to mind is that the event was not significant, the destruction on the 3^rd of March was merely symbolic; the palace was closed, the Caliph with his family members were expelled quietly, as if some employees in a private firm were made redundant. Hence, the nation continued with the new secular government of Mustafa Kemal, it was business as usual. If the event represented a change of system that would have caused shocks in society, which implies, the Ottoman State as a fully functional Caliphate was already dead and buried, what remained was merely a historic relic.

The obvious question that follows is, when the Caliphate as a fully functional state ceased to exist. Over the years, I have heard various opinions on it, one of the popular opinions is 1809 with the removal of Sultan Abdul Hamid.  In any case, pin-pointing the exact time is irrelevant, because the death of the state was a slow process; one can see the decline passing various milestones, with its borders shrinking. In contrast, whenever a society undergoes a radical transformation, through the establishment of a new ideology, the upheaval is marked by violence and the loss of life.

Is Free Speech a Licence to Promote Islamophobia and Protect the Zionist Narrative?

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. (Noam Chomsky)

In defence of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, the Danish Cartoons and the recent YouTube movie, the liberals argued that Muslims should not get too upset over the offensive contents, because this was about the ‘sacred’ free speech or freedom of expression; the right to express a certain viewpoint, no matter how offensive or accurate. The problem is this is not applied consistently across the board. Why it is free speech to mock religious values, and yet a similar tone of language is not tolerated against a particular racial group or a group with a certain sexual orientation?

The usual suspects lecturing about free speech are not the ones on the receiving end, and when the tables are turned, free speech conveniently transforms into incitement to violence or threats to national security. The persecution of Julian Assange is a classic example of America behaving with such duplicity.

Is it time to sacrifice Hamid Karzai?

As 2014 approaches for the full withdrawal of the US-led forces, the question of the Taliban issue remains unresolved; they are essential for a political settlement that is likely to result in long term stability. Otherwise, there is a real risk of a civil war breaking out after the US departure, as occurred after the Soviet withdrawal, when the country was left to the mercy of various tribes and warlords. In addition, the US plans to leave a counterterrorism force in Afghanistan to continue the fight against remnants of al-Qaeda, which would find difficulty to operate in a volatile environment. The negotiations are critical to get a prisoner exchange with the Taliban, who are holding the only US service member, Sgt. Bowe R. Bergdahl.

Read More 

Is ‘Free’ Speech a Product of Secular Intolerance?

From the days of Salman Rushdie and the Danish Cartoons to the recent movie on YouTube, the issue of free speech and Islam has primarily surfaced in the context of vulgar language being directed at the Prophet (saw) and the teachings of Islam; this rabid Islamophobia is fueled by the mainstream media, in particular the gutter tabloid press like the Daily Mail. To reinforce the prejudice, the media disseminates un-Islamic actions of individual Muslims as representative of Islam. Besides the mass media, the Internet is filled with many anti-Islamic websites, engaged in the same task of circulating crude propaganda and inciting hate.

There are primarily two types of groups engaged in this type of activities, the far right extremists driven by xenophobia, and the militant secular camp. The former has adopted the anti-Islamic stance to conceal their disdain towards foreigners. So they make the flimsy argument that the Muslims are not a racial entity. That is true; however, the Muslims are largely composed of foreigners, when they are attacked by the far right, one can see the racist undertones and at times the clear racist language surfacing.  

The Mayan Prophecy: Believers and Sceptics

As 2012 passed, many of us ridiculed the ancient Mayan prophecy predicting the end of the world on the 21^st of December. Throughout history plenty of individuals and groups have made similar claims by pinpointing the date of Armageddon, thus, people naturally express cynicism towards these claims. Some of the academics contested that the Mayan scripture did not explicitly predict anything specific as such. It was deliberately exaggerated by the Hollywood industry, and formed part of the wider media sensationalism; the underlying objective was to increase revenue and it worked.

From the interest generated across the globe, it seems the subject of Armageddon is of interest to people of faith and no faith. This could be indicative of something deeper in our psyche about how we view our planet and the universe that it exists in. It implies that we see our planet as finite, with a beginning and an end, hence there is an expectation that the world will come to an end at some point in the future.   

Connecticut school shooting: America gets a taste of its own medicine

Driven by hate, another homegrown terrorist goes on the rampage – this would have been the headline if Adam Lanza had been called Mohammed Lanza. Similar headlines were seen after the Oklahoma bombings; the media spared not time in tarnishing the Muslims even before the basic facts were known. Like Timothy McVeigh and Anders Breivik, Adam Lanza is also white with Christian heritage. Will the media now scrutinise the link between the ethnicity and religion of these men and the acts of gratuitous violence? 

There is no apparent political motive; the targets were innocent children who could not have caused any harm to Adam Lanza. The only possible ‘justification’ Adam Lanza could have argued is - these children posed a threat to him in the future; hence, he took some sort of pre-emptive strike by killing them. This is the same argument employed by the Zionists when they deliberately target women and children in Palestine, and the US has done the same to some extent after 9/11; shoot first then ask questions.

Israel the Chosen Nation

“We need to flatten entire neighbourhoods in Gaza, flatten all of Gaza; the Americans did not stop with Hiroshima, because the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki too” (Gilad Sharon son of Ariel Sharon, OP Ed in The Jerusalem Post)

“There are no innocents in Gaza.... Turn it into rubble! Paint it red!”  (Michael Ben-Ari Knesset member)

 

Consider how the West would have reacted, if Iran was behaving like the Israelis. They would not be pleading for restraint; instead there would be an outcry, with threats of military action, and instant UN sanctions imposed. History seems to support the notion that Israel will always get preferential treatment, no matter what it does. Hence, the blatant media bias in the West, combined with the unquestionable vocal support it receives from Westerns leaders. Accordingly, they have simply echoed the Israel propaganda: Hamas started this conflict with their rockets and Israel is merely acting in self-defence. 

The British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, blamed Hamas and supported Israel’s right to issue collective punishment on the citizens of Gaza. According to that sort of logic, the British government would have bombed the Catholics in Ireland for the actions of the IRA (Irish Republic Army). Yet, the British Foreign Minister was quick to endorse, Israel can do what the UK would not even contemplate! In tune with this sort of hypocrisy, western leaders continuously lecture about Israel’s security whilst ignoring the fact that the Palestinians have no security.