主播大秀

Has the lack of any over-arching religious figure led to a schism between Sunni and Shia...

Your kidding right?

I think you will find that a quick dip into he history books will show the schism is very real, very deep, and VERY very old (it dates back to the grand children of Mohammed as I understand it), and not in the slightest bit a new phenomenom. Unusual of Newsnight to frame a question in such a way. Would you care to rephrase?

It has been suggested that extremist Islam is at its heart an expression of frustration at the lack of progress towards the wholesale conversion, enforced if necessary, of the West. The question needs to be asked by Newsnight of whether Islam can ever peacefully coexist with western liberalism, or will extremists always find excuses to try to coerce us?

I look forward to tonight's program. I'm slightly disappointed however that Muslim women's perspective especially of those at the forefront of reforms within the Muslim faith (and I will certainly will not count Benazir Bhutto as one)is not part of this dialogue.

I'm afraid that the discussion tonight will be centering again on the divide between Western form of democracy and Islam as represented in the Middle East crisis. Seldom does the 主播大秀 take into account or factor in the perspectives of other Muslim contexts such as those in Southeast Asia where calls for reforms in the Islamic faith are taking place robustly.

From your write-up, this programme seems to be a waste of time -- you're playing to the galleries.

You talk about a comprehensive look at the world of Islam and you have only one serious commentator to discuss these? Omar Bakri is a rent-a-gob who has nothing substantial to say, apart from the demogogic soundbites that producers love. And Benazir is part of a discredited Pakistani elite that presided over the takeover of the Taliban under their watch.

Is Newsnight serious about the Muslim world? Doubt it.

What Muslims need is peace and the right to exist as a muslim.
The different sects that tear muslim unity apart do not do any good to our image and so also is the link of most heinous crimes against humanity such as terrorism which is causing a lot of inconvenience to us.
We must allow peace to reign if we are to advance any cause be it legal or political as violence and lawlessness does not yield any fruitful result.
Let us give true reflection of our great religion which literally means peace.

Good idea.

Wrong guests.

Here, as elsewhere, you neglect the contribution of those genuine social scientists who are busy analysing the numbers.

You are not going to improve public understanding of the phenomenon in question just by questioning the participants. What do they know? Their point of view is of course important but they aren't sufficiently detached from their circumstances to make much sense of them.

The problem is not that Islam did not have its own Reformation but that it did have one. In the 18th century the Wahabbis imposed a radical version of Islam which rejected much of traditional Islam. This form of Islam has been propogated around the world, by Saudi Arabian oil money, for decades. Probably the majority, if not all, Islamic terrorists subscribe to Salafi-Takfirism which is an extreme version of Wahabbism. Traditional fundamentalist Islam does not lead to terrorism but the Salafi-Takfiri form of Wahabbism very definitely does.

Judaism preaches law , Christianity preaches love and Islam preaches jihad !

All three , from the same origin, preach submission to authority.

Maybe it's time to return to the 'old' religion ...the Gods !? There was something 'human' about them...they would oftimes listen to a good reasoned argument !

This God of the desert and His three offspring are all so single minded !
There's no 'come-back' . You have to do just as you're told !..or else !!

Aphrodite ...where are you ???

We need to look at the underlying psychological issues.

Could it be that many of these fundamentalists leaders have deep seated inferiority problems and they over-compensate by taking the position that they and their religious ideology is superior to any other? They believe that they know the truth and all others are less than.

We live in a very competitive world; on the other hand, co-operation is a solution and showing respect and dignity to each other, even our sworn enemies, is the way to bring an end to these conflicts.

Another Newsnight Islamic topic.........GREAT IAM SURE TO TUNE IN............NOT

It is obvious that the Muslim faith needs
to become more vocal about the majority
beliefs of Islam.When they don't we falter and question their beliefs for sure.Show us a reason beyond religious
freedom that you have empathy for your
country of birth or country of choice.
Until you can open your doors to the
Christian living next door then don't expect your neighbour to do the same.
Compassion and understanding is equal
whether you are Muslim or Christian or
whatever faith.Why do you continue to
divide on the subject of faith?
Meet someone new.Tell them about your
family,your hobbies and your dreams
for the future of your children.
Religion and politics are things you
should discuse at home.For the sake of
peace.
So peace to one and all.We serve the
same God but he has another name.

It seems to me that the Christian world went through pretty much the same thing centuries ago. The Crusades were their jihads. The Protestant Reformation was their religious split. They had the inquisition, religious wars, and perpetrated every brutality imaginable. They tried to impose their version of Christianity on each other and the world with wars of conquest, missionaries, and every device the Moslems use today. And they were just as convinced that what we consider today crimes against humanity were justified in the service of god and that they were merely enforcing his will. What they didn't have was the possiblity of acquiring nuclear weapons. If they had, they likely would have used them too. That is why our civilization cannot remain indifferent to Islam's conflict. We have as much at stake in the outcome and the time it takes to get it over with as Moslems do.

The US cannot impose anything, it can only offer oppressed populations the opportunity to create their own democracy in the aftermath of overthrowing a brutal dictatorship which presented a threat to American security. That's what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq but in both instances, with no prior democratic experience, both populations flocked to the polls by the millions risking their lives to exercise their new right to vote. It is only a relative handful of insurgents who would reimpose brutal dictatorship in both nations which is making life miserable for them.

I think the enormous wealth that exists in today's world needs to be shared a little. There is a tremendous need for social uplift in so many Muslim countries and I believe that if some of the billions that Bill Gates and other billionares are donating also find a way to help the orphans, malnourished and desperate people in Muslim countries, this would go a long way to changing public perception about the west and its people.

Not just that but more jobs should be relocated to areas where talent can be groomed and the youth who are vulnerable at the hands of fanatic religious brainwashers have some other alternative to blowing themselves up. If there was promise of decent jobs at the end of gaining an education, a lot more children would enrol in schools. These schools should be funded directly by these organisations and individuals and at the end of it, relevant jobs should be provided so that their families are taken care of.

Once these good measures are implemented on the ground instead of just fast food chains landing at our doorsteps, a lot of hearts and minds will change and be more warm and positive towards the west, no matter how evil their leaders.

Also, we should ponder over the fact that how come Islam which has been around for 1400 years was never a threat to the world or to any "freedom loving people" till just a few years ago.

What we should be considering and looking in depth into are the factors that have created these radicals. This point has ofcourse been raised numerous times, but who is actually listening and who is paying attention to the crisis that most Muslim countries find themselves in.

The west and their leaders need to either start being fair about their dealings or they should stop interfering in other nations'issues.

The media also needs to rationalise the kind of focus they keep. 99% of Muslims have nothing to do with what the media talks about 24/7. Maybe these 99% should be talked about and their needs and wishes be aired on TV and their problems sorted, because the 1% trouble makers get too much air time and that undue fame gives them another reason to continue their struggle.

This does not mean they struggles are always wrong. Most of the time they are legitimate, only their means of registering their protest is wrong, but then when they have no means available to them to register their protest, the only one option that remains with them is the one no one wants to see being used, violence.

Have we not reached saturation point with this topic (鈥淭HE BATTLE FOR ISLAM鈥�) Weds 25th July? Are we all not totally and absolutely fed up with the constant focus and barrage of information, documentaries and interviews about "Islam; the struggle", "Islam; is it a violent faith?", "Islam, Islam, Islam"??

This country appears to bend over backwards to appease this religion and its followers, utterly paranoid about offending them by softening housing, parking and other local council laws so as not to offend them.

When non-Muslims utter a word or question about this religion we are accused of racism, or people are in court within days. However, when muslims display placards encouraging death or violence to UK citizens on the streets of London, and it takes the police months to arrest a few of them! Utter weakness and hypocrisy.

Please, for everyone's sake, enough.
It is plainly obvious (I believe) to most of 'middle England' that our indigenous (mostly Christian) culture will never share the same values as the Islamic religion. So let us work to that end.
We (non-Muslims) operate within a certain, accepted culture here; that is who we are. And if those who either grew up here or have since moved here, do not like or accept this culture or wish to live another way, then they are absolutely free to choose to find somewhere which more suits them culturally.

主播大秀, when you regain your backbone sometime in the future (I suggest when Mr. Thompson's time has passed), I do hope you will have the courage to air programmes about the majority of the UK, who have largely built this country and keep paying the taxes required for those, either less fortunate or simply taking advantage, to enjoy our peaceful way of life.

Ps. The 主播大秀's eagerness to publicise Campbell's diaries after the events of the Hutton Enquiry are quite humiliating. How you could have ingratiated yourselves more is difficult to know. Institutional weakness, hey Mr. Thompson?

Simon George is correct concerning the schism. It began soon after the death of Muhamed and led to a feud between two cousins for the control of the faith and its path. However, beyond the schism lies the basic crisis in the faith. Islam, the subjugation, the conversion of all people to the faith. So far, no one when interviewing Muslims on the question of being British has asked 'If all Muslims were called upon to fight a war against all unbeleivers, would they refuse because they are British. See them selvs as British or would they be obliged to join in because they are Muslims'. I fear that this question just might be asked.

this debate over islams has been going on since India`s War of independence or as we Briish call it The Indian mutiny Following this muslim clerics withdrew to a tiny village called Deobandi and the deobandi movement was formed as a more fundementalist islam which in contrast to the sufi/Balweri islam wanted no accommodation with the british This Deoobandi movemment developed alongside Wahabism in Saudi arabia in 20th century and probably forms the majority islamic funemetalist groups alongside Islamic Jaamaat in Bangladesh Unless we understand our history over 150 years or more we have no means of combating fundementalist islam

SEARCHING FOR WORDS SO AS NOT OT STATE THE OBVIOUS AND THUS OFFEND MOSLEMS. THE FACTS ARE, THE TERRORISTS ARE ISLAM EXTREMISTS. NOT ALL MOSLEMS ARE TERRORISTS, BUT ALMOST 100 % SUPPORT AND CHEER WHEN THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL. THATS A FACT AND WE SHOULD RECONCILE OURSELVES TO THIS FACT.

I believe that the vast majority of Muslims are as peace-loving and family oriented as anybody in the west. Perhaps your panel can discuss how the silent majority may become more vocal and marginalize the extremists.

I think this type of programmes is well over due and so thanks to the 主播大秀 and Gavin. The only way forward for humanity is to communicate for the betterment of humanity and in order to unvail the truth which most of the times is hidden purposely by individuals of high authority or/and Government(s). I hope Gavin is not only going to focus on the differences between the one but happen to be two sides opinions but instead to reflect upon the core of the islamic offering for the world.

I understood from my history books that the Kaliphate was abolished after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and that the British and the French actively strove to prevent its restoration, following the First World War, because of the political power such a figure would exercise, and the potential for uniting the Muslim Arab world. The lack of a single unifying figure is a deliberate foreign policy decison, against British interests at the time.

Today the Kaliphate is still represented to us as a threat - principally as the aim of extremists, who want to impose a "global Kaliphate" and "destroy our way of life". Unity among Muslims seems to be contrary to our national interests. Why?

I am not Muslim, but I think it is an idea worth exploring, which could prove beneficial. But it is for Muslims to decide for themselves.

I echo the views expressed by previous commentators that the guest list for this programme was poorly chosen. Perhaps you could consider a follow up, and revisit the structure of the show. This is a big subject, and deserves serious coverage.

It's a good thing ou have made a start - and I shall watch with interest!

Strange that you should pick upon politically motivated people for such a discussion.

If your intention is to truly brief the British people, surely it would be more appropriate to have invited sober scholars such as Sayyid Fadhel Milani 鈥� a jurist with profound knowledge of the faith 鈥� to inform your viewers.

The truth is that there are political aspects, but these are difficult to understand without an overview of Islam and its history.

Strange that you should pick upon politically motivated people for such a discussion.

If your intention is to truly brief the British people, surely it would be more appropriate to have invited sober scholars such as Sayyid Fadhel Milani 鈥� a jurist with profound knowledge of the faith 鈥� to inform your viewers.

The truth is that there are political aspects, but these are difficult to understand without an overview of Islam and its history.

"Should the USA be promoting, or trying to impose, democracy? And when democracy produces results that Western nations may consider "unsavoury" - what should their response be?"

The reality is that is is far more effective to deal with non-democratic rulers (Kings, Princes, dictators and Generals) than to impose democracy.

The problem with (western) secular, liberal democracy is that it won't work where the society is mired in 14th century religious dogma and where one or more of the "political" parties is massively undemocratic and fascist in nature. Until the Arab world develops to a point of political and religious stability, applying western style democracy is pointless. A democracy that elects a fascist government is not "unsavoury", it has completely failed.

In islam there is conspiracy and misconception that where every one is jealousy of the sectarian tyendencies no wonder the prophet(pbuh) didnt segregate

In islam there is conspiracy and misconception that where every one is jealousy of the sectarian tyendencies no wonder the prophet(pbuh) didnt segregate

Benazir Bhutto isn't any Islamic scholar that she has been invited to speak on such an important issue. She is simply an oppurtunist, criminal and a plunderer of the wealth of the nation of Pakistan. Had she been otherwise her goverment would not have been dismissed twice. It is the West who once again is hell bent upon imposing this criminal on Pakistani nation once more. Shame on you and your double standards.

Of course there is a reason for nearly 1800 years of struggle between the Shia and the Sunni. They have argued about the credentials of a leader since their Prophet Muhammad died and rose again to heaven. The Shias believe the Islam succeeder should be both politically and religiously qualified and the Sunni believes he should be a direct relative of Muhammad.

A seriously flawed line-up of guests. With all the focus on Islamism, why no serious Islamist intellectual on the panel? Omar Bakri certainly doesn't fit the bill. What about someone aligned with one of the major emerging Islamist political movements in Egypt, Palestine, Turkey, Malaysia or elsewhere?

You can call Reza Aslan (PhD candidate) a scholar if you like, but describing him as an "Islamic scholar" is overstating his position in the Muslim community. He is not looked to for guidance in religious affairs. He is a "progressive Muslim" influenced by Shi'ite thought in particular. A look through the history-related chapters in his book "No god but God" makes this last point clear.

Will someone please explain why the 主播大秀 are giving a platform to a man who has been banned from this country. Surely someone other than Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed could have been found for the programme.

Dear Newsnight,

Not a dumbing down by you as well to follow the Today programme. Benazir Bhutto is a thoroughly discredited political figure who did nothing to tackle religious extremism and is doing everything possible to appear as an alternative to Musharraf that the West can live with. She is corrupt and believes in her dynastic right to rule Pakistan as her personal fiefdom. Omar Baki, please please why do you give him a platform, who does he represent and speak for? A handful of fanatics but you continue to give his hate the oxygen it needs. There are plenty of educated, articulate commentators on the Muslim world who you can get in to your studio or on a video link. You are doing yourselves a disservice by trying to put together a programme like this which will be superficial at best and with guests whose platforms and agendas are well known. Can I please suggest that you start by employing some researchers who know something about the topics you discuss in specials like this or at least bringing in some consultants.

Oh how I agree with Mike G.
He has hit the nail on the head.
What I as an O.A.P. have never understood is why people who do not agree with our way of life, want to come and live here ?

Dear Gavin

After listening to Newsnight yesterday I was looking forward to seeing the programme, BUT your review says it all, another of typical sensationalism of Islam with all the isms, if 主播大秀 is truly interested of educating the west about emergence of political Islam you would have considered talking to AKP of Turkey, Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and Hamas given this are the emerging political forces in the Islamic world鈥�, I am sure it want give you audience rating when you portray the success stories like above鈥�.Likes of Butto and Bakaries belongs to opposite end of the spectrum in the current debate while one advocate total secular values later advocate the extreme and radicals BUT the majority of the Muslims stand for value rooted on just and ethical principals rooted in Islam which are progressive.

Not all that long ago we had the battle of the Roses. Lancs v Yorks.
I have forgotten what it was all about; most other guys have too. So the Suni and the Shia are having a ding dong. Human nature, being what it is, means each side pretends they are in the right! Even to praying to the same deity. Our ex PM,
by deliberately ignoring the real evidence, hid his light under a Bush! Not really clear just what went on in either brain but not a lot it seems. Now Blair has waltzed away covered in something less than he hoped while Bush is making more of a mess than ever. It is called the 'presidential' way! Yes Sir!

What I really resent most of all in this whole matter of Islam is that its wackier manifestations are turning me intolerant. I've always been intolerant of its - anyone's - denigration and oppression of women, but that intolerance is perfectly reasonable, as such oppression is despicable. But up till now I have always thought that other people's religious belief was a private matter with which I should not find fault, as simply not my business. Now I want to bang the jihadi Islamists on the head and tell them to go and do something that everyone in the world of whatever religion will see as constructive, useful, and above all kind. OK so Christians were just as bad in the middle ages, but that was in the middle ages. It's about time jihadi Islamists grew up.

I applaud your attempt to delve deeper into the changes currently taking place within Islam.
But I cannot fathom why you are wheeling out OBM. The last time I saw / heard of him was last summer and his now hilarious attempt to escape the Israeli jets. In what capacity is he appearing on tonight鈥檚 show? As the token mad Mullah? (I thought there were many of those within the UK) Or the piped piper that led our youth astray?
I am more than willing to offer my own two pence worth should you be short of 鈥淢uslim鈥� panellists in the future. ( I can do a wicked ranting mad Mullah impression that will make any spook watching frantically go thorough there database)

IS NEWSNIGHT ABSOLUTLEY SERIOUS ABOUT THIS PROGRAMME?

BENAZIR BHUTTO IS NOT AN ISLAMIC EXPERT BUT A DISCREDITED POLITICIAN.

OMAR BAKRI WILL GIVE YOU GREAT SOUND BITES BUT IS HARDLEY LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER.

AND "the leading Islamic scholar Reza Aslan" IS SO LEADING THAT I NO ONE I'VE SPOKEN TO TODAY AS HEARD OF HIM.

The world is in a battle between God and Satan.I've read the book. We won!

The cliche you get from any discussion on Islam is. "Every non-muslim is against islam. Islam is a religion of peace" The atrocities and murders committed throughout the world is jihad, a religous justification. This includes murdering children, women, and innocent people and destroying property. Even those who pretend to be apolitical about and denounce the activities of a few (thousand) sick muslim fanatics does not reflect the true attitudes of many muslims. The very people will rejoice when they are with own kind. In short, dont waste time trying to understand them. Ordinary sensible people will be wasting their time. There will not be a sensible intellectual discourse that will serve any useful purpose.

Mustajab Rizvi #15
Free people make their own wealth. Enslaved people will remain poor no matter how much you give them. It's one thing to feed people when they are starving to death, it's another to put them on permanent welfare. People in the Moslem world who are impovrished need a hand, not a handout but it won't do them any good if they live in dictatorships. Iran overthrew one dictatorship, the Shah only to replace him with another, a repressive theocracy which has not only impovirshed them but now put them in grave jeopardy of dying in a war which is of no possible benefit to any of them. Islam must decide what is more important, the next world or this one.

Hi all.
Can we wait till after the program before pulling the 主播大秀 to pieces, please attempt an open mind then let the comments come.
We must start somewhere and then peace just might prevail.
On 主播大秀 religion there is ample space if you sign up.

Mick Fenner.

It would be useful if the leaders of the various factions within Islam met at a conference to establish what precisely they can all agree upon. They might then have some idea of what problems they are up against and it may make everything a bit more understandable to the rest ofus.

Within Christianity I can see no similarity between Catholicism and the more radical elements of Pentecostalism. It is hardly surprising that Islam suffers a similar fragmentation.

It is early afternoon and so too early to judge tonight's broadcast.
But I do think it is the sort of thing that you, the 主播大秀, do very well - and in spite of some of the critics I read on this web page - I think you should go on doing it.
I would like to see you do a programme on the Muslim status of women in both their world and now carried over into our world too.
Wouldn't Ayaan Hirsi Ali (author of "The Infidel" and "The Caged Virgin") make a great panel member.
And why have we never seen on 主播大秀 TV her Dutch film on Muslim women
("Submission, Part 1") that got Theo Van Gogh killed in Amsterdam?
I shall be tuned in and watching.
Cheers!
Jed

We here in America are our own worst enemy. As far as I am concerned we have been the direct cause of the expansion of Islamic fundamentalism, extremism and terrorism. Our foreign policy in the middle east over decades supporting dictators, coupled with the occupation of Arab lands, and our inequitable support of Israel have all contributed to the situation we have today. All that and the unjustified attack of Iraq based on a stack of lies all have worsened the situation and exacerbated terrorism. Islamic fundamentalism is a problem such as was Christianity was during the Crusades and the Inquisition. It's fanaticism will also pass with time.

We can accelerate that transition by understanding why they are so extreme and also take action to respect the people and the lands they occupy.

We here in America are our own worst enemy. As far as I am concerned we have been the direct cause of the expansion of Islamic fundamentalism, extremism and terrorism. Our foreign policy in the middle east over decades supporting dictators, coupled with the occupation of Arab lands, and our inequitable support of Israel have all contributed to the situation we have today. All that and the unjustified attack of Iraq based on a stack of lies have worsened the situation and exacerbated terrorism. Islamic fundamentalism is a problem as was Christianity was during the Crusades and the Inquisition. It's fanaticism will also pass with time.

We can accelerate that transition by understanding why they are so extreme and also take action to respect the people and the lands they occupy.

The debate won't resolve a thing except to demonstrate the 主播大秀's Islamaphobia in trying to appease a culture alien to Western tenets.

Hi - this looks like a very interesting programme. Real shame about the guests though. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and has the right for them to be heard I guess - but you need to find more representative and knowledgeable people in the future. Could you not have tried to get Prof. Tariq Ramadan, or Akbar Ahmad, or how about Inayat Bunglawala from the MCB in the UK, or if you want someone to draw in the viewers you could go for Azzam Tamimi. But Omar Bakri?? Come on, why wheel him out again, he is so 1990s, and I remember he was a favourite of Newsnight back then as well. And who is this scholar I have never heard of? Anyway, maybe you tried to get alternative guests but they declined to be on your show? Looks like the 主播大秀 were left scraping the bottom of the barrel this time. Big shame.

Everyone has an axe to grind! All of these organised religions must be stopped - they are all as bad as next one. It is time the United Nations got some teeth and tramples on all of them - Islam - Christendom - Budism etc etc. "It appears they are all a device of the Devil" who is very adept at hiding a needle in a haystack. If there is one true religion as it appears God designated in the first place, how can anyone find it under a great haybale of rebelious rubbish?

More about Islam.......oh dear!!!!!
boring, boring ,boring......zzzzzzz

How can Omar Bakri be banned from returning to this country,and yet Newsnight is giving him a platform from which to spout his hatred from?

I doubt that the real reason for the United States attacking Iraq has anything to do with bringing democracy.
But all to do with the oil and the threat to Israel.
Of course our actions will create hostile acts in return, we would do the same if a foreign power invaded Great Britain, just look at our history.
Islam and Christianity have been sworn enemies for centuries, all we have succeeded in doing is to further inflame this situation.

The perception about schism is real.But increasing extremism is not the consequence.Rather,extremism is the natural fallout of double standards.When palestinians are punished for electing hamas and at the same time,egypt and saudi arabia are not deemed UNDEMOCRATIC,the spillage will traverse boundaries.

How do we know that Mohammed ever existed? Where's his birth certificate? Could it be that he's just one media creator? Or if he ever existed, could he be just another disgrunted Jew?

We have spent a considerable amount of time and energy trying to resolve just what it is that "the Muslims" want from us. (The Muslims in "" as there seems to be no universal Muslim)
Democracy will never come into any Muslim country. Well regulated Arab countries do not need it (pace Jordan under Hussein) Trying to force it down their throats will never work.
Solution - agree to differ. They do as they do and we do as we do. If what they do impinges on what we do, act to change this. This could range from effective sanctions through to eviction of those nationals in UK. The new Border controls Brown speaks of should be robust and all-encompassing. A register of aliens introduced with periodic re-registration. Any 'problem' with the alien to be resolved upon re-application. Any Human Rights legislation that says we cannot put an undesireable on the first plane out to any country where his religion operates to be set aside. We might think of it as reverse apartheid. Not so much keeping them from us but more like keeping ourselves from them. They would be free to live their lives as they wish but must clearly understand that it is not for non-voting aliens to direct by political action or violence what happens here.

Would like to see a wider more balanced religious content. Less politically correct and MORE CHALLENGING of all things from the 主播大秀.
By all means have a solid Christian content for the homegrown bible squad BUT remember that
many more people in Britain don't believe in any make-believe gods than believe in Islam so I'd like to see a MUCH bigger attempt to cater for the non-believing viewers in effect make some programmes CRITICAL of all religions. Particularly I want to see programmes critical of cultural side effects of religions on womens rights, surpression of 'Western' culture and personal freedom etc. You give Islam a MUCH bigger share of attention than the number of followers warrents (and in my opinion only ever show the 'positive' side).

Why give airtime and any shred of credibility to the two internationaly discredited guests
B.Bhutto and sheikh OBM. Anyway, do we really need more explanation or attempts to justify that primitive religion, still killing one another and innocent bystanders, based on a mythical succession dispute that (may have)happened light years ago? Those who may still need an official explanation of what The Battle for Islam is about should send to Islamic Dawah Centre International www.idci.co.uk for their free copy of 'Towards Understanding Islam' which clearly shows the mission of world domination and female subjugation. Alternatively look on some of the websites by ex-Islam academics who have lived it,studied it and thus utterly reject it. Meanwhile, let them continue murdering each other while we get on with our peaceful lives - in my case happily free from being forced to worship anything other than the beautiful and bountiful Mother Nature that has given me life, adventure and wonderment for the past 75 years.

Why does Newsnight always phrase the topic of discussion controversially? Why it's called the battle for Islam when the contents suggest that it is for the battle against Islam. Extremists willing to kill relate their actions as a consequence to the Western atrocity against Muslims. Sunni and Shia are simply different sects just like any other religion may have e.g., Catholic and Protestants in Christianity. If they fight each other it's not a battle for Islam; every one knows it has always been motivated politically. The Western form of democracy can never be a solution for current crisis. The aftermath of US invasions on Iraq and Afghanistan are evident proof for that. Yes, Islam does advocate democracy but not in the manner in which President Bush can do whatever he wants irrespective of the senate votes and public aspirations.

If Newsnight is really concerned about Islam why are they afraid to invite really recognised scholars? And the height is that all of the three participants are Shia in the current episode. Newsnight is definitely impartial, to say the least.

"Is there a crisis intrinsic to the Muslim faith? And, if so, does Islam need its own Reformation?"
For me this is the crux of the issue - Islam is split between traditionalists and modernists. Unfortunately, the modernists have been browbeaten into silence - it is the Islamo-fascists who are making all the running at the moment. This is not surprising however - during the Reformation, the Catholic Church went through a period of extreme repression (the Inquisition anyone?) before it adapted to the new reality. The West simply has to hold its nerve and make no concessions to the Islamo-fascists.

This is a much needed to debate. Sadly though it is a debate that only those muslims can cause changes.
Any imposed ideas are likely to to be rejected.

Want do the muslims leaders want. It is this that will change things. If they want peace,peace will happen. If they want conflict, conflict will happen.

There have always been schisms and there always will be, when leaders live in the past.
In the Muslim religion and other religions and none , these are born in differences of BELIEF.
If individuals could see that Love and peace are the way and individual difference are unimportant then we can move into a new world.
The problem is that individual's love
their beliefs more that they love people and so people are glad to kill in order to defend their beliefs.
Until people see this little will change.
We saw in Germany how much a charamatic leader can take
the masses into conflict.
Why not choose leaders who want peace ?

Conflict and hate are glorified in radical Islam ! although the majority I believe are peace loving.

Why cant individuals put aside differences and see what unites us.
It is necessary for one Muslim leader to go beyond this need for conflict !

Look at the example of Gandhi he put aside his own group and his own life to bring about peace. This is true LOVE. (Very rare among leaders !)

the disputes between muslims and the followers of other religions are not new buthave continued over centuries in different parts of the world. memories die hard particularly if they ar kindled by fundamentalists.
no solution can be effective or successful so long as the muslims have the same mind-frame

Who Cares I am more interested in which law represents the English Scots etc Its US and Them at The Moment. perpertrated By our useless MP,s Judges and Greedy Cut Off My Groin but Give me that coin Lawyers, MZz Missing the point Cherie Blair take note. 2,000 girls murdered in the name of honor in this country in the last 10 years. the above mentioned are more intererested in HUMAN Rights of the muppets who carry out these deeds than our human rights. Which law is it Mr Brown and co? Sharia or english scots Law. I just noticed my 17 year old daughter looking at a young man I dont like the look of, Shall I torture and kill her now? If its English Law then we should ask the Menfolk muppets to leave now, the women and girls can stay. oh and anybody else you allow into this country can you please brief them on which law we have in this country. I know that will cut down on your earnings ripped off from the tax payer. But then again child killing seems to be in blood of our useless leaders we have 260 Dead so far in Iraq and Afganistan, Not to mention their dead.

Dear Gavin,

It is late afternoon when I read talk about newsnight.
Congratulations To Mr W.Murray (47).Oh how I agree with his sound and subtle analysis.
He HAS HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
With the injust POLICY of the West and its double standards it is difficult to remain a moderate muslim.
THANKS to people like W.Murray and Paula Varley (22)we can still find moderate muslims but until when?

I am happy to see the topic being discussed, however i am extremely unhappy though not surprised at the panel chosen for this topic. One of the key reasons for the misinterpretation of Islam by both muslims and non muslims is that all too often we are presented with the two extremes of Islam by the media. On one hand the far right extremist (omar bakri) and the far left secular Muslims (benezir bouto). However the platform is rarely given to the majority "middle ground Muslims" who truly represent Islam and its peaceful teachings. The so called divide between Sunni and shia has been blown out of proportion. As far as i am aware approximately 90% of the worlds 1.3bn Muslims are Sunni this issue has been in the media recently mainly due to the recent invasion of Iraq in which the divide was fueled by the US/UK. The differences between the two have been there for over one thousand years so this is no new issue and does not need for an Islamic reformation. True Islamic values and beliefs remain unaltered since the death of the Prophet Muhammad over 1400 years ago (pbuh) as are all too clear and can be expressed in the proper manner if the correct people/scholars of Islam were given as much opportunity to talk as that given to the misguided few. The fundamental principals and laws of Islam that are in the Quran and Sunnah (teachings of the prophet (pbuh) can never be reformed by man, however i agree that Muslims especially those living in the west may need a new approach in attempting to better integrate Islam into western society, but this will need a lot of effort and UNBIASED help from the media/governments who so far have suppressed the majority view.

I believe allah the creator is aware of our diferences that is why he gave us the free will to decide which way to go.
Wassalam.

This is a debate which should be among the Muslims themselves and look upon in contemplation that where the rot is. Over so many centuries Muslims are becomnig hostage to the whims of clergy who are exploiting the emotions under various spheres like political and economic. The nation of Islam is oscillating between two extremes of so-called modernists and the Mullahs who are actually the two sides of the same coin. Both are not only ignorant of their own notions but also have the vested interests in political mileage. The likes of Benazir, who is ignorant about the core concept of Islam and the likes of Osama who are oblivious of the real teachings of Islam. It is actually the politico-economic agenda for the former and not for nation and the wishful thinking of the later for political ascendency. The rot in Muslim mind will only be ameliorated when the nation of Islam looks and contempplates the real teachings minus the dependence on clergy for interpretation. I like to share the established norm among the Muslim that the study of Quran is worship i.e. Ibadah, which is actually the cause of rot in masses and results into pseudo-imitation with surface knowledge of clergy. When we comprehend/or decide that it is the book which can be understood only if we learn geology, biology, or natural sciences then one can be able to harness the real message.But alas for the last so-many centuries this aspect of knowledge has not been appreciated. Take a look at Yahya Haroon who negates the concept of evolution which is actually the bench mark of current bio-technology and genetic theraputics in medical sceinces. As he seemed not acquaint with the biosciences hence by the sheer zeal for negating the concept of sciences which actually do not fits in his socket for religion calls the theory as flaw. Same can be said about the so-called modernists like Rushdi who is not able to imbibe the core issue of Islam which lies in moderation and patience succumbs to other extreme and hence becoming the provocateur.
So the nation of ignorant Islam will always be vicitms of religio-political jugglers if they are not able to address the real morass in them which lies in education.

save energy, listen/read Richard Dawkins.

Since when has Benazir Bhutto become an authority on Islam.

Your basic problem is that instead of solving a problem,if you can call this a problem, you are creating more problems.

Please leave Islam to the Clerics, you will never understand Islam.

This world would be a much safer place without 主播大秀 commenting on Islam.

Thank you

The article concerning the so called 'schism' within Islam is non-existant. The Westerm neo-cons, the Zionist and a Corrupt Roman Cotholic Church are behind all these talk about a thing which in the words of William Shakespeare would be - " Much ado about nothing". The Christians & the Jews; particularly the Jews had been scheming since 1400 years. Any un-biased believer would understnd how brutal, in-human the Crusaders were who killed Millions in the name of Christ .
The Jews were able to create the division of Sunnis & Shias
on a Political level, but on the religious Front they will never ever SUCCEED. I am a Sunni Muslim but I am tolerant and appreciative of certain things with the Shias. The basic religious tenets are the same and so it does not whether we are Sunni or Shia.
If the Christians believe in the Blood of Christ to salvage them from Hell..let them first and foremost 'live according to the dictums of Jesus who also lived by the Ten Commandments. All Christians would NEVER ATTAIN SALVATION Unless they abide by the Commandments.
Scheming and Plotting as done by the Roman Catholic Church and the rest against Islam will not take them anywhere...but ONLY TO HELL FOR SURE.
You might not publish my letter for sure, but remember that IF it goes into the heads of the guys at 主播大秀 (which is always biased !!!)that would be enough for me.

I believe that religion is and should be the source of peace ,happiness and love ,and not means of conflict ,not instrument of suffering and killing.I also think all muslims believe that sucide is the worst sin.If musilims agree with me,I wonder why they do not try aggressively to stop the continuous sin and defend their belief.violence will never bring solution, and peacefull srtuggle is the only lasting remedy.

If Islam is intrically linked with Terrorism, then so is Britain and the British people. They have a long history of colonisation, oppression, murder and torture. Today, that continues through the political and military support given to despots, and the regional wars for control by despots controlled by competing western powers.

I read many "anonymous" Brits posting their utter anger and distaste for the mindless murder that Muslims are supposedly carrying out all over the world.

Clearly, there is selective amnesia and a different yardstick used by the public here in order to gauge mindless murder. Brits apparently dont do "occupation" and "mindless murder", they do "liberation" and "peacekeeping". Scratch under the surface of such fig leaf titles, and it turns out they are the most brutal and violent.

Lets not continue living in denial. If there are values that Brits believe in, then they need to be seen, not spoken about whilst acting as terrorists and dictators.

If the Muslim world, including the Muslims living in England are to have any confidence in the regime here, then that regime needs to act honestly in its home and foreign policy.

Looking at the founders of the two main monotheistic religions we find Mohammed preaching warfare and imposing Islam by the sword. We see Jesus Christ preaching peace, love and forgiveness and offering a free gift of a new relationship with God.
That not all those who claim to be followers of Christ have understood or obeyed him and many have shown their claim to be false.
By you fruit you shall know them

Rafi Haniffa (71). Your musings basically serve to convince many of us "unbiased believers" that there is really something very wrong at the heart of some (how much, I wonder?) Islamic thinking. It's paranoid (oh dear, not those vilainous jews again)and is clearly rooted in the 12th Century. Yes, the crusades were bloody and brutal (as was all medieval warfare - read some history; we inflicted the same brutality on fellow Europeans for centuries and even fellow Englishmen) and unjust, but they were started not long after the Norman conquest - almost 1000 years ago. That's a long time by anyones standards. My ancestors were liable to being hanged for taking a rabit at around this time in history and we still had trial by ordeal for petty felons, the ducking stool for nagging wives and the country was ruled by brutal Norman warlords; perhaps not unlike some islamic states under sharia law today I should imagine, what with mutilations and stonings etc for theives and adulterers. This does still happen, doesn't it? Would it really be taken seriously if an Englishman started to quote the Norman conquest and subsequent ethnic cleansing that took place against the Anglo Saxons at the time as some sort of justification for a feeling of injustice today? All of this complete with threats of us all going to hell are the usual fare from you guys; us "unbiased beleivers" went in for this sort of talk, again back in the days when the sword ruled and heaven was a reward for not getting upity, challenging the unfounded dogmatism of the church etc. You guys are unfortunately still at this stage; no problem, but please leave us "unbiased believers" and unbiased non beleivers out of it. We in the West have learned our lessons (and still are), often the hard way, but we have moved on from the midle ages.

Newsnight producers shame on you! I know its summer but must you rely on spotty teenage researchers for sourcing interviewees? The people that were filmed spoke more sense than the useless marginal live guests.

Omar Bakri: Islam was the perfect realisation? Really? How does he explain the competing caliphates that fragmented the Muslim world.

Maryam Namazie: I had to laugh at this. She complains that Muslims are unfairly labelled as Muslims. What is her preferred label? An ex-Muslim.

Reza Aslan: He is good. This man speaks sense.

Very interesting program tonight - well done beeb.

Always fun to hear the spiel of Omar Bakri - a useful reminder of the ignoirant dishonest bigots out there, abusing religion to further their aims & careers.

That studio guest was 'bang on the money' what do the islamic terrorists & radicals mean by 'innocent' esp the variety like Omar Bakri

Reality Check .... Ref Muslim communities within the UK.

Firstly, we have the pressing danger from Islamic terrorism (domestic/foreign)

Secondly, we have the ever present cultural impasse within such self imposed Islamic ghettos for last 40+ years (which some noted expectations, welcome but in the distinct minority).

When there are far too many inherent sub cultural practices (non indigenous in nature) practised as daily norms in these communities, no wonder the disaffected & vulnerable in these self imposed ghettos are readily converted to violent radicalism.

The UK鈥檚 鈥榤oderate鈥� Muslim communities, are radical is essence, as they defy the social norms of British Society (rights & attitudes towards - treatment of girls, women, minorities, arranged/forced marriages accompanied by oppressions & even honour killings & are fuelled by male expectations of their female contemporary鈥檚)

So even if terrorism was not the lethal problem it is today, the radical nature of the UK Muslim communities would remain, at odds to the host society that allowed them to settle & enables their existence.

Therefore, because the 鈥榥orm鈥� of these communities are totally radical by comparison to British society, they are more readily available cannon fodder, given radicals are one step nearer to terrorists.

vikingar

Hear, hear Reza Aslan!

I found it rather ironic that Bhutto was talking about honest democracy when she and her husband stole wealth from their own nation during her democratically-elected reign! The excess usage of "Islamism" annoyed me and I was glad Mr. Aslan put that point forward.

I know others have said something similar about the programme, but I am boiling and must let off steam. Shame on Gavin and Newsnight for having on Omar Bakri, and then feebly letting him get away with downright porkies. The 主播大秀 has broadcast ample evidence since the July 2005 attacks that this man lauded the 7/7 bombers, including shortly before he was excluded from Britain, and that he and his group Al-Muhajiroun praised the 9/11 attackers to high heaven. The 主播大秀 has also on other occasions exposed his inflammatory teaching to British Muslims over the internet from Lebanon. So why on earth is he treated like some respectable panelist when his statements are so clearly at odds with what he has said in the past, and are so obviously dishonest and intended to portray him as a reasonable person? Newsnight seems to have had a 10-year or so infatuation with Omar Bakri, and it and the 主播大秀 in general played a dangerous role from the 1990s in giving him and Al-Muhajiroun endless publicity, out of proportion to their numbers, and to the exclusion of other Muslim voices here, without really penetrating and exposing what they were up to. Since 9/11, there is much evidence from terror trials and from the testimony of eg Hassan Butt as to the role Omar Bakri and Al-Muhajiroun played in fostering terrorism among certain young Muslims. Omar Bakri claimed tonight that he played a protective role while he was here; has Gavin forgotten that he declared, I think re the 7/7 attacks, that his so-called "covenant of security" whereby Britain would not be attacked had been broken? Why did Gavin let his performance tonight go unchallenged? Is this meant to be a kind of 主播大秀 "up yours" to the government? In fact, compared with some of the debates Newsnight has shown recently between British Muslims recently, eg Shiv Malik and Inayat Bunglawala, or Shiraz Maher and the guy from the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPACUK) Asghar Bukhari recently, I thought tonight's "special" a superficial waste of time despite the hype that has preceded it.

We have seen an 'experiment' conducted in recent times, i.e., to promote the democracy in the world which was not very successful (not West's fault but enviornmental conditions were't ideal, specially in ME) but, you know, it was an experiment. At least some lessons are learned, so from now we on 'good governance' will be on top of the agenda instead of democracy.

Congratulations on an outstanding piece of reporting to examine the strategic aspects of Western and Islamic issues, and in such a balanced way! We need more exposure of these matters to provide context behind day-to-day occurances. Well done The Beeb!

Gavin's rude and dismissive attitude towards his more "extremist" guests tonight did nothing more than create a bias that would not have been considered by moderate secular viewers prior to the programme. Ok some of his guests may have adopted a lecturing tone but perhaps this is more to do with lingual and social differences.

This concept of democracy as discussed on programmes such as newsnight (and incidentatly given the high standards the programme is renowned for it should not be) is seemingly unquestioned. The whole idea of democracy is sugar coated, When only a limited turnout of poorly informed predominantly trash media driven voters is proposed as a system that a prinicipled (at least in concept) nation should adopt by the majority of the programmes guests the 主播大秀 should be questioning the objectivity of the editorial staff.

Gavin's rude and dismissive attitude towards his more "extremist" guests tonight did nothing more than create a bias that would not have been considered by moderate secular viewers prior to the programme. Ok some of his guests may have adopted a lecturing tone but perhaps this is more to do with lingual and social differences.

This concept of democracy as discussed on programmes such as newsnight (and incidentally given the high standards the programme is renowned for it should not be) is seemingly unquestioned. The whole idea of democracy is sugar coated, When only a limited turnout of poorly informed predominantly trash media driven voters is proposed as a system that a principled (at least in concept) nation should adopt by the majority of the programmes guests the 主播大秀 should be questioning the objectivity of the editorial staff.

Ref Ali Raza #70

'This world would be a much safer place without 主播大秀 commenting on Islam'

Yep, that rational commentary & free speech thing must really annoy the mind control freaky nature of myopic violence & murder condoning Islamic radicals, extremists & terrorists.

LONG LIVE THE 主播大秀

GOOD BYE ISLAMIC DINOSAURS this is the 21st Century not the 14th

vikingar

Does anyone know how to get the islam programme on the internet, seems to be tues' programme on all the links

thanks

I have just watched the programme, which was excellent.

I started half way through and missed the name of the male author of a book with a name like "God is no God". He had a slight US accent

His analysis was impressive. Could you please supply the names of the guests and their credentials including the name of his book?

Thank you

Well, Newsnight has caught up a little.

Majority voting is under attack all over the world when it does not deliver the outcome the powerful want.

In South Africa we have majority rule, minority power. In 1997 a Labour majority had to implement Tory policies.

The, academic, Impossibilty Theorems provide the intellectual ammunition that the US and UK need to attack democracy when they deem it necessary.

The theorems purport to show that majority voting is irrational, an adequate system of rights impossible and that honesty in societies where majorites rule can never be guaranteed.

This ammunition is brought out to support dictators US - UK approve of and to attack democracies they don't approve of.

The others, complient dmeocracies and hostile dictatorships, are given the full 'pro democracy' verbal rhetoric.

How does this work in practice? Post grads from 'suitable' dictatorships are taught the theorems. Thus I saw students from the Shah's Iran and Saddam's Iraq taught this stuff in the late seventies. (The theorems in fact purport to show that only dictatorship is rational and honest and only a dictator can be allowed rights.) And students from Latin American socialist counties were forced to learn it too.

The theorists were rife at Essex, Birmingam and Oxford Universities.

The theorems (for which a Nobel Prize was dealt out) have a proper resolution but you will not find it in the literatue. (Otherwise they would have no 'value' to US - UK in supporting pro West dictators and attacking anti - West democracies).
Instead you will find pseudo solutions, some patently silly. They in fact add credibility to the theorems. Some try to propose alternative decison making procedures which in FACT have the difficulties which majority voting is quite wrongly accused of. (Those for example of Saari)

The recent opinion expressed in a 主播大秀 programmes that it was Isaiah Berlin on rights that was the main source of our present plight. In fact it is this 'Impossibility' attack on democracy, together with the modern fashion for believing there is only one way to run an economy (the single endogenously determined growth path) and now apparently only one way to run a society. There is only one view possible on everything. Democracy simply delivers easily won compliance. (In a nutshell the view of the pwerful is that democracy is for the plebs)

Thus RSA, still in economic wealth terms a white society. Thus increasingly the EU run as a technocracy.

So thus, Algeria in the EARLY 90's, Hamas today, Allende, the coup against Mosedeq in the 50's etc.

Thus also the faith that so many dictators have of the West's ultimate support. Unless they stop doing what they're told. In which case bombs rain, as in Iraq, on a people with an intelelctual elite that takes seriously what it learnt of Impossibility in the West.

Finally Newsnight has cottoned on that it is the West that is Janus faced towards democracy.

As I have been telling you for over decade.

If you are only worried about what happens at home remember these pro - dictatorship thereoms are taught to political and economic science graduates still in Britain and America.

The underlying assumption amongst many of the posts is that 'liberal democracy' is the only correct view point and all else is then seen and discussed through this prism. If this is the starting point then of course any thing that questions this will automatically be labelled as extreme. Far too many people actually discuss these points based upon an understanding derived through a false premis projected by the media.

People need to wake up and understand the subject matter independent of the media before arriving at any conclusions.

Having seen the program, it clearly sought to project Islam in any current form as a failure on multiple levels and the need to reform it. However, once again this idea has been built on a false premis that Islam has failed when in reality this whole propganda campaign is in fact precisley to stop Islam rising as a political system once again.

Terms like 'extremism' and 'Islamism' are deliberatly used and misused to attribute to Islam something which it is not. Anyone with a small amount of intellect who independently researches what Political Islam really is and its history will not fail to realise the magnitude of the current misconceptions that are being projected.

When I think back to when I was a child in the nineteen eighties, politics was so easy. There were two worlds communists and capitalists. In the west communism was "the evil empire", and we the westerners were the good guys. In 1989 we didn't ever talk about having "won" the cold war, but we do now, the question I ask myself is why? Our western coporate and speculative might annihilated the fledgeling Russian capitalist economy creating the very extremes of poverty in Russia that existed in Tsarist Russia before the Bolsheviks took over, and once again Russia has become a hotbed of revolution, a sort of corruption revolution, a sort of anarchy for people with loadsa money.

So what has all this got to do with Islam? Well it's entirely to do with shooting ourselves in the foot. I remember a muslim friend of mine at school explaining exactly what was explained tonight, that islamic leaders did encourage muslims and non muslims to live side by side, and that Jesus was (not a God) but a very important and respected religious figure, indeed important evidence that all momothehilistic religions believe one and the same God. Even though I consider myself Christian, when I admitted, I was not sure that Jesus was actually God's direct son and that I also believed that the most logical religious assumption that all monothehilistic religions believe in one and the same God, my friend turned to me and said "you are a muslim!".

The importance of this little exchange may seem insignificant to the 主播大秀 or governments, but I believe it must become an integral part of post cold war culture, in which a bipolar world is becoming increasingly multicentric, power is being shared between many powers, among them islamists, but also Chinese communists and others. My solution is simple, that we must become TRUE individualists, that we have a duty to constantly question, who we are, what we are doing, what we believe, where we are going. We must no longer be territorial about religion, about state boundries, about civilisation and culture, but it should be made compulsary for everybody in the world to live in another country (the same country) becuase it takes time to get to know another culture in depth, for at least five years. We should be made to learn the language, live seperately from our fellow citizens, take all our friends from that country and live as a person, under the same pressures and pleasures as the native population.

You can't understand Islam through the rose tinted spectacles of the media, or even simply through the eyes of British muslims. I can understand why, the violence? Why september 11? Becuase we are not innocent, the media and the governments make out that we are, but we have totally failed to connect and engage with arabic people. Why do they think that all we are after is money, becuase the only reason why we ever speak to them seriously is to do business, for oil, for making vast amounts of cash out of them and for making many of them so rich it unbalences their whole view of society and the world. Commercialistion and industrial development in the Middle East has only happened in the last fifty years, they are facing an internal moral dilemma at the same time as a religious one similar to our own in the 19century. However, some arguments are true, if we really cared about muslims, why don't we help the Yemen develop? Anser they have nothing we want.

Its not more pen pushing academics we need, studying cultures from the comfort of their armchair in Cambridge GB or Massechussets (hope I spelt that right). We need to train people with a hard wired sense of fundemental understanding of another culture, based on five years experience of living abroad in another non English speaking country with no contact with ex pats. Only by understanding what it is like to live in surroundings which are regardless to what extent alien to ourselves can we even begin to make judgements on solutions to the politcal problems in the world today. I can only begin to sympathise with islamists as a westerner, (which I regard as the first stage to becoming friends with them) becuase I myself (as an Englishman have been subjected to various forms of institutional, sociological and hidden and direct racism, which I believe is the engine for this conflict). I would encourage everyone else to do the same.

Well said, Answar, (74)

This was a most interesting and informative discussion with a wide variety of guests, many more than are mentioned in the piece above. Please have more discussions of this kind.

Omar Bakri Mohammed said "Islam is a religion of conviction". If that is so (someone should have asked him) why is it that those who want to leave Islam are persecuted. Recent examples are in the news for anyone who wants to verify that. If someone can only be Muslim through personal conviction as he implied then what is the point of persecuting those who through their own conviction want to change to another faith or none? This is a question that really should be posed to the first Islamic fundamentalist or scholar that appears on Newsnight from now on. They must be made to answer and explain why persecution of individuals who want to leave the Islamic faith can possibly by justified.

On the other hand O.M.B. made a good point about "secular fundamentalism" many of whose supporters you will find on this and other message boards unfortunately. These include within their ranks many of the most strident of cheerleaders in favour of the disastrous Iraq war, and for that matter Israel.

A few guests mentioned that the western form of democracy is based on capitalism and privatisation, a very good point. We all know that many of those who want to promote 'democracy' around the world have their own financial interests at heart.

The man from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood pointed out how hypocritical it is that the Americans purport to support democracy then in the case of Palestine refuse to deal with the democratically elected government. Not only that, but they continue to support various dictatorships throughout the region the most blatant of which is probably Gadaffi of Libya.

Benazir Bhutto also said that it was important to bring the parties such as Hamas into international acceptance, for otherwise the extremists will prevail.

The writer Reza Aslan made a good point that the western commenters and politicians in many cases like to mass all "Islamism" together when in reality the Islamic movements and political and religious sects are many and varied.

Benazir Bhutto is always interesting. Of course it is true that during her term in office funds and assistance were chanelled through Pakistan to the Taliban (but that originated from the USA because at the time the Taliban were fighting the USSR). But we are led to believe that today funds and assistance are being channelled through Pakistan to the Taliban from a different source, not quite sure what that source is.

We do not need to realise there is another religion. they are the ones that will not allow other religions to settle freely in their countries, even the moderate clerics show how ignorant they really are.

There is no real debate here. Not really.
When will people understand that problems are socio-economic, and oh yes, educational- or the lack of it?

Developed countries have understood that every person needs to feel included, important, secure, and have a future for themselves and their family.People require a sense of justice, fairness and freedom to be present in their society if they are to have faith in it.

The root of terrorism lies in a lack of these values. The religious beliefs of some people have been twisted to allow these people "a way out of their frustration". Those cults involved in this have indeed brainwashed these
despaired people, showing them " a highway to bliss".

The problems are indeed simple, but if capitalism is based on the rich and powereful exploiting the weak and poor, then the poor in any religious country will turn to their ideology for strength and a direction (right or wrong) to resolve their issues by whatever means they can.

PS- dear 主播大秀, Benazir Bhutto only reminds rich and poor Muslim of how an educated and liberal Muslim woman failed disastrously to deliver promise and hope to her country. Please find some new hope for Pakistani Muslims!

As an atheist I am sick and tired of hearing this religious trash pumped at me from the media . I feel it is wrong that none believers in these fairy stories are subjected to all the wars and troubles that religion causes .As far as muslims are concerned I believe they should be banned from this country .All religions are ficticious but the muslim religion is just a terrorist organisation trying to dominate the world ,and unfortunately in Britain it is winning .Let Britain become Britain again and not a Islamic state.

So many glaring ommissions in tonight's programme about Islam...

Islam - the world's fastest growing religion? Why? Could it be anything to do with the disproportionately high birth rate among Muslims? Just compare the Muslim and non-Muslim birth rate in Britain and other Western European countries... Look at the birth rate of Muslim countries and you will see why there are so many more Muslim around today than 50 years ago.

Islam - a religion of peace and tolerance? Yeah right!

Its founder was a warlord who ruled by the sword. And how much tolerance do you come across in Muslim countries towards people of other religions.

Hint:-

And how tolerant is Islam toward minority groups like women and gays? Not a lot.

Anyone know what Islamic law prescribes for any Muslim turning his back on Islam - death - that's what. How tolerant!

Don't forget Islam's so-called 'golden age' when Christians and Jews were supposed to live peacefully under Islam rule - anyone care to Google 'Jizyah'?

Not much mention of all the countries which are not (yet) considered Muslim but where there is significant Muslim insurrection - there are only around 50 such countries at the moment including India and China where there are over 400 million Muslims.

To see how much Islam is "the religion of peace" just google the phrase itself.

When watching Muslim commentators on TV one should always be aware of the concept of 'Taqiyya'. Tariq Ramadan is a perfect exponent.

And it's quite staggering of the 主播大秀 to suggest that democracy is alive and well in this country where all sorts of views can be voiced in a public debate, whereas most of us realise that the 主播大秀 is the prime controller of what may or may not be said in a debate about Islam.

Congratulations on a program of rare balance on this subject, with a broad choice of suitable experts.

One quibble: Mrs Bhutto should not have been allowed to get away with picturing the Muslim Brotherhood as an extreme fundamentalist organization. For a long time it was a liberal, progressive party in Egypt, only forced to seek shelter in mosques because of savage persecution by Western-backed dictators from which only the mosques could provide some shelter.

Unfortunately this has happened to most liberal mass democratic parties in the Middle East.

mudassar #81
"We have seen an 'experiment' conducted in recent times, i.e., to promote the democracy in the world which was not very successful (not West's fault but enviornmental conditions were't ideal, specially in ME) but, you know, it was an experiment. At least some lessons are learned, so from now we on 'good governance' will be on top of the agenda instead of democracy."

The truth is that in Afghanistan and in Iraq democracy has succeeded far beyond all reasonable expectations. When given the opportunity to run for office and vote, candidates came from everywhere to campaign and voters turned out by the millions, in Iraq three times despite knowing they were risking their lives in doing so. That is why democracy's opponents have been forced to resort to the most heinous crimes of mass murder to try to put an end to it before it becomes established as part of the local culture. Had democracy shown signs of failure, all the opponents would have had to do was wait it out until enough people tired of it and then they could have gone back to dictatorship. Outside military force remains only long enough for the local populations to handle their own security. Not an easy prospect when terrorists cross the borders easily from Iran and Syria into Iraq and from Pakistan into Afghanistan.

Bakri should of been hanged fourty years ago He should of never been allowed to stay in Britain
If people gop to Britain they should abide by British standards not as they are doing now creating slum area and living like they do in their own land like pigs Britain is the biggest dumping ground in the world now for all radicals Still as long as the government keeps paying hand outs and as long as idiotic human rights activists are allowed so much power All the assylum seekers in the world head for Britain so why not terrorists Glad I got out

Jambo all,
Let's build a world of peace free from hatred, revenge.
Love should reign.

In the name of Islam every Muslim literate or illiterate,poor or rich have only one type of thinking i.e. intolerance. Until unless a very great personality emerges from muslim community itself and whose words respected in muslim world will guide them then only some thing can be hoped.

Who Cares?
Who Can Do What?
Time!

I think it was a balance and a good debate.

I think Sheikh Omar Bakri put the case of Islam in a very simple words ..

May Allah Bless him

Islam does not need to be reformed -- it needs to be destroyed utterly. The same goes for Judaism, Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

The Monotheist religions are fundamentally incompatible, and at least three of the four are wrong (because the claims of more than one cannot be true at the same time).

We should smash religion altogether, and concentrate instead on real, human values.

I must say that I totally and unreservedly agree with Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad. In fact I would go as far as to say that not only was he the only Muslim worthy of the name on the programme last night but he is one of the main players in the Islamic revival in Britain.

Let us recall that Sheikh Omar Bakri is not a non-entity like some of the previous posts would have you believe rather he founded many Islamic movements in Britain and during the 1980's and 1990's he certianly was the main refernce point for many youth at universities.

Moreover, unlike those in the MCB, MPAC etc... who rarely quote any Islamic text Sheikh Omar Bakri is a well versed scholar of Islam who, from my experience of him is always backing up his arguments with authentic interpretations of the text from the early generations of Muslims.

Perhaps the most important point profound point he made for me last night was that there are extremists on all sides, secular and otherwise and one must ask extremist from what? why is it that when Muslims call for the Shari'ah pejorative like 'extremists' are branded around but when secular extremists dictate their own laws that is called moderation.

Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad is a great loss to the Muslim community in Britain and I pray that we see more of him in coming programmes from the 主播大秀 to present the real and undiluted message of Islam.

Is their any objective criterion involved in selecting the panel? having people in panel who are discredited (by and large) negates the very purpose of having any intelligent discussion on issue.

The commentator in point 8 says that Judaism preaches law. It does but it also preaches love. When Jesus gave His most famous commandments (Love God and neighbour) upon which Christian faith is based (and St Paul goes on to say that faith without love is useless - Corinthians 13) Jesus words reflect the words of The Old Testament: ' Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might' Deuteronomy 6:4,5
Attributed to Moses. And. You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord.' Leviticus 19:18
Attributed to Moses.'

However, the point i really want to make, regarding Islam, is that surely it needs to through a Reformation. Religious isn't something static. There are some things that never change (for, example, in Christianity, God will always be the Trinity). But that doesn't mean certain forms of religious practice cannot change (i.e turning the liturgy from latin to the vernacular - thanks to changes to in education and learning making this possible). Life during the Middle Ages was physically harsh just as life in the desert, where Islam originated was harsh. People can be more easily forgiven for using harsher methods to stabalize communities. But in today's modern world where, for example, governments in muslim countries have more time, education, technology and wealth to run their countries, the harsher laws of the desert become less acceptible. That doesn't mean we become more wishy-washy, more liberal. Where old challenges disappear, new one appear. For example, making sure that people are taxed fairly and the poor, the pensioners, the marginalized etc are looked after - that factory workers aren't taken advantage of - that corruption is tackled in the courts - that the extra money in these countries are used to help the poor people around the world etc .. And, above all, democracy. And at the end of the day this means that people have the God-given right of free choice, to choose whether to accept religion or not. That people are fairly represented in government. That women are treated as human beings equal to men. And so on. Just as Christianity faced the same problems that Islam faces now - we had to go through a Reformation which ultimately cleaned up religious practice.
Any person, whether Jew, Christian or Muslim, who uses religion as a means to control other people (even though they may never admit it to themselves)(as we have seen Jews, Christians and Muslims do in history in the past) is committing a terrible crime. Christians have had their Reformation. Le'ts hope that Muslims do the same - and, above all, for the love of God, that it is a peaceful one.

I very much agree with Ibnu Mahraj who says

"Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad is a great loss to the Muslim community in Britain and I pray that we see more of him in coming programmes from the 主播大秀 to present the real and undiluted message of Islam."

It is only by exposing the views of Omar Bakri and his like to the British public that we can contemplate the enormous problems we have created for ourselves in Britain by our gushing embrace of multiculturalism - a policy which we are unlikely to ever recover from.

Hi,

My concern is with Islam as an identity. I am an Ahmadi muslim (we believe, in brief, that the Holy Prophet Mohammad is the seal of prophets and that the Promised Messiah has come bringing with him reformation in the same way that the Prophet Jesus did with Judaism) and what really sets us apart from the Muslims typically portrayed in the media is our strict adherence to the principals of Islam and the teachings of the Holy Quran (and all of the Books revealed by God which includes the Torah and Gospels) which is a message of peace.

I believe that your guests are not representative of Islam that is currently undergoing a 'reformation' right now as we speak.

Of course my views do not represent Islam, Ahmaddiya or anything and what I have written here is only MY opinion. You can learn more at www.alislam.org.

My point then, in summary, is that Islam, as a whole, is currently undergoing a 'reformation' that was prescribed/predicted by the Prophet Mohammad and also by the Prophet Jesus.

I HAVE THE BELIEVE THAT THE WESTERN WORLD ESPECIALLY U.S.A SHOULD LEAVE THE ISLAMIC NATIONS ALONE.THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO RUN THEIR AFFAIRS ON THERE OWN WAYS.IF THE WESTERN WORLD IS NOT PROTECTING THEIR SELFISH INTEREST,THEY SHOULD NOT FIND IT DIFICULT TO ALLOW THEM PRACTICE THEIR OWN POLITICAL SYSTEM,RELGION ETC

This is one of the worst programmes I have ever seen. It was as if the 主播大秀, having been told it had one hour to fill programme on Islam and Muslims, decided to cram it with as much stuff as possible. There were so many generalisations being thrown around it was like being in a Primark changing room. More disturbing was the nonchalance with which the Newsnight team leapt from one issue, and one country, to another without taking into account the complexities of each situation and each circumstance. There was no focus, no overarching objective and no point. It was so bad I think everyone working on this project should be sacked.

heres another so called programme on Islam by newsnight who dont bother to get the ryte speakers to come up with some sense in the debate.

first you bring in a former muslim to talk about Islam. yeh she will be very unbiased!!

then Benazir Bhotto who has been exiled from Pakistan for extorsion. nice one!

an unknown person from u.s. maybe u forgot Hamza Yusuf's number!

and finally the muslim nut case Omar Bakri!!

why didnt u get Abu Hamza? that would have completed it!!

the 主播大秀 just want to fill in their schedule thats all. i saw the next segmant by Mark Urban. In the beginning it had a screaming Muslim in a close-up. Hillarious at first but relised after that, if thats what the british public percieve us, as screaming nutcases who just want to blow up anything moving, like what the 主播大秀 are trying to do show if not directly.

this is not the first time where Islam has been questioned about its place in society in the west. Huntington did it in his 'clash of civilisations' thesis. in today's Europe and the United States
what is described as Islam, for instance, because this is where the burden, I think of Clash of Civilizations thesis goes, what is described as Islam belongs to the discourse of Orientalism, a construction fabricated to whip up feelings of hostility and antipathy
against a part of the world that happens to be of strategic importance for it's oil, it's threatening adjacence to Christianity, it's formidable history of competition with the
West. Yet this is a very different thing, that what to Muslims who live within it's domain, Islam really is.

so what should we do?
I think, one of the things that's very striking to me, as somebody who travels in and out of the United States a fair amount is the fact that most American intellectuals are really not as conscious as they perhaps ought to be of how powerful the effects of U.S. intervention is throughout the world. I mean, you know, therefore the main duty for an
American intellectual is to think about the responsibility of addressing this vast interventionary power which is scattered all over the world where U.S. interests are to
be found. I mean I think that's an important moral and political task that has to be defined and in this period of basically inertness where there isn't much debate on intellectual and policy issues outside the great think tanks and centers like the Rand Corporation and the Pentagon and so on and so forth. That seems to be terribly
important. What are we going to do with all these nuclear devices that are secreted all over the country and all these B-2 bombers and etc. I mean this is a vast military budget
that is supposed to police the world.

Though i just had access to my mail box today. i think that the problem was created by the so called police of the world USA and it 'Friends' if they live there on life the way they want they cannot force others to live the way they want. They will support any purpet in power as long as that purpet play there tune for example Pakistan.They claim they want democracy but when the people of any country elect who they want and they dont like the party or individual they start there political gimics look at Palestein,Iran or Turkey which make the people feel that they are been prosecuted or they dont have a say in what goes on in there country.THEY SHOULD LEAVE IRAQ AND MIND THERE OWN BUSINESS AND STOP MEDDILING IN OTHER COUNTRY AFFAIRS.

Please send the detail recordings of the programmme to my Email. I missed the programe.

I don't think everyone working on this project should be sacked but I do think that Gavin didn't give Reza Aslam a chance to finish anything.

Emily should have presented this programme as she is calm and not biased like some other presenters. Talking of which where Jeremy these days?

What a waste of time. The only member on the panel with sensible comments was Reza Aslam. Gavin totally failed to conduct the programme.By the way , who was representing the Shia views?

democracy, theocracy, monarchy and tyrant are competing and mutually exclusive systems of law making.

Plato didn't believe in democracy he believed in philosopher kings as does the british establishment. The public school system is the closest anyone has got to implementing the ideas of Plato's Republic. The only difference being that rather then electing and being governed by experts [the philosopher kings] we elect amateurs because we don't like being told what to do even if it is by experts [the philosopher kings].

When it comes to questions of religion, why does Newsnight deem it acceptable to abandon all sense of rationality and intelligent enquiry? There is nothing out there in the ether called 'Islam' or 'Islamism' for human beings to discover and define. They are man-made ideas and as such mean whatever anyone wants them to mean. Any debate about definitons is farcical. Why was there no voice of reason on the panel? Why did Gavin not feel the need to remind everyone every couple of minutes not to lose focus of the fact that the topic under discussion was the interpretation of a centuries-old man-made book about which the most ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims have been made. If a politician was on a regular Newsnight edition making out their party's manifesto was the word of God, something tells me Gavin would have been a little less accommodating.

THE LITERARY MEANING OF ISLAM IS PEACE, THUS AS A RELIGION OF PEANCE, THE WORSHIPPER ARE PEACEFUL, ACCOMODATING, LOVABLE AND HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR OTHERS.

We live in a multicultural part of Britain. My children go to a school where about half the population are muslims and for the large part I think its great, it makes life interesting and colourful.
However, there is very little interaction between the groups outside the classroom (Maybe this is human nature) which gives both sides reduced opportunities for friendships.
What does upset me is the local community centre, every night of the week there is a club for boys. There is less for girls and little going on during the day for those of us unable to work.

really enjoyed reading post 130.

Really shocked at the way Omar Bakri
Mohammed was able to lie his way through the evenings newsnight special, was Gavin asleep? did he not hear the blatent untruths uttered out of the mouthpeace of the spiritual leader of terror? maybe its fear which has many commentators and questioners holding back somewhat, really, who wants a fatwa issued, yeah its easy to be an armchair critic but i felt Gavin could have taken Omar to task even just a little bit.

This n/n special did not live up to the hype other than mark urbans analysis which included recent historical content(Egypt 1950s)which explained the remergence of radical Islam

Many have made the assumption that the prophet Mohammed was similiar to Jesus, but anyone with even a passing interest of history will find that the Prophet Mohammed is more akin to Edward the 1st, a 13th century king of England. and finally the assumption that christians and jews have coexisted peacefully with muslims is incorrect as you will find many historical examples of brutality within Islamic expansionism over the last thousand years and the crusades were only a response to it.

Following my support for this programme - see comment 82, I find it sadly disappointing that most of the comments above are highly parochial and lacking balance.

The reality is that the world is shrinking dramatically and information is becoming universally available on the internet. This trend is exponential and we need to develop much greater understanding of diversity and conflicting views if the world is going to co-exist in harmony.

Most religions have sort to use a monopoly on information to try to control people over two or three millennium and this is becoming less possible in the future. Consequently, tolerance of differing views will become more important in the World.

Therefore we need to understand differing views, not suppress them. And if this means listening to opposing views, so be it. We have clear laws banning public speaking that incites terrorism, but understanding the views that fuel extreme views is legal and important. As an example the British Government attempt to silence terrorist voices in Northern Ireland was one of the hurdles that had to be abandoned to achieve a peace settlement.

The programme provided an excellent strategic overview of some issues views in what is clearly a very complex matter.

We must applaud the principle of free speech as an underpinning principle of Western society, which inevitably means that some of those views will be incompatible to some.

Once again, well done to Newsnight for exposing underlying cultural differences, which drive actions in many of the World's points of conflict. Open debate is a good vehicle towards better mutual understanding.

"The 主播大秀 - "The British Broadcasting Corporation" so-called but they aren't on Britain's side. With friends like the 主播大秀, Britain doesn't need any enemies - because the 主播大秀 will give every assistance to Britain's most dangerous enemies.

Like this enemy of Britain - Omar Bakri Mohammed/Fostok - barred from Britain in 2005 as a dangerous terrorist leader now brought back to inspire more terror, more bombings in Britain, all thanks to a broadcast feed of Fostok from outside Britain and broadcast on 主播大秀 2 Newsnight."

Why do you think the 主播大秀 had him on?? It was to air his views of course, but he wasnt quite extreme enough for them so the presenter butted in whenever he said anything that made sense. Personally, apart from razi, i thought he was the only guest to speak any sense. And those constant angry muslim shots disgusted me and showed the perspective that the 主播大秀 wished to put across.

Dont believe the hype and play into peoples hands. Switch off your tv and stop reading those damn papers! hah im joking, but seriously, do some research into who runs the bank of england and you may find out what is actually going on

A lot of people commenting here, especially Mohammedans, are trying to enforce the wrong meaning of Islam, Islam means "submission" in Arabic. To what, is not mentioned in the Islamic scriptures, but in all probability to the will of Mohammad (he was the first leader). Islam was always a socio-political ideology. It has nothing to offer on the spiritual front. This is very apparent from the Islamic scriptures (al-Qur'an, al-Hadith) which are political commentaries and interpretations. Even texts on Islamic jurisprudence (referred to in all Islamic countries and the basis of Shariah) are NOT spiritual texts.

All so-called Islamic spiritual/mystic thoughts are basically contributions from non-Muslims (means areas outside Arabia proper, where pre-Islamic societies had their own belief, systems). Sufism is a Turkic animistic/pre-Islamic Iranic religion concept. All these are innovations to the true Islam (if what is quoted in the Islamic scriptures is assumed to be the true one). All history of Islamic mysticism / spiritualism try to 'trace' their route to the prophet, though in fact the truth is they are not something that Mohammad and the scriptures preach.

All these reinforce the point that the Islamic system is incompatible as a Universally applicable set of rules. Thus Islam will perpetually remain in conflict with other systems (social, political, judicial and cultural, as well as spiritual and philosophical - original Islam lacked the last two mentioned properties). In Islam, any innovation is termed "bid'ah" (means the same in Arabic), and are to be avoided. Islamic scriptures very clearly divide humans into two parts, believers (Muslims) and non-believers (Kafirs). Islam is therefore antithetical to a rationalist and adaptive viewpoint, simply because it is frozen in time and space. The current global conflicts involving Islam is therefore expected because most Mohammedans (except in Arabia) today are all culturally un-Islamic, and hence not true "Muslims", they are following Islam because of historic events relating to Arab political influence (Iran and east, Egypt and west).

Thus, Mohammedans in South , Central and South East Asia (accounting for ~80% of so-called Muslim Ummah) are all culturally divorced from their socio-cultural history and suffer from an 'identity crisis'. Similar is the situation in Africa. So the solution lies in renouncing of the Islamic ideology and going back to their own (mostly spiritually Dharmic/Animist based societies, not Abrahamic monotheistic ones).

In the historic Islamic heartland of Arabia, the situation is different. The societal situation there is probably good for ideologies like Islam, because the society and faith-systems there is strongly tribal and feudalistic even today. Whether forcing monotheism is ok even there is a matter of conjecture though.

As long as the majority of the Mohammedans in Afro-Asia (barring Arabia) do not go back to their original belief systems, there is going to be this Islamic problem in the World. The solution lies not in any Islamic "Reformation" but in a "Renunciation" of the Islamic faith, by its adherents and recognizing their real-true belief systems.

This will solve some part of the world's problems (the identity crisis cure). The problems arising out of economic deprivation have nothing to do with Islam, and must be cured by a more humane wealth distribution and control of the innate human fault of greed (but yes, faith does help some in curing greed).

Thanks.

主播大秀 has gone tabloid - not really interested in serious debate but to discredit Islam and the Muslim Community. Get serious - you are going to discuss ' the struggles within Islam' with Omar Bakri Muhammad, Benazir Bhutto and Reza Aslan (whoever that is)???? That's like saying, we will have the following guests to speak on Western thought and Democracy:

Leader of the BNP/National Front

George W Bush

George Newman (a great scholar of Western Thought - don't ask me who he is, I don't know him either)

Thankyou Newsnight. I thought this was an above average Newsnight discussion which aired a genuine 'inter-muslim' discussion as to what is really going on and what's important. Where else would you get Mohammed Omar Bakri conceding under pressure that the innocent should not be killed and that muslims can live side by side with non-muslims? More please.

Basically there is no problem with Islam, if you go by it's five tenets. The problem always arises when you see some holier than thou moslems being more catholic than the pope. As a result of thier inadequacies, be it educational or cultural and not being able to comprehend other's thought/beliefs, the refrain is to hide under the cloak of religion. Some tend to even mistake culture for islam. Take for examble; why would I want to dress like an Arab in south-west Nigeria if the dressing is uncomfortable? And the moment you try to point out the illogicality on health grounds, you're quickly dubbed anti-islam or a kafir (unbeleiver) on that account alone. Now in this modern era, the West is far ahead of the so-called islamic countries that it is incomprehensible to these people that the former cannot even tarry awhile to wait for them to catch up, forgetting that the world does not wait for anybody. The aphorism, if you can't beat them, join them is not relevants to these latter day saints who'll not look inward and separate religion from culture. If you doubt this, take the case of Nigeria where all the central government's policies tend to hold back the south for the north to catch up. Where the south protests or force it's way and there is no counterpoise, what happens is the resort to religious bigotry, as exemplified by the introduction of SHARIA legal system in a country deemed indivisible and indisoluble. The British need not panick unduely, though this did not mean that it's government has not committed some fundamental political faux-pas. Stop to think; why are the French not with you in Iraq? The solution is not appeasement but admission of past mistakes like colonial maladministration and the need also, as you rightly pointed out,to know that while democracy, as practiced in the West may work for you, it doesn't necessarily have to take the same pattern say in Russia. Most often where a party feels it is right, even while working in good faith, the opposing party may not share the same prism. Remember, victory could be as bad as the defeat.

Tajudeen O. Bakre writes:
"Basically there is no problem with Islam,"

There is one problem with Islam - it is stuck in the 7th century. Maybe that isn't so much of a problem for those who wish to see the Talebanisation of the world, but some of us would prefer to live life in the 21st century, free of notions of subjugation of women, gays and non-Muslims. There is no place in today's world for a criminal justice system which allows the stringing up or stoning to death girls for 'behaviour incompatible with chastity', or for homosexuality or for converting away from Islam.

Islam, however anyone dresses it up, is not some cuddly fluffy religion designed for a plural society in the 21st century. Islam has no compromises with any other belief system. It is time it was appreciated for what it really is.

And if it provides such a good moral code why are so many Muslims queuing up to escape to the West. Why don't the Muslims in the West simply go and live in Muslim countries. I'm sure they will be much happier there.

The main religion of the people of the middle east is Islam and isn't it time that western nations realised that and start having a dialogue with the muslim brotherhood and hamas. These are basic rules in conflict resolution you have to talk to everybody even though you may not like it to achieve real everlasting peace.

No one has really considered the example of Mohammed, who lies at the cultural and historic heart of Islam. In today's world, he'd be tried for war crimes and given a life sentence.

Its not surprising Islam has always been violent; the situation today is characterisic not exceptional.

I posted a blog for the first time at about 5.00PM on the 25th. It has still not appeared.

How long does it take to approve a first time blogger?

Or is there some other reason?

Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,

Hassan Asmal

I thought You are an independent...

indead the islamic faith has had deep divide,as in my opinion this faith comes to us,with the bagage of the ancient world.ie.tribalism whitch inturn will battal against the modern world, only with the liberation of ones mind trough open minded questioning,can we,in the west as should,be the case in the east.escape this sword of damecles

islam is a bloody religion..
allah is an old idea..
so better hate religions

sir,
The deterioration of Islam is not due to the external factors.rather it lies in the hands of the Muslims.there is no true leadership in the whole Muslim ummah,rather to some extent we find it in Iran.In the early Islam,it was the true and genuine leadership of the Muhammad(pbuh)which removed all obstacles in the way of spreading Islam only and only at the strength of his true and sincere character.but now the leadership is selfish and use the Islam as to gain their own worldly benefits.if today the Islam gain true and genuine leadership , i think Islam can get the old status which at this moment it is slowly losing.
Mushtaq Khan Mooliani
Layyah Pakistan

giving 'islam' an equal voice to that of the west in affairs of the west signals the end of western civilisation.

for me to see women wearing headscarves in my everyday life signals the end of a culture that once believed that the onus is on men to behave and not on women to hide themselves - 'yes means yes and no means no, however we dress and wherever we go'.

allowing moslem women to wear the headscarf in public is a direct infringement of rights previously agreed. when I see the headscarf the logical conclusion is that certain people in the society in which I live do not believe women should be free to choose their own dress - that is an attack on my freedom in a very real and scary sense and no amount of pseudofeminism from moslem scarf wearers will convince me that it is not true that women invariably do westernise when removed from the influence of men who believe that they should not.

the battle over islam is not a battle over god it is a battle over the right to freedom for women. the voice of free women has already been subjugated by the non-elected voice of Liberty, and non-moslem men have failed to support the freedoms of women that they once supported. Tim Marshall on Sky and Johann Hari are exceptions and their unashamed condemnation of islam's attitudes to women is very welcome.

as long as islam educates moslems to see themselves as superior to non-moslems, the voice of islam cannot be considered as balanced or rational and if we give it space in our democracy we will be committing civilcide.

the bbc, in all seriousness, should give air time ONLY to moslems who support the west's liberation of women ....and then we might have a creditworthy debate about foreign policy, and only then.

When are we going to wake up and appreciate that we have more to learn (especially about family values) from Islam than Muslims have to learn from we 'liberals'?

They (unlike us) are not committing slow demographic suicide! If it takes a return to 'love, honour and obey', and a return to domesticity to reverse that trend, so be it.

Anyone care to argue the opposite case? (If you do, make sure you understand the one I am making first).

I think what the USA government is doing is not right because the prblems of muslims should be left to the muslims to solve them according to their religion not any unIslamic or any government fighting with the religion to interfere to thier issue.
US government is doing so for their own intrest, they iniciated it, make the muslims to fight with them selves so that they can take advantage and erase islam and muslims on earth.
Sharia(God laws) is far better than democracy(kufr,man made law)

Adrienne, I couldn't agree less with you. Whatever has gone wrong with your family I am sorry for because in my experience westernisation is a precious tool on the road to both individual fulfillment and group support - families, communities and especially the treatment of others in public spaces, standing back from the supermarket shelves to allow others a share of the view, being a good samaritan, loving thy neighbour, that sort of thing. we don't often say it but those are the values that underpin western secularity and they are good ones. for breakdown of multiracial english families we should look more to the increasing unfairness of employment incomes and to the stigma surrounding female-headed households.

Despite all the evidence to the contrary Western politician, commentators and so called experts on Islam persist in the myth that it is the desire to establish a world wide caliphate that motivates violent actions by Islamic fundamentalists.

Bin Laden has on more than one occasion repeated his objectives - the removal of U. S. troops from Saudi Arabia and justice for the Palestinians - and subsequently the removal of Western troops from all Muslim countries. One would have thought that there was room to find a peaceful solution if Western governments desired one. One of the 7/7 terrorists made it plain in a pre-death video that he was at war with the the U.K. because we had gone to war with Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the bombers of Glasgow Airport came from Iraq.

The reversion to orthodox Islam has very little to do with Madressas. At Madressa pupils spend hours by hearting the Quran, learning Urdu and religious history from Adam to Moses to Christ and to the time of Mohammed and nothing about establishing Islamic caliphates.

The advent of the age of communication, satellite television, 24 hour news and the internet has much more impact in this respect. Muslims all over the world see on CNN, 主播大秀 and Al-Jazeera and are incensed by the daily horrors perpetrated on the Palestinians and now on the Iraqis and Afghans. The question asked by many of them is "Why are the Americans and British killing their fellow Muslims?" It is little wonder that a 78 year old woman living 4000 from the Middle Eastaway should ask such a question when you consider that 655,000 +++ dead Iraqis and 2-3 million Iraqi refugees cannot now to be said to have better lives than under Saddam, any more so than those with limited electricity , running water, education etc in Iraq can be said to have better lives 4 years after Bush's "mission accomplished".

As an atheistic, apostate Labour voter I find it very difficult to defend my liberal values when confronted by accusations that the West is trying to impose its values on non-compliant Islamic states and peoples at the point of a gun and with pre-emptive wars. To Muslims all over the world it would appear that the West has declared a war on Islamic value and wishes to impose Western values on unwilling people and that it is not Islamists that are trying to create a world wide caliphate but the West creating an Empire.

It would be much better for world peace if we were to jaw, jaw than make war. If we want others to accept our liberal values let us do do so by showing how much better and freer our individual lives are and let them aspire to our values for this reason.

Yours sincerely,

Hassan Asmal,
Islington

I think what the US & wastern countries is doing is not right because the prblems of muslims should be left to the muslims to solve them according to their religion not any unIslamic or any government fighting with the religion to interfere to thier issue.
Everyone knew the recent UK & US done
by invating Iraq and topple the ligitimate iraqi government has increase anti Wast and US becouse mojority of muslim feel injustice from so call civilise nation

Bin Laden's definition of 'justice'?

what about islamic states that do not want troops withdrawn?

terrorists are not 'at war' by western definition because war is governed by documented procedures that terrorists don't follow - should we submit also to Bin Laden's definition of war?

since the (in retrospect unwanted) removal of s.h., US and UK troops have been in defense mode - at the request of the moslem, Iraqi govt.

there's no secret about our values, why else do people flock to the west to find a better life? blatantly alot of moslems/iraqis don't actually want the sort of individual freedom we enjoy and that's their choice...

but more worrying is the erosion of that freedom that has already taken place - individual freedom comes from secularity and secularity only works if monotheistic religions agree to perceiving their monotheism as part of a greater diversity of spirituality.

liberalism only works if liberals are in the majority, the moment repressive ideas grow to more than a minority they vote out liberalism. it has taken thousands of years to pick up from where the greeks left off and never before has the world seen such a liberal culture - let's protect it for those who respect and enjoy it.