This statement was made earlier this month by my Maasai husband Lesikar, his father, and thirteen other senior elders within the Tanzanian Maasai community. I am posting it here because it reflects a lot of the points mentioned in your blog.

I live in Arusha, Tanzania, where the Kenyan conflict is regarded with a mixture of incomprehension, disbelief, horror and mild amusement. Tanzanians, thanks to Nyerere's legacy of building a strong national identity that transcends ethnic differences, consider themselves above such things. If only moral and spiritual leaders could be found, of any faith or none, to build a coherent global identity that transcends ALL differences of race, tribe, religion or nationality. We are all, in the words of Baha'u'llah, "the fruits of one tree and the leaves of one branch."

------------------------------------------------

STATEMENT FROM TANZANIAN MAASAI ELDERS ON VIOLENCE IN KENYA

We have gathered here in Eluwai village, as Maasai elders from many different parts of northern Tanzania, to pay our respects to a young man who was killed by a buffalo in Manyara. He was our son, and we mourn his loss together. He was taken from us against our will. Yet our brothers and sisters in Kenya are mourning too, not because of a tragic accident, but as a result of premeditated murder carried out in the name of ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. How can people even sit down together to enjoy a meal while this is happening?

We have become one society and one tribe in this world, and we must live together and cooperate without destroying the world and destroying ourselves. We call on all Kenyans to stop this senseless destruction and war at once. Many people have already lost their lives for no reason at all, and once they are gone, they can never return again. Yet it is not too late to save others.

People who once saw themselves as brothers and sisters must act like brothers and sisters. We were once at war among ourselves, but the world has become one now, and killing has no more meaning than a childish game. These different tribes can never be separated, because they have already intermarried and become one family, one blood, one community. We see Maasai marrying Chagga, Kikuyu marrying Luo, even Europeans marrying Africans. How can these people then turn around and murder members of their own family?

As Maasai elders we call upon Kenya’s political leaders, and in particular Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, to act with wisdom. We see that they have lost sight of wisdom in their leadership. The peace of the family depends on the parents, as they are the ones with the highest rank, and the children have to listen to their commands. The leaders of Kenya are the parents of the nation, and when they speak out in a loud voice for peace, peace will be established among the children. Yet if they do not speak out to tell their children that they do not want this violence and devastation, it will never be ended. They are the ones who can help the Kenyan people. By clinging on to tribalism they will never build a nation.

Politics and business have stolen the land from those who inherited it from their ancestors, handing it down from one generation to the next. Political leaders take human life so lightly, like drinking enaishoo oo lotorok [traditional honey beer], something that is gone in a few seconds. They treat politics like a game, but human life is weightier than that. If ballot papers have been stolen and then you take a spear and kill someone, where is the democracy? What kind of justice is this? When you claim to be speaking up for human rights and thousands of people are already dead, whose rights are you really defending? Those who are dead, or those who are still alive, but could be destroyed at any second?

In traditional African cultures, when there is a funeral, everything stops. We have to leave our fields, our cattle, all of the daily business of our lives, to come and pay our respects to the person that we have lost. Yet we see the leaders of Kenya going to meetings and carrying on with their lives, uncaring, as if nothing was going on. Where is the respect in this?

We call on people of all nations, not just to encourage from afar, but to get ready to help if necessary, because we cannot accept killing in the name of tribalism within the borders of our countries.

We are establishing a Global Polity of world citizens here in Tanzania. This Global Polity will not have political power but it will have the spiritual power of love and peace. It will lobby national governments and international organizations to respect future generations, to eliminate all forms of hatred and prejudice, and to save the human society as a whole from these meaningless wars.

arif,

the story of mohammed and aiesha has the classic traits of pedophilia. pedophiles become fixated on a child and lust after them and fantasize. it is bondage for the child with no hope of an independence. the child can only gain control through manipulation using sex for bribes.

sick. sick. sick.

wake up muslims. you've believed a lie. get out of the death cult before it robs you of the joy and beauty of life..

All possible kind of questions asked by non muslims about Islam answered on below web site:
http://www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm

Victoria;
You asked me to ... "read the post again"
It would be a waste of my time, here victoria please read what actually happened.

Read and find the guts to abandon this cult.

Mohammed was a good friend of Sadiq, they must have visited often and duscussed raids together. Mohammed also must have seen Aiesha prancing around nacked once in a while being only 4~5 years of age. He was a sick man who had a dislike for body hair. To this day Muslim men/women shave their pubic hair for a feeling of being clean. This was actually the sick dirty mind of Mohammed who fantacised a minor with no hair. He asked Sadiq to marry Aiesha, Sadiq was shocked at first. Mohammed insisted, more people were shocked at him asking for the hand of a child. The sick man then asks Allah for help and Allah swiftly dispaches Gabriel with a handy dandy verse to justify the gastly request. There is also a mention of Mohammed having a dream of Aiesha beign given to him by a bird of some sort... read that for your pleasure please. Mohammeds convenient verse makes the other sick man Sadiq reconsider the absurd request and he caves in, but not after getting old Mo to pormise not to consumate the marriage before menstruation. Mohammed marries the young child and it is widely known that he used to "play" with her on his lap. What a sick bastard you believe in Vicotria.

Folks for more information on this dirty sex pervert "Prophet" Mohammed please read actual Islamic sources of literature and documentation of facts, some of which I have posted here. Also these are good reads if you are a pedophile or have such tendincies. The sex life of Mohammed has been the thorn of converts, and scholars throught the period of Islam, there is no wonder we have blasphemy laws in muslim countries. Also, Muslims on these boards get insensed when they read the actual dirty life of this man they call prophet, last prophet my arse.
A friend just came over and asked me if I was going to Jummah, little did he know I was off to my secret Jummah; beer and sandwich.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64,65
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
Sahih Bukhari 5.236.
Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 38, Number 504)
Suhayli, ii. 79: In the riwaya of Yunus I. I.

really mr mahfouz-
speak only for yourself-

we are aware that you have noknowledge of islamn, and you have a strong antipathy towards muslims-

so its no surprise that no one you know has a better knowledge of islam than khomeini-

but i know many people whose knowledge surpasses khomeini-
dont equate your poor knowledge with mine, or people i know.

speak for yourself

literally thousands upon thousands of muslims DO know islam more than ayatollah khomeini mr mahfouz-

and this particular opinion of khomeini's has been thoroughly trounced, denounced and discredited.

youre grasping at straws

i didnt ask for an obscure opinion- i asked for laws of nations

Here is:

The Unicef Photo of the Year 2007

40 yr old man 'marries' 11 yr old child

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3znhvtvKo14

Look at the anger and fear on the little girl's face.

Is it any wonder Islam is attracting so many pedophiles as converts.

It is age nine that Muslim men may begin having sex with children. Age nine is when Muhammad had sex with his child wife.

The Islamic armies in Sudan pass around nine year old girls as "concubines". They beat and chain young boys for resisting their Islamic indoctrination.

Don't believe me? Check this out-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC_wO6eyWIE

Victoria:
Neither you nor I or anyone I know, for that matter, know more about Islam than the Ayatollah Khomeini. Below are some of his injunctions regarding relations with underaged children.

Sayings of Ayatollah Khomeini

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he
should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and
damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her
life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives.
The man will not be eligible to marry the girls sister."
From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,
Iran, 1990

"It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin
menstruation at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any
father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in
heaven."
From Khomeini's book, "Tahrirolvasyleh", fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom,Iran 1990.

hadeeth are not judged on their goodness or badness- but on the validity of the transmitters.

the hadeeth that is the sole support of the theory of aisha's age was transmitted by one man- over 71- who had a questionable memory- also it was through the people of iraq attributed to one lone man-

pretty insubstantal- no matter what the content of the hadeeth- it would be rejected for this reason alone.

the validity of the age is taken through known quantities and is simple math.

your projected level of my comfort or discomfort has no bearing whatsoever on the facts

read the post arif

your gut reaction isnt substitute for real critique

when you make wide claims- back them up-

to say 'muslim countries have such and such a law requires ore than subjective conjecture

simply put- i need more than your saying it is so to KNOW it is so.

i know of no muslim country that has the marriage age at 6- or 9

read the post again

Victoria,
I am glad to learn that you are uncomfortable with Mohammed marrying a 6 year old child and then consummating the marriage when she was 9. Muslims who go through such lengths to disprove this horrendous crime are bothered by this too.

We know today in Islamic countries it is legal to marry a girl at (9), they believe in at least 7 hadith that specifically mention Ayesha’s tender age of 6 and 9 at the time of marriage/consummation. Muslims rely on Hadith rather than this research you have presented which at best is all conjecture. Glad to know you are uncomfortable with the pedophile accusation of Moahmmed.

You often quote Hadith to strengthen your arguments when defending Mohammeds character, here are your words...

"In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly misreported in the narratives of the incident."

The problem with such an argument from many Muslims like yourself is that if Hadith can contain "grossly misreported" narratives, then the good deeds reported about Mohammed must be tainted as well.

Mohammeds bad deeds far outnumber his good deeds, violent crimes are committed by “few bad" Muslims daily because they follow those so-called misreported narratives. A prophet so revered and who's claim to be the Creators most favored one cannot afford to have a single blemish, Mohammed violated many rules that govern normal good human behavior; multiple marriages and rape are NOT normal.

Thanks to A Kafir and Ibrahim who bring out the History of Islam that was taught to us, the history that we could not question out of fear. You should respect questions from these individuals; they challenge you and others like you. Muslims by birth have no choice; rejecting reason in favor of believing is a terriable way to live a life.

It is a shame when Eboo can ignore the evils of Islam and chastise whoever he pleases. The good thing is we can and will throw stones at his glass house.

the main goal seems to be socially sanctioning prejudice against muslims at this time in america-

it happens- african americans, irish, germans, japanese, jewish people, russians-

now muslims-

20 years from now there will be a new crop of people who feel equally justified hating a new 'other'.

so, mr. mahfouz- youve already presented this one persons perspective-

look at your own processes and why you feel the need to 'prove' anything to anyone.

are you own beliefs so fragile that they are so easily threatened that you feel the need to be on the offense?
no one is defaming your faith mr mahfouz-
attempting to defame islam servesa no purpose for understanding of it-

heres a start arif-

Title:
What was Ayesha's (ra) Age at the Time of Her Marriage to the Prophet (pbuh)?

Question:

What was Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage?

It is normally believed that she was nine years old at the time of her marriage with Mohammad (sws) was consummated. I do think it was according to the traditions of the Arab culture, as otherwise people would have objected to this marriage. But unfortunately, the modern day man is not satisfied with an answer as simple as that.

Answer:

To begin with[1], I think it is the responsibility of all those who believe that marrying a girl as young as nine years old was an accepted norm of the Arab culture, to provide at least a few examples to substantiate their point of view. I have not yet been able to find a single reliable instance in the books of Arab history where a girl as young as nine years old was given away in marriage. Unless such examples are given, we do not have any reasonable grounds to believe that it really was an accepted norm.

In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly misreported in the narratives of the incident. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point. My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are:

Most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. An event as well known as the one being reported, should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three.

It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy-one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medinah for seventy-one years.

Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: "narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham, which were reported through people of Iraq (Vol. 11, pg. 48 - 51).

Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal, another book on the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that when he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly (Vol. 4, pg. 301 - 302).

According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. However, according to another narrative in Bukhari (Kitaab al-Tafseer) Ayesha (ra) is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an , was revealed, "I was a young girl". The 54th Surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Ayesha (ra) had not only been born before the revelation of the referred Surah, but was actually a young girl (jariyah), not even only an infant (sibyah) at that time. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham ibn `urwah. I see absolutely no reason that after the comments of the experts on the narratives of Hisham ibn `urwah, why should we not accept this narrative to be more accurate.

According to a number of narratives, Ayesha (ra) accompanied the Muslims in the battle of Badr and Uhud. Furthermore, it is also reported in books of hadith and history that no one under the age of 15 years was allowed to take part in the battle of Uhud. All the boys below 15 years of age were sent back. Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden upon them.

According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). It is reported in Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb as well as Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah that Asma (ra) died in the 73rd year after hijrah[2] when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in the 73rd year after hijrah, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha (ra) - if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH - was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.

Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr (ra) reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah - the pre Islamic period. Obviously, if Ayesha (ra) was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH - the time she most likely got married.

According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn Khattab (ra). This shows that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Ayesha's (ra) marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Ayesha (ra) should not even have been born during the first year of Islam.

Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr (ra) planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am - with whose son Ayesha (ra) was engaged at that time - and asked him to take Ayesha (ra) in his house as his son's wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam. Subsequently, his son divorced Ayesha (ra). Now, if Ayesha (ra) was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Ayesha (ra) had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.

According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of Khadijah (ra), when Khaulah (ra) came to the Prophet (pbuh) advising him to marry again, the Prophet (pbuh) asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed Ayesha's (ra) name. All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a "lady".

According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was five years older than Ayesha (ra). Fatimah (ra) is reported to have been born when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha (ra) could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.

These are some of the major points that go against accepting the commonly known narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage.

In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten years, nor did the Prophet (pbuh) marry Ayesha (ra) at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage, because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.

1st May 1998

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] The answer to this question is primarily based on the research by Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi (urdu) as presented in his booklet, "Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat", Anjuman Uswa e hasanah, Karachi, Pakistan

[2] That is, the migration of the Prophet (pbuh)




peace all

Victoria:
You say: “your 1000 year old pact with Omar (as the decisive indication of the entire theological thoughts of Islam) is both irrelevant, and becoming a bit obsessive.”
Listing all the terms of Omar pact was merely to show Patel, who had just lectured America about pluralism, on how pluralistic his religion is. This is relevant to his post. It is not an essay on “ the entire theological thought of Islam”.
Omar was not just the second Caliph of the Muslim Empire, but was a friend, a confidant and adviser to the founder of your religion. This pact which was written 1400 years ago,a few years after the Quran, is very revealing of the mindset of the clique who cooked up your religion. This is vital to the people who want to understand the worldldview of your faith. Is not this "Faith" section’s main goal to be a venue for dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims to further the cause of mutual understanding?

I "just wonder" too. So lets watch as it plays out..

"French Given Green Light To Intervene In Chad"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/05/wchad105.xml

"France watches Chad-Sudan border"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7229575.stm

"For now, Americans are busy watching the game, electing nominees and questioning their candidates as to who has the best "credentials" to win the war on terror. In France the debate is about where will the Presidential couple spend their honeymoon. Let's admit it, the Jihadi strategists are having a blast. One more country has fallen on the way to Constantinople."

— Dr. Walid Phares"

You mentioned that in France the debate is about where the presidential couple will spend their honey moon. Surprisingly, you did not mention that this is the President's third wife. The other two got discarded after they got the wrinkles on their faces.

I donot know what sweeping generalizations you are seeking from your "facts".

Please rush to Chad and teach them a thing or two about pluralism. Thank you.

ISLAM IS SPREAD BY VIOLENCE. NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN 1300 YEARS:

"As Americans are debating who among their candidates for the primaries can best confront the Jihadists or at least preempt their offensives worldwide, future Jihadi forces have in one day invaded an African country (under European protection), a key location for the Darfur forthcoming peace missions. In less than 12 hours the so-called armed opposition of Chad, crossed the entire country from its eastern frontiers with Islamist-ruled Sudan to the capital N'Djamena across from northern Nigeria. The latest reports mention fierce battles around the Presidential Palace and back and forth inside the city. But at this stage the geo-political consequences are crucial for the next stages locally, regionally and internationally. The bottom line is that, in one day, what could become the future Taliban of Chad have scored a strategic victory not only against the government of the country (which was supposed to back up the UN plans to save Darfur in Sudan), but also against the efforts by the African Union and European Union to contain the Sudanese regime and stop the Genocide. Today's offensive, regardless of the next developments, has already changed the geopolitics of Africa. Outmaneuvering the West and Africans, those regimes and forces standing behind the "opposition" have shown that they are restless in their campaign against human rights and self determination on the continent. But even more importantly the events of today shows how unprepared are Europeans and Americans in front of Jihadi regimes which seem weak on the surface but highly able to surprise and crumble Western efforts of containment.

On Saturday February 2, 2008, and as French President Nicolas Sarkozy was getting married in Paris and Americans were shopping for food to enjoy the "super bowl" on Sunday, Jihadi-backed military forces launched a blitzkrieg across Chad using one thousand 4 X 4 armed trucks. They reached the capital in few hours and started battling the Chadian Army, isolating the President in his palace and declaring victory to the international media. This so-called "opposition" has a unified "military command" and includes: The Union of Forces for Democracy (UFDD) led by Mahamat Nouri, Rally of Forces for Change (RFC) led by Timane Erdimi, and the UFDD-Fundamental led by Abdelwahid Aboud Mackaye. At first sight, a non-seasoned observer would conclude that this is yet another African troubled country with a bunch of "separatists," "rebels" and "insurgent." In fact it is not that simple. These forces have been backed by the Jihadi regime in Khartoum and some of its funding – according to the Chadian Government – has been sent from Saudi Arabia.

At the center of the confrontation is Darfur. This Black Muslim province inside Sudan has been the victim of genocide at the hands of Arab fundamentalist forces known as the Janjaweed, essentially backed by the regime of Sudan. The people of Darfur have resisted the forced "Arabization" – turned ethnic cleansing – at the hands of the Janjaweed. Both neighboring Chad and the United Nations have come to the help of Darfur since 2005. In return, the Salafists and Wahabis of the region came to the support of Sudan's regime against the Africans and the West. France dispatched some military to Chad and soon a "Eurofor" (European Force) was set under UN auspices to be dispatched on the borders between Chad and Sudan to help the Darfur refugees. The Islamists of Khartoum opposed the international initiative and seems to have enlisted – although discretely – the backing of the Wahabi circles in Saudi Arabia, but also the Syrian and Iranian regimes. Hence the battlefield for Darfur became a fault line between the international community and the strange bed fellows of the Jihadi axis.

Using the classical doctrine of Khid'aa (or deception) the Khartoum regime bought as much time as it needed to allow the arming and training of the "rebels" inside Chad. The equipment used by the militias has been obtained in few months and "offices" were opened in several countries in the region. Oil dividends quickly poured on the future Taliban of Chad and their political and media training went very fast. All that the Sudanese regime had to do to abort the forthcoming Darfur UN operations was to collapse the basis from where these operations will be launched: Chad. The question is not about how did the Jihadists figure this out, it is rather how the strategists in Washington and Paris failed to predict it. Although it was very simple: Movements on the ground inside Chad and intense media activity in support on al Jazeera for months projected what was to come. How did the Atlantic allies fail to see the threat gathering is stunning.

For Western and international defense systems to dramatically fail to monitor and detect the movement of thousands of armed men crossing an allied country from border to border is alarming. The US has just organized an African Command – backed by the highest technologies worldwide – and the French military have an airbase in Faya Largau as well as a jet squadron in the capital ready to scramble. Was there an abandonment? Was there a deal cut on Darfur? We will see. However the most interesting development – along with the militia's blitzkrieg, was the preparedness of the Jihadi propaganda machine. Amazingly, as the "opposition" forces have reached N'Djamena the official minister of what will become the future Taliban regime in Chad, Jibrin Issa was comfortably seated in al Jazeera's studios in Qatar. Obviously he wasn't flown from Africa to the Gulf on the request of the booking Department of the Qatari funded network to "react" to the offensive. He was already in the station – or at least in Qatar – when the offensive began. Very interestingly, the man was wearing a classical Western business outfit and clean shaved. The PR strategy was not to show the world, including France and the US, that the forces thrusting into their ally was a sister of the Islamic Courts of Somalia or a Taliban "looking" militia. The game was to project this coup as "domestic" against "corruption" and the rest of the litany, thus boring for average Western public.

Issa played the script very well until a point where reality surfaced abruptly. At first, as I was listening to his impeccable Arabic, I was wondering why did he have this Arabian Peninsula accent and utter those mechanical sentences. It was strange to hear an African "minister" of a future regime in Chad speaking excellent Arabic, but I gave it a pass. Until, at the end of his interview he made a troubling mistake. Out of the blue he started to thank the "brave commander of the Islamic Republic of Sudan" General Omar al Bashir (the head of the regime responsible for the Genocide in Darfur) for his help to the "movement" and started to praise his "highness the servant of the two shrines," (that is the Saudi Monarch) for his support (obviously to the movement). Suddenly, and despite the frustration of the al Jazeera anchor that the game may have been uncovered, I connected the dots. It was indeed a Sudanese-backed operation to change the regime in Chad, and backed by Wahabi circles, as a preemptive move to crumble the forthcoming humanitarian operation in Darfur. The Jihadists, kings of strategies, won another day. To preempt a UN move against one of their regimes they took out the government which had agreed to help the UN and the West. In my sense this was highly predictable. But the failure of the West to predict is highly questionable.

The days ahead may shape or reshape the ground in Chad and the direction of events could lead to more dramatic change in the political landscape in Africa. If Washington and Paris tergiversate, the future Chad Taliban will consolidate their grip and thrust further into the Sahara. The Darfur operation will be doomed. If the Chadian Army resist and the international community intervene, the status quo ante could be restored. It is also predicted that the "opposition" will work hard on is image. It will try not to show the "Jihadi" identity immediately. Besides, not all components of the "opposition" are Taliban-type. When the opposition settles in the capital, the Islamists will slowly surge and behead their allies a la Afghanistan. It is really too early to tell.

For now, Americans are busy watching the game, electing nominees and questioning their candidates as to who has the best "credentials" to win the war on terror. In France the debate is about where will the Presidential couple spend their honeymoon. Let's admit it, the Jihadi strategists are having a blast. One more country has fallen on the way to Constantinople."

— Dr. Walid Phares

Homo A. Kafirus addresses Victoria as "Mullah Victoria".This is why he is being addressed as Homo A. kafirus. Lack of civility will be responded in kind.

Malleck writes...
"I'll spare you this time, having other things to do;"
Please! Please Malleck don't! don't spare Ibrahim, drop all your other things because what can be more important than defending islam? We want to read your "intelligent rebuttal" please.

Victoria,
Do you believe that Mohammed fondled a 6 year old, and then later consumated his marriage to her at nine?
Do you agree that Mohammed looted caravans?
Do you also agree that Mohammed raped Sumayya? Also Safia after killing her husband?
Also he Mohammed had sex with one of his wives slaves?

If you do believe in any of the above, how do you hold this man as a prophet to your god?

I'd like an honest answer because I believe you are an honest person. I left Islam because I found those aligations and more like them to be true. Even if one was true I would not have any regard for such a person. I find it harder to respect people who can get themselves to believe in such a monster.

Do you or do you not believe that Mohammed did at least one of the above?

Arif

Mullah Victoria,

Your shameless witnessing for your death cult will not hide the facts about it as they exist. Pact of Umar is relevant because it still forms the basis of how minorities are treated in Islamic lands. New Chruches can still not be built in "Secular" Turkey. Copts of Egypt still cannot ring bells of their Chruches. Shame on you for being so enamored by your attachment to your savage prophet that you ignore the millions who live as dhimmis under laws derived from the pact of Umar.

You are one of the immoral and conscience less "Shameless Sheilas of Islam".

mr mahfouz-

this is a forum of ideas, mr malleck was informing you that he was sparing you from his intelligent rebuttal-

if you perceive such a sparring of ideas a 'direct threat' upon your personhood and safety-

you either-
a) feel personally rebuffed by the lack of attention
b) are desparate to fight

we read books, newspapers, the qur'an, and make informed opinions coalesced from a combination of thuoght processes and references-

all of us here can lazily google-

your 1000 year old pact with omar (as the decisuve idication of the entire theological thoughts of islam)is both irrelevant, and becoming a bit obsessive.

faithfulservant offered up a strange solution-

"The Turkish model of radical nationalization rejects God and I am offended by it. Indeed, that solution seems to be falling apart as well."

and then this odd solution-

"I have come to believe that a process of voluntary, peaceful "ethnic resettlement" (for lack of a better term) may be the only solution in some extreme cases."

turkey has gone through its own pendulum swing, and is re-integrating faith in its society-
both its president and prime minister are observant practitioners of their faith-

the solution of "involuntary" ethnic resettlement, was already disastrously tried by ATATURK- the father of turkey- (who initiated the same nationalism that seems to offend)

the only instance i can think of where such a resettlement benefitted the voluntary resettlers is israel-
of course the 300 billion dollars donated by the united states for over 60 years helped their transition considerably-

and of course there were the original inhabitants- those pesky palestinians with their constant demands of water and bandages-

but that is their fault for living where someone else wanted to be.

people seem to have this annoying attachment to their own homelands.

Malleck: You say "I'll spare you this time, having other things to do; but, if you're still as pernicious next time, you'll be taught a lesson in how to rein-in your most hateful feelings".
That sounds to me like a direct prsonal threat.You are full of yourself, are'nt you? Or maybe you think you are still living in that hellhole you crawled out of where dissidents are intimidated with beheadings and limb cuttings and stonings.That did not intimade me when I was living among people of your cult and is not going to intimade me now. This is very typical of fanatics who can't think rationally. How listing the terms of a document written by one of your saints, Omar, and considered by you and your cult as divine be "pernicious" and "hateful" on my part. I am not the one who wrote this document.

JAMES, JAMES,

If your intention had been honest rather than hate-motivated, you would have limited the alterantive place where Mr. Patel would move his Interfaith Youth to Saudi Arabia and you may have been credible. But your irrepressible hatred made you add Iran, and thereby you lost all credibility. There still are many Bahai's in Iran, even though many left when they lost the privileges they enjoyed under the Shah. As for the Jews, who had also enjoyed privileges under the Shah (as did Christians under Saddam), and who still number at least 36,000 in Iran, they resfuse to leave their country despite all the bribes being offered by Israel for them to resettle in Israel. Of course, there are also Christian Armenians and Azeris as well as a few hundred Hindus. All these groups have their own synagogues and churches; I cannot tell whether the Hindus have their own temple. But I assure you that I know at least one Jewish Iranain who will not leave Iran for Israel or the US even if you offer him all the gold in the world to do so.

Ibrahim Mahfouz,

I thought that you would have been chastened by the lecturing I gave you last time. But, apparently not!

I'll spare you this time, having other things to do; but, if you're still as pernicious next time, you'll be taught a lesson in how to rein-in your most hateful feelings. Already, you might read about pluralism in Iran as I lectured James above. Saudi Arabia, which, as James correctly points out, has not in the past allowed the construction in the country of places of worship other than Islamic (but, of course, everyone can pratice his religion in private), is currently revising this anti-Islamic practice, as everyone who cares about the issue of pluralism knows.

One very good way to prevent what's happening in Kenya from happening here would be to stop giving any tax money to so-called faith-based initiatives.

Mr. Patel:
You say "The reality that emerges at any given time has everything to do with whether the leaders of those communities are organizing for pluralism or organizing for violence."

The founder of your religion, Islam, and his successors did not "organize" for pluralism but to the contrary; organized for exclusivism, as evidenced by the so-called Omar Pact.This document is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Second Caliph, Omar, to the Christians of Syria, a "pact" which formed the pattern of later interaction whose echoes reverberate till this date.

"In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Omar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:
1. We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches,
2. We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
3. We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
4. We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children.
5. We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
6. We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
7.We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
8.We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
9. We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
10.We shall not sell fermented drinks.
11. We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
12. We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists
13. We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims.

13. We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. 14.We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
15.We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.
16.We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.
(When I brought the letter to Omar, may God be pleased with him, he added, "We shall not strike a Muslim.")
We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.
If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.
Omar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: "They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims," and "Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact."
from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.
[This was a from handout at an Islamic History Class at the University of Edinburgh in 1979. Source of translation not given.]

I've just been wondering-

Why doesn't Eboo Patel move his Interfaith Youth
Network to an Islamic country like Saudi or Iran where his views on Pluralism are desperately needed? Doesn't he realise he should enlighten his fellow Muslims first? Isn't he preaching to the choir in America? America is already culturally Pluralistic.

Pluralism-Does it apply to 50 plus intolerant Islamic states including the land of your prophet? Can I take a Bible inside S. Arabia?

Latest peace of Islam- Gazans distribute sweets and dance in the streets after killing one Israeli woman in a suicide attack.

Mentally disabled women used by Muslims to annihilate 65 civilians in Iraq.

6 blown up in Pak. Terror plots uncovered in Karnakata, India after Muslims caught training in jungles.......

A giant do feel the mosquito pinch.
But the mosquito could die even when he looses wind!

VOTE:

Blow-up the KABBA in MECCA, Saudi-Arabia!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA in MECCA, Saudi-Arabia!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA in MECCA, Saudi-Arabia!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA in MECCA, Saudi-Arabia!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Blow-up the KABBA...!

Note: To Prevent this Calamity, OSAMA BIN LADIN, et al, must surrender "Dead or Alive" by end of this JUNE.08! Or the Prophecy will be fulfilled!

**************************************************

VOTE:

Blow-up the AL AQSA DOME in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the Al AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOAQUE in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Blow-up the AL AQSA DOME in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the Al AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOSQUE in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Blow-up the AL AQSA DOME in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the Al AQSA MOSQUE...!

Blow-up the AL AQSA MOAQUE in JERUSALEM, ISRAEL!

Note: To Prevent this Calamity, OSAMA BIN LADIN, et al, must surrender "Dead or Alive" by end of this JUNE.08! Or the Prophecy will be fulfilled!

**************************************************
VOTE:

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

iLLEGALiZE "iSLAMA-SATiN Religion in AMERICA NOW!!!

**************************************************

VOTE:

ABOLiSH ALL EVERY & ANY 'Foreign' Made [Not Made In AMERICA] Pre-Apocalyptic Religions Now!

ABOLiSH ALL EVERY & ANY 'Foreign' Made [Not Made In AMERICA] Pre-Apocalyptic Religions Now!

ABOLiSH ALL EVERY & ANY 'Foreign' Made [Not Made In AMERICA] Pre-Apocalyptic Religions Now!

ABOLiSH ALL EVERY & ANY 'Foreign' Made [Not Made In AMERICA] Pre-Apocalyptic Religions Now!

**************************************************

REMEMBER iSLAM;

Yes, MU-HAM-MAD

[Mu=Chamore(Muel), HAM=Hazeer(pig), MAD=Monszhnoon(crazy)]

is the last Prophet [Profit] in Middle East ... But Never ever in Sweet Sweet APocalyptic Nation , N. A*M*E*R*i*C*A & S. America!

**************************************************

Soon Arabia will drink their oil! This is the Prophecy!

VOTE: E*C*A*T*i*ON PARTY 2012! Ya Ya!

What an IRONI in the whole present world:

LOOK ALL OVER AROUND,

"ACTUAL KILLERS ALL IN CONTROL" CALLING/BRANDING WHO ARE BEING KILLED IN 'UNCOUNTALBE NUMBERS' AS KILLERS!!!!!!!!!

TO JUSTIFY THERE FURTHER NON STOPPING KILLINGS!!!

Eboo

Do you want to stop religious violence? Then stop practicing religion. There is no separating the two.

You are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

I like the key element of pluralism in your article. I was still living in Zambia when Nelson Mandela was freed and remember his trip to Zambia after his release. Even though we were in a different country, there was a sense of excitement and hope that followed him. He is indeed a figure of hope and togetherness and wish that Kenya finds a figure like him. Mandela understands that as a leader his actions, words and life directly affects a nation and thus multitudes and generations of people he has never and will never meet.

I hope that Odinga and Kibaki have the courage to see past their own quests for power and put the welfare of their people first. I truly wish them hope.

More than anything else, what is needed by the world is a clear education about Islam. One fifth of humanity is trapped in a 7th century violent cult and the educated muslims like Eboo are emotionally and psychologically handicapped in dealing with its atrocities in an honest and truthful manner. Unfortunately it falls upon the ex-muslims, like Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Ayan Hirsi Ali, etc. etc. to educate the Kafirs and to garner their help to educate and save the muslims from Islam.

How do you bring democracy to people who want to stone women to death because they appear on Video with men who are not sanctioned relatives. No sex, nothing, just they were there with strangers!!! And kafirs are told that Iran is a democracy.
****************************
Iranian sisters face stoning for adultery

TEHRAN: Two Iranian sisters convicted of adultery face being stoned to death after the supreme court upheld the death sentences against them, the Etemad newspaper Monday quoted their lawyer as saying.

The two sisters were found guilty of adultery - a capital crime in Iran - after the husband of one of the pair presented video evidence showing them in the company of other men while he was away.

“Branch 23 of the supreme court has confirmed the stoning sentence,” said their lawyer, Jabbar Solati. The penal court of Tehran province had already sentenced the two sisters identified only as Zohreh, 27, and Azar to stoning, the daily said.

Solati explained that the two sisters had initially been tried for “illegal relations” and received 99 lashes. However in a second trial they were convicted of “adultery”. The pair admitted they were in the video presented by the husband but argued there was no adultery as no scene on the video showed them engaged in a sexual act with the other men.

“There is no legal evidence whereby the judge could reach the knowledge for issuing a stoning sentence,” Solati said, adding that he had appealed to the state prosecutor. “The two sisters have been tried twice for one crime,” Solati protested.
***********************************

Eboo,

You never give up, do you? Start with a reasonable hypothesis and then pull a sleight of hand and you earn your keep as the silent and queit worker of jihad. So let us see how smooth the transition is in this piece:

You write: "Too often, identity-based violence is reported as if it is somehow inevitable – Sunnis and Shias, Catholics and Protestants, Muslims and Hindus are simply fated to kill one another. Nothing could be further from the truth. Each of the identity groups mentioned above – just like the Luo, the Kikuyu and the Kalenjin– have a history of coexistence and a history of conflict."

And before anyone knows all of the conflicts in their full complexity have been reduced to identity-based, tribal politics, and there you slip in muslims ... oh the poor muslims. And you are going to take the analysis of why Islam as an ideology is incapapble of holding the nations together that the Atlantic article is considering, you write:

"about the potential ethno-religious balkanization of much of the Muslim world. Goldberg points out that many ethno-religious groups who are now part of one nation state or another in the Middle East and South and Central Asia – the Baluchis of Pakistan, the Kurds of Iraq and Syria (not to mention Turkey) – have loyalties effectively only to their own ethno-religious group, and not to the broader nation. What if the Pashtuns decide that paying taxes to Kabul is not in the best interests of their people, secede from Afghanistan, and try to set up their own government in Kandahar?"

How conveniently you forget the two nation theory upon which Pakistan was founded and upon which all these nations subsumed and divided. The partition of British India that engulfed your homeland was precisely the reason why the violence that you mention above exists. Followers of Muhammad could not bring themselves to live as a minority ... Islam was in danger. The complete way of life that Islam is could not have non-muslims who had been ruled by the muslims for a 1000 years as ruling partners. 3 million Bangladeshis killed by the Mullahs of Pakistan who killed those muslims because they were half hindus. And then the mullahs of Pakistan and Iran would not and could not allow Afghanistan to be but it had to be either shia or sunni. Only the stupid Kafirs do not know the battle that the Sunni Saudis and their Pakistani proxies fought to dominate Afghanistan ... all to get a beachhead to the underbelly of Russia. All those Istans were all ready to have Islam revived.

And now what is the recipe you offer:
"I am saying that creating peaceful, participatory democracies that bring together diverse populations is one of the most important issues of our time."

Oh no!! Two trillion dollars have gone in and democracy is no where in sight in Iraq. Apostates are still being killed. Blasphemy still carries the death penalty. It is not democracy that needs to be brough, but an ethos where people can choose democracy on their own if they wish. It may not be possible to bring democracy to people who want Islam as the reigning ideology. The difference between your country of origin and India should be enough to convince you of the validity of that thesis. An ethos that will opt for democracy is likely not possible where Islam dominates.

ps

How many would have died if Pakistan had stayed part of India?

probably a lot more

Thank you for pointing out the obvious comparison to India 1947. I've been waiting for someone else to make it. Wow, over one million killed.

Unfortunately, ethnic cleansing has been sweeping the globe at least since the break up of Yugoslavia. Most of my life I have been all for the solutions that you have laid out. Recently, I have changed my mind.

The powers who negotiated the end of WWI, and the aftermath of WWII to a lesser extent, left a series of arbitrarily drawn states destined for "ethno-religious" conflict.

Who can be sure that the nation-state model of the west is transferrable? All the solutions that you mention have been tried. If anything, the situation is getting worse. The Turkish model of radical nationalization rejects God and I am offended by it. Indeed, that solution seems to be falling apart as well.

The problem as I see it is not religion, but the failure of people of faith to credibly put their creeds into pracice. Thus, Christians embracing total love, Muslims complete peace etc.

I have come to believe that a process of voluntary, peaceful "ethnic resettlement" (for lack of a better term) may be the only solution in some extreme cases. I know, this sounds like heresy, but hear me out.

What if parents, clerics, teachers and governments really taught peace, love and harmony? Then, and only then, would the solutions we have believed in all of our lives be possible. Now they are subsumed in sectarianism, extremism and hate. Maybe "ethno-religious" separation, in places of extreme violence and hate, could provide the security and breathing room for a renaissance.

Sometimes you have to go backwards before you can go forwards.

This track is at least as plausible as your view or the military conquest (to the victor goes the spoils) strategy. My way might be accomplished with much less bloodshed if you could get all the stakeholders to buy in.

your article has led to some deep
contemplation and some sincere desires like i'm sure many have to stop and see if perhaps i might have anything which mite further the complex problems of realitys as they come into conflict with what we colectively and individually have aspired to actually acheive.. ifind it hard to believe that either of the two sides of the argument we can readilly see... would have wanted the reality anf thr result they have now and they had know the clear choices between peaceful disobediance and push for fair rules and fair laws and the vilence and loss of life and possesions and the most important fabic of civilized society hope and trust that the systemin place will be able to handle the dissagreements which are sure to arise.. i can't imagine either side feals any real sense of confidence right now... there is also the unamed and unstated posibility ... i would even say probability if your assertions of pre made arguement points and materials wwould indicate someone or some group who will and is somehow benifitting from the conflict beween the two peoples wha had apparently lived side by side in harmony or at least cooperation and peace..divede and conquorin the guise of help like the slime of mr' rove and his misguided freinds. there undoubtedly are myriad of people who saw what was happening and turned and looked the other way.... possibly from fear or the misguiede assumption that it did'nt somehow applie to them,, this i this the point in the process when sane concerned people take it upon them selve to speak and actually propagate and disseminate truth troughout thier immediate shere of influence. it is only when peoople have the rights to voice thier concerns... even if they turn out to be incorect.. a simple mispoken word or kmisguged assumption uttered within the confines of others who can and should comment on what they thinkk is thej truth would bear a lot more good fruit that simply backing up... stopping talking and start sharpening the proverbial and sometimes real knives... i think find... the agitators ...and unmasking... thier true motives would be the way to go ... people have the right to wear masks in private for whatever reason or game they may be playing but when one come to the public marketplace of ideas and opinions one should be ready to answer as may question as they ask or to simply don't pretend and not come to the real and neccessary place which should be consdidered by all religions... sacred rights... individually ...and collectively... but please check 4 truth i'm just an artist

Hereunder is the relation of events that I have experienced in situations that are relevant to what is happening in Kenya. I just read that Kofi Annan has given up his reconciliation efforts because his choice of a mediator, Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa has not been accepted.

But, I am hoping that the new Head of the African Union will persevere, alongside Dr Kaberuka of the African Development Bank and the Head of the World Bank as well as other Statesmen.

>

Eboo, Eboo. ever hear of the CIA?? please someone rigged the election and now people are mad. Can't you see that we need AFRICOM more than ever. true democracy is at risk in Kenya.

Simply more evidence that:

NO ONE IS SAFE UNTIL THE KORAN IS "DEFLAWED"!!!!

Mr. Patel,

You get it spot-on when you write: “ Nothing [like this apocalyptic vision of unbound ethnic hatred] could be further from the truth. Each of the identity groups mentioned above …ha[s] a history of coexistence and a history of conflict. The reality that emerges at any given time has everything to do with whether the leaders of those communities are organizing for pluralism or organizing for violence."

There are many, many studies and research projects and movements to support the vision of human solidarity that William Pfaff had so eloquently spelled out to conclude his mid-1990’s study about “The Wrath of Nations” , a prize-winning ‘current affairs’ volume that dissected, without false timidity, the murderous ethnic hatreds unleashed after the dissolution of Marshall Tito’s Yougoslavia. That barbaric episode of modern history, which triggered the new-age coinage of the term ‘ethnic cleansing’, took place at the very heart of a European Continent that thought that it had forever purged the devil out of the more barbaric tendencies in its soul with two World Wars and the subsequent establishment, by the Statesmen of the time, of multinational institutions that were mandated to shield the human fraternity from a repeat of the nightmares that had caused those World Wars.

Philip Bobbit’s volume, “The Shield of Achilles” is a worthwhile read in this regard, with its analysis of the futility of the nenocon-like agenda of instigated paranoia to advance an ambition to perpetuate Western if not American hegemony in the face of an irreversible trend towards multi-polarity. Bobbit analyses the clio-dynamics (study of the various socio-cultural-political and military-industrial-ideological forces that shape history) of dynastic-feudalism, tribalism, and makes a distinction between state-nation and nation-state forms of governance leading up to the emerging globalization agenda with all its dangerous pitfalls and promises. The end-message is similar to your: Nothing like this apocalyptic vision could be further from the truth. Although, without any doubt, there are many dangers looming ahead, which, the record of human genius has taught us that we will be able to negotiate successfully but not without deploying the invincible weapons of our best good will and willing ness to show and patience and consent sacrifices.

Canadians are deeply attached to the Diversity in Unity Platform, and are inspired by the communitarian philosophy of McGill University’s Professor Charles Taylor, author of ‘Sources of the Self’ and winner of this year’s Templeton Award for Progress in Religion. You and your readers could check on the wikipedia entry under Charles Taylor.

In the context of your comments about Islamic values, ethnicity dynamics, and the ongoing debate about the validity of all the most common interpretation of the values of the Enlightenment (a debate in which not only Christian ‘creationists’, and atheists/agnostics are engaged, but also practising Muslims who challenge a remark attributed to Abul Ala Maudoodi that ‘the gates of Ijtihad have long been closed’), Professor Peter Turchin has applied his Game Theory-grounded theses about clio-dynamics to the Muslim historical experience, especially the spectacular reversal of fortunes which saw the Mongols convert to Islam and spread the religion to Europe and China following their initial onslaughts on the most glorious monuments of Islam, including the library in Baghdad and the siege of Damascus. During the siege of Damascus in 1400, Ibn Khaldun famously went outside the gates of the besieged city to ask Tamerlane why would such a formidable warrior in front of whom the whole of Europe and Asia was trembling decide to embrace the religion of peace that Islam is, and Tamerlane would lecture this erudite Arab about “Asbiya, a term that current students of communitarianism would rename ‘social and spiritual capital’, the subject of Peter Turchin’s hypotheses. You are right that the lands of Central Asia are experiencing echoes of what tribal and ethnic dynamics must have been like before Tamerlane decided to don the mantle of Genghis Khan and unite the tribes of Central Asia, including the Ferghana Valley and the province of Khorezm where was born the Perso-Arab mathematician Al Khwarizmi, father of the arabic numeral and system of counting, as well as of algebra and the original conceiver of that thoroughly-modern concept. the algorithm, named after him. The next decade will witness much strife as the world powers vie for the oil and gas resources of the Muslim lands of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and these powers (Russian, Chinese, American French, European, Indian and Arab) will play both ethnic division games and ethnic harmony games (sometimes igniting the fire to play heroic firefighter) in order to increase their influence. But the civilizational lessons learnt will eventually prevail, not least the eminently communitarian civilizational lessons of Islam.

A final word that will surprise you : you will not believe me if I tell you that my enthusiasm for the communitarian civilizational values of Islam is dwarfed by Peter Turchin’s rendition of it in his erudite book War&Peace&War, so read it and check for yourself.

Mr. Patel,

I, as well, am saddened by the turn of events that are happening in Kenya. It is sad to see such barbaric behavior being done in the 21st century.

In your article you outlined three principles that are key to having a pluralistic democracy. Though I basically agree with your concept, however, I am baffled at why the Kenyan people do not subscribe the idea and practice of democracy. What is standing in the way of the Kenyan people to be democratic?

Eboo Patel has the pulse on the Kenyan situation. He writes sympathtically and longs for peace in Kenya. A refershing change of tone rarely seen anywhere in the international media.

A fourth issue that needs inclusion is an assessment of how grossly lopsided the age demographics are in Kenya. Minors, especially those without competent guardians, are a class unto themselves in this most chronologically bottom-heavy of countries. If Mungiki are to be stopped, outreach and care need to fill a vacuum that exists in the lives of the desperately poor and/or orphaned youth. Simultaneously, outreach can undermine some of the tribal allegiances in a positive manner by creating Kenyans out of the most alienated people. However, it is a most prodigious task.