Islamic radicalization' hearing stirs hornets' nest

Congress holds hundreds of hearings each year — and most generate more yawns than fireworks.

But the plan to hold hearings on the danger posed by radical Islam in the United States has inspired protest, counterprotest, debate, editorials, petitions and even pray-ins, before the first witness takes the stand.

The goal of the hearings, the first of which is being held Thursday, is "to establish and show the American people that there is a real threat of al-Qaida recruiting and of homegrown terrorists being self-radicalized within the Muslim community," according to Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., the new chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

He also charges that Muslim Americans are not doing enough to discourage extremists in their midst.

Opponents say King is stoking anti-Islam hysteria at a time when the Muslim American community is already besieged by attacks on mosques, hate crimes and overzealous surveillance by law enforcement.

Many have compared these proceedings to the McCarthy hearings of the 1950s, which fed on fears of Communist subversion.

But King has not budged. He accused critics of being in deep denial of the threat, chiding them for seeking some sort of "kumbaya moment" with extremists and vowing not to bow to what he calls "political correctness."

Now the question is whether the hearings will produce a more secure nation or further alienate the roughly 2.5 million Muslims living in the country.

Check back for streaming video, live reporting and commentary on the hearing

"I think it's legitimate to hold hearings on any aspect of radicalization, and I'm not dismissing these hearings out of hand," said Charles Kurzman, a professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. "At the same time, I would be concerned if an intentionally provocative approach to the hearings reduces cooperation with Muslim American communities, which is the opposite of Congress' intention."

'Going after radicals' Proponents of the hearings insist that they are but one security discussion among many — in this case focused on young Muslim men who become radicalized and then pursue terror plots — not about all who practice the faith.

"He's not going after mainstream Muslims," said Steve Emerson,  executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, who has long warned about the danger posed by home-grown terrorists. "He's going after radicals."

But many Muslims, as well as leaders of other religious and legal advocates, reject the premise of the discussion — that Islam can be singled out as more prone to engender radicalization and violent extremism than other religions.

"By framing his hearings as an investigation of the American Muslim community, the implication is that we should be suspicious of our Muslim neighbors, co-workers or classmates solely on the basis of their religion," Rep. Michael Honda, D-Calif., wrote in a Feb. 28 op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle.

He compared the move to the roundup of Japanese Americans during World War II that led to the three-year internment of his own family. Many civil rights groups also say the hearings set a disturbing precedent.

A coalition of 50 human and civil rights groups, religious organizations and Muslim advocacy groups appealed to King to cancel the hearings or frame them to look at all forms of violence motivated by extremist beliefs, but he rejected their call. 

"Congress should not be focused on First Amendment-protected beliefs and activities," said Farhana Khera, executive director of the San Francisco-based Muslim Advocates. "To the extent that you have Congress exploring violent extremism, it should be focused on criminal behavior. … What faith somebody practices or whatever variant someone practices would not be the proper scope for congressional review."

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People sent a letter sent to King on Tuesday urging him to "reconsider holding the narrowly focused and reckless hearings."

King and Muslims in his Long Island district say the congressman used to be a champion of the Muslim community, visiting mosques and attending their weddings and dinners. He was also one of a handful of Republicans who supported efforts to protect Muslims in the Balkans from aggression by Serbian Orthodox Christians.

But the congressman says he became bitterly disillusioned after 9-11, when some of the local imams rejected the idea that Muslims were behind the devastating attacks.

'Moral myopia' They later recanted and denounced terrorism, but for King the events unveiled the "moral myopia … of the Muslim leaders and their apologists in the media."

In op-ed piece in Newsday, the congressman describes his transformation.

King argues that the threat from Muslims in the U.S. has increased because anti-terrorism measures overseas have made it more difficult for al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations to attack the United States from abroad. As a consequence, he says, the terrorists are now focusing on indoctrinating American Muslims to carry out attacks.

In an interview with NBC's Meredith Vieira on the TODAY show, King defended his belief, telling the anchor, "this is the same message that president's deputy national security advisor gave the other night. He said that al-Qaida has changed its strategy and it is now attempting to recruit and radicalize the Muslim American community. That's where the threat is coming from."

United States to parents from Yemen.

He points to recent plots: The failed Times Square bombing and the Fort Hood massacre, which were perpetrated by American Muslims influenced by Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in the 

After coming under scrutiny by U.S. authorities for contacts with suspected terrorists, including several of the 9/11 hijackers, he moved to Yemen in 2002 and began broadcasting his extremist views over the Internet.

Nidal Hassan, the Army major accused of shooting to death 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, was a U.S. citizen born in the United States to parents who emigrated from Jordan. Although Hassan had exchanged email with al-Awlaki, experts have said he acted on his own.

Faisal Shahzad, who admitted attempting to detonate a car full of explosives in New York’s Times Square, is a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in Pakistan. Shahzad trained with terrorist groups in Pakistan but told authorities that he was inspired by al-Awlaki through the Internet.

King maintains that 80 to 85 percent of mosques in the United States are led by fundamental Islamists — a figure that is broadly disputed — and thus set the stage for radicalization of young Muslims.

حساب زیست کا بس اتنا سا گوشوارھ ھے۔ تمہیں نکال کے دیکھا باقی سب خسارھ ھے

کبھی کبھی سوچتا ہوں کے اگر ہم مسلمانوں کی زندگی سے کافروں کو نکال دیا جائے تو ہمارا معاشرہ کیا منظر پیش کرے گا ؟ سواری کے لیے اونٹ خچچر اور گھوڑے استعمال کئیے جایا کریں گے، کیسا عجیب منظر ہوگا کمپنی کا ڈائیریکٹر خچچر پر سوار ہو کر آفس آیا کرے گا، مینجر حضرات اونٹ یا گھوڑے پر سوار ہو کر آیا کریں گے ، ہم جسے تو پیدل ہی جایا کریں گے آفس ، کام کی نوعیت بھی بدل جائے گی، کمپیوٹر پر ای میل کے بجائے کبوتر کے پر سے خط لکھے جایا کریں گے، کورئیر کمپنیز جہاز کے بجائے کبوتروں کے ذریے لیڑرز بھیجا کریں گی، کچی مٹی کی عمارتیں ہونگی تو زیادہ بلند بھی نہیں ہونگی اسلیے لفٹ کے استعمال کی بھی ضرورت محسوس نہیں ہوگی، بجلی ہی نہیں ہوگی تو تمام الیکٹرونکس آئیٹمز کی بھی ضرورت نہیں رہ جائے گی، گرمیوں میں ائیرکنڈیشنڈ اور ملّت فین کی جگھ ہمّت فین ہوا کرینگے جس کے ہاتھ میں جتنی طاقت اور ہمّت ہوگی وہ اتنی ہی زیادہ ہوا لیا کرے گا. چرخے سے کپڑا بنا جایا کرے گا ، ایک شپمنٹ گمان غالب ھے تقریبن تین سے چار سال میں یورپ پہنچ جایا کرے گی کتنی خوش حالی ہوجائے گی نہ ہر طرف، چپل سنگھا کر مرگی کا علاج ہوا کرے گا، کینسر اور دوسرے موزی امراض کے لیے ڈاکٹر بنگالی عامل سے جھاڑ پھونک کروائی جایا کرے گی، آپریشن کی تکلیف سے بھی نجات مل جائے گی ہمیں، جسے بھی موزی مرض لا حق ہوگا اسے جن بھوت کا سایا کہہ کر علاج کا خرچہ بچا لیا جایا کرے گا، آنکھوں میں موتیا نہیں پورا موتیا کا درخت اگ آیا کرے گا، موتیا کے معاملے میں ہم خود کفیل ہو جائیں گے ساری دنیا ہم سے مانگنے آیا کرے گی موتیا. جوانی میں حج کرنے کے لیے پچپن میں ہے خچچر پھ سوار ہو کر سفر پھ نکلنا ہوا کرے گا ، جوان بڑھاپے میں پہنچیں گے، اور بوڑھے حضرات کو تو سفر کے دوران ہی حج کی نیت کا ثواب مل جایا کرے گا، بغیر لاوڈ اسپیکر کے ملا حضرات مذہبی منافرت نہیں پھیلا پائیں گے، مولانا فضلل رحمان جو کے قوم کو دیکھانے کے لیئے کافروں کے خلاف ہیں اور غیرت پھر بھی نہیں آتی انہیں کے ان کے دل میں کافروں کی ہی ایجاد کردہ بیٹری لگی ہوئی ہے وہ بھی کافروں کا احسان لینے سے بچ جائیں گے، اور جلد اس دنیا سے رخصت ہو کر پوری پاکستانی قوم پر احسان عظیم کریں گے، کراچی والوں کو تو ہر روز حب ڈیم سے پانی بھر کے لانا پڑا کرے گا کیوں کے پانی سپلائی کرنے والی مشینیں ہی نہیں ہونگی، بار بار گھڑی دیکھ کر لوگوں کو انکی اوقات یاد دلانے سے بھی جان چھوٹ جائے گی قوم کی، سورج کی گردش سے ہی وقت کا اندازہ لگا لیا کریں گے، ایٹم بم کی جگھ ہمارے پاس منجنیق ھوتی انڈیا کے بم کے جواب میں ہم منجنیق سے پتھر برساتے جی تھری گن کی جگھ ہمارے فوجی جوانوں کے پاس تیر اور بھالے ھوتے اور ملا حضرات ہیمیں آج بھی یھ ہی تلقین کر رہے ھوتے ، مومن ھے تو بے تیغ بھی لٹرتا ھے سپاہی۔ پورے عرب کی زمین کے نیچے جو خزانے الله نے دیے ہیں جنھیں ہم تیل کہتے ہیں اسکی حیثیت بھی کیچڑ سے زیادہ نہیں ہوگی، پورا عرب دو ہزار دس میں بھی انیس سو پینسٹھ سے پہلے کا ہی منظر پیش کرے گا ، اگر کسی کو عرب کی ترقی دیکھنی ہو تو سعودیھ عرب کی انیس سو پینسٹھ سے پہلے کی تصویریں دیکھ لے سعودیھ عرب اور پورے عرب کی یھ بغیر پلر کی نام نہاد ترقی بھی کافروں کی ہی دین ہے، عرب کی زمین کے نیچے کیا کیا خزانے پوشیدہ ہیں یھ بھی انھیں کافروں نے ہی بتایا تھا. ورنہ ان کے لیے یہ تیل کیچڑ سے زیادہ کی اہمیت نہیں رکھتا تھا. کبھی سوچیے گا کے کافروں کو ہماری زندگی سے نکال دیا جائے تو کیا بچے گا ؟ نہ یھ کمپیوٹر بچے گا نہ یھ بلاگ بچے گا اور نھ ہی قوم کو آگاہی دینے والا کوئی بچے گا.

Feminisation of faith

THE lady cooking a new version of chicken curry is wearing a mint green hijab.
In the midst of adding spices and emptying out bowls of beaten yoghurt and thinly chopped ginger, she pauses to narrate a hadith.
Within the hour, viewers have been provided with an endearing combination: a new recipe with which to dazzle the family’s palate and religious instruction. The act of cooking, a dull chore that can be trying for the most creative of domestic divas, is thus given greater significance, providing sustenance for the stomach and solace for the soul.
This coalition of faith and food preparation is more than just an inventive way to boost the ratings of Pakistan’s television channels. In it are the visible clues of transformations that have taken place in the public sphere over the past several decades.
Over three decades ago, when Islamisation first appeared in Pakistan, it came via a combustible mix of militarism and dictatorship. A bastion of laws labelled Islamic and presented as Sharia made their appearance on the law books of a mangled Pakistan still coming to terms with its disturbed democracy. The Zina and Hudood Ordinances of 1979, followed by the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance and the Qanoon-i-Shahadat made the project complete with an injunction requiring all women appearing on the then single television channel to cover their hair.
Those laws were not digested whole. Groups like the Women’s Action Forum agitated against them through campaigns in the media and marches that defied military injunctions. Their struggle continued through dictatorship and on to democracy and through not one but two tenures of a female prime minister. But the laws remained and with age came the legitimacy that eluded them at their inception.
Wave after wave of secular, male and purportedly liberal male politicians tolerated their presence, eager to sideline the gripes of women insisting on their rights and unwilling to take on the censure of religious groups. But while legal Islamisation provided a focus for campaigns against dubiously ‘Islamic’ laws not ratified by a duly elected legislature or affirmed by Islamic scholars, cultural fronts were largely ignored by secular women’s civil society groups.
Drawing largely from upper middle-class and elite cadres, the organisational arrangements of these groups failed to penetrate the grassroots or seep into existing cultural arrangements, focusing less on the world women inhabited and more on the egalitarian, empowered society.
At the same time, religious groups often the offshoots of religious parties, pursued a contrasting strategy. Instead of public marches, they targeted the private spheres best known to females, sending gaggles of women, duly veiled, to the homes of their neighbours and friends and inviting them to tafseer sessions and prayer meetings.
In urban environments, with weakening extended family structures and the close proximity of teeming slums and apartment buildings, they filled a social vacuum with faith.
In contrast to secular women’s groups, religious revival movements focused on emphasising and highlighting women’s traditional work as central to society and as the integral building block of faith. Adhering to their precepts did not require abandoning what women were already doing — raising children and caring for the home — for some remote vision of empowerment or a march down a public street.
Instead of positioning empowerment and progress as an abandonment of femininity as understood by the ordinary housewife, it allowed the housewife to see significance in her actions that went beyond the limited meaning of laying out an adequate spread on the family dinner table.
Being ‘modern’ as they imagined it meant a rejection of these roles and of all that was familiar. It was tainted with the influences of the hated West that subjugated men and women through its imperialist policies. Conversely, religious revivalism, embodied in the mechanics of faith-based groups both evangelical and political, insisted that a willful embrace of the household under the umbrella of religiously defined duties and obligations possessed both ethical and spiritual significance.
The transformation of Pakistani culture did not end there. While the Islamisation of Pakistani femininity may have initially prodded housewives to attend tafseer meetings or pray and fast regularly, its next generation suggests far more than a benign avowal of cooking and cleaning.
Women leaving the home to participate in faith-based activities discovered, by experience and example, that faith could provide a compelling argument for leaving the home for reasons such as further education and employment. Duly veiled and covered, they had an argument for entering the public sphere without the moral aspersions that a patriarchal culture cast on women leaving the home.
The overtures of Islamist groups to Pakistani women began as a project to Islamise Pakistani culture and to thwart ‘modern’ ideas by a revival of faith; and as a celebration and heightening of the existing roles of femininity.
However, to the extent that such revivalism has been successful, it has also produced a congruent and possibly unexpected feminisation of Islamist movements, with all of these focusing more and more on women within their cadres.
If women were initially attracted to local Islamist rhetoric by the affirmation provided to their existing roles within the family, their persistent presence in many Islamist groups has produced a feminisation of an Islamist revival that is just as marked as the cultural transformation.
Perhaps the question of who conquered who — faith or feminists — is not the right one. Maybe the muddying of boundaries between feminism and faith, the language of choice mixed with the language of submission, is the recipe that will deliver the change that has so far eluded Pakistani women.
A cooking show with a hijab-clad woman offering creative recipes and religious wisdom may not seem like much. But within its parameters is a growing ease with the idea that women can define and perhaps even reform what they believe in.
The writer is an attorney teaching political philosophy and constitutional law.