Of course, all opinions can be sought because we believe in freedom of speech, but shouldn’t obvious disclaimers and representations be made available so that the public can distinguish between mainstream and fringe opinions? If fringe opinions are used, then at least shouldn’t mainstream views also be obtained? And wouldn’t it be fairer if the views were published in proportion to the views held? So, if 1% held a certain Islamic opinion versus 99% holding an opposite view, shouldn’t the space and press devoted to the 1% be close to 1% and not close to 90% as it is now?

So, “media”: please start doing their homework before reporting Muslim opinion. Please STOP picking out any Muslim (by name or claim) to represent the mainstream, everyday Muslim, even if he claims “subject expertise” but is not widely followed by Muslims. And here’s why :

1. Such reporting is inaccurate and flawed. You can not pick up a fringe element to represent a majority.
2. It is unfair to the majority, especially when the majority may not agree with what the fringe is representing.
3. When you pick and choose those figures, especially the ones despised and sidelined by the vast majority of Muslims, then the message you are sending to Muslims is:
   1. You (the media) will decide who represents us.
   2. You (the media) feels that Muslims cannot decide for ourselves who we want to represent us.
   3. You (the media) are creating “Uncle Toms” to represent the opinion that You (the media) want people to hear: the opinion that suits your fancy.
4. It is important that you learn to discern between the sects of Islam and NOT choose people from a sect, whose practice is vastly different from mainstream Muslims (such as Aga Khanis/Habashis/etc.). Because most likely such a person will not be able to properly represent the mainstream Muslim opinion (even if he or she has no ill intentions).
5. For God’s sake, recognize that apostates do NOT represent Islam. What else would you get from them other than a biased version of Islam? If bias is your angle, fine, but don’t try to make it sound as if this is how all Muslims feel! And also, please know that Qadiyanis/Ahmedis do NOT represent Muslims. They are not EVEN Muslims, and 99% of Muslims agree on this. So either go and change the mind of the 99% Muslims or STOP using these Qadiyanis as figureheads for Muslims!
6. Finally, there are two reasons to report about Muslims these days:
   1. Critical analysis and the desire to send a message to everyday Muslims, whether it be to prevent extremism or encourage integration. Well, let me say it bluntly: it is FAILING! Just like the Western Al-Hurra TV experiment failed in the Middle East, similarly the choice of your Muslim talking-h eads will not help any such message. You cannot have “foreign” elements telling the “locals” what is right or wrong. Similarly, you cannot have fringe element telling mainstream Muslims what “Islam says”.
   2. Representing Islam to non-Muslims: Unless you want to feed the everyday non-Muslim a warped, fringe view of the Muslims, stop FINDING fringe elements to discuss what we believe and how we practice. A classic example of such bad reporting was the Hajj storyby a journalist who does not even identify herself as a Muslim!

So, I am sick of Tarek Fatah‘s tirades, the Communications Director of the fringe organization Muslim Canadian Congress. The fact is that most of his positions are outright unIslamic and unrepresenting of the vast majority of Muslims. For instance, his organization endorsed same-sex marriage, campaigned against Islamic family courts, and pretty much came out on the wrong side of every mainstream Muslim opinion. So, WHY, does any of the media give ANY credibility to this tiny group of fringe nut-cases?

While I am at it, let me also tell you who else does NOT represent the vast majority of Muslims. I should add that there is no doubt that the fringe has a following in the fringe, and that there are followers of all sorts of nut-cases (examples: Church of Scientology, Submitters, etc.). Let me also state that the web, esp. the blogosphere probably has a disproportionate burden of extreme “Muslim” leftists, progressives, and nut-cases. A very important disclaimer: all the people in this list are not equal in their separation from mainstream Islam. Some in the list are not even Muslim, while others are Muslim and have a small following (still not close to being widespread though):

• Irshad Manji. Do I need to say more? A must-read crucifixion by Dr. Asad Abu Khalil onDemocracyNow, and a good article on ‘Aqoul should do.
• Thankfully, the entire slew of Islamophobic wolves who donned sheep’s clothing for the so-called “Muslim manisfesto”, provide an EXCELLENT reference list of the NOTs. ‘Aqoul nicely summarized the effort as ultra-liberal, pretentious rhetoric delivered by self-proclaimed moderate Muslims. The list includes the illustrious Muslim-bashers such as Ayan I-only-lied-to-get-asylumHirsi, Salman Rushdie, Taslima Nasreen, Ibn Warraq and other islamophobes.
• Stephen Schwartz. Yes, he is a “closet” Muslim, and he tries his best to make sure his Islam doesn’t effect his worldviews and probably his life. Schwartz is a follower of the Kabbani cult, and still hangs out with the remnants of Kabbani’s group and other similar extremist-sufi cults in America. He makes no secret of his neocon identity. Justin Raimondo, editor of Antiwar.com, tears him apart on “Liar, Wackball, Creep“. Our own Amir Butler has also done a fantastic job on him. Schwartz runs the non-profit organization “Islamic Pluralism”, which Louay Safi dismissed as an effort to “invent” moderate Muslims by “hardliners” trying to discredit mainstream American Muslim organizations. Safi charged that “those who are busy producing moderate Muslims have long time ago moved from the center to the ideological fringes of the American society.”
• Khalid Abou Fadl, who makes no secret of the fact that he follows an early Islamic sect called the “Mu’tazilah” (considered deviant by consensus of the Sunni scholars). Abou Fadl has also been active in sitting in trials and cases against other Muslims! For instance, he was a witness for the prosecution against a group of Muslims in Detroit. Abou Fadl shared the prosecution expertise alongside such Islamophobes as Waleed Phares, dueling against the team of experts of an Arab Christian (Hallaq) and an Arab of Jewish/Christian heritage (Haykel) for the defense. In other words he shared a spot on the defense team with a well-known Islamophobe against other Muslims who were being defended by non-Muslims! Abou Fadl probably has more following than any others on this list, but he still holds fringe views.
• Also, media friends, scratch off the “ex-extremists” who suddenly become your darlings for their views and historical accounts, accounts that are usually discredited not long after. Ed Hussaincomes immediately to mind, and others like him. More on him here and here. One way of figuring out who not to pick for Muslims, is someone who is actively propagated and plugged for by the Islamophobes. The fact that Melanie Phillips, the notorious Muslim-bashing UK version of Robert Spencer/Horowitz praises Ed Hussein is a tell-tale sign that Ed does NOT speak for Muslims.

I will also mention some others in passing remarks: Reza Aslan, for example writes well and many of his opinions are good. But he is of Shia persuasion and obviously progressive, so he does not represent the views of the majority of “conservative” (as are most in the mainstream) Sunnis in America. Similarly, Eboo Patel, is an Ismaili/Aga-Khani, who is eloquent, but is still someone who represents a fringe section of those who call themselves Muslims. And not because they are malicious or insincere but because they have fundamentally different beliefs. I mean, Patel’s Ismaili faith doesn’t require the hijab, doesn’t require the 5-times prayers, and most of the Ismaili jurisprudence is completely different from mainstream sunnis AND shias. How can he speak for the challenges that practicing mainstream Muslims face in everyday life?

I am not advocating that the views of these fringe elements be completely ignored. But proportion and fairness should be employed, by allowing “mainstreamers” to also speak, and preferably speak more!

Finally, on what may be a controversial note for some, there are many bloggers who represent the fringe element/opinions of those perched up by the media (as embodied in the names mentioned above), some of whom are parroting the opinions of the Abou Fadls and the Tarek Fatahs. To be fair, I should add that not everything these authors write is necessarily bad or evil. In fact, some of the articles defending Muslims and Islam are good, just like some of what Abou Fadl has written is good. But when these authors delve into Islamic theology and jurisprudence and especially, the amusing attempts at “ijtihad”, then that is where we draw the line. And that is where the media cannot let those fringe opinions represent Muslims.

So, without further ado, the list includes…

After much thought, and remembering the spat last time, I decided to withhold listing website names. Readers, most of whom already know the fringe, are nevertheless free to use this space to discuss. But I would like to share some tell-tale signs about the bloggers who do not represent mainstream views and what to look for in their posts (more often than not):

• The constant theme of “ijtihad”, when clearly the writer has no Islamic authority or training to indulge in it.
• The constant reference to the “fatwas” and opinions of the scholars of the fringe. So, you will find multiple uses of Khaled Abou Fadl’s opinions or the opinions of other barely-known “scholars” or if known, then notorious for strange opinions.
• Even if a blogger sticks to mainstream scholars but frequently highlights strange opinions, jumping from one faqeeh to another to another (many times of different methodologies), then consider that as a danger sign as well. I think most Muslims recognize that if one goes “fatwa-shopping”, one can find pretty much any opinion or verdict that one is looking for among the differences of opinion. That is why scholars of the mainstream forbid a person from searching for edicts that matches with his or her desires.
• A multitude of posts discussing strange and new opinions that most Muslims have never heard of. A “new” tafsir of a verse or prodding the “latest” ruling on a matter that reverses the traditions of the majority of this Ummah’s scholars. Moreover, many times, these opinions are based on other opinions, not textual evidences. In fact, it is not strange to find “muftis” who don’t even know Arabic, and base their “fatwas” on the available English translations! An example of prodding strange opinions is the questioning of the very obligation of hijab, while this issue has been a closed and shut topic for the vast majority of this Ummah’s MAINSTREAM scholars.
• Posts that question the authority of Sunnah, implicitly or explicitly. Or push forth the idea of “only-Quran”. This of course is similar to what has always been pushed by deviant sects offline– take away Sunnah and you can interpret Quran anyway you want!
• Post that mock specific ahadith or open it up to questioning, simply based on the poster’s own dislike of what it conveys. An example of this would be discarding the hadith of angelic curse upon the wife who refuses intimate relations for no reason. Remember if one can reject one hadith today based on one’s desires, then what stops this person from rejecting another tomorrow? This is a door that once opened can never be closed
• Posts that pull out one or two “funny” fatwas to mock. Many times these posters are equal-opportunity fatwa-pullers. So, they will pick out fatwas from any of the “traditional” or what they consider “fundo” scholars, be it “traditionalist”, “salafi”, etc. And then they will pick these fatwas apart and openly mock the scholar, the opinion and eventually everyone who might follow this scholar in other opinions. These posters do not have any benefit of doubt for the scholar, and forget that what is posted is usually a translation of the answer in response to a translated question, and it is entirely possible that something may be “lost in translation”. Disclaimer: MR is not one of them (for those who know what I am talking about)

Who represents mainstream Muslims then?

Many. Find someone at CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, MAS, TDC. I think the media has gotten it right a few times with Hamza Yusuf, Zaid Shakir. But we need more of Ingrid Mattsons too. More of Siraj Wahhajs. More of Yasir Qadhis, Johari Maliks. More of Yasser Fazaqas, more of Suhaib Webbs, more of Usama Hasans, more of Mohamed AlShareefs, more of any of the Sunni Shayookh, the Shayookh of deobandis, tablighis, ahl-hadith, ikhwanis, more of any of the signatories of the Sunni Pledge and even beyond. Why? Because most Muslims are confident that these scholars have two important foundations, even if everyone doesn’t agree on ALL their opinions: (1) a firm understanding of the religion and (2) more or less in line with the mainstream Sunni opinions.

So MEDIA, if you are having trouble locating one, contact us and we’ll put you in touch with a couple!

See also: Join the “Tarek Fatah Doesn’t Represent Me” facebook group.

Tarek Fatah and His Masters Voice

This article by Tarek Fatah can be described as a classic yellow journalism a la NEWS OF THE WORLD  genre. The article is so absurd, that it can only be published in Toronto Sun, not noted for excellence. This goes to show the credibility of the rest of the OP-ED articles in this newspaper. Its thesis is implying that Pakistani people, government, and Armed Forces had sinister designs towards Israel. As one of the few Pakistanis, who has travelled to Israel as part of professional duties. I have talked to several  Israelis, they know that Pakistan’s Nuclear and Missile Program are defensive and a reaction to India’s introduction of nuclear and ballistic technology in the Pak-Hind Sub-Continent. Mr.Fatah’s knowledge about Pakistan’s missile technology is superficial, at best. For his information, none of Pakistan’scurrently deployed ballistic missiles have a range greater than 2500 Km.  Tel Aviv is nearly 3600 Km from Islamabad.A Pakistani nuclear strike against Israel is not only implausible, but unthinkable, because such a strike would kills millions of Muslims, mostly Arabs, who live in Israel. This would also mean anhilation of the People of The Book, Torah and Zabur, The Psalms. Pakistan may have its fair share of lunatics, but, 180 million Pakistanis are part of the human family and care about other nations, even if, they are hostile to Pakistan. Therefore, Mr.Fatah should not only get his facts straight, and brain in care, before, letting loose with his pen. Also, a paper like Toronto Sun, should do a FACT CHECK, before publishing articles, which are full of inaccuracies!

BTW, This socalled fear-monger, does not know that mother of Imran Khan’s children, has Jewish parents, Sir James Goldsmith and Lady Annabel Vane-Tempest-Stewart. So There!

This is such a preposterous article that we would like our readers to judge for themselves.

Here is the factually inaccurate article by attention starved Tarek Fatah (Ref): A rebuttal also follows

Return of the mad nuclear scientist

By Tarek Fatah

Dr. A.Q. Khan, left, with Imran Khan — founder of the political party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.

As Israeli politicians and intelligence officials bicker publicly about Iran’s capability of making a nuclear bomb and its capacity to strike Israel, they seem blind to what is happening next door in Pakistan that has both the bomb and strike capability, and soon the political leadership to order such a strike.

Like the rest of the West, Jerusalem seems incapable of sifting through the myriad of complexities that allow Pakistan, the most dangerous enemy of the West to escape scrutiny. Islamabad’s military capabilities are not restricted to nuclear bombs alone; it has deviously managed to squeeze billions of dollars from the very West its undeclared jihad wishes to destroy.

Israel’s defence minister Ehud Barak insists Iran is “determined to obtain nuclear weapons,” adding, “And they are getting closer. We are approaching what I’ve termed the immunity zone — the moment when Iran’s nuclear program will be sufficiently developed and secretly concealed, that it will be immune to any surgical attacks.” Israel is particularly concerned with Iran’s underground Fordo site buried deep inside a mountain near the city of Qom, where centrifuges are enriching uranium to 20 percent purity.

Well, unbeknownst to the Israelis and perhaps the Americans, the man who supplied the Iranians the centrifuges and who amassed a fortune selling stolen nuclear know-how from the Netherlands and components manufactured in Pakistan to Iran, Dr. A. Q. Khan is being set up to become the next president of nuclear-armed Pakistan.

Time magazine called this dangerous rogue scientist “The Merchant of Menace” in 2005 and had this to report on Khan’s Iranian connection: “… IAEA officials say, [A. Q.] Khan did establish contact with the Iranians. A key member of the network has told investigators that Iran bought centrifuges from Khan. The IAEA reports that the Khan network also provided Iran with blueprints to manufacture more P-1 and P-2 centrifuges.”

Seven years ago Time reported, “Khan is under house arrest, his every move monitored by Pakistani government agents. He is said to be in failing health,” predicting Khan “will probably live out his days a recluse.”

Not so fast.

The man Pakistan promised would never be allowed to peddle his nuclear wares again, is today a free man and has teamed up with the notorious pro-Taliban Pakistani politician, Imran Khan donning the title of ‘Patron’ of cricketer-turned politician’s political party.

While the anti-American Imran Khan is being groomed by Pakistan’s military-judicial-jihadi complex to take over as the country’s next prime minister after the 2013 elections, the mad scientist Dr. A. Q. Khan is being promoted as the country’s next president.

Already a Facebook page has emerged with the title “We want Imran Khan as PM and AQ Khan as president.”

The possibility of President A. Q. Khan of Pakistan is already creating waves in The Netherlands; Holland is to host the 2014 World Nuclear Security Summit where Pakistan will be at the table and some members of the Dutch media are raising the issue with alarm.

It seems neither the U.S. nor Israel have woken up to the scenario of a nuclear-armed Pakistan headed by a pro-Taliban prime minister and a rogue nuclear scientist as the president; one who admits to have sold nuclear parts and know-how to both Iran and North Korea.