Islam and hadiths: Sifting and combing

Point well made in The Economist on religious and scriptural interpretation, and whether or not they lead to moderation:

Mr [Jonathan] Brown [author of Misquoting Muhammad] takes particular issue with The Economist for predicting that the information age will undermine the authority of old-time scholars and revolutionise the way in which ideas about Islam’s core teachings are formed. Given his fascination with long intellectual traditions, the author insists that nothing good can come of people going straight to texts which can foster extremist ideas unless they are leavened by scholarly wisdom.

In our defence, it is an already observable fact that electronics are making it much easier for ordinary Muslims, or self-taught “experts”, to bypass the older authorities and come to their own judgements on what their holy texts say and how they should be read. And as The Economist writing on the subject has made clear, this change can have bad consequences as well as good. Amateur theologians, bent on bypassing the professionals, can come to enlightened conclusions or appalling ones, such as the gimcrack theology used to justify acts of mega-terror by al-Qaeda or Islamic State.

However it’s also worth pointing out that neither conscientious scholarship nor participation in a centuries-old chain of editing and learning are foolproof guarantees of moderation. True, scholarly activities like hadith-sifting can sometimes help to mellow a religion. But remember, too, that the leaders of the Iranian revolution, who raised the standard of militant political Islam in the modern world, included many conscientious scholars.

Islam and hadiths: Sifting and combing | The Economist.

Omnibus budget bill restricts refugee access to social assistance

Whether or not you agree with the restriction (given that the major changes to the refugee system have dramatically reduced the numbers claiming refugee status, hard not to see this as more ideologically driven than based upon evidence), it is abuse of Parliament to include this measure (along with far too many others) in the Omnibus Budget Bill.

Not the first government to stuff budget bills with measures that should be debated and reviewed separately (Liberals under Chrétien started the trend), but as the Globe editorial notes, this government has taken this to new lows –Harper’s Ottawa is Omnibusted):

Although he did not take issue with the timing, New Democrat MP Craig Scott said the government uses omnibus bills precisely to avoid scrutiny of controversial provisions like the refugee social assistance cuts.

Scott called the social assistance and health care cuts “a one-two punch,” aimed at discouraging vulnerable, desperate people from finding their way to Canada and claiming refugee status, even though many claimants turn out to be genuine refugees.

“It suggests to me that they are pursuing the Fortress Canada approach to refugees to the nth degree,” said Scott, adding that the NDP will press the government to split the refugee provision from the budget bill.

“We want this pulled, simply because it’s frankly so offensive that they can’t justify the substance, let alone how they’re doing it.”

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Chris Alexander defended the notion of restricting refugees access to social assistance in essentially the same language the government used to justify limiting their access to health care.

“Canada has the most fair and generous immigration system in the world,” said Kevin Menard.

“However, Canadians have no tolerance for those who take unfair advantage of our generosity.”

Menard added that allowing provinces to impose minimum residency requirements would build on the savings already racked up as a result of reforms to the refugee asylum system, which he pegged at $1.6 billion over five years.

He stressed, however, that it’s up to each province to decide whether to impose minimum periods of residence to qualify for social assistance.

Deputy Liberal leader Ralph Goodale called the governments latest move on refugees the product of a “nasty, vindictive and irresponsible” ideology.

Omnibus budget bill restricts refugee access to social assistance – Politics – CBC News.

More articles on radicalization of interest

Ongoing amount of reporting and commentary on radicalization and fundamentalism.

Starting with Premier Couillard’s measured (i.e., not rushing it) legislation requiring faces to be uncovered when giving or receiving government services, and what initiatives, if any, are planned with respect to non-violent fundamentalists inPhilippe Couillard promet d’agir sur lintégrisme religieux | Politique québécoise.

More meetings within the Muslim community in Montreal, reminding of the need for measures to improve the economic integration as part of any anti-radicalization in L’intégration plutôt que la stigmatisation.

CBC report on Self-radicalized and adrift: The shared traits of the ‘lone wolf’ killers discussed the commonalities but with experts (Dawson, Zekulin) noting correctly that there is no one pattern for those drawn to violent extremism.

For those interested, a fairly good overview of the respective roles and responsibilities of the security agencies involved in countering radicalization in Michael Zehaf-Bibeau and Martin Couture-Rouleau: How Canada tracks homegrown radicals.

And while only one “slice” of those radicalized, Maclean’s discusses issues related to converts as many extremists are in Islam’s conversion problem, echoing Imam Soharwardy’s call for more “vetting” by mosques of those wishing to convert (Prominent Muslim cleric urges imams to vet new Islamic converts).

“Everything Poisons Religion” « The Dish

Interesting discussion on Karen Armstrong’s book, Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence, and the links between religion and imperial power and the degree that religion can be separate from economics, social issues and politics:

The conversion of Constantine also meant the conscription of Christianity. It was not long before Augustine of Hippo was developing the convenient theory of the ‘just war’. Similarly the ahadith, the later reports of the Prophet’s sayings, confer a spiritual dimension on warfare which it doesn’t have in the Koran. Militant Sikhs today prefer to quote the martial teachings of the Tenth Guru rather than those of their founder Guru Nanak, who taught that only ‘he who regards all men as equals is religious’.

“Everything Poisons Religion” « The Dish.

The birthright citizenship debate – LA Times Editorial

LA Times editorial in support of birthright citizenship.

No numbers or estimates, however, on how many cases of “birth tourism,” although USA has greater concerns over illegal immigrants living in the USA, rather than the “birth tourists:”

Birthright citizenship is an emblem of equality and inclusion. Many other countries confer citizenship on the basis of bloodlines, what the law calls jus sanguinis. That makes sense when nationality is conceived of primarily in terms of ancestry or tribe or race or ethnicity.

But in America, a nation of immigrants, citizenship is defined differently. That principle was established when the 14th Amendment was adopted, and it should not be tinkered with today in an effort to keep out unwanted immigrants. Indeed, the decision to grant citizenship to everyone born on U.S. soil was made in part so that members of particular minority groups would not be required to win the favor of the majority to claim the privileges of American citizenship.

Birthright citizenship provides a clear standard that sweeps away questions about whether someone has the proper ethnicity or antecedents to be an American. There are too many examples in history of people being victimized because of who their parents were. There is no good reason to add to them.

The birthright citizenship debate – LA Times.

Reza Aslan on the ‘Sudden Jihad Syndrome’

Good take down of  the rhetoric:

Indeed, there’s even a term for this idea: Sudden Jihad Syndrome — an imaginary contagion invented by the neo-conservative commentator Daniel Pipes to describe how any normal-seeming Muslim can suddenly snap for no reason at all and go on a murderous rampage thus proving Pipes point that “all Muslims must be considered potential terrorists”.

Strangely, this causal connection between belief and behavior seems not to be as aggressively applied if the criminal in question claims a different religion than Islam. Take the example of the Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik, who slaughtered 77 people, the majority of them children, in 2011. Breivik explicitly defined himself as a Christian warrior fighting what he called an “existential conflict” with Islam.

Nevertheless, a great deal of the media coverage surrounding his actions seemed to take for granted that his crime had nothing to do with his Christian identity — that it was based instead on his right-wing ideology, or his anti-immigrant views, or his neglectful upbringing, or even, as Ayan Hirshi Ali famously argued, because his view that “Europe will be overrun by Islam” was being censored by a politically correct media, leaving him “no other choice but to use violence.”

All of the above explanations for Breiviks behavior, including his religious beliefs, are pertinent in understanding the motivations for his behavior. But to argue that Breiviks or Bibeaus actions were motivated solely by their religious beliefs — or that their religious beliefs necessarily dictated their actions — is simply irrational.

How strong a tie between faith and terror? | News – Home.

RCMP says Ottawa shooting driven by ideological motives, Psychology of radicalization

It is not an either/or dynamic but in many cases, a complex mix of elements that make a person more susceptible to radicalization messaging. We may crave simple explanations but, as the RCMP knows all too well given is Countering Violent Extremism programming, the reality is messier:

The killing of a Canadian soldier in Ottawa and subsequent gunfight on Parliament Hill was driven by “ideological and political motives,” RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson said Sunday.

A statement from Paulson said the man responsible — Michael Zehaf Bibeau — made a video recording of himself just prior to last Wednesday’s attack.

“The RCMP has identified persuasive evidence that Michael Zehaf Bibeau’s attack was driven by ideological and political motives,” Paulson’s statement said. “The RCMP is conducting a detailed analysis of the video for evidence and intelligence.”

The statement, released during the Sunday dinner hour, said the video could not be immediately made public.

RCMP says Ottawa shooting driven by ideological motives.

RCMP calls Parliament shootings a ‘terrorist attack,’ driven by ideology

And a caution in labelling Zehaf-Bibeau as ‘crazy’ by psychiatrist Dr. Allen Frances:

Mental illness can make people more susceptible to extreme religious or political teachings or fanaticism, he said. The killer may have “globed onto” radical teachings that brought meaning “to what was previously his meaningless life.

“And if he was willing to kill and die for this, that is regrettable. It is something that all of us have to begin to worry about — how we’re going to prevent others from finding meaning in this bizarre way, this destructive way,” Frances said.

Zehaf-Bibeau was a danger to society and to himself. But believing his actions those of a single, mentally sick man — a one-off aberration, an individual act — is easier than addressing the systemic problems that are dangerous and harder to deal with, Frances said, including disaffected youth and a society that permits easy access to drugs, weapons and bizarre political and religious extremisms.

“It’s hard to solve those problems. It’s hard to solve the alienation of youth, particularly youth of first- or second-generation immigrants,” Frances said.

“It’s easy to say, ‘oh, he’s just crazy.’ “

Prominent psychiatrist cautions against rush to portray Ottawa shooter Zehaf-Bibeau as ‘crazy’

Two contrasting reports from Quebec, the first regarding Imam Omar Koné and the need to counter Islamist ideology and doctrine (Appel à lutter contre les intégristes) and Karim Akouche, argues (again) in favour of the PQ’s Quebec Values Charter, as if that would make any difference in dissuading potential extremists (Radicalisation: réveillez-vous, belles âmes).

Noah shows the path against zealotry: Marmur | Toronto Star

Good piece by Dov Murmur on liberal religion within each tradition:

Looking at the havoc caused by those who purport to be God’s trailblazers, in our time no less than in ages past, we may have good reason to reconsider our admiration for Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice his son in ostensible obedience to God. The story seems to hint at the potentially destructive nature of religious zeal and reminds us that we should judge biblical characters by their actions, not by their apparently heroic intentions.

This may shock pious Muslims, Christians and Jews, but it will strengthen the resolve of progressive dissenters who seek to distance themselves from religious fanaticism, even when it appears to be devout.

Scripture indicates that God is on the side of the dissenters. It is God who prevents Abraham from carrying out the execution. God doesn’t seem to tolerate Abrahamic zeal, even when the good intentions are acknowledged. Child sacrifice is always senseless murder and a scandalous affront to God.

Malala Yousafzai and Kailash Satyarthi are powerful witnesses to it. Their Nobel Peace Prize is an acknowledgement that good people in the world are on the side of God when they stand up against zealots, especially on behalf of children.

…To opt for Noah is to follow in the footsteps of the prophet Micah who teaches that God requires of us “only to do justice and to love goodness, and to walk humbly with your God.” Humility — walking with God — manifests true and wholesome faith; fanaticism — purporting to make way for God — often becomes its lethal opposite.

This is the credo of liberal religion within each tradition. It’s also the basis for mature interfaith relations. What binds adherents of different faiths isn’t their zeal but their humility before God. Holy Writ endorses their stance.

Religious fanaticism, on the other hand, is invariably divisive. Zealots always fight others, not only non-believers but often also people within their own religious tradition who don’t share their zeal. Which is yet another reason to opt for Noah.

Noah shows the path against zealotry: Marmur | Toronto Star.

Susan Bibeau’s letter to Postmedia News

Worth reading in its entirety but some highlights:

Most will call my son a terrorist, I don’t believe he was part of an organization or acted on behalf of some grand ideology or for a political motive. I believe he acted in despair. I am not sure of the meaning of being radicalized. I doubt he watched much islamic propaganda, I doubt he wanted to go fight in Syria. I know he believed the US government responsible for killing thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, that he did say that.

I believe his actions did create terror. He did mention having met once one of the persons mentioned in the media, person that I believe went to Syria to fight, he also said that person would have left Canada with the passport of someone else. He had met him in the mosque. He mentioned having asked the Imam of the Mosque if he knew of this persons’ activities and the Imam would have said no.

My son was not on the list of persons under supervision by CSIS, that further supports my belief of the last desperate act of a person not well in his mind, a person wanting to be killed. I will add that I am not unbiased in this so I may be wrong, I have not been following much of the information on the news, so there may be a lot I don’t know.

For me mental illness, is at the centre of this tragedy. At some point in his life, my son had a serious addiction to drugs, I don’t know if he overcame it, but doing so much of it could have left permanent marks and led to his current mental state. His conversations were often strange.

Was he crazy? I never could have imagined that he would do something like this, but he was not well either. He refused any of my help, he preferred staying in the homeless shelter rather than coming to my house.

I will always be left with the question if I could have said something else, insisted more to help…. The emptiness and pain are overwhelming.

In closing, I wish to apologize to everyone, I am deeply sorry and deeply saddened by the events. Violence never solves anything, however it seems ever present, so easily the response.

Susan Bibeau’s letter to Postmedia News.

Radicalization and the Ottawa Shooting: Weekend Commentary

Weekend news and commentary I found relevant and interesting.

Consistent messaging from a number of political figures and media commentators on the need for more than security approaches in combatting radicalization. Premiers Wynne and Couillard stress the community and societal aspects in Curbing radicalization a community issue: Wynne |  Toronto Sun.

A great deal of speculation on what measures the Government may be considering (beyond the already announced increase in CSIS powers), ranging from Online hate speech could be curtailed under new anti-terror push (ironic, given the Government’s removal of online hate speech from the Canadian Human Rights Act, and to strip the federal human rights commission’s power to investigate such complaints) to greater use of preventive detention in Tories hint at even tougher anti-terror laws. John Ivison thinks the template will be the UK in  Conservatives’ new anti-terror laws likely to mirror ‘immensely controversial’ U.K. legislation.

Stephen Maher sounds a note of caution, considering the Government’s record on privacy, oversight, and transparency, in Harper government’s intelligence agenda a cause for worry.

Interestingly, Benjamin Perrin, formerly of PMO, argues that existing laws are adequate (including the proposed additions to CSIS’ powers)in Our laws are up to the homegrown terror threat, and Ian Brodie, former chief of staff to PM Harper, advocates for an all-party non-partisan approach to improving security on Parliament Hill in Ian Brodie: There is no reason to turn Parliament Hill into an armed fortress.

And as the debate starts, Scott Reid notes that We’ve seen MPs unite, now we need them to be divided to ensure a full discussion and debate about the appropriate responses to the attacks.

Jon Kay discusses how the immediacy of video heightens fear in Did attack on Parliament really change our lives forever? even if incidents and risk are relatively low.

Doug Saunders explores the grey line between ideology and pathology in The lone wolf: Is it ideology or pathology? with both Islamic-inspired and other extremism examples. Margaret Wente dismisses arguments over blowback over intervention in What do we do about the Islamic State fanboys? without the nuance of Saunders with respect to ideology and pathology. Andrew Coyne takes a similar talk, with more nuance, and makes the valid point that We got off relatively lightly this time. We may not be so lucky the next.

Some nice commentary contrasting restrained Canadian and hyperventilated US coverage of the attacks by Dean Obeidallah in To US media Canadian shooter being Muslim ends investigation.

Douglas Todd reports on the Burnaby Mosque which essentially expelled Zahaf-Bibeau given his intolerant views in Is Burnaby mosque a victim of its own openness?

And while there have been a few incidents against Muslims (Islamophobia: the ugly side of the municipal election?), there has also been support for those Muslims or Muslim institutions (Volunteers help clean vandalism from Cold Lake mosque). And within the Muslim community, some strong messages against radicalization during Ottawa Friday prayers The Roots of Radicalizaton and the Education to Prevent It among others.