\nThe saga continues, alas.\n<\/p>\n
Apparently, total agreement with (or silence concerning) Muqtedar Khan\u2019s inconsistent politics is now Someone who signed on at July 26, 2005 12:13 AM as Akram, you now officially qualify as a stalker, a cheap, in ethical and devious, small minded individual, determined to malign one of the most important American Muslims voices in this country, and also one of the rising stars on the Islamic intellectual horizon.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I am a \"stalker\" now, for writing about a prominent (and very outspoken) media personality\u2019s politics in my own blog.\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/p>\n Like many bloggers, I believe in something called free speech and holding \nThis is the third or fourth time you have attacked Dr. Muqtedar Khan, and what is more indicative of your cheap character, you repeatedly delete all the responses that your readers make. Do you do this to all your posts or you have just deleted the defense of Dr. Khan by Muslims, some of whom were known scholars in the discipline of Islamic studies.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I deleted those postings because I decided that some of my language was In the spirit of open debate, though, I will see if I can\u2019t repost all the \nIf you had left them they would have belied your false claims.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I didn\u2019t find them particularly convincing as a rebuttal to my points, but you\u2019re entitled to your opinion.\u00a0 Several were were non-sequiteurs (\"He\u2019s a great scholar of fiqh\u2013How dare you criticize his politics??\"), ad hominem attacks on me (I\u2019m a \"nobody\u2019, a \"hack\", a \"nurse\" second-guessing a great surgeon, \u2026),\u00a0 or vague appeals to emotion.\u00a0 <\/p>\n \nYou constantly accuse him of blamign it all on isam and Muslims, well you are wrong and a liar!\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Actually, I accuse him of inconsistency, of periodically writing things which make it easy for others <\/em>to blame Islam and Muslims.\u00a0 He\u00a0 doesn\u2019t do it himself (though his \"Memo to American Muslims\" came pretty close).\u00a0 So I accuse him of reinforcing many of the pernicious myths and doublestandards that permeate mainstream media coverage of Islam and Muslims.\u00a0 There\u2019s a big \nHere are some examples which ptove you entirely wrong, and yes they are not academic writings, they are op-eds written at the height of 9\/11 fever in prominent media:\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n See for yourself [Akram will soon delete this posting to, the shameless hack!].\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Fear of attack on Muslim civil Rights \u2014 fist by any Muslims as early as sept 17, 2001 in Detroint Free Press and Baltimore Sun:http:\/\/www.glocaleye.org\/threatfreedom.htm\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Attack on Bush again in Sept. 2001: Explaining the root causes of Muslim anger again in early 9\/11 days, completely contrary to your claim that he blames it all on Muslims. I read this in Salon.com and have been a fan of his courage since then:\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \nhttp:\/\/www.ijtihad.org\/memoa.htm\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \nI could go on and on: But these few examples should be sufficient.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Well, we obviously disagree.\u00a0 <\/p>\n I think his analysis tends to basicly serve established interests and crowd out sharper, more independent analysis.\u00a0 Imagine the good that would be done if the New York Times ran\u00a0 SoundVision\u2019s Abdul Malik Mujahid\u2019s painstakingly researched and eye-opening commentary<\/a> on post-9\/11 Muslim civil rights instead of Khan\u2019s eloquent but ultimately toothless discussion in \"putting the American in \u2018American Muslim\u2019\"<\/a>.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/p>\n [In a way, that NYT piece encapsulates this whole debate, as it is not without its insights and eloquence.\u00a0 It is the lack of additional perspectives in the mainstream media that makes it problematic.\u00a0 If it appeared in a media context where more critical voices like Mujahid\u2019s were heard with some regularity, I wouldn\u2019t have a problem with it.\u00a0 I wouldn\u2019t feel like an opportunity had been lost for real dialogue, real\u00a0<\/em>debate about our problems.\u00a0 ]<\/p>\n First of all, there is the \"Good Cop\/Bad Cop\" Unless someone wants to commission me to write an in-depth study, that\u2019ll \nReaders who wish to understood the extent of Akram\u2019s perfidy and meanness can read Dr. Khan\u2019s columns at www.ijtihad.org and www.glocaleye.org.\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \"Perfidy\"!\u00a0 I think you\u2019re getting a little carried away.\u00a0 Questioning MK\u2019s politics is treasonous?? <\/p>\n \nI also know that he regularly speaks at the annual conventiosn all the main American Muslim organizations, CAIR, MPAC, ISNA and works with them. It is indicative of the acceptance of his ideas by the community. Well, politics makes for strange bedfellows sometimes.\u00a0 <\/p>\n No, this isn\u2019t personal.\u00a0 I find him quite likable and believe his Also, if I was simply out to get him, I wouldn\u2019t be writing this in my blog, perhaps they even maintain sectarian hatred since Akram is an Ahmadi Muslim and Khan a Sunni Muslim. Aha, the plot thickens!\u00a0 Yeah, that\u2019s a big problem.\u00a0 Something needs to be done about all these But, seriously, it\u2019s interesting to see how the sectarian club is being Talk about a cheap, ad hominem attack.\u00a0 I guess you can be a Perhaps it\u2019s a compliment.\u00a0 Resorting to this kind of below-the-belt I\u2019m not going to dignify this by getting into personal beliefs about secondary matters that are In fact, I am no less a Sunni Ergo, I am a Sunni Muslim. <\/p>\n \nLet us see if he deltes this post and writes another last word on Khan.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n You\u2019ll notice that I haven\u2019t at any point chosen to disable comments\u2013which I suggest that we just agree to disagree.\u00a0 I\u2019m sure we both have better things to do.<\/p>\n P.S.\u00a0 I have not yet succeeded in finding a copy of the previous comments, as they were deleted along with my postings.\u00a0 I checked Google for a cached version and also tried WayBackMachine.org, but to no avail.\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n Here\u2019s my recollection of some of the most salient comments that were lost:<\/em><\/p>\n This is the best I can do.\u00a0 The point is that a number of readers vehemently protested my comments. BTW, if anyone can think of another place online where I could find a cached copy of those pages, please let me know and I\u2019ll repost them.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The saga continues, alas. Apparently, total agreement with (or silence concerning) Muqtedar Khan\u2019s inconsistent politics is now part of the Shahadah, and some people appear committed to browbeating me into recanting my heresy (last posting: “The Last Word on Muqtedar Khan and PMU”). Someone who signed on at July 26, 2005 12:13 AM as MMamdani […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":357,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[62],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-805","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-progressive-muslims"],"yoast_head":"\n
\npart of the Shahadah<\/em>, and some people appear committed to browbeating me into recanting my heresy (last posting: \"The Last Word on Muqtedar Khan and PMU\"<\/a>). <\/p>\n
\nMMamdani<\/a> wrote a nasty comment (read it in its entirety here<\/a>) that,
\nas eager as I am to move on, requires a response : <\/p>\n\n
\npublic figures accountable for their actions that affect the public.\u00a0 If that seems like reprehensible
\nbid\u2019a<\/a><\/em> to some, that\u2019s simply not my problem.<\/p>\n\n
\noverly harsh (hardly a rare occurrence on the Internet, as one hurriedly types
\nmessage on the fly) and I needed to partly reword it to be more fair.\u00a0 Typepad
\n(the blogging service I use) doesn\u2019t allow you to delete a message without
\ndeleting its comments, so they are gone, as well..<\/p>\n
\ncomments.\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n
\n
\ndifference.\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.glocaleye.org\/crusade.htm <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n
\n
\n
\nroutine I mentioned before, which if one accepts as a premise would explain much
\nof this.\u00a0 Second, I think a closer reading of his writings reveals their
\ndissent to be very safe and carefully limited in scope vis-a-vis the Beltway
\nconsensus.\u00a0 This is actually rather tame stuff when you consider the gravity of the problems, misconceptions and doublestandards that are at work.\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/p>\n
\nhave to suffice.\u00a0 I have other things to do with my time than parse these
\nessays line-by-line to satisfy critics.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\nPeople Like Svend are nursing personal grudges,\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\nintentions to be good, but that doesn\u2019t change how problematic some of his
\npolitics are or how they need to be openly debated.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\nwhich is read by a handful of people.\u00a0 I\u2019d be writing a systematic expose
\nfor a publication (a la the Z Magazine piece).\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n
\n\u00a0 <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\nAhmadis running around persecuting Sunnis.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\nbroken out here, even though this question has no bearing whatsoever on what I\u2019ve written
\nabout Khan, or the views and causes I\u2019ve advocated elsewhere.<\/p>\n
\nliberal reformer and still play the same old takfir<\/em> game.<\/p>\n
\npunch is generally a sign of being unable to respond to your
\nopponent\u2019s arguments.<\/p>\n
\nopen to interpretation and which are nobody\u2019s business but my own,
\nbut I will note for the record that I no Qadiani.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\nMuslim than Khan or anybody else is, as I believe in the Sunni Aqeedah<\/em>,
\nincluding the Khatm an-Nabiyin <\/em>(the Finality of Prophethood). And I accept Hazrat Abu Bakr as-Saddiq (ra),
\nHazrat Umar Farooq (ra), Hazrat Uthman Ghani (ra), and Hazrat Ali ibn Abu Talib (ra).\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n
\ncan easily be done in Typepad merely by clicking a checkbox\u2013even though I expected
\nto receive abusive responses.\u00a0 Unlike some people, I believe in and am
\ncomfortable with public debate.<\/p>\n\n
<\/em><\/li>\n
<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
<\/em><\/p>\n