Time article "Struggle for the Soul of Islam" TERRIBLE!

[poliguru]

It was one of the most ethnocentric and jingoistic pieces I've seen come out of them for a long time - and they have quite a few. It's in the Sept. 13 issue (cover story). Just a few pieces:
1. They give as an example of Islam extremism the fact that Pakistani Islamic schools teach the Koran in Arabic, even though Pakistanis don't generally speak the language. Muslims, though, believe that since God gave Muhammad the message in Arabic, that is the only form it can take as the message of God. The Koran in any other language is only considered an interpretation of the Koran, not the real thing. That's a basic Muslim belief.
2. They noted that favorable views among Muslims worldwide toward the US have dropped. Duh. They failed to note that favorable views toward the US among ALL peoples of the world have dropped.
3. They mention that there are fundamentalists that come out of both branches of Islam, but then they inexplicably provide a map of Shi'ite and Sunni statistics throughout the world. It seemed to imply that one was connected to fundamentalism and one was not.
4. They note that radical fundamentalism has a much smaller following in Asia than in the Middle East and seem puzzled by this fact. Perhaps it is due to the US's treatment of each area, hm?
5. They mention France's law banning head scarves in schools (which is a disgusting, narrow-minded law from a country with a long history of religious oppression) in the context of "Most Muslim leaders in France have backed the law." They then characterize Muslims opposing the law as fundamentalists. That's like banning people from wearing cross necklaces and then calling people who are upset fundamentalists.
6. In the section entitled, "Does the Koran condone killing?" the only things they say are that the current interpretation is that beheading is only for the heat of battle. Funny how they make no mention of the Koran's specific instructions to harm no civilians, women, children, etc. and its other peaceful messages. 'Cause after all, we want people to think the Koran is just an instruction booklet for terrorists.
7. They play the "oppression women" card way too often. Yes, it's an issue, but in an article about the soul of Islam?

Basically, it covered and reinforced Islam as the caricature Americans have made it. I was disgusted and am writing to them about it. Please write - having articles like this as people's basis for understanding Islam is terrible.

[Kagemusha]

1. France DID ban cross necklaces (beyond a certain size), right?

Not saying you have no points but, it's not teaching the Koran in Arabic, it's teaching it using the Wahabbist sect's beliefs. That *is* something that is watched by experts.

I could go on but, no point - I'm not claiming Time did great work, haven't read the article...

[poliguru]

2. Re the teaching of the Koran

I quote the article:
"The US and other international donors have pumped millions of dollars into the Pakistani education system in an effort to draw students away from Saudi-funded fundamentalist madrasahs, or religious schools, where 1.5 million Pakistani children spend nearly all of their time memorizing the Koran in Arabic, even though few Pakistanis speak the language."

That's it. That's their complaint. I'm not saying that the terrorist training grounds disguised as schools aren't present or a problem, but many of the schools they are referring to are kind of like our Catholic schools - better, safer education and important to their religion. Either way, to characterize learning the Koran in Arabic as a dangerous mark of a terrorist in and of itself is scary ad lacking in understanding of a basic tenet of the faith.