We have a date…
The last few days have been revealing. My latest media appearances in France have exposed to television viewers and radio listeners the underhanded game being played by a clique of self-styled journalists. Most of them accuse me of“double speak” while others, without a shred of evidence, have termed my positions “murky,” insinuating that they may know something but cannot prove it. “None is so deaf as he who will not hear.” These days France is suffering from the media (as well as intellectual and political) disease of “double hearing.”
My person aside, their behavior points to an attitude problem in France: a deeply rooted and persistent problem. To discredit me, they must first declare me “controversial”, “ambiguous,” dismiss my words as “cunning,” accuse me of “double speak.” The last two weeks have been no exception. The same strategy has been used to refuse to hear what I have to say, or to destabilize the listening and viewing public when I am allowed to speak. The preferred tactic is not to invite me, or to do so using the time-tested “filter,” “cautioning” viewers and listeners, “alerting” them that “this man” is dangerous and devious…even though on occasion he may say something interesting—which would make him more dangerous still. Rare are those who, in France, have dared to invite me onto their programs without delivering the customary low blow, the snide introduction, the fine dusting of innuendo. Their names are known in France: Moati, Giesbert, Taddéi, Simonin, Marschall and Truchot, Naulleau and Zemmour… But how many other staunch defenders of freedom of expression either do not invite me onto their programs, or have stopped doing so in the face of pressure and criticism.
The parallel with French state institutions and the academic establishment is striking. I teach contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford, and have been a frequent speaker at the world’s leading universities. Except in France, with its curious “cultural exception” where academics appear to have bought into (and bowed their heads to) the dominant media narrative—which is cause enough for alarm. No academic appearances, lectures cancelled or pressure from the authorities designed to stop me from expressing my views: it’s been going on, month in, month out, for the last twenty-five years. What an insult to French students! Do they lack the intellectual tools to listen, analyze and criticize? Are they less intelligent, or more gullible, than students in other countries? Or is someone afraid of something else; that my message might awaken free consciences?
There are three crucial points to be made, whose implications go well beyond my person:
1. Those Muslims who are invited to speak (on television, radio or other media) are either demonized or regurgitate what the media and the State want to hear. The same warmed-over subjects are rehashed. But failure to deal with these questions in new ways means only one thing: regression. Intellectually and socially, dear journalists, you are driving France backward, and the country’s politicians and intellectuals are only too happy to follow.
2. French Muslims are still seen and stigmatized as “the other” in public debate and in the media. They must constantly justify themselves, are suspect and suspicious; their freedom of expression is limited by the metaphorical gun held to their heads, forcing them to identify themselves physically and intellectually. Come clean! they are told—both in appearance and spirit.
3. The mainstream media, like most French politicians and public intellectuals, today bears the principle responsibility for the normalization of xenophobic and racist speech that reeks of the Extreme Right. They may pretend they keep their distance, but the tone and the substance of public debate, where individuals are stigmatized because of their identity, are having a dangerous impact on France, on its collective psychology and its lack of openness to diversity.
I have said it once and will say it again: I am the tree that hides the forest; the way I am treated by the media and in the academic world shows the depth of the contradictions in France…land of asymmetric liberties. But I remain optimistic; things are bound to change. Even as I write,French women and men of Muslim belief are making themselves heard and defending their rights just as surely as they recognize their responsibilities. They will rebuild a France fully reconciled with the values of liberty and equality. Listen to them! Your continued refusal to do so would be among the worst things that could befall the country. Assuredly you will hear them, and one day you will remember me, with humility and serenity: we have a date!
But today I accuse you, in your overwhelming majority, of unethical behavior; of a failure of professionalism, intellectual freedom and courage. We have a date! The course of events will prove more powerful than your betrayal of the fine values you pretend to uphold.
Tariq Ramadan
January 30, 2015
I have watched some of these” interviews” and totaly respect Tariq Ramadan’s clarity and ability to remain calm under such obvious hostility and provocation. Very brave to be able to engage with these attacks with such dignity.
Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu professor,
May Allah protect you and yours. May Allah help you to succeed in this struggle, ameen.
And Alhamdulillah, hallelujah too for all your endeavors!
Bravo Tariq!
The sad situation seems to be that even in what is advertised to be THE home of free speech – the Western world – the situation is actually not much better than in the many pseudo-democracies around the world. To the culprits of self-interested politicians and “intellectuals”, one should not forget to add Big Business, which seems to control everyone else, including the “most powerful man in the world”, the president of the US. Such interference is an insult to the general populace, to people’s capacity to evaluate and think for themselves. But then the general public is also to blame for allowing this to happen.
Do people not care any more? – Where is the spirit of revolution and demanding accountability in leaders (whether political, governance, finance or academia) that rocked many European states and the US in past times, and forced major change for the better, revitalizing the nations concerned. Maybe it will only re-emerge when the sagging economy hits their pockets.
Xenophobia has occurred in many civilizations in history, and often led to long-term decline in that nation. The ironic thing is that France, and Europe in general, have in earlier times benefitted tremendously from interaction with Muslims in many fields, as well as from trade with Muslim countries. It surely wasn’t due solely to the fact that the Muslims were repelled from the gates of Vienna that Europe was able to enjoy a brilliant revival and flowering during the Renaissance? The basis of that dynamic new phase of civilization owed a great deal to the enormous body of knowledge in many areas which they had gleaned from their contact with Muslim scholars.
The rejection of anything different from oneself is not usually based on any sound knowledge of “the other”- in fact normally it is due rather to almost total ignorance and misunderstanding. Is it not perhaps also a symptom of confusion about what “we” really stand for? Across the Channel, David Cameron loves to talk about “British Values”, but seems unable to specify exactly what they are – along with most of his citizens. Similarly, in France, secularism is so fiercely defended, but its exact form or substance seems debatable, and often arbitrary.
British values – How about, for starters, the right to belong to any religion, or none, without pressure. Or the status of women being equal to that of men. Do you ever watch the Islam Channel, particularly Q and A?
In France, secularism is fiercely defended, and debated – the operative word.
Free speech – are you serious? Particularly in the light of recent events in Paris.
“The misery of our Oriental nations is the misery of the world, and what you call civilization in the West is naught but another spectre of the many phantoms of tragic deception.”
~ Kahlil Gibran
Best wishes and regards to you Prof. Ramadan. You are amazing in your articulation and brave. Thanks to Allah, we have men like you who are scholars that can represent the Muslim perspective and face the heat with dignity and patience. May Allah give you all the strength,success, and wealth to go through this with grace, Ameen. May Allah keep you safe, always with your family.
As you would say, we need our youth, Muslims and non-Muslims, to get educated and equip themselves with the deep understanding and knowledge of our own faith. And engage in healthy debate and dialogue. And this is what the Quran ordains us to do as well in Chapter: 16 , Ayat: 125. Unfortunately, hypocrisy and double standards have become the way of life for many in our world. May we be guided. Thank you for your insights and virtual education. Thank you for all your works. You are my virtual teacher and a scholar whom I can look up for guidance.
Ameen! I agree, great scholar to revere.
This is the era of ” Trade off” if we don’t respect others and their point of view then do not expect much from others.(Under the cloak of Freedom of Speech)
There is no reason why ideas should receive automatic respect. On the contrary, progress is made by the challenging of ideas, especially those that interfere with the freedom of others.
Scientists do not complain about their ideas being scrutinised, reviewed , even ridiculed.
Large claims about the nature of the universe and the position of human beings within it deserve proper scrutiny. It concerns us all.
Prof. Ramadan,
What is happening is recorded and history will be the judge. You went against the stream for the last 25 years. The prophet Mohamed ( may peace upon him) had the same struggle. Guess what; good will definitely thrive. Keep your head up and carry on your mission to educate and give options to a generation that has been brain washed. Finally, Ralph W Emerson once said ” great people are mis-understood”.
I raise my hat to you in admiration.
AEE
I remain optimistic….
Regarding the accusations of your “double speak”, perhaps the media refer to how you communicate with your Muslim audience in a way that confirms their “conspiracy” theory, perpetuating their chronic sense of victim-hood which fires their thirst for more and more bloodshed and engagement in terrorizing the world which they perceive to be the enemy constantly plotting against them. On the other hand, you appear in the Western to talk about peaceful coexistence, interfaith dialogue and tolerance.
Moderate Muslims are too often painted with the same brush as their fundamentalist counterparts. This is often true, and is largely unfair to moderates like yourselves. But you can’t simply blame this on the “ignorance” or “bigotry” of non-Muslims, or on media bias. The problem is this: moderate Muslims like you also play a significant role in perpetuating this narrative — even if you don’t intend to. To understand how, it’s important to see how it looks from the other side. Tell me if this sounds familiar:
A moderate Muslim states that ISIS is wrong, they aren’t “true” Muslims, and Islam is a religion of peace. Read the following Qur’an verses to understand why all Muslims who refuse to remove these verses from their Qur’an are responsible for the Jihadi terror actions such as ISIS, Boko Haram, Taliban and countless other Islamist terrorist groups who are currently beheading /killing, enslaving their helpless enemies:
1) Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them. Qur’an 2:19
2) Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood. Qur’an 9:123
3) Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable. Qur’an 3:85
4) The Jews and Christians are perverts; fight them.” Qur’an 9:30
5) Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam. Qur’an 5:33
6) The infidels are unclean; do not let them into a mosque. Qur’an 9:28
7) Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies. Qur’an 22:19
8) Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them. Qur’an 47:4
9) The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them. Qur’an 8:65
10) Muslims must not take the infidels as friends. Qur’an 3:28
11) Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an. Qur’an 8:12
12) Muslims must master all weapons to terrorize the infidels. Qur’an 8:60 ..Etc.
These verses of hate/violence as well as almost the whole Hadith, so faithfully followed by the violent Islamists are the reason why other Muslims in the world sit back and say nothing and why the heinous acts of Muslims word-wide continues undiminished. They know that they can not challenge their Islamic scriptures which Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS quote as they commit cruel inhuman atrocities. Moderate Muslims like you insists that the verses have been quoted “out of context,” have been misinterpreted despite the fact that these so called `divinely’ inspired.verses are hateful, unethical, inhuman in any context. The verses and much of Hadith incite violence against all those seen as infidels, the non-Muslim other.
Are you objective and fair when you say the media are unfairly stigmatizing Muslims But put yourself in the shoes of your non-Muslim audience. Is it really them linking Islam to terrorism? We’re surrounded with images and videos of jihadists yelling “Allahu Akbar” and quoting passages from the Quran before beheading someone (usually a non-Muslim), setting off explosions, mass enslaving and raping girls (spoils of war) and committing genocide against the whole Yazidie community. Is it really the West linking Islam and Muslims to terrorism? Who is really making this connection?
Yes, it’s wrong and unfair for anyone to judge a religion by the actions of its followers. But it is appropriate and intellectually honest to judge it by the contents of its canonical texts which have become the manual for all Muslim terror groups.
Ezadie Roj has articulated very clearly what many, many people are thinking and has encapsulated the problem and the whole situation.
Please, M. Ramadan, would you reply to the comment.
Monsieur le Professeur,
First of all, all Praise be to God, and Peace and Blessings of ALLAH and HIS angels (PBUH) on our Beloved Prophet, Muhammad.
Je salue votre courage, votre patience, determination, et resilience.
You do not need a lawyer to defend you, as ALLAH is by your side, however, I just would like to express/share some opinions here.
Secondly, the rest of my message is a respond to Ezadie. Prof. Tariq Ramadan is not a moderate Muslim (far from being the case and you would need to define what you understand by “moderation”), he is a balanced Muslim scholar striving for the Truth, peace and justice on the face of earth. Thirdly, Prof. Tariq Ramadan does not speak a double language. I have listened and I am still listening to him in French and English, and, this is the truth, Prof. Tariq Ramadan says the same things whether he speaks in English or French, and whether the audience is Muslim or Non-Muslim. Prof. Ramadan is extremely consistent and rigorous (mashaALLAH). When I was living in France, I used to believe the French media (human mistakes happen), but when I moved to the UK, I stopped having this bias I had and I now totally agree with Prof. Ramadan: it is the French Media and politicians that have a problem of double hearing!!!!! Prof. Tariq Ramadan just describes the exact facts as they are in his article. Recently, I watched a video of him invited to talk about the deaths at the Charlie Hebdo members of staff (at the French radio station Europe 1) where he was facing three main chief editors of the largest French media companies/channels. Europe 1 had to invite these three competent chief editors to be able to face Prof. Tariq Ramadan (it looked like a jury accusing Prof. Tariq Ramadan)!!!!! One would certainly not have been enough to sit and discuss with Prof. Tariq Ramadan! And, half way through, I saw a shift in these 3 people. The aggressive and accusative tones they were using at the beginning of the interview were not so present anymore. Of course, they had to bring all the necessary terms used in the current media to describe Muslims (I am not going to quote them here, but I am sure you will understand which ones I am referring to).
Finally, it is so easy to quote the text outside the context of revelation as it feeds your fire. Have you read the Quran? Have you read the verses that say NOT to spread bloodshed (for one example, please see Surah Al Baqarah Verse 84)? Have you read the verse 11 of Surah Ar-Rad? Have you heard this verse about the beauty of nature and how ALLAH knows everything even when a leaf falls from a tree? Or when the Quran describes that there is not a single female creature that gives birth without ALLAH not knowing? Have you actually read the first verse of the Quran and the first revealed verse of the Quran? Have you read Surah Ar Rahman (Surah 55)? The situation remembers me – as mentioned above by another reader – the insults our Beloved Prophet (PBUH) faced. Yet, did He (PBUH) give up? Nope, He (PBUH) did not.
I am not surprised when I read comments from people like you. You do not really know what you are talking about and us, Muslims, unfortunately, we are quite used to this nowadays. However, by the Grace and Might of God, it is now time to rise up and add our voices and use the pen to speak and write the Truth, just like Prof. Tariq Ramadan does.
I sincerely and humbly ask ALLAH AZJ to protect you, Prof. Tariq Ramadan and your family always, amine. I pray that ALLAH grants you a long life so that you can disseminate the Truth, Justice and Peace on the face of our Beloved Earth.
It is obvious that you know nothing about Islam nor Qur’an and that shows in your verses quotation which seems to be a copy and past from some Islamophobe article and they all falsify those verses or take them out of their context. I’ll take the first verse as example :
1.The number of the verse is 2:190 and not 2:19 which means that you didn’t even bother looking out if it’s the right verse.
2. Here is the context starting from the verse 2:189, “(189) Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. (190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (191) But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”
See how much have you wronged Qur’an and Islam in just one verse ? That’s why people should read Quran and understand why and when and for what and what is the situation that applies to before going onto spreading false assumptions and conclusions and spreading hatred.
If Islam is a religion of hatred and monstrous blood shedding then why is it spreading in the world this much ? is it not because people who came to explore it and read the Qur’an found truth, peace and serenity in it ?
Finally I urge everyone who wants to know about Islam to do some research, read Qur’an ask scholars and Imams and Muslims about their religion, and do not let the mass media and Islamophobia spreaders trick you and lead you astray.
Peace upon you all.
Here is a website for Qur’an recitation: quranexplorer[dot]com[slash]Quran
First of all I do agree that this is actually an insult to not only students but people’s intelligence because the ones who are watching these interviews or keep following the information through these medias are the ones who are supposed to discern the right from the wrong or the fake from the real,so putting an etiquette on somebody who is just saying his opinion and the facts that he has noticed is also trying to manipulate the people who are going to listen to him,which comes to say “the listeners are not able to think by themselves”.Therefore I think that during a discussion the most important is the content of the speech and not the one who is giving, if it does make sense there no reason to not keep the idea.
Then the medias who restrict or pick informations are not really executing what is supposed to be ‘Freedom of Speech’.
At the end of the day I’d rather going in the street and discuss instead of listening to the TV news that only show me how they want things to be seen.
My husband tried to strike me last week because he said I was arrogant. He says it is allowed in the Quran (4:34)but I have told him that he has taken it out of context . He asks how can this verse be interpreted in any other way. Please advise.
When one is afraid of holding an open transparent and fair debate there is no opportunity to learn or realise a higher level of knowledge…the reason to restrict open debate is to preserve the status and extend the status – quo of ignorance and social exclusion.