Making Strides Against Breast Cancer

I've loved helping others all my life. And because as a former(?) engineer, I value my time more than anything monetary, when I choose to help others or to make a difference (or both), I choose to do volunteer work. Even when I want to give gifts to friends, the most precious thing that I can give them would be my time (and conversely, I hate it when people choose the easier cheaper way, spending their money on me, instead of their time).

And now, as a born again sociologist, doing volunteer work would serve me not only personally, but also professionally. First time I did volunteering in my new career over my first days in the US, was serving at Cherry Street Mission. I was keen to know how charity works of this sort are done here and to make a comparison with what I'd experienced doing in my own country. I've written about my observations and reflections here.

And when I saw an ad in the University Hall for Making Strides Against Breast Cancer, I didn't hesitate to volunteer. For more info on what's it all about and the locations across the US, have a look at this page at the American Cancer Society. Here, it was not merely about loving volunteer work in general or making some observations as a sociologist in specific. This touched a nerve on a personal level: my mother is a breast cancer survivor. And she's had a tough experience: 3 major operations (the last one being a lumpectomy) and 2 rounds of hormone-therapy for a total period of 10 years in a row.

To be honest, I felt (and I still do feel) somehow guilty about coming to the US to continue my education, leaving her thousands of miles away. After all the hardships of cancer, it's very hard for her to miss her only son being stranded here on a single-entry visa for several years. The only comfort that I can give myself is that in the long run, when I complete my education and thrive in my new career as a sociologist, it would make her happy. As retired teachers, both my parents feel upbeat about anybody's academic progress (although both preferred me to remain loyal to electrical engineering). As a hardhearted engineer however, I believe enduring hardships in the short-term is worth the fruits you get in the long-run. I've followed such a maxim over my engineering years and thanks be to God, I've succeeded with almost all my mid-term and long-term objectives.

Having decided to volunteer, I trivially chose to serve in the survivor tent when I registered online. That way, I could not only have more interesting observations, but also through interaction with the likes of my mother, I could feel that I was serving her (and when I called her after the event finished and explained about my day and my feelings, she was clearly moved).

However, things did not go exactly the way I had dreamed. It appears that my engineering karma follows me like a curse even when I look for the most social positions. When I arrived at Levis Commons in Perrysburg (the venue for the event), although I was an early bird, all my preferred positions in the tent were already taken. I was given the job of collecting hope cards (where survivors would write their name) and passion cards (where survivors would write about their experience with breast cancer) and placing them on the Wall of Hope. As it was very windy out there, I had to post them on the board securely and yet in an organized legible way. Doesn't sound much like a sociological job? I don't feel that way either. Once an engineer, always an engineer. Here's how my job looked:


And doing such an engineering job deprived me (to a great degree) of the major purpose of choosing the survivor tent: interacting with the survivors. It appears that my engineering-natured job at Cherry Street Mission was more fruitful, sociologically speaking. Although, I still had some survivors watching my job (what I did on others when I was a supervising engineer) and at times commending what I did. Yet, there was something I didn't feel comfortable with: money.

I've crunched numbers all my life. But I don't enjoy dealing with prices or price calculations. Managing my personal budget is the only monetary job that I've succumbed to (and I have to brag I'm very good at that; nobody believed I could survive in the US with the meager stipend I get here as a Graduate Assistant). Over my engineering years, I did my best to stay away from financial aspects of the projects. I preferred to stick to the technical side of the job. Even when I served as a supervising engineer in that hydroelectric powerplant project, although I did anything that could help the project (even jobs that were not relevant to my line of duty) I never let my project manager engage me with statements (the money claimed by contractors in a project must be approved by supervising engineers). But here, to my discomfort, I had to mention about the donation for hope cards (which were rather fancy).

Please, this event is not just about breast cancer survivors; it's for survivors. It's understandable that other people have to donate money. It's a fundraiser after all. But why should survivors pay to put their name on a bulletin board? Actually, one of the survivors grumbled that she had already paid enough and chose to fill the passion card (which was free). And I felt so embarrassed. Anyway.

Speaking of donations and money, I strongly encourage you to bookmark the Breast Cancer Site and click at the top of the page on the pink "Click Here to Give - it's FREE" button everyday. This is a convenient way to donate money for free mammograms for women who can't afford it. Mammography was what led to early detection of cancer in my mother in both instances (the second time, the tumor was a malignant, rare, infiltrating type) and saved her from chemotherapy (which she probably wouldn't survive) or probably much worse consequences. Not all women afford mammograms on a regular basis and they may get to know about the tumors when it's too late.

And clicking on this button is a way of donating without actually paying money out of your pocket. In case you wonder how, be assured it's not a hoax (like eternally-circulating Emails claiming that merely by forwarding the email to all your firends, you help some fictitious dying kid somewhere). I research these things on Snopes (urban legend reference page). The Breast Cancer Site and websites like them are paid by advertising (not that I like or approve of all the ads in there). You can find more explanation on their website and also on Snopes page. The good thing is that unlike many similar pages, you can click the button several times a day.

And like any fundraiser, there was a lot going on beside the main event (which was walking). Other volunteers had a better chance to use their talents (isn't engineering a talent?) to serve or entertain people. Have a look at the schedule of activities. There was a lady who made stylized portraits (without collecting any donations). Near the end of the event, as I had nothing to do, I sat for her to have a portrait. And it was fun. Here's a photo of me accompanied by my job (as an engineer) and her job (as an artist):


Well, in her artwork, she not only trimmed my beard a bit (something I've stopped doing since landing in the US), but also put shining stars in my eyes. Probably that (and her spending much time and effort on me) had something to do with her finding out that my mother is a breast cancer survivor. Or maybe it was when she asked me whether I wanted to have the things on my t-shirt to be in my portrait. Of those things on my volunteer t-shirt, what I liked the most was the motto: Hope starts with me.

Commencement

OK. It appears that I'm at the end of this stage of my academic endeavor. Today, we had the commencement ceremony for Spring 2008 graduates (me included). Here, as in most universities, commencement is celebrated the day right after the last final exam. But does it make sense to celebrate graduation while almost no grades are reported to the Registrar’s Office? Just being on your last semester wouldn't automatically make you a graduating student. At least, that's what happened to me over my presumably last semester when I was an undergrad student.

I've written a 100+ page thesis for my bachelor's degree. And that with all the troubles I went through. I had a thesis advisor whom I had to dump with much difficulty and fighting (choosing a busy egomaniac PhD candidate in another university as your thesis advisor is not a very good idea). And although the original idea of the thesis was mine, they didn't let me finish the same thesis with my new advisor. I had to adopt a new idea in the same area (my former thesis advisor had tried to depict me in the faculty meeting as incapable of doing a thesis in Artificial Neural Networks and the stubborn guy that I am, I wanted to prove him wrong). I defended my thesis after a 1.5 year crusade and going through all sort of troubles with school administration. That’s another story.

Near the end of my thesis, my mother was diagnosed with cancer and the day right before her operation, one of my professors flunked me in the middle of semester just for not attending his class enough. His class is all about him photocopying everything from his lecture notes on the whiteboard and you're supposed to do the same from the whiteboard to your lecture notes. Just a two-stage photocopying session. Every semester. So, if you endure his class once, you'll go through exactly the same torture in every detail the next time. And I was going to graduate that semester. And I had talked to the professor long before (he had unfairly failed me in the same course over past semester) and had got his permission not to attend his class (he later denied having given me such a permission). The students had nicknamed him Dr Cow for his attitudes.

This combined with my mother’s cancer diagnosis and other problems (financial troubles included) devastated me so much that I failed almost all other courses that semester (even the Microcomputer Basics that anybody would bet at the beginning of semester that I would pass with 20, the maximum grade).

The good point was all the referee (equivalent of committee members here) evaluated my thesis as excellent, 20/20 (and later on, two of them wrote me strong letters of recommendation when I was about to apply to graduate school in 2005). To my disappointment, my former thesis advisor gave my original thesis topic to a poor student (who was desperate to graduate) and the result was dismal. It could have become a great thesis if done properly by a good advisor and a more capable student.

I would say my undergrad years were the worst years of my life (except for some periods brightened by some good professors and the time I spent with my good friends). But at least, I had the freedom to work and make money for my basic needs (we were struggling with financial hardship back then). Probably, my bad memories from college could be one of the reasons that made me hesitant about going back to college again. And over my last conversation with my former thesis advisor (that PhD candidate), he told me in a threatening way: “at some point, you may choose to come to the graduate school and you’ll know then”. Was he so sure that I would choose their university for my graduate study? Or did he believe that he was so almighty to make me troubles even if I ended up in another university? Anyway.

Although not mentioned in this previous post, the first time I felt like “And now, you’re a free man!” was when I graduated from college in 1998. Now, ten years after that graduation, I've almost finished my first stage of graduate study and am about to enter a new phase (PhD) which sounded like a distant dream to me when I was an undergrad student. Thanks be to God.

As the Savage Hall is undergoing construction and renovation, they’ve decided to have the university commencement in the Glass Bowl (our football stadium), rain or shine. Probably, many graduates from last semester are unhappy about their commencement being cancelled for a few inches of snow, although the Savage Hall was available then and a level 2 snow emergency was the reason, as mentioned in this previous post. As it was stormy today, they've even included instructions in the commencement program in case of a tornado. What a resolve!

And to shorten the event (and hence lowering the risk of getting wet in the open), they've decided to have separate convocation ceremonies for each college (with names being read and recognized, diploma cases given, pictures taken and stuff) and then have a condensed commencement for the university. Here is the memorandum for the College of Arts and Sciences convocation and here is more info on the university commencement.

Having attended the non-condensed commencement last spring, I didn’t find it specifically very exciting. Or maybe I’m not very excited about getting an MA in Sociology. Just between us, although I’m happy about finishing this degree as a stepping stone toward my PhD, I still value my Bachelor’s in Electrical Engineering more than a Master’s in Sociology. I hope none of my current professors read this! But seriuosly, I'm very grateful to my professors here. Their mentoring and support has been very helpful in my adaptation to a new academic discipline after being away from academia for such a long time.

Although I had brought my Ali lapel pin from Iran specifically for my commencement, I didn’t feel like spending money on Cap and Gown for an MA degree. And without academic regalia, you can’t walk in a commencement. Up until this morning I wasn’t even sure whether I would attend the ceremonies. Eventually, I decided to just take my Ali lapel pin with me and sit in the back and see how this college convocation was different from what I’d seen last year at the university commencement.

And while I was about to enter the Student Union auditorium along with other graduates of the College of Arts and Sciences, somebody from the Registrar’s Office approached me and told me that I had to have Cap and Gown. And I hadn’t (and presumably should've sat in the back). However, to my surprise, she proposed to get me one. And she did. I put on my Ali lapel pin and walked like other graduates. As the official pictures taken by the university photographers are not ready yet, I put one of my pictures taken in front of the Student Union after the convocation was over:

From left to right: me, Dr Barbara Chesney (Department of Sociology & Anthropology Chair), Dr Dwight Haase (Sociology) and Dr Willie McKether (Anthropology). The University Hall (where our department is located) could be seen in the background.

One of the several minute details about convocation and commencement is the tassel position. According to the University of Toledo protocols, graduate students should put it to the rear right side of their cap before the commencement and upon conferral of the degree at the commencement, put it to the rear left side. In other universities graduate students put it on the left even before the commencement, because they’ve already earned a degree (their Bachelor's degree). Furthermore, even according to our university’s version of the tradition, commencement is not technically the actual time that students graduate; rather it would be the time when all grades are reported to the Registrar’s Office.

Anyway, tassel to the right or left, as I didn’t feel like attending the university commencement in the open and wind (and probably get wet), I preferred to watch its webcast at the comfort of our department computer lab. And although there was not a tornado(!), it was rather windy and it did rain a little bit. And I called home to share the news with my parents. I ask God to help me with the next stages in my academic endeavor. My academic progress will make them happy and their happiness will make God even happier.

What do you make of so many religions?

Last year, over my first visit to CedarCreek, it didn't take me long to understand the absolute truth about the number of gums in a gum-dispenser. But this week, they were going to dedicate a whole service to clarify their point. This is the fifth in a series of sermons "I've got questions". I couldn't attend the past two weeks. You can find the first and the second parts here and here.

As I've been around evangelical people for a while (and have read their literature for quite some time), I already knew what to expect. To warm up, let's have a look at 1 John 4:1-10.

Well, the same old interpretation that with Jesus being the only way (and that means believing in guaranteed automatic salvation, no matter what), all else are false. But when you put these verses (mention of antichrist in verse 3) in the context of talking about other religions, the message implied sounds like people whose rhetoric is not so love-inspiring. In case anybody is scratching their head, I'm talking about post-911 intensified Islamophobia and the way such verses are used to instigate the battle of Armageddon.

But when Jesus talks about false prophets (and we know there have been some) does he negate and discredit true prophets as well? Should we ever think that he does not believe that God has sent any true prophet whatsoever? Could we find a single reference in the Bible where Jesus explicitly (not wistful interpretation, I'm talking about explicit expression) has ever stated that for example Moses was a false prophet or if he was once a true prophet, he lost his credibility altogether with coming of Jesus in the flesh?

Pastor Gray began to make his case by a simple example (similar to the gum-dispenser). If we look at the cars manufactured in a factory, we might think that the essence of all is the same while the superficials are different. However, we must understand that actually in different cars, the essence is different while the superficial, morality, looks the same. Clear enough?

He then made the major points of his sermon as follows:

1. All religions make exclusive claims to the truth. So, they cannot all lead to heaven.

2. Origin of Jesus' salvation. He existed before coming.

3. Purpose of Jesus' salvation. He came in the flesh not to liberate us from the flesh (as is the case with other religions).

4. Method of Jesus' salvation (John 14:6). Other religions perform to truth. Christianity is the only religion that has a personal relationship with God. It is grace-based. Work is already completed by Jesus.

Well, he's already opened the debate in his blog (the same .tv domain thing). I'm not going to enter the debate. Just two comments before going to my argument.

At one point in his sermon, he admitted that there are people in other religions (he did not feel like naming Islam) who are more devout than today Christians. Going back to his car analogy, I'd like to ask: while you tell Christians that morality is the superficial of religion and your theology is the core, can you expect better? Probably, if you spend the time (that you waste on the claim of superiority and uniqueness of your theology) to teach people to follow in the very footsteps of Jesus Christ, or as you call it, superficial moralities, we can have a better society.

I would also find the point #3 interesting. The same old method: give your own description of something and then discredit it based on this self-devised description.

I think one of the earliest things I was taught in my religious teachings as somebody from other religions (Islam), was not exactly the same as what I hear in this sermon (and similar sermons). We were taught to view "this world as a farm for the other world". So, basically it doesn't sound equivalent to liberating from the flesh. In other words, this flesh, although not a goal, is a means (not a barrier) in our journey. We are advised in Quran to focus on the next world, but not to forget our share of this world. Yet, we are taught that the worthiest of people before God is the one who is the most obedient to God. And we are also reminded that God is closer to us than the artery of our neck. So?

When it comes to exclusivist evangelicals and their main line of reasoning that all religions make exclusive claims to the truth, it should be evident to any kid that only they have the absolute truth, because only they have access (or are in possession of) the gum-dispenser (or so they claim). Hence, nobody else's claim about the absolute number of gums in their gum dispensers has any merit whatsoever. So, let's get rid of evil things such as religious pluralism and religious tolerance. These are things that we have to temporarily endure as a result of secular humanism in the world and in the US in specific. So, let's convert everybody to Christianity; however, as we are the sole proprietor of the gum-dispenser, only we are the people to judge who is a true Christian or who is not a Chirstian at all.

Fortunately, the position of Islam is not explained in ways that evangelicals choose to make their point. At least, when it comes to Quran, its message is very clear. Although as a Muslim, I cannot be responsible for people in my religion whose claim to truth, like their peers in other religions, is motivated by selectively choosing verses of Quran and imposing their interpretation on those verses. And just like their bigot peers in other religions (specifically evangelicals), they believe that merely repeating their interpretation a million times over hundreds of years would make it a valid proof in and by itself in the absence of evidence.

There are consistent patterns in Quran, repeated so much, that don't leave us with the benefit of the doubt. And Quran is very explicit about pick-and-choose approach to the word of God.

1. There is only one God, God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses (and many other Hebrew prophets named in Quran), Jesus and Mohammad. All are sent by the same God and we as Muslims do not differentiate between any of them and their message. And by the way, Allah is not the God of Islam. It's simply the Arabic word for God. If you happen to read an Arabic translation of the Bible, you will see Allah (so-called God of Muslims) all over the Bible.

2. Prophets are not perishable foodstuff to be disposed of after their expiry date. In Quran, God repeatedly reminds us (Muslims or anybody else reading the Book) that prophets are chapters of the same book (with Mohammad being the last chapter). To make anybody understand this absolute truth, God doesn't leave us on our own to fantasize about our own unique gum-dispenser. In several instances, God names the prophets in a chronological order and makes it clear that all are sent by the same God and we, as Muslims, do not differentiate between any of them and their message. Prophets are not sent to tell us about the word of God; they are THE word of God. Specifically, when Jesus is mentioned in Quran, he's described as the Word of God or Spirit of God.

3. Salvation does not come through either faith or works alone. All over Quran, God speaks of people who believe in God AND do good deeds. God has made it clear that without following his words and merely by claiming faith in Him, there's no way to heaven (and Jesus too has made this clear in Matthew 7:21-23 and elsewhere). Morality is not the superficial of Islam; it is the core. And likewise, acting on our own, without continuously trusting in God, would lead us nowhere in our quest for truth. Salvation is by faith AND works, with faith being given the precedence all over Quran. And both faith and works are believed to be a matter of grace by God.

Who made God?

This is the second in the series in CedarCreek trying to answer some vexing questions. I'd written about the first sermon in the series here.

They started by showing a brief tour around the Creation Museum at Cincinnati. In the same way that shadow lets us know about the Sun and the steam (from a kettle) informs us about heat, we must look to see. Sounds familiar? Yes, a mix of creationism and intelligent design. And this way, they changed the question of "Who made God?" to "What God made?" and maintained that we must think about the latter before the former.

And then Pastor Powell, being unhappy with secular humanist thesis of "we came from nothing and go to nothing", proceeded to make the question of "What is the Point of Life?" the main topic. And the major points:

1. Life is Perfect for Eternity (Ecclesiastes 3:11)

2. How do I Prepare?

3. Get to Know God (John 1:12)

4. Become like Christ (Roman 8:29)

5. Practice Service (Ephesians 2:10)

6. Share Life's Points With Other People (2 Corinthians 5:19)

I'm not going to make my blog into a theology blog. Still, I don't find the answer to the original question by listening to the answers to other more important questions. And like the last week service, I was not looking to get an answer for myself. But when I get advertisement for something, I expect to receive exactly that, not a substitute.

Well, actually he did answer the main question: it's not reasonable to speak about creating the uncreated. Fair enough. But if that answer is supposed to convince an atheist, who does not even believe in the existence of God (let alone accepting Him as uncreated), it hardly serves the purpose.

To the sidenotes. There was one interesting ad rolling on the big screens: if you attend the 9:00 am service on Sunday, instead of the noon service (which is the most convenient and hence the most preferred and the most crowded) you could have a chance to win a car. Isn't it cool to see such an ad before a worship service?

And there were some reserved seats in the back, separate from all others, for the junior-high lifegroup. They would enter the auditorium just for the warm-up (prejam) music and the special music. Then, they would leave for they special room.

If all these attractive special groups are meant to accustom younger people to church, wouldn't it be a better idea to include them in the service in whole? After all, a worship service that is dominated by Rock culture shouldn't be so boring to these young fellows. And in my opinion, the sermons given here for grownup people are understandable and appropriate for teenagers as well. So, why should they leave the communal worship place and receive a lighter version of the message in isolation from their families and others? Shouldn't church worship be a familial and communal experience? It appears that I'm siding a little bit with Borgman and his arguments in his Power Failure book.

Before the live broadcast of the sermon, Pastor Bernard (Toledo campus lead pastor) made a couple of announcements. And among them: while a visitor had complained that he comes to church for worship not "free tea", a 5-grader (I'm not sure about the grade) was understanding enough to commend them and send them donations.

Or explaining about rumors such as "CedarCreek people are making money for themselves", "they receive six digit salaries", "Pastor Powell has 2 Jaguars" (the car of course) and alike. He went into great length as to explain that Pastor Powell does not have any Jaguar and his old Ford is so rundown that it makes noises and he didn't remember even seeing a radio or CD-player in it.

Plain and simple, such allegations (that I have read on the net) are mudslinging, probably by people who are not happy with a strong rival snatching their customers in the marketplace of religion. I've had my criticism of their commodification of religion and McDonaldization of religion in my previous posts here and here and also their holding chocolates for kids (lost or not lost) in my first post on CedarCreek. But even as a strong critic of their methods (and also their conservative exclusionary theology under the guise of rock concerts), I find such rumor-spreading abhorrible.

The founders of CedarCreek come from Fortune-500 backgrounds (and it clearly shows in their business oriented corporate church). If they were so desperate for personal gains, why on earth should've they abandoned their promising career (where they could've really made six-digit salaries) just to establish a church?

Fitna

Out of curiosity, I watched the Fitna movie. And as a Muslim, I found it disgusting. It's the same old nonsense anti-Islamic propaganda. And it's nothing new. Islamophobia has existed almost for the entire life of Islam.

It began with brutal persecution of early believers by infidels in Mecca. Islam was a threat to their revenues from pilgrims who visited Kaaba to pay their tribute to the idols (and also to do some shopping on the side of their pilgrim). Furthermore, the egalitarian ideology of Islam, declaring all people (regardless of skin color, gender, tribe, wealth and social class) to be worthy only by their obedience to God, was enough reason for slaveholding tribalistic mysogenic infidels to fear the spread of this new religion.

During the Dark Ages, when Islamic world was the cradle of civilization and knowledge (well, if we ignore some dark pages when Shia Muslims were persecuted), Islamophobia manifested as the Crusades and horrible crimes in the name of Jesus and Christianity. The threat of the Islamic empire to European kingdoms who ruled people by keeping them in abysmal ignorance was something that necessitated immediate action. And those kings and monarches (in an unholy alliance with the Holy See) managed to fool their subjects that the Holy Land should be liberated from the yoke of infidel Muslims. Ironically, the accusation that Islam was the religion of sword, proved to suit better the promoters of Christianity over that period and the centuries that followed the Crusades.

And following that line and using a similar rhetoric in our modern times, it shows up as the media hype and anti-Islamic propaganda. At a lower level, such propaganda inspire like-minded idiots to discriminate against Muslims (have a look at this experiment video or this real video) or worse, commit hate-crimes against anybody who just looks like Muslims (even if they're not). And at a higher level, they prepare the western world mindset for new forms of Crusades against Islamic world. Fitna is the latest example of such garbage. And its name, Fitna, suits the content and intent.

The producer, Geert Wilders claims that he's concerned about extremist Islam. But looking at his movie, it appears that his problem is with Islam and Muslims in general. At one point, he gives alarming statistics about the rising population of Muslims in the Netherlands since 1909 (54) to 2004 (944,000). The population of the Netherlands is about 16 million. Then, he proceeds to declare the number of Muslims in Europe in 2007 as 54,000,000. And he makes no distinction about what percentage of these alarming numbers constitute extremists. He's just concerned about the numbers.

At another point, he juxtaposes images of mosques with the caption "Greetings from the Netherlands". Apparently, he's not happy about seeing mosques in general, regardless of the nature of the message preached in there. And this reminds me of the Minaret controversy in Switzerland (one of the most progressive democratic countries), where some bigots lobbied (and apparently, are still lobbying) for a constitutional amendment preventing construction of mosques with minarets. These democratic freedom-loving people are not happy about seeing their land being conquered by minarets.

The rest of the movie consists of recitations of some verses from Quran, followed by carnage scenes created by terrorists. So, you want to believe that Quran is the textbook for terrorism. At the end, he suggests Muslims to tear out those pages from Quran.

Well, those verses are taken out of context, both by Muslim extermeists and also by their bigot peers in the non-Muslim world. Such verses tell Musims what to do with enemies of Islam who actively and aggressively engage Muslims in war, not just anybody who simply is not a Muslim. And even when warmongers opt for peace, Quran advises Muslims to treat them peacefully. Anybody could pick and choose verses out of holy books and come up with conclusions they want. Have a look at this video-clip or this one just as examples to see how similar verses exist in the Bible. Should Christians tear out those pages from the Bible? Probably not.

And following those verses literally has not been a hypothetical situation or occasional occurrence. The Crusaders did follow those instructions very faithfully (much beyond the surface of the words) during the Crusades while they conquered Muslim territories. And even in our modern times, there are modern Crusaders who do the same thing, although not as wide-spread as the Dark Ages.

However, when wars are waged against Islamic countries and civilian Muslims are mass-murdered as collateral damage (God knows how much I hate this phrase), the result is the same. It just inflames new cycles of violence with popele in the Muslim world finding enough fuel to avenge their civilian casualty by killing some civilians on the other side. And then, anti-Muslims defend against violence and terrorism with killing even more civilian Muslims. And the vicious cycle goes on and on and on.

Thinking about anti-Islamic garbage, I remembered Salman Rushdie and our Department of English Language and Literature widely promoting him for their undergraduate conference on Identity in Language and Literature. For several weeks, you could see his picture in their Call for Papers (and the extension thereof) all over the University Hall floors, stairways and corridors.

Having read the Satanic Verses, I don't find any merit in the book apart from insulting the beliefs of over one billion Muslims and fueling the Clash of Civilizations. The book is a cheap effort in Magic Realism (not even distantly comparable to works of Marquez, the master of this genre). In the Satanic Verses, the author who has experienced humiliation as an immigrant Indian Muslim in the British society has let it out in his book through 2 fictional characters (one of them makes you think of our Prophet). What you read in the book is mostly comprised of fantasies based on historical lies. I've seen lots of these cheap works targeting religious beliefs.

Even when the controversy over the Danish cartoons broke out, it was not the first (or the only) of its kind. I've seen a comic book which is entirely comprised of cartoons of our Prophet (and in this case, the author/creator was an ex-Muslim Arab making fun of everything in Islam). And those pictures were much more abhorrible than the ones published by Danish newspapers.

And regrettably, I have to admit that some of the nonsense in this comic book (or similar anti-Islamic stuff in general) are originated in some unauthentic, yet widely recognized Islamic texts. For example, the central theme in Salman Rushdie's book (Satan leading the Prophet recite some bogus verses recognizing idols besides God) was not completely a product of his ingenuity; it has been present in some unauthentic Islamic texts read over and over for centuries. And ironically, those Muslims believing in those Islamic texts, never scratched their head that such lies in their texts contradict Quran. Well, until Salman Rushdie brought it up and embellished it by some other lies (again, present in those unauthentic Islamic texts).

Lots of such works are published around the world and nobody knows or even cares about them, except for some intellectually-challenged people who base their information and knowledge of history and religion on such sources.

What enrages the Muslim world is the publicity and support that such works and their creators receive by the western governments under the pretext of artistic creation and freedom of expression. As a recent example, Salman Rushdie was awarded knighthood last year for services to literature. It appears that certain instances of free speech immediately lead to prosecution and jail while insulting religious beliefs receives a blind eye or worse, support and praise. And when Muslims observe double standards on freedom of expression, even those not subscribing to conspiracy theories, come to believe there's a modern Crusade going on.