Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic lllusion of an Islamic State [Hardcover]

I found this book to be well-thought out and educational. I have seen Mr. Fatah on T.V. interviews/discussion boards, and have read his articles in major publications. He is a representative of the Muslim community who is building bridges with all. He is a tireless champion of human rights. Simply put, I admire this author. Personally, I wish he was my neighbour.

I think it is a fair observation of affairs in the Islamic world. My dissatisfaction with this book came in chapter four when Mr. Fatah discusses "Islamic state of Iran". He doesn't know much about the history of Iran as best as he should. May be he could benefit a lot from reading books (such as Eternal Iran by Michael Rubin) other than a biased book like 'All the Shah's men' which he calls a classic, unfortunately. Mr. Kinzer author of that book is supposed to be a prime target of Mr. Fatah's book but here he praises him when he needs a Communist, pro-Jihadi idiot to prove his point. So he lost me there. Mr. Fatah says he wants to awaken the misinformed Western leftists but he quotes one of the worst of them: Stephen Kinzer. And quoting him to prove a point about the history of Iran is just plain wrong and un-academic. I am though with him on the terrible state of affairs in Iran and I praise Mr. Fatah for bringing this up in his book. Iranian people need to be heard and I am glad Mr. Fatah does them justice in this book.

Again, I need to say that Mr. Fatah ignores the facts about Iranian coup of 1953. He doesn't understand that PM Mossadegh was not ELECTED, rather appointed to the job and according to the constitution of Iran at that time, the Shah had the power to dismantle the Parliament and take the Premiership away from Mossadegh and when he did so, Mossadegh refused and resisted. The rest is story of history. One more thing is Mr. Fatah's point that Iran, Turkey and Iraq OCCUPY Kurdistan. Well, that's another point that Mr. Fatah does not appreciate the history of that part of the world. Kurdistan has never been OCCUPIED by Iran as he claims, it has been PART of Iran since the dawn of history. He fails to back his claim up. Kurds consider themselves more Iranian in the Iranian national context than Kurds. Yes, they're proud of their heritage but Iran is not a country like Iraq or Jordan or other ex-British Empire possessions. It's always been independent and never been colonized and parts of the Kurdistan that happen to be in Iran have always been Iran's. Turkish or Iraqi Kurdistan were rather TAKEN AWAY from Iran during the Safavid dynasty. However, no body from the state of Iran did not go and occupy Kurdistan. The case for Kurdistan of Iran is very different. Yes, they are oppressed but they are not occupied... So I don't understand what Mr. Fatah would like to imply that Iran has occupied Kurdistan for 80 years. Kurdish provinces of Iran like Ilam, Kurdistan, Kermanshah and Azerbaijan e Gharbi have been parts of an independent, strong and united Iran since Persia was founded thousands of years ago. I don't know where he got 80 years frorm. World War I didn't take any part of Iran away. The end of the Great War saw the foundation of states like Iraq, Turkey, Jordan and ... etc but it didn't have any territorial impact on Persia/Iran. Mr. Fatah fail to present an evidence to prove his point on that. He just rants there to prove his valild point that Muslims have been silent about their own atrocities.

Moreover, Mr. Fatah doesn't seem to understand the nature of Arab-Israeli conflict. It's not about land or water of nationalism. It's never been. Whenever it has been about land, i.e Egypt's Sinai and Jordan's claims, the parties have managed to come to a peaceful agreement and Israel have given those lands back to those states. Palestinians on the other hand would like to see all Jews driven out of their lands. It's also not historically correct to say that Muslims were peaceful before the death of Muhammed and became violent when he died and the Islamic leadership was also buried with him. Mr. Fatah fails to mention the mass killings of Jews of Bani-Qorayze'e clan or the killings that Muhammedans did when returned triumphant back to Mecca after 13 yrs of exile in Medina. Islam, in its core, is not as peaceful as Mr. Fatah claims it to be. The intolerance has always been part of the culture that embodied and did spread the religion of Islam from Indonesia, Persia to the shores of Spain and France. Again, that's part of history of the world and a matter of discussion. But I would like not to forget the crimes done in the name of Islam from day one.

All in all, this book is an Okay one as it tries to explore new ways of discussion on the possibility of reforming Islam. It is a good work/attempt by a voice of sanity and reason. The impossible task of reforming the religion of Islam will ultimately be done by the likes of Mr. Fatah and hopefully, he'll be able to see the day when his faith is reformed and civilized. I still recommend it to the western readers, with some reservations though.

Tarek Fatah has done his community a favor and the reading public a service by highlighting, at great personal risk, the problems he sees with Islamic fanaticism and the extremists desire to force-feed the illusion of an Islamic State on an unsuspecting world.

This book is worth reading because it is well-written, well-documented, and reaches out into uncharted waters. Hot-button items such as Human Rights in the Islamic context; the Apostasy Bill in Pakistan; Sharia laws; the Hijab controversy; and Jihad are discussed boldly and intelligently by the author.

One of his more fascinating chapters is the case study he has made of the Palestine-Israel problem which has been a global sore point for many years. He makes an excellent presentation showing that this problem could have been resolved had the Geneva Accord been implemented in 2003.

Most of the arguments presented by Tarek are in a thoughtful, reasoned way but it is in the chapter devoted to Jihad and specifically the "lesser" jihad (war in the cause of Islam) that he is most forthright

It takes courage to write a book like this. After making an honest appraisal of the malaise that affects Muslims he makes a plea to them to "oppose the extremists and present the more humane and tolerant face of our community" to the world. His may be just a voice in the wilderness but as Mother Teresa said in context, "What we are doing is only a drop in the ocean but the ocean would be diminished by that one drop."

Throughout his life and through this book, Tarek has sought to make a difference. He is concerned that the young men of his community may be led by Islamic scholars and clerics to "blame others for our shortcomings" and seek violently to establish a mythical Islamic State. He hopes that those who read his book will be secure enough in their faith to stand up and be counted so that the imbalance between the Islamists and Muslims is tilted in favour of the true Muslims. Maybe this is the wake-up call.