Amr Khaled Official Website

- Last February a poll was published on Amr Khaled’s website for all site visitors: “Do you want to be an Islam Ambassador?” More than two thousand youth replied to this question, and they were filtered where a small group of 25 youth was selected to participate in the Denmark conference that has been broadly tackled by the press. The selected youth are graduates or undergraduates, who met the criteria set as a condition to travel. Those young people traveled to Denmark not only to represent the conference officially, but also to express an inner desire to hold a dialogue with those who insulted Prophet Muhammad (SAWS)[1].

- Today we will meet four of those young people: Sawsan Shobeiky a doctor from Algeria; Darah Rateb, a student in Faculty of Economics and Political Science, American University in Egypt; Sarah Al-Refaey, a graduate of Faculty of Fine Arts, Helwan University; Khaled Barakat, who co-operated in this conference, and who works in the IT field.

- I would like to ask you Mr. Khaled, what are the measures you have set for selecting the young people who traveled with you? Moreover, why did you choose this group in particular?

Ø We had various measures of choice, and we had a sophisticated application that was written by Human Resources and Recruitment specialists. We considered this as if we are hiring an Ambassador, and therefore, the applicant should have had particular capabilities in language, appearance, and dealing with strangers and foreigners. Besides, there was a condition that the applicant’s age should be between 18 and 27 or 28 years old. He/She should have had past experience in dealing with the West, non-Muslims, and those who live in Europe. The participant should also have had participated in previous conferences of inter-cultural dialogue, in addition to high communication skills. Eventually, we have set intellectual questions to see how they think, especially regarding the idea of dialogue.

- What are the types of questions that were set in the application? In other words, if any of the applicants were here now, what would you ask him/her?

Ø The following question was included in the application: “What would you do if the Prophet (SAWS) gets insulted in your country or abroad?”

Ø This concept does not apply here. The whole idea focuses on whether the applicant comprehends the idea of dialogue and our desire to hold discussion with the other side who does not understand the reason behind what happened. Simply, we did not go to talk with the wrongdoers, but we went to talk with those who know nothing about the whole issue, i.e. the Danish youth. In fact, the Danish youth feels that something wrong happened in their country, but cannot perceive it. Hence, the reason behind our travel is to help them know who Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) is.

- Sawsan, please tell me about your experience in Denmark, and how you consider its success, or do you think it could be even better than this?

Ø Al-hamdulillah (all praises be to Allah), it was a successful trip, and the whole team was so optimistic about it. I had in mind a certain idea: that the Danish youth is just like us, and are curious to know the culture, traditions, and customs of the other party. Personally, I had that same curiosity to know everything about them. I was optimistic and felt that there would be interaction and response from their part, which is what actually happened.

- What kind of response was there? How did you sense it? In addition, how do you decide that it was a response?

Ø There was curiosity on their part, and inquiries about religion and my country Algeria.

Ø When they first saw me they asked about my job, and I said I am a doctor. They further asked about my studies and country, and asked if my Hijab[2] forms an obstacle in my life. I replied saying that it is not an obstacle: I drive my car, practice sports, and go to university with it. They had many questions of that kind.

- Darah, who are the young people you met there? Did they meet you in the conference hall, or did each of you go individually to talk to the people through Denmark?

Ø Well, we applied both types of interaction. We first talked to them in the hall, at other times we would take a taxi to any place or go to buy some food, and so we dealt with all types of people in Denmark. Before traveling, I was very scared that they would not accept us as Muslims. However, I entered wearing my Hijab with no obstacles or problems at all, although some were watching us with doubt and curiosity. Nevertheless, they were so good to us.

- Does this mean that you returned carrying love and not hatred toward the Danish?

- Sarah, would you tell me about the main features of your trip to Denmark with Mr. Amr Khaled? As you know, there has been some attack against this trip, which we will tackle with Mr. Amr later; but now we would like to know about your experience.

Ø In Denmark, we met youth just like us. As Khaled said, they suddenly found there was a problem, and so they were ready to listen to us, which facilitated a major part of our mission. They treated us as fellow humans, with no difference between us, despite the cultural difference. Hence, we focused on the common things between us instead of focusing on the differences, which was awesome.

Ø Passion for knowledge and science, and the curiosity to know what is happening around us. By focusing on such points of agreement, the whole activity became very positive.

- Didn’t they think the issue was very big when you traveled to Denmark? I do not mean the idea of hatred, but the complicated state and the decision of the Islamic world to boycott the Danish products. Besides, there has been mutual attack between the two sides (the West and the Islamic countries). Tell me about this feeling, and the way they talked about that problem.

Ø Khaled Barakat: There is a point I would like to highlight, that for the government, ministries, and peoples the issue is different. We went to hold a dialogue with those who are like us, and whom we consider as objective or would like to know the reality of what happened. We did not go to talk to those who could be considered the reason of the “battle”. The Danish people really care to know why we got angry to that extent.

- Nevertheless, they heard of that battle, and they are suffering from its consequences.

Ø Ye, but that does not mean that they approve it. We talked with 25 youth, but this is not the actual number. Those 25 youth represented 700 associations with 800.000 members who really followed the discussions and dialogue, as all this was broadcasted to them. We were addressing the youth sector of the Danish population, and actually, most of them were not able to comprehend or identify the problem before, and therefore wanted to know the reason behind our rage...isn’t this mere criticism?
That was the idea, and they were very curious- as Sawsan mentioned- and so we explained to them the meaning of the Prophet in our lives. It took us from morning until evening to make them understand that for us the issue was not simple at all. We worked hard to convince them that it could not even be compared to burning the flag, the act that enraged them, simply because the Prophet (SAWS) is the core of our whole life. They had to know all this because they could not understand the reason behind the rage, the boycott, the demonstrations, and the extremes of burning the embassies and flags. Thus, there was a key role to define the issue and the problem, as we helped people to identify the problem and acquaint them with Prophet Muhammad (SAWS).

- Eventually, enthusiasm and eloquence alone are not enough as qualifications for participating in such a conference. What were the practical preparatory steps taken before you traveled?

Ø I will say them in brief, but first I would like to stress the point that we did not go the conference as preachers or specialists, but as Muslim youth.

Ø I mean that the conference lasted for two days; a day where there were talks and discussions held between youth, and another day for preachers where youth were listening to them. I will talk about the day when youth were talking together. As for specialists, who played a vital role, we were accompanied by Moez Massoud, a well-known young preacher, and he was the head of the team.

Ø Yes. He was our leader in the specialized issues. Other than that, we talked about freedom of speech and dialogue, in addition to positive projects between the two sides. Not all this required any specialists in religious matters. However, the main trait that was common between all participants was their love for the Prophet (SAWS), in addition to their creativity and intellect. There were students of the Faculty of Law and Political Science like Darah, and there were students of the Faculty of Press and Media, who discussed the freedom of speech. This was all what we talked about there.

Ø Sawsan: I have another specialization, which is human development. I am a professional trainer, certified from the Canadian Center for Human Development. In addition, I am a certified practitioner in NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming), which is characterized by the communication skills and means of persuasion. This really helped me a lot in communicating with the others.

Ø Darah: I lived abroad for 18 years, and since I was young I was asked too many questions like, “Are you a Muslim? Do you pray? Why do you do this? Who is your prophet?” When any related event was broadcasted on the T.V, they asked me to explain to them because I came from a Muslim country. Therefore, I have a large experience. Besides, I took a course in Connection Revolution about solving disputes between the Americans and the Arabs and Muslims after 9-11. As I had such an experience, attending the conference was nothing new, but the new thing was dealing with a new people.

- On what basis were the Danish youth chosen to participate? They could have chosen youth who already accept the idea with no extremism, which will facilitate your mission. What if you had met with other type of youth?

Ø I do not know how they were chosen, but I know that each of them represented an association, which means that each was a team leader to a large group of youth. Accordingly, they were ready to listen to us, and did not just intend to prove their viewpoint. Their desire to know what enraged us and why it was a big issue was really dominating all other desires. We talked about our feelings all day long and about the sanctity of the Prophet (SAWS) for us. Consequently, at the end of the day they could comprehend our feelings and the reasons behind them.

Ø Khaled Barakat: To reply to this point I would like to mention that we tried something else. It was possible that the 25 youth were especially picked for that purpose, and that is why we tried to talk to people in the streets. The Danish people know English, which facilitated the communication with them. The Danish population is about 5.5 millions, and they are aware of all the news and events, and they knew we were coming. We talked to them in taxis, hotels, and streets and they interacted with us and were willing to listen. Furthermore, they insisted that what happened was a single stand of an independent newspaper, and that the people had nothing to do with it. They objected to such a stand after they had understood the value of the Prophet in our lives.

- Allow me to keep the thorny part to discuss it with Mr. Amr Khaled. Eventually, the prevailing and governing ground rules of your experience are enthusiasm and love, which are positive rules that no one can doubt. I would like to know the bottom line you derived from your experience, or the lesson that you learnt.

Ø Sawsan: Personally, I learnt that I should not judge any one or any thing before I see with my own eyes. Although I was optimistic about the trip, I had a small judgment of generalizing the view to all the Danish people because of a newspaper. However, after I returned I found out that we should see before we judge.

Ø Dara says, “What I have really learned that heart-to-heart talk makes a great difference, no matter how educated or cultured I am. What happened is that I told them that I was really hurt because of what they had done. On the other hand, they said that we live in Denmark and we have never met an Arab before when all of a sudden we found those who were burning our flag. I felt that both sides are offended. Therefore, there comes the need that we both talk from the heart in order to meet on the way to find a solution, if Allah wills.”

Ø Sarah says, “I was really touched by the way we departed, though our feelings grew only in two days. At departure, girls cried. They have not imagined that they would meet people like us. They have never known Islam. Some girl told me that she never thought how great Islam is and her horizons had broadened; moreover, she would carry our smiles and warmth to the world. That what deeply touched us most when those words and feelings arouse at the end of the day.”

Ø Khaled Barakat says, “I will quote from Al-Habib Ali Al-Jaffry, who had accompanied us along the journey. He clarified in a program yesterday that there are no fierce disputes in the Islamic world. They are divided into two parts: an unfair one, and a fair one. We represent the part that went to open a dialogue with their impartial fair part. We never claim that the unfair part’s belligerent attitude is not accelerating; thus we complete each other. On the other hand, we had a disfigured image of the Danish and the European people being against us. This is not true. I cannot generalize; as Sawan said, that they are all against us; each one has his own attitude. The people we talked to and conversed with, even in the streets, understood well, I think.”

- Welcome back Khaled Barakat, Darah Rateb, Sarah Al-Refaey, and Sawsan Al-Shebeky. Nonetheless, this experience adds to the credit of your lives and of a young generation whose phase will be on the fringe whenever dealing with the other, either positively or negatively. Thank you. After the break, we will meet on air with the core of this issue and, sometimes, the attacks, with the young Islamic preacher Amr Khaled.

On March, 9^th and 10^th, a big conference was held in Copenhagen titled “This is Our Religion.” A group of Islamic preachers were invited to this conference, however, Amr Khaled is always on the spot as he is the one who called for this conference on his private site on the internet and urged a lot of youth who perceive in themselves the ability to talk about our Prophet (SAWS)[3] with the others. The strange thing is the emergence of a big number of counter-declarations to the conference and, occasionally, angry declarations of both the conference and Amr Khaled, personally. Moreover, there are those live declarations, like those of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawey, that assume that it is not right to hold such conference because it prevents something on the Islamic nation. Furthermore, there are many distinguished writers, such as Fahmy Howaidy, Muhammad Selim Al-Awa, and Muhammad Umara, who doubted and were disapproved to this conference. In addition, part of the Islamic community in Denmark had, unexpectedly, asked for not holding this conference. Hence, we ask Amr Khaled on air, “What was that all about? Was there really a reason behind doubting the conference? Or are there other things we do not know about either the conference or the subsequent comments?”

- With no further introduction, we have the Islamic preacher Amr Khaled on air. Welcome back home.

- In the light of your private experience and the positive feelings towards the conference, and also in the light of the bitter criticism directed towards the conference and you personally, how do you feel after returning? Do you feel good, bitter, or self-revised? A mistake might be what provoked all the anger against you.

As for self-revision, no as I am not a stubborn person. I believe that what the youth have demonstrated is clear. As for goodness and bitterness, yes I agree. I, and all the people participated in it, feel good for presenting a civilized respected thing to the Muslim nation. I think that we have improved the image of Islam. I want to tell millions of people that we did not go there for inviting them to Islam but to present the beautiful image of Islam, which is something we can do.

- Millions? How can you tell that the conference had effect on millions of people although it was held in closed rooms?

That is not true. The modern telecommunication revolution allows it; two days can be broadcasted to whoever wants to listen, as the youth said. Denmark was prepared to listen because it had prior knowledge of our arrival. The most important thing, as we told them, is that we did not go there to negotiate on behalf of the Islamic nation, the Muslims, nor the Islamic community. We went there neither to stop the boycott nor to prevent the right of the Islamic nation to protest. We went there to present Islam and to keep the impartial as they are.

The Scandinavians are initially neutral. I believe that there are three groups of people: the Muslims, the anti-Muslims, who constantly conspire against Muslims, and a large number of impartial non-Muslims. I believe that this crisis was due to the attempts of the anti-Muslims, whether the cartoonist or who instigated him to do so, to attract the impartial to join them because they cannot defeat us unaided, or to isolate Muslims from the world. Moreover, thanks to the numerous satellite channels, the chances of the Muslims have increased to convey the voice of Islam to Europe, which is home to 20 million Muslims. I have lived in the west for three years because of certain circumstances. Now I live in Egypt, but still, I know how people in the west live. I think the matter is obvious. There is a glaring attempt to attract the impartial people to enmity. Attention was deliberately given to the burning of the flags and to those who screamed, as if it were the case. Meanwhile, they do not know what is happening and they wonder why we are screaming! No one ever tells them why. I told them that there are several roles. The protests have already burst out and I have no power to stop them. I told them that we cannot stop the boycott until they show good signs. Nevertheless, why do not we benefit from this extraordinary opportunity? The world is all ears to listen to us? Thus, we went in order to present our religion and introduce our Prophet to them. We aimed to let them know us, in order to change the image they had. That is why we went there. That is the source of my happiness. On getting into a taxi, we were surprised that the taxi driver opened the radio station on the speech of Al-Habib Ali Al-Jaffry, the part which we had just watched, while the Danish or the English language prevailed on his voice. I appeared on the principal nine o’clock news watched by million viewers. That is why I just told you “millions of people.” The presenter began the news with my interview, “Could you talk about your Prophet so we could understand why you are angry?” I replied that our Prophet is the one who taught us so and so. As for the press, I just wish I could show you what they wrote about us. Allow me to translate what was written in large font in their principal newspaper; “We learned from the Muslim delegation tolerance[4], peaceful existence, youth are the hope, mutual respect, human diversity, and most importantly, Muhammad is a great man, the government has to act, and the solution is dialogue, dialogue, then dialogue.” Those are the millions.

- Since we are talking about dialogue, when Sheikh Qaradawey justified his objection on this trend, he said, “Is it comprehensiable when someone insults my father, I go to that person and engage in a dialogue with him?” There are some people who think that dialogue is just refuting the aim which most people agreed on.

First of all, you have already heard what the youth said. I second that and say that who insulted us are the anti-Muslims who want to win the neutrals to their side. We are talking about generations that are turned into enemies of Islam. The future of the 20 million Muslims in Europe is dark. To make it clearer, a German minister asked a Muslim delegation he had received, “why are you in a hurry on your demands? We are getting old, while your numbers are increasing in Europe.” We have to be aware of what happens around us. By this, I do not mean that we disagree on the protests. Would a dialouge be valid without protests? Would we have found any one to listen if it had not been for the protests? Why not say that they complete each other? We went to engage in a dialogue with the people not the governments; even the two foundations we talked to were non-governmental. Furthermore, while we were in Denmark Dr. Abdullah Gul, the Georgian minister of foreign affairs, was in Austria to meet with the Danish government, which we did not meet. He held negotiations with them on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to discuss the state of the danish Muslims. This is an official, public, and scholar stance. What integration and variety!

- Then from your point of view, what was the reason behind the fierce attack on you? It has been said that a party that aimed to propagandize the event did this. It has also been said that this is just an exaggeration of positions, and that there is no more to this conference than any other and that we should not to give it more weight. Others viewed Amr Khaled and the delegates as wrongdoers. A popular writer said, “Return to your house Amr Khaled,” in other words, don’t worry we won’t harm you. There is an extreme situation so what do you think the cause was?

Firstly, we were not the ones who exaggerated the conference. In fact, the constant comments on it led to this state. Perhaps Allah’s plan was to let the more people hear us. The first question that was directed to me there during the press conference attended by 60 news agencies was, “Why are you here though Dr. Yusuf considers us enemies?” I replied, “Firstly don’t change the topic. Logically, it is not acceptable to insult 1/5 of the world’s population then come here and ask about difference of opinions. Secondly, you talk about freedom of expression and we have a purely Islamic dialogue taking place. Anyhow, let me answer you with another question. Well, Dr. Yusuf Al-Qardawy’s objection is considered an Islamic-Islamic dialogue so where is the west-west conversation about the injustice taking place in Iraq and Palestine? Where are the voices of the dissenters against the western mainstream that is directing a message of injustice towards us?” We responded with powerful responses. The reasons behind the attacks are a different matter. I am just proving to you what I said and I have got with me a scene from the conference in which I said the same speech clearly and powerfully.

Of course, for there are several matters at hand here, but firstly we should agree that we highly respect our scholars and preachers. I am going to go to Dr. Yusuf and kiss his head for I learned much from his books, understood them well and was educated by them. I said this to make things clear. On the other hand, Dr. Fahmy Howaidy and his opinions are well respected for he advices me in secrecy and in public. That was the first category. The reasons for the attack are many. One reason is that many dislike initiatives.

- This idea generally suggests surrender and negativity such as the peace negotiations’ initiatives. For ages, this word has been believed to prove incompetence.

I want to say that in comparison with the reformers in history, we still on the first step. History shows that initiatives are not accepted by many at their beginning. The mind always compares what it encounters to previous encounters. It does not know how to deal with novel things.

- I bet many wonder why Amr Khaled is certain that he is one of the reformers of the world.

I did not say that. I said that we are simple. I knew that you were going to ask about this. In fact, it is true, not because of dialogue but because we are really trying. What happened and what you have seen was all because of ambitious youth. I do not think it is shameful that those attempts were just initial. this only the beginning. Secondly, integral thinking is a problem in the Arab world, i.e. only the mainstream opinion is heard. Freedom might be a reason for this. I want to ask you a question and I hope you bear this story; There are three basic colors; blue, yellow and red. If each color were put alone then the world’s beauty and richness would be limited. In contrast, when the colors are mixed together properly they add so much to the beauty of the world. Did you get my point? Likewise, the diversity of thoughts is highly important. I highly respect our scholars and am grateful to them. If all of them have agreed on one idea then I would not have said anything. Muslim scholars’ union organization, which is a great and highly reputable organization, has its own opinions but I am not one of its members. On the other hand, other organizations and associations such as, the Egyptian Dar-Al-Fatwah from which Dr. Ali Jum’a sent a letter blessing this work; The Syrian Dar-Al-Fatwa did the same. Moreover, Sheikh Saeed Ramadan Al Bouty, am eminent Syrian scholar, Sheikh Abdulla Ibn Baih, Dr. Abla Al-Kahlawy, lecturer at Al-Azhar) and others, supported us. There are two opinions. We consider this diversity as a source of perfection. As long as we do not conflict with the other, this diversity is bout to bring about more benefits. Why should we then always see matters from one point of view? Conflict is useless. Having different opinions does not mean we disrespect the other-I seek refuge from Allah from doing so-for we respect our scholars and ourselves. In the meantime, I do not see the lack of consensus as a problem.

- Some people do not see this as a difference in opinions but as a straying way of thinking. Even in terms of colors, it seems as an odd color.

- Thursday was the second day after your return from Denmark and on which Al-Jazeerah Channel showed in the news that the Danish general public defendant stressed that Denmark has not intention to issue an apology to the Muslims who should learn the art of dialogue. This news has different implications. So long as you are here with us today, let us discuss one of the implications of this news, which is the futility of your attempt!

Flexibility is required here. We should not view the west from one standpoint. For instance when Mido the Egyptian football player participated in the Tottenham match some audience cheered against him though just because he was a Muslim Arab, which is racist. Fortunately, the audience of the other part of the stadium applauded because they refused what the others did. In the west, a Muslim woman wearing the veil rides a bus and is asked to leave or undergo inspection because they feared bombings. At the same time, she could get down the bus to find another woman who had also left though it is not her stop just to calm her down saying, “forgive us. We are afraid of death”. In the West, there are racists, Anti-Islamists, and there are also those who call for driving out European Muslims. calling to send the Muslims out of Europe for they reached to 20 million individuals. At the same time, there are those who say ‘ we want to know them.’ Therefore, we cannot consider them all as one. They are like us in a way; we beg the west to forgive us for what the extremists do, don’t we? Why do not we apply this both ways? Let me tell you something that would put an end to this matter. You say that what I did was out of line and you called it odd. Now I have an Islamonline dossier about the initial press conference about the impending “Bring Victory to the Prophet” Bahrain conference that was set as a preparation for the conference. All our great Scholars will attend it.

Dr. Yusuf Al- Qardawy, Dr. Shk Sulaiman AL-Ouda, and other great figures. It It will be on the 12^th of March 2006. Shall we read what it says? This is in preparation for the Bahrain conference. I attended the conference. I was invited to it and I appreciate that. This again proves the idea of completion. I really do not want to divert attention away from the main subject; bringing victory to the Prophet and focus instead on the conflict between scholars. Let me tell you what I think, which is written in this dossier. We do not want an apology written on a paper or published but we want an a knowledgeable apology i.e. we need the others to know the truth about the Prophet and mend his image in Danish society. We are not asking the others to believe in what we believe in, we only want the truth. In fact, we want to invest such incidents to unify the nation and improve the image of Islam. We should not be driven by temporary anger. We should use this emotion to bring us closer to positive ends. There is no conflict between the religious speech Copenhagen conference and the attendants who went in response to Amr Khaled’s inivitiation, and the one in Bahrain. In fact, we could call the trip of Amr Khaled to Denmark as an exploration trip. In today’s Nahdat-Misr Sheikh of AL-Azhar said, “The nation’s interest requires dialogue with Denmark or any other country as it could put an end to the problem. Who knows, it could change the Danish misconceptions about Islam. Through it, we could form an appropriate image of Islam. As Muslims we do not encourage isolation from the world. Our religion is neither isolated nor closed. In fact, exchanging visits is a step towards problem solving.

- But the issue is not as simple as you put it, you must realize that. I am not quite sure what contributed to playing up this issue. I cannot make myself a part of it. The matter is simply that some people intend to go and hold a forum with the purpose of engaging in dialogue with those who had a hand in attacking us. Suddenly because this step starts to constitute an insult added to injury. We eventually lose face. Furthermore, if you will may, what made things worse is that the Muslims in Denmark were upset that this conference was being held. I am quoting them when I say, “The conference has failed and we warned brother Amr Khaled about this before he even began.” They made it obvious that it was an unwelcome initial because it disregards their existence in Denmark, an opinion that differs from ours, an interesting argument indeed. These Danish Muslims are supposedly the ones who have been injured the most.

Let me first ask you a question. Our esteemed scholars, I repeat, I shall be at their service even if we differ in opinion. I think that diversity is acceptable when there is no consensus. Are matters clearer now? You said that matters are not that simple, but I say that they are not that simple because they as deep as I have explained. You cannot say that it is simple after all I have said. As for the conference’s success, I am keen on demonstrating to the viewers that something has really happened.

- It could be the first time that scenes of such detail are shown on our screens.

Yes. It is not true that “no one attended” or that “doors [were] closed”. Sixty Arabic media agencies attended the conference. Some of them are Al-Arabia, Al-Jazeera, LBC, and ART, which partly sponsored the youth’s trip. Al-Alam was also present. In the end, only the fact that we were introducing our religion remains, which is in itself beautiful. Going back to a point I made earlier, I did not go to end the boycott or please anybody. We made it very clear. I said in a strong-worded tone that what happened was an unacceptable insult; an insult that reached the extent of ill-manners and audacity. We do not have the power to end the boycott. Why do not we consider completing each other’s roles? This point must be clear already. The Dialogue between the 25 delegates and the Danish youth was not held in closed rooms. There were between them those who were briefing others via the Internet at Copenhagen University about what was happening at that minute by minute. There were satellites broadcasting to universities, scenes of Moezz while he was speaking, as he was fully conversant in the English language. There were also scenes of Dara while she was speaking. The scenes showing the Arab and Danish youth hug before departure were touching. What I want to emphasize is that something positive happened. It is not always necessary to view the negative side when something positive occurs. Does anything we succeed in doing ever win your approval, even if it were simple?

- No because we always question the intentions behind good deeds. Isn’t it better then to admit what it what it actually was about?

Though I do not like the generalization made about the Muslim community there, if you believe that they are not satisfied with the conference, then you should talk to Dr. Jihad Al-Farra, Head of the Danish Muslim Council. How long has the Danish Muslim Council been in existence? For years and not just from today. The Committee for the support of the Prophet, on the other hand, was established recently. Try to understand what I am saying. Dr. Jihad Al-Farra mentioned to me more than once his desire to appear on satellite channels to tell everyone about the effects of the conference on the Danish streets not just within the conference. I will give you Dr. Riyad Al-Farra’s phone number and you may call him tomorrow. He will attend the Bahrain conference since he is the head of the Danish Muslim Council. He told me, “I vouch that you have not compromised or given the Danes a safety net. You said what you had strongly and firmly while extending your hands for open dialogue. I am saying a word of truth so where is the problem?”

- The problem is that a rumor was spread about the initiative and conference being only responses to the Danish authorities’ expression of its desire to hold such events. It has also been said that the only gainers are the Danes, as the conference serves as an easy token of their cooperation, tolerance, and respect for Muslims. Now are Amr Khaled’s genuine efforts for the benefit of Europe and Denmark and at the expense of the Muslims? This was said in different phrasings. Some were very subtle and some were distressingly clear.

Firstly, it is not the Danish government that welcomed us. We announced the initiative in Cairo in a press conference and later the Danish government responded welcoming the initiative that so and so started. We did not wish to coordinate with the Danish government. Instead, we looked for unofficial organizations to work with us. We did not go there to negotiate with the Danish government. This needs to be a very clear point because this is not our specialty; it is the job of governmental institutions. I searched for two areas that would link me to the people. The Danish Youth Council represents 800,000 young men and women and the Danish Institution for International Dialogue are both non-governmental organizations. This is because I always think that there is a role that no one has performed yet, which is defining Da’wa (missionary activity). I beg the viewers not to disregard what I am saying. For years we have been asking why missionary activists travel to Europe. They go there to converse with the Muslim communities in Europe. This is the first time that the missionary activists travel to converse with the west and for the west to listen to them. I do not want to generalize, but as far as I know, it is the first time. .

- Even if we differ on how we evaluate the success of this experience. We will not differ on the point that it is a positive attempt at least.

This was the situation with the community. Do you know who of them coordinated with me? This is indeed interesting. Everyday, one of the figures of this community would call me asking me to coordinate with them instead of so and so.

Why did I not say all this before I went? I did not because of two issues. Will it be of any benefit if Amr Khaled goes there and tear up the community even before he arrives? I would not reveal it if I were insulted. It happens. However, I used to look at the situation this way: answering back would indicate contempt to the small Muslim community in Denmark. The new community comprises 200,000 Muslims. It is essential to support them. In fact, this is one of the objectives of the Bahraini conference; to stand by them. I am at their service. However who was I to choose of them? If I had coordinated with one party rather than the others, you would have asked me in this same interview why I divided the Muslims in Denmark. You would say that I am accused of dividing the them. Secondly, each of them represents a different sect. I have been careful from the beginning not to affiliate with any Muslim sect. I speak to the whole ummah (Muslim nation).

This is normal. You are talking about the reality of Muslims worldwide. There is no need to accuse Danish Muslims and scholars. They are all highly esteemed scholars whose success we want to promote. We will, if Allah wills, all stand by our scholars and Dr. Yousef during the Bahraini conference. At the end of the day, each of us will go home and leave them there alone.

- How did you view the boycott? Let me expand this question a little. There was a furious reaction to the offensive caricatures of the Prophet SAWS. This rage was followed by several steps. Some took the route of demonstrations while others demanded an apology and nothing but an apology. Where are you from all this?

Firstly, let us look at the boycott. I think it is like a car’s horn, more or less. It is used to warn of possible danger. The Muslims used this warning in the form of the boycott. It was as if they were telling the west that there is a grave danger coming their way because they made a huge mistake. This is what I think. We stop sounding the horn when the other realizes that and makes amends. On the other hand, it is of no use to keep sounding the horn. It would defeat the whole purpose. So when do we stop? The right timing is dependant on Denmark and not on us, when Denmark shows good intentions and sound steps.

- How do you see the official and unofficial reactions? It has been said that there were some implications of an apology. Some believe it to be sufficient while others do not think it is enough.

Let us say something. The apology could have been useful at the beginning, when the wound was still new. However, an apology now is not enough. It is not a matter of punishment or imposing sanctions. An apology at the time would have healed the wound but now after this long journey, an apology do. We want to look at the situation differently. One fifth of the human population has been severely wounded. The old world was secluded but now it has become smaller after the advent of technology and communications. The world is defined as a sphere, it is no secret. I am sure of the politicians, diplomats, scientists and scholars do not expect an apology. It is evident in the documentary that we just saw. All of them doubt that an apology would ever be issued. It depends on deeper matters such as, fallen regimes, upcoming cultures and historical culture. I analyzed why show Denmark became as such. But the question is: are there practical apologetic steps being taken on the Danish part? If there are then I believe that Muslims will calm down. Until such steps are taken however, Muslims will continue to suffer from it. Who would think that the subject is closed? It is not over so then why is it that I performed this attempt? I did it because in the end neither an apology nor a legislation is sufficient to solve the problem. Honestly, if a legislation is issued tomorrow prohibiting attacks on Islamic sacred symbols, the enemy will find a way to bypass these laws in one way or another. Their aim is to seclude Muslims. I hope people realize that. As soon as we are isolated, a global war will be waged on us. Our voices will be drowned. The solution from my point of view is increasing cultural awareness as it makes people immune to such atrocities. Do not misunderstand me, I am in favour of a legislation. A legislation is necessary but not enough. The incident happened in the Scandinavian countries who supported the Palestinian cause in the past and never waged a war against us. Just look at their history. These caricatures in particular should give us a sign. What I am trying to say is that we need to know these people so that before any similar incidents occur they could say, “No, we denounce what is being said about Muslims.” Right now they are saying, “What is the problem?” Do you see how with a visit many said that we reached out to hundreds of thousands which is far from the truth. The effect can show in a newspaper headline that says we should respect Muslims. This alone is big gain. The solution is as I said awareness and dialogue. Dialogue is a civilized means of dissolving rifts at the present time. The human race is constantly evolving. In the past humans used to live in forests and jungles but now we are civilized. What is the meaning of the word civilized? Does it mean that one has a laptop, a cellular phone and wears a suit and tie? Or does it mean that we deal with each other in a refined manner, though if one is wronged then one should act and claim one’s right. However the main solution is through dialogue. This is what Quran says. The Quran is a book about dialogue. It has outlined the views of those who differ in opinion and has conversed with them and criticized them. Our prophet conversed to the extent that his companions bled for the sake of dialogue. In Surat Al-Hujurat (The Apartments), Allah says what can be translated as, “…and We have made you races and tribes that you may get mutually acquainted…” (TMQ, 49:13)[5]. This is a Quranic bond that clearly tells us that dialogue is required. In missionary activity, we have fallen short of this requirement for 100 years. Now we have been given a golden opportunity, we might as well us it.

- Allow me to translate the last caller. The dear German Muslim wife said that she has been watching Amr Khaled since Ramadan after her husband and father-in-law urged her to. I asked her about Germany as it is right next to Denmark. I specifically asked whether the image of Muslims in Germany is so bad that that no form of dialogue could be useful. She said that Amr Khaled took a very good step in Denmark. She finally hopes that he visits Germany to expand the ordinary people’s horizons and to give them a positive view of Islam.

The effects of the conference surely cannot be guessed. I could not, personally. Still, I cannot speak of it as a heroic action. It is only a seed. The conference called upon the 20 million European Muslims to stand up and shoulder their share of the responsibility—introducing Islam and raising cultural awareness. The west is not my focus, however, I found that the protection of our country necessitates a form of coexistence with them. My message is that of Life Makers. Revival is simply inevitable if we desire to save ourselves from cultural clashes. I cannot say that it was a great victory, but I believe that we achieved something. I say this because there are some who belittle our efforts by saying that we failed. It is a unfair to judge such efforts so easily.

- You have managed to pinpoint the uneasiness of some people. There are those who wonder if Amr Khaled is the conqueror of Muslims in Denmark and if he is the one who established fraternal relations and spread Islam. Exaggerating the conference could have undesirable aftermath.

I could not agree more. Still, it is a good, sincere seminal effort. In tears, Ali Al Jafri, Dr. Tarek Suweidan, the youth and I prayed to Allah to consider what we did for the sake of our prophet. We asked him to accept our efforts and preserve our sincerity to Him. We were worried and we wished we could present it to the prophet on the Day of Judgment. Allah graciously allowed us to show the whole ummah the prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) through the series “On the Path of the Beloved”. Then the opportunity presented itself and we thought why not show the prophet to non-Muslims. It would be the first time that they would hear about the prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). We set out from this point. Nevertheless, this is a step and a seed that needs care. I look at the Bahrain conference with all due respect and appreciation since a gathering of this magnitude with me in the midst of them is a step forward. I do not wish to build on shaky foundations especially with those who spoke about us in an improper manner.

I was there and was hurt, but it was not possible for me to answer back while I was performing a duty. All that was said was said before the end of conference i.e. before all the information was put in place and that is simply unjust. While I was there I felt I was fulfilling a religious, patriotic and social duty that was limited as you said. If we assume that we failed they would say, “We told you so!” This made broadcasting the scenes very important. I have a series of lectures called “Morals.” If we had been observed bickering, we will be accused of blemishing the image of the religious. That is why I am protecting my sight and hearing. and I tell those who do me injustice may Allah reward you with goodness and may Allah forgive me and you. There is a touching ayah that includes all of us in Surat Al-Hijr (Thamud’s Habitation) that says, “…and lower your wing to the believers.” (TMQ, 15:88). I am trying to make practical use of this ayah as I enter this battle. I chose my own the battles. I will not enter a battle against scholars and will not allow that to happen because the only loser in this case will be Islam.

Peace be upon you. Firstly, I am very happy with the conference. A series must be held in Europe. I request introducing the Islamic culture to the west. They have to know about our religion and the message of the prophet (SAWS). Do you think that conferences are enough to connect us to the world? An award-winning Islamic product serves this purpose too, don’t you think? Or are conferences enough?

A.K.: I did not mean conferences alone. As you said, the world has to know enough about Muslims, whether through conferences or industries.

The conference was not limited to dialogue. The youth have given out their recommendations. Even the Danish Youth Council along with our youth led by Khaled agreed on five main recommendations, which I believe to be very good:

The first and the second are being implemented. Actually, the festival will be held in May. Our youth along with Khaled Barakat will return to Denmark tomorrow. There a few who are still in Denmark entering into agreements with the Danish youth, this emphasizes individual efforts.

Whether the controversy sprang up because of personal or situational reasons, only Allah knows. Anyway, the step Amr Khaled began arranging for a few months ago in the wake of the outburst of Islamic emotions has stirred some dispute. He tried to invest all efforts, creating unity to achieve this step, which is feasible. The Islamic world has interpreted it differently. I do not want to call it negativity because it was positive in itself.

Yes we were just talking about the diversity theory, such as the diversity of colors.

Even if we hold a different opinion, we, as media, are the ones who would eventually gain. If everyone had agreed with Amr Khaled, we would have been the ones who don’t. However, in the end there is a some sort of balance, which gave you support and at the same time created an opposition. However much we differ, in the end we all work towards the same goal, which is to assert our identities with the least possible losses.

Mutual respect is important. I am saying it again. I admire our scholars though we have different viewpoints. I am not repeating trite clichés; I am expressing what I really feel. Our cause is our religion and our countries. There are no side battles. I am truly speaking, by Allah, of the meaning of lowering one’s wing in the previous ayah. I do this even with those who harmed me with their harsh words. Let us forget this and give some attention to the future.

- Thank you, Amr Khaled, for this opportunity to meet with you on air. Thank you for your efforts, you and all the other hard workers. In the end, it is always positive.

All Rights Reserved جميع حقوق النشر محفوظة
This Article may be published and duplicated freely for private purposes, as long as the original source is mentioned. For all other purposes you need to obtain the prior written approval of the website administration. For info: dar_altarjama@amrkhaled.net

[1] Salla Allah alayhe Wa Salam [All Prayers and Blessings of Allah be upon him]

[2] Hijab: literally “cover”. It describes the self-covering of the body for the purposes of modesty and dignity. Broadly, it should be regarded as a prescribed system of attitudes and behavior regarding modesty and dignity.

[3] All Prayers and Blessings of Allah be upon him

[4] Acknowledging and supporting that individuals have the right and freedom to their own beliefs and related legitimate practices, without necessarily validating those beliefs or practices

[5] TMQ=Translation of the Meaning of the Qur'an. This translation is for the realized meaning, so far, of the stated (Surah:Ayah) of the Qur'an. Reading the translated meaning of the Qur'an can never replace reading it in Arabic, the language in which it was revealed.