There are many reasons to condemn and agonise over Pakistani Taliban’s wanton attack on Bacha Khan University in Charsadda on 20 January, causing twenty-one deaths and injuring more than thirty people, but two definitely stand out singularly. This private institution of higher learning was named after a great humanitarian and eminent freedom fighter, who avowedly believed in non-violence that he practised even before Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) made it into his unique creed. Khan, a towering and no less charismatic personality, began his long political career during the stormy day of the Khilafat Movement when Indian Muslims were deeply astir over events in the Ottoman caliphate. Exhortations for tolerance, non-violent resistance, modern education and an austere life endeared Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan (1890-1988) across South Asia besides earning him a well deserved title, Bacha Khan—the King Khan. Charsadda was his birth place though the illustrious Khan willed to be buried in Jalalabad underlining his lifelong desire to solidify his ideas among fellow Pashtuns--often derisively called Pathans by the Raj and others. Not only this massacre of two teachers and nineteen students happened on Khan’s death anniversary, it callously took place in his very town as well and presumably the four perpetrators and their backers claiming responsibility for this heinous crime happened to be fellow Pashtuns for whom he had devoted his entire life.

This essay analyses the thoughts of three (3) Prominent Western Academicians on Islam-Democracy Discourse, namely jurist Khaled Abou El Fadl (b.1963, Kuwait), Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law (USA); political scientist Abdelwahab El-Affendi (b. Sudan), Reader in Politics in University of Westminster (London); and theologian Abdulaziz Sachedina (b. 1942, Tanzania), Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Virginia (USA). These Muslim thinkers/ intellectuals have, along with others, contributed greatly to shape the theoretical understanding of "Islamic democracy" and thus have advanced this decades-old-discourse many steps further. The essay argues that the crucial issue, and the challenge ahead, faced by Muslim intellectuals is to turn the theory of Islamic democracy into a practicality.

A series of French and foreign scholars and researchers have embarked on an effort to approach a phenomenon that has increased in ìpopularityî since 9/11 in western media, academic communities and thinkñtanks; however, it still remains widely ambiguous. Analyses which focus on extremist movements in the Muslim world quite often use the term ìSalafismî along with ìJihadismî, ìWahhabismî and ìextremist Islamî. This kind of mixing of theological, militant and political terms obscures more than it reveals while confusing the reader and intensifying his or hers already troubled perception of the phenomenon under discussion. This work - the first one to approach the Salafist phenomenon under a global prism - sheds light on the course of salafism from its cradle in the Arabian Peninsula to its apparition in the Parisian suburbs, passing by the Middle Eastern world and particularly Morocco.

'Memory is not only a filter; it has also a regrettable way of reflecting the needs of the present''. In this comparative political treatise, Zeev Sternhell seeks to challenge longstanding myths surrounding the founding of modern Israel. His stance on this demythologizing work is partially connected to the post-Zionist intellectual movement, which challenges the prevailing truisms of Zionist historiography, trying at the same time to put them in a historical context and explain them. As an advocate of this new approach, the writer moves away from the conceptual and widely accepted "myths" that view Zionism as a socialist-democratic movement of national liberation.

 Idith Zertal, a leading member of the new generation of revisionist historians in Israel, presents through her analysis the way in which Israel's collective memory of death and trauma was created and re-produced, and how it has been processed, coded and put in use in Israel's public space, particularly during the half century which has lapsed since the destruction of the European Jewry. This book offers a new perspective on Israel, its history and the construction of national identity.

The importance of the Six Day war of 1967 lies in the major changes it brought about not only in the Middle East but also in the entire system of international affairs. Apart from its direct impact on the Palestinians, it has also led to the birth of a new group of Israeli historians who have adopted a critical approach in their study of Israel's history. They are called Post-Zionists or revinsionists and Tom Segev is one of them. Although not all New Historians have uniform views, there is a point of convergence: the Palestinian refugee problem. They have opened a discussion on the very nature of the Israeli state, with a view to exploring ways through which it could come to terms with the Palestinians. Furthermore the New Historians are racking up events and facts which were downplayed or suppressed by Zionist historians, in order to define the causes of the current situation. Accordingly, Segev uses a variety of sources, such as letters, diaries and interviews as well as Israel's official archives, and lets them speak for themselves. The most interesting fact is that he achieves to highlight the causes of the war not only through political and strategic facts but also through an analysis of Israel's psyche before and during the war.