I wanted to understand. I'm not here to support one, but I am here to criticize all, on a principled position. I very much value the position of counter power. I think this is where ethics should be, in front of power as I said in Radical Reform. The power of counter-power is very important.

Culture constitutes an essential element of social and political liberation. As people rise up across the Middle East and North Africa, the diversity of their cultures is not only the means but also the ultimate goal of their liberation and their freedom.

To have a moral sense is not to be dogmatic in dealing with rules. It can be an open way with dealing with questions of objectives and purpose, which is completely different.

There must be a very clear understanding that you cannot work for peace if you are not ready to struggle. And this is the very meaning of jihad: to manage your intention to get your inner peace when it comes to the spiritual journey. In our society, that means face injustice and hypocrisy, face the dictators, the exploiters, the oppressors if you want to free the oppressed, if you want peace based on justice.

I focus on Islamic applied ethics in many fields, and here I am saying that coming back to the Qu'ran and the sunnah as our reference point does not mean that we depend for our ethics on 'Islam as opposed to the others'.

We are not competing for the good when we only compete for numbers, being preoccupied with how many converts we are gaining. The true competition for good only happens when we are implementing our values of justice.

Saying that I am talking out of both sides of my mouth just proves my very point. Politicians would bypass real social issues by referring to my grandfather, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, or to my brother, currently chairman of the Islamic Centre in Geneva.