THE BLAME ISLAM GAME By Parvez Ahmed When asked whether the recent bus and subway bomb blasts were acts of Islamic terror, London Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair responded that the culprits were certainly not "Islamic terrorists" because Islam and terrorism do not go together. He was echoing the sentiments of Prime Minister Tony Blair who earlier said, "The vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims both here and abroad are decent and law abiding people who abhor this kind of terrorism every bit as much as we do." During a private meeting with American Muslims, British Ambassador to the U.S., Sir David Manning was emphatic in distancing the London terror bombings from Islam, which he described as a faith of "peace, reconciliation and tolerance." Despite this sentiment, it is quite common to see terrorism committed by Muslims be referred to as "Islamic terrorism." Yet efforts to find an alternative to this false assertion have often proven inconclusive. As author Karen Armstrong recently noted in the Guardian newspaper, "Incorrect statements about Islam have convinced too many in the Muslim world that the West is an implacable enemy." She also pointed out that acts of terrorism by the Irish Republican Army are not referred to as "Catholic terrorism." This week marks the 10th anniversary of the massacre of 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica. That act of barbarism was never attributed to any religion, despite the religious roots of the conflict. Columnist Thomas Friedman recently promoted another damaging stereotype by writing in the New York Times, "the Muslim village has been derelict in condemning the madness of jihadist attacks....To this day - to this day - no major Muslim cleric or religious body has ever issued a fatwa condemning Osama bin Laden." Juan Cole, a professor of history at University of Michigan, debunks this myth by cataloging numerous condemnations from prominent Muslim religious figures who have not only called the "jihad" of Osama bin Laden un-Islamic but also pointed out Islam's emphatic rejection of terrorism. Following the bombings in London, every major Muslim group in America and abroad issued clear condemnations, dissociating the barbarism of a few from the peaceful practices of the mainstream majority. "We join Americans of all faiths, and all people of conscience worldwide, in condemning these barbaric crimes that can never be justified or excused," declared the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). "Attacking civilians who are going about their daily business is a criminal act that violates Islamic principles, and must be condemned by all Muslims," was the response from the Islamic Society of North America, one of America's largest Muslim groups. Misperception about Islam's position against terrorism is making an already jittery American public even more suspicious. More importantly, it is also preventing meaningful dialogue between American Muslims and policy makers. Lack of dialogue also leads to very little discussion about the "underlying issues" of terrorism, which Tony Blair asserted must be dealt with if terrorism is to be eradicated. However, this important step cannot be achieved so long as the American public remains misinformed about Islam in general and Muslim positions related to terrorism in particular. Only when the blame game stops can meaningful dialogue begin. American Muslims should rightfully undertake the mission of building bridges of understanding between America and the Muslim world. This can happen when mainstream American Muslim groups are constructively engaged by policy and opinion makers. [Parvez Ahmed, Ph.D., is board chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy group. He may be contacted at: pahmed@cairfl.org.
I think it is refreshing to see leaders speak out against terrorism, and I don't believe most of them would have done it without Bush sending our troops to Iraq. I mean...the PLO, and HAMAS speaking against the attacks. Outstanding. DD
Let me help you answer those questions. How do they treat women? With Respect. Straight up... every women is treated like a mother or sister, and she is to be given respect. Yes women are allowed in mecca, and they have special provisions for women without any male relatives. How permissive is (ISLAM) to others faiths? There is no compuslion is islam. You can be whatever faith you wish. Infact, when the muslims were conquering lands, they gave the civillians the option to convert to islam, leave the country, or remain in the country while paying a tax for the defense of the people. That is how it is now, or should be in an ISLAMIC country.
I dont see how bush sending troops to IRAQ has anything to do with leaders speaking out against terrorism. If anything the leaders of these countries probably fear that bush may send troops to their country and they may in turn have more terrorist uprisings. On a more serious note, Hamas, may organize attacks on civillians, i feel that they are always in retaliation to Israeli attacks on palestinian civillians.(regardless of who started it) And while it is still definately wrong, they may percieve killing of innocent civillians without a reason(9-11,london,madrid) to be even more wrong than a retaliatory attack(see palestinian intifada) I highly doubt they are condemning the attacks because they fear bush or the USA, I think that these people do have some sympathy, and do still have feelings. Thats just my opinion.
Sending troops to Iraq is why leaders are speaking out against terrorism…. ..interesting....I don't see the connection. ...do you think Bush has frightened these leaders? Another topic…. 1)500,000 children under the age of 6 died in Iraq because of U.S sanctions……facts and figures….now I do not mean to belittle the incident in England….but when 50 innocent people die in England it’s a bigger deal…. the act of terrorism is awful …and nobody has the right to take the life of an innocent ….though when the U.S puts sanction on Iraq so many people died…how come nobody paid any attention to it?.....when they put the sanction they were hurting the public not Saddam….he was just a brutal/tyrant ruler who wanted to stay in power…and did.... can anyone explain to me why the public of other countries do not matter to the U.S??...if you are a hegemon don’t you have the responsibility to the results of actions? 2)In 1953, the CIA deposed Iran's last democratic leader…. Mohammed Mossadeq and set his country on a path toward dictatorship and tragedy….Mohammed Mossadeq was elected by the people through democracy….Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq sponsored a bill to nationalize Iran's oil industry (controlled by the British-run Anglo-Iranian Oil Company). The Majles votes for the bill, and follows through with nationalization of the oil industryin Iran. Western countries respond by boycotting Iranian oil?….was this the reason why the CIA had to support (militarily and financially) the Shah regime???….the Shah’s were a brutal regime….when you create one extreme you help cultivate another extreme ….Ayatollah Kumani ….can someone explain to me what was the reason of supporting the Shah??? I am not a political person…though can some of you who are help me understand these two cases?
Not sure I understand the connection. Do you mean they were intimidated into condemning the acts for fear of retaliation by Bush? Kind of like how Iraq paid for being behind the 9/11 attacks...?
The world provided plenty of food and medicine to Iraq under the sanctions. The problem was that Saddam's regime still controlled the interior of Iraq and he did not allow the goods to get to the public. The sanctions didn't stop Saddam from stockpiling food and drugs and keeping the Army well fed and in good health. If you did not like what the sanctions were doing to the Iraqi people, then you should have supported regime change, it's one of the reasons I did. Supporting the Shah, like pretty much every other case of supporting a dictatorship in the history of the US, was not a good idea. Condi Rice recently talked about this very thing. I only wish we would stop supporting the dictatorial regimes that are "on our side" in the war on terror (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan). Not everything America has ever done is good, and there are few if any that would claim that to be the case.
IMO, they died because of their tyrant ruler. He wouldn't comply with the UN etc, and him defying them caused the sanctions. The blame shouldn't be put on the US. The US and the petty un, sent a lot of aid to Iraq. Much food and medicine that was sent in vain, because the tyrant Saddam blocked the aid from reaching the needy.
No, the million muslim march is the dumbest thing I've heard. I simply replied with an EQUALLY dumb thing to make a point. Blacks WERE being killed in the name of Christianity. (Historically, more people have died in the name of religion than anything else.) I didn't see white people having a million man march. Its a dumb thing to say. You know why? Because if you did, you were a "****** lover." Two of the three people killed in Mississippi for that guy on trial last month were WHITE civil rights workers. So if you did speak up, you put your OWN life at risk. The same goes for Muslim's. If you oppose them, then will target you next. What sucks for them, is the peaceful muslims live side-by-side with the extremists so they are easily targeted. Its easy for you to sit over here and claim they should speak up.
Recently when Christians in Africa were putting whole villages to the torch, I didn't see people demanding Christians to denounce the acts. When Christians were committing genocide against Muslims under Milosevic, there were no cries that Christians should police their own. There is a lot of sympathy and uproar over the bombings in London, and there should be. But the same number of civilians are being killed several times a week in Iraq, by terrorists, but for some reason their deaths don't receive the same sympathy or news coverage.
1. IIRC 9/11/01 happened before the intervention in Iraq. Osama didn't attack the US for 'invading other countries.' 2. This IS a conflict between modernity and Islam (as represented by AQ et al). To claim they 'don't hate our way of life' is simply incorrect. Radical Islamic fundamentalist such as Osama DO see this as a conflict between an open society and (what they prefer) a Taliban style Islamic society. While it certainly should be noted that this is a subset (as krosfyah points out) of the Muslim population, to claim that there is not direct open conflict between what radical Islam wants and what the west/modernity wants is avoidance thinking at best. Don't think you were looking. It was, in fact, the 'Christian West' that stopped the genocide against Muslims in Bosnia and eventually removed Milosevic. Strangely enough that happened after the 'muslim world' declared they would act and never did.
Just as there were Muslim troops in Afghanistan after 9/11. Those seem to be ignored by all those that whine about the Muslims doing nothing.
I don't recall any photos of Christians celebrating the OKC bombings, though we saw plenty of Palestinians celebrating 9/11. I also recall many Muslim press reports concocting all sorts of silly stories about how 9/11 was a Jewish plot.
I don't recall any Christian ministers doing this after OKC. ****http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050713/ap_on_re_us/terror_paintball_sentence_3 By MATTHEW BARAKAT, Associated Press Writer Wed Jul 13,12:25 PM ET ALEXANDRIA, Va. - A prominent Islamic scholar who exhorted his followers after the Sept. 11 attacks to join the Taliban and fight U.S. troops was sentenced Wednesday to life in prison. Ali al-Timimi of Fairfax was convicted in April of soliciting others to levy war against the United States, inducing others to aid the Taliban, and inducing others to use firearms in violation of federal law. The cleric addressed the court for 10 minutes before his sentencing. "I will not admit guilt nor seek the court's mercy. I do this simply because I am innocent," al-Timimi said. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Kromberg said al-Timimi "hates the United States" and has called for its destruction. "He's allowed to do that in this country," Kromberg said. "He's not allowed to solicit treason. He deserves every day he gets." U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said the evidence supported the mandatory life sentence. The judge had earlier left open the possibility that she would toss out some of the counts. About 50 supporters were in court for al-Timimi, who waved to his wife as he was escorted from court. She declined to comment. Prosecutors portrayed al-Timimi, a native U.S. citizen, has having "rock star" status among his followers, who frequently heard his lectures at a small mosque in Falls Church. In particular, prosecutors said, the defendant wielded enormous influence among a group of young Muslim men in northern Virginia who played paintball games in 2000 and 2001. Authorities said they were a "Virginia jihad network" training for holy war around the globe. Nine members of the group have been convicted for their roles in the conspiracy, with prison terms ranging from three years to life. Al-Timimi's lawyers argued that their client merely suggested that Muslims may want to leave the United States after Sept. 11 because of the potential for a backlash against them. But he was accused of telling a group of young Muslim men just days after the attack that an apocalyptic battle between Muslims and nonbelievers was at hand and that Muslims were obligated to engage in holy war. He told the group that defense of the Taliban was a requirement and that U.S. troops were a legitimate target, according to court testimony. Several of the men who heard Al-Timimi's speech traveled days later to Pakistan and began training with a militant Islamic group called Lashkar-e-Taiba, officials said. Some testified that their goal was to obtain training that would allow them to fight alongside the Taliban, though none actually made it to Afghanistan. ******* One more thing, how many pilots from Muslim countries were involved in the air campaign that brought down Milosevic? Did the House of Saud send any of their F-15s over there?
I dont recall any Palestinians that were informed on what really happend at 9-11 celebrating. I definately recall the part where some of the people were asked why they were celebrating, and they had no idea that the world trade center was blown up. I also recall the afghani people having no clue about 9-11, and yet their relatives were killed in gunfire. and as for the silly stories, I recall many SILLY stories about how oklahoma was a muslim thing, and its legit for people to brainstorm. When nobody was given proper information, and to this day we dont have proper information about what exactly went on in those airplanes, or whatever, i dont blame people for having conspiracy theories. Dont expect anything different coming out of the London bombings, people will make stories, until they get the proper information to back up what the governments are saying.
You clearly have a selective memory. This is just flat out false. We sent our brave troops over there for crying out loud.
Those pictures were part of a series of pictures/video. When you saw the zoomed out version of those pictures/videos, it was like 10 people dancing. But the zoomed in version made it look as though dozens or hundreds of people were dancing. Don't get all excited about it. Islam prays to the same God as Christians. Most Muslims are peaceful. Get over your holier than thou Christian view of things as you only see one side of the story. I'd bet if you asked any random Muslim, they'd give you a very different story then the one that's in your head. You don't know any Muslims, do you?
