We are so Sorry for 9-11: Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism
There was a very interesting article on the web today, on the 3rd anniversary of September 11th terrorist attack. It was an article by an Islamic group apologizing on the behalf of the entire Muslim world for the acts of Terrorism that some members of Islam have perpetrated.
We are so Sorry for 9-11: Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism
It is a curious article. As a non-Muslim, I appreciate the sentiment and I applaud the actions of the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism in taking a stand against violence in the name of Islam, but the article left me with a number of thoughts that probably were not intended.
The article was published on September 11th, the third aniversary of the attack. I would guess it was released to get the maximum exposure to the apology. The message reaches the most people and additionally provides the maximum exposure for the group worldwide. While some may attack the decision as tacky as the writers do not appear to have anything to do with the attacks besides sharing a religion (they appear to be American Muslims), I do not. I think an apology has to be taken at face value. It was not an apology that anyone requested, but it was one that suvivors and the family of the deceased I am sure will appreciate.
Frankly, all of Islam has looked subhuman for the last few years as Middle Eastern Muslims have taken to the streets in what seems like nightly parades to cheer murder worldwide. It is nice to see that not all Muslims are religious fanatics looking for a reason to blow up themselves and anyone around them, however, I cannot escape the feeling that the vast majority of this organization are American Muslims---a pretty peaceful group these days.
A co-worker recently recounted a discussion he had with a female Muslim in college over a decade ago that as of late has had me thinking about Muslim violence. He was asking if she thought there would be peace in the middle east in our lifetime. He suggested that if the Muslims who wanted peace demanded it of their leaders, maybe we would see it in our lifetime. She responded, "There are no peaceful muslims; Only undisturbed ones."
If this is an opinion of a young Muslim, I had to ask, am I fooling myself to think otherwise?
(I live in Texas and as such I am surrounded by fundamentalists of an equally disturbing nature---the Evangelistical Christians. After every attack I hear the same thought echoed over and over in casual conversation, "Turn the middle east into a parking lot. Nuke it all. That will solve all of the world's problems." I would think that the idea is too insane to be considered, but as the President of the US is just another one of these people, maybe I should touch on it.
It is foolish in my opinion to believe that this would resolve anything. With one group eliminated, the nature of human kind is that other groups' confilcts would move into the forefront. Korea or India having Nukes, China suppressing human rights, someone else having a natural resource the US, Europe, or China covet, etc...
Looking at the idea further from just a practicallity standpoint, what about the Muslims in other countries? How are they going to react to having family and loved ones in the Middle East slaughtered? It seems a recipe for MORE terrorism, not less. (Even in spite of the simple truth of Terrorism. Terrorism is a despirate and immature cry for attention. It is buying a 20 second commercial for your cause with your life. And you don't even get to write the script.)
Look at Afganistan and Al Quida. The US went into Afganistan and we killed a number of member of Al Quida. But we didn't get everyone. Now there are Al Quida cells all over the place in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. I would think that the death of fellow members (friends of theirs) would galvanize a religious fundamentalist---bringing the personal in line with the dogma to birth a more devoted Terrorrist.
Why would anyone want to make more of these damaged people?
It is scary to think that the embattled Russian leadership now also has has a national consensus to address the "Muslim problem" after the autrocity at Beslan. Russians are tough. They are not the kind-hearted liberals we are in America. Their response will be brutal. With 2 super powers having had enough of the Islamic fundamentalists and Bush ahead in the US presidential race, Iranians should sleep lightly.)
I read the editorial by Abdel Rahman al-Rashed condemning the Beslan terrorists and asking Muslims to take a critical look at their society. ( "Almost all terrorists are Muslims. It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims.")
I found the editorial and the FMCAT website a welcome comfort to my troubling thoughts. Here are Muslims acknowledging their issues and trying to bring about positive peaceful change in the Muslim community. They have articles that are designed to encourage Muslims who might be supportive of murder and brutality to think about their actions. They present arguements based off scriptures from the Koran. While I think the article on the Koran basically supporting American values (The Qur'an demands a SECULAR state) may have many fallacies in it, if they are going to battle for the soul of Islam vs. militant religious leaders, their arguements must have the weight of the Koran behind it to have any sway. It mirrors the language that is used on sites that are in support of terrorist activities. So that seems positive.
I hope SOMETHING positive may finally come from this. If reform in the Middle East comes about from these individuals efforts, maybe the deaths of the 9/11 victims and others might be a little less meaningless and the survivors of terrorism could take some small comfort from that.
We are so Sorry for 9-11: Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism
It is a curious article. As a non-Muslim, I appreciate the sentiment and I applaud the actions of the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism in taking a stand against violence in the name of Islam, but the article left me with a number of thoughts that probably were not intended.
The article was published on September 11th, the third aniversary of the attack. I would guess it was released to get the maximum exposure to the apology. The message reaches the most people and additionally provides the maximum exposure for the group worldwide. While some may attack the decision as tacky as the writers do not appear to have anything to do with the attacks besides sharing a religion (they appear to be American Muslims), I do not. I think an apology has to be taken at face value. It was not an apology that anyone requested, but it was one that suvivors and the family of the deceased I am sure will appreciate.
Frankly, all of Islam has looked subhuman for the last few years as Middle Eastern Muslims have taken to the streets in what seems like nightly parades to cheer murder worldwide. It is nice to see that not all Muslims are religious fanatics looking for a reason to blow up themselves and anyone around them, however, I cannot escape the feeling that the vast majority of this organization are American Muslims---a pretty peaceful group these days.
A co-worker recently recounted a discussion he had with a female Muslim in college over a decade ago that as of late has had me thinking about Muslim violence. He was asking if she thought there would be peace in the middle east in our lifetime. He suggested that if the Muslims who wanted peace demanded it of their leaders, maybe we would see it in our lifetime. She responded, "There are no peaceful muslims; Only undisturbed ones."
If this is an opinion of a young Muslim, I had to ask, am I fooling myself to think otherwise?
(I live in Texas and as such I am surrounded by fundamentalists of an equally disturbing nature---the Evangelistical Christians. After every attack I hear the same thought echoed over and over in casual conversation, "Turn the middle east into a parking lot. Nuke it all. That will solve all of the world's problems." I would think that the idea is too insane to be considered, but as the President of the US is just another one of these people, maybe I should touch on it.
It is foolish in my opinion to believe that this would resolve anything. With one group eliminated, the nature of human kind is that other groups' confilcts would move into the forefront. Korea or India having Nukes, China suppressing human rights, someone else having a natural resource the US, Europe, or China covet, etc...
Looking at the idea further from just a practicallity standpoint, what about the Muslims in other countries? How are they going to react to having family and loved ones in the Middle East slaughtered? It seems a recipe for MORE terrorism, not less. (Even in spite of the simple truth of Terrorism. Terrorism is a despirate and immature cry for attention. It is buying a 20 second commercial for your cause with your life. And you don't even get to write the script.)
Look at Afganistan and Al Quida. The US went into Afganistan and we killed a number of member of Al Quida. But we didn't get everyone. Now there are Al Quida cells all over the place in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. I would think that the death of fellow members (friends of theirs) would galvanize a religious fundamentalist---bringing the personal in line with the dogma to birth a more devoted Terrorrist.
Why would anyone want to make more of these damaged people?
It is scary to think that the embattled Russian leadership now also has has a national consensus to address the "Muslim problem" after the autrocity at Beslan. Russians are tough. They are not the kind-hearted liberals we are in America. Their response will be brutal. With 2 super powers having had enough of the Islamic fundamentalists and Bush ahead in the US presidential race, Iranians should sleep lightly.)
I read the editorial by Abdel Rahman al-Rashed condemning the Beslan terrorists and asking Muslims to take a critical look at their society. ( "Almost all terrorists are Muslims. It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims.")
I found the editorial and the FMCAT website a welcome comfort to my troubling thoughts. Here are Muslims acknowledging their issues and trying to bring about positive peaceful change in the Muslim community. They have articles that are designed to encourage Muslims who might be supportive of murder and brutality to think about their actions. They present arguements based off scriptures from the Koran. While I think the article on the Koran basically supporting American values (The Qur'an demands a SECULAR state) may have many fallacies in it, if they are going to battle for the soul of Islam vs. militant religious leaders, their arguements must have the weight of the Koran behind it to have any sway. It mirrors the language that is used on sites that are in support of terrorist activities. So that seems positive.
I hope SOMETHING positive may finally come from this. If reform in the Middle East comes about from these individuals efforts, maybe the deaths of the 9/11 victims and others might be a little less meaningless and the survivors of terrorism could take some small comfort from that.
posted by The Tobidian at 6:34 PM
1 Comments:
Tobidian, nice blog!
There's a reason why the article seems curious. Free Muslims presents themselves as a grassroots muslim organization, and Nawash pretends to speak for the Muslim Community--but they are a Republican front group.
Post a Comment
<< Home