The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest
Vol: 55 Issue: 17 - Monday, April 17, 2006
Depicting Islam Unfairly . . .
US Islamic leaders are complaining about the way that Muslims are being portrayed on TV and in the media. They say conveying a peaceful image of Islam is much more difficult since September 11, and they blame what they call a 'barrage' of negative news stories.
By 'negative' news stories, they mean stories like the Afghani convert threatened with execution, the daily terror attacks by Islamic jihadists, the mass demonstrations protesting cartoons of Mohammed and the Islamic car-burning protests in France.
USAToday quoted Irfan Rydhan, 31, a spokesperson and organizer for the South Bay Islamic Association in San Jose, Calif.
“We say we're peaceful people, but it doesn't matter what we say,” he complained. “They see these violent images on TV, and those people look like us.”
It seems as if extremist voices “have taken over,” said Rana Abbas, a 26-year-old Muslim American who is deputy director of Michigan's American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, a nationwide civil rights group based in Washington, D.C.
“It makes your struggle so much harder. It makes it seem as if all your efforts are in vain. It's really hard right now for moderate Muslims to get their message out.”
James Zogby, the president of the Arab American Institute says Islamic terror isn't Islam's fault, at all. Instead, says Zogby, the Islamic world has been destablized by war.
“The problem is not the nature of the religion; it is the dislocation and disruption of normal society brought on by the trauma of war,” says Zogby.
“It's similar to what happened in our own country during the post-Civil War period where you had lynchings and the emergence of extremist currents that lasted for decades.”
Imam Hassan Qazwini heads the largest mosque in the USA, the Islamic Center of America, based in Dearborn, Mich. Qazwini said he and other imams have grown weary of being made to answer for every violent act committed in the name of Mohammed.
“This has become a daily nightmare for Muslims,” Qazwini said. “We're upset. We're frustrated. We cannot control every Muslim. We cannot be held responsible for everything.”
By way of comparison, Qazwini asked, “How is it that when Pat Robertson calls for the murder of the president of a sovereign country that nobody said Christianity is promoting violence and murder?”
One suspects there is a difference between one guy calling for a political assassination and thousands of guys committing political assassinations, but therein lies the problem.
Assessment:
I admit that I feel bad for those Muslims who aren't sympathetic to Islamic terror. But my sympathy is tempered by the fact that there are about a billion and a half Muslims and maybe a dozen of them have spoken out against the Islamic terrorists -- the rest just complain they are being tarred with the same brush.
The 'negative news stories' that US Muslims say give Islam a bad name are NOT 'made up' stories. Afghanistan, the most moderate and US-friendly Islamic regime in the Islamic world WAS prepared to execute a guy for converting to Christianity.
There WERE hundreds of thousands of Muslims demonstrating, destroying property and burning cars over the publications of cartoons insulting Mohammed.
Why don't people say Christianity promotes violence and murder, despite Pat Robertson's comments?
Let's see. Is Jesus regularly lampooned by the media? Yes. Do Christians react by rioting and burning private property? No.
Has a Christian ever been executed by his co-religionists for converting to Islam? No.
(And, for the record, Robertson's comments were widely excoriated and Robertson subsequently apologized. I am waiting for an apology from Islam for promoting jihad)
Zogby's argument that Islam seems warlike thanks to all the wars in the Islamic world is almost impossible to follow. What wars is Zogby referring to?
The five wars against Israel? (All were conducted in the name of Islam). The Sudanese civil war? (That is a war between Islam and the Sudan's non-Islamic population.)
The UN charges of genocide were NOT leveled against the non-Islamic south, but against the Islamic government of Sudan.
The comparison to the American civil war is makes one wonder what in the world Zogby is talking about. The Civil War was about politics, not religion. It was between two clearly identifiable sides, not an assymetrical global war between the United States and stateless, faceless Islamic jihadists.
The imam complaining about the 'daily nightmare' for American Muslims has my sympathy. But, as noted, it is tempered by the fact their complaints are aimed at the US -- not the jihadists. I don't think there is any American who believes anybody can 'control' the jihadists.
But the reason that Christians couldn't mount an effective terror campaign (apart from the fact is is wrong) is that they would immediately be slapped down by other Christians.
There was no groundswell of Christian support for Eric Rudolph, or James Copp, -- or Paul Hill -- who was executed in Florida for the murder of an abortionist in Florida. Murder is wrong, regardless of the reason behind it.
If the majority of the Islamic world was truly moderate then where are they?
There are two schools of thought regarding the best way to deal with the war with Islam. The first is the ecumenist school.
To the ecumenist, the aspect of Islam that represents a threat is the radical (false) Islam. That school of thought dictates that the West must empower 'moderate' Islam so that Islamic moderates can remake their world into decent, free societies.
The second school of thought is the 'civilizationist' view. The civilizationist school of thought sees the problem as not being one of a few radicals having hijacked a peaceful religion, but rather that the problem is the teachings of Islam itself.
The civilizationist school does not believe in the existence of 'moderate' Islam and efforts to co-opt them to our side has about as much chance of success as Israel had with the Oslo Agreement.
They fear the possibility of endless negotiation going nowhere while we empower our mortal enemies in the vain hope they will become our friends.
At its heart is Islam's understanding of jihad. The way Islam understands jihad, it is the legal, compulsory, communal effort to expand the territories ruled by Muslims (known in Arabic as dar al-Islam) at the expense of territories ruled by non-Muslims (dar al-harb). In other words, it is an Islamic duty to destroy America.
Sheikh Faysal Mawlawi, deputy chairman of European Council for Fatwa and Research is one of those Islamic moderates who participates in Islam Online's 'Ask the Scholar'. Islam-Online.net describes themselves as: "adopting the middle ground of Islam, avoiding extremism or negligence, rejecting deviant or strange opinions."
Mawlawi was asked if suicide bombers are striving in the cause of Allah.
Replied the moderate Sheik, "Martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life. Allah says in the Glorious Qura'n: "And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to (your) destruction; but do good; for Allah loveth those who do good." (Al-Baqara:195)
He continues, "This means that martyr operations are totally different from the forbidden suicide. . . . In the light of the above-mentioned facts, I believe that those missions are a sacred duty carried out in form of self-defense and resisting aggression and injustice. So whoever is killed in such missions is a martyr, may Allah bless him with high esteem. "
Islam Online is the voice of 'moderate' Islam.
Is anybody out there listening?
Archives of past issues of The Omega Letter Intelligence Digest plus many other Omega Letter member features can be found at: www.omegaletter.com