Posted on 10/24/2001 10:39:29 AM PDT by BenF
"This has nothing to do with Islam," British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently told a delegation of Muslims at a meeting at 10 Downing Street, referring to the Sept. 11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Mr. Blair was echoing a view, popular both in Europe and the U.S., that it is impolite, not to say impolitic, to subject Islam to any criticism. Yet to claim that the attacks had nothing to do with Islam amounts to a whitewash. It is not only disingenuous but also a disservice to Muslims, who need to cast a critical glance at the way their faith is taught, lived and practiced.
Even worse, the refusal to subject Islam to rational analysis is a recipe for further fanaticism. Unless we believe those who claim that the Sept. 11 was organized by Israel, we have to assume that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda were responsible. And since there is no mechanism for excommunication in Islam, bin Laden and his gang have every right to describe themselves as Muslims.
***
Al Qaeda did not materialize out of thin air. Nor have they been operating in a vacuum. Bin Laden belongs to a prominent Yemeni-Saudi family that makes much of its Islamic credentials. He began his militant career in 1984 as a fund-raiser for Afghans fighting the communist regime in Kabul in the name of Islam. He had offices in a dozen Muslim countries, none of which regarded his activities as un-Islamic.
In 1993 bin Laden was divested of his Saudi passport but was warmly welcomed in Sudan where a fundamentalist regime is in power. Later, bin Laden was the star of an international conference of Muslim fundamentalists organized in Khartoum by the then-strongman Hassan al-Turabi. He was elected a member of the Supreme Council, whose task is to promote a radical brand of Islam throughout the world. That gave him the right to call himself a "sheik" and issue religious fatwas, or edicts. Again, since there is no clerical hierarchy in Islam, there was no reason why bin Laden could not claim such authority.
Once bin Laden was forced to leave Sudan (under U.S. pressure), he was welcomed in his ancestral homeland of Yemen, another Muslim country. From there he went to Pakistan, the world's second most populous Muslim nation, where he was welcomed not only by the army but also by virtually all of Pakistan's Islamic parties, which continue to support him.
From Pakistan, bin Laden shifted to Afghanistan, where the Taliban had established what they claimed to be "the only truly Islamic government." The Taliban continue to shelter bin Laden to this day, even in the face of U.S. attacks. To say that bin Laden has nothing to do with Islam and Muslims, therefore, requires a big leap of imagination.
When pressed hard, some Muslim leaders admit that bin Laden is "part of Islam," but try to minimize his place. Dalil Boubakeur, a French Muslim leader, says that bin Laden does not represent more than 1% of Muslims. Some comfort. That 1% means almost 13 million people.
There is more. All but one of the world's remaining military regimes are in Muslim countries. With the exception of Turkey and Bangladesh, there are no real elections in any Muslim country. Of the current 30 active conflicts in the world no fewer than 28 concern Muslim governments and/or communities. Two-thirds of the world's political prisoners are held in Muslim countries, which also carry out 80% of all executions each year.
Anyone familiar with textbooks in most Muslim countries would know the twisted view of the world they propagate and the hatred they promote. Anyone who follows the media in the Muslim world would know that the verbal version of the Sept. 11 attacks is an almost daily fare. Go to the Internet and check the editorials of virtually any Muslim paper on Sept. 10 and see what they were saying about the West in general and the U.S. in particular. Anyone listening to a sermon in virtually any mosque, including many in the West, would be shocked by the vehemence of the anti-Western, especially anti-American, sentiments expressed.
It is both dishonest and dangerous for Muslims to remain in a state of denial. And yet a state of denial is what we have. When Iran's Khomeinists burned 600 people alive in a cinema, the whitewashers said that it had nothing to do with Islam. When the same gang took the American diplomats hostage in Tehran, again the whitewash party insisted that had nothing to do with Islam. And when the suicide bombings bloodied Beirut we were told that Islam had nothing to do with them.
***
The Muslim world today is full of bigotry, fanaticism, hypocrisy and plain ignorance -- all of which create a breeding ground for criminals like bin Laden. The principal victims of these criminals are Muslims, who are prevented from developing a modern political culture without which they cannot reform their societies and rebuild their economies.
What I am saying is not meant as critique of Islam as a belief system; that's an issue for theologians, and people should be free to believe whatever they like. What is needed is a critique of Islam as an existential reality. The Sept. 11 tragedies should trigger a rethink of the way Muslims live Islam. We should start with condemning those attacks without "ifs" and "buts." Sadly, the way we Muslims live Islam today is a far cry from the way our ancestors lived it in the golden age when Islam was a builder of civilization, not a force for repression, terror and destruction.
Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
The article was only available to WSJ subscribers, but a copy of it was sent to members of the Freeman Center e-mail list.
"Sadly, the way we Muslims live Islam today is a far cry from the way our ancestors lived it in the golden age when Islam was a builder of civilization, not a force for repression, terror and destruction."
Sadly, since the time of Mohammed, Islam has spread precisely through violence, conquest, and terror.
Other than that, an outstanding article.
Regards
And what is being done presently to change this complicity?
Maybe Mr Blair - If Muslin countries have separation of Church and State (anyone know)? - might some of the States take umbrage after years of Clinton bombing and British and US support of puppet regimes? "ABOVE ALL THINGS, TRUTH BEARETH AWAY THE VICTORY"
You are right. So is the writer. The Golden Age he refers to represents a time when Islam was supreme throughout a wide area and had little or no competition. In that circumstance only, Islam is able to show its "good" side, since all are in "submission". But whenever there are competitors in their midst or on their periphery, Muslims are duty-bound to participate in and foment "struggle" (jihad). Obviously, we are seeing the struggle in our time, and it is inevitable. And now that civilization has passed Islam by, it is inevitable that they will lose.
Lastly, I want to honor this Muslim writer for being so forthright; but I wouldn't give you two cents for his chances of living out the year. What he has done, while refreshing to us, is not permissible in Islam.
Regards
It's too bad we can't find these published somewhere...or can we?
Amazing, isn't it, that islam gets away with advocating things which would result in any other group being branded with all manner of unsavory titles!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.