This is so a war on Islam - just not by the U.S.

[Milossarian]

A very well-written column by Michael Moran of MSNBC, “The War We Cannot Fight,” very eloquently ties up some thoughts I’ve been having in recent days.

Read the whole thing, but here are some excerpts:

No people of the 20th century killed with such abandon as the nations of the West — a fact that militant Islamists often cite to justify murders committed in Allah’s name today. Yet the European wars of the 20th century were unlike wars that came before, not spawned by lust for territory, wealth or power. Rather, these were wars of exorcism fought, literally, for the soul of western civilization. But the battle for Islam’s soul is not the West’s to wage; Muslims must exorcise their own demons.
<snip>
The time has come for good Muslims to do something. The West cannot fight this battle, for obvious reasons.
<snip>
Many Muslims — call them “the silent majority,” if you like — see Islamic extremism for what it is: a cynical power play that makes use of the ignorance and misfortune of the masses to turn out suicidal killers. To date, few in the Islamic world have stood up against the extremists, and fewer still have survived the experience.
<snip>
Sadly, absent completely from efforts to restrain the extremists are Muslim clerics, and this failing is the most damaging thing of all. In their unwillingness to challenge those who twist the Koran, the clergy of Islam who do find terrorism abhorrent ultimately surrender to it. From their ranks must rise people like the Polish priest who battled communism and fascism and became Pope John Paul II. Until this happens, Islam is open to interpretation.

It’s a long article, and there’s a lot more worthwhile there.

The Muslim people are going to be so critical in the success of any effort the West takes post-Sept. 11. If fundamentalists like Osama bin Laden are truly perverting Islam, where is the jihad against them?

I’m sure it isn’t happening because people like al-Qaida are bullies with might and power, against people with shaken wills and not much else.

But just as the West is going to have to muster courage it hasn’t had to draw upon for several decades to win a very long, tough, complex battle here, those many good Muslims in the Middle East are going to have to muster their own courage - and for their own reasons, not for ours. It strikes me that they should almost be more motivated than the United States is. Perhaps they just don’t know it.

I would be very interested in what everybody has to say on the subject - especially Muslim Guy, Tamerlane, and any other Muslims on the boards.

Have Muslim religious leaders done enough to quell this violent fundamentalism in the past (and, in a similar vein, the cultural perversions in the name of Islam that lead to poor treatment of women)?

Realistically, can they make a difference here? How? How would the Islamic, Arabic public respond?

Why are the Islamic voices calling the violent, radical fundamentalist movements a bastardization of the Qu’ran seemingly on the fringes?

[eyewearlime]

There’s a lot to be said for this, IMHO. Look where the Taliban and al Qaeda set up their headquarters, Afghanistan–a wretched place (at least geographically) with extremely rampant poverty, illiteracy, and little communication with the outside world. I don’t think it was an accident. Any humanitarian aid and propaganda we can manage to put through is going to be met with extreme suspicion. We do need the Muslim leaders, especially those in the Middle East and South Asia, to speak out.

But I don’t think it’ll happen–we can hope all we want, but Iran is not our friend in this, and Iraq? Don’t make me laugh. Our best hope, I think, is really Pakistani leaders–the majority of Pakistanis don’t support the Taliban (contrary to the characterization in the media), they are just too afraid to speak out.

We really do need to work on Islamic leaders. How to go about it (Tamerlane, Ask the Muslim Guy)?

[Zenster]

*Originally posted by Milossarian *
…If fundamentalists like Osama bin Laden are truly perverting Islam, where is the jihad against them?

I’m sure it isn’t happening because people like al-Qaida are bullies with might and power, against people with shaken wills and not much else.

…It strikes me that they should almost be more motivated than the United States is. Perhaps they just don’t know it.

I would be very interested in what everybody has to say on the subject - especially Muslim Guy, Tamerlane, and any other Muslims on the boards.

Have Muslim religious leaders done enough to quell this violent fundamentalism in the past (and, in a similar vein, the cultural perversions in the name of Islam that lead to poor treatment of women)?**

D@mn good questions, all of them Milo. It’s just too easy to say that tacit support is being shown by the lack of truly dramatic action against these few fundamentalist maniacs. However, were I of the Islamic persuasion, little would deter me from seeking to obliterate these perverters of the faith. The black eye ObL has given the Islamic world will last for decades, if not longer.

One would think that mainstream Muslims would defend the good name of their faith with more vigor than is being shown. While I cannot attribute the random and stupidly misdirected bigotry taken out on innocent Arabs to this awkward silence, I am nonetheless forced to wonder why there is not an army of volunteers from the Arab nations willing to expunge this stain upon all Islam.

[Muslim_Guy]

What can I say? I’m with you on this. I also wonder why Muslims are intimidated by the extremists. I was already saying this before the disaster happened. There have been fatwas by mainstream scholars against the extremists, but there still needs to be a concerted effort by moderate Muslims to purge them. I keep hoping this will be the opportunity for moderate Muslims to be emboldened to finally get to that unfinished business. As for myself, I had been withdrawing from public Islam for years being unhappy with the way fundamentalists are overbearing in everything. The need to defend moderate Islam has brought me out of my shell.

[Muslim_Guy]

The Lebanese-American Sufi leader Shaykh Hisham Kabbani has been trying to take back Islam from the extremists for years. Just by arguing with reason. The response from the major Islamic organizations has been to ostracize him and talk bad about him because of their head in the sand, see no evil attitude. I wish more people had listened to him.

I’m sorry that I hurt you
I didn’t mean to make you cry
I didn’t want to hurt you
I’m just a Muslim Guy

[London_Calling]

I guess I see the issue differently. For me, the extreme terrorists are but one end of a spectrum of opinion – just a tiny little way in from them are the people who think equally extremely but aren’t motivated to take action. At the other end of that spectrum are the moderate Muslims like the ruling family in Saudi.

I suppose that means I don’t perceive the terrorists to be isolated from popular support or mainstream opinion but rather part of the whole of Islamic society – a whole in which the moderate extreme would wish to disown the radical extreme but, in reality can’t because the masses of ‘popular’ Islam sit between the two, taking a little from each end.

Let me expand on that: Politically, one extreme can say “I disown you” but in cultural and religious terms, it’s implausible because both need the mass of middle ground Muslims, a mass that is sympathetic to much of the terrorist agenda (particularly on US Foreign Policy) but doesn’t whole-heartedly agree with the means. At the same time, that same mass isn’t at ease with Saudi type cuddling up to the US (especially the religious consequences) but understands the need for international co-operation and oil dollars.

If one then thinks of that spectrum analogously as a bell-curve, Bin Ladin sits at one end, the Saudi’s at the other and there’s a ruddy great lump in the middle. However, you then, IMHO, need to transpose three different bell curves, one each for the politics, religion and culture to begin to grasp the complexity of Muslim opinion.

Once that’s done, it’s a question of shifting those bell-curves in the direction you want, popularly known as ‘winning hearts and minds’ so that the West is not perceived to be a threat to Islam.

I believe you begin to do that by winning over the most influential group in Islamic society, the Clerics. Unfortunately, history has taught them to not trust the West as far as you can throw an oil barrel.

[Slip_Mahoney]

Is it possible that America’s reaction (and react they must) will create a sympathetic attitude toward the fringe elements of Islam by traditional Muslims?

I fear that the moderates may well say of the extremists, “They’re crazy. But they’re our crazies.”

I hope that won’t be the case, but until I see a stern, unconditional condemnation of terrorism from mainstream Islamic leaders, I can’t help but believe that the possibility exists.

[Milossarian]

Good points.

And I agree with Slip’s assessment.

For the vast, vast majority of people over there, what little information they have is from the extremists. They truly just don’t know any better. And this will be an extremely difficult wall of ignorance for the West to penetrate or scale, because of the effectiveness with which the extremists have painted us as the evil enemy.

If we say it, many won’t believe it. If we build a hospital or housing, somebody will burn it down or blow it up, saying it’s the evil infidels trying to buy them off and erode their religion and culture.

Those Muslims in the region that do know better are likely going with the flow for reasons of self-preservation. Or, in a complex philosophical morass like this, it’s simply easier to side “with your own” against the West, which they see as completely motivated by its own self-interests in the Middle East (not incorrectly).

There seems to be some indication that the West intends to change that now. Did anyone see British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s speech yesterday? Amazing. Better than Bush’s speech to Congress - and that’s saying a lot, IMO. (And Blair wrote it himself? Wow.)

I wish I could find it in its entirety online.

“This is a moment to seize,” he said. "The kaleidoscope has been shaken, the pieces are in flux, soon they will settle again. Before they do let us reorder this world around us and use modern science to provide prosperity for all.

“Science can’t make that choice for us, only the moral power of a world acting as a community can.”

But none of it happens if the Muslim religious leaders (who, in most of the states in the region, are also the political leaders, either directly or indirectly) don’t lead the way.

And again, I don’t think they should be doing this “for the West.” They should have their own motivations, with potential consequences for them and their beliefs being almost as grave.

[SuaSponte]

*Originally posted by London_Calling *
**I guess I see the issue differently. For me, the extreme terrorists are but one end of a spectrum of opinion – just a tiny little way in from them are the people who think equally extremely but aren’t motivated to take action. At the other end of that spectrum are the moderate Muslims like the ruling family in Saudi.

I suppose that means I don’t perceive the terrorists to be isolated from popular support or mainstream opinion but rather part of the whole of Islamic society – a whole in which the moderate extreme would wish to disown the radical extreme but, in reality can’t because the masses of ‘popular’ Islam sit between the two, taking a little from each end.

Let me expand on that: Politically, one extreme can say “I disown you” but in cultural and religious terms, it’s implausible because both need the mass of middle ground Muslims, a mass that is sympathetic to much of the terrorist agenda (particularly on US Foreign Policy) but doesn’t whole-heartedly agree with the means. At the same time, that same mass isn’t at ease with Saudi type cuddling up to the US (especially the religious consequences) but understands the need for international co-operation and oil dollars.

If one then thinks of that spectrum analogously as a bell-curve, Bin Ladin sits at one end, the Saudi’s at the other and there’s a ruddy great lump in the middle. However, you then, IMHO, need to transpose three different bell curves, one each for the politics, religion and culture to begin to grasp the complexity of Muslim opinion.

Once that’s done, it’s a question of shifting those bell-curves in the direction you want, popularly known as ‘winning hearts and minds’ so that the West is not perceived to be a threat to Islam.**

Your analysis is pretty good, but your facts are flawed. The Saudi ruling family are by no definition of the term “moderate Muslims”. The Saudi royal family adheres to the Wahhabi sect of Islam, which is extremely fundamentalist. In theological terms, the Saudi royal family is pretty close to bin Laden - which just further demonstrates that religion has little to do with this conflict.

A better choice for a “moderate Muslim” state would be, for example, Malaysia.

Sua

[Blackclaw]

*Originally posted by Milossarian *
Did anyone see British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s speech yesterday? Amazing. Better than Bush’s speech to Congress - and that’s saying a lot, IMO. (And Blair wrote it himself? Wow.)

I wish I could find it in its entirety online.

I second this. I’d actually like to hear a full recording of it, the parts of it that I heard on the radio yesterday were amazing.

[Ogalthorp]

But, <sarcasm> the Islamic religion is a peaceful, loving religion! Don’t you know that? Posts here have proven that. Ask any Muslim and they will happily tell you how wonderful it is.<end sarcasm>

It is also supposedly one of the fastest growing religions, for what reason, I don’t know. I don’t know of any people who would happily join a group which suppresses so many freedoms, though many Blacks have joined it and the warped version called the Nation Of Islam. I think it might be the guaranteed trip to heaven if you die while fighting an enemy who is not an Islamic.

This apparently includes thieves who rob your store and who are not attacking you because of your religion, from what I understand.

I have watched the turmoil among the Moslems for quite some time and the almost negligent resistance to their expansion as well as the insistence on returning to the ‘olden form of the religion.’ It’s like the people in power, the clerics, want the masses to remain locked in the stone age so that they can retain a greater control of their minds and beliefs.

Then again, we’ve seen this before in history. Remember the several Catholic efforts to suppress knowledge and freedom of thought through various ways, including the Crusades and possibly the Inquisition? However, this time, the resisting religious base is trying to control people surrounded by a world more free, more intelligent and full of easily accessed information than in the dark ages.

I’ve been waiting for them to run into resistance from the other nations, figuring that they would slap the wrong hands eventually in their fanatical actions. They’ve managed to anger close to everyone not of their beliefs with their close minded attitudes and their love of terrorism and Jihad.

I recall the Iyatolla Khalmany (SP) and his betrayal of America, who rescued him from exile and returned him to power.

In an advancing world, you cannot expect to live in the primitive past while the majority moves on.

[Spoke]

Some good points in the OP. I’ve been thinking about this as well.

A parallel I see is the American South of the Civil Rights era. There were plenty of people of good will in the South, but they allowed themselves, for the most part, to be cowed into silence by racist bullies. (A point made frequently by MLK.) The vocal racists, utilizing racist propaganda, succeeded in creating a racist culture, in much the same way that the vocal Muslim extremists have largely succeeded in creating an anti-American, anti-Western culture in much of the Middle East. People who feel differently seem afraid to speak out for fear of retribution by the extremists. (Just as in the Civil Rights era.)

Will the Muslim world ever cure itself of fundamentalism? I don’t know. Could the South (without Federal intervention) have ever cured itself of segregation?

[Captain_Amazing]

Originally posted by Ogalthorp *
**
I recall the Iyatolla Khalmany (SP) and his betrayal of America, who rescued him from exile and returned him to power.*

That’s the Ayatollah Khomeni. How did the US rescue him from exile and return him to power? He fled to Paris to escape the Shah’s secret police, then flew back after the Shah was overthrown. The US didn’t have anything to do with it.

There are some other points in your post I might differ with, but just wondering why you would call the Crusades “efforts to suppress knowledge and freedom of thought”, assuming you’re talking about the major middle eastern crusades and not things like the Albegensian Crusade. Could you clarify for me?

[tradesilicon]

I’m not sure I agree with the premise that Muslims in particular have to rush to condemn and fight this type of lunacy. I see it as a duty for the world. Just I don’t think Christians alone are responcible for stopping abortion clinic bombings, but rather everyone in society.

This is certainly not a war on Islam, since we can agree that Islam itself does not preach this type of terror, or anything remotely like it. It’s a group of nuts who must be stopped by everyone.

I can understand the point made about Muslims disassociating themselves from these radicals, but I think the more important issue is for complete world-wide obliteration of these types of groups and any of their support structure - regardless of where the “majority” of any one religion may stand on the issue. If the Muslim population of the world does not stand in unison (what religious group can stand in unison world-wide?) it should not stop us from acting politically, economically and militarily. The religious leaders may or may not jump on board once they see the train is moving, but in either case the train must roll.

As an aside, I have listened to Shaykh Hisham Kabbani, and he is a very convicing speaker on behalf of moderate Muslims, and seemingly a brilliant scholar. I can only second the motion that we need more of the same in every religious group.

[Milossarian]

**This is certainly not a war on Islam, since we can agree that Islam itself does not preach this type of terror, or anything remotely like it. It’s a group of nuts who must be stopped by everyone.

**
True; but my point was, there is a war being waged against Islam by Osama bin Laden, and perverters of the religion like him.

[rjung]

*Originally posted by Ogalthorp *
But, <sarcasm> the Islamic religion is a peaceful, loving religion! Don’t you know that? Posts here have proven that. Ask any Muslim and they will happily tell you how wonderful it is.<end sarcasm>

People say the same thing about Christianity. And then I read the news articles about the abortion clinic shootings, and the “God hates fags” families, and Jerry Falwell’s latest moronic spew against liberals, feminists, and anyone else who disagrees with him.

“But, <sarcasm> the Christian religion is a peaceful, loving religion! Don’t you know that? Posts here have proven that. Ask any Christian and they will happily tell you how wonderful it is.<end sarcasm>”

Really, Ogalthorp, we’re here to fight ignorance, not spread it, remember? That’s what it says on the sign above the front door to this place…

[gobear]

People say the same thing about Christianity. And then I read the news articles about the abortion clinic shootings, and the “God hates fags” families, and Jerry Falwell’s latest moronic spew against liberals, feminists, and anyone else who disagrees with him.

Well, every group has its lunatic frings. however, if you are comapring Islam and Christianity, you don’t find mainstream Christian churches preaching the destruction of Israel and the United States, which seems to be the main topic of Friday sermons by Muslim clergy.

I’m reading an article in this week’s New Yorker about the prevalence of extremist rhetoric among the rank and file clergy in Egypt. One of the mullahs is quoted as saying the suicides of the hijackers and the massacres at the WTC were sinful because the attacks were on civilians, but because every Israeli is a soldier, it’s OK to kill Israeli citizens at any time.

Falwell and Phelps have been denounced by every reputable
Christian denomination, but I have not heard of any
Muslim clergy who are willing to denounce murders of Israelis.

[gobear]

People say the same thing about Christianity. And then I read the news articles about the abortion clinic shootings, and the “God hates fags” families, and Jerry Falwell’s latest moronic spew against liberals, feminists, and anyone else who disagrees with him.

Well, every group has its lunatic fringe. However, if you are comparing Islam and Christianity, you don’t find mainstream Christian churches preaching the destruction of Israel and the United States, which seems to be the main topic of Friday sermons by Muslim clergy.

I’m reading an article in this week’s New Yorker about the prevalence of extremist rhetoric among the rank and file clergy in Egypt. One of the mullahs is quoted as saying the suicides of the hijackers and the massacres at the WTC were sinful because the attacks were on civilians, but because every Israeli is a soldier, it’s OK to kill Israeli citizens at any time.

Falwell and Phelps have been denounced by every reputable
Christian denomination, but I have not heard of any
Muslim clergy who are willing to denounce murders of Israelis.

[London_Calling]

*Originally posted by SuaSponte *
The Saudi ruling family are by no definition of the term “moderate Muslims”.

Yes sua, I should certainly qualify that to say: Politically moderate as opposed to religiously moderate. However, it does still impinge on religion.

For example, the political decision to allow US bases on Saudi soil has had serious ramifications for some religious fundamentalists. For them (including Bin Ladin), allowing Christian/Capitalist forces so close to the twin centre’s of the Islamic faith is inexcusable and a cause in itself. But not, seemingly, for the religiously fundamental Saudi’s…

[rjung]

*Originally posted by gobear *
Well, every group has its lunatic frings. however, if you are comapring Islam and Christianity, you don’t find mainstream Christian churches preaching the destruction of Israel and the United States, which seems to be the main topic of Friday sermons by Muslim clergy.

Do we know how many Islam sermons harp on the destruction of Israel? All of them? Half of them? A handful of extremists that get air time on CNN because it makes good news copy?

And while we don’t find mainstream Christian churches preaching violence against a nation today, I wonder if that’s only because there isn’t an “invasive nation-state” in mainstream Christian thinking today (e.g., there’s nothing comparable to Israel-as-an-unwelcome-nation in Christian thinking). In contrast, you can find examples of Christian sermons that denounce invasive social issues in contemporary times, such as homosexuality, feminism, and “secular humanism”.

Just because the hostility isn’t directed at a nation doesn’t mean there’s no hostility at all.

Falwell and Phelps have been denounced by every reputable Christian denomination, but I have not heard of any Muslim clergy who are willing to denounce murders of Israelis.

I lay three-to-one odds someone will bring along some cites for you soon enough.