Mona Eltahawy, a New York-based columnist for the pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, unleashes the rhetoric on terrorists and their apologists:
The July 7 London bombings did it for me. Perhaps it was because my parents moved us from Cairo to the British capital when I was 7 years old, and so London was my childhood “home.” Or maybe it was because our route to work and school every morning crisscrossed those same Underground stations that were targeted.
I’m sure it was also those dog-eared statements that our clerics and religious leaders read out telling us that Islam means peace — it actually means submission — and asking us to please forget everything they had ever said before July 6, because as of July 7 they truly believe violence is bad. Their backpedaling is so furious you can smell the skid marks.
Some are not even bothering to put their feet on the pedals, such as the 22 imams and scholars who met at London’s largest mosque to condemn the bombings but who would not criticize all suicide attacks.
Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted “there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime.”
In a classic example of laying blame everywhere but at our own door, Musawi actually criticized the Western media (for supposedly confusing frustrated young Muslims) rather than those scholars who had blessed suicide bombings as long as they targeted Israelis.
More of this, please.
Mike
I thought that was a great column as well.
Here are a few additional lines I particularly liked:
“I never bought the explanation that U.S. foreign policy had “brought on” the Sept. 11 attacks, and I certainly don’t buy the idea that the Iraq war is behind the attacks in London. Many people across the world have opposed U.S. and British foreign policy, but that doesn’t mean they are rushing to fly planes into buildings or to blow up buses and Underground trains in London.
I was against the invasion of Iraq and would not have voted for George Bush if I were a U.S. citizen, but I’m done with the “George Bush made me do it” excuse. We must accept responsibility for this mess if we are ever to find a way out.
And for those non-Muslims who accept the George Bush excuse, I have a question: Do you think Muslims are incapable of accepting responsibility? It is at least in some way bigoted to think that Muslims can only react violently.”
Beautiful.
Christie S.
Excellent article.
Stormy70
Thank you. I thought this was a great Monday morning read.
Mr Furious
I didn’t read the piece yet, but the comments in the excerpt would appear to justify not just attacks on Israelis, but the suicide attacks in iraq as well. “Occupiers” and all…
ether
It seems more and more Muslims are beginning to feel more confidence in expressing their outrage…
“And I am certain that the overwhelming majority of Muslims believe the exact same thing. Thus, they conclude – in the pain of despair at seeing their faith smeared by the sins of the violent mutant fringe – that the perpetrators of these horrific attacks just cannot be Muslims. This stems from only one thing: denial. Denial can be deadly. I have seen patients present with advanced breast cancer, after any effective treatment can be rendered, who – when asked – first noticed the lump several years previously. It is a very powerful defense mechanism, and there are so many Muslims who suffer from such denial. And being of Egyptian ancestry, I know denial: and believe you me, it is not a river in Egypt.
Yet, we can not afford to be afflicted with denial. Not in this day and age. We must all wake up to the fact that there are Muslims who claim to worship the God of Abraham and kill innocent human beings. In fact, they cry out “Allahu Akbar” while doing it! There are Muslims who brutally behead innocent people under a banner that reads: “There is nothing worthy of worship besides God, and Muhammad is His messenger.” There are Muslims who have absolutely no qualms about blowing themselves up at a resort hotel in Sharm El Sheikh, killing dozens of fellow human beings. It is a painful reality, for sure. But, it is reality nonetheless.”
Anderson
This meme again? Sheesh.
Ask yourself this question:
If America were occupied by another power, would you condemn suicide attacks by Americans against occupying forces?
If your answer is “no,” then you agree with the Muslim clerics quoted above.
Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted “there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime.”
Who could honestly disagree with that?
jg
Red Dawn was a really cool movie.
Non-Fat Latte Liberal
…but who would not criticize all suicide attacks.
It’s good but this line leaves much to be desired…
Anderson
Not totally irrelevantly, via Pandagon:
As Jesse says, “If it’s down to you and Benedict, and Benedict is the one that seems sensible and moderate, it’s time to rethink your position.”
Bob
Suicide bombing uses the same mental and biological hooks that convince a mother to die for her child, and for soldiers to die for their comrades and their countries. You know, for the greater good. It doesn’t really even have all that much to do with religion beyond a shared belief defining the group that feels oppressed and aggrieved (in this case, the Muslims) and giving the schmuck who carries the bomb a hope for the hereafter.
If you’re willing to die for your cause and you don’t have an airplane and a bunch of bombs and missiles, you do with what you have. The first wave of guys who landed on D-Day may not have faced the same odds as a suicide bomber, but a goodly percentage were going to die. Those GIs knew the odds but went to their deaths anyway. (Reference: “Sky Pilot” by Eric Burdon and the Animals, circa another war)
So killing yourself to cause harm to your enemy is a shared human quality, and to write off suicide bombers as crazy motherfuckers won’t get you much more than visits from more crazy motherfuckers at a later date. Better to use a three-pronged attack: 1.) hunt down and eliminate the leadership of these guys, 2.) fully understand this group’s grievances, sorting out the reasonable and rational from the rhetorical, and 3.) make changes in your policy and actions to make accomodations to the aggrieved. The current administration is incapable of any of these, so expect more exploding Muslims until 2008.
While a community’s leaders should condemn and reveal those lawbreakers among them, and speak out against violence and murder, it won’t do much good if the bombers don’t see those leaders as representing how they define their “leaders” or their “people.”
Mike
Anderson Says:
This meme again? Sheesh.
Ask yourself this question:
If America were occupied by another power, would you condemn suicide attacks by Americans against occupying forces?
If your answer is “no,” then you agree with the Muslim clerics quoted above.
“Sayed Mohammed Musawi, the head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted “there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime.”
Who could honestly disagree with that?”
All this idiot is doing is justifying killing Americans, Brits, Israelis and anybody else he decides are an occupying force. And you’re basically agreeing with him that he’s correct and therefore it’s okay to kill Americans. Amazing…
Beej
“If America were occupied by another power, would you condemn suicide attacks against occupying forces?”
Against occupying forces? Maybe not. But the keyword is “forces”. Just which “forces” did London commuters or a group of Iraqi children belong to?
On second thought, I guess I would condemn suicide attacks against occupying forces. They seem to me to be ugly, awful, and ultimately futile attempts to sap, not an enemy’s ability to fight, but their will to do so. Mostly, they don’t succeed. Other than the recent example of Spain’s pullout from Iraq and the U.S. exit from Lebanon after the bombing of the Marine barracks, just what have suicide bombings accomplished? After years of suicide bombers, the West Bank is still under Israeli control (and a big fence is going up), the English are now heading into full “never give up” mode, the U.S. has more, not less, troops in the Middle East (remember, it was the U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War that originally inspired OBL), and more and more members of the reasonable, righteous Muslim majority are getting so angry that they’re speaking out.
All of this leads me to conclude that if there was, indeed, an occupying force on U.S. soil, the suicide bombing tactic would not get me very far at all. Far better to organize a few militia, or, better yet, how about adopting the tactics of Gandhi or Martin Luther King? If the occupier was a western nation, I’m betting a little (or a lot) of passive resistance would get them out a whole lot quicker than military action. Problem is, of course, you never know what would happen if the occupier had no compunction about just killing anyone who got in the way. Like, for example, the people who bomb subways and groups of children.
Anderson
Mike, try not to be a dimwit. Whether or not Americans are “occupiers” is a political question. If we’re not, then we’re not the “occupying forces” that the cleric had in mind.
Germans and Japanese killed lots of Americans in WW2, and while we detested their nations in general, I’m unaware that we ever thought that their religion ought to forbid their fighting us. Why is it an issue with Muslims?
Beej, again, the London attacks were condemned by the clerics. Your thoughts on the efficacy of suicide attacks are interesting and probably correct. They’re pure desperation. It’s not like the Japanese used kamikaze attacks at Pearl Harbor; they came when the J’s realized they were losing the war & didn’t have enough trained pilots to do any good.