Recently, an
article appeared in the Anglo press about Muslim condemnations of terror
attacks (Max Fisher, “A very simple explanation of why it's wrong to demand
that Muslims condemn terrorism”, vox, November 21, 2015). The article suggests
that Americans don’t perceive Islamic terror the way Israelis perceive it.
On November
13, 2015, an ISIS attack in Paris, France killed 130 and wounded hundreds more.
After the attack, some Americans wanted to see Muslims condemn it (Max Fisher, ibid).
Muslims didn’t answer the call. They didn’t storm into the streets to protest against
ISIS.
People
noticed. In Paris, the site of the attack, many expected mass Muslim protests
against ISIS. Paris is home to 1.8 million Muslims. An anti-ISIS protest should
have attracted thousands from the ‘religion of peace’. But only 30 Muslims
showed up (“Paris: 30 Muslims out of 1.8 mil in the city turn up to protest
terrorism”, themuslimissue, November 17, 2015).
This lack of
Muslim interest to stand up against ISIS isn’t unique to Paris. It’s happened before. When ISIS atrocities in
2014 shocked the world, few Muslims came out to protest. For example, in Grand
Rapids, Michigan—which has a population of 200,000 Muslims—only 50 went to
protest ISIS (Tziv Ben-Gedalyahu, “A Grand Total of 50 Muslims in Michigan
Condemn ISIS”, Jewishpress, August 29, 2014). Through 2015, ISIS brutality has provoked
very few Muslim protests--anywhere.
Some
Americans wonder: why don’t Muslims protest atrocities committed by their co-religionists?
Wouldn’t adherents of a ‘religion
of peace’ want to show they stood for peace, not terror?
That
question provokes anger. On what basis, some Muslims ask, am I answerable for
the actions of others who claim my creed?
(Justin Glyn “On blaming Muslims for Paris”, eurekastreet,
November 18, 2015).
On US TV,
MSNBC’s Chuck Todd set out to explore that very question. He invited a woman
named Dalia Mogahed, a Muslim and, Todd said, an expert on Muslim attitudes in
the US (Fisher, ibid). He asked her about American leaders who had demanded
that more Muslim leaders come out to condemn ISIS. Mogahed didn’t respond by
declaring that Muslim leaders were condemning ISIS (as we saw some do
after the San Bernadino, California attack on December 3, 2015). She made her
own demand: we need to stop demanding that Muslims condemn terrorism.
She argued
that one could not justify such a demand. Her reason was simple. The majority
of terrorist attacks in the US, according to the FBI, she said, were committed
by white, male Christians (ibid). When those terrorists kill, she said, we
don't suspect other people who share their faith and ethnicity of condoning their
actions. We don’t ask Christians to stand up to condemn them. We assume these attacks
outrage Christian leaders just as much as they do anyone else.
Therefore,
she concluded, we have to afford this same assumption of innocence to Muslims. Essayist
Fisher (above) agrees with her. He sees any demand that Muslim leaders condemn
ISIS as some kind of bigoted ritual (ibid). It’s bigotry because, Fisher says,
it implies that every Muslim is under suspicion of being sympathetic to
terrorism unless he or she explicitly says otherwise. The implication is also
that any crime committed by any Muslim is the responsibility of all Muslims
simply by virtue of their shared religion. He claimed it’s a form of blaming an
entire group for the actions of a few individuals (ibid).
I disagree
with Fisher. The reason Western man would ask Muslims to condemn ISIS is not
because the West is bigoted towards Muslims. The West makes this request
because Islamic ISIS terrorists claim they kill in the name of Islam. All the
West wants to know from its Muslim friends is, are these terror attacks truly a
part of Islam, or just ISIS?
To express
shock that one would be asked that question is to dodge the question. That
dodge suggests one doesn’t want to answer the question.
What’s wrong
with the question? When white Christians
in the US commit terror attacks they don’t do so while exclaiming, ‘Jesus is
Great!’ They don’t exclaim, in the middle of their attack, that they kill in
the name of Christianity. That’s why no one asks Christian leaders to denounce
the attacks. The killers themselves don’t connect ‘killing’ with ‘Christianity’.
But Muslim
terrorists do make such exclamations. They do connect ‘killing’ with ‘Islam’. Why
wouldn’t we want to hear from Islam’s leaders?
When Islamic
terror happens, you almost always see two things occur. First, the terrorists
declare they kill in the name of Islam. Second, few Islamic leaders denounce
those attacks.
What does
that suggest?
In Israel, we
don’t have such questions. In Israel, Islamic religious leaders do speak out.
They are as clear as the killers.
Is Islam in
America different from Islam in the Middle East?
No comments:
Post a Comment