Reply to Harrak

Submitted by Pat (United States), Feb 17, 2006 at 16:48

Harrak,

I'm glad to hear that you opposed the 9/11 attacks. What you can't accept is that you and other Muslims who think as you do need to stand up and denounce what is being done to Islam IN YOUR NAME. Are you unable to find imams who believe as you do?

Allow me to make a few corrections for you:

1. The US didn't create the Taliban. You listen to way too much propaganda.
The Muslim Council may have argued against the destruction of those sculptures, but that didn't stop the Taliban (a fundamentalist government) from destroying sculptures that probably existed before Islam made its way to Afghanistan.

2. The US has come to the aid of Muslims time and again. It's appears to me that, at least as far as you're concerned, no good deed goes unpunished. Our efforts beginning in 1990 to return Kuwait to its people and to solve the Palestinian problem got us nothing but terror attacks. So why bother?

3. The Iranian government has called for the destruction of the US and of Israel. It has said that the use of atomic weapons is perfectly alright according to Sharia law. Do you approve of the use of atomic weapons as an offensive measure?
The vigils held by the people of Iran in the wake of 9/11 were noticed and appreciated, but that doesn't change the fact that their government is seeking to destroy all who disagree with it. What are Iranians doing? If they rose up against their own government as quickly as they demonstrate against perceived insults to Islam, Iran might be free today.

4. What double standard are you talking about with Jesus and Mary? There have been all sorts of caricatures of Jesus and Mary in our popular literature, in movies and art. We have had some offensive (to some) depictions and they have been protested, but no one ever sought to burn down an embassy.
Why doesn't Islam allow illustrations in a children's book, which was the genesis of the Danish experiment?

5. Muslim terrorists attacked civilians, using their religion as justification. You're right that others have also attacked civilians, but those acts were condemned by their countrymen and no religious authority ever validated them.

6. You accuse me of generalizing. Every instance I cited I lived to see. Where in Islam is the justification for hijacking a cruise ship and murdering a defenseless old man sitting in a wheel chair? What is the justification for going to an airport ticket lobby and shooting randomly at people you don't know and who never hurt you?

I mix Islam with terrorism because the Muslim terrorists are using the Koran as justification for their actions. (They bombed the US because we had the temerity to defend Saudi Arabia. Again, no good deed goes unpunished.)

Osama bin Laden said the people who died in the WTC were valid targets because they "supported the American system". Do you consider us to be valid targets?

None of the other conflicts you cited were religious in nature, they were political. Only Muslims are using their religion to justify killing others. A British imam said it was good that the London attacks took place because it meant the British would notice the Muslims. Not Arabs. Muslims.

7. Why are non-Muslims banned from Mecca? Mohammed didn't found Mecca. It predates him. Why aren't Christians even allowed to have a bible in Saudi Arabia? It's another double standard and it's not a generalization. I realize it's not something you can control, but it's a fact and you can't deny it.

If you want to say these terrorists don't represent you, that's fine. But you need to disassociate yourself from them. You need to let the authorities know if your mosque is being used to house weapons or plan illegal acts. If you believe what you say, you need to find a mosque that preaches peace and not violence against non-Muslims. You need to let authorities know if your mosque is being used to plan illegal acts. Either you believe in rule of law or you don't.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".