Today I’ve been enjoying
a storm in a teacup over in the States.
The argument is essentially that
the memorial to those who died in the ‘fourth plane’ on September 11
th 2001 is actually a Muslim Red Crescent and hence the design committee (which includes representatives of the victims’ families) is thereby supporting the terrorists who hijacked the plane.
As far as I can see, this idea hasn’t been picked up by the mass media, so I’m assuming it’s just a lot of arch-politicos looking for ways to out-patriot each other on an otherwise slow news day.
What I find disturbing, though, is the underlying assumption of the argument: The use of a Muslim symbol would be giving ‘aid and comfort to those who wish to kill us.’ Essentially this tars the entire Muslim faith with the ‘9/11 terrorist’ brush. That is a huge and dangerous generalisation, worthy of the late Senator McCarthy! The attacks on New York and Washington were the acts of a tiny number of religious extremists who in no way represent the beliefs of the majority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims. As long as this ‘connection’ is lurking in the minds of even a few people, then Al Qaeda is winning the supposed ‘War On Terror.’
3 comments:
Hey, Liam. Thanks for commenting on my blog, and linking to me on Mike's. I was initially outraged, but I've now come to believe the the memorial represents the outline left by the impact of the plane. I wasn't angry because I hate muslims, but rather because I thought it was another example of politically correct BS. They are already trying to destroy the WTC memorial, by making it about slavery and the Holacaust instead of about 9/11. I'll try to get you a link about those charity numbers, but I'm lazy, and about to take a vacation, so no promises on that.
Mike, I have to say that that is another very sweeping statement; 'Muslims in general do not seem to be very outraged by those who kill in the name of their faith.' As I recall there was plenty of condemnation from Muslim bodies at the time of 9/11. What kind of outrage should they show for it to be satisfactory?
Yes, America’s reputation is pretty poor in the Middle-East and, I fear, mostly for good reasons, but I don’t know that that is particularly a Muslim thing. As an example of why you might be seeing what you are seeing on TV, although I’ll admit it's not totally comparable, ask yourself what your reaction would be if China, supported by Cuba, North Korea & Vietnam, had invaded Canada and was in the process of setting up a communist government to rescue the Canadians from the tyranny of capitalism. Would you think “Well, they didn’t have much of mandate from the UN but, hell, they managed to pull it off so good luck to them,” or would you be worrying about what came next and feeling threatened by having a clearly aggressive army on your borders? Wouldn’t Americans be burning the Chinese flag and celebrating whenever an attack by the Free Canada movement managed to blow up a patrol of Chinese soldiers?
Turning now to religious leaders condemning violence; how many times have you heard Christian leaders condemning pro-life extremists; people who terrorise, maim and kill doctors performing legal abortions, workers at their clinics and the family members of them both? Commonly accepted Christian doctrine is that killing anyone is wrong; vengeance should be left to the Lord and you should turn the other cheek to your opponent. Yet you almost never see Christian leaders speaking out on this topic. Should I assume that the majority of Christians support this behaviour because I don’t see it condemned on TV often enough? I know that this behaviour has been condemned from time to time in the past, but I don’t see any big movement in the Christian faith to stamp out these extremists.
What should I think?
Post a Comment