I think those kind of demonstrations are vulgar and absurd. They put the rest of the Christian community at risk since the Muslims will launch attacks for blasphemy against Islam. In our society, people are afraid to kill someone for insulting them. Not so much in Iraq, people aren't afraid to resort to violence. 60 years ago in this country, organized crime did the same damn thing. Maybe they aren't that far behind us.
As Christians, we need to learn some common sense when it comes to dialogue. We can't have French and German papers insulting the Muslims every time someone makes a negative remark. Religious tolerance has nothing to do with accepting religious insults against your culture, as we have grown accustomed in the dehelenization of Christianity. We may thrive in a culture of multicultural pluralism, but Islam is adamanent about their religious practice.
Free speech and religion should protect the rights of people to worship as they please, not to give people the right to insult prophets. As much as the statements from N Korea are mind numbingly stupid, there is an underlying truth to their observation that American tolerance for anti religious comments is provoking the Islamic community. I'll bet Al Zawahiri will have nothing good to say about the Pope's comments or Bush in his forthcoming address.
Where do we go from multicultural pluralism? Respect would be a good place to start. Why did we hate the blacks who were a victim of racial intolerance in this country by the kkk? Why did we hate women in this country when they protested for the right to vote? Why did we hate the coal workers when they went on strike to unionize? Why do we have to keep resorting to intolerance and bigotry to fight the same problem these people are trying to avoid?
Eventually, our multicultural pluralist society is going to have to set a better example to improve the war against religious intolerance. Signs like feck mecca are obscene to the Muslims we are trying to help in this world. We had better learn that we are there to help the Muslims, not to subject them to multicultural pluralism. There is no chance of conversion of 1.5 billion Muslims. They have voluntarily chosen a legal system for democracy based on religious law. Yes, the Law of Sharia sets a strict guideline for religion, but that is what the people support. They are not looking to exchange their simple way of life embraced by almonds, dates, and goat meat for modern economic opportunities.
Our purpose in the war on terror is to keep the radicals from intimidating the moderates from intolerance and persecution, not to teach the Muslims they don't need religion. We are trying to stop the Taliban or Al Quaeda of the ME from intimidating all the moderates. The Taliban crushed the spirit of Muslims that wanted to determine their unique traditions of Islam. The same with Al Quaeda in Iraq, the crushed the Shiites once they were set free from Sunni control. The insurgents poured in help fight the Americans, but proceeded to to much further. They used their position of power to remove religous freedom from communities that thought they were helping. They threatened to kill them unless they adopt a much more fundamental approach. People had no choice but to listen to them as they watched them brutally murder all of the police recruits and other soldiers trying to restore peace. In reality, these Sunni jihadis had been discarded by the Sunni governments in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. We are just beginning to teach our Sunni allies the threat of intolerance is a threat to everybody. No one can just let them follow their own path of determination.
Why can't we figure the cycle of behavior. The West is so conditioned to hate Islam, we can't understand the Muslims are the one's being attacked by their own terrorists. Al Quaeda isn't setting a standard for fundamental Islam in the US, they are trying to establish total control of Islamic life in Iraq or Afghanistan. Same with Pakistan. They attacked the US which interfered with their power struggle in the ME. On what level were we supporting the anti Taliban movement in Afghanistan before 911. I'd love to see why the Taliban thought we were such a threat to them.
We have every right to help our allies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq from the power vacuum that has been created in the transition of the ME, which used to tolerate this disobedience. The governments even paid for the madrasses that supported these salafi, wahabbi, anti establishment schools of thought. Those practices are finally being challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The terrorists are a threat to the US as a secondary enemy. They are primarily concerned with assuming power in the ME. God knows what they would do from there, once they killed their own people. Why was Clinton trying to kill Bin Laden in the 1990's? Why was Al Quaeda bombing the USS Cole and making threats? We were crushing their ability to assume control of the moderate way of life. Before 911, there wasn't much of an issue, anymore than the Japs before Pearl Harbor. Oh there were signs, but nothing we were able to predict. It's totally absurd to talk about the presence of terrorists pre 911 without understanding the terrorists objectives. None of the 911 shows spent any time talking about the poitical and religious goals of the Taliban or Al Quaeda. All they wanted to show was that Bin Laden was a target of the US before the WTC. Why didn't they talk about their power struggle to kill and torture Muslims in Afghanistan that would not follow their fundamental instruction? |
