Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Wednesday, July 4, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version Print | Comments

Document At a Theater Near You ...

by Thomas L. Friedman

Reposted from the NYTimes

I knew something was up when I couldn't get a cab. Then there were sirens and helicopters whirring overhead. I stopped a passerby to ask what was going on. He said something about a car bomb outside a disco six blocks from my hotel. A few hours later, I finally found a taxi. The driver warned me that it was nearly impossible to get across town. Another bomb had been uncovered in a car park. Next day, more news: a suicide bomber had driven his Jeep into an airport and jumped out, his body on fire, screaming "Allah! Allah!"

Where was I? Baghdad? Kabul? Tel Aviv? No, I was in England. But it could have been anywhere. The Middle East: Now playing at a theater near you.

But this movie gets more confusing every time you watch it. When you watched it on 9/11 it was about America's presence in the heart of Arabia. And when you watched it on 7/7 it was about unemployed and alienated Muslim youth in Britain. In Jordan not long ago it was about a wedding at a Western hotel. In Morocco recently it was about an Internet cafe. And two days ago in Yemen it was about seven Spanish tourists who were killed when a suicide bomber drove into them at a local tourist site. Wasn't Spain the country that quit Iraq to get its people out of the line of fire?

Because these incidents are scattered, we're growing numb to just how crazy they are. In the past few years, hundreds of Muslims have committed suicide amid innocent civilians — without making any concrete political demands and without generating any vigorous, sustained condemnation in the Muslim world.

Two trends are at work here: humiliation and atomization. Islam's self-identity is that it is the most perfect and complete expression of God's monotheistic message, and the Koran is God's last and most perfect word. To put it another way, young Muslims are raised on the view that Islam is God 3.0. Christianity is God 2.0. Judaism is God 1.0. And Hinduism and all others are God 0.0.

One of the factors driving Muslim males, particularly educated ones, into these acts of extreme, expressive violence is that while they were taught that they have the most perfect and complete operating system, every day they're confronted with the reality that people living by God 2.0., God 1.0 and God 0.0 are generally living much more prosperously, powerfully and democratically than those living under Islam. This creates a real dissonance and humiliation. How could this be? Who did this to us? The Crusaders! The Jews! The West! It can never be something that they failed to learn, adapt to or build. This humiliation produces a lashing out.

In the old days, you needed a terror infrastructure with bases in Beirut or Afghanistan to lash out in a big way. Not anymore. Now all you need is the virtual Afghanistan — the Internet and a few cellphones — to recruit, indoctrinate, plan and execute. Hence, the atomization — little terror groups sprouting everywhere. Everyone now has a starter kit.

Gen. Michael Hayden, the C.I.A. director, recently noted in a speech that during the cold war "the enemy was easy to find, but hard to finish," because the Soviet Union was so big and powerful. "Intelligence was important" back then, he added, "but it was overshadowed by the need for sheer firepower."

In today's war against terrorist groups, said General Hayden, "it's just the opposite. Our enemy is easy to finish, but hard to find. Today, we are looking for individuals or small groups planning suicide bombings, running violent Jihadist Web sites, sending foreign fighters into Iraq."

I'd go one step further. The Soviet Union was easy to find and hard to kill, but once it died, it was dead forever. It had no regenerative power because it had no popular base. The terrorists of Iraq or London are hard to find, easy to kill, but very difficult to eliminate. New recruits just keep sprouting.

Of course, not all Muslims are terrorists. But it's been widely noted that virtually all suicide terrorists today are Muslims. Angry Norwegians aren't doing this — nor are starving Africans or unemployed Mexicans. Muslims have got to understand that a death cult has taken root in the bosom of their religion, feeding off it like a cancerous tumor.

This cancer is erasing basic norms of civilization. In Iraq, we've seen suicide bombers blow up funerals and schools. In England, seven out of the eight people detained in the latest plot are Muslim doctors or medical students. Doctors plotting mass murder? Could that be? If Muslim leaders don't remove this cancer — and only they can — it will spread, tainting innocent Muslims and poisoning their relations with each other and the world.

Comments 1 - 50 of 50 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #53922 by tieInterceptor on July 4, 2007 at 8:11 am

 avatarthe 'God 3.0 + economic and social failure = envious anger at the unbelievers' is something I always suspected,

the Muslim fear of liberated women seems so childishly man-baby attitude that it would be lol funny if it didn't enslave women by the millions.

Other Comments by tieInterceptor

2. Comment #53923 by Cool on Oolon on July 4, 2007 at 8:20 am

To be fair, condemnation is coming in from some British muslim leaders:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2733259.ece

Other Comments by Cool on Oolon

3. Comment #53924 by Duff on July 4, 2007 at 8:28 am

Condemnation from a few English Muslims is hardly sufficient to change the Muslim world. The real question is whether or not there are leading Muslims in the Muslim world who have the courage and the wisdom to step forward and say, "No one did this to us, we have humiliated ourselves. We used to be one of the most advanced cultures in the world and now we are pariahs, making fools of ourselves and our religion. It's time to get out of the 12th century and get real or we will be left so far behind we will be the enemy of the entire world."
I won't be holding my breath.

Other Comments by Duff

4. Comment #53925 by HelloLOL on July 4, 2007 at 8:29 am

Man, this is crazy, huh?

Other Comments by HelloLOL

5. Comment #53927 by Dunc-uk on July 4, 2007 at 8:45 am

 avatarI would agree with most of this article... it is fair in not blaming moderate Muslims, but places the onus of reform at their feet.

I am ideologically behind "new atheism" (or whatever you want to call it), but I don't see the intellectual marginalisation of faith as a viable short or medium term solution to the extremist problem. That is not to say that we shouldn't try anyway (the long term is a worthy goal), but something else is needed. I do see it as inevitable in the long term, as suggested by the increasing irreligious nature of the west and Europe in particular. However, there is almost nothing that I, as an atheist, can do or say to prevent borderline-radical Muslims from taking that final step into madness. Change has to be affected by other Muslims.

Moderate, peace-loving Muslims must align themselves with non-Muslim, anti-terrorist sentiment and openly oppose radicalism (and to be fair, many are). They must fight it on an ideological level in the mosques and amongst their peers, and if necessary combat extremism via collusion with the authorities.

Aggressive foreign policies on the part of the west are definitely not helping, but these are slowly being quashed by the weight of shifting public opinion - a far more legitimate, peaceful and democratic process. Call me a raving liberal, but I really do think change cannot be properly affected by force. Governments can be fought and defeated militarily, but ideoligies have to be fought on an intelllectual level. Nevertheless, much islamic terrorism is independent of the west or our actions... obvious examples would be the recent shoot-outs in Pakistan by those supporting Sharia Law, or the sunni-shia infighting all over the world.

Other Comments by Dunc-uk

6. Comment #53929 by Mango on July 4, 2007 at 8:50 am

 avatar"Norwegians aren't doing this — nor are starving Africans or unemployed Mexicans."

He can't compare religions with nationalities.

Other Comments by Mango

7. Comment #53930 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 8:56 am

Duff is on the money.

Condemnation so far emanates from muslim leaders in liberal democracies.

Have Jordanian muslims condemned the attack on Glasgow airport? Yeah, right. They are denying that Jordanian Dr Asha was even involved, yet alone an extremist.

This despite film of him screaming "Allah" as he ran into the terminal on fire, his car crashed at the door. Presumably a guy that looks like him had a run in with his zippo lighter and lost control of his car. The gas canisters and nails were in the vehicle as he was planning a massive barbecue and home improvement charity event, no doubt.

A muslim solution to a muslim problem would be great. But I fear it is as likely as Colin Montgomerie winning the Open.

Other Comments by geckoman

8. Comment #53932 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 9:08 am

And another thing!

Our Foreign Secretary should be hauling in the Jordanian Ambassador and asking him to explain what conditions allowed one of his citizens to perpetuate this monstrosity.

Other Comments by geckoman

9. Comment #53933 by Dunc-uk on July 4, 2007 at 9:14 am

 avatar"Condemnation so far emanates from muslim leaders in liberal democracies."

Then again, so does alot of support for extremism. It has to be fought on home turf before we have any chance of any sucesses propogating back to the middle east.

"A muslim solution to a muslim problem would be great. But I fear it is as likely as Colin Montgomerie winning the Open."

I agree, but that shouldn't stop us demanding it.

Other Comments by Dunc-uk

10. Comment #53934 by eye of horus on July 4, 2007 at 9:14 am

** Look upon U.S. you mighty, and despair **

In the U.S. we don't need terrorists, foreign or domestic, to undermine our secular state and institute religious law. We have Bush/Cheney/5 Supremes well on their way to ending what little remains of the Republic.

Those wretched ephemeral babblers lusting for the purple in '08 notwithstanding, a slide into the abyss can only be slowed, not reversed. No political force exists which can not be enslaved or aborted by MIXR -- the military industrial Xian right.

De facto dictator Cheney, a postmodern Sejanus, does more to catalyze the rot of Empire than any external threat or internal disaster.

This is not necessarily a bad thing.

Since . . . Carthago delenda est.

eye-of-horus
copyright asserted 2007

Other Comments by eye of horus

11. Comment #53936 by Pieter on July 4, 2007 at 9:16 am

The real problem for islamic moderates is that there really aren't that many out there. Of the 1.2 billion muslims that supposedly exist how many are older than 25 years? How many are literate? How many are educated? How many can we say form this elite core of muslim intelligentsia that holds sway over their co-religionists? And how many of these men are not the hate spewing university educated wahhabi funded salafist mullahs?

And then if we do manage to track down the elite moderate core of islamic thought (bear in mind it will probably still seem pretty fundamentalist to us; even Jordan's King Abdullah condemned Denmark for the cartoons, instead of supporting free speech) what do you people think they will be branded as when they being to speak up? Apostates! Traitors! Not true muslims, becasue they have been posioned by western influence. See the case of Irshad Manji if you don't believe me. And here's another possibility to bear in mind, for it is happening as well, that plenty of muslims who are, in a sense, moderated by exposure to non-islamic ideas actually do become apostates. They abandon the religion altogether, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is case and point here.

I think that at its basics Islam is not a moderate religion. As Harris has written, moderation comes from hammer blows of modernity blasting away at faith. Moderate christians and jews do not take the bible/torah literally. How could they, and still seem like reasonable people. The problem for muslims is that they are all essentially fundamentalists. They are scriptural literalists. Whereas the torah and bible are assembled texts by many many different authors, the koran has supposedly one author, is dictated explicitly, and meant to be taken literally and no other way.

In the past islam may have been moderated by bulky amounts of theology and mysticism, but the wahabbi and salafist movements have done away with all that. I don't think we have the time nor the patience to let islam build up centuries of obscure theology again. Supporting the moderates is not going to work. There aren't that many of them, they aren't effective spokespeople, and they won't be what we're looking for.

Better to meet it head on, confront islam for what it is, and at least in the west assert more control over who gets let into our countries and what kind of rabid fascist filth they can spew in their houses of worship. Deport anyone who treasonously supports the destruction of the very political system that grants them the freedom to say what they want. Tolerance cannot abide intolerance, and that does not make it contradictory (read Voltaire). Allow we to close with my favorite south park quote, done in the redneck voice: "if you don't like [America] then all of you can just get out."

Other Comments by Pieter

12. Comment #53938 by bitbutter on July 4, 2007 at 9:34 am

 avatar@anyone living in the UK reading this: please consider registering at theyworkforyou.com and adding your comments next to the transcription on debate on Counter terrorism (which addresses these attacks) in the house of commons here: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2007-07-02a.671.0#g679.0

Other Comments by bitbutter

13. Comment #53941 by jonecc on July 4, 2007 at 10:02 am

There's been an interesting debate at the Guardian website here.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/sarfraz_manzoor/2007/07/reclaiming_our_religion.html

The thing that strikes me from a purely "military" point of view is that the old Al Qaeda, the one that knocked down the twin towers and blew up a Spanish train and a Balinese nightclub, knew what they were doing. This new lot are rubbish. Bombs that don't go off, or go off too early, bombs that fizz visibly in car parks, Molotov cocktails instead of bombs. It's the worst British military performance since Singapore. Fortunately.

Other Comments by jonecc

14. Comment #53942 by Shrunk on July 4, 2007 at 10:04 am

 avatarI don't pretend to understand the reasons for the rise of suicide bombing by Muslims, and certainly this article is correct in saying that the recent arrests in the UK challenge, to say the least, the belief that it is a reaction of the downtrodden and disenfranchised to their situation.

However, I think the phenomenon is most likely to be understood if we can figure out how faith manifests itself in particular behaviours. Faith makes people do all sorts of crazy things. For Catholics to believe that a cracker can be turned into the body of a 2000 year old dead man by saying a few words over it, and that you should then eat it, is crazy. Crazy but harmless.

In the same way, a significant number of Muslims have come to the conclusion that their faith is best expressed by strapping explosives to their body and killing themselves, along with as many innocent bystanders they can. This is obviously a more dangerous manifestation of faith than the eucharist, but it seems to me that the two phenomena are of a kind. In both instances, otherwise rational people have suspended logical thought and are acting on the dictates of faith without questioning what they are doing.

Other Comments by Shrunk

15. Comment #53943 by Moebius on July 4, 2007 at 10:09 am

I've been among the "New Atheists" long before the term was even developed and eagerly read Harris, Dawkins and Hitchens as soon as their books were released. I agree that the tactic of suicide bombing is specific to Muslim fanatics (not counting Kamikaze pilots of WWII) and that the ideology of political Islam is as absurd and dangerous as political Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc.

However Thomas Friedman's assertion that Muslim "humiliation" is the result of anger because other nations have advanced while Islamic states have stagnated is wrong, simplistic and patently offensive to thinking people. The individuals who choose to martyr themselves (which is how they view it) do so for real grievances that we in the West would be wise to acknowledge. The three primary grievances that these suicide murderers believe they're fighting for include:

1. Western expansion into Arab territories for geopolitical influence and control of vital resources.

2. Western support for corrupt and brutal Arab regimes ranging from the family dictatorship of Saudi Arabia (the "good Taliban") to the secular dictatorships of Jordan and Pakistan and the dictatorship in all but name in Egypt.

3. Perhaps most importantly, the political and economic support for the apartheid conditions in Palestine and the brutal Israeli occupation that has resulted in 750,000 refugees, tens of thousands killed and thousands more arrested without charge.

These three factors are then mixed with extreme religiosity that purports Islam to be the most perfect and true belief system and a conviction that these killers will be rewarded in the afterlife. The best way to combat this on the ground is, not through military force, but through police action. There is no central hierarchy that can be dismantled because the individuals only share common motivations but no shared infrastructure. However, police tactics will ultimately fail as "new recruits just keep sprouting" if we don't address the larger motivations. If we're serious about stopping terrorism the best way to go about it is to eliminate the base of support for terrorists.

Obviously addressing these concerns will do little to reduce the civil war in Iraq with Sunni and Shia antagonism so firmly entrenched (and exaggerated as the result of colonial policies and Sunni brutality under Saddam Hussein's regime). But if we seriously engage these political grievances we will, not only support Western rhetoric of justice and fairness, we will undermine many of the reasons people see suicide bombing as the only solution.

For more information about these issues I'd recommend Robert Fisk's reporting in the London Independent, Norman Finkelstein's "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict" and Noam Chomsky's "Middle East Illusions."

Other Comments by Moebius

16. Comment #53944 by howtoplayalone on July 4, 2007 at 10:15 am

 avatarMango said:

""Norwegians aren't doing this — nor are starving Africans or unemployed Mexicans.""

"He can't compare religions with nationalities."

Of course he can, and he is doing so here to show that religion, particularly this one from which essentially all suicide murderers come (recall Tibet), is more likely to produce suicides for a cause and murder of disco-goers than nationalities alone.

Duff, in comment 3, is right on the money indeed. What we need to hope is happening is that Muslim parents (never mind clergy) are telling their kids "These people do not represent you or your faith. They are evil, don't romanticize them." That is not happening enough, though, and the kids are often hearing "They deserve it; They weren't Muslims who did it; it was a set up [or even] it was the Jews."

And wasn't this likely about Salman Rushdie getting tapped on the shoulder with a sword? Holy shit.

Other Comments by howtoplayalone

17. Comment #53945 by geckoman on July 4, 2007 at 10:17 am

jonecc

I too was struck that the recent attempts in the UK were amateurish (thankfully). Molotov cocktails are 60 year old technology and their use and that of other legal weapons (gas cylinders and nails) smack of desperation.

Perhaps we should praise the security services for limiting access to dangerous substances and generally practicing better vigilance. Hopefully too,we are seeing a fall in the calibre of terrorist-in terms of his training and experience.

Let's hope this is not a temporary blip..

Other Comments by geckoman

18. Comment #53946 by Serious on July 4, 2007 at 10:20 am

but has muslim *religious* leaders (as opposed to "community leaders") in the UK or elsewhere condemned the attacks?

I think not.

Other Comments by Serious

19. Comment #53947 by jonecc on July 4, 2007 at 10:39 am

Geckoman

As you say. It's a bit like football hooliganism. The hard core crews mainly got locked up, or got exclusion orders against them, and were policed out of the game. The field was then left to the enthusiastic amateurs.

Part of the problem for English terrorists is that they just don't get the practice. It doesn't matter how hard you pray, growing up in Bradford or London just isn't like growing up in Grozny.

Other Comments by jonecc

20. Comment #53949 by howtoplayalone on July 4, 2007 at 10:41 am

 avatarMoebius (comment 15) -

For more information about why making rationalizations for suicide bombing that the bombers don't make for themselves and often (doctors or engineers or not) can't even articulate is not in anyone's interest, I'd recommend Johann Hari and Nick Cohen in the Guardian, Benny Morris' "Righteous Victims" on Palestine and Israel, and Paul Berman's "Terror and Liberalism" (which, for those interested, is the best non-fiction book I've ever read. Further selling points, it's easily read in a day (meaning only that it's not a commitment one need fear adding to the stack on the shelf) and the prose is fantastic).

Other Comments by howtoplayalone

21. Comment #53952 by Bonzai on July 4, 2007 at 11:05 am

What is a "moderate muslim"? It seems that the official line considers any Muslim who doesn't openly call for terrorism and violence as a moderate. Never mind he may hold truly repugnant ideas about women, non muslims and gays. A muslim can be more exterme than the late Jerry Falwell and still be a 'moderate' as long as he is not a jihadist. Based on this concept of moderation Josef Qarawadi is considered a great liberal by Ken Livingstone and he is probably correct.

The bar of "moderate Islam" is set really low.

Other Comments by Bonzai

22. Comment #53953 by pewkatchoo on July 4, 2007 at 11:06 am

 avatarAbdul Bari is not someone whose words I would treat with any seriousness, unless of course he is inciting people to stone homosexuals, as is his usual mode.

As to the final point of the article. I would suggest that it is already to late. I think that relations between muslims and everyone else have already been poisoned beyond easy repair. It is going to be very difficult for people to trust Islam any more.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

23. Comment #53955 by pewkatchoo on July 4, 2007 at 11:11 am

 avatarDunk uk, I don't think that we can demand that Colin Montgomerie win the Open! Tiger Woods and Ernie Els might have something to say about that.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

24. Comment #53957 by gordon on July 4, 2007 at 11:39 am

 avatarPewkatchoo,

You say,

'As to the final point of the article. I would suggest that it is already too late. I think that relations between Muslims and everyone else have already been poisoned beyond easy repair. It is going to be very difficult for people to trust Islam any more.'

I have a great many Muslim friends. I even brought one chap into the country from Yemen to work in a London hospital as a plastic surgeon. He works here still, passing another examination last week (for which I give thanks to the Celestial Teapot, Blessed Be Its Lid). Guess who was the first to get a call when he passed? They are far removed form these lunatics as is possible and they are still my friends. I helped a Palestinian friend who worked for me in the Middle East to get residency in Ireland, where he now has children and is very happy thank you. The events of this week have not soured my affection for them or their families. Whilst agreeing that all religious moderates support the extremists (fundamentalists) by their acquiescence, the people at the top have to be seen in the light of their actions. These people are gangsters, we should stop calling them terrorists. You do not see a cleric strapping a bomb to his body and launching himself at a nightclub full of slags. You hear him convincing others to do so. The people on whom the message falls are not always disenfranchised but they are brainwashed. It is after all a very powerful message. Our own message is too weak. We set a poor example in the manner in which we have lived our lives over the last couple of centuries in the worship of capitalism and money. I am not suggesting that capitalism should or could be replaced but I am suggesting that the systems we have at present are jaded and overgrown. We are over populated (as a planet) and for everyone to have what we have is not possible within the resources we have available. Something has to give. Science will provide many answers, it always does, but we need to have a say in how the science is used by powerful corporations and governments or we will simply exacerbate the condition. In the mean time, the problems will get worse. Any time soon the US will attack Iran. Pakistan will explode and the Saudi monarchy will be overthrown. Yemen is already on the brink, partly due to Al Qaeda and partly due to the extraordinary corruption of the rulers there and in many other Middle East countries. Fasten your belts; it will be a long and bumpy ride.

Other Comments by gordon

25. Comment #53962 by Salvatore on July 4, 2007 at 12:50 pm

 avatarA good point, Moebius.

There is sometimes the tendency to describe the motivations of terrorists as empty-headedly as G.W. Bush's "They hate us because we are free."

The economic and social troubles in islamic counties -- and hence the dissatisfaction with the secular, "western" way among the youth-- though, is probably also a factor.

Also, the imperialism of the west isn't seen as just economic and political, but also social: no good muslim wants their country flooded with booze and pornography.

And one must admit, there are a lot of U.S. warships floating around in the Persian Gulf, and, I imagine, a lot of U.S. soldiers mulling around in certain quarters of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It must be easy to build resentment...

Other Comments by Salvatore

26. Comment #53965 by Bonzai on July 4, 2007 at 1:10 pm

Not all terrorists are motivated by the same reasons.

Some no doubt carry out terrorist attacks for tangible grievances. They usually live in the trouble spots and carry out their attacks locally. The Palestinian suicide bombers belong to this category. There is always a clear political context for this kind of terrorism. I agree that it would be gross simplification to blame religion only in these cases.

However, I cannot see what on earth do foreign policies have to do with young, U.K born and educated, newly radicalized or recently converted Muslim men trying to blow up bars because Allah hates loose women. Whenever such people are caught they talk about some general "Muslim oppression" and may mention Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine or Kashmir. In other words places that they have never been to and have no tie to whatsoever. The only reason why these places enter their consciousness is because they are all hot "Islamic causes". These people are motivated by Islam and Islam only. They mention foreign policies,--if at all,-- only as an afterthought.

Other Comments by Bonzai

27. Comment #53970 by Bremas on July 4, 2007 at 1:44 pm

Just want to second the link put up by jonecc (post 13).

It's a thought provoking debate.

Other Comments by Bremas

28. Comment #53972 by Vinelectric on July 4, 2007 at 1:51 pm

 avatarBonzai:
Problem is that the same Islamic ideolgoy motivates others to charity and other humane activities. Religion is tactically used by the clerics as a tool to manipulate the emotionally charged angry members of society for some political gain and for some fundamentally political grievance. Islamic fundamentalists have existed for many years yet active terrorism has surfaced relatively late.

The Islamic model does relatively well in times of economic health (Andalusia, modern Gulf countries). Historically, hostile Islamic activity was almost invariably linked to colonial exapnsion of its empire. If Islam on its own has the power to persuade its members to self destruct for no reason then the muslim community would have disappreard off the face of the earth centuries ago.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

29. Comment #53977 by Dr Benway on July 4, 2007 at 2:37 pm

 avatarVinelectric:
Problem is that the same Islamic ideology motivates others to charity and other humane activities.
True. Debate over the good vs. evil done in the name of religion may lead nowhere.

I do think we ought to hold people to account for their intentions. Treatment of non-believers and homosexuals is a good test. If the believer has a holy book, we ought to point out the bits that put the infidels and queers at a disadvantage. We say, "what's up with that?"

If they say, well that's what God wants. Then we poop upon their heads.

If they say, oh that's backward thinking we don't follow any longer, we say "ok then."

Other Comments by Dr Benway

30. Comment #53980 by Johnny O on July 4, 2007 at 3:29 pm

 avatar>>the 'God 3.0 + economic and social failure = envious anger at the unbelievers' is something I always suspected<<

These guys weren't failures at anything other than bomb making. They were qualified Doctors. My mother actually works at the hospital where two of them had previously worked and one is being treated for burns. This is pure and simple Religious Ideology.

The guy was actually trying to get into the back of the jeep to set the bomb off whilst on fire. Until several people jumped on him and kicked the shit out of him.

You really don't want to be trying that kind of thing in Glasgow... The locals don't like it.

Click the link to see what I mean (Possibly the best newspaper headline ever)

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/news/tm_headline=hero-cabbie%2D-i-kicked-burning-terrorist-so-hard-in-balls-that-i-tore-a-tendon%26method=full%26objectid=19401382%26siteid=66633-name_page.html

And this one shows you where the guy's priorities lie...lol

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_headline=hero-cabbie%2D-police-took-my-good-nike-trainers%26method=full%26objectid=19401912%26siteid=66633-name_page.html

Other Comments by Johnny O

31. Comment #53982 by Ivan The Not So Bad on July 4, 2007 at 3:46 pm

The reason we are living "more prosperously, powerfully and dynamically than thoe living under Islam" is because Western society (for want of a better term) has crossed the rubicon that was the Enlightenment and as a result has been able to develop a model of society based on the core democratic values of social and economic liberalism with all the freedoms and prosperity this brings.

I am constantly left disturbed that even within Western society there are daily attacks on the values of the Elightenment from popes, bishops and evangelical preachers who each day urge us to go back to the Dark Ages.

To use an old quote: "Democracy is the worst way to run a society. Apart from all the others."

Other Comments by Ivan The Not So Bad

32. Comment #53992 by tieInterceptor on July 4, 2007 at 5:47 pm

 avatar>Johny O 'These guys weren't failures at anything other than bomb making. They were qualified Doctors.'

I wasn't talking about the terrorists, I was referring to the Muslim believers in general,

The way I feel it, when I do the mental exercise of putting myself on the religious mindset I think something on these lines.

-If I was living on a repressive state and told that I must do this and that, and to pray 5 times a day, and feast for a week, and not eat pork, etc... OR ELSE I will be tortured for eternity... (or just killed by my fellow country man)

If I believed that truly, I would most certainly be damn annoyed about all the other people in the world who do NOT believe what I know in my heart of hearts to be the most important 'truth' ever told.

On top of that, those unbelievers are having a blast of a time doing all those forbidden things!!

I would think that they are having an easy life, and at the same time probably thinking of me as backward person, and as the final insult, most of the kaffir somehow managed to live in richer countries with more stuff technology and quality of life than most of us true belivers.

The thought of them going to hell when they die of old age would not be nearly enough to appease my indignation and resentment.


All of this sounds really bad to my politically correct side, and childish, but I feel that there is something of truth in there. And it can be easily converted to Christianity and Judaism , so I'm just lashing against religion really.

ps: I second the conversations on the Guardian article too, (jonnec. 13) very interesting indeed.

Other Comments by tieInterceptor

33. Comment #53994 by Shuggy on July 4, 2007 at 7:36 pm

 avatarSerious asked:
but has muslim *religious* leaders (as opposed to "community leaders") in the UK or elsewhere condemned the attacks?

I think not.
I don't understand Muslim leadership. It seems as though Muftis and Imams and Ayatollahs are all autonomous and can interpret the Qu'ran how they like - unlike ordinary Muslims. Now if they were Roman Catholic Jihadis, we'd know Whose Holiness to blame. Judaism seems to have the same non-hierarchy, but they've never been so disunited. I don't get it.

Other Comments by Shuggy

34. Comment #54006 by Big T on July 4, 2007 at 10:58 pm

9/11 and 7/7 were wake-up calls. The terrorists will not win. The most dedicated terrorists are probably dead or in hiding/on the run, etc. Gun control in Europe no doubt also helps greatly. In America, the land of my birth and where I'll always live, any idiot can get a firearm and ammunition. If you have to build a bomb from scratch, it's harder to kill people than if you can buy firearms and ammo easily. Anyway, despair is not called for. We in the (relatively) secular and civilized West are winning. And if the terrorists continue to make trouble, John Smeaton will "get about" them.

Other Comments by Big T

35. Comment #54015 by pewkatchoo on July 5, 2007 at 12:48 am

 avatarShuggy
The problem is all the schisms within Islam. The Shiite and Sunni are just the most well known of these, but there are also the Suffi and Bahai and other sub-groups. Even within Shia there are several distinct groups of which the Wahabbi sect is perhaps the most virulent and anti-western.

There are, of course, schisms within Christianity too, but those schisms came about relatively peacefully (I said relatively) whereas the schisms in Islam have almost always been bloody.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

36. Comment #54027 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 5, 2007 at 2:31 am

>>I don't understand Muslim leadership. It seems as though Muftis and Imams and Ayatollahs are all autonomous and can interpret the Qu'ran how they like - unlike ordinary Muslims<<

Eh, not really. Imam's can practice what is called 'ijtihad', which is basically like a judge forming a ruling based on judicial law, precendent, and the facts at hand. But just as a judge can't got against the law or the constitution, an Imam can't rule against what the Qur'an say, and can't really ignore the strong Hadiths or much of Islamic jurisprudence. At least, he can't do that without running the very real risk of 1) Being publically called on it and humiliated, 2) loosing his congregation, and 3) ending up with his head in a basket.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

37. Comment #54040 by Philip1978 on July 5, 2007 at 4:17 am

 avatarHey Jonny, thanks for the links, that guy sounds like a legend, my hat off to them all for doing what they did, very brave men indeed.

Incidentally, I don't believe a kick in the nads from an outraged Scotsman failed to incapacitate that man, he must have been wearing a cricket box hence the tendons going kaput!

Other Comments by Philip1978

38. Comment #54053 by j s bach on July 5, 2007 at 5:54 am

 avatarWhere is the evidence for so-called "moderate" Muslims? We just assume they exist.
The day I see a demonstration of Muslims in their tens of hundreds in Trafalgar Sq protesting against the presence of the extremists in their midst will be the day I believe moderate Muslims exist.

Other Comments by j s bach

39. Comment #54057 by konquererz on July 5, 2007 at 6:16 am

 avatarI have to agree with Bach, I just haven't seen a moderate Muslim. I see Muslims who don't loudly believe that these people are correct, but they mostly believe in what they are doing in principle. Their goals are the same, thats why they don't speak out against it, even if they don't think their methods are the best way. Islam, by Allah's command, is to be spread to the entire world. If nations don't submit, then they are supposed to spread it by sword. A moderate Muslim is one who doesn't take the Koran or the Hadith as literal. There are very few of those types of Muslims, and the ones that are face death. Islam has not evolved to the point of having passive non-literalist as a large group like Christianity does.

Other Comments by konquererz

40. Comment #54082 by Johnny O on July 5, 2007 at 8:53 am

 avatar'Twas doon by the inch o' Abbots
Oor Johnny walked one day
When he saw a sicht that troubled him
Far more than he could say
A fanatic muslim bastard
Wiz doin what he'd planned
And intae Glesca's departure hall
A Cherokee he'd rammed.

A big Glaswegian polis
Came forward tae assist
He thocht "a wumman driver"
Or at least someone half-pissed
But to his shock nae drunken Jock
Emerged to grasp his hand
But a flamin Arab loony
Frae Al Qaeda's band

The mad Islamist nut-case
Had set hissel' on fire
And swung oot at the polis
GBH his clear desire
Now that's no richt wur Johnny cried
And sallied tae the fray
A left hook and a heid butt
Required tae save the day.

Now listen up Bin Laden
Yir sort's nae wanted here
For imported English radicals
Us Scoatsman huv nae fear
Oor hame grown Glesca Asians
Will have nae bluidy truck
So tak yer worldwide jihad
An get yersel tae Fuck

Other Comments by Johnny O

41. Comment #54104 by captain underpants on July 5, 2007 at 11:33 am

 avatar35. Comment by pewkatchoo

"The problem is all the schisms within Islam. The Shiite and Sunni are just the most well known of these, but there are also the Suffi and Bahai and other sub-groups."

Actually Bahai is not a subgroup of Islam but a completely different religion. To my knowledge, it's the only monotheistic religion whose scriptures do not contain any passages that could be interpreted as condoning or calling for violence. And it has no concept of hell.

Other Comments by captain underpants

42. Comment #54107 by Bonzai on July 5, 2007 at 11:39 am

js bach wrote;

I just haven't seen a moderate Muslim


Actually there are many cultural muslims who don't really care a whole lot about religion. They are the true moderates. That is perhaps why you don't hear moderate muslims speaking out against the radicals as Muslims. They probably don't even go to the mosque and are quite detached from the religious scene. They probably never read the whole Quran. They are probably so well integrated that they no longer consider themselves as "muslim first". Now I think it would be insulting to expect a Chinese Canadian who for all intent and purposes has become a Canadian to make a special effort to criticize China's human right record. Why should he care more than the average Canadian?

As is the case with all religions, the genuine moderates are the people who don't think a great deal about their religions.

Other Comments by Bonzai

43. Comment #54109 by pewkatchoo on July 5, 2007 at 11:48 am

 avatar
Actually there are many cultural muslims who don't really care a whole lot about religion. They are the true moderates. As with the case with all religions, the true moderates are those don't really care and they are the majority.


Do you have evidence to qualify that statement?

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

44. Comment #54111 by Bonzai on July 5, 2007 at 12:01 pm

pewkatchoo,

Well I don't have statistics but I do know many "moderate muslims" in the sense I describe. When js bach complains that he hasn't seen any moderate muslim what is he really looking for?

Does he expect to find a throughly secular muslim yet at the same time would be interested in and capable of taking on the mullahs on the Quran and the hadith? Well in that case perhaps there aren't that many moderate Christians either. I think perhaps we cannot see the moderates because they don't fit into our expectations and stereotypes.

Other Comments by Bonzai

45. Comment #54117 by L.Minnik on July 5, 2007 at 12:24 pm

Just for the record: I have met a couple of muslims who did try to change things, have stood up against the dictates of their theistic governments, and are now living in Europe under different names and with a death sentence if they would ever go back. Don't expect them to publicly react to what is happening now - it's dangerous for them.

Other Comments by L.Minnik

46. Comment #54119 by HappyPrimate on July 5, 2007 at 12:42 pm

 avatarNo change will occur in the devout Muslim community until they stop brainwashing their young from cradle to coffin. They do not give these kids a breath without shoving this crap down their throats 24-7. They have no capacity for critical thought. They are biological programed robots. The so-called moderates have somehow broken through a crack and breathed a bit but are still subject to being sucked back in. I see little hope for the situation. These people think nothing of killing their own. They cannot realize that they have just about lost their right to call themselves homo sapiens sapiens, not that they would anyway being formed from a clot of blood.

Other Comments by HappyPrimate

47. Comment #54120 by Bonzai on July 5, 2007 at 12:55 pm

Here is a "progressive muslim" site. You may find something unexpected there.

http://muslimwakeup.com/

Other Comments by Bonzai

48. Comment #54131 by Goldy on July 5, 2007 at 1:57 pm

I worked in Syria for about 8 months. Lots of very irreligious men of Muslim faith there (can't really call them Muslim as they didn't follow it). At a Christmas party, one of my co-workers, Daoud, tucked into the roast pig we had managed to get, washing it down with Heineken brought in from Turkey (Al Shark beer, the local brew, was not really worth drinking). We pointed out the un-Islamic nature of his feeding, to which he replied "Yes, I am not a good Muslim", popping another piece of pork into his mouth and grinning. Turkey is also awash with Muslims who are, well, totally unislamic.
Maybe it is different in the UK etc - maybe the Islamicisation is stronger is it imparts a feeling of identity. It's hard when you are different from the rest of the population, even though you may have been born and bred there.

Other Comments by Goldy

49. Comment #54253 by logical on July 6, 2007 at 6:45 am

 avatarThank you, Goldy.
It is nice to read that the masses to be freed exist not only in North and South America, but everywhere else.
The "I am not a good Muslim" - selflabel is something I have been hearing in Europe too, but being a woman I could not find out what it exactly means. (Women do not use it)

Other Comments by logical

50. Comment #54279 by hightrekker on July 6, 2007 at 8:56 am

Well Tom, maybe the World is Round after all------
Of course, Mohammed knew that anyway, as he viewed it from his flying horse---
If you don't believe me, just ask the Talking Snake---
That was a few Friedman Units Ago (google if you are curious about the definition of a Friedman Unit)

Other Comments by hightrekker
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password:

Send a letter to the editor of the original media outlet.
letters@nytimes.com