Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Indian Muslims

By

Juan Cole points to this article from the BBC:

Indian Muslims say they do not want the gunmen killed by the security forces during the attacks in Mumbai to be buried in Muslim graveyards.

Community leaders believe the militants cannot be called Muslims because they went against the teachings of Islam and killed innocent civilians.

…

Other Muslim groups have written to their local assembly representatives to say that if the authorities force the militants to be buried in a Muslim graveyard, they too will come out on the streets in protest.

Sadly, I think many Americans will find this news surprising.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I think Americans will remain ignorant of this news, or the fact that there are more Muslims in India than all but two countries.  Not to mention that in the state of Maharashtra, the Muslim population seems a lot less radical and doctrinaire than the wingnut Hindus who govern the party.

    • When there is an incident of violence by Muslim terrorists, I for one look to the organized Muslim community for condemnation. Instead we usually are given video footage of people chanting and reveling in front of the carnage as a celebration. Heads chopped off, woman beaten to death for having a boyfriend, female sexual castrations, burning effigies… How should people view videos like this? The MSM drives the propaganda into our living rooms nightly and we get “educated”.

      <

      p>I have heard many times that true Muslims would abhor any violence against another person, but there seems to often be some caveat about “unless it is a jihad” and the violence was somehow related to some jihad.

      <

      p>Speaking for myself I think it is wonderful that so many peaceful Muslims would feel this way about the violent Muslims who committed this terrorist attack. It would be great if other Muslim nations also issued strong statements against this attack and stated publicly that this is not acceptable behavior for Muslims. Have they? Anything from Iran, Syria, UAE… Broadcasting and publicizing this official condemnation would do wonders to make American feel better about Muslims, the Muslim religion and be more educated about what Islam is all about.

      <

      p>As for the “sadness”, we should remember that Americans are ignorant about many many issues even here in the US. How many believe Mormons still have multiple wives? What’s the difference between a Catholic and a Protestant? Who the VP is/was? As a nation we are overwhelmed with morons who don’t even know where their state is on a US map so why would we be surprised when someone doesn’t know a religious issue in a country on the other side of the world?

      • Although it does seem that some media filtering is more willful (whether because of money or ideology,… take your pick) than circumstantial.  

        <

        p>Its funny that you bring up the media filter because I just read this yesterday:

        We’ve been repeatedly calling attention (here, here, and here) to the case of Aafia Siddiqui, an MIT grad and mother of three who the U.S. government claims is the new face of Al-Qaeda — but her lawyers say Siddiqui has been essentially kidnapped by the CIA and tortured possibly to the point where she’s mentally unfit to stand trial. (She was also shot and nearly killed at Bagram — the military says she grabbed a soldier’s gun and he fired in self-defense).

        Who’s telling the truth? We haven’t really been able to say, as the American MSM has almost completely blacked out the story. The last major paper to write anything on Siddiqui was The Washington Post, which gave her case three sentences in a news briefing compiled from wire services, according to Nexis.

        But Der Spiegel, the German magazine, has written a fantastic and lengthy story on the case, here, and it presents details that have never before appeared anywhere in the American MSM, so far as we’re aware. Why a chilling account of what the American government may be doing has to appear in a German magazine, we’re not sure, but it’s worth a read — especially if you happen to be an editor or producer stateside. Feel free to send it to one.

      • “It would be great if other Muslim nations also issued strong statements against this attack and stated publicly that this is not acceptable behavior for Muslims.”

        <

        p>When’s the last time that the United States was expected to declare that attacks by ETA or Northern Irish groups was not acceptable behavior for Christians?

        <

        p>You’re painting with a broad brush in your comment, JohnD.

        • We aren’t a theocracy (sorry mr. lynne haha!)

          <

          p>However, nations that are actual theocracies, such as Iran, or de facto theocracies, such as Saudi Arabia, are in perfect positions to declare something as being un-Islamic.

          <

          p>Now, if you want to talk Christian theocracy rejecting IRA violence, there’s a long history of JP2 calling for an end to violence by the IRA, and a long history of the IRA telling JP2 to go pound sand.

        • And another thing… I am a Irish Catholic and during the “war” in Ireland I was embarrased to be Irish. I would speak harshly about both sides of that battle. Terrorism, no matter what the stimulus (religion, national…) must be condemned universally when it happens.

          <

          p>This is clearly a case where silence = support.

        • When’s the last time that the United States was expected to declare that attacks by ETA or Northern Irish groups was not acceptable behavior for Christians?

          <

          p>Last I checked, neither the IRA or the Basque were explicitly Christian organizations, nor were they engaged in killing people based upon their religious beliefs.  The predominantly Catholic IRA killed people in a political struggle over English hegemony (with, nominally, Protestant unionist opposing them, but, to be sure, they’ve fought more amongst and between themselves than with anyone else.) That the political divide can be viewed as a straddle across religious divide, it seems to me, is neither causal nor causative.  

          <

          p>But to belabor the point… I was weaned on a mainstream media that constantly played up the ‘Catholic IRA’ v. ‘Protestant Ulster Union’. That such remains your view after all this time indicates you’ve purchased what they’ve been selling… which is the point, I daresay, that JohnD was making above.  

          <

          p>As for ETA, as far as I can tell, they’re strict nationalists who kill people simply for not being Basque.

          <

          p>And, for background, both the Provo IRA and ETA have strong socialist roots: which roots, as I’m sure you know, aren’t always that friendly towards religion.

          <

          p>On the specific matter of the article at hand: I’m heartened to see honest and earnest Muslims standing up to the vile extremists amongst them.  Amen to that!!  I’ve long said that the only cure for extremists are moderates.  

          • I’ll break it down.  We have nothing — nothing to indicate that these Pakistani operatives were radical Muslims aside from their swarthy skin.  That is the base of JohnD’s hyper accusations.  If the past is any guide, they were secular nationalists the way that ETA is, and Jammu-i-Kashmir and other regional terrorist groups are.  So to ask the secular government of Saudi Arabia to condemn what are likely secular terrorists for acting with inappropriate religious fervor is way off-base.  As off-base as asking the secular American government to condemn secular terrorists who happen to be Christian.

            <

            p>While the IRA is not explicitly Catholic in belief, it gains supporters through exploiting a sense of wronged nationhood in a nation that is bound by religion.  Yes, they are Marxist on either side of the border, which as you say could raise questions about their enthusiasm for religion.  However, Marxism is also diametrically opposed to nationalism, and the IRA is the essence of a nationalistic organization.  Marxism has never superseded their nationalism as a political organization (indeed, it was emphasized mainly in an effort to procure funding and weapons from post-war fellow Marxists), and I would be shocked if it ever did.

            • It is worth noting that while on paper the Saudi government is secular, the reality is that they owe their existence to their relationship with their wahabi clerics.  Not sure it matters for purposes of your illustration though.  While not a theocracy, the record is one of governing and lawmaking with an extremely high preference to wahabi sensibilities (where applicable).  The extended royal family’s ties to the wahabis even pervades their non-governmental life.  This is how all the wahabi schools all over the globe have been funded.  Not sure if this relationship is so pervasive that it breaks your analogy, but it certainly might.

            • I’ll break it down.  We have nothing — nothing to indicate that these Pakistani operatives were radical Muslims aside from their swarthy skin.

              <

              p>… I thought that A) a Muslim group, calling themselves Deccan Mujahideen had claimed responsibility and that 2) the surviving (captured) attacker, himself a Muslim, was one of several (now dead) Muslims involved 3) who had targeted Jewish cultural establishments, amongst other places, during the attack.  Certainly, it’s possible that nationalism, and not religious fervor, is at play here, but you have to squint real hard to ignore other possibilities.

              <

              p>And, while TIME magazine doesn’t explicitly say so, each of the listed ‘likely suspect’ groups is tied to Islamic religious fundamentalism.

              <

              p>Further, the rather advanced step, as noted in the article cited, of Muslims denouncing other Muslims (you know… the TOPIC of this thread) ought to be indicative of how the ‘boots on the ground’ view the situation.

              <

              p>In any evend, motivated by nationalism doesn’t void the laudable sentiment expressed by these honest Muslims: that Islam is a peaceful and nurturing religion and that any Muslim who targets and kills innocents, whether for reasons political or polemic, ought not be considered as the face of Islam.   They’re either vile Muslim extremists or vile extremists who are Muslim. Same point applies.

          • I think it might be more accurate to say that in Ireland, religious identity reflects ethnic identity, and the divisiveness tended to reinforce both.

Archives