« Muslims thrown off Luton-Glasgow Easyjet flight | Main | Blair playing to "tabloid agenda" in terror fight »

12 November 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c34b553ef00d834fa2cda69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Difference between terrorism and fundamentalism:

Comments

The Antagonist

'Perceived.... injustices' is an interesting choice of phrase for the dame to use in relation to Muslims.

It appeared twice in the anonymously-penned Home Office 'Report of the Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005' as the motivation for Mohammad Sidique Khan's 'justifying violence through his own twisted interpretation of Islam.'

Let's hope nobody mentions Lockerbie, eh?

Sam

I think a lot of this fundamentalism/terrorism confusion stems from a dangerously simplistic, but very commonly held right wing view of Islam in both Britain and America.

Essentially, people tend to view 'terrorist' and 'moderate Muslim' as existing at opposite ends of a single sliding religious scale.

To sum it up, in this view, people who *really* *really* believe the literal truth of the Qu'ran are 'terrorists'. People who believe in it just, like, in some parts (like Christians who don't go to church except at Christmas), are 'moderate Muslims'.

(After all, literal belief in the Old Testament of the Bible is the main difference between fundamentalist - i.e. evangelical - Christians and most average secular Christians)

To people who think in this way (which includes I think probably a very large chunk of the British population), fundamentalists are by definition terrorists.

The message that cannot be repeated enough is that a Muslim can be as devout as they like without becoming a terrorist. They do not have to be 'moderate' in order not to be a terrorist. The manipulation of Islam to support terrorism is a completely separate issue to strength of belief in the religion.

zanjabil

"Al-Qaida has developed an ideology which claims that Islam is under attack"...

Michael Meacher, former Minister in Blair's Cabinet, has also claimed that Islam is under attack. The motive, in his words:

"By 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the world's oil production and, even more importantly, 95% of remaining global oil export capacity.

Iraq has 110 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves in addition to its oil."

"This war on terrorism is bogus," Michael Meacher
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4747953-103677,00.html

George Carty

I'm surprised that the oil connection has been monopolized by the anti-war side. I would have expected the pro-war people to talk about "the sea of oil that the Muslims hope will propel them to world conquest".

Raashid

George, the reason the anti-war brigade rarely mention the oil reserves in the Muslim world is that it would mean admitting the oil is theirs. Which would naturally deligitimise the notion of "securing" oil supplies (how do you secure something which isn't yours?)
Also, it wouldn't square with that other favourite barb of theirs, that Islam is incapable of producing anything for humanity etc. How would a "Worldwide Caliphate modelled on the Taliban" as they put it, go on to conquer the West when they wouldn't allow their people to gain literacy beyond the rote recitation of the Quran?

George Carty

Thanks Raashid for pointing out that extremist Islamophobic propaganda can resemble Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda which claimed that Jews were on the one hand weak and contemptible, but on the other hand plotting to take over the world...

thabet

I would recommend The Nazi Conscience for a flavour of what the Nazis did in order to push their anti-Semitic propoganda through. They actually had to work quite hard to convince the German populace to hate Jews and other 'enemies of the Volk'. One interesting point noted by Koonz, author of the book, was their reliance on "polite" and "scholarly" forms of anti-Semitism.

joe90

(Thanks for sorting out my posting problem Osama - I hope it's worth trouble you went to!)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2496507,00.html>Join the British Army and become a martyr, say Muslims
by Abul Taher
The Sunday Times
10 Dec 2006

"A GOVERNMENT-BACKED Islamic organisation is teaching young Muslims that dying while fighting for the British armed forces is an act of martyrdom.

The British Muslim Forum (BMF) explains to young people that even if a Muslim soldier dies in combat while fighting in an Islamic country such as Afghanistan, he will still be regarded as a martyr and a hero for this country."

I don't think I need to comment on this!

Just to add that,
Tony Bush and George Blair don't like terrorism but they do like committing war crimes themselves, the cause of the much lesser crimes of terrorism.

ainelivia

Sam, spot on.

The comments to this entry are closed.

View Osama Saeed's profile on LinkedIn

Feeds


  • Subscribe in Bloglines

    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to Google


  • Enter your email address:

    Get alerts of new posts