In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. Let me tell you about my brother. As the blogosphere was aflame with intense speculation (and it was just that: speculation) about Cho Sueng-Hui's possible connection to "Islamic terrorism" because of the words "Ismael Ax" tattooed on his arm, the Virginia Tech Muslim community was mourning the death of one of their brightest stars.

Waleed Shaalan, 32, was a graduate student in the Civil Engineering Department at Virginia Tech. He first came to VT in August 2006 from northern Egypt. He took on an assistantship position, choosing to leave his Ph.D. track which he started in Egypt. He was known for "his broad smile and wave that he gave everyone."

Says Fahad, Waleed's roommate: "He was the simplest and nicest guy I ever knew.We would be studying for our exams and he would go buy a cake and make tea for us." Fahad was the last person to have spoken to Waleed.

"He was studying late for an exam the morning of the incident," Fahad said, "it was about 4 am when I last saw and spoke to him. We were talking about how amazing it would be once he brought his wife and son to Tech after the summer. I could never have imagined that in 5 hours he'd be gone forever."

Mr. Shaalan is survived by his wife for three years, Amira, and Khaled, his one-year old son.

As some people were wondering whether Cho Seung-Hui was a "terrorist" because of two cryptic words on his arm, details were emerging about how Mr. Shaalan was murdered in cold blood.

As reported in the New York Times, Waleed Shaalan died a hero: according to Randy Dymond, a civil engineering professor at Virginia Tech, Mr. Shaalan was in a classroom with another student when the gunman entered and opened fire.

Mr. Shaalan was badly wounded and lay beside the other student, who was not shot but played dead, as the gunman returned two times searching for signs of life. Just as the gunman noticed the student, Mr. Shaalan made a move to distract him, at which point he was shot a second time and died. The student believed that Mr. Shaalan purposefully distracted the shooter to save him, Mr. Dymond said.

"Waleed was bright, energetic and caring," Mr. Dymond said. "The reason we are in higher education is because there are students who are the bright light to the future. Waleed was one of them."

That was my brother who died there. That was my brother who put his own life on the line to save the life of someone else. That was my brother who embodied Islam's teaching that the sanctity of life is paramount. Now, to be clear: Mr. Shaalan is not my actual, "blood" brother. Rather, he was my brother in faith: "The believers are one brotherhood" (49:10)

Still, Waleed Shaalan gave his life to follow the instructions of the Qur'an: "...if anyone saves a life, it shall be as if they have saved all of humanity." (5:32) This is how the majority of Muslims live and act. This is what the majority of Muslims believe about life and death. Waleed Shaalan is the true face of Islam, not the murderous, vicious soldiers of Satan who kill and destroy and claim they are doing so in Islam's name.

Thus, for some to try to link Islam to the Virginia Tech shootings is insulting. When it first came out that the shooter was "Asian," some people asked the question: "Were they from Pakistan and part of a terrorist attack?" How sickening.

Of course, I am also sickened by the acts of terrorism committed by some Muslims in the name of Islam. Of course, authorities must consider all possibilities when investigating an incident as terrible as the shootings at Virginia Tech. But to automatically assume that it is "terrorism" whenever something even remotely connected to Islam shows up, this is plain wrong.

Waleed Shaalan was what Islam is all about: kindness, caring, compassion, and respect for life. Rather than take your life senselessly, you will find that the overwhelming majority of Muslims would do what they can to save your life, because, their religion tells them so.

I couldn't help but notice that Waleed Shaalan's story and picture were completely ignored in Time magazine's latest special report issue.

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/2007/1101070430_400.jpg

Also, on social news sites like Digg when the fact that he was a "muslim" hero was mentioned, users started complaining how his religion is completely irrelevant. In contrast, whenever a story about violence emerges Islam becomes immediately relevant.

b00006749,

Plenty of hypocrites out there. As for Digg, you get all kinds of idiots, as well as very intelligent people. Its a hell of a crazy mix.

Thank you for shedding that story into light. I, like many others, had not known this story about Mr. Shaalan and I can only say that it makes me happy and even more proud to be a Muslim. May Allah (swt) bless him for his heroic action.

Mr. Shaalan was a hero. So were the several others, not all of whom have been subjected to press coverage, who gave their lives or placed themselves in harm's way that day, in service to the common good. As far as I know, they included persons of many religious persuasions, and, even, in pluralist and diverse USA, perhaps none. My own theory is that religious insanity was probably only one of many speculative explanations occurring to horrified spectators, both on site and around the world. As for the "Ismail Ax" business, Cho was obviously a very histrionic guy who wanted to be noticed, as witness his video and letters. He probably, as someone else mentioned in another thread, wanted people to think he might be Muslim or Black Panther or a Malcolm X disciple, and thus add to his notoriety and legend. I wouldn't be surprized if he had other symbols about his person, beyond the "gothic outlaw" gloves, hat, black clothing - "Jerry Garcia lives" tattoo, Hells Angels skulls and swastikas, and so on. Please, Dr. Hasaballa and other brothers in humanity, don't take human tendencies to leap to conclusions so personally. Just because the net is so full of whacky paranoid conspiracists doesn't mean provocateurs lurk in every life incident.

Given that Shaalan fell in the line of fire, I'd also like ot know about the Muslim woman whose name appeared in one of the pictures posted on altmuslim. Also, did the MSA of the school take up collection plates for her as well, or just for the male? Was it covered by Muslim media...I mean about her? This in no way should detract from Mr Shaalan, but should be a wake up call to us who seem to not want to mention her...I will, this time, give props for whomever can remember her name.

OmarG,

Are you referring to the Lebanese Reema Samaha? Some have have assumed her to be Muslim, but it has not been mentioned whether she is Muslim or not. The New York times does not mention her religion http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/reema_samaha/index.html

But it is mentioned that "Mr. Shaalan was active in the Muslim Student Association at Virginia Tech."

OmarG,

In the New York Times list of victims http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/20070418_VICTIMS_GRAPHIC.html there is the Indonesian Partahi Lumbantoruan. There is also the victim Ross Abdallah Alameddine; his last and middle name, I believe, are Arabic. But there is no mention of their religion.

...which was my point exactly, Randall. Its commentary on how the media selects its heroes, which no one should understand as debating his actions, just those who do the selecting when its all over. And you get big props for remembering her name and I think I did hear about her being Muslim, but can't remember exactly where.

I believe Reema Samaha was Christian according to an interview with her father on one of the news networks (can't remember which one).

Why is he a "Muslim" hero and not just a hero, like the others who acted in bravery that day? Yet he alone is singled out on all Muslim forums, etc, as being highlighted, with the rest being ignored.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you don't like the reference to religion in newsworthy matters because there are violent incidents involving Muslims and they are assumed to be "terrorists" , take it out of your own practices when it comes to describing only one of the fallen heros by their religion and not the others. Were the others who saved lives not of a religion?

You can't hold a double standard and demand that others don't hold the same.

Snapoutofit,

Its no different than the Israeli newspaper Haaretz highlighted the heroics of the Holocaust survivor Jewish professor in the same shooting above any other. I did not see them mention any other heroes in those articles let alone a muslim one.

I am looking for integrity, not for other examples of a lack of it.

Egocentricism according to group identity is found everywhere...the us and them mentality. If any particular group cries loud and long about how they are not being treated "fairly" in the press, they best be showing their own integrity on a higher level and not resorting to it themselves.

So your referrering to an Israeli newspaper highlighting the heroics of only one person because he is Jewish does not excuse the Muslim behavior. It only equates it.

Set an example and you will find deeper respect for your complaints. As it is said...be the change you wish to see in the world.

There are sites which honored all of the victims regardless of their religion or nationality. But I did not see this on any Muslim forums. Just observing.

Snapoutofit,

I don't see your point - what is wrong with saying a muslim had done something good? That does not take away the good done by others. What has it got to do with integrity? And, why shouldn't muslims (or any other group) point out that they are vilified in the media more often than not. What is your point?

My point is, when you begin to see ALL humans as humans, equally your "brothers and sisters", regardless of race, religion, creed, nationality, you will understand how it is offensive to place special emphasis on the GOOD or the BAD of any human based soley on their religious affiliation.

You wish to be able to honor your brother because he is Muslim, but this states, the rest of the world as humans are NOT of the same cloth. This very root thought creates the division of humanity through various surface judgements.

If you wish to experience a world where there is NO hate according to religion, race, etc...begin by seeing all those who were massacred at VT as your beloved human fellows who all deserve to be honored for being who they were. Period.

It is a double standard that is perhaps a bit sublime, but real none the less. And if I do not recognize this particular individual as being any more honorable than any of the other individuals who lost their lives, this does NOT make me anti-Muslim, but anti-division according to arbitrary classifications.

We are a whole human race, one dissected only by perspective and opinions based on arbitrary systems of division.

This is my point.

I want to agree with snapoutofit for moral reasons but pragmatically its difficult to ask this of Muslims for two reasons: 1) the guy is dead. He was shot to death; let his family and freinds take comfort in knowing that his life was taken in place of another's. 2) Its not practical to expect most Muslims who are mired in deep identity crisis to equate "thier" hero with any one else (what makes him "our" hero; do we possess him simply because of his faith system?? Isn't that God's job to possess him...).

All groups need thier heroes, and in this climate where both anti-Muslims and Muslims politicize tenets of faith, we cannot expect that Muslims would not take this chance to show, as Hassaballa wrote, that his actions are representative of how "good" Muslims in America are (never mind that he was a guest student and could hardly be called an American Muslim IMHO [See! I politicized him, too! We just can't resist, can we?]).

I say, let the fallen rest in peace and let's give comfort to those who lost. Anything else is crass exploitation of a tragedy.

From Wiki:

Most of the thinkers who describe themselves as pragmatists consider practical consequences or real effects to be vital components of both meaning and truth.

But I ask...which comes first, the separatism and absolutism or the prejudice and hate?

By setting an example of "no division of human value by virtue of culture, class, race, religion, etc" and setting no human apart in a moralistic vein by such definers, would this not eventually undo the hate of "what is not of our own"?

Let groupings define the vast diversity of humanity, like nature is vastly diverse. Moral subjectivity is not required to honor human life and experience.

If you don't want to be a victim of being seen through negative bias, it is wise to resist puffing the group identity up with postiive bias. The goodness of those lost is not measured in any other way than the vibrancy of their living and the love they shared.

This is the universal key.

snapoutofit,

"If you don't want to be a victim of being seen through negetive bias, it is wise to resist puffing the group identity up positive bias"

Are you saying, if muslims stopped trying to do positive PRs by finding muslim heroes, the media would stop negetive bias? Is that why media and the mob were looking for a Arab looking bomber after the Oklahoma bombing?

Snapo, you go, lad (lady?) I think I was trying to get to where you are in my early comment, just don't have the tools. My appreciation for help in clarifying my thoughts.

And, for Arshad, perhaps some comfort to be had if you can see the media, and their core audiences, left/right/center, always needs a "them" to assure themselves and audience of their own rectitude and justification, if not Godliness. For example, have you recently seen any leading "orthodox" Muslim media, (except AltMuslim and its peers) say anything positive (or give them a platform from which to speak it) about any non-Muslim culturally or politically more to center than, say, Jesse Jackson or Bernie Sanders, on any topic at all? Oh, right, I'll give you Pelosi and Murtha, too. Or about AltMuslim, for that matter? (Pardon, please, my partisan slip is showing.)

Anyway, from where I stand, EVERY group has its villains du jour, as well as its heroes. As Snapo says, though, its the job of persons of good will and the moral right stuff to rise above the fear and manipulation, and begin living the solutions, rather than the problems. Moments of heroism like those given us by those who took a bullet for their fellows can take us in the right direction, or their heroism can be appropriated for lesser purpose.

Seems to me like Heroism, to be truly commemorated, should offer a jumping off point for transcendence of the conditions that caused Heroism to be necessary in the first place.

snapoutofit wrote, So your referrering to an Israeli newspaper highlighting the heroics of only one person because he is Jewish does not excuse the Muslim behavior. It only equates it.

Set an example and you will find deeper respect for your complaints. As it is said...be the change you wish to see in the world.

snapoutofit did you send emails to the major newspapers and radio and television news programs who only mention the Jewish hero but not any other heroes? Or do you only spend your time preaching to Muslims?

>>Or do you only spend your time preaching to Muslims?

Uh, you kind of do the same thing yourself, eh...