Seven years ago, four planes hijacked by 19 Arab Muslim men crashed into specially chosen sites of American significance in New York City, the country’s financial and cultural capital, and Washington, D.C., our political capital. As we know, the hijackers of United Flight 93 only partially succeeded in their mission of destruction: the brave passengers of that flight managed to down the plane in a field in Pennsylvania. All on board died, but none on the ground did.

In passenger Tom Burnett’s last call to his wife from aboard the plane, he said, “Don’t worry, we’re going to do something.” The passengers of United Flight 93 did not go down without a fight. They stood up for themselves and for the American people, paying the ultimate price. Their brave actions prevented the deaths of more Americans and those visiting our country on the ground in Washington DC. In New York, many Americans, as well of people of other nationalities, died - on the planes and on the ground. Some of those people were Muslims; most of them were not.

Dear Ummah, I would like to know when we are going to stand up against those we say have hijacked Islam. “Oh, they hijack Islam,” we say, and we leave it there. “Oh, I’m a moderate Muslim,” we reassure our co-workers. Most of us don’t dare say, “Let’s roll” when it comes to confronting the extremism of our own people. The bitter, bitter truth is that Muslims have largely been apathetic and ineffective against the creeping tide of Islamic extremism and terrorism — despite the fact that most victims of said violence and extremism are fellow Muslims.

On Flight 93, a flight attendant named Sandy Bradshaw prepared scalding hot water to throw on the hijackers, in an attempt to disable or distract the terrorists. Looking at the behavior of Muslims the past seven years, I’d say most of us are preparing hot water so we can have another cup of tea. (Well, those of us who aren’t preparing to offer the terrorists a cup of tea, that is).

Where is our Sandy Bradshaw? Where is our Tom Burnett? Our CeeCee Lyles? Our Todd Beamer?

I am tired of the defensiveness and ineffectiveness of the Muslims when it comes to this issue. “I’m not a terrorist!” “I’m not like that!” “Most Muslims aren’t extremists!” “They’re a minority!” Great. That may all be true, but they are a minority who have been on a decade-long rampage of murder and rape across Africa, Europe and Asia. “They’re a minority!” we crow as women are gunned down in the streets of Iraq for not being “properly covered.” Well, of course, that one is Bush’s fault, according to a lot of Muslims. While his actions have made it convenient for them to act there, the fact is that it is Muslims doing the killing. The plain, hard truth is that it is people who profess Islam who are killing others in Nigeria, in Sudan, in Iraq, in Palestine, in Pakistan, and elsewhere. George Bush didn’t force a machete into the hands of the Muslim men who beheaded Daniel Pearl.

Stop deflecting. It is true that the war in Afghanistan has gone on too long, that the Taliban keep resurfacing like some sort of bad dream, that Osama is still on the loose, that Iraq is a huge disaster, that the Muslims who live in post-colonial nations have valid complaints against both the Western powers and the autocratic despots who rule over most of them. All of this is true.

But Muslims have to stop making it their sole response to the question, “What are you doing about extremism and terrorism amongst Muslims?” Are our statements “strongly condemning these actions” enough? No, because it has to be backed up by real action, action which I believe is largely intellectual and spiritual. We have to firmly and without any reservations reject the rhetoric of extremism and invalidate its sources. We have, so far, been unwilling to do this.

For crying out loud, you have Muslims in the West who refuse to denounce the Taliban. I find this absolutely disgusting, and would be willing to contribute to a fund whereby these jokers can leave the freedom they find in the West and go live with the Taliban. I’m sure all those women defending them on ‘net forums as the vanguard of true Islam will really love it.

I met a Muslim a few years ago who referred to Osama as “sheikh.” And I know a lot of you out there know characters like this. We have remained silently embarrassed of the rhetoric of extremism that exists inside of Western Muslim communities. We have said very little about the fact that before 9/11, khutbas and halaqas urging hatred of the West were common in many communities. We forget that anti-American rhetoric among Muslims living in America was common. It was not even unusual for many of us to fall prey to this, since the Islam of the Saudi petro-dollars dominated much of what was available in English. An Islam where, ideally, all women would wear black and cover even their eyes, since these tiny organs are so alluring to most men. An Islam where polygyny was not only the norm, it was the truest way of being Muslim. Many of us were taught that this was the only way you could be Muslim — that to be a true Muslim who were required to hold specific political, cultural, and social positions.

We said nothing about the implicit support of certain segments of the community for suicide bombing (as long as it’s against the Jews, it’s okay!). We said and say nothing about the treatment of Muslim women in our communities in the land of the free. We say nothing about rampant anti-Jewish sentiment, which extends to horrifying and intellectually cowardly ideas about the Holocaust. And not just in the Arab countries. We all know it is present among many in the West. Everything wrong with us, from Osama to the dudes who ban women at the masjid, is the fault of the Jews, the West, capitalism, the Sufis, the Shi’a, and anything else under the sun. It is never the fault of Muslims.

The fact that I am afraid to publish this is proof enough of the fact that beneath our well-intentioned talk of tolerance and moderation, the truth is that there are plenty of crazies amongst us, and that we are not dealing with them sufficiently. Several bloggers have even received death threats that the authorities viewed as credible. Not from anti-Muslim types (although I think that is true too), but from fellow Muslims. I myself was threatened last year here in Jordan over things I was writing (not by the authorities, by just another “crazy” Muslim). Blogger Tariq Nelson is someone I can point out as an inspiration. In the face of threats and hatred, he continues to tell the Muslims what we need to hear, what we don’t want to hear. He has not been cowed by these idiots. Why should we?

As the revolt of the passengers of Flight 93 began, forty-four average American men and women came together roughly a half an hour after the hijacking to stop what they knew to be a suicidal mission being carried out by the four Arab Muslim men who had taken them hostage. Forty-four average Americans, like you and me, overcame all of their fears of the unknown, of being hurt, of death to try and put a stop to it. And though they all perished, they succeeded in stopping the hijackers from killing more everyday people on the ground.

Where is your courage, community? We are a group of people who can’t manage to keep the masjid bathroom clean. In most of our large-scale endeavors we have proven impotent and ineffectual. Forget large scale, our day and weekend schools operate on a seat of the pants philosophy. How do we think that we can be effective when it comes to speaking against and ending extremism in our own country, let alone the rest of the world?

Why is it politically incorrect, simply “not done” to express admiration for the passengers of Flight 93 in our community? For the firefighters and transit cops, the NYPD and EMTs at the World Trade Center? When Sheikh Hamza Yusuf dared express sorrow for their loss, he was loudly excoriated by a segment of our great community that feels it is somehow offensive to God to mourn the loss of good people because they are not Muslim. Yes, individually, many people do have these feelings of admiration and sorrow, but collectively, as a community, we avoid discussing it. In the seven years since 9/11 happened, I have never heard much sentiment or sorrow expressed for these people among the Muslims. We point out and mourn the Muslim victims (I think this helps make us feel more American and more innocent of the crime), but stay oddly silent on the rest. Why? All of their lives had meaning and value, all of them.

Two people in my graduating high school class, as well as one in the class before mine, and one in the class after mine died that day. And that was just my time. It doesn’t include the victims who graduated many years before I did (or after I did), nor does it include those who graduated from our sister school at the same time. People I had study hall with, or whose lockers were near mine. A woman I grew up with, whose younger siblings I went to school with, died that day. A neighbor from New York, an EMT, died trying to rescue people. A very, very good Muslim friend of mine lost a cousin at the Pentagon. He was serving his country in the military after having an extremely rough childhood and young adulthood. None of them were Muslims. They are as deeply missed as the dervish from Rockland County, or the Muslim EMT from Queens.

They were good people, just working for a living, just like the Muslim victims we publicly mourn.

As though it somehow makes us disloyal to Islam to acknowledge this. As if mourning the firefighters or the passengers of Flight 93 means we don’t mourn the dead in Iraq or Palestine or anywhere else. As if mourning our own fellow Americans means that we valued their lives more than people anywhere else in the world. It doesn’t. It doesn’t have to be that at all.

To acknowledge these victims and heroes, from the traders and programmers to the cops and firefighters does not mean aligning ourselves with the xenophobes in our country and elsewhere who use the victims to push for racist policies, or who unfairly demonize Muslims and other groups.

I remember everything about that day. The terror, the fear, the uncertainty, the panic. We were without television, cell phones, or landlines. Unbeknownst to me, friends and relatives all over the country were attempting to phone and e-mail us in a state of near-panic. The one who called the most often, the first one I spoke to? Not a Muslim. I remember Rudolph Giuliani, of all people, being the first to tell Americans not to attack Muslims, that it was not our fault, that we were not guilty. I remember weeping that night and other nights following that Tuesday, wondering who these people were that they did such a thing, and that they were Muslims. I was mortified, horrified, embarrassed, and angered. Within days of the attacks, I had joined a fledgling activist group, Muslims Against Terrorism, meeting in the heart of Manhattan itself. The group did not last very long. Infighting and an inability to find direction did us in, alongside the demands of everyday life. And this was largely a group of American born, highly educated, professional Muslims. Some were critical of the name chosen when the founders had come together. Some were afraid that it insinuated that some Muslims were for terrorism.

Well duh! Wasn’t that the point?

I felt sure that now the sun would shine in, that things would be exposed for what they were, and that the Muslim community, all around the world, would reject extremism, reject its proponents. That our American Muslim leadership would put an end to extremist rhetoric and actions inside of the community from the second-class treatment of women to anti-American hate speech. To stand up against the fear that these people would label us people of bid’a or apostates if we dared question their stultifying and suffocating “interpretations” of Islam. To realize that disagreeing with them was not a rejection of the Qur’an and Sunnah, as they claimed it was, but a reclaiming of our own religion. To not deny, for once, that the perpetrators of these acts were, in fact, Arabs and Muslims. For once, not to descend into ridiculous conspiracy theories (usually involving Jews), but to say, “My God… these were our people.”

No, we were not guilty for what those 19 men did… or the guys in the London bombings, or the guys in the Madrid bombings, or the guys in the Bali bombings or… or… or. We did not carry out those acts ourselves. We would never, ever do such a thing. But what we have done is allow extremists to flourish prior to 9/11, and to allow their rhetoric to remain largely unchallenged after 9/11 (rather than alienating those Muslims, who are largely liberal, who do challenge it). All because we fear that we will not be “true Muslims” if we challenge and put an end to it.

I’m still waiting, leaders. I’m still waiting for you to say, “Don’t worry, we’re going to do something.”

(Photo: Jeff Kubina via flickr under a Creative Commons license)

This is a remarkable screed.

The author's anecdotal observations and whiplashing of Muslims is not supported by the facts on the ground - a book based on the largest survey of Muslims ever done, called "Who Speaks for Islam?" dismantles the neoconservative presumption that Muslims acquiesce or silently support terrorism.

The author appears to presume - like the neoconservative pundits - that Sept. 11 happened in an historical vacuum, floating above time and space.

Unfortunately, Sept. 11 was one drop of terror in an ocean of terror - an ocean which includes the much, much larger casualties inflicted in two raging wars (Afghanistan, Iraq), an illegal occupation (Palestine), and punishing assault (Lebanon).

Curiously the author neglects to mention these concrete realities. In overlooking the state terrorism - and, an honest observer must say, the solid support this state terrorism has received among many Americans - the author appears to encourage the view that Muslim life carries little weight and that the only crime in the universe to worth looking at is September 11th.

What about the dozens of September 11ths Muslims have endured? We know of the planes slammed into buildings. What about the planes that have bombed thousands of buildings, weddings, orphanages, villages?

The author excoriates Muslims for what he presumes is an insufficient denunciation of Islamist terror, while remaining eerily silent about state terror that has snuffed out the lives of almost one million Muslims [Lancet Study estimates] in the past seven years, and equally silent about the millions of conservative Americans who happily cheerlead these illegal, immoral wars opposed by the rest of the world.

Context is everything. A one-sided assault, replete with snide remarks about Muslims being unable to keep their bathrooms clean and Saudi petro-dollars, strikes me as a sad reflection of the state of some Muslims who appear to be aching for American "mainstream" approval.

Yes, some Muslim countries have been invaded, destroyed, subjected to apartheid, mass exodus - but the worst thing to see is the colonization of the Muslim mind.

M. Junaid Levesque-Alam

And I feel compelled to respond specifically to this line:

"Most of us don’t dare say, “Let’s roll” when it comes to confronting the extremism of our own people."

Actually, Americans are "our own people." We live here. We were raised here. We were born here. And it is the "extremism" of the American government that has - according to respected international human rights and health agencies - caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims and the dislocation of millions more.

It is, again, sad to see some Muslims so deeply internalize the hate and rhetoric of Islamophobes that they subconsciously - or openly - feel guilt and responsibility for individual terrorists we neither appointed nor elected in any way. At the same time, these same Muslims have not one unkind word to say about Americans who did vote for and elect leaders who openly campaigned on a platform of bombing and torturing Muslims.

This mythical notion of a silent majority of Muslims who secretly support terror is highly disingenuous. There was enormous sympathy for America post-Sept. 11th.

The problem is that when America "rolled" to respond to this terrorism, it was not through building infrastructure, schools, universities, and civil society in the Muslim world, combined with some targeted operation against terrorists.

Instead, after Afghanistan was cruise-missiled and cluster-bombed, America submersed itself in a hate campaign in which one dead Muslim was considered as good as another. And so the Iraq war was launched, with all its plainly obvious disastrous consequences. The pretexts for war were transparent lies, but what mattered is that Iraq was an easy target to beat up on for "revenge", no matter how wildly disproportionate, for a crime not even committed by any Iraqis.

If there is a tiny minority of Muslims here who support Islamist terrorism, shame on them. But let us not strike poses in order to be patted on the head: there are much larger percentages of citizens in America and Israel who have gladly supported state terrorism and have no introspection or moral pangs about the huge "collateral damage" inflicted.

How much more loudly can you expect Muslims anywhere to "denounce" Islamist terror, the terror of individuals, while entire Muslim populations face organized state terror? It is simply disingenuous: resistance, including individual terrorism, can only be stopped when the principal aggressor, the more powerful side, stops terrorizing the weaker one.

M. Junaid Levesque-Alam

Let's face it, the espionage agencies of the US Gov't knew about the planning and logistics of 9/11. They could have stopped this from happening, but chose to act as if "caught by surprise". The author should be feeling sorry for the poor people in the Muslim World who have since had to suffer from death and injury from the resulting wars and occupations. They are the real victims here, most of them don't have life insurances and government pay-outs to compensate them for their losses. They have nothing. I am sure families of the people who died in 9/11 received quite a bit of compensation, despite most of them being well-off enough to afford flying on airplanes. Duh.

Well, Umm Zaid, there were those of us who were in the military before and after 9-11. The hostility and total absence of recognition for our service puts a chill on us. And our service was both to our country and by fulfilling the Quranic order to fight against agression (especially the khawarij as mentioned in the hadith). I had no regrets about serving in Afghanistan because it was the right thing to overthrow the Taliban. But, Iraq was intolerable, mostly because it was so supremely botched, whether purposefully or more likely out of arrogance and incompetence.

Its a difficult job to have, especially if, like me, we do it for reasons above the money, such as actually (gulp) making war on agressors like the 1995 and 1999 wars against Serbia.

People who have said "lets role" and then actually did it are looked upon with suspicion by other Americans and as traitors by other hypocritical Muslims. Who would want that? If you want to see it change, convince your local mosque to have a cook-out for the 4th of July or clean up a veterans cemetary on Veterans' Day.

Junaid, the Lancet study is quoted at 600,000 Iraqis of which it concluded 400,000 were murdred by *other* Muslims. this inconvenient truth is always overlooked by Muslim apologists / "anti-this or that when it suits them" crowd.

Under the Geneva Conventions, the occupying power is responsible for the administration of the occupied. The total absence of post-war planning and bone-headed decisions like purging the Ba'ath carte blanche set the civil war into motion.

If I set you on fire, I am guilty. If I see you and a bitter rival are separated by a gate, open that gate, and give you both flamethrowers, am I less guilty?

And the Lancet study does not take into account the preceding years in between Gulf War I and II, during which, UNICEF concluded, 300,000 to 600,000 "excess deaths" of Iraqi children occurred as a direct result of U.S.-led sanctions.

I admire some U.S. officials who honestly admitted that the Gulf War I war planners knew they were killing civilians and that these Muslim civilians deserved to die:

"People say, “You didn’t recognize that it was going to have an effect on water or sewage.” Well, what were we trying to do with sanctions — help out the Iraqi people? No. What we were doing with the attacks on infrastructure was to accelerate the effect of the sanctions." [Pentagon official]

"Among the justifications offered now, particularly by the Air Force in recent briefings, is that Iraqi civilians were not blameless for Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. “The definition of innocents gets to be a little bit unclear,” said a senior Air Force officer, noting that many Iraqis supported the invasion of Kuwait. “They do live there, and ultimately the people have some control over what goes on in their country.” [another Pentagon official]

Source: Washington Post, June 23, 1991.

Well, I don't support those comments of the alleged officers quoted by you. The inter-Gulf War period dragged on too long and there was no self-interest in bringing it to an end. It simply should not have occured, whether in the interests of humanity or the national interests of the US (which is the only thing that should matter to a government: the interests of its own citizens, not the world). For an officer to say the Iraqi people were at all respsonsible for thier government assumes it was a democracy in which the wishes of the Iraqi people mattered, which any 5th grader would know was false.

I found Umm Zaid's lengthy remarks to be much-needed and right on the mark. M. Junaid Levesque-Alam's frustrated thoughts stand in stark contrast to this. As a Muslim who has spent over sixteen years living amongst Muslims, including time in the Middle East, I have to agree with the, no doubt painful, observations of Umm Zaid--who is an American who embraced Islam over fifteen years ago and currently lives in the Middle East. In my view, it's these years of combined first-hand and in-the-trenches experience that tell me what the "facts on the ground" are, in spite of the wishful thinking of some Muslim Uncle Toms.

In regards to "the largest survey of Muslims ever done"...well that only confirms the observation that far too many Muslims have the tendency to say the right thing when asked, especially when it comes to the topic of terrorism, extremism and love for America. I give about as much credence to such surveys as I would a survey in which the large majority of Germans in the Third Reich claimed that they did not know anything about the death camps. Although this might surprise Mr. Alam, human beings have a strong tendency to tell others what they want to hear...especially if they're part of a beleaguered minority that suffers from a nearly ubiquitous victim mentality.

From I've seen over the years, and I have a strong feeling that Umm zaid would agree, is that what is preached from the minbar or expressed in private conversations often contradicts the friendly-faced sentiments that are publicly expressed--thus the charge of duplicitousness is well-earned. This is not to say that this is done everywhere, all the time and by all Muslims, but its presence is far too common. And, as Muslims, our response to this should be? Alam seems to think that we'll clean up our own house by pointing out the misdeeds of the American and Israeli governments...all the while turning a blind-eye to our own in-house problems. I can feel Umm Zaid's frustrations already!

Sadly, Alam's remarks serve as a glaring confirmation that many Muslims are morally and ethically challenged these days. Not only does he seem to be unaware of the maxim that "two wrongs do not make a right," but he tries to undermine constructive criticism by pointing to the crimes of others. That realized, the charge that Umm Zaid appeared "to presume" some things is clearly misguided. Rather, Alam makes it abundantly clear that he just wishes she had written a ruthless tirade directed at American and Israeli wrongdoings instead of those of some Muslims. Unfortunately for him, Umm Zaid courageously chose to write on another topic...one that Alam cowered from without even looking it in the eyes. Please realize, that if that was the widespread reaction of Muslims whenever constructive criticism was offered which pointed out painful realities within our communities, well it might drive a disheartened Muslimah to write an article with a cynical title like...Don’t worry, we’re going to do something. M. Junaid Levesque-Alam....you really missed the boat on this one, bro!

Let's just be thankful that not all Muslims are so allergic to hearing sincere advice meant to help us start getting our house in order. It is indeed rather sad that some Muslims will treat any exposé of some of the darker realities of the Muslim community, done in the spirit of getting the corrective Muslim forces rolling within our own house, as a scramble for "American 'mainstream' approval." Such a comment not only proves to me that M. Junaid Levesque-Alam doesn't know Saraji Umm Zaid, but it also shows that he really doesn't understand the realities of extremism in the Muslim World and in the communities here in America. He just seems to be a one-issue type of guy with a real chip on his shoulder, which explains why he wrongly employs certain "facts".

I'm sure that this J'accuse! by Umm Zaid, and other articles like it, cause untold frustration to many linguini-spined Muslim liberals who have spent years trying to convince Americans that Islam abhors violence and that jihad is "only in the heart," but such embarrassments are simply the price of being intellectually dishonest. Indeed, only someone living in a bubble of fantasy, not actively involved in a real Muslim community and who equates polls with "facts on the ground" could disagree with what Umm Zaid said about the general and too-often-heard (private) opinions of Muslims. Indeed, her insightful reality check was very much in order. If it can be faulted for anything, it's that it was long overdue.

In conclusion, most of the comments so far only prove the urgency of Umm Zaid's message to the Ummah...but don't worry, we’re going to do something. And by that, I don't mean we're going to point our fingers at someone else.

If there was ever praise that damns, Mr. Squires' remarks certainly qualify.

In defending the author with neoconservative flair, he dismisses the largest and most comprehensive survey of Muslims ever undertaken ["What do a billion Muslims really think?"], which shows Muslims and Westerners share many values and that the overwhelming majority of Muslims do not support killing innocent people.

How does he accomplish this impressive demolition job against this painstaking work undertaken by the most experienced [Gallup] pollsters? By comparing Muslims to Nazis and Islamic societies to the Third Reich.

Could Irshad Manji have outdone this performance?

When pesky and stubborn facts are not on your side, titillating and emotionally-loaded catchphrases and codewords apparently suffice.

Mr. Squires also invokes the maxim that "two wrongs do not make a right." The point here is unclear: can he point to any instance where anyone here has said that Sept. 11th was at all justified? Certainly not: but insinuating this idea passes as honest debate for Mr. Squires.

He ignores what was actually said: that you cannot ask Muslims to behave like animals at the circus, jumping through hoops time and again to "condemn terrorism," when all the while, the U.S. and Israel are engaged in massive state terrorism that - irrefutably - has taken many times more innocent lives. That would be like asking an African-American to repeatedly condemn racist remarks by an individual black person here or there while suffering under the systemic racism of segregation.

Every major mainstream American Muslim organization has already condemned Sept. 11th. But this is not enough for the author or Mr. Squires, who construct a strawman argument that most American Muslims are apparently secretly fist-bumping each other, seven years later, in support of Sept. 11th. This false construct, drawn from thin air, is then used to bash Muslims.

Again, one must point out the overriding problem: Mr. Squires and the author have internalized the hatred directed at Islam and Muslims. They feel "responsibility" and "guilt" for Islamist terrorism, since, as the media has drilled into American skulls, these terrorists "represent" Islam.

They carefully avoid anything resembling sociological, political, or historical analysis: who helped fund and train these terrorists?; what terrorism was directed at Islamic societies before and after Sept. 11th?; who destroyed and defeated secular movements in Muslim countries in the name of the Cold War before Islamic extremism gained popularity?

These questions concern neither of the two. Answering them would require an unpleasant excursion into facts, evidence, history, and analysis.

This is not profitable or satisfying: it feels much better to lecture other Muslims about how wicked and backward they are from the Orientalist perch.

None of this is to say Muslim societies do not face internal problems: clearly, they do. Rather, it is to say that these problems should not be wielded like a club to beat up Muslims when they are already under attack from torture, extraordinary rendition, apartheid, and occupation.

No society can advance or progress under massive military attack. Progress requires breathing space. As American Muslims, we are uniquely situated to call for peaceful solutions and demand an end to continued military depredations. That is the only way to deprive Islamist terrorists of their only hand in the deck.

Some American Muslims refuse to recognize this. They want to please the masters. They have forgotten about the trials and travails faced by those left behind, those who could not or did not make the American journey, and therefore find it easy and satisfying to self-righteously heap one-sided criticism on Muslims without any regard to circumstance or context.

Finally, Mr. Squire's accusation that I have an "allergic" reaction to what he sanguinely describes as "constructive" criticism is far off the mark.

My blog, Crossingthecrescent.com, features three posts in the past three weeks that are critical of Muslim failings.

When I recently interviewed leading Jewish scholar Norman Finkelestein (to be published soon), among my first two questions were: why is Fatah so incompetent and why are the Arab regimes in paralysis? I also asked what Muslims can do to reach out to progressive Jews, which I happen to know a thing or two about from personal experience.

So this idea of being "allergic" to criticism is a red herring. What is at issue here is the *framework* in which Muslim shortcomings are to be understood.

Communities under attack do not adopt the values their attackers claim to represent. Instead, a negative association forms: "Why are these people who claim to loving of tolerance, democracy, equal rights, bombing my village, my city, my country?"

As leading American foreign policy ex-officials have noted, it is terror that breeds terror. (Michael Scheuer, Chalmers Johnson, Ray McGovern, Zbigniew Brzezinski). Former Shin Bet officials have said much the same.

So there is nothing "constructive" in excoriating Muslims from a perch: this is what Fox News already does every day and it has helped nobody except the racists feel more secure in their hatred of Islam.

The best way to stop Islamist terror is to stop the Western terror that spawns and fuels and feeds into it. Of course, if one is living in a largely Muslim society, any efforts toward justice - internal or external - should be welcome. But that is hardly the same thing as a public, one-sided attack that offers no specific solutions whatsoever, on a website mainly catering to Western Muslims.

M. Junaid Levesque-Alam

I would like to add one comment here, although a lot has been said. But Americans, and the west in general, are largely completely ignorant of the history of their country's activities in the Middle East and in Iran over the last century and a half. So they are easily snowed into believing any attacks against them are out of the blue as it were and unprovoked. What is fascinating in this call for Muslims to stand up and resist extremism, with which I wholly agree, there is no equally loud call for Americans to stand up and come up to speed about the equally monstrous events that have lead up to it. As the original poster said, we're not PERSONALLY responsible for this, that, or the other thing, but collectively, we are. It's too easy to slough off responsibility like a soiled coat and scream innocent. Americans claim (and I am an American) that our government is our elected official that does our bidding. People around the world believe that. Therefore it follows that the policies of the west and the US of the last 100 years have been the will of the American people. The American people need to wake up and understand their own history. But increasingly the trend seems to be falling deeper and deeper into a narcotized stupor. I think the recent 3-ring circus of popularity that the newest vice presidential candidate is enjoying should serve as an indicator (warning) of how globally savvy and historically aware the American people have truly become. Yes, America’s day as the hip world leader on the cutting edge is over. But the rabid dog can still do a lot of damage before it is finally taken down or wanders off to rot.

>If there is a tiny minority of Muslims here who support Islamist terrorism, shame on them. But let us not strike poses in order to be patted on the head: there are much larger percentages of citizens in America and Israel who have gladly supported state terrorism and have no introspection or moral pangs about the huge "collateral damage" inflicted.<

Very true.

>Junaid, the Lancet study is quoted at 600,000 Iraqis of which it concluded 400,000 were murdred by *other* Muslims. this inconvenient truth is always overlooked by Muslim apologists / "anti-this or that when it suits them" crowd.<

Rubbish, I read the Lancet report when it came out. What you neglected to mention was that these "other" Muslims were armed, trained, organized and unleashed on the Iraq people by the occupying power, the US.
Iraqi death squads were trained and armed by the US in their "counter insurgency" campaign to both punish the Iraqi people for supporting the Resistance and balkanizing the country into 3 zones, Sunni, Shia and Kurdish. This was also done in the 1980s when the US was arming and training right wing paramilitary militias/death squads in South America. Classic divide and conquer strategy.

"What is fascinating in this call for Muslims to stand up and resist extremism, with which I wholly agree, there is no equally loud call for Americans to stand up and come up to speed about the equally monstrous events that have lead up to it."

Indeed. This is because the author deliberately glosses over the matter with dismissive rhetoric found in GOP circles. Do Muslims have grievances over American foreign policy, and its amply-documented civilian casualties? No: this is dismissed by the author as "anti-American" and "hate-speech" by irate imams who detest the country.

But what of the outrage and grievances of non-Muslim Americans, over the much smaller American casualties? This, apparently, is not anti-Muslim or hate speech: this is fair because we Muslims are backward and "duplicitous" and "indirectly" guilty.

There can be no moral equivalence between Western terror and Islamist terror: full stop. Unless you internalize the Fox News philosophy that Muslim lives are virtually worthless, you must adhere to the principle that all of us are equal.

Therefore, why should we accept verbal assaults and inquisitions? Do those who support terrorism that produced several hundred thousand casualties (and millions of injured and millions displaced) hold the right to interrogate others for not condemning with "enough" vigor the terrorism that produced 2,700 casualties?

No. This is disingenuous. When you have such a vast gap in harm inflicted, this "question" is nothing but a decoy, a distraction, a way to blame the victims and ignore cause and effect. It's a case of glass houses.

I am sure there were many problems with African societies during colonization and slavery; or American Indians during ethnic cleansing and extermination; or Vietnamese; or European Jews. But what honest person would pretend that these flaws "caused" or somehow "justified" the injustice these groups faced or made them "collectively responsible?" Every honest student of history understands that these flaws were blown out of proportion so that the oppressors could rationalize their crimes in their own minds.

M. Junaid Levesque-Alam

>> The bitter, bitter truth is that Muslims have largely been apathetic and ineffective against the creeping tide of Islamic extremism and terrorism — despite the fact that most victims of said violence and extremism are fellow Muslims. (Violence in Sudan, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, Iraq-Iran, Afghanistan etc self-inflicted with weapons from the west)
>> “They’re a minority!” we crow as women are gunned down in the streets of Iraq for not being “properly covered.”
>> I met a Muslim a few years ago who referred to Osama as “sheikh.”
>> Everything wrong with us, from Osama to the dudes who ban women at the masjid, is the fault of the Jews, the West, capitalism, the Sufis, the Shi’a, and anything else under the sun. It is never the fault of Muslims.
>> We have to firmly and without any reservations reject the rhetoric of extremism and invalidate its sources.
>> We said and say nothing about the treatment of Muslim women in our communities in the land of the free.
>> Not only does he seem to be unaware of the maxim that "two wrongs do not make a right," but he tries to undermine constructive criticism by pointing to the crimes of others.
>> we’re going to do something. And by that, I don't mean we're going to point our fingers at someone else.

I agree wholeheartedly. I think the political problems and legal-defences aside, I see that this piece is primarily about constructive self-criticism! i.e Facing our own self-limiting beliefs about victimhood... and more importantly our notions of moral superiority. All of which are independent of any outside interference.

My experiences from an early age about muslim institution and muslim establishment, is that we are to hate non-muslims, we are not to extend any goodwill to any of them, we are to remember that they are ignorant, we are to thank Allah for making us better than them, we are to aspire to undermine their faith, we are to treat our own brothers and sisters with favouritism over them. We are taught that they are the people defeated at Badr and the Trench. We are taught their only true place of stature is to humble themselves in Islam. We are taught that democracy and western legal institution are to be undermined. We are taught that our system of thoughts and ideologies are perfect and don't work because of Jews and Christians plotting against us. We are taught that Muslims have mastered all necessary western science. Human rights are limiting western notions and not to be valued. Sport is unhealthy (except archery, wrestling or some other combat sport), television is haraam, and literature is distraction. We must educate ourselves to dominate others. All taught in one mish mash bundle, as a child, by very ordinary moulanas with very solid Islamic roots.

It was my parents, an honest reading of the Quraan and Sunnah, and self reflection that have been my better guide. And the better guide to my friends and family too. I don't see as being morally superior (even if legally in the right), because what I see in our practice of Deen is that we differ in no way from the western powers accept in our ability to inflict damage as well as effectively as they can. In fact, we are foolishly taught that that is what we need to Master and not the knowledge that they have to offer.

But I want to echoe that last sentiment as well. We cannot hope that the establishment will change until we change. Allah will not change a status of a people until they change themselves and that applies double to us. We must educate our children in the pacifism or our Messenger, his non-sexism, his anti-racism, his respect for culture,learning and science; his utter scrupulousness when faced with war, his respect for building institution and fostering dialogue and ecnouraging construtive action over above the rhetoric. And WE HAVE TO BE THAT POSITIVE EXAMPLE too. We cannot wait for the post-colonial pathos to stir itself, we must stir it by changing our own status. We cannot keep on arguing the failure of the west, we need to build the success of the Ummah. We know how. Lets not let those negative voices get the upper hand again.

There are DVDs being bundled and mailed out inside newspapers in "swing states" in the U.S. with the movie "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West" which you can watch online here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMLJJEDDDGc

the implication being that ALL Muslims are potential terrorists and that Muslims sympathize with terrorism done in the name of Islam, hence Muslims and Islam are at war with America.

The garbage that this individual has written in this piece above would fit perfectly into this narrative. She should inquire as to whether she can be featured in a sequel.

regrds,
Kw

>The best way to stop Islamist terror is to stop the Western terror >that spawns and fuels and feeds into it. Of course, if one is living >in a largely Muslim society, any efforts toward justice - internal or >external - should be welcome. But that is hardly the same thing as a >public, one-sided attack that offers no specific solutions whatsoever, >on a website mainly catering to Western Muslims.

Solid observation. Bill Maher said exactly the same thing a few days ago while interviewed on MSNBC.

Kw

There are DVDs being bundled and mailed out inside newspapers in "swing states" in the U.S. with the movie "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West" which you can watch online here:>>>

I have started to hear from people who are getting it unsolicited in the mail, not as part of a newspaper as well. Some households are getting two and three, seemingly for each registered voter. What would be the response of Ku Klux Klan literature was mailed out to voter's homes? I should think a class action could be brought against something like this.

>I have started to hear from people who are getting it unsolicited in the mail, not as part of a newspaper as well. Some households are getting two and three, seemingly for each registered voter. What would be the response of Ku Klux Klan literature was mailed out to voter's homes? I should think a class action could be brought against something like this.<

The best course of action of action is pro-activism. I don't believe propaganda can be neutralized without taking a closer look at the individuals disseminating it.
Checkout Judeofascist Awareness Week(and Shabbos Goy Awareness Week) :

http://drmaxtor.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html

As for "Obsession," this brother has a nice refutation :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ullnmKAkkzA

At least the title is amusing. Last time I checked there are no "radical Islamic" tanks or soldiers or checkpoints or detention centers outside any American residence. But for obsessed and paranoid people this is no barrier to spreading fear and hate about impending hordes of dark-skinned invaders.

Anyone remember how the Sandinistas in Nicaragua were vilified as being "two days' march away from invading Texas?" That was Reagan.

I am convinced that American conservatives have the best deal on earth. They titillate themselves with hysterical nonsense from the comfort of their recliner sofas and LCD computer screens, playing the victim card, and they fulminate for wars that are outsourced to a fraction of the population, with no sacrifice on their part.

And of course all this hate and bigotry is spread under the "noble" banner of free speech, but do we have equal access to this free speech? Only if you believe that a shopkeeper and Donald Trump have equal access to the "free" market.

M. Junaid Levesque-Alam

>> The garbage that this individual has written in this piece above would fit perfectly into this narrative. She should inquire as to whether she can be featured in a sequel.


Actually, that assertion is utter rubbish! To be against the war and to be critical of Muslims are mutually exclusive ideas. You and I and most of the people who post here have at some point or the other, come across perfectly ordinary Muslims who accept that the socio-political reality is that Muslims are entitled to more rights and more respect than non-Muslims and dissidents. That is what she is dealing with. She is talking directly to those fervent "Kuffaar-system" and criticism that gets shouted out as some implicit Muslim pledge of allegiance.

>> And of course all this hate and bigotry is spread under the "noble" banner of free speech, but do we have equal access to this free speech?

Access? No. Capacity to create our own. Yes. The criticism is about how what speech is being exercised within the Muslim community, our self-censorship, and the links to our own violent ideologues. Very few neo-cons have picked up a gun and attacked their adversaries, but that doesn't imply that they don't subscribe to a violent ideology. Similar practice is actually rife in our communities. And they pre-date 9//11. And we need to deal with it, to at least assert our own credibility if nothing else.