Growing up as an American Shiite Muslim in the United States, the annual recounting of the killing of Imam Husayn, the third of 12 Shiite Imams to succeed the Prophet Muhammad, had a profound effect on my socialization. What struck me then - and even more now after the Al-Askari Mosque bomb blast - was in learning that Imam Husayn was killed by a purported Muslim, the Umayyad caliph Yazid.

The popular repeated notion in recent years that Islam has been "hijacked" is a foreign construct. As a child, the hijacking of Islam was recounted each year with Imam Husayn's saga. The story engrained in me the notion that the enemy within myself and within my community is far more erosive, far more threatening than any external, non-Muslim threat.

The bombing of the Al-Askari Mosque was not an attack on Shiites, but on the ethos of Shiism itself. While the majority of Sunnis abhor last week's attack, there is a small minority within the Sunni community that is becoming increasingly more violent and more determined to eliminate Shiites (and Shiism) from any and all lands. The attack in Samarra has resulted in gruesome and indiscriminate Shiite relataliation on Sunni innocents and Sunni places of worship. This must be equally condemned and deplored.

This tide of abuse against Shiites is not limited to Muslim countries. Whereas violence against Shiites manifests itself in the form of targeted killings in Pakistan and in Iraq, violence against Shiites in the U.S. manifests itself in the form of hate speech.

On February 5, 2006, Shiites of New York City marked the martyrdom of Imam Husayn with a procession through the Upper East Side of Manhattan. It is a tradition that has occurred for many years without nary of a conflict.

This year a group calling itself the Islamic Thinkers Society staged a protest outside the procession to "expose Shiism and the filth they stand for" and to "show that these Shiite heretics do not represent Islam." Many of those present complained of being verbally threatened and the NYPD had to intervene to provide safety to the Shiite mourners.

Five years ago, acts like the protest in New York City were unheard of. Although a rift has always existed between Sunnis and Shiites in the United States, it never resulted in a confrontation against Shiites as we saw in New York.

Sadly, much of this hate speech has trickled down to college campuses where Muslim students are influenced by online learning academies like SunniPath that consider Shiites heretical people to be avoided. With such ideas being peddled, what options do Shiites have to dialogue with Sunnis?

In a survey The Qunoot Foundation conducted in 2004, about the socio-political perceptions of American Shiite Muslims, we found that most respondents did not report Shiite-Sunni relations as improving or becoming more friendly. Equally as troubling, Shiites were far less likely to report hate crimes to national, often Sunni-majority Muslim organizations.

Of course, these Muslim organizations will boast that they condemned the attacks. But it is all too easy to create a paper dragon and then slay it valiantly for the media's sake.

Indeed the majority of Sunnis denounce religious extremism or sectarian hate speech. But mainstream Muslim groups - the Muslim Public Affairs Council excluded - have failed to provide a space within their organizations to discuss intra-Muslim discrimination in the U.S. They have instead provided forums for vacuous dialogue in which the Sunni-Shiite problem is presented as a global sectarian problem where all parties deserve equal blame.

It is not. It is a problem of an unchecked (and thankfully still minority) Sunni bigotry that is festering in Muslim societies and in some parts of the West. Muslims owe it to themselves to admit that basic and crucial fact.

Stop pretending like it is just an assault on Shiites. The violence is going both ways in Iraq. Shiites murdered hundreds of Sunnis in Baghdad over the last few days. I read stuff like this from Zeyad's blog (he lives in a Sunni neighborhood in Baghdad) about armed Shiite killing squads going through his neighborhood and scoff at this post:

"Fierce streetfighting at my doorstep for the last 3 hours. Rumor in the neighbourhood is that men in black are trying to enter the area. Some armed kids defending the local mosque three blocks away are splattering bullets at everything that moves, and someone in the street was shouting for people to prepare for defending themselves."

"News are conflicting. Some say the local National Guard unit (its commander is from our own area) helped repel the assailants. Others say the neighbourhood watch teams clashed with an armed group in several unmarked vehicles.

The same situation occured in both Adhamiya and Al-Khadhraa'. In Adhamiya, armed groups in black crossed the river in boats from neighbouring Kadhimiya and took over the Nu'man hospital.

In Khadhraa', a combined force of Interior ministry forces and men dressed in black are surrounding 2 mosques with several families inside, threatening to burn them down on the occupants. Baghdad TV (the Islamic party's channel) is updating on the situation through telephone calls from inside the mosque. The families are crying for outside assistance.

Other bits from here and there:
An armed group in 10 vehicles with no number plates entered the Al-Iskan Al-Sha'bi district in Dora, and attempted to enter mosque, but was turned back by the residents. Eyewitnesses claim that as many as 40 bodies and 5 burnt vehicles are still in the area. 3 attackers were also killed in Dora when they attempted to enter the Al-Kubaisi mosque.

Another group dressed in black in one Daewoo and two Opel vehicles passed the Interior ministry forces' checkpoint at Abu Dshir square, south of Dora, with no resistance and entered the Yassin mosque with explosives in tin containers. The keeper was killed and the mosque blown up.

a Shi'ite armed group carried Sheikh Ghazi Al-Zoba'i in a pickup truck around Sadr city, shouting that they have a Wahhabi terrorist with them, before he was lynched on the streets by the angry mob."

I agree and disagree...

I agree that there is a minority of sunni muslims who have attacked minority islamic sects, and continue to do so today. A lot of times, they justify these attacks through lies and distortions of what those sects believe. Something needs to be done to unite muslim brothers who fundamentally have the same beliefs, and are usually divided on politics and historical technicalities that really don't matter.

However, I disagree with the Iraq example. A common tragedy in history is that majorities have opressed minorities, and in Iraq, sunnis are the minorities. This is irrelevant and doesn't justify anything, but what I'm trying to point out is that a civil war in Iraq is not a "global assault on shiism". The bombing in Samara was a criminal act by actual terrorists who have pretty much no global support.

Also, this is a civil strife, not a war, since the leadership of both parties have been opposed to such acts, and only foolish people have been participating.

As much of a criminal Sadam was, I don't think such a criminal act would have happened under him. Though we Shia and Sunni may have issues, this civil strife is a result of the failure of the United States foreign policy. They are failing to deliver on there promises. This is why we muslims must unite in a peaceful way and take things in to our own hands.

May Allah Guide us all

thanks for the comments above. please note that the article was changed slightly to reflect the comments above.

I agree that the Shia retaliation is deplorable and should be condemned. As for criminal acts not happening under Sadaam, any Iraqi Shia can speak to abundant abuses and attacks on shrines during his time. of course the scale is not the same.

as for the US role, indeed the US has failed in many many ways, including failing to provide security. but I think its imp that Muslims acknowledge that for many of the global jihadi groups, they regard Shias with almost equal hatred as they do Jews. One only has to read their writings (Zarqawi or Jhangiv in Pak) to attest to this.

Salams,
Anyone who claims they'll "expose the Shias and the filth they stand for" (Nauzubillah,astagfirullah!), is probably a Wahhabi extremist themselves, of the likes of Bin Ladin and al-Zarqawi. I have read the transcription of a letter from al-Zarqawi from a BBC website concerning Iraq, and it's funny that almost everything he (or whomever writes in his name), says about Shias can be applied to the Wahhabi cult. (I realize there are those of the "neo-salafi" school who are more moderate, and who do not advocate violence or brand other Muslims with whom they disagree as "kafir", but OBL and Z. seem to be "hardcore".) Cf. Huseyin Hilmi Isik's "Endless Bliss", (unfortunately, he also seems to consider Shias to be heretical, but nobody's perfect.) where he warns us about the Wahhabis' intolerance and anti-spiritual bias, and that they required British support against the Ottoman Empire in WWI, not to mention the later discovery of oil in the Arabian Peninsula. Of course, the U.S. funded the various "jihadi" groups back in the 1980's against Soviet aggression in Afghanistan.

I draw the line at considering the Wahhabis to be "Sunni", the way some of the papers seem to do. Mr. Isik himself referred to them in E.B. as "la-mazhabi", since they didn't follow any of the four Sunni schools, though some of them claim to follow ibn Hanbal.

Everybody has their "extremist" contingent, whether they claim to be Sunni, Shia, or something else. I won't even speak on Iraq at this time, since I don't know what goes on there, except for what I've heard. Only Allah knows.

There is much that should be done for shi'a-sunni dialogue, but this is not a sectarian issue. This was an attempt to divide the Muslims of Iraq, an attack on a place of worship. Regardless of our position regarding shrines, the Imams themselves are respected by both Sunnis and Shi'as. The NY group taking out a counter Shi'a rally were provocative and wrong. However, Muslims have a right, and I'd say a duty to study and logically reflect on what the religious truth is. I'd like to keep my freedom to differ with dogmatic Shi'as, Sufis, and Wahhabis. However, they are my brothers and sisters in Islam if they profess shahada, and our co-citizens regardless of faith. So a physical attack on any one is an attack on all of us. Muslim first, and Muslim last (insha'Allah), not Sunni or Shi'a.

This is a major problem with islamic fundamentalists - they revolve around hating heretics and non-adherants of their religious beliefs. Now the Sunnis and Shiites are feeling what it's like to suffer acts of violence merely for your religious beliefs. Religous intolerance and bigotry are terrible things. But they are basic tenets of most islamic fundamentalists' beliefs.

These people take the passages from the Koran literally when Muhammad (PBUH) talks about having to conquer the heretics, infidels, and non-believers and make them believe are kill them.

Maybe there is an upside to the sunni-shiite violence - if it gets bad it will turn many Muslims off to islamic fundamentalism. Western religious tolerance/plurality/liberalism grew out of the gruesome protestant-catholic wars of the 16th and 17th centuries (100 years' war, etc.).

Muslims should focus on the peaceful teachings of Muhammad (PBUH) and their religion. It shouldn't matter what other people believe, your only concern should be your own faith and not others.

"So a physical attack on any one is an attack on all of us. Muslim first, and Muslim last (insha'Allah), not Sunni or Shi'a." - hb

That is exactly the wrong mindset. The violence isn't wrong because it is against your own Muslim brothers, it's wrong because it's perpetrated against people because they have different religious beliefs. Whether or not they are muslim should not matter. If they were christian, jew, hindu, buddhist, satanist, it would still be equally wrong.

To ClassicLiberal :

I did not say that it would be less wrong if it were directed against Christians or anyone else. Of course it would be equally wrong.

I was reacting to the article and the relevant scenario. This act of carnage was used to divide the Muslims of Iraq. It is against this idea that I was voicing my opinion. As a Muslim, I have a right to try to safeguard my identity, which is Muslim and not Shi'a or Sunni, or Wahhabi or Sufi. I repeat, no one is calling for violence against any creed here. It would be nice if you appreciate the difference.

hb, well, to paraphrase another article on this website, "your Muslim identity stops at my Muslim nose". Take it for what you will...

Classical Liberal; Don't you get it dummy???

All Muslims are fundamentalists. By definition:
fundamentalism n. strict adherence to traditional religious beliefs or doctrines. (fundamentalist n. & adj.)

So Muslims by definition are fundamentalists. You really do believe all the bllsht they pump out don't you????

"These people take the passages from the Koran literally" YES YES YES We people do take the word of God literally. We are not going to let go of our beliefs as quickly as the stupid white northern tribes did. Enjoy your faux-pagan-Christianity aka Cult of St Pauls..... True Judaism and Christianity is all but totally corrupted and lost to the masses.

"Maybe there is an upside to the sunni-shiite violence " What idiocy! When the mosque in Samarra went off we know for a fact that:
(1) The Iraqi Defence Forces disappeared from guarding the mosque just minutes and hours before the blast went off.
(2) Allied Forces have been proven to be dressing as Arabs, creating and setting off car bombs and roadside incendiary devices. Arrested and rescued from jail in a 'cowboy' style breakout.
(3) The Allied Forces need a reason to leave the country. As we have seen in India, Africa and many other places; they will only leave once the brothers are killing each other in civil war on the streets.

OmarG and Classical: To be honest I couldnt care less what you think as you are not going to believe any truth anytime soon.

>>To be honest I couldnt care less what you think as you are not going to believe any truth anytime soon.

Same here, bud. Did you miss the part about "my Muslim nose"? hint, hint... not all Muslims will believe you when you say that others won't believe the "truth". Do tell, what truth is it that you have? Surely, you won't tell me that it is *YOU* who knows the true meaning of the Message, will you? But, I suppose as Imam Abu Laith says, you will see Muslims who disagree with you as the enemy. The world wonders.

OmarG, how is my Muslim identity threatening your Muslim nose? I am saying that the bombing of the Askari complex was wrong and criminal. It was criminal because it was violence targetted at a civilian institution and a religious place. It would be equally wrong if it were a church or a synagogue.

I am also saying that it hurts me more because it seeks to sow discord among people following different schools of Islam. It seeks to destroy what is common and burn the bridges of faith, language, nation, and families that Sunni and Shia Iraqis share. So I want to say loud and clear that for these times I am not Shia or Sunni or anything else, but Muslim. What is it about it that you feel is wrong here? I know we differ on some political issues, but I respect you as a Muslim perspective from a different but equally important cultural background, i.e. Italian American. So I'd really appreciate it if you reply as to what it is about my post you found wrong or offensive.

"YES YES YES We people do take the word of God literally. We are not going to let go of our beliefs as quickly as the stupid white northern tribes did. Enjoy your faux-pagan-Christianity aka Cult of St Pauls..... True Judaism and Christianity is all but totally corrupted and lost to the masses."

This is exactly what I am talking about. You think everyone else is a bunch of heretical infidels. Your ideology is bankrupt. There are thousands of religions in the world. Your religious intolerance is astounding.

In the West, all people are free to worship who they want and how they please and believe in whatever they want. There are thousands of religions in the world. Religious intolerance is the enemy of humanity. The West learned this lesson a long time ago during the Protestant Catholic wars in Europe. That is why we have way better protections for religious plurality and freedom of religion than Islamofascist states like Iran.

In America, after 9/11, there were police guarding all the mosques in America to make sure Muslims were protected. In Iran, the police go around doing the oppressing and burning down churches and synagogues.

>> "In Iran, the police go around doing the oppressing and burning down churches and synagogues."

You keep bringing freedom of religion. No one is opposing that. Iran may have some oppressive laws, but there is no Islamic ban on churches or synagogues or following other religions. But that does not mean that Muslims have to give up belief and one can not differentiate or talk about faith. It is you who are no calling for homogenous agnostic belief. Yes, there is a lot that is politically wrong in the Middle East, or what a few people claim to do for Islam but it does not mean we are going to give up belief just because you'd like it that way. You are free to proclaim whatever you believe or don't believe in.

"Iran may have some oppressive laws, but there is no Islamic ban on churches or synagogues or following other religions."

Iran Religious Freedom Report 2005
"Members of the country's religious minorities--including Sunni and Sufi Muslims, Baha'is, Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians--reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs."

"Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities who are guaranteed freedom to practice their religion; however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs. Adherents of religions not recognized by the Constitution do not enjoy freedom to practice their beliefs."

"By law and practice, religious minorities are not allowed to be elected to a representative body or to hold senior government or military positions."

"All of Iran's minority religions, including Sunni Muslims, are barred from being elected President."

"All religious minorities suffer varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in the areas of employment, education, and housing."

"Apostasy, specifically conversion from Islam, may be punishable by death"

hb, not so much *your* specific identity, but that whole concept of there being a distinct "Muslim" identity. So, I was not trying to be offensive towards you which is why I said to take it as you will. Islam is something to believe in while an identity is what one is exclusive of others, at least to me. An identity MUST be exclusive since it can only be constructed by contrasting it with the Non-Muslim Other. This is why such identity issues seem to be more important in Western communities and in a globalized world. Of course, others have different views as to what an identity is, thus your milage may vary with my definition.

at least two witnesses saw ìunusual activities by the ING [Iraqi National Guard] in the area around the mosque.î Two mosque guards reported four men in ING uniforms had blindfolded them and planted explosives. A second witness, Muhammad al-Samarrai, the owner of an internet cafe in the area, was told to stay in his store and not leave the area. From 11 pm until 6:30 am, ten minutes before two bombs were detonated, the area surrounding the mosque was patrolled by ìjoint forces of Iraqi ING and Americans,î according to al-Samarrai.
Of course, two eye witnesses should not be considered conclusive evidence the Pentagon puppet Iraqi National Guard is behind the mosque bombings in Samarra. However, when added to the wealth of evidence from various sources detailing the existence of a Anglo-American ìcounterinsurgencyî program in Iraq (including the now largely forgotten and never referenced by the corporate media story of two British covert operatives caught red-handed in terrorist behavior last September) the incident should at least ring some bells in your head.
Quds Press quoted an ìinformed Iraqi sourceî who asked not to be identified as saying that the bombing had been the object of a plot. The source said that on Wednesday, responsibility for security in Samarraí was to have been handed over from the puppet ìIraqi Interior Ministry Shock Troops known for their extreme sectarianism, to the Iraqi puppet army. The source said that on Tuesday night, however, ìShock Troopsî closed off the area around the tomb, and asked shopkeepers to close their shops and kiosks early on Tuesday night.

The source told Quds Press, ìWe have information indicating that the ìShock Troopsî arrested and bound all the guards at the tomb at midnight Tuesday-Wednesday night for reasons that they did not announce. The guards were found after the explosion still tied up. Since it is unreasonable to expect Baghdad hotel-bound corporate media hacks to report anything beyond what is read from a Pentagon script inside the Green Zone, most Americans remain unaware of details implicating the Iraqi National Guard, (CIA/MOSSAD/MI6),and the neo-con masters in the bombing.

So if you are sane enough:ask your brain,who wud benefit from bombing a holy shrine(when they have enuff check-points and the green zone to aim at!)? who wud benefit from a "sunni-shiite" conflict?

We may never know the full truth since none of us participated or witnessed the "plans". But any full understanding would need to also account for two facts: ING uniforms can be bought anytime and anywhere & its rather well known that the ING is heavily infiltrated by both Sunni insurgents (who have often used government uniforms while perpetrating assaults) and by Shi'a militiamen. Trying to deflect resaonable blame from the jihadi guys just isn't totally a "realist" thing to do...

What I find funny is that people keep saying "a small group of..." or "fringe extremists..." Bull doodies! Islam is a religion of hate and bloodshed it started that way and will continue to the end. If someone disagrees (esp. Arabic Muslims) then stand up and make it stop. The religion teaches unless you believe exactly as they do then they are animals so its no problem to kill 'em! it's absolutely hilarious trying to say no its US soldiers blowing people up! No no they pretty much have a lock on that. BTW what country has done more in the last 50 years to help Muslims? No not Saudi Arabia no not Egypt or Syria.

"Islam is a religion of hate and bloodshed..." Well, Ron's "expert opinion" not withstanding, it wasn't always this way,(actually real Islam was NEVER this way), but we've allowed the "children of the liver-eater", and the Khawarij, et.al to HIJACK it. It's on us, now. Only when this Ummah returns AS a WHOLE to the way of Allah and His messenger will He remove the curse from us--and remove us from under the shadow of the hate-teachers.

Ron seems to be off his medication.....I'll bet the farm this moron supported the war. Ofcourse we all know that the US is in Iraq to find those terrible fearsome WMDs and stick a lollypop in every Iraqi child's mouth.
"Help the Muslims?" what a crock. Imbecile, go get a history book and lay of the crack.