It was George W. Bush who started off with the rhetorical question, “Why do they hate us?” and then answered his own question by the now oft-repeated patter, “They hate us for our Freedoms”. “They” of course, meaning Muslims even though the word “Muslim” was disguised behind perfixes like “Radical” and suffixes like “Fundamentalists”. Both, the “Freedom”-loving West and the targeted Muslims, knew of course, that the West was and is, taking on the task of making sure Muslim countries remain in the Dark Ages and dependent on the West; imperialism was simply taking on a new persona.
After 9-11, America decided to rise to defend its “Freedom” by imprisoning over 14,000 Muslims within this country alone and to torture hundreds more and kill over a million more. This is how “Freedom” and “Democracy” are protected By America.
Moving on to the Charlie Hebdo slaughter. Continue reading
I would like everyone to take a brief break and read these two articles. The first one, about the Muslim hero, is barely-acceptable in today’s fashion where Muslims and Islam are best left open to condemnation by members of the so-called, “Judeo-Christian Civilization”. Unfortunately for the current populist narrative, Muslims are humans too. We are just as good and just as bad, as anyone else and yes, we ARE Americans in America, Canadians in Canada and Europeans in Europe; no different from other fellow-citizens.
Yes, our fellow Muslims did blow up buses in London and killed people in mainland Europe, but no, Muslims did not blow up trains in Spain or go on bombing sprees in Ireland or UK or, kill 70, 80 people, mostly children in Norway, inspired by Islamophobic “experts” from the USA. Those acts were committed by the so-called Judeo-Christian Civilization as evidence of the “Clash within Civilization” to borrow from other “experts” such as Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis.
Did Charlie Hebdo support Islamophobia?
Some may wonder why such a question is being brought up in the light (or dark) of the Charlie Hebdo slaughters, but it is a valid question. It must be noted that even if Charlie Hebdo supported Islamophobia and lauded it as “Freedom of Speech”, that does NOT give license to fanatics to kill the supposed offenders. Still, it sheds light on the topic of “Freedom of Speech” which is always seen being trotted out when Islam and Muslims are bashed and carefully put away when other minorities are targeted.
Even as our hearts are wrenched at the news of the people killed by a couple of fanatical Muslims, a glance at Charlie Hebdo’s double standards of promoting Islamophobia but crushing similar jibes at other faiths, is a worthwhile endeavor. Richard Silverstein of Tikun Olam
, dug up this 2009 news
item about a time when a Charlie Hebdo cartoonist suggested in a column, that the French President Sarkozy’s son (a Jew) was marrying a Jewish heiress for her money. In the news report
, Charlie Hebdo demanded that the cartoonist apologize and then fired him for refusing to do so.
The anguish and the frustration over the murders at Charlie Hebdo, were felt by almost every Muslim who heard of the tragedy. We all feel the injury whenever some Muslim fanatic takes matters into his own intolerant hands and kills people for saying something disagreeable (to him) about Islam or the prophet Mohammed.
Our pain is compounded by the many folks who take the “Muslim Connection” and extrapolate it into a problem with Islam and Muslims in general…after the de rigueur
disclaimers that “not all Muslims are terrorists”! The acts of the fanatics are laid at the feet of Islam and Muslims, while the acts of the victims are defended as exercises of the much-touted “Freedom of Speech”. The sad fact is that bigotry is only protected by “Freedom of Speech” when Muslims and Islam are being bashed. In 34 European countries
, any doubts about the reality or magnitude of the Holocaust is punishable by up to two years in prison and in many of these same countries, insults to people’s religion
that causes them pain, is also punishable by up to six months in prison. Nevertheless, any insults to Islam or its prophet, are encouraged and lauded as “Freedom of Speech”.
Even in the United States, “Freedom of Speech” is a fluid concept that is weighted against Muslims.
Muslims have been imprisoned for playing Paintball because they were accused of practicing in order to fight in Kashmir, while others, such as the Hutaree, who were planning to kill
Police officers and then kill the ones who would come to the aid of the officers, were exonerated because they were said to be simply exercising their right to free speech. A young Muslim was sentenced to 17 years in jail
for translating some passages of some Jihadi group, a translation he thought, would help Americans understand what the group was all about. On the other hand, a Christian who translated the entire Al-Qaeda Manifesto
, is lauded as a hero. We cannot ignore the fact that when Major Hassan went on his killing spree at Fort Hood
, all of Islam and all Muslims were put on trial, while Aaron Alexis’ killing spree in Washington DC Navy Yard
was attributed to “a lone gunman” possibly, a disaffected one. The terms “Terror” and “Terrorism” too, seem to be used quite liberally, against Muslims and quite frugally, when the perpetrators are not Muslim.
The world would be a happier place and everyone would be less paranoid, if we only noted the crimes committed by people, instead of taking greater note of the perpetrators’ race or religion.