I have been keeping an eye out for any comparisons of the suicide bombings in London with those in Iraq, Israel and elsewhere, in the (probably vain) hope that the London bombings may awaken more sympathy for the plight of victims elsewhere, and for the difficulty of opposing Islamism and its extreme methods.
Just seen this at BBC News:
Muslim leaders and scholars met at London's largest mosque on Friday and condemned the attacks, saying the bombers had violated the Koran by killing innocent civilians, and could not be regarded as martyrs.
"There should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime," said the head of the World Islamic League's Sayed Mohammed Musawi.
In other words, killing Londoners is wrong, killing Israelis is right. I don't suppose the fact that the vast majority of Israeli victims are civilians has occurred to Mr Musawi. Wonder what he thinks about the killing of Iraqi civilians?
2 comments:
Doubt they would apply this reasoning to Israel:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4688909.stm
Meanwhile Britain's top Muslims have branded the London suicide bombings "utterly criminal, totally reprehensible, and absolutely un-Islamic".
A joint statement of condemnation came as 22 leaders and scholars met at the Islamic Cultural Centre in London.
...
Of the Muslim stance on suicide bombing, the leaders said: "There can never be any excuse for taking an innocent life.
"The Koran clearly declares that killing an innocent person was tantamount to killing all mankind and likewise saving a single life was as if one had saved the life of all mankind.
Those who carried out the bombing, the statement said, "should in no sense be regarded as martyrs".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/07/16/do1601.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/07/16/ixopinion.html
A warning from the past that the BBC does not want us to hear
By Charles Moore
Telegraph
16/07/2005
On the Today programme on Thursday, Inayat Bunglawala appeared on behalf of the mainstream Muslim Council of Britain. He condemned the "killing of all innocent people" which sounds fine, but leaves room for dispute about who is innocent and allows you to get in your pitch about other killings. Sure enough, Mr Bunglawala's next shot, unprompted, was to attack Israel for making "nauseating" political capital out of the blasts. Asked about the support for suicide bombing by a leader of the Muslim Association of Britain (an affiliate of the MCB), he said that "I understand why he feels such pain for the Palestinians". Asked why his MCB colleague had attended a memorial service for Sheikh Yassin, the spiritual leader of the terrorist organisation Hamas, Mr Bunglawala said that Yassin had been a "renowned Muslim scholar".
Translate the muddy language. The murder of British citizens is seen as an occasion to criticise Israel. Support for suicide bombers, though regrettable, is in effect defended; and one leader of the bombers, it is said, should be respected in death, because he was a Muslim scholar. What is happening to a religion when its scholars are telling people to kill others and themselves? The BBC is notoriously shy of using the word "terrorist" about people who plant bombs: would "renowned Muslim scholar" be a useful substitute?
Post a Comment