WEATHER »

Islam Nexus with Peace


Friday, April 26, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article

As a Muslim, I am saddened and condemn the terrorism in the Boston Marathon bombing. The worldwide head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, His Holiness and Khalifa of Islam Mirza Masroor Ahmad, condemned the bombings in a recent sermon. Moreover, His Holiness was saddened that Muslims were the first to be targeted as the culprits of this heinous crime.

In a time when Muslims need the most guidance, His Holiness has been a leader in peace. His Holiness initiated the “Muslim for Peace” campaigns through out the world. His Holiness has said, “Islam is an open religion which teaches mutual respect. And so if you are a true Muslim you should be willing and able to integrate in any part of the world.”

Mirza Masroor Ahmad will be visiting Southern California in early May. His visit will demonstrate Islam nexus with peace and condemnation of any form of terrorism.

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

Sorry Mr. Saifi, some of us were on the Front line when 9-11 happened, we stayed at our Posts when the order came down that we were attacked and by a religion that has been stigmatized as a War religion (J hadj / Holy war). Most of us have been conditioned to view those in face-coverings as potential enemies of the State, who plot to blow themselves up in crowded events, sporting games, parades and yes Marathon's. Many of us are very targets that terrorists focus on, we serve our Country, fight our countries wars, or just because we are born in this country we wear targets on our bodies that those who represent Islam focus their sights on; we are American's. This is why Islam and those who practice this religion are viewed with ongoing suspicion, apprehension and contempt for living in OUR country and continue to attack us on our own ground. Our latest local TERRORIST just became a citizen a year ago only to attack those who are NOT Muslims and to promote more hate, we American's are only reacting to this terror attack. This is why "Muslims were the first to be targeted as the culprits of this heinous crime"; it was one of your own.

dou4now (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wasn't Timothy McVeigh a self described "Christian"?

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That's why it is so striking to bring him up KV because his case is such an aberration. Did he go to a church with a congregation of murderers like with radical Muslims?
You cannot espouse radical hatred in any modern Christian Church without someone dropping a dime on you. Certainly not in any Catholic Church. And there is no part of modern Christianity that has this large a group of wing nuts or that rationalize murder.
As horrible as this Boston case is it serves as an example that radical Muslims have no place in any modern society and I am still waiting for the majority of peace loving Muslims to ostracize these cretins with every breath.
"Moreover, His Holiness was saddened that Muslims were the first to be targeted as the culprits of this heinous crime." I would have hoped this dude would have been too saddened and embarrassed by the murderous horde that Islam has spawned to make such a self serving statement.

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There's that whole "Christian Identity " group which of course begs a different name, Italiansurg. A whole underground network of McVeighs.
I basically see Al Qaeda as the same, just like the Manson family, a cult.
So you can see I use McVeigh as a valid point of reference. To illustrate my point in a far different arena, I do not equate Eisenhower with either Bush even tho all three are "Republicans."
I don't equate Clinton with Carter even tho both are "Democrats".
Any idea or belief system can be warped.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

We can at least agree that there are underground right wing nuts, much like our own left wing murders from the 60's. Radical Muslims don't have to hide in the shadows in too many parts of the world and are tolerated to a degree in certain parts of the world to an extent that is sick. Plus, just count the number of Muslim terrorists vs the rest. The tally speaks for itself.
Yea, now we'll get the left nuts claiming that the U.S. is the biggest terrorist of all; whatever...

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think in "those parts of the world" ( indeed numerous to list) that form of Islam is used to control the people.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 3:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

We can go with the idea that all liberals hate children, all conservatives hate women, all Muslims are terrorists, all Christians blow up abortion clinics, and so forth.

Bottom line: Innocent people get stigmatized for what others in their own Demographic do.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 8:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said Bill. Religion is being used to manipulate angry people and cause them to commit murder. Muslims do not hold exclusivity on this horror. Right now Islam is the religion that is being corrupted for political ends, but Christianity was once promoted at the point of the sword too. I like polytheism best, because it's like an open marriage, you can date any other god or goddess that looks good to you.

blackpoodles (anonymous profile)
April 26, 2013 at 10:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The difference is that Christianity stopped being promised at the end of a sword a very long time ago; Islam as remained anachronistic and is increasingly more violent and yet folks continue to make the comparison.
Of course Islam is being used to manipulate people but there seems to be more hatred of the Franciscans who oppressed the native Americans 250 years ago than there is for educated mullahs today who are helping to kill not only infidels but also their own. At least the Franciscans did not have the benefit of some modicum of modern science to better understand the folly of their doctrine. What the hell is the excuse for radical Muslims that are actually using technology and the internet to spread their 2,000 year old stupidity?
Blackpoodles-while culturally and by birthright a Catholic, I prefer monotheism in the form of Mother/Father/Weird Uncle Nature. But like a good Italian I still go to mass occasionally...

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 6:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Actions speak louder than words. America is in for a
rough ride, as there are sleeper cells throughout our country,
ready to attack.

thethorns4 (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

one angle is to view Islam as the "youngest" of the three major Abrahamic faiths, and as teen-agers "they" still have much growing up to do. E.g., when the Christian knights from Europe mass murdered 30,000 humans up on Jerusalem's Temple Mount [1099 CE in July], & largely Moslems and Jews, Christianity was still 1000 years young. The horrendous religious wars in Europe [The Thirty Years' War in 1600s Germany killed off at least 1/3 of the entire population] came when Christianity was 1600 years old and STILL exceedingly violent.
Islam, with the umma idea, is about 1300 years old. A lot of growing up to do.
Very thoughtful comment, BC!
thorns4, I am sorry you're not only so full of FEAR, but that you try to spread it.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Americans kill way more Americans with guns than terrorists, Muslim or no. Over 20 or 30 years, the stats are something like a million to 5,000. Never forget.

spacey (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It wasn't too long ago that there were many cries from Indy readers for more repudiations of terrorism from within the Muslim community.

Here we have such a letter and people still aren't pleased. Sheesh.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for making the point, EashBeash!

The silence is more deafening from Christians who don't repudiate our ever-so-unrewarding patronage of Israel.

When Israel clears out Palestinian neighborhoods & erects Jewish housing, our tax U.S. $ are involved. Why should we buy weaponry and munitions for Israel? Some ancient Hebrews write stories good enough to enthrall children, and they remain enthralled for life?

I seem to recall that in the first Crusade, enraptured yoemen took up scythes and pitchforks and streamed off toward Jerusalem, never to arrive. But armies followed. What will follow nail bombs? (And don't expect Israel to share any intel with us re an impending attack.)

Can we rebottle the nuclear genie? Will GWOT be to our short-term benefit but long-term doom? Picture Saladin and Richard the Lionheart, with nukes. Even if we win, we lose.

Are Christians quietly praying for Armageddon?

Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 5:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

can we rebottle the drone genie? you didn't even bring up the aerial assassinations we imperially carry out in foreign lands, even killing a US citizen (whatever sort of scum he was)...

DrDan (anonymous profile)
April 27, 2013 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blackpoodes: While I appreciate your compliment, I want to make clear that I was not saying it's all religions' fault or that religious people alone are guilty of fanaticism.

Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin are good examples of atheistic intolerance. Pinochet comes to mind as someone who as far as I know wasn't swung either way on the religion/atheistic spectrum but was a power-mad tyrant.

The Cult of Personality and scapegoating can go any which way.

Human nature is the core problem.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 12:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Moreover, His Holiness was saddened that Muslims were the first to be targeted as the culprits of this heinous crime."
Included again since some readers cannot read the entire text before commenting.
Apparently the grand Holiness(or whatever the freakin title is, they too wear funny clothes like Christian nitwits)was sooo compelled to apologize that he had to also admonish the U.S. for thinking that the likely suspects might be the group that commits almost all of the terrorist acts. Nice going with your womens rights as well Islam...

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I wonder what many of the writers will say when the
next attack occurs? An informant from the FBI has already
said there are sleeper cells in America and an EX Taliban
members has said many are walking around our country.
When will Americans wake-up instead of playing word
games? Americans and politicians are making it easy for
Islamic radicals to take over America. And what about the
Mosques that are teaching many to become radicalized?

thethorns4 (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Calm down everyone, thethorns4 post only proves that a totally broken clock is never the less right twice per day, nothing more.

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Indonesia. Largest Muslim country. No Islamic "with sword" conquests ever recorded in history for that country. Go figure:

[Qur'an 2:257] "There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become distinct from wrong; ... "

Islam doesn't need, never needed, never wanted to spread by any force.

We are Muslims belonging to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, who believe in the Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad fo Qadian and here is what we did:
Muslimsforlife(dot)org - successfully collected 10,000 pints of blood to honor 3,000 dead of 9/11 (by saving 30,000 lives.
Muslimsforpeace(dot)org - condemning terrorism, promoting Islamic value of loyalty to ones nation, peace, bus-ads and flyers and leaflets to promote the same.

KTShamim (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Those sound like fine deeds, but isn't your group considered to be apostates by the mainstream branches of Islam? That sort of adherence to sectarian orthodoxies (by those branches) would seem to be a significant part of the larger problem that many perceive.

zappa (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

yes, zappa, but "That sort of adherence to sectarian orthodoxies" has also been characteristic of most of the major world religions.... Some argue that Islam still needs its "Reformation" or break-away series of sects to make it more tolerant...after Luther, and more religious wars, science tended to replace monolithic Christianity (which had crumbled) and Christianity finally became [mostly!] more tolerant...
More apostasies and a proliferation of sects would likely help Islam to mellow out...where are all the Sufis?

DrDan (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That's sort of my point: Islam is typically not too tolerant of breakaway movements or the idea of "reformation" of any kind.
Yes, those peaceful Sufis are often silent too and are, in fact, considered heretics by the Wahhabi and Salafist elements.
Am no apologist for extremism in any religious practice, past or present, but to ignore the present religion-based, often political and frequently belligerent worldview of one group in a sometimes over eager attempt to appear unbiased seems to be a less than a wise choice today.

zappa (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

yes, and a very long view....1300 years...for Christian 2000 years...for observant Jews 3 to 4,000 years... and this doesn't make me a complete relativist or accepting of terrorism in any form.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How many people die in the U.S. by drunk drivers compared to how many die in the U.S. compared to Muslim attacks?

I'll bet more die by drunk drivers.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 4:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry, false equivalence fallacy there. Drunk driving is a serious issue, I agree, and many people tragically die as a result, but it has nothing to do with the issues discussed above. And, FWIW, I don't the think the issue being discussed above is really about "Muslim attacks" either, but, perhaps could be better described as the sort of violence that might often be inspired by religious dogma and practice when those things inspire beliefs that some take to dangerous extremes.

zappa (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 5:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think Bill Clausen's comment calls into question as to who the real terrorists are, a legitimate question.
How about the terrorism of poverty and no pathway out? How about the terrorism of having cancer and the gov blocking your treatment?

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 7:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There've been more than a few times in my life in which I was literally rescued in varying circumstances by people of the Muslim faith, some of whom were complete strangers. My introduction to people who follow Islam was after an apratment building I was in burned down. A neighboring Sunni family (who really didn't know me) welcomed me into their home for as long as I needed. I also have many Shia and Sufi friends as well.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I interpret this letter, the essence expressed in the 1st and last sentences, to be a very positive signal that some of the Islamic faith want to take steps toward a peaceful coexistence.

"Moreover, His Holiness was saddened that Muslims were the first to be targeted as the culprits of this heinous crime."

@italiansurg: your interpretation of this sentence in the letter to be an 'admonishment of the US' is not supported by anything in the letter. The 'sadness' may be genuine, akin to the sadness that a parent of a known criminal might feel. Do you have any specific information that leads you to believe otherwise, or did you jump to a conclusion, or is it simply cynicism?

I think it is generally wisest to take a person's word at face value, unless there is reason to believe the individual is unreliable or dishonest.

hodgmo (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 7:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I can’t resist answering BC’s question: “In 2010, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.”

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety...

The number of terrorism deaths *globally* ranged from 3,000 to 13,000 between 1991 and 2010. In the US, the rate is of course much lower and varies widely – 168 in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and 2,996 in 2001 in Manhattan. Far fewer in other years.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailyc...

But apparently “More Americans Killed by Bees and Wasps or Falling Televisions than by Terrorists”

http://www.allgov.com/news/top-storie...

And, of course, in the US, death by other US citizens using a gun trumps any of these, and usually trumps them all combined. Just handguns killed (roughly) 8,000 to 14,000 per year between 1976 and 2004, with “other guns” adding another 2,000 to 3,000 per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ush...

hodgmo (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 8:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Most of us here are members of one kind of specific group or another. Imagine if a member of a group you belong to acted in a violent, murderous way that claimed to represent your group but doesn't.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
April 28, 2013 at 8:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ahem, here's my point: During my childhood, we were told the Russians/Communists were going to nuke us. Many lived in fear. There is risk of talking to a stranger because that person may kidnap and kill you. Walk into a crowded building, you may pick up a contagious disease.

Yes, we all have to use pre-emptive safety measures if we expect to live our normal lifespans, but I'm not going to stay inside all day with the blinds drawn.

I heard tonight on the news that Russia had been aware of these guys for some time and even their mother was on the radar and they even warned the U.S. but of course, here we are. (As I say, this is what I heard--I don't know if it's true)

Tighter security? Ending our endless meddling in the Middle East? Accepting that sometimes manure happens? I'm afraid however, that after all the caterwauling and tributes to the victims, the Feds will just use it as an excuse to talk out one side of their mouths about protecting our freedoms from terrorists whilst passing even more laws along the line of the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act. while people don't see the contradiction in this.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
April 29, 2013 at 4:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I've often wondered whether the money the US spends on "anti-terrorism" is really cost-effective. hodgmo's post raises those concerns again.

It may be more prudent to approach those expoenditures the way a consumer purchases insurance ... it's not economical to buy insurance to cover everything, so you insure only for those things which could be a catastrophic loss. The problem is, what would the public consider an "acceptable loss"? Emotions can run high, as Bush/Cheney realized.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
April 29, 2013 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good questions hodgmo, two reasons:
Cynicism;
I expect even my kids to be contrite without somehow mentioning "the other guy" or creating a crack to crawl through.

italiansurg (anonymous profile)
April 29, 2013 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Ahmadiyya sect of Islam, a recent offshoot dating from between 1880 - 1908, constitutes from 10 to 20 million Moslems, many living in Pakistan (outlawed there as non-Moslem) or India or Britain. Their guy, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad [the Mirza...mentioned in the nice letter] is part of the Ahmadi effort to make Islam less fundamentalist and to liberalize it...perhaps one of many sects that might form a "Reformation" for Islam.
Our tiresome meddling in the Near and Middle East, as someone posted, doesn't help others or ourselves. Should we intervene militarily in Syria if it's proven they used the sarin gas? (I say no.)
Better expenditure of our gov't funds might be to foster much more InterFaith exchanges, hey and esp with the Ahmadiyyas and then some of the disorganized very peaceful Sufi... and yes, I do know the Ahmadiyyas believe only Allah is the way, but they do REINTERPRET the KORAN, which is what is needed, no?

DrDan (anonymous profile)
April 30, 2013 at 5:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Probably hard to nurture a reform movement if the adherents of this sect are viewed as apostates subject to death sentences by the majority. It also seems unlikely that the U.S. would wish to do much more to anger our dubious (and already angry) "ally," Pakistan.
"Should we intervene militarily in Syria if it's proven they used the sarin gas? (I say no.)"

I agree, a resounding no!

Isn't there an Arab League (of which Syria was until recently a member) that has at least some theoretical authority in the region? Maybe time for its members (and other Arab states) to step up and maybe let the "Great Satan" off the hook. If regional powers handled their own regional messes, there would be excuse (if and when there ever is) for the U.S. or Europe to intervene.

zappa (anonymous profile)
April 30, 2013 at 6:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hopefully Islam will quickly evolve into a more peaceful religion that stops repressing woman and practices birth control. Mohammed (the creator of the religion) was a violent man, and many fundamentalists believe in the violent Jihad which has become religious lunacy. Until Islam evolves it will continue to be known as the religion of violence. Actions speak louder than words Mirza Masroor Ahmad. Good luck convincing Al Queda that their actions go against Islam. Ideology and reality are rarely if ever the same.

Georgy (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2013 at 4:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

But Georgy part of the point of my post about the (very small) Ahmadiyya sect is how very slowly Christianity shed its fundamentalist and war-like countenance...killing each other off in vast numbers in the 1600s after 1600 years of development...Islam has only had 1300 years... And I am not defending them, either, what do have to recognize are the terrific (and horrific) new weapons the scientists have given to the crazies... Should Iran get the bomb? Pakistan already has it, and Israel, too.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2013 at 7:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why doensn't everybody leave everyone else alone?

billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2013 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hodgmo (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2013 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: