Fort Hood: Terror & Tragedy
What does this terror and tragedy mean, and what does it not mean?
(Note: This is a second look at this delicate but important topic)
The shooting rampage at Fort Hood was an act of terror, but we should not feel terrorized or lash out against Muslims. We should also not play either the politically correct card and avoid recognizing that a very small part of Islam is militant and violent or blame everything on Islam. We need to talk straight about this but with information, respect and kindness.
Remember that the very worst act of domestic terror in this nation was in Oklahoma City and was done by white Christian veterans of the first Gulf War. We do not however make hateful generalizations about whites, Christians or veterans. We remember that Israel's peace advocate Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin was assassinated by an ultra Orthodox Jew, Yigdal Amir. But we do not huddle in fear at the sight of ultra Orthodox Jews. We remember that Columbine was plotted by young, ostensibly Christian, Goths. We do not quiver in terror at Goths. The murder of abortion provider Dr. George Tiller was perpetrated as an act of terror by antiabortionist Scott Roeder. We do not assume that any large number of antiabortion folks is dangerous or violent. We do know that in any religion, ethnicity or political movement there can be extremists--folks motivated by grievance and instability to take direct action. The fringe should not be mistaken for a whole people or movement or ethnicity.
Many pundits asked, in my view, foolishly if this was the act of a lone wolf or an act of terror? It was both. Terror does not need proximate co-conspirators to be terror. Nor does the existence of a plan mean that the perpetrators are not crazy.
It is very clear that there is a violent jihadist movement in radical militant Islam right now. This movement is recruiting and organizing violence against all "Crusaders." Only last week Al Qaeda's website exhorted the faithful not to wait for large and dramatic events but to take up arms personally and individually against the "Crusaders wherever they live or train." We are seeing by Major Hasan's web visits and postings that he felt alienated from mainstream America and wrote in defense of suicide bombing. We know that he gave away food and furniture and clearly did not expect to return to his apartment. He was seeking suicide by police which, according to him, would not be counted as suicide but as an act of holy struggle, Jihad.
We are reading early reports that Hasan felt persecuted and marginalized as a Muslim and over time this made him identify more and more with Islam and perhaps fairly radical elements of it. If we want to be both humane and sane we will work not to marginalize our Muslims, not to lump them all together as terrorists. It is a self-fulfilling horrible prophecy. While understanding the dangers, it is vitally important to our future and our survival that we not demonize a race, religion or people. We may not know how to turn the already violent towards peace, but turning the peaceful towards violence, that we know how to do all too well. We do it with violence and scorn, with hatred, distrust and isolation.
©2009 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Excellent, wise piece, JD. Thanks.
Well, Jonathan, since you are re-running comments, allow me the same courtesy.
Again, your attempts to lump Islamic-based terror in with lone crazies that occasionally emerge elsewhere is somewhat disingenuous. You actually referred to the Columbine shooters as "Christian"! (What does "ostensibly Christian" mean, Jonathan? Not Jewish or Muslim? Good grief. That's pretty astonishing from someone as "open-minded" as yourself.)
Let's talk about what is motivating Islamic terror. It seems to be--Islam. Rob can argue up and down that it's someone's "extreme interpretation" of Islam but I believe I don't have to re-invent the wheel to point out that the radical Islam faction has a pretty good grasp of their own holy teachings. I have yet to see someone actually refute this.
Unlike Christianity, where it is clear that people who (a) take the law into their own hands or (b) kill other people, are clearly acting outside the boundaries of what Jesus Christ taught. Yes, some of them (not the Columbine kids, for pete's sake, who were among the most godless kids ever), but perhaps the Roeders of the world... try to argue that they are following biblical teaching. But they are not! They can't act in direct contradiction to both the spirit and letter of the Bible and claim they are acting for God. We can all, Christian or non-Christian, can look at that and recognize the hypocrisy for what it is. This is why you are correct in stating that people do not cower in fear due to Christians (well, except for Nancy Pelosi).
I am not at all sure -- and again, I've certainly not seen a good argument for this -- that the teachings of Islam do not directly encourage the type of behavior we saw at Ft. Hood. The violence we saw there, like 9/11, is ALL about Islam, is it not? Bottom line question: Does this type of violence contradict the Muslim faith or not? That may not be a politically correct question but it's a damn important one.