Militant Islam and Europe

The controversial and polarizing issue of militant Islam is always one that promises to raise heated arguments no matter what. But that becomes particularly true after some violent episode when militant fundamentalists are involved. Such was the case following the 9/11 attacks (and to a lesser extent, the first World Trade Center bombings in 1993). People forget, but that was also actually the case in the immediate aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, although that went away when the bomber was a Christian with blonde hair and blue eyes. That was the case after the bombings in Spain in 2004, and the London bombings in 2005. To a lesser degree, that was the case after the bombings in Russia just before the Sochi games. It was the case after the Boston marathon bombings, and the highly publicized aftermath of those bombings. It was the case following the attacks in Ottawa as well some months ago. That was the case also after the Sydney chocolate shop incident some weeks ago, and that is now the case, of course, after the Paris incidents in the last few days, which is the biggest terrorist episode that the west has seen in almost a decade. I know that China had some problems related to Muslim terrorism, at least officially, as well. Obviously, there are huge tensions that exist between India and Pakistan, and within those countries, as well. And, of course, we see huge problems with militant Islam in various parts of Africa, from Nigeria to Sudan to Somalia, as well as farther north, where Islam is easily the dominant religion.

If you look at the locations of those incidents mentioned, they run all across the globe. Asia and Africa, certainly. But also North America, Europe, and even Australia. This problem has become a world problem. Whatever label you want to call it, whether militant Islam, or fundamentalist Islam, most people agree that it must be stopped.

Yet, can we realistically believe that every attempt at such attacks can be stopped? Not too long ago, there was a fairly high profile case in London, where terrorists ran down a soldier, than cut him to pieces before engaging verbally with onlookers, with spectators of the crime, before calmly waiting for the police and being sent off to jail. It dominated the news for a few days, then went away. How can you possibly stop every instance like this? Is it even realistic to think that we can?

Following the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris, and the immediate aftermath in the last couple of days or so that sure seem related, people are expecting some kind of backlash, maybe a move to the right in Europe, particularly in France, where these attacks occurred. The Front Nationale is already capitalizing, asking French people if they have had enough yet.


No one knows what will happen in the future. But there already were some attacks on mosques in France since these incidents. In Germany just before the Paris attacks, there were anti-immigrant protests with record numbers of people, although in fairness, it should also be pointed out that there were counterprotests for increased tolerance in a dozen or so cities throughout Germany as well. It is still unclear how the recent slate of attacks in Paris will impact Germany and the rest of Europe outside of France, although there are predictions that the reaction will be ugly and xenophobic. I have seen quite a few articles, as well as comments on articles, with various different interpretations across the pond as well. Anytime something of this magnitude occurs, it will obviously generate a reaction, and a very strong one.

Clearly, these are divided times. That is true in Europe, as well as the United States. Even aside from militant Islam, that is true. But it seems clear that each attack like this seems to bring out a stronger reaction here in the west, one way or another.

Again, no one an know the future. Certainly, I do not know what will happen, either. Will there be more such copycat attacks in France, or in Europe more generally? Will there be other terrorist attacks in the United States, or Canada, or Australia? How will people across the globe react then?

I do not know. What is clear is that there are various interpretations of what is happening. What also seems clear is that there is plenty of blame to go all around. I can understand Bill Maher's viewpoint, when he states that liberals in the United States are quick to blast what they perceive as intolerance by whites, but seem mute on the point of intolerance by fundamentalist Muslims. At what point are we going to be able to say, with a sense of purpose and no ambiguity, that such intolerant viewpoints, even without action, are intolerable? When many Muslims, including government officials and official publications in predominately Islamic countries, seem to only condemn the Paris attack with an asterisk attached to explain why, on some level, these attacks are justified, then what are we supposed to make of this?

No one has the answers. The more people seem to claim to, more often than not, the more their prejudices bleed through, and the more transparent their lack of qualifications to do so become.

Intolerance clearly exists on both sides, and xenophobic attitudes on one side should not justify narrow-minded responses on the other side. Nor do past injustices, or even crimes, going back throughout history by one side or the other justify injustices or crimes as reciprocation today. It would be intolerable to believe even for a moment that they can be used as justification for such actions. If, for example, we do not hold the Germans today responsible for Nazi crimes of decades ago, why is it acceptable to hold Europeans responsible for crimes committed during colonial days going back even farther into history?

Then again, those crimes happened. So why should they be forgotten? At what point can we put them to the side, and say that they are no longer relevant? Is there such a point?

I do not know. What I do know is that learning more about such history does not usually hurt. Engaging in discourse with others usually does not hurt as well. Generally speaking, we have the means at our disposal to do so.

This post was actually rather old. I was going to write about it last year at some point, when the tensions between Israel and Palestine were much more acute, and these were what dominated the headlines at the time. There was a response in Europe to what was going on, and those tensions have always existed, and always seem to be affected by headlines around the world, perhaps starting with the Munich games in the early 1970's. I was going to write about it, then let it go, for whatever the reason.

But the recent attacks brought me back to them, and I got on this topic. I did not even open these particular links this time around, because this computer is really slow today. However, I found something in them interesting enough to want to share, so I hope that you will take a look at them for yourself, by clicking on the links below:






http://global.christianpost.com/news/muslims-forcing-co-workers-to-obey-religious-practices-french-report-claims-96811/



http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/def_lies.htm