| Yawning
Bread. June 2006
How George W Bush feeds Muslim cynicism
|
|
|
The Pew Global Attitudes Project conducted the study [1] among 16,710 people in 15 countries: Indonesia, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, India, China, Japan, Spain, Germany, Russia, France, Great Britain and the United States, with "special oversamples" taken in the four European Union nations, to assess the views of their Muslim minorities. The interviews for "The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other" were conducted from 31 March to 14 May this year. The survey asked Muslims to state whether they associated each of 11 different character traits with non-Muslims -- and asked non-Muslims vice versa. Five of the character traits were positive (generous, honest, devout, tolerant and respectful of women) and six negative (violent, greedy, fanatical, selfish, immoral and arrogant). In all the Muslim countries (Indonesia, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan), on every one of the negative character traits, 41% to 81% of the populations associated those traits with Westerners. Typically, 60% - 75% felt that Westerners were selfish, violent, greedy, immoral, arrogant and fanatical. The only exception was that only a minority (24%) of Pakistanis
felt that Westerners were fanatical.
Among non-Muslims in the Western countries, majorities or near-majorities associated violent and fanatical characteristics with Muslims. The Nigerians were quite interesting. Demographically, the country is almost equally split between Muslims and Christians. They seem to hold a low opinion of both. The findings were reversed when respondents were asked about positive characteristics. Muslims, especially those in Muslim countries, thought Westerners lacking in those.
While "it's a mixed picture," said Carroll Doherty, associate director of the Pew Research for the People and the Press, "I think there are findings that point to very deep hostility." Among the notable points that press reports didn't seem to highlight was the result for the question was to whether people were concerned about the rise of Islamic extremism in the world. Unsurprisingly, huge majorities (73% - 93%) in Western countries said they were somewhat concerned or very concerned. India and Japan too, at 85% and 82% respectively. But in 4 Muslim countries (Pakistan, Indonesia, Jordan, Egypt) concern was quite high too, ranging from 54% to 71%. Only Turkey had 39% concerned. Nigeria was once again interesting. 47% of the country's Christians were concerned about Islamic extremism, but 57% of its Muslims were. This shows us that Muslims are just as aware of the dangers of extremism. The odd one out was China. Only 3% of Chinese were very concerned about Islamic extremism, and 15% more were somewhat concerned, probably reflecting their insularity. Yet, on another score, one wonders whether the West's "concern" was anything similar to Muslims' concern. Do they see different things even when they speak of "extremism"? For example, the report said,
There seems to be a serious distrust of even neutral facts, which is a very bad sign. Communication and the building of bridges needs a starting point -– at a minimum, to see each other as human, and to more or less see the same reality. But it appears that we're not there yet. It's easy to blame the Muslims for refusing to recognise reality, and for seeing conspiracy theories hatched by America behind everything. Yet, the same day that the Pew results hit the papers, another story showed how justified they can be. In Florida, 7 men were indicted on conspiracy charges for trying to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and federal buildings in Miami. The indictment said the men pledged loyalty to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda in order to seek support from it for their desire to "wage war" against the US government. They wanted to "kill all the devils we can", it said. Led by Narseal Batiste, they lived in a warehouse in a run-down mostly-black district of Miami, called Liberty City. In February, Batiste told a government plant that he and his five soldiers wanted to attend al-Qaeda training, in order to wage a "full ground war" against the United States. "They talked about belonging to an Islamic army, wanted to raise an army in the US. But they did not have the means to do this," a senior law enforcement official said. Although they didn't pose any immediate danger, U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta said it was exactly the right time to dismantle the group, before it was able to execute a plan that one member said he hoped would be "as good or greater than 9/11." "You want to go and disrupt cells like this before they acquire the means to accomplish their goals," Acosta said. Given all these references to al-Qaeda, 9/11 and the raising of an "Islamic army", it looked like a major coup for law-enforcement agencies. But if one looked at the names of the 7 defendants, none of them had Muslim names. Then funnily enough, they called their group Seas of David, a reference that sounded more Hebrew than anything else. Considering the antipathy that Muslims had towards Jews (another finding from the Pew survey) what true Muslim group would use a Jewish-sounding name? One of the members called himself "Brother Corey", which again doesn't sound Muslim at all. A neighbour, Tashawn Rose, however recalled a conversation about a month previously wherein "They said they had given their lives to Allah." The men had tried to recruit youngsters in the neighbourhood, including Rose's younger brother and nephew, for a karate class, but when parents asked questions about the karate class, the men would get sanctimonious and start talking about Allah. "It's weird," she said. Some neighbours thought the group behaved in a cultist way. "They would come out late at night and exercise," Rose noted. "It seemed like a military boot camp ... They would come out and stand guard." "They reminded me a lot of the followers of Yahweh Ben Yahweh," another neighbour said, referring to a cult that flourished in Miami's Liberty City in the 1980s. Yahweh Ben Yahweh [2] was led by Hulon Mitchell who was constantly spewing hate against Whites. At one point, his group numbered some 12,000 members, but these members gave every cent they had to him, such was the degree of control he exercised. He was also reported to have had sexual rights to the members' wives. At least 14 people, according to police investigations, were killed, some of whom were members who had wanted to get out. The first murder, in 1981, was of a 25-year-old ex-member, Aston Green, who was beheaded with a blunt knife. Indeed, Seas of David seems like a close parallel to Yahweh Ben Yahweh -- a cult. Narseal Batiste probably knew nothing about Islam, but just latched on to the biggest "enemy" he could think of in his quest to be different from mainstream America. Thus, most likely, Batiste's group was yet another of the home-grown religious and militant cults that America has been so good at spawning through the last few decades. Remember David Koresh? Timothy McVeigh? The Seas of David was never even in contact with al-Qaeda. The person posing as a representative for bin Laden's organisation was an FBI agent. "There's less than meets the eye here," said Jimmy Hardy, the public defender for Lyglenson Lemorin, one of the 7 indicted men. "The only al-Qaeda person was the undercover guy." In fact, I don't think they even acquired their first stick of dynamite, for nowhere in the news reports is there mention of any arms or explosives seized. Yet, we have the Bush administration trumpeting these arrests as a big victory in America's fight against Islamic terrorism, probably in an attempt to burnish the President's and the Republican Party's reputations ahead of the November midterm elections. Newspapers carried it as front page news
in many cities. Even in Singapore, it was the lead story in the online
edition of the Straits Times (I don't know about the print edition). All
this will have the effect of reinforcing in people's minds the notion that Muslims are a
threatening class of people, ever ready to resort to terrorism. Can we
blame them for being cynical? © Yawning Bread
|
|
|
Footnotes
Addenda Amazingly, in the comments to this article there were at least 2 persons, both posting as "anonymous" who held diametrically opposed positions. One disputed that the hijackers of the 4 airliners in 9/11 were Arabs at all, and suggested that we shouldn't believe anything that comes out of Western governments. The other said there are lots of evidence that they were Arabs, but then he (I think it's the same person) also said that the 7 persons arrested recently (above essay) are also Muslims... which my very essay suggests we're reading too much if we said that. Anyway, on the matter of whether the hijackers in 9/11 were Arabs, we should note it isn't just the US government or the Western media who say they were mostly Saudi Arabs. None other than Osama bin Laden has said so, via the al-Qaeda videos and messages broadcast over the internet and other non-Western media. In the report from MSNBC, (source Reuters, 13 June 2006) it was said,
|
|