| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
The Stockholm Spectator GroupBlog takes Swedish columnist Göran Greider to task for his sympathy for the Beslan terrorists. Unfortunately, this moral myopia is not confined to Sweden; just yesterday I got into a discussion here with a self-proclaimed Muslim who justified suicide bombing in cases of "occupation." So many analysts, when confronted with Islamic jihad, turn the discussion to Western colonialism. But jihad existed long before colonialism.
I don't agree with all the assessments in this statement, but the fundamental point is sound. (Thanks to Ali Dashti for the link.)
Taking a leaf from Noam Chomsky’s post-9/11 playbook, Sweden’s Göran Greider today voiced sympathy for the terrorists who had, at last count, slaughtered at least 150 innocent children in Ossetia. Greider quips that it “isn’t impossible to explain [these] acts of terror,” citing the tortured past of Chechnya and its people. Translation: terror is a legitimate response to colonial repression.Not surprisingly, Greider tosses Iraq and Israel into the mix for good measure. His analysis is firmly rooted in the notion that “brutal colonialism” rightfully begets terror. But, as Michael Moynihan pointed out to me the other day, Mr. Greider, unwittingly perhaps, ignores one of the most ruthless and longstanding occupations of all time: that of Tibet by the Chinese. Does anybody recall the last time a pack of repressed religious Tibetans employed terror to send a message to their occupiers? Can someone please direct me to statements by the Dalai Lama sanctioning civilian casualties in the name of freedom? This is not about occupation, it’s about militant Islam. Period.
These latest events in Russia, as well as the Moscow theater siege in late October 2002, have one chilling thing in common: ties to Arab terror organizations. Greider half-heartedly admits that the Chechen “rebels” “may have cooperated” with Al-Qaeda operatives; however, Russian officials have now confirmed that 10 of the terrorists were in fact Arabs. Terrorists without borders, as it were.....nothing – and I mean nothing – legitimizes acts of terror targeting innocent men, women, and children. Greider should be ashamed.
Posted by Robert at September 8, 2004 9:35 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
"These latest events in Russia, as well as the Moscow theater siege in late October 2002, have one chilling thing in common: ties to Arab terror organizations."....and islam.
Posted by: jawa![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 8, 2004 11:33 AM
Is there perhaps another flaw in the argument/excuses offered vis brutal occupations preceeding violent rebellions?
Michael Ignatieff defines movements as terrorist if the first response in support of the cause is violent, thus he deems the PLO a terrorist movement (and he is not without sympathy for displaced Palestinians nor wholely supportive of Israel).
Another argument might be found in the response of non-Muslim entities that have come under Muslim domination, but I'm at a loss for a clean example. Certainly, there is plenty of brutality to witness when one Muslim sect or Muslim group of a particular ethnicity dominates another (Sudan, for one). Lebanon would make a rather complicated example -- officially occupied by Syria, but Iran has its interests represented through Hezbullah and I suspect there were always tensions between the Christian and Muslim communities that resulted in bloodletting, and of course the presence of Palestinian "refugees" mixes things up even more.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at September 8, 2004 4:18 PM
sometimes, in order to get at an inane idea, it's useful to reverse it. it would go something like this:
i wonder if nutjobs like greider would support the u.s. systematically murdering the children of bin laden, zawahiri, ksm, zarqawi, need we name more?
Posted by: ted at September 8, 2004 7:08 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)