Why don't we hear Muslim leaders condemning terrorism? In the wake of the London bombings, I called Parvez Ahmed, a Jacksonville resident who three months ago became chairman of perhaps the best-known Muslim organization in America, and asked him that. And there was silence. Well, just when the phone cut out. Once I got him back on the line, the University of North Florida professor who is the new chairman of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, did what he has been doing ever since he woke up Thursday, logged onto his computer and saw the news. He condemned the bombings. He condemned the people behind them. He did it immediately and unequivocally. "This is just absolute madness," he said. "It does not make any sense whatsoever. No ideology can even remotely justify what's going on." You want a Muslim condemnation of terrorism? How would you like it delivered? In the past week, Muslim groups have been condemning the attacks via e-mail blasts to the media, through news conferences, during a personal meeting with the British ambassador, in prayer services all over the country and, coming soon to television stations, with a public service announcement. This hardly is new. After Sept. 11, Muslim leaders issued statements, prayed for the victims, encouraged relief efforts and, in some cities, took out a full-page newspaper ad signed by 40 groups that said: "We condemn in the strongest terms possible the use of terror to further any political or religious cause." Nearly 700,000 Muslims have signed a "Not in the Name of Islam" petition on CAIR's Web site that begins: "We, the undersigned Muslims, wish to state clearly that those who commit acts of terror, murder and cruelty in the name of Islam are not only destroying innocent lives, but are also betraying the values of the faith they claim to represent." Yet when Ahmed speaks in public, the most common question is: Why don't Muslims denounce terrorism? This has been a persistent drumbeat on talk radio, one that was echoed last year by syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin after CAIR took on a radio host in Boston. The organization, she wrote, "won't condemn Muslim fanatics, but it has declared war on outspoken Americans who will." Just last week, following the London bombings, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote, "To this day, no major Muslim cleric or religious body has ever issued a fatwa condemning Osama bin Laden." Juan Cole, a University of Michigan history professor, quickly compiled a list of such condemnations. Not that people remember them. They remember that some kids danced in the street when the towers came down. "There always will be lunatics who will try to justify the unjustifiable," Ahmed said. There certainly are legitimate reasons to question some Muslim groups (not to mention some Christian and Jewish groups). But to say that Muslims have remained silent after attacks not only is inaccurate, Ahmed believes it fuels Osama bin Laden's Sept. 11 goal of a religious battle. "That trap needs to be avoided," Ahmed said. "The breadth of Muslim voices against Al-Qaida, against Osama bin Laden, against 9/11, against such terrorism, is as broad as it can be, from the most conservative to the most liberal voices and everything in between." So why don't we hear Muslim leaders condemning terrorism? Maybe we're not listening. mark.woodsjacksonville.com, (904) 359-4212 |