Why Do Americans Feel Entitled to Lynch Muslims?
Published in Novoe Vostochnoe Obozrenie
(Russia) on 21 August 2012
by Yuliya Chmelenko (link to
original)
With the approach of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, it’s once again obvious that the events of 9/11 have forever turned away millions of Americans from Muslims. Moreover, a kind of Ku Klux Klan has popped up, aiming to destroy all Muslims in the country. The U.S. military frequently shows severe aggression toward members of the Islamic faith, making civilians pay for the losses incurred by the U.S. Army in Muslim countries, where “the proud Arabs” do not want to take the generous helping hand of the “herald of democracy.” But could the numerous acts of violence against Muslims happen in a country where the government treats members of all religious faiths equally? And are the extremely cruel acts toward those who practice Islam in the U.S. caused independently, by individuals with psychological issues, or does the White House consciously support the feelings of rejection and hostility toward the followers of Mohammed?
News articles about armed attacks on Muslims during religious ceremonies have long ceased to be on the front pages of newspapers. Thus, only a U.S. pastor who in the spring of 2012 burned several copies of the Koran in front of video cameras caused a public uproar. His actions led to sharp protests from Muslim communities around the world. But the pastor was not arrested or even fined. Only the latest events of this August, when a man opened fire on worshipers of a Sikh gurdwara in the town of Oak Creek (a suburb of Milwaukee, Wisconsin), have returned attention to the issue of Muslims in the U.S., due to the astonishing extremism of feelings toward members of this faith. As a result of the attack, at least six people were killed (including members of the clergy and the police) and about 20 were injured. The policemen who arrived on the scene shot the assailant.
The investigation revealed that the culprit who shot members of the religious Sikh community was an ardent Muslim-hater. This conclusion was presented by the civil rights organization Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC also said that it did not have any indication that white extremists hate Sikhs. SPLC’s representative, Mark Potok, said that the attack likely happened because the offender confused Sikhs with Muslims. The “9/11” tattoo, which in the U.S. represents the series of terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, proves that the killer hated members of the Islamic faith. Police quickly identified the perpetrator as 40-year-old Wade Michael Page. Page served in the U.S. Army from 1992 to 1998. During his service, he was subject to disciplinary action on several occasions, for performing his duties under the influence, among others. According to the FBI, Page acted alone. But the FBI is currently “looking at ties to white supremacist groups.”
Thus, as a result of an American soldier’s hatred of one religious denomination, members of another religious group also suffered. It’s common knowledge that Sikhism is an independent religion that derived from Hinduism and Islam, but it’s unlike these other religions and does not acknowledge its succession. Sikhs believe in one God, the all-pervading and all-powerful Creator. No one knows his real name. In Sikhism, God is worshipped through meditation. In accordance with Sikh religion, no other gods, demons, or spirits, are worship-worthy. However, due to the fact that this religion is not widespread in the U.S., and because of its similarities with Islam, its members were also flooded by the wave of hatred that a number of Americans feel toward Muslims. This means that the events of 9/11 cannot in any way justify or explain the motives of the perpetrator. However, American society digests such events very calmly. Meanwhile, the slightest transgression by the Muslim community immediately leads to thorough investigations with interrogations. When it comes to Muslims, U.S. law enforcement agencies’ actions are frequently not even warranted but, rather, based on intuitive causes.
For instance, the FBI showed a legally unauthorized degree of interest in the Muslim community in California, as a result of which the Muslims sued the FBI for abusing authority. The litigation, which started in February of 2011, has only just ended. The injustice of its outcome was noted even by a Federal Court judge, where the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit, accusing the special services of illegally spying on them. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American-Islamic Relations acted as the direct plaintiffs. In addition to the FBI, the defendants included in their suit seven senior officials, one of whom was FBI director Robert Mueller. According to the plaintiffs, the FBI had violated Muslims’ rights by sending an informant — former convict Craig Monteilh — a resident of Irvine, California, into their community. Pursuant to the Bureau’s orders, Monteilh had to collect information about the congregations of local mosques regarding their involvement in terrorism. The informant was uncovered due to his excessive activity, pushy inquiries and aggressiveness. According to the Islamic community, the special service had them under surveillance, not based on specific intelligence, but only because they were members of the Islamic faith. Thus, the government had violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of religion. Nonetheless, the plaintiffs lost. In justifying the decision, Judge Cormac Carney admitted that he did not want to rule against the plaintiffs, but had to do so because the operation involved “intelligence that, if disclosed [during trial], would significantly compromise national security.”
He emphasized, “The state secrets privilege may unfortunately mean the sacrifice of individual liberties for the sake of national security.”
However, what’s significant is that such incidents happen in a country that has taken upon itself the mission of bringing democracy and tolerance to the world community. It's no secret that the American government’s words about respect for people of other religions and ethnic groups are dissolving into thin air. There are many widely known cases of abuse, torture and murder committed by American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan against Muslim locals. Having failed to bring peace to these countries, the American "Starship Troopers" have gone to help the "oppressed" people of Syria, where with the help of weapons, they believe that democracy must finally prevail. But in this country, Americans also cannot get the laurels of victory. U.S. commanders’ anger at civilians for refusing to support the occupants, and for desperately struggling for their country, is often manifested primarily in a hatred of Islam itself. That is why American soldiers become vigilantes against Muslims abroad and at home. Their government’s actions have convinced U.S. citizens that they have an indisputable right to do so.
News articles about armed attacks on Muslims during religious ceremonies have long ceased to be on the front pages of newspapers. Thus, only a U.S. pastor who in the spring of 2012 burned several copies of the Koran in front of video cameras caused a public uproar. His actions led to sharp protests from Muslim communities around the world. But the pastor was not arrested or even fined. Only the latest events of this August, when a man opened fire on worshipers of a Sikh gurdwara in the town of Oak Creek (a suburb of Milwaukee, Wisconsin), have returned attention to the issue of Muslims in the U.S., due to the astonishing extremism of feelings toward members of this faith. As a result of the attack, at least six people were killed (including members of the clergy and the police) and about 20 were injured. The policemen who arrived on the scene shot the assailant.
The investigation revealed that the culprit who shot members of the religious Sikh community was an ardent Muslim-hater. This conclusion was presented by the civil rights organization Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC also said that it did not have any indication that white extremists hate Sikhs. SPLC’s representative, Mark Potok, said that the attack likely happened because the offender confused Sikhs with Muslims. The “9/11” tattoo, which in the U.S. represents the series of terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, proves that the killer hated members of the Islamic faith. Police quickly identified the perpetrator as 40-year-old Wade Michael Page. Page served in the U.S. Army from 1992 to 1998. During his service, he was subject to disciplinary action on several occasions, for performing his duties under the influence, among others. According to the FBI, Page acted alone. But the FBI is currently “looking at ties to white supremacist groups.”
Thus, as a result of an American soldier’s hatred of one religious denomination, members of another religious group also suffered. It’s common knowledge that Sikhism is an independent religion that derived from Hinduism and Islam, but it’s unlike these other religions and does not acknowledge its succession. Sikhs believe in one God, the all-pervading and all-powerful Creator. No one knows his real name. In Sikhism, God is worshipped through meditation. In accordance with Sikh religion, no other gods, demons, or spirits, are worship-worthy. However, due to the fact that this religion is not widespread in the U.S., and because of its similarities with Islam, its members were also flooded by the wave of hatred that a number of Americans feel toward Muslims. This means that the events of 9/11 cannot in any way justify or explain the motives of the perpetrator. However, American society digests such events very calmly. Meanwhile, the slightest transgression by the Muslim community immediately leads to thorough investigations with interrogations. When it comes to Muslims, U.S. law enforcement agencies’ actions are frequently not even warranted but, rather, based on intuitive causes.
For instance, the FBI showed a legally unauthorized degree of interest in the Muslim community in California, as a result of which the Muslims sued the FBI for abusing authority. The litigation, which started in February of 2011, has only just ended. The injustice of its outcome was noted even by a Federal Court judge, where the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit, accusing the special services of illegally spying on them. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American-Islamic Relations acted as the direct plaintiffs. In addition to the FBI, the defendants included in their suit seven senior officials, one of whom was FBI director Robert Mueller. According to the plaintiffs, the FBI had violated Muslims’ rights by sending an informant — former convict Craig Monteilh — a resident of Irvine, California, into their community. Pursuant to the Bureau’s orders, Monteilh had to collect information about the congregations of local mosques regarding their involvement in terrorism. The informant was uncovered due to his excessive activity, pushy inquiries and aggressiveness. According to the Islamic community, the special service had them under surveillance, not based on specific intelligence, but only because they were members of the Islamic faith. Thus, the government had violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to freedom of religion. Nonetheless, the plaintiffs lost. In justifying the decision, Judge Cormac Carney admitted that he did not want to rule against the plaintiffs, but had to do so because the operation involved “intelligence that, if disclosed [during trial], would significantly compromise national security.”
He emphasized, “The state secrets privilege may unfortunately mean the sacrifice of individual liberties for the sake of national security.”
However, what’s significant is that such incidents happen in a country that has taken upon itself the mission of bringing democracy and tolerance to the world community. It's no secret that the American government’s words about respect for people of other religions and ethnic groups are dissolving into thin air. There are many widely known cases of abuse, torture and murder committed by American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan against Muslim locals. Having failed to bring peace to these countries, the American "Starship Troopers" have gone to help the "oppressed" people of Syria, where with the help of weapons, they believe that democracy must finally prevail. But in this country, Americans also cannot get the laurels of victory. U.S. commanders’ anger at civilians for refusing to support the occupants, and for desperately struggling for their country, is often manifested primarily in a hatred of Islam itself. That is why American soldiers become vigilantes against Muslims abroad and at home. Their government’s actions have convinced U.S. citizens that they have an indisputable right to do so.
Next article![]( "The Republicans Are Disconnected from American Society")
