Imam: No, Muslims Shouldn’t Have To Apologize For Islamic State

Very interesting thought process going on

(Huffington Post) American Muslim leaders gathered at Washington’s National Press Club late last month to release a scathing 17-page letter to the Islamic State that distanced mainstream Muslims from the militant group’s actions. But one prominent imam from Northern Virginia refused to give his endorsement.

“It sounded like they were apologizing for something they haven’t done, like they were running for cover,” Imam Johari Abdul-Malik said in an interview with The Huffington Post.

President Barack Obama has called on the world’s Muslims to “explicitly, forcefully and consistently reject” the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, while Secretary of State John Kerry recently said that Muslims need to “reclaim Islam.” In response, some of the largest Muslim organizations have issued sweeping condemnations of the militant group’s extremism. The letter unveiled at the National Press Club had the signatures of 126 prominent Islamic scholars, including the grand muftis of Egypt, Jerusalem, Bulgaria and Kosovo.

But not all Muslims have engaged in these condemnations. Many have written blog posts and created social media campaigns to criticize what they see as Muslim institutions’ knee-jerk instinct to decry faraway atrocities that are unconnected to their communities.

That’s an interesting point of view: why should they have to apologize when they aren’t involved? That leads to another thought: why should White people have to apologize for slavery when absolutely none of us were alive when it occurred here in the United States? Heck, my family wasn’t even here in the US, having legally immigrated in the early part of the 20th century on my Dad’s side, and escaping from Europe in the late 1930’s on my Mom’s side.

Anyhow

“When you ask Muslims to condemn or denounce heinous actions, ideologies or groups what you’re saying is that you don’t trust any Muslim,” Sana Saeed, a San Francisco-based producer at the digital Al Jazeera channel AJ+, wrote in a recent blog post, “Why I Won’t Condemn ISIS. “[Y]ou’re saying that I can’t be trusted until and unless I vocalize dissent against an individual, an action, an ideology or a group that claims to do something in the name of a shared identity.”

Interestingly, it wasn’t until White American’s stood up and said “no more institutional racism in my name” that the Civil Rights era truly made strides. Perhaps if more of the so-called moderate Muslims stood up to the extremists, they could significantly reduced the high number of Muslims who are being radicalized.

But, then there’s this

(Breitbart) The Imam’s frustrations and grievances would be perfectly understandable were his mosque not associated with a plethora of Islamic terrorists. Nowhere in the Huffington Post piece does it mention that Dar Al-Hijrah is the mosque with arguably the most convicted terrorists associated with the establishment.

Current Imam Abdul-Malik is the progeny of former chief al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki, who once served as Imam at the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque.

Major Nidal Malik Hassan, who was responsible for the jihadi attack on Fort Hood in 2009, was also a frequent attendee of the radical mosque.

Additionally, two of the September 11th hijackers were members of the Dar Al-Hijrah congregation.

Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, whom the Huffington Post portrays as a victimized Muslim, has spoken in the past in defense of convicted terrorist Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi. The Holy Land Foundation trial found Al-Amoudi’s American Muslim Council not only to be a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, but also guilty of raising funds for terror group Hamas.

Oops.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Leave a Comment

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend