I've recently written two articles in relation to Terrorism: London Terror: Islamic Politics & Religion - and - Racism, Discrimination, Terrorism and Armageddon.

Within these articles I wrote the following points:

• If however, you (MUSLIMS) see yourself as a citizen, with a religion different to the Terrorists, you need to make a stand, before terrorist strikes, not after them.
• All citizens have a duty to inform security organisations of suspect people; people who in some concrete sense, pose a threat to national security. If that means informing on fellow Muslims, or former countrymen, then it is your duty.
• It is your duty for two reasons. Firstly, it is your duty as a regular citizen; and secondly, it is a duty you have toward your fellow Muslims, who are not party to the religion of the Terrorists. Muslims who came from other countries to western countries, presumably did so, because they were looking for a better life. How will your life be better, if the terrorists succeed?
• Idiots who jump up and down on the human rights issue in relation to suspected 'terrorist' persons, would be the first ones bitching if airport security failed to prevent a bomb being placed on THEIR plane, even though the basis for airport security is that someone is about to commit a crime when no evidence for such is obvious and that all are guilty until proven innocent.
• When 'my' rights take a back seat to the safety of my family, friends and country, my lack of integrity demonstrates that I am not a worthy candidate of anyone's love or protection.

Today I want to specifically address the last two points, by bringing to your attention an article in the Sunday Mail Online Newspaper (Brisbane Australia) entitled: We must expose fanatics by David Murray, who reports the following:

• QUEENSLAND'S Muslim leaders have called on followers to expose any potential terrorists within their ranks.
• Local Muslims have been told to "target" fellow worshippers trying to justify the July 7 London bombings which killed at least 54 people and injured 700.
• Leaders from the state's 17 major Islamic societies will gather this month to discuss ways of ensuring there is no repeat in Australia of the London attacks.

These initiatives taken by the Muslim Leaders address the three major problems that I perceive that we have in the west, when it comes to the issue of Islamic Terrorists.

1. We see all Muslims as Terrorists
2. We blame all Muslims for these acts of violence
3. We do not see or hear enough from Muslim organisations to dispel our fears.

This Sunday Mail article is a welcome relief.  It tells us that Muslim leaders are active in their attempts to ensure 'homeland security', and active in their 'anti-terrorism' beliefs.

While I am well pleased to have read the article, in the back of my mind I could not help but wonder what the 'civil libertarians' and 'human rights' organisations will have to say about the measures to be introduced in Muslim communities.

For starters, it requires that people become informers, reporting to police any person who utters a statement that might be considered inappropriate. We all know the down side to this type of behaviour. We have heard and read of enough situations in relation to 'feminism and racism', where someone (a man) says something innocuous, only to be accused of being 'sexist or racist'. I'm sure some Muslim community members will report others to police simply because someone wants to cause someone else a little trouble.

However my point here, is that if the Australian government (or American?) insisted that we all report people whose speech or actions were less than acceptable, we would have '(un)civil libertarians' jumping up and down, screaming about draconian or communistic laws that impinge on 'MY freedom of speech'.

But my guess is that these same people won't say a word about such things within the Muslim community. Firstly, because in their hearts they too are racists, with the same feelings as the rest of the population. In their hearts, they would feel a little safer with these new measures. The second reason that they will keep silent, is that they are 'hypocrites'.

I say this because I feel (an opinion without evidentiary substantiation) that most activities and objections of civil liberty groups have only two purposes. The first is to draw attention to themselves in order to boost their self esteem and importance; and the second, is that their underlying motivation is and has always been, to create legal situations in which social norms can be changed in order to justify the behaviours and attitudes of a group of people whose basic personality resides on the fringes of society. They seek change so that their fringe positions can be legitimised as 'main stream'.

Some would say that my accusation of 'hypocrisy' is unjustified, and that such groups have done a lot of good in society. To the latter I would agree, but to the first I would disagree.

One of the contradictions of such groups is that while they all tie in, they have created for themselves a maze of contradictions. Take for instance the issue of Racism. If I call you any number of disparaging four lettered words, such groups could care less. But if you are a Negro/ Chinese/Jew or anything else, and I call you a Negro/Chinese/Jew or something else *%##% then I am a racist. This of itself is illogical, and worse, it ignores the true 'hate crime' which is not about race, but about the evil that resides in some hearts that cannot contain their innate nastiness.

But here is the real foundation to what I am saying. If you speak out against a Black, Religious, African or Pakistani or Indian, and say that you don't like them because their culture is "this, that or something else', you will find yourself in court. But these same groups that are eager to take you there, are the same ones who press for changes to our laws, to STOP CERTAIN CULTURAL PRACTICES that are attached to immigrants. For Example: Female Circumcision (haven't stopped Male Circumcision yet) and the slaughtering of Chickens, goats, or other animals associated with religious practices, to name two.

So in fact, they ensure that whilst we MUST accept other cultural norms, they first VET OUT all those things of which they disapprove. On the flip side, they never get involved in issues in relation to such cultures, unless those issues are attacked 'offshore'. Such issues would include 'wife beating' and the sending of teenagers back home to be forcibly 'married off'. If they involved in these issues 'onshore', they would fall into the category of 'racist', and this they could not do.

So while I am glad to read the report from the Muslim Leaders in Australia, I can't help but wonder when the civil libertarians will jump up and down about it. It's really quite amusing. In the end however, the situation is serious, and the Muslim Leaders have done the right thing, firstly by announcing their actions, and secondly, by ensuring their own young do not get caught up in these atrocities, either as terrorists or victims. Muslims are just people, and while some of them are violent, this does not mean that all Muslims are violent. One only has to look to Ireland on that score. Just because terrorists there were Irish, does not mean that we suspect all Irishmen are terrorists.

I hope that readers at Magic City have been reading the articles onsite, written by Noor Al Haqq and Jamal Dookhy (Aboo Mohammad), to get a better Idea of what Islam really is.

Be vigilant; be safe ride a bicycle to work, and stay away from restaurants and any place where people congregate! HAVE FUN! (?)

R.P.Bendedek

Email: rpbendedek@hotmail.com

Note: Because of the recent Server change, some links may not work. This file was amended September 2007. King's Calendar Social Commentaries may be found at: http://www.kingscalendar.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?action=viewnews&id=331

_______________________________________________________

The 'King's Calendar:The Secret of Qumran http://www.kingscalendar.com is a chronological study, of people and events listed in the Bible, Josephus, and The Damascus Document of the Essenes. It approaches the history of Israel and Judah from a purely mathematical Linear Causal viewpoint and both confirms and challenges many historical and archaelogical assumptions in relation to the writings of Josephus, the Reign of Nebuchadrezzar, Moses and the Exodus, Jeremiah's Seventy year prophecy of the Babylonian Exile, Daniel's Vision of Seventy weeks, and discrepancies between the Septuagint and Masoretic Texts of the Bible.