Is ISIS Islam's Ku Klux Klan?

The Ku Klux Klan has a corrupt version of Christianity.  If you don’t behave as they wish, they think they have the right to kill you, gruesomely.  ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) has a corrupt version of Islam. If you don’t behave as they wish, they think they have the right to kill you, gruesomely. 

The Klan wore white hoods to hide their identity.  ISIS wears black hoods to hide their identity. 
The Klan is still alive and well in the U.S., maybe not as deadly as before, but just as hateful towards those they don’t like.  See “At Gateway to Hamptons, Ku Klux Klan Advertises for New Members”, Al Baker, New York Times, 2014-08-29.  The Klan’s targets are immigrants.

The Klan bombed black churches.  ISIS bombs Shiite mosques.

Christian leaders outside the South condemned the Ku Klux Klan.  Those Christian leaders in the South who spoke out against the Klan would be intimidated overtly or covertly.  An illustration of how much courage it took to stand up for the rights of Negros is “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee.

Muslim leaders outside the areas controlled by ISIS have spoken out against ISIS.  One is Othman Atta, Executive Director of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee.  Some British imams have issued a fatwa calling ISIS “heretical” and stating that it is “prohibited to support or join” ISIS.  A Muslim cleric in India declared ISIS is “not just anti-Islamic but are enemies of humanity as well.”  I can’t verify it with multiple sources, but supposedly ISIS executed 12 clerics in Mosul because they would not swear fidelity to ISIS.

For more see “How Islamic State resembles the Ku Klux Klan”, Brian Denson, The Oregonian, 2014-08-24, http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/08/how_islamic_state_isis_resembl.html

Some are calling on President Obama to do something about ISIS and do it yesterday.  But what can the United States do other than make matters worse?  It is an outside power that really doesn’t understand all the dynamics of other countries and cultures.  Look at the messes in Afghanistan and Iraq.  They were in turn caused by one man, Osama bin Laden, a former ally, who didn’t like the U.S. putting troops into his Holy Land, Saudi Arabia.  Bin Laden decided to strike back at the U.S. and did so several times.  Will ISIS strike back in similar ways?

Consider that fighting ISIS may be fighting two enemies with different agendas.  ISIS are a set of fanatical jihadists who want everyone to follow their way or die.  They are allied with Sunnis who resent the Iraqi government, dominated by Shias, exercising too much control over the Sunni dominated areas.

Wouldn’t you think that Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would be under a bigger threat from ISIS than the U.S. would?  All of these have bigger armies than ISIS.  It seems only Iran is making any known effort to contain ISIS, and even that is trying to be done with a low profile.

The United States gave over one billion dollars in military assistance to Egypt in 2012.  Egypt can easily spend that as it sees fit.  It has an estimated annual military budget over seven billion dollars.  ISIS supposedly has stolen over two billion dollars, but who will be selling it arms and how much of that money can it actually access and use, like gold bullion?

Saudi Arabia is a big customer of military suppliers.  It has 233,500 active military personnel, over a thousand tanks, and over 200 attack aircraft.  Should not that force be sufficient to overwhelm ISIS with firepower and personnel?  ISIS has more than ten thousand fighters as of July 2014 and estimates keep climbing.  Even if ISIS has 100,000 fighters, would they be a match for Saudi Arabia with all of its aircraft?

King Abdul of Saudi Arabia said recently, “Fight terrorism with force, reason and speed.”

Turkey has been fighting ISIS at its border with some success, but groups like ISIS will keep coming back.

It seems this is another case of “Let’s you and him fight.”  Let the U.S. come in and settle other people’s problem (or think it had) and let the U.S. take the blame if things go wrong.  When it comes to war, Murphy’s law definitely applies.

So I have two big questions.  Why haven’t Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Iran taken a much larger and forceful role in combatting ISIS?  ISIS is a much greater existential threat to them than to the U.S.  Is President Obama pushing on these countries to do more?

So, your Majesty, why not be the leader of the Islamic world and take on ISIS?  Don’t you have the advantage of force, reason and speed?  You don’t have to get your parliament’s permission, tacit or otherwise.  And you don’t have to get the backing of your people.

Mel keeps wondering who elected the President of the United States as “leader of the free world.”

Published in the Reader Weekly at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2014/09/04/4020_is_isis_islams_ku_klux_klan, 2014-09-04.

The blog version includes corrections to the published version.

Appropriate punishment for Islamic and other terrorists

Many terrorists of any ilk act in the name of an ideology, whether it be religious or political.  They think they are doing their cause a favor by killing as many people as possible who don't believe in their cause or just happen to be in the way as they kill their targets.

Many think these terrorists should be executed if caught, with or without a trial, fair or otherwise.  But this is just what some of them want – to be martyrs to their cause.  An example is former Major Nidal Hassan who has been sentenced to death for shooting and killing thirteen people at Fort Hood.  This probably won't happen and really shouldn't happen.

He probably won't be executed because the military hasn't executed any active military personnel for some time and the appeal process can take decades.  He shouldn't be executed because this is just what he claimed to want – to be a martyr to his cause.

I don't think terrorists should be subjected to forced watching of similar crimes like that in Stanley Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange".  I do think they should be subjected to repeated recitations of the non-violent portions of their beliefs.  For example,

“O People of the Book! [Jews, Christians, Muslims] Come to what is common between us and you: That we worship none but God, that we associate no partners with Him, that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords other than Allah. If then they turn back, say: 'Bear witness that we are bowing to Allah’s will.'" From "The Qur'an and Tolerance of Christianity and Judaism", Islam Online.

The same kind of tolerance can be found in the Talmud and the Bible.

Narrow interpretations or even misinterpretations are found over and over again down through the centuries.  Catholics killed Protestants and Jews.  Protestants killed Catholics and Jews.  Jews killed the worshippers of Ba'al.  Christians killed Christians and Muslims in the Crusades.  Muslims killed Christians and Muslims in the Crusades.  Muslims seem to be killing more Muslims in these times than they are killing Christians.  All this despite the fact that the text they hold in common states unequivocally "Thou shalt not kill"!  It does not state "That shalt not kill any who believe as you do but thou mayest kill those who believe even slightly differently."

So, if terrorists are jailed and subjected to similar recitations, videos of their listening to these should be made widely available.  If the terrorists wish to make any statements recanting their previous beliefs, then these statements should be widely circulated.

I know this is wishful thinking and probably won't happen.  But those of us who believe that these three faiths (and others) have many tenets of generosity can avoid general statements of hate and counter those who do spew hate.