In one of the worst shooting in Army history today in the US, a US soldier – psychiatrist – shot 12 of his colleagues and injured over 30, some seriously at Fort Hood in Texas.
His name was Nidal Malik Hasan and he was, according to his local Masjid’s imam “a lifelong Muslim”. He had recently started frequently arguing against the wars that America was fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and tried hard to prevent his deployment there.
Recently, the FBI and law enforcement had grown suspicious about him as some internet postings were attributed to him about suicide bombings and how the suicide bombers are similar to those soldiers who throw themselves on bombs to save their comrades.
His cousin gave a statement that the family is shocked and the family loves and is proud of their country.
By all accounts, Hasan was a professional soldier who never spoke ill of military or his country. But it is also undeniable that his motivation to kill his own comrades for what he believed to be a “larger purpose” was higher.
Two questions trouble me:
1. How does one separate a normal Muslim citizen who will NEVER commit a terror attack from another normal Muslim citizen who WILL?
2. What makes a normal Muslim citizen go over the line to kill the innocents?
To make sure Muslims are not hurt in future, there has to be a way to differentiate between the two types of people I mentioned in (1). The risk to the society of not being able to do so is HUGE!
I know many crib in Mumbai about the “discrimination” against the Muslims in allowing them to buy apartments in certain colonies. But can you really blame them? Unless someone CONCLUSIVELY settles question #1, how does a colony really feel safe? If such a guy could go out and kill – one who ostensibly fought for his country and, by all accounts, loved his country, then how do we know for sure of the others? Its not a rhetorical question! Sweeping it under the carpet as many have been doing in the name of Political correctness is a devastating practice!
There are a few issues that I think need to be noted in this context and addressed seriously:
Pan-Islamism: This is a screwed concept. For some reason without any affiliation, a person sitting in a small village in Pakistan gets enough passion to kill for someone in Palestine! Now, how or why a guy in Palestine is getting killed is a complicated explanation. Reasons for that occur at many levels and many parties are involved in that.. but for the guy in the village in Pakistan, the narrative is “One Dimensional” and so is the decision.
Flawed Victim Narrative: There is no such thing as victimization of Muslims by other people specifically. If someone slaps you, it is because you let him! If the countries in Middle East are being ruled by impotent bastards then it is because the Middle Eastern citizens deserve NO BETTER! If Pakistan’s leaders are to be considered flunkies of US, then that is because it is part and parcel of the Pakistani psyche!
It is time that Muslim world starts taking responsibility for its own state. Enough… honestly.. is Enough!
And, btw, no matter how victimized they feel, they STILL HAVE NO INHERENT RIGHT to go and kill innocents! Narrative needs an overhaul.. and at the most fundamental level!