On March 1st there was a bomb attack in a cafe in India. Here is a quick video:
Since then the Indian security services have identified two Muslims for carrying out the attack and it is another case of a Muslim linked terror act. Nine people were injured but no one died in that attack.
Then we had that horrendous attack in Moscow also carried out by four Muslim guys. 144 people were killed in that shooting and bombing attack. There is speculation over who is the mastermind behind the Moscow attack but most certainly it was another attack directly linked to Islamic terror. A religious identity was present.
Now here in Malaysia we have seen the second firebombing of a KK convenience store in Kuantan obviously carried out by angry Muslims over those FIVE pairs of socks issue. Another attack linked to Muslim people.
Why are these people always angry at someone?
Lets go back to India. India possibly has the largest number of races, religions, languages, castes, differences and divergences any society could have. Someone is always angry at someone else. But Muslim terror attacks are too frequent and they often make the loudest bang. They grab the headlines.
The same in Russia and lately terror attacks have become too identifiably Muslim based or Muslim linked.
Now in Muslim majority Malaysia it is Muslims associated or linked to these firebombings. It does not seem to matter if the Muslims are in the minority or majority. They seem to have plenty of pent up anger and they appear quite ready to show their anger.
Eddie Griffin seems to get this quite well.
And the anger boils over easily when two things are involved ie
i. if it involves disputes / disagreements with non Muslims or other sects.
ii. if there is a perceived slight or insult against religious beliefs (regardless of who is involved either Muslim or not).
If there is dispute or death involving Muslims and Muslims of the same sect then the Muslims may not get as angry or excited. Regardless of who started the fight.
If there is dispute or death involving non-Muslims and Muslims or between Muslims of different sects then the anger really boils over, always in favour of the Muslims or the same sect. Regardless of who started the fight.
But Sunni Turks killing Sunni Kurds is not even worth mentioning.
The Sunni Shia violence is another fire starter. But when Shias (Houthis) get bombed by the Americans for fighting for Hamas (Sunnis) again it is not even worth mentioning.
The India (Hindu) dispute with Pakistan (Muslim) over Kashmir has long become a religious dispute (for Muslims) but the ongoing war between Pakistan (Sunni) and the Baloch people (also Sunni) and the Pushtu people (Sunni) hardly warrants mention.
Two things are always incendiaryi. if it involves non Muslims / other sects (regardless of who started it)
ii. if it involves religious beliefs.
The 'why' is easily observable. The 'how to' fix or solve the problem needs thinking and input.
In eastern European countries like Poland, Romania they just clamp down on Muslims. To an extent in China and even South Korea. Now Geert Wilders in the Netherlands and Marine Le Pen in France are winning more support down this same path.
Saudi Arabia is also clamping down on religion. Saudi Arabia has done a 180 degree turnaround on Wahabism - their state religion. There is now a Miss Saudi Arabia who will be taking part in the Miss Universe contest.
I think the Saudis are playing with fire as well. "ii. it involves religious beliefs".
N'theless the Angry Bird syndrome is a reality for far too many Muslims.
A lot of people are walking around carrying a lot of pent up anger. My suggested solution has never changed. Free up the space for religious discourse. Religious discourse should be completely free from prosecution and persecution. As long as Muslims keep criminalising religious discourse they will never find the solutions for their anger.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.