Dear Christian Brothers and Sisters

The wider implication of the Norway attacks is the formulation of “security” policies targeting white Christians, the majority population of most Western countries. This step towards complete control of the population has already been planned, but now there’s the requisite excuse. People of the revealed Books should unite around our right to believe…

*******

Dear Christian Brothers and Sisters,

In this, the aftermath of the terrible attacks in Norway, I ask that we all continue in prayer for the victims and their families.  Their loss and grief is the severest aspect of the tragedy, but, in scope, it is not the greatest.  The wider and more lasting tragedy of these attacks is what I see happening to you.

The person who did this, and whoever he was in concert with, have played right into the hands of the polities they claim to oppose.  Now- and you will soon see much to prove this- the white Christian is a threat.  This is profoundly significant, for the populations that Western polities are working to disenfranchise and control are majority white Christian societies.  With the two attacks in Norway, an excuse has been provided worldwide to profile, infiltrate, imprison without due process, and create divisions in this group.  It is already happening.  Google articles about the event and you will see headlines with words like “white” or “ethnic Norwegian”.  His race is being highlighted in a way that would otherwise be considered racist, and that is no mistake.

Now, the white Christian is the culprit.  Now, the white Christian is a target. 

If you believe in living by the words of the Bible, you are a fundamentalist.  If your beliefs or words conflict with the polities-that-be or their security apparatuses, you are an extremist.  So-called right-wing militias, with their Christianity-tinged ideologies, will soon be falling under the microscope, as part of a wider strategy of disarming the populace by ending the right to bear arms.  Legitimate questions and grievances are radicalism.  Missionaries and evangelists are recruiters.  Maybe not today, but very, very soon.

You may have been thinking all along that your government and politicians are Christians like you, and that you live in a Christian country.  If so, you have been wrong.  Your politicians have always and only been opportunists, for their own political survival, and the greater opportunity lies with an establishment of polities beyond the reach of democratic machinations.  This is not conspiracy theory, I don’t ascribe to that.  But is there not something that induces politicians to vote against their voters, as they often do?  Aren’t there persons and bodies of political and economic influence whose status is not subject to elections?  Why were your rights changed from life, liberty and property, to life, liberty and the “pursuit of happiness” when the Declaration of Independence was revised?

A religion and book should not be judged by the actions of a few criminals, even if they claim to act in their name.  Rather, the evaluation and judgment should be based on nothing other than a fair reading of the texts.  Nonetheless, you are about to start seeing a subtle, but growing association of the Norwegian terror act with a larger, wider demographic, your demographic, you… 

Prepare for the outrage of lone wolves being broadcast around the world as the spokesman.  Your way of life will be attacked from without and within as both ignorant adherents and prejudiced commentators quote scripture out of context and make the extremes look like the core, as obvious vagabonds are touted as priests.

Welcome to my world. 

As a black person, I have watched my whole life as the actions of a few have been used to label the many, and it was never the good actions.  As a recent convert to Islam, it is only doubly so, even though innumerable scholarly articles have invalidated miscreant acts as illegal in Islamic law.  There is a part of me that could gloat in “white folks getting a taste of their own medicine” or seeing another religion get attacked the way mine does, but the greater jihad is to strive against the base parts of our nature, so I will not do that.  I honestly don’t feel that way anyways.  How could I when most of my family and many of my friends are Bible-believing Christians?  I do not celebrate the calamity that has doubly befallen me befalling you.  Rather, I welcome you.

I invite you.

Though we differ in religion, we worship the same god, Allah.  Do you object to this name?  Why?  The Arabic word ‘Allah’ is nearly identical to the Aramaic word Jesus used.  It is very close the Hebrew words of Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, David and Solomon, peace be upon them and all prophets.  It is certainly much closer than the Germanic ‘god’ or the derivatives of the Greek “theos” (dieu, dios, etc.).  It is the word your Arab co-religionists use to this day. 

Our god is one and the same.  We share the duty to research and uphold the integrity of the revealed books:  the scrolls of Abraham, the instructions of Moses, the songs of David and the good message of Jesus, peace be upon them all.  We share the duty to stop the oppression and expulsion of our respective brothers and sisters in faith in the land we both consider holy.  We also share the duty to defend the right to live by revealed religion, a right that is being threatened for all of us.  It is on this, the common and obvious points, that we should unite and cooperate, inclining towards peace, and leave the differences to the debates of our respective scholars.

 “…and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, ‘We are Christians,’ because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant” (Qur-an 5:82).

Your brother in Humanity,

al-Qahırıĩ

Advertisements

7 comments on “Dear Christian Brothers and Sisters

  1. afrigiyah points out something interesting, I actually posted a salon.com article about it on fb yesterday. “Terrorism” has seemingly become a term used exclusively with Muslims. When it’s found that the perpetrator is not Muslim then the terms used is typically “extremist.” But I think we should try to keep in mind the expanding use, within media and government entities like the DHS, of terms such as “domestic terrorists.” That is not a term used to describe Muslims, and given DHS material it appears to mean white Americans. More specifically, conservative Americans. Everyone should go watch the video on the link within the top comment. I don’t care to forecast how long it will be until we’re all so suspicious of one another that race really won’t matter. But putting the events in Norway aside, there does seem to be a current push from government to characterize white Americans as most likely to be terrorists.

  2. Check the article entitled “Norway, Islam and the threat of the West”:

    http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/07/2011723135619293955.html

    Also, here’s an interesting excercise…Do a Google search on “norway bombings” or “anders behring breivik”. Then click on the articles one-by-one and do a find for the word “terrorist”. After doing this, I’m convinced that Muslims have “given” exclusive rights to the word TERRORIST. Almost no articles refer to Breivik explicitly as a terrorist. For anyone, who ascribes to the all-Muslims-are-not-terrorists-but-all-terrorists-are-Muslims point of view should give this some deep thought. How easy is it to turn a human being into a parrot–a creature that can impressively mimic what he’s heard a thousand times but has no ability to reason?

    Al-Qahirii–to your post, I’m not sure that white Christians will ever be branded the way that blacks, Muslims, Native Americans and other minority groups have been, but there are certainly other ways of keeping freedoms of the masses in check. And I agree that the secularist attack on revealed religion is part of this mission because authentically revealed religion is revolutionary at its essence. So it is quite expected from the powers that be to either misdirect or eliminate any threat to the status quo. I see that Christians in the West are more likely to be targets of misdirection than elimination. Firstly, because it’s more difficult to eliminate a majority than a minority. And Secondly, because it’s more difficult to justify killing someone who looks like you than an “alien” who doesn’t belong in the first place.

  3. Oh yeah, and as for being out of the U.S. for so long, it’s debatable whether that makes one prone to inaccurate readings of politics. While I’m less likely to be in tune with the day-to-day comings and goings- don’t know who Michelle Bachmann is, for example- I do have a sort of “outside looking in” perspective that is doubly rare because I’m “from the inside”. I have a panoramic, rather than zoomed-in, perspective, and I see trends unencumbered by the distraction of minute-by-minute minutiae. From that, however accurate or inaccurate it may be, the name of the president doesn’t matter much in my view, as far as larger agendas are involved. Pet projects aside, all presidencies run along the same trajectory. A candidate either supports a given agenda, wins, and furthers it. Or, they oppose it, win, and compromise their way right to it. Conservative, liberal, democrat, green, etc. more accurately describe the standpoint from which a politician’s rhetoric begins, rather than a direction he or she will head in. It’s the kingmakers, Professor Bruh, that matter, and only they…

  4. Although the sentiment of interreligious solidarity is commendable, I think you’ve overstated the case. It’s hardly that simple. The day when “white Christians” are widely demonized is a loooong way off. You’ve been away from America too long akh…do you realize who controls Congress? Michelle Bachmann is running for president last time I checked. The US is in no danger of a white Christian backlash. The US is one of the most religious societies in the world. Religion ain’t going NOWHERE….the world itself is actually probably more religious now than it was 30-40 years ago.

    On another note, I disagree with the following statement: “A religion and book should not be judged by the action of their adherents, even if they claim to act in their name. Rather, the evaluation and judgment should be based on nothing other than a fair reading of the texts.”

    First of all, if a religion or ideology should NOT be judged by the actions of its adherents then I know some Marxist-Leninist theory that is looking reaaal good right about now. Perhaps you mean to say they are not the ONLY one. In which case I agree, of course. The reality is that the actions of an ideology’s adherents are an important judgment on it, because if the book/message/ideology a group claims to follow is effective, then it will literally result in a transformation of the self, and this will reflect in the groups actions.

    Second, your statement begs the question: what is a “fair” reading of the text? To a secular critic of a sacred text a fair reading is one that privileges a critical attitude towards the message and source of that text….lately these critics resist any attempt to fix meaning to a text. However, to a believer, a “fair” reading could be many things. To some believers, a fair reading could mean only a reading that comes to the conclusion that the text is divine….those who refuse to believe after reading are thereby unfair, disqualified from interpreting and furthermore headed to hell for their alleged disobedience to what should have been self evident.

    Lastly, I would like to offer my prayers and deepest sympathies for the victims of this horrible attack in Norway.

    • as-Salamu alaykum.

      Very good points, and I anticipated some of them.

      If you look now, you will see that I changed the sentence “A religion and book should not be judged by the actions of its adherents…” to “A religion and book should not be judged by the actions of a few criminals”. That actually happened before I read your comment. I think that provides a more realistic level of clarity.

      As for my definition of a “fair reading of the text”, I don’t want to be any more specific than that a person should check what is in her or his heart before embarking on any endeavor. Both of the scenarios you described- not fixing a meaning (which I’m not exactly clear on) or being condemned for not being convinced- describe extremes that are inadvisable. Of course, and it is not alone, “hell”/damnation is very real in Islam, but as far as I’ve read it is only for Allah to Judge.

      In the end, though, I really don’t feel that what we are describing is as far off as you do, and there are evidences of a rising undercurrent (check out the first comment to this post). It is hard to imagine because if it were true, it would be the first time in history (to my knowledge) that a MAJORITY population has been the target of profiling, etc. by a “democratic” government. “Communist” countries more or less do it all the time. It happens to minorities in “democracies” all the time- Japanese/ethnic German-speaking Germans in WWII, various racial groups, immigrants, etc. But never, in a “democracy” the majority demographic. Only time will tell. I hope we’re both wrong and things go the other way…

    • Assalamualaikum.

      I think the “fair reading of a text” clarifies your first assertion that an ideology’s judgement should include an examination of its adherents. What I mean to say is that I believe most “muslim terrorists” do not give the text a fair reading. A lot of terrorists, especially in third world countries are terrorists because of their living situations. When a person has grown up without stable food, income, housing, family,… it is easy to trick and brainwash them. These people maybe illeterate and unable to even read the Quran but are tricked by the Terrorist leaders that a suicide bombing will land them a spot in Heaven. Now for a person who has had a poor lifestyle up until now and are taken up by terrorist leaders who give them food and security and then promise them everything (paradise) for killing someone, they believe it and accept the offer. And those terrorist leaders themselves don’t carry out any of the bombings or anything, they get others to do their dirty work for their own personal gains.
      So how can we judge an ideology by its adherents, when those “adherents” have never read (or if they have then never read fairly or truly understood) the text– rather they are just basing their actions off of false promises given by terrorist leaders. You can judge the terrorist leaders by the actions of terrorists, because the terrorists act based upon the warped version of Islam falsely given to them by terrorist leaders.
      IF one does want to judge an ideology by its followers (which I agree with that point) then that ideology should be judged by its TRUE followers, who actually read and understand the message.
      Your point of Marxist theory is good, but we judge Marxism by people who actually followed it, so why not judge Islam by people who actually follow it.

      My condolences to the victims of the Norway Bombings and to their families.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s