Home Columns Books Papers Biography Contact

Columns and Articles by Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman

April 28, 2012

Fear and Loathing or Analysis and Perspective?

There are two ways to analyze the violent eruption of global terrorist attacks that have marked the past three decades: analyze the nature of the threat and the culture supporting it, or blame it all on the evils of Western colonialism and American militarism. The latter analysis is the choice of the “politically correct,” who say that terrorism is as rampant in the West as it is in the Muslim world. A truth check, however, will tell us that for every Western terrorist (such as Timothy McVeigh), there are hundreds almost exclusively from the Muslim world.

If colonialism is the villain of this piece, why do ideologues only talk about Western colonialism? Why ignore that Arab Muslims (and European Christians) suffered under 500 years of Ottoman Turkish colonialism well before Western colonization, and how about the Muslim world in Central Asia that suffered under both Russian Tsarist and Communist colonialism?

Arabs themselves were dreadful imperialists (700-1,000 A.D.) and every land they conquered is still dysfunctional today, according to Harvard economics professor, Eric Chaney: “Democratic Change in the Arab World, Past and Present,” in the April 7 Economist and Fareed Zakaria in Time, April 7. Wherever Arabs conquered, bad governance and economic development remain smothered to our day. This is even true for countries temporarily conquered but not converted to Islam by the Arabs (Spain, Portugal, Southern Italy).

Islamist terrorism is not just aimed at the West (revenge for colonization), but also at Thailand (Buddhist); Muslim Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia; and Nigeria, where jihadis murdered Christian church goers on Easter Sunday. Black slavery was an Arab business long before it was European.

American deniers and apologists for Islamist terrorism have a colleague in Canada: Mira Blinkers, president of “Canadians-are-Under-No-Threat,” who has passionately denounced the treatment of “captive insurgents” (her term for terrorists) and thinks that they should not only be treated better, but should be integrated into Canadian society. The current object of her attention is Afghan jihadi, Ahmed Allah-Akbar.

The satirical website, British Freedom, has offered an imaginary letter from Canada’s Department of Defence, providing Ms. Blinker with a new “Adopt-a-Jihadist” program designed specifically for her. (See britishfreedom.org/canada’s-new-adopt-a-jihadist-program/)

“In accordance with the guidelines of this new pilot program, we have decided to release one terrorist and place him in your custody. I am pleased to inform you that your personal detainee has been selected and is scheduled for transportation under heavily armed guard from Pearson International to your residence in Toronto next Thursday.

Ahmed Allah-Akbar (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of complaint. In other words, the standards which you and most people of your ideological persuasion demand of civilized democracies like Israel, but not of Islamic dictatorships.

We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home-schooling. Be warned. Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers. We advise that you do not ask him to demonstrate these skills at your yoga class or while you are piloting your Cessna aircraft. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless you think that this might offend him. [Canada permits ruinous lawsuits against those who “offend” Islamists.]

You will appreciate that Ahmed, as an Islamic fundamentalist, views females as a subhuman property without rights, including the right to refuse his sexual demands. This is a particularly sensitive subject for him and he has been known to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the new dress code that he will "recommend" as more appropriate attire. I'm sure that, over time, you will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the burka. Just remember that it is all part of 'respecting his culture and religious beliefs' as described in your letter.”

The letter was signed by “General I. M. Perturbed.” A man after my own heart.

679 words

Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is a historian, lecturer, and author of How Do You Know That? You may contact her at Lfarhat102@aol.com or www.globalthink.net.