they claim to be muslim terrorists

the london bombing topic had drawn interest and generated lots of discussion here, that i feel the need to ‘reopen’ another post on it.

major (rtd) d. swami had share an interesting article ‘the calculus of appeasement’ by john derbyshire, and he and wits0 and mentioned about the archbishop of canterbury, rowan williams and the mayor, ken livingstone.

i made a remark that in yesterday’s star paper, in an article (can’t find it online), there was a statement from the archbishop, which i feel is very good and need to be share. he had said this, he when urged britons to resist the temptation to lash out at muslims:
“it is a huge falacy to suppose that one community is somehow more intriniscally prone to violence or courage than any other.”

so true. just because the terrorists claim to be muslims, we shouldn’t conclude that all muslims are violent. i, and i’m sure most of you, were quite upset to hear of the news in new zealand where some mosques had been vandalised. what kind of mentality these people have eh? just because these terrorists who claim they are muslims (see below) bombed london, why did they attack other muslims in retaliation?

in that same article, at a church service to mourn the victims, a priest, rev. paul hawkins also said something meaningful:
“there are no muslim terrorists. these are terrorists. these are criminals who claim to be muslims. we all know that the vast majority of our muslim friends and neighbours are as horrified and disgusted at what has happened as we are.”

in one of my comments earlier, i had argued with some readers that ‘they are muslim terrorists’. well, i take it back now. i feel it is too harsh to say that. the rev. hawkins is right. there are no muslim terrorists. these terrorists claim they are muslims, and claim they are doing it in the name of god… their god.

UPDATED: i managed to get the link on the church service by fr. paul hawkins on which he made the above statement from idlan’s blog. it was from the guardian.