Should Muslims feel obliged to apologize for terror attacks?


The folowing link is to an article on the website:

Should Muslims feel obliged to apologize for terror attacks?

This is an interesting article. I thought it might present me with a real reason why Muslim’s shouldn’t feel obliged to defend their faith in the face of extremist terror attacks. However, quite early on the article slides into another finger-pointing political argument with nods given towards the UN and Saudi Arabia and mention of the various wars that the former League of Nations has been responsible for since its transmutation into the United Nations in 1945. It ends on a vitriolic note condemning the West as a whole, somehow managing to get from an impartial argument to an irrefutable bias in less time that it takes me to zip up my fly.

But this is all completely irrelevant in the bigger scale of things that are happening globally. The article has a point, individual Muslims should not feel responsible personally for the horrors inflicted by the radicalized extremists of Islam but they should acknowledge that their religion is accountable directly for the atrocities. As a result, many Muslims feel the need to speak out or show solidarity against Islamic extremism and I think this is a wonderful display of proactive thinking, putting oneself in the shoes of Muhammad and seeing, quite clearly that he would not have condoned this type of pandemic terror inflicted upon many innocents.

Some would argue that Islamic terrorism and the mandates of the Islamic State are part and parcel of the Islamic doctrine but I would hasten to disagree. What was written in a time of war and dissent need not apply nowadays. By all means, live up to the virtues of Islam but never deviate into the darker side for they are the words of a military leader motivating his armies, prophetic or not and not those of a man committed to universal peace as in the earlier teachings of Muhammad.

Back to the article. Every time I hear the words ‘Suez crisis’ or ‘Two state solution’, I cringe a little knowing that my ancestors were responsible for kicking out the Palestinians and making shady deals to usurp control from Egypt of nationalised resources. That’s only two countries; England and America have been bullying the Middle East for centuries, raping it of resources and sanctioning the countries from trading with strong economic states. England is responsible for the reshaping of borders, for the creation of states and nations at the cost of others freedoms and for the usurping of control from many regimes. It has made deals with America, Russia, Israel, France, the Commonwealth to legitimise invasions on foreign soil and despite its shrinking stature on the world stage, it is still a powerful and influential player (for now). It’s no wonder that some Muslim’s hate us.

But if we’ve been bad them America has been just as guilty of orchestrating land-grabs and lording power over Arab states, making underhand deals and even planning coups as in the Iranian CIA coup de tat that put a puppet regime in place for years and enabled England, Russia and America to greedily drain the sands of oil whilst giving the Arabs the shittest deal possible on royalties. The Islamic Revolution changed all that and the regime is still strong, although it is too orthodox for my liking, by far and always unpredictable.

The article doesn’t mention the Soviet Union or Russia in any way, focusing on ‘the West’ instead. Russia is not without its own history of oppressing the Muslims. Wars raged between Russia and Persia in 1826 and the Russians helped England to invade Iran during 1941 although, again this was not necessary and was another underhand attack stewed up between the Soviets and Great Britain for other reasons other than purported allegiance to Hitler by the Shah of Iran. No doubt oil was at the heart of it as well as Stalin’s wishes to force Communism on the Arabs.

Yes, the West (and Russia) have been right pains in the arse for the Arabs, Indians, South Americans, pretty much everywhere, really. It was the Europeans that settled in America and look what they did to greet the natives? It was also the West that put Israel where it is today, in the territory of the former Palestine and we all know how grateful the Muslim community is for that.

But there is one fundamental difference its historic versus current. I do feel like I should apologise for England bombing the shit out of Syria and Iraq because it’s happening right now but we have to thank the Syrian Government for inciting a revolt and the Islamic State for taking advantage of civil unrest in both Iraq and Syria, forcing the UN to intervene. Let’s not forget the puppeteer hold Russia has over Syria and its present involvement in laying siege to the country; they are not exempt.

Al-Assad wants the opposition crushed and Russia is happy to oblige with superior military might. Other countries have jumped on the bandwagon despite their conflicting opinions on the continuance of an Assad regime, bombing the shit out of Islamic State controlled territory and wiping out countless civilians in the process. Proxy wars are fought in the middle; Sauds against Yemenis, Turks against Kurds, one half of Syria against the other, Israel bombing Hezbollah using Syria as their business partners to which Syria respond by firing on Israel. Group fights against group in a maelstrom of conflict. That’s just the Middle East. What about North and South Africa? What about the Baltics, Russian artillery lined up on the borders and UN battle groups sent to the Baltic states as a deterrent to invasion? What about South America, what about fucking North America?

It’s a shitstorm of epic proportions and what makes anybody think that the situation will improve once the Islamic State have been eradicated?

If a nation behaves badly, its citizens should feel ashamed for the actions of its government. If a religion behaves badly, then all members should feel remorseful that such a thing has been born from their scripture. The article in question downplays the level of remorse that Islam should feel as presently, its doctrines are responsible for thousands upon thousands of deaths in a pandemic surge of extremist violence. The UN bombs might kill hundreds of civilians and for that, I feel terrible but this is nothing compared to the number killed in the name of Islam across the globe.


Before the author of the article in question decides to shake his spear at the West, he should remember how far Islam is prepared to go in order to assert its dominion over others. Most of what the Islamic State preach is in the Qu’ran and Sunnah and they focus on particular sections of the Sahihian Sunnah books to license murder and oppression, rape and torture, namely the Book of Jihad and Expedition. The notion of blowing oneself up and taking out innocent civilians is not an Islamic ethic and I can only really find one hadith that might hint at the legislation of murdering innocent people. Of tens of thousands of hadith, to focus on one is pathetic:

Chapter 9: Permissibility of killing women and children in night raids, so long as it is not done deliberately

Sa’b b. Jaththama has narrated that the Prophet (ﷺ) asked:

“What about the children of polytheists killed by the cavalry during the night raid? He said: They are from them.”

Sahih Muslim Book 19, Hadith 4323

This one hadith, with only four words spoken by Muhammad is apparently enough to sanction the murder of children whilst performing jihad. There is no Qu’ran verse to fortify this hadith.

Compared to the subsequent chapter:


Chapter 8: The prohibition of killing women and children in war
It is narrated by Ibn ‘Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) forbade the killing of women and children.
Sahih Muslim Book 19, Hadith 4320
I prefer to look to the Qu’ran and Surah Al-An’am (The Cattle):

Those will have lost who killed their children in foolishness without knowledge and prohibited what Allah had provided for them, inventing untruth about Allah . They have gone astray and were not [rightly] guided.

Qu’ran 6:140

There are thousands of supporting hadith to forbid the killing of innocent people (those not oppressing the Muslims directly) yet the death toll is rising each day. It is not fair for the author of the article in question to twist Muslim’s genuine remorse for the abuse of their doctrine into a political rant. He fell away from the crux of the question; should Muslims feel obliged to apologize for terror attacks?

Well, if they have a heart and follow the true tenets of their faith then they will feel obliged to have remorse for ALL victims of Islamic violence, worldwide. If I was a Muslim then it would be a constant test of my faith and I would feel compelled to have an opinion, to make my apologies for the misguided warmongers of the world using Islam as a bullwhip to secure their own material goals.

Have a read of the original, heavily biased article and see whether you agree with it. Some might, those firebrands who cannot leave old bones buried and need to rationalize the actions of a few, try to find reason in their madness that dissociates them from terrorism. What’s done is done, there’s little point trying to undo the past. Most countries are independent, those that wish to be. They got their eventually but the sins and sufferings of the fathers need not burden the children.


One thought on “Should Muslims feel obliged to apologize for terror attacks?

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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