|
|
Tal Ben-Shahar wonders why the Organization of the Islamic Conference doesn't condemn the suicide attacks on Israeli people. Some civilians may die in these attacks, but on the other side, a massive population of Palestinian civilians are murdered and ethnically cleansed in the most terrifying bloodbaths and war crimes by the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) under the title of "destroying the terrorism infrastructure", and without any complain or regret form the western governments. Hence, the entire world has to understand that the "terrorism infrastructure" is created inside the human mind, that isn't changeable unless we end unjust and indiscriminant policies, including "campus watching".
The first action that has to be condemned is injustice in judging a particular action, as does Mr. Ben-Shahar when he describes Yasin's speech as an "evil triumph". The first people who have to be condemned are those writers and intellectuals -such as Ben-Shahar- supporting war criminals who don't find it difficult to kill defenseless people and occupy their own land. The first policy that must end is the consideration of people defending their property as "fanatics" and "terrorists". The most atrocious activity that must end immediately is the "campus watching" xenophobia held by Daniel Pipes, the campus-watch leader, and his followers including that Tal Ben-Shahar. In fact, Pipes and his supporters believe that their unwarranted survey of institutions aims at the sabotage of pro-Islamic activities, but in reality, Pipes and his assistants are not doing less than implanting fear and anxiety between students who support Arab and Muslim cases. This restriction on the freedom of speech may induce some students to commit excessive violence as an only form of expression. Therefore, the legacy of campus watching won't be effectively anticipated.
Drawing a similarity between the Palestinian nation that has no army to defend its lands from the IDF occupation and between Islamic fundamentalism is the weakest point of Ben-Shahar's essay. This unfounded point of view reminds me of the famous speech of the Marshall Seymour of Great Britain in June 1882, -after his naval forces shelled, crippled and burned the Egyptian port of Alexandria leaving a massive destruction all over the city, and starting the British invasion of Egypt-, when he said to his European allies that he considered that battle as a great victory over "Islamic fundamentalism"! One can observe that ungracious ideology towards Islam shared between Ben-Shahar and the Marshal Seymour.
In conclusion, instead of adopting the system of "mind terrorism" and censorship, universities should allow the freedom of thought, the freedom of speech, the freedom of expression, and the freedom of dialogue between different mentalities, through an atmosphere of tolerance and respect of the other. Supposedly open-minded university students have the ability to separate between right and wrong, they shall compare between different ways of thinking, and decide for themselves which is moderate and which is extremist. They will know when can an action be judged as terrorism, and when it can be judged as a rightful struggle. Through that path, history won't be written by the dominant powers, but it will be seen through the clarity of facts provided by that useful multi-mental freedom of expression.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Saladin
My name is Ayman el-Hakea, I am a Construction Engineering graduate from the American University in Cairo. My origins date to an interesting mixture of Yemeni, Moroccan, Albanian, and Egyptian ancestors. I always try to be a moderate Muslim, I like animation, geopolitics, comparative religion, and football. I like to be with "people"...and I hope my writing isn't boring for anyone.
|
Comments
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
