“When we look at the problem of radicalization, the excuses will never run out,” Dr. Jasser, founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy said. “It seems to me that Americans are sitting around doing nothing to combat extremists.” Dr. Jasser said this at the March 10, 2011 hearings by Rep. Peter King. There is another article I invite you to read:
Jasser stressed the need to combat radicalism, saying the issue is a moral one that Muslims must take on and fix. He added that violence is the last step in radicalization and that American Muslims are failing to address, observe and report those they see taking steps toward radicalization in a productive, proactive way that provides solutions moving forward. Jasser compared radicalism in Islam to a cancer, and said if American Muslims are going to fix the problem, they have to be able to talk about it openly and attack it from all angles. When asked about his view on CAIR, Jasser said the organization promotes a victim mentality rather than a corporative attitude within the American Muslim community.
“We have a problem internally,” Jasser said. “We must awaken the silent Muslim majority.”
Melvin Bledsoe, father of Carlos Leon Bledsoe of Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the man convicted of killing U.S. Army Private William Long and wounding Private Quinton Ezeagwula outside of a military recruitment center in Little Rock, Arkansas after going through the radicalization process, had a similar message to Jasser.
Bledsoe gave a detailed description of his son’s decline into radical-Islam, adding that political correctness will not stop radical extremists from countries like Yemen and terrorist organizations from recruiting vulnerable young men in America.
“This hearing today is extremely important,” Bledsoe said. “I sincerely hope this committee can address the issue in a productive way.”
Some critics have already brought forth predictable historical analogies. I would point out that historical events are, by their nature, unique and unrepeatable. Drawing analogies with such events to the present setting is a risky business.
1) Holding hearings into Islamic "radicalization" is not an exercise in "McCarthyism," as widely and deeply misunderstood. I would invite you to read M. Stanton Evans
' 2007 investigative masterpiece "Blacklisted by History." We toss around the word "McCarthyism" with little understanding of it actually was. I am no apologist for him or his approach. However, as historians, both liberal conservative, examine the Soviet archives, it is quite clear that Soviet Communism had its supporters in various branches of the federal government in the 1950's. The proper analogy, it seems to me, is that there is, clearly, a path toward radicalization of a Muslim that it would do well for Americans of all type, but especially Muslims, to become aware.
' 2007 investigative masterpiece "Blacklisted by History." We toss around the word "McCarthyism" with little understanding of it actually was. I am no apologist for him or his approach. However, as historians, both liberal conservative, examine the Soviet archives, it is quite clear that Soviet Communism had its supporters in various branches of the federal government in the 1950's. The proper analogy, it seems to me, is that there is, clearly, a path toward radicalization of a Muslim that it would do well for Americans of all type, but especially Muslims, to become aware. 2) Holding hearings into Islamic "radicalization" is not akin to Japanese internment during World War II -- another widely and deeply misunderstood phenomenon.
Diana West points out that evidence of extensive Tokyo-directed espionage networks within the Japanese community on the West Coast was largely shoved aside, evidence revealed to FDR and his senior advisers through the MAGIC project, the top-secret decryption of some 5,000 Japanese diplomatic cables. Again, the proper analogy was that in a time of war, FDR acted upon evidence, and not racism. Again, I do not defend what FDR did in isolating Japanese Americans, as does Michelle Malkin in her book In Defense of Internment. I think there were other ways of dealing with the evidence. However, to accuse him of acting upon racism is, in my view, contrary to the evidence.
My point is that in both historical analogies, what we need to learn on the positive side is that there are enemies to America within our borders and that we need to be vigilant. The negative lesson to learn is that government always runs the risk of over-reaching, so to speak. Thus, we as citizens also need to be vigilant to be sure that does not happen. Yet, we do not help our case by closing our eyes to the quite real issue to which Dr. Jasser points us: there is a process of radicalization of which we need to be aware and stop.
No comments:
Post a Comment