Bin Laden's Test of Islam

Time to find out whether Islam really is a religion of peace.

Osama bin Laden has, at long last, joined his evil master Muhammad in the pit of hell, or so we're told by a high-placed source who ought to know.  We will not insist, like the Weekly World News, on a death certificate; it's enough to rejoice with the rest of America.  As with the Somali pirates he (finally) ordered gunned down, it's fair to give Mr. Obama credit for issuing the orders that led to this happy end.

Fine.  Now what?  Osama bin Laden, while the titular leader of al Qaeda and a noted chieftain of our enemies, didn't seem inclined to personally blow himself up at our expense.  Will his decease lead to more, or less, danger from terrorist attacks?

The remaining leaders of al-Qaeda would like us to think it's the former.  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed claimed he'd stashed a nuke somewhere in Europe as revenge if we ever bagged his boss.  Ordinary Muslims living as neighbors to bin Laden think the same:

Muhammad Ibrahim, who is in his early 60s, said in Peshawar the killing of bin Laden would have no affect on most people's lives.

"If Osama is dead or alive it will not make any change in our life. This dirty game will continue," he said.

It need not be so.  The "dirty game" need not continue - if, that is, our elites have been right all along and Islam is truly a religion of peace hijacked by a handful of extremists.  Other ordinary Muslims hope that's the case:

Muhammad Tahir Khan, working as a telephone operator in a private organization, said that killing bin Laden was good news.

"He Osama is responsible for violence in Pakistan and Afghanistan," he said.

Even the Muslim Brotherhood, no strangers to violence themselves, took the opportunity to lay blame on bin Laden and suggest a peaceful outcome:

"With Bin Laden's death, one of the reasons for which violence has been practiced in the world has been removed," Essam al-Erian, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's governing body, told Reuters.

"It is time for Obama to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq and end the occupation of U.S. and Western forces around the world that have for so long harmed Muslim countries," he said... "It is time for the world to understand that violence and Islam are not related and that relating them has been an intentional mistake by the media."  [emphasis added]

Only one hasn't been willing.
Are they willing now?

OK.  We've got bin Laden.  American forces are in Iraq and Afghanistan under treaty agreements with the Muslim governments of both countries, but there are existing timetables for our departure in the very near future.  We won't leave tomorrow, but we've got tickets for the day after that.  A little patience and the Brotherhood's wish will be granted, no violent action required.

When Hitler ruled Germany, the democratic nations naturally equated Germany with aggressive violence.  After the war, we occupied Germany for many years in a successful attempt to root out Nazism, militarism, and any remaining tendencies to invade other countries.

If anything, we were a bit too successful: Germany is so pacifistic that it's reluctant to act even in the defense of Europe.  Germans alive today have provably demonstrated that Germany is no more dangerous or violence-prone than anywhere else and is entitled to equal international respect and trust.

Thanks to the good work of America's special forces, the religion of Islam has been granted the same opportunity.  The mass murderer bin Laden is dead; America's thirst for vengeance and justice has been slaked, and our occupation of Muslim countries will shortly end.

Thus, there's no plausible reason or excuse for any more terrorism.  If the terrorists will cease their barbaric assaults, we'll shortly move along and the world can coexist in peace.

Is that likely?  Time will tell.  All Muslims should know this, however: the next bomb that goes off with a fundamentalist Muslim finger on the trigger will be conclusive proof that the phrase "religion of peace" is a lie.

If Islam is your religion, and you believe in peace, that makes it your job to stop that finger before it reaches the trigger.  We'll help in that effort if you like, but if you're telling the truth, our help isn't necessary nor should it be.

We'll find out for sure pretty soon.

Petrarch is a contributing editor for Scragged.  Read other articles by Petrarch or other articles on Foreign Affairs.
Reader Comments

Aaaaaand... here's the answer.

While al-Erian portrayed bin Laden as a cause for violence in the Reuters article, the Muslim Brotherhood’s statement on their Arabic-language page said nothing critical of him. The website refers to the killing of “Sheikh” Osama bin Laden, using an honorific title, and condemns the attack as an assassination. It demands America stay out of the internal affairs of Arab and Muslim countries, and blames the West for launching a media campaign to demonize Islam.

Above all, the MB’s Arabic-language statement “confirms that the legitimate resistance against foreign occupation, for any country is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine law and international convention,” in reference to America’s presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. By supporting violence against America’s troops in Muslim lands, the MB essentially defends the al-Qaeda campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.

May 3, 2011 4:51 PM

So Muslims are two-faced on the issue yet again. Hmmm, gee, what a surprise.

May 3, 2011 4:53 PM

Islam is not a religion, it is a political movement like National Socialism which has had the good fortune or smarts to disguise itself as a religion. True believers in communism were acted religions but communism said there was not god so it couldn't be a religion. This is the first religious enemy we've had and it will be interesting to see what happens.

May 3, 2011 10:29 PM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...