![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Someone linked to This article from the New York Times (requires registration, bugmenot works) on SOCNET, the mailing list for INSNA members, and other researchers working in social networks. The article annoyed me, so I composed a response:
Whilst the link between this editorial and the original topic of discussion seems tenuous at best, I feel that since it's been mentioned, it should be challenged.
Firstly, terrorist action in England has been an occasional feature of life for a long time, largely as a result of IRA action. It's terribly sad that people have died and been injured (and yesterday was stressful for those of us who have friends in the capital), but today we're back to business as usual. The odd explosion in London won't cause us to lose our freedoms. How we react to such explosions might, however.
Secondly, it still isn't clear who was responsible for the bombings. Someone has put up a rant in arabic on a website claiming responsibility, but that doesn't prove anything. It may yet prove to be the work of Al-Qaeda, but we don't know that yet.
Thirdly, to glibly connect Al-Qaeda with Islam serves to further the alienation some Muslims feel in our society. There is no room for the blowing up of innocents in Islam.
Fourthly, the assertion that "The Muslim village has been derelict in condeming the madness of jihadist attacks" is simply incorrect. British Muslim leaders have been lining up to condemn the attacks in the clearest possible tones, and to suggest otherwise is slapdash journalism.
London will defeat the madmen who are responsible for these attacks by uniting as a community, not by alienating the Muslim population who are already fed up of people claiming atrocities are "Islamic" in origin.
One reader suggested I send it to the editor of the NYT; I note they say 150 words is the maximum length of a letter. Maybe I should just send it anyway? I'm not sure I have arsed to chop it to 150 words.
Whilst the link between this editorial and the original topic of discussion seems tenuous at best, I feel that since it's been mentioned, it should be challenged.
Firstly, terrorist action in England has been an occasional feature of life for a long time, largely as a result of IRA action. It's terribly sad that people have died and been injured (and yesterday was stressful for those of us who have friends in the capital), but today we're back to business as usual. The odd explosion in London won't cause us to lose our freedoms. How we react to such explosions might, however.
Secondly, it still isn't clear who was responsible for the bombings. Someone has put up a rant in arabic on a website claiming responsibility, but that doesn't prove anything. It may yet prove to be the work of Al-Qaeda, but we don't know that yet.
Thirdly, to glibly connect Al-Qaeda with Islam serves to further the alienation some Muslims feel in our society. There is no room for the blowing up of innocents in Islam.
Fourthly, the assertion that "The Muslim village has been derelict in condeming the madness of jihadist attacks" is simply incorrect. British Muslim leaders have been lining up to condemn the attacks in the clearest possible tones, and to suggest otherwise is slapdash journalism.
London will defeat the madmen who are responsible for these attacks by uniting as a community, not by alienating the Muslim population who are already fed up of people claiming atrocities are "Islamic" in origin.
One reader suggested I send it to the editor of the NYT; I note they say 150 words is the maximum length of a letter. Maybe I should just send it anyway? I'm not sure I have arsed to chop it to 150 words.
determined
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
maybe you can beg one of your friends list to edit... :)
(no subject)
Islam isn't monolithic. I don't think there's much any Muslims in england could do that they haven't already.
Of course, the Muslims I know personally are just like everyone else I know, but follow Islam to a greater or lesser extent, so I may not have a clear picture. There must be a great many people in other countries who feel abused by England/USA and while not terrorists, understand the motivation, and are in a culture which Islam is an integral part. Possibly his rant would make some sense directed to them, but wouldn't exactly be effective.