| Terrorism as a Force for Change The British experience has shown that terrorism can be extremely effective at changing a society, for better or for worse depending on your point of view. After the London bombings of July 2005, the British government saw to it that no serious discussion about the book and the man, which were the inspiration for the slaughter of 54 British citizens ever took place by silencing critics of the book and the man with threats of fines and imprisonment. The government, in effect sought to appease would-be cold-blooded mass-murderers through a Munich-like policy of appeasement, granting them, in the face of opposition from Muslim themselves, more freedom to spread their gospel. ... we also recognize that a free society must have the scope to debate, to criticize, proselytise, insult and even ridicule belief and religious practices in order to ensure that there is full scope – short of violence or inciting violence or other criminal offences - to tackle these issues. From a plea by an alliance of Muslims, Christians, humanist, secularist urging the British Parliament to reject legislation limiting the rights to criticize religious beliefs and traditions. A tacit bargain was struck between the British government and those for whom terrorism is a legitimate mean, sanctioned by the Koran (read The War Surah), to impose Allah’s Will on the unwilling. Put away your bombs and your guns and you will be allowed to recruit largely unopposed in our corner of the Land of War (anywhere Islam is not supreme). Almost from one day to the next, the country that fought a world war to preserve us from fanatics simultaneously became a more tolerant and intolerant society: more tolerant of zealots and less tolerant of their critics. Threats of terrorism can also be very effective at changing societies as the “cartoon protest” demonstrated. For more than two decades members of the Arab League (a regional organisation of Arab states in North and Northeast Africa) and other Muslim nations have been trying to get the United Nations to declare the Koran and the Prophet Muhammad above criticism of any kind as part of a global policy on controlling the press. Only the United States has steadfastly stood in the way of such a resolution which would make a mockery of free speech. The Arab League did not get their declaration of immunity for their beloved Messenger of God, but two Danish imams did, using the threat of violence. The imams manufactured truly offensive cartoons of the Prophet, slipped them in among the mostly inoffensive drawings of the Danish cartoonists and travelled the Middle East inciting violence against those who would draw such caricatures of Allah’s Messenger. It worked, and like Britain before it, most of Europe became more tolerant of religious fanatics and less tolerant of their critics. Will Anders Behring Breivik succeed in changing Norwegian society? Probably not! Terrorists with a political objective, as oppose to those with a religious agenda, are few and far between. The time between political acts of terrorism is measured in years, while those of religious terrorists are almost a daily occurrence. I doubt very much if political terrorists are lining up to follow up Breivik’s heinous act, with equally murderous acts of their own, should the Norwegian government fail to meet his demands. Therefore, there is little incentive, as there was in Britain after the bombings, to accommodate this brand of lunatic. Bernard Payeur, July 25, 2011
|
