When that shooting in Christchurch, New Zealand occurred in March, of Muslims at a mosque, by an Australian White Supremacist whom many would also like to remind us is Christian, I was certain that there would be reprisal attacks. I was so sure of it that I told friends who cared to listen, while I wrote nothing about same on social media, especially because others who felt the same way had done it, and on Twitter I simply retweeted such, especially one that suggested that that terrorist in New Zealand had just provided Islamic Fundamentalists an excuse they'd ride on for a long time because the Islamists, not just in a particular part of the world, but the "gathering" the world over, including in Nigeria, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Southeast Asia, Palestine, Iraq, even in the UK will respond. And respond they did in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday at churches and hotels, with more than three hundred dead, and many more injured. Sadly the thing with deaths from terrorist activities is that they rise, and the numbers bandied about in the early days after the activity grows, sometimes geometrically, after the world may have turned it's eyes away to other issues. hence it isn't unusual to find the number of dead nearly equalling the number of those affected at the end of the day, especially in countries like Nigeria where trauma centres have less than the required capacity, human and capital, to cope with the aftermath of a terrorist attack. One thing I particularly paid some attention to, after the Sri Lanka incident, was the reaction of Muslim friends online. After the Christchurch bombing, I took an interest in noting those who condemned it, because I knew there'd be reprisals, I wanted to know if the same Muslims who responded then, would do same again, seeing as being part of humanity, a hurt against one should naturally be a hurt against us all. I had intentionally commented on posts by Muslims concerning terrorism after the Christchurch attack, to condemn attacks on Muslims, so when this one happened and I heard nothing from the same people, I made an effort to remind them via Facebook and Twitter, which yielded no fruit at all. I cannot impose my will on anyone, and I can't judge people's behaviour, or insist that unless they follow a particular path, they are in the wrong, however what I'm about is humanity, and it calls on us, regardless of our leanings to empathise with victims, and condemn wrong against fellow humans, not only when "our kind" is affected. What I've noticed is the penchant by some Muslims when they eventually comment (even when there's no atom of condemnation for the terrorist act perpetrated by Islamists against people in their reactions), to claim that those ignoble acts are by Islamists, thereby separating "Islamism" from "Islam", as if no relationship whatsoever exists between the two, despite instances where Islamists have been found to claim that they are the Muslims who practice the true religion, hence the ultimate desire to institute an Islamic State, like the several attempts in Syria, Iraq and even Nigeria so far. Let us even agree that the difference between Islamism and Islam is like night and day, shouldn't Muslims condemn acts of terror by Islamists? Such people forget easily the case in Northeastern Nigeria, where Islamic Fundamentalists launched attacks initially at non-Muslims and their properties, sometimes to the delight of the local Muslim inhabitants who felt that the cups of the "Kaffirs" was finally full, as their predicament was long in coming. This, just a few years after many of the northern states adopted the Sharia Law as the model of jurisprudence in their areas. In those early days, Christians in the northern states where Sharia is a thing, were exempted from the rules, and couldn't be prosecuted at Sharia Courts. Apparently, this didn't go down well with the intolerant fundamentalists, some of whom eventually went rogue, and started attacking non-Muslims in their domain, only to eventually attack Muslims who they deemed as not practicing their faith conscientiously enough as well. The dangerous tide of intolerance not only affected easy going Muslims, but also swept away reputable imams, sheikhs and other leaders of the faith, some of whom paid the ultimate price, just because they were considered not pious enough for the faith they professed. This is why Moderate Muslims must condemn terrorist acts when perpetrated by so called Islamists, because no one is safe from them, whether Hinduist, Buddhist, Jew, Christian, Muslim, Shia, or any other Muslim sect they are not comfortable with, at the moment they wish to strike. It is not difficult to see how there exist a link between the silence amongst Muslims following a terrorist attack by fanatics in the name of Islam (under the guise of retaliation or for any other reason), and a tacit acknowledgment of such by the terrorists as an acclamation for a job well done by the Ummah, even when it isn't necessarily so. That, beyond any kind of monetary compensation, or even the assurance of an exotic life in paradise in the hereafter, surely plays a role in encouraging further, and future attacks. It is my hope that Muslims who read this treatise, especially in this Holy Month of Ramadan, will do so with an open mind, to do the needful when it is called for, to show these extremists that they do not speak for us, and in that way unite to fight this scourge of our time, whether they be Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus or the likes. 'kovich MUSLIMS SHOULD CONDEMN TERRORIST ATTACKS BY ISLAMISTS – madukovich's cogitations https://madukovich.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/muslims-should-condemn-terrorist-attacks-by-islamists/

Published by m'khail madukovich