U.S. Muslim Leaders Denounce Al Qaeda Slur Toward Obama
Spiritual leaders of New York’s African-American Muslim communities lashed out at extremist terrorist organization Al Qaeda on Friday after the organization had released a tape on which the group’s number two can be heard using racial slurs against president-elect Barack Obama.
In the tape, Ayman al-Zawahiri calls Obama a “house negro.”
The American imams called the recorded comments ”an insult” from people who have “historically been disconnected from the African-American community generally and Muslim African-Americans in particular.”
“We find it insulting when anyone speaks for our community instead of giving us the dignity and the honor of speaking for ourselves,” they said in a statement read during a news conference at the Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial, Educational and Cultural Center.
Not only did Zawahiri call Obama a house negro, he also compared them unfavorably to “honorable Americans” like Malcolm X in the message.
Of course, the American leaders are correct to speak out against Al Qaeda. Too often Muslims hear that they do not ‘condemn’ Al Qaeda and groups like it enough. As such, this condemnation serves as an example of Muslim condemnation of Al Qaeda and its message of hatred.
But the real problem with al-Zawahiri’s comments were not the racial slurs he used. The real problem is his extremism and his advocacy of terrorism. These Imams should have used the opportunity to lash out at Al Qaeda and its violent ideology in general. They should have condemned the organization itself in its entirety and explained why they believe that Al Qaeda’s leaders are not good Muslims.
That would have sent a much stronger message.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
Daniel, I’m as much an atheist as you, but if you are really sincere about wanting people to “drop religion” I’d advise you to use another tone. Even if patently man-made in your eyes, religion is extremely important to many people. They aren’t going to just drop it because you tell them it’s stupid. Engaging people in actual discussions that don’t involve insulting them has actual potential of winning hearts and minds. What you do is the opposite of that. Also it does us no good at all to pretend that the Taliban and moderate Muslims are the exact same people just because they both hold a supernatural belief system. In practice they are extremely different and refusing to see that is to fall into the same sort of black and white universe we revile in religious extremism.
If however all you want is to feel superior to those who follow supernatural belief systems then go right ahead. Sure you’ll completely undermine rationalists efforts, but maybe it’ll make you feel good. I’d recommend reading the comments policy if you wish to do that on this particular blog however.
Barack Obama wrote in his memoir that Malcolm X was one of his role models and heroes. Malcolm X never rejected the kind of simplistic thinking represented by the lame “field slave/house slave” metaphor– devised, by the way, with the specific intent of intimidating moderate black voices (MLK’s, for example), as he did (reject) the cartoonishly ludicrous racism of the “nation of islam.” So how is it racist for Al-Zawahiri to use this terminology?