Having my facts put straight...

9/11 Attacks: Not by Islamists?

(Image from Wikipedia)

A man claiming to be Muslim and going by the name "Masoom Najiyah" (which comes up nada on Google) recently posted some comments to an old blog entry, "Speaking of Muhammad's Image..." (February 6, 2006).

Masoom was concerned that I had gotten some misinformation and wanted to put my facts straight:

FYI Muslims ARENT BEHIND 9/11 all the facts pointing to president bush. you want a Muslim to argue with you got one! ill put all your facts straight! cause at the moment your dont have a clue!

One fact that he informed me of?

Islam mean peace.

On that point, I happened to have a clue, so I replied:

I am sure that there is a lot that I don't know, and I am always willing to learn. I do know, however, that the word "Islam" does not mean "peace." It literally means "submission."

Masoom elaborated:

Islam does mean peace - through submission of Allah.

Well . . . that's what I was afraid of. Without submission to Allah -- in Masoom's view -- Islam does not mean peace. For the non-Muslim, then, "Islam" -- or, more problematically, the very religion Islam -- means submission.

According to the early Muslim writer ibn Ishaq, writing in Sirat Rasoul Allah, Muhammad ordered the poets Abu 'Afak and Asmā bint Marwān killed for writing poetry urging the Arabs of Medina not to submit to the rising power of Islam but to fight instead. Reportedly, both were assassinated -- Asmā bint Marwān being murdered by night as she lay in her bed nursing one of her infants.

Is this story true? I suppose that one might question it and argue that early Islamic leaders invented some hadith about Muhammad's action toward poets in order to justify their suppression of dissent.

Masoom, however, accepts the story:

the story you read was true Prophet (pbuh) did have her killed

And defends Muhammad's putative assassination order:

she blamed Islam and hated the followers. like i said before vilonce can only be used to defend Islam.

At that point, I didn't have any great desire to continue our 'discussion', for I wouldn't want to be accused by Masoom of blaming Islam or hating its followers, so I posted no reply and thus had to forego Masoom's factual evidence that Mohamed Atta and his companions were not really (radical) Muslims or that Osama bin Laden was lying when he claimed that 9/11 was the work of his organization Al-Qaeda. I assume, anyway, that this is what Masoom meant by stating that "Muslims ARENT BEHIND 9/11."

But Masoom needs to convince other Muslims first, and he could begin by persuading Gamal al-Banna, the 'moderate' brother of Hassan al-Banna, that Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11, for Gamal al-Banna had this to say about the attacks:

"A group of young people from the Gulf countries and Egypt [looked a American oppression of Muslims.] ... These [Muslim] youths thought of a way to teach the U.S. a lesson, in an extraordinary and unprecedented manner. Their thought guided them to a plan that the greatest American film producers would never have dreamed of: using American planes. [They would] first be trained to fly them, and then would set a plan to take over some of them and change their direction, so that they could destroy the symbol of the Americans' prosperity and false pride -- the World Trade Center. Thus this dreadful and splendid event occurred. [The event was] dreadful because within half an hour, and with a dramatic sight whose violence surpassed all imagination, the World Trade towers, that were the source of pride and fame in the U.S., were destroyed, and over 3,000 people were killed... [It was also] a splendid [event], because the ones who planned it, with all its daring and its destructive power... knew that they would be the first to die, and that within seconds after the plane crashed into the towers, their bodies would be smoke... yet they did not hesitate, and were truly 'extremely courageous.' This event marked the end of an era and the beginning of a new era. Before this era, the powerful and wealthy countries enslaved the East, plundered its wealth, killed its people, conquered its land, and transferred everything precious and valuable there to themselves, until they attained the accumulated wealth without which they would not be able to achieve such a rise in standard of living. This accumulation [of wealth by the West], which went on for two or three centuries, impoverished the East to the same extent as it enriched the West.... These countries -- [whether] the old imperialist European nations or the new global imperialist leader, the U.S. -- never feared a settling of accounts; nor did a leader of European nations or the new global imperialist leader the U.S. fear a settling of accounts, or punishment, and they refused even to apologize. But the September events opened new horizons - a new way of settling old accounts. We acknowledge that this way will harm innocents. But when are innocents taken into account when engaging in battle? ... Finally, I would like to say that a new and unfamiliar means of obtaining justice or rights was revealed by the events of September 11, and by the Palestinian incidents of martyrdom [i.e. suicide bombing]. This method will in the future certainly find its way to American and European society, as long as this society's policy is barbaric capitalism and the enslavement of the peoples. It is only a matter of time before those who carry out acts such as those of September 2001 or the Palestinians' martyrdom will come from European society itself, and not from 'Islamic fascism,' as Mr. Bush calls it. This will give no rest to the U.S. and its allies, because it is difficult to fight it... any effort they invest in fighting terrorism will be in favor of the terrorism." (Original Arabic source cited in Memri, "Inquiry and Analysis Series - No. 334," March 16, 2007, footnote 25)

I suppose that Masoom would say that Gamal al-Banna is mistaken, but I'll just stop here.