(no subject)

Various newspaper pundits and bloggers (mostly non-UK) are talking about the "lack of condemnation" of the London bombings from the muslim community and the 'weak response' from official groups who did condemn it. Christopher Hitchens isn't the worst offender, but he deserves to be singled out for this particular piece:

Far more depressing are the insincere and inauthentic statements made by more "mainstream" types. The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone--another Blair-hater and another flirter with any local Imam who can bring him a few quick votes--managed to say that the murders were directed at "the working class," not the "powerful." That's true enough, but it doesn't avoid the implication that a jihadist bomb in, say, the Stock Exchange would have been less reprehensible. Another dismal statement, issued by the Muslim Council of Britain in concert with something called "Churches Together in Britain and Ireland," got as far as proclaiming that "no good purpose can be achieved by such an indiscriminate and cruel use of terror." This is to say too much and too little. It still hints that the purpose might be ill-served by the means. Further, it fails as an ecumenical statement in that it was evidently not submitted to Britain's large Jewish community for ratification. Why do I think that there were some in both the Muslim and Christian leaderships who thought that, in their proud "inclusiveness," they didn't need to go quite that far?

His comments on Ken Livingstone seem to be based on the fact that Ken's a dodgy leftie and therefore can't have meant what he quite clearly said. I'm not sure they justify a more extensive reply.

It's not like we expected Catholics to apologise every time the I.R.A. detonated a bomb, is it? So why the cherished myth that British Muslims need to condemn these atrocities, but aren't doing so (not actually true). But anyway...

"Nothing in Islam can ever justify the evil actions of the bombers" - Iqbal Saccranie

There you go. Another clear statement of condemnation from the Muslim Council of Britain. I'm sure it won't be enough for some people, of course.

And as for Churches Together using weak wording, Hitchens must have blinked and missed the next line in that statement:

"The scriptures and the traditions of both the Muslim and Christian communities repudiate the use of such violence. Religious precepts cannot be used to justify such crimes, which are completely contrary to our teaching and practice."

Sounds about right to me.

Come to think of it, if he's talking about the proud "inclusiveness" not including the Jewish community, he must have blinked again and missed the Chief Rabbi standing alongside the Archbishop of Canterbury and a spokesman for the Council of Mosques and Imams.

I don't know if that was a Churches Together statement (although it was rather more high profile than the one he quotes), but it's worth pointing out that Churches Together definitely have released some joint Jewish/Christian/Muslim statements of condemnation, too.