Why aren't Muslims speaking out? Options

[radhikaeatsraman]

I was having a discussion with my uncle and my father about the current situation with terrorism and the Middle East. During the discussion, I kept emphasizing that the majority of Muslims are good people and probably don't support terrorists and their actions. But then they said that they're all keeping quiet, and that by doing that, they're indirectly supporting it. By ignoring it, it's going to continue.

Then, they went on to say that in order for the terrorists to commit these acts, they need money for weapons and other equipment. Who provides it? Right after 9/11, millions of Muslims across the US were caught having connections to al-Qaeda, and many of them are in prison for it.

So why aren't "good Muslims" speaking out? Is it because of fear, or are they quietly supporting it?

[innovation]

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves. (Al-Baqarah 2: 190-194)

Clearly, Muslims are not pacifists, and they are willing to wage war in order to ensure the survival of their faith and their people. However, Islam itself is not deliberately militant, either. This passage seems fair (parts of it even reflect the norms of modern diplomacy), but it relies too much on human judgment to decide when violence is appropriate and when it is not. For example, what is "oppression"? What constitutes the end of "tumult and oppression"? When does one "transgress limits"?

Thus, if one judges Islamic militancy by this passage, it's really human judgment that is flawed, not Islam itself. This reliance on human judgment is rather surprising, however, since Islam emphasizes the flawed nature of human beings by asking its followers to submit to the word Allah without question.