A champagne socialist reflects on Western culture and the Universe... and whilst gazing at his navel, he comes up with a lot of useless lint. It is the fruits of this navel-gazing that form the substance of this blog.
Sheikh Mohammed Omran
Published on August 24, 2005 By Champas Socialist In Politics
Is Sheikh Mohammed Omran really as extremist as is suggested or is he just a scapegoat for the media and the Government?

He is often quoted as saying that Osama bin Laden is a great man. Yet listen to the full context of what he is saying. This is the advice he gives to those involved in the WTC attacks:

“"This is not the right way to handle your unjust matter if you feel you are dealt with unjust", but to bring it out to the community and solve it in a proper manner.”

This is how he described the attacks:

“This has happened in evil hands for an evil action...”

Weeks later he clarified his comments that bin Laden is a great man:

“I said Osama bin Laden is a good man in a sense that I freed him of all these horrible actions.”

It is at this point that I realised the misunderstanding that had been occurring. Firstly, the Sheikh’s English is not exactly perfect. He often seems to have difficulty trying to find the right words to express himself. That is the first thing to take into account. The second is that he is a religious man. A holy man. Therefore he is judging the actions as evil, but no man is inherently evil in the eyes of a holy man (priest, imam or otherwise). The imam makes this fairly clear through his muddled English:

“take it as I am talking of Osama bin Laden, the man who did September 11, the man behind so many atrocities or bad actions or horrible actions, of course I won't accept or I won't support 1% a man did something like that. So the argument here should be, did we accept or we support this atrocity or not? We accept the terrorist act or not? It doesn't matter who did it. We don't accept it. If Osama bin Laden did it, of course, we are the first one to condemn the action and the person or the persons behind that action.”

He also clarifies that he doesn’t go in for the West’s obsession with presenting such black and white ideas of good and evil. He can see tha bin Laden has done evil and has done good:

“When I said "a good man" I meant he did good deeds with the poor people. I admire his leaving all of his luxury life and his riches and go back to Afghanistan mountains and work with the Afghanis and help them, and this is what I'm looking at. I'm not saying a good man, good and bad in your sense. In my sense, a man did a great job with the Afghanis somehow and helped them with his wealth and support the poor, and this is what I'm praising of him. Not praising of him the actions you see and you believe he did it and I take refuge of God to say something like that.”

The Sheikh was also accused of supporting the people fighting against the Coalition of the Willing in Iraq. But they assumed that the Sheikh believes that they are fighting a jihad, which the Sheikh makes clear:

“If there's a Jihad in Iraq I don't believe what's happening in Iraq today, with all of this interruption and misconduct with everyone against everyone is a jihad, I don't say that, no.

TONY JONES: So it would be wrong for any young Australian to go to Iraq to fight jihad, is that right?

SHEIKH OMRAN: That's less or more about what I'm saying, yes.”

And as to the 72 virgin myth:

“What do you say to the delusion that many of these young suicide bombers have that they will go straight to heaven and be attended by 72 virgins?

SHEIKH OMRAN: I'm saying they got it wrong,”

How is this extreme? Once again, the media likes to beat it up and find extremists. They ignore the moderates and they take them out of context to turn them into extremists. Shame on them.

Comments
on Aug 24, 2005
How is this extreme? Once again, the media likes to beat it up and find extremists. They ignore the moderates and they take them out of context to turn them into extremists. Shame on them.

And the 700 Club calls Pat Robertson a "Christian"... same idiots... same logic
on Aug 24, 2005

I take it this is an Aussie problem?  Cause I have not heard of the man or his words until this.  But a fast Google search pretty much backs up your story.

Seems he is walking a tight rope, but doing it very well.  Dont expect the Media to let off him.  Like tics on a hound dog, once they sink their heads into a prey, they dont let go until he is destroyed.

on Aug 24, 2005
I came to more or less the same conclusion after seeing the interview. I also get impression that he is perhaps a bit ignorant on top of not speaking english very well (he seemed to not be aware of some things that Osama had said and so on). His comments remind me of some of the stupid things Anthony Mundene said after 9/11 which sound a lot worse then I think he actually meant.
on Aug 24, 2005
'His comments remind me of some of the stupid things Anthony Mundene said after 9/11 which sound a lot worse then I think he actually meant.'
Anthony Mundine may not be one of the great thinkers of the Western World, but I don't remember him saying anything stupid. His suggestion that the events of 11 September were caused by prior actions of the West may have been unpalatable to the political powers that be, but that doesn't make them stupid.
on Aug 24, 2005
I think if youlook hard enough, you'll probably find some sort of charitable behavior by every evil piece of filth throughout history. I doubt we'd be sitting here quibbling over whether Hitler or Stalin were "good men" just because they built a few orphanages and cared for the poor of their ethnic preference.

I wonder. If people found that Bush had donated more to charity than bin Laden, would the Bush-haters here admit he is a 'good man'?
on Aug 25, 2005
I didn't call bin Laden a good man. But I would expect priests and imams to do so.

(This is off-topic but I wouldn't necessarily call him an evil man either, because I think that's a simplistic way of looking at it. I don't think Hitler was an evil man either (and I have a blog planned on that topic). They did very evil things and were consumed by evil. But anyway, the point is not what I think, but what this Imam is saying. I think the Imam is basically saying the Islamic equivalent to "Love the sinner, hate the sin". It's a good doctrine.
on Aug 25, 2005
Dr Guy, yes he's walking a tight rope, but very few realise he is. In most presentations of him you only get to see him saying "Bin Laden is a good man" and then he's cut off.

I agree with you Furry. Mundine expressed himself poorly, and did so at a very insensitive time, but his comments were a similar viewpoint to those of Noam Chomsky. Whether you agree with Chomsky or not, it does seem that from the terrorists' viewpoint, part of their anger was at US foreign policy. The argument is not unreasonable, even if it s a little unpalatable as you say.

He is a little unaware of what bin Laden said and did...he also did the unthinkable and suggest bin Laden should be considered innocent until a trial proves him guilty. Astonishing concept I know...must be a Middle Eastern thing.