“We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British imperialism in the streets of Belfast and Derry,” Mr. King told a pro-I.R.A. rally on Long Island, where he was serving as Nassau County comptroller, in 1982. Three years later he declared, “If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the I.R.A. for it.”What bugs me about this is the naked us vs. them logic of King's thinking. King is said to have played an important part in the negotiations that led to peace in Northern Ireland, singled out for praise by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. Successful negotiators in such complex peace talks must, it seems to me, be able to see both sides of the conflict. But confronted by scary brown people of another religion, he reverts to naked hatred of the other. He is suddenly blind to the shades of opinion among Muslims, throwing around statements like "85 percent of leaders of American mosques hold extremist views"and arguing that Muslims pose a unique danger because they do not cooperate with law enforcement. These things are not true, and this speaks not just of poor homework but of a blindness to the humanity of Muslims.
Niall O'Dowd, Irish historian and writer, has the same doubts I do about King's "strange journey from Irish radical to Muslim inquisitor."
In Northern Ireland, Mr. O’Dowd said, they saw a Catholic community “demonized” by its Protestant and British critics and worked to bring it to the peace table. Seeing his old friend similarly “demonize” Muslims has shocked him, he said.
“I honestly feel Peter is wrong, and his own experience in Northern Ireland teaches him that,” Mr. O’Dowd said. “He’s a very honest, working-class Irish guy from Queens who’s had an amazing career. Now I see a man turning back on himself, and I don’t know why.”
No comments:
Post a Comment