Good Muslim Bad Muslim Pdf Download

Open Preview

See a Problem?

We'd love your help. Let us know what's wrong with this preview of Good Muslim, Bad Muslim by Mahmood Mamdani.

Thanks for telling us about the problem.

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Community Reviews

· 1,018 ratings · 90 reviews

Start your review of Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror

The chapter on the Afghan war from this book is the only history assignment I've ever had that has genuinely made me start crying. This is necessary knowledge that Americans have allowed ourselves to forget. The chapter on the Afghan war from this book is the only history assignment I've ever had that has genuinely made me start crying. This is necessary knowledge that Americans have allowed ourselves to forget. ...more

Aug 06, 2008 Hafsa rated it really liked it

Definitely a must-read for those who need some fodder when dealing with American jingoists. Mamdani covers the double standards in US foreign policy from Latin America and Africa, to the Middle East and Afghanistan. The first part of the book is mainly about Latin America & Africa and read a bit more slowly than the rest (he was building up to show how American involvement in Middle East/Afghanistan is related to cold war politics---including support for right wing despotic governments over left Definitely a must-read for those who need some fodder when dealing with American jingoists. Mamdani covers the double standards in US foreign policy from Latin America and Africa, to the Middle East and Afghanistan. The first part of the book is mainly about Latin America & Africa and read a bit more slowly than the rest (he was building up to show how American involvement in Middle East/Afghanistan is related to cold war politics---including support for right wing despotic governments over left wing nationalist groups). The part on the US support for what became the Taliban (the US essentially crafted the Afghan war against the Soviets in religious terms in order to garner more support for it across the Muslim world) is something we all know, but reading the detailed account was still pretty shocking. I wish every American could read Chapter Three: Afghanistan: The High Point in the Cold War." So, so, so many issues that just keep on recurring today.

The only reason I didn't give this book a five was that he went less into the rise and development of political Islam in respose TO the US foreign policy that he described pretty thoroughly.

...more

Feb 06, 2009 Ram rated it liked it

This book is virtually the authentic history of the genesis of islamic terrorism as we see today. It starts with the hey days of the Cold War, the US role in privatising war and conflict, its nefarious role in South Africa, Mozambique, Nicaragua, the use of drug money for financing war, creation of Afghani jihad forces to fight Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and the CIA role in creating conflict situations, which has resulted in the menace of Islamic Terrorism as we see today. The book does This book is virtually the authentic history of the genesis of islamic terrorism as we see today. It starts with the hey days of the Cold War, the US role in privatising war and conflict, its nefarious role in South Africa, Mozambique, Nicaragua, the use of drug money for financing war, creation of Afghani jihad forces to fight Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and the CIA role in creating conflict situations, which has resulted in the menace of Islamic Terrorism as we see today. The book does not exonerate terrrorism, but carefully places vital facts for the reader to conclude the real villian in this drama.
...more

Dec 09, 2008 Kat rated it it was amazing

I finally exhaled... it had been since last week when I finished Clash of Civilizations. My face has returned back to my shade of brown. Excellent read. Very accessible. Pick up a copy, start reading, let´s talk. "Not only must we learn to forget, we must also not forget to learn." I finally exhaled... it had been since last week when I finished Clash of Civilizations. My face has returned back to my shade of brown. Excellent read. Very accessible. Pick up a copy, start reading, let´s talk. "Not only must we learn to forget, we must also not forget to learn." ...more

Jan 09, 2009 Annette rated it it was amazing

A must read if you understand that no event in the modern world is abstracted from decades of history, politics, and complicated relationships. It will open your eyes.

The beginning of this book would have the reader believe that it is going to talk about political Islam and the question of how 9/11 happened. It doesn't however. Instead it says, essentially, political Islam is not about terror and besides, you did it first.

While there are some insightful sections in this book about the difference of secularism in Islam vs secularism in Christianity, it is mostly about the proxy wars and CIA influence in the US since Vietnam. For those that aren't familiar with this, it is insightful, but for me, it was simply rehashing things I have known for a while. Yes, I know of the Iran-Contra affair, yes I know of the assassination of Patrice Lamumba, etc.

I give this book 4 stars simply because the rehash of history is well done for those not already very familiar with it. I would have liked this book to look more closely at the intersection of US political strategy and political Islam as we know it today rather than a history of how the US has trained guerrilla fighters that we've come to regret later.

...more

Aug 26, 2007 Emily rated it liked it

Recommends it for: Americans, Republicans

This is an ambitious book that attempts to cover the involvement of the US in the Middle East (and Asia as a whole) during the time of the Cold War. Mamdani argues a number of points, many of them in attempt to debunk the idea that Muslims are the world's only terrorists, that it was cultural determination that lead to violence in the Middle East and not American and foreign meddling, and that there are no solutions to the US vs Middle East controversy other than American occupation of nations i This is an ambitious book that attempts to cover the involvement of the US in the Middle East (and Asia as a whole) during the time of the Cold War. Mamdani argues a number of points, many of them in attempt to debunk the idea that Muslims are the world's only terrorists, that it was cultural determination that lead to violence in the Middle East and not American and foreign meddling, and that there are no solutions to the US vs Middle East controversy other than American occupation of nations in that area. Although it is sometimes too broad in its scope and Mamdani gets a bit carried away in his zeal, thereby allowing some great points to slip by, "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" is an excellent book that is incredibly relevant at the moment, especially to Americans who are seeking to better understand the situation in which our country finds itself with respect to Arab nations. ...more

Nov 30, 2008 Lindsey rated it really liked it

I'd like to read again, or parts of it again, now that I am out of an academic setting, to see how it applies to the practicalities of most work. I'd like to read again, or parts of it again, now that I am out of an academic setting, to see how it applies to the practicalities of most work. ...more

Dec 19, 2010 Tim rated it really liked it

Great Book. It did a great job of placing the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in historical perspective by connecting the dots from American clandestine interventions in Laos, Nicaragua, and Afghanistan (1980's). The American intelligence agencies privatized war by funding terrorists, gangs, warlords, and the like throughout the Cold War to defeat pro-Soviet regimes and "roll-back" the Soviet Union. One can view Al Qaeda as a product of this process, and the Afghanistan War as "Cold War cleanup". The Great Book. It did a great job of placing the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in historical perspective by connecting the dots from American clandestine interventions in Laos, Nicaragua, and Afghanistan (1980's). The American intelligence agencies privatized war by funding terrorists, gangs, warlords, and the like throughout the Cold War to defeat pro-Soviet regimes and "roll-back" the Soviet Union. One can view Al Qaeda as a product of this process, and the Afghanistan War as "Cold War cleanup". The writing style was particularly dense, hence the 4 stars as opposed to 5, but still a really good book. ...more

Jul 20, 2018 Joseph Stieb rated it did not like it

A book that draws a moral equivalence between the United States government and al Qaeda isn't worth a longer review, or your time, for that matter. Among the dozens of distortions and exaggerations in this book is the direct claim that the al Qaeda is both a U.S. creation and ally. This is about what you would expect from a book Noam Chomsky blurbed. If you are already a doctrinaire leftist, don't read it; he won't challenge your views. If you aren't, read it only to get a sense of what far left A book that draws a moral equivalence between the United States government and al Qaeda isn't worth a longer review, or your time, for that matter. Among the dozens of distortions and exaggerations in this book is the direct claim that the al Qaeda is both a U.S. creation and ally. This is about what you would expect from a book Noam Chomsky blurbed. If you are already a doctrinaire leftist, don't read it; he won't challenge your views. If you aren't, read it only to get a sense of what far left screeds say. If you want well-sourced, fair, and rigorous criticism of U.S. foreign policy, especially of culture and Orientalism, try Zach Lockman's "Contending Visions of the Middle East" instead. ...more

Apr 26, 2007 Jordan rated it it was amazing

Recommends it for: anyone concerned with identity politics and the politics of representation

Brilliant analysis of how political zeal and religious piety are wrongly mixed thus creating a distorted understanding of Muslim grievances toward the US and former colonial powers.

Jun 03, 2021 Ali Hassan rated it really liked it

In an article he wrote in Dawn, the Pakistani political thinker and activist Eqbal Ahmad draws our attention to an American television image from 1985. On the White House lawn, President Ronald Reagan is introducing, with great fanfare, a group of Afghan men, all leaders of the mujahideen, to the media: "These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America's founding fathers." This was the moment when America tried to harness extreme versions of political Islam in the struggle against the Soviet In an article he wrote in Dawn, the Pakistani political thinker and activist Eqbal Ahmad draws our attention to an American television image from 1985. On the White House lawn, President Ronald Reagan is introducing, with great fanfare, a group of Afghan men, all leaders of the mujahideen, to the media: "These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America's founding fathers." This was the moment when America tried to harness extreme versions of political Islam in the struggle against the Soviet Union.
The link between Islam and terrorism became a central media concern following September 11, resulting in new rounds of "culture talk. This talk has turned religious experience into a political category, differentiating 'good Muslims" from "bad Muslims, rather than terrorists from civilians. The implication is undisguised: Whether in Afghanistan, Palestine, or Pakistan, Islam must be quarantined and the devil must be exorcized from it by a civil war between good Muslims and bad Muslims. Beyond the simple but radical suggestion that if there are good Muslims and bad Muslims, there must also be good Westerners and bad Westerners, the very tendency to read Islamist politics as an effect of Islamic civilization—whether good or bad—and Western power as an effect of Western civilization. Both those politics and that power are born of an encounter, and neither can be understood outside of the history of that encounter. Cultural explanations of political outcomes tend to avoid history and issues. Thinking of individuals from "traditional" cultures in authentic and original terms, culture talk dehistoricizes the construction of political identities. This book places the terror of September 11 in a historical and political context. Rather than a residue of a premodern culture in modern politics, terrorism is best understood as a modern construction. Even when it harnesses one or another aspect of tradition and culture, the result is a modern ensemble at the service of a modern project.
P.S. Read this book only if you know about orientalism. ...more

Sep 24, 2019 Zihad Azad rated it it was amazing

De-linking Islam from the roots of terror is no easy fit and from that perspective, this book is a monumental undertaking. Yet, Mahmood Mamdani writes with an ease rare among his peers, hopping from politics to history to philosophy with seeming abandon. The density of information might often present a real obstacle to reading fluidity; yet, for the major part, his incisive analysis is too good to be passed up for something else that might be more amenable to a relaxed reading..

The best accompli

The best accomplishment of this book is the differentiation between two strands of analysis as it pertain to Islam and Terrorism: The "Culture Talk" and The "Politics Talk". Culture talk attempts to find the causes of the violence perpetrated by an individual or a group in the culture of said individual or group. The cultural traits that dominate the causality debate are either religious (Al Qaeda, Taliban) or racial ("Black-on-black" violence in Apartheid South Africa) identity. On the other hand, Politics Talk sees violence largely as a manifestation of the historical and political grievances of a dis-enfranchised group of people. In the author's view, the latter, and not the former, is the preferred way if we truly want to address and redress global terror. This book also does a pretty good job of distinguishing Islamic Terror from Political Islam by showing that not all varieties of Political Islam degenerated into terrorist movements. Some, like that of Jinnah in pre-partition India, were deeply rooted in secularism.

All in all, this book makes for a rich read, as you would expect from something recommended by THE NOAM CHOMSKY. However, that does not mean that this book can only lend itself to the expert. Each chapter offers enough backdrop and introductory details for the uninitiated too. And therein lies the true strength of this work.

...more

Jan 01, 2021 Moataz rated it really liked it

This book was a minefield. I never felt both helpless and angry, ever in my life. Growing up, I always heard the same narrative about US, but never from US officials or CIA documents/manuals. I don't know what's worse: CIA fucking us up in the middle east, or fucking up its own country with drugs and such? I was brought more than once to the same thought: if this knowledge (despite being overlooked by media in the US) exists in documents and research, why no one is doing anything about it? (I me This book was a minefield. I never felt both helpless and angry, ever in my life. Growing up, I always heard the same narrative about US, but never from US officials or CIA documents/manuals. I don't know what's worse: CIA fucking us up in the middle east, or fucking up its own country with drugs and such? I was brought more than once to the same thought: if this knowledge (despite being overlooked by media in the US) exists in documents and research, why no one is doing anything about it? (I mean in the American Administration to halt the influence of CIA.) Don't they care about the American people's welfare? Don't they care about their soldiers?
The author doesn't really explain this. Again, how come the USA intelligence agency betraying the very people they serve and protect? ...more

Jul 30, 2020 Sabrina Lauv rated it really liked it

You always hear about how the US gets into everyone's business, but you never realized how recent this all started until you read this book. From staying out of WW2 as long as possible, to taking hawkish stances and building on executive powers present day. You always hear about how the US gets into everyone's business, but you never realized how recent this all started until you read this book. From staying out of WW2 as long as possible, to taking hawkish stances and building on executive powers present day. ...more

Jan 09, 2018 Megan rated it really liked it

"America cannot occupy the world. It has to learn to live in it."

This book was difficult for me, as someone born in 1992 and who really came of age in post-9/11 America. My eternal refrain bewailing the state of the U.S.'s public education must be repeated again: many of the political events related in this book were incredibly difficult to understand because I knew nothing or next-to-nothing about them. The Cold War era through, pretty much, George W. Bush's presidency just . . . isn't real

"America cannot occupy the world. It has to learn to live in it."

Still, I think it's a critical text for American citizens, not the least because it contextualizes our place on the world stage and provides a more comprehensive understanding of the political events leading up to the present. Mamdani stresses in the latter part of his book that the U.S. controls public perception of its actions (its atrocities) abroad through carefully controlled media and the framing of our actions in a righteous "good" vs. "evil" fashion. It's also sadly true that they control public perception through the lack of education and the rewriting or plain erasing of historical fact. When you know nothing of the horrors your country committed ten, twenty, or even two years ago in some far-away country you can't even point out on a map, it isn't that hard to be led in any direction a skilled propagandist wants you to be led.

One of the best takeaways from this text was the earlier discussion regarding the perceived morality/justness of colonization - and the amount of violence allowed - based on the so-called "civility" of the place being occupied ("savage" cultures vs. pseudo-Westernized ones). I of course loved that Mamdani did the work of holding the United States responsible for the terror it has cultivated abroad for its own political purposes, terror which has now grown out of our control and which we very desperately refuse to admit culpability for creating (esp. the role of the CIA in working with drug lords and training troops to wage our proxy wars). I also really appreciated the sheer amount of effort that went into drawing connections between key political events spanning half a century and multiple continents. It got muddled at times, both because of my own ignorance and because I think the scope of this work was enormous, but ultimately it provided me, the reader, with a very necessary historical and political context, which I will take into other readings.

My main complaint is that the citations in this edition, at least, were terrible. We had a huge amount of chapter notes tucked away in the back, but no citations on the page indicating that anything was being referenced. I don't care if it's a valid citation style; I think it hurts the credibility of the author's arguments. It was as if he was trying to hide his endnotes for some reason, which is probably not true but is nevertheless the vibe I ended up with.

I also noticed a breakdown in the lucidity of his arguments where the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was concerned, particularly in the last chapter when he begins to discuss the U.S.'s relationship with Israel. I'm not pro-Israel (I actually don't know enough about it to be pro-either of them at this point), but even I could see that his arguments became thin, emotional, and less supported by fact in those sections.

A lot of great information in here, much of which surprised and dismayed me, and some interesting arguments made by Mamdani.

...more

Dec 23, 2014 William rated it really liked it

A very good look at the cultivation of terror by the United States during the Cold War. The book begins with a chapter on what Mamdani calls "culture talk", which shows the problems inherent in describing non-westerners and especially Muslims using Western terms (fundamentalist, for example) that already have clearly defined meanings in their Western contexts that do not describe non-western counterparts. This leads into a helpful and productive discussion of "political Islam" and its variants. A very good look at the cultivation of terror by the United States during the Cold War. The book begins with a chapter on what Mamdani calls "culture talk", which shows the problems inherent in describing non-westerners and especially Muslims using Western terms (fundamentalist, for example) that already have clearly defined meanings in their Western contexts that do not describe non-western counterparts. This leads into a helpful and productive discussion of "political Islam" and its variants. The simple matter of finding clear and accurate language goes miles toward understanding the roots of the problem of terror. The remaining chapters walk the reader through the Cold War and the development of "low intensity" tactics by the US and especially by the CIA. The history runs from Vietnam and Laos to the culmination of the Cold War proxy war in Afghanistan. Mamdani shows how political and low-intensity/terror tactics developed by the US in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Central America were used to cultivate terrorist proxies, gathered from around the globe, to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. Mamdani then walks the reader through the results of the dispersal of that international insurgent force and the consequences: the Gulf Wars, 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. His conclusions are helpful as well, calling for a condemnation not only of "their terror", but "our terror" as well and the need for the United States to learn to live in the post-Cold War world rather than trying to occupy it. The book is very broad in scope and moves very quickly. Some readers may find they need more background information to fully grasp what Mamdani is saying. I'm well-studied in the Middle East, but not so much in Africa and found myself having to do a bit of research "on the side" as Mamdani discussed the Cold War proxies in Africa. ...more

Jan 30, 2012 P rated it liked it

There are some interesting parts, but his main ideas were more fully expanded in books like Legacy of Ashes, The Looming Tower, Orientalism and Sowing Crisis. Mamdani has moments, but for someone who went though a Hizballah appreciation phase 3 years ago, Mamdani's fawning repetition of Fanon and general Third World-ist view really does not provide a superior alternative. See Olivier Roy for why this book was not fantastic. There are some interesting parts, but his main ideas were more fully expanded in books like Legacy of Ashes, The Looming Tower, Orientalism and Sowing Crisis. Mamdani has moments, but for someone who went though a Hizballah appreciation phase 3 years ago, Mamdani's fawning repetition of Fanon and general Third World-ist view really does not provide a superior alternative. See Olivier Roy for why this book was not fantastic. ...more

May 07, 2009 Andrew rated it it was ok

This is quite the Bush-era relic. There's a definite hidden agenda here, and a predictable bias toward blaming the US and Israel for all the world's problems. No surprises here, and nothing you haven't heard a zillion times before. Skip this one and pick up Wright's The Looming Tower instead. This is quite the Bush-era relic. There's a definite hidden agenda here, and a predictable bias toward blaming the US and Israel for all the world's problems. No surprises here, and nothing you haven't heard a zillion times before. Skip this one and pick up Wright's The Looming Tower instead. ...more

great book to read up on the political nature of islam. i felt somewhat lost at parts because i have no political background and little history background on some of the things he discussed. i felt that if i had more knowledge, i'd enjoy the book a lot more, since the chapters i did have previous knowledge of, were the ones i enjoyed the most out of this book. great book to read up on the political nature of islam. i felt somewhat lost at parts because i have no political background and little history background on some of the things he discussed. i felt that if i had more knowledge, i'd enjoy the book a lot more, since the chapters i did have previous knowledge of, were the ones i enjoyed the most out of this book. ...more

Aug 19, 2007 Sebastian Schwark rated it did not like it

Recommends it for: noone, really

not convincing at all. a conceptually confused, partially preposterous narration.

This book gets a little technical at times, but I think everyone who wants to get a feel for all perspectives of terrorism should read this book.

May 28, 2012 Lina rated it really liked it

Excellent read!

Very insightful for those who would like to learn more about the history of terrorism, and the US's involvement in created the terrorists of today.

Excellent read!

Very insightful for those who would like to learn more about the history of terrorism, and the US's involvement in created the terrorists of today.

...more

Jan 10, 2019 Adeeb Conrad rated it really liked it

Enjoyed Mamdani's rise analysis of the current criteria used to judge Muslims. Great analysis that looks deeper than the superficial sensationalized views portrayed by modern media of the minority of Muslims.

He does 3 things well:

1. Analyse US foreign policy for the past 30 years and the role it has played in creation of "terrorist groups" such as Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. A history often overlooked and simply blamed on religion itself. The two-faced nature of US foreign policy in the attainment of their own objectives and rise to the be the sole superpower of the world.
2. The criterion used imposed by non-muslims to judge muslims as either good or bad, a criteria foreign to Islam.
3. Identify the ideologues and modern day intellectuals who pioneered the school of thought championed by modern day organizations to justify their means and methods employed.

Great book for all to understand modern day political trends and worldviews.

...more

Nov 19, 2020 Carlos rated it it was ok

The irony in my disappointment with the book is that Mamdani's arguments have become so common in the years since the book's publication that I felt like I was reading nothing new or particularly enlightening. Mamdani takes the reader through the political lessons on foreign intervention that the US learned from the debacle that was Vietnam. From that moment until the end of the Cold War, Mamdani's shows how the US learned to carry out its operations outside of Congressional oversight and fundin The irony in my disappointment with the book is that Mamdani's arguments have become so common in the years since the book's publication that I felt like I was reading nothing new or particularly enlightening. Mamdani takes the reader through the political lessons on foreign intervention that the US learned from the debacle that was Vietnam. From that moment until the end of the Cold War, Mamdani's shows how the US learned to carry out its operations outside of Congressional oversight and funding. This seemed to create a no-risk tool that the US put to use all around the world, until it lost control of it. While the book was not bad, and there were some interesting explanations of religiously motivated political movements, there didn't seem to be anything in the book that has not appeared in a thousand newspaper articles in the years after 9/11. ...more

Aug 20, 2018 Ali rated it liked it

Mamdani provides a lot of important detail about the roots of the modern terror, starting from U.S. late Cold War policy in Vietnam, to proxy warfare in Southern Africa, Central America, and Central Asia, to invasion of Afghanistan and finally the Gulf War.

While it's clear that a lot of research went into the book, its structure is totally muddled, as he goes on tangents constantly throughout, and, unlike the rest of his work, the theoretical perspectives he tries to bring in are incoherent and

Ultimately, there's a lot of useful information that, at the same time, isnt particularly groundbreaking. If you want to understand the roots of Islamist terror, I'd recommend Lawrence Wright or Robert Fisk.

...more

Sep 08, 2020 Jason Cook rated it really liked it

Author writes in a dense manner, but the topic is complex, his scope is global, and the book isn't even 300 pages. Still, I read the last paragraph considerably changed in the way I viewed the US hegemony post Cold War.
The author uses a lot of foreshadowing and I enjoyed the copious amount of "aha!" moments once I stopped flipping back to other chapters thinking I hadn't grasped something I had read previously. Really a thoroughly researched and well presented look into the cost of the US' moral Author writes in a dense manner, but the topic is complex, his scope is global, and the book isn't even 300 pages. Still, I read the last paragraph considerably changed in the way I viewed the US hegemony post Cold War.
The author uses a lot of foreshadowing and I enjoyed the copious amount of "aha!" moments once I stopped flipping back to other chapters thinking I hadn't grasped something I had read previously. Really a thoroughly researched and well presented look into the cost of the US' moral ambiguity when it comes to foreign policy with it's banner of "Law & Order". ...more

Jul 27, 2020 Chase Jackson rated it really liked it

Brilliant book. I had a hard time with it primarily being a historical account of how the US shot itself in the foot by overimposing itself and "democracy" into other countries. Wished it could have gone into psychology, anthropology, and how politics played into that a bit more instead of just a historical account throughout.

Overall though, a great book that many should read, it's just not super readable...

...more

Hello ! I prepared a video that easily teaches reading the Quran in 1 hour. If you do not know how to read the Quran, you can easily learn by watching the video on YouTube by clicking the link below. If you know you can share it with those who do not know. I wish you will have healthy happy and peaceful life with Allah ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtJgo...

...more

Nov 16, 2018 Aoife rated it it was amazing

Very interesting counter-narrative to the common pro-West one we hear. It was enlightening to take the time to read the different perspective! I also appreciated Mamdani's clear and compelling writing style. Very interesting counter-narrative to the common pro-West one we hear. It was enlightening to take the time to read the different perspective! I also appreciated Mamdani's clear and compelling writing style. ...more

Mahmood Mamdani is Herbert Lehman Professor of Government and Professor of Anthropology and of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies (MESAAS) at Columbia University and Director of the Makerere Institute of Social Research in Kampala. He is the author of Citizen and Subject, When Victims Become Killers, and Good Muslim, Bad Muslim.

The last five years of world history have been nothing if not...eventful. When living in interesting times, there's nothing better for...

"Few would fail to notice the growing common ground between the perpetrators of 9/11 and the official response to it called "the war on terror." Both sides deny the possibility of a middle ground, calling for a war to the finish. Both rally forces in the name of justice but understand justice as revenge. If the perpetrators of 9/11 refuse to distinguish between official America and the American people, target and victim, "the war on terror" has proceeded by dishing out collective punishment, with callous disregard for either "collateral damage" or legitimate grievances." — 4 likes

"Before 9/11, I thought that tragedy had the potential to connect us with humanity in ways that prosperity does not. I thought that if prosperity tends to isolate, tragedy must connect. Now I realize that this is not always the case. One unfortunate response to tragedy is a self-righteousness about one's own condition, a seeking proof of one's special place in the world, even in victimhood. One afternoon, I shared these thoughts with a new colleague, the Israeli vice chancellor of the Budapest-based Central European University. When he told me that he was a survivor of Auschwitz, I asked him what lesson he had drawn from this great crime. He explained that, like all victims of Auschwitz, he, too, had said, "Never again." In time, though, he had come to realize that this phrase lent itself to two markedly different conclusions: one was that never again should this happen to my people; the other that it should never again happen to any people. Between these two interpretations, I suggest nothing less than our common survival is at stake." — 3 likes

More quotes…

Welcome back. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.

Posted by: burtonburtonjustake0270193.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/66420.Good_Muslim_Bad_Muslim

Good Muslim Bad Muslim Pdf Download

See a Problem?

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Related Articles

Post a Comment

Formulir Kontak