I just saw this article and it made me stop and wonder…how come I have never seen anybody question the mental stability of Muslim extremists in court cases? Perhaps I just have not sought out the right news articles, but for the most part when Muslim terrorists are tried, it seems as if they are simply accused of heinous crimes done in cold blood, in their right mind.
And somehow whenever a white American/European (right wing or otherwise) commits some violent act, his ideologies are ostracized and his mental capability questioned…as if there is no way a white person could ever be so irresponsible or irrational, that naturally his philosophies and reasons for action were the products of some gross mistake. I think most would agree that the corresponding arguments for terrorism in a Muslim context would equally be deemed as wrong, but I definitely feel as if there is a pattern or accepting terrorism done by brown people as part of some unstable nature that deserves criminal punishment, while such an act committed by a white person automatically becomes an extreme exception. I think that what we discussed in class is valid, that elements of American society are quick to condemn Anders Breivik because some of his views parallel their own, but I’m beginning to think that there are underlying racial factors at play in this global problem of terrorism.
(btw Wikipedia agrees with me on this one by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotypes_of_South_Asians#Irrationality)