Matthew Schmalz - Associate Professor of Religious Studies reflects on the Sri Lanka Easter Sunday Attacks. This afternoon the segment below aired on NPR stations throughout the country on the program “All Things Considered”.
Since the bloody and coordinated Easter Sunday anti-Chistian suicide bombings had all the obvious earmarks of the usual radical Islamic terrorism I’m thinking it wasn’t PC to point that out...or the HC Professor is hopelessly befuddled.
Last Edit: Apr 24, 2019 13:55:32 GMT -5 by hcpride
I would not characterize his comments that way. The reference to a majority buddhist country was right at the beginning, by the interviewer, not Schmalz. He actually said he was surprised by the violence. At the end of the interview, he made the same point about being surprised, because, other then a recent rise in buddhist extremism, he had seen no other previous signs of violence.
In the last 2 days since the interview and article, it now seems clear, according to the latest reports, that this was imported islamic terrorism. That is especially sad, since christians (7%) and muslims (10%) are both minorities in Sri Lanka, and have had good relations over the years.
It really wasn’t a headscratcher to figure out who was behind the simultaneous and multiple suicide bombings that killed hundreds of Christians on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka. Bizarrely tossing Buddhists into the discussion while refusing to mention the obvious culprits is (if anyone listens to a befuddled egghead) irresponsible.
(BTW I would not assume that all of the Islamic terrorists involved in the attack were imported from outside of Sri Lanka.)
hcpride, here's the thing, buddhist violence WAS the main thing going on before this attack, and the professors comments were made BEFORE the identity of the attackers was known. This article from yesterday's paper describes the situation, and also has a very interesting map of the countries christian, buddhist, hindu and muslim population centers:
This excerpt from the article encapsulates what i am talking about:
"But after the civil war ended in 2009, militant Buddhism began to surge. Some observers have said it was as if powerful forces in Sri Lankan politics were looking for a new enemy to fight. Hard-line Buddhist monks targeted churches and mosques, priests and imams, often with the tacit support of the security services."
CHU So AFTER the world (and Professor Schmalz) learns that hundreds of Christians were slaughtered by simultaneous and coordinated suicide bombers on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka, this fool prattles on about issues with ‘extremist’ Buddhists in Sri Lanka and never once mentions the POSSIBILITY of Islamic terror once again striking the Indian Subcontinent?
I don’t think this is unfair Monday-morning quarterbacking. To be clear his interviews were AFTER the details of the attack were known. He was interviewed because of the attack. Did anyone on planet earth NOT recognize a typical Islamic terror attack?
While the relative percentages of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Muslims, etc. is interesting it is another reminder that a small or large Muslim population is no defense from Islamic terror.
A few wags in the press now appear genuinely startled that several of the (late) Sri Lankan Islamic terrorists were very well off financially. Apparently there is still a false notion in some quarters that class (or gender or race) is the common thread that connects all Islamic terrorists.
Last Edit: Apr 25, 2019 13:00:49 GMT -5 by hcpride