Muslim Immigrants in the Shadow of Islamist’s Terror Attacks - An approach to Freedom

Whenever it comes to a religious assault in Europe committed by any "Perpetrators with Islamic background", the customary life of most of the domiciled Muslims get striding towards an antagonistic terrain by leading instantaneously to a steady growth by socio-political tension between the same and the indigenous European citizens. As a further step, it comes to an expansion of hate and disrespect of the “Otherness of immigrants", which turns subsequently into any intensified "ethnical contradictions" to an extent that the already overcrowding political stress in the Society looms to convert into an organized hostility, followed by incidents of violence occurring quite frequently. The further continuation by suchlike untenable multiplication of assaults would probably lead unwillingly to a vigorous expansion of "reciprocal distrust”, that would finally threaten the generally well-experienced “Principles of Co-Existence”, surely the indispensable Fundament of a " liberal and secular" Society.

It could be, that the just sketched situation would be branded as baseless Supposition. But the possibility of its realization is indeed enormous for it could be ignored categorically. On the contrary, it might keep increasing endless further by each of the terror attacks, lately taking place with certain periodic regularity in various European Localities. Hence, it would be rather advisable to recognize the predicted emergence of any violent outrages at proper times. In another case, it has to be feared that any further religious assault, alike the "Atrocity", which had been committed during October 2020 in France, could regrettably be shocking enough to provoke any blunt reactions, which may completely shatter the “socio-political freedom” in European Societies, followed by severe blows of “harassment” and “persecution” for many innocent people living therein.

Notwithstanding the widely established determination that “the Muslims" could be considered as “liable” for the acts of violence which had been committed by any Muslim Zealots, the “suggested verdict” must not implicitly laud as "guilty", because Muslims in their pluralistic formation does not follow the "ideology of violence" at all. They do not share with the alleged perpetrators even a certain “Sect” together. Instead, Muslims differ among themselves not only by Origin, Language and Culture but also by many other localized Diversities. Therefore, it would be certainly a difficult task to bring all Muslims, who live and work in either of the European countries, to one unified narrative. The diversification of their religious affiliation contains a broad and complex sphere of spiritual characteristics, which deserves to be examined exclusively. Apart from this, Muslims do not follow even a common "Way of Life". The only thing they share could be specified by the way that they have to perceive often anxiousness and bewildering because of the expanding hostility they had been facing in Europe repeatedly.

The unnoticed and slowly unfolding hazards by fearfully expected acts of "retaliation” threatened by "extreme right outfits”, might have motivated some groups of Muslims to evolve initiatives of their own to encounter the prevailing hostile circumstances. The expounding Manifestations of their loyalty toward the new homeland as well as the sincerely formulated Press Releases accompanied by doubtless condemnation of terror attacks should be observed therefore as any "jointly worked out aspirations" of Muslims, that has been emerged, not only to satisfy the demands raised by the Indigenous Citizens but also to demonstrate their willingness and affirmative recommendations to participating in Projects”, which had been initiated to prevent the expansion of "Extreme Populism" effectively.


As a matter of fact, Islam is a global religion by having its "Believers" on many continents of the world and thus enjoys as such a vast versatility of social and cultural identities of Followers. Consequently, it must be taken into consideration that the Muslims living in Europe comprises of many groups, whereby each of them could be implying their own "Mother tongue" and a particular mode of communication. Therefore, it should be understood as an appreciable gesture of "Sincerity" by the Muslims, who may be willing to demonstrate their affiliation by resolutely denouncing the acts of religious violence, indifferent to the religiosity of the identified Perpetrators. Even though, there might be existent some groups of Muslims, who could have decided, to keep themselves out of the matter completely or some Others, who could have been maintaining sympathy for Muslim perpetrators or even extending any kind of support to them.


Muslims as Scholars, Academics and Intellectuals:

The Muslims belonging to this group could be specified as well-integrated European citizens with profound conviction to democratic and secular values. Hence, they prefer to live their life within a liberal and democratic society. Apart from this, they count to well-educated people, living mostly with dignity and prosperity in any respected professions.

Prof. Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed, for example, is a Senior Scholar, Historian and Writer of various books. He is of Pakistani origin and presently living and officiating as an Emeritus Professor of Political Science at Stockholm University in Sweden. He issued on the 5th of November 2020 a statement on his home page by referring to his Viewpoints about the "Freedom of Speech" and the "Right of Criticism" existing in many democratic and liberal societies. The statement came out just a few weeks after the "Beheading of a School Teacher" in France. He described it as a terrible offence of Atrocity, which had been carried out by a Muslim zealot.

By delivering his opinion about the “Freedom of Speech” Prof. Ahmed expressed his admiration regarding the historical and socio-political developments which took place during the last few centuries in Europe. Furthermore, he accentuated his resolute conviction relating to the Freedom of Speech and acknowledged hereto that “the Freedom of Speech includes the freedoms to believe, question, write, publish, present in artistic form, including cartoons without fear”.

By continuing with his statement he referred to certain relevant historical incidents in support of his Findings of the controversial Understandings relating to the “Right to Freedom of Speech”, which is a contrary sense means that every Claim or Assertion deemed to be at the same time “Everyone’s Right” to accept, criticise or even to reject it as a whole. He mentioned hereto some other historical and religious events which had been once predicted without having ultimately been awarded the required Evidence.

The Statement issued by Prof. Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed is a genuine Plea favouring the Freedom of Speech, saying “So, just as the various religious minorities in the West now enjoy the freedom of Belief simultaneously people are free not to believe and have no religion”. Finally, his supporting advice (probably addressed to many in Europe living Muslim Immigrants comparatively with more freedom and prosperity as in countries of their origin) reads: “Therefore, everyone has to obey the laws of the country and there is no right to break the law”.


Muslims by Faith but Citizen by Liberal Mindset:

During the last two decades of the 21st century, there has been an arising of a new religious Sect among the immigrated Muslims in western Europe, which could be specified for their broadmindedness as "Sect of Liberal Muslims". They maintain their religious obligations in an inconspicuous way and proclaim for having a concept of Islam that suggests the Believers arrange their way of life by upholding the values of Respect and Tolerance. The doors of their mosques stand incessantly open to all Muslims without any distinction. Above all, they have introduced an additional administrative regulation that gives Women the eligibility for holding the position of an Imam. This functional position is otherwise reserved traditionally only for male Followers. It means in practice that the performance of Prayers and other Religious Ceremonies could be arranged and by a female Imam. The “Liberal Muslims” administer meanwhile besides many new Mosques in the many European States, also a few Culture Centres.


Kahina Bahloul, a daughter of French and Algerian parents, has an exemplary association with this group of Muslims. She is well educated and lives her life as a free and liberal woman. Notwithstanding being a woman, she has courageously extended her willingness to exercise the functions of an “Imam” at a Mosque located in Paris. The fellow “Liberal Muslims” confirmed her decision benevolently and authorised her to conduct all obligatory prayers as “Imam”, including the distinguished “Friday Prayers” as well as other occasional Islamic ceremonies.

Kahina Bahloul proclaims for being resolutely convinced of the “Philosophy of Tolerance” which means in a real sense that she follows the Islamic Rules by upholding the Principles of Liberalism simultaneously.


About the Terror Attacks carried out lately by some Muslim Extremists, she expressed her understanding in an Interview with French TV24 on 20th October 2020 over the passiveness of some of her fellow Liberal Muslims. In her opinion, they would not consciously be realizing the Interlink of the Terror Acts with their religion because most of them sincerely believe that they follow their Faith strictly in a peaceful manner. She added to it further, that most of her fellow Muslims do believe firmly that they let nothing undone on their path to integrate themselves in French society and keep upholding the Values of “Peace and Freedom” honestly.

Imam Bahloul referred thereby in addition to the Process of Evolution

by Islamic Thinking as well as to the still existing roots of “Wahabism and Salafism” by pointing out some of their Streams which unfortunately had taken an Attitude and Characteristic which could not be suitable or compatible with the Human Values like “Otherness”, “Religious Diversification” and “Freedom of Women”.

Non-Fractional Muslim with Liberal and Secular Mindset:

Even though it is not an empirically investigated analysis, it is still a widely known supposition that most of them in Europe domiciled Muslims do not maintain the formal association to any particular mosques or Institutions. The presumption indicates further that a major part of the group of "Non-Fractional Muslims" deemed notwithstanding the Islamic origin firmly committed to the Virtues of Humanism, which reflect indeed Broad-mindedness, Tolerance, reciprocating Respect etc. and give guidance toward the achievement of Social Equity as well as Ecological Equitability, as an inalienable Roadmap to secure Peace and Freedom.

Consequently, they cultivate no affection to perform any required religious Rites or holy Conventions just to satisfy their spiritual desires. They have rather elaborated an inviolable determination to live their life in a democratic, liberal and secular society. Proceeding further with the Principles of Respect and Tolerance, the "Non-Fractional-Muslims" have thus attained the Incentive to keep upholding and disseminating the Myth of Peace, Freedom and Social Justice.

Apart from this, they were deemed profoundly convinced of the validity and viability of a Jurisdiction that guarantees the Freedom of Speech, an indispensable instrument of a Liberal and Secular Society. Freedom of speech, apart from its requirement, counts as one of the most important successes mankind had achieved during the last few centuries in Europe and hence need implicitly to be preserved and developed constantly. By following the referred Way of Thinking, the "Non-Fractional Muslims" could have acquired the obligatory competence and capability to evaluate and understand the Motivations and Aftermaths of the religiously motivated violence in Europe.

Even though many fundamental “Believers” of Islam recklessly play down the cruelty of religious offences with the clarification that these acts ought to be committed just to get the retaliation for the "desecration", that had been intentionally inflicted by displaying Cartoons with the portrait of the revered Prophet. The non-fractional Muslims have got however a different way of looking at things, namely by analysing facts by the dialectic of contradictions. The secured results bring them thus to condemn all the savagely terror attacks without any abstention. They detest at the same time further with enough revulsion the coldblooded Beheading of a School Teacher by the end of October 2020 in France and scorn it as “Atrocity”.

The question arises, why only Muslim Immigrants commit acts of violence, although they could have availed the opportunity too for living their life with anticipated Affluence and Prosperity. The answer could only be elicited by examining the relating psychological aspect, that the Immigrant, for being a part of mankind, do live at least during the first few years after having been granted with the formal capabilities hereto, in two different countries simultaneously, whereby one's heart begins gradually pounding for two Homelands at a time. Consequently, the situation leads inevitably to the emergence of an ambiguous affinity.

With the reception of Citizenship begins by many elected Immigrants a modified arising of ambivalent considerations regarding the newly acquired Status of Nationality, which confers them doubtless several Entitlements (Rights), accompanied however by some Obligations (Duties) as well. The Regulations hereto are Universal indeed. The acceptance of "Rights" means simultaneously "Commitment to Duties" as well. The combination of these two symptoms leads the Immigrants correspondingly to the psychological confrontation with an interdependent phenomenon, called the "Right and Duty Complex".

On the other side, it could be an immense advantageous step, if there would be any considerations to eliciting any “explanatory and supportive" projects that could be evoked, to enable the European Citizens (either origin) to identify the "Correlation" of external Military Interventions in any "Neutral Countries" with the Dissemination of Religious Extremism. The perception gained therefrom should then ensure the enlargement of the scope of "Sense and Insight" by common people, so that the Intercourse of Dialogues among Citizens could be realized with reciprocal Respect in a Society, which deemed consisted on the Democratic, Liberal and Secular Fundaments.

Whereas the absence of likely "eye-opening" knowledge would disturb the otherwise so harmonic Living by “Co-Existence” successively. Perhaps it was the suchlike absence of knowledge that was observed by Sabine Kebir and motivated her to take inevitably the opportunity to describe it in the weekly magazine "der Freitag" of Hamburg on 3rd of December 2020; “Moreover, it could be pointed out that the participants of the civil societies 'can' or 'want' only insufficient differentiate between Islam and Islamism” (translated).


By having recognized the deficiency of genuine information by the Citizens of European Countries, it would surely not be ridiculous, to begin with, the evoking programs which could assist the people by learning and analysing the Roots and Roles of religious violence on one hand and the drawbacks of the '"unratified" political or military Interventions in an alien but sovereign country on the other. In another case, the side effects of reciprocally expanding “Distrust” would probably keep on growing and thus segregate the Society into various egoistic oriented groups.

Hence, it would be rather helpful, if the appropriation of genuine knowledge could be made available to all of the willing members of European Society. Because, the accurate knowledge about the “Coherence” of “Cause and Effect” as the indicators of “Religiosity and Intervention” could enable the people to understand the ‘Universality of Causation’, which is evermore based on the proposition “that everything in the Universe has a cause and is thus an effect of that cause. This means that if the given event occurs, then this is the result of a previous, related event" (extract from Wikipedia). Consequently, it leads inevitably to the Presumption that each Incident which occurred has got a Reason (Cause).

The "availability of cause" has been anyhow the matter of consideration for Elsa Koster, whilst she worked on her essay: "Keine Sorte Mensch" - Not a (particular) Sort of Human published in "der Freitag" of Hamburg, on 1st July 2021. Elsa Koster explains by analysing the incidence of an assault, which occurred by the end of June 2021 in Würzburg, Germany, whereby a Somali Muslim stabbed three innocent Women to death and injured seriously many others. Koster has described the situation in the aftermath of the crime, which took place before many Spectators, who could do nothing but remain staying there appalled with a suggestive question; What sort of human nature was the offender?


A sort of man who suffered at the time of an offence under any mental sickness? (He came from Somalia, a venue of the Civil War for many decades).


A sort of offender who belonged to any group of Muslim Zealots? (He could have been radicalized by any Religious Extremists).


A sort of Misogynist, was it a Femicide? (All of the victims, who were killed by the assault, belonged to the female gender).


No matter, whatever the cause of the offence could be determined finally, the responded answers would surely lead to any enlightening explanations with the provision of genuine arguments for holding open discussions at global level, so that the people in both of the Homelands of Immigrants could participate in the peacebuilding process. Seen that way, it means also that the mode of communication by asking questions can indeed turn out with enough benefits for everyone and do confirm thus the Saying; "Questions provide the key to unlocking our unlimited potential" (Anthony Robbins).



Although the questions to be asked must be precise, correlative and target-oriented, but there should not be a lack of Feasibility, Reality and Reliability as well. In addition to the compliance of suchlike procedural requirements, there should also be the possibility available to the Citizens of the European Union, including those with Islamic origin, whereby they would be allowed deliberately to ask any profound questions as referred exemplary hereunder. Provided, the Formulations must not have gross provocations, but of course, any reasonable peace-promoting Suggestions, even though if they correspond a breeze of annoyance.


Q. 1: What could be the reasons behind the motivation of Immigrants with Islamic origin to conduct the terrible acts of violence, even though they came once to Europe voluntarily and with self-determined aspirations "to live and work" in the newly adopted domicile for the betterment of socio-economic conditions of their family. Was it the result of a psychological process, whereby the Muslim Immigrants, who might have been selected by any "Jihad Preachers" for the implementation of terror attacks, could have been the subject to an arbitrarily applied "Indoctrination"? or could the reason be laying just behind the non-availability of sufficient positions of required apprenticeship with long term perspectives that could be offered to the up growing generations of the Muslim Immigrants, who might be yearningly expecting these for a long time?

Q. 2: How could it be specified as a fair and righteous “modus operandi” applied by a member State of the United Nations, that proclaims peremptorily by defying the Basic Principles of the International Legislation, its self-determined authorization over the "Natural Resources belonging to any of the outlying Sovereign Countries?

(The coveted Raw Materials like Oil and Gas had been frequently claimed by the USA and many other Industrial Countries to be the "indispensable" as well as "essential goods" for the further existence of their economy).

Q. 3: Why it had been a diligent and peremptory "Striving" for a prosperous Industrial State with an unchallengeable Military Supremacy, to intervening repeatedly in the political affairs of many sovereign alien countries by implying different undiplomatic and hostile instruments of Warfare, no matter with or without its Armed Forces?

(A question that burns evermore on fingernails of the people, especially those in the former Homelands of the Muslims, who live as Immigrants in Europe. The reasons, therefore, could be laying behind the numerous suchlike incidents of political intervention that occurred repeatedly in the past, which could somehow be considered for being the prime examples of any extreme aggressive and antagonistic policies duly chalked out and adopted by the USA against different “neutral” States by supporting any preferred political groups striving to overthrow the respective elected government in following mentioned cases:

a) of M. Mossadegh in Iran on 19.08.1953,

b) of P. Lumumba in Kongo 17.01.1961,

c) of B. Billah in Algeria on 19.06.1965,

d) of A. Sukarno in Indonesia on 22.02.1967 and

e) of Z.A. Bhutto in Pakistan on 05.07.1977.

Q. 4: Was it a legally and morally justified procedure during 2003 as a group of countries organized within a "Defence Alliance" intruded collectively into the territory of Iraq without having secured the "consent of the United Nations"?

(The Invasion had been led by the USA under the pretending Pretext of hampering the Production of ABC weapons, which had allegedly been kept in progress by the Government of President Sadam Hussain somewhere within Iraqi Territories.

The occupation of Iraq had been primarily proposed to be of short duration but it should also undoubtedly convey a notable Lection to the political leadership, whereas the professed target of the Invasion had been focused on the Elimination of the “ruthless and hideous Dictatorship” of Saddam Hussain. Seen that way, it was an "instructive" Invasion, which had ultimately come to an end only after they formally achieved the real target, resp. the “Regime Change”. The concrete evidence for the existence of ABC Weapons had never been produced by Intruders.

The ironic conclusion of the “instructive” Overthrow of the Dictatorial Government in Iraq could only be testified as to the devastating destruction of its economy as well as the enormous damage to its Ecological Fundaments. Instead, the armoured Interference in Iraq induced a Collateral loss of hundreds of thousand innocent Human Lives, followed by a disastrous Civil War with ruinous consequences, not only for the people of Iraq).

Q. 5 (a): Was it an obligatory task for any State with a liberal and democratic Constitution to extend in contrast to the Neo-liberal Code of Conduct its friendly cooperation by offering the moral, financial and arsenal support to Mujahedin (1979-1989), actually the radical Opponents of all the indispensable and essential values of civil society, whilst the same were then at "Holy War" against the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Forces?

(Even though the reason for providing the generous help to Mujahedin had been denoted by downplaying as "a matter of goodness and leniency", the Recipients of the benevolent support, on the other side, had for their highly radical comprehension, to