Malay Coolie's letter is disturbing, especially the statements that say "Muslims all over the world have been in mourning for over 60 years" and that "I would still want to be known as a Muslim in birth and in death."

Why is he so determined to stress his identity as a Muslim as opposed to, say, his identity as his individual self, as a Malaysian, as his own ethnic identity with his own culture?

Why the need to project his faith as his identity?

Faith is a deeply personal matter. Apart from certain external features such as headwear like a tudung (headscarf), songkok or the turban that characterise our religions, are there any differences among us as Malaysians?

Should we not try to concentrate on what we have in common, rather than where we are different? Where is the line drawn between religious pride and religious chauvinism?

It is a fallacy to lump all the world's conflicts that ever involved a Muslim community into one huge injustice, as if these acts were all driven by the same motivation. What is really disturbing is the statement that Muslims all over the world have been mourning these events because they are Muslim.

There is a need to differentiate between victims of faith and not trivialise the complexities that are involved in various conflicts. The sudden rush for Muslims to publicly mourn the loss of lives in Sept 11 is direct reaction based on this simplistic universalisation of Muslim oppression, and if it were not so tragic, it would be funny.

I would ask people involved in taking sides on this debate, if the death of a Palestine child is more tragic than the death of an Israeli child, or vice versa? Does it make children's death any less tragic because it was their community which started the spate of killings?

It is far easier to demonise someone and blame them for all the ills of the world. This makes the whole problem of contemporary world affairs easier to swallow, and easier to manipulate.

Yes, this universalisation of Muslim oppression is convenient, but it is not real. It's nothing but propaganda, of stamping out the inconvenience of facts that both parties in any conflict are never free from blame.

It allows people to make sense out of Kashmir and Palestine without having to get into the complex issues, or to face uncomfortable facts such as that Palestinian and Kashmiri terrorism has claimed innocent lives in the fight for "justice" and "freedom".

It also ropes in the support and sentiments of peoples all around the world who, other than their shared faith, have nothing in common. It allows someone living in Java to believe he has a stake in the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

In essence, the people who propagate this idea of Muslim solidarity against a universal oppressor are using a convenient, but powerful, tool to advance their political position.

The problems of Bosnia, Palestine and Afghanistan are very different stories. There is no common thread here except politics, greed and senseless death.

If there is one thing we can all learn from their horrors, it is not the Muslims' need to strengthen their resolve against oppressors, because there is no such thing, but that politics is a very cruel tyrant, and the destruction of lives of those playing with politics aim to drag everyone into it.

This is the real enemy. Not America, not Israel, not Serbia. The sooner victims in conflict learn that murder, death and revenge just feed this destruction, the sooner there will be hope for real peace.