Terrorism = Islam? Sadly Seems So

I always thought that landlords amused themselves by biting the heads of ferrets and peeing out the window on beggars!! Must only be in Australia..... :wink:

Gotta run - back to home and sleep and work and repeat till death!! See ya!

Well, having already been pre-chatised for posing racist thoughts, I might as well throw my nickel in here...

Here's a question or two:

Does the United States of America in particular and other capitalist democractic republics in general have anything to worry about in terms of "murderous attacks" against its citizens or its economic interests?

If we do have something to worry about - what would you all call it?

If we do have something to worry about - what would you all do about it?

Anyone?

Yes



An insignificant statistical threat amplified in its psychological effect.

Makes some of my fellow americans behave like idiots and is subsequently a significant threat.



Keep fighting against the idiots who use the statistically insignificant terrorist threat to cause greater dangers.

i think if we all got on with loving each other more instead of hating each other more

and

we got on with sharing and growing what we have in common as opposed to what we have in difference

and

we worked on helping people less fortunate than ourselves instead of excluding them or looking down on then

then

these terrorists would cease to be

feed em and cloth em and house em and most important love them

the more we divide the more chance we will end up with nuclear war
it only takes russia and china to team up n fire off all their nukes and there wont be a usa anymore....
just a memory

so peace and love thats what i say

i agree with craven... these terrorists are small groups its not exactly a majority... incidents like 9/11 are rare to say the least

Col Man, you touch upon an issue which the conservatives in America resolutely ignore. The base of support for Muslim terrorists is considerable, because so many people in the Muslim world (restricted largely to the middle east and south central asia--it barely effects north Africa, and is an aberrant phenomenon in Indonesia) have so little, and therefore little to lose. American conservatives don't wish to acknowledge or discuss two signal points: we are seen as supporting repressive regimes soley for access to petroleum, and therefore forwarding the poverty which means they have nothing to lose; and further, how is one to identify, and thereby destroy, the terrorist among the hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world.

Social and economic justice in the world of the Arab and south Asian Muslim would both remove the base of support for terrorist organizations, and sufficiently isolate the terrorist so as to make them more readily identified and eliminated. A sufficiently supported and respected government, for example, in an Afghanistan or a Pakistan in which something approaching justice existed could then easily work with the West to eliminate the threats.

To acknowledge as much, and the act effectiely, however, would require acknowledging a too long history of supporting repressive regimes on the part of American adminstrations who have had the control of petroleum resources as their own agenda. This agenda has typically been implemented in a short-sighted and foolish manner. It is so much easier simply to demonize Islam as a flawed and evil doctrine, and Muslims as our enemies, than to actually examine the situation in detail, the historical and political antecedants, and to move from there to a solution. It would also entail acknowledging that we are and long have been wrong and one-sided in our treatment of petroleum exporting nations and the Israeli/Palestinian debacle--a species of self-criticism to which the conservative will not stoop.

There was an interesting article in the New York Times that dance along the same lines. If I find it I will definitely post it.

--Ibn

Jihad - The Misperceptions
Abrar Akbar



The novelist Tom Clancy, while commenting on the events of September 11, once remarked, "it is simply ridiculous to talk of "Islamic" terrorists, the media's favourite epithet. These people don't act because of their religion; it's because they are fools".

He was not very far from the truth. No religion, least of all Islam, condones terrorism or endorses indiscriminate violence. Offending this might be to certain factions; I would dare to aver that the suicidal path being followed by some and favoured by many among our brethren, for highlighting Muslim resentment, is utterly counter-productive and doomed to create more problems than it would ever solve.

It would be unfair to mistrust the dedication and valour of the jihadis but the lack of peripheral vision renders them incapable of anticipating the unfavourable consequences or unintended effects of their misperceived jihad. As a result, the self-appointed "defenders of Islam" are wreaking formidably more damage to Islam than serving its cause, with their do-first-think-later attitude and insular approach.

The bottom line is that to live gracefully is far more difficult than to die gallantly. To deliver a fearsome punishment to an aggressor is one thing, but to invite an armed conflict is sheer insanity. Without comprehending the wider implications of their fanciful agenda of hoisting the Islamic flag in New Delhi, Tel Aviv and Washington, these self-styled "soldiers of Allah" have become a major source of embarrassment for Muslims in the international arena.

I have full understanding and profound appreciation for the grievances of Muslims towards the West. No doubt, only through sheer dishonesty, a complete absence of empathy, biased perception of the facts and/or absolute lack of analytical prowess, can one deny the gravity and the genuineness of some, if not all, of these complaints. Reciprocating savagery will nevertheless lead nowhere. Like dogmatic theocracy.

At the same time, it would be self-deception to blame everything on the US and the Zionist lobby. It is equally important to realise that firstly most of our predicaments are of our own makings and secondly solution to them doesn't squarely come from the barrel of gun. Demonising the West alone - that too without a whit of understanding of their socio-political structure -- is not only tantamount to denial but also hampers serious analysis of the underlying causes of the petrifaction and thereafter initiating astute handling of the intricacies being faced by the Ummah.

It would also be pertinent to note here that with the exception of the Palestinian armed struggle, to some extent the uprising in Kashmir and Chechnya and prior to the bombing of the American embassies in Africa, the prime target of the "holy warriors" had always been fellow MUSLIMS, under the pretext of "jihad". Even in Afghanistan, jihad or no jihad, the sordid truth is that Afghans have been for the most part fighting fellow Afghans.

As a matter of fact, the intensity of dissension amongst Islamic states runs at least as deep, if not deeper than the hatred against infidels. Apropos, was it jihad, what we did in East Pakistan? Iran - Iraq war - over 1 million deaths -- was it a fight to salvage Islam? The Taliban waging "jihad" against other Afghan factions or the other way round -- all of them Muslims -- what was that? Sunnis maiming Shiites and vice versa, Deobandis slitting throats of Brevlis -- is it what holy war all about?

Without any exaggeration, during the last 40 years, over 80 per cent of the victims of so-called jihad, the world over, have been none but Muslims. Followers of Islam have in any case butchered 10 times more Muslims themselves than the number of faithful fallen to the aggression of unbelievers. It seems, we Muslims don't need external rivals to slaughter us; we do it ourselves -- with enthusiasm.
[These scaled-down figures are retrieved from an article published by the leading Swedish morning newspaper "Dagens yheter" some three years back.]

Peculiarly, the political manipulation of Islam has resulted in a bizarre paradox where Islam is equally (mis)used by diametrically different groups for widely divergent ends. Sometimes it is justification for the state to curb demands for reforms and fundamental human rights -- cloaking it as a drive to contain Islamists -- as in Turkey, Egypt and Algeria, and at times Muslims are being deprived of every freedom in quest to "enforce" Islam like in Iran and Afghanistan under the Taliban.

Likewise, manifold more Muslims have been persecuted, "disappeared" and/or summarily executed at the behest of our own despotic "Islamic" regimes than all casualties inflicted upon us by our "enemies" put together. The bloody track record of Middle Eastern governments in general and dreadful Iraqi, Syrian & Iranian regimes in particular, would convincingly substantiate this assertion.

To be honest, the religion has become a tool in Muslim societies to fool people, to divert their attention from the real issues. "Jihad hysteria", not-so-seldom fomented by the official quarters to acquire cheap legitimacy for their autocratic rule, serves as a ready-made smoke screen to cover the failure of the state in delivering even the basic most necessities of life and to deflect the resulting anger.

Then, what a tragedy, not a single member state of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) can be pointed out where citizens enjoy comprehensive social and political rights? Similarly, across the Muslim world not a fraction of the civil, social and political rights -- explicitly stipulated by Islam -- can be taken as granted. Not even one nation, out of 56 members of the OIC, comes half the way vis-à-vis well-being of their residents compared with most of the non-Muslim Western countries tending their general public, (immigrant) Muslim communities included.

A newly arrived Pakistani refugees seeking asylum in the "kaafir" EU, that's too usually on fabricated premises, even the scores of countrymen illegally residing and earning a living over there, (justifiably) feel more secure there than back home in "the land of the pure". Their legal/social rights being taken care of in a far better manner than that of 2nd generation Pakistani Muslims born, brought up and ever since living there in "brotherly" Muslim Gulf emirates/kingdoms, or for that matter anywhere in the Muslim world.

Social equality might be a fundamental tenet of the theoretical Islam but virtually non-existent in all Muslim countries. Nowhere in the entire Muslim world, rule of the law runs supreme and/or judiciary independent enough and free of executive interference to deliver justice in a true sense. Consequently, hardly surprising, burgeoning Muslim male population with no outlet for dissent and debate is turning to radically militant Islam, but plausibly not a fault of others.

We must find time for some soul-searching, self-reflection, honest introspection and the courage to speak out now. Without addressing the internecine problems of the Ummah, upholding the spiritual vision of Islam and safeguarding the grand religious heritage of our great faith, we are damned to fail. It is imperative to be clear about the difference between vice and virtue. Jettisoning Islam's most salient attributes i.e., mercy, peace, equality, compassion, duty and moral perfection for secondary obligations and superficial rituals will (if not already have) shatter the very foundation of Muslim societies.

The emphasis on armed struggle alone is to interpret jihad in its narrowest sense leaving aside other superior forms of the concept. By the way, why shouldn't we start with a jihad against tyranny, persecution and repression within our frontiers first? Ignorance, bigotry, social injustices and poverty are the agonies ought to be urgently obliterated (or at least alleviated) among us before we take on external foes.

It is preposterous that head-on collision with the West is a more urgent task for the "guardians of Islam" than the plight of the majority of faithful living under abject poverty and despair. It would be scarcely a hyperbole to assert that quite a few exploit certain (dubious) religious interpretations merely to camouflage various personal as well as collective misdeeds/shortcomings.

One really wonders, why can't we strive to move forward, instead of craving to put the clock back? Instead of incessantly revelling in our distant glorious past, it is time to come to terms with present day realities. Sagacious grading of the priorities, a bit horizon broadening and re-alignment of the long-term objectives, not more drum-beating or emotional rhetoric, would steer us out of the mess.

In the age of the information revolution, nations are as inter-dependent as they are independent. It would be a fatal miscalculation to assume that crude violence and capricious militancy, sans an effective political strategy, could benefit Islam in any sense.

Therefore, the propensity for violence has to be replaced with the zeal to make progress in social, cultural and academic sectors. Frankly speaking, before ensuring a decent living standard for our peoples and eradicating social disparities, I am not willing to be a part of any jihad exclusively meant to destroy the US or for that reason any other nation state.

Our penchant to consider social, cultural and intellectual diversity as a threat bodes ill for our abilities to meet the space-age challenges. Undeniably, the salvation of the Muslim Ummah rests in producing Noble laureates not suicide bombers. Only by recognizing that the long-term dividends of emulating the MIT, Harvard & Oxford exponentially surpass that of the "Jihad Academies" at Khost, Muridke or Akora Khattak, we can make progress. Metaphorically, construction of the Petronas Towers, Kuala Lumpur, not the demolition of the World Trade Centre, should be the line of attack to counter Western hegemonic designs.

Imagine the results, if we could divert our energy and passion towards weeding out umpteen social evils we are suffering of, and pool our immense resources for education, health care for the poor and overall reformation of the Muslim societies. What a pity, "jihad-e-akbar" i.e. to improve oneself has taken the backseat for not-so-negligible number of the Muslims.

While the West too must heed the legitimate recriminations of the Muslim world for accomplishing viable peace, the Ummah has also got to do its part of the job to come out of this morass. Blindly accusing the so-called foreign hand for all of the debacles, all the times, is at best a naïve attempt to wangle (false) alibis and at worst an imbecility akin to doggerel, insulting the reader`s intelligence.

"Where all think alike, no one thinks very much."
- Walter Lippmann

In some cases this would work, in some cases it wouldn't. Most people would agree that it wouldn't have worked with Hitler or Stalin. Some people are simply evil. That is why the word is in the dictionary. There seems to be no hesitancy to attribute base motives to the US, therefore it should not be so implausible that some terrorists may act from base motives, rather than legitimate grievances. In his manifesto, published in the newspaper, one of Osama bin Laden's grievances against the US was that we haven't accepted Islam. Surely this is an unreasonable demand that we shouldn't negotiate.

Technologies now exist and are relatively accessible which would permit a terrorist to inflict catastrophic damage from within the US with a single action. The terrorists include people who kidnapped planes and flew them into buildings, people who bomb buses and marketplaces in Israel, and people who kidnap civilians in Iraq and threaten to behead or set fire to them unless their (the terrorists') demands are met. In 1999 an Algerian terrorist with links to Afghanistan tried to enter the US and bomb the millenium celebrations in Seattle, while other terrorists tried to blow up the Los Angeles airport. Does anyone really believe that if they could acquire a bioweapon and start a plague across North America, they would refrain from doing so? Does anyone think that one of them won't sooner or later succeed in doing something like this?

Thanks, Son of Kumuna . . . but i've been pushing this line here for several days in the face of right-wing attempts to demonize all Muslims, and have been resolutely ignored. To engage in a debate on these heads would require the conservatives to acknowledge that these are valid talking points, and it seems they simply will not do so.

Welcome to the Monkey House, boss . . .

(Hmmm, it must be the flag.
Oh well. The fact is, I've become attached to the flag since I realized people were trying to kill me. Sort of a security blanket.)

The article published by Ibn_kumuna is indeed directly to the point.
It is very good.

Now, my question would be: how would one implement such reform as the author speaks of?
(My own poor effort is to disseminate this article and others like it hither, thither and yon to a wider web community.
I believe in the power of communication.)

It would seem to me that it would take a highly dedicated group of people who believe in the rightness of their cause; who wish for peace and disdain the vile acts of war; who wish to see mankind grow and live in harmony.
Such a group of people would have to be willing to undertake the task to:
It would not be for the faint hearted. There is a high probability that the more aggressive elements that perpetrate these evils might try and thwart you, violently.
But the task is there for the taking.
Volunteers?

M,
Here's a list of how many people die annually from various causes in US:

Tobacco 435,000
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 400,000
Alcohol 85,000 / 101,653
Microbial Agents 75,000
Toxic Agents 55,000
Motor Vehicle Crashes 43,000 / 26,347
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000
Suicide 30,622
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000
Homicide 20,308
Sexual Behaviors 20,000
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,000
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600

How many died in 9/11? Less than 4,000?

To answer your question, yes, I think we have something to worry about. But if we're worrying about dying, we should be much more worried about things like: poor diet, aspirin, prescription drugs, motor vechicle accidents, etc. Much more worried.

How's your diet and exercise routine?

Nonsense. Our task in self-defense is simply to assure that we are not to be so casually and easily associated with the repressive regimes in the middle east, and with a right-wing militarist regime in Israel--that will go a long way toward immunizing us against extremist elements.

Which leads to the proposition of assuring social and economic justice for the Muslim world in so far as it embraces Arabs and the peoples of southern Asia. When it is plain that we do not and will not support people such as Mubarek, Musharef or Sharon, within one or two, or in many cases perhaps more, generations, such leaders will either be gone or face the necessity of assuring that social and economic justice. Some might well fall to popular Islamic movements such as that which captured power among the Persians. But in Iran today, there is less and less support for a regime which is rapidly becoming as repressive in the eyes of its current population as was the regime of the Shah a generation ago. There are no quick fixes, and it won't be easy for any of those concerned. But as is so commonly observed, the journey of a thousand miles beings with a single step--the right wing in America refuses to budge, to the loss and continued peril of us all.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart Mill

A little harsh, but not far from the truth. Several other applicable sayings were said by a man - a complete idiot and man of falacies - George Orwell, but those can be read at another time.

Ibn, I thought the article you included was poignant and incredibly edifying. While I do not agree with some of the author's reasonings or conclusions, it was introspective and judicious. Due to time constraints I cannot express further admiration or opinions so I will desist here. Once again thanks for the post.

Who here has said that NOTHING is worth war, Lusatian?

Or was this another rhetorical device?

And JSM also said:

"
"."

Sounds like unlimited license to shoot people of different religions, blow up abortion clinics and wage war on the gummint.

Go talk to the straw men you create, nobody here has said anything of the sort and you rely on caricatures to argue against because you lack the ability to argue against real people on an intellectually sound level.



A straw creature of your creation. See you need to make up such cartoons to argue against here because you lack the ability to argue against the real people without employing fallacy.



As long as "truth" is the straw people living in your head then yes.

Learn how to argue, as it stads you just spew playgroud tactics while trolling and are too cowardly to post your genocidal opinions.

You have a world view that would make the worst monsters in history look like bunnies but you lack the testicular fortitude to post them. You mock cartoon characters of your own creation but do not have the courage to post your own cartoonish and pathological need for violence.

Why not let out your "truths" and reveal your anthropomorphic nature? You know, the parts where the KKK look mild by comparison and such.

You come here to ridicule people for being wary of your generalizations when you are the very bottom of the slippery slope and simply lack the balls to say so.

So out with it, make you ridiculous case for genocide and evoke your meager knowledge of history (you know the routine, start with Charlemagne..) to try to justofy the mass killings you advocate.

See, the genocidal position is the absurd one and you know this because you lack the balls to post what you really feel and reveal the manic streak you have.

Come on, let your repressed anger out, this is where the healing begins...