Blowing Up People and Property is Not Islam

VRV #72 Good post. Welcome to chowk.

behram #78 I think you are barking (if you will excuse the expression) up the wrong tree - i.e. the tree with various personalities sitting on it (or, in case of dracula Zia, hanging upside down from it).

You need to move to the tree with various systems sitting on it, namely the Democratic System vs the Khalifa System (which is basically what rule through force in the name of Islam basically is). Liaqat Ali started Pakistan on the wrong road with his Objectives Resolution whereby Islam was dragged into politics by naming Pakistan an Islamic Republic (thus corrupting both Islam and politics).

ZAB provided the next big step in this wrong direction towards a Caliphate by creating a Ministry of Religion and bending in other ways to please the mullahs and thus gain their support for his ambitions to become some kind of a lifelong Great Man of Pakistan. Zia then institutionalized the Caliphate by creating sharia courts, introducing obscene Ordinances designed to reduce the Pakistani people into subserviency to his autocratic rule. And now Musharaff is happily reaping the fruits of this travesty of religion and of the Pakistani people while declaring himself to be some kind of an ``enlightened moderate`` (which is basically a load of meaningless garbage).

This, in a nutshell, is the evil that we are stuck with. The evil that these individuals may escape man`s justice on, but for which God`s justice awaits them.

End of speech. :-)

HP writes in #75 <<< So the point really is that the Muslims societies need to identify the source of this intellectual bankruptcy and deal with it as Ghori said, “The ‘enemy’ is within the community administering on its youths an opiate that’s rapidly dulling their senses and blurring the vision..”

The ‘enemy’ is the ideology that presents religion as the counter weight but fails to provide the adequate answers that leads to an untrained, half-baked, and semi-militarized response that actually helps the West in its ongoing encroachment. >>>

I agree with your conclusion but the legitimacy and the power in the global arena for these Jihadists and their ideological masters derives from the West itself. They have made them the monster that they are by building them up as the legitimate foe and they have done it to facilitate as you put it the ``West`s ongoing encroachment``. These US elite will not let them weaken, they will use every opportunity to build them up, the alternatives are just too difficult for them to envision or deal with. So this ``internal`` enemy`s lifeline is actually external. Why have the Jihadists, a caricature of Islam drawn up by the West, to the dot, been raised up in this fashion when a myriad of other philosophies exist? Look at how Zarqawi was built up compared to the main source of the resistance. They feed and grow upon each others perversions, as I claimed previously. Allocating status in a world where the US holds cultural hegemony, is the domain of the US elite and they have built up these rag tags so that they strutt around claiming to be reps of Islam, when they harm it more than any benefit or work of consequence they have ever done. This theatre of a farcial conflict should be ignored by ``realists`` on both sides of the ``fence`` that it has created. The first step is rejecting what feeds it and looking inside is the smaller part of the equation.

Re: # 73
Rawdust to Zeemax

``zeemax:
where is the evidence that Mohammad went on Mairaaj and had communications with Gibreel on and off for 23 years?! I mean: where is the irrefutable evidence?``

Rawdust -- if YOU can provide ONE `irrefutable evidence` that Hanuman sahib flew to Lanka carrying the mountain on his right palm because he was medicinally challanged -- Moses parted the red sea -- and Jesus resurrected the dead --

Zeemax will definitely provide you with THREE `irrefutable evidences`-- that Mohammed did not go to the mountain, the mountain came to Mohammed -- that Mohammed parted the moon -- that Mohammed visited God, had an audience with Him -- argued with HIM -- and convinced Him to reduce Namaz from 50 times to five times a day -- ( tells you about the power of a good argument, you can even convince God -- against a weak argument with the Suicide Belt) --

Well, -- Mohammed did all that jawboning work with God and came back to tell us about it. -- while his bed was still warm... the door chain was still moving!!!

....Maazallah....Subhanallah -- Naara- Takbeer Allaho Akbar.....Mohammed is the Greatest!

now Raw Dust can you beat that.....Hanuman or no Hanuman.....

Re: # 73
Rawdust to Zeemax

``zeemax:
where is the evidence that Mohammad went on Mairaaj and had communications with Gibreel on and off for 23 years?! I mean: where is the irrefutable evidence?``

Rawdust -- if YOU can provide ONE `irrefutable evidence` that Hanuman sahib flew to Lanka carrying the mountain on his right palm because he was medicinally challanged -- Moses parted the red sea -- and Jesus resurrected the dead --

Zeemax will definitely provide you with THREE `irrefutable evidences`-- that Mohammed did not go to the mountain, the mountain came to Mohammed -- that Mohammed parted the moon -- that Mohammed visited God, had an audience with Him -- argued with HIM -- and convinced Him to reduce Namaz from 50 times to five times a day -- ( tells you about the power of a good argument, you can even convince God -- against a weak argument with the Suicide Belt) --

Well, -- Mohammed did all that jawboning work with God and came back to tell us about it. -- while his bed was still warm... the door chain was still moving!!!

....Maazallah....Subhanallah -- Naara- Takbeer Allaho Akbar.....Mohammed is the Greatest!

now Raw Dust can you beat that.....Hanuman or no Hanuman.....

(DRAFT)
The Declaration of Independence
The Democratic Republic of Pakistan

Article 1: A recognition of the truth
We, the people and rulers of Pakistan, admit that we made the following serious mistakes: (a) by creating a country based on religion, (b) by assuming a distinction among humans on the premise that being a Muslim makes us better than those of other faith, (c) by trying to sustain that distinction through foul means, including by promoting jihadi terrorism in the region, and (d) by consistently looking for external scapegoats for the above.

Article 2: An acceptance of the responsibility
We accept responsibility for the mistakes listed in Article 1 and within two weeks from this date, undertake to (a) arrest and try the army officers responsible for the 1965 debacle, the 1971 debacle, the 1999 debacle, the 2001 debacle, and all other hidden-from-public-view debacles, (b) arrest and try the ISI hierarchy for compromising the national interests of Pakistan, (c) destroy the Jihadi training camps immediately and arrest and jail every Jihadi for compromising the interests of the people of Pakistan, (d) compensate the Bangladeshis for the damage caused to that country in 1971, including providing compensation to family members of the intellectuals who were killed en-masse(e) compensate those who have been victims of Jihadi terror funded in Kashmir and elsewhere, (f) turn over all Jihadi terrorists to the USA, (g) turn over all mob figures being protected by Pakistan to their original countries, (h) make a comprehensive list of all misdeeds and put them up in the public domain as a testimonial of our seriousness, and for ensuring that there shall never rise a need for such remedial measures again.

Article 3: Separation of the church and the state
We assert that a person’s religion is his private affair and the state shall make no laws regarding the same and no federal, state, or local entity – including those based in religious organizations or community organizations – shall have any powers to make or enforce any such laws. We declare that all laws that run counter to this article are null and void and no religious books can ever be used for making any laws of the land and this article shall forever stay inviolate, with absolutely no exceptions.

Article 4: Supremacy of the civilians
We assert that any and all members of the armed forces are by definition an appendage of the state and serves at the will and pleasure of the state represented by its civilian leaders who are duly elected consistent with the rules of free and fair elections conducted in full view of the world body and meeting the critical review of the electoral process by third party observers. We declare that all laws that run counter to this article are null and void and this article shall forever stay inviolate, with absolutely no exceptions.

Saimasha #66 wrote ``The problem therefore is not racism, insularity or inter-communal hatred, the world has lived with this for a long long time. Quite sadly the problem is that the West is indeed after the Middle-east.``


Very aptly put. Until the middle east is the center of western interest for purely economic reasons, focus will be on Islam and muslims. And so you will find that every individual in the world - hindu, jew, christian, pagan, secualrist, buddhist - who can put two sentences together will have an opinion on how to reform Islam and Muslims. The west with its domination of media, will continue to create demons so that it can use these demons to scare its own populations as well to destroy these demons in such a spectacular fashion so as to justify trillions in defense budgets. Surely it is only a matter of time when the bankrupt americans will start asking their govt to justify half trillion dollars in defense budget. Surely targetting a few looney cave dwelling, slipper wearing, rifle totting individuals like zarqawi and al-masir and al-mohajir does not justify half trillion dollars in defense spending. The threat must be elevated to a level where it justifies the spending. And so this cycle will continue, until the focus shifts to somewhere else.

Re: # 85

``Article 3: Separation of the church and the state
We assert that a person’s religion is his private affair and the state shall make no laws regarding the same and no federal, state, or local entity – including those based in religious organizations or community organizations – shall have any powers to make or enforce any such laws. We declare that all laws that run counter to this article are null and void and no religious books can ever be used for making any laws of the land and this article shall forever stay inviolate, with absolutely no exceptions.

Article 4: Supremacy of the civilians
We assert that any and all members of the armed forces are by definition an appendage of the state and serves at the will and pleasure of the state represented by its civilian leaders who are duly elected consistent with the rules of free and fair elections conducted in full view of the world body and meeting the critical review of the electoral process by third party observers. We declare that all laws that run counter to this article are null and void and this article shall forever stay inviolate, with absolutely no exceptions.``

I would certainly consider the above two draft articles as making significant contribution to Chowk...............

that was great post BJ Saheb!!!

#82 by masadi

“They have made them the monster that they are by building them up as the legitimate foe and they have done it to facilitate as you put it the ``West`s ongoing encroachment. These US elite will not let them weaken, they will use every opportunity to build them up, the alternatives are just too difficult for them to envision or deal with. So this ``internal`` enemy`s lifeline is actually external.”

I don’t agree with you here. This is a subjective analysis and you need to look at this with some historic background. Allow me to take an empirical view here to say that since the time human have learned to have enemies, they have always made caricatures or built characters to scorn out of each other. The conflicts are the essence of human progress and we see them from personal feuds to the political feuds. What the US is doing is not new nor does it prove that the US is building up its own enemies. Both sides feed off each other. In the recent history, both the Americans and the communists were building enemies they could present as the symbol of the conflict. From Godless communists to hegemonic imperialists, both the US and the Soviets went after each other’s political ideologies. While Americans poked fun at Khuroshov (sp), the Soviets upped the volume on ugly American and Uncle Sam. These were the immediately recognizable symbols of the enemy.

Currently, while the US built up Zarqawi and Bin Laden, the Islamists scorn Bush and Cheney. Closer home, while the Democratic Party makes Rove and Cheney as the hateful symbols of the rightwing politics, the Republicans use Michael Moore and Bill Clinton for the same effect.

Why Zarqawi was built up and why it is okay to have him dead is something to ponder over.
The stateless actors don’t provide longevity to the GWOT. Zarqavi was needed because the enemy in Iraq was faceless. The US could not figure out who the leaders of the insurgency were. Zarqawi was a convenient name. So he was projected even though his role might have been really small in the Iraq insurgency. OBL too is a stateless actor so I think his time is pretty much up too. He may be gone before the mid term elections or just before the Presidential elections. This shows that the US does have the ability to take them out but will do that when the timing is right.

Why the stateless actors are not needed any more? For the very simple reason that now the US has a legitimate state as enemy (Iran) so it can now build its war against the Islamist forces around Iran. while Iranians too cherishes the role of magnet for the Islamists. Actors on the both sides of the conflict would continue to change. Bush would be gone in 2009 but his place would be taken up by some other player. Similarly, OBL’s place has already been effectively earmarked for the Iranian President. There is no conspiracy here. That is how the game has always been played.

The war between the Islamist and the US is real. The US does have overwhelming superiority in the media and war material but it is very effectively countered by the Islamists by providing bodies that create huge promotional value in the Muslim world. The exchanges would continue until we get to a point where these players are either exhausted or new forces emerge as the upshot of this conflict.

#88

“This shows that the US does have the ability to take them out but will do that when the timing is right.”

Adding… That does not prove that OBL is a closet ally of the US. They are still enemies. It is just that US is capable of taking him out when needed.

Ballukhan/Bjkumar sahib,

What if Articles 3&4 were to contradict each other for instance lets say the civilians decide that one religion is to be the state religion and its adherents a special status.

Regards

HP writes in #88 <<< Why the stateless actors are not needed any more? For the very simple reason that now the US has a legitimate state as enemy (Iran) so it can now build its war against the Islamist forces around Iran. while Iranians too cherishes the role of magnet for the Islamists. Actors on the both sides of the conflict would continue to change. Bush would be gone in 2009 but his place would be taken up by some other player. Similarly, OBL’s place has already been effectively earmarked for the Iranian President >>>


I don`t see how what I wrote is very different to what you write above. It is not the particular face that matters, but as far as the US is concerned this battle is a farce. There is no threat to the US from `political Islam`, from Iran`s nukes or from UBL. The US elite have picked a foe, in the neighbourhood of their interest, given them legitimacy by presenting them as the official enemy, thereby strengthening the position of those thugs at home, while justifying the rape of their own citizens in the US through militarized capitalism. That is what I meant by a farce, not that they met in some Hollywood studio and decided to undertake some fake endeavour even though they loved each other. The US elite are the dominant players in this, UBL and the Jihadists are merely fitting into their grand strategy or trap if you will, while not understanding how convenient it is for the US elite to have such a ``war`` and how catastrophic it will be for the masses in the area.

Suppose they take away the caricature of ``Islam`` that they have familiarized their own with at home, what image are they then going to use to justify their barbarism for home consumption. Why have the US elite, out of varied shades of opposition that exist in the Muslim world, picked up a convenient caricature, the Jihadist, to battle with and your conclusion much the same as mine was because it was convenient for them. The relationship between them is thus symbiotic, both`s motives are met in the process, the Jihadists motive for legitimacy and supremacy in the Islamic world and the US elite`s hegemony motives.

Ref 84

Dear Nasah,

I am copying this poem I wrote for another article

Masadi, mughlim, Salam-al-e-kum

Khushi se na-vaakif, chungal-e-wahab me atka
hoor-e-asal se na-vaakif, zakar-e-mohammad se latka

manind-e-zeemax, laga tujhe hanuman ka fatka
sun ke teri bak bak, Stuka ko laga jhatka

Uska ho gaya hiran, nasha tha jo do peg ka
Ho ke tum sab se pareeshan, Nasah ne kheencha kashka

I almost threw up reading the header of this article: “Blowing up people and property is not Islam”.

I then asked myself, what if it were “Islamic”? Would that give a bunch of knuckleheads a free ticket to blow up people and property? This is a self-serving mind-set trying to pin the blame on something instead of what is right under one’s nose. It is not the size of Allah’s merchandise or who worships what, it is about a society-gone berserk to justify it’s hypocritical and false beliefs (a war within, if you will) to the rest of the world. Those hypocritical beliefs have become a staple in the Muslim world, in terms of economics, governance, and polity (and we have an interesting set of views here – from colonial injustice to the new world order – terms or phenomenon unfamiliar to 86% of the Islamic world)… so go figure.

Only if the author had realized that no one in the extra-Islamic world gave a jack about what Islam allows or what it doesn’t, he would have been a bit more cautious in his thesis. It is only Muslims who try to drag belief system in every human act, e.g., “let’s try to be like Jews``. Give us a fuking break. Don’t insult Jews. Go do something for Sudanese Muslims instead of blaming the big bad West. Let the Jews be the ones wanting to imitate Muslims (oops, wrong analogy). But then what will we do about the bunch of egos on Chowk? That is a much potent question.

Kulharee #93 Hear! Hear!

Also, now I dont have to read the article, given your summary. Also, I happen to believe that the central message of Islam is individual responsibility to use your head . While a non-muslim can be rightly excused for not being interested in what Islam says or does not say, someone who calls himself a muslims should be interested in what Islam says. Either way, using their common sense, both would reach the same conclusion - i.e. it is not OK to run around killing people. Or to go ranting about the ``oppressed palestinians`` or the ``oppressed kashmiris`` as if muslims had a monopoly on being oppressed and as if muslims themselves were not guilty of the worst kinds of oppression when given the chance (as in Darfur, or as in the daily ignominies that the poor suffer every day in Pakistan at the hands of these same whiners).

#66: ... the problem of the Muslim community is not the aggresive underbelly, but the apologetic pacifist elites....

Saima Shah`s sharp intellect has accurately identified and isolated the problem. It is indeed the moderatoons, apologistoons (Secularoons, Liberaloons etc as per echoboom) who in their misguided and simplistic reformatory zeal fall quite blindly into the trap laid down of joining the chorus against the saddams, usamas, zarqawis and the rest who are/were the carefully manufactured red herrings towards the larger aim of dominating the middle-east and hence the world.

These apologistoons shudder at the thought of being downgraded to 3rd class citizens from the present 2nd class (which is ok for them) through no fault of theirs and think with the elimination of radical Islam they will somehow become 1st class. Well, they`ve got another think coming because they`ll always be pakis for the `others`. The only people who can get them some modicum of respect are the very same radicals whom they`re knocking, by kicking the butt of those people who term them pakis or some other derogatory descriptions (e.g. patels, chappatees etc ...)