Terrorism and the Muslim World

re: this article
BTW, this article is crap! No sense wasting time on it.
Sridhar

re: Islam
People tell me that Islam is a peaceful religion. I am sure most muslims are peaceful by nature.
Some recent developments in India are however, disturbing. For eg, Islamic Sharia courts have started to interfere in the criminal justice system to the extent that Supreme Court of that country has asked for an explanation from these courts. Sania Mirza, the teenage tennis sensation from India, was recently issued a Fatwa by a Shia cleric in India for violating Islamic dress code!
It is disturbing that these things happen in India. I thought those who wanted such things have already moved to Pakistan but apparently not. It is imperative that this be nipped in the bud. It is the inability of muslims to see the other viewpoint and join the mainstream that makes them easy targets for suspicion and ridicule.
Sridhar

Re: # 25 Thank you so much.

good entertaining read.
keep up the good work!

Re: # 15
Dear Salim_Chauhan. I really welcome and appreciate your serious comments. I fully agree with you. A wrong can never be justified even though it is held very dearly by the whole world. This is the essence of teachings of Islam which stands for human dignity, liberty, solidarity and respect to human institutions. Any organisation, institution or a leader acting in defiance to this ideal is devilish in spirit and contents.
thanks
Sincerely yours,
Syed Javed Hussain

Re: # 15
Dear Salim_Chauhan. I really welcome and appreciate your serious comments. I fully agree with you. A wrong can never be justified even though it is held very dearly by the whole world. This is the essence of teachings of Islam which stands for human dignity, liberty, solidarity and respect to human institutions. Any organisation, institution or a leader acting in defiance to this ideal is devilish in spirit and contents.
thanks
Sincerely yours,
Syed Javed Hussain

re: Syed Javed Hussain

I will post my comments, when time permits. However, there are some points, with which I disagree. The foremost is that Al-Qaeda did not exist till the 1990s and the nucleus of its membership did not fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan on the behalf of United States; it fought the Soviets on the behalf of Islam. Secondly; Pakistan and Zia-ul-Haq were well aware of the situation and Zia did use/exploit this Islamic militancy for his own ends. Lastly, Mulism nations have supported Islamic militancy for their own political end-games and hence, the argument that they were unwilling dupes of the United States (and the west) is not a valid one.

Ciao

#19 by FawadR on September 12, 2005 5:17pm PT


How can we discuss terrorism, when we can`t even define terrorism. Who is a terrorist? Can anyone answer that question on this forum?


It`s like pornography...I know it when i see it...

`` Al-Qaeda fought in Afghanistan on behalf of the US for so many years. It only used Islam for rallying support for its own cause. The US and its supportive governments in Pakistan under Ziaul Haq turned blind eye on certain sections closely knit to parent Al-Qaeda organization that played havoc with people and property of certain sections of society that did not adhere to their interpretation of Islam. Shia in Pakistan, so to speak, were at the receiving end of the unceasing ire of first Sipah-e-Sabaha, then Janghavi, Riaz Basra, Akram Lahori groups etc and many other nondescript rebellious factions of the same organization since 1985. Pakistan society was torn asunder; however, ‘greater national interest,’ while serving the interest of the US, sealed the mouths of the people in power corridors. It is not difficult to visualize the situation at home if 11 September’s diabolical event had not taken place and the Al-Qaeda had not been taken good care of by the US. Pakistan would have completely become pre-September 11 Afghanistan by now. Saddam, like Al-Qaeda, was West’s erstwhile partner. Later he turned against them when he was ditched at the end. Presently Mujahideen-e-Khalq working against Iran are being supported by the US in Iraq on the same lines as of Al-Qaeda, and if in near future it turns against the US, it should not blame anybody else rather curse its own Frankenstein fate. ``

Al-Qaeda did not exist in the 1980s. Few hundred of Osama`s henchmen fought against the Soviets. Most of the Afghan Arabs are living in Arab countries where they originally came from.


`` Shia in Pakistan, so to speak, were at the receiving end of the unceasing ire of first Sipah-e-Sabaha, then Janghavi, Riaz Basra, Akram Lahori groups etc and many other nondescript rebellious factions of the same organization since 1985. Pakistan society was torn asunder; however, ‘greater national interest,’ while serving the interest of the US, sealed the mouths of the people in power corridors. ``

It is a stretch to say that all actions of the Pakistani elite are to bidding of the Americans.
That would call for some imagination and creativity that most elites lack.

`` It is not difficult to visualize the situation at home if 11 September’s diabolical event had not taken place and the Al-Qaeda had not been taken good care of by the US. Pakistan would have completely become pre-September 11 Afghanistan by now. Saddam, like Al-Qaeda, was West’s erstwhile partner. Later he turned against them when he was ditched at the end. Presently Mujahideen-e-Khalq working against Iran are being supported by the US in Iraq on the same lines as of Al-Qaeda, and if in near future it turns against the US, it should not blame anybody else rather curse its own Frankenstein fate. ``

Pakistani Punjab and Karachi would never live under Taliban like rule. Attempts by the Pakistani military to impose mullah rule would backfire severely.

How can we discuss terrorism, when we can`t even define terrorism. Who is a terrorist? Can anyone answer that question on this forum?

Given the passage of time, many terrorists become national heros and some even go on to win Nobel Peace prizes - Menachem Begin, Sadat, Arafat, Sharon, Bhagat Singh, Netaji, Tikka Khan, Nathan Hale, Putin, Ahmed Shah Massoud.

#16, Abey, #5 and #6 in my post #15 pertain to the role of Islam in promoting and nourishing terrorism. The Ozone layer is affecting many people`s comprehension. :)

Re: # 15

Very nice speech, and as always, when confronted with a simple picture of Islam’s role in promoting and nourishing terrorism, those living in denial will talk about the Ozone layer.

Javed Sahib,
Thank you for presenting yet another perspective on this whole preoccupation with ``terrorism.`` Let me state without any conditions that terrorism, the wanton act of killing/injuring/maiming civilians and destroying property, to further one`s objective, is a curse, a crime, an evil act, and can never be justified no matter what the goal. That said; let`s take a look at this recourse of the cowardly throughout the ages:

1. Sneaking into Troy in the wooden horse and then annihilating the entire city.
2. Surrounding Jericho, and with God`s help, the walls crumble to the ground as the good guys decimate every man, woman, and child.
3. Using captive labor with many many losses to erect strange looking structures in Egypt.
4. Civilizing the world then taking captive men, women, and children to enjoy life as gladiators, prostitutes, and household servants in Rome.
5. Attacking your neighbors, the Persians, Byzantines, Indians, and Visigoths and defeating them into submission to the one true God.
6. Looting temples, breaking idols, and stealing riches because of the one true God.
7. Liberating the Holy Land by sending huge number of devout civilians, including children, to capture cities, massacre entire populations, just to get to heaven because of God`s Will.
8. Discovering new worlds, spreading disease, looting riches, forcibly carrying humans as samples, destroying cities, and killing natives - all in the name of God and King/Queen.
9. Colonizing darker-skinned people to save them for God and make a profit while doing so.
10. Transporting huge numbers of slaves from Africa to the New World, crammed in ships like sardines, and bred and sold for profit for generations.
11. Usurping lands, breaking treaties, settling with transplanted Europeans, massacring natives, and then calling it Manifest Destiny.
12. Attacking well-armed, disciplined professional soldiers while hiding behind bushes and calling it a `fight`` for freedom, then discrediting others for fighting like this when the tables are turned.
13. Spreading violence and warfare, killing and robbery, on a universal scale and calling it a World War - twice.
14. Splitting former colonies into North/South, East/West, Hindu/Muslim, Jewish/Arab and declaring these as problems for the UN.
15. Stealing the world`s resources, depleting the Ozone layer, massive deforestation, and then proclaiming and enforcing ``environmentalism,`` when the less fortunate mimic your success.
16. Exploding the first nuclear weapon on actual humans and then being a watchdog against nuclear proliferation for the sake of humanity.

Shallow article full of cliches that sheds no new light on lamentable lack of political institutions and development in the muslim middle-east and its colonies (e.g., Pakistan).

If you compare it to:

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005580&channel=university%20ave

the difference between a quality product and a second-rate one is transparent.

Why is it so hard to digest the concept of “clash of civilizations”? Between the two that feel threatened by the existence of the other. Why shouldn’t “Islam” be kept out of any analysis of this conflict? Islam may allow forced sex with slaves or may view things as polygamy as a righteous virtue (and Suuna) or keeping women as goats may be a normal practice. So let’s keep all of that aside and argue why a society that promotes inequality (in Pakistan, for example, 98% of janitorial jobs are held by non-Muslim minority – I have yet to see a Syed (a descendant of Mohammad) cleaning siht out of toilets in Pakistan). So first get your house in order before worrying about bigger issues.