GreekChat.com Forums

GreekChat.com Forums (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)
-   News & Politics (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=207)
-   -   islamic discussion (off shot of the condi discussion) (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=59661)

_Opi_ 11-16-2004 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
Bush isn't fighting a "Holy War against the Islamic World," he's protecting our country from terrorists who are fighting a "Holy War" against us. Read the Koran-- it's all in there.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html

Umm, did I read that correctly? For a person who's read the Koran, can you tell me which verse(s) you're talking about (assuming of course, YOU'VE read the Koran, because if you didn't ....that would be a stupid thing to say).


I will be waiting for a good response.

Moderator Note: OPI did not start this discussion. Due to me being an idiot and accidently deleting the Condi thread, everything is now a mess.

DeltAlum 11-16-2004 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by _Opi_
...can you tell me which verse(s) you're talking about...
I'd like to know more about that, myself. Having never read the Koran, I am still under the impression that many/most of the things going on presently are specifically against its teachings and those of Islam.

AlphaSigOU 11-16-2004 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by _Opi_
Umm, did I read that correctly? For a person who's read the Koran, can you tell me which verse(s) you're talking about (assuming of course, YOU'VE read the Koran, because if you didn't ....that would be a stupid thing to say).


I will be waiting for a good response.

Ya hit it right on the head, _Opi_... a superficial reading of a passage in the Holy Qu'ran is just as dangerous as a superficial reading of a passage from the Holy Bible - subject to extreme misinterpretation.

Just as we have Bible-thumping fundamentalist Christians, the Islamic world has its own problem with Koran-thumping fundamentalist mullahs.

And no, I'm not a Muslim, though I do have a copy of the Qu'ran in my library next to the Holy Bible.

Rudey 11-16-2004 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
I'd like to know more about that, myself. Having never read the Koran, I am still under the impression that many/most of the things going on presently are specifically against its teachings and those of Islam.
Jihad?

-Rudey

AlphaSigOU 11-16-2004 07:08 PM

Jihad in the Holy Qu'ran
 
One of many passages in the Holy Qu'ran:

Surah II, 190-193

190. Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for God loveth not transgressors.

191. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. But fight them not at the Sacred Mosque [Mecca] unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

192. But if they cease, God is oft-forgiving, most merciful.

193. And fight them on until there is no more tumult and oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God. But if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.


A superficial reading this would be interpreted as a justification for the insurgents to go after the hated infidel Americans. Below is an interpretation of jihad, according to religious scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali (notes 1270 and 1271 of Surah IX:20) :

Quote:

1270. Here is a good description of Jihad. It may require fighting in God's cause, as a form of self-sacrifice. But its essence consists in (1) a true and sincere Faith, which so fixes its gaze on God, that all selfish or worldly motives seem paltry and fade away, and (2) an earnest and ceaseless activity, involving the sacrifice (if need be) of life, person and property, in the service of God. Mere brutal fighting is opposed to the whole spirit of jihad, while the sincere scholar's pen or preacher's voice or wealthy man's contributions may be the most valuable forms of Jihad. (Emphasis added.)

1271. Those who strive and suffer in God's cause are promised (1) a mercy specially from Himself, (2) His own good pleasure, (3) gardens of perpetual delight (4) the supreme reward, God's own presence or nearness. These are, in gradation: (1) is a special mercy, higher than flows out to all creatures; (2) is a consciouscness of God's good pleasure, which raises the soul above itself; (3) is that state of permanent physical assurance, which is typified by gardens of perpetual delight, and (4) is the final bliss, which is the presence of God Himself, or, in Sufi language didar-i-Ilahi, the sight of God Himself.

DeltAlum 11-16-2004 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
Jihad?
I know the word. I'd like to know how it's used in the Koran.

PhiPsiRuss 11-16-2004 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
I know the word. I'd like to know how it's used in the Koran.
I'm no expert, but my understanding is that "jihad" means "personal struggle." Its supposed to refer to an individuals efforts to become a better human being. Bin Laden types have broadened the definition to mean a "struggle, by absolutely any means necessary, to fulfill the will of Allah." I believe that most Muslims would find such a reinterpretation offensive.

Rudey 11-16-2004 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DeltAlum
I know the word. I'd like to know how it's used in the Koran.
Listen, my point is that the religion is up for interpretation. There are people who believe killing women who are raped is acceptable and this belief is widely accepted and administered in many religious communities. Many mosques blare the call of jihad and to root out the infidels and talk of the many virgins that will be received upon a murder's/martyr's death.

So call it an aberration from the norm of peace if you want, but these men, many more learned in the Koran, would beg to disagree with how you view them.

-Rudey

Pike1483 11-16-2004 08:41 PM

Allrighty, people, this is Greek Chat, not Politically-Correct-Chat. I'm not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist. Far from it. There are lots of good peaceful Muslims. I was simply making a point that the terrorists we are fighting are fighting a "Holy War" against us. They whole-heartedly believe that they are fighting a Holy War against us and that this will get them into heaven. I was making this point since IowaStatePhiPsi falsely stated that Bush was fighting a "Holy War against the Islamic world."

If you want to see more of where I'm coming from as far as the Koran goes, read the book of Surah.

For a related artical check out: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1100.htm The artical is on a Christian-based website, so I'm sure many of you will be turned off to it because of that, but please try and read the whole thing because it is a very good read and gives one very good perspective on this whole issue.

I'll try and comment more on this and the koran and all that stuff later if anyone is still interested, but I've got an organic chemistry test tomorrow, and need to do some hard-core studying.

AlphaSigOU 11-16-2004 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
If you want to see more of where I'm coming from as far as the Koran goes, read the book of Surah.
Unlike our Holy Bible, the Qu'ran does not have individually-named books; the word "surah" loosely translates to 'chapter'.

I agree with ya... not all Muslims are terrorists. It's the hotheads who have other ulterior motives, while wrapping themselves in the cloak of religion that are giving Islam a bad name.

RACooper 11-17-2004 12:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
For a related artical check out: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1100.htm The artical is on a Christian-based website, so I'm sure many of you will be turned off to it because of that, but please try and read the whole thing because it is a very good read and gives one very good perspective on this whole issue.

I'll try and comment more on this and the koran and all that stuff later if anyone is still interested, but I've got an organic chemistry test tomorrow, and need to do some hard-core studying.

As they say a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing...

In this case the author of the article selected passages that support the allegation that Islam is a violent religion... problem is you can do the same thing with the Torah or the Bible as well. The author however did not provide any context to the quotes, nor does she even hint at statements in the Qu'ran that would counter her arguement(s).

moe.ron 11-17-2004 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
Allrighty, people, this is Greek Chat, not Politically-Correct-Chat. I'm not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist. Far from it. There are lots of good peaceful Muslims. I was simply making a point that the terrorists we are fighting are fighting a "Holy War" against us. They whole-heartedly believe that they are fighting a Holy War against us and that this will get them into heaven. I was making this point since IowaStatePhiPsi falsely stated that Bush was fighting a "Holy War against the Islamic world."

If you want to see more of where I'm coming from as far as the Koran goes, read the book of Surah.

For a related artical check out: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1100.htm The artical is on a Christian-based website, so I'm sure many of you will be turned off to it because of that, but please try and read the whole thing because it is a very good read and gives one very good perspective on this whole issue.

I'll try and comment more on this and the koran and all that stuff later if anyone is still interested, but I've got an organic chemistry test tomorrow, and need to do some hard-core studying.

Uhm, surah is not a "book." And please don't use the ever convinient anti-PC argument to cover up your lack of knowledge about Islam.

GeekyPenguin 11-17-2004 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
Allrighty, people, this is Greek Chat, not Politically-Correct-Chat. I'm not saying that every Muslim is a terrorist. Far from it. There are lots of good peaceful Muslims. I was simply making a point that the terrorists we are fighting are fighting a "Holy War" against us. They whole-heartedly believe that they are fighting a Holy War against us and that this will get them into heaven. I was making this point since IowaStatePhiPsi falsely stated that Bush was fighting a "Holy War against the Islamic world."

If you want to see more of where I'm coming from as far as the Koran goes, read the book of Surah.

For a related artical check out: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1100.htm The artical is on a Christian-based website, so I'm sure many of you will be turned off to it because of that, but please try and read the whole thing because it is a very good read and gives one very good perspective on this whole issue.

I'll try and comment more on this and the koran and all that stuff later if anyone is still interested, but I've got an organic chemistry test tomorrow, and need to do some hard-core studying.

Because no Christians have ever fought Holy Wars based on false interpretation of the Bible.

How does it feel to be so righteous all the time?

Pike1483 11-17-2004 01:41 PM

Okay, I'll admit that I'm not an expert on the Koran (as proved by my earlier Surah blunder). I never said I was. I simply said I had studied it, which I have. Based on what I've learned from stuff, I can see why the terrorists hate us and think us infidels. And once again I'm not bashing the whole Muslim religion, I'm just simply stating my interpretation of it. If they're not fighting a "holy war" against us, then what are they doing? If anyone is an expert on the Koran, please explain this to me. I'm also not claiming that Christians have never persecuted anyone.
Mainly I was stating that Bush is not fighting a "holy war" against Islam as someone stated earlier. It seems to me that everyone thinks it's okay to bash Bush's religion, but it's never appropriate to even question somebody else's religion.

moe.ron 11-17-2004 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
Okay, I'll admit that I'm not an expert on the Koran (as proved by my earlier Surah blunder). I never said I was. I simply said I had studied it, which I have. Based on what I've learned from stuff, I can see why the terrorists hate us and think us infidels. And once again I'm not bashing the whole Muslim religion, I'm just simply stating my interpretation of it. If they're not fighting a "holy war" against us, then what are they doing? If anyone is an expert on the Koran, please explain this to me. I'm also not claiming that Christians have never persecuted anyone..
Al-Qaeda has violated, imho, the just war doctrine which is contained in the Qur'an.

In particular, the declaration of war can only be initiated by head of states. Qur'an, when it come to warfare, is a very statecentric document. It also ordained that warfare must be the last resort. It is also interesting, something you don't hear, warfare or force is not a permitted instrument for advancing Islam. Consider this:

Invite (all) to the Way
Of thy Lord with wisdon
And beautiful preaching;
And argue with them in ways that are best
And most gracious (16: 125)

Let there be no compulsion
In religion: Truth stands out
Clear from Error: (2: 256)

The just ad bellum tradition in Islam is very similar to the western tradition: just cause, right intent, proper authority, and discrimination in the use of force.

GeekyPenguin 11-17-2004 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pike1483
Okay, I'll admit that I'm not an expert on the Koran (as proved by my earlier Surah blunder). I never said I was. I simply said I had studied it, which I have. Based on what I've learned from stuff, I can see why the terrorists hate us and think us infidels. And once again I'm not bashing the whole Muslim religion, I'm just simply stating my interpretation of it. If they're not fighting a "holy war" against us, then what are they doing? If anyone is an expert on the Koran, please explain this to me. I'm also not claiming that Christians have never persecuted anyone.
Mainly I was stating that Bush is not fighting a "holy war" against Islam as someone stated earlier. It seems to me that everyone thinks it's okay to bash Bush's religion, but it's never appropriate to even question somebody else's religion.

Have we been invaded? Have Muslims as a whole risen up against the US? One isolated terror attack, as awful as it was, does not a war make.

AlphaSigOU 11-17-2004 02:37 PM

'Bout time to split this thread off...

GeekyPenguin 11-17-2004 02:38 PM

Yes, we have proved yet another ignorant GCer wrong,and thus we must delete this thread.

BALEET! BALEET FOR JUSTICE! :rolleyes:

wreckingcrew 11-17-2004 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Yes, we have proved yet another ignorant GCer wrong,and thus we must delete this thread.

BALEET! BALEET FOR JUSTICE! :rolleyes:

It has nothing to do with that and you know it.

It's all about posturing and your inflated egos. But we should let that stay right? I mean, i post something about blue states, and the socialist mod on this board has to delete it all.

KS 361

_Opi_ 11-17-2004 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
All it has been has been the same back and forth crap about Islam that's already been hashed and re-hashed on here.
KS 361

To some posters, Islam is not just crap. And until people start involving the problems of this world on their ignorant and unfounded views on muslims and those who follow the Koran, it will continue to be hashed and rehashed...... which is continuing to be a trend on GC politics anyway.



Pike1483, I am still waiting for a good response and all you can give me is an "article" you read ....an obviously biased one at that. Disappointing.


AlphaSigOU, I whole heartedly agree with you. You can't post a verse without talking about its context.

wreckingcrew 11-17-2004 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by _Opi_
To some posters, Islam is not just crap. And until people start involving the problems of this world on their ignorant and unfounded views on muslims and those who follow the Koran, it will continue to be hashed and rehashed...... which is continuing to be a trend on GC politics anyway.

settle down there ace, don't get all Jihad on me.

i didn't say, this Islam crap. What i said was crap about Islam. Meaning specifically the misconceptions held by many. I was really referring to how a thread on a completely different topic got steered into a new discussion because Islam seems to be the new 'hot' topic.

I for one don't care what God, Creator, Allah you worship. But it doesn't need to made central on every thread on this board.

I'm really starting to feel that everytime we see an "Islam is a religon of peace" some of y'all are trying to compensate for us seeing people brutally murdered in it's name.

KS 361

_Opi_ 11-17-2004 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
settle down there ace, don't get all Jihad on me.
LOL

Quote:

I for one don't care what God, Creator, Allah you worship. But it doesn't need to made central on every thread on this board.
actually...its not central to every thread I make...but if I see someone saying something ignorant about muslims or the Koran - like Pike1483 - I will address it since I am a proud muslim and not afraid to talk about it. Notice that I don't start topics about it, rather..others do (do a quick search).

Quote:

I'm really starting to feel that everytime we see an "Islam is a religon of peace" some of y'all are trying to compensate for us seeing people brutally murdered in it's name.
Well if that's how you feel, then there is nothing I can do about that. Maybe you think that I am using the religion-card. Here is the thing though...why is it that on numerous occasions when there are terrorist attacks, we muslims have to "condemn" or explain Islam's true teachings? Hey I didn't do it....a delusional criminal did it...but the rest of 1 billion muslims gotta explain themselves...Don't some people get that we are targets too...there were muslim people beheaded, there were muslims on the WTC, etc etc and I'm sure in many other places....but hey...I'm just using the "religion-card".

AlphaSigOU 11-17-2004 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Because no Christians have ever fought Holy Wars based on false interpretation of the Bible.
Hold on a sec... aren't you forgetting the Crusades? We're just as guilty of knocking heads in the name of religion.

aurora_borealis 11-17-2004 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
Hold on a sec... aren't you forgetting the Crusades? We're just as guilty of knocking heads in the name of religion.
She was being sarcastic, or should I say, Sarkathstic. ;)

Rudey 11-17-2004 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Have we been invaded? Have Muslims as a whole risen up against the US? One isolated terror attack, as awful as it was, does not a war make.
One terror attack? Where did you get that?

Maybe if you count each individual attack once. Once for the barracks, one for the African bombings, one for the WTC part I, one for the USS cole, and on and on.

-Rudey

Rudey 11-17-2004 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
Hold on a sec... aren't you forgetting the Crusades? We're just as guilty of knocking heads in the name of religion.
But is this a conversation on all religion or just one and in the current time.

Again, people who are much more learned in Islam are preaching hate in the middle east with talk of dhimis, infidels, and jihad. Women who are raped are worthy of death and this goes on and on.

Are people just going to say their interpretation is wrong and theirs is right?

I'm not saying any interpretation is right or wrong but I am saying that clearly at this point in history Islam has become associated with terrorism and even promotes it quite often.

-Rudey

PhiPsiRuss 11-17-2004 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
One isolated terror attack, as awful as it was, does not a war make.
It wasn't one attack. There have been more, and there is the publicly stated intention to continue to attack when possible.

Peaches-n-Cream 11-17-2004 04:28 PM

I just feel so sad about the kidnappings, beheadings, and executions. I don't know how anyone can justify that. This recent killing of Margaret Hassan, a CARE worker who dedicated her life to helping Iraqis, has left me feeling sick to my stomach and questioning what kind of people could do this. Where is their humanity, their decency, their compassion?

RACooper 11-17-2004 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Peaches-n-Cream
I just feel so sad about the kidnappings, beheadings, and executions. I don't know how anyone can justify that. This recent killing of Margaret Hassan, a CARE worker who dedicated her life to helping Iraqis, has left me feeling sick to my stomach and questioning what kind of people could do this. Where is their humanity, their decency, their compassion?
Again by radicals... and roundly condemned by the Iraqi and Islamic communities. The problem is that many people are judging the community by the actions of radicals; the actions of radicals are not a reflection of the faith - which is why they are called radicals, fundamentalists, or militants.

GeekyPenguin 11-17-2004 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
It has nothing to do with that and you know it.

It's all about posturing and your inflated egos. But we should let that stay right? I mean, i post something about blue states, and the socialist mod on this board has to delete it all.

KS 361

Actually it has everything do with that. Pike1483 doesn't know anything about Islam and is making outlandish claims.

Thanks for sweating me, though.

GeekyPenguin 11-17-2004 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AggieSigmaNu361
settle down there ace, don't get all Jihad on me.
:eek:

Rudey 11-17-2004 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RACooper
Again by radicals... and roundly condemned by the Iraqi and Islamic communities. The problem is that many people are judging the community by the actions of radicals; the actions of radicals are not a reflection of the faith - which is why they are called radicals, fundamentalists, or militants.
Right...it's only 1 or 2 people and everyone else condemns it.

-Rudey

RACooper 11-17-2004 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
Right...it's only 1 or 2 people and everyone else condemns it.

-Rudey

Well quite a few actually do... it all depends on what news source you're catching - and how much time they dedicate to international affairs...

For example a number of Islamic leaders were already condemning the insurgents for "desicrating" mosques by using to stage attacks - more or less stating that the insurgents actions are only serving to fulfill the stereotypes that the Western world has about Muslims....

Later on the BBC & CBC & ABC (Australian) went on to interview members of the Islamic community in Europe, Iraq, and Suadi Arabia about the killing of Hassan - all soundly condemned it as an "abomination".

Rudey 11-17-2004 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RACooper
Well quite a few actually do... it all depends on what news source you're catching - and how much time they dedicate to international affairs...

For example a number of Islamic leaders were already condemning the insurgents for "desicrating" mosques by using to stage attacks - more or less stating that the insurgents actions are only serving to fulfill the stereotypes that the Western world has about Muslims....

Later on the BBC & CBC & ABC (Australian) went on to interview members of the Islamic community in Europe, Iraq, and Suadi Arabia about the killing of Hassan - all soundly condemned it as an "abomination".

Really? A number? Right like one or two.

Those same leaders were talking about how American soldiers deserved death as a result of walking into a mosque with their boots.

Then there were many religious leaders who were calling for jihad.

But I guess the many don't matter when you have a "number" of religious people who don't completely agree with their point of view.

Hmm I wonder what those Saudi Arabians teach their kids in their school books about Christians, Jews, Americans, and any foreigners.

-Rudey

AKA_Monet 11-17-2004 09:32 PM

Re: Jihad in the Holy Qu'ran
 
Quote:

Originally posted by AlphaSigOU
One of many passages in the Holy Qu'ran:

Surah II, 190-193

191. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. But fight them not at the Sacred Mosque [Mecca] unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

192. But if they cease, God is oft-forgiving, most merciful.

193. And fight them on until there is no more tumult and oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God. But if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.

Far be it from me to interpret just these few passages in the Holy Qu'ran (or anything) as an avowed Christian to have the decency to reach out to my fellow lovers of Allah, muslims...

However, in looking at world history and how my OPINION of various Holy Books and passages might be a blueprint or map of humankind and life on this planet, Earth--maybe it seems that many in the Islamic world have been in "tumult and oppression" which is "worse than slaughter"... So these folks sincerely and earnestly believe that their "heart" has to be to fight--and in Christian terms--"the good fight..."

Yes, this war IS about PRINCIPALITIES!!! And it is scary to those of us that deem ourselves as Spiritual... Simply because we are so empathic that we truly are beginning to believe the end times are near... Just that the trumpet hasn't sounded--or wasn't heard... :rolleyes:

And think, what if this war DOES ESCALATE??? Where are we as humankind now?

And who started warmongering? Really? With nuclear weapon capabilities that are intercontinental with GPS and satellite technology?

moe.ron 11-18-2004 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
Right...it's only 1 or 2 people and everyone else condemns it.

-Rudey

Well, NU and Muhammadiyah has condemn terrorism without reservation. Here is their joint statement on the JW Marroit Bombing in Jakarta:

Quote:

JOINT STATEMENT AND CONCERN BY
PP MUHAMMADIYAH AND PB NAHDATUL ULAMA

ON ACT OF BOMB TERROR AT JW MARRIOT HOTEL, JAKARTA

5 AUGUST 2003

In connection to the terrorist act of bombing at the JW Marriot Hotel in Jakarta on 5 July 2003, the Central Board of Muhammadiyah and the Central Board of Nahdhatul Ulama state the following:

1. Strongly condemn the act of terrorism as a heinous, ruthless and uncivilized crime against humanity, and belied religious values. As such, the perpetrators, under any pretext for their action, are in violation of religious norms.

2. Express deep concern for the casualties and convey condolence to the bereaved families.

3. Demand and support the authorities to apprehend the culprits and reveal the terrorists' network behind the bombing through a professional, transparent and assertive process.

4. The reoccurrence of such heinous, ruthless and uncivilized action depict the need to further strengthen the capacity of the security officials to disclose the terrorists’ network and their efforts in combating terrorism in Indonesia. Therefore, we request that the government, especially the Police, improve their anti-terrorism and contra-terrorism capacity, not only at the post-occurrence management but also in its preventive and anticipative capacity to prevent future occurrence of terrorism acts.

5. Appeal that government officials, leaders, observers and people at large refrain from making speculations and conspiracy theories, and ask that they remain calm and unprovoked by these speculations.

Jakarta, 6 August 2003


Prof. Ahmad Syafii Maarif

Chairman of the Central Board of

Muhammadiyah


K.H. Hasyim Muzadi

Chairman of the Central Board of

Nahdlatul Ulama

Rudey 11-18-2004 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by moe.ron
Well, NU and Muhammadiyah has condemn terrorism without reservation. Here is their joint statement on the JW Marroit Bombing in Jakarta:
2 things:

1) So many things are just words. For example, there are several Arab rulers who talk about non-violence and peace one day along with the rejection of terrorism and then the next day talk about jihad, jihad, jihad and define terrorism as they see fit.

2) How do they define terrorism? Do they say that Iraqis who are attacking Americans should stop? Do they say they should stop in mosques only? Do they try and define terrorism in a way to suit them?

-Rudey

moe.ron 11-18-2004 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
2 things:

1) So many things are just words. For example, there are several Arab rulers who talk about non-violence and peace one day along with the rejection of terrorism and then the next day talk about jihad, jihad, jihad and define terrorism as they see fit.

2) How do they define terrorism? Do they say that Iraqis who are attacking Americans should stop? Do they say they should stop in mosques only? Do they try and define terrorism in a way to suit them?

-Rudey

1) Give me one example of how the two organizations have even hinted that they are in favor of violence. The two organizations have never advocated violance and has even , without hesitation, go against the implementation of Sharia.

2) They support the anti-terrorism legislation: the Government Regulation in lieu of Law No.1/2002 on fighting terrorism. So, their definition is the same as the Indonesian government.

Rudey 11-18-2004 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by moe.ron
1) Give me one example of how the two organizations have even hinted that they are in favor of violence. The two organizations have never advocated violance and has even , without hesitation, go against the implementation of Sharia.

2) They support the anti-terrorism legislation: the Government Regulation in lieu of Law No.1/2002 on fighting terrorism. So, their definition is the same as the Indonesian government.

How do they feel about suicide bombers?

Do they consider any type of attacks on soldiers as legitimate?

I guess the flaw could carry over from the Indonesian government's choices on how to define terrorism as it suits them as well.

As for an example, I said many Arab governments. I'm not sure how these 2 organizations have responded in the past.

-Rudey

moe.ron 11-18-2004 12:47 PM

Dunno if this will answer your question, but this is a good assessment of what is going on in Indonesia:

Quote:

Political developments after the Bali tragedy

Presented by Sarwono Kusumaatmadja

1. Violence as a means to meet objectives has had a long history in Indonesia. Lack of conflict resolution mechanisms, an incompetent and corrupt judiciary and police as well as simplistic and insensitive policies have led to outbreaks of violence amongst the populace. Authorities habitually utilized violence as an approach to discredit and stifle opposition as well as in facilitating land acquisition of big business and to suppress labour unrest, among other reasons. All the above factors have contributed to the perpetuation of violence which has continued in the years after Suharto. As such it is not an easy matter to investigate acts of violence especially terrorism, since there are numerous candidates who may have motives as well as the means to perpetrate heinous acts like the Bali bombing of 12 Oct 2002.

2. Although the police has so far conducted a credible process of investigation with uncharacteristic resolve and skill, regretfully marred by a farcical and callous joke trading between a suspect and the Chief of Police, the ultimate answers to the tragedy will depend on future political developments. Terrorism is a violent act of politically motivated crime, and since it may be distinguished from other crimes for its political content, the truth behind the Bali bombing can only be found in a political climate in which confidence and trust in the government has been restored. Therefore linkages between the perpetrators of the bombing and other networks whether they be domestic or international may only be convincingly disclosed by a government with strong leadership enyoying a moral high ground. Otherwise, the police may be frustrated in their attempts to consummate their task to the full. Producing an answer to the Bali bombing, however credible, may raise other questions in need of urgent answers. It is not within the capacity of the present leadership to cope with such a situation.

3. After an initial flurry of activities, leading to the signing of anti terrorism act, the consolidation of intelligence agencies and a serious investigation of the Bali bombing, the government has fallen to the previous style of interagency bickering on a wide variety of subjects, with the President acting as a hapless onlooker. As such, the investigation being undertaken by the police may risk losing its initial focus of attention, and it will then take another dramatic turn of events for Indonesia to return to much-needed attention to the Bali incident and for the due process of law to bring justice to the culprits.

4. The present political tensions in Indonesia have their roots in the mainstream belief systems, all of which have evolved from earlier years. A closer look on how political Islam has evolved will be of relevance in looking at how violence increasingly became an integral part of power games. In the 1950s mainstream Islam hoped to establish an Islamic state through a parliamentary approach, resulting in a deadlocked Constitutional Assembly in 1959, in which both the secular mainstream and political Islam failed to achieve the needed absolute majority to establish a permanent constitution. The support for establishment of an Islamic state received 45% of the vote. In the following years, however, the idea of establishing an Islamic state lost considerable support and has become a non-issue. The mainstream Islamic movement, represented by Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah has instead chosen to inculcate religious values in society, recognising that basically state institutions should remain secular. This evolution in political thinking may perhaps explain the radicalisation of the shrinking numbers of true believers in the idea of an Islamic state. The manipulation and violent suppression of this hardline minority during the earlier years of the Suharto regime may also contribute to their isolasionist and hostile attitudes towards any ideas and social entities outside their own, and increasingly the ideological leanings of this group veer toward the strict Wahabi stream of the Arabian peninsula, opening the way for intensified contacts with likeminded comrades in the Middle East and paving the way to their participation in the Afghan war against the Soviet Union and training as well educational opportunities in various likely countries. The internationalization of this hardline movement then led to pan Islamic ideas of nationhood, hence the establishment of Jama’ah Islamiyah in Malaysia with the dream of establishing an Islamic state encompassing parts of South East Asia with muslim majorities.

5. Police investigations, enjoying substantial public support, so far have pointed in the direction of the Jama’ah Islamiyah network, laying to rest doubts whether such a group ever existed. Previous scepticism of the existence of Jama’ah Islamiyah (J.I.) was however well founded due to several reasons. First, jama’ah islamiyah is a generic term referring to any congregation of the devout. It is usual for communities of muslims in Indonesia and elsewhere to see themselves as jama’ah islamiyah. Second, a history of manipulation and violent suppression of devout muslims contributed to this attitude of wariness, shared by non muslims as well. Third, very little information aside from that provided by foreign governments is known about J.I. , which is only natural since J.I. is a secretive society, whose inner workings can only be uncovered by a thorough intelligence approach. This sort of intelligence work by foreign governments was and is still viewed with distrust, reflecting the lack of credibility of the intelligence apparatus in Indonesia, coupled also with the belief across religious lines that some foreign governments have the habit of intimidating and harassing opponents by a deliberate engineering of information. The nature of Indonesia as a low trust society gives rise to a fabulous number of conspiracy theories available to the public, some of them bizzare and yet some of them believable to a sizeable audience.

6. Given this atmosphere of low trust, the public support for the police is indeed remarkable. Perhaps this is due to the fact that so many foreign nationals died in the horrific blast, in Bali of all places, leading to a case of shame and wounded national pride. Another reason related to the above is the appointment of Gen. Mangku Pastika as chief investigator, a no nonsense and professional policeman of excellent reputation. For the police, recently separated from the Armed Forces, the investigation is especially vital to establish primacy in pursuing cases of political crime, formerly the domain of the Army. Third is the large presence of foreign investigators of various countries, leading the police and other agencies to put their best effort. Therefore it is a longstanding fact that despite grumblings and apparent dislike of foreign interference, it has been repeatedly demonstrated that external pressures are always there when things begin to get done. Even Laskar Jihad, an ultranationalistic muslim paramilitary group, felt it necessary to quote a fatwa from a Saudi cleric as a major reason for their disbandment

7. The Bali tragedy presents a window of opportunity for Indonesia to forge solidarity and cohesion, and to begin to reestablish trust and generate hope. However, this is far from easy. The government’s incapacity to provide leadership is a foregone conclusion. The society lacks natural leaders that have a broad appeal to a heterogenuous populace. A potential rallying point is the mainstream Islam which has enjoyed a mutually rewarding relationship with minorities, but its most prominent leader Mr. Abdurrahman Wahid has lost influence and prestige. The Bali bombing may effectively increase the distance between the moderate Islamic majority and the violent few, but this does not translate automatically into a posistion of leadership since Indonesia’s political field is a minefield of mistrust, anger and frustation. To give an example, it is one thing to keep a healthy distance from the violent fringe and to condemn their actions and to demand that justice prevail, but one does not want to be seen as being an agent of western powers in doing that. This field may present an opportunity for a populist demagogue , but we still have to find one after Sukarno who has his ability to provide leadership to a complex mix of people. All of which gives rise to speculation that the military may be considered as providing this leadership vacuum.

8. The shift of attention from human rights and democracy to the war on terrorism provides an opportunity for the military to strenghten their leadership potential, but the hurdles are huge. The emergence of a better image of the army necessitates an answer to widespread and undenied belief that elements of the army have been actively promoting conflicts in Papua, Ambon, and Poso in keeping with past tradition of fomenting unrest as a means of control. The international community, although in a lesser sense due to the shift in priorities, are also watchful of the ongoing trials on human rights abuses in East Timor. Unless the military finds resolve to act against their own kind, trust as a paramount social capital will still be outside their reach. While the police have already found a newly found source of trust which they still have to build up as time passes, the military so far has not done so. A cessation of conflict in Aceh will be a welcome progress as far as the military is concerned, but their most serious problem is their zealous commitment to impunity.

9. Consistent with the time honoured phenomenon that political developments inside the country are always influenced by major international dynamics, the Bush Administration policies are keenly watched in Indonesia. The prospect of a messy and protracted war in Iraq with the equally messy and bloody process of regime change, if it occurs at all, is especially worrisome since there is a generally held view that this particular war will open a Pandora box of widespread conflict. It is seen as an ironic tragedy that the US as a victim of 11 September 2001, will risk being viewed as a source of global conflict. In that sort of scenery voices of moderation in Indonesia will face an enormous challenge from an unlikely alliance of xenophobic ultra nationalists and Islamic hardliners sharing a common constituency, the millions of impoverished, unemployed youth of Indonesia.

10. In conclusion, the Bali tragedy provides a precious opportunity for Indonesia to shape up, but there is a worrisome outlook that this opportunity may be missed due to leadership problems in Indonesia and a negative trend in international politics, of which the impending war in Iraq looms large. Indonesia in particular and the world as a whole may experience further tragic losses of innocent lives, before a prospect of a better future can emerge.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.