by Ghassan Kadi
Islam, real Islam, is a religion of piety, wisdom and peace, and Muslims, real Muslims are not terrorists. Even though all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are “Muslims”, this does not give a blanket description of all Muslims as beings terrorists.
Those who “use” terrorism to spew hatred towards Islam and indiscriminately against all Muslims have their own agenda. These are the true Islamophobes. These people do not need a reason to hate Islam and Muslims. They are now having a field day with the terror issue and using it to feed their hatred and to justify it.
I wanted to start this series of articles with the above statements in order to keep some who will try to put words in my mouth at bay. I had to make my position clear here, because inspired by The Saker, I want to have “my rant”.
In making my position clear and saying the above, I emphasize that we need to be able to discern what is what and what is not when it comes to Islam, Muslims and terrorism. In between the two extremes of 1) turning a total blind eye to the violent segment within Muslim communities in fear of being wrongly and unfairly branded as an Islamophobe and 2) clamping down on all Muslims and persecuting them, there is definitely an elusive fine line that needs to be identified. I am yet to see anyone trying to do this.
The EU has been towing the line of option (1) above. The American presidential hopeful Donald Trump is promising to enact option (2).
Option (1) led to the Paris November 2015 and the Brussel March 2016 attacks. This option is not leaving only the EU poised to suffer more terror, but the entire West. Option (2), if ever enacted, has unforeseeable consequences that I will not even try to imagine and discuss.
In between the extremes of fear and hatred, the West finds itself incapable of dealing with the Daesh phenomenon that has infiltrated into its heartland.
The problem with Daesh is certainly not restricted to the West. Its bigger impact is within the Muslim World. Its Western operatives have brought it to infamy in the West, turned the spotlights towards it, but its roots and recruitment base are without any shadow of doubt within the Muslim World.
I have in recent times expressed views about IS/Daesh that go against the grain of the politically-correct mainstream mindset of many friends of Syria. As a result, I had to weather quite a bit of harsh criticism, but this will not silence me.
I have serious concerns about the turn of recent events, and I humbly, but firmly, believe that with my upbringing in a city that became a major hub for Jihadis, having gone to school with and rubbed shoulders with many who became Jihadi leaders, and having been personally targeted as a potential recruit, my opinion is based on a broader-than-average exposure to different angles of the crisis in Syria and the rise of fundamentalism. I am not forcing my views on anyone, and all I am hoping for is that my views, that are based on my actual first-hand experience, can shed more light on the underlying issues behind the IS/Daesh phenomenon.
There seems to be a huge deal of misconception about what Daesh is and who directs it. Some of this is the direct result of the confusion caused by the rather big number of Islamist organizations and sponsors, but the biggest confusion originates from the opinions of analysts (mostly Western) who do not know the roots of the problem, and yet for some mysterious reason, they assume a leading role in the debate.
This confusion will probably go on for a long time, and it may never get resolved. However, I believe that it is time that a proper debate is conducted; a debate in which analysts with opposing views come in and bring their argument with them, if and when they have any.
We are on the cusp of an “enough-is-enough” moment. Whilst this attempt may not succeed, it is however an invitation, a challenge, to put this argument to rest once and for all.
It is easy to get bogged down in the details of which organization, the name of its leader, his association with different sponsors, why and when different leaders and the followers rebunk from one organization to another. All of those complications mask the simple reality behind what the current IS state is all about.
Daesh/IS is a new name, but in reality not different from its Islamic fundamentalist predecessors. The origin can be traced back in recent history to Wahhabism, but on examining the roots, it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran. Such theology is much more ancient than Wahhabism and even European settlement in America. Hence, the United States of America and the CIA cannot be held accountable for its existence.
When Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) was attacked by his own people (Quraish tribe), self-defense weighed in and battles were fought. Later on, as Islam expanded into other regions, for reasons not exactly clear to us now, wars associated with Islam were fought, but that was more than a thousand years ago. Furthermore, that modus operandi was not meant to stick, but it did. It goes against the teaching of the Quran, but to complicate things even more, the Quran was interpreted in a manner that endorses those widely accepted but false interpretations, and consequently, all Quranic translations are based on them. I have written at length and depth about this miscontrued theology before, and there is no real need to repeat the same message.
Wahhabism then adopted and fostered such pre-existing radical views, but it did not “invent” them either. They pre-date Wahhabism. The discovery of oil in Saudi Arabia lubricated the process and gave it a new momentum. Saudis became able to sponsor and finance Islamic schools that taught this perverted version of Islam. The Saudi funds were not spent only on preaching, but also on military training and setting up militia groups in different regions of the world. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the invasion was seen by Islamists as the attack of a “Kafir” (heretic nonbeliever) Communist nation on a Muslim nation. As a result, and in accordance with a Brzezinski-initiated plan, Afghanistan became a fertile ground for Jihadis, Saudi funds and American support.
At that point in time, the Islamists and the Americans found common interests. Even Bin Laden was on America’s side during this stage. This alliance however was not a permanent mark as some insist and refuse to see otherwise. The Al-Qaeda/American alliance broke up when America put boots on Saudi soil leading up to Operation Desert Storm in 1991. To Bin Laden that was a redline. To him, the Muslim Holy Land was not to be desecrated by “Salibyyin” (Crusaders).
Those who were fixated on seeing Bin Laden as an American lackey, especially those who weren’t in a position to understand his many speeches, let alone listened to them, could not understand the underlying nature of the conflict that turned Al-Qaeda from an ally of the Americans to a fierce foe. In all of his speeches, which were never translated in their entirety into English for public broadcast, Bin Laden had one single demand from the Americans, and that was for them to leave Islamic lands in general and the Islamic Holy Land in particular.
This was exactly how Bin Laden recruited Muslim youth. Every time he appeared on Al-Jazeera making his harangues, he reached out to the hearts and minds of those youth and had them flocking in droves to join him. Yes, Al-Jazeera was a huge recruiter playing his messages.
Those who come from the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp find themselves in a logical dilemma that they refuse to see. Even if Bin Laden, Al-Baghdadi and others are indeed CIA operatives and are working under the direct orders of America, even if they are paid by MI6, the KGB, the Peruvian Intelligence or the Zimbabwean underground, this makes no difference at all. For as long as they are using widely-accepted Muslim theology to lure in recruits, a theology that they know cannot be refuted by other Muslims, then this means one and only one thing. It means that they have found in the theology a weakness that they could use as a recruitment drive. For as long as the theology that supports this drive is in existence, then it can be employed again and again, and this is where the problem is.
In the meantime, as many confused adversaries of Daesh continue to reiterate that the USA and the DAESH are one, the latter continues to capitalize on this, and makes itself look like the long-awaited Muslim movement that is going to restore the former ancient Muslim glory, and thus continue to be able to lure more and more recruits.
If anything at all, Jihadists loathe the West and detest Westerners enough to want to kill them all. They regard themselves as pure and all others (especially Westerners) as filth. They will use them, take their money and arms and use their women for their pleasure, but they will never trust them and/or partner with them in any manner, shape or form. It is totally against their doctrine to partner as equals with them.
What is most pertinent here is that fighting DAESH entails nipping its ideology in the bud, where it festers within decayed and ancient fundamentalist Islamist theology. Any diversion from this focal point of attention is dangerous, distractive and divertive.
Now here is the irony. Every time I discuss this subject with a native Arab (mostly Muslim) who is fluent in Arabic and familiar with the history of Islam and current distorted beliefs, I do not find any resistance in expressing the message. Some know all of this already, others may confess that they have never thought about it before, but contend with the fact that the current and archaic Muslim interpretations of the Holy Quran do lend themselves open to violence.
The staunch opposition for this analysis invariably comes from people who don’t speak a word of Arabic, have not studied Islam through Arabic language texts, lack total historical perspective, never lived among Muslims, and do not know the first thing about Muslim theology. How audacious indeed. How would they like the shoe to be on the other foot? For example, how would they like someone from a country and culture so removed from anything American, someone who doesn’t speak a word of English, has never been in the West, never studied its history and never mingled with its people to lecture them, in their own very remote language, about American politics?
The “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp has got to accept the fact that the Muslim world is full of people who give themselves the title of “Da’iyeh”, a term that simplistically translates into “preacher”, but it puts the person on a very high pedestal. A “Da’iyeh” therefore is someone who is a preacher of very high acclaim.
If anyone or any group of people want to take the challenge to prove without any reasonable doubt that the Daesh mentality is only exclusively the works of the CIA, I then invite them to come forward to present one single shred of evidence. The question here is not about the funds. We all know the funds came from Saudi Arabia and the USA and recently from the stolen Iraqi and Syrian oil. It is about the ideology.
If Daesh recruiters are not using archaic Muslim theology, advocates of the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp owe their readers and followers presentation of proof of any alternative ideology those recruiters are using. They will have to listen to Arabic videos, understand them, and have them translated. They will have to learn Muslim theology in order for them to be able to substantiate their claims. There is no other way for them to prove their claims, but this is what they have got themselves into.
In asking for this, I must mention that there are thousands upon thousands of videos on the Internet and YouTube of Muslim preachers misusing the Holy Quran in order to lure Jihadi recruits. Not unless and not before Islam reforms and denounces this theology that lends itself to violence, then that same theology will be used again and again now and in the future.
I can provide the Internet/YouTube evidence, miles and miles of it, and the “blame-Daesh-only-on-America” camp can present their counter evidence. I invite them to take the challenge, put up or shut up.
At times in the MSM there are articles calling on Muslim leaders to cry crocodile tears and do the usual empty political hand wringing over terrorist attacks. Drawing a line in the sand in theology seems a far better solution though in the real world I doubt this would happen.
On the other side the US and states largely controlled by the US is deliberately setting conditions for these cult groups to flourish for geo-political purposes.
Without US backing the influence of these cults could be kept to a minimum, and the extremists controlled/destroyed.
Amaq Agency, official news site for ISIS is currently hosted in the US. ISIS oil trade was/is in US dollars, the size of which transactions, before Russia destroyed the oil convoys, needed be conducted by electronic bank transfers rather than suitcases full of cash.
Wa’alaikum a’salam
You write that …”all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are Muslims.”
All terrorists are Muslim — except for the 94% who aren’t:
• https://duckduckgo.com/?q=all+terrorists+are+muslim+except+those+who+aren't
Is there any relation between Daesh and Hizb ut-Tarhrir? Between ISIS and Muslim Brotherhood? Is their aim to restore the caliphate (with the help of the other candidate to the caliphate, Turkey) just a coincidence?
Is Jemaah Islamiah, dedicated to the establishment of a Daulah Islamiyah (regional Islamic caliphate) in Southeast Asia, linked in any way to the more senior caliphate? Or the salafist organizations in North Africa (with such an early start as 1998 -The Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) which grew into AQIM (Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb)? Or Boko-Haram?
Why all of them attack predominantly Christians?
Dear WizOz,
As far as I understand the names of all the fundamentalist organisations, past, present and future don’t really matter for as long as they are under the mantle of the same ideology, theology and seeking the same objectives and which they do.
Your article starts with insult of Muslims and throughout your article you are insulting and demeaning Islam. The question I have previously asked you whether if you are a Muslim, which you have never answered?
There are lots of Christians in the Levant.
Your quote that all terrorist are Muslims reeks of ….. What about IRA? What about Menachem Begin to give you very few examples….
I am a native Arab from Oman and a Muslim and am ready for your challenge about the Holy Quran .
Underneath all this, Saker’s blog has become very anti-Islamic with “Guest Post” where he devoid all responsibility.
Even when Saker posted the flag of Two Shahada (Shahadatyan) for ISIS, he posted the flag of Islam rather than posting the flag of ISIS. BTW Saker, Arabic is written from “right to left” and not from “top to bottom”, which shows the ISIS decades old hatred of the Prophet of Islam, Rasool Allah Mohammad (saws)
Enough said,
Mohamed
Did Mohammed personally kill to further his spiritual mission- Yes. Did Jesus kill to further his spiritual mission-No. Nothing else to be said.
No Mohammed did not, please bring me one example. However, Jesus told his disciples to sell everything and buy swords. When Jesus saw himself outnumbered, he then changed his mind about the sword.
You don’t even have the Gospels, what you have propaganda in Greek/Roman and not even in the language of Jesus.
Enough said!
Mohammed
since all (or most) are trying to being respectful of the texts themselves, despite many human errors in both citing and practicing, Jesus was most assuredly NOT unable; from Gospel of John 18:6
6 As soon then, as he had said to them; I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.
is just one example, Jesus makes a similar demonstration in the next chapter in response to Pontius P inquiring about His “force“
And there it is a nutshell . The New Testament is propaganda and the Koran is the truth.
You say the New Testament is properganda and then recite from the New Testament ! Mathew 7-16 is a excellent commentary that sheds light Islam. I look around at the world today and I see the fruit that Islam produces .
Hayek, you say you are not comparing religions, but you are, and you’re doing it again and again
I am trying to get the point across that Daesh has a source that they have legitimized to justify their brutality.
Pretty sure that Jesus said to those who didn’t have enough faith to go buy swords. Then went on to say that real faith meant having no need for money. Personally I think that specific instruction, at that moment, was to temporarily get rid of the posers, more than anything else.
And shut the door after you.
“No Mohammed did not, please bring me one example.”
Well, maybe he did not kill personally, but he did order them, wich is even worse.
so how about 43 examples.
List of Killings Ordered or Supported by Muhammad:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad
Salam Rik,
Just like the Religion of Jesus was hijacked right after his death by Greek/Romans to control the masses by the creating Gospels in Greek/Roman, which is not the language of Jesus. Hebrew was dead during the times of Jesus and thus he spoke Aramaic. If one looks at the history that one finds that the author of Gospel called, “John” never met Jesus as he was not born before the death of Jesus. Add, to that the Oral Transliteration who took place from Aramaic to written Gospels in Greek/Roman.
Mohammad’s companion also hijacked the Religion of Mohammad too. They couldn’t change the Holy Quran as Mohammad made sure a large population had memorized the Holy Quran. So his companion who took over the Empire to control the masses, cooked Mohammad’s History and Sayings, called Sunnah. Dragon has posted an excellent link below to show the effects of this cooked Sunnah by a Wahhabi Imam:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68V44Jgl60g&index=53&list=LLTdtzBrHtVOLxpBOvST-NqA
I am sure that you are an intelligent and I hope you realize that Jews were persecuted from the inception of Jesus Death until very recently by the adherent of Jesus, who message is “turn the other cheek and love your enemy”.
The adherents of Islam went one step further. They murdered the complete family of Mohammad within 50 years of his death.
The author of the above article is not a Muslim and thus, he is not very familiar with Islamic History and preconditioned too, so he blames the Holy Quran without providing support for his claim rather than blaming the cooked Sunnah of Mohammad. It will be worth your time of one hour and the author of the above article to learn a little bit of Islam regarding Sunnah. But a very important bit.
Best regards,
Mohamed
That is completely incoherent and makes no sense whatever. If the Greek/ Romans wanted to control the masses then why on earth would they allow the death and resurrection of Jesus to be in the Gospels . Why not just say it was all a fraud and that Jesus wasn’t really crucified ( that it was a imposter in his place) and that Jesus lived and died a normal death like any other mortal man ? Oh. Wait a minute , that is exactly what Islam did with Jesus in the Koran . It really didn’t work out too good for the Romans and their devious plot now did it ! – Constantine- What did Mohammed say about Jesus ?
Well, your question was, did Mohammed kill??
If you consider ordering the killing as murder as well (or worse), then the answer is Yes.
I realy am very sorry for you.
Salam Rik,
What you quoted is lies, and I tried to tell you diplomatically, but I guess you failed to understand.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Looking at the comments, divide and conquer is the name of the game. Like Jesus and Mohammed need to get in the ring and have it out to decide who is the prophet.
It is something that cannot be decided by scientific/forensic analysis nor archeology.
Good and bad is not in religion but in people.
Attacking somebodies religious beliefs is like attacking their family. A red line for most.
Mr. Kadi,
What you detailed here is generally known (maybe overlooked by certain section of peoples).
The theological background of Wahabism exists long before Saudi monarch and Wahabi sect religious chief went on to create the Wahabi Saudi Arabia.
But, how do you negate the historical fact that first the British colonial power and then, the USA ruling elites utilised and aided the Wahabi sectarian Islamic fundamentalists to create trouble for the rulers of west Asia, north Africa, and south Asia ?
It is not clear what is your challenge !
Actually, it is more logical that Al Qaida and Daesh draw their recruits from among the poor peoples of Islamic religion from different regions of Asia and Africa continents using the Islamic theology to which the peoples can easily relate, and the entire funding and logistics arrangements are done by USA and 5-Eyes … That’s how it works !
Daesh/IS is a new name, but in reality not different from its Islamic fundamentalist predecessors. The origin can be traced back in recent history to Wahhabism, but on examining the roots, it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran. Such theology is much more ancient than Wahhabism and even European settlement in America. Hence, the United States of America and the CIA cannot be held accountable for its existence.
By this logic, the CIA can not be held responsible for anything they are doing today.
Can you not see why this statement is problematic? Someone — people — are responsible for what is happening in Syria, Iraq and 150 or more countries today.
Neither can Muslims be held responsible for the actions of Daesh, somehow, because of ancient fundamentalist theology, which they adhere to in ignorance. Is that your claim?
This makes no sense Mr. Kadi. It is a total contradiction.
You lament ‘Muslim’ terrorists are all Muslims.
What does this mean?!
I had to read this five times before I got the idea you might be saying the actions of Daesh are blamed on all Muslims. Yet it is your readers who are to blame for not understanding what you write? C’mon already.
Continuing with this incoherent logic, you complain we poor fools misunderstand because we are not from the region and we don’t speak Arabic.
What an incredible statement to make!
(Edited for attacks on the author. A violation of the rules. Please don’t ruin your post by personal attacks. Mod on duty)
C I eh?
Quoting, “By this logic, the CIA can not be held responsible for anything they are doing today.”
He did not say that. He wrote, “the United States of America and the CIA cannot be held accountable for its existence.” The “it” being the “fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran.”
That is quite different from what you are pretending. Why put words in Ghassan Kadi’s mouth? If you want to debate him, do everyone the courtesy of debating what he actually writes, not what you wish he’d have written. Put the imagination away.
Quoting some more, “Neither can Muslims be held responsible for the actions of Daesh, somehow, because of ancient fundamentalist theology, which they adhere to in ignorance. Is that your claim?”
How can Muslims all, each and every individual one of them, be held responsible for the action of those particular individuals who commit criminal acts? For example, a few days ago I disclosed a situation wherein a young woman immigrated to Australia and married (twice). She had nonsense ideas and these caused her (and the people around her) woe. Still, she never violently attacked. No bombs or guns or MANPADS or RPGS or grenades has she weilded against anyone at all. How can she be responsible for the actions of Daesh?
The recommendation has to be, read carefully and think about what Ghassan Kadi writes for us. He is trying hard to explain to you that the theology that many Muslim people have been taught is wrong. He is saying that clearly demonstrating to them the erroneous nature of that theology is a means to defeat the violent radicalism. That is his core message.
Quoting, “Continuing with this incoherent logic, you complain we poor fools misunderstand because we are not from the region and we don’t speak Arabic.”
Actually this is sound. Answer me these. Do you speak Arabic? Can you read it? Have you studied the literature (as relevant to the topic today) in Arabic? Are you familiar with Muslim Theology? Are you familiar with Muslim religious observances, cultures and history from THEIR perspective in THEIR language/s? Have you read the Holy Quran (in Arabic)?
If the answer be a big fat no, then the point to make is that you are putting yourself in the position of an ignorant one having opinion on a topic of which he knows but little, and delivering same in a public forum while remaining absent of actual knowledge all the while. All goes to remind me of an education managerial type I once met. She was a junior academic manager at a tertiary institute of higher learning. I walked in just as she started lecturing an elderly welding tutor about how to teach his skills to his classes. He asked her, “Can you weld?” The conversation ceased at that point, for she could not. How, then, could she tell him what to do to teach his students welding when she had no idea what it was he and they were doing? (BTW his students were snapped up into industry when they graduated his course, as the skills he imparted were well recognised as relevant and valuable). There is a moral here, or, if you prefer, a take-home message.
Siotu
Salam Siotu,
I am a Muslim and an Arab. C I eh? is correct and please see my response to C I eh?, which I have already submitted and should be shortly posted by the mods.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Mohammed
Really?
Gosh.
Mohammed, unfortunately you are making the same error, hence just as wrong, as C I eh. The recommendation remains to read what was written and address yourselves to that. No more straw-man misdirection please.
Siotu
Salam Siotu,
I am not blaming the straw man. The author is not Muslim, he is an Arab and preconditioned towards Islam. He blames the Holy Quran without providing any evidence. The blames lays at the cooked Sunnah of Mohammad (saws).
Please see my above response to Rik.
Please check out the following link by Dragon, which is an hour long, but it will make it clear the daylight between Holy Quran and Sunnah which is mostly cooked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68V44Jgl60g&index=53&list=LLTdtzBrHtVOLxpBOvST-NqA
Best regards.
Mohamed
Mohamed
Quoting, “He blames the Holy Quran without providing any evidence.”
He did not do that at all. If he had, then you’d be able to reproduce his writing by direct quotation and thus demonstrate that he has in fact committed the act of which you accuse him. So go ahead and reproduce by direct quote where “He blames the Holy Quran without providing any evidence.” Beware that if you cannot, then you are in danger of falling into the trap of deep hypocrisy.
What he did write was, “Daesh/IS is a new name, but in reality not different from its Islamic fundamentalist predecessors. The origin can be traced back in recent history to Wahhabism, but on examining the roots, it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran.”
He is blaming the false interpretation. He is not blaming The Holy Quoran.
He also writes, “It goes against the teaching of the Quran, but to complicate things even more, the Quran was interpreted in a manner that endorses those widely accepted but false interpretations, and consequently, all Quranic translations are based on them. I have written at length and depth about this miscontrued theology before, and there is no real need to repeat the same message.”
The major point he repeats is that it is the interpretations that are the issue and that they (the interpretations) are what are faulty. Look again, he writes for us that, “It goes against the teaching of the Quran” (in reference to the false interpretations). Hard to be clearer than that.
His overall conclusion is that it is by challenging and renouncing the false interpretations that the means to avoid the violence of Daesh and its ilk may be found.
Siotu
Salam brother C I eh?,
To quote the author again: “Daesh/IS is a new name, but in reality not different from its Islamic fundamentalist predecessors. The origin can be traced back in recent history to Wahhabism, but on examining the roots, it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran. Such theology is much more ancient than Wahhabism and even European settlement in America. Hence, the United States of America and the CIA cannot be held accountable for its existence.”
The author is correct in saying that Wahhabism can be traced back to past, but he is very misleading in his above statement.
First of all, fundamentalist is a very loaded term and it is intentionally given a negative connotation. Most adherents of any religion are fundamentalist, and this include myself.
Yes, Wahhabism has past history but let us look into this history. The author fails to mention that the roots of Wahhabism started more than 600 years after the death of the Prophet. It was an individual called Ibn Taymiyyah who falsely quoted the “sayings” of Prophet Mohammad (saws).
The Muslims impassioned him and literally threw away the keys to his imprisonment in the seas and suppressed his teachings as he subscribed to the House of Omayyad, an arch enemy of Islam and Prophet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah
Today, due to Petro Dollars, Ibn Taymiyyah is called “Sheikh of Islam”. It was our British Masters who revived Ibn Taymiyyah and introduced Ibn Taymiyyah to Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab but according to the author CIA is not to be blamed.
If the author is a Muslim, he should know the history of the roots of Wahhabism and that it is nothing to do with Holy Quran. I doubt if the author have ever read the Holy Quran.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Salam Mohamad my brother,
Good to hear from you again. Thank you for the supportive words.
Mohamed
When referring to religious practice in English language the term “fundamentalist” is defined as,
“an adherent of fundamentalism, a religious movement characterized by a strict belief in the literal interpretation of religious texts”;
“the belief in old and traditional forms of religion, or the belief that what is written in a holy book, such as the Christian Bible (or the Holy Quoran), is completely true”;
“someone who believes that original religious and political laws should be followed very strictly and should not be changed”.
When you make the claim, “Most adherents of any religion are fundamentalist,” you are on extremely shakey ground. Most people identifying as religious adherents do not take religion to the extreme level of fundamentalism. Actually, apart from formal ceremonies and the external trappings of the religion, they tend not to take religion that seriously at all- certainly not literally, not in routine life and not often in their regular decision making and activities. Sure, they may be aware of the religious teachings to a certain level (a casual understanding), but very often they make decisions and act in ways that are not in accordance with the demands of the religious teachings, teachings they deliberately ignore. They are adherents but not consistent in their observances of religious demands. This is by far the most common approach right around the world. Those adherents who are fundamentalist in outlook, practice and action are a strict minority.
The term “fundamentalist” is often understood to be pejorative, as well it should be. It is a term commonly employed to refer to people with dogmatic and inflexible behaviours, often to the extent where those persons are unpleasant to encounter, unreasonably demanding of others, profoundly ignorant, uncivilised or, worse, promoters of violence. Most religious people are not of that type of personality, nor of that type of behaviour.
Moving on. Quoting, “Yes, Wahhabism has past history but let us look into this history. The author fails to mention that the roots of Wahhabism started more than 600 years after the death of the Prophet. It was an individual called Ibn Taymiyyah who falsely quoted the “sayings” of Prophet Mohammad (saws).”
You cite Ibn Taymiyyah as inventing and disseminating faulty “sayings”. OK. Let’s accept that. So, answer this. Was he an agent of the of the CIA or the US government? For if he was not, then those organisations were not causal in bringing into existence corrupt interpretation of The Holy Quoran. Therefore, they can’t be responsible for it. It existed independently of them. Actually it long existed before they did (last I checked CIA was founded 1947, the US government was founded 1776, hundreds of years after Ibn Taymiyyah’s time).
Quoting, “If the author is a Muslim, he should know the history of the roots of Wahhabism and that it is nothing to do with Holy Quran. I doubt if the author have ever read the Holy Quran.”
I must take exception to the dishonesty of this rude statement. You know full well the author’s background, as he has contributed here previously and has gone to the effort of explaining his situation, his past and his intellectual journey towards the understandings he presently holds. You owe an apology to him.
And as far what Wahhabism has or has not to do with the Holy Quoran, you sure are in denial of what Ghassan Kadi was trying to teach you! No more evasions, nor misdirections please.
Siotu
Salam Siotu,
It is easy to be a writer and it takes an art to be a good reader. If you have taken the time to watch the video which Dragon posted, you would may have understood what I am trying to say.
I am a Shia, which are considered 15% of the Muslims. It the Shia belief while Prophet Mohammad (saws) dead body was still warm, the Islam was hijacked and the books were burned, Islam was changed and recreated by cooked Sunnah.
Is the author trying to say that the 85% of the Muslims, who are Sunni are wrong, and therefore they should change their religious belief?
As far as fundamentalism is concerned, it is a loaded term. Sex is a private thingy, and what people do within the four walls, it is their private business, it is between them and their God. Any sex which is open in public, becomes the business of society. Thus, God doesn’t changes His Mind, if He Says homosexuality is wrong, then it is wrong and nothing to do with any dictionary definition.
The day Obama gave Putin the present of Crimea on a Silver Platter, from that day I have been saying on Saker’s blog that God bless Obama, Putin, Kerry, Lavrov, John McCain and Lindsay Graham being in cahoots. People taught that I being an Ahab, I don’t know the meaning of cahoots. Now, I add God bless Trump too.
I have been saying that just like Goddess ISIS, the ISIS is a figment of imagination too. Russia is back in Middle East and they are at the doorsteps of IsraHell with their best military hardware from Syria. Very soon this will be from Egypt too. Netanyahu has burned all his bridges and he is very, very isolated man.
I am a Shia Muslim from Oman and my wife of 41 years is an ex-WASP from USA. You can guess, my age.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Mohamed
Did Ghassan Kadi claim “that the 85% of the Muslims, who are Sunni are wrong, and therefore they should change their religious belief?”
No.
He did not differentiate between Shia and Sunni.
You write, “As far as fundamentalism is concerned, it is a loaded term. Sex is a private thingy, and what people do within the four walls, it is their private business, it is between them and their God. Any sex which is open in public, becomes the business of society. Thus, God doesn’t changes His Mind, if He Says homosexuality is wrong, then it is wrong and nothing to do with any dictionary definition.”
Whatever are you trying to argue with this? First you start with fundamentalism and then you start going on about sex. This is incoherent.
You write, “The day Obama gave Putin the present of Crimea on a Silver Platter, from that day I have been saying on Saker’s blog that God bless Obama, Putin, Kerry, Lavrov, John McCain and Lindsay Graham being in cahoots.”
Obama did not give Crimea to Putin. It was not his property to give. Nor was it a property of the US government to give. The citizens of Crimea (who are the rightful owners of all of the Crimea) held a vote. They, the Crimean people, voted to rejoin Russia of which the Crimea had been a part for hundreds of years previously. The result of their vote was honoured by both the Crimean and Russian governments. Whatever is it you are attempting to allege with your comment anyway? No matter, it is incoherent and off-topic anyway.
This latest post of yours is incoherent and illogical. It is a disgrace that you dissemble like this and feel that somehow that you have justified your position. It is dishonest. You are now formally challenged to put up or apologise. Please demonstrate by direct quote where Ghassan Kadi,
a) “blames the Holy Quran without providing any evidence”;
b) is “trying to say that the 85% of the Muslims, who are Sunni are wrong, and therefore they should change their religious belief”.
Siotu
Siotu said:
“last I checked CIA was founded 1947, the US government was founded 1776, hundreds of years after Ibn Taymiyyah’s time).”
Well, the CIA, like the Russian FSB/SVR, or the MI5/MI6 or the French Securité, obviously, have not had the same name throughout the years/ages, but it had also its precursor, such as OSS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Strategic_Services
And this is only a quote from Wikipedia with its obvious bias.
Mod I did not ‘sully’ my comment.
I completed my post by making an objective statement, which you chose to remove thus making it impossible for readers to form their own judgement.
This leaves the impression I was unfair to Mr. Kadi, which is incorrect.
“It means that they have found in the theology a weakness that they could use… For as long as the theology that supports this drive is in existence, then it can be employed again and again, and this is where the problem is…”
The problem with ‘the theology’ is the Abrahamic foundations + that is common with the other terrorists in history, the Crusaders with their Judeo-Christianity + the Zionists who were the original usurpers + land-grabbers. The problem with the ideology is that it intends to establish (or re-attempt to) a global caliphate at any cost… thus it is not simply about hatred of the West.
But the problem with Islam today is that it is a state religion in Muslim countries generally. That means that it is not concerned with spirituality + the spiritual well-being of its followers but with the power of the state to control its citizens. Thus its root purpose has been abandoned for the sake of deceiving its followers, making them bow down + meekly accepting the control of the state. It gives the state the illusion of authority + the state gives the religion (Islam or any other) temporal power + prestige. From there, it is easily corrupted by any who wish to misuse it or the state.
“…where it festers within decayed and ancient fundamentalist Islamist theology.”
Every theology festers and decays unless properly cared for. Major religions are ancient by default and to some degree fundamentalist. You either respect and follow rules or at least try to,or not.
From my personal experience,trouble is not in the theology but in half understanding of it.
When i was younger i mocked all faiths, just to make myself popular in a godless environment, i later understood that. My whole intellect went into it. That phase was followed by indifference. Indifference was followed by baptism in Serbian Orthodox Church. Which at the time was a cultural thing, Orthodoxy being so entwined with our national identity. After that came a period of wasting time or as we call it- stealing days from God. During that time i had some serious crises in my life, for me serious anyway. Bombing of my country in 1999 being one. At that point i understood why i engaged in aforementioned mockery and was ashamed of my words and deeds. I resolved myself to be a better man than that. Not believing still at that time. Even now my faith is not stronger than a leaf in the wind. But i try. Fail and try again.
To shorten this confession, a friend of mine gave me a book “Razgovori stranika sa duhovnim ocem” (i don’t know how it’s called in english). Directionless and seeing his good intent i went and read it. I was very intrigued by it and found out that one of books mentioned in it is “Dobrotoljublje” or Philokalia. After i got Philokalia and read not whole first tome i suddenly became aware of host of my inadequacies. It was few years back and i am still reeling from experiencing that realisation.
That experience along with some others in my life and lives of my dearest along with some deaths and particulary deaths led me to start believing. After that i came to a realisation which i want to share with you on this topic.
Just reading religious texts without proper instructions and here i would like to distance myself from total understanding. I got just a glimpse. Just reading, due to many reasons,leads you astray. So, those who instruct how to understand have enormous responsibility. Now i understand how i was so easily led to wrong conclusions just by reading those words. Following letter without the spirit. Form without substance. If you keep substance and spirit in your heart and mind, then you have a chance of understanding. If,on the other hand,you keep letter and form closer to you,then you are walking a dangerous path.
There is a video here that speaks of the same matter but from Muslim perspective and is of relevance to the topic. Thanks to whoever posted it here some time ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68V44Jgl60g&index=53&list=LLTdtzBrHtVOLxpBOvST-NqA
That said i understand you problem Ghassan Kadi and i agree with you. Who better than muslims to try to heal the Muslim world? Christians,Budists,Judaists,atheists,…? We all have that same task in our own houses to solve first. And i would add,responsibility.
Be well Ghassan Kadi, i wish you not good luck but to stand fast on your journey.
Dragan
“Now i understand how i was so easily led to wrong conclusions just by reading those words. Following letter without the spirit. Form without substance. If you keep substance and spirit in your heart and mind, then you have a chance of understanding. If,on the other hand,you keep letter and form closer to you,then you are walking a dangerous path.”
Thanks,you had done a very good explanation of the main problem in understanding the Word.
I have tried the same thing to explain in an older comment also but I failed.
Sorry, Martin SEB was referring to ioan, but my comment still stands.
Hi Dragan, be warned: /yet-another-version-of-mozgovois-murder/#comment-224706
Don’t waste your time with that Hitler fanboy.
Thank you so much Dragan for the link to Hassan Farhan al Maliki
A kind of muslim ecumenist!Very interesting.
Dragan you said it perfectly, with a generosity of spirit I failed demonstrate.
@Martin SEB.
Dragan has taken responsibility for himself. I doubt you ever will, but there’s hope for you still. That guy in Bosnia was doing God’s work, but like all Germans, you are impervious to understanding the people of Yugoslavia.
Good luck to you too.
> C I eh? on March 31, 2016 · at 10:36 pm UTC
Never in your life call me a “German” again!
Also read before you write.
As you meanwhile managed to find out, I wasn’t referring to you.
Also I’m not sure what you mean with “I doubt you ever will [take responsibility for yourself]”.
But nice to hear from you like that, this saves me the time to read your “contributions” from now on.
I was on a roll and now I regret.
You make me laugh M.seb. I take it back.
Too late I guess:(
But I have wanted to pound ya;)
not so difficult, sir, for the westerners like me.
The underlying nature and ´philosophy are not american or anglo powered creatures because they precede it.
But Daesh has been operationally anglozionist – a tool for geopolitical purposes.
And Russia – and even the west – cannot be blamed for fighting what is more evident: the consequences. However, sure can be blamed for not fighting the causes. Don´t ask me how… should it be done> I don´t know.
Btw, remember how was it that Putin solved the Chechenya (muslim) problem????? Am I beeing pertinent in this subject? please correct me, i am prone to change my views on that.
Turkey Arrests Shooter Of Parachuting Russian Pilot
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-31/turkey-arrests-shooter-parachuting-russian-pilot
Assad Ready For Snap Elections As Kremlin Denies Report Of Russia-US Plan To Help Him Flee Syria
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-31/assad-ready-snap-elections-kremlin-denies-report-russia-us-plan-help-him-flee-syria
“Even though all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are “Muslims”.
No they are not. That is the sort of smear one finds from the zionazi disinfo machine.
Russia was invited to Afghanistan by a democratic elected socialist government or am I misinformed?
Second any religion has its monstrous character. Those who “handled ” blacks in S Africa or in US went to church on Sundays . They were,are as much terrorists as IS.
The reaction from fundamentalist is against westernisation of their culture it is an understandable but misplaced reaction born of an inherent erosion stagnation of their own culture.
Strange that all Islamic fundamentalism negates Israel and the Palestinian holocaust leaving the Palestinian to their own fate. IS-rahell is were you can find some answers.
“Option (1) led to the Paris November 2015 and the Brussel March 2016 attacks.”
It didn’t, you know. For one thing, whatever “the EU”, or Germany, might be doing, France in specific certainly is not and has never been pursuing the article’s “option 1”, and so I don’t see how “option 1” could have led to anything in Paris. Also, the attack in Brussels happened even as the city was under heavy police/military surveillance which was precisely expecting and attempting to investigate the prospect of specifically Muslim terrorist acts. Whatever cultural commentators might have been doing, the whole security state was poles away from “turning a total blind eye to the violent segment within Muslim communities”–they were investigating the heck out of them and doing the whole security dog-and-pony-show. The really striking thing about the Brussels attack, actually, is precisely that despite having warning of attacks on a specific city, of the basic nature of the attacks that could be expected, even knowing who some of the people involved were, and spending huge amounts of money acting on that warning, the security services still could not stop the attack.
More importantly, what led to those attacks was largely EU and French foreign policy combined with a significant minority living in France and apparently Belgium which identified more with the victims of that foreign policy than with the country they lived in. Whether talking heads pretend the problem doesn’t exist (either by denying that Muslims in these countries would ever do anything or by denying that their foreign policy has victims), or whether they pretend the problem is that Muslims are all vicious, or whether they pursue some middle commentator ground (which still denies the basic problem that the EU shouldn’t be helping destabilize the Middle East and North Africa) really doesn’t change the situation a whole lot.
The brute fact that may disturb people is that if terrorism is what you’re mainly worried about, it really doesn’t matter that much what the official discourse is on Muslims, or even what attitude ordinary people take towards them. As long as there is a significant percentage of people in France or Belgium or wherever who deplore the massacres France and the EU have signed on for and identify with the people being massacred, some tiny smidgen of those people will take violent action to register their displeasure. If a lot of those people are also generally disaffected and disconnected from the society they’re living in, that will make it worse no doubt, but the fundamental issue is not something that can be sociologically gamed. So “option 1”, “option 2”, “option nuanced”–they matter in terms of being right or wrong but they don’t matter much in terms of preventing or not preventing terrorism.
Let’s not forget, there have been attacks in the US as well, even though nobody is going to claim the US approach has ever been “option 1”. Not as many, and they’ve gotten rather more lost in the general noise of US mass murders, but they have happened. That there haven’t been more is largely because a much smaller proportion of US citizens has close connections to the Middle East. Not only are nearly 10% of French citizens Muslim while nearly 1% of American citizens are, but I strongly suspect that the US Muslims are much more diverse in their origins, with more Southeast Asians and so forth who don’t give a damn what happens to Libyans, say.
Now, the Takfiri Islam thing is real. But it too is more an effect than a cause. Look, 50 years ago nobody gave a damn about Takfiri Islam. If Arabs were upset about British and US foreign policy, they adopted the ideologies that were resisting British and US foreign policy at the time: Pan-Arab nationalism and various variants of socialism. Persians obviously weren’t so big on the pan-Arab nationalism, but back in the 50s there were Persian socialists and even Communists galore. But all those people lost. The Americans won, and they made sure all the local secret police whether the Shah’s or Saddam Hussein’s, stepped on leftist resistance before they stepped on anything else. On the other hand, some of their best friends were Takfiri Islamists, and both they and those best (Saudi, for e.g.) friends pushed extreme violent Islam as an ideology to fill the vacuum created by the absence of the stuff they’d bludgeoned. They didn’t think it posed a serious threat, largely because it had no real ideological content that could really challenge colonialism, imperialism or corporate power. And it had its uses, and still does, although some of the US elites are starting to get uneasy about whether it’s as controllable as they hoped.
It’s an old story–if a place is unstable, there’s widespread misery and discontent, and there’s going to be unrest, you’ll get lefties and fascists; if you successfully suppress the lefties, the fascists will become the major threat. Takfiri Islam is IMO the Middle Eastern functional equivalent to fascism. A religious component is pretty normal in fascism–Spanish fascism was deeply intertwined with the Catholic church, and Opus Dei as I understand it still venerates Franco. Takfiri Islam just makes the religion part (ostensibly) central.
The west and east or you and me are not the problem!…its Team Chaos ..and they strike by supporting whatever ideology or both at the same time.Dont fred about things not understood stick to what’s known.Its blowing in the wind which is the only two countries not attacked by Daesh?
Very clear, Colonialism and fascism always in the western world got religious fundamentalists to help them getting what they wanted: catholiscism, protestantism, judaism, Islamism….and so on.
i would like someone to explain me finaly once for all what is story about Islam, Christianity or any other religion? which “truth” is the real one. if only one truth exist, why we have to have Islam? Christianity? any other religion. what is the point of religion if people is taking it by mind not by heart. people who are taking truth by heart are same time muslims and christians. i am christian by “default”, but i can be muslim anytime, anywhere, because i do not harm anyone, anything except maybe in self defence. and i expect the same hard core muslims to be christians like me. otherwise i would not respect him or his view of Islam. i just don’t care. all religions teach the same. i lived in ex Yugoslavia. we had lot muslim population. but, it was almost imposible to distinguish muslims from other. it coud be done just by knowing his/her name. we were the same “body”. until nationalism came and forced people to pick side and they stick to mind choosen side, not side choosen by heart. because it was impossible to choose war by heart, by God. then came war. it is almost the same in arab world. there is no religion there, only some “frame” in the name of religion.
GHASSAN’S KEY POINT, PERSUASIVELY MADE. A MUST SHARE ARTICLE: “What is most pertinent here is that defeating Daesh entails nipping its ideology in the bud, where it festers within decayed and ancient fundamentalist theology. Any diversion from this focal point of attention is dangerous, distractive and divertive.”
Good enough place to post this here, since the Erdogan column is dated 2 days ago & no one will scroll that far.
Seems Erdo is stateside (where Lord O refused to meet with him, remember, & they’re treating him like a leper as clearly seen ongoing here where the local thought police, normally zealous to a fault at enforcing “frei speech” zones & busting heads, are not doing anything about the Erdo protestors!
http://thenewsdoctors.com/chaos-erupts-as-turkish-security-team-kicks-out-media-confronts-dc-police-at-erdogan-event/
The security detail for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan clashed with opposing activists for the second day in a row in Washington, DC, removing journalists and even confronting city police after law enforcement refused to remove protesters from the area.
Read Full Article at RT.com Read Full Article
Thank you for introducing this subject. There are people challenging extreme theology such as Fadel Soliman and Tariq Ramadan, try this link,
http://fadelsoliman.com/video/the-isis-delusion/
As this is an invitation/challenge to debate what the definition of Daesh is, I expect that comments should stick to this subject, but sadly, most of them did not. I will therefore at this stage give a combined response to all the comments one by one presenting why in my view the debate has not yet started:
To Mohamed: The article starts with these words” “Islam, real Islam, is a religion of piety, wisdom and peace, and Muslims, real Muslims are not terrorists. Even though all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are “Muslims”, this does not give a blanket description of all Muslims as beings terrorists.”.
Your response starts with these words: “Your article starts with insult of Muslims and throughout your article you are insulting and demeaning Islam.”.
If anything, the article supports the religion of Islam and is trying to expose those doing misdeeds in its name. Get real. Have a cold shower and snap out of this victim-under-attack complex.
To Hayek & Brian: We are not comparing religions here.
Straight Bat: You answered your own question regarding the challenge.
To C I eh?: You have swallowed the bait Top Cat, not that I needed more proof to identify you Mr. TC. Your rhetoric, anger, lack of logic and vision of “dystopia” “can not” be missed. You do not have an argument to make, and no knowledge of the subject matter what-so-ever. Just like in the past, you have been a politically-correct apologist. It is people like you who force governments into turning the blind eye and deaf ear to terror cells. Go away.
To Siotu: Thank you brother. We are on the same wavelength. There is no challenge between us and I would appreciate it very much if you hang on and help me.
To Douglas Chalmers: I agree with you. But this does not really help us define Daesh. Please keep in mind that after defining Daesh, we need to propose a philosophical modus operandi designed for it undoing. Whilst the “states” you referred to play a role, our objective here is to identify the origin and nature of the recruitment drive.
You comment is appreciated.
To Dragan: Thank you brother. I appreciate your input and sympathy.
To Vo Tak: Get real. One can hide his head in the sand and say the terrorists have not been Muslims. Are they Buddhists? They are perverted and distorted Muslims. Do not give me politically-correct responses. They do not stack up, not here.
There has been few other comments as new ones keep coming in. As far as I am concerned, the challenge debate has not started yet. Please let us adhere to the subject.
It’s not about comparing religions . Islam was not founded on piety,wisdom and peace. The Jews of Medina are testimony to this. When you have violence at the source of your spiritual spring then it is no wonder that followers would drink from the fountain that it produces.
Wow and Wow Hayek. The Greek/Romans not only murdered Jesus, but also stole the Holy Book of Jews called, “TaNaKh”. They blamed the murder of Jesus on Jews and they transliterated TaNaKh from Hebrew to Greek/Roman and called it “Old Testament”. They changed the order of chapters of TaNaKh to Old Testaments, making Isaiah the last chapter in Old Testament. They fooled the adherents of Jesus by claiming the prophesies in Isaiah has to be do with Jesus rather than King of Babylon.
Called the “Morning Star” a reference to King of Babylon, “Lucifer”. Forgot to tell the adherents of Jesus that if Emanuel means, “God with us” then Israel means, “Ever Lasting God”.
When they transliterated the TaNaKh to Greek/Roman they forgot to tell the adherents of Jesus that at that time the TaNaKh didn’t contain vowels, pronouns, proper nouns ….. and these were added to real TaNaKh during 12th to 15th century from Quranic Arabic.
Jesus teaches us; to turn the other cheek and love your enemy, but the Greek/Roman installed hatred of Jews in the adherents of Jesus. The persecution of Jews started right after the death of Jesus and continued until very recently.
Enough said!
You are tying yourself up there Mohammed. According to your beliefs Jesus wasn’t crucified but lived a normal human life and died a normal human death. Which is it ? Was he murdered or did he die a normal human death ?
There you go Hayek again. You just proved that you don’t know anything about my religion. It is the Shia belief and most Sunni, excluding the Wahhabi, that Jesus (as) is alive and he never died. He will come back after the tribulations to unite the mankind to Kingdom of God.
Therefore the whole Chritian faith is built upon a lie .
The article is about Daesh and what is true and righteousness and yet you deny the root of your own faith and also deny the full flowering of the Christian belief. Daesh’s of this world will always be with us as long as man denies what is true and follows his own path.
That the ISIS/Wahabbi style of religion has been around since long before them seems fact.
That the US in particular is encouraging the growth of these groups is fact.
As this is an invitation/challenge to debate what the definition of Daesh ??
Perhaps the debate is more suited confined to Islamic circles rather than just the world in general.
Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims. It should be added: who adhere to the Caliphate ideology. But the restoration of the Caliphate is a central tenet of ‘moderate Muslims’ organizations as well, which are the contemporary result of continuous waves of “Islamic revival (or Tajdid, also Sahwah) (Arabic: التجديد الإسلامي aẗ-ẗajdid l-ʾIslāmiyyah, also Arabic: الصحوة الإسلامية aṣ-Ṣaḥwah l-ʾIslāmiyyah, “Islamic awakening”)” movements. These movements in Islamic history were addressed by Ibn Khaldun 600 years ago and he found an explanation for them in the tension between the easy living in the towns and the austere life in the desert, the same justification given today. Replace ‘easy life in town’ with ‘modernity/western corruption/usury’ and you have a continuity of thought. I would not exclude the Iranian Islamic Revolution.
I fully agree with you Wiz Oz.
Hallelujah, the WizOz just called all Sunni as terrorists and all Shia as non-terrorists. What a sectarian statement and the esteemed Ghassan Kadi agrees with WizOz, and to quote the esteemed Ghassan Kadi, “I fully agree with you Wiz Oz.
The Muslims reject the sectarian move by non-Muslims as they are trying to create fitna (sedition) within Islam and Muslims.
Mohamed, you clearly have a problem understanding what you read. I don’t think it’s due to lack of language skills, I think it’s a matter of lack of intelligence.
Pure class through and through.
You reveal yourself once more Mr. Kadi.
Long before you made a first appearance at Saker blog, Mohamed was a frequent commenter.
He is known and remembered by many long time visitors as intelligent, funny and extremely knowlegable about history and especially Islam.
I wish to note, you have still not answered one of his initial questions: are you a Muslim?
You will not answer, I suspect, because your answer will be negative and thus you will be seen as posing as an expert on a subject you know nothing about, except as an outsider..
I further wish to note, the name Ghassan is associated most often with Syrian and Lebanese Christians and secularists. Like any secular liberal, your pretense is neutrality and objectivity but in truth you are an extreme ideologue. Many people who read here will understand exactly what I am describing.
Some others will not understand, which I can accept, unfotunately you will divide those people, one from another, accomplishing your goal of sewing division and scapegoating people who have nothing to do with the problem at hand.
Mohamed in particular, has the courage to search for an answer from within, the only possible source of a solution, something I have failed to accomplish consitently myself. Were everyone to follow his example, we would not be in the mess we are in today.
I regret my own reaction has demonstrated I have yet to come to terms with this myself. God willing, I will learn from my error.
There is a big difference listening to the loving criricism of a parent, versus finger pointing done by those who are both ignorant of, and unconcerned with the fate of those children.
I am not a Muslim nor am I religious. I reacted to you on the basis of what I perceive as extreme insincerity.
Most of all I regret other people’s children will reap what I have helped you sew.
It is good that you remind us that Mohamed is an old contributor to Saker. That would explain his slight on my regard. I had at times to correct some (actually a stream) wrong assertions he made on subjects about he had only superficial knowledge. He showed himself to be impervious to any criticism. He gave then, as he gives now, the impression that he is preaching (mostly against non-Sunni and Christians).
Mohamed you wrote ” the WizOz just called all Sunni as terrorists and all Shia as non-terrorists.”
I could not find such statement from WizOz, but you are suggesting by such statement, he is trying to create Sunni-Shia sectarian divide !
Could you please quote from statement of WizOz exactly what did he write ?
Salam Straight-Bat,
I am a Shia, which are considered 15% of the Muslims. It the Shia belief while Prophet Mohammad (saws) dead body was still warm, the Islam was hijacked and the books were burned, Islam was changed and recreated by cooked Sunnah.
Shia don’t believe in the concept of Caliphate. The Sunni believe in Predestination and believe that all these Islamic Leaders over them, Caliph or whatever the title you give them are appointed by the “Will of God”. Therefore, the Shia to them are Rafida (Rejector) of God’ Will and are Heathen and Infidel.
Below is WizOz statement and yes he is trying to create a Sunni-Shia sectarian divide :
Quote of WizOz: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims. It should be added: who adhere to the Caliphate ideology. But the restoration of the Caliphate is a central tenet of ‘moderate Muslims’ organizations as well, …..”
Best regards,
Mohamed
Mahomed,
I wonder whether you realize that this site is not a platform for Islamic propaganda (Sunni as well as Shia). That would save you a lot of bile and time.
Mohamed, Salam.
Thanks for your clarification – now I understand the basis of your statement.
With my limited knowledge of political history and history of religions (but, not religious scriptures), I found, every religion post-Zoroastrianism have sectarian divides caused by so many reasons (including, but not restricted to, rivalry among influential groups of followers of the prophet).
I also learnt that, the interest groups (feudalistic – imperialistic – capitalistic, and at times all rolled into one) utilise these fissures existing within the socio-cultural life to extend chaos and destruction of competing powers/societies. This is what we are witnessing in west Asia and north Africa – AngloZionist forces destroying the social fabric of the countries one by one. To defeat their design all common peoples should stand united irrespective of religious/language/genetic differences.
@ Ghassan Kadi [on March 31, 2016 · at 9:19 pm UTC]
Oh, ok, thanks for the clarification.
My view of Daesh/ISIS/IS is that we have to separate their leadership (if we can call it that) and the foot soldiers. From those at the top, it may or may not include western operatives, that is: actual agents for the various alphabet agencies. One thing I’m sure is that they’re not Muslims, not in the sense of true believers. They may have a Muslim upbringing/background, sure, but they’re no more believers than the royal Sauds are.
Now, and I’m sorry to say, the foot soldiers are believers, however twisted or extreme those beliefs are it doesn’t mean that a) it has nothing to do with Islam and b) that they’re not Muslims. To say otherwise is just as ridiculous as to claim that Protestantism has nothing to do with Christianity.
Now, other brands of Christians can claim all day that Protestants are not “real” Christians or not even Christian at all, but screaming it until their faces turn blue doesn’t make it true.
At the end of the day, the bigger debate here can be about if people, as individuals, have the right to identify/define themselves or not.
If not, and an individual doesn’t have the right to self-identify, then that makes them dependant on how others view them and what identity if any, they assign to them.
Not so sure that sits well with me, and I did travel the laberinth that is ‘identity politics’ and I happen to disagree with most of it.
But a religious identity is absolutely one of those things people have the right to self-identify with. Religion as with any ideology/belief is something that anybody can subscribe to or unsubscribe from as they wish. Now, a man, self-identifying as a woman is the opposite of that; gender/sex is a biological reality, is not something one can hop-in and hop-off at will. A person can’t claim to be a Panda bear (and there are plenty of weirdos who think they’re animals) and expect people to go along with that and feed them bamboo instead of sending them straight to the nut-house.
My two cents.
-TL2Q
ok i pondered the wisdom of posting this quote and link .. as it is rather blunt and a summary but worth repeating … here is a quote and article by Jim kirwan… -‘ When prophet Muhammad supposedly revealed his revelation from the Angel Gabriel that he is supposed to be the last of the prophets in the early 600’s. He started preaching in his own city Mecca. He tried to recruit sons and followers to spread his religion and he tried for twelve years and failed. And after twelve years he was only able to recruit his immediate family and friends.
So he decided if I go to Medina, which was the Jewish hub of Arabia, the business hub where the Jews lived: If I go there and preach my religion to them if they respect me that will buy me respect and stature with my own people who will then respect me.
So prophet Muhammad started borrowing a lot from the old testament, to make his religion more palpable to the Jews: To make it a lot similar. This is why you saw a lot of similarities between Judaism and Islam. For example: Jews don’t eat pigs, Muslims don’t eat pigs. Jews pray few times a day, Muslims pray few times a day. Jews fast on Yon-Kipper, Muslims fast on Romadom, and this is why we started seeing a lot of good writing at the beginning of the Koran when Prophet Muhammad was saying all the good things about the people-of-the-book. He took his message and went to Medina trying to recruit the Jews: Talking about the people-of-the-book, and how similar the religions are.
When they refused to accept him and follow him as the last of the prophets, that’s when he turned against them and started killing them and started expelling them. That’s when ‘Islam’ went from a spiritual movement; for the first twelve years of Islam, into a political-group cloaked in a religion: ~ After Mohammad went to Medina and the Jews did not accept him. he became a military warrior, and declared war on them and started expelling them. Jews and Christians became ‘Dimi’, or second class citizens. They were only allowed to stay alive and not be killed, only by paying ‘the protection tax’.’-
article at ..http://www.rense.com/general96/prooforgottenhist.html
persoanlly it seems the haddiths also have much to answer for as that is often what is quoted by takfi wankers.. not just quranic verses..
thanks thanks ghassan for your clarity.
I think one key aspect of this is the presence of coordination in the activity of those following a certain ideology. It is one thing to see followers of a certain belief that exists within a society perhaps grow in numbers, even cause trouble for the rest of society in some way. Conflict among people in any society is bound to happen and we all understand and expect that from time to time. Usually a cause can be identified for this. It is another thing when the followers seem to have a peculiar or particularly high degree of coordination to both their adherence to the belief, and to their expression of that belief. I think that’s when the rest of the society suspects something bigger is involved here, and is playing a larger role than just the natural inclination of some people towards a belief system that is native to the society. They are serving someone’s purposes.
I do not live in the Middle East or in a Muslim country, but I observe this kind of activity here among followers of some other belief system. Although the beliefs which are followed may be native to the society I live in, the way in which the followers express and adopt these beliefs suggests that they are totally organized and coordinated by an outside party. This by definition, in my opinion, tells me they are acting in someone’s service, and serving a particular agenda. The built-in conflict resolution methods which society functions on are totally useless among this crowd for that reason.
In this case, the specifics of the beliefs are almost a distraction from the larger issue: someone is coordinating this effort, and unleashing it within a particular society for a purpose. Ultimately, it appears to be part of the global destabilization trend, expressed in this way in my country. I very ungraciously refer to these actors here as pinheads, while they are in motion. That is not an attempt to summarize the character of the individuals who are participating, or to summarize each person’s actions 24/7, but simply to characterize the nature or quality that is displayed while they are in full-on destabilizing action.
The repeated focus on the CIA and the US is perhaps an expression of resentment towards them for coordinating something like this to the extent that is causes such disruption and destabilizing effects in the broader society.In my experience, to try to treat someone who is participating in this (wearing the pinhead hat), like I would any other person who is expressing a belief is futile. They’re just recruits, serving another person’s purpose, following orders or group think, and not behaving along authentic, individual adherence to a belief. They’re meant to cause trouble and that’s what they do. For me, it’s now a matter of accepting that this is happening, walking respectfully around them and keeping my distance as much as possible. So far, I haven’t witnessed any violence.
” The Al-Qaeda/American alliance broke up when America put boots on Saudi soil leading up to Operation Desert Storm in 1991. To Bin Laden that was a redline. To him, the Muslim Holy Land was not to be desecrated by “Salibyyin” (Crusaders).”
This is not a convincing line of argument. US soldiers and airmen have been located on the holy land for a very long time. The airbase in Dhahran, is under an agreement from 1958. When Osama was a toddler in Dhahran, he certainly saw US servicemen and their wives shopping around. So, who is Osama trying to kid? Again, in 1979, Saudi monarch used French commandos to entere the sanctum in Mecca to dislodge the Iranian rebels who had occuppied the shrine. I read, in an Indian newspaper that Wahabis are themselves regarded as heretic. In 1792., according to this account, the Qadi of Mecca barred Wahabis from entering mecca and Medina. The Ottomans in their long rule, made this wahabi exclusion rigid and in fact, even the present Saudi monarch’s grandfather was unable to perform the islamic duty of the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca. In the 1920s, British from India enquired of both the al-sauds and the Rashidis ruling mecca if they would accept status of a British protectorate. The Rashidis refused and the Brits armed the Al-saud clan. Ibn Saud broke down to Major-General Sir Percy Cox of the Indian Army asaying “..oh., oh, you are my father and my mother…”. The al-saud clan with british weapons brutally invaded Medina in 1927 , massacred many and commenced their long puppet rule of the kingdom uniquely named after a family. Where, in all this, is there room logically for any sudden feeling of “hurt” of Osama because of presence of foreign troops.
v v anand. I cannot agree with you more and I thank you for saying the Bin Laden’s argument was not convincing enough. But he was not trying to convince YOU or ME or any rational person, and here’s the irony. The people that Bin Laden was addressing were the youth, and he knew exactly the key to the heart and minds. Whether or not he was using historical facts or lies did not matter at all.
Maybe some may recall what I recently wrote about my “experiences” at London Heathrow (as an irony or parody of history they employ religious muslims for the high security area checks!)
Now, watch the following autotranslated newspaper article from Switzerland which indicates, that the situation in Brussels is similar or worse:
“At Brussels airport employs 50 IS-sympathizers”
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blick.ch%2Fnews%2Fausland%2Fpolizisten-warnen-am-bruesseler-flughafen-arbeiten-50-is-sympathisanten-id4864502.html&edit-text=
But I know I know, nothing has nothing to do with nothing (how silly can the claims get?)
An Israeli security firm had been in Brussels Airports prior to the blasts – they recommended urgent upgrades:
http://www.sott.net/article/315324-Israel-intel-linked-journal-says-explosives-were-pre-planted-in-Brussels-airport
WTF, only yet another false flag??
The question is, will no real terror attacks ever happen.
What is truth and what is disinfo, damn.
I think meanwhile it is a game of double agents.
Nobody knows the truth anymore.
Lol Martin, it is a figment of imagination just like the Goddess ISIS……
Welcome back, nice to see you again……
Best regards,
Mohamed
Very poor article with little substance, particularly concerning Islamic theology which the author professes to know.
As a Muslim, I do know some theology, enough to help me lead a life and not get embroiled in ISIS evil fantasies. Where the author says Wahabism is based on archaic Islamic theology … He has no idea what he is saying.
Wahabism did borrow, primarily from Ibne Taymiyya. However Ibne Taymiyya was a student of Imam Hanbal’s and professed beliefi in all the four madhabs (theological schools of Islam.) The Wahabism however corrupted Ibne Taymiyya’s message. The blame perhaps does not lie with sheikh Abdul Wahabism, the founder of Wahabism, as on his followers. I am not well informed enough to know about Sheikh wahabs complete teachings.
The basic point being in Islamic traditional theology fiqah is based on the four imams, Abu hanifa, Imam shafi, Malik and hanba for Sunnis. None of them preached anything close to violence. Particularly the dominant schools Hanafi and Malak were rationalists.
I would advise the author to stick to Geopolotics.
ur
The archaic theology is the one that misunderstands the divine concepts of Jihad, Fateh, and Shahada. For Islam to be properly understood, clerics need to reform their views, because the religion itself does not need reform. Nothing will clean up the image of Islam other than in in-house job that will put the false understandings of Jihad,Fateh and Shahada to rest. Only then, organizations like Daesh will be stopped at their and rendered unable to draw in more recruits. But if Muslims insist to hide their heads in the sand and blame it all only on America and/or Wahhabism, the problem, the real problem will never be addressed and consequently, it won’t be resolved.
Your response was very rude, and I responded to you politely. If you really want to have a discussion with me, you will need to be polite otherwise I will ignore whatever you say next.
Salam Ghassan
Quote of Ghassan: “The archaic theology is the one that misunderstands the divine concepts of Jihad, Fateh, and Shahada.”
I am a Shia from Oman, 63 years old and married to ex-WASP from USA for the last 41 years. What I am trying to tell you the theology was INTENTIONALLY misunderstood. The Islam was hijacked while the dead body of Prophet Mohammad (saws) was still warn. The Shia have been vocal about this throughout the history and for this reason they have been persecuted throughout the years.
When a group of people intentionally doesn’t something, you cannot correct the whole group at one time. This a slow process and with the internet the TRUTH (God) is finally becoming evident.
A Shia from Oman. Yes, there about 1% to 2% Shia in the Ibada Land. If you knew the history of Ibada, then you know what I am talking about. The Ibada of Oman are the best of Muslims and they never persecuted the Shia in Oman. God bless His Majesty and His Forefathers, we have been living in the land of Milk and Honey. In Oman we all Muslims, the six madhabs (theologies) pray in the same mosque together but each one differently according to his madhab. God bless His Majesty, as there is no sectarianism in Oman.
Having roots in USA too, I kept away from Syed Hassan Nasrallah as he was considered a terrorist by the USA. It is brother Saker who introduced me to the Syed.
I have been saying on this blog for more than 2 years that God bless Obama, Putin, Kerry, Lavrov, John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Trump (since he started to run for the President) for being in cahoots. People thought that being an Ahab, I don’t know the meaning of cahoots.
God bless King Salman of Saudi Arabia and the fictional ISIS is God send for Muslims. The whole of Islam is now coming together and rejecting sectarianism. You should need to spend some time, an hour to check link of Dragon who posted a Wahhabi Imam, and you will understand that how Muslims are coming together.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Salem Ghassan,
Ask yourself a simple question. Why a ex-Wahhabi Iman, who now calls himself a Muslim and exposes the Cooked Sunnah and Hijacking of Islam, is still preaching from Saudi Arabia?
He was introduced to us recently on the Saker’s blog by Hamza Haider in which you participated. Things are never black and white, they are always grey. It is our courage to hunt in this for TRUTH (God) and expose this TRUTH.
Best regards,
Mohamed
And what would the Jews at Medina have to say to that ?
Truly sickening reading through all the posts dissing or cheerleading this or that, when too agitated or blinded to see the big picture, for anyone who’s done any amount of reading on history & its movers & shakers (mostly arrogant scheming evil filth).
All laid out by this guy, but also many others, 150 years ago, and guess what–it’s all occurred on time and target & working perfectly since.
Top Illuminati Grand Wizard: “We Control Islam and We’ll Use It to Destroy the West.” (WW3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dXD2H0m74g
Published on Mar 24, 2016
In this documentary short we discuss Albert Pike’s Three World War Predictions. There are websites with this information, however I believe the most important aspect of the predictions is that the Illuminati is using Islam to accomplish its goals. Albert Pike openly stated that Islam will be the central component in a war against the West, and that the Illuminati will lead Islam into direct confrontation with the West. We have already seen what the New World Order has done with Islam, and that is to foment a crisis and watch as Brussels, Begium and Paris, France attacks happen. But it’s all been planned, setting the stage for WW3. Just as they set the stage for WW1 and WW2.
After second reading i realised something.
You are talking about a rift in teaching,possibly even understanding, of Islam. That rift exist in Christianity also. Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Division goes even further, within those partitions there are different currents/blocks or however would you name them. This stands for Islam and Christianity both.
So we come to the point where there are many interpretations. And there are those who are mutually exclusive. How do we differentiate them? How do you know which of them is safe to have as a neighbour? Which group might initiate an offensive Jihad or a Crusade and start slaughtering? Or which will take arms only to defend what is theirs from aggressors and oppressors?
We might start in history. Just to take quick bearings where to look. But that can be done only in private. Because once you start naming things,people and events, you are not politically correct and pressure mounts up. Discussing the nature of that pressure and those who conduct it and those who are behind it will not get us far. We can proceed to look in theology next. Politic, culture, education, welfare…
Real question here is what to do even if we manage to differentiate them. What then? We are right – you are wrong! Change or else… That is tried so many times and only lead to more wars and suffering of innocents, even without change or else part. Way forward, as i see it, is to live up to your beliefs and lead by example. Living in the society and shaping it, no matter how small the shaping is.
It is beyond our capability to make a blind man see or deaf one to hear. It is up to them. That is true faith. Choice. Free will is a great gift but also a heavy burden. Without forcing your views upon others. No force conversions. No, a bit softer version, uniatism or its subtler cousin ecumenism, from which we in Christianity suffer.
But what if we are a majority somewhere and want to live and continue living in that way? It should be up to us how we live in our communities. But that is not the case. Someone big always come along and say “you should change your evil ways”. Wars, assassinations, bribes, sanctions, coups,… follow. I think that we have an obligation, opposed to just having a right, to stand up for what we think is right and defend it. We however do not have a right to go and change somebody’s “evil ways”. That bring only more suffering and misery as history taught us. We can choose to not start wars. We can always finish them if someone other initiates them.
Exercise free will, responsiblity for your behaviour and speak the truth. Name things, people and events. One thing we should keep in mind in doing so is that government’s actions are not actions of it’s people. Russia demonstrated it with their statement that downing of their bomber is not the action of Turkish people but it’s government. That governments are responsibility of people of that country goes without saying. If another government/country comes to sort things out it only bring bad blood. What goes for governments and its people goes also for religions and their believers/adherents. That is why i have no problem with Catholics only Catholicism. That is also a reason why i have problem with people who advocate violence in settling disputes in my surrounding, no matter their affiliation, religious or otherwise. There are good people everywhere, evil also, your affiliation does not give you instant righteousness. My personal observation is that most of humans are just not interested in good or evil. Just behind them, in size, come good people. Smallest population of us are evil. But they are the most visible.
Religion can also be a cultural thing. If that is the case, you can count on many deviations/sects and outright heresy’s. That is in my personal opinion root of large percentage of those who stray into extremism. Religion as a cultural thing, without proper religious guidance, is a spawning pool for extremism.
Teachers are a major threat. All sorts of missionaries doing “whatever it takes”, “fighting the enemy with its own weapons”,… You named them well. Religious texts are ancient. Language barriers are vast even if it is the same language in question. Add to that pot translations. And top it off with message. Message that is so foreign to our minds on this world that it is mind boggling. If they are not interpreted correctly, which is responsibility of those same teachers, there more than one wrong conclusion to be made.
Salam brother Dragan,
Excellent post as usual. Sorry to spell your name wrong. You are correct, the biggest problem of all Religions is the Dhawa (Invitation), which tells others that their religion is wrong, and that I who is giving you the Dhawa am on the right path.
The link you posted of the Wahhabi Imam is excellent. I recently came to know about him on Saker’s blog, by an article posted by Hamza Haider. The imam is very good, and I am glad that you posted him again. I hope everyone on Saker’s blog, take some time and visit the link you posted, especially the author of this article Ghassan Kadi. The author will learn that the problem with Islam has nothing to do with the assertion of the author that, “it can be traced back to a very ancient fundamentalist Fukih (theology) that is based on false interpretations of the Holy Quran.”
It has to do with intentional hijacking of religion of Mohammad, just like the intentional hijacking of religion (singular) of Moses and Jesus, to control the masses and steal the riches. God has sent the same religion on all His Children.”
The Wahhabi Imam in you link talks about the Dhawa and the effects if has on all religion, which created nothing but infighting and sectarianism in all religion (singular).
God bless Trump to bring all issues on the table, especially the Nuclear One.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Greeting brother Mohamed
Do not worry about the name. We have a saying that goes, call me however you like just do not brake me. Imam impressed me. Speaking what he speaks, in Saudi Arabia may literally cost him his head. And he speaks what i find quite normal and encouraging for the future. He takes great risks by doing so and so humbly, without accusations, just waving them aside and directing them where to look for their answers. His bravery, not for the sake of personal glory but for the message he speaks, is a sure sign of wisdom. That earns him my respect. Although, being proverbially “behind enemy lines” his message may seem suspect. I did not find that to be the case. Thank you Hamza Haider for that video.
I presume you are talking about Household/Companions rift? If that is the case would you care to tell us more about it? A lot more, for it seems quite relevant for this topic.
It looks to me that you and Ghassan Kadi are talking about the same thing after all. Although it looks to me also that the discussion that would follow could easily degenerate into a mud slinging contest. Especially as it already shown some signs of it. I urge all participants to refrain themselves from that if we are willing to find our answers. Some of us will probably hear things we find offensive during this discussion but if we claim that we want to find the Truth let us not nitpick and open our minds and hearts. How else can we learn and grow?
Can you explain what exactly do you mean by saying singular? As in one Islam, Christianity, Judaism, no matter the divisions and bringing unity to each of them them separately or something else?
And last, can you give me your thoughts why three different religions for one God, if i am not mistaken?
Excuse me for asking so much in so little words but your arguments seem to reach deepest in history about the topic and as i mentioned above it looks quite similar to the situation we have in Christianity.
@Ghassan Kadi, reading through the article, the various comments and your replies, I have trouble seeing where you are going with this.
I think the only common denominator amongst people at this site is their resistance against what the US is doing in this world. By the US I mean the US military, the US dollar and the powers that control them. There are different religious beliefs and different political beliefs.
Three things I see here – you have set people to arguing with each other about religion, you seem unable to distinguish between the possible and the impossible, and what seems to be an intellectual arrogance comes through.
Peter AU, the message I am saying is very clear; Let us stop the nonsense and define Daesh, as it is, without fear or favour. How is this hard to understand?
For as long as you keep your only focus on the USA, then with respect, you and others are on the wrong track trying to understand what Daesh really is.
find out who is providing them with guns ammo training, money and pills etc etc. and you will understand what daesh really is
For as long as you keep your only focus on the USA, then with respect, you and others are on the wrong track trying to understand what Daesh really is. — G. Kadi
US military ops since 1990
1990–1999
1990 – Liberia: On August 6, 1990, President Bush reported that a reinforced rifle company had been sent to provide additional security to the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia, and that helicopter teams had evacuated U.S. citizens from Liberia.[RL30172]
1990 – Saudi Arabia: On August 9, 1990, President Bush reported that he launched Operation Desert Shield by ordering the forward deployment of substantial elements of the U.S. armed forces into the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia after the August 2 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. On November 16, 1990, he reported the continued buildup of the forces to ensure an adequate offensive military option.[RL30172]American hostages being held in Iran.[RL30172] Staging point for the troops was primarily Bagram air field.
1991 – Iraq and Kuwait: Gulf War, On January 16, 1991, in response to the refusal by Iraq to leave Kuwait, U.S. and Coalition aircraft attacked Iraqi forces and military targets in Iraq and Kuwait in conjunction with a coalition of allies and under United Nations Security Council resolutions. On February 24, 1991, U.S.-led United Nation (UN) forces launched a ground offensive that finally drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait within 100 hours. Combat operations ended on February 28, 1991, when President Bush declared a ceasefire.[RL30172]
1991–96 – Iraq: Operation Provide Comfort, Delivery of humanitarian relief and military protection for Kurds fleeing their homes in northern Iraq during the 1991 uprising, by a small Allied ground force based in Turkey which began in April 1991.
1991 – Iraq: On May 17, 1991, President Bush stated that the Iraqi repression of the Kurdish people had necessitated a limited introduction of U.S. forces into northern Iraq for emergency relief purposes.[RL30172]
1991 – Zaire: On September 25–27, 1991, after widespread looting and rioting broke out in Kinshasa, Air Force C-141s transported 100 Belgian troops and equipment into Kinshasa. American planes also carried 300 French troops into the Central African Republic and hauled evacuated American citizens.[RL30172]
1992 – Sierra Leone: Operation Silver Anvil, Following the April 29 coup that overthrew President Joseph Saidu Momoh, a United States European Command (USEUCOM) Joint Special Operations Task Force evacuated 438 people (including 42 Third Country nationals) on May 3. Two Air Mobility Command (AMC) C-141s flew 136 people from Freetown, Sierra Leone, to the Rhein-Main Air Base in Germany and nine C-130 sorties carried another 302 people to Dakar, Senegal.[RL30172]
1992–96 – Bosnia and Herzegovina: Operation Provide Promise was a humanitarian relief operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav Wars, from July 2, 1992, to January 9, 1996, which made it the longest running humanitarian airlift in history.[9]
1992 – Kuwait: On August 3, 1992, the United States began a series of military exercises in Kuwait, following Iraqi refusal to recognize a new border drawn up by the United Nations and refusal to cooperate with UN inspection teams.[RL30172]
1992–2003 – Iraq: Iraqi no-fly zones, The U.S., United Kingdom, and its Gulf War allies declared and enforced “no-fly zones” over the majority of sovereign Iraqi airspace, prohibiting Iraqi flights in zones in southern Iraq and northern Iraq, conducting aerial reconnaissance, and several specific attacks on Iraqi air-defense systems as part of the UN mandate. Often, Iraqi forces continued throughout a decade by firing on U.S. and British aircraft patrolling no-fly zones.(See also Operation Northern Watch, Operation Southern Watch) [RL30172]
1992–95 – Somalia: Operation Restore Hope, Somali Civil War: On December 10, 1992, President Bush reported that he had deployed U.S. armed forces to Somalia in response to a humanitarian crisis and a UN Security Council Resolution in support for UNITAF. The operation came to an end on May 4, 1993. U.S. forces continued to participate in the successor United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II).(See also Battle of Mogadishu)[RL30172]
1993–95 – Bosnia: Operation Deny Flight, On April 12, 1993, in response to a United Nations Security Council passage of Resolution 816, U.S. and NATO enforced the no-fly zone over the Bosnian airspace, prohibited all unauthorized flights and allowed to “take all necessary measures to ensure compliance with [the no-fly zone restrictions].”
1993 – Macedonia: On July 9, 1993, President Clinton reported the deployment of 350 U.S. soldiers to the Republic of Macedonia to participate in the UN Protection Force to help maintain stability in the area of former Yugoslavia.[RL30172]
1994 – Bosnia: Banja Luka incident, NATO become involved in the first combat situation when NATO U.S. Air Force F-16 jets shot down four of the six Bosnian Serb J-21 Jastreb single-seat light attack jets for violating UN-mandated no-fly zone.
1994–95 – Haiti: Operation Uphold Democracy, U.S. ships had begun embargo against Haiti. Up to 20,000 U.S. military troops were later deployed to Haiti to restore democratically-elected Haiti President Jean-Bertrand Aristide from a military regime which came into power in 1991 after a major coup.[RL30172]
1994 – Macedonia: On April 19, 1994, President Clinton reported that the U.S. contingent in Macedonia had been increased by a reinforced company of 200 personnel.[RL30172]
1995 – Bosnia: Operation Deliberate Force, On August 30, 1995, U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing campaign of Bosnian Serb Army in response to a Bosnian Serb mortar attack on a Sarajevo market that killed 37 people on August 28, 1995. This operation lasted until September 20, 1995. The air campaign along with a combined allied ground force of Muslim and Croatian Army against Serb positions led to a Dayton Agreement in December 1995 with the signing of warring factions of the war. As part of Operation Joint Endeavor, U.S. and NATO dispatched the Implementation Force (IFOR) peacekeepers to Bosnia to uphold the Dayton agreement.[RL30172]
1996 – Liberia: Operation Assured Response, On April 11, 1996, President Clinton reported that on April 9, 1996 due to the :”deterioration of the security situation and the resulting threat to American citizens” in Liberia he had ordered U.S. military forces to evacuate from that country “private U.S. citizens and certain third-country nationals who had taken refuge in the U.S. Embassy compound….”[RL30172]
1996 – Central African Republic, Operation Quick Response: On May 23, 1996, President Clinton reported the deployment of U.S. military personnel to Bangui, Central African Republic, to conduct the evacuation from that country of “private U.S. citizens and certain U.S. government employees”, and to provide “enhanced security for the American Embassy in Bangui.”[RL30172] United States Marine Corps elements of Joint Task Force Assured Response, responding in nearby Liberia, provided security to the embassy and evacuated 448 people, including between 190 and 208 Americans. The last Marines left Bangui on June 22.
1996 – Kuwait: Operation Desert Strike, American Air Strikes in the north to protect the Kurdish population against the Iraqi Army attacks.
1996 – Bosnia: Operation Joint Guard, On December 21, 1996, U.S. and NATO established the SFOR peacekeepers to replace the IFOR in enforcing the peace under the Dayton agreement.
1997 – Albania: Operation Silver Wake, On March 13, 1997, U.S. military forces were used to evacuate certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens from Tirana, Albania.[RL30172]
1997 – Congo and Gabon: On March 27, 1997, President Clinton reported on March 25, 1997, a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel had been deployed to Congo and Gabon to provide enhanced security and to be available for any necessary evacuation operation.[RL30172]
1997 – Sierra Leone: On May 29 and May 30, 1997, U.S. military personnel were deployed to Freetown, Sierra Leone, to prepare for and undertake the evacuation of certain U.S. government employees and private U.S. citizens.[RL30172]
1997 – Cambodia: On July 11, 1997, In an effort to ensure the security of American citizens in Cambodia during a period of domestic conflict there, a Task Force of about 550 U.S. military personnel were deployed at Utapao Air Base in Thailand for possible evacuations. [RL30172]
1998 – Iraq: Operation Desert Fox, U.S. and British forces conduct a major four-day bombing campaign from December 16–19, 1998 on Iraqi targets.[RL30172]
1998 – Guinea-Bissau: Operation Shepherd Venture, On June 10, 1998, in response to an army mutiny in Guinea-Bissau endangering the U.S. Embassy, President Clinton deployed a standby evacuation force of U.S. military personnel to Dakar, Senegal, to evacuate from the city of Bissau.[RL30172]
1998–99 – Kenya and Tanzania: U.S. military personnel were deployed to Nairobi, Kenya, to coordinate the medical and disaster assistance related to the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.[RL30172]
1998 – Afghanistan and Sudan: Operation Infinite Reach, On August 20, President Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against two suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and a suspected chemical factory in Sudan.[RL30172]
1998 – Liberia: On September 27, 1998, America deployed a stand-by response and evacuation force of 30 U.S. military personnel to increase the security force at the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia. [1] [RL30172]
1999–2001 – East Timor: Limited number of U.S. military forces deployed with the United Nations-mandated International Force for East Timor restore peace to East Timor.[RL30172]
1999 – Serbia: Operation Allied Force: U.S. and NATO aircraft began a major bombing of Serbia and Serb positions in Kosovo on March 24, 1999, during the Kosovo War due to the refusal by Serbian President Slobodan Milošević to end repression against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. This operation ended in June 10, 1999, when Milošević agreed to pull out his troops out of Kosovo. In response to the situation in Kosovo, NATO dispatched the KFOR peacekeepers to secure the peace under UNSC Resolution 1244.[RL30172]
2000–2009
2000 – Sierra Leone: On May 12, 2000, a U.S. Navy patrol craft deployed to Sierra Leone to support evacuation operations from that country if needed.[RL30172]
2000 – Nigeria: Special Forces troops are sent to Nigeria to lead a training mission in the county.[10]
2000 – Yemen: On October 12, 2000, after the USS Cole attack in the port of Aden, Yemen, military personnel were deployed to Aden.[RL30172]
2000 – East Timor: On February 25, 2000, a small number of U.S. military personnel were deployed to support the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). [RL30172]
2001 – On April 1, 2001, a mid-air collision between a United States Navy EP-3E ARIES II signals surveillance aircraft and a People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) J-8II interceptor fighter jet resulted in an international dispute between the United States and the People’s Republic of China called the Hainan Island incident.
2001–2014 – War in Afghanistan: The War on Terror begins with Operation Enduring Freedom. On October 7, 2001, U.S. Armed Forces invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attacks and “begin combat action in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda terrorists and their Taliban supporters.”[RL30172]
2002 – Yemen: On November 3, 2002, an American MQ-1 Predator fired a Hellfire missile at a car in Yemen killing Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, an al-Qaeda leader thought to be responsible for the USS Cole bombing.[RL30172]
2002 – Philippines: OEF-Philippines, As of January, U.S. “combat-equipped and combat support forces” have been deployed to the Philippines to train with, assist and advise the Philippines’ Armed Forces in enhancing their “counterterrorist capabilities.”[RL30172]
2002 – Côte d’Ivoire: On September 25, 2002, in response to a rebellion in Côte d’Ivoire, U.S. military personnel went into Côte d’Ivoire to assist in the evacuation of American citizens from Bouaké.[11][RL30172]
2003–2011 – War in Iraq: Operation Iraqi Freedom, March 20, 2003, The United States leads a coalition that includes the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland to invade Iraq with the stated goal being “to disarm Iraq in pursuit of peace, stability, and security both in the Gulf region and in the United States.”[RL30172]
2003 – Liberia: Second Liberian Civil War, On June 9, 2003, President Bush reported that on June 8 he had sent about 35 U.S. Marines into Monrovia, Liberia, to help secure the U.S. Embassy in Nouakchott, Mauritania, and to aid in any necessary evacuation from either Liberia or Mauritania.[RL30172]
2003 – Georgia and Djibouti: “US combat equipped and support forces” had been deployed to Georgia and Djibouti to help in enhancing their “counterterrorist capabilities.”[12]
2004 – Haiti: 2004 Haitian coup d’état occurs, The US first sent 55 combat equipped military personnel to augment the U.S. Embassy security forces there and to protect American citizens and property in light. Later 200 additional US combat-equipped, military personnel were sent to prepare the way for a UN Multinational Interim Force, MINUSTAH.[RL30172]
2004 – War on Terror: U.S. anti-terror related activities were underway in Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen, and Eritrea.[13]
2004–present: The U.S deploys drone strikes to aid in the War in North-West Pakistan
2005–06 – Pakistan: President Bush deploys troops from US Army Air Cav Brigades to provide Humanitarian relief to far remote villages in the Kashmir mountain ranges of Pakistan stricken by a massive earthquake.
2006 – Lebanon: part of the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit[14] begins evacuation of U.S. citizens willing to leave the country in the face of a likely ground invasion by Israel and continued fighting between Hezbollah and the Israeli military.[14][15]
2007 – The Mogadishu Encounter, on November 4, 2007, Somali Pirate’s boarded and attacked a North Korean merchant vessel. Passing U.S Navy Ships and a helicopter that were patrolling at the time responded to the attack. Once the ship was freed from the pirates, the American forces were given permission to board and assist the wounded crew and handle surviving pirates.
2007 – Somalia: Battle of Ras Kamboni, On January 8, 2007, while the conflict between the Islamic Courts Union and the Transitional Federal Government continues, an AC-130 gunship conducts an aerial strike on a suspected al-Qaeda operative, along with other Islamist fighters, on Badmadow Island near Ras Kamboni in southern Somalia.[16]
2008 – South Ossetia, Georgia: Helped Georgia humanitarian aid,[17] helped to transport Georgian forces from Iraq during the conflict. In the past, the US has provided training and weapons to Georgia.
2010–present
2010–present – al-Qaeda insurgency in Yemen: The U.S has been launching a series of drone strikes on suspected al-Qaeda and al-Shabaab positions in Yemen.
2010–11 – Operation New Dawn, On February 17, 2010, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that as of September 1, 2010, the name “Operation Iraqi Freedom” would be replaced by “Operation New Dawn”. This coincides with the reduction of American troops to 50,000.
2011 – 2011 military intervention in Libya: Operation Odyssey Dawn, United States and coalition enforcing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 with bombings of Libyan forces.
2011 – Osama Bin Laden is killed by U.S. military forces in Pakistan as part of Operation Neptune Spear.
2011 – Drone strikes on al-Shabab militants begin in Somalia.[18] This marks the 6th nation in which such strikes have been carried out,[19] including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen[20] and Libya.
2011–present – Uganda: U.S. Combat troops sent in as advisers to Uganda.[21]
2012 – Jordan: 150 U.S. troops deployed to Jordan to help it contain the Syrian Civil War within Syria’s borders.
2012 – Turkey: 400 troops and two batteries of Patriot missiles sent to Turkey to prevent any missile strikes from Syria.
2012 – Chad: 50 U.S. troops have deployed to the African country of Chad to help evacuate U.S. citizens and embassy personnel from the neighboring Central African Republic’s capital of Bangui in the face of rebel advances toward the city.
2013 – Mali: U.S. forces assisted the French in Operation Serval with air refueling and transport aircraft.
2013 – Somalia: U.S. Air Force planes supported the French in the Bulo Marer hostage rescue attempt. However, they did not use any weapons.
2013 – 2013 Korean crisis
2013 – Navy SEALs conducted a raid in Somalia and possibly killed a senior Al-Shabaab official, simultaneously another raid took place in Tripoli, Libya, where Special Operations Forces captured Abu Anas al Libi (also known as Anas al-Libi)[22]
2014–present – Uganda: V-22 Ospreys, MC-130s, KC-135s and additional U.S. soldiers are sent to Uganda to continue to help African forces search for Joseph Kony.[23]
2014–present – American intervention in Iraq: Hundreds of U.S. troops deployed to protect American assets in Iraq and to advise Iraqi and Kurdish fighters.[24] In August the U.S. Air Force conducted a humanitarian air drop and the U.S. Navy began a series of airstrikes against Islamic State-aligned forces throughout northern Iraq.[25][26]
2014 – 2014 American rescue mission in Syria: The U.S attempted to rescue James Foley and other hostages being held by ISIL. Air strikes were conducted on the ISIL military base known as “Osama bin Laden camp”. Meanwhile, the bombings, Delta teams parachuted near an ISIL high-valued prison. The main roads were blocked to keep any target from escaping. When no hostage was found, the American troops began house to house searches. By this time, ISIL militants began arriving to the area. Heavy fighting occurred until the Americans decided to abandon the mission due to the hostages being nowhere in the area. Although the mission failed, at least 5 ISIL militants were killed, however 1 American troop was wounded. According to the reports, Jordan had a role in the operation and that one Jordanian soldier had been wounded as well. This was unconfirmed.
2014–present – American-led intervention in Syria: American aircraft bomb Islamic State positions in Syria. Airstrikes on al-Qaeda, al-Nusra Front and Khorasan positions are also being conducted.
2014–present – Intervention against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant: Syrian locals forces and American-led coalition forces launch a series of aerial attacks on ISIL and al-Nusra Front positions in Iraq and Syria.
2014 – 2014 Yemen hostage rescue operations against al-Qaeda: On November 25, U.S Navy SEAL’s and Yemeni Special Forces launched an operations in Yemen in attempt to rescue eight hostages that were being held by al-Qaeda. Although the operation was successful, no American hostages were secured. In the first attempt, six Yemenis, one Saudi Arabian, and one Ethiopian were rescued. On December 4, 2014, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) threatened to execute the Somers if the U.S failed to the unspecified commands. AQAP also stated that they would be executed if the U.S attempted another rescue operation. On December 6, a second operation was launched. 40 U.S SEALs and 30 Yemeni troops were deployed to the compound. A 10-minute fire fight occurred before the American troops could enter where the remaining hostages (Somers and Korkie) were being held. They were alive, but fatally wounded. Surgery was done in mid air when flying away from the site. Korkie died while in flight, and Somers died once landed on the USS Makin Island. No American troop was killed/injured, however a Yemenis soldier was wounded.
2015 – April 30, 2015 U.S. sends ships to the Strait of Hormuz to shield vessels after Iranian Seizure of commercial vessel: The U.S. Navy deploys warships to protect American commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz from Iranian interference. Concerns were also raised that Iranian gunships were trailing a U.S. container ship. Iran additionally fired shots over the bow, and seized, a ship registered in the Marshall Islands, part of a long-standing dispute between the two nations.[27]
2015–present – American military intervention in Cameroon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations
Anonymous. Was the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople of 1453 AD also an American military operation?
Fortunately, on the eastern coast of the Baltic sea – in this undefined zone between Europe and Russia – there is a small country which is very aware of the point Ghassan Kadi is trying to make.
In recent polls the fear of migration has surpassed that of the Russian invasion. This despite the fact that just a couple of days ago, first seven refugees arrived.
Besides, mainstream media is quite adamant that a proper muslim – once he or she gets rid of sinful inertia – will not rest until the whole world is conquered.
The parties whipping up xenophobia and hatred of islam are making huge gains. Interestingly, this goes hand in hand with denouncing – wait for it – marxism and socialism.
The second sentence, “Even though all terrorists that have been caught involved in terrorism are “Muslims”, this does not give a blanket description of all Muslims as beings terrorists” is contrary to fact.
Sorry, unibomber was not “muslim”, kansas city was not “muslim”. Yes, I understand what you want to say. But why not say it so others understand???
Lets say there are roughly 1.7 billion Muslims in the World today. Given this, let’s also say that 200,000 of them are homicidal extremist -blow themselves and others- type. Terrorists period. This number does not represent Hezbollah, legitimate freedom fighters etc, Palestinians …
Ok, these number would roughly come to about 0.09 % of the Islamic World would – less than point one percent! Miniscule number isn’t it. You can find worse odds to so many variables its almost frightening. In any societal norm, 1 out of 100 people either are completely mentally off balance, or homicidal and/or criminally inclined.
Given this, these figures above reflect under a murderous regime of coup’ detat, regime change, invasion, bombing, drone assassinations and whatever else nefarious you can think of. In fact, in the year 2015, the U.S. (with it’s Noble Peace prize winning President) has dropped 23,144 bombs on majority Muslim countries.
Take a few to ponder this. Are Muslim’s terrorists , and is Islam a religion of terror ?
You miss the point that several people, including myself , have made about Mohammed and the birth of Islam. Violence was present at the birth of Islam including -ordered and maybe personally carried out by Mohammed himself. These acts alone give legitimacy- justified or not – to commit violence to further the religious, political causes of Muslims around the world. We see this in many manifestations- state mandated persecution and murder of homosexuals in multiple Muslim countries around the world. We see people condemned to death for speaking against Islam and converting to alternate beliefs. If I was in a Muslim country I would be sentenced to death for what I have written on this blog. These,and countless other facts are obvious to the majority of non Muslim people’s in the world. Because we don’t accept this is not my problem, it is Islams problem. Daesh is nothing new, it is just the latest version of religious nihilism that Islam produces.
I fully agree with Hayek.
Although Christianity isn’t a Saint either, Islam did not even attempt to.
All monotheistic religions are a man-created fraud.
But I save me my time and energy, rather than repeating my findings 500 times per day.
And the point you are missing Hayek is that the problem is not in the Teachings of either Christianity or Islam, but in the manner people understood the Teachings
Actions speak louder than words- Mohammed and his followers killed to further his cause, and then we have the rest of history. It’s not complicated.
Totally agree, bored muslim! And I guess you so bored of seeing how all is blamed in the muslim people and how Obama and American government goes, once again, scot free. And people like Ghassan Kadi is not of much help, no doubt, I wonder why.
“Are Muslim’s terrorists , and is Islam a religion of terror ?”
Definitely not, as a long time traveler in the lands of Islam ( Arab comuntrie mainly ) I can testify that muslim people is not only peaceful but also very kind. Even I would say that I have been treated with more respect in almost all muslim countries I have visited than by some men in my own country, other European countries and even in this blog.
The only one muslim country where me and my friends were disrespected, and even assaulted, was Turkey, and this was an issue of two men in one city and some youngsters coming from the football in another. It seems that Taharrush had been invented there already 20 years ago. Fortunately we could get rid of them without more consequences. And, for the record, we were decently dressed, and even when the attack by the youngsters took place, one in the group was married being her husband and some other men from our group only some meters in advance.
One of the countries where I could find the kindest people was Yemen, to the point that I did not want to leave and always thought that I would come back. Perhaps one day.
And, for Hayek, who is saying that homosexuals are murdered in muslim countries, that is absolutely false. Did you know who was in charge and served our meals in the largest restaurant near Krak des Chevaliers castle in Syria when I visited it? Well, just a kind of transvestite, so friendly and funny, all the time attending us, asking, in his personal Spanish, if all was well and if we wanted, Más pollo, más patatas?
Guys, it´s a pity that you can not travel more to know people before talking so bad of them without even knowing them. Some friends of mine who have never left Spain do the same you do and have the same erroneous idea about muslims and this gives rise to a heated discussions on the issue between us. But even when I have always a bad time when this happens, I can not but try to get them out of their mistake, despite their stubborness. It´s my duty since I was lucky enough to meet this kindhearted muslim people.
@elsi: I do travel a lot.
I know enough of them.
It is not denied that many muslims are good friendly well-hearted persons as individuals.
The discussion was about the religion Islam itself [and religions in general if you ask me].
Question: How often have you read the Qur’an before you can make any such generalistic statements?
Proposal: Come to Berlin and move to one of their ghettos.
Then if you are still alive and well after 1 year let’s perform this quiz again.
Doesn’t that sound democratic?
You really have no clue what’s happening.
@ Elsi: It is a bit arrogant that you deal with all others except yourself as if they had never left their respective country.
And I won’t make the same mistake, but I would doubt that you traveled half as much as I did (cannot know this but I do know how much I have been abroad, my passport is literally filled with forgeign stamps).
p.s. If you lived in Berlin or any other large city in western Europe you wouldn’t even need to travel at all. They all come to you from all directions!
You really lost the rest of me over that comment.
Although you certainly have good intentions (like all the Refugees welcome hurray wavers) – in this area you are imho mislead.
@elsi, last word: Many women fell into the very same trap like you. There are even young native germans or native french women who joined ISIS. Later they were beaten to death, stabbed with a knive or burned. Go, research history.
Look how many girls have married muslim men and later could not or hardly could escape. Yes – frienedliness can be great with such muslims. Until it changes by 180 degrees.
Same with situations when they suddenly disagree and start to beat.
A “communist” girl fighting for Islam, omg
Reminder: Don’t confuse a discussion about Islam with a discussion about people you met somewhere. The discussion was about the “religion of peace”, which it simply is not and never has been. I said Never.
Add to that that virtually every other widespread “modern” religion has also lead to similar problems. But that wasn’t the point of this discussion. Read the article again. The author used a careful language. Maybe it is a problem if some people didn’t read the fine grained if’s, although’s and while’s he used.
But believe what you want.
It is all pointless.
elsi: Here also the proof that I really love Bosnian (muslim) music: Alma Subasic – Nigdje tako ko u Bosni nema https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9S-0Ut6EYE&list=PL463F01895A5B44BF
I have known muslim friends there, in China, Tunesia and Egypt, and still have some.
In Berlin I got to know about 50 individuals from all over the Middle East.
Most of them are very friendly good people (especially in Bosnia).
However – we all know how quickly situations can change. Ask Serbs.
Also I lost many contacts in Bosnia every time I tried to tell them the truth about Srebrenica or Karadzic.
I once really loved the oriental culture, still do to some extent.
But there is a difference of those that stay in their home countries versus those who risk the lives of their childs and women only for buying a new smartphone or BMW or for “getting a castle” from Merkel. Also there is a difference to those mercenaries who would join ISIS. And there are about 20,51973520 zillion such differences.
That’s what the recent very valuable contributions on this blog are dealing with.
It’s not enough that you met some nice guys in Yemen.
And nobody denied that there are many good-hearted muslim humans, too.
BTW, let’s not forget bashing the (jewish or non-jewish) Zionists.
Well, religions … useful tools used by the elites to manipulate and to start wars.
Sadly :-(
@elsi: I understand your noble motives. Now I must also defend the muslims at once, look what happened: Shocking Video From Brussels Anti-Islam Protest Of Moment Muslim Woman Is Run Over By Car http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-02/shocking-video-brussels-anti-islam-protest-moment-muslim-woman-run-over-car
It is very sad.
The ruling 0.001% are driving different religious groups against each other. AS ALWAYS. This time it is not the catholics against the protestants, but christians against muslims or vice versa.
It has been like that for hundreds and actually thousands of years.
Everything according to the plans: USA wants war in Europe / USA möchte Krieg in Europa – proof/Beweis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZrQnpYUu-U
Now, take into account that such incidents will lead to an outright civil war, then hot war.
Remember how the Bosnia war (got) started on full purpose.
Some dead civilians here, some there, then it starts.
I cannot grasp why humanity never learns only the smallest piece and doesn’t finally outlaw all religions. This stupid species Homo Sapiens will die out rather sooner than later. Why doesn’t my God-darn space-ship start up its engine – brrrrb brrrrr brrrrggg BOOOM
The comments above are a tiny microcosm of the responses that are likely to be generated whenever the subject of defining Daesh is brought up. These are the findings:
1. There are those who will continue to only blame the West for the rise of Daesh, despite all the current and historic evidence that clearly refutes this view.
2. Others deny that there is an association between distorted Islam and terrorism.
3. And there are those who say that terrorism is in Islam itself.
4. And of course there are those who will bury their heads in the sand and bring in Jack The Ripper, Hitler and the Unibomber into the debate to prove that there are non-Muslim terrorists.
5. Then there are those who argue that Muslim terrorists are not real Muslims (which is a good start), but fall short of accepting that Muslims need to reform their understanding of Islam in order to stamp out misinterpretations that lend themselves to terrorisms.
6. And of course there are those who will take any debate about Islam as an opportunity to bash Islam and Muslims and to prove that their religion is better and superior.
7. We should not forget the apologists who have inadvertently been helping the spread of terrorism by standing in the way and protecting those spreading it, all in the name of upholding freedom of expression and freedom of worship. Apologists do not normally possess neither substance nor manners, so they resort to illogical statements and insults.
8. And how can I ignore personal accusations against me of Islamophobia and that this whole debate is an anti-Muslim conspiracy.
9. It is sadly a small percentage of the comments that indicates clear understanding of the nature and objectives of this debate.
As far as I am concerned, no one really took the challenge; at least not thus far. I will respond to further comments that are relevant to the actual topic of the challenge. On the other hand, the “fight” will go one and the chronicles will be completed and published.
If you feel that the beginnings of Islam and all the attendant history that goes with it is irrelevant to the topic you posted and want to discuss then just say so.
Hayek. I am one of few who continue to reiterate that the problem originated very early in the history of Islam. The difference between what I am saying and what you are saying is that I see the origin of the problem to be in misinterpreting the Holy Quran, whilst on the other hand, you see the problem to be in the Quran itself. There is a huge difference. And clearly, you are focusing on this issue in the manner that presents a comparison between religions. In all of your comments, you have hinted and concluded that Christianity is better than Islam. This is not what we are debating here.
Never mentioned Christianity, just Jesus – 2 different subjects.
If Muslims cannot even agree on the basic foundation of their faith it is hardly surprising that entity’s such as Daesh exist. What exactly is the debate ? How can you even have a debate if potential root causes are dismissed as not relevant to the debate. A fools errand I would say.
Tell me one thing- Is a Muslim being condemned to death for turning his back on Islam true Islam or a misinterpretation? Simple question
You are unable to differentiate between the fact that this line of teaching has been around since long before Wahabbi and may never be eradicated completely, and the fact that the US and states controlled by the US, have facilitated, financed, and armed these groups, which has enabled the meteoric rise of these groups across MENA in the last decade or so.
With this mindset, how can anything you write be taken seriously?
If you simply wish to seperate terrorist groups from Muslims in general, something along these lines.
Elijah J. Magnier
JN holds the Salafi ideology , or al-Salaf-al-saleh[5], means followers of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed. It is a positive attribute describing non-radical Sunni believers. Not all Salafists are terrorist but all Sunni Jihadi movements are Salafists, also defined as Takfer
https://elijahjm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/jabhat-al-nusra-intelligence-counter-intelligence-values-and-ethics/
Ghassan, I think this article from Gordon Duff may be useful in this discussion:
http://journal-neo.org/2016/04/05/no-end-to-turkish-insanity/
I can’t comment on the Islam connection — whether the Holy Quran is correctly or inaccurately interpreted, and the source or foundation of this interpretation. But, the rise of “world organized crime” and the “global criminal organization” that Duff speaks of in this article, with reference to ISIS, reflects what I see happening in my own country outside of ISIS.
So far, we are mercifully spared the cruelties and atrocities that ISIS has perpetuated. We are only subject to other forms of destabilizing (perhaps because we don’t have the oil-richness of the Middle East. As a side note, I sometimes wonder what the Middle East would be like if it didn’t have the blessing and curse of its abundance of oil and natural gas reserves.) I think Gordon Duff pinpoints the much larger (much, much larger) context for what is happening.
This is the USN missive response today on the China missive yesterday, warning ZATO to stay out of their backyard.
Lost on most never mentioned was that was intentionally put out on April fools since it was the 15th anniversary of the Apr 1/2001 USN spyplane forced down over Hainan Island.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/04/02/458776/US-Navy-South-China-Sea/
The US Navy seeks to sail yet again around disputed territories in the South China Sea despite earlier condemnations from Beijing of America’s “provocations” in the region.
The new operation will be the third so far slated for early April, a source familiar with the plan told Reuters on Friday.
Will Lebanon be ‘handed over’ to ISIS?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/will-lebanon-be-handed-over-to-the-isis/5518116
Whle secularists offer advice on how ‘Muslims’ should fix themselves, Lebanon is about to implode.
Hezbollah remains the only force capable of taking responsibilty for and defending the people of Lebanon.
Makes me..grrr
https://media3.giphy.com/media/IgASeJJYuK1u8/200w.gif
@Ghassan Kadi,
First of all, I must say that by saying that anybody who do not speak/understand Arab, have not ever heard Wahabi´s clerics or Bin Laden speeches in Arabic, or have read the Holy Quran in Arabic, or have lived years amongst Arabs, has no a valid oppinion on the Daesh issue, is like disavowing from input almost all the capacity of response here because I fear that Arab readers/commenters are a minority here and not only, but also I fear that the Arab countries are overhelmingly unknown for the majority of the readership, if not only because they are not the tipical destinations for a Westerner like we are most of us here.
Second, I would never blame all the Daesh problem in America, but, clearly if they had not supported The Sauds and other Gulf Monarchies since ever, this governments would have not survived till nowadays, but would have been overthrown by their people, and so, they would not be able to support Daesh, and Daesh without money, arms, training, logistic, and the blind eyes in the borders throughout they need to cross to invade countries and commit their atrocities , is nothing, despite the feverish speeches scholars could spread in the mosques or on TV.
Third, in all that narrative of yours about Daesh and Al Qaeda turning against US and other allies from time to time, how do you explain that precisely these turnabouts, happen always when US is losing his “War on Terror”, as happened in Afghanistan, Irak and Syria? And also, how do you explain that Daesh and Al Qaeda were allies in the war against the Yemeni people and so, at the same time, allies of the “Saudi coalition”? And how do you explain the curious “migrations” of Daesh jihadist from Lybia to Syria, and then to the Ukraine, then to Yemen, then to the Caucasus, and always curiously coinciding with the interest of the US there? And how do you explain that these fanatics being so well armed and trained and turning against the hand who fed them from time to time, being so near, never turn against and attack israel and, not only but besides, they accept being treated in hospitals in Israeli territory? is it that their extremism does not forbid being treated in “Salibyyin” territory? Well, it would look like they make their exceptions with depending whom.
Last, I wonder if you see behind this Daesh/ Al Qaeda issue the hidden hand of the Muslim Brotherhood . I ask about this ( and this was a question I have already posed to you in a previous article ) since you are pointing out as the main problem with Daesh the speeches given by the “Dai´yeh” who are dedicated to spread wahabism/takfirism amongst the Arab youth. In this regard I would also like to know if you see that the Al Azhar University plays a role in the formation of these “Dai´yeh” and therefore in the spreading of jihadism and islamic extremism.
I say this ( and I do not think that to be able to reach these conclusions one does need to live in any muslim country nor read the Holy Quran in classic Arabic, but simply connect some dots ) since the model of society who pursue the Muslim Brotherhood have many points in common with the style of “Caliphat” Daesh want to stablish eveywhere in the muslim world, and so this so called “army” could well serve as “army of conquest” by force those places in the muslim ( Arab or non Arab ) world where this nefarious sect can not reach power by more “democratic” means and also that these Interests could well join that of the AngloZionist Empire in those places.
I could remember how in the beginning of the Syrian conflict, one of the candidates who was postulated by “The Syrian Opposition” as a sustitute of Al Assad was, precisely, one “Dai´yeh” of these from the Muslim Brotherhood who was living in Qatar if I do not remember bad ( I can not remember his name right now, a bearded tall, thin man in his fifty with little round glasses, perhaps you know ). And there we have our Muslim Brotherhood Erdogan family, supporting Daesh and “a patriarcal model of society where women must dedicate themselves to maternity”……
elsi
You are quite right in the point you raised in the first paragraph. However, I am not saying that those who do not speak Arabic….. are not allowed to partake in the debate, but on the other hand, how can they form a theory about Daesh without the local knowledge and experience? And this is exactly the logical dilemma here (as referred to in the article itself). People of the Muslim World are much more likely to accept that the problem that underpins terrorism within Islam originates from misinterpretations. It is Westerners who do not know anything about the subject who insist that it is otherwise. Your line of questioning (which is quite logical) should be addressed at them? Since when has it been acceptable for someone to pretend to be an expert about a subject he/she does not know anything about?
The other points you raised are interesting, I don’t have all the answers, and I don’t find them to be relevant.
Thanks for you comment and rational analysis.
Would that be like Muslims telling people who read the New Testament that they have it all wrong, that what they are reading are lies, that what really happened to Jesus is …………….. You mean that kind of pretense about a subject ?
I said. “I could remember how in the beginning of the Syrian conflict, one of the candidates who was postulated by “The Syrian Opposition” as a sustitute of Al Assad was, precisely, one “Dai´yeh” of these from the Muslim Brotherhood who was living in Qatar if I do not remember bad ( I can not remember his name right now, a bearded tall, thin man in his fifty with little round glasses, perhaps you know )”
Well, the man in question was Ahmed Mouaz Al Jatib, former Ulema of the Ummayad Mosque in Dimashq, in exile and residing in Doha. he appeared as opposition candidate in 2012 and was firmly in the position “Assad must go” ( obviously for him to be placed ), and I have read reports about him visiting the positions of the “rebels” and the “Free Syrian Army” in Aleppo. Obvioulsy, despite being an Ulema, he did not claim for the cessations of hostilities nor gave him a damn the gross destruction of the ancient city and that the majority of its population had to flew. Then, he resigned from his post as opposition candidate, arguing that “he did not have freedom of move”. To see what he was meaning with this, but one would ask how in the Earth this man was aimming to be placed instead of Assad without being elected by the majority of the Syrian people.
Contrary to what you may think, I think that this issue is very relevant to see the hand of the US and the Muslim Brotherhood behind Daesh and the destabilization of all the Middle East, and as a result, of the whole world.
“The multiple faces of Sheik Ahmad Moaz Al-Khatib” by Thierry Meyssan
http://www.voltairenet.org/article176627.html
“Moaz Al Khatib”, by Carnegie Middle East Center
http://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=50017
He was behind the start of the first protests in Syria by their subversive speeches at the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus in connivence with the covert operations for a “color revolution” by US Ambassador Robert S.Ford. When they saw that they could not turn the population against Al Assad, because the Syrian population is multi-religious and widely tolerant after centuries of healthy and civic coexistence among all religions and do not want to be Islamized more than it is already, the “death squads” aka, “contras”, now known as ISIS / DAESH, were activated and the country reduced to ashes.
Therefore, the US hand firmly behind and also Western Big Oil .
It is therefore not a problem that could be in the hands of muslims to solve the ultimate cause of these destabilizations but instead what is needed is to stop who is provoking them through their “covert operations” and their support for the regimes which serve them as platform to do it.
English version of the article by Thierry Meyssan, for those not used to the voltairenet site and who could have not repaired in that the article can be read in various languages by clicking in the desired language below the title.
Just in case, because I consider it a MUST READ:
“The many faces of Sheikh Ahmad Moaz Al-Khatib”:
http://www.voltairenet.org/article176707.html
Yes, Meyssan knows who most of the poisonous, oily reptiles in the Middle East are, including the American ones. Thanks for the link, Elsi.
De nada, bro anon, es un placer contribuir a despejar el humo y espejos para que ustedes puedan ver claramente a todos los verdaderos culpables. Buena tarde de domingo para usted, y para todos, por supuesto, también para Ghassan allá en Líbano.
In the same line of the above mentioned, Thierry Meyssan last article offers a new perspective about the terrorist attacks in París and Belgium. For you all to see the hidden hand in all this and the that the issue is not so much about Islam and its verisons but mainly on large-scale theft of the region.
“Black clouds loom over Erdogan” ( by this time only available in Spanish, French, German, Arabic and another Slavic language ). Perhaps you would like to translate it from one of these languages.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article191071.html
This is my first comment on the Saker Blog. I greatly benefit from his work and those who comment.
Regarding the rising of Wahhaabism I was unaware of Ibn Taymiyyah until now, thank you.
Very few people seem to be aware of the way the British Colonial office operatives spread out to subvert rivals in the 18th century included one Hempher who apparently ingratiated himself to Muslims from Constantinople to Iraq and ended up befriending, encouraging, supporting and arming Muhammad bin Abd-ul-wahhaab Najdee and his violent gang. Wahhaab’s heretical views were rejected by imams and even his father. Information from this account:
“Memoirs Of Mr. Hempher, The British Spy To The Middle East” http://www.sunna.info/antiwahabies/wahhabies/htm/spy1.htm
reveals a psychological operation of nurturing and setting up a patsy an a manner that has has been carried out repeatedly till today to sow violent discord in the rivals of the empire. Knowing the machinations of the empire loyalist elite behind the scenes to obliterate rivals to the empire from the S. African colony through 1st and 2nd world wars (against Germany), it is not difficult to believe this account. It reads strangely apparently because it is an English translation of an original translation from English to Arabic, the original having apparently been lost. The manuscript has been attacked as a ‘forgery’, by which is meant it is contrived. But I feel it is not. Perhaps the astute scholars who frequent here can evaluate its legitimacy. I think I falls right in with British empire behavior, and Anglo-Zio-American operations since.
In my mind I blame the British war room and colonial office for fomenting this violent heresy which later joined with the secular power of Saud and unleashed so much violence against Muslims from within.
This sentence in your linked page.
>I have written all the talks held in that conference in my book “Ilaa Melekoot-il-Meseeh.”<
I did a search for any reference to this book, but the only links were to the same story. That there is nothing on the book itself puts the story in some doubt?
If he were working for the British government, I would think there would be some historical record of the book. Though it could be under an English title.
To: Peter AU
Thanks for your reply.
Yes there may be problems with this account.
1. Given our intel on all the meddling the empire has been up to I would think something like this was going on even if we heard nothing about it.
2. That the lying (presumably Muslim anti-British) author would go to the trouble of producing such a long and detailed account just seems a bit far fetched to me.
3. Strange and wonderful that today we assume that if it can’t be found on the Internet it doesn’t exist.
JD
The ancient root of the theology of Daesh was conclusively identified and termed in the early days of Islam. It was termed what translates to ‘exiting’ as in exiting Islam. The proper term used to call its propagators is Khawarej: the Exiters. Daesh = Khawarej
Regarding my former post about Wahhaab I happened to listen to Sunday Wire this morning on which Patrick Henningsen spoke with Dr. Radwan Rizk beginning at 35:20, who gives a detailed history of the region, especially regarding the 2 oldest cities in the world, Aleppo and Damascus. At 78:40 he mentions Wahhaab and the British Hempher, whom he pronounces ‘Humphry’ as being involved with Wahhaab. He goes on to speak of the alliance with Bin Saud and how another British agent, Philby (father of the famous one) took on Islam and even read prayers in Mecca manipulating things while being both British and Jewish. The show is every Sunday, long but worthwhile. I just wanted to report this corroboration of the British operative behind Wahhaab. Thank you.
JD
Here: http://tinyurl.com/hspu73f
or maybe better here: http://tinyurl.com/gvb4smd
1873
A big problem with dates here. Dr. Radwan Rizk gave the year as 1873 when this Humphry was involved with Wahabbi.
The other article I think was 1730 which seems to be the times of Wahabbi. Born around 1700.
There does seem to be something in this, but without being able to cross reference at all it is hard to know where the truth is.
Yes a problem. I think Rizk misspoke in the interview and the 1700s is correct,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_ibn_Abd_al-Wahhab
JD
Hi Peter AU,
I am a Shia and in most of my posts I mention that ibn Taymiyyah was revived by Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab under the guidance of our British Masters.
Due to Petro Dollars, ibn Taymiyyah is called, “Sheikh of Islam”. Which is a very insulting title for Muslims. I don’t know if you remember about 2 months ago, there was a very good guest article on this by Hamza Haidar on this blog called, “After the Prophet”:
/after-the-prophet/
Dragan in this thread has posted a link from the above article about an ex-Wahhabi Imam from Saudi Arabia. It is an hour video with English Subtitles and worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68V44Jgl60g&index=53&list=LLTdtzBrHtVOLxpBOvST-NqA
Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab and the House of Saud history in the Muslim World have been passed down for about 2 centuries. Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab went to Kerbala, Iraq over 3 period and massacred about 40,000 Shia pilgrimage and looted them. He also massacred lots of Sunni in Saudi Arabia and looted them for years too.
The Prophet is from Mecca, Arabia. Now Saudi Arabia named after the House of Saud after WW1. The Wahhabi destroyed all the Islamic Heritage in Arabia. At that time Arabia was under the Ottoman Empire, so the Muslim complained to them. Turkey sent troops and put down both the Wahhabi and House of Saud.
After WW1 and defeat of Ottoman Empire, the British Master kept their promise to the Wahhabi and House of Saud and handed the Arabia to them. Again, destruction of the Islamic Heritage started, Prophet House was destroyed and toilets build on them. They also wanted to torpedo the Grave of the Prophet, but Islamic World rose again against them. You can Google the facts about destruction of Islamic Heritage.
If you are interest about how ibn Taymiyyah distorted Islam, the there is a Shia Imam called, Ayatollah Kamal Haidari whose videos are in Arabic and some with English and some with French sub-titles. They are very heavy due expertise of the Ayatollah, with proper research and references:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=kamal+haidari+and+ibn+taymiyyah
Best regards,
Mohamed
“Islamic fundamentalism, a media creation” by Marcelo Colussi for Rebelión
“Lie, lie, lie, always something left,” said Nazi regime Communications Minister Joseph Goebbes. The lesson was prefectly learned by the American strategists. Today we are witnessing a monumental media machine that has enthroned the always vague and ill-defined “Islamic fundamentalism” as a new biblical plague. But quickly, before entering the analysis of this phenomenon, take the indication does Noam Chomsky when analyzing propagandistic manipulation strategies in vogue. Among some of them said the following: “Create problems and then offer solutions This method is also called “problem-reaction-solution”, a problem is created a situation “intended to cause some reaction in the public, so that they are the principal demandant of measures you want them to accept. For example: let it unfold and intensify urban violence, or arrange for bloody attacks, so that the public is the applicant of security laws and policies to the detriment of freedom”. By this we mean that much, much of what we now think in terms of political-ideological, our vision of global society worldview has to do with the lies manufactured by great powers. Media manipulation has a decisive role in this. They are seen as “problems” things that have actually been made as such.(…)
(…) It is a subject-thought-problem imposed by the mass media undoubtedly with a political agenda behind. Though not know what that means, the term “fundamentalism” has become commonly used. And even more than “Islamic fundamentalism”. To pass it once: according to the collective imagination that the media has been generated in the West, it is synonymous with backwardness, barbarism, primitivism, and inextricably linked to the notion of murderous terrorism.(…)
(…) Strictly speaking, the term “fundamentalism” has its origin in a series of pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915 in the United States; entitled “The Basics: a testimony of Truth” documents written by Protestant pastors were distributed free among the churches and seminaries against the loss of influence of the evangelical principles in that country during the first decades of the twentieth century . It was the Christian declaration of the literal truth of the Bible, and persons responsible for disclosure were considered guardians of truth. Thus, then, fundamentalism it means “return to the sources, to the basics”.(…)
(…) But even more: fundamentalism is not only religious. Any idea, principle or value that is defended at all costs, without consideration or mediations, may end up being quite fundamentalist, fanatical position. Bombing civilian noncombatants to show “who’s boss”, as did the US government on numerous occasions (two atomic bombs in Japan, thousands of tons of napalm and Agent Orange in Vietnam, plus a long, endless etcetera along the world during the twentieth century and so far this XXI) only to defend “freedom” (read: free market) is not an extreme form of bloody fundamentalism?(…)
(…) For this analysis it is essential start from the basis that the current and widespread ad nauseum characterization of Muslim culture as inherently “backward”, “barbaric” -a biased and unhistorical vision by the way- erase times of immeasurable greatness today gone. Islam deployed for centuries a powerful creative potential, philosophical and scientific-artistic, superior in its time to the Christian West; there they are colossal architecture, algebra, medical advances, its art, as witnesses of a great moment of glory. However modern scientific-technical revolution of the industrial era did not emerge in Islamic soil but has entered it from outside, most of the time under the sign of colonialism. Today -this is the stark reality- the Arab world does not mark the cultural front of the planet; its place on the world stage is relegated, at least for logic imposed by international centers of power, to be producers of raw materials, mainly oil. Natural resources which only help to maintain pre-industrial social dynamics, with corrupt feudal monarchies often entrenched in dictatorial states, who profit from the exploitation of these resources and in whose shadow vegetate impoverished majority, desperate in many cases.
In this context Islamic fundamentalism arises as a political-religious movement that advocated a return to strict observance of Koranic laws in the field of civil society. Derives its name from the desire to retrace the sources, ie, the Koran, the Sunna (tradition of the Prophet’s sayings and deeds of Muhammad) and the Revealed Law. Among its plans are rescuing own values and intrinsic to Islam, the restoration of the Islamic State and opposition to everything that has entered the Muslim society as innovation. Within this broad movement various trends, even antagonistic: Sunnis, Shi’ites, Wahhabis, Islamic Jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood of sunni trend which emerged in the late twenties and implemented mainly in Egypt but also in other countries of the Muslim West: (Sudan, Yemen, Syria), the Hamas movement, the Al Qaeda network, the Nigerian sect Maitatzine, etc.(…)
(…) In this vein, for the fundamentalists many problems of the current Arab world are attributable to the abandonment of the Islamic faith. Therefore, it is essential to return to the sources of faith, debug all slags and deformations resulting from centuries of decay ( understand that poverty, economic backwardness, foreign domination, are due to the abandonment of Islam ), and retrieve a golden age seen today as paradise lost.
This fundamentalism has spread mainly among the poorest and most exploited strata of the societies in which it is rooted, such as employees, expropriated peasants pushed to migrate to the city, workers and petty bourgeoisie that revolves around the economy of the bazaars, and part of the Islamic clergy; but especially amongst the youth. important fact: 60% of the Muslim population under 20 is unemployed and with an uncertain future.
Spread among the poorest strata of society, then, fundamentalism is a cross-class movement, including through violent and terrorist actions, it opposes the “secular modernity” rather than oppose capitalist exploitation and unfair trading international system ( now in its globalized neoliberal version ), true causes of the current sufferings of the oppressed masses. As in the Qur’an it is written that those who die in defense of their faith will have eternal bliss, parishioners-citizens are induced to make the greatest sacrifices to achieve worldly ambitions of their leaders, skillfully barricaded behind the sacred texts and religious ideals. This explains the selfinmolatory fundamentalist terrorism, so difficult to understand from the Western worldview. When an Islamic young thrown himslef at a target charged with bombs he is convinced that he does it because that is the “will of God” and that after his death will go straight to heaven to be with Allah.
In the context of economic misery, unemployment and poverty, the masses of Muslim countries are at an impasse. The arrogance and contempt of monarchs and dictators in the Islamic and Arab world adds more fuel to the hatred and anger of the masses. Then, seen the phenomenon in the sociopolitical dimension, the main reason to understand is given by the huge void created by the lack of alternative proposals given in these societies, and the manipulation of populations appealing to an easy to exacerbate fanaticism. Is there where should begin to glimpse the answers to the questions: who benefits from this fundamentalism? Is it really a way of liberation for the masses? Religion, then, is the opium of the people?
As stated by the Pakistani political scientist Lal Khan: “this virulent fundamentalism is a reactionary culmination of trends in the modern era, characterized by politics and the world economy, try to recover Islamism. In the fifties, sixties and seventies in the Muslim world existed left flows quite important in Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Ethiopia and other Islamic countries, left coups occurred, and the overthrow of the capitalist-feudal corrupt regimes led to the creation of proletarian Bonapartism or deformed workers states . in other countries there were movements of large masses led by populist leftist leaders. In the climate of the Cold War some of these leaders, like Gamal Abdel Nasser, even defied Western imperialism and carried out nationalizations and radical reforms. From that moment, one of the cornerstones of US foreign policy was organizing, arming and encouraging modern Islamic fundamentalism as a reactionary weapon against the insurrection of the masses and social revolutions. ” (…) “After the defeat of Suez the Imperialists gave priority to this policy. They spent huge sums of money in special operations conducted by the CIA and the Pentagon. They provided support, training and strategy to these religious fanatics. The major covert operation of CIA in which has been involved Islamic fundamentalism has been in Afghanistan. ”
The main source of finance of Islamic fundamentalism comes from illegal drug trafficking. This process was initiated by US imperialism, but now this black economy is disrupting the functioning of capitalism itself. It has become part of the policy of the CIA’s use of drugs and other forms of crime to finance most of the counter-insurgency operations in which it participates. This drug policy in Afghanistan has had a disastrous impact on young people around the world. Today 70% of the world’s heroin comes from Afghan-Pakistani mafia. Modern laboratories on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan ( where the opium is converted into heroin ) were installed with the help of the CIA.
In societies where states are unable to provide basic services to its population ( health, education and employment ), Islamic fundamentalism has used these hardships to build their own forces. With large amounts of money fundamentalist proposal has created religious schools ( madrassas or Islamic schools ) to train and develop fans from an early age, which then become the raw material of religious madness.(…)
(…) According to the Egyptian economist Samir Amin this resurgence of fundamentalism is not accidental. “Imperialism and cultural fundamentalism go together. Market fundamentalism requires religious fundamentalism. Market fundamentalism says… ‘Subvert the state and let the market on the international scale operate the system’ This is done when states have been dismantled completely. Without nation states, the popular classes are undermined by the lack of their class identity. The system can govern if the South is divided, with nations and nationalities fighting each other. The ethnic and religious fundamentalism and are perfect instruments to promote and direct the political system. United States, as the case of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has always supported Islamic fundamentalism “.(…)
(…) The new danger stalking the world, according to this communication engineering, is no longer communism or drug trafficking: it is international terrorism, even more, that of Islamic stamp. There appear then the diabolical figure of the new icon with Hollywood edgings: Osama Bin Laden, who actually was always an agent of the US geostrategy, living or dead yet.
In terms that left no doubt who was national security adviser under President Jimmy Carter and co-author of the ultra right-wing papers Santa Fe, Polish nationalized American Zbigniew Brzezinski, described the policy of his country in an interview with the French newspaper Le Nouvel Observateur in 1998, admitting that Washington had deliberately fostered Islamic fundamentalism to entrap the Soviet Union seeking it entered the war. “Now we have the opportunity to give the USSR its Vietnam war,” he said. “Fill its backyard with shit” actually said explicitly. When he asked if he regretted having helped create a movement that committed acts of terrorism worldwide, dismissed the question and said: “What is most important for world history, the Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Several fanatical Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? “.
Actually this is not a “clash of civilizations” Islam-West as cynically presented in its analysis of the world situation Professor Samuel Huntington, with which, ultimately, the way for militaristic supremacy of Washington is paved, self-appointed as champion in defending world peace. If today “Islamic terrorism” is the new demon ( with Bin Laden, Al Qaeda or the Islamic State now as its main star -the star cast goes changing-, of course ), that is not but a Machiavellian media montage. The relationship between US imperialism and Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is symbiotic. The so-called “war on terror” is nothing more than a cover for military violence to achieve the global strategic objectives of the United States;(…)
Well, this essay is a MUST READ in its totality, despite being a bit long, I only have translated what seemed to me the most relevant fragments, but in the end, it happened to be almost all.
from the same essay quoted above, a final quote worth the translation:
(…) Worthy to add that with the economic and social structure that presents our global village -not very fair, by the way- currently exist on a global level 6,000 daily deaths from diarrhea, 11,000 daily deaths from starvation, 3,800 people die daily from HIV /ADS infection, while 150 die every day for drug and 720 other human beings die from car accidents, while the always ill-defined “terrorism” produces on average 11 deaths a day. At the risk of being repetitious: who benefits from this Muslim fundamentalist awakening? Any Muslim maybe? Any ordinary citizen of somewhere in the world?
Oh, sorry, forgot the link to the essay, ( I was late after doing the translation ):
“Islamic fundamentalism, a media creation” by Marcelo Colussi for Rebelión
http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=189770
Just in case someone would want to translate it in full.
Salam Sister elsi,
As the “Good Book” says:
Blessed Are The Peace Makers :)
Amen!
Salam Brother Mohamed,
Glad to see you posting here again, even not agreeing in some of your blessed, but, I always learn a lot about Islam from you.
Then, of course, I come to my own conclusions, as always, and as with everything I read posted here or there.
I hope that all is going well in Oman, also for you and your wife.
The ancient root of the theology of Daesh was conclusively identified and termed in the early days of Islam. It was termed what translates to ‘exiting’ as in exiting Islam. The proper term used to call its propagators is Khawarej: the Exiters. Daesh = Khawarej
There’s no need for speculation. There is no need for ranting. The above quote from anonymous at 7.57 would not even cause an uproar on the Wikipedia editor’s page. Because it is simply the accurate record.
Saker, this is a disappointing post. Can you find me any other ‘sects’ in Islam that have been bulldozing living Islamic sites (mosques, shrines etc.) for far longer then they have been blowing up abandoned Buddhas and towers of Baal? Who’ve blocked Islamic scholarship and governance since their petro fueled rise to power whilst funding a ‘caliphate’ movement of haplessly trolled patsies? Who’ve even threatened to bulldoze the tomb of the Prophet who Muslims believe lies upon a spot where the messiah will eventually join him in eternal rest after his second coming.To bulldoze that very site. I am not a Shia btw. But I do notice that no Muslims in history have ever built structurs to block the moon and the stars from the Ka’ba, a structure that all Muslims and indeed even the pagan Arabs who preceded them believe to be a Neolithic monument (one that is aligned with the cosmos). Of course all those contractors applying international building codes on this site were never asked to apply international archaeological standards as they piled and blasted their way and obliterated the history of the Arabs, gone forever now. Please note these items listed in this paragraph are not opinions or even interpretations, they are simply a record of things that have happened. Now if you apply the record of the Arab Spring to that record, that’d be the first spring in 1914ish and then the second one, and do a bit of research using the comments and links provided above on links between the Saud and their clear and identifiable sponsers you might get somewhere beyond the reflection in the mirror of the moisture generated from a rant. When was it that Qatar gained independence? From who? Oh right. Thanks for clearing that up. Cheers.
Would anyone describe any or every Jewish person they met as a rabid Zionist? Even those who don’t believe in Israel? That would be: strange behaviour. The Saker’s friend, the wise and undeniably prescient scholar made a comment on his broadcast lecture from Moscow, a comment that seemed to intrigue his hosts almost more then any other. The one on two Judaism’s, two Christianity’s and two Islam’s. You know of what I refer to. In Islam there is a Hadith giving accurate numbers of sects for all three of the Abrahamich faiths, but that would not lead to any confusion of that to which the imam was referring: the understanding and acceptance that in this world the messiah and the anti-messiah do exist.
God bless.
Apologies mod, forgot to enter an email previously.
“The ancient root of the theology of Daesh was conclusively identified and termed in the early days of Islam. It was termed what translates to ‘exiting’ as in exiting Islam. The proper term used to call its propagators is Khawarej: the Exiters. Daesh = Khawarej”
There’s no need for speculation. There is no need for ranting. The above quote from anonymous at 7.57 would not even cause an uproar on the Wikipedia editor’s page.
Dear Saker, this is a disappointing post. Can you find me any other ‘sects’ in Islam that have been bulldozing living Islamic sites (mosques, shrines etc.) for far longer then they have been blowing up abandoned Buddhas and crumbling towers of Baal? Who’ve blocked Islamic scholarship and governance (of the imams) since their petro fueled rise to power whilst funding a ‘caliphate’ movement of haplessly trolled patsies? Who’ve even threatened to bulldoze the tomb of the Prophet who Muslims believe lies upon a spot where the messiah will eventually join him in eternal rest after his second coming.To bulldoze that very site. I am not a Shia btw. But I do notice that no Muslims in history have ever built structures to block the moon and the stars from the Ka’ba, a structure that all Muslims and indeed even the pagan Arabs who preceded them believe to be a Neolithic monument, one that is therefore explicitly and obviously aligned with the cosmos. Not forgetting what prophet of the Muslims famously said on the trend of shepeards building high rise buildings. Of course all those contractors applying international building codes on this allegedly sacred site were never asked to apply international archaeological standards as they piled and blasted their way and obliterated the history of the Arabs. Like they would be in say, London. So some of that history has been obliterated, gone foreve, alongside, you know, the ‘Hejaz’ and the cradle of Islamic civilization stretching all the way up to ‘syria’: a multi ethnic multi religious region for the past one thousand five hundred years That’s also not an opinion but it is most defintely the record, unless all those Eastern (Nestorian? – I can’t comment upon that of which I am ignorant ;) ) sects and other faiths in the area. that would have been persecuted historically in the West and are being attacked today are simply all a giant illusion? Please note these items listed in this paragraph are not opinions or even interpretations, they are simply a record of things that have happened. If you apply the record of the Arab Spring to that record, that’d be the first spring in 1914ish and then the second one, and do a bit of research using the comments and links provided above on links between the Saud and their clear and identifiable sponsers you might get somewhere beyond the reflection in the mirror whilst indulging in a rant. When was it that Qatar gained independence? From who? Oh right. Thanks for clearing that up. Cheers.
Would anyone describe any or every Jewish person they met as a rabid Zionist? Even those who don’t believe in Israel? That would be: strange behaviour. The Saker’s friend, the wise and undeniably prescient scholar made a comment on his broadcast lecture from Moscow, a comment that seemed to intrigue his hosts almost more then any other. The one on two Judaism’s, two Christianity’s and two Islam’s. You know of what I refer to. In Islam there is a Hadith giving accurate numbers of sects for all three of the Abrahamich faiths, but that would not lead to any confusion of that to which the imam was referring: the understanding and acceptance that in this world the messiah and the anti-messiah do exist.
God bless.
To clarify further:
The bjp a fascist right wing party whose stormtrooper organisation the RSS were responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.
I wouldn’t waste my time insulting the memory and sacrifice of Gandhi by looking for intrinsic Gibberish in some forgotten corner of the history of Hinduism in order to explain the actions of some post-industrial power or petro fueled fascists.
Salam brother Dragan,
Yes, you are right that both Ghassan Kadi and I are talking about the same thing, keeping in mind Hamza Haidar’s Guest Post on this blog, which was posted about 2 months ago and about which you on reminding us all:
/after-the-prophet/
What I don’t understand why Ghassan Kadi is blaming the Holy Quran. He uses Double Speak that the Holy Quran is not to be blamed but the blames lies on false interpretations of the Holy Quran.
With this double speak the question is why would there be false interpretations of the Holy Quran, unless there is something itself in Holy Quran which lends to false interpretations of the Holy Quran?
–
Yes, you are right again. Ghassan Kadi either being a Muslim or a non-Muslim should know Islamic History, especially after Hamza Haidar’s Guest Post on this blog, which is less than 2 years old. What amazes me is his Double Speak.
Almost in all his Guest Posts, Ghassan Kadi keeps on using the same mantra, and I keep on asking him if he is a Muslim. He never answers.
Best regards,
Mohamed
@why would there be false interpretations of the Holy Quran, unless there is something itself in Holy Quran which lends to false interpretations of the Holy Quran?
This is precisely the case. Why so many schools of interpretation? There is no text that was not corrupted at some time. Are the glaring historical inaccuracies which crept into the text part of the “original” message? Does an “original” text of the Koran exist at all? Is there any evidence to suggest that anyone had actually compiled the whole text of the Qur’an into a single manuscript during Mahomed’s lifetime and submitted to his recension? Was not rather a collection of the various sayings of Mohamed preserved by various companions? How solid a guarantee exists that all the sayings collected were indeed of Mahomed or that they have been correctly recorded? Did not “many (of the passages) of the Qur’an that were sent down known by those who died on the day of Yamama … but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur’an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them”? (it is a quote!). Did not ‘Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt…”? Etc.
“Why would there be false interpretations of the Holy Quran, unless there is something itself in Holy Quran which lends to false interpretations of the Holy Quran”
Holy books are pointers to the truth, and just like sunrise gave some ancients the impression that the earth was flat, yet the same sunrise gave a few others that there could be another explanation, and so are the words of the Books.
Most people get lost in their literality, and the temple cannot literally be rebuilt in three days. Lazarus eventually died, but his soul was saved from death. That was the miracle.
The “double speak” is in the minds of those who are stuck in literality and cannot see beyond it, expecting their religions to give them a list of rituals to follow without any questions asked.
This is how religions in general get misunderstood, and Islam is no exception.
The Temple was rebuilt in 3 days. Jesus was the temple. He was crucified, and then rose on the 3rd day.
One can not get around the fact that the problem of violence in Islam lays with Islam itself. The demand that everyone must “submit” to the dictates of Mahomed, or else, is a commandment for all Muslims. They must go to jihad. And “islamic revivals” are also commanded by Mahomed: “Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it”.— Sunan Abu Dawood, Book 37: Kitab al-Malahim [Battles], Hadith Number 4278. Mujaddids are a feature of Islam itself and not creations of MI6 or CIA or Mossad. Nor of Muslims who interpret wrongly the Koran, corrupted by kafirs’ influences.
What real “understanding” with non-Muslims can ever be, when all Muslims, “fundamentalist” of “moderate” refuse to share a meal with them? When they refuse to drink wine, which is a sign of friendship, of communion? When they demand that people who gave them hospitality abstain from certain foods that “offend” them, or to not celebrate their own traditions because they “offend” their religious beliefs?
Reading your comment I could not but remember some quotes by Imam Alí (AS):
http://41.media.tumblr.com/9b1509a20cff2c277a23cdfe1d91d62a/tumblr_mu0mrnTsPg1s5flgxo1_540.png
http://25.media.tumblr.com/5e131bc931693970d5c9bd57c6696e60/tumblr_mtdkh447Jz1s5flgxo1_1280.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X0DBSghEQLw/U8gMmUmusNI/AAAAAAAAATg/mV-_91JS9ao/s1600/b.png
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/b6/06/39/b60639459a7502fbe8a6942c0a1db787.jpg
http://rasoolaladham.com/wp-content/uploads/imam_ali_quote_sin_love.jpg
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-wc_u89ovYG8/VkF-OPdHhGI/AAAAAAAADLw/b-PDU0yIpUw/w800-h800/tumblr_mtldhyt91J1s5flgxo1_500.png
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/2c/42/3d/2c423d621e376f409ffc8763c9ac476e.jpg
http://www.relatably.com/q/img/uproot-quotes/tumblr_mqyzneriix1s5flgxo1_500.png
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/3a/8e/06/3a8e06145bf425612da918f69e9c4133.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/29/c9/aa/29c9aa92e1a7b0d6d9ac3e1be062b565.jpg
Remember that too:
“Beware of speaking too much, for it increases mistakes and engenders boredom.”
― Hazrat Ali Ibn Abu-Talib A.S
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/eb/80/60/eb8060eb4c8a32bc7870477637618012.jpg
http://41.media.tumblr.com/3e96dae7fd5fca1773464e90f47f213f/tumblr_mz530whuQF1sb324go1_1280.jpg
“Beware of speaking too much, for it increases mistakes and engenders boredom.”
― Hazrat Ali Ibn Abu-Talib A.S
I believe the Imam or Saint or Caliph that you refer to above was trying to advise people not to indulge in Gibberish. Bigotry. Or prejudice. That kind of thing. It’s good advice!
What those who have in their own words exhibited such behaviour above should ask themselves is why do no sane commentators agree with them? For example:
The greatest living satirist in the English speaking world as recorded in such works as The Day Today and Brass Eye, is one Chris Morris. He has been described as a modern day hero by some, his body of work is without doubt the most impressive of any artist in this part of the English speaking world. A great CGI studio like Framestore came to prominence through their work with this artist who as can be seen in the production of the Day Today (twenty years ago), that this artist understands illusions and the medium through which they are transmitted better then most. That’s his record.
In the entire canon of this great artists work he has made only one ‘movie’. One. He could have made many more if he wanted to (see Framestore).
It is called Four Lions. It is easily available to watch and in easy to understand English is you don’t mind northern English accents.
The question the readers of the Saker should ask themselves is why would this great artists who experimented with and mastered many mediums only be interested or inspired to make one movie. And what is that movie about? Here’s a clue: what the Brass Eye episode on the Cake pandemic.
This movie by Morris reminded me of those Iranian movies of the modern era. Beautiful evocative, skilful and poignant works of art, produced under conditions of extreme censorship.
Of course some would say that because Morris doesn’t speak Arabic that his thoughts don’t matter.
If you don’t like art then the reader can wonder over to the British Commonwealth Insitute where there’ll be able to find an Oxford Dean giving a lecture on what happened in the Middle East when the war departments in London, Paris and Berlin needed to recruit some cannon fodder. The London Jihad (fodder from India), The Paris jihad (fodder from Africa and the Middle East) and the Berlin jihad (fodder from Turkey). That were the historian’s account of the record. But you can ignore his words as he doesn’t speak Arabic, if you so choose. However a glance at the current map would be strong evidence that the First World War hasn’t ended. Perhaps that is why the historian chose to give such a lecture? In London. To a public audience. Possibly?
Seek. And ye shall find.
The author unfortunately further misleads the reader with the proclamation that the builders of Stonehenge believed that the Earth was flat.
That is quite an assumption to make when the circular site was and has been accurately used to measure and predict the movement of primarily the sun but also the stars and planets. To clarify for the reader, it is irrational and perhaps arrogant to presume in contradiction of the stone evidence before you that the builders of such structures wherever they may be, Europe, S.America, Africa etc could not understand the cosmos as well as we do today. Perhaps they all just made a lucky guess?
The archaeological evidence, the work they left us, their calendars or the stone carved from their own hands tells us otherwise.
Most such sites are listed as Unesco heritage sites. I believe there’s no need to bang the drum further on this one. It’s staring you all in the face.
People that proclaim the early humans did not understand the structure of the skies and heavens are propagating in defiance of the evidence before them. Like a Flat Earther who proclaims that a round earth was a concept invented in Europe a few hundred years ago. In defiance of the evidence before them (rocks and stuff. Granite). It’s an arrogant belief, not a good look. And I wouldn’t recommend it.
Stonehenge? I wrote about the people of Stonehenge? What else did I say? The Martians are coming?
You can’t avoid the meddling of the Newage-ists into any serious discussion, in order to derail it and orient it towards irrelevancies. Typical trolling tactics.
Salam Ghassan Kadi,
Hallelujah, not only you are not a Muslim and never read the Holy Quran, but you proved you hardly know anything of Islam.
To a Shia, which I am, every verse of Holy Quran has seven meanings. To ibn Taymiyyah, who gave Allah anthropomorphism, he believed when Allah says in Quran, when His Two Hands Are Open, this literally mean that God has two hands which are always open. You should spend some time and read, what is best for you to read about your own Syrian Brother, ibn Taymiyyah. Here is a link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah
Now, I will give you 4 examples of Christians from the Jewish Scripture called, “TaNaKh” which the Christian’s call “Old Testament”, which the Jews resent as to them there is no such thing as “Old” and “New” Law
1. “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them.” To Jews which is their Scripture, the word “our” mean a majestic plural, thus a singular. But to the Christians it means, Trinity.
2. When Jacob wrestle Elohim throughout the night, he eventually about to give up but at the he wins the wrestling match. Imagine, anyone can wrestle eloh/ilah (al ilah – allah) God, and win the fight and God gets happy with him and names him Ever Lasting God (Israel).
Now Google, how many different explanations you get from Christians, and over the 20 years on the internet these explanations keep on changing.
Now Google, what is the interruption of Jews, whose Scripture it is. You will Get “yetzer hara” and “yetzer hatav”.
3. The last book in OT is Isaiah, the Christians swear that the prophesies in Isaiah are regarding Jesus and Lucifer. The Jews say, that in our Scripture, Isaiah is not the last book and the prophesies are for King of Babylon. The reference to “Morning Star” is to King of Babylon and there is no such thingy as Lucifer in Isaiah, as Lucifer is not a Hebrew name.
4. President Jimmy Carter claiming that if Jesus was here today, he will allow the same sex marriage. What? There were no homosexuals in Jesus time? There are certain laws which have to be taken literally, and God doesn’t change His mind on these certain laws.
It is the Jews and Christians who take literally that, “Heaven and Earth a similar number” were created in Six Days. Both the Hebrew Book and Arabic Holy Quran says, Sitta (6) Ayam. As an Arab you know that Ayam has more than one meaning, beside being “Days”. It can mean, “Seasons” and so forth.
But if you have read the Holy Quran it also says, To Seven Heaven and Earth a similar number, Allay say, “Be” And, it is.
Now if one takes this literally, than there is a contradiction as one place it says, “Sitta Ayam” and in another place it says, “Be” And, it is.
Continued in next post…..
Salam Ghassan Kadi,
Continued from first post….
No one claims that the Holy Books are Scientific Books. However, if you have read the Holy Quran it describes, the Earth being an Oval Shape.
Or the Quran describes Pregnancy as Trimester. You can Google about the Scientific Miracles of Holy Quran.
Or read the Sura al-Rahman in the Holy Quran. You know that in Semitic language we have singular, dual and plural. Sura al-Rahman is about dual. The two sunsets and two sunrises, ……
Or everyday you read and write the miracles of Holy Quran. As as Arab you are well aware before the revelation of the Holy Quran there was only one Arabic, which was very deficient in writing. With Quran, the Quran Classical Arabic was introduced. I am sure that you are student of higher studies and you were taught in Quranic Classical Arabic. Those who are interest what I am taking about here, please follow this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic
Arabic is a Central Semitic language, from which the dead Hebrew was revived about 2 centuries ago. Readers are well aware that Jesus spoke to his disciples in Aramaic and not in Hebrew.
From Classical Quranic Arabic, proper grammar was included in Jewish Scripture, TaNaKh as it was written without short vowels. The short vowels were included in TaNaKh during 12th to 15th century, but they they didn’t include short vowels in YHWH Elohim as Jews till today write God, as G-d without short vowels.
Ghassan Kadi you are an Arab, and put the short vowels in YHWH. I can bet you that you won’t get a Proper Noun with it.
Let us discuss about literally saying that YHWH being G-d’s name by both Jews and Christians….
Continued on next post…..
You do a lot of writing but don’t answer the simplest of questions- Did Mohammed and his followers kill to further his mission. Yes or No. ???
Hayek. The whole article is about denouncing those who have killed in order to spread Islam in the name of Islam. Read carefully. But mind you, “Christians” did the same.
You are confusing actions of humans with the Message. Islam does not call for military conquests any more than Christianity does. But you are stuck on comparing religions.
If Muslims understood Islam properly, they would not kill in the name of God. I hope you don’t continue to misunderstand my main message here.
The real question remains : “why would there be false interpretations of the Holy Quran, unless there is something itself in Holy Quran which lends to false interpretations of the Holy Quran?”
Is there corruption of, or additions to “the original message” which we know only from later copies anyway? Are there not internal contradictions in the Quran itself? Historical inaccuracies (Mary the daughter of Amram e.g.)? It is a purely historical problem.
So are you denouncing the Prophet Mohammed for killing to spread Islam or not ? We are not talking about ” followers” , we are talking about the people who founded the faith for others to follow. Mohammed is not responsible for the actions of his followers, unless there is a foundational mandate and actions based on that mandate that his followers could follow ” by example”. This is not about comparing religions as you keep stating to avoid the obvious. I could just as soon as used mahatma Gandi as a counterpoint . Neither you or Mohammed will answer the question , why ?
@ “Christians” did the same.
We came to a dangerous moment in any argument, the use of the “You too” fallacy. It is a typical tactic to avoid answering an embarrassing question.
“Comparing religions” is relevant to the question “does Islam kill in order to spread Islam?”, “does Muhammad ordered to kill in order to spread Islam?”
In actual fact he did.
Sahih al-Bukhari 6924—Muhammad said: “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and whoever said La ilaha illahllah, Allah will save his property and his life from me.”
Sahih Muslim 30—Muhammad said: “I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”
Sahih Muslim 4366—Muhammad said: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”
Al-Bukhari, Al-Adab al-Mufrad 1103—Muhammad said: “Do not give the People of the Book the greeting first. Force them to the narrowest part of the road.”
You will notice that the Shahadah is an anti-trinitarian (therefore anti-Christian) declaration. And the second part of the Shahadah actually identify the “actions of humans with the Message”.
Are these misunderstandings of Islam?
Salam Anonymous,
The two books you quoted are from six books called, Sahih Sitta (Six Most Authentic Books) are known for being cooked by Mohammad’s Sayings.
The Sayings of the Prophet were burned by the very First, Second and the Third Caliphs. About 250 years later they were complied. The first one to compile his book is Bukhari and he named his book, “The Authentic Sayings of Mohammad” by Bukhari. It is called, “Sahih al-Bukhari”.
The second book was compiled by his student named Muslim, and he called his book, “Sahih Muslim”.
250 years later, after being cooked, cooked and recooked, the Hadiths were compiled after being burnt. And the Hadiths (sayings) of Prophet Mohammad (saws) cannot go against the message of the Holy Quran which was revealed by God. Any Hadith, which is against the Message of the Holy Quran is cooked.
Just like the Gospels were complied 150 or more years later after Jesus disappearance. BTW, Jesus spoke Aramaic to his disciples and not Greek/Roman. How hard is this to understand?
Best regards,
Mohamed
It is hard to understand nonsense. It is obviously harder for you to understand that you are talking nonsense. Admittedly all Hadiths are cooked (as the Koran, by the way, compiled about twenty years after the death of Mohamed, after 70 Muslims who had memorized the Quran were killed and burning all ‘divergent’ variants of the Koran, not of the Hadiths!). But exactly the Hadiths I quoted are in perfect accord with the Koran.
Quran (2:191-193) – “And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing…
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)
Quran (4:74) – “Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.
Quran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
Quran (4:95) – “Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward “.
This is just a small selection. But the cherry on the cake is:
Quran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”.
BTW, the books which form the New Testament (Gospels, Acts of the Apostle, Epistles of the Apostles) were written by witnesses of Jesus life, death and resurrection) in an interval of thirty years to maximum sixty. There are manuscripts of the Gospels dating from the first century.
Anonymous. These Quranic translations you quoted are actually translations of the misinterpretations of the Quran. I referred to this issue many times. Reading English, French …. or any other translation sadly does not help.
But those misinterpretations are what is accepted in main stream Islam, and this is why I’ve been saying time and time again, that it’s time that for Muslim clerics to review their understandings and understand the Quran properly. Once they’ve done this, then they can translate it
Why? Because Once again, my argument is in relation to the teaching and the difference between the teaching and practice. But you want to change it to a match between Christianity and Islam and/or one between Jesus and Mohamed without paying any consideration to whether or not you are being insensitive to the feelings of others. How would you like to see the shoe on the other foot? How would you like to see someone questioning crucifixion and resurrection? No one here did, even though you mentioned them on at least 2 occasions. So stick to the subject or leave the discussion.
@Quranic translations you quoted are actually translations of the misinterpretations
I was responding to the divagations of Mohamed. We can’t wait to see the Muslim clerics reviewing their understandings and understand the Quran properly as you recommend. And to see the “true” translations. It seems that they are poorly equipped to do it since none of the translations made so far cannot convey the “true” sense of the Message. It is unlikely that they would be ever doing it if us, critics from outside, are enjoined to “not be insensitive to their feelings” and abstain criticising their wrong beliefs. It is a short way from “hurting feelings” to “insulting Islam” which deserve punishment.
Mohamed. Let me say this to you bluntly. You go on and on, and all the way making assumptions and accusations. According to Islam “Inna Ba3d Alzann Ithm” (A little bit of suspicion is sinful). Just like our friend Hayek who insists to compare Jesus with Mohamed and yet claims he is not comparing religions, your entire objective is to show that the Shiite version of Islam is right and the Sunni is wrong.
Whether I am a Muslim or not, this does not change the nature or the substance of the discussion I am trying to have, and quite frankly, it is none of your business. But you have certainly portrayed yourself as one who pretends to be a pious good Muslim, but all he is capable of doing is to attack blindly and mindlessly the moment he hears any criticism about indoctrinated Islam.
That was very obvious in your very first response when you said that the article starts with attacking Islam when it in fact does exactly the contrary.
Your vision is muddied, muddied by your belief system and prejudices. You are one of those who “if you say to them believe in God, they say have believed, but they do not believe and they do not know it”. You are one of the “deaf dumb and blind” who do not return.
You can keep ranting, but I will not even read a single more word you write any more than I will waste my precious time responding to you. The invitation to have a discussion was addressed to people with intellect; something you obviously lack.
You wrote that some people may have believed the earth is flat.
Some did. In later times. But there’s no evidence that Neolithic people’s had such a belief. Zero. To assume that ancient humans might’ve believed in a flat earth when there is no evidence is a personal projection.
There’s nothing new age about the science of archaeology or the craft of architecture and building. StoneHenge is a good evidence for the sohisticated mathematical models early humans could make. These ancient humans could use this stone circle to measure the motions of the heavens, and yes indeed that would most definitely include The Martians. You’re welcome.
If you can’t talk or write clearly or concisely (my excuse is I’m travelling and on my phone!) when referring to what people believe or believed in the past on such a simple matter as whether or not th lie earth was flat then perhaps this topic you are attempting to address is not for you?