|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 3:26 am Post subject: HIJACKING ISLAM |
 |
|
| Quote: |
HIJACKING ISLAM
By AMIR TAHERI
'GOD? What about him?" the sheik asked with a frown.
We were in a London mosque, discussing the ser mons the sheik delivers at Friday congregations. I had asked why God almost never featured in (or, at best, got a cameo role) in sermons that focused almost exclusively on political issues.
For the sheik, what mattered was "the sufferings of our brethren under occupation." In other words: In our Islam, we don't do God — we do Palestine, Kashmir and Iraq!
Here we have a religion without a theology, a secular wolf disguised as a religious lamb.
How did this neo-Islam — a political movement masquerading as religion — come into being, and how can those who know little about Islam distinguish it from the mainstream of the faith?
USING Islam as a vehicle for political ambitions is not new. The Umayyads used it after the Prophet's death to set up a dynastic rule. Three of the four caliphs who succeeded Muhammad were assassinated in the context of political power games presented as religious disputes.
Fast forward to the 19th century, and the Persian adventurer Jamaleddin Assadabadi, who disguised himself as an Afghan to hide his Shiite origin and set out to build a career in the mostly Sunni land of Egypt. Although a Freemason, Jamal (who dubbed himself Sayyed Gamal) concluded that the only way to win power among Muslims was by appealing to their religious sentiments. So he transformed himself into an Islamic scholar, grew an impressive beard and donned a huge black turban to underline his claim of being a descendant of the Prophet.
His partner was Mirza Malkam Khan, an Armenian who claimed to have converted to Islam. Together, they launched the idea of an "Islamic Renaissance" (An-Nahda) and promoted the concept of a "perfect Islamic government" under an "enlightened despot."
Malkam had a slogan of unrivaled cynicism: "Tell the Muslims something is in the Koran, and they will die for you."
The trick worked, because the overwhelming majority of Muslims didn't know Arabic, and those who did had as much difficulty reading the Koran as an English speaker has with Chaucer.
LATER in the century, the campaigns of Sayyed Gamal and Mirza Malkam produce the Salafi movement. The term comes from the phrase aslaf al-salehin ("the worthy ancestors") and evokes the hope of reviving "the pure Islam of the early days under Muhammad."
The Salafi movement gave birth to the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan al-Moslemeen) led by Hassan al-Banna in Egypt (1928), and to an Iranian Shiite version, the Fedayeen of Islam, led by Muhammad Navab-Safavi (1941).
In the '40s the movement produced two other children. The first was a hybrid of Marxism and Islam concocted by a Pakistani journalist Abul-Ala al-Maudoodi, who saw himself as "the Lenin of Islam." The other was a hybrid of Nazism and Islam promoted by the Palestinian Mufti Haj Amin al-Hussaini and Rashid Ali al- Gilani, an Iraqi firebrand of Iranian origin.
From the 1930s through the 1960s, the offspring of Salafism organized terrorist operations killing hundreds of people, but failed to win power anywhere. Instead, most Muslim nations were seduced by Western ideologies such as nationalism, socialism and communism. Yet most of those ideologies lost their luster by the 1970s — and various versions of the Salafi movement began to fill the vaccuum.
In 1979, it won power in Iran under a semi-literate mullah named Ruhallah Khomeini. In the 1980s, it dominated Pakistan through a group of army officers known as "the Koran Generals." In 1992 it came close to seizing power in Algeria through the Front for Islamic Salvation (FIS). In 1995, it seized power in Kabul under the banner of the Taliban. Most recently, it won the election in the West Bank and Gaza under the label of Hamas.
SALAFISM'S biggest successes, how ever, have come in the West — where the emergence of large communities of Muslims has created a space in which neo-Islam can thrive.
This new space is of crucial importance for two reasons.
* It allows Salafism to promote its ideas and recruit militants in freedom — something not possible in most Muslim countries, where local despots won't tolerate any breach of their control of the public space.
* Muslims living in the West have no first-hand experience of the intolerance and terror that neo-Islam has practiced in Muslim countries for decades. Instead, they see Islam as an element of their identity and, although seldom going to the mosque, consider neo-Islamist militants as "lobbyists" for themselves.
Anxious to control its constituency within Western democracies, neo-Islam, in its different versions, uses tactics developed by other totalitarian ideologies, notably fascism and communism.
ITS first move was to promote a visual apartheid to distinguish its adherents from the rest of society — in the same way that Lenin, Hitler and Mao wanted their followers to wear specific uniforms.
For men, the props are beards, khaksari (earthly) garments such as shirts falling down to the knees, baggy shalwar (pantaloons), an araqchin (cloth cap), a checkered Palestinian neck-scarf and sandals or shoes without laces. The garments must never come in bright colors (although green was the color of Mohammed's clan, the Bani-Hashim); black and white are the preferred shades of neo-Islam. The neo-Islamist will also always carry a worry bead plus a miswak (a wooden tooth pick), which is supposed to have been favored by the Prophet.
When it comes to women, the choice of clothes is even more limited. Women are obliged to cover their hair, and also avoid bright colors. The more radical neo-Islamists promote the burqa, a head-to-toe drape with two holes for the eyes.
Only a small minority of the world's Muslims follow this visual apartheid. Some of the most outrageous neo-Islam outfits can be seen only in the West, never in any Muslim country.
Once visual apartheid is achieved, the neo-Islamist moves to Phase Two: making his followers brain-dead. This is done by persuading them that there is a unique Islamic answer to all questions ever asked or ever to be asked.
And where does the answer come from? From "fatwa factories" set up by (often semi-literate) sheiks in some Muslim countries. The most complex issues of life, from banks charging interest to euthanasia, are often answered with a simple "yes" or "no."
The idea is that, as Maudoodi (the "Lenin of Islam") believed, Islam was sent by God to turn men into robots obeying divine rules as spelled out by the sheiks.
Maudoodi claimed that, when God created man, He made His creature's biological existence subject to "unquestionable laws." Yet God failed to to apply the same rule to man's spiritual, political and cultural existence. Realizing His mistake, God sent Mohammed to preach Islam, which provides the "unquestionable laws" needed for the non-material aspects of man's existence.
NEO-ISLAM pursues its culture of apartheid by dividing the world into "Islam" and "un-Islam."
Wherever Muslims are a majority is designated as Dar al-Islam (House of Peace); the rest of the world is Dar al-Harb (House of War) or, at best, Dar al-Da'awah (House of Propagation). The claim is that it is enough to be a Muslim to be always right against non-Muslims.
This is not how Muhammad taught Islam. His biography is full of instances where he ruled against a Muslim in a dispute with a non-Muslim. For him, the world was divided between "right" and "wrong," and "good" and "evil," not Islam and non-Islam. It is possible to be a Muslim and do evil things, while a non-Muslim could also be an agent of good.
That neo-Islam is uncomfortable with the idea of religion as something to do with God is not surprising. In Islam, the only absolute and immutable truth is the Oneness of God. Thus what the Koran or shariah (not to mention self-appointed sheiks) offer are relative matters, open to infinite interpretations.
Neo-Islam's attempt at destroying individual freedoms is as much a threat to Islam as the Inquisition was to Christianity.
To protect itself, Islam needs to revive its theology with emphasis on divinity (marefat al-ilahiyah). In other words, Islam must re-become a religion.
THIS does not mean that Muslims should stay out of politics or ignore Palestine, Iraq, Kashmir or any other cause. What it means is that they should recognize that these and similar causes are political, not religious, ones. Nobody prevents Muslims from practicing their faith in Palestine or Kashmir. These disputes are about territory, borders and statehood, not about faith.
Neo-Islam is a form of fascism, hence the term Islamofascism. Its primary victims are Muslims, both in Muslim majority countries and in the West.
In many Muslim countries, neo-Islam has been exposed as a political movement and can no longer deceive the masses. In the West, however, it is has managed to dupe parts of the media, government and academia into treating it not as the political movement it is, but as the expression of Islam as a religion.
It is time to end that deception and recognize neo-Islam in its many manifestations as a political phenomenon.
Neo-Islam has as much right to operate in the political field as any other party in a democracy. But it does not have the right to pretend to be a religion — it is not.
Iranian author Amir Taheri is a member of Benador Associates. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AbbeFaria
Joined: 17 May 2005
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good read. I don't think that Islam has been hijacked, however. I think the keys were handed over to the Islamofascists much the way Germany handed the keys over to Hitler. They were run down, abused, disheartened and disinfranchised, mostly do to their own governments, and wanted someone to blame. The people who wanted either to stay in power or gain power just gave them an easy target: Mainly the West and Jews.
When you point a finger at someone you've got three fingers pointing back at yourself.
��S�� |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
It certainly is an interesting article, thanks for posting it.
I doubt it will sit well with those who prefer their Mulsims to be monolithic and undivided in their hatred of the West... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well done Joo and thanks for posting something that actually advances debate on this board rather than the bigotry spewed up by the usual suspects. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jaganath69 wrote: |
| Well done Joo and thanks for posting something that actually advances debate on this board rather than the bigotry spewed up by the usual suspects. |
What a stupid statement.
As long as an article is liberal and all hands-across-America BS then it advances debate? Religion is dangerous. Islam is a particularly violent religion (read the Korean, "And remember Allah (hakuna mattada) said to the Angels, Smite the Infidel, Smite him above his neck and Smite his fingertips off). You can't hijack something that is inherently corrupt. Islam demands total submission and zero questioning as well as providing all the ammunition a crazy wannabe murdering MF needs to justify being a crazy murdering MF. Tell me that isn't a dangerous concept?
The entire history of Islam is one of expansive violence.
Why don't you let us know specifically what opinions constitute bigotry when referring to Islam and we can take note. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, I wouldn't be surprised if agents of Syria and/or Iran are behind the riots over the cartoons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why don't you let us know specifically what opinions constitute bigotry when referring to Islam and we can take note. |
The following usually get dismissed as 'bigotry'.
1. Disagreeing that the 'vast' majority of muslims are moderate.
2. Opposing large scale muslim immigration to the West.
3. Claiming that Islam is especially prone to violence and intolerance, despite the wealth of evidence supporting such a stance.
4. Claiming that Islam is incompatible with human rights.
5. Stating that Mohammed was not a great role model, but a rather nasty peice of work, which is supported quite conclusively by the Koran and Hadith themselves.
If you make any of these arguments, expect to be called a 'racist', 'bigot' or 'hatemonger'. Do not expect your opponents to respond with rationale debate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Religion is dangerous. |
Yes, it certainly can be, if you're an abortion doctor in the States. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Or part of a Christian Peacemeaker team in Iraq.
Or a nun in Guatemala... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| jaganath69 wrote: |
| Well done Joo and thanks for posting something that actually advances debate on this board rather than the bigotry spewed up by the usual suspects. |
What a stupid statement.
As long as an article is liberal and all hands-across-America BS then it advances debate? Religion is dangerous. Islam is a particularly violent religion (read the Korean, "And remember Allah (hakuna mattada) said to the Angels, Smite the Infidel, Smite him above his neck and Smite his fingertips off). You can't hijack something that is inherently corrupt. Islam demands total submission and zero questioning |
Totally. Especially this part of the Koran:
109:1 Say: O disbelievers!
109:2 I worship not that which ye worship;
109:3 Nor worship ye that which I worship.
109:4 And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
109:5 Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
109:6 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
Ouch, that's harsh! "Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion." How intolerant can you get?
I'd rather think of it as a book with contradictory parts like all holy books. People then pick and choose which parts they like at any point in time.
Now nobody come in and throw some other quotes at me like "Slay all the unbelievers". Like I said, certain parts contradict others. Big surprise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
A: SHUT UP, DHIMMI!
Q: What's the most likely response to Mithridates' post? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: All this talk of 'Dhimmis' and 'Bigots' gets us nowhere |
|
|
There are not simply two choices here: one mustn't believe that Islam is all across the board as it is being practiced today a religion of peace, nor mustn't one condemn Islam as backwards and intolerant in its every present incarnation (and all future ones).
Frankly, I am a little weary of those assualting Islam being called bigots. It is a little weak.
Meanwhile, comments like these are certainly over the top.
| Quote: |
| Religion is dangerous. |
In response to Mith:
| Quote: |
109:1 Say: O disbelievers!
109:2 I worship not that which ye worship;
109:3 Nor worship ye that which I worship.
109:4 And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
109:5 Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
109:6 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
Ouch, that's harsh! "Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion." How intolerant can you get?
I'd rather think of it as a book with contradictory parts like all holy books. People then pick and choose which parts they like at any point in time. |
But do people really get to pick and choose which parts they like? Or do they have their local Imam/Ayatollah instruct them in which parts they should take more seriously than others. I am too incompetent yet to post graphs, but you can check this one on literacy rates circa 1995 in the Middle East. Also, economic stagnation is also a problem. We have a whole lot of unemployed resentful young men running around. It seems more than possible to me that they will choose a leader as much as the leader chooses them (in Iraq the US has been lucky, yes lucky, Moqtada Al-Sadr is for the moment restraining his angry youth).
The article is good. Obviously, the Al Qaeda varieties have plenty of influence from the West. But the article IMHO does not address some of the more mainstream sympathy for some of these 'divergent' groups in the Middle East.
I want to make one more point. Let's say you are Iran. Your population is getting older, and you are propping your economy up artificially from oil revenues (Ahmedinejad was elected largely because he promised hand-outs to the lower classes to come out of oil profits). You are despised by the only superpower, and your mainstream economy continues to stagnate. What options do you have? Are these the conditions for a Shi'a reformation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:03 pm Post subject: Re: All this talk of 'Dhimmis' and 'Bigots' gets us nowhere |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
There are not simply two choices here: one mustn't believe that Islam is all across the board as it is being practiced today a religion of peace, nor mustn't one condemn Islam as backwards and intolerant in its every present incarnation (and all future ones).
Frankly, I am a little weary of those assualting Islam being called bigots. It is a little weak.
Meanwhile, comments like these are certainly over the top.
| Quote: |
| Religion is dangerous. |
In response to Mith:
| Quote: |
109:1 Say: O disbelievers!
109:2 I worship not that which ye worship;
109:3 Nor worship ye that which I worship.
109:4 And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
109:5 Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
109:6 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
Ouch, that's harsh! "Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion." How intolerant can you get?
I'd rather think of it as a book with contradictory parts like all holy books. People then pick and choose which parts they like at any point in time. |
But do people really get to pick and choose which parts they like? Or do they have their local Imam/Ayatollah instruct them in which parts they should take more seriously than others. I am too incompetent yet to post graphs, but you can check this one on literacy rates circa 1995 in the Middle East. Also, economic stagnation is also a problem. We have a whole lot of unemployed resentful young men running around. It seems more than possible to me that they will choose a leader as much as the leader chooses them (in Iraq the US has been lucky, yes lucky, Moqtada Al-Sadr is for the moment restraining his angry youth).
The article is good. Obviously, the Al Qaeda varieties have plenty of influence from the West. But the article IMHO does not address some of the more mainstream sympathy for some of these 'divergent' groups in the Middle East.
I want to make one more point. Let's say you are Iran. Your population is getting older, and you are propping your economy up artificially from oil revenues (Ahmedinejad was elected largely because he promised hand-outs to the lower classes to come out of oil profits). You are despised by the only superpower, and your mainstream economy continues to stagnate. What options do you have? Are these the conditions for a Shi'a reformation? |
Apparently one of the biggest problems over there (according to bb) is that most people get their news from the local coffee shop as opposed to actual news networks like Al-Jazeera and that can have a galvanizing effect on whatever the issue of the day happens to be.
I think it's sad that a nation that produced Rumi of all people has the government it does today.
I'm not sure if I've ever used the word bigot, because I don't like it. Using the word bigot is usually the sign of the end of all civilized conversation and goes against the tenet of knowing one's enemy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Now nobody come in and throw some other quotes at me like "Slay all the unbelievers". Like I said, certain parts contradict others. Big surprise. |
The problem is that the violent, more repressive verses of the Koran are deemed by most Islamic theorists to take precedence over the more peaceful ones, which were 'revealed' when Mohammed and the muslims were militarily and politically weak. As Mohammed gained power, and his need for peaceful relations with other tribes decreased more violent and oppressive verses were 'revealed'.
So, it is not a simple case of verses contradicting each other, but certain verses taking precedence over others, and therein lies the problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Now nobody come in and throw some other quotes at me like "Slay all the unbelievers". Like I said, certain parts contradict others. Big surprise. |
The problem is that the violent, more repressive verses of the Koran are deemed by most Islamic theorists to take precedence over the more peaceful ones, which were 'revealed' when Mohammed and the muslims were militarily and politically weak. As Mohammed gained power, and his need for peaceful relations with other tribes decreased more violent and oppressive verses were 'revealed'.
So, it is not a simple case of verses contradicting each other, but certain verses taking precedence over others, and therein lies the problem. |
Yep.
BTW, what do you think of Sufism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
