UK Muslim's letter to Tony Blair

[Castro]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

I’d go as far as call it offensive in its unwitting duplicity.

It's duplicitous, I admit, but it sure feels good.

[NGONGE]

^^ I know

 

Like a fully covered woman getting of the bus and a bit of her calf is revealed as she disembarks. It feels good to catch a glimpse of such hidden treasures but it is still wrong to look.

 

 

As for the Brother that set me the impossible question of working out what the Muslims should do in these ‘critical’ times! Well, after thinking long and hard about it all and then thinking some more, I’ve reached the conclusion that nothing should be done. Nothing that would cause confusion and cause damage to the faith that is.

 

The above was the short version of my reply. The long version starts by dealing with your question and the way you phrased it. Here it is:

 

 

There is a clear crusade against the Muslims…..and to me you sound like an apologetic Muslim. So do tell me what is to be done by the Muslims in these critical times both in the west and at the Muslim countries? Shukran if you can answer.

Clear Crusade and Critical Times?

 

It’s true that Islam (and the Muslim world) is going through a difficult time at the moment. But to call it critical (in the way you use the word) would be an exaggeration. To claim that what’s taking place today is a crusade is an even bigger overstatement.

 

 

If one goes back and looks at the history of the Crusades one will easily realise what a critical time for Islam that was. The invading crusaders (back then) came with an aim and clear plan to take up the holy lands and defeat Islam. There were no hidden agendas, no double-speak and no conspiracy theories. I suggest that you read up on that subject and find out what a wretched time it was for Muslims (in between the great victories of course).

 

When the Mongols invaded the Islamic lands and sacked Baghdad, it was also a critical time for Islam. When Bonaparte tried to emulate Alexander and conquer the east (in addition to dealing with the unemployment problems in France at the time), that too was a critical time for Islam. And when the British convinced the Arabs of the Gulf (who were led by Shariff Hussein) to rebel against the Ottomans, then double crossed them by signing the Sykes-Peco agreement with France; that too was a critical time for Muslims and Islam. When a million Algerians were killed while resisting the French occupation, that was a critical time for Islam. When Omar Al Mokhtar was hanged by the Italians for resisting occupation, that was a critical time for Islam. When pseudo-Sufis, conmen and Arab nationalists were dominating public opinion and attempting to cancel out simple Islamic rules and duties, that was a critical time for Islam.

 

Each of the above can be explained in more detail and compared to contemporary events and hardships. However, that will take up a long time and (though educational) might divert us away from the argument we’re having here. Still, if you have not done it already, I urge you to read up on every single topic up there and contemplate the grave dangers that Islam faced back then.

 

What did the Muslims do back then and how did they cope with all these troubles? Well, for the most part, they did nothing that eroded on their faith and allowed Islam to be tampered with. In fact, this reminds me of the Arab defeat in 1967 and what Sheikh Mohammed Motwali Al Sha’rawi did when he heard about it (he was based in Algeria at the time). When he heard of the defeat, it’s claimed that he told his followers to pray and thank Allah! Of course, many Egyptians turned against him and wondered if he was happy that Jamal Abdulnaser was defeated (and didn’t care for Egypt itself). His reply is said to have been along the lines of having to thank Allah for good and bad news. Many interpreted it as being grateful that the Socialist/Marxist regimes of Egypt, Syria (and others) were defeated and, with them, the sacrilegious communist ideas that, if it were not for this defeat would have spread across the Muslim world.

 

So, as you see, we’ve been through a lot in our recent Islamic history and we have managed to survive without compromising our faith. Isn’t then the greatest of follies to allow a bunch of ragtag dodgy ‘freedom’ fighters to erode on our faith and cause untold damage to the way we and those that follow us would understand it and practise it?

 

It is not about being apologetic or brave. It’s about making the right and rational choices. If our starting point is that terrorism is FORBIDDEN then none of the cause and effect arguments should really matter (in an Islamic sense). If it’s not, well, I guess it’s a free for all .

[Castro]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

If our starting point is that terrorism is FORBIDDEN then none of the cause and effect arguments should really matter (in an Islamic sense).

Tell me good Ngonge, do you believe that blowing up an Israeli tank with a rocket or a US Humvee with a roadside bomb is terrorism? How about "kidnapping" enemy soldiers and holding them as prisoners of war in exchange for your own prisoners of war? No? Well most western governments and their media outlets do. In fact, killing a US/British/Israeli/NATO soldier in full combat gear and in a war zone no less, is a form of "terrorism", they tell us. Now, tell me saaxib, is this the same form of terrorism we're talking about here? Is that what will erode our faith? What about killing those who support (morally and financially) the wars being waged against Muslims? How about killing those who directly benefit from these wars? Finally, if in the process of targeting what is ostensibly a legitimate target, innocent people are killed, does it still count as a sin?

 

Isn’t then the greatest of follies to allow a bunch of ragtag dodgy ‘freedom’ fighters to erode on our faith and cause untold damage to the way we and those that follow us would understand it and practise it?

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, is how the famous line went. Saaxib, American and Israeli leaders have the audacity to say they use "gentle" and "smart" bombs to carpet-bomb civilian areas. We know they're full of cow dung when the devastation is later shown. There's much evidence (in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, even as far back as Vietnam and WW2) that much of the carnage inflicted on civilians and civilian targets was intentional. And the lions share, if not the whole thing, was committed by non-Muslims. Remember Japan? As Muslims, intentionally targeting defenceless civilians is out of the question but I dare say much of what is labelled terrorism nowadays is legal and rightful resistance.

 

So atheer, define terrorism first then you can wax philosophical.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Kashafa:

The Middle East, Asia, and Africa have been the playground of the West for the past 300 years. Like kids in a sandbox, Western governments(with a few exceptions) have been changing the fates of entire nations with a few strokes of the pen.

 

Nonesense! Were these continent's peoples rich prior to Western subjugation, were they markedly better off back then than they are now? No! The main reason why Africa, Mid-East and large junks of Asia came under West domination was due to their weakness vis-a-vis the West. Otherwise, they would've withstood the onslaught of Western encroachments, faired better... instead, as we now know most collapsed like a house of cards as the early whiffs of Western approach reached them. Lastly, this is hackneyed arguement of the Left... our friend Kashafa and other of it's proponents would never admit this but the incontrovertible fact is this arguement is rip-off of the old battle cry of the Left. It goes something like this: the West is the source of much of the Word's problems; Western coloniasm is the reason why many nations are poor and underdeveloped; 3rd world people are ****** , things always happen to them and they're never able to think for themselves to do what's best for them... inherent in this arguement is Racism of the worst kind. It practically asserts 3rd people don't have will of their own and wherewithal to dig themselves out of their misery... they're powerless beings unable to do what their Western counterparts can and do.

 

To blow this arguement right out of the water, to show it's complete lack of merit, all one needs to do is cite few examples of nations that have been under the West's thumb for eons and yet have, somehow, realised their potentials by rising to status of immense wealth and power.

 

 

But the greivances that SB so causally dismisses(u need to wake up, boy) are being constantly stoked and restoked by imperialistic interference in the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims worldwide,

covertly and overtly

. It's like picking at a scab wound and saying "Dammit, why won't it heal"(Dammit, why do they hate us so much)

 

Well, this is more or less along the same lines as the previous reasoning. However, it's further compounded by it's dearth of truth. Most muslims in the World are under the imperialistic interference of other muslims... most muslims are killed, disenfrenchised, terrorised and ruled over by other muslims. Western imperialistic intentions in the Muslim world today is pure apocryphal... endorsed by those who embraced victimhood wholesale and wallow in self-pity.

 

 

"With respect to Western goverments, they need to do much more to fight imperialism in their ranks. So far, it's been See a Muslim, Steal a Muslim , Kill a Muslim. The rather perversely inhumane attitude many have towards Muslim lives & property doesn't help matters either."

This doesn't explain why it seems only muslims react violently. I'm sure you'll agree Western foriegn policy hasn't been all that different across continents and peoples in the last 50 or so years. Why no S. Americans (or african or asian) ever blew themselves up while using martyrology espoused by Catholicism (or whatever) as excuse? The only reasonable explaination is sick, demented mindset promoted by depraved minority has taken hold in popular muslim discourse. As shown by the popular support of groups like Al-Quida garner... isn't Osama Bin Laden some sort of hero in the Muslim world, particularly in Pakistan where new born boys are named after him.

 

You can put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and pretend you don't see and hear reality for what it is but that would only take you so far.

[NGONGE]

Castro,

 

you’re moving the goal posts there, saaxib. It’s not fair or nice to do so.

From the start of this discussion my argument was about Muslims who intentionally cause the loss of innocent lives. It was not about Hezbollah or Hamas, saaxib. For with those two one could clearly and rightfully argue that they’re resisting occupation and defending their lands. At times, I disagree with some of their decisions but in no way do I regard them as terrorists, nor do I use the western application of the term (it would go against all I’ve been arguing for and about here, see). Besides, you’ve gone all Muslim Council on me and switched the blame to the other side. That’s a different topic, I tell you.

 

 

PS

To all those reading this:

I realise that most of you (including myself) are bombarded (perish the thought) daily with all sorts of propaganda and Islamphobic arguments in the news and other forms of media. I understand that it can be frustrating to read, hear and listen to all of that and not having the opportunity to answer back. However, I’m not that media and would appreciate it if you don’t tar my comments and arguments with that same brush (you can drench Socod Badan if you like though).

[Castro]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

you’re moving the goal posts there, saaxib. It’s not fair or nice to do so.

From the start of this discussion my argument was about Muslims who intentionally cause the loss of innocent lives.

I could've sworn we settled this more than a year ago, saaxib. Few people encourage, support or condone such depraved indifference to innocent life. But the way you used that broad brush prompted me to solicit the above from you. We're on the same page. Wax on, atheer.

 

As for SB, I believe he brings a healthy diversity of opinion here. That he's often wrong on these matters shouldn't deter him from contributing. Wax off, atheer.

[AYOUB]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

I have no idea why you decided to post that article. To criticise Muslim reactions is NOT to support Bush (and Blair’s) policies. They way you’re conducting this argument seems to be in the style of Mr Bush’s ‘you’re either with us or against us’ statement.

I wouldn't even say that to wayward Socoto, let alone you. The two points I was trying to make were:

 

1. I don't think anyone would take Muslim Council criticism of the foreign policy as a green light to commit some sort of revenge attacks on innocent people. It's their duty to point out the fallacy in Blair's arguments when he came to power promising "ethical foreign policy" and to be "tough on crime and tough on causes of crime". These leaders have previously been used for photo opportunities and publicity stunts by politicians, and it would damage their credibility if don't speak out against unjust policies and, THAT would send the wrong message to the people they represent.

 

2. A person does not have to read the letter you posted to find out Blair's policies were linked to the recent troubles and last year's attacks. The article I posted (written by a former high-ranking intelligence official) does so, in no uncertain terms. I have even read an article where a victim of the 7/7 attacks blames politicians more than the bombers themselves. I'm not down-playing how evil the attackers/attacks were, am saying the Muslim Council were correct and not duplicitous in sending that open letter. A person looking for an excuse to harm others does not to have to read between the lines of the letter because they can find more explicit articles out there if they want to.

 

PS You can only accuse the Muslim Council of "eroding the faith" the day they claim attacking innocent civilians is acceptable.

[Tahliil]

Watch this clip...The Nexus of Politics and Terror....from countdown with Keith Olberman

 

[Naxar Nugaaleed]

Only muslims, after all their fellow members did, could suggist that western countries listen to their nonsense arguements about the countries foreign Policy. However much disagree with, their policy will not change because some religios community disagrees with it, not least because the countries policies are derieved from the interest of the nation as a whole but also because that desicion making is secular and does not take into account religions but reason and interest. My suggestion to the muslim community would be

 

to help authorities find terrorist

Build bridges with other communities

find way to integrate not assimilate

lastly, forget about forein policies or hire professionals to work with muslim government and their country to find common interest in the international community.

[Khalaf]

Naxar tell me then...if Muslims commit these so called terrorist attacks, why has not the biggest attack in history to US 9/11 not invesigated still? Dude wake up and read about it instead of watching fox news or CNN, all this is bullshit...and it works excuse for their impresslistic expansion.

 

NGONGE

This is the main message I get from what u wrote: the reactions of the Muslims is wrong and in fact their actions are eroding the faith. In another version your saying Muslims are not doing enough to condemn the so called terrorists and distance themselves from them.

 

Listen sxb, there are no terrorists among Muslims all this is madeup…an excuse to capture more Muslim lands and as the Quran says to eliminate this light of Islam: “Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religionâ€.

 

 

These so called radicals u describe in our midst are Allah fearing brothers who show the Sunnah, who attend the masjids, who fear Allah…not terrorists…no prove of terrorism other then what u hear from controlled sources. Condemn terrorism all you want, the tanks will keep rolling, more Muslim Blood, until “we will their form of religion.â€

 

This is no different from the early crusades but as Allah says never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumphs) over the believers. The best solution for the Muslims is to go back to the Quran and Sunnah, follow it, and apply it in their communities. To do nothing as u have said or follow what Naxar said, then that makes us false Muslims, since Allah orders us to apply the shariah and make command only for Allah and abolish the oppression of man-made systems.

[Naxar Nugaaleed]

^^you are right, they were not muslim, they were barbarians. but unless muslims tell people (Instead of coming up some conspiracy theory or wasting time with how a sovergien government conducts its affairs) that these 19, mostly wealthy saudis, do not represent the poor masses of the third world (the case brought about by will intended westerners) or the Islamic faith, then how will they know.

[Khalaf]

Originally posted by Naxar Nugaaleed:

^^you are right, they were not muslim, they were barbarians. but unless muslims tell people (Instead of coming up some conspiracy theory or wasting time with how a sovergien government conducts its affairs) that these 19, mostly wealthy saudis, do not represent the poor masses of the third world (the case brought about by will intended westerners) or the Islamic faith,

then how will they know.

using your intellect thats how one can know and don't listen to sources that feed ppl information. Things just dont add up! check this out sxb: web page

[NGONGE]