Neo-Con Salafis (Saudi-Salafis)
In the 13th century, Hulagu Khan, the grandson of Genghis Khan, led the brutal Mongol invasion of Baghdad, turning the river Euphrates and Tigris red with blood of men, women and children. To instil fear and humiliation, the invaders made pyramids with the human skulls of the victims. For the same reasons, the neo-Mongols of today made similar pyramids with the bodies of naked Iraqis. Clearly technological advancements does not always equate to advancement of civilisation; at least Hulagu Khan was honest, and did not pretend to wear the mask of civilisation while his men carried out atrocities!
The advancing Mongols were halted after their defeat by Sultan Baybars in the battle of Ein Jalut in 1260. Subsequently, the Mongol invaders were absorbed by the Muslims. This is a distinct episode of human history, where the invading conquerors assimilated into the culture and religion of the conquered nations. Yet, the medieval propaganda that Islam was spread by the sword continues to be propagated, by the ‘enlightened’ and scientifically advanced minds of today.
Prior to Sultan Baybars, Salahuddin Al-Ayubi came to the defence of Muslims and non-Muslims of Palestine, and liberated it from the clutches of the barbaric crusaders. After Sultan Baybars, came the rule of the Othmania Caliphate (Ottomans). It produced the likes of Sultan Muhammad Al-Fatih, who liberated Istanbul (Constantinople) at the age of 21, partly fulfilling the prophecy of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). The Islamic State reached its apex under the rule of Suleiman Al-Qanuni (Suleiman the Magnificent), who was on the verge of opening up Venice to Islamic rule.
After his demise, the Islamic State kept declining, with its inherent problems of economic and cultural stagnation. The gap between the Islamic State and secular Europe increased significantly after the Industrial Revolution, because now the European powers could produce much larger quantities of military hardware over a shorter period of time. This led to loss of territory in a series of disastrous wars and increasingly the Ottoman State fell under the financial control of the European powers, who labelled it as “the sick man of Europe’. Furthermore, fuelled by nationalism and inspired by outside forces, internal rebellions from the various ethnic groups increased, after living together in harmony for centuries under the Islamic State.
The last independent Ottoman Sultan was Abdul Hamid, who was renowned for refusing to sell Palestine to the Zionists, despite being tempted by huge amounts of money and at the time the state was in huge debt. He also tried to eradicate the notorious network of freemasonry which was prevalent within the Islamic State. During the Ottoman rule, there were Sultans in other parts of the Islamic world that also defended the Muslim community, for example, Ahmad Shah Durrani (Ahmad Shah Abdali) of Afghanistan, Imam Shamil of the Caucasus, and Sheikh Uthman Dan Fodio who established the Sokoto Caliphate over Nigeria, Cameroon and other parts of West Africa.
Eventually, the Ottoman Islamic State was symbolically demolished in 1924. This was achieved by the collective effort of the colonial powers (Britain and France), the Turkish nationalist movement (Young Turks), and the treacherous Arab regimes that were aided by the Wahhabi (Salafi) movement. The Wahhabi movement ‘legitimised’ the revolt against the Islamic State, as they considered everyone as an apostate unless they followed the Wahhabi school of thought. Whilst the British schemed to create the Arab revolt, the French worked to create the revolt of the Young Turks, both groups worked for the destruction of the Caliphate.
As a just ‘reward’ for their treachery, the colonial nations handed Palestine to the Zionists. People forget that these Arabs aided by the Salafi movement, were complicit with the Zionists in creating the Israeli cancer. Also, the colonial powers betrayed the Arabs by carving up the rest of the region, according to the secret treaty of Sykes-Picot. They created petty kingdoms ruled over by puppet dictators to serve their policy of divide and conquer. Some of the countries are so small and artificial that it can be classified as an oil field with a flag. The colonial powers even manufactured royal dynasties out of wild Bedouins who were operating as bandits.
In the absence of the Caliphate who will come to the defence of the Muslims now? With the demise of the Caliphate, the incursions into the Islamic lands have increased, as has the killing of Muslims and the exploitation of their resources. Most of the puppet regimes in the Muslim world continue to function like the coolies of the British Raj, always ready to serve and take orders in order to preserve their self-interests. They would sell anything to maintain their oil fields, empty palaces, shopping complexes and Filipino ‘maids’. After the Iraqi invasion, one of the members of the Kuwaiti royal family stated on TV that he would embrace the devil to regain his oil-field (Kuwait) in the south of Iraq. There was no Fatwa (Islamic edict) to pronounce him as an apostate from the land that produces endless fatwas against anyone, except those who show support for the pro-US puppet regimes!
When Iraq was attacked by the US-led coalition in 1991, these Gollum (Smeagol) like Salafi ‘scholars’ nearly choked trying to utter the word Jihad. Instead they gurgled and legitimised fighting the Muslims of Iraq under the American flag; some even saw ‘Jihad’ behind American troops in 1991! If fighting behind the Americans is Jihad, surely the likes of Bush and Sharon (a close ally of the US) are the Ameers (leaders) of Jihad! In reality this is Jihad in reverse gear, as the Muslims are the intended victims.
It was those same American troops that continued to commit the atrocities in Iraq, through enforcing the self-styled no-fly zone, and the cruel economic sanctions with direct cooperation from the Salafi orientated regimes. Then came the second invasion in 2003, the US troops committed atrocities in places like Abu-Ghraib, Baghdad, Fallujah, and Ramadi. To humiliate the Arab/Islamic world, they deliberately taped and aired the sadistic torture of Iraqis. In Haditha they gang raped a young girl and killed her along with her family, one of many such brutal crimes.
These Salafi orientated regimes managed to spin idiotic arguments for the naïve and their brain-dead followers. One of these claims is that the presence of US troops was good for Islam, as allegedly so many of them embraced Islam. According to these idiots, the blood of the Iraqi Muslims for some mysterious number of US soldiers allegedly converting to Islam was a good exchange! I suppose the first instruction given to those ‘converts’ by the Gollum like Salafi ‘scholars’ was to bomb the Muslims in Iraq! Was it their words of encouragement that led to the US forces, perhaps including the so-called ‘converts’, to massacre the retreating Iraqis on the road to Basra, and bury the defenceless Iraqi soldiers under the sand?
These Salafis describe the resistance in Palestine and Iraq as terrorists and extremists. Concurrently, they will not issue any criticism of the Pro-US regimes who are actively aiding the slaughter in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine, because allegedly they have found a ‘Hadith’ which permits this treacherous stance. Even common sense tells us that this is a perverted interpretation of Islam, as they justify remaining silent and inactive when violence is inflicted upon the Muslims but become overtly critical against Muslims for retaliating against injustices. This stance contradicts human nature as well as Islamic evidences. What then is the difference between the Salafi position and the neo-con ilk, who are leading the war on terror (Islam)? Only the shameless and treacherous ones would adopt the same position as those who have raped and tortured their children, mothers and sisters in a manner that is not even found amongst animals. Yet, these charlatans have the audacity to call themselves followers of the real pious predecessors (Salafis) that came after the demise of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). Therefore, the label ‘neo-con salafis’ or Saudi-Salafis is most appropriate for them. This also distinguishes them from the Jihadi-Salafis, who are far more consistent.
According to the neo-con Salafi obsession of purifying the creed (Aqeeda), liberation (purification) of Palestine should be a top priority. This is because Palestine includes Masjid Al-Aqsa (Jerusalem, Al-Quds), which is explicitly mentioned in the Quran and in the Hadiths, as a purified sacred place for the Muslims. Of course that is difficult as the Salafi orientated Saudi regime is closely aligned with the US and by implication allied with Israel. No one can dispute that the US provides the lifeline for Israel. So how will these neo-con Salafis liberate Palestine when they are aligned with the US and the Israelis? Thus, to date, not a single item of literature has been produced by these neo-con Salafis, as to how they visualise liberating Palestine.
When the Muslims in Bosnia were being massacred and raped by the Christian-terrorists of Europe, the Saudi-Salafis blamed the victims (Bosnians) for their fate, because they were bad Muslims. Surely, such arguments are also applicable to the Palestinians and the Iraqis who are also suffering. If we recall, Prophet Muhammad (SAW) sent an army seeking retribution for the dishonoring of one woman, and there was no discussion if she was a good Muslim or a bad Muslim. What the Saudi-Salafis really meant was: the Bosnians were apostates, so they have no obligation to help them, and they have the same opinion of the others, but the existing public opinion makes it difficult to express their real views. Isn’t it convenient for those who blame the victim, because they can simple turn their backs on them! Some would call it treachery and cowardice. This is why those planes should have been rammed against the palaces of these oppressors, instead of the WTC. Remove the snake inside your house, before you attempt to fight the bigger beast outside.
The paradox is: the neo-con Salafis (Saudi-Salafis) incessantly attack the mainstream Muslims by calling them deviants, as their Aqeeda is not pure enough, yet they have no problem in aligning with belligerent non-Muslims with a false Aqeeda and not just a deviant one. Note, the US bases in Saudi Arabia, and the other smaller Gulf States are used to launch murderous campaigns against the Muslims in Iraq, Palestine and else where, this has hardly bothered the conscience of the neo-con Salafis. Did the Prophet (SAW) not cleanse this land (Saudi Arabia, Hijaz, Najd) and say this is exclusively for the people of Tawhid (monotheism)? How can we explain this paradox, when these neo-con Salafis scream Shirk (Polytheism), Bidda (Innovation) and Kufr (Disbelief) but they are most comfortable with the presence of those hostile foreign forces that displays Shirk, Bidda and Kufr and even go beyond it?
This paradoxical behaviour of the neo-con Salafi can be explained if we dig deeper. Although they classify the rest of the Muslims (non Salafis) as deviants, but in reality they are viewed as apostates. Because, the neo-con Salafis follow the Khawarij doctrine of elevating minor issues of sin to major issues of disbelief (Kufr), hence like the Khawarij they pronounce Takfir (declare someone as an apostate) frequently. However, to avoid being isolated they say a particular notion makes one deviant instead of an apostate, but this is simply clever language on their part. Therefore, the neo-con Salafis are also the Khawarij (neo-Khawarij) of today. Accordingly they see no real problems with the killings of the Palestinians or the Iraqis or the Bosnians, as they are unbelievers being killed for their sins by another group of unbelievers (the Israelis, Americans, and Serbs). Consequentially, Salafi orientated regimes like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf States find it easy to abuse the poor Muslim workers who have come from places like Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Egypt, Sudan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Yemen. These poor workers are often paid very low salaries, and some occasions paid a lower than what was agreed and there are many cases of withholding payments for long periods. This is disgusting behavior and naked oppression by any standards.
When such criticisms have been raised they become Salafi-Capitalist, arguing that the labor force should move elsewhere for greater salary. So, the Islamic brotherhood vanishes, the purity of the Aqeeda is put aside, and exploiting the poverty faced by the poor Muslims is deemed acceptable and even ‘Islamic’. They are depicting the Sunnah of the pre-Islamic pagan Arabs. Is there a chance of issuing a ‘fatwa’ on this type of issue? Then the neo-Con Salafis have the audacity to lecture these poor Muslim workers facing exploitation about how deviant they are in their Aqeeda. In contrast, the white Europeans and Americans are paid promptly and paid a far greater salary for doing the same work. This is the consequence of having deep inferiority complex and racist views. There is no chance of squeezing a ‘fatwa’ out of them on this issue either.
True to their rebellious Khawarij nature, they aided the destruction of the Caliphate, replaced it with oppressive monarchies. Surely this is one of the greatest form of innovation (Bidda)? Old habits die hard, so they remain active in opposing those who are trying to re-establish the Caliphate, using various pretexts. For example, they say they do not oppose the notion of the Caliphate (Islamic State) but the creed of those who are trying to re-establish it, and at times they have had the chutzpah to question their sincerity. Obviously this is an excuse, otherwise by now we would have seen plenty of literatures and books on the notion of the Caliphate from these neo-Khawarij. In any case, did the Prophet (SAW) test the creed of all the companions before the establishment of the first Islamic State of Medina? Perhaps these neo-Khawarij are shy to proclaim that they consider the current rulers as legitimate. They were dancing and celebrating with the American forces after the killing of Muslims (or non-Muslims?) in Iraq! Never mind the dead Iraqis, but I would have thought a fatwa on the issue on dancing and celebrating with the American unbelievers would have been pronounced by now, from the land of ‘fatwas’.
For these neo-Khawarij, the Shi’ites are worse than the American soldiers massacring the Iraqis and presumably worse than the Zionist that are murdering Palestinians and Lebanese everyday! Accordingly they criticised the Shi’ites in Lebanon for fighting the Israelis, a close friend of their American masters, and simultaneously remained silent towards the Shi’ites in Iraq who collaborated with the Americans. These neo-Khawarij have been living with the Shi’ites for centuries and they only became a problem after Khomeini came to power in 1979, challenging the legitimacy of the Saudi regime. It was at this juncture we witnessed the circulation of anti-Shi’ite literatures from that part of the world.
To divert attention away from the occupation and slaughter facing the Muslims, the neo-con Salafis insist that everyone should accept their interpretation of certain metaphysical issues that has no real consequences for our life on earth. Nothing else can be discussed until this is resolved. So shedding of the blood of the Muslims, addressing famine, and other forms of tragedy does not rank very high on their list of priorities, assuming it is on their list in the first place! Perhaps helping Muslims in need is considered a minor Prophetic tradition (Sunnah)! But then again, there are no Muslims unless one is a neo-Khawarij (Saudi-Salafi or neo-Con Salafi)!
These neo-Khawarij are well-known for attacking the mainstream Muslims for following the established Madhabs (the traditional Schools of thought). They say you should not follow the Scholars but only the Quran and Sunnah (Hadiths) of the Prophet (SAW). Which tacitly implies the previous Scholars did not do that. In any case this is a redundant argument as following the opinion of a scholar is a must, unless one is a scholar who is capable of deducing the rules from the Islamic texts. The vast majority of the Muslims are not scholars. Therefore, the neo-Khawarij claim of following the Quran and Sunnah in reality means: do not follow the established Madhabs but follow our interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah, i.e. our Madhab. So instead of referring to the books of the traditional scholars like the Hanafi, Shafee, Maliki, Hanbali, Ghazali, and others, you should pickup ‘only’ the books of Al-Albani or Bin-Baaz.
According to these neo-Khawarij, the solution to our problems means going back to the 14th century and continuing the philosophical/theological debate that was initiated as a result of encountering Greek Philosophy. In essence, when everyone becomes a neo-Khawarij, our problem will be magically solved! The US soldiers will then suddenly run in fear seeing the prevailing of the Khawarij (Salafi) compliant doctrines, Israel will cease to exist, and our lands from Morocco to Indonesia will be free and unified under a single Caliphate, finally the oil will be ours, and it will be sold at genuine market prices, the revenue will be used for the welfare of the entire Muslim Ummah (community)!
The neo-Khawarij hide behind their superficial piety which they like to display and brag about, and then confuse the unwary Muslim by citing books, scholars and technical terms. It is easy to promote the above mentioned arguments, as the vast majority of the Saudi-Salafi followers are brain-dead, incapable of thinking independently and rationally about their situation. This is why they fear the wooden cross or the tombstones over the graves, more than the American firepower.
Moreover, they have been programmed to attack the mainstream Muslims and to raise irrelevant minor issues, so that focus is kept away from their paymasters and from vital issues like the mass killings of the Muslims. The Saudi-Salafis talk, you must listen. You challenge them by the constructing your own thoughts then automatically you are reduced to a deviant innovator lacking in scholarly knowledge. There is no doubt the neo-Khawarij are the fifth columnist, they will be at the forefront of fighting the Caliphate when it returns. If we are to learn from history this time we should be prepared to shed their blood and make them extinct, if it is necessary!
Yamin Zakaria (www.iiop.org) London, UK Copyright © Yamin Zakaria 2006
| More from Yamin Zakaria
Stumble It!
December 14th, 2006 at 12:22 am
DWG. You can’t tell the difference between a suicide bomber and a troop shooting soldiers in a battle? Gee whiz. Should you be raising children?
Maybe I should move to America and start shooting people on the pretext that I am protecting the real inhabitant people from the white men who invaded the Indians. Get a grip of your knickers, man.
You want a definition of suicide bomber: how about a pesron who so hates life that he/she is prepared to kill innocents by blowing him/herself up in public places on the false promise of virgins in an afterlife. God alone knows what Allah thinks of that. I think it is mentally unhealthy. Just an opinion – although I am professionally qualified to make it.
As for the ‘racism’ comment, paint me as black as you like (’scuse the pun). Don’t put faux-guilt trips on me, they just run off my back. Anyway, I cannot be racist, by definition. I was born an Englishman! All others are wogs and I make no distinction between them. I do not need to imagine sci-fi fantasies thanks. Racism looks a lot different to that, Sunshine.
The redemption issue: I am not in the redemption business. Surgeons do not try to ‘redeem’ cancerous tissue, they cut it out.
December 13th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
OK…
I’m going to write another dismissive comment.
I like history. And its ironies. And its truthfulness.
What is the difference between an American revolutionary soldier who shot British Redcoats in 1776 from behind a tree while the imperial Brit army marched in their bright redcoat imposing immaculate straight lines….
and an Iraqui Sunni or Shia suicide bomber today?
The occupiers seeking to conquer the American colonies were shot down. It was a necessary slaughter. Our great-great-great grandfathers celebrated many INSURGENT victories.
Can you imagine what you would do if an alien force invaded your town and declared that your relatives had to be killed in order to “plant democracy?”
Welcome to Iraq’s “liberation.”
December 13th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
amfortas — “So how do you define suicide bombers?”
It is time to raise the bar on the logic employed hereabouts.
If we wish to explore the psychology of suicide bombers….
December 13th, 2006 at 10:32 pm
I am still reading but this particularly vile screed caught my eye–
“The Muslim culture isn’t thousands of years old. It was born a mishapen child and has contributed little but pain to all around since its conception. It is genetically inferior.”
That is a pure expression of racism.
And an even more tragic expression of ignorance.
How does one seek to redeem a brother with this sickness of the mind?
December 13th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
Yasmin says – “I am an optimist and a Muslim should always be an optimist. This is why we have almost zero level of depression rates and mental health problems.”
hahahahahaha. So how do you define suicide bombers? Mentally healthy? Depression is the leading precourser to suicide. But, you have to laugh, don’t you.
December 13th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
Toubrouk – You have surprised me with your last response, given your tack record of making intelligent posts. I suggest you look at my post no 93 – instead of making up things in your mind and attribute it to me or borrow them from Squiggy. At least you could have gone to my friend “DadwithGirls”!
Yamin
December 13th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Squiggy you said: “Yamin just said it’s okay for any government to kill anyone they choose, anytime they choose, as long as they pass a law saying it’s legal. The true Muslim thought process on display.”
Nope I did not say it was ok to pass a specific type of law, I did not point that a specific type of law. All I said government implements their respective laws and punish those who break it. If a government passes such an arbitary law where it can allow them to kill anyone as they chose that sounds to me like a version of a secular system, man as legislator.
Such laws could not be passed under Islam as I pointed out in my earlier post.
Observation of the reality is on thing, i.e looking at this process, as opposed to what is right and wrong is another, where you pace valued judgement.
Obviously Squiggy this is challenging for you and Tourbouk – and I dont mean this with sarcasm.
Yamin
December 13th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
SQuiggy – It seems getting this basic observation is becoming very challenging for you. I stated my OBSERVATION of the reality and did not state what is right or wrong! The reality is government implements laws and punishes those who break it. Is that really difficult to understand?
You you are right in democracy you can legislate such exterme laws as the system may permit it, HItler in fact rose through the democratic process and as you say: ” Excellent. So we will just pass a law that says that anytime a Muslim tries to come into our country, we can kill him on the spot. Just make Islam illegal. There doesn’t have to be consensus, as YOU say?”
However in Islam you cannot issue such laws! For example we could not issue a law that says kill all Dhimis or put them into a concentration camp! Thats the big difference, in a democracy you can legislate any kind of laws but not under ISlam!
You are proving my point here.
As for consensus – I did not say there doesn’t have to be any consensus, I said the reality is you never get 100% consensus.
Then in your confusion you jumped to war crimes etc which is related to foreign policy, between nations and has nothing to do with implementation of laws INTERNALLY.
Yamin
December 13th, 2006 at 7:35 am
***P.S. Just for those who dabble in “clear non-sense†(?????) Yamin just said it’s okay for any government to kill anyone they choose, anytime they choose, as long as they pass a law saying it’s legal. The true Muslim thought process on display.***
I will remember this thread when Yamin will be back whinning about the politics of Israel towards the palestinians.
Thanks for the treat Squiggy, you made my day!
December 13th, 2006 at 5:38 am
P.S. Just for those who dabble in “clear non-sense” (?????) Yamin just said it’s okay for any government to kill anyone they choose, anytime they choose, as long as they pass a law saying it’s legal. The true Muslim thought process on display.
December 13th, 2006 at 5:28 am
I said: What part of “pray five times a day or you will be publicly murdered†is “Muslims deciding to rule over themselves�
Then Yamin said: Squiggy – your argument is dwindling into clear non-sense.
When any regime is in place it enacts laws and those who break it are punished.
Excellent. So we will just pass a law that says that anytime a Muslim tries to come into our country, we can kill him on the spot. Just make Islam illegal. There doesn’t have to be consensus, as YOU say?
Not to mention, you just justified any “war crime” ever committed, and slavery, and most every other heinous act committed by any government ever. Your inconsistency is consistent.
Plus, you can’t make any more arguments on these pages without having this drunken statement of yours quoted.
December 12th, 2006 at 2:48 am
Squiggy – your argument is dwindling into clear non-sense.
When any regime is in place it enacts laws and those who break it are punished. This is how the masses rule over themselves. The US is no different in this respect. Secondly when the laws are enacted and applied is there consensus by everyone ? Is there?
I did tell you before you need to think before put pen to paper and construe your argument.
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Yamin said “If the Muslims decide to rule over themselves by the Sharia and impose those laws and values then it is their business and their right, even according to your so-called values of democracy!
The article stated “Residents of a southern Somalia town who do not pray five times a day will be beheaded, an Islamic courts official said Wednesday, adding the edict will be implemented in three days.”
What part of “pray five times a day or you will be publicly murdered” is “Muslims deciding to rule over themselves”? You are insane.
December 11th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Squiggy you are still being irrational here.
You say: “No you don’t. You know exactly what the point is. When Muslims take over a country, the “fundamentalists†grab control and force everyone to do things their way (or death). The only Muslim countries that don’t force Sharia onto people are the ones run by secular dictators.”
If the Muslims decide to rule over themselves by the Sharia and impose those laws and values then it is their business and their right, even according to your so-called values of democracy!
Ever society enforces some kind of law and order and values and not everyone will concur.
Of course enforcing US made values inside and outside the US is ok, but if it is Islamic then it is unacceptable even if it is within the muslim countries. Why, because you say so? That is the essence of your ‘logic’!!!
When you make such types of response, it only strengthens my argument.
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 6:53 pm
Squiggy – I fail to see the point you are making.
No you don’t. You know exactly what the point is. When Muslims take over a country, the “fundamentalists” grab control and force everyone to do things their way (or death). The only Muslim countries that don’t force Sharia onto people are the ones run by secular dictators.
I would concerned if the Somalis invaded the US, raped their women, killed women and children for fun by taking pot shots on the road (as shown by the videos), stole their wealth, raped young girls and burn their body, sodomise young boys in front of their parents, then initiate civil war by promoting one group against the other, or by using counter insurgency activity. Then call the entire thing ‘liberation’, ‘freedom’ etc.
You find a couple of instances of something and extrapolate to the entire American Army. So I should assume you behead people (I have more examples than you do, and these videos were made by the murderers, not good people trying to get bad actions stopped).
And as for “calling the thing ‘liberation’, ‘freedom’ etc.” that’s exactly what it would be if people with other agendas (like you?) didn’t foment trouble. In fifteen of the eighteen Iraqi provinces the people are safe and happy, and love the American soldiers. In the other three, they are being murdered daily by “Islamic extremists” (something you always ignore, or blame the U.S. for, which is imbecilic). And yet way more than half of them still love America. Go figure.
You are one voice (of reason, sort of), and the “extremists” are many thousands of voices. Which voice(s) should we believe? Only someone who is suicidal should listen to you.
December 11th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
More rants against the article:
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?p=11692&posted=1#post11692
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 5:43 pm
Yamin under attack from all sides -
http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_YaminZakaria.pdf
A 74 page response to my article – someone must have felt very storng about it.
Note the attack is very personal – rants all over the place and in places it looks racist. He calls my writing insignificant but yet he makes a 74 page response to it!!!
I have porven the retarded “neo-con Salafi” ‘logic’
Â
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
To DadWithGirls – Your question to Amfortas is redundant. Because expecting amfortas to be objective with regards to ISlam and Muslims is like asking the KKK to do the same, with respect to the African-American communities.
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Squiggy – I fail to see the point you are making. If the Somalis or the Eskimos decide to drown themselves under water what has that got to do with you or me? They may have laws and customs you dont like and vice versa.
I would concerned if the Somalis invaded the US, raped their women, killed women and children for fun by taking pot shots on the road (as shown by the videos), stole their wealth, raped young girls and burn their body, sodomise young boys in front of their parents, then initiate civil war by promoting one group against the other, or by using counter insurgency activity. Then call the entire thing ‘liberation’, ‘freedom’ etc.
That would be a genuine point of concern and discussion.
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 4:33 pm
To DadWithGirls – I did not dodge your question on psychology – I said clearly you need to ask the Muslims experts. This is not my field and I have no knowledge in this arena.
Yamin
December 11th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
amfortas – Please refrain from provocations. Also, your tone is combative – even ugly. Please stop posting in anger.
December 11th, 2006 at 6:10 am
Just a little note to see if Yamin will comment:
MOGADISHU, Somalia – Residents of a southern Somalia town who do not pray five times a day will be beheaded, an Islamic courts official said Wednesday, adding the edict will be implemented in three days.
Public places such as shops and tea houses in Bulo Burto, about 124 miles northeast of the capital, Mogadishu, should be closed during prayer time and no one should be on the streets, said Sheik Hussein Barre Rage, the chairman of the town’s Islamic court.
Those who do not follow this edict “will definitely be beheaded according to Islamic law,†Rage told The Associated Press by phone. “As Muslims, we should practice Islam fully, not in part, and that is what our religion enjoins us to do.â€
He said that the courts are announcing the edict over loudspeakers in the town.
Anything to say Mister Zakaria?
December 10th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
Sorry I can’t put it in an equation for you DWG. That a few bright men n000 years ago were inventors of maths that has remained accurate matters little. Individuals and cultures grow old regardless of earlier life achievments. Anyway, the Muslim religion/culture isn’t thousands of years old. It is more recent than Christianity and even Christianity doesn’t claim invention of wheels.
As an individual ages so does his acceptance of death. He/she may even come to embrace it, especially when life holds so little furure promise and the pains of decay, disease or disability set in. Civilisations age too, get past their Prime (’scuse the pun) and take on a fatalistic smell. Some do it with an anger and resentment just like some old folk do.
The Muslim culture isn’t thousands of years old. It was born a mishapen child and has contributed little but pain to all around since its conception. It is genetically inferior. Its a shame, but that’s life. Not all children are perfect and neither are all civilisations. Some need wheelchairs while they live and early life-insurance to pay for the coffin.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:57 pm
amfortas — you have observed that Muslims have an “antipathy to life…”
Please write more about your insightful argument.
I am fascinated to understand how a four- thousand year-old civilisation can be what you imply.
Since they invented modern mathematics, I hope you will be precise in your reply.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:43 pm
Yamin,
You dodged my question about a Muslim “psychology” with obscure references to marginal ancient Muslim scribes.
So, I am going to try again to pose what I feel is a seminal question —
Is there any PSYCHOLOGICAL common ground between Christians and Muslims?
I am neither, so perhaps I can pose as an objective observer?
(No, I am not Jewish either…)
Yamin, upon what ground do you envision a recognition of likenesses between cultures might occur?
Where is the ideological demilitarized zone to be found?
December 10th, 2006 at 8:07 pm
Yasmin said, “Pity you came along and lowered the level of discussion again. Your contribution is like inserting drops of urine inside a glass of milk.”
Larf. I’ve never tried that Yasmin. What strange practices you have. Should I give it a go to understand your culture the better.
The level of discussion is variable Yasmin. You pose issues from a POV which in many societies would be considered menataly dysfunctonal. I have lived in many parts of the world and was always able to find commonality with the various cultures. Some I found very strange in custom and even in thinking style. The Chinese for example take a bit of effort to understand. Maybe it was my age and experience which had me hard at it. I managed though. But the commonality included a love of life in all cases – except the Muslims. You seem to exhibit this antipathy to life, prefering the rules of your religion to the presence of love and the spirit of life. If anything lowers the discussion it is this. Your hatred is like a black hole.
December 10th, 2006 at 7:45 pm
Oh, also…
that we do not get blown up during our cafe lunch.
Because if you read the Iraq Study Group’s report, they envision 70,000 U.S. military troops in Iraq PERMANENTLY… as “trainers and advisors…”
Our lunch date may have to be an indefinite rain check, Yamin.
Cold soup might be best?
December 10th, 2006 at 7:28 pm
Yamin — (reply to DWG):
“I am sure if I was in the US or you in the UK – we have had this out over a nice meal!”
I would prefer that we could have that nice meal you anticipate on a sidewalk cafe in Baghdad…
That would be my criteria for a successful American intervention.
Everything else is just politics….
December 10th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Toubrouk – After showing great improvement your latest response has declined again to the likes of Squiggy.
You’re welcome Toubrouk. Anyone Yamin loses an argument to gets compared to me, an American who doesn’t live up to his murdering standards for “African-Americans” (an ignorant term that needs to go away).
You’re on the “fatwa list” now. Hope they still allow Canadians to own guns.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:07 pm
To DadWithGirls – Of course – Mike can be the judge.
I am sure if I was in the US or you in the UK – we have had this out over a nice meal!
There would have been a fence around us for the likes of amfortas, squiggy et al to be spectators.
Yamin
December 10th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Yamin — “DadWithGirls – I hope you remain on my blog for sometime.
That will depend upon your degree of ruthless honesty and your willingness to continue to interrogate your own beliefs…
and my own.
Deal?
December 10th, 2006 at 6:39 am
Angry Amfortass you say: “Yamin, lucidly speaking whilst reading the Koran is oxymoronic”
Read my response again in post 67….It seems in anger your brain is not funcitoning properly. All evidence points your brain is in the dysfunctional state.
LOL LMAO
)
Pity you came along and lowered the level of discussion again. Your contribution is like inserting drops of urine inside a glass of milk.
Yamin
December 9th, 2006 at 10:11 pm
Yamin, lucidly speaking whilst reading the Koran is oxymoronic. But you may be right in part. Maybe he was dysfunctional before the radiation poisoning if he was already considering converting. But, then again, perhaps being buried as a Muslim was insurance against you lot blowing up his corpse.
I have no concept of honour? Just how did you reach that wild conclusion, not even knowing anything about me? Shirley you are a comedian. Or perhaps you are a bog-standard bigot, Sir.
Marines are known for? You take one alleged instance and condemn all Marines, do you. I guess I can apply the same ‘logic’ then about Muslims when they incinerate innocent bystanders. Muslims are therefore to be known for blowing up innocent children buying an ice-cream in a cafe. “By their fruits, you shall know them”.
And please leave my ass out of it.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:44 pm
Amfortass – As for your comment about the Russian Spy – the Quran states this “Haterd is uttered from their mouths but what they conceal in their hearts is worse”.
The poison did not affect his judgement, as he stated in clear lucid speech that he wanted to be burried as a Muslim. He was reading the Quran before he died, thus highly likely that he had converted prior to being affected by the poison.
So you see, your response proves that you do not have to be infected by radition to have a dysfunctional brain!
As for the isue of honour – How can I respond to someone who has no concept honour! Which is self-evident from your response!
. In any case, the woman is unlikely to survive as your Marines are known to burn or kill their victims after raping them.
Yamin
December 9th, 2006 at 8:07 pm
The ex-Russian-spy who was murdered so slowly by radiation poisoning, Yamin, was no doubt a very angry man. Radiation not only attacks the body’s cells but the brain’s as well. So his judgement ability had a double whammy. Dying, brain disintegrating, consumed by righteous anger, it isn’t a suprise that he turned to Islam. Seems a most suitable end point.
Re: the woman in the cartoon. The Arab men are taking notes so that her sharia trial will reach a ‘just’ sentence. She will be stoned to death for bringing dishonour on her father (the guy covering his face with his hands. The poor man is beside himself with shame). The Marine may well protest that she was hysterical and needed restraint, but the arab guys will quickly dismiss that and claim she was raped. There are more than enough witnesses to condemn her. They will probably give the marine a house in down-town somewhere.
December 9th, 2006 at 6:07 pm
Strange but true………….
AS you know the recent Russian spy who died embraced ISlam on his death bed. When I heard the news of this man that he was sick and on the brink of his death. I was wondering in my mind, I wonder if he would embrace Islam before he die or suppose this man turns out to be a Muslim? Then the next news I hear is he did embrace Islam.
It felt strange as my thoughts collided with the reality.
Yamin
December 9th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
DadWithGirls – I hope you remain on my blog for sometime.
I am an optimist and a Muslim should always be an optimist. This is why we have almost zero level of depression rates and mental health problems. Our source of contentment comes from our stable family life and knowing our purpose in life. So ask the three pertinent questions:
1) Where have we come from
2) Why are we here
3) Where are we going, what is our destination.
If you woke up tomorrow in a strange place these are the first questions that you would ask yourself. As man gains conscience about his existance he must at some point ask the same questions about life on earth.
About pshchology you have to ask the experts in the field. Early scholars in this field were the likes of Ibn Sina (Avecena from Spain), Ibn Khaldun (From Tunisia) and Ghazali (From Baghdad).
Yamin
December 9th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
So Yamin,
Ultimately, you are an optimist?
One theme in the current U.S. “race-from-disgrace” media campaign that is clearly the intent of all the new U.S. regime’s propaganda to “explain” the quagmire in Iraq is arguably just this —
Now we (via America’s mass media) are characterizing the Iraquis themselves as lazy, incompetent, disorganized, in fact — as morally deficient, for having not yet “stepped UP” so we (America and Tony Blair) can step DOWN.
This is a classic case of Freudian projection!
The defeated project their worst self-humiliating fears upon their victims.
I might be completely incorrect in this analysis.
Yamin — who is the Muslim version of Freud?
Is there such a thing as a Muslim professional “psychological” profession?
Or, does Islamic creed suffice as an antidote to modernity?
December 8th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
To DadWithGirls – quickly as I am getting sleepy.
About graceful disengagement – that only would have been the case had the US achieved its objective of creating a stable government that is moving towards your vision of democracy. Otherwise it will look like a humiliating defeat. As the response of BUsh and Blair to the recent report, already indicates that they have been humiliated, especially after declaring victory early on. The report also suggests that US casualties has been far higher than what they have admitted to.
And once you leave… Of course there will be further bloodshed in terms of settling scores. There will be some degree of reprisal against collabrators, hence some of the Shi’ites and Pesh-Mugger criminals will be targeted. But I am not sure if it will led to a full scale civil war. Nor am I sure that in turn will lead to regional war involvoing other countries. Of course none of this would have happened if the invasion did not take place, as secterian war did not exist prior to the war.
Yamin
Yamin
December 8th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
Toubrouk – After showing great improvement your latest response has declined again to the likes of Squiggy.
I never said Patton was right, because the Americans are greedy capitalist pigs. This is most preplexing. Patton was correct due to his accurate observation of the reality. I did not say the Americans, I said some Americans, and finally I never used the word pig.
Then you make a big deal of HizboAllah firing rockets, but no mention of what Israel has been doing prior and since that. So your account of the event startes with Hizbo-Allah firing rockets and I suppose Israelis were showering the Lebanese with flowers! Is this a fine piece of objective analysis you uphold as truth? Then to support your claims you cite one pro-ISraeli report, while ignoring the vast amount of reports from the more neutral sections which blames Israel for the violence.
If you are interested in truth then look who has been firing missiles in far greater quantity well before Hizbo-Allah fired its rockets. Like if you want to establish who has been the biggest victim, all you need to do is count. Can you do that?
If you are interested in truth, then look who has been holding larger numbers of prisoners which includes children, women and the old, priror to the war.
If you are interested in truth, then look at the reports of human rights groups, all of them condemned Israel for its criminal actions.
If you are interested in truth then look where the Israeli soldiers were captured – many have stated that it was within the Lebanese borders.
Yamin
December 8th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Thank you, Yamin. Your artice exposing the true nature of present day Khawarij is right on.
December 7th, 2006 at 11:06 pm
I just love your style of writting Yamin. You are telling me Patton is right because Americans are capitalists pigs? I don’t see the link, then it must be a strawman attack. Come-on! Think about all those poor Islamists who want to die as martyr and who volunteer to be human shield! Do you want to slander their pure purpose in life? Their mission?
Smart bombs is a great thing. 20% means one bomb hit the target for five bombs dropped. During World War II, entire wings of bombers were needed to hit a target. Sometimes, they couldn’t even hit it. So, a rate of 20% is great. Think about all those human shields, they DESERVE ammo who hit their target!
Right now, the Ghandi thing could work in Iraq. 1-) Public support in the U.S. is in a all-time low, 2-) Everything remotely socialist and mediatic support the cause. Your arab friends got a golden opportunity here…
As far as Lebanon goes, are you tell me that all those rockets fired by Hezbollah actualy were firred by evil mossad agents in south lebanon? Even if the leaders of Hezbollah claimed they were firing them?
**********
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=ae679beb-d2be-40a4-8e74-8e581c1bf1ca&k=16670
Hezbollah’s deadly hold on heartland
Loved by many, accused by others of sacrificing civilians
Sonia Verma
National Post
Saturday, August 05, 2006
TYRE, Lebanon – When Dr. Fouad Fatah emerged bleary-eyed from the ruins of his hospital during a pause in Israeli air strikes last week, it felt like the first time in forever.
He counted himself as the last living soul in the five-room clinic, the only hospital serving this devastated swath of Lebanon’s south. His surviving patients had already been evacuated.
The surgeon led a group of journalists over what remained: mangled debris, shredded walls and a roof punched through by an Israeli shell.
“Look what they did to this place,” Dr. Fatah said, shaking his head. “Why in the world would the Israelis target a hospital?”
The probable answer was found a few hours later in a field nearby. Hidden in the tall grass were the burned remnants of a rocket-launcher.
Confronted with the evidence, Dr. Fatah admitted his hospital could have been used as a site from which to fire rockets into Israel.
**********
The truth is a wonderful thing, don’t you think, Yamin?
December 7th, 2006 at 7:02 pm
Yamin,
Perhaps you might consider starting a new thread in light of the just-released Iraq Study Group’s report?
Do you think there is any kind of graceful “disengagement” for the U.S.?
And after we leave, what future do you see, based on your historical acumen of the Middle East?
December 7th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
Tourbouk – I know who Patton is, and the also the quote. It is sad but true. It shows how the poor in America are being exploited for the few (neo-cons and capitalists like Haliburton, Bechtel etc) to make lots of money. There are numerous reports confirming the would be Green-Card holders (esp Mexicans, Latinos) fighting in Iraq.
As for “smart” bombs their succes rate was less than 20% in the 1991 Gulf War if I recall.
As for Ghandi – this is misrepresented, the reason why the British gave up India had nothing to do with Ghanids non-violent resistance. IT had do with two main factors – 1) The UK was exhausted from the Second World War 2) The US was pushing the idea of decolonisation and scorned the old colonialism as part of her policy to replace herself where the British interests used to exists.
As for the recent LEBANON war, many Westerners (esp in Europe) also gave full support to Hizbo-Allah, as many came back and stated clearly that the Israelis were targetting civilians areas where there was no sign of any Hizbollah fighters or their presence. They were angry with what they saw was a nothing but a deliberate policy of terror which will not work. It only creates more resistance and will power.
Yamin
December 7th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
DadWithGirls – “Yeah, you’re right. (My bad.) War Crimes trials are only for the losers.” LOL
You make me laugh
)
Yamin
December 6th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
Ah Yamin, sometimes, I am amazed by your verb. You know how to twist things!
You see, unlike many, the west learned that sometimes, massive bombing is useless. This is why there’s still some buildings standing in Bagdad!
Yes, we got technology on our side. We can destroy a building with pinpoint accuracy with guided ordinance. Note that I dint say “Smart”. There’s no such thing existing. Guidance depend of the skill of the operator and sometimes, it fails.
As far as the Human shield tactic goes, it is also doomed to fail. Ever heard of Patton? He was a great American general who once said: You don’t win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by killing the poor, dumb bastard who want to die for his country.”. In fact, being a human shield HELP the enemy to get rid of you.
By itself, there’s two ways to win a war against an enemy with a crushing military edge: First, it is to make them pay for every inch of ground. This has for effect something like trying to chew a Re-Bar. You might get throught but you will have broken teeths at the end. The palestinian authority is a pure example of this. Israel still exists even after decades of terrorism and war from neighborhooding countries.
The other possibility is to act like Ghandi. This might be alien to Islamic culture but passive resistance is a way to win a war. During the last lebanese conflict, many westerners openly supported Israel because they were under Hezbollah’s fire. Had Hezbollah just vanished, Israel would had looked like monsters. Oh well, think what you want to think.
December 6th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Yamin,
BTW … please do not blame me for any of my beliefs, convictions, confusions, cynicisms, idealisms, omissions, excesses, or stupid posts.
I am a product of my culture.
Just like you!
December 6th, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Yamin wrote —
“DadwithGirls you say: “Eventually, there will be War Crimes trials against the U.S. for this travesty. Count on it.â€
Despite showing intelligence after all this time, you failed miserably here. When was the last time you heard a UN resolution passed against the US? Is that possible? Nope, because of her Veto status thus she has set herself as judge jury and executioner. No room for democracy in the highest political institution!”
Yeah, you’re right. (My bad.) War Crimes trials are only for the losers.
And when the U.S. makes a “strategic redeployment” from Iraq, there will never be any admission from any elected politicians that we actually lost.
And I take no satisfaction in that.
Because, once again, Americans will be demonstrating to the world-at-large that we, as a people, are so arrogant that we cannot learn from our experiences.
And that is not a condemnation of our idealism.
Americans really wanted to see a democratic Iraq.
We like to believe that every culture on this planet wants to aspire to be just like us.
This is a consequence of Americans’ lack of cultural mobility and experience.
Fewer than 20% of Americans live more than 300 miles from where they were born.
The same percentage have passports or have ever travelled outside U.S. borders.
Yamin, you are dealing with an insulated tribe that represents itself as the world’s savior.
But the tribe’s leaders have no experience outside their own neighborhood. And their sheeple even less.
And, anyway, all this silly chit-chat about war and peace is distracting from the real agenda —
PROFITS.
Am I making myself clear?
December 6th, 2006 at 4:06 pm
As there has not been any reponse to the Quiz. Let me give you another clue on the recent Shia-Sunni conflict in Iraq.
When the British controlled India, they did something similar with Muslims and Hindus. THey introduced the Zaminder class system. Whereby they took a predominantly Hindu populated land and appointed a Muslim ruler and vice versa. Now what do you was the result of this? Yes after living together for centuries side by side in peace, you had communal riots for the first time in history in the 1880s onwards. No doubt people were saying the same thing, as you are about shia-sunni conflict in Iraq.
Yamin
December 6th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
Tourbouk to my surprise you say: “Western military doctrine in the past advocated for the heavy bombardment of civilian areas.â€
So this is terrorism, state-terrorism, and the mother of all terrorism. It was the West who invented and practiced State-Terrorism and this continues today. Yet it is the Muslims who are classified as terrorist for retaliating.
Now after showing flashes of brilliance you then spoil it by stating the usual Fox-News propaganda: “On the other side, Arabic terrorists leaders just love to use human shields. Since they don’t have the guts to stand up and fight, they surround themselves with women and children.â€
So you expect the Iraqis to face the US army after it had stripped it of all the heavy weapons, bearing in mind that advantage your forces posses despite this. You think that is a fair fight? You expect them to face F16s, Heavy Tanks and Cruise Missiles with RPGs? Isn’t that a bit like asking a light weight boxer to fight ten Mike Tyson and if he does not do that you call him a coward? So, dropping bombs from high altitude demonstrates the bravery of the US soldiers, while the weaponless Iraqis fighting a guerilla war is cowardice! You see, I am still struggling to see the world from your perspective.
Finally, when you kill civilians indiscriminately as bombs are by their nature are indiscriminate; you put a spin on it by saying they were using human shields. Most of those casualties could have been avoided if your marines went into a place without air cover, without use of illegal weapons (like cowards) and fight the resistance who then has half a chance. Of course whenever you tried that you took heavy casualties.
Yamin