The Truce: The Fair Point of Agreement

[_Waziri_]

In the recent past we had a little disscussion here about suicide bombing and terrorism in Islam. Our friend here Myadudu has proved a little instrangient though with honest admission of the fact that he is NOT learned in the science of substanciation according to Islamic principles. This informed my perception that his condemnation of Saudi Scholarship and the people there as Kindom of fools is not without  connection to his reading of the paper by another very controversial character, my brother, Sanusi L. Sanusi in a paper he presented in August condemning schorlars of Saudi and celebrating the change of curriculum imposed on them by the Americans in his public adress to some sisters in FOMWAN. See this link: http://www.gamji.com/sanusi44.htm

After that I took the pains to share the content of my post in another topic dealing with Yusuf Islam's deportation on this board with brother Lamido and others via  an emailing list where we discuss ideas and Islamic principles. This is it:

I think we will start being unfair to ourselves if we say we don't know about the ideological battle hence cultural war that is currently going on between Western culture and Islamic culture.

America being the touch bearer of Western civilisation leads the frontier of the battle and the aim is to crush Islam and all elements of its culture( culture here means organised way of life) from the surface of the earth just as it tried communism.

I do not think I have to deal with details and maximum references before I can make everybody see reason in my claims. I also do not require more proof apart from what Kitkat said to make all see that this thing is being effected to the end of the stretched string.

Just some few weeks back, a brother adressed some of our sisters in FOMWAN here in Nigeria celebrating the fact that America has succeeded in forcing saudi government to change the curriculum of Islamic Studies taught in Saudi Kingdom. He was ridiculing our local scholars who once read in Saudi Universities. He thinks he is doing a service to "true" Islam by crushing those he believed to be the promoters of militant Islam.

This claim of his is far from the truth. The West in its bid doesnt distinguish between any militant and non militant elements in Islam and Muslims. The West aims at Islamic culture anywhere across the globe. It doesnt care whether it is Shi'a, Wahabi, Sufi or whatever. Evidence of this is their fight against Iran and Saudi curriculum at the same time. Before then also was Ottaman Empire of Turkey which harboured an Islamic worldview different from Saudi of today and Iran. So anybody who allowed himself used to crush any Islamic group in the name of liberalisation or democratising Islam should know the West will only finish up those groups only to turn its aggressive tone to HIM.

Our position is for a worldview that insists the world be seen through a divine script and preferably the Qur'an, not just reason and materialistic philosophies that are never new and novel in anyway which the West wish to make the in thing.

For the West with America in its forefront our claim is one: Let them allow us live our own way. We do not desire to crush them. We do not want impose our ways on anybody. Muslims have ruled India for over 700 years but they did not force the Indians to convert. That was why many of them later could chase the Muslims out of their lands.

Also we have ruled Spain for almost 800 years but yet we have left enough people to practice their faith that they coukd chase us out of the land later.

The West in the name of America should learn to understand that nature itself is dual in attribute. They do not have to quence Islam and its culture or its representative elements like Yusuf Islam and Kitkat by denying them some of  their rights. And also by branding us terrorists upon a slightest action of protest or inclination to seek for our freedom. The West should understand that they need not to fabricate 9-11 and hinge it on the Muslims just for the simple reason that they have to declare some foolish war on "terror" that till today kill nobody but civilians and refused to find the much taunted WMD.

We are ready to have a dialogue with the West that a win win situation may be achieved.

Alhamdulillahi now when Sanusi found himself recently in Uganda to speak about terrorism and the construction of the identities of the so called terrorists he  looked for the reason of "terrorism" and the justification of it in the Qur'an in the light of the attitude of the West towards Islam and Muslims. He is welcome back home just as Myadudu will be welcome back home after reading his last part of the prresentation which reads:

"The Way Forward



I have tried to argue that on the balance of the evidence, there is no basis for our continued assumption of an organic link between Muslim teaching and religious intolerance. I have examined the main exegetical approaches associated with intolerant traits in Islam, particularly among Wahhabis. But as in all else, to reduce all manifestations of intolerance to Wahhabism or pretend that only Wahhabis among Muslims are in conflict with non-Muslims would be not just simplistic and na?ve but patently unfair.



The reality is that to understand the sources of religious violence we need to go beyond an exposition of religious texts and the manner of their interpretation (or even misinterpretation). If the fundamentalist does violence to the sublime message of peace and justice that Islam contains, he is often also on the receiving end of violence and bigotry.



Muslims live in a world in which they feel persecuted and victimized. This is particularly true of Arab Muslims, since the Middle East is the arena of the most violent conflict in this ?clash of civilizations?. It sounds strange to those who believe history started on 9/11. But what happened on 9/11, as stated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, did not change the world. The events of 9/11 merely bought to parts of the world which have always lived in security some experience of what it feels like to live in Gaza , Baghdad , Kabul or Chechnya on a daily basis. In Iraq , citizens have seen their houses bombed and shelled and their children killed by foreign forces on the pretext of ridding their country of ?weapons of mass destruction?. It has since transpired that these ?WMDs? only existed in the mind of senior government officials in the West. The US president told the world that Iraq had tried to buy enriched uranium from Niger . Colin Powell actually showed the world pictures and ?intelligence? of ?mobile WMD factories? and ?active? plants. Tony Blair announced that Hussein had the capability to launch WMDs in 45 minutes. Each of these assertions, ostensibly based on sophisticated intelligence, turned out to be false. Worse, increasing evidence suggests that the intelligence did not even exist in the manner presented by Washington and London .



The world is witness to the atrocities of the Russians in Chechnya . That which was available to Latvia , Lithuania and Estonia will not be granted the Chechnyans. Israel has turned into an apartheid state and Zionism has built walls around Palestinians. Arab ghettos are being constructed by Israel the way Jewish ghettos were in mediaeval Europe , thus reminding one of Hannah Arendt?s description of Israel as an imperialist state with a ghetto mentality. The American treatment of Iraqis in prison, and the conditions of Muslims in Guantanamo bay are not concealed from the Muslim world. Iran cannot have nuclear weapons without risking the wrath of the world, but Israel can, and even refuse to sign the NNPT.



Given all of this, it is no longer possible to resolve the question by appealing to texts and their interpretation, or to blame Muslim fundamentalists alone for the violence that has consumed the world. Let us assume that the fundamentalist concedes to us that Muslims are only allowed to fight in retaliation against aggression, or if persecuted and exiled. Can we, in all sincerity, deny that in Iraq , Chechnya , Afghanistan and Israel , the Muslims may legitimately claim that they are victims of military aggression and political persecution? Are they behaving any different from the peasants of Latin America who fought against the US- backed fascist regimes in the 60s and 70s? Is the fundamentalist teaching of Arab Muslims much different from the liberation theology of renegade Catholic priests, which later found its way to the anti-Apartheid ?terrorists? in South Africa ? In other words when those who fight quote the Qur?an as justification is it possible that they refer to the Jihad as a ?just war? rather than a religious one? It is only by thinking through these questions that the limitation, or even futility, of theological explanations becomes apparent. The solution lies, not in faith, but in politics.



Conclusion



Without a doubt, the blame for the insecurity the west feels today lies partly with Arab Muslims. But it also lies, perhaps to a greater extent, with the insecure conditions to which Muslims have been subjected for years, responsibility from which the west is not entirely free. This is why we only rarely come acreoss references to non-Arab African or Malaysian or Indonesian Muslim terrorists. We must, in all our religions, continue to resist supremacist, bigoted and intolerant interpretations. We must call to world peace, and condemn the killing and persecution of the innocent-of all the innocent, not just the innocent of a particular breed. But we must dedicate ourselves even more strenuously to a bigger task: That of understanding the violence experienced by those who are oppressed and bombed, a violence that makes it impossible for them to look for peace in their religion. Only by bringing peace and security into the lives of fellow human beings can we expect them to let us live in peace and security. "

[Humrah]

The West is to blame for the actions of the so-called Muslim terrorists.

[alhaji_aminu]

salam

I guess responding to Humrah first is in order. The West the west.... when does it end huh? When will people (muslims) just say it, THERE ARE TERRORISTS AMONGST US. It is very simple. The admission of guilt in something honorable is NOT humiliating or degrading to the ummmah as a whole! I don't think Algerians who fought gallanty against French forces are squimish about their adventure. Neither are the brave and courageous Chechens.

I agree that the root causes of terror[ISM] are created by the United States and Britain but the terrorist attacks witnessed over the last few years weren't in response to their actions. Example: the FIS attacking innocent tourists in the Sahara or bombing the synagogues in Tunisia or UBL blowing up the WTC. I cannot see how UBL, in his twisted and demented mind, justifies attacking the USA. Is it because the US Army refuses to leave Saudia? Perhaps he is forgetting they were invited by the Saudi FOOLISH leaders (WAZIRI ARE U READING THIS??????) to protect them from an enemy to the east- that by the way is Saddam Hussein.

Until and Unless we accept reality and clearly separate those fighting the coalition in Iraq as resistance forces and those who blow up and kill Shi'ite leaders (in front of the masoleum of Ali in Najaf), amongst many crimes, as terrorist, then we might as well deny the existence of atoms and other western pioneered sciences simply because the West are responsible for them.

Sorry for being harsh but that is the way i see the situation!

Mr (koko Alhaji ne) Waziri I couldn't help noticing my name in the first sentence of  your post. Ko anga watane?

Anyhow I don't believe I have said I am not learned in the science of substanciation on the basis of Islamic principles. That is not to say I am. But I really don't see the relevance here? Am I missing something? Or are you referring to my remarks about Saudia as a kingdom of fools (which it indeed is). And I cannot tell you how much I differ from SL Sanusi. I think he is consumed by this arrogance of being an educated man. I read what he writes but I don't take anything out of it (well perhaps I get reinforcement on my assumption of his being gidi-gidi- hausar kanoce basan ko Zaria kunada wannan word din ba).

My comments on Qaradawi and Saudi Arabia are correct to the best of my knowledge!

And Allah ya maimai tamana....... amin.

[_Waziri_]

So Amin you are responding to me in a vein like saying, "Yes I say it" by saying Saudi Leaders are foolish and further capitalising the letters " I hope Waziri you are reading this". This of course is a very naive approach in discourses. It gives me a picture of someone who appears to want to just tell me that he is fed up with me. Or atleast have the previledge of telling me off in a very daring manner. No. We eat from the roast we make, and this world suffices all for a sewn cloak, trouser and a cap.

But one reality is we can not in anyway claim to be better in anyway than those people we call foolish, especially when we say it without citing any example of any sort. Also I think it was established that FIS in Algeria did not commit those act of terrorism that was ascribed to it, but rather Algerian government herself who wished to scare away people from FIS. All the media house including those in the West carried those reports in those years.

Also, Amin, I couldn't have lied  against you. I am really to old to do so. You really said you were not learned in the science of Usul, this is it:

Waziri..... nagode fa. Before I start I want to make this clear. I am not a scholar of Islam. Infact, har yanzu ban sauke Qurani in the form it is done in Hausaland.

Finally, I believe I have a duty among my people, which is primarily calling them to understand the realities of the world they live in and put things in their right places and perspective with the hope of achieving higher goal. I discuss many things. But in all my persistence, I never cease to appeal to my co-discussant to come up with more substantial proofs. For you only have three options in discussion. You either prove what I say and agree with me. Or disprove me with superior points or remain instrangient and stay in doubt forever with a cry of "I DARE SAY IT ALWAYS".

[alhaji_aminu]

salam

Allah yabarmana Waziri. Allah shi karamaka imani.....amin.  

I can't really see how you can take offense in my capitalizing a sentence. Capitalizing is for emphasis and emphasis only. If i did not capitalize the phrase, chances are you will not have seen it. I think the efficacy of capitalizing that phrase is not in doubt.

Believe me bayanda zan taba cewa I am fed up with someone I have never met. What for? Kasan cewa mu kanawa are very hospitable and muna willing to go the extra mile in accomodating differing opinions         (think mallam aminu). You are drawing wrong conclusions based upon what I said.  To make it clear, I EMPHASIZED THAT PHRASE TO GET YOUR ATTENTION.....

The FIS.... common waziri you know it deep down they commit atrocities which are terror related. Obasanjo does. Maitastine did.Terrorist violence doesn't have to be overt with a heavily bearded Arab man claiming, with a heavy accent, that , " we the heroic forces of the resistance in Algeria have killed a number of alcohol drinking civil servants in Algiers. They deserved what they got. They are anti-Islam and pro France!".  I guess you get my flow... and don't forget the UBL gang!

Finally, you seem to have this one-dimensional thought process in matters which don't fit or conform to your own thinking. You said I said,  "I am not a scholar of Islam. Infact, har yanzu ban sauke Qurani in the form it is done in Hausaland. ", and yes I did. What this doesn't say, however, is that the opposite of scholar is NOT an ignorant. So, while I cannot quote a 10th century Islamic figure in Baghdad, I still have a working knowledge of Islam.

ciao!