Thursday, July 28, 2005

Fw: Muslims speak out against terrorism

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Karim A G
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 12:43 AM
Subject: Outside View: Battling the cancer within

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050727-013553-5951r

 

Outside View: Battling the cancer within

By Turki Al Faisal and George Carey
Outside View Commentator
Published July 27, 2005

 

LONDON -- What makes a man take his own life and the lives of dozens of innocent people: mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons and daughters the heroes and heroines of everyday life?
    
    We should be clear upon one thing, which is that it has nothing to do with any faith. Good people of all faiths, or of none, are united in seeing the London bombings as a terrible act against humanity.

 

Not to see this is to be inhuman. There is no faith that condones the taking of innocent life and that celebrates suicide. The killing of innocent people is prohibited by all faiths.
    
    "Thou shalt not kill" is one of the Ten Commandments passed down to us all from the Moses in the Bible. "Whoever kills a person has killed the whole of humanity," says one of the best-known Koranic verses.
    
    Suicide is a sign of an individual's alienation from God and his or her alienation from the human family to which we all belong. This shared human bond, on which we are all so widely and clearly agreed, is a bond that can transcend other divisions.
    
    Our deeply shared humanity unites us. We serve as co-chair of the Council of One Hundred of the World Economic Forum. In this we are committed to building bridges and to overcoming divides.
    
    One of us has served as a Christian leader in Britain and the other as a Muslim diplomat, but we share a common goal, which is to build a vehicle and a dialogue that can address this great challenge of our time.
    
    We do this in the belief that it is possible to construct a world built upon cooperation and harmony sustained by meaningful dialogue. We reject the inevitability of a "Clash of Civilizations."
    
    We do not accept the concept of "Islam vs. Christianity," or of "the West vs. Islam."
    
    Differences are real and need to be acknowledged, but the bonds of common humanity and of our being citizens together of one world are stronger.
    
    Islam, Christianity and Judaism are all Abrahamic faiths with the same core values. Yet facts must be faced.
    
    There are those among our human family who are committing these deeds of horror and devastation and who do not see how evil and terrible they are. They claim to be faithful to Islam and faithful to God but they are not.
    
    This is not Islam and these acts are absolutely not the will of God. Their twisted vision is alien to the healthy body of the faith that holds the world's Muslim community together. It is a wicked perversion of the common values of faith.
    
    The misappropriation of religious labels for violent ends is not a new problem, as past conflicts and experiences in Northern Ireland have made clear, but it is a very urgent one. Politicization of any faith can be extremely dangerous.
    
    In the Middle East, the separation between politics and religion has, by some, been confused, and it is a highly volatile and dangerous confusion that must end.
    
    The fact that the laws of Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, are Islamic laws and that their governance is guided by Islam, does not mean and never has meant that Islam can legitimately be used as a political tool.
    
    Imams and teachers who have used Islam to bolster and preach their political beliefs have done so by perverting traditional Islamic texts.
    
    Declaring fatwas permitting suicide bombings goes against everything at the heart of Islam. These so-called Muslim scholars must be and are condemned. They are violating the most dearly held principles of Islam.
    
    The terrorists who have been led to kill themselves are the victims of bad teaching, resulting from this twisted ideology subjecting religion to political ends. Al-Qaida is not and never has been an Islamic force.
    
    Majority of imams in the Muslim world both since and well before 9/11 have consistently and widely condemned suicide bombings in particular and terrorism in general.
    
    The West does need to understand that while some Islamic scholars may seek to follow a path that goes back to a fundamental view of Islam, they do not accept suicide bombings or the taking of innocent human life.
    
    No one can do this and be a true Muslim.
    
    What then must be done? The Islamic world needs to acknowledge the cancer within its own community and to root it out. Muslim scholars must come out loudly and strongly against suicide bombing regardless of where, when and why they have happened.
    
    We must undertake a global act of collective self-examination. In Islamic terms this is a project of "muhasaba," a quest for the authentic Muslim voice that can dissolve the dark forces of destruction and point towards our true human values that cherish life and can bring about true human flourishing.
    
    In the words of the Koran: "God does not change the condition of a people until they change the condition of their own selves" (13:11).
    
    This is happening: there is a deep significance in three declarations made immediately before and after the London (7/7) bombings.
    
    First, more than 170 Muslim religious leaders met in Amman, both Shiite and Sunni leaders as well as Ebadis and Ismailis. They all agreed that only those trained within the traditional eight schools of Islamic jurisprudence have the authority to issue fatwas.
    
    This might seem an academic point, but it is fundamental to undermining the legitimacy of so-called Islamist (rather than Islamic) terrorism.
    
    This declaration makes clear that none of these supposed fatwas is legitimate or Islamic: Islam has united and declared the terrorists to be in breach of the Islamic faith.
    
    Second, immediately after the bombing, the Grand Mufti (of Saudi Arabia) Shaikh Abdul Aziz Al Shaikh issued a statement condemning the terrorists. He has consistently condemned suicide bombings which have no basis in Sharia.
    
    Last week, 500 British imams put out a fatwa prohibiting suicide bombings and the killing of innocent people. For its part, the West needs to be supportive of the vast majority of Muslims who are peace-loving citizens.
    
    The West also needs to understand the dangers encompassed in the liberal society which it advocates. That liberalism is the very tool used by extremists to foster and spread their twisted ideology.
    
    We appeal to the West and world of Islam not to generalize but to differentiate the minority from the majority. It is time for us all to realize that true freedom is the freedom to live a moral life in fellowship with all mankind as citizens of one precious world. In the name of God we invite everyone to help build it.
    
    --
    
    (Turki Al Faisal is the Saudi Arabian ambassador to Britain. George Carey is the former archbishop of Canterbury. This article was made available by the Common Ground News Service -- Partners in Humanity.)

 

 (United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

 

The GOP is Certain to Win in 2006, Unless...By: Ernest Partridge

  Psalm 84 12O LORD of hosts, blessed is the man that trusteth in Thee.
 
Dr. Partridge's paper is lengthy and well-written.  I have excerpted it here.  He does not mention God directly, but does give several examples of recent miracles that have mitigated the drive toward planetary suicide.    He ends with suggestions for winning in 2006, and I have added a couple of ideas.  Peace, Carol Wolman
 

Independent Media TV

Under Reported

July 25, 2005

The GOP is Certain to Win in 2006, Unless...

By: Ernest Partridge

Crisis Papers, The



I have frequently been accused of being hopelessly optimistic. Perhaps so: thats what keeps me going.

But now, for those who thrive on gloom and doom  it's your turn.

Heres the very bad news: the Democrats will almost certainly lose in 2006 and again in 2008.

Three essential reasons: (a) the GOP and the Bush junta simply cannot afford to lose, (b) they can prevent their defeat no matter what the voters have to say about it (as they have in the last three elections), and (c) apparently the Democratic Party, the media, and law enforcement are unable and/or unwilling to do anything about it.

A GOP win in 2006 and 2008 seems simply inevitable: as "inevitable" as LBJs re-election, Nixon completing his second term, and the endurance of the Soviet Union and apartheid South Africa. By this I mean that all this would have come to pass but for some extraordinary and unforeseen developments. Nothing less will budge the GOP from the White House and the Congress. After all, their private sector supporters count and compile the votes with secret software  and do so with no official independent means of validation. These facts about voting in the United States are publicly known and undisputed. And yet, despite compelling and unrefuted evidence of voting fraud, no one, except some determined citizen groups and a small minority of members of Congress, appear to be bothered enough to take action...
 
Partridge goes on to explain in detail why the Republicans are bound to win.  He ends with:
 
 
Is there any hope?

Not if things continue as they are.

There may have to be a dramatic disruption in the flow of events. And there is no guarantee that this disruption wont have horrible consequences. For example, if Al Qaeda manages to slip a nuclear device into a shipping container and it goes off in one of our ports, all bets are off. Martial Law is a distinct probability, and American Democracy will be a goner.

As it happens, Bushs Department of Homeland Security has done precious little to intercept such horrors. And who knows, Valerie Plame Wilsons covert operation just might have been able to intercept it  had she been allowed to stay on the job.

Hopefully, if a different kind of dramatic disruption comes around, it will work to our favor. For all we know, it may even now be in its early stages: the Rove/Plame/CIA scandal may be at the third-rate burglary phase, with the analogs to the cancer on the Presidency and the White House tapes still to come. The new deep throat may yet enter the stage...
 
He ends with suggestions for the 2006 elections.  I would add:  1) Make impeachment the center of the campaign, by running an impeachment candidate, on any ticket, in every Congressional district.  A Republican has already declared his candidacy on this platform, in Vermont.  2) Give all registered non Republicans absentee ballots, to be mailed in.  This will ensure the counting of these votes, and circumvent the corrupt machines.
 
 
In the name of the Prince of Peace,  Carol Wolman
 

Fw: Who's taking blame for Christian violence?

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Karim A G
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 9:23 PM
Subject: Who's taking blame for Christian violence?

 

Who's taking blame for Christian violence?

CALVIN WHITE

Now that imams in Britain and Canada are standing up and publicly condemning terrorist acts as anti-Muslim and against the teachings in the Qur'an, I wonder if pressure might be put on Christian leaders to take a similar stand.

 

Contrary to what some might like to insist, Christianity is not the religion of "an eye for an eye" but it is the religion of Jesus, who refined those earlier directions and distilled the ten commandments into two. One was to "love thy neighbour as thyself." Pretty definitive isn't it? As is the edict of turning the other cheek.

 

Jesus expected to be betrayed. He expected to be arrested by the authorities. There was no exhortations to prepare for battle. There was no bloody attempt to stop the proceedings.

 

Even as Jesus was brutalized while carrying his own crucifixion cross and being nailed onto the timbers, there was no violent counterforce from his disciples. Not even an outcry.

 

No matter where one reads in the accounts of Jesus, the only conclusion one can come to is that Jesus was about love.

 

So where are the Christian leaders when it comes to violent actions by our Western leaders? Where are the televangelists, who every Sunday take over the airwaves to trumpet the message of Jesus, when it comes to taking on bunker busting bombs and mass carnage?

Where are they when it comes to the death penalty prevalent in the majority of American states?

 

When President George Bush insists that billions of dollars need to continue flowing to the war effort in Iraq which leads to more American body bags and Iraqi graves, why is there no outcry? Why don't the Christian leaders stand up and challenge those decisions, and passionately assert that Jesus would have sought another way of solving the problems?

 

In this time when Christianity is on the rise all over America, when there is a growing surge in extolling Christian values, why is it that when the born-again Bush says it's better to fight "them" over there than on American soil, no concerted group of leaders stands up and yells that he's got it wrong?

 

Like Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair is also born again.

 

Yet, their combined leadership has been responsible for excruciating death and injury to innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

They both claim a righteousness in their policies of destruction. They were even counselled by their secular allies not to resort to the carnage. Where was the equal pressure from the Christian leadership?

 

Interesting, isn't it, that Muslim fanatics use the idea of holy jihad and rewards in paradise to recruit their dupes into terrible acts of destruction, and in Christian circles there is the solemn assembling for prayer and seeking of blessings for the troops and leaders in their mission of war.

 

Interesting, isn't it, that polling clearly indicates the Christian right in America is emphatically against bad language on TV and in the movies, horrified by Janet Jackson's bare nipple — but drawn with considerable relish to violence in the same media.

 

The additional galling irony of Jesus being emblazoned on the foreheads of those in command of the sharpest swords is that Jesus was also all about intelligence. He was all about deeper understanding, about using insight and keenness of mind to solve problems. Think of how the Pharisees tried to trick him by holding up different sections of the law to trip him up.

 

His disciples picking corn, for instance, and thus working, on the Sabbath. Jesus answered that the Sabbath was for man and not the other way around. There was the adulteress brought before him to be stoned; he responded that any without sin might cast the first stone.

What kind of insight have Bush and Blair employed? What intelligence, what deeper understanding is demonstrated by the tactic of blast and shoot with as much technologically advanced weaponry as is available?

 

What compassion, what recognition of common humanity is shown when the biggest concern is how to pad the soldiers with as much body Kevlar and the humvees with as much armour as possible so they can kill all the easier without casualties — and thus retain the support of the home front.

 

How do our current religious leaders think Jesus would react to the concept of collateral damage?


Calvin White is a freelance commentator and poet who lives in British Columbia.