[lit-ideas] Re: New EU lexicon on terror
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:07:33 -0700
Simon,
I suppose you are conceding that I do read different points of views but are
suggesting I am perhaps unfamiliar with the one in the note you post. Not
so. I've read that point of view before. I've also read opposing views.
David Selbourne in his encyclopedic The Losing Battle with Islam writes (on
page 130) "Too serious for satire, as well as for the simplicities of the
counter-assault, are modern Islam's refusals of criticism. So, too, its
harshness with 'apostates' and 'blasphemers'; so, also, with its use of
threat (and worse) against its own intellectuals when they are of
independent cast of mind, and its widening abandonment of the principles of
balance and compassion, proclaimed by other Muslims to be 'central features'
of Islam. Scholarly historical 'explanations' that Islam was either always
thus, or never thus in the past, are no longer of much service. Both
'explanations' are simultaneously proffered to us by the 'experts', and
cancel each other out."
And your newstatesman reporter, John Pilger, isn't even an expert. He is
not noted for his objectivity. He can be said to be anti-American, Bush,
Blair, etc. Why would you think I wouldn't be familiar with his position?
I'm also surprised you take people like Pilger seriously. Why not get hold
of some decent scholarship?
You seem to have missed most of the recent discussions. The Islam vs
Islamism vs Terrorism has been discussed at great length. Omar and I for
example have discussed whether there is a majority in Islam that can be
considered Moderate. We discussed an article that described Moderate
Islamism as being one in which the moderates agree with the militants in all
things except violence; which I argued didn't qualify as moderate in any
useful sense of the term. I also complained that the moderates, the ones
who could be truly distinguished from the militants, are silent. They are
either non-existent or afraid to speak up. I assume the latter case, but
this forces many scholars to base certain theories upon the supposed
existence of a silent Islamic moderate majority. To read moderate Muslims
you must read scholars who are located in Europe or the U.S. All of this
has been discussed at length in recent weeks.
As to how Osama bin Laden founded "the base" Al Quaeda after the Afghan war
against the USSR, this has been discussed in a number of books. The U.S.
can be said to have inadvertently abetted Islamism as the U.S. supported the
anti-USSR forces. But the terroristic impetus came from the Wahhab milieu
out of which Osama came by way of the teachings of Sayyid Qutb of the Muslim
Brothers. Osama studied under Sayyid Qutb's brother.
As to Benezir (aka Benazir, aka Benezair) Bhutto, she was in some trouble in
Pakistan. Here is a comment from a Pakistani: "Benezir Bhutto seems like an
arrogant and selfish type politician who inherited the political capital of
her great father which gave her two chances to climb to the post of prime
minister but due to her personal weaknesses and the overwhelming factor of
her corrupt husband she fell prey to the conspiracies of her opponents and
for this, instead of blaming others, she must admit & audit her own person
to redress the characteristic loop-holes in her person & politics.
"She must confine her husband to the household without any political role or
rank otherwise this continued Zardari impact & involvement shall over-shadow
and ruin the Bhutto-oriented legacy in toto as this guy has a world-wide
reputation for corruption and which is not
good or conducive for her career.
"I must quote here one meeting, held in Stockholm during mid 1990s, with a
businessman from South Korea who asked me whether I know Mr 10% and I said
no because my being living abroad I didn't know much of the home politics so
this gentleman told me that your Prime Minister's husband, Mr Zardari is
known by this denomination as he gets 10% commission in all state contracts
and businesses and this really was felt as a shameful act on part of the
son-in-law of a legendry and ever-living political icon like Mr Z.A. Bhutto.
"So may be people in the PPP(P) are afraid and lack courage to suggest or
point out this but since my immense love and regard for her great late
father I make her realize, through this reprimand, to mend her political
ways to reach the heights of her martyr father.!"
She still seems to be out of the country for some reason.
http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.php?id=141704
Lawrence
_____
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Simon Ward
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 4:36 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: New EU lexicon on terror
'As to the war West described being the same as the war Osama bin Laden
describes, I fail to see your problem. If there is a war, then surely both
sides fighting it know it.'
And yet this war was advertised as a war on terror, not a war against Islam.
Tell me Lawrence that you can see the difference. It's been ramped up since
2001 to the extent that mainstream journos such as West are talking of a war
against Islam, the same message as the most recent bin Laden tape.
'The U.S. didn't create terrorism.'
So what were they doing in Afghanistan in the 1980s? Who brought the Saudis
over there to begin with? What was Benezir Bhutto referring to when she
described the Mujahadin as a Frankenstein's Monstor created by the US? If
that wasn't creating terrorism Lawrence...
Try a different viewpoint...
<http://www.newstatesman.com/200604240013>
http://www.newstatesman.com/200604240013
Simon
Other related posts:
