I wonder about the seeming expansion of Muslim-on-Muslim suicide bombing we first saw in Iraq and are now seeing in Pakistan. Are there religious authorities that are sanctioning this? Most of these attacks are Sunni vs. Shi’a affairs or vice-versa, but some of it is now tribal or militia-on-militia.
A suicide bomber set off an explosives-laden vehicle on a field during a volleyball tournament Friday in northwest Pakistan, killing at least 25 people, police said.
The blast occurred near Pakistan’s tribal belt, and was the latest bloodshed to rattle the country since the army launched a military offensive against Taliban fighters in the South Waziristan tribal region…
Police said Friday’s bombing in Lakki Marwat city, not far from South Waziristan, was possible retaliation for local residents’ efforts to keep militants out of the area.
”The locality has been a hub of militants. Locals set up a militia and expelled the militants from this area. This attack seems to be reaction to their expulsion,” local police chief Ayub Khan told reporters.
I’d think that such attacks are harder to justify on Koranic principles than even al-Qaeda’s attacks. Muslims killing other Muslims while they’re trying to play volleyball? Because they don’t want to host armed insurgents? I can’t imagine how they could justify it religiously. Is this something new? Or is it just an expansion on what’s already been going on?
I don’t think there’s a mention of volleyball in the Old Testament so shouldn’t we be bombing them?
Booman, you’re probably going to laugh at what I’m about to say but I believe al-Qaeda is just a death squad created under the Reagan years by American right wingers and this is why they don’t adhere to the teaching of Islam etc. I also believe Dick Cheney is connected to this group.
See?
Stop laughing! LOL
“Both [the Islamists and Neoconservatives] were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. And both had a very similar explanation for what caused that failure. These two groups have changed the world, but not in the way that either intended. Together, they created today’s nightmare vision of a secret, organized evil that threatens the world. A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful. ” The Power of Nightmares, Baby It’s Cold Outside.
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
This doc is definitely worth watching.
I’m not laughing.
The CIA operation in Afghanistan in the 1980’s was the largest ever.
Down the road, you can say that the groups that are killing innocents are a result of those days.
I doubt Cheney would have been allowed into those groups.
The neocons have a lot to answer for.
Oh thank you! I’m glad I’m not alone in this thinking. What really did it for me was watching what appeared to be CIA/Bush Regime “Osama bin Laden audios” that would come out for Americans to listen to just in the nick of time (you know…to boost the fear and to help the Regime in expressing their thoughts!).
I feel we’ve been duped. It doesn’t help that it was Dick Cheney who PERSONALLY allowed IN SECRET the release of two al-Qaeda in Yemen:
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2009/12/dems_blame_bush.php
Mr. War Criminal is definitely involved with al-Qaeda as far as I’m concerned and he and Georgie spent their years protecting these a-holes because they’re on the payroll!
I, for one, am not laughing. You’ve made a reasonable speculation. The odd aspect of conspiracy theories is that they can be true.
If someone told you that the American Revolution was plotted by men in a secret society who wore aprons during their magical rituals, you might laugh, but it wouldn’t make it less true.
Ack, my comment disappeared after I previewed.
I don’t claim to know much about Islam, but I very much doubt that suicide bombings and the like have anything to do with Islam. I very much doubt that the killing of innocent bystanders, Muslim or not, can be justified by anything in the Koran. I don’t think the jihadists have any more to do with Islam than the dominionists have to do with Christianity. In fact, I think the two have more in common with each other than either has with the essentially peaceful world religions they claim to represent.
The word missing from this thread is “apostasy.” An apostate is a Muslim who is considered to have turned their back on Islam. Accusations of apostasy are frequently leveled at any Muslim who collaborates with occupiers or other non-Muslims against the interests of other Muslims.
Radical imams throw the “apostate” accusation around pretty freely. Apparently, refusing to support the Taliban (in favor of the Pakistani central government, or even in favor of local tribal councils) is enough to earn the mantle these days.
And once the “apostate” term has been applied, all sorts of justifications arise to kill that person. Obviously, most Muslims don’t subscribe to this calculus and would argue that true Islam does not permit such behavior.
The problem, of course, is that just what constitutes “true Islam” is an intense conversation going on worldwide. There is a tug of war between the radicals and the cooler heads, and it’s too early to tell who will prevail. And, in some ways, the struggle to define Islam parallels the struggle to define America.
The Koran teaches that the taking of an innocent life is akin to killing the entire world. Simply redefine who is an ‘innocent'(read apostate), to meet your own ends, and you have justified killing anyone you want. On our side, we use that insidious term ‘collateral damage’ to justify killing innocent civilians. Where is the real evil? Fundamentalism. It doesn’t matter if it’s Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindi, etc. They all use their faith to justify murder of the ‘other’.