Blair Getting Away With Murder 561


Blair just said “You would be hard pressed to find anyone who in September 2002 doubted that Saddam had WMD”.

It wouldn’t have been that hard. If he had asked members of the Near East and North Africa Department of the FCO, the Middle East experts in the FCO’s Research Analysts, or in the Defence Intelligence Service, he would have found absolutely no shortage of people who doubted it, whatever position No 10 was forcing on their institutions.

One of the many failures of this Inquiry has been a failure to ask individual witnesses before it whether they personally had believed in the existence of any significant Iraqi WMD programme. I know for certain that would have drawn some extremely enlightening answers from among the FCO and probably MOD participants.

Sir Martin Gilbert allowed Blair to conflate Iran, Iraq, Al-Qaida, WMD and terrorism in a completely unjustified way. When Straw tried exactly the same trick, Rod Lyne did not allow him to get away with it.

A further stark contrast with Straw is that both Blair and Straw were asked about the failure of the UK to secure movement in the Middle East peace process by using our role in Iraq to influence the USA. A major, detailed and fascinating part of Straw’s answer was that Israel’s – and specifically Netanyahu’s – political influence in the USA had prevented progress.

By contrast, Blair did not even mention Israel in response to the questions on the failure to achieve progress in the Middle East. He solely blamed the Palestinian Intafada. He has been anxious to widen the discussion beyond Iraq at every opportunity, and frequently referred to destabilising factors in the Middle East, and again and again pointed to a growing threat from Iran and Iranian sponsorship of terrorism, and to Palestinian terrorism (including Saddam Hussein’s past sponsorship of it).

He has made not one single comment about Israel’s behaviour as a contributing factor in Middle East instability. Given Blair’s official position as Middle East envoy, this lack of any bare pretence at impartiality is most revealing.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

561 thoughts on “Blair Getting Away With Murder

1 7 8 9 10 11 19
  • Suhayl Saadi

    Essentialisation and racism as a substitute for thought and the seeking of knowledge. The spectacle of an individual who revels in the fact that they haven’t got a clue is always amusing. And yet – and so – repeatedly such individuals don the armour of religion, God’s silver sword in their (right) hand. It suggests the old adage that most people who stand on (their own perceived) religious piety are insecure hypocrites. No wonder such porous individuals are attracted to cults who claim to deliver the truth, the whole truth… It’s not always the journey; sometimes the final destination matters.

    The idea of a complex, polyvalent society and the concept of history terrifies some people; they thrive on simple dualism: Good versus evil. Love versus hate. Was it the Greek Buddhist missionaries? The magnificent spectacle of Aphrodite with lots of arms? The beauteous Quranic Yusuf? Or was it simply the idea – the reality – of Jewish Pakistani film stars that rankled?

    Lamb pulaow, anyone?

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    ————– THE TORTURE MEMO —————-

    EXTRACTED FROM:http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/doj/bybee80102mem.pdf

    “The definition that emphasizes that torture is not the MERE infliction of pain or suffering on another, but is instead a step well removed. The victim must experience INTENSE pain or suffering of the kind that is equivalent to the pain that would be associated with serious physical injury so severe that DEATH, organ failure or permanent damage resulting in a loss of SIGNIFICANT body function will likely result.”

    “Torture is not merely cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, but aggravated and deliberate forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

    Example:

    “Israeli Supreme Court

    Public Commitee Against Torture v Israel

    1. Shaking

    2. Shabach

    3. Frog Crouch

    4. Excessive tightening of hand-cuffs

    5. Sleep deprivation”

    .. not torture

    How to avoid prosecution (my statement)

    “The President, through a United States Attorney, need not, indeed may not, prosecute criminally a subordinate for asserting on his behalf a claim of executive privilege.”

    The necessary defense can justify the intentional killing of one person to save two others.

    Can I put this another way? (my words)

    In the case of Iraq, the killing of 3000 Americans justifies the murder of 1 million Iraqis.

    “al-Qaeda plans apparently include efforts to develop, and deploy chemical, biological and nuclear weapons of mass destruction.”

    “Clearly any harm that might occur during an interrogation would pale to insignificance compared to the harm avoided by preventing such an attack. (hypothetical attack – my words)

    (Signed,)

    Jay S Bybee

    Assistant Attorney General

  • Richard Robinson

    “Apparently, it is true, among some Christians. They believe that Jesus was fed a potion on the cross to simulate death, and was then revived by herbs while in the tomb. This has always struck me as a cheerful version of the crucifiction”

    I’ve heard that story, as “some Muslims believe that …”. I don’t mind, either way, but I rather like the idea of thinking that he died at a ripe old age, instead. But what about the poor sod who got the trouble instead, though ? Collateral Damage, again.

    But, this is a nice turn of conversation, I like this. So I’ll tell another story I heard, and can’t remember where from, which is, why Ethiopia is Christian (it’s a story that goes back further than the last few decades, then. Ho hum, these things happen).

    Which is that when the Prophet (pbuh) was without honour in his own country, that was one of the places he travelled to. And they showed him a drink they had, where there’s this bush, and you gather the berries, and roast them, and grind them, and do things to the powder with nearly-boiling water. And he liked it, a lot, and passed the word of it on to his people. So, when they were doing better for themselves, he told them, Ethiopa’s all right, we owe them for that, you leave them alone. And they did.

  • Richard Robinson

    “Reminds me of that great quote: “sometimes I thank God I’m an atheist”.”

    Reminds me of another quote. Man called Grgory Bateson, a kind of all-purpose academic, I read a wonderful quote from him :- “My father was an atheist. Every morning after breakfast, he would read to his children from the bible, in order that they not grow up to be ignorant atheists”.

    *grin*

  • Richard Robinson

    Mark – it must be five years now, that people have been publishing about how they have the definitive date when some combination of The West was going to launch the invasion of Iran (and, currently, yes, it ought to be shocking to see someone called a Peace Envoy out selling it). I think there must be some kind of fairly serious faction-fight going on ?

  • CheebaCow

    Suhayl Saadi –

    I just want to say thanks for all your comments, they are always fascinating, and I’m envious of your ability to always engage with people in a positive way.

    I remember when I first read one of your comments, I checked out your website for Josephs Box. To be honest, my first impressions weren’t great. It seemed very Paulo Coelho to me (and I’m not a fan of Cali neo-hippy feel goodism). However, after reading more of your comments, I’m sure your book must be a lot more interesting. When I get back to my home country I will definitely order a copy (I already have a large bag full of books to take home).

    I really enjoy your posts about history, they always tell me something I had no idea about. Can you recommend any good history books?

  • arasalan

    I hate Pakistani films because they are rubbish, not because the actors may or may not be Jewish, Muslim or Mormon. I don’t know the religions of any Pakistani actors, they are so crap I don’t have a desire to learn anything about them.

    Indian films are also all rubbish, except maybe Lagan. But all Pakistani films are rubbish, no exceptions.

    The same applies to Israel, people hate it because it is a genocidal colonialist country. And I am not just talking about the west bank, Gaza Jerusalem both east and west, the Golan, Sheba farms and other places that may be recognised as colonised. I am talking about the whole thing. It was made by kicking out or killing people in every inch of what is now Israel. Every village there has been built on an Arab village that was destroyed.

    It would make no diffence what the religion of these colonialists is. What ever it is they are evil. They are as evil as Pakistani films are crap.

  • Vronsky

    Suhayl

    “Look for the good, you’ll find it. Wherever in the world you go, look for the bad, you’ll find it. ”

    I had a friend who visited Venice. What did you think? I asked. It’s very smelly, he said. No, he hadn’t noticed anything else.

    PS: Loved Joseph’s Box – bought a copy for my daughter who asked for it, having read a few chapters of mine. Definitely not Paul Coelho (*spit*).

    a~

    Jesus survived? So he didn’t die for our sins (whatever the hell that means) – he just a had a really bad weekend?

  • Vronsky

    PPS: ..and now that I think about it, I bought it from a shop in Glasgow, and that shop is no longer to be found. Should I expect strange things to happen?

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    Richard Robinson,

    I do enjoy your dry sense of humour, you make my laugh (hung) in difficult times. I wonder if the berries from that bush might be given back to the Bush inspired war-mongers? Faction fight? maybe, remember Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace prize and people have to be persuaded that war is unavoidable (the global consciousness factor). Right now a process of prodding Iran is active on one front, revolt against theocracy on another and agent provocateurs on yet another in the form of Mossad and it’s art of deception (check here for a flavour of deception: http://tinyurl.com/mossad-deception ).

    The Council of Experts are fully aware of propaganda in America to conjure hate for Iran as ‘mary’ astutely warns us. ‘MJ’ reminds us of ‘powerful allies’ but China I believe is impotent in a defence role, although powerful with her voice in the Security Council; Russia plays both sides and very annoying (according to British SIS) holds her cards very close, making analysis of her intentions virtually impossible. Russia is content to make money with arms deals to Iran and help with her civil nuclear program.

    That is a snap-shot of the scenario, but the whole thing is extremely volatile with Israel loaded up and ready to roll.

  • mary

    What difference will this make? None whatsoever.

    Iraq inquiry to recall Tony Blair over possible conflicting evidence

    Former prime minister to be questioned in public and private over evidence he gave to panel on invasion’s legality

    Richard Norton-Taylor and Patrick Wintour The Guardian, Monday 1 February

    Tony Blair being questioned in public for the first time about his decision to take the UK to war against Iraq in London. Photograph: EPA

    The Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war is to summon Tony Blair back to give evidence and he will be asked to testify in both public and private, officials saidlast night.

    The former prime minister, who gave nearly six hours of evidence on Friday, is expected to be asked about intelligence reports. His second public appearance could take place before the general election.

    The panel are concerned in particular about his evidence relating to the legality of the invasion, the Guardian has learned. Blair’s evidence seemingly contradicted that given by Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general at the time, about the number of discussions the pair had about issues of law between 7 March and 17 March 2003, three days before the attack on Iraq.

    Blair also told the inquiry that the question of whether military action would be lawful was “always a very, very difficult, balanced judgment”. Yet the panel has heard he told Lord Boyce, then chief of the defence staff, that it was his “unequivocal” view that an invasion would be lawful.

    Blair told Goldsmith to pass on the message after Boyce demanded a yes or no answer to whether it would be legal. Boyce had been concerned about Goldsmith’s view that only “a reasonable case” could be made in favour of an invasion.

    Jack Straw, foreign secretary at the time, will be questioned next week about his view on the lawfulness of an invasion.

    Clare Short, then international development secretary, yesterday claimed Blair marginalised her and Gordon Brown in the runup to the war, a view she is expected to repeat when she gives evidence to the inquiry tomorrow. She will face questions about whether she instructed her officials not to co-operate with the occupation, and to detail the legal restraints on her staff due to the lack of clear UN endorsement for military action. Short will also be expected to explain why so few of her staff were apparently available or willing to help in the reconstruction of Basra.

    She told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show: “In most of the runup to the war Gordon and Tony were in one of their fallen-out phases and Gordon was marginalised, not included and not in the inner group.

    “He was saying to me, ‘They think they’re going to have a quick and successful war and then they’ll be very powerful and they’ll have a reshuffle.'”

    Short added: “He thought they wanted him out of the Treasury, because there was tension about how you spend the money of the government, and they were going to offer him the Foreign Office and he was saying, ‘I won’t accept it. I’ll go and join you on the backbenches’.”

    She claimed that John Prescott, then deputy prime minister, reconciled Brown and Blair, leading Brown to back the war at the last moment on the basis that the French had vetoed a second UN resolution that would have endorsed the war.

    Short, who resigned shortly after the war started, also condemned the key thesis put forward by Blair to the inquiry.

    “His great big argument that, after 11 September and the attack on the twin towers, there was a danger that rogue states would give weapons of mass destructions to organisations like al-Qaida, and that’s the reason for going to Iraq ?” he never argued at the time.

    “And it is ludicrous. There was no link of any kind … between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. So there was no such threat.”

  • arsalan

    Vronsky

    Muslims do not believe he died to remove sins, and we don’t believe in an original sin that needs removing.

    Each person is responsible for his or her own sins and no one elses.

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    mary,

    Thanks for your post and the information on Clare Short. Brown was marginalised and I have some faith in Gordon (as stated on this board, on his determination of the Iraq war. I believe his hands are/were tied)and look forward to his testimony.

    It is also sweet to have a female perspective here and I treasure your thoughts mary.

  • anno

    Suhayl

    I take it by polyvalent you mean polytheist. One of the more worshipped gods of Western society being Lying or being economical with the truth, but there are plenty of others to choose from.

    Islam is in the middle of a Reformation, not unlike the destruction of the monasteries and papal power following my hero Martin Luther. All of the merits of the United Kingdom derive from that religious revival in my opinion.people read the Gospels in their own language and put its advice into action.

    When Islam’s reformation, assisted by Saudi Arabia, brings the Muslims back to the Qur’an and Sunnah, polyvalency or as I call it polytheism, will be seen for what it is, an excuse for keeping the old injustices going. You correctly blame the US i.e. Zionism for blocking reform in Pakistan, but at the same time

    your position against Islamic knowledge is like saying ‘ We’ll keep the monasteries but change them to protestantism.’ No, sack them, and start again. We need to establish Shari’ah against injustice, but the West is fighting desperately to prevent that from happening. Every trace of the India/Pakinstani concept that Islamic knowledge is a route to self-enrichment and power, in the Sufi ‘peer’ system, where individuals are credited with special supernatural powers on the Hindu/ Buddhist model, will be ransacked and destroyed.

    I agree with Arsalan, if Bollywood and Urdu go as well, good riddance to the lot of them.

  • MJ

    Ah yes, the 2001 anthrax attacks. As I recall the highest profile recipient was Tom Daschle, Leader of the House and responsible for determining whether the Patriot Act should be fast-tracked through Congress or undergo the usual process of debates and amendments etc. As it so happens, after the anthrax business, he chose the former.

  • ingo

    Although I agree with your analysis MJ, it can also be said that the 400 million spent annually on undermining Iran, keeping tribal differences at boiling point and interfering in the elections has had an effect. It has galvanised modern Iran into re evaluting their system and how it is serving society.

    It is to beseen, whether the paranoid actions of republican war mongers in the US has the desired effect.

    Whatseems obvious to me is that we should advise people to stay away from voting for the two main parties, both to be relied upon to wagg that tail and commit this country to a major world conflict, the third and final great unpleasantness.

    China will not be boxed in economically by its debtors, it will not support any Iran action, however much Israel likes to have a go before the ss300 are installed, as if that matters much.

    I would not be surprised if China, the largest rare earth producer in the world, now stalls all its exports and hence, our own drive to more alternative energy generation. This would work well into the hand of the coal and Oil lobby, not far away from decision makers when schock and awe is near.

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    Vronsky,

    An amazing lady, cheers for the introduction. I am exploring the connection between David Kelly and Bruce Ivins and I will report back here or in a relevant thread. Right now I am unable to retrieve her link to the National Academy of Engineering detailing the reverse engineering attempt to establish a match.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Thanks so much, Vronsky! It’s good to get feedback like that. I’m really, really pleased you enjoyed ‘Joseph’s Box’; it’s the sort of book, with its dense, multi-levelled, poetic prose, which one would need to become wholly immersed in, I think, to really ‘get’ it, so it’s super that you did! That’s also amazing, cosmic, even, about the ‘ud – truly I wish I could play an instrument. I’d keep a close eye on it if I were you, lest it begin subtly to mutate…

    CheebaCow, thanks also. Yes. ‘Joseph’s Box’ is a brick of a book – not like Coelho though. The little White Cliffs is probably the most accessible of my books to date. Psychoraag is fast-paced and urban, lots of music. The Burning Mirror is an eclectic short story collection – many different styles. The Snake is a literary erotic fiction (under pseudonym, Melanie Desmoulins!). ‘Joseph’s Box’ is in Standard English, but is complex and dream-like. Not New-Agey, though, perish the thought! Much more visceral, historical and trippy. Fulfilling, though, if one has the stamina – good for a long-haul ‘plane journey, also goes well with Turkish coffee!

    History books – depends what area of history one’s thinking – a good one might be the late Angus Calder’s book on the British Empire – I forget the title, but it’ll be on the web; it pre-dated Edward Said’s more famous works, and also Calder’s book, ‘The People’s War’. He’s a vastly under-sung historian; he felt for people as well as understanding the mechanics of events.

    Anno: I didn’t mean polytheist actually, I just meant multiple modes of living and multiple modes of faith within a particular set of religious traditions, the acceptance that not everyone adheres to the exact same set of convictions about (a) particular religion(s) as oneself and the willingness to analyse the power dynamics thereof. You have a point about Sufi shrines, I’m not a great fan of them myself, but they are part of an intriguing tradition and seem to fulfill a need. As with most universalist faiths, Islamic life has always been complex, it was a religion which arose in the context of the metropolis and of mercantile exchange. This has been one of its great strengths: a simple message, but efflorescent manifestation. You may not agree, and that’s fine, but that’s the way I see it.

    Arsalan: My irritation re. the ‘Pakistani’ thing was simply a reflection of my frustration at people who seem ?” at least in the highly artificial, often anonymous and hothouse atmosphere of a blog – unwilling even to learn new things and explore the possibility that their own personal experiences, while valid, may not necessarily represent the totality of reality. I used to have dismissive, pejorative views about a number of matters, but have learned, I hope, to listen to others’ experiences and knowledge and to try to explore these possibilities in order to apprehend a particular subject in a broader way. I’m always learning and so by definition remain deeply imperfect.

    I liked Lagaan, too! It was a great film. At the risk of provoking ire, may I politely suggest that the film, ‘Ramchand Pakistani’, a film based on a true story, is worthy of appreciation. It may, I’m not sure, it might have been screened last year; be on at the Tongues of Fire film festival. There is a genre of films/ shorts/ documentaries being made in Pakistan, not by the sadly degraded and now almost defunct commercial sector but by independent film-makers, based largely in Karachi, which are much better – they screen at film festivals around the world, Sundance, Frankfurt, etc. It’s worth a look, if one wishes.

    I know this little deviation, which I seem, inadvertently, to have sparked, has little to do with Tony Blair – but maybe in a deeper sense, it has everything to do with how one comes to view the world, and people as part of the world.

  • arsalan

    My criticism of Pakistan was actually meant in a tong in check way to elicit the very response you gave to on this reply to Anno and me.

    Why?

    Because you are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing in regards to what is different. I am not just talking about this thread, I have seen it in your posts in many others but I didn’t bother replying.

    I myself believe that there is nothing more intolerant then being intolerant of what one regards as intolerance.

    Who do I accuse you of being bigoted too? Selafis, or Wahabis as you might want to call them.

    They are a tiny minority in Pakistan, so make an easy target for the cowardly.

    I don’t claim to be some type of liberal extremist who tolerates everyone and everything. But even though I am not a selafi myself I do recognise that their opinions are within the fold of Islam. So I would say there is nothing more intolerant then intolerance against them in the name of tolerance?

    Might I be so bold as to say I sense the stench of hypocrisy?

    I am also not a Sufi, but I Studied Islam in one of the world’s foremost and oldest Sufi Madrasas. I would probably guess that the majority of students there were main stream like me and not Sufi and there were many Selafis there.

    That is the key issue. In Islam we do not have the blatant bigoted sectarianism that exists in western Christianity.

    People study at a Madrasa because of its reputation, its teaching reputation. Not because of sectarian allegiances. People travelled from all over the world, Iran, China, Russia, Indonesia and Africa to study there because of the knowledge of the teachers. I can give you the name of the Madrasa, but I can’t be bothered. Because it is irrelevant they are all like that. You may be asked about your knowledge and previous courses you studied, to meet the entrance requirements, but you will not be asked if you follow their school of thought. And the same thing applies to Mosques. We go to a Mosque when it is time to pray. It doesn’t matter what the school of thought of the people who run it is, and mostly we ourselves don’t know. We just go inside, pray then leave.

    I feel what you said in your attacks on selafis was a cut and paste from a neocon website.

    Muslims do not really have such distinction. If you think we do please define Selafi and Sufi and tell me where one ends and the other starts? If selifi means as the neocons state attempting to follow the pure form of Islam which was followed by the Prophet pbh and his companions, then I am a Selafi. If that is the definition I would say I am more of a Selafi then the people who choose that as a title. If Sufism means spirituality as the sufis like to claim, then I am a Sufi, and I would say I am more a Sufi than many who label themselves with that title. I can’t see why someone can’t be both?

    There is no contradiction between obedience to God and loving God. I would say both are interdependent. You can’t have one without the other. And they do not contradict.

    I make a distinction between Sufism and heretical ignorant idiots using Sufism as an excuse. I have studied in a Sufi Madrasa, prayed in Sufi Mosques and have many Sufi relatives. But I have never seen any of those knowledgeable people visiting graves. The people who I see visiting graves are ignorant people who know nothing about Islam anyway, and practice very little of it.

  • mary

    Baroness Scotland is very busy.

    – Withstanding the outcry about possible changes to the UK law vis-a-vis Universal Jurisdiction being demanded by the Zionist.

    – Deciding on the holding of an inquest for Dr David Kelly

    And now 35 days to reply to this request -http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/government-ordered-to-reveal-iraq-legal-advice-1885156.html

    The Government’s most senior legal advisers broke the law by refusing to tell The Independent who was given crucial advice about the treatment of prisoners during the war in Iraq, the Freedom of Information watchdog has ruled.

    Baroness Scotland and her predecessor Lord Goldsmith twice breached Labour’s flagship right-to-know legislation in refusing to say who was briefed on the application of the Human Rights Act in the run up to the war. Human rights lawyers now want the Chilcot inquiry to consider the effect of Lord Goldsmith’s advice after the start of conflict in 2003.

    Baroness Scotland, the Government’s most senior legal adviser, has been ordered by the Information Commissioner to tell The Independent whether the Army, the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence were warned about human rights laws.

    The question of what advice was given and to whom is deemed essential by human rights groups, who have argued that the advice may have helped create a culture of abuse in detention centres.

    In 2007 the first British soldier convicted of a war crime was jailed for a year and dismissed from the Army after being convicted of mistreating Iraqi civilians, including the hotel worker Baha Mousa, who died of his injuries at the hands of British soldiers. Today the MoD is investigating 47 more allegations of torture and abuse in relation to operations in Iraq.

    The Deputy Information Commissioner, Graham Smith, ruled that while the actual advice should not be disclosed, it was in the public interest for the Attorney General to confirm who received it. He also said that by taking nearly six months to respond to The Independent’s request, the Attorney General had breached the Information Act. Under the legislation she should have replied in 20 working days.

    /continues

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    Will a childs sweet life be nipped in the bud

    Before life has really begun

    Without ever having dreams

    Much less, having dreams fulfilled

    Never to know tomorrow’s treasures?

    Will they be able to see

    Through fogbound nightmares

    Beyond the haunting mist of terrors?

    Do children feel the swirling hatred

    Or numbly take it in?

    How can children live in a place

    Molten in humanity’s disgrace?

    Here, where fear replaces love

    The only thing showering down from above

    Children feel not blessings

    But tears in their eyes swelling

    Born in a world of hating

    Pain replacing tenderness

    Memories made by shock and awe

    Killing is the law.

    http://tinyurl.com/Blair-Murderer

  • Anonymous

    ah religion….now I may not be of a legal mind, but the evidence over the past couple of hundred years would seem to suggest that following religion aint a good thing, when you take the death toll into account…etc

    me i’m happy getting by not wanting to kill others cause they aint in my gang, and like the majority of all gangs its one run by men.

    time to spend a bit more time (gents) not being outclassed in the majority of fields by women and get on with having fun. Oh by the way I prey to the church of the old mighty Chicken Korma….it gives me all the I need. The rest…well I get that from family and friends..oh and that thing called common sense.

    you all play nicely now

  • Suhayl Saadi

    “There is no contradiction between obedience to God and loving God. I would say both are interdependent. You can’t have one without the other. And they do not contradict.”

    I agree entirely.

    There is nothing to stop people practising the way they wish to practice; I have never advocated this. My criticisms are about power and the manner in which too many of the people who claim to have a monopoly on thought and belief in Islam try to foist their views on other Muslims and issue edicts and restrictive condemnations. And the organisations which often they seem to represent appear to have the money and power to do it on a massive scale in some countries. Such people – or their ideologues – interpret the religion all they want to suit their ends and then they attempt to stop others from doing the same. Perhaps we are all hypocrites, to one extent or another, perhaps it is a part of the human condition.

    The imperial powers – whether paleo- or neo-con – have been allies of the Saudi regime for many decades; does this not also suggest some degree of hypocrisy on both their parts? Paleo-neo-cons also put the ‘Islamist’ General Zia ul Haq into power and suuported him in Pakistan and all that flowed from that. Aggressively exporting their particular brand of the religion to other areas and attacking those who do not accede reminds one more of the tactics used by the right-wing Evangelicals in the USA. I think it needs to be critiqued and I don’t think one ought to be accused of being a neocon for doing that!

    My argument here with you was really mainly about your expressed views on all-things-Pakistani – you must know that Pakistanis are the easiest of targets in the UK and that no matter how horrible your experiences might have been, other people have had other types of experiences. With respect, your comments last night didn’t seem particularly tongue-in-cheek to me and were unprovoked; I hadn’t attacked anything you’d said in the thread but was trying to illustrate some of the intriguing histories of the region and all I got in return from your good self was a reflexive tirade. I’m sorry if subsequently I seemed condescending.

    “The people who I see visiting graves are ignorant people who know nothing about Islam anyway, and practice very little of it.”

    I know what you mean. But it’s a lot more complex than that. There is also a social class/ poverty dynamic at work in relation to Sufi shrines. If literacy rates were higher and if poor people’s economic/ health circumstances were not so dire in those countries, it seems likely that such devotional worship would decline, at least in the form in which it exists today. There’s also the syncretism of traditions which actually is also instrumental in some of the central practices of the (and of all) religion. This does not lessen the power or validity of Muslim revelation, far from it; it actually strengthens it.

    Anyway, maybe some day we could share a fish pie.

    With respects and salaam.

  • arsalan

    I believe lake of religion is the real killer. Just look at the last 100 years. WW1, ww2, Stalin, Hitler, Moa, the British Empire. Soviet Union and America.

    And then compare it to the few people who unite on the bases of religion to fight back?

    Some people worship God, and it is this belief which limits their crimes.

    Others believe in No God, and nothing limits their crimes, but the means they have to commit them.

  • glenn

    arsalan: Hitler was actually a Christian. Don’t you recall the Nazi SS had emblems inscribed with “Gott Mit Uns” ?

    Trying to suggest Stalin, Mao etc. did their deeds _in the name of atheism_ is utterly ludicrous, and rather disingenuous if you don’t mind my saying so.

    You don’t think people’s crimes will be that bad if they happen to have an irrational belief in some sky-spook? Well that’s rather odd, because history is replete with examples of just such a thing. Unless you think the Crusades, the Inquisition, Columbus and his butchery, not to mention Bush & Blair didn’t do anything wrong, when they apparently truly believed they were acting on behalf of Gaad and God respectively.

    And that’s just KKKristianity. If you don’t think Muslims have done anything wrong while under supposed spiritual guidance, or Hindus, Sikhs, and just about any religion you care to mention, I respectfully suggest you read up on some history.

    Nobody has launched wars and massacres in the name of atheism. Plenty have done so to please the blood-lust of their preferred mythical sky-spook.

  • arsalan

    I know you didn’t attack anything I said. I attacked you because of what you said, not because of who you said it to.

    You have actually strengthened my point with your last post. So I will repeat what I said.

    Intolerance of intolerance is not tolerance. By attacking them, you have become them!

    If your attack was solely on the Saudi Regime, I would not have a problem with it. But you attacked a community. The Selafis, which have become a very easy community to attack, you can say the neocons favorite target amongst the Muslims.

    I thought it was blatantly clear that it was tong in Check by the very fact that I started by informing you that my wife was a Paki. Wouldn’t the fact that I choose a Paki out of all the women from all the different nationalities that proposed to me indicate that I don’t really hate Pakis and I was trying to make you think about something you said by what I say?

    The selefis are a very small community in Pakistan. Neocons like to cause a confusion between Deobandis and Selefis for there own ends. But every Muslims knows those two communities are about as far away from each other as it is possible to get within Sunni Islam.

    you already know what I think about the Issues of sectarianism and Nation states. I don’t believe in it. As you know I believe all Muslims should unite under one Khilafah. I already know that you disagree with it. And the absence is what I blame for the mess in Pakistan, not the presence of selifism, Sufism or any other difference.

1 7 8 9 10 11 19

Comments are closed.