Mutazilah its pashtoon relevence by ScimitarXEdge

[BarakzaiAbdali]

as an outsider i find it sad that muslims appear to have so much to bicker about.
as i recently saw on a map, the block of muslim countries is huge, containing much mineral wealth and much oil and human potential. if you could all work towards peace between yourselves you would be a powerhouse and these 'powers that be' could be kept in their place.
while these freekin wars continue, your country, afghanistan will be a toxic wastedump, half of the population will be hobbling around with one leg, your land will be unusable for crops, children will be being born with defects, white phosphorous etc. imagine another 10 years of war in afghanistan. bombs are still going off that were there since the russians! i don't know the solution but you all should be concentrating on one. where are the peaceful protests by the afghans in the west, to publicise the cause of your people and country?

True Faye, its a situation very similar to that faced by a group of men in 1776 who were in 13 colonies. Also similar to their situation though is that peace must come after the imperial yolk is broken.

[faye]

do you mean faced by or created by, the colonisers? there has to be a point whereyou stop blaming the colonisers for all the things that are done by muslims and take responsibility. look what saddam did to people in his country, look what some of your own have done in afghanistan. you have quoted malalai a couple of times and she is dissed from the govt in afghanistan for speaking the truth. i have also read about the issues between sunni and shia throughout history. i read about that because i was wondering why the muslims were not supporting each other.

[Toramana]

Many of the causes are in the dominent ideology of Muslims which kind of preaches retrogression...i agree with faye...

[ScimitarXEdge]

do you mean faced by or created by, the colonisers? there has to be a point whereyou stop blaming the colonisers for all the things that are done by muslims and take responsibility. look what saddam did to people in his country, look what some of your own have done in afghanistan. you have quoted malalai a couple of times and she is dissed from the govt in afghanistan for speaking the truth. i have also read about the issues between sunni and shia throughout history. i read about that because i was wondering why the muslims were not supporting each other.

We dont deny responsibility but before you can take responsibility you must acknowledge the cause and by acknowledging the cause it requires being fully honest and addressing the relationship colonizers imperialists have had in creating and cultivating the situation and by letting go and refusing them, we in turn can reunify ourselves and work together; because insomuch as I see it, it is entities like America and Britain, and the general Capitalist order that has a vested interest in keeping Muslims divided, and therefore Muslims should be united to address this as priority #1.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

do you mean faced by or created by, the colonisers? there has to be a point whereyou stop blaming the colonisers for all the things that are done by muslims and take responsibility. look what saddam did to people in his country, look what some of your own have done in afghanistan. you have quoted malalai a couple of times and she is dissed from the govt in afghanistan for speaking the truth. i have also read about the issues between sunni and shia throughout history. i read about that because i was wondering why the muslims were not supporting each other.

Dear Faye,

We agree. In fact, documents released by insurgents, that I can cite to you indicate that they agree with you. They view the Americans as occupiers but put the burden of corruption, death, destruction, idiocy square at the feet of the Muslims themselves. In fact, per my reading of Scheuers new book, Mr. Bin Ladin himself appears to have made this the leading keypoint of his organization. In the 3rd chapter of the book Scheuer writes that the latter stated in no uncertain terms that Muslims were responsible for their own troubles. This in fact, appears to be what differentiates the effective insurgent from the lethal nuisance.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

do you mean faced by or created by, the colonisers? there has to be a point whereyou stop blaming the colonisers for all the things that are done by muslims and take responsibility. look what saddam did to people in his country, look what some of your own have done in afghanistan. you have quoted malalai a couple of times and she is dissed from the govt in afghanistan for speaking the truth. i have also read about the issues between sunni and shia throughout history. i read about that because i was wondering why the muslims were not supporting each other.

Faye here is the reference to a previous reference regarding how this effective insurgency places the burden of failure squarly at the feet of the Muslims themselves (pg 115):

Ch. 4: The World's View of bin Laden: A Muslim Leader and Hero Coming into Focus?
"Viewed from any angle, Osama bin Laden is a great man," "world-changing" in Western eyes and revered by tens of millions of Muslims (103-05). The evil-criminal view (105-07). Denigrations of his mind and capacity for leadership (107-09). Said by some to be dominated by al-Zawahiri (109). The thesis that Islam is a "failed civilization" lashing out in resentment (109-13) does not jibe with bin Laden's view: he blames Muslims themselves (114-15). Ideals of tolerance and multiculturalism impede analysis (115-16). Bin Laden as military genius (Christopher Bellamy) (117). Bin Laden as business genius (Larry Seaquist; Bruce Hoffman) (117-18). These miss the religious inspiration of the Islamic hero (118-21). Testimony of those who know him (121-22). Influence of size of his enemy (U.S.) (123). Bin Laden inspires love (124-25). He, like Abraham Lincoln, represents belief in a moral universe (Scheuer quotes again from Kent Gramm's Gettysburg: A Meditation on War and Values (1994) (125-26; also xii and passim).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Hubris

[faye]

when people are oppressed and they don't have the power to fight the oppressors they end up fighting between themselves. i think there are so many examples of this, including, within palestine, african americans, australian aboriginals etc. then they have to reach a point where they say, that is the cause but we will now take control of us. now there are many say, pashtuns, and they can use some of the power of being so many. there can be protests to illuminate your issues or making of videos to get publicity. these ways can work. i didn't know about pashtuns, specifically, before joining this forum. i am glad i did and i am learning heaps, but even those people in afghanistan have learned to have a peaceful protest to try and get what they want, which probably included publicity for their cause. (protest for the release of prisoners)
like i have said elsewhere, majority of westerners know nothing about afghanistan or the people there, other than taliban and osama residing there as a welcome visitor.

[ScimitarXEdge]

sometimes peace isn't the solution, it's the desired goal, but not always the solution. We have to purge ourselves of the corrupt elements, that's where we blame ourselves for allowing it to even set foot, for being too nice to foreign powers. And then we blame them for taking advantage of our initial kindness.

[faye]

yes..

We dont deny responsibility but before you can take responsibility you must acknowledge the cause and by acknowledging the cause it requires being fully honest and addressing the relationship colonizers imperialists have had in creating and cultivating the situation and by letting go and refusing them, we in turn can reunify ourselves and work together; because insomuch as I see it, it is entities like America and Britain, and the general Capitalist order that has a vested interest in keeping Muslims divided, and therefore Muslims should be united to address this as priority #1.

i am not even sure yet whether the disruption is what they want and better for whatever cause they have in mind, or whether they have planned for externally controlled 'democracies' as more favourable to their planned leaching of the muslims resources.

[Alchemist]

do you mean faced by or created by, the colonisers? there has to be a point whereyou stop blaming the colonisers for all the things that are done by muslims and take responsibility. look what saddam did to people in his country, look what some of your own have done in afghanistan. you have quoted malalai a couple of times and she is dissed from the govt in afghanistan for speaking the truth. i have also read about the issues between sunni and shia throughout history. i read about that because i was wondering why the muslims were not supporting each other.

it is you who is the zombie

[faye]

it is you who is the zombie

what's up your chakra?

[Alchemist]

Allow Sartra to explain it to you:


During the last century, the middle classes looked on the workers as covetous creatures, made lawless by their greedy desires; but they took care to include these great brutes in our own species, or at least they considered that they were free men — that is to say, free to sell their labour. In France, as in England, humanism claimed to be universal.
In the case of forced labour, it is quite the contrary. There is no contract; moreover, there must be intimidation and thus oppression grows. Our soldiers overseas, rejecting the universalism of the mother country, apply the ‘numerus clausus’ to the human race: since none may enslave, rob or kill his fellowman without committing a crime, they lay down the principle that the native is not one of our fellow-men. Our striking-power has been given the mission of changing this abstract certainty into reality: the order is given to reduce the inhabitants of the annexed country to the level of superior monkeys in order to justify the settler’s treatment of them as beasts of burden. Violence in the colonies does not only have for its aim the keeping of these enslaved men at arm’s length; it seeks to dehumanize them. Everything will be done to wipe out their traditions, to substitute our language for theirs and to destroy their culture without giving them ours. Sheer physical fatigue will stupefy them. Starved and ill, if they have any spirit left, fear will finish the job; guns are levelled at the peasant; civilians come to take over his land and force him by dint of flogging to till the land for them. If he shows fight, the soldiers fire and he’s a dead man; if he gives in, he degrades himself and he is no longer a man at all; shame and fear will split up his character and make his inmost self fall to pieces. The business is conducted with flying colours and by experts: the ‘psychological services’ weren’t established yesterday; nor was brain-washing. And yet, in spite of an these efforts, their ends are nowhere achieved: neither in the Congo, where Negroes’ hands were cut off, nor in Angola, where until very recently malcontents’ lips were pierced in order to shut them with padlocks. I do not say that it is impossible to change a Man into an animal I simply say that you won’t get there without weakening him considerably. Blows will never suffice; you have to push the starvation further, and that’s the trouble with slavery.
For when you domesticate a member of our own species, you reduce his output, and however little you may give him, a farmyard man finishes by costing more than he brings in. For this reason the settlers are obliged to stop the breaking-in half-way; the result, neither man nor animal, is the native. Beaten, under-nourished, ill, terrified — but only up to a certain point — he has, whether he’s black, yellow or white, always the same traits of character: he’s a sly-boots, a lazybones and a thief, who lives on nothing, and who understands only violence.
Poor settler; here is his contradiction naked, shorn of its trappings. He ought to kill those he plunders, as they say djinns do. Now, this is not possible, because he must exploit them as well. Because he can’t carry massacre on to genocide, and slavery to animal-like degradation, he loses control, the machine goes into reverse, and a relentless logic leads him on to decolonization.
But it does not happen immediately. At first the European’s reign continues. He has already lost the battle, but this is not obvious; he does not yet know that the natives are only half-native; to hear him talk, it would seem that he ill-treats them in order to destroy or to repress the evil that they have rooted in them; and after three generations their pernicious instincts will reappear no more. What instincts does he mean? The instincts that urge slaves on to massacre their master? Can he not here recognize his own cruelty turned against himself? In the savagery of these oppressed peasants, does he not find his own settler’s savagery, which they have absorbed through every pore and for which there is no cure? The reason is simple; this imperious being, crazed by his absolute power and by the fear of losing it, no longer remembers clearly that he was once a man; he takes himself for a horsewhip or a gun; he has come to believe that the domestication of the ‘inferior races’ will come about by the conditioning of their reflexes. But in this he leaves out of account the human memory and the ineffaceable marks left upon it; and then, above all there is something which perhaps he has never known: we only become what we are by the radical and deep-seated refusal of that which others have made of us. Three generations did we say? Hardly has the second generation opened their eyes than from then on they’ve seen their fathers being flogged. In psychiatric terms, they are ‘traumatized’, for life. But these constantly renewed aggressions, far from bringing them to submission, thrust them into an unbearable contradiction which the European will pay for sooner or later. After that, when it is their turn to be broken in, when they are taught what shame and hunger and pain are, all that is stirred up in them is a volcanic fury whose force is equal to that of the pressure put upon them. You said they understand nothing but violence? Of course; first, the only violence is the settlers; but soon they will make it their own; that is to say, the same violence is thrown back upon us as when our reflection comes forward to meet us when we go towards a mirror.
Make no mistake about it; by this mad fury, by this bitterness and spleen, by their ever-present desire to kill us, by the permanent tensing of powerful muscles which are afraid to relax, they have become men: men because of the settler, who wants to make beasts of burden of them — because of him, and against him. Hatred, blind hatred which is as yet an abstraction, is their only wealth; the Master calls it forth because he seeks to reduce them to animals, but he fails to break it down because his interests stop him half-way. Thus the ‘half-natives’ are still humans, through the power and the weakness of the oppressor which is transformed within them into a stubborn refusal of the animal condition. We realize what follows; they’re lazy: of course — it’s a form of sabotage. they’re sly and thieving; just imagine! But their petty thefts mark the beginning of a resistance which is still unorganized. That is not enough; there are those among them who assert themselves by throwing themselves barehanded against the guns; these are their heroes. Others make men of themselves by murdering Europeans, and these are shot down; brigands or martyrs, their agony exalts the terrified masses.
Yes, terrified; at this fresh stage, colonial aggression turns inward in a current of terror among the natives. By this I do not only mean the fear that they experience when faced with our inexhaustible means of repression but also that which their own fury produces in them. They are cornered between our guns pointed at them and those terrifying compulsions, those desires for murder which spring from the depth of their spirits and which they do not always recognize; for at first it is not their violence, it is ours, which turns back on itself and rends them; and the first action of these oppressed creatures is to bury deep down that hidden anger which their and our moralities condemn and which is however only the last refuge of their humanity. Read Fanon: you will learn how, in the period of their helplessness, their mad impulse to murder is the expression of the natives’ collective unconscious.
If this suppressed fury fails to find an outlet, it turns in a vacuum and devastates the oppressed creatures themselves. In order to free themselves they even massacre each other. The different tribes fight between themselves since they cannot face the real enemy — and you can count on colonial policy to keep up their rivalries; the man who raises his knife against his brother thinks that he has destroyed once and for all the detested image of their common degradation, even though these expiatory victims don’t quench their thirst for blood. They can only stop themselves from marching against the machine-guns by doing our work for us; of their own accord they will speed up the dehumanisation that they reject. Under the amused eye of the settler, they will take the greatest precautions against their own kind by setting up supernatural barriers, at times reviving old and terrible myths, at others binding themselves by scrupulous rites. It is in this way that an obsessed person flees from his deepest needs — by binding himself to certain observances which require his attention at every turn. They dance; that keeps them busy; it relaxes their painfully contracted muscles; and then the dance mimes secretly, often without their knowing, the refusal they cannot utter and the murders they dare not commit. In certain districts they make use of that last resort — possession by spirits. Formerly this was a religious experience in all its simplicity, a certain communion of the faithful with sacred things; now they make of it a weapon against humiliation and despair; Mumbo-Jumbo and all the idols of the tribe come down among them, rule over their violence and waste it in trances until it in exhausted. At the same time these high-placed, personages protect them; in other words the colonized people protect themselves against colonial estrangement by going one better in religious estrangement, with the unique result that finally they add the two estrangements together and each reinforces the other. Thus in certain psychoses the hallucinated person, tired of always being insulted by his demon, one fine day starts hearing the voice of an angel who pays him compliments; but the jeers don’t stop for all that; only from then on, they alternate with congratulations. This is a defence, but it is also the end of the story; the self is disassociated, and the patient heads for madness. Let us add, for certain other carefully selected unfortunates, that other witchery of which I have already spoken: Western culture. If I were them, you may say, I'd prefer my mumbo-jumbo to their Acropolis. Very good: you’ve grasped the situation. But not altogether, because you aren’t them — or not yet. Otherwise you would know that they can’t choose; they must have both. Two worlds: that makes two bewitchings; they dance all night and at dawn they crowd into the churches to hear mass; each day the split widens. Our enemy betrays his brothers and becomes our accomplice; his brothers do the same thing. The status of ‘native’ is a nervous condition introduced and maintained by the settler among colonized people with their consent. Laying claim to and denying the human condition at the same time: the contradiction is explosive. For that matter it does explode, you know as well as I do; and we are living at the moment when the match is put to the fuse. When the rising birthrate brings wider famine in its wake, when these newcomers have life to fear rather more than death, the torrent of violence sweeps away all barriers. In Algeria and Angola, Europeans are massacred at sight. It is the moment of the boomerang; it is the third phase of violence; it comes back on us, it strikes us, and we do not realize any more than we did the other times that it’s we that have launched it. The ‘liberals’ are stupefied; they admit that we were not polite enough to the natives, that it would have been wiser and fairer to allow them certain rights in so far as this was possible; they ask nothing better than to admit them in batches and without sponsors to that very exclusive club, our species; and now this barbarous, mad outburst doesn’t spare them any more than the bad settlers. The Left at home is embarrassed; they know the true situation of the natives, the merciless oppression they are submitted to; they do not condemn their revolt, knowing full well that we have done everything to provoke it. But, all the same, they think to themselves, there are limits; these guerrillas should be bent on showing that they are chivalrous; that would be the best way of showing they are men. Sometimes the Left scolds them ... ‘you’re going too far; we won’t support you any more.’ The natives don’t give a damn about their support; for all the good it does them they might as well stuff it up their backsides. Once their war began, they saw this hard truth: that every single one of us has made his bit, has got something out of them; they don’t need to call anyone to witness; they’ll grant favoured treatment to no one.
There is one duty to be done, one end to achieve: to thrust out colonialism by every means in their power. The more far-seeing among us will be, in the last resort, ready to admit this duty and this end; but we cannot help seeing in this ordeal by force the altogether inhuman means that these less-than-men make use of to win the concession of a charter of humanity. Accord it to them at once, then, and let them endeavour by peaceful undertakings to deserve it. Our worthiest souls contain racial prejudice.
They would do well to read Fanon; for he shows clearly that this irrepressible violence is neither sound and fury, nor the resurrection of savage instincts, nor even the effect of resentment: it is man re-creating himself. I think we understood this truth at one time, but we have forgotten it — that no gentleness can efface the marks of violence; only violence itself can destroy them. The native cures himself of colonial neurosis by thrusting out the settler through force of arms. When his rage boils over, he rediscovers his lost innocence and he comes to know himself in that he himself creates his self. Far removed from his war, we consider it as a triumph of barbarism; but of its own volition it achieves, slowly but surely, the emancipation of the rebel, for bit by bit it destroys in him and around him the colonial gloom. Once begun, it is a war that gives no quarter. You may fear or be feared; that is to say, abandon yourself to the disassociations of a sham existence or conquer your birthright of unity. When the peasant takes a gun in his hands, the old myths grow dim and the prohibitions are one by one forgotten. The rebel’s weapon is the proof of his humanity. For in the first days of the revolt you must kill: to shoot down a European is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time: there remain a dead man, and a free man; the survivor, for the first time, feels a national soil under his foot. At this moment the Nation does not shrink from him; wherever he goes, wherever he may be, she is; she follows, and is never lost to view, for she is one with his liberty. But, after the first surprise, the colonial army strikes; and then all must unite or be slaughtered. Tribal dissensions weaken and tend to disappear; in the first place because they endanger the Revolution, but for the more profound reason that they served no other purpose before than to divert violence against false foes. When they remain — as in the Congo — it’s because they are kept up by the agents of colonialism. The Nation marches forward; for each of her children she is to be found wherever his brothers are fighting. Their feeling for each other is the reverse of the hatred they feel for you; they are brothers inasmuch as each of as each of them has killed and may at any moment have to kill again. Fanon shows his readers the limits of ‘spontaneity’ and the need for and dangers of ‘organization’. But however great may be the task at each turning of the way the revolutionary consciousness deepens. The last complexes flee away; no one need come to us talking of the ‘dependency’ complex of an A.L.N. soldier. With his blinkers off, the peasant takes account of his real needs; before they were enough to kill him, but he tried to ignore them; now he sees them as infinitely great requirements. In this violence which springs from the people, which enables them to hold out for five years — for eight years as the Algerians have done — the military, political and social necessities cannot be separated. The war, by merely setting the question of command and responsibility, institutes new structures which will become the first institutions of peace. Here, then, is man even now established in new traditions, the future children of a horrible present; here then we see him legitimized by a law which will be born or is born each day under fire: once the last settler is killed, shipped home or assimilated, the minority breed disappears, to be replaced by socialism. And that’s not enough; the rebel does not stop there; for you can be quite sure that he is not risking his skin to find himself at the level of a former inhabitant of the old mother country. Look how patient he is! Perhaps he dreams of another Dien Bien Phu, but don’t think he’s really counting on it; he’s a beggar fighting, in his poverty, against rich men powerfully armed. While he is waiting for decisive victories, or even without expecting them at all, he tires out his adversaries until they are sick of him.
It will not be without fearful losses; the colonial army becomes ferocious; the country is marked out, there are mopping-up operations, transfers of population, reprisal expeditions, and they massacre women and children. He knows this; this new man begins his life as a man at the end of it; he considers himself as a potential corpse. He will be killed; not only does he accept this risk, he’s sure of it. This potential dead man has lost his wife and his children; he has seen so many dying men that he prefers victory to survival; others, not he, will have the fruits of victory; he is too weary of it all. But this weariness of the heart is the root of an unbelievable courage. We find our humanity on this side of death and despair; he finds it beyond torture and death. We have sown the wind; he is the whirlwind. The child of violence, at every moment he draws from it his humanity. We were men at his expense, he makes himself man at ours: a different man; of higher quality.

[Alchemist]

what's up your chakra?

your face.

[faye]

can't be bothered reading all that. why couln't you speak with me, give a critical analyses or whatever and we can converse. the zombie missile doesn't get you anywhere.did you write all of that comment yourself?

[faye]

mahathir of malaysia made a great speech at the 10th islamic summit conference, malaysia. oct 16th.2003 mentioning how the jews as such a small group, now have other countries fight and die for them he encourages muslims to join together to use their power of numbers and wealth in resources. has anyone else seen it? worth a read. i think he is very intelligent. he is also the one who named america 'the global bully', a much quoted description.