Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Understanding Radical Islam

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Understanding radical islam: how us army demonstrates nonviolence, from Yahoo news.

    U.S. abuse of detainees was routine at Afghanistan bases
    By Tom Lasseter, McClatchy Newspapers Wed Jun 18, 5:15 PM ET


    (This is the second part of McClatchy's Guantanamo: Beyond the Law, a five-part series that is available in full at www.mcclatchydc.com)
    ADVERTISEMENT
    http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=WMLgS0WTV...B%3d-1%2fV%3d0http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=WMLgS0WTV...B%3d-1%2fV%3d0http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=WMLgS0WTV...919452%2fV%3d1
    KABUL, Afghanistan - American soldiers herded the detainees into holding pens of razor-sharp concertina wire, as if they were corralling livestock.
    The guards kicked, kneed and punched many of the men until they collapsed in pain. U.S. troops shackled and dragged other detainees to small isolation rooms, then hung them by their wrists from chains dangling from the wire mesh ceiling.
    Former guards and detainees whom McClatchy interviewed said Bagram was a center of systematic brutality for at least 20 months, starting in late 2001. Yet the soldiers responsible have escaped serious punishment.
    The public outcry in the United States and abroad has focused on detainee abuse at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba , and at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq , but sadistic violence first appeared at Bagram, north of Kabul , and at a similar U.S. internment camp at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan .
    "I was punched and kicked at Bagram. ... At Bagram, when they took a man to interrogation at night, the next morning we would see him brought out on a stretcher looking almost dead," said Aminullah, an Afghan who was held there for a little more than three months. "But at Guantanamo, there were rules, there was law."
    Nazar Chaman Gul , an Afghan who was held at Bagram for more than three months in 2003, said he was beaten about every five days. American soldiers would walk into the pen where he slept on the floor and ram their combat boots into his back and stomach, Gul said. "Two or three of them would come in suddenly, tie my hands and beat me," he said.
    When the kicking started, Gul said, he'd cry out, "I am not a terrorist," then beg God for mercy. Mercy was slow in coming. He was shipped to Guantanamo around the late summer of 2003 and imprisoned there for more than three years.
    According to Afghan officials and a review of his case, Gul wasn't a member of al Qaida or of the extremist Taliban regime that ran Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. At the time he was detained, he was working as a fuel depot guard for the U.S.-backed Afghan government.
    When U.S. soldiers raided the house he was visiting, acting on a tip from a tribal rival who was seeking revenge against another man, they apparently confused Gul with a militant with a similar name - who was also imprisoned at Guantanamo, according to an Afghan intelligence official and Gul's American lawyer.
    The eight-month McClatchy investigation found a pattern of abuse that continued for years. The abuse of detainees at Bagram has been reported by U.S. media organizations, in particular The New York Times , which broke several developments in the story. But the extent of the mistreatment, and that it eclipsed the alleged abuse at Guantanamo, hasn't previously been revealed.
    Guards said they routinely beat their prisoners to retaliate for al Qaida's 9-11 attacks, unaware that the vast majority of the detainees had little or no connection to al Qaida.
    Former detainees at Bagram and Kandahar said they were beaten regularly. Of the 41 former Bagram detainees whom McClatchy interviewed, 28 said that guards or interrogators had assaulted them. Only eight of those men said they were beaten at Guantanamo Bay .
    Because President Bush loosened or eliminated the rules governing the treatment of so-called enemy combatants, however, few U.S. troops have been disciplined under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and no serious punishments have been administered, even in the cases of two detainees who died after American guards beat them.
    In an effort to assemble as complete a picture as possible of U.S. detention practices, McClatchy reporters interviewed 66 former detainees, double-checked key elements of their accounts, spoke with U.S. soldiers who'd served as detention camp guards and reviewed thousands of pages of records from Army courts-martial and human rights reports.
    The Bush administration refuses to release full records of detainee treatment in the war on terrorism, and no senior Bush administration official would agree to an on-the-record interview to discuss McClatchy's findings.
    The most violent of the major U.S. detention centers, the McClatchy investigation found, was Bagram, an old Soviet airstrip about 30 miles outside Kabul . The worst period at Bagram was the seven months from the summer of 2002 to spring of 2003, when interrogators there used techniques that when repeated later at Abu Ghraib led to wholesale abuses.

    New detainees were shoved to the floor of a cavernous warehouse, a former Soviet aircraft machine shop that stayed dim all day, and kept in pens where they weren't allowed to speak or look at guards.
    The Afghan government initially based a group of intelligence officers at Bagram, but they were pushed out. Mohammed Arif Sarwari , the head of Afghanistan's national security directorate from late 2001 to 2003, said he got a letter from U.S. commanders in mid-2002 telling him to get his men out of Bagram.
    Sarwari thought that was a bad sign: The Americans, he thought, were creating an island with no one to watch over them.
    "I said I didn't want to be involved with what they were doing at Bagram - who they were arresting or what they were doing with them," he said in an interview in Kabul .
    The rate of reported abuse was higher among men who were held at the U.S. camp at Kandahar Airfield . Thirty-two out of 42 men held there whom McClatchy interviewed claimed that they were knocked to the ground or slapped about. But former detainees said the violence at Bagram was much harsher.
    The brutality at Bagram peaked in December 2002 , when U.S. soldiers beat two Afghan detainees, Habibullah and Dilawar, to death as they hung by their wrists.
    Dilawar died on Dec. 10 , seven days after Habibullah died. He'd been hit in his leg so many times that the tissue was "falling apart" and had "basically been pulpified," said then-Lt. Col. Elizabeth Rouse , the Air Force medical examiner who performed the autopsy on him.
    Had Dilawar lived, Rouse said in sworn testimony, "I believe the injury to the legs are so extensive that it would have required amputation."
    After Habibullah died, a legal officer for U.S. forces in Afghanistan asked two military police guards at Bagram to demonstrate how they'd chained detainees' wrists above their heads in a small plywood isolation cell.
    "Frankly, it didn't look good," Maj. Jeff Bovarnick , the legal adviser for the Bagram detention center from November 2002 to June 2003 , said during a military investigation hearing in June 2005 .
    "This guy is chained up and has a hood on his head," Bovarnick continued. "The two MPs that were demonstrating this took about five minutes to get everything hook(ed) up; and I was thinking to myself, if this was a combative detainee, it must have been a real struggle for them to get him to comply, and the things they must have been doing to make him comply."
    The only American officer who's been reprimanded for the deaths of Habibullah and Dilawar is Army Capt. Christopher Beiring , who commanded the 377th Military Police Company from the summer of 2002 to the spring of 2003.
    Beiring told investigators that he'd received no formal training in leading a military police company, "just the correspondence courses and on-the-job training."
    Then-Lt. Col. Thomas S. Berg , the Army lawyer who investigated Beiring in the deaths of Habibullah and Dilawar, argued that: "The government failed to present any evidence of what are 'approved tactics, techniques and procedures in detainee operations.' "
    On Berg's recommendation, the charges against Beiring were dropped, and he was given a letter of reprimand.
    "It's extremely hard to wage war with so many undefined rules and roles," Beiring said in a phone interview with McClatchy . "It was very crazy."
    The commander of the military intelligence section that worked alongside Beiring's military police company at Bagram, Capt. Carolyn Wood , declined to comment.
    The soldier who faced the most serious charges, Spc. Willie Brand , admitted that he hit Dilawar about 37 times, including some 30 times in the flesh around the knees during one session in an isolation cell.
    Brand, who faced up to 11 years in prison, was reduced in rank to private - his only punishment - after he was found guilty of assaulting and maiming Dilawar.

    'EVERYBODY STRUCK A DETAINEE'
    U.S. soldiers' testimony in military investigations after the deaths of Habibullah and Dilawar suggested that detainee abuse at Bagram occurred from the summer of 2002 to spring of 2003, a period of about seven months.
    Soldiers who served at Bagram before that time said detainees were never beaten. Col. Matthew Bogdanos , a Marine Reserves officer who worked there from December 2001 to April 2002 , said in an interview that none of the soldiers or American operatives he knew had resorted to abusing detainees.
    An Army interrogator who was based at Bagram in the spring of 2002 and later wrote a book under the pseudonym of Chris Mackey for security reasons, said in an e-mail exchange that while soldiers pushed the limits - such as using stress positions and sleep deprivation - he never saw or heard of detainees getting beaten.
    Former detainees interviewed by McClatchy and by some human rights groups, however, claimed that the violence was rampant from late 2001 until the summer of 2003 or later, at least 20 months.
    Although they were at Bagram at different times and speak different languages, the 28 former detainees who told McClatchy that they'd been abused there told strikingly similar stories:
    -- Bashir Ahmad , a Pakistani who fought with the Taliban, said that in the late spring or summer of 2003, U.S. troops would chain him to the ceiling by his hands or feet. "Then they would punch me or hit me with a wood rod," he said.
    -- Brahim Yadel, a French citizen, said he was punched and slapped during interrogations at Bagram in December 2001 .
    -- Moazzem Begg , a British citizen, said he was assaulted regularly at Bagram for most of 2002, until he was transferred to Guantanamo in January 2003 .
    -- Akhtar Mohammed , an Afghan, said that at Bagram during the spring of 2003, "when they moved me to the interrogation room they covered my eyes, and took me up steep stairs. I always fell on the ground. And when I fell down, they punched and kicked me."
    -- Abdul Haleem , a Pakistani, said that U.S. soldiers threw him to the ground at Bagram in 2003 and kicked him in the head, "like they were playing soccer."
    -- Adel al Zamel , a Kuwaiti, said guards frequently waved sticks at him and threatened to rape him at Bagram during the spring of 2002. During an interview in Kuwait City , Zamel shook his head and said he remembered hearing detainees being beaten and "the cries from the interrogation room" at Bagram.
    He wasn't the only person to report sexual humiliation.
    Sgt. Selena Salcedo , a U.S. military intelligence officer, said that sometime between August 2002 and February 2003 she saw another interrogator, Pfc. Damien Corsetti , pull down the pants of a detainee and leave his genitals exposed.
    In a 2005 sworn statement in the court-martial of Corsetti, she said she'd left the room and that when she'd returned the detainee was bent over a table and Corsetti was waving a plastic bottle near his buttocks. She said she didn't know whether the detainee had been raped.
    Corsetti was acquitted of any wrongdoing. He didn't respond to a request for comment submitted through his attorney. Salcedo pleaded guilty to kicking a detainee - Dilawar - and grabbing his ears during a December 2002 interrogation.
    Soldiers who served at Bagram starting in the summer of 2002 confirmed that detainees there were struck routinely.
    "Whether they got in trouble or not, everybody struck a detainee at some point," said Brian Cammack , a former specialist with the 377th Military Police Company , an Army Reserve unit from Cincinnati . He was sentenced to three months in military confinement and a dishonorable discharge for hitting Habibullah.
    Spc. Jeremy Callaway , who admitted to striking about 12 detainees at Bagram, told military investigators in sworn testimony that he was uncomfortable following orders to "mentally and physically break the detainees." He didn't go into detail.
    "I guess you can call it torture," said Callaway, who served in the 377th from August 2002 to January 2003 .
    Many human rights experts say the U.S. military began cracking down on detainee abuse at Bagram in 2004, in response to the public outcry over pictures of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq .

    RETRIBUTION FOR 9-11
    Asked why someone would abuse a detainee, Callaway told military investigators: "Retribution for September 11, 2001 ."
    When detainees first had their hoods removed on arriving at Bagram, looming behind them was a large American flag and insignia of the New York Police Department , a reminder of Sept. 11 .
    Almost none of the detainees at Bagram, however, had anything to do with the terrorist attacks.
    Bovarnick, the former chief legal officer for operational law in Afghanistan and Bagram legal adviser, said in a sworn statement that of some 500 detainees he knew of who'd passed through Bagram, only about 10 were high-value targets, the military's term for senior terrorist operatives.
    That hardly mattered.
    Khaled al Asmr , a tall, gaunt Jordanian, was hauled off a U.S. military cargo plane at Bagram in early 2002. Flown in from Pakistan in heavy shackles and with a hood on his head, he was accused of being an al Qaida operative with possible connections to the Sept. 11 attacks.
    Standing in an interrogation room, Asmr said, he'd already been punched in the face several times by American guards. Two Americans walked into the room, wearing civilian clothes. They pulled out pistols and held them to either side of his head as a third American man entered and walked up to Asmr, according to his account.
    The third man leaned toward Asmr's face and whispered, his breath warm, "I am here to save you from these people, but you must tell me you are al Qaida."
    Asmr, who told his story to a McClatchy reporter in Jordan , was declared no longer an enemy combatant after a 2004 U.S. military tribunal at Guantanamo. He said he'd known some al Qaida leaders, but that was more than 15 years earlier, during the U.S.-backed Afghan uprising against the Soviets.
    Nazar Gul was of even less intelligence value. None of the Afghan security or intelligence officials whom McClatchy interviewed said they'd heard of Gul, making it unlikely that he was the dangerous insurgent the U.S. said he was.
    Gul's American attorney, Ruben L. Iniguez , went to Afghanistan and Pakistan in 2006 to check the details of his story of working as a guard for the Afghan government, and later said in sworn court filings - which included videotaped testimony by witnesses - and in an interview with McClatchy that every fact checked out.

    A LAWLESS PLACE
    The mistreatment of detainees at Bagram, some legal experts said, may have been a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention on prisoners of war, which forbids violence against or humiliating treatment of detainees.
    The U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 imposes penalties up to death for such mistreatment.
    At Bagram, however, the rules didn't apply. In February 2002 , President Bush issued an order denying suspected Taliban and al Qaida detainees prisoner-of-war status. He also denied them basic Geneva protections known as Common Article Three, which sets a minimum standard for humane treatment.
    Without those parameters, it's difficult to say what acts were or were not war crimes, said Charles Garraway , a former colonel and legal adviser for the British army and a leading international expert on military law.
    Bush's order made it hard to prosecute soldiers for breaking such rules under the military's basic law, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, in large part because defense attorneys could claim that troops on the ground didn't know what was allowed.
    In sweeping aside Common Article Three, the Bush administration created an environment in which abuse such as that at Bagram was more likely, said Garraway, a former professor at the U.S. Naval War College .
    "I think it's completely predictable, because you no longer have standards," he said.
    In 2006, Bush pushed Congress to narrow the definition of a war crime under the War Crimes Act, making prosecution even more difficult.

    UNTRAINED, UNDISCIPLINED
    The military police at Bagram had guidelines, Army Regulation 190-47, telling them they couldn't chain prisoners to doors or to the ceiling. They also had Army Regulation 190-8, which said that humiliating detainees wasn't allowed.
    Neither was applicable at Bagram, however, said Bovarnick, the former senior legal officer for the installation.
    The military police rulebook saying that enemy prisoners of war should be treated humanely didn't apply, he said, because the detainees weren't prisoners of war, according to the Bush administration's decision to withhold Geneva Convention protections from suspected Taliban and al Qaida detainees.
    The military police guide for the Army correctional system, which prohibits "securing a prisoner to a fixed object, except in emergencies," wasn't applicable, either, because Bagram wasn't a correctional facility, Bovarnick told investigators in 2004.
    "I do not believe there is a document anywhere which states that ... either regulation applies, and there is clear guidance by the secretary of defense that detainees were not EPWs," enemy prisoners of war, Bovarnick said.
    Compounding the problem, military police guards and interrogators lacked proper training and received little instruction from commanders about how to do their jobs, according to sworn testimony taken during military investigations and interviews by McClatchy .
    The guards who worked there from the summer of 2002 to the spring of 2003 were all reservists from the 377th Military Police Company , based in Cincinnati , and many of the military intelligence interrogators serving at the same time were from the Utah Army National Guard .
    Good order and discipline had evaporated.
    1st Sgt. Betty Jones said during a 2004 interview with investigators that a fellow military police sergeant and his men on several occasions were "drunk to the point that they could not go to duty."
    Salcedo, the military intelligence soldier, said in her statement at Corsetti's court-martial that she and others drank alcohol during their time at Bagram, and at one point smoked hashish on the roof of a building.
    Cammack told McClatchy that one of his sergeants drove a John Deere Gator, a four-wheel all-terrain vehicle, to a nearby town and traded with locals for bottles of vodka.
    "Really, nobody was in charge ... the leadership did nothing to help us. If we had any questions, it was pretty much 'figure it out on your own,' " Cammack said. "When you asked about protocol they said it's a work in progress."
    PENTAGON RESPONSE
    Senior Pentagon officials refused to be interviewed for this article. In response to a series of questions and interview requests, Col. Gary Keck , a Defense Department spokesman, released this statement:
    " The Department of Defense policy is clear - we treat all detainees humanely. The United States operates safe, humane and professional detention operations for unlawful enemy combatants at war with this country."
    No U.S. military officer above the rank of captain has been called to account for what happened at Bagram.
    The head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan when prisoners were being abused at Bagram, then-Lt. Gen. Dan K. McNeill , declined an interview request. McNeill was later made the commander of all NATO forces in Afghanistan , a post he held until recently.
    His predecessor, then-Maj. Gen. Franklin L. "Buster" Hagenbeck , said in an e-mail exchange that from late 2001 to 2002, his attention wasn't on detainee facilities.
    "Unfortunately, I have nothing to add to your reporting ... I was focused on battling the Taliban and al Qaida, as well as reconstruction and coordinating with the nascent Afghan government," Hagenbeck wrote. "I do not personally know of any abuses while I was there, and we focused on treating all with dignity and respect - even, and perhaps especially, those persons in our custody."
    Hagenbeck is now the superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point .
    Capt. Carolyn Wood , who led the interrogators at Bagram, was sent to Abu Ghraib in the summer of 2003 and assumed control of interrogation operations there that August.
    A military investigation that followed the Abu Ghraib scandal - known as the "Fay-Jones Report" for the two generals who authored it - found that from July 2003 to February of 2004, 27 military intelligence personnel there allegedly encouraged or condoned the abuse of detainees, violated established interrogation procedures or participated in abuse themselves.
    The abuse resembled what former Bagram detainees described.
    A key factor in serious cases of abuse at Abu Ghraib, the report found, was the construction of isolation areas, a move requested by Wood, who said that "based on her experience" such facilities made it easier to extract information from detainees.
    Wood remains an active-duty military intelligence officer. ( Matthew Schofield contributed to this report from Paris and Lyon, France .)

    Comment


    • #77
      lui, what is it that you're after here? are you trying to get people to admit that the US government is corrupt? or are you saying that "they also terrorize other people groups," which is something we are ignorant of and should understand?

      ok, the us government is corrupt and they do terrorize other people groups. i agree.

      now what?
      ZhongwenMovies.com

      Comment


      • #78
        Now stop eating meat and go hug an Arab.

        Comment


        • #79
          Here is an article about civilian death in Afghanistan. I wonder if the use of air strike is really the way of non violence and what is its goal? Eradicate all talibans? That seems impossible. There must be a time for dialogue and loving speech. I think because we do not know how to talk with them we use force. We must use the power of love and speech.

          http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/n...p_logo_106.png
          Aghan official says US strikes killed 22 civilians


          By FISNIK ABRASHI, Associated Press Writer 56 minutes ago


          KABUL, Afghanistan - The U.S. military said airstrikes by its attack helicopters hit two vehicles carrying insurgents in eastern Afghanistan. The province's governor said 22 civilians, including a woman and a child, were killed.
          ADVERTISEMENT
          http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=8v5J8UWTc...406809%2fV%3d1
          A spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition said Friday the airstrikes in Nuristan province hit militants who earlier attacked a U.S. military base with mortars.
          The helicopters identified the militants' firing positions, tracked them down and destroyed the vehicles they were traveling in, said 1st Lt. Nathan Perry.
          "These were combatants. These were people who were firing on us," Perry said. "We have no reports of noncombatant injuries."
          He gave no account of casualties in the vehicles.
          Nuristan's Gov. Tamim Nuristani said, however, 22 civilians were killed in the Waygal district of Nuristan province. "This afternoon (Friday), two civilian vehicles were hit by airstrikes," Nuristani said over the phone.
          Among those killed were a woman and a child. All 22 dead bodies were brought to a provincial hospital, Nuristani said. Seven other people were wounded.
          "Last night, the opposition fired rockets at the (U.S.) base ... and today this incident happened," said Nuristani, speaking from Kabul.
          The military base is 6 miles away from the place where the airstrikes happened, Nuristani said.
          It was impossible to independently verify any of the claims because of the remoteness of the area.
          In other violence, gunmen lobbed a grenade and sprayed a police checkpoint with gunfire in the southern Kandahar province, killing eight officers, said provincial police chief Sumanwal Matiullah.
          Overall, more than 8,000 people were killed in insurgency-related attacks in Afghanistan last year — the most since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion. Violence has claimed more than 2,100 lives so far this year.
          ___
          Associated Press reporters Amir Shah in Kabul and Noor Khan in Kandahar contributed to this report.

          Comment


          • #80
            Interesting item from Reuters, which discusses an aspect of Sharia law found in Saudi Arabia. Note that this is a Wahabbi form of Islam, which is generally considered to be different from mainstream Islam.

            Saudi man and woman face flogging for research work

            RIYADH: A Saudi appeals court is due this week to review the case of a biochemist and his female student sentenced to jail and flogging after a lower court ruled their research contact was a front for a telephone affair.

            The man was sentenced to 8 months in prison and 600 lashes and his student to 4 months in prison and 350 lashes last November for establishing a phone relationship that led her to divorce her husband.

            London-based Amnesty International says it will consider the two as prisoners of conscience if the verdicts are carried out.

            "The charges ... do not correspond to recognisable criminal offences," the group said in a statement in April.

            A spokesman for the government's Human Rights Commission said he was not immediately able to comment.

            Rights groups and some Saudi reformers have criticised what they say is an arbitrary justice system unsuited to the needs of a country of 25 million people.

            Judges who are religious scholars apply the rulings of an austere version of sharia, Islamic law, often termed Wahhabism.

            The government, a key U.S. ally, says the system ensures justice for Muslims and non-Muslims. It is in the process of overhauling the organisation of courts and codifying a formal penal code.

            The hospital where the man worked in al-Baha in the southwest of the kingdom put him in charge of the masters research the student was doing at the King Abdul-Aziz University in Jeddah in 2002.

            The woman obtained a divorce seven months after she was married in 2004. Her husband then raised the court case, saying the supervisor's phone calls led to the break-up.

            The supervisor, who asked to be identified only as Khalid, 32, told Reuters that over 12 months of trial he and the woman were refused permission to use lawyers or bring witnesses to testify.

            The woman was represented in court by her father because Wahhabi rules require a male legal guardian.

            (Reporting by Andrew Hammond; Editing by Matthew Jones)
            Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

            "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

            (more comments in my User Profile)
            russbo.com


            Comment


            • #81


              Views by a Jewish man

              Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder
              Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder-A Glimpse Into Israeli Collective Psychosis by Gilad Atzmon
              17.9.06


              It is hard to believe, but only 60 years after the Holocaust the Jewish people is once again in danger of being destroyed - at least in its own state, where 40 percent of the world's Jews are concentrated. Evidence of the severity of the danger can be found not only in the explicit threats by Iran's president, which are backed up by an arms program that would provide the means to carry them out. It can also be found in recent articles in the European press that discuss the possibility of Israel's 'disappearance' as a reasonable 'working assumption.' Additional evidence regarding the threat level exists in the fact that not only is Israel the only country in the world that is threatened with destruction, it is also the only state whose right to exist is the focus of international polls, with many respondents answering negatively. That is an honor that even Iran, North Korea and apartheid-era South Africa were never granted.” (Yair Sheleg. Haaretz http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/757767.html)

              While many may find it heartening or amusing that even an Israeli right winger cannot see a ray of light at the end of the Zionist tunnel, it is rather disconcerting to read that Israelis are already seriously contemplating their next Shoah. I would argue here that it is exactly this form of deadly meditation that turns Israel, Israelis, global Zionists and Neocons into the gravest enemies of world peace.

              Indeed, a growing number of people want to see an end to Israel, the ‘Jew Only State’. Yet, no one around expresses any murderous or terminal plans against world Jewry or even against their Jewish State. No one in the political or the media spheres is calling for a homicidal act against the Jews or their Jewish State. Thus the well-established Judeocentric tendency to interpret almost any legitimate political and ideological criticism as a perpetration of an upcoming Judeocide should be comprehended as a severe form of paranoia verging on collective psychosis, which I define as Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder (Pre-TSD).

              Within the condition of the Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the stress is the outcome of a phantasmic event, an imaginary episode set in the future; an event that has never taken place. Unlike the PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) in which stress comes as the direct reaction to an event that (may) have taken place in the past, within the state of Pre-TSD, the stress is the clearly the outcome of an imaginary potential event. Within the Pre-TSD, an illusion pre-empts reality and the condition in which the fantasy of terror is focussed is itself becoming grave reality. If it is taken to extremes, even an agenda of total war against the rest of the world is not an unthinkable reaction.

              One may wonder at this stage whether Pre-TSD is just another name for paranoia. I would argue that the difference between the two is rather obvious. In the case of paranoia he who is subject to the disease makes us feel sorry for him. In the case of confrontation with a Pre-TSD case, we happen to feel sorry for ourselves.

              Projection and Pre-TSD

              "We fired more than a million cluster bombs in Lebanon. …What we did was insane and monstrous, we covered entire towns in cluster bombs,’
              (the head of an IDF rocket unit in Lebanon http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/761781.html)

              Let us face it once and for all. Since no one voices a call to throw the Israelis into the sea or to nuke them instead, one is entitled to argue that the Israeli inclination to blame Muslims and Arabs for holding such murderous tendencies themselves must be understood in terms of projection. The people who rained Lebanon with ‘more than a million cluster bombs’ are projecting their murderous zeal onto their victims and even onto their victims to come.

              Sheleg, for instance, throws his own malicious tendencies onto the Muslim world and Iran in particular. Sheleg, being a devoted Zionist who advocates violent measures against almost anyone who fails to be a Jew, is doomed to project his own murderous zeal when referring to Arabs and Muslims. Obviously Sheleg is not alone; the American Jewish Committee (AJC) is doing exactly the same thing. In a recent PR campaign it warned Europe of Iran’s long-range missiles. Obviously within their phantasmic Judeocentric universe, a global war against Islam is a ‘Judeo-Christian interest’. However, Europeans tend to laugh once confronted with the AJC’s embarrassingly aggressive ideology. Europeans are obviously not afraid of Iran at all. Unlike the Jewish American Committee members who happen to promote violence, the Europeans fantasise over peace; seemingly Europeans have had enough wars (clearly AJC didn’t have enough yet….). Europeans also realise that as long as they do not harm Iran, Iran’s ballistic capability is totally irrelevant to their security. In other words, Europeans fail to regard Iran as a murderous entity just because unlike the AJC, Europeans are not murderous to start with. Because they aren’t murderers, they simply fail to see murderers in others. The Europeans lack the necessary aggressive zeal, which the AJC are overwhelmingly saturated with. This is exactly where a growing abyss is emerging between the Zionist’s utterly phantasmic bloodthirsty universe and the rest of Humanity.

              Who needs a Nuclear Arsenal, (Aren’t Katyusha Rockets just more than enough)?

              The general mood in Israel, which is expressed so eloquently by Sheleg and reflected in the AJC catastrophic scenario, reveals a severe collective form of Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The Israelis and their supportive lobbies are contemplating publicly over their Nuclear Shoah to come. This pathological mode is rather bizarre considering the fact that the bold Hezbollah has managed to defeat the mighty Israeli army just with light weaponry. It also managed to defeat the Israeli society with nothing more than short-range Katyusha rockets. In fact, the enemy of Israel does not need to ‘nuke Israel’, all they have to do is just to send a message to the Jews of the world: Israel is anything but a shelter. By doing so they confront Israelis with the following realisation: once again you have failed in the ‘love your neighbours’ test. This is what Arab resistance is all about. It is a metaphysical message rather than a call for a Judeocide.

              However, the Israelis somehow fail to read the message on the wall. Rather than looking at the mirror and spotting out their obvious faults that have already matured into severe moral bankruptcy, the Israelis prefer total submission to the materialist fantasy of Nuclear Judeocide. Rather than thinking in ethical terms, the Israelis surrender to the shallowest materialist discourse solely centred on ‘the destruction of the I’. The Israelis have succumbed to an imaginary phantasmic Shoah in which they are nuked on a daily basis. Worryingly enough, the Israelis are not alone, insofar as worrying of an illusionary terror is concerned, Blair and Bush are infected with the very same mental disease.

              Repeatedly, Sheleg, the AJC and Bush refer murderous tendencies to the Iranian president but is this indeed the case? Do they have a case? Has the Iranian president ever spoken of destruction of the Jewish people, the Israelis, or anyone else?

              Let us confront the obvious fact. President Ahmadinejad certainly said that Israel should be ‘wiped off the Map’. However, the president has never said that Jews as people should be murdered. He was clearly referring to Israel, the racist ‘Jew Only State’. This is a legitimate criticism as much as criticism of Apartheid South Africa was justifiable. But Ahmadinejad doesn’t stop there, he elaborates on the issue. Cleverly and rather reasonably, he challenges the West:

              "If you (the West) have burned the Jews, why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel?… Our question is; if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"

              This is indeed a most appropriate question to be asked and yet, there is not a single hint that this man has any plans to annihilate the Jews or their State. If anything, Ahmadinejad does his best to find the Jews a new home. Clearly, the Zionist dream of a Jewish settlement in the Holy Land turned into a grave disaster. And it is Ahmadinejad who is already pointing out that the wanderers may have to Schlep again. May I suggest that a glimpse into the endless queue list of Israeli citizens who are now reclaiming Polish and other EU citizenship reveals that a growing number of Israelis already internalised the idea that Schlepping is probably the next phase of their Jewish existence.

              The Real Axis of Evil

              Reading Sheleg’s op-ed in Haaretz, one may wonder, “who exactly contemplates the liquidation of the Jewish State?” It is obviously clear that Iran plans to join the nuclear club. However, even if Iran intends upon developing an arsenal of deadly nuclear weapons, surely it won’t be the first in the region. It would just follow the Jewish State, a State that proved beyond doubt that the killing of innocent civilians happens to be its favourite practice. Thus, the Israeli as well as Zio-centric fear of Iranian nuclear aggression must be realised as nothing but projection. Since Israel is engaged on a daily basis in the killing of innocent civilians, Israelis and Zionists are doomed to interpret others’ behaviour as a murderous inclination.

              This is indeed very sad but far from being unique. The case of America’s Cold War paranoia is not that different from the case of Israel. Since America was the first and so far, the only country to use the atomic bomb against other people, it was the Americans who were actually caught in a cold war Pre-TSD. They simply projected their collective murderous tendencies onto the Soviets. It goes without mentioning, that unlike the Americans, the ‘Communists’ have never dropped an atomic bomb on anyone nor it seems had they ever considered such an act. Somehow, it becomes clear that the more cruel one is, the more subjected to terror one is. Moreover, the more cruel practices a nation is engaged with, the more subjected to the politics of fear the nation would be. This simple formula may throw some light over the emerging bond between America and Israel. Applying some devious expansionist tactics, the two countries are sinking into dark deadly thought on the verge of collective paranoia. This collective paranoia maintains the hegemony of the one and only axis of evil around: i.e., Global Zionism and Neocons.

              A comic Relief
              The following is a Jewish Telegram:

              ‘begin worrying, details to follow’


              The joke above is actually older than Israel, it is probably as old as the telegraph itself. In fact, it refers a devastating reality in which the dialectic of fear is dominating the Jewish existence as well as mindset. Seemingly, fright has been exploited politically by Jewish ethnic leaders since the early days of emancipation. It is possible that within the process of Jewish secularisation and emancipation initiated by enlightenment and the French Revolution, fear of imaginary phantasmic reality replaced the fright of the almighty evil God, the God that kills without grace and mercy, the very God of Sodom and Gomorrah. If this is indeed the case, ‘fear’ should be realised as the modern Jewish God and the Pre-TSD is better seen as the modern Jewish practice. The Judification of Blair and Bush can be realised as the emergence of the ‘Politics of Fear’. Seemingly, this very political practice is very successful in America but it proved to be a total failure in the UK.

              However, Pre-TSD is not an Israeli invention at all. Jewish opinion leaders as well as ethnic campaigners were specialising in maintaining Jewish anxiety a long time before Israel came about. Early Zionists were very effective in terrorizing their brothers. Herzl was foolishly inspired by the Dreyfus case (as Lenni Brenner points out, Herzl failed to understand the meaning of the case and its implications. In fact, Dreyfus’s vindication proves that French people and French Jews won in their fight against Anti-Semitism and xenophobia). Other early Zionists were stimulated by some East European anti-Jewish riots and pogroms. In general, Zionism can be realised as an urge to formulate a general political agenda based on self-inflicting fright. This is probably why Zionism must maintain terror in order to sustain its power. It is evident that Bush and the Neocons use exactly the same tactic.

              Divine Intervention

              May I suggest at this point that it is rather possible that more than one world leader is alarmed by the Iranian atomic program not because they are afraid of Iranian aggression but rather because by now, they are all aware of the Israeli collective psychosis. Without knowing about Pre-TSD, Western leaders do grasp that Israel would not hesitate to initiate a nuclear war as much as it didn’t hesitate to cover Lebanese cities with more than one million cluster bombs. A country that can destroy its neighbour and turn one-third of its citizens into homeless people just for 2 POWs is basically capable of anything.
              I am not a psychiatrist, I am not even a practicing psychoanalyst, I do not know whether there is an analyst couch big enough to accommodate the entire Israeli people and their many global Zionist brothers. I am not so sure whether there is a professional around who can take care and help the Israelis to deal with their current Pre-TSD phase. I don’t even know whether the Israelis would take the advise of a shrink. All I myself do is merely suggest a diagnosing of a rather severe malaise. While many of us are convinced that Israel’s behaviour is the outcome of moral bankruptcy, I insist that the Israeli identity is emerging as a pathological psychotic case. The moral bankruptcy, thus, is a mere symptom of a deeply concerning mental disorder.

              Being in a psychotic state, the Israelis indeed enjoy their symptoms, from us they just need some brief attention. They basically need our approval. When they flatten southern Beirut, their spokesman insisted upon convincing us that it was actually a Western sacred war that they were fighting. They really wanted us to believe that they have done it all for our behalf and in our name. We may have to admit that except two democratically elected Pre-TSD cases (Bush & Blair) who approved the Israeli atrocities, the rest of humanity who was watching the emerging carnage in Beirut sensed some clear growing detestation towards the Jewish State and the entire Zionist adventure.

              For those who still fail to see it, we are dealing here with a severe mad case of a State that is reaching the very peak of its collective psychotic phase. For those who tend to forget, this mentally disordered national entity possesses a vast nuclear arsenal, and it has its belly full of deadly intentions. We are horrified and so we should be. We can see them bullying the entire Middle East. We are encircled by their merciless hedonism and self-righteousness and there is very little for us to do except pray for divine intervention.

              Comment


              • #82
                About terrorism Thich Nhat Hanh in this video says we should understand the suffering.

                He also says that the irak war has caused an increase on terrorism and anger and that one solution is dialogue.

                Some say u can not talk with unrational people but Thich Nhat Hanh seems to believe terrorists are rationals and should be talked with.

                I do agree with that and think that trough transmigration only dialogue can find a solution on the long term

                Peace and love

                [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74o9P6G2y18"]YouTube - Thich Nhat Hanh on Burma[/ame]

                Comment


                • #83
                  A SHINING WEB OF GOOD HEARTS AND GOODWILL
                  IN ISRAEL AND PALESTINE


                  Jack Kornfield Ph.D.
                  903 words
                  Back to Top
                  Dear Friends,
                  Jack wanted me to pass on this brief account of his recent trip to Israel and Palestine. If you know of anyone in the media or foundations who might help please let him know .
                  Thank you…
                  Sara Sparling

                  Contact Sara: ss4jk@spiritrock.
                  Asst for Jack Kornfield.
                  Spirit Rock Meditation Center,

                  Woodacre,
                  California.

                  In a recent visit to the peacemaking communities of Holy land, I found an astonishing (and hardly reported) web of hundreds of organizations fostering reconciliation and peace in powerful ways among goodhearted people on all sides.

                  Careening around the West Bank through armed checkpoints and guardposts, guided by the wise Sheik Abdul Aziz Bukari and unflappable Jewish activist Eliyahu Mclean, founders of Jerusalem Peacemakers I was led to meet with leaders (and sometimes to offer teachings to) Arab, Israeli, Christians and Druze who were dedicated to planting seeds of respect and healing in this torn land.

                  It was a wild ride. We drove around the West bank and through barrier wall avoiding checkpoints, listening to Santana and the Grateful Dead (the Sheik lived in California for some years) changing our garb and hats to fit the need, Arab Kaffia, Jewish yarmulke/kippah, secular jackets. Sometimes it was like the Marx brothers, sometimes like James Bond. We met with fundamentalists, mystics, shopkeepers and soldiers in Hebron and yogis and sages in the desert beyond Jericho.

                  There were peace marches across Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives for hundreds, with Muslim, Jewish Christian leaders. And an amazing walk from the Holocaust Memorial into the Palestinian refugee camps, led by an Arab leader intent on teaching his people about the painful history of the Jews inEurope. And thus also helping the Jewish people understand the Naquba, the catastrophic loss of Palestinian homes and villages in the 1948 war to found Israel. There were the Combatants for Peace, former Palestinian and Israeli fighters now fighting for each other’s well being. There were the Bereaved parents in Ramallah/West bank and their partners in Israel. There were the Israeli/Arab women’s groups “Beyond Words” that are working for women’s right and planting hundreds and thousands of olive trees.

                  There is the wise old bearded Chassidic settler Rabbi beloved on all sides who was mediating between Hamas fighters and the Israeli Dept of Defense. There is the Holy Land Trust, run by Semi Awad, a Palestinian center for Gandhi’s teaching of non-violence in the Arab world located a stone’s throw from the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. There was Neva Shalom the peace village founded by a catholic priest for Muslims and Jews, hosting a hundred Palestinian and Israeli teens who had been meeting for 2 years and were now bringing their parents from the west bank and Israel together with tears in their eyes trying to teach them to listen to one another.

                  There were the widespread activities of a whole group of Rabbis for Human Rights, and the Interfaith environmental and peace council meeting at the Sheik’s Sufi center in the Arab quarter of the old city with Bishop’s, Imams, Rabbis, and other community leaders. There was Ipisam the big hearted Arab woman whose name means smile, who runs empowerment and peace groups for women and ran for political office (to the chagrin of the local male Muslim leaders) and who inspires healing work on all sides.

                  There was Stephen Fulder, Naturopath who opened a large clinic in the Galilee for the Palestinians in the adjacent village and is teaching Arab women the ancient tradition of herbal medicine and Stephen’s counterpart, the village Sheik who has spent all his family money bringing sick Palestinian children across the wall to good hospitals in Israel. There was Abdulla, the dignified Arab director of the large Jenin refugee camp, now actively a part of the Middle Way peacemaking group. And all over these committed people are using the widely spreading skills of Marshall Rosenberg’s Non-Violent Communication, of Jack Zimmerman’s Listening Council, of mediation, mediation, Mindfulness, of Peter Levine’s Trauma Therapy, of Arab practices of Houdna reconciliation. I spoke to a hall of a thousand people in Tel Aviv teaching them some of these practices and honoring the widespread support for these heartening possibilities.

                  EVEN THOUGH THE SITUATION IS BAD, POLITICALLY POLARIZED AND DIRE, THIS IS ONLY ON ONE LEVEL. ON ANOTHER THERE ARE A HUNDRED GROUPS OF UNRECOGNIZED COMMON FOLKS, HEROS AND HEROINES, TIRELESSLY SOWING THE SEEDS OF GENUINE RECONCILLIATION OF THE FUTURE FOR ALL WHO WILL LIVE IN THE HOLY LAND. BECAUSE THE LIVES OF THE ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS ARE NOW SO INTERWOVEN ON THIS SAME PIECE OF LAND, THERE IS CLEARLY NO LONG TERM MILITARY SOLUTION. THEY KNOW THE WORLD IS WATCHING AND THAT IF THEY CAN SHOW HOW TO LIVE TOGETHER IT WILL BE A SYMBOL FOR ALL OF HUMANITY.

                  I WANT TO TELL THESE STORIES AND GET THE WORD OUT TO THE MEDIA SO THEY CAN REPORT ON THEM (otherwise the continually repeated stories about fear and violence will sow more fear and violence).

                  AND I WANT TO LOOK FOR FUNDING FOR SOME OF THESE BRAVE PEACEMAKERS. IF WE CAN SEND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR ARMS, WE CAN SPARE A FEW PERCENT FOR PEACE. THIS IS OUR TRUE FUTURE.

                  With appreciation for all who read these words,



                  Dr. Jack Kornfield
                  Spirit Rock Meditation Center
                  Woodacre, Ca 94973. USA.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I find this interesting, because Malaysia is very close to Thailand, and Malaysia seems to go out of its way advertisement wise to bring foreigners and retirees into their country. The incentives for westerners to move to Malaysia are relatively great, especially when compared with the difficulties of moving to Thailand permanently.



                    KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — Malaysia's Islamic opposition party has urged the government to cancel a concert by Avril Lavigne, saying the Canadian singer's on-stage moves are "too sexy," an official said Monday.

                    Lavigne, a Grammy-nominated rock singer who burst to fame with her 2002 debut album "Let's Go," plans to start her monthlong Asia tour with a performance in Kuala Lumpur on Aug. 29.

                    The youth wing of the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party said Lavigne's concert would promote wrong values ahead of Malaysia's Aug. 31 independence day.

                    "It is considered too sexy for us. ... It's not good for viewers in Malaysia," said Kamarulzaman Mohamed, a party official. "We don't want our people, our teenagers, influenced by their performance. We want clean artists, artists that are good role models."

                    Kamarulzaman said he sent a protest letter to the Culture, Arts and Heritage Ministry and the Kuala Lumpur mayor last week, calling for the concert to be canceled.

                    An official from the Culture Ministry's department that vets all foreign artists said the government has not given permission for the concert yet. The department is to meet Tuesday to decide on the organizer's application, which was received last week.
                    Related

                    The official declined to be named because she is not authorized to make public statements.

                    A spokesman for the concert's organizer, Galaxy Group, denied that Lavigne's show had any "negative elements."

                    The spokesman, who declined to be named citing protocol, said his company was confident of receiving the permit as feedback from authorities so far had been "very positive."

                    Malaysia requires all performers to wear clothes without obscene or drug-related images and be covered from chest to knees. They must also refrain from jumping, shouting, hugging and kissing on stage.

                    Still, members of PAS and other conservative Muslims often protest Western and even Malaysian music shows that they deem to be inappropriate.

                    Last year, pop singer Gwen Stefani made what she called "a major sacrifice" by donning clothes that revealed little skin at a performance here.

                    Also last year, Christina Aguilera skipped Malaysia during an Asian tour that included neighboring Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, while R&B superstar Beyonce scratched a planned concert here, moving it to Indonesia.

                    A *****cat Dolls concert in 2006 was fined 10,000 ringgit (US$2,857) after the U.S. girl group was accused of flouting decency regulations.MSNBC
                    Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                    "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                    (more comments in my User Profile)
                    russbo.com


                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I bet Avril Lavigne is thrilled that someone is still talking about her.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Here is an article about dress code for women in the Quran. The author says the veil, hajib, is not islamic and could even be idol worshipping.

                        I noticed at the opening ceremony of the Olympics that many women from islamic countries didnt wear veil, like Algeria, Marocco, Pakistan and even Egypt if i remember correctly.

                        Apparently the editing of the article is not very easy to read, u can read more clearly@



                        SUMMARY:
                        Quran is very clear about the dress code for the believers. Innovations and fabrication intorduced Hijab (veil) to Islam (submission.) Hijab (veil) is a traditional, not religious head cover that dates back to ancient civilizations, and is not supported or advocated by the Quran.

                        INTRODUCTION:
                        God, the Most Gracious, Most Merciful, insists on making His religion easy, practical and enjoyable for His true believers. God also told us that those who reject Him or His books are making life miserable for themselves and for their loved ones who follow in their footsteps.
                        He reminds us in the Quran that He has placed no hardship on us in practicing our religion (see 22:78).
                        "You shall strive for the cause of GOD as you should strive for His cause. He has chosen you and has placed no hardship on you in practicing your religion - the religion of your father Abraham. ................................" 22:78
                        God established also several rules in His book, the Quran, for His TRUE believers. Breaking any of His rules or refusing any of them means loss, misguidance, misery and eternal suffering. To understand a topic like the DRESS CODE for Muslim Women, we need to review quickly some of these rules established by our Creator, God Almighty, to whom we will be responsible for our deeds. Every rule is important and every rule is meant to be.

                        (1) The Quran is a complete book, See 6:19,38,114, 115, 12:111 and 50:45.
                        Remember that when God says that His book is complete, it means 100% complete.
                        "..........We did not leave ANYTHING out of this book." 6:38
                        "The word of your Lord is COMPLETE, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient." 6:115

                        (2) The Quran is perfect; no mistakes, no falsehood, no nonsense.
                        "No falsehood could enter it (Quran), in the past or in the future; a revelation from a Most Wise, Praiseworthy."41:42
                        ".......All ruling belongs to God, and He has ruled that you shall not worship except Him. This is the PERFECT RELIGION, but most people do not know." 12:40 (see also 30:30, 30:43 and 98:5).

                        (3) The Quran is detailed, and when God says He detailed His book it means FULLY detailed. God does not do half jobs.
                        "Shall I seek other than GOD as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed? Those who received the scripture recognize that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbor any doubt." 6:114 (See also, 7:52, 11:1, 41:3, 10:37 and 12:111)

                        (4)God does not need any addition to His book. God teaches us in the Quran that He does not run out of words and that if He so willed He could have given us hundreds, thousands or millions of books besides the Quran (see 18:109). Since the Quran is complete, perfect and fully detailed, God did not give us any more books.

                        (5) God calls His book, the Quran, the BEST HADITH. HE called on His true believers to accept no other hadiths as a source of this perfect religion . See 7:185, 31:6, 39:23, 45:6, and 77:50.
                        "Have they not looked at the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all the things God has created? Does it ever occur to them that the end of their life may be near? Which HADITH, besides this (Quran) do they believe in?" 7:185

                        (6) God calls on His true believers to make sure not to fall in the trap of idol-worship by following the words of the scholars instead of the words of God (see 9:31).

                        (7) God calls those who prohibit what He did not prohibit, aggressors, liars and idol-worshipers. Idol-worship is the only unforgivable sin, if maintained till death. See, 5:87, 9:37, 7:32, 6:119, 6:140 and 10:59.
                        "O you who believe, do not prohibit good things that are made lawful by God, and do not aggress; God dislikes the aggressors." 5:87
                        "Say, "Did you note how God sends down to you all kinds of provisions, then you render some of them unlawful, and some lawful?" Say, "Did God give you permission to do this? Or, do you fabricate lies and attribute them to God?"10:59

                        (8) Muhammed is represented only by the Quran. The Prophet Muhammed was the last Prophet and a messenger of God (33:40). He was not the messenger of God because of who he (Muhammed) was, but because he was given the Quran (the message) to deliver to the world. The religion of Islam is a religion of God, not about Muhammed, who was blessed by God with the delivery of the message of the Quran. He did not have an agenda of his own. His job was to deliver to the world what God was giving him, the Quran. See 42:48, 13:40, 5:99-100
                        Muhammed cannot prohibit things, or make lawful things on his own. When he tried to do that God admonished him publicly, see 66:1
                        "O you prophet, why do you prohibit what GOD has made lawful for you, just to please your wives? GOD is Forgiver, Merciful."66:1
                        66:1 reminds us that God is the only ONE to prohibit or make things lawful. NO ONE can attribute to Muhammed a prohibition that God did not give him in the Quran. Anyone who tries to do so is admitting his/her refusal of God's words and commandments in the Quran.

                        (9) The TRUE believers KNOW that when God says something, He means it, and when He does not, he means it as well. Everything given to us in the Quran was done deliberately and everything left out was also left out deliberately.
                        God does not forget. See 19:64. We are not to add to this religion what God deliberately left out and claim it to be from Him or His messenger. His messenger has only ONE message, the Quran. God already told us He does not run out of words. 18:109

                        (10)God does not need us to improve on His book, the Quran, but we very much need Him for every aspect of our lives. Those who think they have some improvement on the Quran are but asking for recognition of their idols as gods besides the ONE and ONLY GOD.
                        Fabricated hadiths tried to add to Islam (Submission) what the disbelievers thought God forgot to mention in the Quran.

                        (11) God calls on His TRUE believers to verify every piece of information they see, hear or read, see 17:36.
                        "You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them." 17:36
                        So, Please VERIFY for yourself.

                        THREE RULES FOR WOMEN DRESS CODE
                        IN ISLAM (SUBMISSION)

                        FIRST RULE : THE BEST GARMENT
                        [7:26]"O children of Adam, we have provided you with garments to cover your bodies, as well as for luxury. But the best garment is the garment of righteousness. These are some of GOD's signs, that they may take heed."
                        This is the BASIC rule of DRESS CODE in the Quran. This is the first rule in WOMEN DRESS CODE in Islam (Submission).

                        SECOND RULE : COVER YOUR BOSOMS
                        The second rule can be found in 24:31. Here God orders the women to cover their bosoms whenever they dress up. But before quoting 24:31 let us review some crucial words that are always mentioned with this topic, namely "Hijab" and "Khimar"

                        THE WORD "HIJAB" in the QURAN
                        "Hijab" is the term used by many Muslims women to describe their head cover that may or may not include covering their face except their eyes, and sometimes covering also one eye. The Arabic word "Hijab" can be translated into veil or yashmak. Other meanings for the word "Hijab" include, screen, cover(ing), mantle, curtain, drapes, partition, division, divider.
                        Can we find the word "Hijab" in the Quran??
                        The word "Hijab" appeared in the Quran 7 times, five of them as "Hijab" and two times as "Hijaban," these are 7:46, 33:53, 38:32, 41:5, 42:51, 17:45 & 19:17.
                        None of these "Hijab" words are used in the Quran in reference to what the traditional Muslims call today (Hijab) as a dress code for the Muslim woman.
                        God knows that generations after Muhammed's death the Muslims will use the word "Hijab" to invent a dress code that He never authorized. God used the word "Hijab" ahead of them just as He used the word "Hadith" ahead of them.
                        Hijab in the Quran has nothing to do with the Muslim Women dress code.

                        HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
                        While many Muslims call "Hijab", an Islamic dress code, they completely ignore the fact that, Hijab as a dress code has nothing to do with Islam and nothing to do with QURAN.
                        http://submission.org/images/livia.gif"Hijab" or veil can be traced back to early civilizations. It can be found in early and late Roman and Greek art. The evidence can be seen in archeological discoveries whether in pottery fragments, paintings or recorded civil laws. In Greco-Roman culture, both women and men wore head covering in religious contexts. The tradition of wearing the veil (by women) and the headcover (by men) was then adopted by the Jews who wrote it in the Talmud (Talmud equals the Hadiths and Sunna, neither are the words of God) then the Christians adopted the same. A well respected Rabbi once explained to a group of Jewish young women, "We do not find a direct command in the Torah mandating that women cover their heads, but we do know that this has been the continuing custom for thousands of years." After the prophet Muhammad's death , the writers of the hadith books adopted and encouraged the ancient tradition of head covering. Hadith book' writers took after the Jews as they did with many other traditions , and alleged them to the prophet since the Quran did not command it.
                        Any student of the Jewish traditions or religious books will see that head cover for the Jewish woman (and men) has been encouraged by the Rabbis and religious leaders. Observant Jewish women still cover their heads most of the time and specially in the synagogues, weddings, and religious festivities.
                        http://submission.org/teresa.gifChristian women cover their heads in many religious occasions while the nuns cover their heads all the time.
                        As we can expect the traditional Arabs, of all religions, Jews, Christians and Muslims used to wear head cover, or "Hijab," not because of Islam, but because of tradition. In Saudi Arabia, up to this day most of the men cover their heads , not because of Islam but because of tradition.
                        North Africa is known for its Tribe (Tuareg) that have the Muslim men wearing "Hijab" instead of women. Here the tradition has the hijab in reverse. If wearing Hijab is the sign of the pious and righteous Muslim woman, Mother Teresa would have been the first woman to be counted.
                        In brief, hijab is a traditional dress and has nothing to do with Islam or religion. In certain areas of the world, men are the ones who wear the hijab while in others the women do.
                        Mixing religion with tradition is a form of idolworship, since the followers of traditions are following laws from sources other than God's scriptures and claim it to be from God. Idolworship is the only unforgivable sin if maintained till death.
                        Ignoring what God asks you to do in His book, or following innovated laws not stated in the the Quran, is a clear sign of disregarding God and His message.
                        When tradition supersedes God's commandment, the true religion takes a second place. God never accepts to be second, God has to be always the FIRST and to HIM there is no second.

                        THE WORD "KHIMAR" in the QURAN:
                        "Khimar" is an Arabic word that can be found in the Quran in 24:31 While the first basic rule of Dress Code for the Muslim Women can be found in 7:26, the second rule of the DRESS CODE FOR WOMEN can be found in 24:31. Some Muslims quote verse 31 of sura 24 as containing the Hijab, or head cover, by pointing to the word, khomoorehenna, (from Khimar), forgetting that God already used the word Hijab, several times in the Quran. Those blessed by God can see that the use of the word "Khimar" in this verse is not for "Hijab" or for head cover. Those who quote this verse usually add (Head cover) (veil) after the word Khomoorehenna, and usually between ( ), because it is their addition to the verse not God's. Here is 24:31,
                        "And tell the believing women to subdue their eyes, and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall cover their chests, (with their Khimar) and shall not relax this code in the presence of other than their husbands, their fathers, the fathers of their husbands, their sons, the sons of their husbands, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, other women, the male servants or employees whose sexual drive has been nullified, or the children who have not reached puberty. They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake and reveal certain details of their bodies. All of you shall repent to GOD, O you believers, that you may succeed." 24:31 Khalifa's translation.
                        Here is Yousuf Ali's translation, but the word KHIMAR was put back in place instead of (veils), so the verse would look as it should have been before adding Ali's own interpretation:
                        "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments ....... . . that they should draw their KHIMAR over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands.........."
                        Y. Ali's translation, with the word khimar put back in place.
                        "Khimar" is an Arabic word that means, cover, any cover, a curtain is a Khimar, a dress is a Khimar, a table cloth that covers the top of a table is a Khimar, a blanket can be used as a Khimar..etc. The word KHAMRA used for intoxicant in Arabic has the same root with Khimar, because both covers, the Khimar covers (a window, a body, a table . . . etc.) while KHAMRA covers the state of mind. Most of the translators, obviously influenced by Hadith (fabrications) translate the word as VEIL and thus mislead most people to believe that this verse is advocating the covering of the head.
                        In 24:31 God is asking the women to use their cover (khimar)( being a dress, a coat, a shawl, a shirt, a blouse, a tie, a scarf . . . etc.) to cover their bosoms, not their heads or their hairs. If God so willed to order the women to cover their heads or their hair, nothing would have prevented Him from doing so. GOD does not run out of words. GOD does not forget. God did not order the women to cover their heads or their hair.
                        God does not wait for a Scholar to put the correct words for Him!
                        The Arabic word for CHEST, GAYB is in the verse (24:31), but the Arabic words for HEAD, (RAAS) or HAIR, (SHAAR) are NOT in the verse. The commandment in the verse is clear - COVER YOUR CHEST OR BOSOMS, but also the fabrication of the scholars and most of the translators is clear by claiming- cover your head or hair.
                        The last part of the verse (24:31) translates as, "They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake and reveal certain details of their bodies."The details of the body can berevealed or not revealed by the dress you wear, not by your head cover.
                        Notice also the expression in 24:31,
                        "They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary."
                        This expression may sound vague to many because they have not understood the mercy of God. Again God here used this very general term to give us the freedom to decide according to our own circumstances the definition of "What is necessary".
                        It is not up to a scholar or to any particular person to define this term. God wants to leave it personal for every woman and no one can take it away from her. Women who follow the basic rule number one i.e. righteousness, will have no problem making the right decision to reveal only which is necessary.
                        The word "zeenatahunna" in this verse refers to the woman's body parts (beauty) that can be exaggerated by the movement of the body while walking and not to the artificial ornaments and decorations as some people interpret it or translate it. At the end of the verse, God told the women not to strike with their feet to show their "zeenatahunna." Striking the feet while walking can emphasize , exaggerate or shake certain parts of the body that do not need to be emphasized. It is important to remember that striking the feet while walking does not have this effect on the head, hair or face, they are not part of what God calls in this verse the hidden zeena.
                        Accepting orders from anybody but God, means idol-worship. That is how serious the matter of Hijab/khimar is. Women who wear Hijab because of tradition or because they like it for personal reasons commit no sin, as long as they know that it is not part of this perfect religion. Those who are wearing it because they think God ordered it are committing Idol-worship, as God did not order it, the scholars did. These women have found for themselves another god than the One who revealed the Quran, complete, perfect and FULLY detailed to tell them they have to cover their heads to be Muslims.
                        Idol-worship is the only unforgivable sin, if maintained till death, 4:48.

                        THIRD RULE : LENGTHEN YOUR GARMENTS
                        The first regulation of DRESS CODE for Muslim women is in 7:26, the second is in 24:31 and the third is in 33:59
                        "O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they shall LENGTHEN their garments. Thus, they will be recognized and avoid being insulted. God is Forgiver, Most Merciful." 33:59
                        In 33:59, God sets the other regulation for the dress code for the Muslim women during the prophet's life.
                        Although the verse is talking to the prophet which means this regulation applies to the time of the prophet, just like the order in 49:2, the description fits the spirit of Islam (Submission in English), and can teach us a great deal.
                        If you reflect on this verse and how God ordered the prophet to tell his wives, his daughters and the wives of the believers to lengthen their garments, you would understand the great wisdom of the MOST WISE, the MOST MERCIFUL. In this verse, God, DELIBERATELY, (and all the TRUE believers know that everything GOD says, does, or did is DELIBERATE) said, tell them, to lengthen their garments, and never said how long is long. God could have said tell them to lengthen their garments to their ankles or to their mid-calf or to their knees, but HE DID NOT. He did not, OUT OF HIS MERCY, not because HE FORGOT as God does not forget. God knows that we will be living in different communities and have different cultures and insists that the minor details of this dress code will be left for the people of every community to hammer for themselves.
                        It is clear from the above verses that the DRESS CODE for the Muslim women (Submitters) according to the Quran is righteousness and modesty. God knows that this modesty will be understood differently in different communities and that is why He left it open to us to decide for ourselves. Decide, after righteousness what is modesty. Modesty for a woman who lives in New York may not be accepted by a woman who lives in Cairo Egypt. Modesty of a woman who lives in Cairo, Egypt may not be accepted by a woman who lives in Saudi Arabia.
                        Modesty of a woman who lives in Jidda in Saudi Arabia may not be accepted by a woman who lives in a desert oasis in the same country. This difference in the way we perceive modesty is well known to God, He created us, and He put NO hardship on us in this great religion. He left it to us to decide what modesty would be. For any person, knowledgeable or not to draw a line and make conclusion for God about the definition of modesty is to admit that he/she knows better than God.
                        God left it open for us and no-one has the authority to restrict it, it has to stay open.

                        RELAXING THE DRESS CODE:
                        In the family setting, God put no hardship on the women, and permitted them to relax their dress code. If you reflect on the verses, 33:35 and 24:60, you will see that God did not give details of what this relaxation is, because every situation is different.
                        A woman may relax her dress code in front of the four-year-old son of her brother but not as much in front of the 16 year old son.
                        "The women may relax (their dress code) around their fathers, their sons, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, the other women, and their (female) servants. They shall reverence GOD. GOD witnesses all things."33:55
                        "The elderly women who do not expect to get married commit nothing wrong by relaxing their dress code, provided they do not reveal too much of their bodies. To maintain modesty is better for them. GOD is Hearer, Knower."24:60

                        DRESS CODE FOR THE MOSQUES (MASJIDS):
                        "O children of Adam, you shall be clean and dress nicely when you go to the masjid. And eat and drink moderately; Surely, He does not love the gluttons." 7:31

                        HARDSHIP IN THIS RELIGION:
                        God, the MOST GRACIOUS, MOST MERCIFUL decided that those who will reject His complete book and go look for other sources for guidance will suffer in this life and in the HEREAFTER by their choice. God never put any hardship on the believers, but the scholars did, they invented their own laws in defiance of God, to regulate everything from the side of bed you sleep on, to which foot should step in the house, to what to do with a fly in your soup, to what to say when having intercourse with your spouse.
                        Those who believe God and believe that His book is COMPLETE, PERFECT AND FULLY DETAILED, will have everything easy for them as God promised, See 10:62-64, 16:97 while those who could not believe God and have been seeking other sources than the Quran will have all the hardship of this life and the life to come. In the Hereafter they will complain to God, "we were not idol-worshipers," but God knows best, He knows they were See 6:22-24
                        "On the day when we summon them all, we will ask the idol worshipers, "Where are the idols you set up?" Their disastrous response will be, "By GOD our Lord, we never were idol worshipers." Note how they lied to themselves, and how the idols they had invented have abandoned them." 6:22-24

                        CONCLUSION:
                        God, the Most Merciful, gave us three basic rules for the Dress Code for Women in Islam (Submission),
                        (1) The BEST garment is the garment of righteousness.
                        (2) Whenever you dress , cover your chest (bosoms).
                        (3) Lengthen your garment.
                        While these three BASIC rules may not sound enough for those who do not trust God, the TRUE believers know that God is ENOUGH. God could have given us more details to the point of having graphs, designs and color rules, but He , the Most Merciful, wants to give us exactly these very basic rules and leave the rest for us. After these three basic rules every woman is more aware of her circumstances and can adjust her dress for her situation. Any addition to these basic Quranic rules is an attempt to correct God or improve on His merciful design.
                        We have no obligation to follow but God's rules, just as His messenger did all the time. Innovations and fabrications that added thousands of rules to the women dress code are nothing but idol-worship and should be refused.

                        STAY WITH GOD, that is where the winners go. May God bless us with His mercy and guidance
                        Last edited by liutangsanzang; 08-18-2008, 06:55 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Liu, good stuff.

                          Here's an example of ignorance found in religion (all religions have this sort of nonsense, but this is a bit extreme):
                          Bangladesh police say a crocodile killed and ate a 25-year-old after he waded into a pond next to a shrine in an attempt to receive the animal’s blessing, news.com.au reported Friday.

                          Inspector Humayun Kabir said Rubel Sheikh and his mother traveled to the Muslim Khan Jahan Ali shrine, where hundreds of people visit every day to offer hens and goats to the crocodiles living there.

                          Part of the shrine ritual involves bathing in the water with the crocodiles, but devotees are very rarely approached by the animals, according to Kabir.

                          "He went into the pond hoping to be blessed when a crocodile attacked him and dragged him into the deep part of the pond,'' Kabir told the Australian Associated Press.

                          "This is a very unusual incident. Normally, the crocodiles are very friendly and do not harm people.''

                          About 25 people dove into the pond to try and rescue Sheikh, but could not find his body. It washed ashore Thursday and had been largely eaten, Kabir said.
                          Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                          "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                          (more comments in my User Profile)
                          russbo.com


                          Comment


                          • #88
                            "This is a very unusual incident. Normally, the crocodiles are very friendly and do not harm people.''
                            I think this might be quote-worthy, what do you think Doc?
                            "For some reason I'm in a good mood today. I haven't left the house yet, though. "

                            "fa hui, you make buddhism sexy." -Zachsan

                            "Friends don't let friends do Taekwondo." -Nancy Reagan

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              They're very friendly until they get hungry.

                              Again, stupidity rules.
                              Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                              "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                              (more comments in my User Profile)
                              russbo.com


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                OK doc but if u say stupidity rules, do u deny Plato's idea of the Demiurge, sorry i dont know the english name, putting order to the Chaos, or the idea of a loving god creating us from the dirt, or of the Adi buddha ruling the samsara, Nirvana being the same as Samsara, or that Punk rules OK, or that Allah created us or that Shiva/consciousness/atman and the maya/illusion of his lover/shakti/energy are one or that yin is inside yang ...?

                                Personally i tend to think that indeed ignorance is strong but that Guan Yin is also quite merciful and powerful and being empty she can be quite everywhere.


                                Just an idea of these days, i m open to change

                                That might be too much everything is in everything and all religions are one and all men are brothers

                                Om and peace and love

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X