AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-06-13, 10:45   Link #34021
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yamabuki Art High School
Age: 65
The Times this morning reports that there is no evidence that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has become involved in the conflict:
Quote:
Iran’s state-run news media reported this week that Tehran had strengthened its forces along the Iraq border and suspended all pilgrim visas into Iraq, but had received no request from Iraq for military help. Reports that Iranian Revolutionary Guards troops had crossed the border into Iraq to assist the government forces could not be confirmed; Shiite militia leaders in the capital said they knew of no such move and had not asked Iran to send troops.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/14/wo...east/iraq.html
__________________
SeijiSensei is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-13, 12:06   Link #34022
Ridwan
Got A Bad Desire
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
Quote:
Why are there no Muslim philosophers?
Are Muslim academics playing the role of 'house Muslims'?

"Why are there no Muslim philosophers?" Sudipta Kaviraj posed this question to me while I was studying some critical Western texts of philosophy in the fall of 2009 with him. Although this is a complicated question - which I do not take at face value, given that Kaviraj is himself an important postcolonial thinker - it does point to a significant failure of Muslim thinkers to engage their own intellectual tradition, together with the Western tradition of thought.

At the same time, Kaviraj's question relates to another crucial question raised more recently by Hamid Dabashi: "Can non-Europeans think?" In his article, Dabashi highlights how non-European thought - Muslim thought for our present purposes - is cast by the academia. The problem now is not whether Muslims can or cannot think, but how their thought needs to be reshaped according to Western "styles" of thinking for it to be deemed "philosophy" by Western academics, and not something closer to mythology.

On one level the question "Why are there no Muslim philosophers?" is an absurd one. Hamid Dabashi and Walter Mignolo, both major thinkers in their own right, mention the names of a number of Muslim philosophers (Souleymane Bachir Diagne, Azmi Bishara, Sadeq Jalal Al-Azm, Fawwaz Traboulsi, Abdallah Laroui, Abdolkarim Soroush, and Seyyed Hossein Nasr). Wael Hallaq - himself also a very important thinker - has added to that list in his own commentary on the relation of politics and knowledge (Muhammad Arkoun, M Abed al-Jabiri, Ali Harb, Hasan Hanafi, and Muhammad Shahrur).

Muslim thought and Western academia

Lately, I have been pondering a set of questions. I posed them in a few academic forums, all with a decent Muslim representation, but I have yet to receive any satisfactory responses. My questions are: To what extent can Muslims think as Muslims within the academia without being deemed too Muslim, and to what extent must their thought be made to conform to Western paradigms of thought?

That is, in order to be accepted within the academia, the writings of Muslim academics must not be identifiable as Islamic thought, but just more expressions of "academic objectivity". Put differently, if the primary role of the academy is to inculcate obedience to the state, and if Muslims must make their thought conform to the strictures of the academy, are they then reproducing Western power/knowledge given that, as Michel Foucault has taught us, knowledge and power are intertwined?

The way I posed my initial question was whether Muslims within the academy are "house Muslims" or "field Muslims".

I would like to remind the reader that one of the major endeavours of the British in India (which was the exemplary colonial project) was to educate Indians according to modern, Western knowledge in order to create subjects that were more pliant and welcoming of British rule. One of the dreams of Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859), who played a major role in introducing Western education to India, was that Indians would ultimately educate other Indians in Western subjects.

This dream is now a reality to an extent that was perhaps never imagined by Macaulay and his peers. Indians - Muslims and otherwise - and non-Westerners the world over, are taught Western subjects by non-Westerners themselves. This is certainly also the case within the academy where, given the history of Orientalism, Islamic Studies is just another Western subject.

I mentioned earlier that I have yet to receive any satisfactory responses to my questions. The fact is some of the responses I did receive have bordered on the hostile, which, looking back now, perhaps makes sense. The way I posed my initial question was whether Muslims within the academy are "house Muslims" or "field Muslims". I was of course drawing on Malcolm X's powerful metaphor of the "house negroes" versus "field negroes", and the role played by the former during the civil rights movement in the US in appeasing white authorities over the concerns of the African American population.

Of course, I do not see "black" and "Muslim" as separate categories. They are very much intertwined. Malcolm X's autobiography resonates with me (a non-Black Muslim) more strongly than any other text of resistance of the last 50 years. Another, earlier text that has equal force is Frantz Fanon's inimitable Black Skin, White Masks.

Yet, some of the responses I received insisted that my metaphor was unacceptable because of "the difference" between African American and Muslim experiences. I wonder if some of the hostility was due to my problematisation of the role of Muslims within the academy? I was bringing into question their very bread and butter, after all. My concern is with highlighting any inadvertent contribution to the post-9/11 racialised binary of "extremist" versus "moderate" that is being constructed by Euro-American discourse regarding Muslims the world over, and which has been writ large and wide.

'House Muslims'

As Euro-American public discourse seeks to identify and promote "moderate" Muslims over "extremists", I am asking how Muslim academics themselves contribute to this politicised geopolitical narrative by trying to identify "moderate Muslims and Islam" over other forms of Islam, which are more varied and variegated than anyone could ever imagine. My argument is that by characterising Muslims according to such a "racialised binary", as critical race theorist David Tyrer describes it, Muslim academics are playing the role of "house Muslims".

The Islamic intellectual tradition has had a long history of reading things against the grain.

But the focus of the conversation I had unsuccessfully tried to initiate was repeatedly lost. One person suggested I was indulging in "pseudo-intellectualism", a charge that normally does not warrant a response, as it is often made to stop a discussion short without addressing the substantive question posed. She or he (the person chose to remain anonymous) argued that one of the advantages that Muslims had was they "refused" to think within colonial paradigms, and that is the advantage that Muslims still have. (It is not clear to me over whom Muslims have or had "the advantage").

My point is that through the implementation of Western education in the colonies, Western knowledge became knowledge itself. It replaced the countless ways of "knowing" that existed side-by-side in premodern times. Therefore, the idea that any of us can, and somehow do, think outside of Western education, is a fanciful one.

The virtual pushback that I experienced (all the discussions were on online forums) reminds me how, by contrast, Muslims historically always made room for people to question and challenge the status quo. The Islamic intellectual tradition has had a long history of reading things against the grain. The idea being, there is always more than one, or even a few, ways of reading texts or circumstances. Ibn Arabi (1165-1240), known as the "greatest teacher" by those who admire his work - and his influence has been enormous in the Muslim world - was also, paradoxically, considered by many to be a heretic.

He famously argued that Pharoah - the archetypal self-idolater of the Quranic and Biblical narratives - was a monotheist. Ghazali (1058-1111), another extremely influential figure in Islamic thought, contended that one should learn monotheism from Satan. A vital intellectual tradition has the ability to produce such paradoxical and intellectually challenging figures.

Without such open and free intellectual discussion, no tradition can claim philosophical vibrancy. The status quo must always be open to reexamination. And the status quo for Muslims, as far as their larger contribution to the world of ideas, has been a pitiable one for too long.

So why are there no Muslim philosophers? I submit this is a question that will trouble some of the best minds for many years to come.

Hasan Azad is a doctoral candidate specialising in Islamic Studies at Columbia University.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
In short, the moment 19th century kicked in, Islamic world began to lose its intellectual independence. Emulating successful ideas from a winning culture is not bad, but after the near death experience Ottomans had at the first decades of 19th century and the dawn of European subjugation upon the entire muslim world muslim world became frantic to gather whatever European they can for the sake of survival. There was a panic over "what have we missed" all over Muslim intelligentsia. They coopted with it at first, through Muslim modernism, which was later got oppressed by Kemal and soldifying the humbling of muslim culture under western "modernity". It's really a sad story. Nowadays we see muslim thinkers, intellectuals and radicals all confused to figure the right standing ground. Look at all the jargons, creationism and Islamization of pop culture, tactics that muslim fundies have adopted. They all come from the west. American even ! The legitimate solution got burried alive by Kemal and the entire western world all cheered for it. Kemal can't be blamed entirely for that, but he really was the angel of hell that Islamic world didn't deserve.



An even more detailed explanation about how westernized muslim radicals is served by this article : http://www.danielpipes.org/273/the-w...-radical-islam

Quote:
Fat'hi ash-Shiqaqi, a well-educated young Palestinian living in Damascus, recently boasted of his familiarity with European literature. He told an interviewer how he had read and enjoyed Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Chekhov, Sartre, and Eliot. He spoke of his particular passion for Sophocles' Oedipus Rex, a work he read ten times in English translation "and each time wept bitterly." Such acquaintance with world literature and such exquisite sensibility would not be of note except for two points-that Shiqaqi was, until his assassination in Malta a few weeks ago, an Islamist (or what is frequently called a "fundamentalist" Muslim) and that he headed Islamic Jihad, the arch-terrorist organization that has murdered dozens of Israelis over the last two years.

Shiqaqi's familiarity with things Western fits a common pattern. The brother of Eyad Ismail, one of the World Trade Center bombers recently extradited from Jordan, said of him, "He loved everything American from cowboy movies to hamburgers." His sister recalled his love of U.S. television and his saying, "I want to live in America forever." The family, she commented, "always considered him a son of America." His mother confirmed that "he loves the United States."

Hasan at-Turabi, the effective ruler of Sudan, the man behind the notorious "ghost houses" and the brutal persecution of his country's large Christian minority, often flaunts his knowledge of the West, telling a French interviewer that most militant Islamic leaders, like himself, are "from the Christian, Western culture. We speak your languages." In a statement that sums up this whole outlook, an Islamist in Washington asserted, "I listen to Mozart; I read Shakespeare; I watch the Comedy Channel; and I also believe in the implementation of the Shari'a [Islamic sacred law]."

This pattern points to a paradox: the very intellectuals intent on marching the Muslim world back to the seventh century also excel in Western ways and seem very much to appreciate at least some of them. How does this happen? What does it indicate about their present strengths and future course?
Fundamentalists are Westernized

Islamist leaders tend to be well acquainted with the West, having lived there, learned its languages, and studied its cultures. Turabi of the Sudan has advanced degrees from the University of London and the Sorbonne; he also spent a summer in the United States, touring the country on a U.S. taxpayer-financed program for foreign student leaders. Abbasi Madani, a leader of Algeria's Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), received a doctorate in education from the University of London. His Tunisian counterpart, Rashid al-Ghannushi, spent a year in France and since 1993 makes his home in Great Britain. Necmettin Erbakan, Turkey's leading militant politician, studied in Germany. Mousa Mohamed Abu Marzook, the head of Hamas' political committee, has lived in the United States since 1980, has a doctorate in engineering from Louisiana State University, and has been classified as a permanent U.S. resident since 1990. Though for years he was able to elude law enforcement, Abu Marzook was recently arrested at a New York airport on his way into the country to register his son in an American school.

Indeed, the experience of living in the West often turns indifferent Muslims into Islamists. Discussing Mehdi Bazargan, an Iranian engineer who spent the years 1928-35 in France, Hamid Dabashi dissects the process many Muslim students undergo:

Beginning with the conscious or unconscious, articulated or mute, premise that they ought to remain firmly attached to their Islamic consciousness, they begin to admire "The Western" achievements. . . . They recognize a heightened state of ideological self-awareness on the part of "The West" that they identify as the source and cause of its achievements. They then look back at their own society where such technological achievements were lacking, a fact they attribute, in turn, to the absence of that heightened state of ideological self-awareness.

The key notion here, the French analyst Olivier Roy explains, is the rather surprising idea that ideologies are "the key to the West's technical development." This assumption leads Islamists "to develop a modern political ideology based on Islam, which they see as the only way to come to terms with the modern world and the best means of confronting foreign imperialism."

Some of the leading figures fit this pattern. The Egyptian Sayyid Qutb went to the United States in 1948 as an admirer of things American, then "returned" to Islam during his two years resident there, becoming one of the most influential Islamist thinkers of our time. 'Ali Shari'ati of Iran lived five years in Paris, 1960-65; from this experience came the key ideas of the Islamic Revolution. In other cases, Islamist thinkers do not actually live in the West but absorb its ways at a distance by learning a Western language and immersing themselves in Western ideas, as did the Indo-Pakistani journalist, thinker, and politician Sayyid Abul A'la Mawdudi (1903-79). In other cases, reading Western works in translation does the trick. Morteza Motahhari, a leading acolyte of the Ayatollah Khomeini, made as thorough a study of Marxism as possible in the Persian language.

Many of Islamism's intellectual lights also share a background of technical accomplishment. Erbakan quickly rose to the top of the engineering profession in Turkey as a full professor at Istanbul Technical University, director at a factory producing diesel motors, and even head of the country's Chamber of Commerce. Layth Shubaylat, a Jordanian firebrand, is also president of the Jordanian Engineers Association. These men take special pride in being able to challenge the West in the area of its greatest strength.

Actual terrorists also tend to be science-oriented, though less accomplished. Ramzi Yusuf, the accused mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing, is an electronics engineer and explosives expert with an advanced degree from Great Britain; Nidal Ayyad was an up-and-coming chemical engineer at Allied Signal; and Eyad Ismail studied computers and engineering at Wichita State University. This same pattern holds in the Middle East: Salah 'Ali 'Uthman, one of three terrorists who attacked a bus in Jerusalem in July 1993, was a student of computer science at the University in Gaza. The most notorious anti-Zionist terrorist of recent years is Yahya Ayyash, nicknamed "The Engineer." Many Islamist Egyptians who engage in violence against the regime have science degrees. The Islamist leaders are not peasants living in the unchanging countryside but modern, thoroughly urbanized individuals, many of them university graduates. Notwithstanding all their talk about recreating the society of the Prophet Muhammad, Islamists are modern individuals at the forefront of coping with modern life.
Ignorance of Traditional Islam

In contrast to this familiarity with Western ways, the Islamists are distant from their own culture. Turabi admitted to a French interviewer, "I know the history of France better than the history of Sudan; I love your culture, your painters, your musicians." Having found Islam on their own as adults, many Islamists are ignorant of their own history and traditions. Some of "the new generation," Martin Kramer notes, "are born-again Muslims, ill-acquainted with Islamic tradition." Tunisia's Minister of Religion Ali Chebbi goes further, saying that they "ignore the fundamental facts of Islam." Like Mawdudi, these autodidacts mix a bit of this and that, as Sayyed Vali Reza Nasr explains:

Mawdudi's formulation was by no means rooted in traditional Islam. He adopted modern ideas and values, mechanisms, procedures, and idioms, weaving them into an Islamic fabric. . . . He sought not to resurrect an atavistic order but to modernize the traditional conception of Islamic thought and life. His vision represented a clear break with Islamic tradition and a fundamentally new reading of Islam which took its cue from modern thought.

On reflection, this lack of knowledge should not be surprising. Islamists are individuals educated in modern ways who seek solutions to modern problems. The Prophet may inspire them, but they approach him through the filter of the late twentieth century. In the process, they unintentionally substitute Western ways for those of traditional Islam.

Traditional Islam - the immensely rewarding faith of nearly a billion adherents - developed a civilization that for over a millennium provided order to the lives of young and old, rich and poor, sophisticate and ignorant, Moroccan and Malaysian. Alienated from this tradition, Islamists seem willing to abandon it in a chimerical effort to return to the pure and simple ways of Muhammad. To connect spiritually to the first years of Islam, when the Prophet was alive and the faith was new, they seek to skip back thirteen centuries. The most mundane issues inspire them to recall the Prophet's times. Thus, an author portrays the "survival tactics" employed by Muslim students at American universities to retain their Islamic identity as "much like the early Muslims during the Hijra [Muhammad's exile from Mecca to Medina]."

Islamists see themselves, however, not as tradition-bound but as engaged in a highly novel enterprise. According to Iran's spiritual leader, 'Ali Hoseyni Khamene'i, "The Islamic system that the imam [Khomeni] created . . . has not existed in the course of history, except at the beginning [of Islam]." Ghannushi similarly asserts that "Islam is ancient but the Islamist movement is recent." In rejecting a whole millennium, the Islamists throw out a great deal of their own societies, from the great corpus of Qur'anic scholarship to the finely worked interpretations of law.

On the contrary, they admire efficient factories and armies. The Muslim world seems backward to them and they urgently seek its overhaul through the application of modern means. When this process goes slowly, they blame the West for withholding its technology. Thus, 'Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, the Iranian arch-radical, plaintively bemoans that "the United States and the West will never give us the technology" to pursue what he quaintly calls "the science of industrialization."

The Islamists' goal turns out to be not a genuinely Islamic order but an Islamic-flavored version of Western reality. This is particularly apparent in four areas: religion, daily life, politics, and the law.
I. Imitating Christianity

It's certainly not their intent, but militant Muslims have introduced some distinctly Christian notions into their Islam. Traditional Islam was characterized by informal organizations. Virtually every major decision-establishing a canonical text of the Qur'an, excluding philosophical inquiry, or choosing which religious scholars to heed-was reached in an unstructured and consensual way. This has been the genius of the religion, and it meant that rulers who tried to control the religious institution usually failed.

Islamists, ignorant of this legacy, have set up church-like structures. The trend began in Saudi Arabia, where the authorities built a raft of new institutions. Already in 1979, Khalid Duran wrote about the emergence of a "priestly hierarchy with all its churchly paraphernalia":

A number of religious functionaries have come into being whose posts were previously unheard of, for example: the Secretary of the Muslim World League, the Secretary General of the Islamic Conference, the Rector of the Islamic University in Medina, and so [on] and so forth. For the first time in history the imam of the Ka'ba has been sent on tour of foreign countries as if he were an Apostolic nuncio.

The Islamic Republic of Iran soon followed the Saudi model and went beyond it, Shahrough Akhavi explains, to institute a Catholic-style control of the clergy:

The centralization that has occurred in the religious institution in Iran is unprecedented, and actions have been taken that resemble patterns in the ecclesiastical church tradition familiar in the West. For example, in 1982, Khomeini encouraged the "defrocking" and "excommunication" of his chief rival, Ayatollah Muhammad Kazim Shari'atmadari (d. 1986), although no machinery for this has ever existed in Islam. Other trends, such as centralized control over budgets, appointments to the professoriate, curricula in the seminaries, the creation of religious militias, monopolizing the representation of interests, and mounting a Kulturkampf in the realm of the arts, the family, and other social issues tell of the growing tendency to create an "Islamic episcopacy" in Iran.

Even more striking, Akhavi notes, is how Khomeini made himself pope:

Khomeini's practice of issuing authoritative fatwas, obedience to which is made compulsory, comes close to endowing the top jurist with powers not dissimilar to those of the pope in the Catholic Church. After all, compliance with a particular cleric's fatwas in the past had not been mandatory.

In creating this faux Christian hierarchy, Islamists invented something more Western than Islamic. In similar fashion, Islamists have turned Friday into a Sabbath, something it had not previously been. Traditionally, Friday was a day of congregating for prayer, not a day of rest. Indeed, the whole idea of the Sabbath is alien to the vehemently monotheistic spirit of Islam, which deems the notion of God needing a day of rest falsely anthropomorphic. Instead, the Qur'an instructs Muslims to "leave off business" only while praying; once finished, they should "disperse through the land and seek God's bounty"-in other words, engage in commerce. A day of rest so smacks of Jewish and Christian practice that some traditional Islamic authorities actually discouraged taking Friday off. In most places and times, Muslims did work on Fridays, interrupted only by the communal service.

In modern times, Muslim states imitated Europe and adopted a day of rest. The Ottoman Empire began closing government offices on Thursdays, a religiously neutral day, in 1829. Christian imperialists imposed Sunday as the weekly day of rest throughout their colonies, a practice many Muslim rulers adopted as well. Upon independence, virtually every Muslim government inherited the Sunday rest and maintained it. S. D. Goitein, the foremost scholar of this subject, notes that Muslim states did so "in response to the exigencies of modern life and in imitation of Western precedent."

Recently, as the Sunday Sabbath came to be seen as too Western, Muslim rulers asserted their Islamic identities by instituting Friday as the day off. Little did they realize that, in so doing, they perpetuated a specifically Judeo-Christian custom. And as Fridays have turned into a holiday (for family excursions, spectator sports, etc.), Muslims have imitated the Western weekend.
II. Feminism

Perhaps the most striking Westernisms Islamists have introduced are associated with women. Islamists actually espouse an outlook more akin to Western-style feminism than anything in traditional Islam. Traditional Muslim men certainly did not take pride in the freedom and independence of their women, but Islamists do. Ahmad al-Banna, the leader of Egypt's Muslim Brethren, adopts a feminist outlook that leads him to reinterpret Muslim history according to Western standards. "Muslim women have been free and independent for fifteen centuries. Why should we follow the example of Western women, so dependent on their husbands in material matters?"

Traditional Muslim men took pride in their women staying home; in well-to-do households, they almost never left its confines. Hasan at-Turabi has something quite different in mind: "Today in Sudan, women are in the army, in the police, in the ministries, everywhere, on the same footing as men." Turabi proudly speaks of the Islamic movement having helped "liberate women." Following the adage that "the best mosque for women is the inner part of the house," traditional women prayed at home, and female quarters in mosques were slighted; but Islamist women regularly attend public services and new mosques consequently allot far more space to women's sections.

For centuries, a woman's veil served primarily to help her retain her virtue; today, it serves the feminist goal of facilitating a career. Muslim women who wear "Islamic dress," writes a Western analyst,

are usually well educated, often in the most prestigious university faculties of medicine, engineering, and the sciences, and their dress signifies that although they pursue an education and career in the public sphere, they are religious, moral women. Whereas other women are frequently harassed in the public sphere, such women are honored and even feared. By the late 1980s, Islamic dress had become the norm for middle-class women who do not want to compromise their reputation by their public activities. Boutiques offer Parisian-style fashions adopted to Islamic modesty standards.

The establishment of an Islamic order in Iran has, ironically perhaps, opened many opportunities outside the house for pious women. They work in the labor force and famously serve in the military. A parliamentary leader boasts, not without reason, about Iran having the best feminist record in the Middle East, and points to the numbers of women in higher education. In keeping with this spirit, one of Khomeini's granddaughters attended law school and then lived in London with her husband, a cardiac surgeon in training; another organizes women's sporting events.

If the veil once symbolized a woman's uncontrollable (and therefore destructive) sexuality, militants see it as the sign of her competence. Turabi declares, "I am for equality between the sexes," and explains: "A woman who is not veiled is not the equal of men. She is not looked on as one would look on a man. She is looked at to see if she is beautiful, if she is desirable. When she is veiled, she is considered a human being, not an object of pleasure, not an erotic image."

Curiously, some Islamists see the veil representing not careers and equality, but something quite different: positive sexuality. Shabbir Akhtar, a British writer, sees the veil serving "to create a truly erotic culture in which one dispenses with the need for the artificial excitement that pornography provides." Traditional Muslims, it hardly needs emphasizing, did not see veils as a substitute for pornography.
IIII. Turning Islam into Ideology

Traditional Islam emphasized man's relations with God while playing down his relations to the state. Law loomed very large, politics small. Over the centuries, pious Muslims avoided the government, which meant almost nothing to them but trouble (taxes, conscription, corvee labor). On the other hand, they made great efforts to live by the Shari'a.

Islamists, however, make politics the heart of their program. They see Islam less as the structure in which individuals make their lives and more as an ideology for running whole societies. Declaring "Islam is the solution," they hold with Khamene'i of Iran that Islam "is rich with instructions for ruling a state, running an economy, establishing social links and relationships among the people, and instructions for running a family." For Islamists, Islam represents the path to power. As a very high Egyptian official observes, to them "Islam is not precepts or worship, but a system of government." Olivier Roy finds the inspiration to be far more mundane than spiritual: "For many of them, the return to religion has been brought about through their experience in politics, and not as a result of their religious belief."

Revealingly, militants compare Islam not to other religions but to other ideologies. "We are not socialist, we are not capitalist, we are Islamic," says Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia. Egypt's Muslim Brethren assert they are neither socialists nor capitalists, but "Muslims." This comparison may seem overblown-socialism and capitalism are universal, militant Islam limited to Muslims-but it is not, for the militants purvey their ideology to non-Muslims too. In one striking instance, Khomeini in January 1989 sent a letter to Mikhail Gorbachev asserting the universality of Islam. Noting the collapse of Communist ideology, he implored the Soviet president not to turn westward for a replacement but to Islam.

I strongly urge that in breaking down the walls of Marxist fantasies you do not fall into the prison of the West and the Great Satan. . . . I call upon you seriously to study and conduct research into Islam. . . . I openly announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran, as the greatest and most powerful base of the Islamic world, can easily help fill up the ideological vacuum of your system.

As interpreted by a leading Iranian official, this letter "intended to put an end to . . . views that we are only speaking about the world of Islam. We are speaking for the world." It may even be the case-Khomeini only hints at this-that Islam for him had become so disembodied from faith that he foresaw a non-Muslim like Gorbachev adopting Islamic ways without becoming a Muslim.
IV. Overhauling the Sacred Law

Even as the militants pay homage to Islam's sacred law, they turn it into a Western-style code, and three age-old characteristics of the Shari'a disappear: its elaboration by independent scholars, its precedence over state interests, and its application to persons rather than territories.

Through the centuries, jurists wrote and interpreted the Islamic law on their own, with little control by governments. These jurists early on established that they were answerable to God, not to the prince. Joseph Schacht, a leading scholar of this subject, explains: "The caliph, though otherwise the absolute chief of the community of Muslims, had not the right to legislate but only to make administrative regulations with the limits laid down by the sacred Law." Rulers did try to dictate terms to jurists but failed-in the years A.D. 833-849, four successive caliphs imposed their understanding of the Qur'an's nature (that it was created by God, as opposed to the religious scholars, who said it had always existed); despite energetic attempts by the caliphs (including the flogging of a very eminent religious authority), the effort failed, and with it the pretensions of politicians to define the contents of Islam.

The jurists retained full control of Islamic law until the nineteenth century, when the British, French, and other European rulers codified the Shari'a as a European-style body of state law. Independent Muslim states, such as the Ottoman Empire, followed the European lead and also codified the Shari'a. With independence, all the Muslim rulers maintained the European habit of keeping the law firmly under state control; by the 1960s, only in Saudi Arabia did it remain autonomous.

Starting in 1969, Mu'ammar al-Qadhdhafi of Libya started the new wave of expanding the Shar'i content of state laws (for example, in the criminal statutes). He did so as ruler, using the state apparatus to compel jurists to carry out his orders. Islamists in many countries then emulated Qadhdhafi, giving the state authority over the Shari'a even as they extended its purview. They made no effort to revert to the jurists' law of old, but continued practices begun by the European powers.

When Islamists do on rare occasions protest this state domination of the law, it carries little conviction. Turabi remarks that "Islamic government is not total because it is Islam that is a total way of life, and if you reduce it to government, then government would be omnipotent, and that is not Islam." Turabi's enormous power in the Sudan makes it hard to take this critique seriously. Islamists accept Western ways because, first, they know the imperial system far better than the traditional Muslim one, and so perpetuate its customs. Second, reverting to the traditional Muslim way would, Ann Mayer of the Wharton School points out, "entail that governments relinquish the power that they had gained over legal systems when European-style codified law was originally adopted."

The state takeover of law invariably causes problems. In the traditional arrangement, the jurists jealously maintained their independence in interpreting the law. They insisted on God's imperatives taking absolute priority over those of the ruler. Such acts as prayer, the fast of Ramadan, or the pilgrimage to Mecca, they insisted, must never be subjected to the whims of despots. Jurists got their way, for hardly a single king or president, not even so ardent a secularist as Turkey's Kemal Ataturk, had the temerity to interfere with the Lord's commandments.

But Ayatollah Khomeini did. In January 1988, he issued an edict flatly contravening this ancient Islamic assumption. In a remarkable but little-noted document, the ayatollah asserted that "the government is authorized unilaterally . . . to prevent any matter, be it spiritual or material, that poses a threat to its interests." This means that, "for Islam, the requirements of government supersede every tenet, including even those of prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage to Mecca." Subordinating these acts to raison d'etat has the effect of diminishing the Shari'a beyond recognition.

Khomeini-a classically educated scholar, an authority on Islamic law, and an eminent religious figure-justified this edict on the grounds that the interests of the Islamic Republic were synonymous with the interests of Islam itself. But this hardly explains so radical and unprecedented a step. The real reason lies in the fact that, like countless other twentieth-century rulers, he sought control of his country's spiritual life. Khomeini may have looked medieval but he was a man of his times, deeply affected by totalitarian ideas emanating from the West.

In traditional Islam (as in Judaism), laws apply to the individual, not (as in the West) to the territory. It matters not whether a Muslim lives here or there, in the homeland or in the diaspora; he must follow the Shari'a. Conversely, a non-Muslim living in a Muslim country need not follow its directives. For example, a Muslim may not drink whiskey whether he lives in Tehran or Los Angeles; and a non-Muslim may imbibe in either place. This leads to complex situations whereby one set of rules applies to a Muslim thief who robs a Muslim, another to a Christian who robs a Christian, and so forth. The key is who you are, not where you are.

In contrast, European notions of law are premised on jurisdictions. Commit a crime in this town or state and you get one punishment, another in the next town over. Even highways have their own rules. What counts is where you are, not who you are.

Ignorant of the spirit underlying the Shari'a, Islamists enforce it along territorial not personal lines; Turabi declares that Islam "accepts territory as the basis of jurisdiction." As a result, national differences have emerged. The Libyan government lashes all adulterers. Pakistan lashes unmarried offenders and stones married ones. The Sudan imprisons some and hangs others. Iran has even more punishments, including head shaving and a year's banishment. In the hands of Islamists, the Shari'a becomes just a variant of Western, territorial law.

This new understanding most dramatically affects non-Muslims, whose millennium-old exclusion from the Shari'a is over; now they must live as virtual Muslims. 'Umar 'Abd ar-Rahman, the Egyptian sheikh in the American jail, is adamant on this subject: "It is very well known that no minority in any country has its own laws." 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Baz, the Saudi religious leader, calls on non-Muslims to fast during Ramadan. In Iran, foreign women may not wear nail polish-on the grounds that it leaves them unclean for (Islamic) prayer. Entering the country, female visitors are provided with gasoline-soaked rags to clean their varnished nails. An Islamist party in Malaysia wants to regulate how much time unrelated Chinese men and women may spend alone together.

This new interpretation of Islamic law creates enormous problems. Rather than for the most part leaving non-Muslims alone, as did traditional Islam, Islamism intrudes into their lives, fomenting enormous resentment and sometimes leading to violence. Palestinian Christians who raise pigs find their animals mysteriously poisoned. The million or two Christians living in the northern, predominantly Muslim, region of the Sudan must comply with virtually all the Shar'i regulations. In the southern Sudan, Islamic law prevails wherever the central government rules, although "certain" Shar'i provisions are not applied there; should the government conquer the whole South, all the provisions would probably go into effect, an expectation that does much to keep alive a forty-year civil war.
Conclusion: Fundamentalism is not Transitory

Despite themselves, the Islamists are Westernizers. Even in rejecting the West, they accept it. However reactionary in intent, Islamism imports not just modern but Western ideas and institutions. The Islamist dream of expunging the Western ways from Muslim life, in short, cannot succeed.

The resulting hybrid is more robust than it seems. Opponents of militant Islam often dismiss it as a regressive effort to avoid modern life and comfort themselves with the prediction that it is doomed to be left behind as modernization takes place. But this expectation seems mistaken; because it appeals most directly to Muslims contending with the challenges of modernity, Islamism's potential grows as do its numbers. Current trends suggest that it will remain a force for some time to come.
__________________
Ridwan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 20:46   Link #34023
AnimeFan188
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
In Just One Tweet, The Islamic Militants Who Are Taking Over Iraq Reveal How Barbaric They Really Are:

"Radical Islamic militants in Iraq reportedly tweeted a picture of a Sunni police chief’s severed head and made a
disturbing “joke” about using it as a soccer ball."

See:

http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-...c-tweet-2014-6


================================================== ================


Iraqi Military Makes Gains North of Baghdad in Conflict With ISIS:

"Iraqi troops beat back Islamist insurgents in several areas north of Baghdad on Saturday, as the U.S. moved an
aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf."

See:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/iraqi...sis-1402765053


================================================== ================


Analysis: ISIS, allies reviving 'Baghdad belts' battle plan:

"The lightning advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham and its allies from Mosul to the outskirts of
Samarra, as well as its capture of several towns in eastern Diyala, all over the course of several days, appears
to be part of a greater strategy to surround the capital of Baghdad before laying siege to it. This plan, to take
over the "belt" region outside of Baghdad and cut off the capital, appears to be the same strategy used by the
ISIS' predecessor back in 2006."

See:

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archiv...is_allies.php#


================================================== ================


Former Defense Officials Blast Obama As Having A 'Complete Lack Of Strategy' For Iraq:

"With radical militants seizing vast swaths of territory in Iraq less than three years after American soldiers left
the country, two former senior defense officials tell Business Insider much of the blame for an increase in
sectarian violence stems from a lack of leadership in the White House.

"Unfortunately, this administration's principal interest seemed to be not stability in Iraq, not partnership with
Iraq, or even Iraq as a hedge against extremism in the region," said one official, speaking on condition of
anonymity of the 2008 status of forces agreement signed under Bush and implemented by Obama. "Their principal
interest was 'get out of Iraq' and they didn't care about the consequences. Domestic politics rules in this
administration."

"The bottom line," he added. "Watching the administration is like watching a cross between Keystone Cops and
amateur hour."

See:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/former...150928578.html


================================================== ================


America's Allies Are Funding ISIS:

"The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), now threatening Baghdad, was funded for years by wealthy donors in
Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, three U.S. allies that have dual agendas in the war on terror."

See:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ding-isis.html


================================================== ================


The Battle for Iraq Is a Saudi War on Iran:

"Why the ISIS invasion of Iraq is really a war between Shiites and Sunnis for control of the Middle East."

See:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...i_arabia_syria


================================================== ================


Iraqi Kurds Prepared For ISIS Offensive For A Year And Expanded Their Territory By 40% In Hours:

"The collapse of Baghdad's control of northern Iraq in the face of an onslaught by Sunni insurgents has allowed
Kurds to take the historic capital they regard as their Jerusalem, and suddenly put them closer than ever to their
immortal goal: an independent state of their own."

See:

http://www.businessinsider.com/iraqi...rritory-2014-6
AnimeFan188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-14, 22:29   Link #34024
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridwan View Post
In short, the moment 19th century kicked in, Islamic world began to lose its intellectual independence. Emulating successful ideas from a winning culture is not bad, but after the near death experience Ottomans had at the first decades of 19th century and the dawn of European subjugation upon the entire muslim world muslim world became frantic to gather whatever European they can for the sake of survival. There was a panic over "what have we missed" all over Muslim intelligentsia. They coopted with it at first, through Muslim modernism, which was later got oppressed by Kemal and soldifying the humbling of muslim culture under western "modernity". It's really a sad story. Nowadays we see muslim thinkers, intellectuals and radicals all confused to figure the right standing ground. Look at all the jargons, creationism and Islamization of pop culture, tactics that muslim fundies have adopted. They all come from the west. American even ! The legitimate solution got burried alive by Kemal and the entire western world all cheered for it. Kemal can't be blamed entirely for that, but he really was the angel of hell that Islamic world didn't deserve.



An even more detailed explanation about how westernized muslim radicals is served by this article : http://www.danielpipes.org/273/the-w...-radical-islam
I only have one word for that : tsundere.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 08:55   Link #34025
JokerD
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnimeFan188 View Post
Former Defense Officials Blast Obama As Having A 'Complete Lack Of Strategy' For Iraq:

"With radical militants seizing vast swaths of territory in Iraq less than three years after American soldiers left
the country, two former senior defense officials tell Business Insider much of the blame for an increase in
sectarian violence stems from a lack of leadership in the White House.

"Unfortunately, this administration's principal interest seemed to be not stability in Iraq, not partnership with
Iraq, or even Iraq as a hedge against extremism in the region," said one official, speaking on condition of
anonymity of the 2008 status of forces agreement signed under Bush and implemented by Obama. "Their principal
interest was 'get out of Iraq' and they didn't care about the consequences. Domestic politics rules in this
administration."

"The bottom line," he added. "Watching the administration is like watching a cross between Keystone Cops and
amateur hour."

See:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/former...150928578.html


================================================== ================
Iraq had an army, with training and equipment from the western allies, so it's pretty unreasonable to believe that they would be unable to take on a fraction of a rebel (and a pretty unsupported one at that) Blasting the administration under the cover of anonymity seems to smack of partisanship and passing the buck on that guy's part.

Still, it proves again that a small number of motivated soldiers can beat a low moral larger force...
(Take that conscription)
JokerD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-15, 10:53   Link #34026
Renegade334
Exitus Acta Probat
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Permanent retirement from raws-hunting
Age: 28
Scooby-doo's Shaggy just lost his voice.

Quote:
Casey Kasem, the man behind one of the most famous voices on radio and television from the '70s through the 2000s, has died after a long battle with Parkinson's and dementia. He was 82.
RIP.
__________________
<< -- Click to enter my GFX thread.

-- Permanently retired from the raw-hunting business --
Renegade334 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-16, 08:53   Link #34027
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by JokerD View Post
Iraq had an army, with training and equipment from the western allies, so it's pretty unreasonable to believe that they would be unable to take on a fraction of a rebel (and a pretty unsupported one at that) Blasting the administration under the cover of anonymity seems to smack of partisanship and passing the buck on that guy's part.

Still, it proves again that a small number of motivated soldiers can beat a low moral larger force...
(Take that conscription)
Mister :

This is a low moral force.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/mobil...of/641384.html

This is a low morale force.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/mobil...n/1164376.html

[/grammarnazi]
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-16, 09:15   Link #34028
Ridwan
Got A Bad Desire
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: قلوب المؤمنين
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
I only have one word for that : tsundere.
Eh, muslims were enthusiast embracers of western progress before Kemal casted the fatwa that Islam is haraam.
__________________
Ridwan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-16, 22:33   Link #34029
AnimeFan188
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Brookings Expert Makes A Sobering Prediction About Iraq:

"Kenneth M. Pollack, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institution, wrote an overview of the military
situation in Iraq for non-experts — and it's grim.

He prefaces the assessment by saying that it is "exceptionally difficult to understand the dynamics of
ongoing military operations. " Nevertheless, he sees a general trend toward increased sectarian hostilities
and eventually civil war.

He states that the most likely scenario is that the rapid ISIS offensive will be stalemated at or north of
the Shia-dominated capital of Baghdad, splitting the country "basically along Iraq’s ethno-sectarian
divide."

And then he makes a very sobering prediction:

"If military developments in Iraq conform to this most likely scenario, they could lead to a protracted,
bloody stalemate along those lines," Pollack, who served as one of the CIA’s Persian Gulf military analysts
during the 1990-91 Gulf War, writes. "In that case, one side or the other would have to receive
disproportionately greater military assistance from an outside backer than its adversary to make
meaningful territorial gains. Absent that, the fighting will probably continue for years and hundreds of
thousands will die.""

See:

http://www.businessinsider.com/brook...ut-iraq-2014-6


===============================================


Kurds accuse Iraqi army of helicopter and mortar attack, shaking fragile relations:

"Since al-Qaeda-linked renegades swept into northern Iraq, Kurdish forces have played a behind-the-
scenes role in rescuing embattled Iraqi soldiers from checkpoints and bases, staving off more losses for
the troops.

But a disastrous end to one such operation Saturday is threatening to derail their military cooperation
against the militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Furious Kurdish military officials
accused Iraqi forces of firing mortars and Hellfire missiles at Kurdish fighters, killing six and injuring 43."

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...e39_story.html


===============================================


How an arrest in Iraq revealed Isis's $2bn jihadist network:

"Seizure of 160 computer flash sticks revealed the inside story of Isis, the band of militants that came
from nowhere with nothing to having Syrian oil fields and control of Iraq's second city"

See:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...s-wealth-power


===============================================


Syria pounds ISIS bases in coordination with Iraq:

"Syria's army has been pounding for 24 hours major bases of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham in
coordination with the Baghdad government, a monitor said Sunday.

The strikes against ISIS -- which has spearheaded a week-long jihadist offensive in Iraq -- have been
more intense than ever, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights."

See:

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/nowsyria...tion-with-iraq


===============================================


Iraqi Soldiers Fleeing ISIS Detail How They Were 'Abandoned' By Senior Officers:

"Some of the 60,000 Iraqi soldiers who retreated as a much smaller force of Sunni militants overran Iraq’s
second largest city of Mosul last week told VICE News that they fled after being "abandoned" by their
commanders.

Many sought refuge in the Iraqi Kurdistan capital of Erbil 50 miles east.

There, in a cheap hotel, which is now full of soldiers, Kamel, a corporal in his late 40s said that that senior
officers at his station around 10 miles outside Mosul disappeared before the rank and file even knew the
city was under attack.

As a result, when the troops in his company heard that key positions in Mosul had fallen to the militant
force, which is headed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), they fled along with thousands of
civilians to Erbil.

Iraqi security forces personnel across the city did the same. It was not an orderly retreat."

See:

http://www.businessinsider.com/iraqi...andoned-2014-6


===============================================


Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘We Need To Keep Iran Out Of’ Iraq Crisis:

"CBS News senior security analyst Mike Morell, former deputy CIA director, said Monday on “CBS This
Morning” that partnering with the Iranians would not be in the best interests of the United States.

“There is a long-term struggle going on in the Middle East between Iran and our allies, Saudi Arabia, the
United Arab Emirates, and the moderate Gulf states — a fight going on for influence — and I don’t think
we want to give Iran a foothold in Iraq,” said Morell. “We need to help the Iraqis, the moderate Gulf
states need to help the Iraqis. We need to keep Iran out of this.”"

See:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/...f-iraq-crisis/
AnimeFan188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 04:50   Link #34030
Masuzu
サイアク、トキメキ、ヘンシン、コクハク
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: プールなんですよ
Is it okay to use <<sobering>> here, or should it really be <<sombering>>?
Masuzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 04:57   Link #34031
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masuzu View Post
Is it okay to use <<sobering>> here, or should it really be <<sombering>>?
Sombre is an adjective. Unlike verbs, it doesn't have a different form for present-continuous tense.

Sobering is actually an adjective. It's not the present-continuous form of sober, which is also another adjective.

So, you can receive sobering news, or you could learn about sombre news.
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 05:46   Link #34032
MrTerrorist
Takao Tsundere Cruiser
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Classified
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireminer View Post
http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...dence-campaign

J.K.Rowling donates money for the anti-independence campaign for Scotland

Well, that is unexpected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant View Post
Why unexpected? It hardly surprises anyone that a British person might have an opinion on what might change her country irreversibly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireminer View Post
Simply because this is only the second time she did this - the first time it was with Gordon Brown and the Labour Party. Rowling has been mostly doing philanthropy works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant View Post
She moved to Scotland and intended to stay there. I think she might have an issue if her current home is going to become a separate country from her original birthplace.
I don't find this surprising. There is some skepticism amongst Scottish voters that the SNP, the party that wants Scotland to be independent from the UK, plans to make Scotland prosper economically independently seem farfetched since one common criticism amongst Pro UK parties is that SNP rely too much on Scotland's oil reserves.
__________________
MrTerrorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 10:15   Link #34033
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yamabuki Art High School
Age: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnimeFan188 View Post
"CBS News senior security analyst Mike Morell, former deputy CIA director, said Monday on “CBS This Morning” that partnering with the Iranians would not be in the best interests of the United States.

“There is a long-term struggle going on in the Middle East between Iran and our allies, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and the moderate Gulf states — a fight going on for influence — and I don’t think we want to give Iran a foothold in Iraq,” said Morell. “We need to help the Iraqis, the moderate Gulf states need to help the Iraqis. We need to keep Iran out of this.”
Any time you hear former US officials talking about "moderate" Gulf states, change the channel. Just who do you think provides the support for Sunni groups like ISIS? Hint: they have a sultan and a lot of oil.

The Saudis see themselves locked in a battle with Iran for control over the Middle East. Syria was just the latest arena for their proxy war. Now it has spread to Iraq. I'm not surprised, are you?

There will be no long-term solution to these conflicts that doesn't include both the Saudis and the Iranians. To think the US can somehow choose a side here is idiotic. But, then, what can you expect from the people who thought the 2003 Iraq War was a good idea?
__________________
SeijiSensei is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 10:59   Link #34034
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeijiSensei View Post
Any time you hear former US officials talking about "moderate" Gulf states, change the channel. Just who do you think provides the support for Sunni groups like ISIS? Hint: they have a sultan and a lot of oil.

The Saudis see themselves locked in a battle with Iran for control over the Middle East. Syria was just the latest arena for their proxy war. Now it has spread to Iraq. I'm not surprised, are you?

There will be no long-term solution to these conflicts that doesn't include both the Saudis and the Iranians. To think the US can somehow choose a side here is idiotic. But, then, what can you expect from the people who thought the 2003 Iraq War was a good idea?
Seiji, it doesn't matter if they choose a side; they still win.

Currently Iraq and SA are both armed with US weapons, so should any conflict break out, all White House has to do is to declare a windfall tax.

The Americans still win.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 12:42   Link #34035
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yamabuki Art High School
Age: 65
Have you ever considered posting something in this thread other than snark? Perhaps you think you need to provide comic relief? You must realize that your post above has at best a weak connection to a complex reality. Do you have anything more constructive to offer?
__________________
SeijiSensei is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 13:16   Link #34036
GuZidi
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Guam
DF-41 confirmed by the Pentagon

Annual Report to Congress

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_DoD_China_Report.pdf

I think the Pentagon should look into the DF-51 and DF-61.
http://i.imgur.com/1uWaloP.jpg

Last edited by Daniel E.; 2014-06-17 at 19:33. Reason: Use the images tag instead of the IMG one when posting big pics!
GuZidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 20:41   Link #34037
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeijiSensei View Post
Have you ever considered posting something in this thread other than snark? Perhaps you think you need to provide comic relief? You must realize that your post above has at best a weak connection to a complex reality. Do you have anything more constructive to offer?
How do you want to define constructive? I am just stating a perspective, something that is underlying rather than the generic "sectarian violence between various factions" political journals like to discuss. Is there a problem in looking at the situation from another point of view?

If you do not agree that viewing this as a "business opportunity in chaos", I would like to read your disagreements, not your personal attacks. Currently, I don't see how complex this reality has turned itself into other than :

1. US's security plan in Iraq has revealed itself to be a half-hearted solution; the intention at that time seemed to be that they want to pull out of Iraq and nothing else.

2. The foreign policies enacted have ignored their regional allies' problems and views.

3. Regardless of who funded the ISIS, it highlights a prevalent and deep-seated mistrust between the Mideast states that no resident power, be it NATO or the ME states themselves, have bothered to bring to the table and sort out.

However there is a need to politically prove that the foray into the mideast has yielded something , so there lies the possibility of profiting from arm sales. As snarky as it sounds, it is one benefit, at least temporary that keep most parties involved contented.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 23:35   Link #34038
TinyRedLeaf
. . .
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 39
Japan bans possession of child pornography
Quote:
Tokyo (June 18, Wed): Japan has finally made the possession of child pornography a punishable offense.

The country's upper house of parliament passed a Bill today, which will see people found with explicit images of children jailed for up to year or fined up to US$10,000.

The Bill was a long time coming for activists who argued that Japan's relatively lax laws put children at risk by banning the production and distribution of child pornography, but not people found with it in their possession.

However, the Bill notably excludes the possession of explicit anime or manga, a point of contention for campaigners who say that cartoons depicting child sexual abuse should also be banned.

CNN
Let's be clear about something: I don't think any sane person can justifiably argue for the involvement of real-life children in sex videos or pictures.

But that's not quite the same as depicting such acts in cartoons.

Still, though, there is a case to answer that one form of expression may lead to another.
TinyRedLeaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 23:51   Link #34039
Vallen Chaos Valiant
Logician and Romantic
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 34
Doesn't matter what leads to what. You permit what's legal and ban what's illegal. No more and no less.

In theory, eating beef can lead to cannibalism of human flesh. I mean, they are both meat. So why not treat all meat like they are human flesh? Why not discourage cannibalism, by banning meat?

This reminds me of the Queensland law that ban motorcycle clubs, because they want to stop the amphetamine trade. Which is ridiculous; the illegal drugs are already illegal, why targeting motorcycles?
__________________
Vallen Chaos Valiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-06-17, 23:57   Link #34040
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Then should ban people from looking underage. Criminalise Aoi Yuuki!

Proponents of banning loli anime/manga should just come up with the proof before crying out loud. Any society of sane people know that causation does not imply correalation.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.