Bin Ladinism Lives

To end terrorism its root of must be annihilated

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Bin Ladinism Lives
by Azar Majedi
16-May-2011
 

The killing of Bin Laden sparked a wave of conflicting feelings and political and journalistic analysis. Undoubtedly,  the death of such murderous creature, especially when he holds the top position within a reactionary and terrorist political-ideological network does not raise anybody’s compassion or sadness but his own supporters. Surely, the world is a safer and more humane place without the likes of Bin Laden, Khamenei, and all the leaders of the Islamic regime of Iran, the leaders of political Islamic movement and the leaders of state terrorism. This is an undeniable reality. However, the feelings about his death are not limited to happiness or excitement. The feelings that the ideologues of reaction create deserve review and concern. Reports indicate a rise in nationalistic sentiments in the USA. In his speech announcing the killing of Bin Laden, Obama played the nationalist card: “Today we were reminded that as a nation there is nothing we cannot do” As expected, this nationalistic message was the prelude to a wave of US jingoism and nationalism.

On the other side, by proclaiming “national sovereignty”, the reactionary opposition in Pakistan tries to spark a nationalist-antiWest atmosphere in Pakistan and hence invest in gaining power. In Afghanistan, the forces that were put in power by state terrorism, following the September 11 tragedy, (that have embezzled funds for themselves and their families), pretended to be the victims and announced that NATO forces did not listen to them and bombarded the country in pursuit of Bin Laden, when all along Bin Laden was in Pakistan. The Islamic regime of Iran too made a mockery of the US might. These are all the forces that belong to the rank of creatures whom the world could do without and the world would be a safer and more humane place. However since we live in an upside down world, each one of them is capitalizing on the death of Bin Laden. The point is that none of them represent the pain and suffering of the people who are doomed to live under Islamic terrorism. They do not represent millions of people who have lost their lives during the war of terrorists, or the people who have lost everything and witnessed their loved ones drown in blood. These forces have intensified the war of terrorists, have turned a whole region into ruins and the society into a cemetery, and pushed the youngsters into the arms of Islamic terrorism. If there were justice in the world, all these creatures should have been tried for crimes against humanity.

There are fundamental questions beyond these reactionary measures for profiting from Bin Laden’s death, beyond the US nationalistic sentiments and beyond death of Bin Laden. Will the war of terrorists intensify after Bin Laden’s death? Will US/Pakistan relations become sour? Will the NATO forces leave Afghanistan? These questions are being reviewed in journalistic roundtables. However there are two more questions that nobody is bothered to ask: Does the timing of this operation not have any connection with the situation in the region and the ever changing political upheavals following it? Should the negotiations between Fatah and Hamas and their speedy agreement on cooperation and unity in Cairo not be linked with the US operation, and the new extensive US strategy in the Middle East? These questions must be addressed.

The world after Bin Laden

The war against terror, which is the code name for the devastating wars instigated by the West led by the US government in the last decade in the Middle East, (what we rightfully called the war of the terrorists), were waged following the terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers in New York and other air attacks elsewhere in America by al-Qaeda. The New World Order policy of Bush and Thatcher which was implemented after the fall of Soviet Union and under the pretext of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, was given a new lease-of-life by waging war, i.e the “war against terror”. The US administration under Bush Junior, found a very useful excuse and opportunity to demonstrate its might and establishment of its New World Order agenda. The war of terrorists dominated the world after September 11. Millions were killed, injured and made homeless. The share of people of Afghanistan was numerous bombardments, empowerment of Loya jirga consisting of tribal and religious fossils. In addition, state terrorism appointed a no-name lackey as the president of Afghanistan, giving him access to millions of of dollars of aid, bribes and the like. The people of Afghanistan have become poorer, more devastated and suffering while the new self appointed rulers have become richer and more united in their attempts to rob people and devoid them of rights.

Iraq has been turned into a huge cemetery. More than 1 million people have been directly or indirectly killed as the result of the war during the past 8 years. Masses have been made homeless. People have been displaced and given Shia and Sunni identity. Religious and tribal sectarianism was intensified under the name of democracy. The state of political Islam and Islamic terrorism in Iraq was strengthened. The war of terrorists was brought in the heart of Pakistan. Thousands in Pakistan have lost their lives during the past two years as the result of terrorist operations. A million people in Pakistan became dispersed with nowhere to go following the attacks by Taliban. The war was extended to Lebanon. The situation of Palestinians worsened. During the past decade, the whole of the region has been directly or indirectly affected by the war. The threat of terrorism is a constant threat over the people. This is the result of a decade of war of terrorists for the people of the region. In the West too, many civil and individual rights have been abolished under the guise of combatting terrorism. In US, prisoners are tortured and such actions are even defended. Citizen’s lives are under direct control of the state. The world, as we correctly predicted, turned into a darker and bleaker place. The two poles of terrorism plunged the society into more reactionary state.

Now, after the death of Bin laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, the mastermind and the responsible figure for killing of thousands of people in terrorist operations, some are optimistic that the war of terrorists will end. Their argument is that by hunting down the perpetrator of the war, the war ends. Some are worried that the war of terrorists will intensify. Their argument is that al-Qaeda and Islamists will take revenge and the world will witness an escalation of terrorist operations. The fact is that, with Bin Laden’s death, merely a new chapter of the book of terrorist war is turned. This war will continue with other excuses and pretenses. Bin Laden’s death will not affect the intensification or weakening of this war. Bin Laden was merely the excuse to start the war. He was not even mentioned a lot recently. To end the war of terrorists, the root of terrorism and its material basis must be annihilated. It is precisely here that it seems that the timing of the operation to kill Bin Laden, following the mass protests against despotic and dictatorial regimes for freedom and justice, is part of a new strategy adopted by the vis a vis the region.

Why now?

The timing of this operation is questionable. It is said that Bin Laden lived in Pakistan for more than 5 years. He lived in a 1 million dollar villa only 4 kilometers from Pakistan’s military academy which is under tight security and surveillance, and 60 kilometers from the capital Islamabad. These facts make the picture more complicated. The Us administration’s conflicting reports started only a few hours after Obama’s announcement. The facts were changed every hour. It took the Pakistani government almost a week to show any reaction. At the same time, during the past two three weeks, after disclosure of dealings behind closed door between Fatah and the Israeli government, it was announced that with the intervention of the Egyptian government, i.e army, Fatah and Hamas have signed a deal for a unity government in Cairo. Apparently nobody has given a second thought to the Israeli government’s objections. The American government has not made any official remarks. However, looking a bit deeper and putting two and two together one cannot but conclude that this deal has total backing of the US. The Egyptian army is appointed by the US. Fatah is ruined without financial aid from the US. How come, following the overthrow of Mubarak, this becomes the first mandate of the newly formed government of Egypt? It seems that these two recent events which happened with two three weeks of each other have direct link to the unrests in the region and the protests by the down trodden people of the Middle East and North Africa. It appears that the us administration, the leader of the pole of state terrorism, has realized the potential explosive situation and is trying to adopt and use a new strategy to maintain its power, influence, the basis of capitalist system and prevent the revolutionary forces or the extremist Islamists from taking power.

It seems that the turning of the page of war of terrorists is an important element in this new strategy.

War of terrorists

The September 11 tragedy was a good excuse and opportunity for the US to attack the region and establish its New World Order agenda and hegemony as the super power. Hunting Bin Laden in the caves of Afghanistan was an excuse and justification for the attack in the region. The expansion of the wars in Iraq, Lebanon and Pakistan, under the name of war against terror, were the bloody manifestations of this reactionary strategy. This war will not end by the death of Bin Laden, who was raised and found such position under the wings of US. An end to Islamic terrorism is completely dependent on resolution of two main issues in the region. To marginalize political Islam and Islamic terrorism, more than anything else, the question of Palestine must be resolved fairly. Formation of an independent Palestinian state with all rights is the main basis for such process. The Palestinian question has been an infected soar in the region. The Islamists thrive on it. They use the misery of millions of people for the pursuit of their own reactionary aims and policies. The second issue in the marginalization of Islamists and combating political Islam is the revolutionary overthrow of the Islamic regime of Iran as one of the main leaders, the most important source of funds, military and ideological support of this movement. When these two issues are resolved, Islamists will be marginalized.

The recent events in the Middle East and North Africa, the pouring of toiling and suppressed people into the streets for freedom, equality and prosperity in the region quickly led the political-strategic equations of the reactionary forces into a disarray. It was like a social earthquake. The world was speechless towards these developments and mass uprisings which spread from one country to another. It has raised the support and salutation of millions of oppressed and freedom loving people. In fear of losing its power, the world’s reactionary forces come up with new tactics every day to quell the situation. They try their best to end such developments with the least damage or change. The protesting people of the region will have the most influence in the political change and developments.

AUTHOR
Azar Majedi is the founder of the Organization for Women’s Liberation-Iran and at present is acting as its chair. Visit azarmajedi.com.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Azar MajediCommentsDate
نوستالژی رژیم گذشته
11
Nov 02, 2012
باند سیاه
14
Oct 04, 2012
بازار شام آلترناتیو هاى ارتجاعی
17
Sep 30, 2012
more from Azar Majedi
 
Raoul1955

viledmose

by Raoul1955 on Thu May 19, 2011 04:31 AM PDT

Thank you for the article. I am reading it while sipping on my morning coffee.  :-)

'Raoul'


  •  
vildemose

The Fellow Travelers of Jihadism

by vildemose on Wed May 18, 2011 09:18 PM PDT


  •  
Azadeh Azad

Your hermeneutics :-)

by Azadeh Azad on Tue May 17, 2011 10:21 PM PDT

Soosan jan:     

 

On what basis, "the most appropriate meaning for nushuz is 'marital discord'"? The marital context? When Allah says that he has created some people superior to others and the husband should be the bread-winner, I don't see any equality here.                

 

In fact, in the context of the verse that I mentioned, up to now, the great majority of the Islamic scholars have translated Nushuz as rebellion. As a Muslim woman should obey her husband and not even leave the house without his permission, as a Muslim wife is not allowed to disagree with her husband, any disagreement with her husband could only mean rebellion against the Islamic norm and expectation of obedience by the wife.               

 

Now, let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that you are right, that Nushuz means discord. If men and women are equal in Koran, why is it that Allah designates the husband as the one who *decides* whether or not there has been a marital discord and take actions accordingly? Shouldn't Mr. Allah (the masculine of Al-Laat with rahman and Rahim as his personality traits J) have addressed the couple instead of the husband alone?                 

 

Why is it that Mr. Allah does not address women directly when he talks about their hijab? He tells men to tell their wives and female relatives to cover their head and chest and neck! Why? Isn't it because Allah considers women inferior to men, or as if women are children?            

 

When the testimony of one man equals that of two women, you cannot speak of equality in Islam. The meaning of all the Koranic terms is understood in the context of the inequality between the sexes.               

 

When children get their family name from their father (not their mother or both parents), when wives should obey their husbands, when the testimony of one man equals that of two women, when Allah instead of talking directly to women talks to their husband or male relatives about covering their heads, and when Allah does not tell men to cover their head and chest and neck, I cannot accept your statement that men and women are equal in Islam, that Nushuz means "marital discord" instead of Rebellion, or Adriboo conveniently means to separate instead of "to beat."           

 

*      

 

All this said, I do think that your type of interpretation of Koran is the best thing that could happen to Muslims. It is about time for Islam to go through a Reformation and for Koran to be understood in completely different light.          

 

So, I like your interpretation as a very useful tool to eliminate Sharia Law and civilize the Islamic jurisprudence.                  

 

However, your interpretation is for mass consumption only. For one billion people who believe "Nushuz" means rebellion or disobedience and "Adriboo," to beat.  I, as a sociologist, would not agree for a second that Mohammad and individuals who wrote the Koran after his death thought of women and men as equals and did not encourage men to control their wives through beating, Hijab, etc.           

 

Cheers,            

 

Azadeh   


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

lost in translation Azadeh

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 08:40 PM PDT

Wife beating anytime and for any reason is never allowed in Islam.  

The problem is the mistranslation of the two key words nushuz and adriboo. Some of the possible meanings for both the words, according to the lexicon are :

Nushuz: Animosity, hostility, rebellion, ill-treatment, discord; violation of marital duties on the part of either husband or wife.   

Adriboo (root: daraba): to beat, to strike, to hit, to separate, to part. 

In the context of the verse that you mentioned the most appropriate meaning for nushuz is 'marital discord' (ill-will, animosity etc), and for adriboo is 'to separate' or 'to part'.   Therefore, a more accurate and consistent translation of the  verse would be: 

(4:34) [...]as for those women whose animosity or ill-will you have reason to fear, then leave them alone in bed, and then separate; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek a way against them.

The separation could be temporary or permanent depending on the reconciliation procedure.  Such as construction is legitimate within the terms of the language and fits in very well with the divorce procedure outlined in other part Qur'an .....

The verse you mentioned is followed with this verse and this gives further weight to the correct translation.  

(4:35) And if ye fear a breach between them twain (the man and the wife), appoint an arbiter from his folk and an arbiter from her folk. If they desire amendment Allah will make them of one mind. Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Aware.  

These two verses should be studied with each other and should be translated accordingly ......

as I said by no means one can find a verse in Quran suggesting violence against women ...... Quite contrary you will find many verses against exactly what you mentioned ....

"And among God's signs is this: He created for you mates from amongst yourselves (males as mates for females and vice versa) that you might find tranquillity and peace in them. And he has put love and kindness among you. Herein surely are signs for those who reflect. (Quran 30:21)"   


  •  
Azadeh Azad

Soosan

by Azadeh Azad on Tue May 17, 2011 08:15 PM PDT

 You say, in one of your comments,"

You have to stop blaming Islam and educate yourself otherwise you can never get to the roots of violence against women..."

While poverty and illiteracy have a role to play in violence against women (the opposite not being true, of course), the patriarchal religion of Islam allows husbands to "beat" their wives if these wives don't obey them - Koran 4:34 (apparently only (sic) regarding their "duty" to satisfy their husband's sexual urge.) Don't you think this chauvinistic Koranic verse, like other discriminatory laws against women, plays a major role as a green light given to men by Allah to be violent against women?

Azadeh


  •  
Azadeh Azad

Vildemose

by Azadeh Azad on Tue May 17, 2011 06:39 PM PDT

Did you receive my missive? Email me please.

azadeh_azad@hotmail.com

Azadeh


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

the end result is the same

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 06:39 PM PDT

the end result is the same .....  a woman is killed 

Unfortunately you do not get it  

I am a muslim and I strongly disagree with any one who blames it on Islam .. but this is not something new from members on this site either concerning any points they make .......  and i have no idea why you even relate my arguments to IRI .... what a shame on your part  !!

 i agree let us agree do disagree ..... 

 


  •  
vildemose

Crimes of passion and honor

by vildemose on Tue May 17, 2011 06:28 PM PDT

Crimes of passion and honor killings are equal?? Your justifications and false equivalencies are non sequitur at best, Never mind the veiled sophism in all your debates regarding IRI and Islam.

Let's agree to disagree.


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

In Latin America it is called Crimes of Passion

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 06:07 PM PDT


" In India, for example, more than 5,000 brides die annually because their dowries are considered insufficient, according to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). Crimes of passion, which are treated extremely leniently in Latin America, are the same thing with a different name"

//news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling.htm


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

Ignorance

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 05:37 PM PDT

Ignorance  is Ignorance  no matter what and it may end up to an unspeakable crime. It does not matter what you call the crime.....

Women have always been subjected to abusive treatment in many different parts of the world regardless of their religion.  Women in Latin counties have also had their own share if not necessarily honor killing.  The unjust treatments of women varies depending on which part of the world they are living and in which backward culture they have been raised in addition to other factors involved that I mentioned such as poverty and illiteracy.   You have to stop blaming Islam and educate yourself otherwise you can never get to the roots of violence against women in anywhere including so called islamic country. 

now check out this article ....... exactly the same crime .....and they are not even muslim ....

honor killing sometimes even involves men not just women !

"For three weeks now, a morbid murder story has been playing out in the Indian media. Nirupama Pathak, 22, a New Delhi–based journalist, was allegedly murdered by her own mother. Her crime? She had wanted to marry a fellow journalist who belongs to a lower caste — and she was pregnant"

"Activists say dozens of people are killed for "honor" every year, falling victim to the deeply entrenched caste system, which dictates an individual's social standing based on the caste they are born into."

Why Are Hindu Honor Killings Rising in India? 

//www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1991195,00.html

It is what I said .....

Poverty, Illiteracy. and Culture  ..... 

 

 


 


  •  
Raoul1955

vildemose and soosan

by Raoul1955 on Tue May 17, 2011 05:26 PM PDT

Vildemose: You are welcome. Just look at the extremely poor Appalachians where most households don't even have indoor plumbing.

Soosan: You know better than I about these issues.  If a bunch of folks beat a gay man to death because of his sexuality, that is NOT the same as a bunch of guys beating another guy to death over a woman or while robbing him, however, many liberals may make a similar claim as the author of the referenced article has made, in this case arguing that the honor killing [which is widespread among muslims] is similar to domestic violence that occurs in all human societies.  :-)

'Raoul'


  •  
vildemose

Thank you Raul. why don't

by vildemose on Tue May 17, 2011 04:51 PM PDT

Thank you Raul. why don't we have honor killings in Gutamala, Colombia, Brazil, and other south and Latin American countries where people live in ghettos and shanty towns made out of tin...


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

Raul

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 12:06 PM PDT

 

Check out this article:

//muslimvoices.org/honor-killings/ 

"Zakaria points out that domestic violence has risen 72 percent in the United States since the beginning of the economic recession. Though she is hesitant to link honor killings with domestic violence, there is a connection: victims of both types of violence suffer because they have no voice. Zakaria says no amount of reform can occur if this issue is not addressed.

“I don’t want to promote an Orientalized version of women as powerless and subject to honor killings,” Zakaria says. “But at the same time it’s important to me to bring attention to the fact that the girls who are being killed are in their society powerless and are horribly repressed and essentially killed for no reason at all.”


  •  
Raoul1955

Soosan

by Raoul1955 on Tue May 17, 2011 11:02 AM PDT

Poverty and illiteracy don't cause honor killings.  I am sure you already know that.  :-)

Culture, you bet, and that is pure islamic culture that causes many people, even some with terminal degrees and living right here in the US to kill their daughters, wives,...
Enjoy your afternoon,
Raoul


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

vildemose

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue May 17, 2011 10:11 AM PDT

This has nothing to do with Islam as much as it has to do with poverty , illiteracy , and culture .... 

 


  •  
vildemose

Someone forgot that Islam

by vildemose on Tue May 17, 2011 10:01 AM PDT

Someone forgot that Islam means peace:

On Wednesday night, Khatun and Subrato, both of whom are widows, allegedly tied their daughters, 19-year-old Zahida and 26-year-old Husna, to cots and threw a rope around their necks. They then held the girls down and tightened the noose until the victims suffocated to death, police said.

Why would these mothers murder their own daughters?

“We killed them because they had brought shame to our community. How could they elope with Hindus? They deserved to die. We have no remorse,” Khatun and Subrato said Friday.


  •  
vildemose

Bin Ladinism lives through

by vildemose on Tue May 17, 2011 08:42 AM PDT

Bin Ladinism lives through Khameni et al and Ahmadinejad...that much is true.


  •  
Raoul1955

Azar:

by Raoul1955 on Mon May 16, 2011 02:51 PM PDT

How do you propose we destroy islam? Islam is *THE* root of terrorism in many forms.   Perhaps you are suggesting that over a billion muslims should be killed!  Just wondering how to destroy the islamic cult.
Ayatollah Raoul


  •  
Maryam Hojjat

Do you mean ISLAM must be annihilated?

by Maryam Hojjat on Mon May 16, 2011 12:12 PM PDT

I agreewith you.  That is the only solution.


  •