Condemning Terrorists
A "Cynic" wrote:-
You seem to be an erudite teacher of Islam. What is the Islamic position regarding the terrorist Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines.
Answer:-
I am sorry, but I do not have sufficient information about this case to make any judgements. Nor do I have any power over his actions. You say he is a terrorist. If he is then he should be condemned. But opinions usually differ according to which side the commentator is on.
I write about only as much as I understand about Islam. I am not an expert of everything. I confine myself to presenting what the Quran and Hadith have to say. What I know is this, that everyone is responsible for his own actions and will be judged accordingly.
Cynic:-
You are evading my questions on the pretext of not knowing what the Muslim terrorists are doing in Philippines. The whole world knows about the cowardly acts of Abu Sayyaf.
Comment:-
You are making unjustified statements. You cannot possibly know my mind.
I also know, as you do, that the news media is often biased and superficial. The only news I get is from the BBC and that, as other news media, is selective, consists of reports of events, and is not always objective.
I really have no sufficient information about this case to make any judgement. I think that neither do you. As you jump to conclusions about me based on your own desires and emotions, so also are you probably jumping to conclusions about this case. Your wish may well be to condemn and mount witch hunts instead of looking at problems and solving them. I do not wish to have any association with this kind of thing.
I really do not have much interest in politics. It makes no difference to me whether those engaged in these activities call themselves Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu, American, European, Israeli, Turk, CIA, KGB or are the U.S or Russian Military and so forth.
Cynic:-
To put it very plainly, you are burying your head in the sand to the inhumane activities of your brethren.
Comment:-
No, I am aware that inhuman activities are widespread, and people see it selectively in those they dislike, but condone it in those they support. They like to put the blame on others in order to justify their own hatred and inhuman activities.
Many claim to be logical and rational, but as soon as it comes to their own attachments, out flies all reason. Should I be interested in participating in this mindless babble. Perhaps you, like others, condemn these selectively without knowing all the circumstances.
Cynic:-
You wear blinkers and have selective vision. You only like to see what you want to see and hear what you wish to hear. Your feeble excuse of not getting news from a biased news media is flawed; there is always the Internet.
Comment:-
Did you search the Internet to find out what the other side, those you condemn, had to say for themselves? No? I do not believe you did. In which case what you say about me applies more properly to you. You would be better engaged in looking to the welfare of your own mind than criticizing one about whom you know nothing.
I have limited time and do not hunt Internet for specific kinds of news about politics. I already know that there are all kinds of injustices, retaliations against them, and conflicts which are superficially reported with the bias of the reporters.
You obviously want me to agree with your opinions, and make derogatory allegations if I do not. Or if I do, then you want to use this as a weapon for your own hate mongering purposes. But I do not want to play your games.
You can believe what ever suits you.
Cynic:-
I am completely justified in making the factual comment that you have refused to comment, as indeed, you have done just this. Nor have I arrived at any conclusion. I have merely commented on the fact that when someone who engages in despicable activities claims to represent Islam, and no one rebuts this, people can not be blamed for accepting that as a representation.
This is wholly your failure, in this particular case. There is no justification for your refusal to reply. Nothing prevents you from commenting on whether or not the REPORTED acts are consistent with Islam, and disclaiming that you don't know whether or not the reports are accurate.
Comment:-
You have not only made comments on the fact that I make no comment about things I do not know about, but also attributed a motive for this in contradiction to what I stated as my reasons for not makings such comments.
Now you are telling me that this person is a Muslim and represents Muslims and that he is engaged in despicable activities. Am I to take your word for all this? Why?
So I am to go by your judgement about what I should have done! I am not to determine my own responses!
Terrorism is evil. Is that what you want me to say? Then I have said it. Injustice is evil. Oppression is evil. Exploitation is evil. Hatred is evil. Ignorance is evil. But I am sure you know, and I have stated, that people use the word "terrorist" to refer to anyone they dislike. I DO NOT KNOW what the person making the accusations means by the word or whether the person referred to is a terrorist. Is that clear enough?
I have posted numerous articles on what Islam teaches and continue to do so. These, I think are sufficient for people to assess what Islam teaches.
The relevant bit here is that Islam does not allow aggression but does require retaliation against oppression and injustice. (Quran 2:190-193) The judgement should be made by someone knowledgeable and sincere.
Cynic:-
Shame that you don't use that disclaimer with your other essays, where the reliability of your sources is far less.
Comment:-
I beg to differ. I sincerely believe that the articles I write are based on sufficient evidence as I perceive and understand it. If you do not see this then that is entirely a condition of your mind. Where I have some doubts I use the words "possibly" or "in the opinion of some scholars" or "Allah knows best". And I avoid subjects I do not have much knowledge of.
Cynic:-
Islam is one religion that has proven to be particularly vulnerable to abuse over the centuries.
Comment:-
A study of European history shows that the Christianity was probably much more vulnerable, and Communism may have been worse. But, because all systems depend on human understanding and motives, there is no system that can be exempt from this.
But this discussion is leading us into an endless and futile vicious circle. So it is time to end it.
----------<O>----------