It was very dramatic! In less than an hour, the "lungs of U.S." collapse, destroyed by mega-terrorist action on Tuesday, September 11th, 2001. Deliberate action which was armed only by "a dagger" has been successfully rammed three domestic aircraft into World Trade Center (WTC) Building in New York, which became a strength symbol of the U.S. economy and Pentagon building in Washington DC, a symbol of U.S. military superiority.
Then the US government -- through former president George W. Bush -- issued two political statements that fueled anti-Muslim fervor throughout the U.S, and even spread to Australia and Europe region. Two of these declarations using the word "Crusade" and accusations without proof against radical Islam led by Osama Bin Laden as the mastermind of mega theater behind the destruction of WTC and Pentagon.
Bush sparked harassment against American Muslims, ranging from negative labeling until torture, and even murder. Moreover, since the beginning, in the West mind, Islam has always been described as extreme, militant and fundamentalist.
According to Robert Mueller -- FBI director at the time -- dozens of discrimination cases befell American Muslims. Another version compiled by Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) showed more than 300 cases of harassment, discrimination and violence experienced by Muslims in America.
Responding to the situation, Bush tried to neutralize it by urging Americans to not disturb Muslims and mosques. But the state already murky and complex. Discrimination and anti-Islamic wave has spread everywhere. The anti-Islamic phenomenon, in turn, causing backlash with the spread of anti-American-West's wave in Islamic world.
My question is, "Why terrorism has always been identified with the fundamentalist Islamic movement? Whereas, it can be, another group performs this action, such as the Japanese Red Army group that jolted the world with operations of Black September at the Olympics in Germany, 11 September 1972.
Or, perhaps, the U.S. citizens themselves who did it, such as the bombing case of federal building in Oklohama -- previously totally unexpected -- that the culprit was a former soldier, Timothy McVeigh. At that time, Fundamentalist Islam was the only party which most suspected as mastermind of the bombing.
In general, terrorism is a purely political crime, but because the approach used is a religious sentiment: Crusade (Bush version) and Jihad (Fundamentalist Islamic version), then the tension that arises is the clash between Islam and the West.
This tension, in addition popularized by Samuel P. Huntington's thesis in his book, "The Clash Of Civilization", also supported by the orientalists, politicians and Western press which was very provocative and intense in giving stereotypical extreme, radical and fundamentalist to Islam. Even the comment of former Italian PM -- horrendous Silvio Berlusconi -- openly said, that Western culture was superior when compared to Islamic culture. Is it true? Then, who did colonialism in Asia and Africa? Who was also killing the Jews in Europe, if not the European leaders themselves?
Meanwhile, on the other hand, the West labeling even further reinforces the spirit of "fundamentalism" of some Muslims who always get a negative label. Presumably, the identity of "fundamentalism" is used against the West, especially America, since its military aggression has successfully mastered Afghanistan in a very short time.
Identification of Islam with terrorism, extremism and radicalism increasingly globalized after the bombing of Legian Kuta - Bali, 12 October 2002. Moreover, this action occured in the largest Muslim country in the world and aimed only at foreign tourists.
Indeed, terrorism is barbarity. Nevertheless, the problem is not simply resolved by the claims have been hunting for Osama, or accusing a particular group as the mastermind. There is no guarantee, after Osama's death, terrorist networks will be destroyed. Even it can be, thousands of other Osama are emerging. You can slaughter the entire human race and radical group, but this will add to the gloom over the history of human civilization.
From here, it can be said, the tension caused by collision of two negative current, unavoidable, and both have thorough passion. In the language of Epicurus, both have been infected with the virus of "the desire of wholeness". The first flow have desire with its technological superiority, as well as a desire to organize the whole world according to its will. The second stream is being driven by religious superiority, the feeling of being harmed, and captivity of tradition in black and white.
Actually, there are many efforts to reconcile the two currents, both from the West and moderate Islamic thinkers. Unfortunately, the 'desire' of first current is too strong and already globalized, so there is a claim of terrorism, radical, extreme, and fundamentalist for the second current.
Historically and academically, fundamentalist term itself was originally intended for the American Catholic fundamentalists who did not want the adjustment to modern reality. However, according to Roger Garaudy, this term in its development has expanded the meaning, not just limited to Catholics, but also extends to other movements that are identical to the static, fanatical and conservative. Thus, there is a term of Jewish fundamentalism (Zionism), Vatican fundamentalism as well as Islamic fundamentalism, etc.
"Rand Corporation"-- a Strategic Research and Study Center on Islam and Middle East, based in Santa Monica, California and Arington, Virginia in the United States-- on the financing of the Smith Richardson Foundation, conducted a study of the Islamic Movement in various parts of the Islamic world.
Results of research and study has been published in the institution a number of official reports, among others, entitled: Civil Democratic Islam (2003) and Building Moderate Muslim Networks (2007).
The report of "Rand Corporation" becomes an important reference for the US National Intelligence Council that oversees 15 intelligence agencies from 15 countries, which is currently chaired by Gregory Treverton. In various reports, "Rand Corporation" mapping the Islamic Movement in accordance with the West interests, ie into four groups: Fundamentalists, Modernists, Liberals and Traditionalists. In the details of each of these groups, described about the character, traits, status and ways of handling each group. Coupled with the documents of other studies results, then it becomes clear : the classification of Islamic movement conducted by West researchers is very subjective, because it is only based on Western interests.
Under Western eyes and in accordance with their interests, then what is meant by the Fundamentalist is the Islamic Movement with "Anti-Western" character. Its traits are four, namely: pro Islamic Sharia, pro caliph of Islam, anti-Western democracy and critical to Western influence. This group status is "Dangerous", and its handling is "Finish them".
Anyone, individual or groups of Islam who support the struggle of Sharia law, agree with the enforcement of Islamic Khilafah system, and reject Western democratic system, then critical and selective against Western influence, then certainly -- for the West -- they are fundamentalists, no matter they are straightforward, firm, soft or hard, calm or vocal, stay home or go down to the street: they are Islamic fundamentalists.
The group is given the status of "dangerous" because it is considered as a threat to Western interests. This group is considered unfriendly to the West, and even tends to antagonize the West. Anti-Western Democracy group is always considered as a group that does not appreciate discussion, intolerant of the difference, bossy, obtrude, nti-dialogue, rigid, conservative, radical and exclusive.
This group should be finished with a variety of ways, among others: Firstly, sticking a negative image by the environment to the group. The trick, all the good deeds of this group should not be publicized by Western media networks and its accomplice. All errors or badness of this group -- no matter how small it is -- should be published on a large scale, even its preaching must be repeated, even if already expired. They create a negative stigma in this group so that the group is identified with unappreciated things by the public, such as radical, anarchist, terrorists, and so on.
Secondly, stunting the activists. Prevent them from developing the quality of education and other human resources. In the news, any academic degree or honorary degrees from the leaders and activists of these groups should not be mentioned, let alone to mention their work. Mention the name only, and they should be displayed as fools, untidy, uncreative and impolite. Highlight their ignorance, their backwardness and their ferocity.
Third, to isolate the group. Do not give this group the slightest chance in the power system : in the legislative, judicial and executive. Do not involve these groups in any event: national and international. Never ask any opinion in any matter to this group. Never give any role in what circumstances and anywhere.
Fourth, the group's putrefaction. Infiltrate and provoke among activists and among leaders and members of this group. Ride every action of this group and confuse their agenda. Create a variety of damage that could be attributed to this group. Spread slander and accusations of what is systemized that could destroy this group.
Fifth, murdering of the group. Trap and create legal reasons to catch the leaders and activists of this group. Create a formal legal reason to disband the group. Push the authorities in order to make this group as a banned organization. Pay thugs to compete with this group. Threaten, terror and intimidate these groups wherever they are. Make the group leaders and activists feel uncomfortable to travel anywhere. At peak conditions: Kill the figures and activists of the most dangerous groups for the West interests.
Just as "anarchists", the term "fundamentalist" and "fundamentalism" is now already interpreted wrongly. This error affects the use, which is often inappropriate, for example Islamic fundamentalism and Fundamentalist Islam. The use of terms recklessly by the media and secular-liberal academic environment to label a person or group becomes the cause. Society bombarded with terms that its meaning is dictated by the media. It does not matter right or wrong, although at first it seems odd and weird, but a systematic and consistent onslaught finally managed to force the misconceptions to be agreed by the public.
Sociological division of society with various terms as Islamic attributes such as "liberal", "inclusive", "moderate", "radical" and so forth, of course, does not need to be done. The term "Fundamentalist Islamic", will practically obscure the term of "Islam", because it opens the possibility of a form of Islam which have other characteristics, "liberal Islam" for example. The use of this term just shows the confusion of thought which is contaminated by West's frame work. The most dangerous implication is the destruction of key concepts in the Islamic faith. Islam has been knowing the division that comes from a Muslim way of life: it is the Koran, in which there are a variety of terms such as Muslims, believer, heathen, hypocrite, pagans, etc.
My simple conclusion is, Islamization project of social science is becoming an urgent necessity. If by practicing the teachings of Islam, then I am classed as a fundamentalist, well, just call me a fundamentalist Islam.
***
[CZ-lacalifusa011115]
Then the US government -- through former president George W. Bush -- issued two political statements that fueled anti-Muslim fervor throughout the U.S, and even spread to Australia and Europe region. Two of these declarations using the word "Crusade" and accusations without proof against radical Islam led by Osama Bin Laden as the mastermind of mega theater behind the destruction of WTC and Pentagon.
Bush sparked harassment against American Muslims, ranging from negative labeling until torture, and even murder. Moreover, since the beginning, in the West mind, Islam has always been described as extreme, militant and fundamentalist.
According to Robert Mueller -- FBI director at the time -- dozens of discrimination cases befell American Muslims. Another version compiled by Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) showed more than 300 cases of harassment, discrimination and violence experienced by Muslims in America.
Responding to the situation, Bush tried to neutralize it by urging Americans to not disturb Muslims and mosques. But the state already murky and complex. Discrimination and anti-Islamic wave has spread everywhere. The anti-Islamic phenomenon, in turn, causing backlash with the spread of anti-American-West's wave in Islamic world.
My question is, "Why terrorism has always been identified with the fundamentalist Islamic movement? Whereas, it can be, another group performs this action, such as the Japanese Red Army group that jolted the world with operations of Black September at the Olympics in Germany, 11 September 1972.
Or, perhaps, the U.S. citizens themselves who did it, such as the bombing case of federal building in Oklohama -- previously totally unexpected -- that the culprit was a former soldier, Timothy McVeigh. At that time, Fundamentalist Islam was the only party which most suspected as mastermind of the bombing.
In general, terrorism is a purely political crime, but because the approach used is a religious sentiment: Crusade (Bush version) and Jihad (Fundamentalist Islamic version), then the tension that arises is the clash between Islam and the West.
This tension, in addition popularized by Samuel P. Huntington's thesis in his book, "The Clash Of Civilization", also supported by the orientalists, politicians and Western press which was very provocative and intense in giving stereotypical extreme, radical and fundamentalist to Islam. Even the comment of former Italian PM -- horrendous Silvio Berlusconi -- openly said, that Western culture was superior when compared to Islamic culture. Is it true? Then, who did colonialism in Asia and Africa? Who was also killing the Jews in Europe, if not the European leaders themselves?
Meanwhile, on the other hand, the West labeling even further reinforces the spirit of "fundamentalism" of some Muslims who always get a negative label. Presumably, the identity of "fundamentalism" is used against the West, especially America, since its military aggression has successfully mastered Afghanistan in a very short time.
Identification of Islam with terrorism, extremism and radicalism increasingly globalized after the bombing of Legian Kuta - Bali, 12 October 2002. Moreover, this action occured in the largest Muslim country in the world and aimed only at foreign tourists.
Indeed, terrorism is barbarity. Nevertheless, the problem is not simply resolved by the claims have been hunting for Osama, or accusing a particular group as the mastermind. There is no guarantee, after Osama's death, terrorist networks will be destroyed. Even it can be, thousands of other Osama are emerging. You can slaughter the entire human race and radical group, but this will add to the gloom over the history of human civilization.
From here, it can be said, the tension caused by collision of two negative current, unavoidable, and both have thorough passion. In the language of Epicurus, both have been infected with the virus of "the desire of wholeness". The first flow have desire with its technological superiority, as well as a desire to organize the whole world according to its will. The second stream is being driven by religious superiority, the feeling of being harmed, and captivity of tradition in black and white.
Actually, there are many efforts to reconcile the two currents, both from the West and moderate Islamic thinkers. Unfortunately, the 'desire' of first current is too strong and already globalized, so there is a claim of terrorism, radical, extreme, and fundamentalist for the second current.
Historically and academically, fundamentalist term itself was originally intended for the American Catholic fundamentalists who did not want the adjustment to modern reality. However, according to Roger Garaudy, this term in its development has expanded the meaning, not just limited to Catholics, but also extends to other movements that are identical to the static, fanatical and conservative. Thus, there is a term of Jewish fundamentalism (Zionism), Vatican fundamentalism as well as Islamic fundamentalism, etc.
"Rand Corporation"-- a Strategic Research and Study Center on Islam and Middle East, based in Santa Monica, California and Arington, Virginia in the United States-- on the financing of the Smith Richardson Foundation, conducted a study of the Islamic Movement in various parts of the Islamic world.
Results of research and study has been published in the institution a number of official reports, among others, entitled: Civil Democratic Islam (2003) and Building Moderate Muslim Networks (2007).
The report of "Rand Corporation" becomes an important reference for the US National Intelligence Council that oversees 15 intelligence agencies from 15 countries, which is currently chaired by Gregory Treverton. In various reports, "Rand Corporation" mapping the Islamic Movement in accordance with the West interests, ie into four groups: Fundamentalists, Modernists, Liberals and Traditionalists. In the details of each of these groups, described about the character, traits, status and ways of handling each group. Coupled with the documents of other studies results, then it becomes clear : the classification of Islamic movement conducted by West researchers is very subjective, because it is only based on Western interests.
Under Western eyes and in accordance with their interests, then what is meant by the Fundamentalist is the Islamic Movement with "Anti-Western" character. Its traits are four, namely: pro Islamic Sharia, pro caliph of Islam, anti-Western democracy and critical to Western influence. This group status is "Dangerous", and its handling is "Finish them".
Anyone, individual or groups of Islam who support the struggle of Sharia law, agree with the enforcement of Islamic Khilafah system, and reject Western democratic system, then critical and selective against Western influence, then certainly -- for the West -- they are fundamentalists, no matter they are straightforward, firm, soft or hard, calm or vocal, stay home or go down to the street: they are Islamic fundamentalists.
The group is given the status of "dangerous" because it is considered as a threat to Western interests. This group is considered unfriendly to the West, and even tends to antagonize the West. Anti-Western Democracy group is always considered as a group that does not appreciate discussion, intolerant of the difference, bossy, obtrude, nti-dialogue, rigid, conservative, radical and exclusive.
This group should be finished with a variety of ways, among others: Firstly, sticking a negative image by the environment to the group. The trick, all the good deeds of this group should not be publicized by Western media networks and its accomplice. All errors or badness of this group -- no matter how small it is -- should be published on a large scale, even its preaching must be repeated, even if already expired. They create a negative stigma in this group so that the group is identified with unappreciated things by the public, such as radical, anarchist, terrorists, and so on.
Secondly, stunting the activists. Prevent them from developing the quality of education and other human resources. In the news, any academic degree or honorary degrees from the leaders and activists of these groups should not be mentioned, let alone to mention their work. Mention the name only, and they should be displayed as fools, untidy, uncreative and impolite. Highlight their ignorance, their backwardness and their ferocity.
Third, to isolate the group. Do not give this group the slightest chance in the power system : in the legislative, judicial and executive. Do not involve these groups in any event: national and international. Never ask any opinion in any matter to this group. Never give any role in what circumstances and anywhere.
Fourth, the group's putrefaction. Infiltrate and provoke among activists and among leaders and members of this group. Ride every action of this group and confuse their agenda. Create a variety of damage that could be attributed to this group. Spread slander and accusations of what is systemized that could destroy this group.
Fifth, murdering of the group. Trap and create legal reasons to catch the leaders and activists of this group. Create a formal legal reason to disband the group. Push the authorities in order to make this group as a banned organization. Pay thugs to compete with this group. Threaten, terror and intimidate these groups wherever they are. Make the group leaders and activists feel uncomfortable to travel anywhere. At peak conditions: Kill the figures and activists of the most dangerous groups for the West interests.
Just as "anarchists", the term "fundamentalist" and "fundamentalism" is now already interpreted wrongly. This error affects the use, which is often inappropriate, for example Islamic fundamentalism and Fundamentalist Islam. The use of terms recklessly by the media and secular-liberal academic environment to label a person or group becomes the cause. Society bombarded with terms that its meaning is dictated by the media. It does not matter right or wrong, although at first it seems odd and weird, but a systematic and consistent onslaught finally managed to force the misconceptions to be agreed by the public.
Sociological division of society with various terms as Islamic attributes such as "liberal", "inclusive", "moderate", "radical" and so forth, of course, does not need to be done. The term "Fundamentalist Islamic", will practically obscure the term of "Islam", because it opens the possibility of a form of Islam which have other characteristics, "liberal Islam" for example. The use of this term just shows the confusion of thought which is contaminated by West's frame work. The most dangerous implication is the destruction of key concepts in the Islamic faith. Islam has been knowing the division that comes from a Muslim way of life: it is the Koran, in which there are a variety of terms such as Muslims, believer, heathen, hypocrite, pagans, etc.
My simple conclusion is, Islamization project of social science is becoming an urgent necessity. If by practicing the teachings of Islam, then I am classed as a fundamentalist, well, just call me a fundamentalist Islam.
***
[CZ-lacalifusa011115]
No comments:
Post a Comment