[Reader-list] Fwd: "Muslims must quit UK armed forces"

Mon Nov 16 20:50:12 IST 2009

Dear Anupam

When a non-citizen comes and tells the citizens of a country that they should not (in this case) join the Military, that is problematic. Moezi is free to issue his advisories in his own country.

I was quoting this an an example of why the "loyalty of Muslim citizens to their Non-Muslim countries tends to  be viewed with suspicion?". Because by not challenging such statements and not asking such persons to not interfere in their lives as citizens, they get identified with the statements. They damn well will be looked upon with suspicions about their loyalty to the country. 

Moezi advises Muslims "that their involvement in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars is forbidden by Islam."

Mark that, he does not advise that involvement in wars is forbidden in Islam. 

If you think (as you seem to suggest) that Moezi is a 'peacenik', shouldnt he make a start with advising people in Iran not to join the Military in Iran.

Moezi says Muslims are not allowed to kill Muslims and Christians are not allowed to kill Muslims. Are Muslims allowed to kill everyone else?

Let us not be naive.  

"""" Moezi believed that Islam and politics were “inter-mixed” because religion “could not be ignorant of social issues. And part of social issues is politics, therefore Islam should have some sort of eye on political issues”. """"""

Fair enough and valid enough for your own Islamic country. I doubt it that it is acceptable to another Non-Islamic country. 

Islam can keep keep all the 'eye' that it wants to on political issues but it should do so in Islamic Countries. When your loud pronouncements try to propagate/export that aspect of Islamicness to the Muslim citizens of a Non-Islamic country then you are creating problems for those Muslims.

Kshmendra

PS. Here is a quote from a participant in the ongoing congregation of Muslims (Tablighi) in Raiwind, Pakistan, ranting against the Taliban:

"""" ‘They call those who refuse to follow their brand of Islam infidels, not knowing they are inviting the wrath of Allah the almighty by killing Muslims, which I call an unholy crusade, """"

Note that. Allah's wrath is incurred if Muslim kills Muslim. It becomes an 'unholy crusade'. What happens when Muslim kills Non-Muslim? What defines a "holy crusade" ?

Also note that Moezi is a Shia and the Tabhligis are Sunnis. Note the identicality of attitudes.  

--- On Mon, 11/16/09, anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com> wrote:

From: anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Fwd: "Muslims must quit UK armed forces"
To: "Rakesh Iyer" <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
Cc: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Date: Monday, November 16, 2009, 7:21 PM

The Ayatollah's words from Daily Mail report:

“Not only do I not accept it for Muslims to go there, I don’t accept
non-Muslims to go there as well,” Moezi said. “We say that Muslims are
not allowed to go and kill Muslims. Do you think that Christians are
allowed to go and kill Muslims?”

The cleric, 65, condemned the massacre in Texas last week of 13
American soldiers at the Fort Hood base by a Muslim military
psychiatrist and insisted that the incident should not be used to
tarnish the image of the world’s 1.5 billion Muslim population."

Dear Kshmendra,

It is very clear that the appeal is not for the Muslims but for anyone
who is opposed to the occupation of forces in these countries and also
who are opposed to things like war in any nation. I think I can very
well read it as a caution against any form of war or violence waged by
anyone. Can we not say that Daily Mail was wrong in interpreting what
this man was talking about? I am sure being a Muslim, and an Iranian
is a peril in these times. Here allegiance to a flag is not the issue.
In a phased manner thousands of young men are exposed to this conflict
of energy-terror-security. after UK and US have been waging this war
at the cost of these lives. would anyone deny the increasing number of
coffins being brought back from Iraq and Afghanistan? there is no
doubt that for a soldier a coffin of a fellow comrade is matter of
pride and motivation, but what are these soldiers fighting for?

-anupam

On 11/16/09, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 5:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] "Muslims must quit UK armed forces"
> To: Kshmendra Kaul <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com>
>
>
> Hi (to all)
>
> Today, after a long time, am I sending one mail to Sarai, having read some
> of the most shocking kind of statements, presented in a very dubious manner
> or shocking ways to prove that Muslims are either traitors, or that they
> can't be loyal to anybody except to the Ummah.
>
> It is disgusting that some people have assumed that Muslims are loyal not to
> their own conscience or even to the nations which they are citizens of, but
> to the Ummah, Mecca or the Saudi regime, or to the Mullahs and Maulvis who
> for them are more important than what the law of the land states. Some
> people on this forum, as also elsewhere across the nation, media and among
> others, have thought this to be obvious.
>
> It is very wrong on any basis to make such conjectures and perception-based
> statements unless one has done an academic study on this issue, to find out
> the effect of what such statements do, or how many among the Muslims across
> different nations, not only in India, but also in Europe and others, are
> actually involved in terrorist activities, or at the least, supporting the
> ideology of terrorism or even the Al-Qaeda. I don't know myself about any
> such study having been conducted in India or any other nation for that
> matter; if any of you has anything or any study to prove so, please do put
> it forward.
>
> It is also shameful that Muslims across India or other regions have to prove
> their loyalty because of these shameful perceptions. It's on this perception
> factor that we have a Raj Thackeray who is stating that UP and Bihar people
> are actually taking over the jobs of the Marathis. The ironic thing is that
> in a newspaper article I have read, the total no. of migrants to Mumbai is
> actually around 45%, out of which 37.3% (the largest) are from within
> Maharashtra, followed by Uttar Pradesh (which when added to Maharashtra
> migrants come over to close to 60%) and then Gujarat. Where does even Bihar
> come into the picture? And all these statistics are based on a UNDP-BMC
> survey report which has been done recently. And the report also says that
> the situation has been the same with little difference in composition of
> migrants since the 1960's.
>
> When did Muslims claim that they are loyal to Ayatollah Khamenei, Osama Bin
> Laden, Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed, Syed Salahuddin, Tehrik-i-Taliban, or even the
> local Mullah on the street for that matter? And how many Muslims even made
> that claim? I know definitely of one Muslim family which always supported
> Pakistan in matches against India, but for that one family, I know of at
> least 5 Muslim friends of mine who had abuses to shower at Pakistan when
> India won the Twenty-20 World Cup in 2007. Infact, some of them even claim
> we should nuke Pakistan. Are they loyal to Pakistan? (although I do agree
> nuking is not what we should do)
>
> When the Hindutva ideologues, be it RSS, VHP or anybody including the Hindu
> Munnani say something, I don't consider it as the views of the Hindus. Who
> are they to represent the Hindus? Do they even know what being a Hindu is,
> or what Hinduism is? The same argument even extends to those who think they
> speak on behalf of the Muslims. Do they know what Islam is? Have they even
> studied the Koran properly, and do understand in what context what has been
> said? Every person has the right to speak for himself/herself.
>
> Hence stop questioning the Muslims. Or even Hindus. Or Marathis. Or others.
> If you want to question someone for his/her beliefs, don't ask questions to
> anyone else but that person alone. Neither assume that somebody has got the
> right to speak on behalf of others. One Deoband conference doesn't have the
> right to speak for Muslims across India, forget across even entire
> South-Asian region.
>
>
> As far as the content of the previous mail is concerned, I think there are
> positives to be taken, many of them. We should respect those. At the same
> time, the representative has a right to request Muslims not to join the
> forces, and his perspective is skewed, fine. That doesn't mean Muslims will,
> by default, accept it. Muslims don't have to. It's their right to accept or
> not accept, this skewed perspective. What we have a right to do, is to
> explain to them why this perspective is skewed or not, depending on our
> value system and judgement.
>
> Don't just assume please, that Muslims are traitors or not traitors. Each
> individual is different, please go ahead and respect their individuality.
>
> Rakesh
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe
> in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
_________________________________________
reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
Critiques & Collaborations
To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>