General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTamerlan Tsarnaev was thrown out of the mosque -- the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center --
about three months ago, after he stood up and shouted at the imam during a Friday prayer service, they said. The imam had held up slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. as an example of a man to emulate, recalled one worshiper who would give his name only as Muhammad.
Enraged, Tamerlan stood up and began shouting, Muhammad said.
You cannot mention this guy because hes not a Muslim! Muhammad recalled Tamerlan shouting, shocking others in attendance.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-boston-bombing-suspect-radical-fbi-20130420,0,4341067.story
BeyondGeography
(39,377 posts)flamingdem
(39,313 posts)avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)But he appears to have understood that Tamerlan had changed, was up to no good and was a troubling influence on his younger brother.
In retrospect, Uncle Rusland was very brave to come forward and say so many difficult things about his own family. It must have been very painful for him to do so.
BeyondGeography
(39,377 posts)At the center of a global firestorm, to react to what is a personal crisis for him so lucidly and perceptively in a foreign language (not easy) showed real intelligence.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Heather MC
(8,084 posts)It's a shame we can't stop these people before they, full on batshit crazy.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Is this a Sufi mosque? Asking because they're known to be liberal, and have actually been repeatedly attacked by other Muslims. It would be completely bizarre if he was in fact Sufi.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)FarCenter
(19,429 posts)...
Wahhabism was therefore used as an ideological platform for political goals despite its inherent incompatibilities with traditional Chechen Sufism[47]. While Salafist followers resent certain aspects of Chechen Sufism, Wahhabi Islam was foreign to the social, cultural and political traditions of the Chechen society[48]. Its presence induced internal conflict and ideological chaos. Wahhabisms antagonistic attitude towards Sufism offered the Chechens only one alternative: Saudi Arabia as a model of ideological and political conduct. Foreign Wahhabi influence thus led to enmity between proponents of increased political and cultural orientation on Saudi Arabia and other Islamic regimes, and those who aspired to preserve the local form of Islam and the traditional, indigenous foundations of government. Furthermore, for the Chechen society Wahhabism constituted an artificially adopted international religious-political ideology, which severely compromised the rudimentary Sufi traditions of ancestral worship, veneration of holy sites and sainthood[49].
The division between proponents of Salafi-Jihadi rule and supporters of Aslan Maskhadovs government is exemplified by an event that occurred in the summer of 1998. On July 14, 1998, in Gudermes, a quarrel took place between supporters of Wahhabism and followers the pro-Maskhadov warlord S. Yamadayev. The Wahhabists were led by Arbi Barayev and Abdul-Malik Mezhidov both prominent warlords self-proclaimed judges in military Sharia tribunals. In the ensuing battle, the inhabitants of the Gudermes region immediately came to the assistance of Yamadayevs forces. The fight ended with tens of casualties, including 30 Wahhabists, 20 supporters of Aslan Maskhadov and 10 innocent bystanders[50].
http://www.ict.org.il/Articles/tabid/66/Articlsid/636/Default.aspx
Codeine
(25,586 posts)FarCenter
(19,429 posts)But it took 4 centuries of bloodshed in Europe to attenuate christianity to the point where its sects can live together (mostly).
pampango
(24,692 posts)with a pluralistic society. There are many Muslims, of course, who function very well in a pluralistic society including the imam at this mosque and the others who tossed Tamerlan out.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Fundamentalism implies that the religion's scriptures and clergy are the sole fount of religious truths and that other religions and sources of religious understanding are invalid or sources of evil.
Evangelicalism implies that the religion has the right and duty to convert others to its views. If this is done through persuasion it is not dangerous, but historically it has been through forcible conversions and by using secular power to oppress adherents of other religions.
Christianity and Isalm have historically been the two religions that have combined these principles to advance themselves by fire and sword. Both have minority sects that adhere to these principles now, but only Islam has this kind of minority sects in control of governments to put them into action.
pampango
(24,692 posts)dictatorship vs. democracy. Islamic democracies like in Turkey and Indonesia seem less inclined historically to advance their religion by "fire and sword".
Dictators and kings (of any religion) rely on the army and police to stay in power and have been more likely to use 'fire and sword' to enhance and spread their power whether that involved secular conquest or the spread of religion. Also repressive governments often try deal with their citizens' frustrations with their own government by using the old "Look! Over there! A Jew (or a Christian or a Sunni or a Shia, etc.) Getting repressed people (and sometimes a not-so-repressed people) to focus on an external 'enemy' rather than the one living in the palace is a tried-and-true tactic of governments to deal with dissent.
If democracy does spread in the Muslim world, it will be interesting to see if their governments become less keen on spreading their religion through "fire and sword". It is hard to know for sure but it is a possibility.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)The Assads, Hussein, Nasser, Sadat, Mubarak and Kaddafi all kept the lid on Islamic radicals in their countries.
Their removal has tended to increase conflict and result in takeovers by more fundamentalist factions. I would expect democracy to fail, and theocratic regimes reflecting the most vocal and intense extremist view to succeed.
The prospects for the Copts in Egypt are very dim. The non-Muslim populations have mostly been driven out of Iraq.
In Turkey, secularism was instituted by Ataturk after WW I. It was kept in place by the Turkish Army. Recent trends are towards more democracy and hence a more religious regime reflecting the overwhelmingly Muslim populations views.
Pakistan is a religous state -- it was born out of a religous civil war.
Farther east Malaysia and Indonesia seem more democratic and pluralistic, but there was that issue of persecution of Christians in East Timor.
There is also the ongoing conflict between Muslims and Catholics in the Philipines.
pampango
(24,692 posts)repression does anything but make the underlying contradictions worse and worse.
You may be right about the future of democracy in that region. If you are, I feel sorry for the people there. They seem to want many of the same things that we want but their leaders - political and religious - may well retain control of everyone's lives.
Few Muslims in the Middle East think that the US is genuinely concerned with them ever achieving any degree of human rights and government by consent of the governed.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/
And Arabs may have good reason for believing that the US cares little about their rights and democratic aspirations. Americans believe that stability in the Middle East is more important than democracy (though Democrats lean more towards democracy as a goal there but still a majority of Democrats prioritize stability). Democrats are somewhat more optimistic than republicans that the Arab Spring will bring lasting improvements to the people there, but still a plurality think things will not change for the better - which I think is in line with what you are saying. Republicans overwhelmingly say that the Arab Spring will be bad for the people in the region and bad for Americans.
I would say that Muslims in that region are probably quite perceptive when it comes to what they can expect from the US.
We should all play ostrich.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Good to know that most muslims reject that kind of thinking (at least in that area).