The time when Islam will be peaceful is when Islam will be no more
When muslims are confronted with the violent history of islam’s barbaric raids on the peaceful countries of the Mideast, Spain, and Europe, they’re quick to point to Indonesia and ask, did islam spread by violence there?
Well, yes it did. How could it be possible that a cult based on violence, be spread peacefully? It’s against the logic and doctrine of islam itself. As they say, “The most beautiful woman can’t give more than what she has.”
The most obvious example that islam can’t be spread peacefully, is mohammad himself. He tried to spread islam peacefully for thirteen years between his own people, and only succeeded in attracting 72 people, that included his family and the family of his 6 years old, “bride,” Eisha. That’s when he realized that the sword and cutting heads is the way to go.
It’s always good to remind muslims that the man who raised mohammad, and was like a father to him, Abdel Mutalib, never believed muhammad, even at the last moments before his death, he refused muhammad’s pleading with him to accept islam.
When muslims boast that no muslim leaves islam, remind them of the famous, “Apostasy war.” When muhammad died, most of the muslims in Arabia rejected islam. Abu bakr, Eisha’s father and first Caliph, waged against them ferocious wars to subjugate them by force and bring them back to islam in chains.
These are just elementary historical facts, from the islamic history books, to give the Western readers basic answers to muslims deceptive questions, or claims.
This article also exposes the hidden reality, only for those who don’t know, of the support by the islamic governments and their political parties for the muslim terrorists, which are called, “Radicals,” in the West. And we showed that clearly in our previous posting exposing the ethnic cleansing of the Copts of Egypt, and the silent holocaust of all Christians in every muslims dominated country.
Clash between fundamentalism and modernism
Opinion News – Saturday, June 14, 2008
Ahmad Junaidi, Jakarta
“Awas, ada orang Islam!” (Watch out, Muslims are coming!) is now a joke among activists after the brutal attack by members of the Islam Defenders Front (FPI) on participants of a peaceful rally organized by the National Alliance for the Freedom of Faith and Religion (AKKBB).
Some probably view the joke as blasphemy against the religion of the Prophet Muhammad but others might see a lesson behind it.
Traditional ulemas would quickly deny that Islam teaches violence, but progressive scholars directly condemn the attack and would admit the brutality has its roots in the religion’s teachings.
It’s probably not exaggerating to say that Sunday’s rallies around the National Monument (Monas) in Central Jakarta were representative of a continuing battle between fundamentalists and supporters of civil society.
The FPI claimed their attack was provoked by newspaper advertisements by the AKKBB which, among other things, supported Ahmadiyah, a sect considered heretical by the Indonesian Ulema Council.
A national conservative newspaper (thank God, it’s only one) even wrote, “Ahmadiyah is the problem”, and blamed the government for not banning the religious sect.
The FPI, who joined another rally organizing a sharia-supporting group and protesting the fuel prices hike in front of the Presidential Palace, decided that beating infidels who commemorate the secular state ideology of Pancasila was more important.
In a soccer game, the FPI is probably similar to Zinedine Zidane, the French player who headbutted Italian defender Marco Materazzi for verbally offending him in the 2006 World Cup.
Religious violence is actually not new in Indonesia despite the claim that Islam arrived here in peace, brought by Indian Gujarat traders and propagated by preachers known as Wali Songo.
A newly reprinted book with the subtitle, Teror Agama Islam Mazhab Hambali Di Tanah Batak (Islam’s Hambali School of Terror in Batak Land), by Mangaradja Onggang Parlindungan, described how puritans forced their beliefs and killed the locals in the 1800s.
Fundamentalism here has its roots in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, says Muslim scholar Azyumardi Azra in his book, The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia.
The current radical organizations are also led by ulemas (they called themselves habib) who have relations — cultural and probably financial — to the Middle East.
It’s true the FPI is small — and maybe frightful — but some may view the fundamentalist group is part of a larger group, including political parties which are still hiding their eternal dream to change the country into an Islamic state.
Supporters of the AKKBB, many of them Muslims, view these groups as a threat to a pluralistic Indonesia, the idea of which has begun to dim in the hearts of its citizens, including its leaders.
Similar reasons could be used to understand why the police are also afraid to take actions against radicals who recently destroyed mosques and properties of Ahmadiyah members.
But certain officials might still think radical groups can be used to lessen their burden to maintain security.
We still remember the civilian militia groups (pamswakarsa) that were actually established to fight pro-reform activists in 1998. A military commander and a police chief reportedly helped establish the groups.
Like Soeharto who tried to attract Muslims due to the weakening support from the military near the end of his power, certain elements in the government might seek support from the FPI and other fundamentalist groups to maintain their power even while sacrificing the country’s unity.
These power-greedy opportunists do not care about any ideology as long as they can be elected in the general elections next year.
They visited and showed sympathy to a radical leader, whose followers tortured AKKBB activists at the rally.
But with the support of diverse elements of civil society, including mass media, the incident could be used to strengthen our commitment to democracy, a political system which does not tolerate violence.
Let’s make the Monas tragedy a stepping stone toward a more democratic country that protects diversity in term of cultures, and faiths, including differences within a religion.
If we fail to learn from the tragedy, we will witness more violence which could lead to the breakup of the country. We would see uniformity, instead of diversity.
If we ignored the incident, we will watch more and more goateed people in Pakistani attire carry sticks and beat others who considered heretical.
And the joke, Awas, ada orang Islam, is no longer a joke. The joke teller would probably be considered defaming his religion.
The writer is a journalist at The Jakarta Post. He can be reached at email@example.com