Zarqawi And the D-Word

[leftchick]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46419-2005Jan29.html

If President Bush wanted to conjure up someone from central casting to act as a foil to his inauguration call for worldwide freedom, he couldn't ask for a villain more fitting than the terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi, who, on the eve of Iraqi elections, denounced democracy as an "evil principle."

In a widely disseminated Internet audiotape, Zarqawi didn't merely say that he opposed the mechanics or timing of the U.S.-run elections being held today in Iraq to choose a 275-member assembly and transitional government. And he didn't say he thought Iraqis should wait and vote after U.S. occupation forces depart. No, Zarqawi said that he opposes any elections under any circumstances.

In doing so, he sets up a clash with more at stake than the outcome of today's voting. In the audiotape, which surfaced last Sunday, Zarqawi, the most feared and wanted militant in Iraq, declared a "fierce war" against all those "apostates" who take part in the elections. He called candidates running in the elections "demi-idols" and the people who plan to vote for them "infidels." And he railed against democracy because he said it supplants the rule of God with that of a popular majority. This wicked system, he said disapprovingly, is based on "freedom of religion and belief" and "freedom of speech" and on "separation of religion and politics." Democracy, he added, is "heresy itself."

The questions Zarqawi raises go way beyond the elections in Iraq to the whole issue of modernization of the Arab world. Is democracy un-Islamic? Is there a fundamental clash between the principles of representative government and the principles of Islam?

[rodeodance]

1. there are many modernites--perhaps trying to translate our moderinty

onto the Muslin world is not the best way to go???

[Cooley Hurd]

2. "If President Bush wanted to conjure up someone..."

...and we know the BFEE would NEVER create a boogeyman from the ether to prove a point, don't we?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p25s02-cogn.html

<snip>
The babies in the incubator story is a classic example of how easy it is for the public and legislators to be mislead during moments of high tension. It's also a vivid example of how the media can be manipulated if we do not keep our guards up.

The invented story eventually broke apart and was exposed. (I first saw it reported in December of 1992 on CBC-TV's Fifth Estate – Canada's "60 Minutes" – in a program called "Selling the War." The show later won an international Emmy.) But it's been 10 years since it happened, and we again find ourselves facing dramatic decisions about war. It is instructive to look back at what happened, in order that we do not find ourselves deceived again, by either side in the issue.
</snip>

[leftchick]

3. exactly...

that is all the BFEE does. LIE!

[rogerashton]

4. The first successor, or Kaliph, of Muhammad was elected.

According to Sir John Glubb, "Glubb Pasha," in The Life and Times of Muhammad," which follows the tradition closely, "The men of Medina assembled to elect ...." Their initial choice was not popular with the whole community, however, and Abu Bakr appealed for a revote and "he was himself elected to be the Prophet's successor or Khalif." p. 368.

It appears to me that Zarqawi and bin Laden, who has previously made such comments, are the heretics here. But their motivation is clear enough. The alternative to elections is not the rule of God but dictatorship based on violence, which they intend to head.

[lockdown]

5. Anyone compared this audio with the Berg audio?

Be funny if they were blatantly different, just no one in the media thought to check. If they match then at least there's consistency to the charade.

[expatriot]

6. I wouldn't be surprised if these Islamo-fascists weren't our puppets...

I mean, coming out against democracy? That's about as politically strategic as liberals attacking Christmas.

[clem_c_rock]

7. How 'bout this - the guy doesn't exist folks

He's an invisible friend made up to sway public opinion to accept a colonialist cause while war crimes are happily committed.

If you beleive this story, you could be told the world was flat and suck that up too.

[CJCRANE]

8. I don't get

why religious fundamentalists are so against democracy. The alternative, a theocracy, is unfeasible as I can't really figure out an accurate way to determine which candidates God has chosen. What happens if lots of people say God has chosen them, how do we know which one is right?

It should be perfectly possible to have a democracy based on religious principles. Freedom of speech would be more limited than in a secular democracy but in every religion there is always plenty of room for argument and discussion on the exact meanings of certain religious laws and how to implement them.