Thursday, 9 December 2010

Theology and Terrorism; No legitmacy – no influence

The question: Can you do counterterrorism without theology?

In the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks, religion was singled out by many in the government as the key driver behind terrorism. The vows to win the battle for hearts and minds came along with an unprecedented emphasis on the Muslim community as the provider of "home-grown" solutions to what was seen as a home-grown problem. All that was needed, it was argued, was for the Muslim community to "get its house in order".
To continue clinging to this discredited hypothesis, after countless reports and testimonies by intelligence services both here and in the US, (the latest being Eliza Manningham-Buller's to the Iraq enquiry) would be preposterous. It was foreign policy that fuelled radicalisation. In fact, religion can be a valuable tool in combating terrorism, refuting terrorists' attempts to confer religious legitimacy on their actions. A Gallup study in 2008 showed that many of those Muslims who opposed terrorism did so on religious grounds, whereas those condoning it did so for political, not religious, reasons. Many Muslim organisations in the field of counter-radicalisation utilise an Islamic ethical framework in their work.
However, integrating theology into a government counterterrorism effort is an altogether different matter. Governments are simply not best-placed to engage in the intricate and complex business of theology. As John Denham recognised rather belatedly in 2009, "Government and local government are not experts on religion". By nature, they seek to control debates and manipulate them to suit their political priorities. Their fraught relations with communities – already strained by the impact of draconian counterterrorism laws and allegations of torture – means that they simply do not have the legitimacy or trust needed to engage in sensitive theological discussions. Any attempts to do so are likely to be read as an unwelcome interference, leading to a further breakdown in trust.
All of these fears played out in the during the implementation of the Prevent agenda, which left widespread disillusionment in its wake. What began as an effort to involve communities as partners in the prevention of extremist violence quickly took on a life of its own, morphing into a large-scale experiment in social engineering, blending security haphazardly with questions of cohesion, identity and integration. The government's limited understanding of religion manifested itself in a preference for nebulous, politicised terms such as "moderate" and "radical" which served as a stick with which to beat those organisations and individuals it did not agree with, and shepherd the errant in the right direction.
While the government was devising criteria to determine what constituted a "moderate" Muslim, it was violating its own standards by creating, funding and promoting groups whose version of Islam fit neatly with its political agenda. This peculiar version of "democratic engagement" served to marginalise many groups. It created an artificial distinction between "moderate" and "extremist" which was exploited by both government and the various Muslim bodies that had become involved.
In fact, the government's own research identified numerous "drivers" for radicalisation, including political and economic grievances and social and psychological factors. Yet it chose to focus on theology as the element from which all extremism stemmed.
None of which is to say that engaging with religious communities has no role in counterterrorism. However, the experience of Prevent has revealed the dangers of making theology a key part of the counterterrorist toolkit. The political machinations involved in determining who could participate and who could not have consumed considerably more time and effort than can be justified by the results of these projects, while also encouraging sectarianism within the Muslim community. And while the government worked to influence theological debates, its failures in other fields – rendition, torture, detention without charge – undermined the legitimacy and trust which might have enabled it to play a genuine role in such discussions.
Theology has provided far too much of a temptation to government – providing it with a convenient distraction from its own responsibilities. There is no way to avoid the long-term painstaking work of tackling inequality, increasing participation and empowering the civic institutions that are vital to tackling terrorism and extremist violence. A mere fatwa here or theological roadshow there will simply not do the trick. (By; Intissar Kherigi)
Intissar Kherigi studied Law at King's College, Cambridge, then specialised in human rights at the Centre for the Study of Human Rights, London School of Economics. She has worked in the House of Lords, the United Nations in New York, and the European parliament in Brussels.

Saturday, 27 November 2010

Journalist Attacked in Sri Lanka

Tamil journalist attacked in Colombo

[TamilNet, Wednesday, 17 November 2010, 10:17 GMT]
Unidentified gang of eight persons severely assaulted a Tamil journalist Lenin Raja, 28 in Wattala area in Colombo when he was returning home after duty at Vetri FM electronic media operating from Colombo Tuesday night around 11:00 p.m. Lenin Rajah rushed with the injuries to Wattala Police Station made a complaint in this regard. 

Lenin Rajah was later admitted to the nearby government hospital, media sources said.

He was seriously injured in an attack on the Vetri FM station by an unidentified gang in July this year. (Tamil Net)

British Tamil journalist arrested in Sri Lanka
[ Friday, 19 November 2010, 07:21.47 PM GMT +05:30 ]
Sri Lanka State Intelligence officers arrested a London based Tamil journalist Wednesday at the Colombo Airport, while the journalist was on his way to visit his family, Journalist for Democracy in Sri Lanka (JDS), a dissident exciled journalist group that first released the Channel-4 execution video said in an urgent alert.
A British passport holder, Karthigesu Thirulogasundar, 37, was arrested by the officers attached to Sri Lankan state intelligence agency and currently being held in an undisclosed location. Thirulogasundar was previously attached to London based popular TV channels Deepam TV and GTV.

He is currently working as a full time journalist for London based radio station, IBC, the news alert said.

Thirulogasundar was visiting Sri Lanka, hoping to see his aging mother who is seriously ill. (Lankasri)

Journalism In Jaffna Is A Walk Through A Minefield

The pressure aimed at newspapers published in Jaffna to set a self censorship has been intensified during the past few days states Center for Human Rights in Sri Lanka (CHR).
A group armed with poles and sticks had come to the avenue where ‘Yal Thinakural’ newspaper office is situated state members of the editorial board of the newspaper. The members of the group with their faces covered had remained there for more than one hour in a threatening manner.

The members of the editorial board say the group had arrived with a person who had come on the pretext of staying in ‘Thinakural Guest House.’ They ask how could a group armed with sticks and poles wander about without being noticed by the Police and the Army whose members are deployed at every nook and corner in Jaffna.

Threatening letters were distributed among newspaper officers in Jaffna on the 25thNovember. This letter was published in ‘Udayan’ and Yal Thinukural’ newspapers on the 26thNovember and was also published in ‘Sudaroli’ on the 27th.  

Throughout the past year the newspapers in Jaffna were published amidst severe threats and challenges. Journalists were threatened and there were many threatening phone calls to members of editorial boards of these newspapers.   
‘Yal Thinakural’ newspaper had its newspapers set on fire and several of its sales agents murdered.

During the last ten days attacking a group of JVP members including its Parliamentarian Sunil Handunneththi, distribution of threatening letters and threatening a journalist of the ‘Yal Thinakural’ in Kayts were reported from Jaffna.

The Centre for Human Rights in Sri Lanka emphasizes that independency of the media including newspapers is vital to set up democracy in the post war period in the North. The CHR calls upon all parties to mediate to protect journalists, printing of newspapers and their distribution. (Lankatruth)

Home          Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)

Sri Lanka; JVP MP Sunil Hadunhetty was attacked by...?


Sri Lanka News Debrief - 16.11.2010

Today on Debrief: - Military intelligence units behind attack in Jaffna -- JVP..... Women's Movement for Freedom demands immediate release of Sri Lankan maid Risana Nafeek..... Ranil wants public sector salaries increased.....Tourism officials set to launch new promotional theme initiative

Does It Mean Gota’s Men Cracked Handunneththi’s Head?

Defense Secretary, retired lieutenant in the S.L Army, Gotabhaya Rajapakse, blatantly violating ministerial regulations and engaging in politics, has said emergency regulations cannot be removed due to the activities of the JVP and the TNA.   
The JVP and the TNA, are political parties that oppose the government but are increasingly being hailed by masses in the North. This situation irritates the Rajapakse regime and the Army has been directly deployed to prevent the two parties having any rapport with the masses in the North.
Meanwhile, a Sinhala speaking armed group assaulted and attempted to assassinate JVP Parliamentarian Sunil Handunneththi, who went to Jaffna for political activities with several others. Fortunately, the murder attempt was thwarted and would be assassins retreated when a crowd gathered at the site.    
However, two groups were appointed on orders of President Percy Mahendra regarding the attack but so far no one has been arrested.  While investigations are being carried out the relevant secretary (Minister) talking about implementing laws and withdrawing them could be termed as the cart jumping before the horse.  (Lankatruth)

Home             Sri Lanka Think Tank-UK (Main Link)

Thursday, 25 November 2010

War on Terror and War on Error; by M. R. Mohamed - Sri Lanka



The conspicuous military approaches consequent to the 11 September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre and the fierce clashes between civilizations are predominant in the new international order.

In the Dawwa service of Rasoolulla (sal) an entire community structure was established and introduced to the world civilization within 23 years. This has clearly created and divided a great path in today’s world. While the Muslim countries following Islam and the other nations function separately, it can be observed that super powers such as the UNO, USA, UK, EU and Russia are operating on a massive plan against Islam.

It can also be observed that in addition to terrorism, Islam and patriotism, errors are now openly discussed in the Western world. The War on Error is now gaining momentum.
But the people of the Western world are thinking differently. They realize that the United Nations, the political authorities of the super powers and the media are creating and spreading a great lie regarding the Muslims. However, no organization or strong media has been formed to gather and reveal these alternative views.

Bush’s War on Terror has not ended. Syria and Iran are further targets. The attack on the World Trade Centre cannot be approved by any Muslim. That was not an American military centre. It was a place of work and livelihood for people. The attack on 11 September 2001 engendered widespread sympathy within America and the rest of the world. 

Using this sympathy as capital, the Bush administration began a major work plan against Islam, to seize lands and resources of the Muslims.

Ordinary American administrators, the public and the entire military participated in this directly and indirectly. Countries such as Britain and Australia also similarly participated. The war against the Muslims was thus institutionalized globally.

Contemporary activities of Bush are more horrendous than the tyranny of Hitler. The tyranny of Hitler did not affect Islam or the Muslims to this extent. It was different. Analysts say Bush’s war has led to more terrible and greater devastation than the destruction caused by Hitler and in the 1st and 2nd World Wars. The grabbing of Muslim land by Bush’s neo-colonialism in the name of war on terror is more cruel than these destructions. Our resources are entirely plundered, and permanent American military bases are established on Muslim lands.

Osama Bin Laden’s unsophisticated war mongering stance against the West by the name of Al Qaida, and bombing approaches are likewise painful in the Islamic view. These triggered Bush’s war on terror against Islam.

The questions asked in the West today are: Who is a terrorist? What is the definition of terrorism? What are the determining criteria?  A public body acceptable to everyone is urgently needed to undertake this. Only through such a body, the totality of the world errors can be understood by all.

Basically, there is no change regarding Muslims in formations and countries such as UNO, USA, UK, EU and Russia. Their intention is to destroy Muslim ascendancy. Faces may change often but there will be no change in this policy. There is deep unity among them in this regard. Therefore, opportunities for realizing their errors or making them aware of the errors are absent. Awareness can be created only by the Islamic Khilafat principle. There is no other course.

The Israeli walls arose in the same century of the destruction of the Berlin wall that divided East and West Germany. Palestine was fragmented. Why did not the Bush administration come forward to give effect to the decision of the International Court of the UN that this was illegal?

The rejection of Hamas (Not in Violence side but their Engagement with Fair Electoral Process), which won a major victory democratically in Palestine, and the acceptance of Fatah under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, which lost the election, to form the government, is akin to murder of world democracy. Although the people desired that Hamas should form the government, the Western world did not allow this. The grant of money in millions, weapons and full international recognition against this desire, is a despicable act. To which institution in the world can anyone complain about this injustice?

The pre-planned entry into Iraq, even before the decision of the UN and the IAEA, breaching international law and justice, norms and boarders, and the destruction of the entire resources, devastating the lives of people, was a great tyranny. The Iraqis have to pay a high price to be liberated from this.

The information that America, Britain and France are united in covering up the historical background of Sudan’s Darfur problem in order to weaken the Islamic state, to transform Darfur into a separate state and to find the Sudanese government guilty, is not new.

They planned and suppressed and restrained leftist and alternative thoughts. By holding the UN veto power in their hands they have placed the Muslim world in a perilous position. It is felt that the veto power is needed at least for one Muslim state. It is said that Malaysia is the appropriate nation.

The failure by both communities (Islam and West) to learn from history and to realize our errors is an indication that destructions will continue. History must be subject to analysis. The results of such analysis must be considered, past errors must be realized and new approaches must be adopted.

Has the world today forgotten the destruction caused by Hitler? Have they forgotten what happened to America in Vietnam and to Russia in Afghanistan? These experiences are sufficient for the UN and the West to institute a new civilized system. It is more beneficial to learn from historical errors and the lessons of history rather than from ideologies.
We now need new Umar Mukhtars with ability to intellectually struggle against colonialism. The role of intellectuals is vital in solving cotemporary problems. This is the basis of the  intellectual jihad of today.

Only the Islamic-ethical intellectual principle of Khilafat, and movement towards it, will provide a solution to the Muslim community to escape the clutches the Western world. It is appropriate to say that the British soil is providing a significant opportunity to intellectuals for such thought. 

(Written by: M. R. Mohamed (, Published in Tamil in Meelparvai-Sri Lanka, on 02nd of November 2007, Issue 138, Page 10)

Monday, 8 November 2010

Aggressive secularism or a new role for religion

Britain’s secular liberal establishment appears horrified by the Pope’s comments, and those of his advisor Cardinal Walter Kasper, about Britain’s secular society. The Pope said in his opening speech in the UK “Today, the United Kingdom strives to be a modern and multicultural society…In this challenging enterprise, may it always maintain its respect for those traditional values and cultural expressions that more aggressive forms of secularism no longer value or even tolerate.”

Cardinal Kasper wrote on the eve of the Pope’s visit that “an aggressive new atheism has spread through Britain. If, for example, you wear a cross on British Airways, you are discriminated against.”

This trend has emerged strongly since 9/11 and led to a magnificent double standard. A letter in the Guardian on 15th September 2010 signed by secular evangelists such as Stephen Fry, Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor AC Grayling, Lord Avebury, and Peter Tatchell amongst others denounced the invitation of a state visit for the Pope and included in their reasoning the Pope’s illiberal views. It would be hard to find a letter with the same spectrum of signatories opposing the visits and hospitality shared between British governments and dictators across the world who actively torture and repress their own people.

In Britain, Europe and the United States secular liberal states are proving ever more their intolerance of people of all faiths – frequently ridiculing and demeaning adherents of religions – but most especially Islam.

Anyone who has witnessed calls for bans on hijabs and niqabs across Europe, as well as minarets; protests against mosques by right wing groups in Britain and even a call to ban the Quran in Holland will recognise an aggressive, unpleasant, even supremacist secular liberalism.

A new role for religion

Aggressive secularism stems from ignorance, fear and dogmatism. Over two centuries after the enlightenment, secular free market liberalism dominates in just about every important nation, yet the secular agenda seems to have stalled. Cynicism has surged. The sense of a strong society is diminishing. And when people are asked about how happy they are, the negativity is electric.

Yet, despite unprecedented prosperity and mass education, it is religion that is today providing a more confident, global and ethical vision, finding traction among all peoples, irrespective of race, colour, sex, age or geography. For supporters of a movement that is supposed to have lost the battle of ideas, religionists have been proving the soothsayers wrong. Why is this?

Firstly, more religious people are now questioning why their values should be suppressed within the public arena. History has taught us that some of the greatest social advancements were made by people motivated by their religious beliefs. The provision of economic and political rights for women in Islamic countries in the seventh century, the abolition of slavery in the UK, civil rights in America: all were done by people with impeccable religious credentials.

If some secularists had had their way, the activism of our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and the campaigning of William Wilberforce or Martin Luther King would be whitewashed from history.

Secondly, despite historical attempts to generalise, many are now rejecting the absurd claim that religion stifles intellectual inquiry. We often hear dire warnings from western capitals about the dangers of the re-emergence of an Islamic caliphate. Yet it is almost undisputed that in its heyday, the caliphate was at the forefront of scientific advancement and community cohesion (contradicting the myth that religious-based systems oppress other faiths).

Thirdly, many are attracted to religion in the West because of what they see as an emerging social malaise and spiritual void. For them, modern society should aspire to be about more than GDP and rabid individualism. This has motivated many to articulate fresh ideas about work-life balance, racism, poverty alleviation and a more just foreign policy.

Lastly, people are rejecting the stale choice of religious fundamentalism versus intolerance. The debate is now centred on competing visions as to how best to achieve the universal ends of prosperity, security and education. But some liberal fundamentalists prefer to use secular society as an overarching ideology to marginalise any kind of religious influence.

Perhaps now is the time for everyone to formulate new paradigms, rather than to fight old culture wars.

For real answers and a real alternative, people need to look at what Islam offers. (HTB)
See also:

Democracy in Crisis

The Global Financial Crisis


Tuesday, 2 November 2010

Manufacturing a ‘terror’ case against Yemen

The latest ‘bomb plot’ will inevitably be used to justify greater Western intervention around the world – most notably in Yemen, but also on-going intervention in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will also be used to justify powers held by governments and budgets by security agencies in the West.

We may never truly know the origin of this plot: whether it is some act of disgruntled resistance against murderous policies by the US and its allies who use the rest of the world as their chessboard; or whether it is a fabricated episode to justify more hostile policies.
The global western media has given immense coverage to the discovery of these two bombs on airlines in the UK and Dubai reporting that they allegedly originated in Yemen.
The enormous speculation about the origins of these explosives contrasts with the lack of critical questioning of the security services and governments who brief the media. Instead, it is all reported as fact.
Yet it is well known that these same government’s and their security services – CIA, MI5 and others – manufactured a false case against Iraq; and people in Iraq and Pakistan believe that these western governments have been complicit in terror attacks on civilians with the intention of sowing discord, raising threat levels and furthering their own agendas.
What is clear are two matters:
1. The public in the West are becoming increasingly wary of the perennial terror threat. This was most evident when the British Airways chairman Martin Broughton criticised the United States for ratcheting up security regulations with “redundant” checks.
2. Yemen is a crucial and strategic region historically strongly under British influence, with the United States trying to gain more influence in recent years. It borders Saudia Arabia, a notoriously vulnerable region with the world’s largest oil supply. It also borders the Gulf of Aden through which 20,000 ships, 7% of the world’s oil and millions of tons of grains, commodities and other goods pass annually.
People should critically examine what is happening, rather than blindly accepting what they are told by media, governments and security agencies. The perpetual feeling of threat is the oldest way for autocratic governments to maintain their powers. Democratic ones are just better at the deception. (HTB)

Roots of terrorism: invasion, occupation and foreign domination

Professor Robert Pape of the University of Chicago’s Project for Security and Terrorism recently published extensive research which analysed each of the 2,200 cases of suicide bombing that have occurred since 1980. The research builds on Professor Pape’s earlier work published in his 2005 book ‘Dying to Win’.

This new study found:
  • Suicide bombings have risen dramatically following the US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, from some 300 from 1980 to 2003, to 1,800 from 2004 to 2009.
  • Over 90 percent of suicide attacks worldwide are now anti-American.
  • Contrary to the belief that these attacks are undertaken by ‘foreigners’, the vast majority are by those local to the region: for example 90% of suicide attacks in Afghanistan have been undertaken by Afghans.
  • Suicide attacks are more likely when the ‘social distance’ between occupied and occupier is more pronounced and that religion is not the only factor in determining this as he points to secular groups who have employed suicide bombings such as the LTTE (Hindu) against the Sinhalese (Buddhists)
  • Suicide attacks have been a measure of last resort, and employed when all other non-suicide measures have failed
Professor Pape argues that research undertaken by his group demonstrates that the underlying narrative of the War on Terror, that these suicide attacks and 9/11 were a function of Muslim hatred of western values and that democracy was subsequently needed to bring stability to the Muslim world, was fundamentally flawed. His publication suggests: ‘It’s the occupation, stupid’.
The research points to conclusions that have long been claimed by people across the Muslim world, that events since, and indeed prior to, 9/11 cannot be separated from the context in which they occur. Foreign policy hawks have long-suggested that Islamic theology is inherently prone to violence and that the Muslim world’s displeasure with the ascendancy of the west has resulted in the desire to launch attacks on western capitals to return the balance of power and civilisation in their favour, to-redress the anchor moment in the 15th century when the Spanish inquisition started the reversal of Muslim fortunes.
Professor Pape’s debases these views empirically. The study shows there is a correlation between occupation and retaliatory violence in occupied territories as the indigenous populations attempt to remove foreign control: 95% of all 2,200 suicide bombings analysed were in response to foreign occupation.
Proponents of the now discredited War on Terror have failed to deconstruct the mix of theological, anti-occupation and anti-American rhetoric in identifying the real factors driving acts of violence and hostility.
What is of greater concern is that the War on Terror has increasingly become a War on Extremism in recent years. This new front however perpetuates a similar narrative, that Islam is the cause of Muslim resentment and ignores the fact that the west deploys troops that now permeate the majority of the Muslim world, support some of the most archaic and dictatorial regimes and have long supported policies which have been to the detriment to indigenous populations. This is further compounded by a confused mix of labels which suggest orthodox Islamic beliefs, held by the majority of Muslims, are problematic and must be either confronted or reformed.
As Pape’s study suggests, context is king. Without direct military and political occupation, a different relationship may have materialised between the Muslim world and the west, not one that now threatens the security and prosperity of both peoples.(HTB)

Monday, 25 October 2010

I am a Muslim; I am a victim of terrorism

Those who try to make the word 'terrorism' a synonym of the word 'Islam' try to brainwash us these days by the phrase "I am a Muslim, I am against terrorism", which many Arabic-language TV stations have started to use during the month of Ramadan, when TV viewing becomes a dominant pastime in the Arab world. This phrase is coined neither by Muslims nor by the real enemies of terrorism; and the objective of funding the intensive broadcasting of this phrase in Ramadan is not exonerating Islam of an accusation levelled against it by Zionists and their allies among the neo-cons in the wake of 9/11. This is clear from the political connotations of this phrase which suggest that "although I am a Muslim; yet, I am against terrorism". In this sense, our enemies accuse a billion Muslims of terrorism; while Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and others are exonerated of any link with terrorism.

One is entitled to ask: how many terrorist crimes the Zionists commit against Muslim and Christian Arabs in and outside Palestine, including murder, assassination, home demolition, setting mosques on fire, etc. Yet, have we ever seen a phrase saying "I am a Jew, I am against terrorism"?

How many war and terrorist crimes have the invading American and Western allied troops have committed in Iraq and Afghanistan, including genocide, torture and assassination which claimed the lives of over a million Iraqis and hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Pakistanis. The victims are always Muslims: civilians, women and children. Yet, have we ever seen a phrase such as "I am a Christian, I am against terrorism?"
The fact is that the intensive racist campaign since 9/11, 2001 has targeted Islam and Muslims. If measuring events by their outcomes is the right way, it can be said that 9/11 aimed in principle at finding an excuse for waging a war on Muslims and covering up all the crimes committed by the Zionist and racist Israeli troops in Palestine, like Judaization, expulsion, killing, imprisoning, torture and displacement.
One cannot but ask, are not 1.3 billion Muslims capable of facing this racist campaign through well-informed and open-minded research institutes capable of addressing the West in its own language and style and conveying to it the sublime message of Islam? If this message is spread and soundly implemented, it will be a genuine savior to humanity of all sins and tragedies which destroy spiritual peace and social cohesion.

Let us remember how the word 'terrorism' was coined and how it was used by of the Apartheid regime to brand Nelson Mandela as terrorist; and how all resistance movements have been branded as terrorist by Fascists and Nazis until they triumphed and achieved freedom and independence for their nations.

What we read today on Wikileaks shows that the United States exports terrorism to the world: "Wikileakes releases CIA paper on U.S. as 'exporter of terrorism'" (Washington Post, 25 August 2010). Three papers described as 'classified' by the CIA's red cell name the Pakistani David Headley and others to show that the U.S. government has become an exporter of terrorism. Headley acknowledged his responsibility for the Bombay attack which claimed the lives of 160 people. The paper adds that "Such exports are not new. In 1994, an American Jewish doctor, Baruch Goldstein, emigrated from New York to Israel, joined the extremist group Kach and killed 29 Palestinians praying at a mosque at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron".
It should be recalled that last month Wikileakes published 76,000 secret documents, part of American military files and field reports about the war in Afghanistan. The Pentagon asked for the documents to be withdrawn because they make the American troops and their Afghani agents liable to the charge of terrorism. This coincided with the scandal of Mohammed Zia Salehi, the chief of administration for the National Security Council about whom the New York Times published an article entitled "Key Karzai Aide in Corruption Inquiry Is Linked to C.I.A." (25 August 2010). Reports confirm that Salehi was released upon Karzi's intervention because he knows everything about corrupt deals inside the Karzi's administration. An American official stated that it was common practice to deal with corrupt people in Afghanistan. He adds: "If we decide as a country that we'll never deal with anyone in Afghanistan who might down the road — and certainly not at our behest — put his hand in the till, we can all come home right now," the American official said. "If you want intelligence in a war zone, you're not going to get it from Mother Teresa or Mary Poppins." (New York Times, 25 August 2010).
This is a clear acknowledgment of the absolute separation between morality and what American troops are doing in Afghanistan. In an article entitled "Making Afghanistan More Dangerous," Jason Thomas asserts that American troops use mercenaries they call 'security firms' in protecting "foreigners, civil-society organizations and aid," but also corruption money sent in cash in protected vehicles". (The Herald Tribune, 25 August 2010).
What do these people have to talk about Islam as a source of terrorism? And how could they accuse Muslims of terrorism, while thy themselves are major exporters of terrorism? Can those who use torture, assassination, corruption and wars as their declared method of occupying one Muslim country after another and killing millions of innocent Muslims accuse those who defend freedom, dignity and sovereignty of terrorism?
The phrase which should be promoted on Arabic-language TV channels should be "I am a Muslim, I am a victim of terrorism". As to our enemies, the stigma of terrorism, war, Judaization, settlement building, home demolishing, assassination and other crimes will haunt them throughout history, because they are the makers of terrorism regardless of their religion. (sabbahbiz)

Read more Articles of Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban from here (Click)
* Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban is Political and Media Advisor at the Syrian Presidency, and former Minister of Expatriates. She is also a writer and professor at Damascus University since 1985. She has been the spokesperson for Syria and was nominated for Nobel Peace Prize in 2005. She can be reached