Teil 2
Geschrieben von MP42 am 23. Oktober 2003 16:00:51:
Als Antwort auf: Wer war Izetbegovic? und warum Preisen ihn die USA UND der Iran? geschrieben von MP42 am 23. Oktober 2003 15:58:53:
Emperor's Clothes Newsletter, *continued*
This is the second half of the email posting of "Who was Alija Izetbegovic? Moderate Democrat or Radical Islamist?"
If you missed the first half you can find it online at http://emperors-clothes.com/gilwhite/alija1.htm
Have you seen the Emperor's Clothes movie, 'JUDGMENT!'? It proves the Western media lied about Bosnia. Learn more about 'JUDGMENT!'
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/film/judgment.htm========================================================
(Second half of text)Bosnian leader Alija Izetbegovic is dead. As the US & Iran unite to praise him, we ask:
* Who was Alija Izetbegovic? Moderate Democrat or Radical Islamist? *
By Francisco Gil-White
[Posted on 10 March 2003]Comments by Jared Israel
[Added 21 October 2003]========================================================
In the first half of this text Jared Israel noted that both the State Department and the Iranian Foreign Ministry effusively praised Bosnian leader Alija Izetbegovic after his recent death. They called him a great unifier. Jared asked: What kind of unity did Izetbegovic want? To answer that, we turned to an article by Francisco Gil-White who examines Izetbegovic's stated beliefs. Was he a Muslim Fundamentalist (or Islamist)? What *is* a Muslim Fundamentalist? Gil-White quoted an unnamed Islamist philosopher, the better to understand the beliefs associated with Islamism.-- John Flaherty
Emperor's Clothes***
* 'Who Was Izetbegovic?' Continues Here *
Our Islamist philosopher continues:
"The exhaustive definition of the Islamic Order is: the unity of religion and law, education and force, ideals and interests, spiritual society and State…the Muslim does not exist at all as an independent individual…"
(You may be wondering which fundamentalist wrote these lines. I shall leave you guessing a bit longer.)
Consider the writer's use of phrases such as "the unity of education and force" and "the Muslim does not exist at all as an independent individual…" Perhaps these ideas are consistent with the traditional teachings of Islam; but the wording has a 20th century ring, as does this writer's reference to "Islam as a total way of life." Super-strict Islamic rules combined with an all-powerful Islamic state to enforce them suggests a modern phenomenon: 'totalitarianism.'
Having penned the chilling phrase, "the unity of education and force," our writer informs us that:
"The education of the population, and especially those media which have an effect on the public such as newspapers, radio, and television, must be entrusted to people whose good Islamic reputation, moral attitude, and intellectual ability are unimpeachable."
And who are these "people whose good Islamic reputation [and] moral attitude...are unimpeachable"? Answer: Islamic fundamentalists. So, all the means of communication and education must be in the hands of Islamists.
The last quoted paragraph - believe it or not - appears under the heading "Freedom of Thought." This is reminiscent of the society that George Orwell described in his famous novel, "1984." The difference is that in the Islamic Order, Big Brother is divinely sanctioned by Allah.
Thus, according to our writer, the very existence of non-Islamic systems is a violent affront.
"It is not in fact possible for there to be any peace or coexistence between ‘the Islamic Religion’ and non-Islamic social and political institutions…"
If there can be no peace or coexistence, then Islam is at war with all non-Islamic cultural and political institutions. And since 'institutions' do not exist apart from the people involved with them, this translates into a war against 'infidels', i.e. against non-Muslims - a jihad, or holy war.
In a section of his book entitled, "The Relations Of The Islamic Society With Other Societies," our author quotes the Qur'an. These quotes are presented as fully self-explanatory, and are neither preceded nor followed by qualification or comment:
"Oh Prophet, incite the believers to combat. If there can be found among you twenty who will endure, they will vanquish two hundred, if one hundred can be found, they will vanquish a thousand infidels, because they are people such as cannot understand."
Why must infidels be slaughtered? Because "they are people such as cannot understand." That is, they must be killed for their beliefs.
The author quotes the Qur'an again (and again without preface or comment):
[Excerpt starts here]"And combat on Allah’s path those who combat you, and don’t disobey. True, Allah does not love the disobedient! And kill them where you will find them; chase them from where they chased you: association is a graver sin than murder. But don’t fight them near the sacred Mosque unless they fight you there first. And if they fight you there, kill them then. Such is the retribution against infidels. Should they cease, Allah is, surely, forgiving and merciful."
[Excerpt ends here]
Consider the statement, "Association is a graver sin than murder."What constitutes 'murder'? If a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, is that murder? Not according to our Islamist philosopher. He has quoted a Quranic text that says the killing of an infidel *pleases* Allah. Indeed, in the text, Muslims are enjoined not to disobey Allah but to kill infidels "where you will find them." Since killing infidels is a sacred duty, it can't be murder.
A Muslim can only commit murder when he kills another Muslim.
Thus, "Association is a graver sin than murder" means that for a Muslim to have cordial relations with a non-Muslim is worse than killing a Muslim!
What is our philosopher telling Muslims? That as long as they live in a non-Islamic society, they must segregate themselves, avoid cordial relations with non-Muslims, and prepare for the day when they can seize state power and enforce the Islamic Order.
This, of course, will guarantee growing tension, leading to civil war...
Our philosopher explains:
"... the Islamic movement may, or rather should, begin by seizing power as soon as it possesses a good measure of moral and numerical strength, allowing it not only to overthrow the non-Islamic power, but also to establish the new Islamic power."
Doesn't leave much to the imagination, does it?
===========================
* Who is this Islamist philosopher? *
===========================
Who did you think wrote the above quoted lines? Osama bin Laden?
Or maybe Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the leader of Hamas?
Or perhaps you guessed it was some official in the Wahabbi fundamentalist state of Saudi Arabia?
These are all good guesses. But in fact the author of these lines is Alija Izetbegovic, leader of the Bosnian Muslim faction backed by the US and NATO during Bosnia’s civil war. And the book he wrote, and from which the quotes are taken, is titled "Islamic Declaration" (sometimes translated as "Islamic Manifesto").[14]
Izetbegovic had his book reissued before the crucial 1990 Bosnian elections. Thus, it was a political manifesto.
If you previously heard of this book, you probably didn't think there was anything scary about it, because the Western press worked hard to make it seem inoffensive. For example, this is what the Financial Times said:
[Quote From Financial Times Starts Here]In 1983, [Izetbegovic] was sentenced. . .for 14 years, commuted to five, for writing the 'Islamic Declaration', a political tract which sought to reconcile European democratic principles with (Sunni) Islamic teaching.[15]
[Quote From Financial Times Starts Here]
Did you see anything in the quotes from Izetbegovic's book that sounded even remotely like "European democratic principles"?Me neither.
Izetbegovic was not jailed for trying to reconcile "European democratic principles" with Muslim beliefs. Who would have objected to that? His book was meant to incite hatred and war against non-Muslims, and such was the determination of the court that judged him, as the BBC reported in 1983, when the sentence was passed down:
[Quote From The BBC Starts Here]...The court found the accused guilty because it held that their activity had been directed against brotherhood and unity, and the equality of our nations and nationalities with a view to destroying Bosnia-Hercegovina as a Socialist Republic and thus of undermining the social order of the SFRY.
For the criminal act of association for the purpose of enemy activity and counter-revolutionary threatening of the social order Alija (Mustafa) Izetbegovic was sentenced to 14 years'... [16]
[Quote From The BBC Ends Here]
To get the story right, all that the Financial Times had to do was consult the news reports from 1983, and look at Izetbegovic's book, as I have done. It is not believable that the Financial Times did not know about this. But they were interested in portraying him as a moderate, so they lied.=========================================
* But the New York Times said he was a moderate... *
=========================================
So it did.
"The Bosnian President, Mr. Izetbegovic, a Muslim Slav regarded by Western diplomats as a moderate…"[17]
Were Western diplomats really fooled into believing that Izetbegovic was a moderate? Or did they just pretend to believe? Here is what former US ambassador to Yugoslavia Warren Zimmerman said in an interview:[18]
[Quote From Zimmerman Interview starts here]"As for Mr. Izetbegovic, we heard that some call him a Muslim fundamentalist. We know what fundamentalism really does, as we were its victims in Iran. That is why we do not believe that Izetbegovic is some sort of fundamentalist. Actually, it seems like he is a moderate politician who is trying to do the best in a difficult situation."
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/nothing.htm[Quote From Zimmerman Interview ends here]
He "heard" that some call Mr. Izetbegovic a fundamentalist? Was it a vague rumor? Remember, Izetbegovic reissued his book in 1990. There is no question that the diplomatic corps was aware of the book's contents. Moreover, as seen above, Izetbegovic had been famously imprisoned in Yugoslavia for several years precisely because of his writings and other activities meant to incite Islamist violence. None of this was a secret; everybody in Yugoslavia knew it, and it is stated in the preface to the French translation of his book (the one I have been using here).And note Zimmermann's argument:
1) Fundamentalism is bad;
2) If Izetbegovic were a fundamentalist, that would be bad;
3) Therefore, Izetbegovic is not a fundamentalist.
This Alice-in-Wonderland logic translates:
1) The American public would rebel if the US government told them it was backing a fundamentalist (whose great hero, by the way, is the Ayatollah Khomeini);
2) It would be bad if the American public rebelled;
3) Therefore we will simply say that Izetbegovic is a moderate, and the truth be damned.
This became the position of the Western mainstream media, as I will demonstrate in a forthcoming piece on Bosnia. Almost without exception, the media - and, I am afraid, many academics - lied about the Izetbegovic regime, precisely as intended by US officials such as Warren Zimmermann.
-- Francisco Gil-White
Deputy Editor
Emperor's Clothes[Footnotes Follow The Appeal]
==============================
* Footnotes and Further Reading *===========================
[12] Islamic religious rules cover areas that are left to personal discretion in most societies. Consider, for example, these elaborate requirements for intimate personal hygiene. [Scroll down to the subhead, 'Rules of Toilet']
http://islam-pure.de/imam/fatwas/practical02.htm#Rules%20of%20Toilet%20[TakhalliWhile Shari'a may not currently be enforced with the ferocity of the Taliban or of Saudi Arabia in all Islamist states, keep in mind two things.
A) Wherever it is enforced, it may subject *all* citizens to the rule of men whose authority derives from Islam and who are trained in its ancient teachings. This leads to very sharp conflict, for example in places like Nigeria. To understand what motivates the non-Muslims who are resisting Shari'a in Nigeria, consider the case of Adama Yunusa. This 19- year-old had sued her fiancé, Isa Katagum, for impregnating her and refusing to marry her. So: we have Ms. Yanusa, 19 years old, that is, little more than a child, and Mr. Katagum, perhaps not much older. And we have a personal tragedy, small, but very real for these young people. What do they need? They need some intelligent help from their elders, so they can resolve the mess they have gotten themselves in. How did the Shari'a court deal with this little tragedy?
First, Ms. Yanusa could not, of course, meet the Shari'a requirement to produce four male witnesses who could confirm that she had had sex with Isa Katagum. So the Shari'a court threw out her charges. Second, since she was pregnant, and it was therefore apparent that she'd had sex with *someone,* the judges, in their exercise of 1300-year-old wisdom, found her guilty of the crime of fornication. She was sentenced to 100 strokes of the cane, to be administered publicly, after the baby was born. [Scroll down to, 'Sharia: Woman Gets 100 Strokes Over Pregnancy']
http://members.internettrash.com/rolfbmiller/engl-akt2.htmlB) Once Shari'a is in force, its severity can increase according to the rulings of religious authorities and/or the mood of the Islamic population. And in States governed by Shari'a, the *only* views that count are those of Muslim men.
[13] For a glimpse into the world of the Saudi "Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice," see
"Saudi police 'stopped' fire rescue," BBC, Friday, 15 March, 2002, 12:19 GMT at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm[14] Izetbegovic, Alija. 1999 [1980]. Le manifeste Islamique (original title: Islamska deklaracija). Beyrouth-Liban: Éditions Al-Bouraq. (pp. 75-76; 81-82; 105; 118; 132)
[15] Financial Times (London), March 7, 1992, Saturday, Pg. 6, 1108 words, Man in the News: Former rebel with a pacifist cause - Alija Izetbegovic, By Judy Dempsey
[16] Copyright 1983 The British Broadcasting Corporation, Bbc Summary Of World Broadcasts, August 22, 1983, Monday, Part 2 Eastern Europe; B. Internal Affairs; Yugoslavia; Ee/7418/B/1; , 372 Words, Muslim Nationalists Convicted, (A) Yuqoslav News Agency 1555 Gmt 12 Aug 83 Text Of Report Belgrade Home Service 1700 Gmt 20 Aug 83
[17] The New York Times, April 5, 1992, Sunday, Late Edition - Final, Section 1; Part 1; Page 3; Column 1; Foreign Desk, 681 words, Bosnia Calls Up Guard and Reserve, By Chuck Sudetic Special to The New York Times, Sarajevo, Yugoslavia, April 4
[18] "Nothing is Forever. . ." An Interview with Ambassador Warren Zimmermann ['Danas', 21 January 1992]
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/nothing.htm[19] "Painting Fascists as Victims, and Their Victims as Fascists: The mainstream media turned Bosnia upside down."
by Francisco Gil-White
http://emperors-clothes.com/gilwhite/alija2.htmEmperor's Clothes * www.tenc.net
- Moslems und 'Integration' RaginHari 25.10.2003 19:35 (0)