From: algebra@leland.Stanford.EDU (Leong Weng Ng)
Subject: Re: Cold war against ISLAM (Part-1)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 00:14:23 GMT

In article <KYTAN.92Jul20105455@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com> kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan) writes:
>In article <1992Jul16.170547.1290@sco.COM> waseems@sco.COM (Waseem Siddiqi) writes:
>
>>I see your point. But have you considered why there are people doing it?
>>Every human being wants to live and have a good life, irrespective of their
>>religion. Where did you get the idea that Islamic 'fundamentalists' are
>>comitting suicide attacks and violence in droves? No doubt from the western
>>media. The only suicide attacks that I can recall occurred in lebanon or
>>Palestine. And I can understand why they carry them out. If you just stop
>>for a moment and think how desperate their conditions are and how long
>>the tyranny has been going on for, then people will adopt desperate measures.
>

>How has a suicide attack helped anything?  The US forces in Lebanon were not
>there to support one side or the other.  They were just there as peacekeeping
>troops and were not there before, so they cannot be accused of having been in an
>"occupational" role.
>>No such suicide attacks have occured in other parts of the world where
>>'fundamentalist' are active such as Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Sudan
>>Afghanistan and Pakistan.
>
>Perhaps not all of the above countries have experienced suicide attacks but
>I think you forget the Egyptian suicide attack on Sadat and the recent suicide
>attack on the Algerian head of state.  The fact that a few of the Sadat
>attackers lived to be tried does not make it any less a suicide attack.  In
>both cases, the attackers were Muslim fanatics.  Christianity, if I remember
>correctly, takes a dim view of suicide for whatever reason, unlike Islam.
                                ^^^^^^^
	Is that a play on semantics? I believe the "suicide" in
"suicide attack" is different from "suicide" as used in your last
line. Your last line sure looks like a jibe at Islam. In any case,
I think a religion should not be judged based on the actions of
its members. Just because a few fanatics go about killing people
in the name of religion does not necessarily mean that the 
religion condones violence, or "suicide" as you put it. I
believe that most religions preach a message of love toward
your fellow man, but man has chosen to misinterpret religion
and turn it into a base ornament for his own misuse. But
even that and more should not be construed as a fault of
the religion. If Islam has its fanatics, then Christianity
also had its Crusaders. No religion is free from bad
reputation.

>>The reason why Islamic 'fundamentalist' are viewed as fanatics as you put
>>it, is because that's how the Western media portrays them. Look at what's
>>happening in the ex-USSR. While the Christian missionaries activities
>>there have been portrayed in a favourable light with articles on
>>how the Russians are discovering their roots, spirituality, culture etc wrt
>>Christianty, similar activities in the Central Asian Republics are 
>>viewed with alarm and described as dangerous, threatening etc . 
>>Aren't the people of Central Asia human too ? Don't they have the same 
>>feelings and needs as their ex-compatriots in Russia ?
>
>I'm no supporter of religious kooks (pardon my language), be they Christians or
>otherwise.  However, the Christian "missionaries" don't kill people (with the
>possible exception of Jim Jones but then, his sect wasn't really "Christian.")
>I'm NOT saying that the Muslims in the Central Asian Republics do so but I
>don't think there is as much alarm about Muslim activities in the Central Asian
>Republics as there is about Muslim activities in Africa.  The Muslims in the
>ex-USSR are NOT perceived as fanatics.  
>
>>Closer to home, let's compare religious activities in Phillipines and
>>Malaysia. The increase in Islamic awareness among Muslims in Malaysia
>>is viewed with alarm in the West as is by a lot of SCA posters.
>>During the recent election campaign in the Phillipines, I began to realise
>>that Filipinos are pretty religious. I could see it in the activities
>>and statements made by the candidates to woo the common masses. I of course,
>>don't have any problem with that. But this activities is not viewed as
>>alarming at all by the same people raising a hoopla over corresponding 
>>activities in Malaysia.
>
>>What gives here?
>
>You must remember that the next in line, in terms of fanatacism, are people like
>the Moonies.  And they proclaim themselves to be Christians.  So, it's not
>Muslims that the world media are against.  Just kooks.  Especially ones
>dangerous to others' health.
>
>
>
>--
>===============================================================================
>Kok-Yong Tan, 			  	| My words are my own: 
>Fixed Income Analytics Group, 	  	| My bosses know naught.
>Merrill Lynch,			  	| Wherever they're sown,
>World Financial Center, North Tower, 	| Just I should be sought.
>New York, NY 10281-1315.	  	|		- K. Y. Tan, 5 Feb 1992
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>InterNet: kytan@fia.dmg.ml.com (Merrill Lynch)
>	  75046.256@compuserve.com (CompuServe)
>===============================================================================
Weng Leong
Stanford U.