🚀 go-pugleaf

Steve, first things first, ggod research. BUT...
Although Saudi government is based upon Muslim teachings, notice they
are carefully worded to say 'are governed by'.  It is not what is
accepted in Islam as an Islamic Law state.  Islamic Law states are run
by the clergy.  Iran and Afghanistan are two such.  I believe the only
two at this time.

This is why fundamentalists in Egypt and Saudi actually are trying to
overthrow those.  Sadat was assassinated and several attempts on
Mubarak have been by Egyptian Jihad and other fundamentalists who wish
to make it an Islamic Law state.

Basing ones laws simply on the tenets of the Koran does not qualify
according to the clerics.

United States is based upon English Common Law, but is actually quite
removed from it now. In fact it is progressively approaching the
French (which is roman based) in becoming codified.  Of the states
Louisiana actually is a codified based state, the only one so
structured,  But that is a digression and I apologize.

The point once again is to clearly understand the disctinctions within
the Islamic world of not only the makeup of governing bodies, but also
the schisms within the faith itself.  

For instancce few realize that the Egyptian Jihad is a fundamentalist
Sunni faction, whereas the Islamic Jihad is, I believe, a Shiite based
one.  bin Ladens followers appear to be all Sunni fundamentalists,
with little or no support from the Shiite factions.  This partially
explains the reason that Iran so quickly closed its border to
Afghanistan and quite loudly and almost immediately condemned the act
and those who did it.

Interestingly from the perspective of the WTC attack is that true
terrorist attacks (those targeting soley civilians) break down to the
Shiites primarily attacking Israeli's and Jews and the Sunni radicals
attacking other Arab leaders and the western nations.  

That is probably more due to the fact that the Shiite is maybe more
pragmatic and realizes that you take on one foe at a time, as opposed
to the insanity of the Sunnis' in thinking they can destroy all of
western civilization and replace it with an Islamic Law planet.

No fundamentalist of any religion should be trusted to be loyal to
anything but the leaders of his particular faction.  Which leads right
back to what began this thread.  The need for peaceful mainstream
Muslims to somehow make themselves identifiable to all the rest of us
so we do not have the across the board attacks on them.  But again the
onus is upon them, for how the hell is any non-Muslim going to know?

Monte








On 22 Sep 2001 20:11:02 GMT, srt@nospam.unt.edu wrote:

>Monte <montep@about.com> wrote:
>> On 21 Sep 2001 21:37:12 GMT, srt@nospam.unt.edu wrote:
>
>>>> Now the question to you is this. Give a specific instance of when an
>>>> Islamic cleric or representative of an Islamic law nation ever
>>>> condemned and or prosecuted another Muslim for terrorists acts against
>>>> a non-Muslim person or nation.
>
>  ....
>
>>>Here's a new example for you:  A group of Saudis carried out a
>>>terrorist bombing that killed 4 Americans and an Indian.  The Saudis
>>>arrested them, convicted them, and beheaded them.  Is that
>>>"prosecution" enough for you?
>
>> Okay, but you did not answer the question as asked.  Most everyone is
>> aware that some terrorists have been prosecuted in some Muslim
>> nations.  But again, you did not READ.  The question was SPECIFIC in
>> asking for examples of Muslim clerics or ISLAMIC LAW nations.  Damn it
>> you merely cloud up evvery damn issue you try and address all because
>> you refuse or are incapable of reading the goddam post.  Read or
>> simply shut up.  
>
>I answered once, but then went out and found something so definitive
>that even you couldn't deny it.  This is from the Web site of the
>Royal Saudi Embassy, talking about the foundations of the Saudi
>Arabian government:
>
>    The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a monarchy with a political system
>    rooted in Islam's cherished traditions and rich culture. Its rules
>    and regulations are governed by the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah
>    (teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad) which call for
>    peace, justice, equality, consultation and respect for the rights
>    of the individual.
>
>    Since the beginning of the first Saudi state in the 18th century
>    through the founding of the modern Kingdom of Saudi Arabia by the
>    late King Abdulaziz bin Abdelrahman Al-Saud on September 23, 1932,
>    the Shari'ah (Islamic law) has been the pillar and source of Saudi
>    Arabia's basic system of government. It identifies the nature of
>    the state and its goals and responsibilities, as well as the
>    relationship between the government and its citizens.
>
>There you have it -- Islamic law is the "pillar and source of Saudi
>Arabia's basic system of government."  Is there any question in your
>mind now that Saudi Arabia is an Islamic nation that follows Islamic
>law?
>
>With that in mind, is there any way you can deny that what I gave
>before was precisely an example of "an Islamic law nation ... that
>condemned and or prosecuted another Muslim for terrorists acts against
>a non-Muslim person or nation" (those are precisely the words you used
>in your posting).   The fact is that there are MANY examples of
>this, and I only gave you a few.  Why do you persist in your denial?

Computers are basically very fast idiots.
http://www.hal-pc.org/~montep