May seem a bit sectarian, and even hypocritical of me since I generally avoid such stuff, but...
In chechnya, there were the "sufi Muslims" fighting, then there was an influx of salafis...
In pakistan the "taliban" are also influenced by Salafis (and fighting the locals to "prevent shirk")
In Somalia, the Shabab are fighting the government and also imposing the salafi ways onto a "sufi population".
I do wonder if this is somehow all being funded by Saudistan.
Video on the imposition of Shariah in Somalia which made me ask the question:
">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8M8KxXG7UFg]
because they're bored?
Either that or elements from there think the rest of the Muslim work is mushrik and that they need to cure that...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
It could just be that all those different groups simply want to live by Islam because they are sick of what they have lived through in their countries.........??
And it could be completely unrelated to each other other than the mere coincidence (not the word I'm looking for...) that they as Muslims, want Islam?
"They want Islam" does not mean that they want what is being imposed on them in the name of Islam.
(Wanting "Islam" and wanting "Saudi Islam" are two different things.)
If it was "mere coincidence", the rules of Islam would be the ones that are as considered by the religious people of the place and not what is suggested by a foreign element.
In the case of Somalia, the locals wanted Islam and they set up the UIC. Then foreigners got involved, fought the UIC, drove them from power... but eventually got worn out and called for peace with the UIC, even handing the presidency of the country to the UIC.
Then a faction broke away to implement its version of Islam and is now fighting the government and the UIC to implement its own version.
Even is Pakistan - the people wanted Islam. Yet when they saw what the Taliban were offering, they saw something alien and the government currently has some support of the people.
Same thing happened in Chechnya and may have led to breaking the back of the independence movement/resistance - they through their actions may have even destroyed the local jihad movement!
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I dont understand how you have linked "Saudi Islam" to Pakistan's Taliban, to Somalia's UIC and to Chechnya...Why are you not factoring in the other 'foreigners'? You know the non-muslim, democracy-spreading ones? What about their role?
What is "Saudi Islam" because if you were to ask the people of Pakistan when they say they want Islam, they actually want it in the wholistic way, they want the Khilafah to rid them of their corrupt leaders. They feel that although Pakistan was established on the Shahadah its not succeeded in ever upholding it as the leaders today have turned it into Unpaak-istan. Saudi's "Islam" hardly promotes a Khilafah.
As for Somalia they want the re-establishment of UIC which when it was around did actually bring some peace to the country, so if the Shabab want this to return, again how is this linked to Saudi Islam?
I find it really funny when we're told all terrorism/extremism comes from Saudi in the form of books, materials or people, just because it's associated with Shariah- note I said it is associated with Shariah, because it doesn't have Shariah in the fullest sense, just the hudood (punishments- which on its own does not work), and so now its something to fear cuz it might take over the world!
Who is imposing what on who? As far as I know it is the average people who are fighting (Taliban, Shabab, the Mujahideen of Pakistan) are/were all YOUTHS so how are they imposing it on others when they are living through the same trials and see Islam as the way out? Yeh the way they go about implementing it may have its pro's and con's but if they were 'imposing' it as such, why do they have support?
Just to be clear, I am not saying that people do not want Islam.
What I am asking is if elements from Saudi are then hijacking those movements for their own purposes (and in effect hurting the movements and the people that initially supported them).
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
The shabab are fighting the UIC.
It's "saudi islam" as they are implementing something that is like what some people from saudi want/like and not what the local people asking for Islam are wanting.
In all three locations mentioned, the majority of people are considered to be sufis, yet the people doing the fighting are trying to implement something that considered sufism shirk. That cannot be from within as if it was, the people would implement what they believed was right.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I think its with any movement there will always be outsiders trying to influence or dilute it, especially the Call for Islam, and these 'foreigners' don't necessarily have to be from other Muslim lands... the hidden enemies of Islam have in the past proved and will prove to be more influential and destructive.
A lot of the youths were brainwashed. A lot of the elders who disagreed were killed and anyone who disagrees is murdered too, through shootings or even suicide bombings in mosques.
The way they go about implementing it has no pros - you cannot implement virtue through vice.
If your means are evil, your end is also evil. (well, their, not your. just to clarify.)
It's not an issue of foreigners (as well, people migrate from place to place and that should not be stopped), but how in all three places the movements managed to get a flavour that is separate from what the majority of the people living there believe. Question is if that is deliberate or on purpose.
its like how Iran wanted to export Shia Islam all over the world and was open about it. Are people from Saudi doing the same but not as open?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Full disclosure:
As such, a major problem arises with such systems that is not other wise is one of asking questions - if you ask a question to a scholar, question his judgement in a religious matter, will the scholar get angry and assume you are not questioning his interpretation of the qur'an, but the actual qur'an itself (and condemning you to death?)
As an example, in the linked video, the Shabaab are forcing women to cover their faces - something which according to that same video has is not a local practice.
Yes, there are some muslims who think covering the face is a must, but the vast majority don't. In such a case the authorities that be should be enforcing the lowest common denominator which is allowing women to not cover their faces. Yet they do the opposite.
Also, Hudood is not supposed to be the first step of implementation of a Shariah compliant system - it is supposed to be the last, yet each and every group does it the wrong way around.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.