[FourEsters]

Its a good book - have read it - but it doesn't confirm your thesis about Taliban being ''Islamic saviours'' - they are still little better than mindless beasts. I agree with the book by the way - the mindless descriptions about AQ and the Taliban in the Western media of them being ''against freedom'' - and the whole ''Why do they hate us'' rhetoric of the likes of Bernard Lewis was absolute tosh. A good book to read is ''Why do People Hate America?''.

The book you cite is great but it does not in any way shape or form confirm your thesis. See this review of the book: http://www.thefridaytimes.com/beta/t...0110617&page=2

I don't see how you can cite this book in support of your thesis - it perhaps indicates to me you have not read the book closely enough.

Let me put it to you like this - most of the Ummah agree US foreign policy is bad - from Ikhwanis, to liberals, to reformists and to Deobandis - there is actually a rare consensus amongst the Muslims that US foreign policy is harmful, bad and counterproductive. What there is disagreement on is how to counter this? I take the view of the Ikhwan, AKP and other moderate movements, ulema, thinkers and intellectuals who say we must make Muslim countries strong, by working hard. The Taliban and AQ believe in a dangerous and foolish strategy - their methods are simply barbaric because in the process they are destroying Islam.


And any Ulema that you cite in support of the Taliban and AQ please name them so I can make sure never to listen to them again and to advise others not to listen to them. These so-called ''Ulema'' should be ashamed of themselves are most likely to be Mullahs who gain from the suffering from others - I have absolutely no respect for them and alhamdullilah most of the Ummah does not either. There should be a black-list of Ulema that support the Taliban - please pass me on the names so I can advise those around me not to listen to such rubbish.

What is wrong with you? Weren't you all for supporting "minority opinions"? Now you have the audacity to call the ulama who support the Taliban as mere "mullahs" and "so-called" ulama?

No wonder the Salafis are so thickheaded when it comes to traditionalists because people like you claim to be representative of traditionalism.

The Taliban have done more than any of the armchair laypeople and even scholars can even hope to achieve. They are defending their land and country and dying in the path of Allah , while we sit back and attack them.

Then, you think comparing Afghanistan to the Arab states is a valid comparison when an Afghan will laugh at you. Arabs have the luxury and comfort of having an infrastructure and an economy boosted by oil, tourism, manufacturing, etc. Afghanistan has an economy supported by opium and foreign aid. The Arabs have a functioning civil system. Afghanistan has warlords, bribery, and corruption. The Arabs had 'revolutions' against their governments that ended up ousting the incumbents. The Afghans in general did not deem it necessary to have a revolution - despite the fact that the actual number of Taliban was extremely low.

The Taliban themselves are composed of scholars and ulama who studied in traditional madaris - people who dedicated their lives to learning and implementing the deen. On the other hand, we listen to a few talks and avoid alcohol and all of a sudden, we're better than them?

Even the issue of suicide bombing to target civilians is not something accepted by the Taliban. The Taliban are also not the same as AQ, since AQ is composed mostly of Salafis, whereas the Taliban are Sufi Hanafis. Their goals are also different, with the Taliban only seeking to reclaim their country, whereas AQ wants a global jihad. Ulama who know the situation in Afghanistan support the Taliban. They may not support them 100% in everything, but they support them nonetheless. In fact, during their reign before 9/11, an 'alim from South Africa visited them and said that they had become too compromising and lenient!