De exemplu:

1. “Contrary to the Islamists who wanted to build an Islamic State in a given country and thus became embroiled in nationalism, neo-fundamentalists are championing the transnational ummah, they address the universalist yearning of Muslims who cannot identify with any specific place or nation.”

Islamismul prin devinitie este antinational si incepand cu Fratia Musulmana (1928) reprezinta curentul ideologic care doreste restabilirea unui stat islamic. Colaborarea dintre nationalistii arabi/iranieni/pakistanezi si islamisti a aparut atunci cand au avut dusman comun – colonizarea, monarhiile-marioneta sau ocupatia comunista (Afganistan). In rest – islamul si nationalismul au fost mereu in conflict – vezi Egiptul imediat dupa revolutia ofiterilor liberi, conflictul dintre FATH si Hamas in Palestina, dintre Fratia Musulmana si Assad in Siria etc etc etc.

2. “So radical Islam now is not a spillover of the Middle Eastern conflict into the West. It is a consequence of the mixing of the West and the East.”

Probabil ca dorea sa spuna “It is a consequence of the mixing of the West IN the East.” pentru ca societatile occidentale nu cunosc o influenta culturala islamica comparabila cu cea pe care a primit-o orientul islamic din partea vestului – institutiile politice, dreptul, frontierele, sistemul de invatamant, modernizarea tehnologica, doctrinele politice (comunismul, socialismul, nationalismul) si curentele artistice etc.

Nu prea cred ca Jim sau Fritz inteleg diferenta dintre Hanbalism si Asharism si nici nu cunosc tezele lui Sayyd Qutb sau diferenta dintre hadith si aiat. In timp ce Abdul pe langa cultura sa mai este si indopat cu Marxism, Liberalism, Drept Civil, divizarea puterilor in stat in universitati si cu Jerri Seinfield si Britney Spears din televizor si radio.

Asa ca mai lasati-ma cu mixing West with East.

3. “Middle Eastern societies are Westernized. They are urban, modern societies.” Modernizarea tehnologica si aculturatia sunt lucruri diferite. Urbanizarea si modernizarea nu sunt monopolul occidentului. Nici nu aduc automat apropierea culturala cum creadeau modernistii ca Walt Rostow.

Intr-adevar exista o doza de occidentalizare a societatilor din orientul apropiat, dar ea este in primul rand institutionala si aici se ascunde cauza conflictelor din aceste societati.

4. “In this Imaginary Islam, there is no endeavor to create a real Islamic state. There is no blue-print for forging a new society.”

Asta deja e ignoranta. There is si chiar there are mai multe.

5. “…there is no such thing as a religious state. You can have states using religion. You can have states using religious legitimacy, but you cannot have a state solely based on religion, whatever the religion.”

“Religious state” in definitia lui este “a state solely based on religion”. E o definitie care intr-adevar ucide orice posibilitate de implementare in practica, DAR cine are nevoie de asa definitie daca nu e utila la nimic. Prin religious state eu inteleg un stat in care reglementarile religioase sunt superioare celor laice. Iranul ar fi un exemplu cel mai apropiat.

6. “These organizations in the movement, like Al-Qaeda and Hizb ut-Tahrir, are not linked to or used by any Middle Eastern state, intelligence service or radical movement, as had been the case in the 1980s.”

Oau. Omul asta stie toate secretele :)

7. “Their (Qaeda, Hizbut Tahrir) background has nothing to do with Middle Eastern conflicts or traditional religious education.”

Eu stiu ca in postmodernism nu exista falsuri, ca orice opinie poate fi adevarata “intr-un sens”, dar afirmatia asta chiar e o provocare…

8. “Twenty years ago such individuals would have joined radical leftist movements, which have now disappeared.”

Twenty years ago these individuals were fighting with Soviet ocupation in Afghanistan. Paralela cu gauchismul elitelor europene e o aluzie foarte frumoasa… Poezie.

9. “Now only two Western movements of radical protest claim to be “internationalist”: the anti-globalization movement and the radical Islamists.”

Ooops. Am uitat democratia si liberalismul. Nu-i grav…:)

10. “There is a liberal Islam and a moderate conservative brand of Islam which is much more aligned with conservative Christians and Jews on social issues (abortion, homosexuality, prayers at school etc.).”

Unfortunately, civilizatia occidentala nu se conduce de valorile crestinilor si evreilor conservativi. Cu alte cuvinte aceasta consolare fortata nu are cum sa consoleze un cititor occidental atent.

11. “neo-fundamentalism is not taking root in Bosnia nor in Kosovo”

Eu asa si nu am inteles ce are in vedere el prin neo-fundamentalisti. Trebuie sa fie un termen foarte elaborat.

Hai ca ma apuc de citit si studiul despre Afganistan, cu toate ca nu e domeniul meu.

Numai fotografia cu turbane cat face :)