You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan/South Asia
"Islamic scholars" split on legitimacy of Afghan election
2004-10-28
A day late and a dollar short.
The landmark October 9 presidential poll has thrown up strong divisions in the Islamic clergy, between those who view the election as consistent with religious law and those who attack the poll as anti-Islamic. Leading religious scholars in the Afghan capital have voiced support for the recent presidential election. In contrast, several mullahs in outlying villages condemned the poll, saying it was the work of Europeans and Americans. One has even urged supporters to wage war against the new government.

Much of the disagreement centres on the interpretation of Islamic law as to whether religious scholars alone have the right to choose a country's leader, or whether ordinary people have a right to participate. Mullahs in Afghanistan wield considerable influence. As the majority of the population is illiterate, the word of religious scholars, particularly in rural areas, is greatly feared respected. One of those most vehemently opposed to the election is Mullah Azizurrahman, 45, a fundamentalist mullah who has a mosque just outside Kabul city. He said the government should be chosen by Islamic scholars and not by ordinary people. "Anyone who cast a ballot and took part in the election has committed a major sin," he told IWPR. Azizurrahman's view represents the extreme end of the spectrum. In his view, even the interim and transitional governments of Hamed Karzai are in breach of Islamic law. He gauges their credentials by asking what "hudud" — punishments sanctioned by Islamic law, such as flogging, amputation, stoning to death and burying alive - have been put into practice by the Karzai-led governments...
"Cuz if it don't got shari'a, it don't got nuttin'..."
Posted by:Anonymoose

#9  If it got shari'a, US must feel itchy. When US feels itchy US must interfere. When US interferes US must kill. Psychotic.
Posted by: Grumpy Uncle Sam   2004-10-29 3:42:25 AM  

#8  [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by: Grumpy Uncle Sam TROLL   2004-10-29 3:42:25 AM  

#7  Or "cannon fodder."
Posted by: Seafarious   2004-10-28 10:13:11 PM  

#6  Is everybody in Islam either a "scholar" or a "cleric"?
Posted by: tu3031   2004-10-28 10:11:27 PM  

#5  One has even urged supporters to wage war against the new government.

Now there is a genious if I've ever seen one. LMAO!
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2004-10-28 10:09:12 PM  

#4  Someone could take a drive to "just outside" Kabul and give this dork a lead injection. Problem solved.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2004-10-28 7:38:53 PM  

#3  

Healing Iraq:


"Sayyid Ahmed Al-Safi, a representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, reiterated during the Friday prayers sermon at Karbala the call of the Maji'iya for widespread participation and voting in the upcoming elections late January 2005. Al-Safi stressed that 'heavy participation in the voting procedures is a national and legal (religious) duty,' adding that those who refrain from voting would 'enter Jahannam (Hell)'.

Al-Safi strongly denied rumours appearing in the media last week that the Marji'iya or Sistani had prepared or endorsed any slate of candidates. This following attempts by several Islamic parties in the south (such as the Da'wa party, SCIRI, and Hizbollah) to mislead Shi'ite Iraqi voters that they are backed and supported by the Marji'iya, or that voting for candidates from these specific parties is an 'order' from the Sayyid (Sistani). Some have even presented forged statements with Sistani's seal on them to convince potential voters.

Meanwhile, the Association of Muslim Scholars continues its threats to boycott the elections especially if a military campaign is carried out against Fallujah or other 'Sunni' towns and areas. On the other hand, several Sunni clerics as well as the Islamic party have issued statements strongly encouraging Iraqi Sunnis to vote in order to guarantee representation in the government and not to fall into the trap of avoiding the elections.

Another Shi'ite cleric, Ayatollah Sheikh Muhammed Al-Ya'qubi, leader of the Islamic Fadhila party and a disciple of the late Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammed Sadiq Al-Sadr, also stressed in a recent statement that voting is an imperative duty for all Muslims the same as prayers or fasting.

As far as public Iraqi opinion. I sense that Iraqis in the north and south are the most eager to vote, unlike Iraqis in Baghdad and the surrounding areas. This is probably due to security concerns as voting centers in Baghdad are easier to come under attack. The same applies to the areas north, west and east of Baghdad. One example is the continous suicide bombings of IP and National Guard recruiting centers, no security measures have been successful in preventing these attacks. Recruits still stand in long queues on the street just like sitting ducks waiting to be bombed. If the voting procedures would be in a similar fashion then I doubt anyone would be willing to vote, and nobody can possibly blame them for that."

Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-10-28 3:40:51 PM  

#2  Hi ya Lucky! How's every little damn thing? :)
Posted by: Shipman   2004-10-28 3:32:59 PM  

#1  Is there nothing they don't know.
Posted by: Lucky   2004-10-28 3:06:34 PM  

00:00