There is only one story today.....everything else is just not relevant today. We have just finished watching and joining in with the 2 minutes silence held across France. The outpourings of grief and the general sense of outrage felt throughout France appears to mirrored across the world.......gatherings in cities across the globe in support of the French people is heartening, the extemporaneous manner of these rallies I think goes to show that this attack has had the effect of uniting people in opposition to terrorism. It is clear that whatever these misguided, psychotic individuals hoped to achieve, it has had, in fact, the opposite effect. Sure, people are scared but they are pushing those fears deep down in order to show solidarity with the French, with all the victims of terrorism, whenever and wherever they are.
But for me, now that the suspects have been named and tracked down (though, the latest accounts indicate they have not yet been apprehended) the big question is how French nationals can become so radicalised at home against their own countrymen. I find this to be almost the most shocking aspect of the whole sordid affair. The perpetrators of this cowardly act were obviously not the brightest stars in the night sky.....one of them left his ID card in the hijacked vehicle.......what a dimwit! ..........but even so how can this happen? How can no-one notice this radicalising process when it's going on in front of their eyes? If they had grown up in a War zone or conflict region it becomes easier to comprehend. But these guys are French, born and bred. This I just don't understand. Without doubt these young Muslims have been educated (if that is the right word) by others, either at a mosque or meetings somewhere and once these guys have been rounded up, then surely the attention should focus on finding the people ultimately responsible for this outrage. The puppet masters pulling the strings of the the weak minded and the ill equipped, twisting their minds with hate and lies. These are the true terrorists, whilst their mouthpieces might be considered to be victims as much as those they have killed, it is these master manipulators who are the crux of the problem. They are true cowards. Men who do not have the balls to open dialogue with those whom they see as enemies of their religion. Men who are too scared to face down their opponents in debate and instead would incite others to do their dirty work; to kill without conscience, to maim without guilt, but only against those who cannot fight back. They wouldn't dream of taking their grievances to someone who might actually react in kind, be it with words, cartoons or guns. No, this is not for these cowards. These religious zealots can only force others to do what they are to scared to do themselves.
During 400 years of Ottoman rule those within the Empire lived under Shari'a Law.
Sura 5:48 says that God sent them 'a law and an open way;' literally translated this is the Shari'a and it's religious interpretation is found in the 'laws' within the Koran that define this path. However, there is very little actual 'legal' material to be found in the Koran and what there is often concerns the rituals of prayer and worship with scant true legal advice or guidance, thereby leaving the legalities of day to day living open to wide interpretation. And it is this 'uncertainty' (for want of a better word) that leads to much of the variation in Muslim 'opinion' as to what exactly the word of God's Law is, a classic case to point being the extremist regime of the Taliban.
Under the Ottoman's however, religious tolerance was practised. Non-Muslims were able to govern themselves according to their own religious Laws or practises with regard to many aspects of everyday life including jurisdiction over all aspects of their own religion as well as matters such as marriage, divorce, education, dowry and alimony. In fact so tolerant were they that many Jews fled the land of their birth to find safe havens under the Ottomans. In cases of non-Religious dispute (i.e business, commercial or criminal) Tribunals decided the fates of the parties concerned. In the case of a non-Muslim against a Muslim the Tribunal was a mixed Tribunal, whereas uni-denominational disputes were settled by a judge from whatever religion the protagonists came from.
Not that life under the Ottoman's was all champagne and strawberries - far from it. This is purely to illustrate the possible range of interpretation that can be found within Muslim teachings. Not being Koranic scholars at the News Network, we must rely largely on the work of others for our own interpretations, but even given the limitations of our knowledge, simply reading the Koran can begin to open the doors of ignorance (?) to, not only, the beauty contained within but also the basic message therein. The following 2 verses (
Sura 5:49 & 50), for example, state that if a man turns away from Allah, then it is Allah's will to punish them (in the afterlife) for who 'can give better judgement than Allah?' And yet there are those who audaciously believe they can, taking matters in the material world into their own hands, nullifying the judgement of Allah and putting it into the hands of despots, misguided teachers and suicide bombers.
It is the duty of every 'good Muslim' to try to convert non-believers, just not at the point of a gun!
For those 'good French Muslims,' that thankfully make up the vast majority, this must be a fearful time. Last night shots were fired at Mosques and Muslim meeting centres all over France. Perhaps this is an understandable reaction, but it doesn't make it right, and I cannot help asking why Muslims everywhere don't handover those that seek to radicalise and corrupt the weak-willed and weak-minded into performing such dastardly acts as the shooting at Charlie Hebdo in the name of their God. Surely they can feel no affinity for these despicable characters and must see that they are Muslim in name only and bear no resemblance whatsoever to a 'good Muslim'.
