Abu Walid’s questions and my response

Below is a translation of the questions Abu Walid posed to me last year, and my (very overdue) response. I’d like to thank him for his patience and trust in me. Abu Walid answered all of my questions on the basis of my undertaking to also respond, but due to thesis issues I wasn’t  able to dedicate the time and attention these questions deserved until I took a break over the recent holiday season.

Abu Walid’s letter to me and his questions are in Italics. My responses are in plain type underneath them.

Free for citation.

Mrs Leah Farrall

After greetings..

A period of diversion has passed that allows me to again continue the dialogue with you. And it is in this dialogue that I find a good opportunity to further clarify more facts. And I think that this a common goal between us. Therefore I hope that the results in general offer benefits–the dimensions of which we cannot yet estimate.

Our current dialogue is the fruit of an initiative from you as an academic researcher with a background in the thorny subject of “terrorism” and “counter terrorism”.  Therefore I consider that the credit for any future positive results of this dialogue returns to you personally.

Since the result of this work may be the removal of many points of ambiguity and misunderstanding  in the  conflict/not between individuals/ but between peoples and nations and civilisations. Therefore the subject is very serious and greater than just (a security problem). It is a real conflict that has so far resulted in many tragedies and may in the future  result in something worse than this.

I hope that our dialogue will be a step towards a common understanding and human relations between the natural and fair people. That is a goal worth working for and sacrificing for. It also illustrates the importance of the brave step you have taken to open the door to such a dialogue and continuation of it.

Your brave work pleased many and I hope that it benefits millions of people. But, unfortunately, there are those who do not like it and will seek to stop it at all costs, because the situations of tension and ongoing conflict, and the destruction and bloodshed, are considered by some as a successful commercial investment, and for others  it is a preferable lifestyle  and a reason to exist.

It won’t be strange that we see reactions of surprise and shock a short time after the beginning of a dialogue between the (terrorist) and (counter-terrorist) in a step that amazed many, and I  cannot deny that it amazed me personally. I did not think in my mind that this would happen one day.

The new in this dialogue is that it is not taking place under any pressure, and is almost equal. We have seen many of the repressive governments (dialogue) secretly in the cells of darkness with their detainees held under the oppression and torture, then they publish the results of that (dialogue), which results in the traditional declaration of repentance and regret on the part of (terrorists) that they were deceived and then realised  thanks to expert instruction of torture.

Of course the whole picture is faked and serves the tyrannical goals. And shows excessive contempt for human rights and wastes their humanity and with it their abilities of understanding and thinking.

Now we talk publicly and from a far distance – away from the torture and oppression.  Therefore we are about to reach approximate parity/but not completely/ when one party in the dialogue is living under house arrest and security guardianship whose limit is not known and its reasons or the goal of it is also unknown.

Briefly, the positive results of the dialogue and their extent can not be estimated now–as well as the extent of resistance for its continuation, and  the obstruction of positives expected from it, which would also be of major dimensions that can not be estimated now.

“Mrs Farrall”…

I expect that our dialogue is just a step on the path of a thousand miles. And it is a brave and fair step and I hope that it continues and expands to include multiple levels and many people from both teams.

And you will always be favoured for the creative and bold beginning.

I offer you now a set of questions that comes to mind at this hour. I do not exclude that other questions emerge during the dialogue, which I do not know to what extent can continue.  It is natural to expect that we will come to varying degrees of agreement or disagreement. And each party will be free to answer in detail or briefly or to abstain from answering when necessary. Although it is not preferable in open dialogue like this.

For your questions, which have come to me, I do not see what is lost from answering all of them. But some of them alerted me to the necessity of writing detailed research around them. And others drew my attention to points that deserve more attention in research and the presentation of more than I had provided in the past. Thus, I find myself benefiting from a discussion with a specialised academic mind with a strong and independent personality.

I hope that everyone benefits with us from our exciting and interesting discussion. The most important is that all humanity benefits from the direction towards truth, justice and equality among human beings.

  1. Your treatment of the subject (terrorism) is especially concentrated on the security side. And the description of the issue and its  characterisation as a security problem. That is why it is necessary to describe the other party as a (criminal) or a (terrorist) according to your term. While the problem is at its basis and essence political, linked to your aggression against the other countries and their wealth and intervention in their internal affairs and your attempts to reformulate their ideals and culture and even their religion.  Followed in that by using extreme means of aggression and violence: cultural and political and even to using armies and the occupation of the homelands.  And if you face resistance, you describe the resisters as terrorists, and you deal with them as criminals who you must chase, arrest, and even torture (to obtain the security information from them).

You approved for yourselves/in the name of security/to commit all kinds of inhuman crimes and you did not give the others a right to speech or to express their opinion peacefully or to exercise the natural right to self-defence of the homeland, culture and beliefs.

The question here is:

A. Why are you concentrating on the subject (terrorism) and reducing all these other thorny serious issues in a single word that offends us and injures our feelings and makes us feel despair of you and to any opportunity for peacemaking between us??

I am not sure who you are referring to when you write “us”. Do you mean Muslims in general or are you talking about the ‘resisters’? My reason for asking is that I do not believe that all Muslims despair for an opportunity at peacemaking because I don’t believe that they all think there is a civilisational war going on—if this is what you were referring to when mentioning “us” and peacemaking.  For example; if this was the case, al Qaeda who claims to fight under these auspices, would have more than just a few hundred members from the 1.57 billion Muslims living in the world, who clearly do not follow its cause and abhor its violence.

You raise a good point about terrorism being considered solely through the prism of security. It is a political issue, as well as a criminal issue and a moral issue.

My personal opinion is that that acts of violence or threats of violence that comprise ‘terrorism’ are criminal and so in this way terrorism is a criminal issue.  I do not believe it is a security issue, because a security issue in the broadest sense implies an existential threat—a threat to a country’s (or the world’s) very existence. I do not believe that terrorism poses an existential security threat.  I think that treating acts of terror carried out by small illegitimate criminal groups solely as a security issue only legitimises and empowers these groups. I believe terrorists should be treated for what they are—criminals. Anything else only glorifies them.

While there is a need to prevent people from carrying out acts of violence, I do recognise that problems feeding, exacerbating or even driving these acts of violence need to be resolved and that this needs to be through political means wherever possible.  However, a political grievance should not carry over into premeditated acts of violence, and when it does it becomes criminal.

B. The Americans said that their abnormal security behaviour was according to decisions of President Bush and therefore it is legal. We will not therefore ask about (the law) or (the justice) in America and the West more generally, only I ask you for your personal opinion –and not official–on the following measures:

These are difficult questions for me to answer Abu Walid because I am only one person. And I must confess I do feel a bit like a lightning rod.  But since I asked for this dialogue, I accept that and I’m willing to answer all your questions. I do hope, however, we can open up your questions for others to respond—as you indicated in your letter.

1. The kidnapping of civilians from the streets and shipping them to Guantanamo as (enemy fighters) according to the hideous “Rumsfeld” term.

I do not support the taking of people off the streets unless it is a legitimate arrest by a law enforcement agency in the country in which the arrest is taking place.  I also do not support sending anyone to a territory hosting a detention facility that operates outside international law, such as Guantanamo Bay or Ghost Prisons.

2. Putting a price on the heads. And encouraging weak people from the public, and corrupt security personnel in the countries of the underdeveloped world with big financial rewards if they kidnap the innocents and sell them, like slaves were sold, to the American Security departments and consider them as (terrorist leaders)?

I do not support paying mercenaries or using vigilantes to capture people, especially if those people are not subject to arrest warrants.  The lack of accountability is unacceptable and means that innocent people get caught up. In terms of military practice on a battlefield, I do not know about those procedures and practices, but I firmly believe these should also be according to international rules and norms relating to prisoners of war.

3. Considering whoever was in Afghanistan in 2001 who was not an Afghan as a terrorist. And arrest them and torture them indefinitely, without any trial. Or release  of some after years without a trial or compensation or even an apology. Or deport them back to their original countries or to a third country with a compulsory recommendation of putting them in prisons or permanently under strict security supervision.

I do not support detention without cause and I absolutely do not support torture. Under no circumstances is it acceptable and its use is in violation of international law. I also do not support the detention of persons without trial for indefinite periods. If people are wanted in their home countries, I see no problem returning them – subject to the correct procedures and protocols regarding extradition in both countries being followed.

4. The reliance on the security reports as a final reference to the judge when considering the status of the cases of those accused of terrorism.

I do not support the use of intelligence as a final reference in legal proceedings such as those at Guantanamo. Intelligence is not evidence and it should never be used in lieu of evidence or as the primary material in the prosecution of a person accused of any crime. This is why I firmly believe that terrorism must be treated as a criminal issue and that terrorists should be tried under the rule of law through the criminal justice system.  This requires that they be tried on the basis of evidence and not intelligence or hearsay.

5. The approval of the principle (the secret evidence) that no one except the security departments know about. It forms the reasons for the issuing of final judgements that are harsh and illogical.

I believe that the judicial system is the best place for trials to be conducted and that an open and transparent process of justice needs to take place. There are some instances when revealing evidence publically can jeopardise other investigations or reveal sensitive information. However, when this is the case there are mechanisms in place within most legal systems to deal with this.

6. The non-disclosure of secret prisons (their locations—the persons detained in them– the charges directed against them and the evidence for that etc)

I do not agree with secret prisons operating outside of the rule of law and the control and function of government, and without the knowledge of the population. I do not believe this is acceptable under any circumstances. I also do not think it is acceptable for people to be ghost prisoners, where no one knows their location or the reasons for which they are being held.

7. The practice of torture as a routine procedure in cases of (terrorism) and making it an agreed constitution between all the security departments all over the world.

As I said earlier, I do not support the use of torture under any circumstances or by any party.  Torture is not an agreed upon constitution between all the security departments in the world. Not everyone tortures, and not everyone agrees with it. My country does not torture. Many countries abhor the practice. I would also like to point out here that even within America, when it did torture, many Americans stood up and argued against it and against Guantanamo and against using ghost prisons in other countries.

You may want to read the information at the following link http://www.campaigntobantorture.org/ and also here http://www.cvt.org/

So I do not agree with your statement that everyone tortures or that it constitutes a practice agreed upon the world over.

8. The lack of public trials, natural and fair, for the accused in cases of (terrorism). And the insistence on making everything a secret and away from the eyes of everyone. Using the pretext/everybody knows it is fabricated and a lie/they say (the reasons are for the preservation of secrets concerning national security).

I refer to my answer in question 5. I would also add that I do not accept the need for military commissions based on the issue of the preservation of intelligence.

I also think the issue also comes down to whether or not one sees terrorism as a criminal issue or an act of war, because the means of dealing with it changes. Personally, I do not support seeing terrorism as an act of war and using military commissions to prosecute terrorists. I think that it only confers legitimacy on the actions of terrorists. While terrorism is an often an extraordinarily violent form of crime, it is a crime nonetheless and so I believe that the criminal justice system is the appropriate means through which to deal with terrorists.

9. The West’s insistence on treating cases of so called (terrorism) as a security issue and not a political issue.

Terrorism is a political issue, a criminal issue and a moral issue. I understand your point that political grievance does play a large part in terrorism and reactions to it. The issue is when political grievance translates into premeditated violent activity that breaks the law.

10. To preserve the future of security in the West they assign security departments in the underdeveloped world to do their dirty work, such as severe torture, which often led to death. They send the detainees there (to complete the investigation with them). They consider that an international assignment, and punish the countries that abstain. And actually you can hardly find many governments who won’t do it because this work is considered work that will allow them to become closer to the west and receive rewards and all kinds of support and benefits. Can this be considered as a noticeable cultural development in Western countries? Or a means to spread its message of Western democracy in the world?

I do not agree with the rendition of detainees to third world countries to be interrogated and tortured. My country to my knowledge has never done this. I think that this practice is a blight on the name of democracy. So in terms of being a noticeable development I can’t say clearly enough that it is a shameful one, which should never be repeated.

To that end I’d like to point out that both candidates in the last US Presidential election were against torture.  One of the very first things Obama did when he came into office was to outlaw torture in an effort to return America to its cores values –which its use of torture completely undermined.

As I mentioned earlier, before he came to office a good number of Americans protested their country’s use of torture because it undermined the core values of the country. And as  I have said earlier my country does not torture people.

11. Under what right does the US chase and charge and arrest and imprison anyone in the world who it does not like. Also sending its security departments to do this devils work. And also force the countries of the third world to abandon their sovereignty and their duty to look after their citizens, and to do that by various methods of persuasion and coercion and political and economic pressure and even the threat of military action?

I am not American so I cannot tell you about what right it justifies doing so, or the laws supporting such action –if there are any. I do not think that America should be able to act with impunity. But I would also point out that it is by no means the only country to do so.

12. Does the US and the west in general think that these (terrorists) and the civilisation they belong to will be finally eradicated, as happened with the indigenous people in America and Australia? Or that those people will continue and remain? Because the balance of power between the nations is continuously changing over time, and consequently a time (for fair trials) definitely will come sooner or later? {{*NB here Abu Walid is referring to the right to justice.}}

I have never thought that the fight against terrorism had anything to do with eradicating another culture or civilisation. It has to do with bringing al Qaeda to justice, which I think the vast majority of the 1.57 billion Muslims in the world would support since Muslims have been the primary victims of its attacks.

Question here is:

Are you seeking to annihilate us ethnically as you did with the ancient indigenous civilisations in your country? Or are you completely safe and confident that we will not one day get the ability for fair trials? Or maybe you feel very secure and confident that we will not get the ability for fair trials (I do not say retaliation, and the difference between them is very big). {{*NB Again here Abu Walid is referring to the right to justice.}}

Or that you only focus on your current moment of superiority, and you are not concerned with what the future will bring??

Again, in relation to “us” are you speaking on behalf of Muslims, or Afghans, or al Qaeda, or all of these?

I do not believe that anyone is trying to eradicate a civilisation or culture, if this is what you are talking about.  If, for example, we were seeking to annihilate Muslims why would so many people and governments have given aid to help Indonesia, when the Tsunami struck and decimated Aceh?

As I said earlier, I do not believe that the ¼ of humanity that Muslims comprise believe that we are trying to eradicate them. Most of us live peacefully together. Ok, so it is not a perfect peace, but the number of people fighting compared to the number of people going about their lives speaks volumes. And I don’t accept the argument that US or Western Colonial rule forces them to be subjugated. A quarter of the world’s population is a huge number of people.

If you are talking of annihilating groups like al Qaeda, who use violence, mostly against Muslims, then I guess you could say yes, there are many people the world over, Muslims and non-Muslims, who would like to see al Qaeda brought to justice. You will notice I use the term justice not annihilation. I believe al Qaeda should be brought to justice.

Regarding fair trials and justice: I would like to ask your opinion on a few questions I have.

What about the right of Muslims to justice and their right to see al Qaeda brought to justice? The victims of al Qaeda’s violence are overwhelmingly Muslim. What about the right to justice of their families and loved ones?

What about the right of Afghans to justice, and their right to see al Qaeda held accountable for bringing war to their country? Al Qaeda sacrificed them and their country to fight against America.  Why did Mullah Omar not bring al Qaeda and specifically bin Laden to justice—especially since bin Laden disobeyed his orders? Even if he did not want to hand him over to America why did he not punish bin Laden for killing Muslims on 9/11?

What about the right to justice for the families of Afghans who have died at the hands of the Taliban (and more have died at their hands this year than coalition forces)?

In the last:

Allow me here to present the verses of an Arab poet:

Always remember

America – with all its glory—

Is not the almighty noble Allah

And America—with all its extreme strength—

Will not prevent the birds flying

Can kill the adult…Rifle

Small…In the hands of a small child

This poet is not (terrorist), he is a Muslim but he was not an “Islamist”.  He is a secular Arab, but he is a poet who became agitated by the grief of his Ummah for a long period time and then he left.  It is the great Syrian poet Nizar Qabbani. If circumstances permit, I will send you the rest of the poem as it is worth reading.

{{NB I have uploaded the full poem Abu Walid sent to me in another post, which you can find here.}}

I will not explain the symbolic picture the poet painted ( by the adult, which could be killed, by a rifle in the hands of a small child). It is clear. But if we expanded our imagination your civilisation may be that adult,  and our mujahideen (the terrorists) the youth by their simple means are the young child.

In the coming future what is now unknown will be revealed and many mistakes will be corrected.

That is why our bet for the future is very big.

This part of the questions concerns your country Australia:

Abu Walid I have answered your questions on the basis of my own personal opinion. As I am sure you understand I can’t speak for other Australians or the previous or current government.

What are the reasons you have sent your military forces to kill the Afghan people?

The reason our military forces are in Afghanistan is that al Qaeda killed Australians on 9/11. I also think that our alliance with America was invoked when al Qaeda attacked but I am not 100% sure about that. Our forces are not there to kill Afghans. In any case, our forces were dispatched as part of the fight against al Qaeda, and because the Taliban refused to stop harbouring bin Laden, against the Taliban too. They were sent to bring al Qaeda to justice.

What crime did these poor people commit?

The Afghan people committed no crime. Al Qaeda committed the crime and brought this fate upon the Afghan people, something you yourself have argued. Moreover, at the expense of the Afghan people the Taliban harboured bin Laden and his group. I would like to ask you a question here: what about all the civilians who have died at the hands of the Taliban over the years? What crime did they commit? This year the Taliban were responsible for 70% of civilian deaths in Afghanistan.

Do not say that you are there to fight the Taliban and not the Afghan people.  Because this is not true since events confirm that the Afghan people support the Taliban movement.  Without this the movement could not continue to be victorious against the western armies there.

And do not say that your armies went there to fight al Qaeda, because you are sure/like us/ that al Qaeda has in Afghanistan only a few people. Also the events of 9/11 had no connection with the Taliban, but on the contrary there were very strict instructions from Mullah Omar to bin Laden not to provoke the United States.

I do not agree with you that events confirm the Afghan people support the Taliban. People are voting. They are not forced to vote. Instead the Taliban tried to intimate them into not voting, going so far as to kill them. But people still voted, even though the system is far from perfect, suffers from corruption and some would say is deeply flawed. They still voted and that vote was a strong statement against the dogmatism of the Taliban.

Also, I don’t understand how you can claim that the Taliban movement is supported by the entire population when it never had full control of Afghanistan–even before the events of 9/11. A movement that is supported would have no need to intimidate people, leaving letters under their door in the middle of the night. A movement that is supported by the people would not have collapsed so easily in late 2001. And a movement that is supported by the people would have no need to threaten its own people and take them hostage and execute them.

I recognise that many people are fighting the occupation of the country by foreign forces but that does not necessarily translate into support for the Taliban. It means they do not like being occupied. I do not need to tell you about Afghanistan’s history in this respect. Many of them might fight the Taliban if it were to try to take over power again. I think most people would not want to see them return. In fact a good half of the population probably feels that way – the women of Afghanistan, who the Taliban subjugated.

And yes, al Qaeda in Afghanistan has only a few people in the country now. But it had more before 9/11 and the presence of the organisation in Afghanistan and its actions was why this war started.

And I do agree with you that the organisation is much smaller than is commonly alleged. But this brings me to an important question I want to ask you:  If this was the case why couldn’t (or wouldn’t) Mullah Omar control them, if its numbers were as small as you say? Or even if they were larger? And why didn’t he immediately punish bin Laden after 9/11? Why didn’t he bring him to justice or hand him over to an international court of justice or to America? Why was he allowed to escape justice? If bin Laden did not have that many followers it wouldn’t have been difficult to bring him to justice or hand him over, even forcibly. You have asked me a lot of questions about the issue of justice and how you feel the war on Afghanistan is unjust. So I would like to ask you why bin Laden was not held accountable for killing civilians and bringing war on Afghanistan?

Don’t you think that you still owe these people great favours because they made it possible for you to defeat the Soviet beast, who you and the others used to fear?

I think the Afghan people were very brave fighting the Soviet occupation and suffered greatly from this occuption. I do think  that more western aid should have been provided after they withdrew.

But here I have a question for you. I also do not understand how you can say Afghanistan required favours but then say that the west should keep its nose out of affairs in the country. It helped you fight the Soviets, and yes I accept this was for self aggrandizing reasons.  But I wonder that even if it had given more aid after they withdrew, whether this would then cause an accusation of meddling in the country’s affairs? To be honest it seems like no matter what it does, the accusations will fly from some people who seem determined to see only bad in the west.

If in the future it is proven/ or if the Americans admit, or if some of the hidden facts reveal that their war against Afghanistan was unjust and the reasons were manufactured like what happened in Iraq/ are you ready to apologise to the Afghan people or pay reparations to the people who were harmed in Afghanistan?

The war in Afghanistan is a tragedy for the Afghan people but it is not a manufactured one. And since we already know why it occurred—because of al Qaeda, who were harboured by the Taliban—I do not think that this will eventuate.

Al Qaeda caused the invasion of Afghanistan. You and I both know that.  No one wanted to invade it before, especially not America. I know you have an enduring interest in China and Chinese Political and Military thought so I do not need to tell you that before 9/11 the Bush administration was preoccupied with the threat of China. Do you remember all of the literature about the new Cold War between them? Why would America bother with Afghanistan when it was so worried about the threat from China and at that point in time so determined to counteract this threat?

The war is about bringing al Qaeda to justice. To ensure that al Qaeda can never again operate from Afghanistan and that criminal groups who take violence into their own hands and operate outside the rules of international law are brought to justice.

As for reparations, a huge amount of money is already being provided for aid and reconstruction projects in Afghanistan. This money has funded bridges and roads and  schools and agricultural projects. All of this is to help Afghanistan. For example there are now 8 million children in schools, compared to the 800 000 children who went to school under the Taliban regime (all of who were boys). There are now 2.4 million girls in school.

And here I wanted to ask you why you support the Taliban’s destruction of this infrastructure and targeting of people trying to help the Afghans with aid projects? Why does it intentionally destroy the things that will help the country rebuild and alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people?

Does the Taliban pay reparations or compensation to the families of innocent people it kills in its attacks against foreign forces, who are in the country because it harboured bin Laden? Does the Taliban pay reparations to people who lose their livelihood and ability to support their family as a result of its destruction of the infrastructure they need?

And why would the west even consider reparations if the Taliban destroys infrastructure? More importantly why would the west pay reparations when it was attacked from Afghan territory?  I know the Afghan people did not start the war. America knows the Afghan people did not start it. Everyone knows this. It was al Qaeda, but at the end of the day the Taliban harboured al Qaeda. This is why people want to support the Afghan population to rebuild their country because we all know the Afghan people did not do this. And we all know that many of them did not support the Taliban but couldn’t do anything about it because of its suppression and hold on power. The Afghan people clearly do not want a return to the previous situation or they would not have gone out to vote.

As for apologies, we are probably going to go around in circles here. I would like to know if Mullah Omar is ready to apologise to his people for hosting bin Laden or failing to control him and so causing the Afghan people all this harm?  Or for attacking his own people and launching intimidation campaigns against Afghans who are only trying to go about their business and survive yet another war—one that he brought upon them by his hosting of bin Laden.

I know Mullah Omar is  probably not inclined to ever apologise to America for allowing it to be attacked from Afghanistan when it was under his rule, but surely he could apologise to his own people if he considers himself their leader? Is he ready to apologise for choosing one man (a man who willingly sacrificed him and all of Afghanistan) over his country? I really do not understand why he didn’t even apologise to his own people or put bin Laden on trial for his disobedience.

The Iraq War was a different case altogether and I can see how people would think the US was aggressive—especially since the auspices under which the war was launched have subsequently turned out to be false or flawed and in some countries like the United Kingdom and The Netherlands are still being investigated. Saddam Hussein was an awful dictator and I am very glad he is gone, but I don’t believe that it was our business to go in there and remove him, which is the other reason often used as a justification for the war.

Do you agree to give whoever is accused from your soldiers and your leadership as war criminals to the Afghan authorities to investigate and prosecute there?

Along the lines of what America is doing with those it accuses of terrorism, and as you do with defendants accused of terrorism in Indonesia?

If you do not agree about that, don’t you think that this action is racist and discrimination on the basis of race and religion, contrary to your liberal and democratic ideals?

No, I do not support agreeing to this. There are international courts and tribunals to deal with war crimes. These are the procedures in place. And if you are talking about a future Taliban government, I would like to ask you how could you expect this to be done when the Taliban wouldn’t hand over bin Laden, who caused this whole war,  and has issued no statement to the effect that they would do so if they were to return to power?  I’d also like to point out  Australia does not  do this. Australia respects the legal processes in Indonesia. The perpetrators of terrorism in Indonesia have been charged and prosecuted within the Indonesian judicial system. Australia has not sought the extradition of terrorists responsible for killing its citizens. We have full confidence in Indonesia’s judicial system. Indeed, their record of successful prosecutions is better than most countries.

There are international tribunals in place for these types of investigations so I do not think it is an issue of being racist or discriminatory or being against liberal and democratic values because it ensures people get a fair trial. I would also note that the Taliban didn’t agree to hand bin Laden over either. Actually it harboured a number of people who were wanted in other countries. So I don’t think that it could reasonably expect anyone to hand their citizens over.

Before you sent your troops were you aware of the results of the US investigation into 9/11?

I do not know the answer to this. That was a decision for the government at the time to make. But it is my understanding that the US government did provide briefings to other countries before the war was launched, at least according to declassified documents, which I have located while researching my thesis.

And why did the US administration keep the results of those investigations secret even to the deputies of the American people in congress and the media and American intellectuals?

The US administration did not keep it secret that  it was al Qaeda who carried out the attacks on 9/11. A good deal of information was made public at the time. Beyond this, I can’t answer your question, because I’m not American.

No one can ever say that all of this was to preserve national security secrets– this is a poor and unacceptable excuse–because the results of this concealment was to spark unjust wars under the banner of the cross (according to what Bush says) against Afghanistan and after that Iraq.

Do you accept sending your forces into a world war, and if against (terrorism), according to US allegations, just on the basis of its conclusions that it did not have evidence for and did not provide the results of an official investigation to prove these claims?

I do think that there was enough evidence to support action against al Qaeda, which because the Taliban refused to stop harbouring bin Laden, also meant action against it.  And so yes I guess you could say I do accept it.

The Afghan people at that time were  suffering severely from the effects of the unjust and very harsh war launched by the Soviets. And you and the other western countries ignored the sacrifices of these people who you benefitted from. Despite that, you did not help them in pursuing their rights for war reparations which are included in international laws you–as western countries–authored.

Can you not see that your country entered an unjust and aggressive war against a small poor and wronged people. And you exercised, and are still exercising an awful colonial role in the world and in the Asian region you live in?

Can you not see that the events of “Bali” were the result of a feeling of bitterness and despair on the part of perpetrators. That was against the feeling of pride and arrogance of the people who carried out the investigation into it and the follow up from your party and the Americans??

Can you not see that your fight in Afghanistan, which lacks justification and in which you have no interests makes you a part of the civilisational and cultural aggression against the Muslims who make up the human density all around you?? And your position that I am talking now about had bad security results as what happened in Bali, and that was a reaction that can happen again in a worse and unknown way?.

I think  I have already explained my view on the war and that it is not against the Afghan people.

I respect that many people feel like America and the West is still exercising colonial rule. I don’t quite know what we can do about that though. If we do not help we are criticised, when we try to help we are criticised.

But not everyone feels that way. For example Australia had very bad bushfires last February  and a lot of people died. Indonesia sent disaster victim identification experts to help us. We did not ask them to do this – they did it because our countries get along. We do not agree on everything.  But I doubt they see us as a colonial power. In fact I think that their gracious offer of assistance shows they see themselves as our partner.

Regarding the Bali terrorist attacks, Jemaah Islamiyyah suffered a big backlash for the Bali attacks– from within its own ranks and from the government crack down and of course public opinion against it.  I would also point out that when members of JI began to identify with the principles of global jihad and supported these over the local issues that drove the group’s founding, its support dropped and a splinter group led by Noordin Top and Azahari Husin emerged. The actions of this splinter group drove another backlash—against both the splinter group and elements of JI who continued to support it. JI and the Noordin Top splinter group became less popular the more that they employed their criminal terror tactics. Most attacks in Indonesia were carried out by the Noordin Top splinter group, which affiliated itself with al Qaeda, received some financing from it and claimed their attacks under its name. So I do not agree with your argument.

Can you not see that the politicians in your country, sell your coming generations future seats in the wars to come that will certainly be more severe than the current wars, whereas your enemies will be more in number and better informed and equipped??

When will you withdraw from Afghanistan? And when will you judge the leaders who drew you into this war, that is harmful to you and your children, now and in the future. ??

I think I have already covered this subject in my response to your other questions. But I would add that I think the war does need to end and the Taliban could make it end a lot faster if they wanted to. I would also like to ask you the same question: when will you judge the leaders who allowed this war to take place by either instigating the terrorist attacks against America, or harbouring those who carried it out?  We did not want this war, and the Taliban could have avoided it by not harbouring bin Laden and other internationally wanted people.

Regarding a withdrawal date: I do not know when the withdrawal date for Afghanistan will be. I imagine that it will not be until the country is stable enough and the population is secure so that it does not descend into civil war like it did in the aftermath of the Soviet withdrawal.  None of this want to see this fate befall the Afghan people again. They have been through too much already.

When will you reconcile with the Muslims around you who represent a quarter of humanity?

Who has the benefit of the senseless conflict?? It is definitely not in your interest and it is certainly not in the interest for the Muslims? In whose benefit is it, in your opinion?

I have already addressed the issue of reconciliation and peacemaking in several questions so I won’t repeat my response here.  As for my view of who this war benefits, I think it benefits al Qaeda, who as I have previously argued would see its position greatly weakened without it.

There is no doubt in my mind that the dialogue between us now despite its bitterness is a small step to cross that greatest obstacle.

However, a small step in the way of understanding and peace is better than a big step in the way of war and destruction.

How long is war the only choice between us?  Especially since your country is far away from us. Its role was always small and secondary in harming us and the enmity with us? Therefore, the way to fix this error is easier and faster than all the others.

Although Japan has preceded you in cutting its relations with the unjust war in Afghanistan and thus the restoration of the relationship with the Muslims.

And the question is:

Why don’t you start the first step to defusing the conflict with Muslims?

I refer you back to my earlier question about who you are referring to with “us” and my belief that there is no war against Muslims. There is however a fight to stop al Qaeda and its wanton use of violence against Muslims and non-Muslims and to bring the organisation to justice for its criminal actions. I too wonder how long war will be the only choice between us. I really do wish that it would stop–for all concerned.

This opens the door of understanding and tolerance with the Muslims to closest to  you first and with the rest of the Islamic world second.

You will find that Muslims besides being the bravest people in the wars are also the most tolerant of people and inclined to peace. That is the essence of their religion

Well Abu Walid, these are my responses. Thank you for taking the time to ask me questions. I’d just like to point out that I have tried hard to keep my responses in line with this being a dialogue. So they are written to reflect that instead of being  a long academic treatise. I have also tried to keep my language direct, wherever possible. It is not meant to be abrupt or aggressive, but I am mindful that many people who read my blog use translation software to read it. So I wanted to try to keep the language clear and direct so that at least some of it comes out clearly in these types of translations.

Like you, I think our dialogue is important. We may not agree, but hopefully we can keep talking and come to a greater level of understanding. As you say, it is a small step, but it is an important one, and any step towards greater understanding is a step away from conflict, which we all want to end. At the end of the day we are all humans. We all have families. We all want to live in peace and freedom and support our families to the best of our ability. I hope that these universal traits eventually lead us down the road to peace instead of conflict.

I have some extra questions I would like to ask you. They came to mind as I was trying to answer your questions. They are about your support for the Taliban and some questions about the Taliban more generally. I hope you will consider answering them as these are questions I have long wanted to ask. I know you do not speak for the Taliban, but I’d really like to know your opinion on the following:

I would like to know why you support a regime that denied the women of Afghanistan basic freedoms and liberty and the right to an education? I would like to know how the Taliban can justify denying women the right to an education and to learn to read, when the very first word revealed to the Prophet Mohammed in the Quran was “Read’?

I don’t understand how they can claim to be upholding the word of God but deny women a right mandated to them by God?

How can they excuse women dying because male doctors were not allowed to treat them and there was such a shortage of female doctors because women were not allowed to work or study? How can they excuse the tremendous impact this had on community well being?

I would also like to know how it is that Taliban allowed its members to torture and mistreat animals like they did at the Kabul zoo when it is written in the Hadiths that mistreating animals is a sin?

I am also curious as to why the Taliban–who argues it has the skills to lead Afghanistan–has not ever issued clear plans or guidelines or strategies for what it intends to do after it might come to power again. There is no educational plan, no plan for rebuilding. There is nothing.  And it has been nine years. If it wants to be taken seriously as a regime that has learned from its mistakes why has it not bothered to provide this type of information to its own people?

Well these are my questions. I’m looking forward to reading your answers and again would like to thank you for your earlier responses to my questions, and willingness to join me in this dialogue.


  1. Charles Cameron
    01/26/2010 at 9:33 am

    Simply stunning.

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      01/26/2010 at 9:52 am

      Thank you Charles. If you’d like to respond too let me know.

  2. 01/26/2010 at 1:00 pm

    To what Charles Cameron says, I can only add my thanks.

    I do think that the issue of cultural & civilizational hegemony/survival, while peripheral to the current conflict with al Qaeda & the Taliban, must eventually become a part of our thinking and discourse if we are to fully understand one another. And that all parties should work to expand our data/information base about those issues and the varying intellectual and, speaking frankly, religious, traditions which color and motivate our understanding. But that’s for after your thesis is completed, I am sure.

  3. Vahid Brown
    01/27/2010 at 1:50 am

    Thank you for posting this, Leah. Truly remarkable stuff.

    All the best.

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      01/27/2010 at 9:21 am

      Thanks Vahid!

  4. Shafi
    01/28/2010 at 6:41 pm

    I have read a few comments-cum-articles on your post. In one of the comments, the author says a former senior Taliban official. The name is not an Afghan name. It sounds Arab especially Egyptian. He can never belong to Afghanistan. Only Afghan must belong to that country. You should clarify the difference between Al-Qaeda and Taliban. An Arav can never be one of Taliban. That hoax has been created by the Western media.

    Afghanistan belong to Afghans not to Arabs and others. Only Afghans. The Arabs and other foreign nations have no place in Afghanistan.

  5. Asp
    02/01/2010 at 2:41 am

    Remarkable exchange. There is real moral clarity in your condemnations of Bush-initiated detainee abuses (some of which continue) combined with your rejection of al Masri’s narrative of colonial conquest in Afghanistan and civilizational war.
    I gather from your writings that al Masri initially posted his responses to your questions on his blog (where his response to your article can be found in English). Has he/will he post *your* responses to *his* questions?

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      02/01/2010 at 12:26 pm

      Hi, thank you!. Yes Abu Walid al Masri posted his responses to my questions on his blog and then I posted transations here (though am still to post a few). I imagine he will post his own response to my response on his blog, but I have asked him to wait because I am drowning in a sea of deadlines at the moment. And I want to be able to give it my full attention. So short answer is yes, but not yet –at my request. Cheers.

  6. Asp
    02/01/2010 at 12:47 pm

    Well, I hope that your arguments make some impression on some of his readership. As is always the case, the fact that you acknowledge the validity of some of his grievances should lend weight to your rejection of his claims about what the Afghan people want and why the U.S. and allies went to war against the Taliban.

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      02/01/2010 at 12:50 pm


  7. رفعت
    02/08/2010 at 6:51 am

    سيدة ليا فاريل
    أنا لا أعرف الإنجليزية
    ولستُ أضمن أن يترجم غوغل كلماتي بدقة
    لهذا أكتبها كما أحب ثم ترجميها أنت من فضلك كما تريدين
    ألا فاعلمي سيدة ليا أنني وبعد أن قرأتُ أسئلة أبي الوليد على مدونته توقعتُ أن تكون ردودك جيدة
    فتسرعتُ بمحاولة ترجمتها مستخدما جوجل
    ولكن للأسف
    لم أجد شيئا مما توقعتُه
    فردود حضرتك لا تدل على فهم ما يجري
    بل هي مجرد ترديد لمزاعم الغرب التافهة
    تقولين مثلا مثلا أننا ـ نحن المسلمين ـ لا نعتبر الحرب حربا ضد الإسلام والمسلمين ودليل ذلك أن مَن يحارب مع القاعدة قليلون
    وأنا أقول لك يا سيدتي أن معظم شباب البلاد الإسلامية
    بل الشباب والشيوخ أيضا هنا في البلاد الإسلامية
    لو استطعنا لحاربنا جميعا
    في فلسطين أو العراق أو أفغانستان أو في أي مكان تحاربون فيه المسلمين
    ولكن المشكلة سيدة ليا أنك قد غفلتِ عن شيء غاية في الظهور
    وهو أن الغرب لا يسمح بذلك
    ولا تتعجبي
    فإن حكام بلاد المسلمين كلهم تابعين للغرب
    والغرب يحميهم بكل ما يستطيع
    لأن الغرب يعلم جيدا أنه لو ترك للشعوب الإسلامية أن تختار مَن تريد لما اختارت إلا ما يشبه ( حماس ) في فلسطين مثلا
    كما يعلم الغرب أن الشعوب لو تركت لتختار ما تريد لاختارت أن تعود كما كانت دولة واحدة تجمع المسلمين جميعا
    ولهذا تحمون الكيان الصهيوني لأنه ووبساطة
    ولأننا وببساطة نريد أن نجتمع
    نحن للأسف لا نستطيع أن نحارب مع حماس أو مع أهلنا في العراق أو مع الملا عمر حفظه الله
    لأن الغرب يمنعنا
    يمنعنا بواسطة الحكام الذين يساندهم ضدنا
    بل ويدافع عنهم كما يدافع الآن عن كرازاي
    معظم شعوب البلاد الإسلامية ينظرون للغرب باعتباره خادم الشيطان
    والباقي مخدوعين فيه
    ولكن اطمئني
    فإن أخطاء الغرب لا تنتهي وهذه الأخطاء توقظ كل يوم بعض المخدوعين بكم !

  8. Chris Yount
    02/11/2010 at 6:34 am


    I think that’s a pretty convenient excuse. If the West could keep people from joining Al-Qaeda simply by pressuring the governments, then why are there any fighters? Al-Qaeda is a criminal organization that operates outside the bounds of law.

    The fact of the matter is that, just as Leah said, the vast, vast majority of Muslims are not taking part in the fighting. If God’s law is above man’s law or the law of the government, then how does a government’s stance on an issue impact what God is telling His followers to do? If the government ordered a stop to all prayers, would Muslims comply? Doubtful. Prayer is a pillar of the faith and no law of man is going to stop a Muslim from praying. The lack of participation in Al-Qaeda is a clear referendum on its support from the Ummah.

    • رفعت
      02/15/2010 at 11:14 am

      من أنت كي تتكلمي عن المسلمين
      فلا أنت مسلمة ولا أنت تعيشين بين المسلمين
      لم نذعن لأمر الحكومات البغيضة
      ولكننا لم نستطع أن نعصي أوامرها
      وساعة نستطيع سنذهب إلى إخواننا الطالبان أو حماس أو المقاومة العراقية
      وهذا هو ما فعله مقاتلو القاعدة
      ساعة استطاعوا الهرب هربوا
      وهذا ما يتمنى معظم الشباب هنا أن يفعلوه

      • Leah Farrall, Australia
        02/15/2010 at 11:37 am

        I know lots of Muslims who would disagree with you.

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      02/15/2010 at 11:39 am

      Chris he left two comments addressed to you, I’ve left them both up for you to address if you want.

  9. رفعت
    02/15/2010 at 11:21 am

    من أنت كي تتكلمي عن المسلمين ؟
    فلا أنت مسلمة
    ولا تعيشين بينهم وتعرفين كيف يفكرون وبماذا يحلمون
    ثم أتقصدين يا هذه أن أي إنسان قادر على الانضمام للطالبان أو المقاومة العراقية أو حماس؟
    بالطبع ليس يستطيع أي إنسان أن يفعل
    وإن حاول فلن يجد لنفيه مكانا إلا في أبي غريب أو جوانتاناموا أو باغرام أو غيرها من السجون السرية القذرة الكثيرة
    الأمر ببساطة
    أننا لم نذعن للحكومات البغيضة
    وإنما لم نستطع أن نهرب دون أن تقبض علينا
    وساعة نستطيع الهرب فسنهرب
    كما فعل أفراد القاعدة
    لأنه لا يوجد عاقل على وجه الأرض يمكنه أن يتخيل أن الحكومات كانت تعرف أن أفراد القاعدة كانوا ذاهبين للانضمام إلى الشيخ أسامة بن لادن وتركتهم
    بربكِ هل تستطيعين تخيل ذلك ؟
    ولماذا إذن قلتِ هذا الكلام الذي قلتيه؟

  10. Chris Yount
    02/15/2010 at 3:22 pm

    Forgive me if my response is incomplete, I am only beginning to learn Arabic. While I am not Muslim, I do know Muslims, and as Leah also shared, I know many that would disagree with you. And these are Muslims that ARE free to go and join whatever organization they like. They have the freedom and the means. Yet they find Al-Qaeda’s message abhorrent and contrary to the teachings of Islam.

    And being disgusted by Abu Ghraib, Bagram or the like isn’t only for Muslims. And disgust for those places and the actions of those people aren’t 1) representative of the West and 2) don’t serve as a universal motivation for Muslims to head directly to a criminal, terrorist organization.

  11. رفعت
    02/15/2010 at 9:00 pm

    سيدة ليا
    تقولين أنك تعرفين الكثير عنا
    إذن فاعلمي أنني أعلم كل شيء عنا
    وأنني مسلم أعيش في مجتمع مسلم يمتلئ كرها للصهاينة الذين احتلوا أرضنا في فلسطين وأقاموا فيها المحارق والمجازر
    ويكره الغرب الذي حاول بكل الطرق ولا يزال
    أن يستعبدنا وأن يقضي علينا وعلى كرامتنا وعتقداتنا
    سيدة ليا
    أنا أعرف كل شيء عن المسلمين
    وأعرف أنهم يوافقونني الرأي
    سيدة ليا
    أنا أعرف الكثير عنكم
    وأعرف أنك تبحثين عن أعذار مقبولة لقومك
    وهذا ليس من الموضوعية في شيء

  12. رفعت
    02/15/2010 at 9:14 pm

    أنت لا تعرفين شيئا عن المسلمين
    والدليل على ذلك كلامك هذا
    أنت والسيدة ليا
    لا تعرفان إلا ما يُقال في وسائل إعلامكم الكاذبة
    ثم القارئ لتعليقاتك يفهم أنك تدافعين عن الأنظمة العربية
    وهذا أمر طبيعي جدا
    اسمعي يا كريس
    لو أن كل إنسان قادر على الانضمام لأي منظمة لما تظاهر الملايين في مصر دائما تظاهرا مع حماس
    ولذهبوا إلى حماس وحاربوا معهم الصهاينة المغتصبين
    وببساطة لم يستطيعوا أن يفعلوا
    ساعة يستطيعوا
    لن تجد هذا الكيان السرطاني الخبيث
    الكيان الصهيوني
    وهذا مجرد مثل
    أما بالنسبة للسجون
    فليس يستطيع أحد أن يعترف بأنه مؤيد لها
    حتى من بنوها ليسوا يستطيعون تأييد ما يحدث فيها
    ولكننا نعلم جديا أن الصليبيين هم الصليبيين
    ولقد عانينا من ظلمكم كثيرا منذ الحملة الفرنسية على مصر
    أوربما من قبلها
    عانينا منكم ونعرف أن هذا هو أسلوبكم المفضل للتعامل معنا
    ومازلتم إلى الآن ترون أن المذابح التي حصلت لأجدادنا في فلسطين على يد أجدادكم الصليبيين
    مازلتم ترون
    أن هذه المذابح هي العدل الإلهي
    ألا فاعلمي يا هذه وليعلم الجميع
    أننا سنستعيد فلسطين كاملة
    وسنستعيد أفغانستان كاملة وسنستعيد العراق كاملة
    وسزيل ذات يوم هذه الأنظمة العلمانية الخاضعة لكم وسنقيم الخلافة الإسلامية الرشيدة من جديد
    أنا متأكد أن هذا سيحدث
    وأراه بعيني قلبي كما لو أنه موجود الآن على أرض الواقع
    ربما أموت دون أن يوجد على أرض الواقع
    بل وربما يموت أولادي وأحفادي وأولاد أحفادي دون أن يروه على أرض الواقع
    ولكننا متأكدون من أنه سيحدث
    وسأعلمهم منذ صغرهم أنه لا يوجد شيء اسمه إسرائيل
    وأن هذا الكيان الغاصب قد أخذ أرضنا العربية المسلمة
    وأنها لابد أن ترجع إلينا من جديد هي وكل أرض أخذت
    وأننا لابد أن نقيم دولة الخلافة
    وأن هذا لابد أن يحدث

  13. رفعت
    02/15/2010 at 9:40 pm

    معذرة يا سيدة ليا
    معذرة يا سيدة كريس
    فربما أكون قد انفعلتُ في ردي
    وربما أنكما مخدوعتين بصحافتكما الكاذبة وإعلامكما الكاذب
    أنا أعذركما تماما
    وأسأل الله لكما ولأمثالكما الهداية إلى الخير والتوفيق الدائم إليه
    أرجو ألا أكون قد أسأتُ إليكما
    بأي شكل من الأشكال
    كما أرجو أن تعلما أن هناك فروقا كبيرة جدا بين بلادكم وبلادنا وبين معتقدات كلا منا وبين تاريخ كلا منا أيضا
    وهذا كله يؤثر فينا وفي حاضرنا وفي نظرتنا للأمور
    كما أرجو أن تعلما أن الإسلام والله لا يدعو إلى الظلم
    بل إن الله ينهى عن الظلم
    أي ظلم لأي مخلوق

  14. Chris Yount
    02/16/2010 at 12:16 am

    I certainly understand feeling passion about the subject and don’t underestimate the impact of past injustice. That said, when calling upon the Crusades that happened hundreds of years agos as a reason for current anger seems to be reaching for an excuse or a justification for an action that has already been chosen. No living creature today is truly reacting to the crusades.

    As for your assumption that all Western knowledge of Muslims and Arabia is drawn from the media, it couldn’t be more incorrect. I have read the Qur’an and the Hadith. I have read Arab history and poetry and seen Arab art. I hope to see more when I travel to the Middle East next month. I understand that there is a great deal of ignorance of Arabia, Arabs and Islam in the West, but would also like you to consider the fact that Arabs play a role in that as well.

    Our cultures and languages are a difficult chasm to cross, but there has been peace between the cultures of the West and the Middle East before and I believe it is attainable again. It will take humility, forgiveness and reconciliation on both sides, and it will take a willingness to learn the truth about the others culture and people while accepting the truth of human frailty.

    I pray that it happens.

  15. Asp
    02/16/2010 at 9:40 am

    Quite a dialogue going here; for those of us who don’t speak or read Arabic, it’s like listening to one half of a phone conversation (and as anyone trapped in a car with a cell-chatting companion can attest, much can be inferred from the audible half).

    • Leah Farrall, Australia
      02/16/2010 at 10:03 am

      Sorry about that. I’m sooo behind and having trouble even managing to keep blogging.

      • Asp
        02/17/2010 at 5:10 am

        Was not complaining at all – your translation as you can manage it of the main correspondence is very much appreciated. Just sightly amused by the effect of reading one half.

      • Leah Farrall, Australia
        02/17/2010 at 5:46 am

        I know, I just feel bad. I hate not being able to follow through immediately. Cheers.

  16. رفعت
    02/16/2010 at 9:52 am

    أما أنا فأدعو الله بالخير
    وأؤكد على أنني لا أسعى لتجريح أحد ولا أحب ذلك
    بل أبغض ذلك وأنفر منه
    ولكن يجب أن أقول أننا هنا لا نهتم بما تقدرون وما لا تقدرون
    أرجوكِ اكرهيني ولكن لا تخربوا دولنا ولا تنتهكوا أعراضنا ولا تقتلوا أطفالنا أمامنا ولا تعذبوننا وبخاصة أمام اطفالنا ونسائنا
    أنا لا أريد تقديركم
    وربما مازلتِ تذكرين أن الأفغان حفظهم الله من شركم
    كانوا لا يجدون طعاما يأكلوه فكنتم أثناء الحرب تقتلونهم بطائرات ثم تلقون عليهم بالدقيق من طائرات أخرى
    أتذكرين ماذا كانوا يفعلون ؟
    أذكرك أنا
    كانوا يحرقون الدقيق
    أرأيتِ إلى أي حد؟
    أنا لا أريد تقديرك
    فتقديرك لن ينفعني
    فها أنت تدعين أنك تقدرين كذا وكذا
    والصليبيين يقتلون المدنيين في هلمند الأفغانية لما يئسوا أن يحققوا نصرا على المجاهدين حفظهم الله ونصرهم
    فعاقبوا المجاهدين بقتل المدنيين
    ماذا نفع هؤلاء منكم
    أنتم بلاشك
    تحسنون الكلام
    ولكن الأفعال عكس الكلام تماما
    ثم تتكلمين وكأن الحروب الصليبية قد انتهت
    وهي لم تنته ومازالت دائرة في أفغانستان والعراق وفلسطين وفي كل بلد مسلم تساندون الدكتاتور الذي يحكمه
    اسمعي يا سيدة كريس
    ثم تقولين أنك قرأتِ القرآن والحديث والشعر
    فكيف إذن لا تستطيعين فهم كلامي
    نعم ربما تكوني قد قرأتي هذا كله
    ولكن قراءة كعدمها إذ إنك غير متقنة للغة ولما كوّنها من تاريخ وثقافة
    اقرأي كما تشائين ولكنك لن تفهمي ما تقرأيه
    بل ربما تفهميه فهما خاطئا
    وهذا ما يحدث عادة
    وكلامك الآن يدل على ذلك
    فالسعودية لا تعبر عن الإسلام
    كما أنني لا أذكر فترة حدث فيها ما سميتيه ” سلام بين حضارتنا وحضارتكم ” كما أنكم الآن لا تسعون لسلام وإنما تسعون لفرض ثقافتكم علينا
    وهي ثقافة منقطة الصلة تماما بثقافتنا وبإسلامنا
    وتظنون أنكم ستقدرون علينا وسنصبح مع الوقت كالهنود الحمر ؟
    هذا وهم وللن يحدث
    لا تقولي لي أنك ضد فرض الثقافات وضد ما يحدث
    لأنني وببساطة غير مهتم بآراء الأفراد ولن تغير آراء الأفراد شيئا مما نراه بأعيينا ونسمعه بآذننا ونشعر به في قلوبنا

    • Chris Yount
      02/17/2010 at 12:35 am

      So then, is your contention that there cannot be peace? That peace between the West and the Muslims in the Middle East is impossible? If so, then who is truly the aggressor, the instigator?

      The West is in Afghanistan, not because we wanted control of the few resources the country has, but because it was a haven for the criminal, terrorist organization that carried out a cowardly, unprovoked attack on our country (actually more than a few attacks on our country).

      If the Taliban had ousted Al-Qaeda, as had been requested of them for many, many years, we would not have had to deal with them ourselves. That was a decision made by Mullah Omar and the Taliban. The US tried for many, many years to bring Bin Laden to justice without damaging the stability and potential prosperity of Afghanistan and its Muslim government, even while they harbored an organization that had the destruction of the West as one of its pillar goals.

      You talk of punishing people for the killing of civilians, then why no punishment for the Taliban and Al Qaeda? The vast majority of their attacks are civilians, and Muslims at that. Where is the rage against these organizations that destroy the infrastructure that the West is building to try and bring prosperity to the Afghan people? Where is the angst about the intimidation that these organizations are bringing to bear on Afghan Muslims that are trying to live and worship in peace? I understand your frustration with the destruction that has been wrought in the Middle East and Central Asia by the West, and I do not claim that there have been no unfortunate, even uncalled for aspects of these incursions, but there are responsible parties involved that you are not taking into account. It is necessary for you to do so, otherwise you are blind to the complete picture.

      As for an example of peace between the West and the Middle East, there has been a great deal of peaceful interaction between Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Jordan, in the present, recent past and back into history. I don’t presume to say that either side has had 100% cooperation and love for one another, but that is not a requirement of peaceful relationships between cultures. There is a long history of Muslim rulers welcoming Christians and Jews into Muslim countries and allowing them to practice their religion. Umar, the second Caliph, also known as Al-Farooq, protected the rights of Christians and Jews to worship as they would and encouraged peaceful relations between Muslims, Christians and Jews.

      If I translate what you are saying correctly, you aren’t interested in the views of individuals. If so, then we may be at an impasse. At the end of the day, all interactions are between individuals. A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and likewise great change and a new era of interaction, connection, and peace between our cultures must begin with individual relationships. I have dear friendships with people from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Morocco. I meet their friends and with each ripple of these relationships, we dispel myth, replace ignorance with knowledge and exchange distrust, guardedness, and cynicism for friendship.

      It is possible with an open mind.

  17. رفعت
    02/17/2010 at 7:56 am

    What do you think? This is what I am talking about
    All this talk indicates first that we are talking about two different things
    The second and most important is that you are either completely deluded to inform you of what he says false
    Either you are one of the promoters of these lies
    All this talk would you say is contrary to the facts
    But the neck and twisted facts to suit the views of your countries military oppressive aggressor
    I will not respond in detail about everything you say it
    But I will not respond to most of the speaking
    For you and despite all of the above
    I’m still sticking Bokazepkm information
    I’m trying to show you the true picture quickly goes back to these lies and to repeat
    We wish for this lies what makes the mind accepted
    But they are all fictional
    Oh you know that civilians in Afghanistan, for example, do not die except in the hands of coalition forces
    And I know that everything he says Ban Ki-moon and the United Nations lie
    Is sufficient to know that the United Nations with the United States against the Taliban
    It is not reasonable to believe enemy speaks of his enemy
    United Nations
    U.S. authority, only to falsify the will of the people
    This is what we know about her deeds dirty in our country
    They were spying on us for the benefit of produced them and their protectors
    This is just like
    Says that the good your relationship with the Islamic East
    And set an example in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Jordan
    I have spoken so often before, that these regulations that govern this country, but systems are not an agent of the Americans and the West and Western interests, it provided the interests of the peoples
    And the West knows it, and thanks to this and encourages it
    What is the explanation and only Egypt to build a steel wall on its border with Gaza
    And how do you explain that to America and France in particular role in that and how do you explain the shameful silence of the West, although the Arab street and the Egyptians are angry over the head of all
    To the extent that the President of Egypt and the Government of Egypt has become acting Bhesterip because it knows that its future is at stake and that the country is almost explode at any moment? The evidence for that is what happened with the hero George Galloway
    A (puppet regimes all) if I tried to learn it will not do much facing the West was appointed by the opponents or to freeze assets in its banks
    Which knows it was stolen from the country they govern
    Or face military force to overthrow the rule he also toppled Mullah Omar, may God protect him and he knows that these governments will not find to defend them from their people as it does now with the Afghan Mullah Omar
    For the simple reason that people Tbgdha and hate because they were not only agents of the West to help him destroy the peoples and culture of literacy
    Therefore, it is quick to your service people Vngill
    Or less quick to anger people Biarzaikm
    For it is better to say that your relationship with such good diets despotic dictatorship Aintamoha one way or another
    And that it is contrary with the peoples
    I said before, more than once that these governments puppet Kkrzai and Jalal Talabani and others who know
    However, return us to the same thing
    And speak the same words without trying to learn something about what I say I’m living in this country
    Even say that the Taliban kill Afghan civilians just to Ban Ki-moon deceitful liar, like his predecessors
    Say that
    How, then, and the Afghan people support the Taliban, and why behind them?
    But how they forget that the Taliban are Afghans themselves?
    And that they were hiding among them
    If you know anything about the environment Afghan or Afghan history when I said none of this nonsense
    If you know anything about the people of Egypt or Jordan or Saudi Arabia when I said this nonsense
    Because the peoples of Egypt and Jordan
    And followed in terms of percentage
    Followed by the Saudi people
    Most of these people are waiting for Bonizthm mostly hopes to be able to escape to Palestine or Iraq or Afghanistan to back and defend their brothers with them about religion and supply
    And the rest of these people gullible and absent
    Simply because they trust you and inform you and some of their acts
    Believe me these very Kulaileon for the rest
    Many of these misguided come to you to live with you
    Although they fear that you deal with them when the masks fall as the Inquisition dealt with by the Muslims, but they do not listen to mentors and prefer to live among you to live in this oppressive atmosphere which we live
    Despite knowing that it was you reason for this injustice by supporting these tyrannical governments
    It is this support to the Ninety-closure of Al-Aqsa TV in order to facilitate the task on Amelcm (Mahmoud Abbas)
    Then come back to say you know many Arabs and they Ikalfonni
    Wronged you and you and you have to kill every civilian just because you died several civilians,
    Without even have to ask yourselves
    Why kill the al-Qaeda Western civilians?!
    And that Tktefon Ilkm and that a militant and hates your progress
    All this empty talk and totally lean completely
    You see things in our country, I’m sure it does not exist; because I live where I am from
    I try to describe to you a reality
    You sure it does not exist
    I do not know why you are so sure
    May be deceived
    May be deceptive
    Perhaps I fear that one of those who denounced them as terrorists and are afraid to believe me
    So trust does not exist
    And reject each of us to move towards the other
    I am quite sure that the error Ktwk
    You are deceived if you think that the mistake was my fault
    If you want, you disingenuous not to recognize you and your people Bouktik

    All of this indicates that the attempt Ivhamk true reality
    Is an attempt completely failed
    Permission will not try again, God willing, you
    And peace be upon those who follow guidance!

    • Chris Yount
      02/19/2010 at 1:16 am

      There are times when it’s clear that a discussion is going nowhere and it’s best to simply leave it alone. I don’t want to take up any additional space on Leah’s comments section with this conversation, so I’ll try to sum up.

      You should seek in your heart if you really believe what you are saying. You claim that the Taliban has never killed an Afghan civilian, that all deaths are by coalition forces. This is a startlingly obvious falsehood.

      Your defense generally involves worldwide conspiracy and collaboration that is simply not possible, and wouldn’t be allowed by the nations you include. You suggest that “most” of the citizens of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan want to “escape” to fight in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m find this an amazing claim, since you claim that they are willing to join a militant organization to fight and kill, yet they aren’t willing to break the law of a government they see as apostate and therefore without authority? It doesn’t process.

      I am absolutely willing to move toward you and consider your perspective, but the only way that is possible is for you to accept certain truths that may not put the Taliban or Al Qaeda in the best light. I don’t suggest that Bagram or Abu Ghraib don’t exist and I certainly don’t suggest that they are positive events in the history of the West. In turn, you have to accept that the Taliban and Al Qaeda (or Al Qaeda franchises) are responsible for the murders of great number of civilians. There are no denying either of these facts, and there is no possible way to move forward in a discussion, let alone a relationship, without accepting the basic truths of the situation.

      If that is not possible, then I will pray God’s blessing for you and your family and remain silent.

  18. رفعت
    02/17/2010 at 8:05 am

    Noted that there are a lot of errors in translation was translated by the media, “What share with you,” It is an error
    Here is the text in Arabic:
    أرأيت ؟ هذا هو ما أتكلم عنه
    كل هذا الكلام يدل أولا على أننا نتكلم عن شيئين مختلفين
    والثاني وهو الأهم هو أنك إما مخدوع تماما بما يقوله إعلامكم الكاذب
    وإما أنك أحد مروجي هذه الأكاذيب
    كل هذا الكلام الذي تقوله مخالف للحقائق
    بل ويلوي عنق الحقائق بما يناسب وجهات النظر العسكرية لدولكم المعتدية الغاصبة
    وأنا لن أرد بالتفصيل عن كل ما تكلمتم فيه
    بل ولن أرد على معظم ما تكلمت فيه
    لأنك ورغم كل ما سبق
    مازلتَ متمسك بأكاذيبكم الإعلامية
    أحاول أن أوضح لك الصورة الحقيقية فتعود سريعا إلى هذه الأكاذيب وإلى تكرارها
    وليت لهذه الأكاذيب ما يجعل العقل يقبلها
    ولكنها كلها خيالية
    اعرف يا هذا أن المدنيين مثلا في أفغانستان لا يموتون إلا بأيدي قوات التحالف
    واعلم أن كل ما يقوله بان كي مون والأمم المتحدة كذب وافتراء
    ويكفيك أن تعلم أن الأمم المتحدة مع أمريكا ضد طالبان
    فليس من العقل أن نصدق عدوا يتكلم عن عدوه
    الأمم المتحدة
    مجرد هيئة أمريكية لتزوير إرادة الشعوب
    هذا هو ما نعرفه عنها بأفعالها القذرة في بلادنا
    لقد كانوا يتجسسون علينا لصالح من أنشأهم ومن يحميهم
    وهذا مجرد مثل
    تقول إن علاقتكم جيدة مع الشرق الإسلامي
    وتضرب مثالا بمصر والسعودية و الأردن
    ولقد تكلمتُ كثيرا من قبل عن أن هذه الأنظمة التي تحكم هذه البلاد لا تُعتبر إلا أنظمة عميلة للأمريكان والغرب وأنها تقدم المصالح الغربية على مصالح شعوبها
    والغرب يعرف ذلك ويشكر لها ذلك ويحض على ذلك
    وإلا فبماذا تفسر بناء مصر لجدار فولاذي على حدودها مع غزة
    وبماذا تفسر أن لأمريكا وفرنسا على وجه الخصوص دور في ذلك وبماذا تفسر الصمت المخزي للغرب رغم أن الشارع العربي وعلى رأسه المصريين غاضبون من كل ذلك
    لدرجة أن رئيس مصر وحكومة مصر أصبحت تتصرف بهيستيرية لأنها تعلم أن مستقبلها على المحك وأن البلد يكاد ينفجر في أية لحظة ؟ ودليل ذلك ما حدث مع البطل جورج غالاوي
    وهي ( الأنظمة العميلة كلها ) تعلم أنها إن حاولت ألا تفعل فسوف يواجهها الغرب بالكثير كأن يعين عليها معارضيها أو أن يجمد أرصدتهم في بنوكه
    والتي يعرف جيدا أنها مسروقة من البلاد التي يحكمونها
    أو أن يواجهها حتى بالقوة العسكرية التي تطيح بحكمهم كما أطاح بحكم الملا عمر ـ حفظه الله ـ وهو يعرف أن هذه الحكومات لن تجد من يدافع عنها من أبناء شعبها كما يفعل الأفغان الآن مع الملا عمر
    لسبب بسيط وهو أن شعوبها تبغضها وتكرهها لأنها لم تكن إلا عميلة للغرب تساعده على تدمير الشعوب ومحو ثقافتها
    لذلك فهي تسارع إلى إرضائكم فتُغضب شعوبها
    أو قل تسارع إلى إغضاب شعوبها بإرضائكم
    لذلك فالأفضل أن تقول أن علاقتكم جيدة مع هذه الأنطمة الدكتاتورية المستبدة التي عينتموها بشكل أو بآخر
    وأنها على العكس من ذلك مع الشعوب
    قلتُ أنا من قبل أكثر من مرة أن هذه الحكومات عميلة ككرزاي وجلال طالباني وغيرهم ممن تعرفون
    ومع ذلك تعود بنا إلى نفس الكلام
    وتتكلم بنفس الكلام دون أن تحاول أن تتعلم شيئا من كلامي أنا الذي يعيش داخل هذه البلاد
    بل وتقولون أن الطالبان يقتلون المدنيين الأفغان لمجرد أن بان كي مون المخادع الكذاب مثله مثل من سبقوه
    يقول ذلك
    وكيف إذن يدعم الشعب الأفغاني الطالبان ولماذا يقف خلفهم ؟
    بل كيف تنسى أن هؤلاء الطالبان هم من الأفغان أنفسهم ؟
    وأنهم يتخفون بينهم
    ولو كنتَ تعرف أي شيء عن البيئة الأفغانية أو التاريخ الأفغاني لما قلتَ أيا من هذا الكلام الفارغ
    ولو كنتَ تعرف أي شيء عن الشعب المصري أو الأردني أو السعودي لما قلتَ هذا الكلام الفارغ
    لأن هذه الشعوب المصري والأردني
    ويليهما من ناحية النسبة المئوية
    يليهما الشعب السعودي
    معظم هذه الشعوب يتربصون بأنظمتهم ومعظمهم يتمنى أن يستطيع الهرب إلى فلسطين او العراق أو أفغانستان ليساندوا إخوانهم ويدافعوا معهم عن الدين والعرض
    وبقية هذه الشعوب مخدوعة ومغيبة
    لأنها وببساطة تثق بكم وبإعلامكم وببعض أفعال أنظمتها
    وصدقني هؤلاء قليليون جدا بالنسبة للباقين
    وكثير من هؤلاء المخدوعين يأتون إليكم ليعيشوا بينكم
    رغم خوفنا عليهم أن تتعاملوا معهم ـ حينما تسقط الأقنعة ـ كما تعاملت محاكم التفتيش من قبل مع المسلمين ولكنهم لا يستمعون للناصحين ويفضلون العيش بينكم على العيش في هذه الأجواء الظالمة التي نحيا فيها
    رغم علمهم أنكم أنتم السبب في هذا الظلم بدعمكم لهذه الحكومات المستبدة
    ومن هذا الدعم ما تسعون إليه من إغلاق لقناة الأقصى لكي تسهّل المهمة على عميلكم ( محمود عباس )
    ثم ستعود لتقول أنك تعرف كثيرين من العرب وأنهم يخالفونني
    وأنكم أنتم المظلومون وأنكم لابد أن تقتلوا كل مدني لمجرد أن مات منكم عدة مدنيين
    دون حتى أن تسألوا أنفسكم
    لماذا يقتل تنظيم القاعدة المدنيين الغربيين ؟!
    وتكتفون بأنه يكرهكم وأنه متشدد ويكره تقدمكم
    وكل هذا الكلام الفارغ تماما والهزيل تماما
    أنك ترى في بلادنا أشياء أنا متاكد من انها غير موجودة ؛ لأنني أنا من يعيش فيها
    وأنا أحاول أن أصف لك واقعا
    أنت متأكد من أنه غير موجود
    ولا أعرف لماذا أنت متأكد هكذا
    ربما تكون مخدوعا
    ربما تكون مخادعا
    وربما تخشى أن أكون أحد هؤلاء الذين تصفهم بأنهم إرهابيين وتخشى أن تصدقني
    إذن الثقة غير موجودة
    ويأبى كل منا أن يتحرك تجاه الآخر
    أنا متأكد تماما أن الخطأ خطؤك
    وأنت ـ إن كنت مخدوعا ـ تظن أن الخطأ خطئي
    وإن كنتَ مخادعا فأنت تريد ألا تعترف بخطئك أنت وقومك

    وكل هذا يدل على أن محاولة إفهامك الواقع الحقيقي
    هي محاولة فاشلة تماما
    إذن فلن أحاول بإذن الله مجددا معك
    والسلام على من اتبع الهدى !

  19. رفعت
    02/20/2010 at 8:39 am

    There are no laws in our country prevents us from Islamic Jihad in Palestine or Iraq or Afghanistan
    The very simple reason
    These systems is that repressive regimes do not need the laws of the
    America knows very well, as well as Europe and the Zionists
    All of these know that without this there would be no repression on our state called “Israel”
    Thus supporting these corrupt regimes all this because it protects them
    They protect it
    They are protected by the repression
    I have seen for yourself what happened when they allowed the Palestinians to elect their leadership
    Why choose?!
    Chosen to (Hamas), what do you think?
    If left us choose what we have done only this
    Now you see Gaza now
    Siege for years, however people still hold on Hamas
    Why do not we go to them?
    Because we can not walk away from our country, which has become a big prison for us
    This is the reality in which we live
    And which can not be attested to
    Simply because you live in very different circumstances
    Because you simply do not want to believe
    This is the most important
    You’re ready to move towards me
    This says that you have to agree with you on such and such
    No lie this?
    You are not ready to move towards me
    Will never be as well
    Because you do not see me
    You see another picture completely different from me completely
    And want to assure me of my image as I
    I am one who thinks himself in the mirror
    I am one who thinks himself in the picture
    I am of the opinion in the same glasses and updated on the water in the river
    I know myself and I know what touring the aversion of the prison, and love for my brothers the Mujahideen and love to catch up
    You do not see me to go to
    You can not see me or hear me
    Because of the limits of your vision
    The hearing within
    Will not see me will not hear me
    Because you do not want to see me or hear me
    You do not want to go out of your fortress
    Because you do not know who is outside the
    For anyone like you’re afraid of the unknown
    I’m for you Anonymous
    I’m sure the validity of everything I said
    I am also not interested in something Biguenaek
    Because this will not change reality
    And I know in the end
    I know very well that this situation will not continue
    And victory in the end, we
    We see this victory in our hearts
    We know that we may see with our own eyes day
    Or see our children or grandchildren with their own eyes or their children or grandchildren
    But in the end
    Victory for us. Finished

  20. رفعت
    02/20/2010 at 8:40 am

    لا توجد قوانين في بلادنا تمنعنا من الجهاد في فلسطين أو العراق أو أفغانستان
    لسبب بسيط جدا
    هو أن هذه الأنظمة أنظمة قمعية لا تحتاج لقوانين
    وأمريكا تعلم جيدا وكذلك أوروبا والصهاينة
    كل هؤلاء يعلمون أن لولا هذا القمع لما كان هناك دولة على أرضنا تسمى ” إسرائيل ”
    لذلك يدعم هؤلاء جميعا هذه الأنظمة الفاسدة لأنها تحميهم
    فهم يحمونها
    وهي تحميهم بهذا القمع
    ولقد رأيتِ بنفسك ماذا حدث عندما سمحوا للفلسطينيين بانتخاب قيادتهم
    ماذا اختاروا ؟!
    اختاروا ( حماس )، أرأيت؟
    ولو تركونا نختار لما فعلنا إلا هذا
    وها أنت ترى غزة الآن
    محاصرة منذ أعوام ومع ذلك مازال الشعب متمسكا بحركة حماس
    لماذا لا نذهب إليهم ؟
    لأننا لا نستطيع أن نهرب من بلادنا التي أصبحت سجنا كبيرا لنا
    هذا هو الواقع الذي نعيشه
    والذي لا يمكن أن تصدقه
    لأنك وببساطة تعيش في ظروف مختلفة تماما
    ولأنك وببساطة لا تريد تصديقه
    وهذا هو الأهم
    أنك مستعد للتحرك تجاهي
    هذا وأنت تقول أنه يجب عليّ أن أتفق معك على كذا وكذا
    أي كذب هذا؟
    أنت لست مستعدا للتحرك تجاهي
    ولن تكون كذلك أبدا
    لأنك لا تراني
    أنت ترى صورة أخرى تماما مختلفة عني تماما
    وتريد أن تؤكد لي أنها صورتي أنا
    كيف ؟
    أنا من يرى نفسه في المرآة
    أنا من يرى نفسه في الصورة
    أنا من يرى نفسه في نظارة محدثه وعلى الماء في النهر
    أنا أعرف نفسي وأعرف ما يجول فيها من كره لهذا السجن ومن حب لإخواني المجاهدين وحب للحاق بهم
    أنت لا تراني لكي تتجه إليّ
    أنت لا يمكن أن تراني أو أن تسمعني
    لأن لبصرك حدود
    ولسمعك حدود
    لن تراني ولن تسمعني
    لأنك لا تريد أن تراني أو أن تسمعني
    أنت لا تريد أن تخرج من قلعتك
    لأنك لا تعلم الموجود خارجها
    ولأنك مثل أي إنسان تخاف من المجهول
    أنا بالنسبة لك مجهول
    أنا متأكد من صحة كل ما قلتُه
    كما أنني غير مهتم بإقناعك بشيء
    لأن هذا لن يغير من الواقع شيئا
    واعلم في النهاية
    أنني أعلم جيدا أن هذا الوضع لن يستمر
    وأن النصر في النهاية لنا
    وأننا نرى هذا النصر بقلوبنا
    ونعلم أننا قد نراه يوما بأعيننا
    أو يراه أولادنا بأعينهم أو أحفادنا أو أولادهم أو أحفادهم
    ولكن في النهاية
    النصر لنا .انتهى

  21. KOYAS
    04/09/2010 at 12:34 am

    Allow me to quote Abu Walid’s question: “If in the future it is proven/ or if the Americans admit, or if some of the hidden facts reveal that their war against Afghanistan was unjust and the reasons were manufactured like what happened in Iraq/ are you ready to apologise to the Afghan people or pay reparations to the people who were harmed in Afghanistan?”

    Why can’t you answer the man’s question without stating your beliefs first? It is a hypothetical question! It is a non possibility for you to even consider in your mind the that the reasons for war were manufactured is it? You say everyone knows what really happened in such an assured way, as in come on, let’s be serious here. That very attitude is insulting.

    Peace be with you.

    Peace be with you.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply