Military Review

On peaceful Islam, the identification of terrorists and the need to separate "their" from "alien"

34
Do terrorists have nationality? Religious affiliation? Floor? Height, weight, skin color, eye color and hair color? A silly series of questions, isn't it? Yes. And at the same time, no. It all depends on the purpose for which the terrorist act is being committed.


On peaceful Islam, the identification of terrorists and the need to separate "their" from "alien"


If a terrorist act is committed by an ETA grouping in Spain, Basque nationalists who seek the independence of their homeland, then we say: Basque terrorists committed the crime. They have a nationality. They are Basques. Actually, that's why they commit their shares. At the same time, to say that “terrorists have no nationality,” and a terrorist act was committed simply by some criminals stupid. In this case, one of them could be a brunette, and the second, as it happened - a blond. And it will not make any difference.

But if tomorrow the blond will commit mass violence under the slogan: all power to the blond, kill the brunet and go to heaven, we say that the terrorist was blond. Because in this case it will be significant. Do you understand what I mean?

In our country, terrorist acts are committed by Islamic terrorists. The nationality of the terrorists is different, and, apparently, it is not important. There are among them Russians, and people from the North Caucasus, and others. But they have the same religion: Islam. They themselves consider themselves to Islam and commit their crimes in the name of what they consider to be their religion. Before going on a mission, they read prayers in Arabic, are tied around with some scarves with inscriptions from the Koran, and so on. They are convinced that by killing many people in the name of their god, they will go to his paradise. They are Islamic terrorists.

This does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists. In the example above, we had Basque terrorists and a blond terrorist. This does not mean that all the Basques are terrorists. Or that all blondes are killers. But specifically these terrorists were not just faceless criminals, but a Basque terrorist and a blond murderer, respectively. In this case, nationality and hair color matter. So it is with Islamic terrorists in our country. Their religious affiliation matters, since they associate their actions with the tenets of their religion.

If tomorrow a Christian, following his understanding of religion in the name of Christ, blows up a bus, I'm sorry, we will have to call him a Christian terrorist, despite the fact that other Christians will not support his methods. In the Middle Ages, the Crusaders went to kill in the name of Christ, and we still call them Crusaders, and not just some armed people. And we consider the Holy Inquisition, which sent people to the fire in the name of the purity of faith, as a Catholic tribunal, and not just some unspecified court. When today we call terrorists Islamic terrorists, we simply call a spade a spade. No need to postpone the truth for the sake of the notorious political correctness.

Recently, tragedy happened again. A bus was blown up in Volgograd, several people died, dozens were injured. It is already clear that, most likely, the crime was committed by the so-called “shakhid”, or “shakhid”, that is, a religious suicide fanatic who kills other people with him, because he believes that this victim will open the doors of paradise in front of him. Or, maybe, revenge for the dead "brothers in faith" (and arms), or for a relative, or for a husband, the same “shahid” or terrorist.

Our fellow Muslims, including the ideologues and hierarchs of religion, will of course say: Islam has nothing to do with this. Islam again has nothing to do with it. Never had and now has not. It just so happens that almost all the terrorist acts in Russia are carried out by Islamists and under Islamist slogans.

But we have to say no. Islam has to do with it. There are no accidents. Here we have politics and war. The war of radical Islamists with the world.

We do not say that all Muslims are terrorists. We do not say that Islam is a religion of terror. We have never said such a thing or even thought of it. To say or think this would be a great lie. But Islam has to do with it. You have to be honest and admit your responsibility. It is clear that specific terrorists have nothing to do with the majority of normal law-abiding Muslims of our country. That is why they, normal and law-abiding Muslims, must show solidarity with the country, not with the terrorists. Both in words and in deeds.

To our great regret, sometimes some Muslims of our country, as if peaceful, express sympathy to extremists and terrorists. Justify. For example, by the fact that this was “Russia brought”, or “America brought”, or “they had no other way out”. On the Internet, we saw a whole campaign to support Syrian militants, Islamic terrorists, and warring with the legitimate government of Syria. We met with the strange attitude of our fellow Muslims to such "minor" crimes as arson and explosions of alcohol-selling stores, for example, in Ingushetia. The reaction was this: our brothers went overboard a bit, but on the whole they are right, because according to Sharia, alcohol is prohibited. And if the store was blown up so well that no one was killed, then understand and forgive, which is already there. And even the head of the Republic of Ingushetia on this occasion enters into a theological dispute with villagers-bombers, instead of burning iron out of betrayal with a hot iron, as befits a Russian officer and a Russian official.

Islam has to do with it. And the attitude of Russian Muslims to crimes against Russian law "in the name of Sharia" is related to the most inhuman terrorist acts. Today we set fire to the store, because its assortment does not correspond to the Sharia product range, tomorrow we shoot at girls who don’t wear the hijab with paint, the day after tomorrow with bullets. And then one of the girls in the hijab blows up a bus with people. Alas, everything is connected. Therefore, we must stop right where the red line has drawn Russian law. Not an inch without stepping over.

Dear fellow citizens of all religions, including hierarchs, ideologues, as well as especially the heads of republics, districts, and other respected people. This is Russia. Russia has never been a country of sharia. And never will be. Accept it or leave us. In the world there are countries living under Sharia law; with a great desire, you can move there. If you do not want to leave your native land, the land of fathers, which is understandable, but still you want to live according to the laws of Sharia, then you can stand out, separate with your land. This can be done in a peaceful and legal way. The whole world community respects the principle of self-determination of nations. You need to hold a referendum, and if a qualified majority of your people favors secession and life in an independent and Sharia country, then the process can begin. It is not fast and not easy, but possible.

At the same time, be prepared, of course, that Russia will close its borders with you, visas and stop subsidizing your economy. But never mind, Allah will give you money. If you don’t attack the neighbors, don’t have a terrorist base and grow poppies for heroin production, if you sit quietly, observe the Sharia and pray, no one will touch you.

And if your problem is that you, staunch shariachiki, are in your own people in an insignificant minority, and the majority of the population of your national republic votes in word and deed for life in Russia, then understand that a minority is a minority. Your people chose to live in Russia, and, therefore, according to Russian laws, and not according to Sharia. And personally, you can choose for yourself another Sharia country.

Russia is not a country of sharia. In Russia, you can live in peace and practice your faith. We will improve the situation. We will build more mosques in the big cities of big Russia, because now there are obviously few of them, this really needs to be fixed, so that for holidays you don’t fill streets and squares and pray on the asphalt for good. And all will be well. Russia is the land of peace, for everyone, for Christians, for Hindus, for Jews, and for you too. Do you understand what I am talking about. But Russia is not the land of Sharia, no.

If you therefore decide that Russia is a land of war for you, then you will get a war. Just not the war you are thinking about. The “Russian answer” is not a sweep of the market by a dozen youths, not a skirmish at the bar with guards, not a “Russian march”, not “Russian jogging” and other parody-small shares of insignificant “Russian nationalists”. Real Russians are a state people, a nation-state. The scale of organized violence carried out by Russians is always greater than you can imagine, thinking in terms of family, clan or ethnic.

As an example to you: in one day, to load into wagons and evict an entire people into the wild steppes. And not one people. Or, another thing: put the Russian boot on half of Europe. Do you think Russia has become weaker since then? Periodically, some also thought so. And always wrong.

Loner-terrorists, we will eliminate. We must do it together. Alas, there are maniacs, criminals, in an imperfect mortal life, we can not avoid the appearance of geeks. But criminals should not have any support in society, either direct, indirect, physical or moral. No ideology should be subtly led to the justification of violence and violation of Russian laws, which we sometimes see in “political Islam”.

Sorry for the truth, but as long as there is no unanimous and complete rejection of extremism in the Islamic community, in the “wise” of Russia, we are forced to treat Muslims as a “risk group”. And when the police are especially attentive to bearded citizens, and when they organize raids on places of religious gatherings, it must be understood: there is no discrimination and no particular dislike for Muslims. Russia loves Muslims. Sometimes even more than Russians. But there is a simple science, criminology. For example, gypsies often sell drugs. Therefore, if a lot of heroin is distributed near the Gypsy settlement, it makes sense to go through a raid on Gypsy houses. This does not mean that we do not like gypsies. We love gypsies, and songs, and ah-na-ne. But crime statistics tell us that there are many drug dealers among Roma. And we are going through the gypsy, and what to do?

Alas, extremist ideas and practices are spread throughout the Islamic community as if it were a mycelium. We recognize that this trend is contrary to normal, peaceful Islam, it may be a virus in a healthy body. Let's say. But mycelium is a mycelium. Mycene is one. Therefore, such attention to Muslims in terms of combating terrorism, such a forced bias.

This problem has a solution. And only Muslims can solve it. Russian Islam should, first of all, be united, having forgotten about the discord between those and other hierarchs, to declare a dogma: Russia is the land of peace for Islam. Russian Muslims abandon plans, even theoretical, to introduce Sharia in Russia (as a state and legal regime; a Muslim can and should follow Sharia privately in his personal life, to the extent that Sharia does not contradict Russian laws: for example, a Muslim can do not drink alcohol, well done; but you can't marry a 14-year-old girl or blow up anything, and so on). Russian Muslims accept the power of the Russian government and Russian laws, henceforth forever. All shariachiki, all extremists, all dissenters are declared apostates and heretics. They proclaim a curse and anathema, or whatever you call it. It is publicly announced that all the “martyrs” go straight to hell. Publicly, openly and unequivocally, any interpretation of the scriptures and traditions that even indicate the potential of military jihad and martyrdom is denied. If at the same time foreign “brothers in faith” condemn the Russian Ummah, point out the inadmissibility of such a radical change of teaching, and so on, then God is with them. Spit.

Secondly and practically. The Ummah must itself identify and surrender all extremists, terrorists, preachers of extremism, and accomplices of terrorists to the Russian law enforcement agencies. Oh, you will say how it is possible to force them to inform, to surrender their own! Here it is, check for loyalty. Who is more for you? Are the terrorists “yours” for you or the citizens of Russia who are blown up in buses for you? If the terrorists are more yours for you, then, sorry, you are the accomplices of the terrorists themselves, isn't it? Normal people have their own other normal people, not murderers, even if they are “their own” religion.

Then we will understand, we will see, we will believe that these specific terrorists have no religion, that Islam is a religion of peace, Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, and Russian Muslims have ours, ours, on the side of the world. And there will be fewer checks, and the bearded ones will attract no more police than the red ones, and build as many mosques as necessary.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_30945/
34 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Revolver
    Revolver 26 October 2013 06: 56
    10
    I have a lot to say on this topic. But I recently received reminder from one of the moderators of the following content:
    The site is strictly prohibited:
    e) An insult to religious beliefs and feelings of citizens, such as: the publication of anti-religious demotivators, sayings, poems, videos and audio clips, etc .;

    Therefore, all that I will say - the article raises questions and offers solutions, albeit halfway, but in the right direction. Bold plus. And I would like to put 100500 pluses.
    1. Starfish
      Starfish 26 October 2013 10: 40
      +3
      "I have a lot to say on this topic."

      everyone already has something to say on this topic.
      Sadulayev is not my authority, but in this article he correctly, readily, almost on his fingers, outlined the vision of the problem of Islamist terrorism as a simple non-belligerent person.
      I also think. that if Russian Muslims really were such a strong cohesive force, which they sometimes want to seem, then these terrorists would have long been transferred as bugs. and as ummah as a swan, cancer and pike. one is Sharia, the other is the loyalty of Russia, and the third is all the same.
      1. bolonenkov
        bolonenkov 26 October 2013 12: 04
        0
        The author has beguiled fight for religion и separatism.
        It doesn't smell like religion there. And our and Western media give a religious coloring to all this using the words "ISLAMist", "ISLAMIC radicalist", "SHAHID", etc.
        How then to explain the war for the religion of the same terrorists in Syria, where they blow up Muslims, or the tragedy in Beslan, where probably all were Muslims without exception?
        These are the gangsters who get paid, and they fulfill the order, and religion is a cover, smart people understand this. The same situation with the democratic bombing of Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya - there is no democracy there and will not be, but there is oil
        1. Geisenberg
          Geisenberg 27 October 2013 17: 19
          0
          Quote: bolonenkov
          The author has beguiled fight for religion и separatism.
          Religion there does not smell.


          Nitsche not beguiled, all in the suit.
          he clearly said - the name of the process, and the process itself is terrorism, that is, in our case, Islamic terrorism.
  2. Humpty
    Humpty 26 October 2013 07: 11
    +1
    Everyone who has grown a beard and dressed in an Arabian fancy dress is at risk. As not every alcoholic will die precisely from cirrhosis, but the liver will still not be healthy.
    1. Ptah
      Ptah 26 October 2013 08: 57
      +4
      Quote: Humpty
      Everyone who has grown a beard and dressed in an Arabian fancy dress is at risk.

      Yes. Not everyone but
      To our great regret, sometimes some Muslims of our country, as if peaceful, express sympathy for extremists and terrorists. Justify. For example, the fact that it was “Russia brought”, or “America brought”, or “they had no other choice”

      Inevitably, social stratification in society. And it only grows.
      There is discontent among the poor. After all, no matter how much they spit in the direction of "watches and mercians of Christian priests", Muslims show this no less.
      And Wahhabism also implies, if I am not mistaken, the polls slaveryequality before one Allah and according to the laws of Sharia.
      So everything is logical - while t.s. the "laws of Marx in terms of capital" apply - Wahhabism will not destroy! And no boundaries can be saved from it.
      Exhortation does not help. Islamic preachers are intimidated by numerous killings and attempted killings. Then the bearded won.
      And if you still think that any healthy nationalism that opposes itself to Islamic hordes is exposed EXACTLY DESTROYED, then what can I say - get ready ...
  3. a52333
    a52333 26 October 2013 07: 12
    +3
    Quote: Nagan
    the article raises questions and offers solutions, albeit halfway, but in the right direction. Bold plus.
    Egypt, by the way, confirmation. They tried to live under Sharia - did not like it. Now heels forward.
    1. alone
      alone 26 October 2013 17: 30
      +1
      They are convinced that by killing many people in the name of their god, they will go to him in paradise. They are Islamic terrorists.


      The author forgets that GOD is the same for everyone. There is no stranger or his god.

      Islam again has nothing to do with this. Never had, and now has not. It just so happens by chance that almost all terrorist acts in Russia are carried out by Islamists and under Islamic slogans.


      Islam, like other religions, condemns suicide. A suicide cannot go to heaven.
      these people cover up their crimes with Islam. in reality, these people serve Satan. And it’s right to call Satanists not Islamists.
      1. a52333
        a52333 27 October 2013 08: 47
        0
        Quote: lonely
        in fact, these people serve Satan
        I agree, Omar. But Saudi Arabia is a sponsor of Wahhabism too "succeeding" in discrediting Islam.
  4. George
    George 26 October 2013 07: 39
    +5
    Hello everyone .
    It is clear that specific terrorists are in no way connected with the majority of normal law-abiding Muslims in our country. That is why they, normal and law-abiding Muslims, must show solidarity with the country, and not with the terrorists. Both in words and in deed.

    Here I am about the same.
    A video where a hobite in a mosque in Moscow calls for jihad against Russia - I did not notice that the talker was besieged, they said, "Why are you talking freak?" , or even stammered. They stood, listened, filmed.
    Once I left a post about the struggle of the Muslims themselves with the monsters, without whom there is nothing in the family, and Magomed (Dagestani 333) answered how they treated a couple of "muddy" guys. I've talked about such solidarity, but it's still a drop in the ocean.
    And on the other hand, what has the government done?
    1. Field
      Field 26 October 2013 08: 36
      +2
      A single case, in Bolsheviks, quiet solidarity.
      Heydar Jamal type in the search, read comrade ...
      And what else does the imam say to his "ummah" in the mosque?
      Speak Saudi Arabia a hotbed of terrorism and Wahhabism and other delights of Islam?
      And where do the Islamic Shariah enlighteners come from?
      Where do Muslims perform Hajj?

      Can translate the service into Russian?
      And a theological school in Russia, without which the theologian will not be able to engage in his activities (just as he should not be engaged in it, upon arrival from the Saudis and Qatari)?

      Hizbut-Tahrir is in the Crimea and in Russia, in Dagestan, Ingushetia, and Tatarstan.
      go through archive news for a couple of years:
      "The imam was detained, the imams were fined, the literature of an extremist nature was seized", etc., etc.
      And this is all over Russia, where there are Muslims.
      Maybe no one would look askance at you (Muslims) if you brought at least a couple of beaten (or whole) "preachers", or even the "imams" or sheikhs themselves who broadcast extremist ideas. Or dug just somewhere ...
      All the same, "Satanists" according to your faith, what a sin.
      And did not cover them.
    2. IRON_MAN
      IRON_MAN 26 October 2013 09: 07
      0
      Putting things in order (with the very removal of power) should be initiated primarily by the national communities themselves. In this regard, the so-called diasporas, unfortunately, actually play a diametrically opposite role. In Krasnodar, with the introduction of Cossack patrols by Tkachev, youth organizations proposed to form patrols from representatives of different nationalities, which would contribute to self-control among ethnic youth. However, things did not go beyond the usual words "this is certainly a good idea" and "we will consider this option." Activists volunteered to patrol. As a result, the information campaign began to be conducted in the spirit of "here the Cossacks will deal with these non-Russians" under the "Cossack patrols" a lot of money began to be allocated, in the "Cossacks" they began to recruit, as they say according to the ad, for a salary of 40. I don’t know how in Krasnodar, but in our country, assigned to reinforce the patrols by 000 people, they were engaged in dispersal of incorrectly parked cars near the shopping center and the youngsters were bred to their homes after 3:22. In general, as always, everything rests on corruption and stubbornness of the authorities, resulting in the growth of nationalism on the one hand and a sense of permissiveness of certain primates on the other.
  5. DZ_98_B
    DZ_98_B 26 October 2013 07: 58
    +5
    Russia is the land of the world for Islam .... well, well. And then what? Do we Russians have a place in Russia? Atheism was under the USSR, the national question was settled, it seems to me that it is religion that is tearing the country apart. Yesterday I saw Kadyrov’s interview with reporters. how he loves Russia and Putin, and some Chechens are peaceful and cool. and followed by footage, the journalist took off when he was driving to the terrible airport. the wipers take out the garbage in the ....... Russian flag.
    1. bolonenkov
      bolonenkov 26 October 2013 12: 22
      0
      Where are the Russians oppressed?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  6. Kolya
    Kolya 26 October 2013 08: 16
    +1
    After 60 years, we finally begin to understand and return to the brilliant ideas of Stalin. Denunciation is not immoral if it is aimed at preventing terrorism, corruption and other crimes. This is civil society, when citizens monitor and can contribute to order in the country.
    1. Tyumen
      Tyumen 26 October 2013 11: 48
      0
      Leave civil society to the West. Russia has always been a traditional society,
      that in the form of the Russian Empire, that in the form of the Soviet Union.
  7. Gregory87
    Gregory87 26 October 2013 08: 20
    +3
    as it was at a lecture on religious movements in Islam, and so there alone the captain told us about Shiites, Sunnis, Halafites, Sallafites, Wahhabis, and many others, in general, this situation reminds me of Christianity of the Middle Ages when Christianity was also divided and divided into many movements and individual sects, when the Catholics called the Orthodox and Protestants heretics, and calmly, with the approval of the pope, they started wars against them, the Crusades arranged, the point is not that Islamist terrorists do not kill and blow up Muslims, they kill Muslims like everyone else, but maybe more and more in the same Syria, they are fighting against everyone and it’s not a matter of religion but of their business implicated in religion, and while their business will be in demand while there will be a sea of ​​money pouring into these groups and there will be explosions in the streets, and light up civil wars in countries
  8. Normal
    Normal 26 October 2013 08: 40
    +2
    And I will step on the throat of my own song and intervene .... FOR ISLAM.
    Not that Islam is a peaceful religion and the like. This is what we hear after every trick of the Islamists. And by the fact that the author deftly replaces causes and effects. They say we’ll declare Sharia outside of the law in Russia, we’ll build more mosques in Russia, and everyone will be fine. Will not be. Because Islamic Sharia extremism is not the cause of terrorism, or rather, not its basis. The basis of Islamist terrorism in the ethno-religious consciousness of certain peoples, actively fueled by the Gulf states, but still its own, local, CAUCASUS.
    You can build mosques and get as a result a lot of recruitment centers for potential extremists from moderate Muslims or Russian converts. You can do as the author suggests
    This problem has a solution. And only Muslims can solve it. Russian Islam should, first of all, be united, having forgotten about the discord between those and other hierarchs, to declare a dogma: Russia is the land of peace for Islam. Russian Muslims abandon plans, even theoretical, to introduce Sharia in Russia (as a state and legal regime; a Muslim can and should follow Sharia privately in his personal life, to the extent that Sharia does not contradict Russian laws: for example, a Muslim can do not drink alcohol, well done; but you can't marry a 14-year-old girl or blow up anything, and so on). Russian Muslims accept the power of the Russian government and Russian laws, henceforth forever. All shariachiki, all extremists, all dissenters are declared apostates and heretics. They proclaim a curse and anathema, or whatever you call it. It is publicly announced that all the “martyrs” go straight to hell. Publicly, openly and unequivocally, any interpretation of the scriptures and traditions that even indicate the potential of military jihad and martyrdom is denied. If at the same time foreign “brothers in faith” condemn the Russian Ummah, point out the inadmissibility of such a radical change of teaching, and so on, then God is with them. Spit.

    But this will not give a result, because moderate mullahs and theologians are being killed now. That is, we have not yet made a move, we only proposed moving the piece to a new field, and this piece has already been blown up, along with the entire chessboard.
    While in the Caucasus there will be a population-supported base of radical ethno-religious extremism, nothing will change.
    Here it is necessary either to establish a strict order in the Caucasus, which we have not been able to do in the entire history of relations with the Caucasian peoples, or to separate the Caucasus. Declare these territories rebellious, prohibit the free movement of natives of these places across Russia, and generally sharply restrict their rights. While a significant part of the population of the Caucasus contrasts itself with the Russians, the Caucasus cannot claim equal rights within Russia.
    And Islam (in its pure form) has nothing to do with this. Islam is also in Tatarstan, but somehow we get along with the Tatars.
    While
    1. crazy_fencer
      crazy_fencer 26 October 2013 09: 58
      +6
      Quote: "Islam is also in Tatarstan, but somehow we get along with the Tatars. For now."

      Exactly what for now. The author in the article seems to write everything correctly, but all the same - an article on the topic "retired woman - catch a spy!" Somehow everyone forgot that it is in Tatarstan that there are a lot of Wahhabi madrasahs, diligently preparing the ideologists of that very Islamic terrorism. In Tatarstan and also in Bashkiria. And what? In exchange for Tatar oil and Bashkir honey, the government pretends not to notice them? So this ostrich policy will sooner or later hiccup with a lot of blood.
      And I will add one more thing. The Uzbeks and Tajiks working at construction sites and housing enterprises are also Muslims. As if peaceful and even friendly. For the time being, too. Personally, I did not forget how Tashkent was rebuilt by the whole country after it was almost completely destroyed by an earthquake in 1966. And then ... then, in 1969, Russians were slaughtered in Tashkent. Probably out of gratitude. And then there was the Ferghana massacre, the Osh massacre, the Namangan massacre and so on.
      1. bolonenkov
        bolonenkov 26 October 2013 11: 56
        0
        Come to Bashkiria and Tatarstan, the fact that there are criminals and they use religion for their own selfish purposes I will not begin to scream about
        that it is precisely in Tatarstan that the mass of Wahhabi madrassas is located, which are diligently preparing the ideologists of that very Islamic terrorism.

        complete nonsense! But such a problem exists, and there is it in Moscow time and in St. Petersburg - EVERYWHERE


        And then there was the Ferghana massacre, the Osh massacre, the Namangan massacre and so on.

        What is the conflict between Uzbeks and Kyrgyzs related to the topic under discussion?
        For that matter, since the beginning of the 90s there has been a slogan "RUSSIA for Russians", the question arises, "Why do they offend Tatars, Bashkirs, Kalmyks, Yakuts and more than 100 other nationalities and nationalities, for what sins?
    2. Ascetic
      Ascetic 26 October 2013 19: 13
      +2
      Quote: Normal
      Here it is necessary either to establish a strict order in the Caucasus, which we have not been able to do in the entire history of relations with the Caucasian peoples, or to separate the Caucasus. Declare these territories rebellious, prohibit the free movement of natives of these places across Russia, and generally sharply restrict their rights.


      If now almost all of the oil is owned by non-Russian oligarchs (or Russian but still managed by non-Russians, then it is no longer Russian, and let them sell their shares to anyone, what difference does it make? We have globalization and a fair distribution of resources. As Ms. Albright said, in the spirit that it’s unfair that one people owns so many resources that the others so badly need. It’s logical? More than that. So the Caucasus is alien and almost completely non-Russian, so why do Russians feed the Caucasus and, in addition, suffer humiliation? So it’s profitable for someone. the Caucasus and the authorities that pursue this policy. So the government is anti-Russian and Putin’s protege of the Caucasian mafia. It’s logical? Well. If you conduct a survey, then 70 percent of the population will be of the same opinion. You can hold a referendum and goodbye to the Caucasus, as Transcaucasia did. is it too bold after all that they have done with the Russians to grant independence as well? From some buoys. We still haven’t sued them for enocide, let them prattle for now.
      So to separate a piece of the mountainous area is a stupid occupation. Moreover, answer the question of how you will restrict them in your rights in Russia? How to select property to deprive registration, the right to free movement? It is necessary to separate not territories, but ethnic groups. But no one will ever do this until National Socialism has been rehabilitated in Europe. Even in Israel, they are forced to reckon with the Arab citizens of the country, despite all the walls and a tough migration policy. the slogan of the inhabitants of the city of Pugachev sounded "Evict", not "Separate". And it is right. The Russian people are faced with a difficult choice. With a state policy that forces him to turn the other cheek to the bandits who are not bound by the ideas of abstract humanism, he is doomed to be destroyed by backward ethnic groups. I have already written about Kosovo and what it can lead to in Moscow. For this process is objective and sooner or later they will require not only to pay tribute but also take everything. like the Albanians among the Serbs with the total destruction of these. Let's overthrow Putin's protege of the Caucasian mafia and put to power kreakl with nationalists and hereditary invalids of the fifth column? It was already with them there was Chechnya and the struggle of the freedom-loving Chechen people for independence with Elena
      Masyuk led and human rights activist Kovalev in the Grozny basement. And after thousands of ruined lives of our guys to give them their blood through the blood of the blood? Why the hell there. Moreover, this process will obviously go according to the Syrian scenario with the support of the international community against the bloody dictator Putin who committed genocide against Chechen brothers of faith. there are peoples, by virtue of their mentality and customs, who do not want or are not able to live according to the laws common to all citizens of the country. A donkey can only be raised with a stick, so talk about respecting ethnic traditions must be stopped.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 26 October 2013 19: 16
        +2
        The peoples to whom the Bolsheviks have carved up territories can preserve their national identity only in them. I went to someone else's territory - I forgot about my ethnicity. Unable to part with the donkey mentality, stay at home. All that is needed is a law according to which the activity of all cultural communities and ethnic diasporas on the territory of Russia outside the territories specially stipulated by law is declared illegal. The same applies to religious affiliation. Is Islam traditional for the territory? Demonstrate the chador, hide the cross. Slavic land? Take off your turban, put on a panama hat. Because others are not annoyed by a person who does not stick out his faith or nationality. And if you demonstrate your otherness in an alien ethnic environment, then you are deliberately showing "I am a stranger, I am not like that." Let the authorities punish for this.
        Only the authorities defending national interests will be able to establish order in the issue of "diasporas" and "subsidized regions" without any separation. And first of all, to solve the problems of our current "semi-dependent" status, as well as corruption and "feeding" - otherwise it will not be power, but still the same Chubais, only in profile.
        therefore normal and sensible people in the same Biryulyovo demand that the authorities put things in order, and for some reason they don’t go to Bolotnaya with kreaks and invalids of the fifth column to overthrow Putin and separate the Caucasus.
        Moreover, in the Caucasus there are pro-Russian elites and entire peoples - the same Ossetians. Shall we betray them? Or, say, we recently recognized the Abkhazians, who even formally did not leave the USSR, but we will cut them off to hell with their kindred Circassians, Kabardians, Circassians, for whom they will tear their throats? Isn't it idiocy? And in general, to cultivate a non-existent project of a "united anti-Russian Caucasus" with your own hands is what a Russophobe you have to be!
        So one can argue that the most inefficient area is non-black earth. And the most unprofitable people will not be the Caucasians at all - namely, the Russians. What to take from the Russians? No dough, no connections, no enterprise, and now more and more often - knowledge. It is "more efficient" to populate Russia with Tajiks or Chinese, who will work here 14 hours a day for $ 100 a month. And then you can shout-Enough to feed Russia, down with the Russians who did not fit into market relations. But seriously, the meaning of North. Caucasus is at least to contain the pressure of the multimillion-dollar Islamist South, preventing it from spreading to the rest of Russia. And for good reason, we desperately need Transcaucasia for this: tsars and commissars were not stupid.
        Oddly enough, the idea to chop off more land from Russia came to mind not only "otdetsov". Interestingly, does Brzezinski approve of the dismemberment of Russia? And what about the OSCE and the PACE, who once treated the "freedom-loving Ichkerian rebels"? And London, which sheltered Zakayev? Will the eyes of the Western ambassadors light up from our own handwritten return of the Kemsky Volost? And how do the Turks or the Saudis, for example, who sponsor all kinds of Wahhabis-Salafis and send all kinds of Khattabs to us, look at this issue? And the descendants of the policemen from UNA-UNSO, who are preparing the militant camps for training "to resist the Russian army and the Ministry of Internal Affairs"? These "friends of Russia" are not interested in the Caucasus - give them Kuban and Don. So why adapt to the most obvious Russophobes who are ready to kill us?
  9. vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 26 October 2013 09: 25
    +2
    We are not saying that all Muslims are terrorists. We are not saying that Islam is a religion of terror. We have never said such a thing or even thought. To say or think this would be a great lie. But Islam has something to do with it. One must be honest and acknowledge one's responsibility. It is clear that specific terrorists are in no way connected with the majority of normal law-abiding Muslims in our country. That is why they, normal and law-abiding Muslims, must show solidarity with the country, and not with the terrorists. In words and in deeds ... And if your problem is that you, convinced Shariat people, in your own people are in an insignificant minority, and the majority of the population of your national republic vote in word and deed for life in Russia, then understand that the minority Is a minority. Your people chose to live in Russia, and, therefore, according to Russian laws, and not according to Sharia. And personally, you can choose a different, Sharia country for yourself ... Then we will understand, we will see, we will believe that these specific terrorists have no religion, that Islam is the religion of the world, Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, and Russian Muslims - ours, ours, on the side of the world. And there will be fewer checks, and the bearded will not attract the police more than the red ones, and they will build as many mosques as they need.

    In early October, Ramazan Abdulatipov announced that Dagestan students would be recalled from Islamic universities in “crisis countries”. In his opinion, this should prevent the participation of young Dagestanis in the religious wars waged by Islamic fundamentalists.
    The State Duma adopted on Friday, immediately in the second and third readings, a law providing for the possibility of compensation for harm from the actions of a terrorist at the expense of his relatives and friends.
    Our leaders are starting to wake up. It ought to be early and so much blood and victims would not have been.
  10. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 26 October 2013 09: 27
    0
    I always want to ask Muslims, those who consider themselves normal, are you against the slogan of fundamentalists who want and make every effort to make the world Muslim? that there would be no other religions except Islam. To be absolutely honest, not a single Muslim will say that he is categorically against it. That everyone has a choice in what to believe and what not to believe. In fact, who will deny that a child born in a Muslim family is a native Muslim. No one asks him, and most importantly with age, declare that he, for example, cannot be an atheist. Those. maybe of course, maybe only after that he will become an outcast. And there are countries where they can just kill him. The fundamentalists of Islam will never be rejected by the Islamic community, precisely because they are based on the foundation of Islam. The foundation that was written a thousand years ago. That's a thousand years ago, and Muslims are leading, which of them is resisting? there are very, very few of them. A simple example of a dispute over a hijab in the Stavropol Territory. Which of the Muslims spoke out and said that this was a relic? who condemned medieval aspiration to the past? Yes, no one. There were none. The conclusion from all of the above is Islam and there are Islamists who are an integral part of Islam. And to separate one from the other is not just a mistake, but a crime.
    1. IRON_MAN
      IRON_MAN 26 October 2013 11: 28
      0
      By your logic, I should be a Muslim by birth ... I am not a Muslim ... then, by your logic, I should be an outcast ... I communicate with Dagestanis (3 different ethnic groups) and Chechens (ardent Nazis, according to popular opinion) I communicate perfectly, in one campaign we have Greeks, Russians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Dagis, Czechs, Tatars, Uzbeks, one German and one ... Jew)) You know, I will not say that this is a pattern, and I will not say that an isolated case ... just like for me, good people do not distinguish between themselves, they are put by bad and just embittered people, and people with prejudices. I also want to add that faith, even in Allah, even in Khrest, even in Kolovrat, should be in the soul and not outside, and lead to moral education.
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 26 October 2013 11: 38
        0
        And you did not try not just to look through the text, but also to reflect on what was written. And then how do I know who you are? and what religious views do you have? I’m talking about the influence of Islam and its foundation. You tell me about a special case.
    2. bolonenkov
      bolonenkov 26 October 2013 11: 48
      0
      I have a few questions for you.
      1)
      I always want to ask Muslims, those who consider themselves normal, are you against the slogan of fundamentalists who want and make every effort to make the world Muslim?

      The slogan and methods for achieving it are two different things.
      For example, Democrats want the world to be democratic, but the way they do it in Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, etc., is not in line with its basic principles. By your logic, it turns out that democracy is a crime. I think Christians are not opposed to their teachings spreading more and more widely, both Muslims and Jews, but not by the methods of "terrorism".

      2)
      No one asks him, and most importantly with age, declare that he, for example, cannot be an atheist. Those. maybe of course, maybe only after that he will become an outcast.

      In the Russian Federation, a bunch of representatives of Turkic peoples (Tatars, Bashkirs, etc.) are atheists or Christians, are they outcasts for the rest of the Bashkirs and Tatars?

      3)
      That's a thousand years ago, and Muslims are leading, which of them is resisting? there are very, very few of them.

      Why should they resist? Are Christians or Jews Resisting?

      4)
      A simple example of a dispute over a hijab in the Stavropol Territory. Which of the Muslims spoke out and said that this was a relic? who condemned medieval aspiration to the past?

      Since when have religious demands become a relic? Oh yes, I forgot, mom + dad = family is also a relic. On my own behalf, I’ll say that in today's reality, I’m on the side of the school principal, a scarf can be worn outside the school and in a madrasah, but in principle it’s not clear what the problem really is if Petya is sitting in the classroom with a cross on his chest and Alfia in a scarf and they are supposed to make no difference
      5)
      The conclusion from all of the above is Islam and there are Islamists who are an integral part of Islam. And to separate one from the other is not just a mistake, but a crime.


      The term Islamist has a clearly negative connotation, and in the press becomes a synonym for a masked person and with AKM in his hands. If you follow your logic, is it also a crime to separate law-abiding and criminals?

      If you want to answer, follow the numbering.
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 26 October 2013 13: 36
        0
        well by numbers so by numbers:
        1. By the way, you yourself answered your first question, if a democratic society supports a forceful, inhuman decision to introduce democracy, then I am convinced that this is a crime, and the whole democratic society is criminal and immoral. Support, even if silent of any crime, is no less a crime.
        2. It is not worth comparing the big cities where, for good, no one cares about who lives and what they believe in. But in the province and especially the mono national and especially mono religious, everything is completely different. Ask about this, for example, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries with a fully Islamic population.
        3. Christianity has not led anyone anywhere for a long time, it simply went over to the plane of moral or spiritual exchange. Islam, the very Islam that is spreading around the world now, requires adherence to medieval traditions and rules. Although of course you may not be aware. Ask how people live in the newly converted Islamic territories.
        4. And what do you think is wearing a burqa, for example? and such traditions in Islam abound. Do not confuse spiritual and moral rules, and the requirements for observing not only strange but also wild traditions of the past. As for the family, this is your speculation simply from the lack of worthy arguments. Where did you read that I am against the family?
        5. The term Islamist for your information means: a person follows the fundamental canons of Islam and one who, by force or belief, imposes precisely the fundamentalist, medieval traditions of Islam. By the way, from the point of view of Islam, this is not even a hint of crime. Because so many, or rather, most Muslims do not even resent such agitators.
        1. bolonenkov
          bolonenkov 26 October 2013 15: 50
          0
          1) So all of Europe, Russia and many states of America, especially the USA, are immoral! So?

          2) Why do you cite Afghanistan as an example, not Syria or Turkey, where the two religions coexist and find complete understanding?
          Moreover, I’ll tell you about Tatarstan and Bashkiria, there are also villages, villages and towns where the mosque and the church stand across the road, or are absent altogether, which doesn’t prevent someone from believing in money and someone in the One God.

          3) The question was why should they resist? Are Christians or Jews Compassionate?

          4) The question was Since when do religious requirements become a relic? Why should they be considered a relic? An example about a family is an analogy to your concept of a "relic" of time

          5) What are the fundamental canons of Islam? And how are they bad? How do they differ from today?
          How are medieval Islamic traditions different from current ones, for example, in Bashkiria and Tatarstan?
          1. vladsolo56
            vladsolo56 26 October 2013 17: 18
            0
            Quote: bolonenkov
            1) So all of Europe, Russia and many states of America, especially the USA, are immoral! So?

            2) Why do you cite Afghanistan as an example, not Syria or Turkey, where the two religions coexist and find complete understanding?
            Moreover, I’ll tell you about Tatarstan and Bashkiria, there are also villages, villages and towns where the mosque and the church stand across the road, or are absent altogether, which doesn’t prevent someone from believing in money and someone in the One God.

            3) The question was why should they resist? Are Christians or Jews Compassionate?

            4) The question was Since when do religious requirements become a relic? Why should they be considered a relic? An example about a family is an analogy to your concept of a "relic" of time

            5) What are the fundamental canons of Islam? And how are they bad? How do they differ from today?
            How are medieval Islamic traditions different from current ones, for example, in Bashkiria and Tatarstan?

            Do not be offended, but to conduct lekbez, I have no desire here, you are a competent person, you can find answers to all your questions on the Internet, if you wish. But as I understand it, your questions do not require an answer; in this way you express your position. And this is your right, just do not say that this is true. So I also just expressed my opinion, and I know for sure that such an opinion will have many opponents. However, this is a personal matter for everyone. But time will judge us and show who was right.
            1. bolonenkov
              bolonenkov 27 October 2013 09: 17
              0
              Do not forget that along with freedom of speech comes responsibility for words, and equating Muslims and terrorists covering their base goals with religion and refusing to share them is a potential catalyst for interfaith hostility
  11. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 26 October 2013 09: 48
    0
    That's right, terrorists are leaving the midst of Islamic society and this forces the rest to squint at him. This can only cause an increase in extremist sentiment. A vicious circle and enjoy it, which is why
    This problem has a solution. And only Muslims themselves can solve it.

    And there is only one obstacle, general corruption on the ground. Surely, personal courage is required, but without the support of the law it looks generally an ungrateful undertaking. All problems are solved by people.
  12. bolonenkov
    bolonenkov 26 October 2013 10: 07
    0
    I don’t understand one thing, the author writes
    "we still call them crusaders, and not just some armed people",

    why is there no mention of religion? Cross? Many people have it, why they did not call them SS Christian shelves, after all, they committed genocide.
    "The Holy Inquisition, which sent people to the stake in the name of the purity of the faith, we consider a Catholic tribunal, and not just some kind of indefinite trial."

    So why the Holy and just a tribunal, not Christian radical repressions

    After all, when the name of a religion such as ISLAMIST, ISLAMIC radical, SHAHID, MUJAHID is inserted into the very name of a crime, this provokes a different understanding of the problems, and for ordinary people, to whom the author and many educated (!!!) people do not belong, a simple formula comes to mind " A MUSLIM IS A TERRORIST ", but the fact that the word Shahid is not synonymous with kamikaze or a suicide terrorist becomes a matter of second or third plan.

    The problem of terrorism in the Russian Federation does not lie in the sphere of religion and its oppression, but in the desire of certain circles in the Caucasus SEPARATE FROM RF in the 90s, respectively, to call terrorists in the Russian Federation Islamic is not correct, as well as to call the Basque terrorists - Christian, and they both fight for independence with the help of weapons and blood. Accordingly, their name is "separatists" or "terrorists-separatists", well, or to the extreme "Dudayev separatists", and if not, then "Chechen", but not "Islamic terrorists".

    The author writes
    "If a terrorist act is committed in Spain by the ETA group, Basque nationalists seeking independence for their homeland, then we will say: the crime was committed by the Basque terrorists.
    .
    blond ... the terrorist was blond. "


    That is, they call these people in accordance with the goals that they pursue, and not with what they hide or are motivated
    But then all of a sudden
    "In our country, terrorist acts are committed ISLAMIC TERRORISTS. ... But they have one religious affiliation: Islam. ABOUT... commit their crimes in the name of what they consider their religion... .... ... killing many people in the name of their god, they will go to him in paradise. THEY ISLAMIC TERRORISTS."


    So during the bombings of houses in Moscow, the hostage-taking on Dubrovka, Beslan, there were demands -
    a) recognize the independence of Chechnya
    b) withdraw troops

    there was no requirement to change the constitution to Sharia law. Accordingly, their goal is separatism, and it so happened that the population of these republics is Muslim, the Basques are also Christians, and perhaps they went to church before the next bombing, or were baptized by pressing the fuse button

    IMHO, the author started well, but he revealed the problem from the wrong angle, and accordingly all his analogies with the Basques and Crusaders are of no use. And at the root lies a misunderstanding of the source of the problem.
  13. DNX1970
    DNX1970 26 October 2013 10: 32
    0
    everything is written correctly, you want to live in RUSSIA, we have a secular state, do you want according to the laws of Islam? Separate and live at your own expense or leave for the Islamic republics ...
    1. bolonenkov
      bolonenkov 26 October 2013 10: 54
      +1
      according to the laws of Islam, you can live in peace in the Russian Federation, as has been happening for several centuries. Do not confuse religion and politics; in Syria, terrorists are at war with civilians, mostly Muslims. They are not fighting for religion, they are engaged in terrorism and they are executing orders
      1. Yuri Y.
        Yuri Y. 26 October 2013 17: 33
        0
        Quote: bolonenkov
        Do not confuse religion and politics

        The fact of the matter is that everything is already mixed up without us, called political Islam (the same "Muslim Brotherhood"). Why do you ignore the way you motivate yourself to achieve your goal. If someone says we will live separately from everyone and I will reign over you by the right of the strong, or having appropriated the right to interpret the word of God, maybe on his behalf, God will say so. Who will they follow? even if someone understands everything, even if they pay for it. In addition, moral prohibitions are removed. I'm not saying that people who interpret it (or to whom they most likely interpret it) may think differently whether they told me correctly. They are the environment and source of recruits, and this is what the article says in my opinion. What if everyone is brainwashed?
        1. bolonenkov
          bolonenkov 27 October 2013 09: 20
          0
          Quote: DNX1970
          everything is written correctly, you want to live in RUSSIA, we have a secular state, do you want according to the laws of Islam? Separate and live at your own expense or leave for the Islamic republics ...


          A person really believes that the laws of Islam are something that cannot exist on the territory of the Russian Federation without harming or disturbing anyone.
          1. Yuri Y.
            Yuri Y. 27 October 2013 17: 30
            0
            In my opinion, the quote you quoted just refers to the rejection of political Islam, i.e. Islamic laws raised to the degree of state. In the article, on the contrary, he talks about such an opportunity and its conditions
            forgetting the discord between those and other hierarchs, declare a dogma: Russia is the land of the world for Islam. Russian Muslims abandon plans, even theoretical ones, to introduce Sharia in Russia (as a state and legal regime; a Muslim can and should follow Sharia in private, in his personal life, to the extent that Sharia does not contradict Russian laws:
  14. smersh70
    smersh70 26 October 2013 11: 22
    0

    here is YOU and the vice-speaker of the DUMA .......... just here the topic of Islam and terrorism .... Shevchenko completely bombed Zhirik))))
    1. Starfish
      Starfish 26 October 2013 11: 51
      +1
      yeah really. leading jew. Zhirik Jew. Shevchenko’s muddy type.
      why watch it? which of them is credible for most? so balabolstvo for the sake of balabolstvo
      1. bolonenkov
        bolonenkov 26 October 2013 12: 11
        0
        And who is the authority for the majority?
        here it is necessary to say thoughts and ideas, and not look at nationality or turbidity.