Chechenya Jihad Victory Allahu Akbar !
Mo
Want to bet it will end up like Somalia , Afghanistan with constant
fighting , killing , maiming , opressing women. Already they have
started public flogging of those who like to have a drink.
It is the nature of Islam never to be at peace.
Ahmad Rana
10033...@compuserve.com (Mo) wrote:
> Want to bet it will end up like Somalia , Afghanistan with constant
>fighting , killing , maiming , opressing women.
I somehow doubt that. Chechans are Turks.
Ahmad.
Matthew J Smith
So Turkey doesn't oppress women? So how come girls can
get kicked out of school there for failing virginity tests
(in a supposedly "secular" country which wants to join
the EU)?
I once knew a girl whose mother had married a Turk and
who'd lived for about 6 weeks in a little Turkish
village. She told me this:
"Turkish men are bastards."
'Nuff said.
Mat
>
> Ahmad.
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This e-mail has been sent from Dillons Cyber.St@tion, the UK's Premiere
Public Internet Access Point.
If this email is from; cust...@dillons.co.uk.
Please do not auto-reply to this address (unless explicitly asked to)
as the sender will not receive your message.
Thank You
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jaffer Jamil
Ahmad Rana wrote:
>
> I somehow doubt that. Chechans are Turks.
>
> Ahmad.
actually, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica places them as a Caucausus people
who have very little, racially or linguistically to do with the Turks.
Jaffer
Jaffer Jamil
Mo wrote:
>
> Want to bet it will end up like Somalia , Afghanistan with constant
> started public flogging of those who like to have a drink.
> It is the nature of Islam never to be at peace.
The man(?) has a PhD in Muslim Hateology!!
jaffer
PPanther
You are wrong Jaffer he is not a !!!!!MAN / WOMAN!!!!!!!!! something like a
PHANTOM full of muslim Hate!!!!!
Moin
Jaffer Jamil <jja...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<3233F0...@earthlink.net>...
Ahmad Rana
Matthew J Smith <indi...@dillons.co.uk> wrote:
>So Turkey doesn't oppress women? So how come girls can
>get kicked out of school there for failing virginity tests
>(in a supposedly "secular" country which wants to join
>the EU)?
What about Britain (a "secular" country which is a member
of EC) where under-aged prostitutes are murdered, and where
senior diplomats are involved in child pornography. Have you
ever been to Turkey, my friend? You'd find it more liberal
than Britain if you went there.
>I once knew a girl whose mother had married a Turk and
>who'd lived for about 6 weeks in a little Turkish
>village. She told me this:
>
>"Turkish men are bastards."
>
>'Nuff said.
And I met a British girl whose mother was a prostitute. And
she told me that all British men are bastards. I personally
don't think so, but you'd find all sort of women in the
world, with equally varied opinion about men. Its not just
limited to Turkish men. By the way, why did this girl's
mother go to Turkey in the first place?
Regarding Chechenya, it was not jehad, but Turks fighting
for their freedom. Russia had subjugated them for nearly
hundred year, and now they have won back their freedom. In
a few years, it would be an independent country. They are
not fundamentalist like the Afghans. The Turks in Afghanistan
(Tajiks from northern Afghanistan) supported the revolution,
but it was the tribals from the south who ruined the only
chance for Afghanistan to become civilized. The fundamentalist
Talibans (southern tribals) have still not been able to take
control of the northern tajik Afghanistan, and they never
will. I'll tell you what happened in Turkmanistan after it
seperated from USSR. They invited some mullahs from Iran to
speak at a public meeting. The meeting went on quite well, and
they agreed to almost everything that the mullah said. They
were moslems after all (at least in name). Then at the end
of the meeting, they served a round of vodka. The mullah
said that it was haram (not allowed) in Islam to drink. You
know what they did? They threw the mullah out. And that was
the end of their religious ties with Iran.
More than enough said, I think.
Ahmad.
Ahmad Rana
Jaffer Jamil <jja...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>actually, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica places them as a Caucausus people
>who have very little, racially or linguistically to do with the Turks.
The British also gave Palestine to the jews (I am not saying whether
it was right to do so or not. Its none of my business). Chechans are
Turks, and so are people living in Daghistan in Russia. In a few years,
you'll hear about the Daghistani Turks rising to fight for their freedom
too.
Ahmad.
p.s. If you can speak Turkish and go to Azerbaijan, Daghistan, Chechenya,
Turkmanistan, Tajikistan, Kazikistan etc., you'll be able to understand
their language too. In fact, in a couple of days, you'd also be able to
converse with the people. They speak the same language, only different
dialects. There is more similarity in their language than there is between
the south London accent and Yorkshire accent.
Stacia
Mo (of course) wrote:
> Want to bet it will end up like Somalia , Afghanistan with constant
> fighting , killing , maiming , opressing women. Already they have
> started public flogging of those who like to have a drink.
> It is the nature of Islam never to be at peace.
>
The Chechen force of several thousand beat the once mighty Russian
army, the same folks who control a country that stretches across the
bulk of two continents. You can bet that they were well-disciplined.
I realize that prohibition of alcohol is a pretty vital part of Islam,
but I compare this phenomenon of public beatings to the tactics used
by the IRA to try and control the absolute rot that drug use has
caused in their impoverished and strained communities. They *execute*
suspected drug dealers because they understand that a young generation
wasted on drugs will have no will/strength to continue the struggle
against oppression. While I don't approve of their methods, I notice
that no one has tied their actions to their religions.
Getting rid of alcoholism is a vital move by the Chechens. One look
at the current set of leaders in Russia shows how alcohol has
completely debilitated that society. If Chechnya has any chance of
survival as a distinct entity, they have got to rid their state of the
great social ills which divide and debilitate. Poverty and despair
are the breeding ground of alcoholism. It is very tempting, I am
sure, for the few men left alive in Chechnya to drown their sorrows in
the bottle. However, it would be disasterous for the Chechens if they
did.
As for Mo's accusations that Chechnya will become a place of killing
and maiming and violence, I reason that the Chechens can certainly
inflict no greater harm on themselves than the Russian soldiers have
in the past year. Grozny is completely leveled. Many of the men are
killed or have been taken away to the camps, never to be seen again.
Women are vital to the rebuilding of Chechnya. I seriously doubt
that they will be oppressed. They are too vital of a resource and, as
a definate majority in almost every city and town, they will probably
have *more* control than ever before. Also, as a Muslima whose family
hails from that same general area, I can tell you that the women in
Chechnya and the surrounding areas have always been very strong and I
can see no cultural reason why the respect/freedom that they have had
traditionally would be removed.
asalaamu 'alaikum
&
do svidaniya
Stacia
Jaffer Jamil
I can agree re the languages of Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhastan,
Uzbekistan, parts of Gilgit, the province of Sinkiang. Even the languages of
Tatarastan are a form of Turkic. The mutual intelligibility of various
Turkic dialects is mere wishful thinking. I was in a business meeting with a
group of Azeris, one Tatar, one Anatolian-sppeaking Pakistani, two Turkic
speaking Gilgitis and one Uzbeki. I had thought that everyone would be able
to understand each other. The Tatar (from Tatarastan) needed Russian, one
azeri had to translate the the Anatolian into Azeri, the Gilgitis were
translated into Urdu and the Uzbek could understand both the Azeri and some
Anatolian also needed a translator. The relationship between the various
Turkic languages goes beyond dialects: They are distinct languages; as
separate as one Indo-Aryan language, the Punjabi of Mianwali, is from another
Indo-Aryan language, the Sindhi of Sukkur.
The Tajik, historically and at present are a Persian-speaking people - though
their language is different from Tehrani Persian. There are some that say
that the Tajik are descended from ancient Dardic (read Sanskrit-speaking)
tribes. Others say that they are descended from the mixture of Turcomans
with Iranian peoples. The latter is a more plausible theory specially if it
were to be agreed that they had some Arab admixture also.
The Chechen, on the other hand, are part of a larger linguistic group called
Chechen-Ingusht which predates the earliest Aryan incursions into the
Caucasus. The language is said to be as different from Turkish as Welsh
Gaelic (a dead language) would be from Sussex English. The fact that one can
be understood if one speaks Turkish is similar to saying that Pushto is same
as Urdu because in Peshawar the Pathans can understand Urdu.
Perhaps if you could direct me to some sources that I may have missed re the
Chechen-Ingusht....
Jaffer
Murat
Ahmad Rana wrote:
>
> Matthew J Smith <indi...@dillons.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >So Turkey doesn't oppress women? So how come girls can
> >get kicked out of school there for failing virginity tests
> >(in a supposedly "secular" country which wants to join
> >the EU)?
>
> What about Britain (a "secular" country which is a member
> of EC) where under-aged prostitutes are murdered, and where
> senior diplomats are involved in child pornography. Have you
> ever been to Turkey, my friend? You'd find it more liberal
> than Britain if you went there.
>
> >I once knew a girl whose mother had married a Turk and
> >who'd lived for about 6 weeks in a little Turkish
> >village. She told me this:
> >
> >"Turkish men are bastards."
> >
> >'Nuff said.
>
> And I met a British girl whose mother was a prostitute. And
> she told me that all British men are bastards. I personally
> don't think so, but you'd find all sort of women in the
> world, with equally varied opinion about men. Its not just
> limited to Turkish men. By the way, why did this girl's
> mother go to Turkey in the first place?
>
> Regarding Chechenya, it was not jehad, but Turks fighting
> for their freedom.
They are not Turks
> Russia had subjugated them for nearly
> hundred year, and now they have won back their freedom. In
> a few years, it would be an independent country. They are
> not fundamentalist like the Afghans. The Turks in Afghanistan
> (Tajiks from northern Afghanistan)
tajiks are not turks.
Murat
Ahmad Rana wrote:
>
> Jaffer Jamil <jja...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >actually, the Encyclopaedia Brittanica places them as a Caucausus people
> >who have very little, racially or linguistically to do with the Turks.
>
> The British also gave Palestine to the jews (I am not saying whether
> it was right to do so or not. Its none of my business). Chechans are
> Turks,
They are Chechens; their language and culture are completely different
than that of Turkish.
> and so are people living in Daghistan in Russia.
Wrong again.
> In a few years,
> you'll hear about the Daghistani Turks rising to fight for their freedom
> too.
>
> Ahmad.
>
> p.s. If you can speak Turkish and go to Azerbaijan, Daghistan, Chechenya,
> Turkmanistan, Tajikistan, Kazikistan etc., you'll be able to understand
> their language too.
Yes, in Azerbaijan, in certain degree, might be in Turkmenistan but not in
Dagistan, Checenistan (their languages are northern causcasic, and
specially in dagistan there are a dozen of diferent languages which are
muttually not understandable) in Tajikistan majority speak Indo-iranian
language.
> In fact, in a couple of days, you'd also be able to
> converse with the people. They speak the same language, only different
> dialects. There is more similarity in their language than there is between
> the south London accent and Yorkshire accent.
You have to check your sources.
Best regards
murat
Jaffer Jamil
Salaam Stacy,
You mentioned:
> Also, as a Muslima whose family hails from that same general area,...
Here we are arquing about the Turkishness of Chechens and Daghestanis,
while you have probably been laughing at us. Could you please enlighten
us on the racial and linguistics similarities of these two peoples
compared to the the Anatolian Turks. Also it would be nice to know
whether the Chechen-Ingusht are a Turkic people. Which part are you
from?
Salaam alaikum
Jaffer (the Pakistani)
Stacia
Jaffer wrote
> Here we are arquing about the Turkishness of Chechens and Daghestanis,
> while you have probably been laughing at us. Could you please enlighten
> us on the racial and linguistics similarities of these two peoples
> compared to the the Anatolian Turks. Also it would be nice to know
> whether the Chechen-Ingusht are a Turkic people. Which part are you
> from?
Wasalaam,
I was born in the United States. The majority of my family is from
Sevastopol (parents, three grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc), which is
on the Crimean Peninsula. However, one of my grandmothers is from
Stavropol, which is not too far from Chechnya. We are
Ukrainian/Turks. I have not been laughing at you. Honest. There has
been very little attention paid previously to Eastern European Muslim
communities in academic circles and so it is difficult to find a large
body of information. Here's the scoop as far as I know it.
The Chechen language is a member of the Caucasian language family.
Its closest relatives with a reasonable # of speakers are Lezghian and
Avar. The language also shares a number of characteristics with
Georgian, but most scholars don't believe there is enough proof to
determine that they share the same background, only that their
speakers have had enough contact with each other to influence each
other. Turkish is a very different language, with a completely
different grammatical system and sound system. However, because of
the significant influence of Turkish culture upon the region, Chechen
contains many Turkish loanwords. (This is what may have caused the
confusion about Chechen being a "dialect" of Turkish).
Another source of confusion may come from the fact that many of the
former republics of the Soviet Union which have large Muslim
populations use Altaic languages (the language group that Turkish is a
member of). These languages are about as close to each other as
English and German. Among these languages are Uzbek, Azerbaijani,
Tatar, Uighur (primarily spoken in Western China) and Kazakh.
I do not doubt that the Turks had a *huge* cultural influence on the
Chechens, being that they were pretty much the dominant force in the
region for centuries. So, arguing that Chechens are similar to Turks
culturally would not necessarily be wrong. However, this similarity
is probably caused by contact between the two peoples and not by their
recent descent from common ancestors.
Assalaamu 'alaikum
Stacia
Jaffer
Stacia wrote:
> Wasalaam,
> The Chechen language is a member of the Caucasian language family.
> Its closest relatives with a reasonable # of speakers are Lezghian and
> Avar.
Salaam alaikum, Stacia,
Thus, my assertian that it is a Caucasian language, distinct from the
Turkic languages is valid. The Avars, I had learnt, are the ancestors
of a lot of Daghestanis and the South Ossetians. Once gain, the Avars
are reputed to have entered the region and come over the Caucasus with
another sister tribe, the Allan (later to be called the Albanians).
Funnily enough the Albanian is considered an Indo-European language and
the South Ossetians are considered a people belonging to the ancient
Iranian tribes.
>The language also shares a number of characteristics with
> Georgian, but most scholars don't believe there is enough proof to
> determine that they share the same background, only that their
> speakers have had enough contact with each other to influence each
> other.
The Georgians are considered descended from Semitic tribes that settled
in the Caucasus after some historical episode. Hence their darker skins
and hair colors, the language with the same grammatical form as most
Semitic languages...
>Turkish is a very different language, with a completely
> different grammatical system and sound system.
Belonging to the Ural-Altaic group of languages, similar in structure to
Magyar, Finnish and, some say say Lapp....
>However, because of the significant influence of Turkish culture upon
>the region, Chechen contains many Turkish loanwords. (This is what may
>have caused the confusion about Chechen being a "dialect" of Turkish).
Sounds similar to Urdu having some Turki words, now left at roughly 2%,
since there was so much Persianization going on of the Turki clans that
ruled the sub-continent.
> Another source of confusion may come from the fact that many of the
> former republics of the Soviet Union which have large Muslim
> populations use Altaic languages (the language group that Turkish is a
> member of). These languages are about as close to each other as
> English and German. Among these languages are Uzbek, Azerbaijani,
> Tatar, Uighur (primarily spoken in Western China) and Kazakh.
Once more validating my assertion that not alll Turkic languages are
mutually intelligible.
> I do not doubt that the Turks had a *huge* cultural influence on the
> Chechens, being that they were pretty much the dominant force in the
> region for centuries. So, arguing that Chechens are similar to Turks
> culturally would not necessarily be wrong. However, this similarity
> is probably caused by contact between the two peoples and not by their
> recent descent from common ancestors.
Point noted and heartily agreed with, now someone has to convince the 7
- 8 people who responded to my similar question in the Turkish
newsgroup. :)
BTW, do you retain any of the Central Asian features in your family?
Salaam Alaikum,
Jaffer
Mo
On Mon, 09 Sep 1996 22:41:34 -0500, Stacia <sta...@ntsource.com>
wrote:
>>Women are vital to the rebuilding of Chechnya. I seriously doubt
that they will be oppressed. <<
The middle class intellectuals fighting the Shah made the same fatal
mistake. The thugs from the poor areas were persuaded by the Islamic
clerics to kill them in the name of Islam. The same has happened in
every Islamic country.
There is no pint in having an Islamic country if you dont impose
'God's ' laws - amputation , flogging women 100 lashes without mercy ,
walling them and starving them to death, forcing the full veil , heavy
taxes on on believers , excision of the clitoris ..
Remember the big Guy says in the Quran Muslims have NO choice when
Allah and his Apostle have decided other wise ie when they have
decided that the above should be enforced. Why Islamic countries
cannot be democratic and secular and sensible like everyone else
instead of God doing all their thinking for them , I will never
understand .
Khan
An intense effort of propoganda. You know enough to be dangerous.