Well, comprehension is a gift.
If you fail to understand the term "fundamentalism" after all that has been written and how it has been flung about and misused...
Let's examine Islamic fundamentalism, shall we. Let's get to the core of it's practice and determine if it is worth the zealous support it has received in this thread.
Exhibit #1.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, widely considered the most moderate of fundamentalist Islamic regimes and an ally of the United States. From a nice, safe liberal news source, not an op/ed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1874471.stm
:"Saudi Arabia's religious police stopped schoolgirls from leaving a blazing building because they were not wearing correct Islamic dress, according to Saudi newspapers.
In a rare criticism of the kingdom's powerful "mutaween" police, the Saudi media has accused them of hindering attempts to save 15 girls who died in the fire on Monday. "
I observe that the moderate fundamentalist religious police of Saudi Arabia have murdered these 15 girls for not wearing a head scarf, just as surely as if they had shot them in the head or stoned them to death.
Exhibit #2
From the same article:
"The religious police are widely feared in Saudi Arabia. They roam the streets enforcing dress codes and sex segregation, and ensuring prayers are performed on time.
Those who refuse to obey their orders are often beaten and sometimes put in jail. "
I observe that women's rights and physical safety are routinely violated by the state in the moderate fundamentalist Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Further, I note that freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of individual liberty are violated on a routine basis in the moderate fundamentalist Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Exhibit #3.
From a nice, safe liberal United Nations source:
http://www.un.org/works/beijing+10/afghanistan.html
Although the Taliban ended the tribal and regional conflict, their extreme form of Islamic fundamentalism made life unbearable for women. A rigid set of laws governed every aspect of their lives. Girls were denied the right to attend school and women were not allowed to work or even venture outside their own home unless accompanied by a male relative. They faced harsh punishment from religious police if they did not wear the Burka, a traditional garment covering their entire body and face.
I observe that the "extreme" form of fundamentalism practiced by the Taliban is remarkably similar to the moderate form of Islamic fundamentalism as practiced in Saudi Arabia.
Further to Exhibit #3:
An eyewitness account of an Afghan woman in the fundamentalist Taliban regime.
http://www.rawa.org/stimes-lk.htm
Aeman, in a speech made available to The Sunday Times, said women are beaten in Afghanistan, stoned in public for not wearing clothes according to Taliban rules, banned from education, using make-up, laughing aloud in public, playing any sport or watching movies or TV.
"Homes where a woman is present have their windows painted so that outsiders can never see her," she said. Women are not allowed to work in Afghanistan nor be seen in public without a male relative. Widows starve to death, beg on the streets, take to prostitution or just commit suicide. Desperate mothers sell their children on the streets as they can't feed them, she added.
I observe that women have no human rights, no civil rights, access to education is denied and widows starve without male relative escorts to allow them to go shopping for food. Women are chattel.
Exhibit #4:
The case of the teenaged Sri Lankan au pair sentenced to death by beheading in an Islamic court without a translator or legal counsel and with a confession obtained under duress. I found this story in my local paper, but here is an online source:
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070713/OPINION01/707130350
Saudi law, which strictly interprets Islamic law, according to Evans, permits the death penalty for both lethal and non-lethal crimes, including drug trafficking. Saudi Arabia has already put to death 100 people this year. Amnesty International says under the secretive judicial system, many of those sentenced to death aren't informed of the charges or kept abreast of legal proceedings against them, and defendants can be convicted solely on the basis of confessions obtained under duress. Trials may be conducted in secrecy, without access to defense counsel or foreign consular assistance.
I observe that in a moderate Islamic fundamentalist nation, there is no access to justice for an accused under Islamic law (Sharia Law).
Therefore, I can see little to no difference in practice between moderate fundamentalism or extreme fundamentalism. All fundamentalists observe the Islamic code, Sharia Law, that denies basic human and civil rights, right freedom of conscience and religion, free speech, freedom of movement and action, denies the basic principles of justice and displays a callous disregard of human life.
I observe that the phrase "Dark Ages mentality of Islamic fundamentalism" is entirely warranted. If anybody on this board wishes to defend the honor of this murderous, oppressive sect, I could easily counter with hundreds of other references of the brutality, indignity, oppression and murder that accompanies all forms of Islamic "fundamentalism.
Exhibit #5.
Further to support of such fundamentalist regimes, this from the U.S. State Dep't:
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/wh/6947.htm
"The world has responded with an unprecedented coalition against international terrorism. In the first 100 days of the war, President George W. Bush increased America’s homeland security and built a worldwide coalition that:
* Began to destroy al-Qaeda’s grip on Afghanistan by driving the Taliban from power."
I observe that the fundamentalist Taliban regime is intimately linked to Al Quaeda, the terrorists that planned and executed the 9/11 attacks. I consider a defense of fundamentalism (as observed above) is a defense of those responsible for the WTC and the murder of it's victims.
