Irfun as usual your piece is timely and thought provoking. As usual it will trigger the usual string of ant-Muslim comments which frustrate balanced debate.

Note that since you wrote the piece JI's spiritual head, Abu Bakar Bashir, has issued a defacto Press Release from his prison cell. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16813119-23109,00.html

He said "I really disapprove of bombings in non-conflict areas for whatever reason, including in Bali, because it can be almost certain that innocent and unknowing victims would fall," however he said he was particularly saddened if such attacks claimed the lives of "people whose religion is Islam".

Bashir also advised the Indonesian Government to "approach closer to Allah" by practising God's law as best as it can.

Irfun. This backs up your Islamic infighting thesis.

Perhaps JI and Co's message to the Indonesian Government is 'don't suppress radical Islam (as a religion and political movement) in Indonesia or we'll make it much much worse'

On calls to ban JI. JI, unfortunately, is not just a terrorist organisation. It is at the sharp end of a radical Muslim religious and political movement in Indonesia.

For many, as yet moderate young Indonesians, it must seem like a type of "Robin Hood" to the "infidel" West's "Sheriff".

The Indonesian Government fears that if it banned JI it would just be glorifying it - thus giving JI and radical Islam generally a wider following. If the calls come from the West to ban JI it would also antaganise natioanlist sentiment ("Australia and US don't tell us what to do") in addition to the religeous backlash.

Reluctance to ban JI is not appeasement. Indonesia is always keeping back the forces of religious, ethnic and geographical fragmentation.

Also sending the JI organisation underground would remove the current ability of Indonesian security agencies to keep tabs on many "legal" JI members. Being able to keep an eye on the "devils you know" while swatting the illegal terrorists (who occasionally come up to meet them) is a seemingly contradictory but effective art.

good post plantagenet and thanks for the insight Irfan.

Three posts in plantagenet and your prediction about anti muslim diatribe has yet to be proven corret - and I am amazed; I have always enjoyed Irfans commentaries for their style as well as their content. This piece is no exception.

Have to make it four posts without anti-muslim sentiment. V/interesting angle about sufis, Irfan, really appreciate your insight on this latest horror.

Did anyone watch Insight on SBS last night? V/impressed by Indonesian speakers - the sincerity, the passion, the desire for friendship w/Australia. All this before the latest bombings.

My condolences to all who have suffered.

Would love to hear some stories about individual Balanese and how they are coping.

Cheers

Irfan, I've not read the other posts, just your article.
I'm writing from Singapore, and on 2 things in your piece I totally agree.
1/ It is an attack on "Indonesian" Islam (in the popular cultural sense)
and
2/ The Yemeni traders were "Sufi's"

Those to facts are very indicative of 'which' source the attacks are coming from.
They are clearly Islamic, but which 'brand'.... one can only presume that it is Wahabi or Salafi, of which there are a-plenty in Indonesia.

I've been travelling on the MRT here in Sg, and I tell you, I almost packed death when I saw a 'dubious' looking character with a back pack and playing with his mobile. Then, even more so when 2 very determined looking Indonesians were walking along in the MRT with a Back Pack and the other using a mobile.... sends shudders up on'es spine.

I don't suppose they showed the severed heads of the bombers on the front page of the Age or Herald, but they sure did here.

The point I'd like to make in this post is that as I've been saying all along, its the 'agenda drivers' who we are at war with. Not the Irfans or Fellow Humans. So, don't take it personally when we attack what we perceive to be the scriptural justifications for those who wish to harm us. (and many other 'collateral's' along the way)

If it were an attack on Indonesian sufist-style Islam, why didn't they just blow up an NU office and blame it on the Christians? That should have served their purpose well enough. I still think Westerners were a target as were the non-Muslim majority of Bali.