PDA

View Full Version : The Moderate Islamist - He exists, and that's a Very Good Thing



Bluesman
02 Jul 06,, 09:13
PLEASE read all of this. I came across it by accident, and it's one of the most important and heartening thing I'll read all year. I really want to discuss this topic, so if you find it as interesting as I did, post your thoughts. Asim and Platinum, I'm lookin' right at you guys; let me know what you thought of this, please.


July 01, 2006
Moderate Islamists Found
I wrote a shorter version of this piece for one of the largest American newspapers, one that gets a hefty dose of criticism almost every day. The editor rejected it because it wasn’t “groundbreaking enough.” I wish he would have been honest with me. Genuinely moderate Islamists are about as hard to find as Zoroastrians in Nebraska. So I rewrote the piece - in blog narrative style instead of newspaper style - and published it here. I don't have time to submit it to other editors right now, but I do think it should get out into the world rather than languish unread on my computer. Please hit the Pay Pal link at the bottom so I can justify my decision to give it to you for free.
SULEIMANIYA, IRAQ - When I went to the Middle East for a six-month extended visit I wanted to see if I could find a genuinely moderate Islamist political party, one that not only practices democracy but also believes in it. There was a slight chance Hezbollah might fit that description. Lebanon’s Party of God has mellowed somewhat with age and participates in elections. But Hezbollah, unfortunately, is psychotic as ever. Hassan Nasrallah and his goon squad are instinctively belligerent and authoritarian even if Lebanon’s post-war democratic culture keeps them in check. Hezbollah is liberal and even pacifist compared with Hamas and Al Qaeda, but they nevertheless are a violent warmongering proxy militia for two despotic regimes in the Middle East.

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood is better. They aren’t armed, they don’t even try to kill Israeli soldiers (let alone civilians), and they at least pretend to be opposed to terrorism. But they are only moderate compared with their violent fellow Islamists. Ideologically they don’t differ much.

The Kurdistan Islamic Union, though, does seem to be genuinely moderate. Its leaders appear to have more in common with conservative Christian Democrats in Europe than with any terrorist organization or Middle Eastern religious dictatorship.

I met with Ali Muhammad, Director of the Suleimaniya bureau of the KIU, Iraqi Kurdistan’s third largest (and growing) political party, in his office. He provided his own in-house translator, a plump woman in a dark brown abaya. My own translator, because he was a stranger, was not to be trusted.

Ali looked to be in his sixties. He wore a trimmed beard, glasses, and a distinctly unfashionable Western suit and tie. He greeted me warmly in English. I greeted him and thanked him in Kurdish. Then we spoke to each other through our translator.

"How do you feel about the U.S. occupation of Iraq?" I said.

“We blame Saddam for the occupation," he said. "Life is much better here now. But of course no one wants his country to be occupied.”

"Do you think the U.S. soldiers should leave now?" I said. "Or would it be better if they waited until later?"

“It is better to wait until the Iraqi army is strong and the country is calm," he said.

"What do you think of the West in general?" I said.

“The West is a successful civilization," he said. "But we think it is too materialistic and technological. If the Islamic East united with the civilized West, all of humanity would benefit.”

Isn’t materialism a problem in the Middle East, too? Saddam’s palaces, the skyscrapers and malls in Dubai...

“When I talked about materialism, I did not mean wealth," he said. "I mean that humans need both the material and spiritual sides of existence. Each civilization has a material side and a soul side. Western people are missing parts of the soul side. But the soul side in the West isn’t zero. Human rights are much more respected there than here." His translator spoke slowly and gave me time to write everything down. “Islam is the medium between socialism and capitalism. In socialism everything is soulless. In capitalism there is a huge gap between the rich and the poor. In Islam we can possess things, but not with such a huge distance between the rich and the poor.”

One of Ali Muhammad’s office assistants brought me hot milk in a Turkish coffee glass, a tall thin can of 7-UP with a straw, and a plate of fresh fruit.

Ali Muhammad wanted to keep talking, so I let him.

“In the West there is absolute freedom,” he said. “In Islam there is not. Our freedom as individuals is combined with the freedom of the whole society. General customs must be regarded in Islam. Our families are stronger than yours. There are many problems in the West when young people leave home at 18.” (Middle Easterners tend to leave home when they are closer to 30.) “You have unmarried mothers. Abortion. Crime. Gay marriage. These things are completely against the soul of human beings. They reduce the brightness of the West.”

"Are you opposed to Western culture then?" I said.

“The West is not an enemy," he said. "We think about Western Civilization as part of the whole human experience. We would like to help you reform it, but we do not want to destroy it. We are not violent. We support civil mechanisms for change.”

"What do you think about Sayyid Qutb and the Hideous Schizophrenia?" I said. Sayyid Qutb is considered the founder of modern Islamism and the intellect behind Al Qaeda theology. He believed - until he was executed by Gamal Abdel Nasser in the dungeons of Egypt - that the liberal post-Christian West threatens Islamic civilization because it promotes, among other things, the separation of religion and the state. Qutb believed this separation triggered an epidemic psychological breakdown in the West that he dubbed the Hideous Schizophrenia, and that this breakdown is spreading to the Middle East.

"Qutb was wrong," he said, parting ways with Osama bin Laden on the most elementary level. “Compare Islam and Christianity. In the Middle Ages, Christians were burning scientists. Then Muslims had a great civilization. The Christians were theocratic then. Muslims were not. We do not believe in a theocratic government that rules the people in the name of Allah. Power should come from the people. Christianity wasn’t weakened because it was separate from the state. Christianity was weakened when it supported oppressive states. The same thing is happening in Iran. Iranians are turning against the religion itself along with the theocratic oppressive state."

“Are you opposed to theocracy then?” I said. “If you win power in Kurdistan will you not govern according to Islamic law?”

“In Islam we have stable things and changeable things,” he said. “80 percent of Islam is changeable things.” Say what you will about Islamists. Ali Muhammad’s religious-political ideology is a long way from the iron rule of 7th Century Taliban.

“Should alcohol be legal or banned?” I said. When I asked this question of Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Essem El-Erian he refused to give me a straight answer.

“In Islam it is prohibited to drink alcohol in public,” Ali Muhammad said. “Drinking at home is fine. If someone wants to buy alcohol and drink it in his house, we should not chase him. We prefer to treat alcohol the same way we treat cigarettes when we create non-smoking sections.”

“Should women be required to wear the hijab over their hair?” I said, referring to the modest Islamic headscarf worn by conservative women in public.

“We don’t force people to wear the hijab,” he said. “There are two types of Islamic rules: personal and general. Individual matters are advised, not required. Advisements by Islam should not be imposed. Islam prohibits only things that harm an entire society.”

Ali Muhammad believes this is the right balance, that Islam is therefore superior to Judaism and Christianity.

“The Koran includes both regulation and advice,” he said. “The Torah included only regulation. The New Testament included only advice.”

Whether the Koran advises certain behaviors or imposes them is a matter of debate within the Islamic world. Most Kurds are conservative compared with, say, Lebanese, Turks, and Tunisians. But their religious tradition, the thing they are conserving, is more lenient than the traditions in some parts of the Middle East. Kurdistan is a blessedly undogmatic place. My translator Birzo Abdulkadir seemed to speak for many when he explained why, despite Kurdistan’s conservatism, it isn’t a backwater like some other places I’ve been: “I have read the Koran in its original language. I know it’s more flexible than most Arab imams admit.”

“There is nothing about Islam that we should be afraid to talk about,” Ali Muhammad said. “It is the best system. But there are and have been problems. We don’t deny that.”

I started to ask another question, and he changed the subject. He wanted to make sure I heard the following and wrote it down:

“We have five members in our leadership committee who are women,” he said. “They were elected, and we do not use quotas. We also have a woman in our political bureau. Women and men work together. Below the leadership level, the numbers of men and women are the same.”

I looked at our translator, a woman, in the eye. There was no need for me to say what I was thinking, to ask the obvious question. She knew. And she nodded. What Ali Muhammad just told me was true.

Assuming Ali Muhammad was honest with me, the very existence of the Kurdistan Islamic Union is a relief. Osama bin Laden will never calm down and become a mainstream religious conservative. He will be a radical and a fascist until somebody punches his ticket. But if the KIU can find a way to reconcile an authoritarian religion with modern democracy there is no reason other similar moderately conservative political parties can’t form elsewhere to compete with the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the theocratic Iranian state.

I do believe Ali Muhammad was sincere in his moderation, that he wasn't just jerking me around for good press. It was painfully obvious that Essam El-Erian of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood was concealing his real opinions (http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001044.html) from me so I wouldn't expose him and his organization as radical nutjobs.

As a reality check, though, I asked my translator Alan Atoof in Suleimaniya about the KIU. Alan is a secular liberal whose family is from the part of Iraqi Kurdistan that was besieged by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ansar al Islam until U.S. Special Forces and the Peshmerga drove them into Iran three years ago. You have to look long and hard to find someone more opposed to violent jihadists. He simply will not put up with these people, and I wanted to know what he thought of the Kurdistan Islamic Union. Do they practice taqiyya? Are they Salafists or Wahhabis in moderate drag?

Not according to Alan, they aren't. His uncle is a member of the KIU, and he knows them well and in person. He confirms that they are genuinely moderate and reasonable people who don't pose a threat to Kurdistan's secular culture and politics.

Before leaving his office I asked Ali Muhammad if he could recommend a nice restaurant for dinner. He suggested what he thought of as a “Western” restaurant (it wasn’t) in suburban Suleimaniya. And he sent his son Iqbal Ali Muhammad to pick me up at my hotel, take me to the restaurant, and continue discussing religion and politics.

So Iqbal met me in the lobby of the Suleimaniya Palace hotel, a shabby place whose name is a ridiculous lie. At first Iqbal was fantastically uptight and humorless, a grim caricature of an Islamist in a blue suit and tie. He was Scandinavian in his stiffness and in his unwillingness to smile or laugh or show human warmth. Most Kurds are outgoing and gregarious, but this guy acted like he was dropped from outer space. Well, I thought, he is an Islamist.

As it turned out, though, he wasn’t uptight at all. He was just a bit shy. He drove us to the restaurant in his SUV, ordered us fresh fish from one of Kurdistan’s lakes, and loosened up as though we were sharing a bottle of wine. We did not share a bottle of wine even though it was available. He would have said nothing if I ordered a glass for myself. But I did not wish to be rude so I ordered a soft drink instead.

He was less interested in politics than his father. Mostly we talked about more casual matters. It was a conversation, not an interview, so I didn't bust out my notebook and grill him. But he was a smart young man - a lawyer - and I did jot down a few things he said.

“We will go to war with Christians against Muslims if the Muslims are on the wrong side," he said. That’s exactly what the Kurds did when they sided with the United States against Saddam Hussein, just as the U.S. sided with Bosnian and Kosovar Muslims against Slobo and his exterminationist regime in Belgrade. This casual comment by Iqbal, a self-identifying Islamist, was perhaps the most poignant refutation of the "clash of civilizations" idea I have yet heard.

Iqbal did turn out to be a bit of a bigot, but not in an anti-Western or anti-American way. “The Arab, he is wild,” he said. “He is not a civilized person.”

I tried to defend Arabs generally. He knew I lived in Beirut at the time, that I had experienced a different side of Arab culture than he had. He smiled patiently while I sat there picking the bones out of my fish and sounding like a self-conscious politically correct American naif. But I wasn't naive. I knew very well what Saddam Hussein and his Baath regime did to the Kurds. Iqbal Ali Muhammad was born in Halabja. He was six years old when the Anfal Campaign reached his home town, when Saddam Hussein doused him and his family with chemical weapons. He still has a hard time breathing when walking up stairs. And he would not let me convince him that most Arabs are more civilized than those who nearly killed him.

Just as I was beginning to think he and his father had no good reason to refer to themselves as Islamists, that the Kurds therefore really - truly! - are different, out came the sadly typical (for the region) paranoid comment: "I think America let Osama bin Laden go free on purpose."

Look, I said. He killed thousands of Americans. We don't let a guy like that get away. Just because we have not killed or captured him yet doesn't mean that's by design.

So many Middle Easterners think the United States is so all-powerful that we can do anything at any time, that nothing is beyond our capabilities, that everything wrong is therefore designed to be wrong on purpose.

I explained to him that the U.S. is a powerful country, but it's still just one country. Americans are flawed and limited humans just like the Kurds. He took me seriously, and he was willing to climb down from his crazy position much faster and more completely than I expected.

“It is good that we are having this conversation,” he said. “We can tell each other when we are wrong.”

If all the world’s Islamists were like these mellow Kurdish Islamists there would be no Terror War and there would be no talk of any clash of civilizations. It’s no accident, nor is it merely a convenience, that the Kurds of Iraq are American allies.

Not all Muslims are terrorists, obviously. Most people in the world know that much at least. It’s also apparently true that not all Islamists are terrorists or even extremists. These guys made me rethink my idea of what an Islamist even is. Call me foolish if you like. But Iqbal repeated the same refrain I heard over and over again in Iraqi Kurdistan, something I almost never hear in Arab countries: “Extremes are bad. The middle is better.”


Iqbal Ali Muhammad

TopHatter
02 Jul 06,, 14:05
PLEASE read all of this. I came across it by accident, and it's one of the most important and heartening thing I'll read all year. I really want to discuss this topic, so if you find it as interesting as I did, post your thoughts. Asim and Platinum, I'm lookin' right at you guys; let me know what you thought of this, please.
Amazing. No wonder it didn't get published in that major newspaper. It's good news.

Confed999
02 Jul 06,, 16:51
I wish them the best...

Asim Aquil
02 Jul 06,, 17:17
Exactly, I mean I got to go with the editor with this one. I mean if he's from around here that is an American editor would've found this interesting though.

Blues, surely you don't think moderates are a rarity around here. It's true man, I mean I don't agree with some of his religious views but they aren't harmful to society so what the hell.

Btw, almost all of Pakistan's secular parties are moderate Islamic parties in actuality. Islam in its core fundamentals is not devoid of secularism. The ruling party PML-Q (Q for Quaid-e-Azam, the founder of the nation), has shown that over n over by backtracking much of the Islamization that took place during the Zia-Afghan-CIA-Soviet period of the 70s.

Quaid-e-Azam Jinnah himself commented upon theocracy:


"Will Pakistan be a secular or theocratic state? You are asking me a question that is absurd. I do not know what a theocratic state means." Jinnah's press conference in New Delhi on July 14, 1947, Jinnah -- Speeches and Statements 1947-1949, Oxford University Press, p.15

"But make no mistake: Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it..." Jinnah's address to the people of Australia on Feb. 19,1948 -- Ibid, p.118

"In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State--to be ruled by priests with a divine mission." Jinnah's address to the people of the United States of America in February 1948, Ibid, p.125

Islam learnt democracy and did not rule with a clergy of priests handing down divine will. Islam is a HUMAN interpretation of the Quran. And he is right 20% of it is quite straightforward and cannot be interpretted in any other way (one god, all the messengers, the five pillars of Islam, etc.), but the other things which the Quran merely mentions or doesn't cover at all, should be figured out by humans themselves.

For example the Quran mentions space, many heavenly bodies like some nebulas but that doesn't means we've figured them out. Thats our job.

The reason that this guy seems so mind blowing to you and just an ordinary person to me, is because he's just expressed the beautiful qualities of Islam and thats why we're all Muslims.

Secularism in Islam is not a rarity or something to be frowned upon for us. Heck this guy's not open towards free will on homosexuality and drinking but many are!

Confed999
02 Jul 06,, 17:24
The reason that this guy seems so mind blowing to you and just an ordinary person to me, is because he's just expressed the beautiful qualities of Islam and thats why we're all Muslims.
Yes, you are correct, it's this open and public expression that we find "mind blowing".

Asim Aquil
02 Jul 06,, 17:50
Yes, you are correct, it's this open and public expression that we find "mind blowing".
Not a rarity either. Ever heard of a guy called Pervez Musharraf?

Heck this guy's more or less a politician as well. You should lay more worth in what common folk say, lets say on ummm INTERNET FORUMS.

Confed999
02 Jul 06,, 18:05
You should lay more worth in what common folk say, lets say on ummm INTERNET FORUMS.
Actually that's the only reason I'm not one of the ones out there declaring all of any group "the enemy". ('Cept maybe commies, I hate commies. ;) )

Asim Aquil
02 Jul 06,, 18:30
Sadly THAT is a rarity though. The only other Americans less hostile towards the Muslims are those that are indifferent and thankfully there are many more of those.

Confed999
02 Jul 06,, 18:39
Sadly THAT is a rarity though.
Only because they have yet to have a decent "mind blowing".

Asim Aquil
02 Jul 06,, 18:46
We can't win. The headlines would next day read, Muslims explode American minds!

Recall that dog joke LT posted on the forums a coupla days back.

Confed999
02 Jul 06,, 18:48
We can't win.
Then you know what it's like to be an American. ;)

Bluesman
02 Jul 06,, 21:21
Sadly THAT is a rarity though. The only other Americans less hostile towards the Muslims are those that are indifferent and thankfully there are many more of those.

You do realize that you just projected a negative generality on Americans, right? Same sin that we're supposed to be guilty of toward you, ain't it? Can you see that this is what that sentence amounts to?

Or are y'all just the victims AGAIN, same as always?

Asim Aquil
03 Jul 06,, 07:43
Negative? hmmm yeah, but it wasn't meant as an insult.

Let me put it this way. Most Americans that are indifferent to foreign affairs are cool with us. You can't hold it against me to find pleasure in peolpe who won't automatically assume the worst about you.

platinum786
03 Jul 06,, 13:23
altogether an intersting peice. hundreds of millions of these people exist, it's just that we aren't "ground breaking enough" to be heard.

if i turned around and said i wanted to be a gay imam it'd hit all the headlines, me saying "i'ma msulim and i don't care if someone smokes a spliff in thier bedroom" doesn't have the same effect.

Confed999
03 Jul 06,, 17:48
altogether an intersting peice. hundreds of millions of these people exist, it's just that we aren't "ground breaking enough" to be heard.
Correct, it takes groups to be ground breaking when it comes to the good stuff.

gunnut
03 Jul 06,, 19:45
So many Middle Easterners think the United States is so all-powerful that we can do anything at any time, that nothing is beyond our capabilities, that everything wrong is therefore designed to be wrong on purpose.

That's a gift and a curse.

They acknowledge our might, but they fail to see the limit of our capabilities.

I feel like Picard in the episode "Who watches the watchers?"

lemontree
04 Jul 06,, 05:26
What has the world come to! One moderate muslim and he becomes a celebrity :rolleyes:

Asim Aquil
04 Jul 06,, 06:00
What has the world come to! One moderate muslim and he becomes a celebrity :rolleyes:
Exactly my reservation on this, but of course from a different angle.

gilgamesh
04 Jul 06,, 07:45
Moderate Islamist, what an oxymoron.

Confed999
04 Jul 06,, 08:36
What has the world come to! One moderate muslim and he becomes a celebrity :rolleyes:
Technically, it's a moderate Islamic party, 3rd most popular, in Iraq.

Bluesman
04 Jul 06,, 11:51
So, Asim's position is what's the big deal? We got them ole moderates chock-a-block through Islam.

Alright, then, shouldn't be that hard to whoop them mullahs back into line, right? To progress out of the 13th Century primitivism and holy fascism, and join the rest of the world into seeing the wearers of bikinis as educated full participants in society and barbecued pork-eating with a cold draft beer and voting for heads-of-state more than one time before the national charter gets suspended by the dictator-for-life and a bunch of other stuff that makes life worth living as just personal choices that don't affect your made-up god and his deluded believers, instead of being black-hearted sins that deserve to get one's head severed from one's body.

Sorry for the run-on sentence, but with all the subjects that 'moderate Islam' has NOT been able to address yet, one tends to go on a bit.

Bluesman
04 Jul 06,, 11:58
Why were these guys allowed to ever get out the door of the mosque with these signs? Why were they not kicked in the crotch and their signs taken away and destroyed before they were allowed to discredit all them moderate Islamists with this extremist stuff, if they're in the minority?

They represent you, like it or not, Mr. Muslim.

667medic
04 Jul 06,, 12:11
Cowardly bastards, don't even have the guts to reveal their faces but have not qualms about claiming dole, bloody leeches....

Asim Aquil
04 Jul 06,, 12:21
So, Asim's position is what's the big deal? We got them ole moderates chock-a-block through Islam.
Actually we do take on Mullahs quite a bit. I mean there are more of us now out there doing the talking than those guys.

I can talk from the Pakistani perspective. Here's the treatment that one of our oppressed Saudi friend received when he came to PDF with his ideas:

http://pakistanidefenceforum.com/index.php?showtopic=56541

Read the first few posts and forward till the end. Even I had to butt in. I got nothing against Saudis but yeah I disagree with their religious and political leadership. I know from personal experience that Saudis don't know any better. So I can feel for them, but nonetheless the truth had to be spoken.


Alright, then, shouldn't be that hard to whoop them mullahs back into line, right?

In Pakistan they can't force their views onto us and we have debates on religion throughout the day on some Pakistani tv channels. Since religion has become so political it needs to be sorted out.

Moderate life style is completely in tune with Islam. and a moderate lifestyle can address sociological issues. In America girls that wear a Hijab are considered to be oppressed, uneducated and the all embodiment of something lowly. Some of the smartest, most educated, and liberated girls I know wear the Hijab. It's their personal choice. Personally my preference is either, but its the chick's preferrence that ultimately matters.

Seriously everything IS happening. Of course the negative is also there, but its not quite the doomsday scenario that people make out. You guys being from the more well off society with a stronger media are not that hard to figure out. Plus more of us visit America than Americans visiting us. But the Americans that do, all have some eye opening experiences from what I've seen.


Why were these guys allowed to ever get out the door of the mosque with these signs?
Yet how many more people you'd see on forums dissing these guys? We can't hold this guy by force. Plus you must know this guy's English vocabulary's very bad probably. When's he's dissing freedom, he probably means YOUR interpretation of freedom. (I'm guessing its frmo the cartoon riots?)

How many people do you think amongst Muslims agreed with the rioting? None of us liked the cartoons and almost everyone supported boycotts, but the riots thing happened in some parts of the world, anyway.


Why were they not kicked in the crotch and their signs taken away and destroyed before they were allowed to discredit all them moderate Islamists with this extremist stuff, if they're in the minority?
In Pakistan they faced rubber bullets. From the checkered veil, I'm guessing he's an Arab in a western country probably.


They represent you, like it or not, Mr. Muslim.
Well then that's your shortcoming not mine. Should I assume the trashy girls I met in some bars in America are what all women in America are like? It's your choice, I chose to be smarter and I was right when I met some super cool Americans and one cool professor at uni.

I just feel that given your lifestyles you'd unfortunately never get to experience multiculturalism and never really figure out the real deal.

Repatriated Canuck
04 Jul 06,, 13:06
Oh god the cartoons, they weren’t even that bad by any stretch of the imagination. I’ve seen many Jesus is a C*NT shirts and such and have never seen as many hic Yanks running about threatening to kill people. They do however scream and rant as they are nuts too but on a different level to these nuts.

Our western nuts only kill or threaten to kill over abortion and animal rights.

Ray
04 Jul 06,, 14:26
that Islam is therefore superior to Judaism and Christianity.

Statements like this is what worries. Why compare?

Live and let live.

Prima facie, the article appears ambivalent.

sparten
04 Jul 06,, 17:40
Why were these guys allowed to ever get out the door of the mosque with these signs? Why were they not kicked in the crotch and their signs taken away and destroyed before they were allowed to discredit all them moderate Islamists with this extremist stuff, if they're in the minority?

They represent you, like it or not, Mr. Muslim.
He an Englishman. Ask them.

Confed999
04 Jul 06,, 18:16
"Slay those who insult Islam" huh? Nice sentiment. It's sad so many of them are so shortsighted they cannot figure out that everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. It's even sadder that none of those people's friends and family will police their own.

Asim Aquil
04 Jul 06,, 18:28
"Slay those who insult Islam" huh? Nice sentiment. It's sad so many of them are so shortsighted they cannot figure out that everyone is allowed to have their own opinion. It's even sadder that none of those people's friends and family will police their own.
You see somehow a nobody like him is a celebrity of Islam, but people who do condemn it are nobody's.

Archer
05 Jul 06,, 09:53
Its a moot point altogether about the conviction with which many of these people "condemn" such statements.

667medic
05 Jul 06,, 12:11
Holy cow, a "moderate" muslim, priceless indeed. So what's the top bid....

Asim Aquil
05 Jul 06,, 16:05
Holy cow, a "moderate" muslim, priceless indeed. So what's the top bid....
A cow.

Officer of Engineers
05 Jul 06,, 16:18
Well someone is on the ball today.

Archer
05 Jul 06,, 19:46
A cow.

Uh oh. Testy testy. :tongue:

Tronic
05 Jul 06,, 21:01
:biggrin:

Tronic
05 Jul 06,, 21:10
You see somehow a nobody like him is a celebrity of Islam, but people who do condemn it are nobody's.
no... the fact is that when Muslims in masses go on streets supporting terrorism... it actually sheds a bad light on the whole muslim society... so what do you do??? nothing... the same goes on in masses but when the conversation comes one on one then you claim you don't support this stuff...

Asim Aquil
05 Jul 06,, 21:22
Well you do know that people who go onto streets are people that we don't even know! Let alone are either our friends or family.

If they're going on the streets and breaking the law, they should've been arrested. I would've supported that. As we are normal people and not rioters we expect the law to take its course.

Everybody in my household that saw the police give the rioters in Pakistan a lathi charge treatment over the news was really pleased. We were talking about the coolness of the police for days, how it finally moved its lazy butt where it counted.

In Dubai there were no riots.

But for those actions I'm not going to make it to TV am I? Short of getting a mob of my own and going head on with the rioters there's little I can do to get my 15mins of fame as an anti-rioter.

Ray
06 Jul 06,, 02:34
In America girls that wear a Hijab are considered to be oppressed, uneducated and the all embodiment of something lowly. Some of the smartest, most educated, and liberated girls I know wear the Hijab.

Wearing a hijab is actually a wise thing to do. It is actually scientific. It protects you from the elements and you can never get skin cancer since you are protected from the UV rays of the sun!

In winters you will not be buffeted by the icy winds either. Therefore, you save money since you don't have to buy even a cold cream to protect yourself!

I am not joking. In the High Altitude, I found Cap Balaclava a great saviour as would a ski mask be for a skier!

Puritan
06 Jul 06,, 03:53
Bravo.

All human beings aspire to have a good quality of life. All events and actions are the outcome of economics. Strong economy....power play. Poor economy, terrorism. Educate the people, give them jobs, a reason to live, even compete with the materialistic joneses and eliminate crooked corrupt tyrannical dictators and you will eliminate terrorism to a large extent. Pygmalion (My Fair Lady) or Trading Places will show all reactions are largely situational. Replace the envira of the same person and you will convert him/her from an angekl to a devil abnd vice versa. In other words we are all human beinf gs and very susceptible to all influneces. Lets preserve and nurture the good influences and try eliminate the bad ones. That is the only intellectual way to eliminate terrorism. Give a human respect, food, job, education, a reason to live and that will destroy terrorist instincts. Permanently.

lemontree
06 Jul 06,, 05:15
no... the fact is that when Muslims in masses go on streets supporting terrorism... it actually sheds a bad light on the whole muslim society... so what do you do??? nothing...
You find them on the internet too... :rolleyes:I mean the terrorist supporting ones.

Asim Aquil
06 Jul 06,, 05:34
Wearing a hijab is actually a wise thing to do. It is actually scientific. It protects you from the elements and you can never get skin cancer since you are protected from the UV rays of the sun!

In winters you will not be buffeted by the icy winds either. Therefore, you save money since you don't have to buy even a cold cream to protect yourself!

I am not joking. In the High Altitude, I found Cap Balaclava a great saviour as would a ski mask be for a skier!
That was pretty much the reasoning behind the Burkha. Otherwise Burkha is not mandatory part of an Islamic dress code.

OrdinaryGuy
06 Jul 06,, 08:02
what the hell happened to sun screen??

Archer
06 Jul 06,, 08:14
You find them on the internet too... :rolleyes:I mean the terrorist supporting ones.

But then they pretend to be brave crusaders, and terrorist fighters. :rolleyes:

gilgamesh
06 Jul 06,, 09:11
That was pretty much the reasoning behind the Burkha. Otherwise Burkha is not mandatory part of an Islamic dress code.

What if they use burkhas to rob 7-11's? Or perhaps as Ninjas?

Asim Aquil
06 Jul 06,, 10:16
What if they use burkhas to rob 7-11's? Or perhaps as Ninjas?
face covering is not mandatory. For security reasons they can be asked to reveal their face.

Now yeah they may have a concealed weapon in the Burkha, but then they might have one in a trench coat ala Matrix lobby scene.


what the hell happened to sun screen??

In the 5th - 6th centuries?

Tronic
06 Jul 06,, 12:01
to whom do they reveal their faces to??? I mean, for example in Saudi Arabia... women can't show their face to other men... cuz they only suppose to show face to another women, but in the Saudi kingdom there aren't exactly what you may call adequate number of women police... (if there are any at all...)

Ray
06 Jul 06,, 12:24
what the hell happened to sun screen??

Try wearing a hijab! :tongue:


face covering is not mandatory. For security reasons they can be asked to reveal their face.

Face covering is the stuff that is important. The dangerous UV rays that are cut off. The remainder is not so important, if you want to your beauty intact!

Asim Aquil
06 Jul 06,, 12:40
to whom do they reveal their faces to??? I mean, for example in Saudi Arabia... women can't show their face to other men... cuz they only suppose to show face to another women, but in the Saudi kingdom there aren't exactly what you may call adequate number of women police... (if there are any at all...)
In Saudi Arabia right, everywhere else they can roam as they want to. Maybe Iran too.

Less than half the women in Pakistan wear Hijab, those who do, do it so with their own freewill. A small percentage only would veil themselves. Only those that want to carry on with Arabic traditions. Which is also their freewill.

platinum786
06 Jul 06,, 13:15
no... the fact is that when Muslims in masses go on streets supporting terrorism... it actually sheds a bad light on the whole muslim society... so what do you do??? nothing... the same goes on in masses but when the conversation comes one on one then you claim you don't support this stuff...

with regards to the cartoon protests, the few hundred people that took to the streets of london with the banners you display did it a few days after the incident, the issue was covered as headline news for days, the sunday after thousands of normal muslims protested in a noraml way, yet the news story didn't make the headlines, why because it's not sennsational, it doesn't project the image that the media feels helps them sell papers.

recently the brothers fom london that got shot held a rally with hundreds of atendee's condmening terrorism and police brutality, yet they have not recieived any coverage. the majority of people that have been taken into custody during investigations and then later relased without charge are never mentioned, yet always you hear xyz has been arrested etc etc etc.

the media portrays what it likes, if the truth was portrayed M5 would be portrayed as idiots entirely.

Ray
06 Jul 06,, 17:39
Would the story of Jabron Hashmi, the British Muslim soldier killed fighting the Taliban be a sensational one?

It has hit the headlines.

While his Uncle has said (as per the thread) that it was unIslamic for the soldier and another article by a Moslem person has stated likewise, I don't find this act sensational at all. The soldier did his duty as anyone would do for this country and his country was the UK.

It is however newsworthy since it shows that Moslems can rise above Islam to do their duty to their county!!!!!!!

Let the act of Jabron Hashmi be a shining star to guide all Moslems worldwide that their country come first and then comes religion! In the same way, as Brigadier Usman's sacrifice for India in the war against Pakistan!

Bluesman
07 Jul 06,, 04:50
In Saudi Arabia right, everywhere else they can roam as they want to. Maybe Iran too.

Less than half the women in Pakistan wear Hijab, those who do, do it so with their own freewill. A small percentage only would veil themselves. Only those that want to carry on with Arabic traditions. Which is also their freewill.

PLEASE give me a very large personal BREAK, man! It may not be codified in Pakistani law, but do not come in here and tell us that women in that society are CHOOSING to be oppressed. Wear of the burka MAY be freely chosen by some, but I bet you dollars to rupees if young Pakistani ladies decided en masse of their own free will to suddenly STOP wearing it, you could read your Koran at midnight a hundred miles from Lahore from the flames those kids would give off.

NO.

SALE.

Your co-religionists tend to be backward, reactionary and extreme, and if some brother in Malaysia read in the Mutowah Gazette about the Pakistani women's revolt agains the burka, he'd crack down on his own family so hard, the girls would probably never be allowed to go outside ever again.

Their own free will??? Please.

Archer
07 Jul 06,, 08:56
E-x-a-c-t-l-y.

Finally, someone pointed out that the emperor has no clothes.

Ray
07 Jul 06,, 09:59
Bluesman,

Your insight marvels!

You seem to see through smoke, fog and mist! ;)

I await to see you see through concrete, or maybe you have already done so! ;) :)

Asim Aquil
07 Jul 06,, 10:10
PLEASE give me a very large personal BREAK, man! It may not be codified in Pakistani law, but do not come in here and tell us that women in that society are CHOOSING to be oppressed.
A Hijab is not a burkha and so you DO assume that a hijabi girl would be an oppressed girl?

The girls that choose to wear it, I've seen are much more progressive than the others at times.


Wear of the burka MAY be freely chosen by some,
Bring in a hijabi and try having that argument with her. "SOME"? Almost all the females won't take off the hijab (THE HIJAB! Pakistanis wear the Hijab mostly not burkhas! Only some in the west might mostly wear burkha since their culture is very much in tune with the Arabs) even after you 'rescue' them off to America. With that in mind, ever noticed how women in America also wear Hijab?


but I bet you dollars to rupees if young Pakistani ladies decided en masse of their own free will to suddenly STOP wearing it, you could read your Koran at midnight a hundred miles from Lahore from the flames those kids would give off.
First of all woman on woman... More women probably DON'T wear the hijab. They are still religious, conservative women, btw. And there's no Hijab frustration in Pakistan that if they take em off they'd go and burn them off in frustration.

Burkha's aren't a good thing, plain n simple. But a hijab is a head scarf. Burkha is a body scarf.


Your co-religionists tend to be backward, reactionary and extreme, and if some brother in Malaysia read in the Mutowah Gazette about the Pakistani women's revolt agains the burka, he'd crack down on his own family so hard, the girls would probably never be allowed to go outside ever again.
Make believe? Most people are religious, sure. Try convincing a hijabi woman that she just believes in Islam because pops made you believe it. Watch the head.

For many girls now your misguided pity is almost sexist and they have an equal resentment towards that.

Ray
07 Jul 06,, 10:21
[QUOTE=Asim Aquil]A Hijab is not a burkha and so you DO assume that a hijabi girl would be an oppressed girl?


Frankly , no. I presume it does contribute to animal rights. No swatting of flies since they can't settle on the general area of the cranium.

The girls that choose to wear it, I've seen are much more progressive than the others at times. So, the insects are not oppressed and neither is the girl. Live and let live.



With that in mind, ever noticed how women in America also wear Hijab?

No. Plese tell me.


Burkha's aren't a good thing, plain n simple. But a hijab is a head scarf. Burkha is a body scarf.

I beg to differ. It does save one from sweaty women in a crowded place.



Make believe? Most people are religious, sure. Try convincing a hijabi woman that she just believes in Islam because pops made you believe it. Watch the head.

Never would try to convince a woman. It would be insance to do so. :)


For many girls now your misguided pity is almost sexist and they have an equal resentment towards that.

Great!

Hakunama tata

Asim Aquil
07 Jul 06,, 11:49
Got any fart jokes, Ray?

Ray
07 Jul 06,, 14:22
Got any fart jokes, Ray?

I don't want to get into any fracas with you since you will run off to seek protection as was the last time.

To be truthful, I don't have fart jokes since farting is your department.

Do desist and exercise some self control from generating a flame. The bomb might incinerate you.

Thank you.

Asim Aquil
07 Jul 06,, 15:05
Hmmm then I wonder what you call that BS which you just wrote in your previous post?

Archer
07 Jul 06,, 15:53
Hmmm then I wonder what you call that BS which you just wrote in your previous post?


Uh oh. Aquilism #101: When one cannot present his/her POV in a logical manner, start with the attacks.

Grow up, tiddlywinks. His post in fact points out the rationale for the Burkhas adoption, if you read between the lines.

raj
07 Jul 06,, 20:30
That was pretty much the reasoning behind the Burkha. Otherwise Burkha is not mandatory part of an Islamic dress code.
black color :rolleyes: , god it cooks the people who wear it esp in desert summer in mideast.

raj
07 Jul 06,, 20:33
black color :rolleyes: , god it cooks the people who wear it esp in desert summer in mideast.
may be they should use some light color for bhurka, BTW i do think bhurka equally protects man and women, then why only bhurka for women not for men????????????????????????

Asim Aquil
07 Jul 06,, 20:44
Erm, you did see that I was just responding to an attack. I did not initiate it. I don't care if you don't believe with my point view but at least talk to the subject as Bluesman did and got a reply on the subject.

Ray tried to deviate and started off in a whole weird direction. Could've might as well talked about fart jokes instead, same thing.

TopHatter
07 Jul 06,, 20:55
Here we go again.... :frown:

Everybody dial it back a few notches please.

Ray
08 Jul 06,, 04:04
A moderate Moslem?

A very difficult question.

The moderate Moslem is like the Holy Grail. Everyone knows that it must be there, but none know where is he. Yet the search is on since hope springs eternal in the human breast.

What constitute the characteristics of a moderate Moslem?

Does non participation in war whoops of the Taliban or AQ constitute a moderate Moslem? Or does standing along the periphery of the lunacy in ambiguous silence indicate the moderate Moslem? Or does the pious bleatings to justify "misunderstood" Islam indicate the moderate Moslem?

Can a Moslem be moderate? I sure hope they can, if for nothing else, at least for the peace of the world. Traditional Islam based on the Quaran is the only religion that makes it incumbent on the "pious" Moslem, who says his prayers at regular intervals during the day, to wage war on non believers or kaffirs. In fact, it makes it a business to decry the non believers in no uncertain terms and makes it a mission to eliminate such kaffirs with unmitigated glee. Yes, eliminate.




DAR UL KUFR

DAR UL KUFR HAS DIVISIONS

Dar ul kufr is three types,

A. Dar ul Kufr Asslie Originally dar ul kufr

Those countries that were never Dar ul Islam, e.g. UK, USA, Japan etc

B. Dar ul Kufr Taari Previously was Dar ul Islam

Taari – means it is an emergency situation, it is temporarily under the hands of the kuffar, Land which was once under the Islamic state and was then occupied by the kuffar, e.g. Philippines, Spain, India etc

C. Dar ul Riddah Domain of Apostasy

This is part of the second division but is different, this also used to be Dar ul Islam but was never taken over by the kuffar, and rather the leader became kafir Murtad. E.g. ALL the Muslim lands, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Palestine etc today. The only solution for this dar is munabaza bil saif, to remove him by the sword.

Dar ul kufr in relation to Dar ul Islam, has only two realities:

A. Dar ul Harb Land of war

This is the state that the Islamic state is fighting war with and is engaged in Jihad with that state to conquer it. It is when the Islamic state rejects to have covenant with the state, or the state refuses to have covenant with us.

There is a difference between the land of jihad and dar ul harb, dar ul harb is only in Dar ul Kufr Asslie, but the occupied lands are the land of fighting but not Dar ul Harb.

B. Dar ul A'hed (or Dar ul Suluh) Land of covenant

This is the state that has treaty with the Islamic state, and we would have agreements with them to debate and call for Islam, to give them da'wah to eventually change the law and order to Islam.
http://alghurabaa.co.uk/Deen/shariah/darulkufr.htm


If one anylses even the syntax, forget about the essence, the total contempt and revulsion Islam has for other religions and people sort of oozes out like goo. Therefore, it would not be wrong to believe that those who believe such sentiments can be moderate or coexist with other is a far cry. Even a cursory examination of Islamic religious text indicates that the final solution to world peace is when all convert to Islam. That surely indicates the contemptuous arrogance and intolerance that underlines Islam. With such being the background and such exhortation hammering at the Moslem subconscious, individual and as a community, can there be moderate Moslems?

Can the Moslem reject the radical aspects of the Quaran, Sunnah and the Hadiths? Haven't you heard that the Quaran is inviolate (even in this forum)? Other religions have ignored their radical aspects, but can the Moslems do so? No. It would be blasphemous and heresy!!

Islam is a highly aggressive religion. It's attiributes constantly hammers at it being supreme in all aspects (even said in this forum). Thus, it cannot give and will not give space to others to coexist. Islam is violent. Islam is always at war. If not with Kufrs, then with themselves. Shias vs Sunni or jihad to cleanse oneself! Why war? Why not some other more decent form to do the necessary? Islam alone is the panacea is repeatedly hammered till it brainwashes!

There are billions of Moslems the world over. They are not participating in the AQ jihad. Arent they moderate?

They apparently are not.

The very fact that they do not run a jihad against the jihadis indicates that while they are not openly belligerent, they are in principle with them, even if silently and in the subconscious.

"Moderate" Moslems claim that there is a problem amongst the believers, but not with the Islamic principles and traditions of faith. Is that correct? How can this be correct when the faith is so steeped in syntax that makes violence and subjugation of non believers a hallelujah for the true Moslem, pious if you wish. Piety, murder or slavery of non believers is piety?

There is also a belief that those Moslems who decry Wahabism are moderates. Is that correct? The Deobandis make common cause with the AQ and they are Hanifis and not Wahabis! Are the incantations of Moslem terrorists not from the Quaran? Are those incantations not from the Quaran or is the Quaran wrong? Surely, these incantations were not invented by the Wahabis! So, does criticism of Wahabis make the average Moslem a "moderate"? Hardly.

And why do the other Moslems detest the Wahabis? Not because of their (Wahabis) radicalism, but because of the Wahhabis’ practice of takfir, or the classification of Moslems of other sects as among those unbelievers. It reviles the other Islamic sects that the Wahabis have the audacity and temerity to club them with the Kufrs - the vilest of all society!

We also have this one of "people of the Book" and that they are worthy of protection! What does that mean? It means protection so long as they pay the jezia and beheve like second class citizens! Indeed, that sure is a great sign of love and moderation! Dhimma also prevents the construction of religious structures of non believers. An ideal way to kill their religion. Clever and devious. Also, one cannot dress like the Mosloem, threaten a Moslem or ride horse. Indeed, moderation at its best!!! If that is the Sharia and it is inviolate, then can moderation be there?

If the mindset cannot change owing to religious brainwashing, then where is the moderate Moslem?

I sure would love to be proved wrong.

Asim Aquil
08 Jul 06,, 05:40
What constitutes as a moderate Christian or a Moderate Hindu?

Aureliusmarc
08 Jul 06,, 05:49
What constitutes as a moderate Christian or a Moderate Hindu?

what constitutes a moderate christian is someone who goes to church every sunday, prays, yet never really questions god they go through every mass as a bland routine, those who dont question are the conformists that i either just go with wut set for the regulars. so wut makes a moderate christian is a person who just goes through the motions, how many christians do u think actually live their faith?

as for your question on what a moderate hindu is i have no answer.

"all faith that is faith is questioned"

Asim Aquil
08 Jul 06,, 06:05
What constitutes as a moderate Christian or a Moderate Hindu?

the faith is so steeped in syntax that makes violence and subjugation of non believers a hallelujah for the true Moslem, pious if you wish. Piety, murder or slavery of non believers is piety?
false. There is only self-defence, no initiation of violence as stated in the Quran.


There is also a belief that those Moslems who decry Wahabism are moderates. Is that correct? The Deobandis make common cause with the AQ and they are Hanifis and not Wahabis! Are the incantations of Moslem terrorists not from the Quaran? Are those incantations not from the Quaran or is the Quaran wrong? Surely, these incantations were not invented by the Wahabis! So, does criticism of Wahabis make the average Moslem a "moderate"? Hardly.
Wahabiism is not terrorism. It's annoying, but people who believe in it just want to practice the religion accurately. But in truth they are just practicing the religion arabically thus thats the problem I see with it. There are non-sect groups as well. There are plain sunni groups as well. Shias totally reject. And there are boris amongst Shias who are also non-violent from their very nature.


And why do the other Moslems detest the Wahabis? Not because of their (Wahabis) radicalism, but because of the Wahhabis’ practice of takfir, or the classification of Moslems of other sects as among those unbelievers. It reviles the other Islamic sects that the Wahabis have the audacity and temerity to club them with the Kufrs - the vilest of all society!
Devotion towards faith is very important in Islam. Obviously the non-Muslims don't follow our faiths and more or less reject it. You won't like anyone who hurls nasties onto you right? Again not all Wahabis do this, they are more annoying since they are trying to convert Muslims into this line of thought. The beard, the hightened pants, etc.


We also have this one of "people of the Book" and that they are worthy of protection! What does that mean? It means protection so long as they pay the jezia and beheve like second class citizens! Indeed, that sure is a great sign of love and moderation! Dhimma also prevents the construction of religious structures of non believers. An ideal way to kill their religion. Clever and devious. Also, one cannot dress like the Mosloem, threaten a Moslem or ride horse. Indeed, moderation at its best!!! If that is the Sharia and it is inviolate, then can moderation be there?
In which Muslim society do you see non-Muslims paying for their protection? They have to be protected like any minority has to be protected. For example in India, in any given day hundreds/thousands of a minority can be killed. This has happened at a rate of at least once per decade. maybe more. This shouldn't happen in a Muslim country as per the requirement.

Jezia? That's a separated issue in the sense that EVERYONE has to pay. Muslims originally are REQUIRED to pay the Zakat. And many forms of it too. Jezia is what non-Muslims have to pay. These both are sort of taxes on the people. Everybody also paid a different amount based on their earnings. The poor are also exempted.

In todays world it doesn't happen since we've advanced to the modern structure of tax collection and the same rules apply. Muslims don't pay Zakat (some do) and non-Muslims don't pay Jezia. The Protection requirement is still there.

Parihaka
08 Jul 06,, 14:37
Even a cursory examination of Islamic religious text indicates that the final solution to world peace is when all convert to Islam Which is why there will never be peace. My whanua, my kith and kin have fought long and hard to loose the shackels of religion, we're not about to allow yet another montheistic desert philosophy to **** us over once more.

Instead of the middle east inventing all these religious regimes to oppress the rest of us, why don't y'all invent a cure for cancer or something useful of such ilk?

Ray
08 Jul 06,, 16:21
Quote:
the faith is so steeped in syntax that makes violence and subjugation of non believers a hallelujah for the true Moslem, pious if you wish. Piety, murder or slavery of non believers is piety?

false. There is only self-defence, no initiation of violence as stated in the Quran.

Funny that the Islamic conquest by the Sword and jezia and stuff like that is being termed as self defence!

Some self defence I must say.


Wahabism is not terrorism. It's annoying, but people who believe in it just want to practice the religion accurately. But in truth they are just practicing the religion arabically thus thats the problem I see with it. There are non-sect groups as well. There are plain sunni groups as well. Shias totally reject. And there are boris amongst Shias who are also non-violent from their very nature.


Your answer does not address the issue I raised. Even in this forum, people of the Moslem faith, have taken shelter for barbarism perpetuated that these acts are those of the Wahabis and not by the "pious" Moslems.

What about the Deobandis? Are they Wahabis?

And what is so annoying about Wahabis? They are following their rules. Non Moslems may find them most annoying, but not Moslems, for after all the purest and most literal interpretation of the Quaran is by the Wahabis. They find the other types of Moslems annoying so much so they feel that the other Moslems are no better than being Kufrs (Kaffir). The non Wahabi Moslems dislike them since they club you all with the vilest of Islamic slurs - Kaffir!


Devotion towards faith is very important in Islam. Obviously the non-Muslims don't follow our faiths and more or less reject it. You won't like anyone who hurls nasties onto you right? Again not all Wahabis do this, they are more annoying since they are trying to convert Muslims into this line of thought. The beard, the hightened pants, etc.

There you go again.

Does Islam have the copyright to devotion?

Why do you feel that other religions do not have devotion as their bottomline? What makes you feel that it is not important to other religions? Ofcourse, I will concede that if "fanaticism" is "being important to religion", then other religions will surely fight shy of it! Hell, why the Dickens then do we have the word in English, "devotee"? Is it a substitute for the word "Moslem"?


In which Muslim society do you see non-Muslims paying for their protection? They have to be protected like any minority has to be protected. For example in India, in any given day hundreds/thousands of a minority can be killed. This has happened at a rate of at least once per decade. maybe more. This shouldn't happen in a Muslim country as per the requirement.

Jezia? That's a separated issue in the sense that EVERYONE has to pay. Muslims originally are REQUIRED to pay the Zakat. And many forms of it too. Jezia is what non-Muslims have to pay. These both are sort of taxes on the people. Everybody also paid a different amount based on their earnings. The poor are also exempted.

In todays world it doesn't happen since we've advanced to the modern structure of tax collection and the same rules apply. Muslims don't pay Zakat (some do) and non-Muslims don't pay Jezia. The Protection requirement is still there.

History indicates non Moslems paying for protection. The protection money is called "jezia". In this forum, there is a thread that quoted a Pakistani newspaper which brought out a statement by a Pakistani Senator demanding that non Moslems pay jezia and Shias be declared as Kaffirs!

In the contemporary world, much that the Islamic countries may like to apply the jezia or declare non Moslems kaffir, there will be such an international hue and cry that Islamic countries will fight shy to own up to such banal acts. International aid will also dry up and desert shall bloom on Islamic countries!

So that is why today, no Islamic country dare practice such odd stuff.

Yes, there have been riots in India. In Pakistan since they have wiped out the minority except for a token ones, they now resort to knocking off the Shias.

You justification of Jezia is most ridiculous of logic. Just because Moslems pay Zakat, EVERYONE has to pay some money or the other. Why should non Moslem have to pay Jezia? It is like stating that just because one eats pork, the Moslems must eat a cockroach! Or, just because Hitler killed Jews, the Moslems must wipe out humanity!

But then logic has never been your forte.

Living up to your religious psyche - supremacy sans rationale?!