Samudra

What were the Pak forces doing before 9/11? They bleed because they don't have a choice now, the day America withdraws it will be the dawn of strategic depth through Taliban in Afghan. Anti-Islamist, yeah right!

entropy

Naturally.

I am not saying anything else. This way we can keep away all sorts of scum and keep all good people, including good Muslims, inside.

__________________
If memory serves...

Agnostic Muslim

Pursuing national interest, and for a while there were others in the West who agreed with Pakistan. You guys supported the war lords of the Northern Alliance, hardly a bunch of peaceniks - national interest.

Was it a flawed policy? Would we have been following it right now? Probably, to our detriment, doesn't take away from the fact that from all appearances, Pakistan's leadership, civilian and military, has acknowledged the terrorist threat, and while the means to deal with them may change, the intention to won't.

__________________
Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah

Agnostic Muslim

This is nothing but demagoguery Samudra.
The vast majority of Muslims are trying to feed, clothe and educate their families. They are trying to eek out an existence. They are trying to not get, in many cases, the sole bread winner killed in a confrontation with extremists who would chop you head off for having the wrong name.

How many people show up at a protest Samudra? The couple of thousand in Karachi I think, during the height of the Cartoon controversy, out of a city of 15 million.

What was the majority doing? Protesting or eking out an existence on this miserable planet?

Even those who protested, what comparison is there between joining a peaceful protest and standing up to a bunch of fanatics with RPG's and machine Guns , ready to dynamite a statue for "offending them"?
Those that come out to murder, threaten, knife, shoot and bomb are the extremists, they are the minority. There is no justification given here for their actions, there is no understanding and support for their aim.

There is support and understanding for those who wish to peacefully make a case for their cause, even if it is for a ban, and the entity being protested to has the right to reject that protest, if it is contrary to its own laws.

Adux

Please to Compare Ahmed Shah Masood to Talibunnie Mullah Omar, what can I say. Pakistan should be thanking their lucky stars, that Musharraf was there for them and the world did not punish them for their contribution to world terrorism, The most number of terrorist camps is in Pakistan.

JamesCash

Well I think the islam is a neutral source of guidance. Most Muslims use it for the good and only some use it with bad motives. I think there has to be another link in the why of radicalism.

I'm not sure about this but I was told by a middle-eastern professor at a guest college that extremist-networks such as AQ had to recruit new extremists via the internet and mosques in europe because the middle-eastern ones weren't up for it anymore. (?)

Paul Aarts

Samudra

That was the way it turned out in the end but everytime somebody has gets threatened with violence and death when they speak out against religion. I'll concede all that would apply to those who knife and shoot.

The question that eludes answer is how come the faults of the non-Muslims gets highlighted while the faults of the Muslim themselves are ***always*** brushed under the carpet with pretexts like pursuing national interests or winning the proverbial bread.

While I'll concede that a very small number of people participated in the protests nobody can deny that the sentiments of the Muslim world were firmly against those cartoons getting published. Compare that to the sentiment of the Muslim world when Pak backed the insane Taliban - when Arabs can flaunt medieval laws and still get a hero's welcome in Islamic countries. Why does the conscience of the Muslim world never prick when it is a Muslim who is at fault?

No sir, we're being dishonest if we say Muslims are impartial. So long as it is a Muslim and it benefits them - anything goes. The utopia and moral uppity of religion flies out of the window in no time to give place for thuggery, bland radicalism and discrimination.

I'm fine with feeding, clothing and shelting one's family so long as they let everybody else do the same and let them worship their own Gods. Not even a handful of Islamic countries let the others live. Heck, when there's no more kaffir around its Muslims Mk.1 versus Mk.2!

glyn

[quote=Neo;475238]
You have to understand that religion to muslims is the most important thing in life, most people fail to see that.

Why should that be? It isn't for any other religion I know of.


Movies like Da Vinci Code and questioning the devine status of the Christ may be agrreable to Christians but a muslim will never question the existance or authencity of Muhammed or the Quran.


To me that is the most depressing thing about it. Over a billion people are trapped in the mindset of 7th Century desert dwellers. Why? The rest of the world lives in the 21st Century.

I guess thats the difference between us.

Which is another way of saying the strife between the world of Islam and the rest of humanity is to continue forever. Not a lot to look forward to, is there?

__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

HistoricalDavid

Since when is being an intellectually impoverished sad deluded failure (i.e. religion tells me what to think!!!!!) a reasonable justification for violence against those who don't share your beliefs?

No, it doesn't. At best it produces moral robots, not moral people; those who do something because it's been drummed into them, not because they understand morality. That's what happens when you explicitly lock out discussion and debate.

__________________
HD Ready?

Agnostic Muslim

Masood massacred hundreds of Heratis. What do you think the term "war lord" implies?

Bastions of freedom and rights?

Your argument is morally bankrupt. The NA killed and tortured a few hundred less, so therefore, for you, there is "no comparison". Whether they killed and tortured five thousand vs the Taliban's 50 thousand - they were both despicable entities.

Agnostic Muslim

"winning bread" and "national interest" are reality. If Muslims or Muslim nations were the only ones to do so, perhaps your argument might be valid - but we aren't. Nations throughout history, religious and non-religious, have pursued flawed policies in the name of national interest.

Now, because that reality doesn't quite fit your attempts to denigrate an entity that has earned your dislike, that entity's actions alone are "condemnable" and a "pretext".

My personal opinion was that they were not simply satire, but a deliberate attempt to link Muslims with violence - Why shouldn't I oppose them?

That sir, is how humans work, the majority of us do not tend to be "impartial". Having lived in the US, Mid East and Pakistan, I don't really see much difference between Americans and others when it comes to "being fine so long as it benefits them".

How are Indians doing more for Darfur than Pakistanis (on a people level)? If you aren't doing much more, what gives you the right to criticize us for being complacent "so long as it doesn't hurt us"?

The "thuggery" and "bland radicalism" remains restricted to a minority - I made my arguments on that in the other thread.

The Muslim world is not a monolithic one - There are Christian nations in Africa and South America that have committed genocide. The status of the Muslim nations, indeed any nation, needs to be looked at from a much larger perspective than merely religion.

I have pointed out how, given a mere semblance of stability, Pakistan has progressed an amazing amount from the Zia years. Turkey, given its own dynamics and history, has achieved even more. Merely looking at one aspect of a country (the dominant religion) to explain its flaws, is an incredibly flawed argument.

Jay

While I agree that muslim world is not a monolithic one, almost all muslims nations tend go by the book (Shariyat). I dont recall any Christian nation going by the bible. Even though the interpretation of shariyat is different among the muslim world, the base is still the same book and you cannot deny that. So even though muslim world is not homogeneous, it looks like one and it acts like one.

Zia did not cause all the misery to Pakistan, so you should stop pointing fingers on him. The secular nature of Pakistan was doomed from the beginning when Jinna carved a separate nation for the sub-continental "muslims", but then that topic would open Pandora's box. Religion ruled Pakistan right from its independence and thats the root cause for all your evils, its not Jinna, Bhutto or Musharaff.

__________________
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

Jay

Yep, long time.
True, different people interpretate in different ways. If an extremist can interpret Hadiths and Koran in the way its shown in the movie, why shouldn't Mr.Wilders have that same freedom?
Let me put it this way, its very hard to figure out the radicals in Islam. Pretty much the taliban and an average Abdul gives the same amount of importance to Allah, share similar level of honor code and stuff that can be easily picked by a non muslim. Some of the verses are indeed very vague and arbitrary, its even hard for a learned scholar to get the real etymological meaning out if it.
Does throwing gays in to water is included in that? Simply put, a majority muslim nation will not accept an individual's choice on being gay, even if its against the nature. Unfortunately, majority of the muslims in the west have the same concocted views on issues like this.
Sure, and I believe that no sane person would agree with Wilders, but when you see more and more violence in your living room and in your street cuz of religion, these folks would quickly vote for Wilders.

Agnostic Muslim

You contradict yourself when you admit that the "interpretation of the source" (the Quran) is different for different nations, yet then argue that "look and act like one".

I don't see how you can argue that Turkey, Lebanon, Pakistan, Malaysia, Iran and Afghanistan are nations that "look and act like one". Its like suggesting that all Christian nations - in Africa, the Americas and Europe are the same. The political structures of those nations are different, the societies are different, the cultures are different (as with Muslim Countries) - but go into any Church, and its Jesus and the bible - just like it is Mohammed and the Quran in any Muslim mosque.


As I pointed out earlier, it makes for an incredibly flawed argument to simply cherry pick one aspect of a Country and then use that as justification for its flaws. Pakistan's history and its course have been shaped by a whole slew of events, personalities and influences, religion is but one of them.

On the Zia issue, I am not claiming that he alone is the source of all of Pakistan's problems, they have been caused by many factors as I have argued - but he did incorporate most of the current obscurantist legal codes in our constitution, and did indeed play an extremely important part in "Islamicising" the country (which is different from simply being an Islamic or Muslim country) . However, my reasons for bringing him into the conversation were to point out the progress in Pakistan over the last twenty years - which is undeniable.

S-2

I haven't watched it. No need. The discussion here has been excellent to absorb the central gist minus the needless poison.

Central point to me is that it's been identified universally as such and is rapidly becoming a marginalized artifact- as it seemingly deserves.

OOTH, Parihaka's earlier comment is disturbing to this American. Europe's growing desire to exclude America from it's security perspective also seems a reflection of increasingly polarized attitudes, particularly when our presence has successfully served as a mitigating agent against Europe's occasional proclivities to indulge pogroms of one sort or another.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, our presence is as much to protect Europeans from one another as, perhaps, anything.

__________________
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski