Postmortem of Israeli-Hezbollah War – What Next?

sattar2 #154 {``Do us all a favor and tell us what bothers you about Ahmadis?``}

Sattar Sahib,
What bothers me about Ahmadis is why they put up with the intolerance, myopia, narrow-mindedness, and stupidity of the right-wing fundo whacko Sunni Wahabbis? If someone threw me out of a club, I would start my own club and then club them on the head with it. Just look at the Baha`is and the Druze - they are happy and content without the majority from whom they originated.

zeemax,

If you think qadiani/mirzai is a better description, you should also agree that your ilk are better described as “suicidal maniacs”. Look, your cousin Urstruly is trying to rationalize suicide bombings on the other board. What does this tell you?

It is incorrect to label those who believe in Quran as non-Muslims. It seems “Islam” has been disfigured beyond recognition by your ullema, and now you can no longer tell what is what. Read my previous post to Urstruly as it applies to you (and echo) as well.

+++

tahmed (#64),

Ahamdi views are consistent with Quranic teachings and I reckon you have misunderstood both. Furthermore, accepting a person as a prophet does not conflict with Quranic view of individual responsibility.

I doubt your viewpoint is well thought-out.

Urstruly,

Do us all a favor and tell us what bothers you about Ahmadis? Merely calling them kaffir or airing hateful rhetoric is not an intelligent response. Try to think before responding.

And while you are at it, do explain this hadith that you yourself quoted, where the dear Prophet (pbuh) said “I am the last prophet and this mosque of mine is the last mosque”. Or at least have the decency to admit that the hadith you quoted proved you wrong. Your failure to admit such blatant errors on your part are very telling.


+++++

echoboom (#62),

Islam permits fighting jihad as a last resort and encourages believers to exhaust all other ways of negotiation and existance. Quran even commands Muslims to migrate to other lands in order to avoid persecution.

It is incorrect to call Ahmadi-Muslims as necessarily “loyal” to British. Ahmadi community has remained committed to peaceful means for resolving political conflicts. They opposed the idea of fighting jihad against British as such jihad would have been in violation of Quranic teachings. Furthermore, Ahmadi community has also opposed Iraq war from the very beginning, if this makes you feel better.

Here’s what I wrote earlier on Chowk. Click away if you must scratch this itch.

Click [Reply #62]

Click [Reply #52]

#151, VRV {``Like you do, I too hate bigots in all religions.``}

VRV Bhai,
When the shalwars, pyjamas, dhotis, pants, and saris are removed from the corpses of the victims of rapes and murders, we are left with the remains of unfortunate beings who are very much like ourselves. Thank you for your compassion and the truth you hold paramount. I have so much respect for people like you. Somehow, I think that we are in a majority - in India, in Pakistan, in the US, UK, and even in Iraq.

VRV #149,
I always knew that you were one decent, honest, and honorable man. It is people like you who restore our faith in our fellow humans. Hopefully, Krishna_abcd will learn something from this ``arjun.`` Thanks.

Re: # 150

Salimbhai,

Thanks for those words.

I was in Gujarat during those days. KPS Gill the tough cop who recetnly admitted that he had sleeping problems during his Gujarat asignment. He was the guy who`d have seen worse incidents in his life as a polieman than he saw Gujarat. Still he spoke with his mind as a human being. Anthropocentrism!

I did my own research on S6 of Godhra and post-Godhra riots. I knew many details......I prefer not to go further. Of ocurse India is important for me but there is no moral crisis on this. I like India and I like humanism. I rant at people who are Koopastha Mandookams.

Like you do, I too hate bigots in all religions.

#146 by VRV

[But, Bombay blasts - given my working assumptions - are interlinked with Pak`s terrorism, extremist Indian Muslims and dickheads like Modi.]

The previous Bombay blasts happened long before anything happened in Modi`s Gujrat. And, as I`ve said many times on Chowk before, it is easy to demonize someone without proof. If what some NGOs and others say about Modi is true then charges should be brought against him (this is the FIRST thing the opposition would do - they have done this many times before). And if found guilty, he should be hanged many times over. But this needs to be PROVED first. In a country like India, where court cases and investigations are done against the most powerful of individuals like Rajiv Gandhi etc. at the drop of a hat, I find it hard to believe that given the ``obvious`` nature of his crimes, no one sought legal action. Even the American Government, in banning Modi, said that they were going by what the UPA govt`s report said, and nothing else.

I`ve looked into newspaper reports of the incident. For every report in the un-Hindu, There are reports in a variety of other newspapers that say otherwise. There is no concrete evidence implicating him that I could find.

If you have concrete information, I would appreciate it if you shared it with me.

[The mainstream extremist thinking in India would eccentuate the problem than solving it. ]

Maybe so.

Re: # 148

Krishna,

I proffer my mind thru email or some other board, not this one. I wrote it but it was too big and too detailed. I was in Ahmedabd on those days and I have photgraphs of Naroda Patiya, Gulberg Society and other places of Ahmedabad and Godhra S6.

I met many journalists in the English and Gujarati press based in Ahd.

On Modi: Anybody lived in Gujarat and have had a detached view of the incidents would feel that Modi was indeed culpable. Sangh was funding the defence of all riot culprits on post-Godhra riots. Jaideep Patel who lead the Naroda Patiya was given state protection and two guys who tried to attack him were killed in a police shoot-out without trail. Godhra attackers were on serious charges under IPC but none of the post-Godhra riots are facing charges. You think Modi is clean?

I prefer not to discuss more on this board.

Correction to Re: # 149

Godhra attackers were on serious charges under IPC but none of the post-Godhra riots are facing charges.

Pl read as

Godhra attackers were on serious charges under IPC but none of the post-Godhra riots are facing SERIOUS charges. Most of the people booked were foot-soldiers but not the kingpins of the respcetive areas.

#142 by qusman1

[Just recognize the Palestinian`s right of return & compensate them for it.
....
What say, Gentoos? ]


Would you support the ``right of return`` of Jews and Christians to Mecca and Medina?

If not, why not?

What say you?

Re: # 147
krishna_abcd- We need some kind of a criterion. Palestinians still have titles to their properties. Jews got compensated for their claims by Germany, etc. Sikhs, Hindus & Muslims leaving Pakistan or India got compensated on the basis of their titles.

So what makes thee growl so menacingly?

Re:masadi#143

[...Since when did behram become the ``lord`` of this domain. The guy is a walking talking contradiction. ...]

I thought this would never happen - but I completely agree with masadi here. Given behram`s extremely filthy, derogatory language about so many people including Indians, he is the last person on earth to pontificate about tolerance and minorities. Behram is nothing more than an uncultured buffoon with a dirty mouth. Masadi, well said!!

#127 by behram1

....a man with a belief or a man with an intellect. Only one of these devices is considered valid to be used at one time....

Nothing could be farther than the truth. These two are not mutually exclusive. One begins where the other ends. And you know which of these ends first due to its severe limitations.

Re: # 144 by zeemax on August 27, 2006 11:08pm PT

Dear Zeemax:

{....a man with a belief or a man with an intellect. Only one of these devices is considered valid to be used at one time....

Nothing could be farther than the truth. These two are not mutually exclusive. One begins where the other ends. And you know which of these ends first due to its severe limitations.}

You suggest ``One begins where the other ends.`` That is mutually exclusive, is it not? What if, intellect begins, but religious belief never ends. Is that a possibility?

Religion in its implications implies no more than ``superstitions.``

Respectfully submitted,

Since when did behram become the ``lord`` of this domain. The guy is a walking talking contradiction. He complains when HP tells him the obvious, yet he is extremely liberal in hitting others ``below the belt`` so to speak with contrived bs. He complains about the treatment of minorities in Pakistan, yet belongs to a minority group that is financially much more secure than the average Pakistani. He has no numbers similar to the ones that are available in the US to show the pathetic existence of minorities here with life expectency being 8 to 10 years less for African Americans and mortality at younger ages being much higher. Often he talks about how he derided the Muslims from that area that try to be friendly with him, yet he talks about the condition of minorities in Pakistan. This guy is a pathetic hypocrite. He calls for there being mutual exclusivity between intellect and belief, yet is oblivious to the fact that most intellectuals of days gone by had ``beliefs`` and what about the belief that says that using the the intellect is the surest way to the truth?

Sorry, couldn`t hold this back seeing how he is strutting around here parading as a paragon of tolerance and enlightenment.

Re: # 143 by masadi on August 27, 2006 10:29pm PT

Dear masadi:

Are you just jealous, since you are unable to make a distinction between your religious belief and your intellect. As I have consistently pointed out to you, a religious believer (am I wrong in assuming that!) like yourself can never been an authentic intellectual. You know that this thought is right. Almost all of the yester year intellectuals that I am familiar with had nothing to do with their religion.

{Since when did behram become the ``lord`` of this domain.}

No, I am not the ``lord`` of any domain. But, I would continue to use the power of my intellect to confuse the heck out of a religious believer like yourself. It is quite apparent that you have become totally confused, and have no place to take refuge.

{The guy is a walking talking contradiction.} And that is the strength of an intellect. Is it not?

{He complains when HP tells him the obvious, yet he is extremely liberal in hitting others ``below the belt`` so to speak with contrived bs. } O! Now you want to bring a alibi into the fake argument that you have created. Why? Are you so insecure to handle your little left intellect by yourself?

{He complains about the treatment of minorities in Pakistan, yet belongs to a minority group that is financially much more secure than the average Pakistani.}

Yes, and that is all the more reason that I can empathise with the unscrupulous ways the majorities have been dealing with minorities, in Pakistan.

{ He has no numbers similar to the ones that are available in the US to show the pathetic existence of minorities here with life expectency being 8 to 10 years less for African Americans and mortality at younger ages being much higher. }

Now, what has that got to do with the conversation about Starbucks? You are just showing your basic indecency when you are mixing a conversation about pigs with sheep.

Did that make any sense to you at all? It is not supposed to. That is exactly how you present your stupid empirical whatever.

{Often he talks about how he derided the Muslims from that area that try to be friendly with him, yet he talks about the condition of minorities in Pakistan.} Uh! Majorities must always, by definition, be derided. Hatred is almost universally promoted by those in the majority, does it not? If not, then where is the argument?

{This guy is a pathetic hypocrite. } Being a muslim and being a majority, you have an ingrained right to humiliate and ridicule minorities amongst you. When was the last time, a muslim society was considered right for minorities?

Well, masadi, that was too long.

{He calls for there being mutual exclusivity between intellect and belief, yet is oblivious to the fact that most intellectuals of days gone by had ``beliefs`` and what about the belief that says that using the the intellect is the surest way to the truth? }

You know very well what I mean. An indoctrinated religious belief can never be replaced by the worldly intellect. Being a religious muslim, you can never be authentic with your intellect. So stop the charade and acknowledge one or the other.

{Sorry, couldn`t hold this back seeing how he is strutting around here parading as a paragon of tolerance and enlightenment.}

And this is where your inadequacies are shown.

Respectfully submitted,