Talibanization of Pakistan
Rafi Aamer April 17, 2007
#97 Posted by majumdar on April 20, 2007 5:18:14 am
Tehsinabbasi sahib,
(A few years ago I was convinced that God had shown us immense mercy when we dodged the bullet. I couldn’t find any justification why America chose Iraq as its next target rather then Pakistan and this despite India’s all out attempt to make this attack happen. )
Becuase sir you have no oil. Plainly speaking, you guys aren`t worth attacking.
Regards
(A few years ago I was convinced that God had shown us immense mercy when we dodged the bullet. I couldn’t find any justification why America chose Iraq as its next target rather then Pakistan and this despite India’s all out attempt to make this attack happen. )
Becuase sir you have no oil. Plainly speaking, you guys aren`t worth attacking.
Regards
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#98 Posted by Urstruly on April 20, 2007 6:26:47 am
Re: # 82 Tehsin
``Pray tell me, what religion considers liberty as a virtue? – which is perhaps the most sacred of all American values.``
That is what my argument was in my post that there is no place for liberal democracy in any Muslim polity. The system of values of Muslims i.e their religion dons a ceiling over the liberties and sets the limits. Yes there are consequences for having limited liberties within well defined boundries but then there are also consequences with unlimited liberties with no boundries. One has to weigh them side by side objectively and justly.
The main argument in this article is also that the Objective Resolution in the Constitution of 1973, as its Preamble sets forth the ceiling for the liberties in the democratic state of Pakistan. So at the end of the day the core of the argument turns out to be whether you are with God or against Him. I do not think a hypocritical middle is possible. It is one or the other.
``Pray tell me, what religion considers liberty as a virtue? – which is perhaps the most sacred of all American values.``
That is what my argument was in my post that there is no place for liberal democracy in any Muslim polity. The system of values of Muslims i.e their religion dons a ceiling over the liberties and sets the limits. Yes there are consequences for having limited liberties within well defined boundries but then there are also consequences with unlimited liberties with no boundries. One has to weigh them side by side objectively and justly.
The main argument in this article is also that the Objective Resolution in the Constitution of 1973, as its Preamble sets forth the ceiling for the liberties in the democratic state of Pakistan. So at the end of the day the core of the argument turns out to be whether you are with God or against Him. I do not think a hypocritical middle is possible. It is one or the other.
#99 Posted by Urstruly on April 20, 2007 6:41:25 am
TEXT OF OBJECTIVES RESOLUTION
It is quite apparent from the text of the OR that there is no place for liberal or secular democracy in Pakistan even though the constitution guarantees a government of the people by the people, and for the people. But people have to stay with in the constitutional freedoms.
Please do note the article # 5 where the word ``free`` was deleted (and replaced with ***) from the original text of the OR during Zia era by Junejo assemblies. The reason for erasing the word ``free` was to make it commensurate with he Islamic edicts where minorities have full freedom to exercise and prolesytize their religion but they cannot prolysetize to Muslim subjects of the state. The Quadiani specific ammendments in the Constitution further restricts this freedom for Quadianis, whose religion in essence is the anti-state and ant-constitution.
Here is the text:
1. Whereas sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the State of Pakistan, through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;
This Constituent Assembly representing the people of Pakistan resolves to frame a Constitution for the sovereign independent State of Pakistan;
2. Wherein the State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people;
3. Wherein the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam shall be fully observed;
4. Wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah;
5. Wherein adequate provision shall be made for the minorities to *** profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures;
6. Wherein the territories now included in or in accession with Pakistan and such other territories as may hereafter be included in or accede to Pakistan shall form a Federation wherein the units will be autonomous with such boundaries and limitations on their powers and authority as may be prescribed;
7. Wherein shall be guaranteed fundamental rights including equality of status, of opportunity and before law, social, economic and political justice, and freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association, subject to law and public morality;
Wherein adequate provisions shall be made to safeguard the legitimate interests of minorities and backward and depressed classes;
8. Wherein the independence of the Judiciary shall be fully secured;
9. Wherein the integrity of the territories of the Federation, its independence and all its rights includ-ing its sovereign rights on land, sea and air shall be safeguarded;
So that the people of Pakistan may prosper and attain their rightful and honored place amongst the nations of the World and make their full contribution towards international peace and progress and happiness of humanity.
#100 Posted by rafi_aamer on April 20, 2007 7:17:04 am
Re: # 93
Those who consider this ``democracy`` should know that this goes against the very grain of our demands in united India. Consider the fact that Muslim League`s claim in United India was that a permanent minority (i.e. a cultural or ethnic group) should not be forced or coerced by a permanent majority. Non-Muslims in Pakistan were and still are a permanent minority. Hence, for OR to suitably meet the end of the basic principle on which our entire struggle for based, a majority of the minority members should have been sought. Hence we didn`t do to our minorities, what we demanded others to do to us.
Excellent point.
Those who consider this ``democracy`` should know that this goes against the very grain of our demands in united India. Consider the fact that Muslim League`s claim in United India was that a permanent minority (i.e. a cultural or ethnic group) should not be forced or coerced by a permanent majority. Non-Muslims in Pakistan were and still are a permanent minority. Hence, for OR to suitably meet the end of the basic principle on which our entire struggle for based, a majority of the minority members should have been sought. Hence we didn`t do to our minorities, what we demanded others to do to us.
Excellent point.
#101 Posted by Tehsinabbasi on April 20, 2007 7:34:29 am
#92 by zeemax
“What is the worst possible do you think these Islamists are going to do you?”
No Sir! You are far ahead of me. I do not consider an Islamist victory to be a forgone conclusion. All the other stake holders i.e. the army, the feudal lord, the politician, the industrialist, the tribal chief are not going to allow to be stepped on by any mullah brigade. This is going to result in a civil war probably worse then what is taking place in Iraq today. I think it is an absolutely essential and worthwhile war if there is any such thing – because we have to know who we are. As you said in your other post …. The unresolved issues from 7th century have to be confronted and resolved one way or the other so that we can at least conjure up a common ethos.
My fear of course is for all our loved ones, especially those who are not stake holders, who are merely trying to eek out a living, they are the ones who will be crushed. Those I would wish to extract.
“What is the worst possible do you think these Islamists are going to do you?”
No Sir! You are far ahead of me. I do not consider an Islamist victory to be a forgone conclusion. All the other stake holders i.e. the army, the feudal lord, the politician, the industrialist, the tribal chief are not going to allow to be stepped on by any mullah brigade. This is going to result in a civil war probably worse then what is taking place in Iraq today. I think it is an absolutely essential and worthwhile war if there is any such thing – because we have to know who we are. As you said in your other post …. The unresolved issues from 7th century have to be confronted and resolved one way or the other so that we can at least conjure up a common ethos.
My fear of course is for all our loved ones, especially those who are not stake holders, who are merely trying to eek out a living, they are the ones who will be crushed. Those I would wish to extract.
#102 Posted by arjun2 on April 20, 2007 7:36:08 am
#93 by Mantolives on April 20, 2007 2:56am PT
Pakistan can be an Islamic state based on Islamic principles ... but it cannot discriminate between its citizens on the basis of any religious beliefs...
It is AND it does..case in point...your ahmedi dad not being able to call himself muslim...a non-muslim having a zero chance of being a CJ(``acting`` CJ doesn`t count), a non-sunni not being able to be the head of the army, PM or president....
Pakistan can be an Islamic state based on Islamic principles ... but it cannot discriminate between its citizens on the basis of any religious beliefs...
It is AND it does..case in point...your ahmedi dad not being able to call himself muslim...a non-muslim having a zero chance of being a CJ(``acting`` CJ doesn`t count), a non-sunni not being able to be the head of the army, PM or president....
#103 Posted by Urstruly on April 20, 2007 7:42:00 am
Re: # 100
This is prepostrous and shameless obfuscation. The ideas presented in this paragraph are shameless re-writing of the history post-fact. If accepted the whole idea of Two Nations Theory falls flat on its face. The TNT demanded Two nations living under one polity under a constitutional parity as opposed to Congresse`s stance that there existed no minority or majority in India; everyone was one nation. Please keep in mind that Quaid-e-Azam always used the option of separate homeland as second option till very late until Cabinet Mission was formed in late 1946 or early 1947. Until then Quadi-e-Azam always propounded the idea of separate-but-equal under one constitution. The idea of United India with a constitutional parity between Hindus and Muslims failed because of the stubborness of Gandhi and Nehru who were of the opinion that even if QA succeeded in creating the state of Pakistan, the state would not last more than 6 months and Muslims would come back crawling on all fours begging to reunite with Union. The rest is history. The Objectives Resolution is the culmination of the ideals that Muslim Leadership long held before partition. And mind you, this was the core argument of Congress against ML that in a Muslim state minorities will exist (and discriminated).
This is prepostrous and shameless obfuscation. The ideas presented in this paragraph are shameless re-writing of the history post-fact. If accepted the whole idea of Two Nations Theory falls flat on its face. The TNT demanded Two nations living under one polity under a constitutional parity as opposed to Congresse`s stance that there existed no minority or majority in India; everyone was one nation. Please keep in mind that Quaid-e-Azam always used the option of separate homeland as second option till very late until Cabinet Mission was formed in late 1946 or early 1947. Until then Quadi-e-Azam always propounded the idea of separate-but-equal under one constitution. The idea of United India with a constitutional parity between Hindus and Muslims failed because of the stubborness of Gandhi and Nehru who were of the opinion that even if QA succeeded in creating the state of Pakistan, the state would not last more than 6 months and Muslims would come back crawling on all fours begging to reunite with Union. The rest is history. The Objectives Resolution is the culmination of the ideals that Muslim Leadership long held before partition. And mind you, this was the core argument of Congress against ML that in a Muslim state minorities will exist (and discriminated).
#104 Posted by shishapa on April 20, 2007 7:44:14 am
So who determines that Pakistan becomes or has become ``Islamic state based on Islamic principles`` and is staying that way?
#105 Posted by zeemax on April 20, 2007 7:52:52 am
#101 by Tehsinabbasi,
I don`t think you understood my question. Let me re-phrase it.
What do you think are the negative implications upon civil society, or against the interests of ``other stake holders`` (i.e. in your words the army, the feudal lord, the politician, the industrialist, the tribal chief) in the event of an Islamist victory, to prevent which there will be civil war?
Now can you be specific please?
Rgds
I don`t think you understood my question. Let me re-phrase it.
What do you think are the negative implications upon civil society, or against the interests of ``other stake holders`` (i.e. in your words the army, the feudal lord, the politician, the industrialist, the tribal chief) in the event of an Islamist victory, to prevent which there will be civil war?
Now can you be specific please?
Rgds
#106 Posted by Tehsinabbasi on April 20, 2007 7:56:51 am
#98 by Urstruly
“So at the end of the day the core of the argument turns out to be whether you are with God or against Him”
No Sir! We are not conceding God to you, He is not the partisan monster that you are making Him out to be.
“So at the end of the day the core of the argument turns out to be whether you are with God or against Him”
No Sir! We are not conceding God to you, He is not the partisan monster that you are making Him out to be.
#107 Posted by rafi_aamer on April 20, 2007 8:00:36 am
Re: # 103
Are you saying that Jinnah never made the case in United India that minorities needed to have a difinite share in power to guard their interest against the permanent majority of Hindus?
Are you saying that Jinnah never made the case in United India that minorities needed to have a difinite share in power to guard their interest against the permanent majority of Hindus?
#108 Posted by arjun2 on April 20, 2007 8:04:11 am
Don’t fence your graveyard, police tell Ahmadis
* Ahmadis told to remove wall after clerics oppose ‘mini-Rabwah’
LAHORE: Police has asked the Ahamdiyya Community to demolish by today (Friday) a boundary wall on a piece of land it had bought to extend its cemetery, after threats by local clerics who said it was a move to build a “mini-Rabwah”.
The community had bought six acres of land in the outskirts of Lahore to extend an existing cemetery, but local clerics – allegedly from Sunni Tehrik and Tehrik-e-Tahafaz-e-Naomoos-e-Risalat – began to provoke the residents of the locality to oppose the construction of a boundary wall on the land.
The clerics, Daily Times learnt, also made announcements in local mosques and held a couple of demonstrations.
Instead of protecting the community, the police and the local administration are pressuring it to stop the construction and demolish the part of the wall it had already built.
The community had bought the land from an Ahmadi landlord at a place called Handu Gujjar, seven miles from Shalimar Gardens off the Grand Trunk Road going towards Wagah. No local authority or housing society is prepared to offer them space for a cemetery in Lahore.
Part of the land has been a graveyard for 10 years, while the rest of it was vacant. The community had recently begun building a wall around it.
On April 15, 2007, a group of clerics (not from the locality) began to say they would not allow a “mini-Rabwah” in Handu Gujjar. Residents say the place had earlier been peaceful and there was complete inter-communal harmony.
On April 16, the Mughalpura SP summoned representatives of the Ahmadiyya Community and a group of clerics and told them to come to the Manawan police station to “show their strength” knowing that Ahmadis are a minority.
This mobilised the clerics, who used loudspeakers and mosques to urge people to “unite against Ahmadis”. They were able to gather about 150 clerics and madrassa students the next day, convincing the Ahmadis to abandon the “illegal construction”.
Later, the SP said the clerics now wanted the height of the boundary wall lowered from 6 feet high to 4 feet, with barbed wire on the top. In the evening, a group of clerics delivered more speeches on loudspeakers and consequently, a group of 500 to 600 men gathered to give the Ahmadiyya Community a “10-day ultimatum” to demolish the boundary wall.
The SP then told Ahmadis to either demolish the wall or let the government do it, lest a mob of mullahs demolished it itself, which he said police could not stop.
Two days ago, the Ahmadiyya Community received a notice from the local town authority that the construction was illegal. The police has now asked the community to remove the wall by Friday (today).
Mughalpura SP Dr Rizwan was not available for comment, but the station house officer (Manawan police station) said the police could not do anything to protect Ahmadis from clerics. “Only the media can protect the rights of that community,” he said. ali waqar
* Ahmadis told to remove wall after clerics oppose ‘mini-Rabwah’
LAHORE: Police has asked the Ahamdiyya Community to demolish by today (Friday) a boundary wall on a piece of land it had bought to extend its cemetery, after threats by local clerics who said it was a move to build a “mini-Rabwah”.
The community had bought six acres of land in the outskirts of Lahore to extend an existing cemetery, but local clerics – allegedly from Sunni Tehrik and Tehrik-e-Tahafaz-e-Naomoos-e-Risalat – began to provoke the residents of the locality to oppose the construction of a boundary wall on the land.
The clerics, Daily Times learnt, also made announcements in local mosques and held a couple of demonstrations.
Instead of protecting the community, the police and the local administration are pressuring it to stop the construction and demolish the part of the wall it had already built.
The community had bought the land from an Ahmadi landlord at a place called Handu Gujjar, seven miles from Shalimar Gardens off the Grand Trunk Road going towards Wagah. No local authority or housing society is prepared to offer them space for a cemetery in Lahore.
Part of the land has been a graveyard for 10 years, while the rest of it was vacant. The community had recently begun building a wall around it.
On April 15, 2007, a group of clerics (not from the locality) began to say they would not allow a “mini-Rabwah” in Handu Gujjar. Residents say the place had earlier been peaceful and there was complete inter-communal harmony.
On April 16, the Mughalpura SP summoned representatives of the Ahmadiyya Community and a group of clerics and told them to come to the Manawan police station to “show their strength” knowing that Ahmadis are a minority.
This mobilised the clerics, who used loudspeakers and mosques to urge people to “unite against Ahmadis”. They were able to gather about 150 clerics and madrassa students the next day, convincing the Ahmadis to abandon the “illegal construction”.
Later, the SP said the clerics now wanted the height of the boundary wall lowered from 6 feet high to 4 feet, with barbed wire on the top. In the evening, a group of clerics delivered more speeches on loudspeakers and consequently, a group of 500 to 600 men gathered to give the Ahmadiyya Community a “10-day ultimatum” to demolish the boundary wall.
The SP then told Ahmadis to either demolish the wall or let the government do it, lest a mob of mullahs demolished it itself, which he said police could not stop.
Two days ago, the Ahmadiyya Community received a notice from the local town authority that the construction was illegal. The police has now asked the community to remove the wall by Friday (today).
Mughalpura SP Dr Rizwan was not available for comment, but the station house officer (Manawan police station) said the police could not do anything to protect Ahmadis from clerics. “Only the media can protect the rights of that community,” he said. ali waqar
#109 Posted by arjun2 on April 20, 2007 8:11:38 am
It`s not just pakiland that has been talibanized...islamic fundamentalism has seeped into the paki DNA to the point where pakis are now a new species..homo jihadis`r`us..
The US government was right to put pakis first on the registering with INS/fingerprinting list...
Pakistan-based Muslim group behind attack, journalist says
Articles about organization reason why he was targeted, columnist believes
OMAR EL AKKAD
An Ontario journalist was beaten and threatened with death this week in what is being called a revenge attack for publishing articles critical of a Pakistan-based Muslim group.
Jawaad Faizi, 35, was pulling into the driveway of his editor`s Mississauga home on Tuesday night when a car pulled up behind him. Mr. Faizi had not yet turned off the engine or taken off his seatbelt when he heard the sound of a blast. Before he knew what it was, the sound came again -- this time it was his front windshield being smashed. Three men began assaulting him with bats and yelling Punjabi profanities at him, he said. When the assailants saw Mr. Faizi call 911, he said, they fled.
Mr. Faizi, who worked as a journalist in Pakistan before coming to Canada in 2002, has been writing columns for the Pakistan Post, a Mississauga newspaper, for more than two years. He believes it is his work there, specifically criticism of a powerful Pakistan-based Muslim group, that resulted in the beating.
``It was Idara Minhaj-ul-Quran,`` Mr. Faizi said in an interview yesterday. ``[The attackers] were saying, `Why you publish news about our leader?` ``
Minhaj-ul-Quran is a Pakistan-based Muslim group led by a religious scholar named Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri. Mr. Faizi said his own trouble began after Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, at a meeting with his followers, pointed to the moon.
Mr. Faizi said that Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri told his followers he had written the Prophet Mohammed`s name on the surface of the moon. Two weeks ago, his newspaper ran an article -- picked up from a Pakistani news outlet -- that questioned whether Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri could have done this. Mr. Faizi wrote a column on the topic.
After publication of these and other articles about Minhaj-ul-Quran that the Pakistan Post printed beginning in January, Mr. Faizi said, he and his editor, Amir Arain, began receiving harassing phone calls.
``They were saying very bad words in Punjabi,`` Mr. Arain said. ``They were saying, `You are not a Muslim, you are supporting Christians.` ``
Both the editor and his columnist contacted Peel Regional Police about the calls twice, once in January and again on Monday, the day before Mr. Faizi was beaten. A police spokeswoman confirmed that a 911 call came from outside Mr. Arain`s home on Tuesday night, prompting an investigation. However, she declined to discuss details of that investigation. She was unable to provide more information on the earlier complaints.
One local immigrant journalist said that the attack against Mr. Faizi is part of a climate of media intimidation that prevails in many home countries.
``It wouldn`t surprise me at all,`` said Saleem Samad, editor of the Toronto-based Weekly Durdesh. ``I`ve also had similar experiences.``
Mr. Samad was forced to leave Bangladesh in 2004 after his writings there provoked a wave of intimidation measures and threats. Since coming to Canada, he said, he received threatening calls after writing about Islamic terrorism, while some of his fellow journalists have received threats after reporting on the Tamil Tigers.
``I know these people, they are very intolerant,`` he said. ``Even if they are in Canada, their mindset doesn`t change. They`re intolerant about political opinion, religious opinion, you name it.``
Many complaints about such intimidation come from writers and editors working for small ethnic and religious-based publications. Most journalists volunteer their time and the ones who are paid tend to take on second jobs. Mr. Samad said that he now advises such journalists to find jobs with security companies, both to make a living and for added protection.
Mr. Faizi spent five hours at Trillium Hospital as a result of the attack on Tuesday, suffering injuries to his arms and head. He and his wife kept their children home from school yesterday, and Peel District School Board officials say the board will meet with police to discuss the situation.
``My kids are asking why they didn`t go to school,`` Mr. Faizi said. ``I told them there was an accident and they have to stay at home. I don`t want to say people attacked me; they will be scared more than me.``
Almost exactly eight years ago, Mr. Faizi said, he had a similar experience in Pakistan after he published photos of a wanted terrorist. The subsequent revenge attack also landed him in a hospital.
The US government was right to put pakis first on the registering with INS/fingerprinting list...
Pakistan-based Muslim group behind attack, journalist says
Articles about organization reason why he was targeted, columnist believes
OMAR EL AKKAD
An Ontario journalist was beaten and threatened with death this week in what is being called a revenge attack for publishing articles critical of a Pakistan-based Muslim group.
Jawaad Faizi, 35, was pulling into the driveway of his editor`s Mississauga home on Tuesday night when a car pulled up behind him. Mr. Faizi had not yet turned off the engine or taken off his seatbelt when he heard the sound of a blast. Before he knew what it was, the sound came again -- this time it was his front windshield being smashed. Three men began assaulting him with bats and yelling Punjabi profanities at him, he said. When the assailants saw Mr. Faizi call 911, he said, they fled.
Mr. Faizi, who worked as a journalist in Pakistan before coming to Canada in 2002, has been writing columns for the Pakistan Post, a Mississauga newspaper, for more than two years. He believes it is his work there, specifically criticism of a powerful Pakistan-based Muslim group, that resulted in the beating.
``It was Idara Minhaj-ul-Quran,`` Mr. Faizi said in an interview yesterday. ``[The attackers] were saying, `Why you publish news about our leader?` ``
Minhaj-ul-Quran is a Pakistan-based Muslim group led by a religious scholar named Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri. Mr. Faizi said his own trouble began after Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, at a meeting with his followers, pointed to the moon.
Mr. Faizi said that Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri told his followers he had written the Prophet Mohammed`s name on the surface of the moon. Two weeks ago, his newspaper ran an article -- picked up from a Pakistani news outlet -- that questioned whether Mr. Tahir-ul-Qadri could have done this. Mr. Faizi wrote a column on the topic.
After publication of these and other articles about Minhaj-ul-Quran that the Pakistan Post printed beginning in January, Mr. Faizi said, he and his editor, Amir Arain, began receiving harassing phone calls.
``They were saying very bad words in Punjabi,`` Mr. Arain said. ``They were saying, `You are not a Muslim, you are supporting Christians.` ``
Both the editor and his columnist contacted Peel Regional Police about the calls twice, once in January and again on Monday, the day before Mr. Faizi was beaten. A police spokeswoman confirmed that a 911 call came from outside Mr. Arain`s home on Tuesday night, prompting an investigation. However, she declined to discuss details of that investigation. She was unable to provide more information on the earlier complaints.
One local immigrant journalist said that the attack against Mr. Faizi is part of a climate of media intimidation that prevails in many home countries.
``It wouldn`t surprise me at all,`` said Saleem Samad, editor of the Toronto-based Weekly Durdesh. ``I`ve also had similar experiences.``
Mr. Samad was forced to leave Bangladesh in 2004 after his writings there provoked a wave of intimidation measures and threats. Since coming to Canada, he said, he received threatening calls after writing about Islamic terrorism, while some of his fellow journalists have received threats after reporting on the Tamil Tigers.
``I know these people, they are very intolerant,`` he said. ``Even if they are in Canada, their mindset doesn`t change. They`re intolerant about political opinion, religious opinion, you name it.``
Many complaints about such intimidation come from writers and editors working for small ethnic and religious-based publications. Most journalists volunteer their time and the ones who are paid tend to take on second jobs. Mr. Samad said that he now advises such journalists to find jobs with security companies, both to make a living and for added protection.
Mr. Faizi spent five hours at Trillium Hospital as a result of the attack on Tuesday, suffering injuries to his arms and head. He and his wife kept their children home from school yesterday, and Peel District School Board officials say the board will meet with police to discuss the situation.
``My kids are asking why they didn`t go to school,`` Mr. Faizi said. ``I told them there was an accident and they have to stay at home. I don`t want to say people attacked me; they will be scared more than me.``
Almost exactly eight years ago, Mr. Faizi said, he had a similar experience in Pakistan after he published photos of a wanted terrorist. The subsequent revenge attack also landed him in a hospital.
#110 Posted by zeemax on April 20, 2007 8:24:20 am
Just an impish observation added to #105 :)
Are there really any stakeholders whose interests will be jeopardized with an Islamist victory other than the ones shown below?
Please continue with your response. Sorry for the interruption.
Are there really any stakeholders whose interests will be jeopardized with an Islamist victory other than the ones shown below?
Please continue with your response. Sorry for the interruption.
#111 Posted by hamidm2 on April 20, 2007 8:43:11 am
zeemax,
``What do you think are the negative implications upon civil society``
Here are the top 10 .....
1. 50% of he population (women) will be classified as 2nd class citizens to be beaten if they venture outside their homes without the burqa
2. ahmedis, christians, hindoos and other dhimmis will be forced to wear distinctive clothing and pay a special tax
3. apostates, heretics and atheists will be hunted down and killed
4. pigs and dogs will be persecuted
5. barbers will be shot and people without beards will be whipped
6. musicians will be killed and actors will be stoned
7. people will be forced to pray five times a day
8. people will be killed for not fasting
9. films and television will only fature bearded men speaking in arabic
10. toothpaste and deodrant will be banned
............. on the positive side, men will be allowed to have sex with concubines, gilmans and sheep ..........
#112 Posted by zeemax on April 20, 2007 8:43:25 am
Islam under attack says former hostage
Sister Ridley urged Muslims “to not kiss the hand that slaps you” and added: “We cannot get down on our knees in front of those that will attack us – it’s the worst thing you can do.
“We are peaceful, we do not look for confrontation, but nor are we pacifists,” she added.
“If someone attacks me, I promise you I will strike back.”
Sister Ridley went on to voice her support for the Islamic Sharia law and attacked Tony Blair for trying to “dilute” Islam.
She said: “Being a Muslim is very, very simple. You either are or you’re not. It’s like being pregnant.
“You either are pregnant or you’re not. I’ve not heard of anyone being moderately pregnant. I cannot give you a definition of an extremist because I do not know any extremists.”
Sister Ridley urged Muslims “to not kiss the hand that slaps you” and added: “We cannot get down on our knees in front of those that will attack us – it’s the worst thing you can do.
“We are peaceful, we do not look for confrontation, but nor are we pacifists,” she added.
“If someone attacks me, I promise you I will strike back.”
Sister Ridley went on to voice her support for the Islamic Sharia law and attacked Tony Blair for trying to “dilute” Islam.
She said: “Being a Muslim is very, very simple. You either are or you’re not. It’s like being pregnant.
“You either are pregnant or you’re not. I’ve not heard of anyone being moderately pregnant. I cannot give you a definition of an extremist because I do not know any extremists.”
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- majumdar: Kaal bhai, Now or Never... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- nkg: Re: # 133 Special provision... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- majumdar: Nkg moshai, What is wrong... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 128 Dinaric... RSS is... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 120 HP... The core... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 98 hamidm2... " what... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: add to #133 Posted... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: #127 Posted by tahmed32... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
