Muslims in America

Somebody has written Islamic Scientist...Nice oxymoron...

masadi, it seems you have lost the argument and chickened out!

Tooth writes "hey masadi,

why dont you answer those questions in #277?"

Once in a while I throw bones to dogs, that does not mean I take their barking seriously....

masadi, we have gone thru this before. we defined bigot and by the definition you were proven to be the real bigot.

hey masadi,

why dont you answer those questions in #277?

thanks

Manto writes "Yaar truth you are doing such a commendable job presenting the facts..."

Manto kissing the a$$ of a certified Hindu bigot who knows next to nothing about "facts" because the empty vessel has been stumped once again. Like I said exorcise the MAJ ghost from yourself or you'll babble in tongues that only Hindu bigots can understand...

Manto writes "The problem is that you are arguing with a halfwit...Now if only the dimwit knew what rhazes and avicenna actually thought of Islam quran etc he would not be taking pride in their purported achievements..."

A retard calling another a halfwit is not plausible evidence. I do not care about the personal beliefs of the scientists but the fact that they were the product of a social order deeply interwined with Islam that produced this openmindedness. I would like this fool to point out to me where these two scientists (out of the dozens of quite famous Muslim scientists) denounce Islam in categorical terms. Regarding Khaldun, the fool doesn't realize that "science" is a way of knowing or learning and doing research, it is not confined to the "physical" sciences, and Khaldun was the first historiographer/ sociologist of the scientific kind. His moqadama, a introduction book of scientific research regarding society and history has extensive quotations from the Quran

Yaar truth you are doing such a commendable job presenting the facts... Why stoop to masadi's level?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 276 masadi,

look around where is arab world today? india suffered because of Jain and Buddhism neglected the "arm". tat is why you brutes could enter in India. the time coming that you will self distruct.

Hear not here

Truth

The problem is that you are arguing with a halfwit

He is probably going to say ramswamiramanu who?

On the other hand ibne khuldun is famous for his work in history not science.

Now if only the dimwit knew what rhazes and avicenna actually thought of Islam quran etc he would not be taking pride in their purported achievements.

Now here him speak of his superior wit... I must bow out now.

masadi aka mulla mandar multankar,

did you change yur biz card, dear?

dear red hot lipstick with pink maskara, would you please look around? u were almost given free ride in US & Canada in 80s and early 90s, what did muslims from arab and pakistanis did? how many really completed their education and what kind of education? You guys got that free ride in US because those poor abduls foolishly became cannon fodder in afghanistan.

You lost your key to progress in dark Islamic Kothi, but you mad-sad man insists to search it under the lampost of economy outside the kothi because there seems to be light of shampooed data supplied by your masters and his lounda Shortcut Aziz.

You have not responded to this:
Mulla Mandar Multankar,

Why do you write these long sentences and very very long paras? Your evey third sentence is same as the first one.

Answer these questions?

1. Why is it hard to practice democracy where majority is Musim?

2. Is Islam demands spreading it?

3. In the case of Islam does the spreading happens mainly by physical force?

4. Does that mean Islam has to excessively depend on the armed forces?

============

Above questions were Islam applied laterally, ie, spreading across the land. Similar questions are there for Islam acting vertically.

1. Does the Islam demand the state, nation country to be Islamic wherever Muslims are in majority?

2. Does that mean politics in Islamic state means proving who is more Islamic?

3. Does that mean people have to be constantly be judged and classified according to their purity?

4. What happens to the people who are little less pure such as Ahmedi and Shias?

5. To keep the society pure does Islam demands the state to be a police state?

6. Since the police are not so well armed and well organized or disciplined, does policing work also done by army in Islamic society?

.
.
.
=========

You see Mullaji with red lipstick and pink maskara, Islamic society is not police state but army state. The people when subjugated to such atrocious ideology and its modus-operndi for long time then they internalize it. People start asking for army rule.

Baki tumhari badbad is only hot air and pile of paper shit.

Manto writes "The contribution of the
Hindu civilization has been much more substantial than the Arab world in terms of science etc and this is a fact no one can deny."

BS.

Oye BJ yaar, tu Chowk sey kuch maheeney ka furlough kyon nahi ley leta? U seem to be the one person uniting Indians and Pakistanis these days..Saala Atif 2 sey ley key Chaltahai gives you gaalis. Take a break, dude.

Manto writes "Are you upset that all these TV stations keep calling me for interviews but a distinguised scholar like you gets ignored?..."

Mian tv channels are very interested in mass murderes and rapists too, does that say much about them? They throng around around that F'ck Musharraf as well. If they haven't called me thus far for my views, it is because I keep a low profile rather than seek cheap publicity like you. Regarding my work, our posts and my quite superior wit shows quite clearly for all to see...

Tooth101, it should be clear to you that I don't correspond with dumb f'cks like you. You don't need to step outside India to be a "made in the West" scientist... Regarding "all of the leading Muslim scientists being athiests", the fool Manto has absolutely no clue about that, but moreso than the personal "faith" of those scientists many of whose works have quotations from the Quran, like Ibn Khaldun etc, the culture that was deeply immersed in the faith's rationality- Islam was never meant to be dogmatic, produced such openmindedness, which produced those scientists...

Aww poor baby ... Are you upset that all these TV stations keep calling me for interviews but a distinguised scholar like you gets ignored?

Maybe you should give up this academia business because you suck at it. As they say those who can't do teach and those who can't teach teach gym. Maybe you can join golden gym in faisal town

Re: # 267 masadi aka Mulla Mandar Multankar,

CV raman never stepped out of India before his Nobel prize.

Ramanujam was more productive in India.

On this issue of Muslim contributiomlb etc why is it that all leading Muslim scientists were atheists.

The contribution of the
Hindu civilization has been much more substantial than the Arab world in terms of science etc and this is a fact no one can deny.

Manto writes about Bjk "Chemical therapy is also required in his case."

And in your case, exorcism of the ghost of MAJ who is trapped in this world because of his crimes, let him fill another empty vessel and bother it and leave you alone...my sincere advice....

nkg what are you new Hindu white wannabes but cheap imitation of the Western F'cks you worship....

nkg writes "Can you please provide some evidences? "

Of course what little you had you did sh** with it, were it not for Muslim organization, sharing and invention period of knowledge, and they became much more advanced than any group in the Middle ages because they were open and unbigoted (unlike you a hole) the Western sciences would not have developed as they did, and there would be no "made in the West" Hindu scientists...

And may I add what a remarkable insight bj has into his own mind. Just goes to show the couch is not enough ... Chemical therapy is also required in his case.

And you are right let's not have a useless discussion.

I speak every day against discrimination against ahmadis on some TV channel or radio channel right here in Pakistan bringing myself in harm's way despite not being an ahmadi in any real sense.
Thus any discussion I have with you would obviously be useless as you abandoned your flock to the cosy comforts of the west just like your brother from another mother urstruly.

So you see it was necessary and what is more I will choose my battles and ignore you from now on.

Sattar,

I am simply pointing out the obvious: my irreligiousity has nothing to do with my ahmadi father who was a very religious man in his own right.

I am the best friend you've got ... not bj or others you are leaning on.

Learn to accept the facts. Ahmadis are for all practical purposes as Islamically rigid and conservative as any other Muslim sect.

My father was threatened with a ban by the ahmaddiya community because he had music at my wedding. I rest my case.

Re: # 234
Masadi...
"Historical Muslim contribution to all the sciences in which they were much ahead of their counterparts in the middle ages is only doubted by Hindu bigots who worshipping sex organs have lost their sense of temporal being.."

What a gem masadi!!! Indians learned science from moslems!!!! This is greatest joke of world...
Can you please provide some evidences?
I can see destruction of Nalanda University and other educational institutions in northern India by islamic looters...

When Brits arrived in India, the education system was at its nadir. Brits used Iswar Chandra Bandyopadhyay to revive education in Bengal. Unfortunately, it was not immidietly replicated accross India, and cow belt ( UP, Bihar, MP) which have received most of the islamic barbarism, is still under seer darkness as per as edcaution is concerned.
Coming back to Brits, the revival of education produced great scholars in all fields in Bengal ( 1870 to 1970) in all areas. Sir J C Bose (father of Radio communication), Satyen Bose, Meghnad Saha, C V Raman, Ramanujam ( in Tamilnadu), R N Tagore, Bankim C Chatterjee..., Vivekananda...

Yes Masadi, the arab slave, the contribution of moslems is distorting Vedas/Upanishads to create Allahopanishad, which the true followers of Muhammed (expert in cheating) Joker Naik try to impose as Islam's relevence in India...
......
and islamic justice system of "extortion money"(Jijiya), even will make the most dreaded mafia, ganster red faced...
...and the famous islamic mathematicians...whatever Boudhayana, Brahmagupta created, arabs have taken 15-20 years to understand it and posed it as their work (blatant IP violation)...
Moslems killed indian scholars and after 15th century Islamic talent of mathematics vanished....

India was better place before Islamic invaders arrived. The HDI index of moslems ruled areas are living proof of how it destroyed Indian civilisation (UP, Bihar, MP, BD and upper West Bengal, Pakistan...)
Now, look at the situation of NW provinces of Pakistan and adjacent areas in Afghanistan. The civilisational structure totally broken down. And we Indian can thank Brits to rescue us from the evil effect of Islam....Masadi, the pathetic creature, after living miserable life in ISLAMIC republic of Pakistan, if you still advocate for Islam, then there is no bigger moron available in world...

Tahir, Murad and Mulla Mandarji

Would you guess who sung the song under, and in what century? We do not need to learn morality from those whose actions have been exactly opposite. We love you as brothers and sisters, but when you make our survival difficult, and you try to enslave us robbing our identity, culture and pride, let God give us strength in killing you. This is also a prayer and a meditation. Indians have come to this point. We do not want to fight your fight against west on our lands. You can fight them in the land of Macca and Madina.

Now, may the Lord of the Universe be pleased by this sacrificial speech, and thus pleased bestow this blessing.

May the crookedness of the wicked end, and may they grow a liking for virtue.
May the creatures be cordial friends among themselves.

May the darkness of evil vanish, and may the sun of truthful conduct dawn.
May the creatures receive what they wish for.

May the creatures constantly meet communities of the Lord's worshippers, who are ever showering bliss.

Like gardens of wandering wish-fulfilling trees,or like villages of wish-fulfilling gems, or like oceans of nectarine speech,

Akin to blemishless moons, or suns without the burning heat, may these worshippers of truth be liked by all forever.

What more need be said? May all the three worlds become filled completely with bliss, and worship the Primal Lord uninterruptedly.

And O Lord! especially on this earth, may those who cherish this scripture as their very life force, be victorious over the seen and the unseen fruits of action.

Then, the Lord of the Universe, in the form of my Guru, said 'your offering shall be blessed'. By this blessing this bhakta attained beatitude.

Re: # 259 Tooth-32
"Old people have that habit of repeating"

And young ones seldom pay heed to good advice!

Re: # 254 Tooth 100
"Fight colonists in mecca and Madina not in the indian subcontinent, killing wrong people, ie Hindus."

Explain that to Indian Muslims; I don't live in a Bombay ghetto dear! Look who is accusing US of killing YOU! What un-truth!

"Science....one of the methods for self-realization. Nothing wrong with Science. It can keep one inquistive and child like."

Don't get me wrong; the child-like science you worship (is there anything you DON'T worship?) has been thoroughly molested; see the effects around you!

Leave science alone and return to faith, goodness, and laaahve!

Now gimme a hug.

Mulla Mandar Multankar Ji aka Masadi Sahab,

"Hindu bigots when they exercise their bigotry of condemning Islam by chopping off historical contexts of arguments."

Can you give us those chopped off parts without using some one's whome you call "the fools" Nama. We can go by the karnames of the faithful followers of Islams. Islam to non Islamic people is the action of its followers. Theory is good if it alters the practice. Mandarji you are a big Namuna of Islam. You are a Islamist bigot with dark red lipstick and pinkish Mascara.

"bigots whose posts are incompetenly juvenile and cannot be expected to fool even weak minds, "

Thanks Mandarji to make me junior, but I hope your dont become senile. Your one post is enough. Rest are jsut repeat. Old people have that habit of repeating.

Mandarji, have you officially changed your name. We know Islam does not make one to lose their identity. So there should not be a problem for you to identify youself with your ancestors custom and names without losing your faith. We hope you have told your family to call you Mandarji.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#238, Arjun, your understanding of student employment is limited, there is a third option within the confines of the law that you missed. I think you should check into it further, though regarding the white man's laws to monopolize all benefits for himself....who cares...

Re: # 238

Arjun, the 20 hour per week limit is only for off-campus employment. There are no limits on how many hours a F-1 visa holder can work on campus.

BJ2 (#237),

I am giggling as I read your post. What a twist of perception on my part (sorry; but I can’t help laughing as I write this …)

But I agree that … while meaning well, though in a stubborn, utopian way, YLH at times goes overboard unnecessarily criticizing others (Ahamdis in this case; also perhaps in alluding to Gandhi in his article, if I am not mistaken).

Now, it is fine to have disagreements … and there is a time, place, and way to go about them. But he tends to lose sight of the context, the need, and the circumstances … at times leaving well-meaning people baffled at the choice of battles he picks.

tahmed is somewhat of a different animal … a little full of himself and a tad bit too self-righteous. We both have gotten on each other’s bad side … and I try to remind him to not take himself so seriously. And life goes on …

"The reason behind todays turmoils is not the Muslim question, but rather colonist exploitation in the name of material progress and mad science."

Fight colonists in mecca and Madina not in the indian subcontinent, killing wrong people, ie Hindus.

Science is Sandeh! Science is Sankhya! One of the methods for self-realization. Nothing wrong with Science. It can keep one inquistive and child like.

The reason behind todays turmoils is not the Muslim question, but rather colonist exploitation in the name of material progress and mad science.

Re: # 250 Untruth

Thanks for six consecutive RED FLAGS! Some think it makes me bleed! Yes it does, but it never hurts. THIS is the difference between comfort-lovers and believers!

You have too many BASIC questions, do some reading which will make you grow up too. Don't touch that TV-remote!

The reason behind todays turmoils is not the Muslim question, but rather colonist exploitation in the name of material progress and mad science.

One day you will come to know THIS truth and you will change your name to Truth 101.

:)

"Try looking over at Malaysia if you're not too busy fixating on your calculus/culture thingy!"

Whatever is Malaysia, it is because of Chinese and Hindu minority. Have you been to Malaysia? Go and check Malay universities, hospitals and software parks. If India had followed Malaysia way then in India there would not be any religious freedom and India would be a sweatshop for Gaps, Nikes and Rebocks. Google on sodomy Malaysia Ibrahim. Do you see US underwear on its flag?

Tahir Uncle,

What is an idol? Is Koran an idol? Is Mohammed an idol? What is faith?

Real growth/emacipation/salvation/self realization starts when one starts questioning "Who am I?". For most of us it is easy to run away from this question and not put effort and run to a Guru, Book , Prophet, Temple and Masjid show fake humbleness and bend or kneel infront of strangers, alien words and books written in distant desert lands, and give ourselves to these things. We basically ask treat me as your slave since I cannot deal with myself and does not want to take the responsibility to answer the presing question "Who Am I?"

That is the genesis of slavery, religious bigotry and atrocities done in the name of all isms and religions.

Faith is equivalent to Vishwas in Indic languages. Vishwas means I have not studied and cannot take responsibility of studing and putting effort in knowing/understanding, so I will just sit and believe. Vishwas does not mean living the truth or knowledge. Such Vishwas is needed in worldly pursuits such as Commerce, trade, driving on the road or sports eg Chess, Basketball etc. We have Wishawas that the rook of opponent is going to move in straight line. Vishwas is not useful for answering the question "Who am I?".

What is useful is Sandeh. Which is to say: I dont know the answer but I will strive to get the answer in my living and not just intellectually by using my Intellect-Mind-Body complex.

Islam means peace but in the name of Islam there is only unpeace allover the world.

Buddha preached not to make Murty god, take the responsibility. But there are more murties of Budhha all over the world than any other deity. In your language Buddha means murty. Isn't it?

Re: # 243 Chorus Girl 100

"The world is saying in chorus, "It's the Islam, Stupid"

Chorus-lines change on Broadway; don't you know that?

Dread the time (but don't have a heart-attack) when they'll sing:

Stupid! Islam is right afterall!

And don't kick up your unshaven legs too high as you sing the old chorus line!

Re: # 242 Ungraceful 100

Thanks for being so gracious your imperial Rajaness! Any more, and Pakistan would evaporate in the Indian Ocean to turn it into Pakistani Ocean.

"is there a technological or scientific Muslim, Arab or central Asian power to which Indians can look upto."

Try looking over at Malaysia if you're not too busy fixating on your calculus/culture thingy!

And hey, high-achiver A-Leveller, look over here...pssstt..across Wahga Border once you're done reforming your caste system and solving poverty problems.

:)

Re: # 231 Dost

"There was no ahadith in the translation that I read (although I have also read Sahi Bukhari)"

Good boy Dost! What a literate youth you are!

"I never said that I did not understand the message but rather that the message, esp. the political Medina part, did not particularly appeal to me. I am sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings in saying"

What Medina political part? You see this was not a class strugggle for political power. To set things to the right, one needs power, and the debaucherous ones who weilded it in Mecca would not give up without a fight. Extreme persecution came first, and lots of hard work to change lazy folks into active and willing agents-of-change!This was followed by complete victory; a working model shown by many Prophets!

Islam is not piri-faqeeri-derweshi; it is a living system prescribed by God that requires struggle against dominant evils of one's own age. Please understand this: Islam is not rituals alone!

And what is the evil of our age; we can see it all around spreading itself thin globally....

Forget the Medina-bit for a moment: are you with the victims or the oppressors?

Re: # 229 Untruth
"Muslims/Islam. When one does not find divinity in himself he cannot find any thing outside also. Such a dead man reading number of times a book written in 7th century can easily be made into cannon fodder for imperialism of whom you called "the fools."

So if you've found yourself 'divinely' ignorant and vulgar, keep it to yourself; solve Indian problems and stay away from God's guidance at your own peril.

And how ancient are the books that you lick? I bet you worship the Greenback with ten hands and a tongue hanging out?

Re: # 217 Untruth
"Hold a mirror in front all the Muslim states from Turkey to Indonesia, do you see whom they are saying Jee Sarkar"

These are states NOT representitive of the ideals of their people. By labelling a country Islamic Republic gives Islam a bad name; can't you see that? Why blame God's Word?

But things change, they are changing right now unless you watch MTV or HBO all day. Things will change!

Hinduism has nothing to offer to the world; Islam has. Its the only system slowly and painfully getting up on its feet; thanks to your adopted country's effort. The Lord does work in mysterious ways through the unbelievers' own hands; they destroy themselves in their arrogance!

Don't lose sleep over this.

Mulla Mandar Multankar aka Masadi sahab,

"Hindu bigots who worshipping sex organs have lost their sense of temporal being."

What do you mean without bringinging in elites and whites?

Who is temporal being? Have you met him/her/it?

What is the sex organ? Sex mostly happens in mind.

Mandarji, has your family started calling you as Mandarji?

Mulla Mandar Multakar aka Masadi Sahab,

You have not responded to many of my posts.

Sorry to make you so angry! I would like to learn your pov.

"I usually don't like wasting time with dimwitted bigots of your calibre, but let me remind you that leaving aside the capitalists of today, you cannot understand today's world."

You are not the only one who call me dimwitted, many dear ones also do. So welcome to the crowd of dear ones!

Excess labor is capital. The west so far monopized inventions and technological innovation which creates the excess labor. Chinese and Indians are trying to beat them in their game. Todays world is like an arrow which was sent released in our collective past, passing the present and going into future. The present can reduce the speed or change its direction little by defection.

"The Europeans didn't do away with the indigeneous Indian population because unlike a settler area, India was colonized, they didn't want to move there in large numbers, just keep you backward and extract the most from you. Compared to colonization where India at the end of which India emerged as a stone-age, backward country compared to the developed nations of the world, Muslim rule left it as the jewel in the crown of the British empire,"

You probably are right, British sucked lot of material wealth from India and also tried to destroy Indian civilization, but Islam/Muslims were physical threat to Indian civilization.

" not to mention that their numbers, even though Muslims were settlers were greater than the number of Muslims, telling you quite plainly that no genocide like that practiced by white settlers too place and no conversion by the sword took place as well."

Looking at how Pakistan and most of the Muslim countries treat their minorities can we say that the forceful conversion did not happen. Islam for most of its followers is a political dogma.

"Now you can invent your own history to suit your BS bigotry and ask us to live in the past and forget the present- such is not what I spend time with or would like to spend time with."

The present is this, Bangalore is San Jose of India. Pune, Noida and Hyderabd are Seattle of india. This present would not happened had there not beeen Shivaji and Guru Govind Singhji. What is happening today in Afghanistan and Pakistan would be happening in these places.

"Muslims brough a lot of positive changes to this world for one they sparked the European rennaisance which lifted the dirt dwellers to what they then became, and instead of thanking them, they turned the Muslim enlightenment on its head presenting a distorted view of Islam for the purpose of identity management and to monopolize the beneftis of their ill gotten power."

Frankly I do not care so much about European history. I would thank Americans for their Haliday Resnicks and Russians for their cheap physics and math books. You should ask why they did, what they did to Muslims/Islam. When one does not find divinity in himself he cannot find any thing outside also. Such a dead man reading number of times a book written in 7th century can easily be made into cannon fodder for imperialism of whom you called "the fools."

"If you think Hinduism and Hindu culture is fluorishing by deculturation of the kind going on in India, you are sadly mistaken, Hindu nonsense might fill sound bytes of tv programs as you white masters partake in its "exotic" practices to counter what the capitalists are doing to them, doesn't mean that such is a fluorishing of Indian culture."

If it's making people happy and brings food on the plate, then it's fine for us. Hindu nonsense hopefully makes people believe in themselves their own creative abilities and not searh it in some books and gurus. They can be guide but they should not own their identity, which Islam does.

"You are a cultural illiterate and a social moron."

Masadi Sahab, would you please start celebrating the cullture. If you become Mullah Mandar Multankar then I will take your Socialogy 401 and Culture 501 class. let me know the prerequisite, such as saying the Kalima, which I woud gladly do it if you translate it in Hindi.

"It is not about Islam stupid, it's about power and manipulation where a population is Muslim, religion is a subordinate institution except among rejected groups, it's the political economy stupid, ignore it to enhance your own stupidity, as is done by intellectual sh**s like Ali Sina..."

The world is saying in chorus, "It's the Islam, Stupid!"

Mandarji aka Masadi Sahab,

"Brit empire, whereas after colonization it was reduced to the stone age with a handful (literally) of trained rulers who kept the same relationship going."

What a joke? Lot of Indians complain that India should have been in American camp from the day one then we would have had a permanent seat on security council and we could have become Japan with 1.2 Billion people for the betterment of the world.

Tell me if there is any democracy of Muslim lands, is there a technological or scientific Muslim, Arab or central Asian power to which Indians can look upto.

Mulla Mandar Multankar, please look in your own mirror carefully. Indians have been gracious and forgiving but don't bully your way...

"Historical Muslim contribution to all the sciences in which they were much ahead of their counterparts in the middle ages is only doubted by Hindu bigots who worshipping sex organs have lost their sense of temporal being."

Mandarji, aka Masadi Sahab,

Would you please tell us about the architects, metallurgist, pharmacists and chemists of the Mughal period. They were all Hindus so there is no mention in different feudal-Namas.

Mandarji, even your prophet would piss on Koran and burn it, if he comes today and sees the plight of Islam and its followers. Indians do not want to be Jewel on some body's top or bottom, they would rather be working constantly new jewel like ideas for common good.

Re: # 235

Mandarji aka Masadi,

"where a new economic order was emerging and the greatest example of that was how India emerged after Muslim conquests, as the Jewel in the crown of the Brit empire,"

India has been jewel of the world from times before Boudha. Respect for Indian culture and spiritual thought is so much from Belarus to Phillipines. Boudha Dharma spread from India to so distant land. Hindu Dharma spread upto Phillipines without conquest and bloodshed.

Ask yourself Mandarji, did any Muslim ruler support any Matha where the seeds of Calculus were sown, did they built any universities. They built memorials for their dead lovers who were wives of some one else before they grabbed them.

Islam tried to physically dessimate the native culture, language and spiritual thought.

masadi:

Another cheap attempt at distraction.

The issue is whether you support jaziya for non-Muslims or not and you do support it.

I'd ignore the BS about India being the jewel in the crown after Muslim rule. They were saying the same thing till 1947.

If you ask Americans, they would say Iraq and Afghanistan are prospering after American occupation. I'm sure you'd believe it. :-)

#234 Posted by masadi on July 5, 2008 11:36:14 am


I got full funding from the university because of my superior gpa, as I worked 60 hours a week


Hmm...aren't students here on an F1 visa legally restricted to working no more than 20 hrs a week...

which means one of two things

1. comrade masadi has a green card or american citizenship that frees him from such restrictions
2. comrade masadi was breaking the law.

Re: # 236

Sattar sahib, I do not wish to interrupt your train of thought - however, in #129 I was referring to the badmouthing coming from YLH (who called chowkies a fool).

BTW, Tauheed sahib is an absolute gentleman who occasionally gets carried away while criticizing Indians and then probably wakes up late in night feeling all guilty, full of remorse, to ask for Allahtala's forgiveness (perhaps even on behalf of GWB)! And I am sure he is fully capable of consuming whatever you dish out to him.

BJ2 (#129),

… oh don’t be such a prude. “Badmouthing� is too strong a word. It is more like having tafreeh at tahmed’s expense. After all, he is the one who wrote a Chowk article, and post after post, questioning sensibilities of those opposed to the war (refer to #194 by masadi). I am only rubbing his nose in this now … for which he set himself up ...

Re #139,

On a serious note: It is a mistake to cite “sectarian hostilities� as the reason for failure in Iraq. “Sectarian violence� is a secondary, nay, a tertiary issue. The main issue is the reason and the intent behind invading Iraq.

When leaders of a powerful nation wage war, they should have firm reasons for doing so. This war was ill conceived to begin with, and this has only become more apparent with time. WMD fears were stoked to manipulate public perception, pre-war intelligence was mischaracterized to support the WMD claims, and arm-twisting was done to hush dissenting voices within ranks. It is a compelling argument that minds were already made up … that we are going to war.

The issue is further complicated by the following consideration: Was Saddam Hussein brought into power by the western alliances in the first place? I have heard compelling arguments that this was indeed the case … perhaps to offset the growing power of Iran under Ayatollah.

The picture gets more complicated when the following is considered: Was Ayatollah supported by western interests (France? USA?) to fill the power void and to keep the Soviets at bay when Shah's government fell? Speculations abound! I wouldn’t be surprised if the reasons of Iraq war can be traced back to the Cold War, political miscalculations, and a byproduct of foreign policies of US and other countries.

Of course, we can always argue that the US was spreading democracy in Iraq; or that the US is protecting itself against Iraqi WMDs (rolling my eyes). I find such views too linear and overly simplistic. Read on …

+++

tahmed (#133),

Blaming the Iraq fiasco on incompetence of Bush administration … as a tactical issue … sidesteps the deeper issue – that of going to war in the first place.

If it was not clear at the beginning, it should be clear now that this war was ill conceived and based on propaganda all along. And ignoring these realities reflects poorly on you.

Real motives of war may forever remain subject of speculation. Was it oil wealth? Was it to ensure that strength of US dollar remains propped up by oil exchange (something Iraqi government was seemingly undermining by accepting Euros)? Were there other geo-political and financial motives? Take a pick.

Of course, you may still believe that US went to war due to WMDs … or to spread democracy in the Middle East (re #137). And that’s the travesty of your views.

And oh yes, from the viewpoint of US population, we attacked the wrong country. Oops, sorry … I guess!

masan writes :

if you are new and try to debate with masadi, you should remember that masadi treats islamic imperialists differently than European imperialists.

FYI, He thinks jaziya tax on non-believers is a good policy. "


Another cheap attempt at distraction. Whereas historical illiterates try to equate conquests of the past with colonization of the present, where a new economic order was emerging and the greatest example of that was how India emerged after Muslim conquests, as the Jewel in the crown of the Brit empire, whereas after colonization it was reduced to the stone age with a handful (literally) of trained rulers who kept the same relationship going. Regarding the Jizya (compensation), no generalization of type these bigots state was applied or is recommended in the Quran, and historically that tax was less than the Zakat tax that Muslims paid, that minorities should go tax free and not compensate for services or exemptions they seek, like the exemption from Zakat, is not in the constitution of any so-called "enlightened" country.

"Truth" the miserable fool writes "You talk about Muslim contribution. Tell us about any university started by mughals..."

Historical Muslim contribution to all the sciences in which they were much ahead of their counterparts in the middle ages is only doubted by Hindu bigots who worshipping sex organs have lost their sense of temporal being.

Then he writes "but lot of Pakistanis landed in US to study some social science or humanities on scholarship because poor Abdul was sent to Afghanistan as cannon fodder."

In understand that your moronic mind is too inadequate to respond to what I write in my posts so you take the easy escape/distration route of ad hominem. I paid for my own social science degree because I got funding from the university for it because of my superior gpa in the undergrad degree, for which my parents paid for year 1 and the rest I got full funding from the university because of my superior gpa, as I worked 60 hours a week to pay my bills together with a full university load of 15 hours/semester. My education had nothing to do with the Afghan war at the end of which I was barely through my O'levels...

MMM aka Masadi,

You talk about Muslim contribution. Tell us about any university started by mughals. Tell us about which Math like Kerala Math, which is now considered the birth place of Calculus two hundred years before Newton and Leibnits,
was supported by Mughals or any Muslim ruler. Tell us about the real history, Mandarji.

Mulla Mandar Multankar aka Masadi,

We would like to hear from you. I do not know your background, but lot of Pakistanis landed in US to study some social science or humanities on scholarship because poor Abdul was sent to Afghanistan as cannon fodder. I hope you are not one such person. If you are then itis really you are a big cheat. Your activism against elite is just empty Islamist burp.

tahir#

There was no ahadith in the translation that I read (although I have also read Sahi Bukhari); actually, the urdu translation is much better than english ones as some of the words are the same/similar in urdu and therefore retain the flavour of the original.

I never said that I did not understand the message but rather that the message, esp. the political Medina part, did not particularly appeal to me. I am sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings in saying this.

Masadi Sahab,

Sorry, if I hurt your feelings. Generally religion, sex and money (RSM) are avoided in discussion. It's little easy to talk about Benezir, Britany, Birla and Bhangra. But for mst of us, yours truly included, RSM occupies big chunk of our mind, almost defining our identity.

First, it is not Islam that "captures" political power, the fools do that in the name of Islam,

Who are those fools? Are they non-Islamic? To capture political power "the fools (TF)" need faith enhancing pirs, courtier writers and King-Nama creating historians and foot soldiers and dhimmi tax (Ziziya) paying financier and Jakat (tax) and Chanda paying believers, as per my understanding. Please correct me.

second the ability to colonize the life world was perfected by the capitalists of today and not by the Muslims of the Middle Ages who even when they got political power did not by fact or defintion get rid of the alternative identities that coexisted, at the time of partition the Hindus outnumbered the Muslims of India, and did not consider themselves subservient to them,


Let us leave capitalist of today aside for time being. Hope we are not playing blame game. Do you mean Aurangzeb did not happen? Shahajan was equally brutal as Aurangzeb. Large populace was allowed to practice Hindu religion for political exigencies, tactical reason and for generating revenue as Jiziya. It was not because of any altruistic or attitude of "celebrating diversity."


unlike the European settlers who wiped out wholesale the very existance of the indigeneous folk, the fact regardless of your bigotry against Islam (contrived and full of BS)


Granted they might have done to Americas but did not or could not do it in Asia. But why bring them into picture. We are focused on Islam. I would like you to hold my own mirror in front of me, not show my image you see in your camera. All of us tend to have tented lenses when we focus our camera on others.


is that never before in the history of the world have so many of such diverse cultures been enslaved by externally defined sense of worth and self, as in today's America-led world. The world today is much smaller than it ever was in the past, which has ensured that the means to define and process reality in the hands of the elite are much greater and the feat much simpler.


Compared to Muslim period, in present so called American period, there is more celebration of Indian culture, spiritual practices and art all over the world not just in India. More Indians are doing Yog, Meditation and chanting compared to Muslim period. More Indians are Garv Se Kaho Hum Hindu Hain. World is smaller, thanks to communication technology and progress in aviation. 30% employees of Bell Labs are Indians. More than 50% of telecom and internet related start ups in silicon valley were started by Indians. NASA is 20% Indian. While achieving these successes Indians do not need to profess new religion or disown their culture and identity. Compare that to Rajputs of medieval India. Aren't majority of them Muslims with Arabic first and lat names? Can these Rajputs talk there Rajasthani or Marwari language? Trace the progeny of Raja ManSingh.


Islam has never had problems of identity and worth based on label, Muslims have invented their preceived superiority just as people of other faiths have; the sense of worth Islam defines is based on character and act and not on some label or belonging with a group, in fact it busts xenophobia and ethnocentricity by declaring that all are equal creations of their one God who because of how they act and what they do either stunt their growth or reach higher levels of development.

Would you be able to call yourself from today onwards as Mullah Mandar Mulatankar? A Jain or Boudha can be Mittal, Agrawal, Chougule, Shinde or Singh and be devout Jain or Boudha. Even Indian devout Christians have names such as Rev. Arjun Krishnan. How about Muslims? I have not seen a Indian Muslim with their native language names. Look at even Bangladeshis who separated from west Pakistan because of the pride in their language but you won't find a Bangladeshi Muslim with names such as Nirankar Dhakkakar. The new converts to Islam first lose their individual identity.


Now I know you Hindu bigots are obsessed with Islam, but only a fool would learn from your perversion of history and your ignorance of the Quran what it is about, so refrain from constructing strawmen where you define what your miserable understanding of Islam


For the survival of true Islam you need to get obsessed much more than me, to save spiritual part of Islam and throw away imperialistic and cultural linguistic enslavement part of Islam.

Masadi Sahab,

Sorry to make you so angry! I would like to learn your pov.

"I usually don't like wasting time with dimwitted bigots of your calibre, but let me remind you that leaving aside the capitalists of today, you cannot understand today's world."

You are not the only one who call me dimwitted, many dear ones also do. So welcome to the crowd of dear ones!

Excess labor is capital. The west so far monopized inventions and technological innovation which creates the excess labor. Chinese and Indians are trying to beat them in their game. Todays world is like an arrow which was sent released in our collective past, passing the present and going into future. The present can reduce the speed or change its direction little by defection.

"The Europeans didn't do away with the indigeneous Indian population because unlike a settler area, India was colonized, they didn't want to move there in large numbers, just keep you backward and extract the most from you. Compared to colonization where India at the end of which India emerged as a stone-age, backward country compared to the developed nations of the world, Muslim rule left it as the jewel in the crown of the British empire,"

You probably are right, British sucked lot of material wealth from India and also tried to destroy Indian civilization, but Islam/Muslims were physical threat to Indian civilization.

" not to mention that their numbers, even though Muslims were settlers were greater than the number of Muslims, telling you quite plainly that no genocide like that practiced by white settlers too place and no conversion by the sword took place as well."

Looking at how Pakistan and most of the Muslim countries treat their minorities can we say that the forceful conversion did not happen. Islam for most of its followers is a political dogma.

"Now you can invent your own history to suit your BS bigotry and ask us to live in the past and forget the present- such is not what I spend time with or would like to spend time with."

The present is this, Bangalore is San Jose of India. Pune, Noida and Hyderabd are Seattle of india. This present would not happened had there not beeen Shivaji and Guru Govind Singhji. What is happening today in Afghanistan and Pakistan would be happening in these places.

"Muslims brough a lot of positive changes to this world for one they sparked the European rennaisance which lifted the dirt dwellers to what they then became, and instead of thanking them, they turned the Muslim enlightenment on its head presenting a distorted view of Islam for the purpose of identity management and to monopolize the beneftis of their ill gotten power."

Frankly I do not care so much about European history. I would thank Americans for their Haliday Resnicks and Russians for their cheap physics and math books. You should ask why they did, what they did to Muslims/Islam. When one does not find divinity in himself he cannot find any thing outside also. Such a dead man reading number of times a book written in 7th century can easily be made into cannon fodder for imperialism of whom you called "the fools."

"If you think Hinduism and Hindu culture is fluorishing by deculturation of the kind going on in India, you are sadly mistaken, Hindu nonsense might fill sound bytes of tv programs as you white masters partake in its "exotic" practices to counter what the capitalists are doing to them, doesn't mean that such is a fluorishing of Indian culture."

If it's making people happy and brings food on the plate, then it's fine for us. Hindu nonsense hopefully makes people believe in themselves their own creative abilities and not searh it in some books and gurus. They can be guide but they should not own their identity, which Islam does.

"You are a cultural illiterate and a social moron."

Masadi Sahab, would you please start celebrating the cullture. If you become Mullah Mandar Multankar then I will take your Socialogy 401 and Culture 501 class. let me know the prerequisite, such as saying the Kalima, which I woud gladly do it if you translate it in Hindi.

"It is not about Islam stupid, it's about power and manipulation where a population is Muslim, religion is a subordinate institution except among rejected groups, it's the political economy stupid, ignore it to enhance your own stupidity, as is done by intellectual sh**s like Ali Sina..."

The world is saying in chorus, "It's the islam, Stupid!"

#215 Posted by truth100 on July 5, 2008 2:15:36 am

REDSKINS ROCK...

IF you don't forward this message to 50 people, you'll die...


p.s.you seem like the gullible type..the type most likely to forward chain mails...

p.p.s: ahmadmadani?

truth:

if you are new and try to debate with masadi, you should remember that masadi treats islamic imperialists differently than European imperialists.

FYI, He thinks jaziya tax on non-believers is a good policy.

truth writes "Let us leave capitalist of today aside for time being..."

I usually don't like wasting time with dimwitted bigots of your calibre, but let me remind you that leaving aside the capitalists of today, you cannot understand today's world. The Europeans didn't do away with the indigeneous Indian population because unlike a settler area, India was colonized, they didn't want to move there in large numbers, just keep you backward and extract the most from you. Compared to colonization where India at the end of which India emerged as a stone-age, backward country compared to the developed nations of the world, Muslim rule left it as the jewel in the crown of the British empire, not to mention that their numbers, even though Muslims were settlers were greater than the number of Muslims, telling you quite plainly that no genocide like that practiced by white settlers too place and no conversion by the sword took place as well. Now you can invent your own history to suit your BS bigotry and ask us to live in the past and forget the present- such is not what I spend time with or would like to spend time with. Muslims brough a lot of positive changes to this world for one they sparked the European rennaisance which lifted the dirt dwellers to what they then became, and instead of thanking them, they turned the Muslim enlightenment on its head presenting a distorted view of Islam for the purpose of identity management and to monopolize the beneftis of their ill gotten power. If you think Hinduism and Hindu culture is fluorishing by deculturation of the kind going on in India, you are sadly mistaken, Hindu nonsense might fill sound bytes of tv programs as you white masters partake in its "exotic" practices to counter what the capitalists are doing to them, doesn't mean that such is a fluorishing of Indian culture. You are a cultural illiterate and a social moron. It is not about Islam stupid, it's about power and manipulation where a population is Muslim, religion is a subordinate institution except among rejected groups, it's the political economy stupid, ignore it to enhance your own stupidity, as is done by intellectual sh**s like Ali Sina...

Indians need not look to these statistics with pride. US and west is on down turn. Indians should create Bell Labs here in Jhumritalaya. We have history of building Nalandas and Taxilas. Newer generations from IITs and IIMs are not any more attracted to the green card. I had a news link (dna) in one of my posts.

We need to build IITs for social sciences and humanities so that we could employ scholars such as Masadi Sahab without asking him to convert to Inidan religion. We should get rid of ghettoes of India haters, such as JNU, St. Stephens, Xaviers, Loyalas and Deoband.

The point is Netravally does not need to convert to Christianity or take American name to head Bell Labs or be in management. Same is true about many Indians who had successes in US in other fields.

Lucent China having Bell Labs now the % of Indians might be less as payrole employee. Anyway it's now Alchatel for last 3 years.

It's not forwarded email statistics coming from Nigeria. What can you guess about me?

I have a friend who works in Bell labs. I can check it out.

Generally, I'm skeptical of all the forwarded emails which claim that such and such company has X% Indians. It is mostly not true.

Core Research at Bell Labs was conducted in Murray Hill, some in Holmdell. If you include contractor/consultants even in developmentthe Indians might be higher than 30%

Masa,

"I think this statistic is BS. Do you believe this?. "

The figures were true by 98-99. Check genesis of Juniper. Before Bell Labs split in Lucent & AT&T Labs in 96 the % might be less. bUt major chunk went to Lucent and there Indian population in core research and not development might be 60% around Y2K.

Are you techy?

World is smaller, thanks to communication technology and progress in aviation. 30% employees of Bell Labs are Indians. More than 50% of telecom and internet related start ups in silicon valley were started by Indians. NASA is 20% Indian.

truth,

I think this statistic is BS. Do you believe this?.

Good questions on the names of Muslims. Islam looks like arab worship in disguise, makes everyone pray towards arabia, adopt arab names and culture. Arabs would be laughing at the craziness of these folks. Anyhow I should appreciate the arab Muhammad. He is a smart guy.

Tahir,

"We Muslims say 'ji sarkar' to God, not to expolitive man-made systems. Look around and see what capitalism and communism have givem us!"

Hold a mirror in front all the Muslim states from Turkey to Indonesia, do you see whom they are saying Jee Sarkar. Since most of Koran and Hadith is about War Craft and political power, in Muslim faithful mind, political power and violence to achieve it is deeply rooted.

"Why not sob and cry about invaders before Muslims came along?"

Who were they. Aryan Invasion Theory is a myth created by Britishers, since they could not accept the origin of number system, math and claculus in India, evolved spiritual thought and even the grammar of Sanskrit being the foundation of grammar of Latin.

Tahir can you please stick to the points under discussion.

Faith, weird faith out of false humbleness is devilish because it first denies presence of devine within oneself, presence of divine in one's own intellect and the actions taken using that intellect. There is Indian word Vichar, which needs to be given first importance over Vishwas. Vishwas is needed for not inventing the wheel again. But first Vichar has to come. Vichar makes one search within. Weird Vishwas makes one search outside within a book, guru, peer or prophet. Vichar is action based...actions togo deeper within oneself. Vichar will lead to Vivek, an action which is for common good.

Re: # 206 Un-Truth

"Did the process of Islamization of non Arab lands/civilization caused this subservient "Ji Sarkar" populace?"

We Muslims say 'ji sarkar' to God, not to expolitive man-made systems. Look around and see what capitalism and communism have givem us!

"Since Islam tries to capture first political power, then dhimmifies large % of populace before gradual conversion to Islam, this population can be manuevered easily."

You're dead wrong; you've chosen Laddu's perspective. Why not sob and cry about invaders before Muslims came along?

"Faith needs to be redefined other wise in its present form it's fatal for the civilization."

This is God's Word for the entire mankind and eternal too! Man-made systems change, not God's!

"walking into future. You can walk ahead if you know where you are at present."

Go ahead, we'll help you when you fall.

"This weird faith in religius dogma, esp Islam keeps one always backword looking, fixeted one personalities and tribal socities."

As if other religions don't have fairy-tales built-in! If you're a devoted Hindu, you ought to know better.

"This faith is very gross, materialistic in its own way and deadly to oneself, ie one is not even a thinking human."

It appears you've missed the finer points of your 'dharam'. There's a description of such folks: hatt dharam!

Understand before its too late; don't abuse Islam.

Masadi Sahab,

Sorry, if I hurt your feelings. Generally religion, sex and money (RSM) are avoided in discussion. It's little easy to talk about Benezir, Britany, Birla and Bhangra. But for mst of us, yours truly included, RSM occupies big chunk our mind almost defining our identity.

First, it is not Islam that "captures" political power, the fools do that in the name of Islam,

Who are those fools? Are they non-Islamic? To capture political power "the fools (TF)" need faith enhancing pirs, courtier writers and King-Nama creating historians and foot soldiers and dhimmi tax (Ziziya) paying financier and Jakat (tax) and Chanda paying believers, as per my understanding. Please correct me.


second the ability to colonize the life world was perfected by the capitalists of today and not by the Muslims of the Middle Ages who even when they got political power did not by fact or defintion get rid of the alternative identities that coexisted, at the time of partition the Hindus outnumbered the Muslims of India, and did not consider themselves subservient to them,


Let us leave capitalist of today aside for time being. Hope we are not playing blame game. Do you mean Aurangzeb did not happen? Shahajan was equally brutal as Aurangzeb. Large populace was allowed to practice Hindu religion for political exigencies, tactical reason and for generating revenue as Jiziya. It was not because of any altruistic or attitude of "celebrating diversity."


unlike the European settlers who wiped out wholesale the very existance of the indigeneous folk, the fact regardless of your bigotry against Islam (contrived and full of BS)


Granted they might have done to Americas but did not or could not do it in Asia. But why bring them into picture. We are focused on Islam. I would like you to hold my own mirror in front of me, not show my image you see in your camera. All of us tend to have tented lenses when we focus our camera on others.


is that never before in the history of the world have so many of such diverse cultures been enslaved by externally defined sense of worth and self, as in today's America-led world. The world today is much smaller than it ever was in the past, which has ensured that the means to define and process reality in the hands of the elite are much greater and the feat much simpler.


Compared to Muslim period, in present so called American period there is more celebration of Indian culture, spiritual practices and art all over the world not just in India. More Indians are doing Yog, Meditation and chanting compared to Muslim period. More Indians are Garv Se Kaho Hum Hindu Hain. World is smaller, thanks to communication technology and progress in aviation. 30% employees of Bell Labs are Indians. More than 50% of telecom and internet related start ups in silicon valley were started by Indians. NASA is 20% Indian. While achieving these successes Indians do not need to profess new religion or disown their culture and identity. Compare that to Rajputs of medieval India. Aren't majority of them Muslims with Arabic first and lat names? Can these Rajputs talk there Rajasthani or Marwari language? Trace the progeny of Raja ManSingh.



Islam has never had problems of identity and worth based on label, Muslims have invented their preceived superiority just as people of other faiths have; the sense of worth Islam defines is based on character and act and not on some label or belonging with a group, in fact it busts xenophobia and ethnocentricity by declaring that all are equal creations of their one God who because of how they act and what they do either stunt their growth or reach higher levels of development.

Would you be able to call yourself from today onwards as Mandar Lahorkar? A Jain or Boudha can be Mittal, Agrawal, Chougule, Shinde or Singh and be devout Jain or Boudha. Even Indian devout Christians have names such as Rev. Arjun Krishnan. How about Muslims? I have not seen a Indian Muslim with their native language names. Look at even Bangladeshis who separated from west Pakistan because of the pride in their language but you won't find a Bangladeshi Muslim with names such as Nirankar Dhakkakar. The new converts to Islam first lose their individual identity.


Now I know you Hindu bigots are obsessed with Islam, but only a fool would learn from your perversion of history and your ignorance of the Quran what it is about, so refrain from constructing strawmen where you define what your miserable understanding of Islam


For the survival of true Islam you need to get obsessed to save spiritual part of Islam and throw away imperialistic and cultural linguistic enslavement part of Islam.

Masadi Sahab,



Sorry, if I hurt your feelings. Generally religion, sex and money (RSM) are
avoided in discussion. It's little easy to talk about Benezir, Britany, Birla
and Bhangra. But for mst of us, yours truly included, RSM occupies big chunk our
mind almost defining our identity.

First, it is not Islam that "captures" political power, the fools do that
in the name of Islam,

Who are those fools?  Are they non-Islamic?  To capture political
power "the fools (TF)"  need faith enhancing pirs, courtier writers and
King-Nama creating historians and foot soldiers and dhimmi tax (Ziziya) paying
financier and Jakat (tax) and Chanda  paying believers, as per my
understanding.  Please correct me.

second the ability to colonize the life world was perfected by the
capitalists of today and not by the Muslims of the Middle Ages who even when
they got political power did not by fact or defintion get rid of the alternative
identities that coexisted, at the time of partition the Hindus outnumbered the
Muslims of India, and did not consider themselves subservient to them,

Let us leave capitalist of today aside for time being.  Hope we are not
playing blame game.  Do you mean Aurangzeb did not happen?  Shahajan
was equally brutal as Aurangzeb.  Large populace was allowed to practice
Hindu religion for political exigencies, tactical reason and for generating
revenue as Jiziya.  It was not because of any altruistic or attitude of
"celebrating diversity."

unlike the European settlers who wiped out wholesale the very existance of
the indigeneous folk, the fact regardless of your bigotry against Islam
(contrived and full of BS)

Granted they might have done to Americas but did not or could not do it in
Asia.  But why bring them into picture.  We are focused on Islam. 
I would like you to hold my own mirror in front of me, not show my image you see
in your camera.  All of us tend to have tented lenses when we focus our
camera on others.

is that never before in the history of the world have so many of
such diverse cultures been enslaved by externally defined sense of worth and
self, as in today's America-led world. The world today is much smaller than it
ever was in the past, which has ensured that the means to define and process
reality in the hands of the elite are much greater and the feat much simpler.


Compared to Muslim period in this so called American period there is more
celebration of Indian culture, spiritual practices and art all over the world
not just in India.  More Indians are doing Yog, Meditation and chanting
compared to Muslim period.  More Indians are Garv Se Kaho Hum Hindu Hain. 
World is smaller, thanks to communication technology and progress in aviation. 
30% employees of Bell Labs are Indians.  More than 50% of telecom and
internet related start ups in silicon valley were started by Indians.  NASA
is 20% Indian.  While achieving these successes Indians do not need to
profess new religion or disown their culture and identity.  Compare that to
Rajputs of medieval India.  Aren't majority of them Muslims with Arabic
first and lat names?  Can these Rajputs talk there Rajasthani or Marwari
language?  Trace the progeny of Raja ManSingh.



Islam has never had problems of identity and worth based on label, Muslims
have invented their preceived superiority just as people of other faiths have;
the sense of worth Islam defines is based on character and act and not on some
label or belonging with a group, in fact it busts xenophobia and ethnocentricity
by declaring that all are equal creations of their one God who because of how
they act and what they do either stunt their growth or reach higher levels of
development.

Would you be able to call yourself from today onwards as Mandar Lahorkar? 
A Jain or Boudha can be Mittal, Agrawal, Chougule, Shinde or Singh and be devout
Jain or Boudha.  Even  Indian devout Christians have names such as
Rev. Arjun Krishnan.  How about Muslims?  I have not seen a Indian
Muslim with their native language names.  Look at even Bangladeshis who
separated from west Pakistan because of the pride in their language but you
won't find a Bangladeshi Muslim with names such as Nirankar Dhakkakar.  The
new converts to Islam first lose their individual identity.  

Now I know you Hindu bigots are obsessed with Islam, but only a fool would
learn from your perversion of history and your ignorance of the Quran what it is
about, so refrain from constructing strawmen where you define what your
miserable understanding of Islam

For the survival of true Islam you need to get obsessed to save spiritual
part of Islam and throw away imperialistic and cultural linguistic enslavement
part of Islam.

Re: # 205 Dost

What part of the message do you NOT understand? May I help?

Urdu translations are not my favourite as they weave in too much of 'ahadith' literature and sub-continental fairy-tales!

Anyway, I'm glad you did try! Many here haven't even seen the Qur'an, leave alone read it!

Regards.

Truth writes "Since Islam tries to capture first political power, then dhimmifies large % of populace before gradual conversion to Islam, this population of new converts acquires this skill of internalizing externally imposed identities, and later the elite have it easy in manuevering/fooling this populace."

First, it is not Islam that "captures" political power, the fools do that in the name of Islam, second the ability to colonize the life world was perfected by the capitalists of today and not by the Muslims of the Middle Ages who even when they got political power did not by fact or defintion get rid of the alternative identities that coexisted, at the time of partition the Hindus outnumbered the Muslims of India, and did not consider themselves subservient to them, unlike the European settlers who wiped out wholesale the very existance of the indigeneous folk, the fact regardless of your bigotry against Islam (contrived and full of BS) is that never before in the history of the world have so many of such diverse cultures been enslaved by externally defined sense of worth and self, as in today's America-led world. The world today is much smaller than it ever was in the past, which has ensured that the means to define and process reality in the hands of the elite are much greater and the feat much simpler.

Islam has never had problems of identity and worth based on label, Muslims have invented their preceived superiority just as people of other faiths have; the sense of worth Islam defines is based on character and act and not on some label or belonging with a group, in fact it busts xenophobia and ethnocentricity by declaring that all are equal creations of their one God who because of how they act and what they do either stunt their growth or reach higher levels of development. Now I know you Hindu bigots are obsessed with Islam, but only a fool would learn from your perversion of history and your ignorance of the Quran what it is about, so refrain from constructing strawmen where you define what your miserable understanding of Islam is (based on the racist perversions by people like Ali Sina the charlatan) and then attack that miserable understanding, that was contrived and full of BS to begin with....


Tahmed writes "masadi the hypocrite and liar, and may you never have to suffer the miseries you wish upon me. And may you get the mental treatment you badly need (I am giving you a pass on your hateful posts as being the result of insanity..."

As usual you don't possess the brains or the b@lls to respond to what I wrote, and complain about insults while your own post is nothing but insults, and talk about my insanity when I say that human life should be protected and not destroyed as those insane people you worship are doing. May Allah damn your kind of fools and relegate them to the lowest dregs of hell as he has promised in his book....

Reply to # 69 by Yasser Latif Hamdani

Dear Yasser , now you are denouncing your faith and it is such a shame for an Ahmadi like me that Ahmadies always lie about their faith and their commitment to Pakistan.

I am witness to this fact that most of the Ahmadies who take part in internet discussions pretend that they are no more Ahmadies.

Most of the Ahmadies have fake hindu IDs and they are dreaming that Pakistan and India will destroy each other one day.

As fifth columnists Ahmadies are trying their best to provoke West about threats of Mullahization,where as our Jamaat has opened huge new factories ( Jamia Ahmadiyyas ) of Ahmadi Mullahs in Rabwah and Europe.

There are reports that some Ahmadi agent women entered Jamia Hafsa and some Ahmadies entered circles of crazy Musharraf.

They provoked both parties in such a way , which ended up in that never ending vicious cycle of blood shed and which polarized Pakistani society.

I am also witness to such techniques of Jamaat Ahmadiyya when they were sending highly trained spies to the Jalsas of Khatme nubuwat in Chiniot ( River Chenab ).

Those Ahmadi spies were pretending to be pious Sunni mullahs , they were praying and eating with Sunnis and they were causing drifts, divisions and fears among Sunni Mullahs.

We never know which Sunni mullah is a hidden Ahmadi and we never know who is on the payroll of Jammat Ahmadiyya.

Ahmadi agents are every where and Ahmadiyya money is working every where.

masadi the hypocrite and liar, and may you never have to suffer the miseries you wish upon me. And may you get the mental treatment you badly need (I am giving you a pass on your hateful posts as being the result of insanity).

(i have briefly glimpsed a couple of the unsolicited posts you have written to or about me, and see it is more of the usual abuse).

dm #184 no doubt an arab middle class developed, but it was never politically strong. in pakistan, the middle class has been strong enough to clip the wings of musharraf and reduce him to being a "convenient idiot" for zardari to keep for now. in the middle east, dictators are firmly in place.

While there was big talk of pan-Arabism and nationalism under Nasser, these various kings and dictators of the arab world made sure that there would never be a political union of the kind formed in europe, let alone a separate country. You can blame this on "western interests" if you like - I happen to believe that as long as the middle east nations fail to produce true democracies, they will remain what they are - a patchwork of kingships and dictatorships, all pointing to the west and isreael as the "enemy" in order to take attention away from their own lawless rule.

Since Islam tries to capture first political power, then dhimmifies large % of populace before gradual conversion to Islam, this population of new converts acquires this skill of internalizing externally imposed identities, and later the elite have it easy in manuevering/fooling this populace.

I would like to explore and find which groups among Muslims are more progressive or not so subservient. In descending order I feel this is the list:

1. Anglophine rich elite and rich sects as Agha Khani, Khojas, Bohras and Katchis
2. The poorest of the poor
Sindhi
Balochi
Hazara
Northern Territories (Shia)
Punjabis
Kashmiris
Pathans
3 Middle class

As I understand you are also saying that there is one response of internalizing the identity by subservient populace.

Masadi Sahab,

You are saying all identities are externally imposed. As I understand there is one response of internalizing the identity by subservient populace.

Can we focus on this internalization process? My theory is the people who can internalize this externally imposed identity must have been used to such process. Did the process of Islamization of non Arab lands/civilization caused this subservient "Ji Sarkar" populace?

Since Islam tries to capture first political power, then dhimmifies large % of populace before gradual conversion to Islam, this population can be manuevered easily.

Faith needs to be redefined other wise in its present form it's fatal for the civilization. We have word called Vichar. Which is for "charing' walking into future. You can walk ahead if you know where you qare at present. This weird faith in religius dogma, esp Islam keeps one always backword looking, fixeted one personalities and tribal socities. This faith is very gross, materialistic in its own way and deadly to oneself, ie one is not even a thinking human.

tahir:

Bhai, I have already read it, or rather a translation, as the quran, as I understand, is only the original in arabic. And I read it in a language I understand - Urdu.

As for not understanding the word of God, bhai,I am one of those pathetic beings whose ears, according to the Book, are sealed to the message.

later....

I think you need to read my post more carefully, it is not how they defined themselves, it is how they chose to define groups within India for the ulterior motive of separation of the kind they wanted, and succeeded in it; if they had used other ethnic or racial identities they would have caused division into 1001 parts which they neither sought nor desired.

Masadi Sahab,

You have not answered why the feudals and Muslim Babudom did not identify themselves more on linguistic lines. What is in Islam religion which makes the believer sacrifice all other identities?

in #200 read "therefore the two divergent responses can be .."


therefore the two divergent responses in addition to turning inwardly can be

The self and self-identity develops and depends on how others see you, the identity givers are thus those that commandeer your social structure, to develop any self-worth a subservient group turns inwardly because its mainstream image (as seen by the colonials or the America elite at the current time) is not one it can coexist with comfortably, therefore the two divergent responses can be i) deculturation, as we see in Japan/S Korea and due to globalization a good percent of the subservient countries and ii) a reproduction of the image those dominant groups have of the subservient group, i.e. Muslims are terrorists, and so a response is you see yourself as a terrorist and become one and iii) turning inwardly with little to no interaction with those that have defined you as inferior, only iii has a concept of self-worth, the others are mere slaves....

Truth writes "Would you please elaborate. Sindhines, Punjabiness, Marathiness, Bangqaliness or Tamilness are blurred identities compared to Islamic identity???..."

Neither the brits nor the feudals were interested in dividing India into 1001 parts, division using the religious identity was thus quite expedient for their motives, using the other identities would definatley blur the rationale behind the kind of division they sought...

Masadi Sahab,

"Those elite chose to use the "Islamic" identity because in India the other identities could not have been used for separation due to their blurred nature."

Would you please elaborate. Sindhines, Punjabiness, Marathiness, Bangqaliness or Tamilness are blurred identities compared to Islamic identity???

If British had made job reservations based on language or economic status and not on religion then would we have different history, present and future? If Mughal had done the same in their court, then...

Identities are enslavements. The people who can be easily exploited and enslaved are given first an identity. The newborn first learns his mother tongue. Mother tongue identity should be the strongest identity. Since we cannot escape from identities, to keep one self free from identities one need to acquire number of identiites. A good life is harmony and balance among these identiites. Islam asks for demolishing of all other identities. Such intense identity one might need when one is facing a mortal threat. Islam tries to creates such threats all the time to perpetuate itself. It's unbalanced system, +ve feedback system. What do you think?

Lot od assertions on my part, many too strong! Please correct.

g'night.....and may God damn the sellout peons of the West, and may he damn the most prominent one of them on this site, tahmed...

By the way, if America were to introduce "Democracy" into the Arab world, the first thing those "democratic" governments, if they were real democracies, would do (as revealed by opinion surveys poll after poll) is cut off all links with the US, throw their companies out and unite under one banner- all these things the US has opposed using its guns and using Israel, so this "democracy" slogan is just a lie that even an ordinary mind can see through. The US will never allow democracy in an area that it wants to use and abuse, such would be to its detriment.

Just recently we saw how the US subverted any remnants of democracy in this nation by its so-called diplomacy, killing of those that didn't agree with their army deal, and trying to isolate the opposition, as a result we see the US/Pak Army FARCE that is currently parading as "democracy". Do you think tahmed is such a goddamned fool not to know this and the US track record in south asia, in latin America, even in US occupied Japan and Korea where the people come second, first come US demands and the standing foreign armies within a so-called "sovereign" nation, ensuring that even ignoring deculturation of the kind we have seen in those two slave nations, they remain fully subservient to the US...

....and may he (Tahmed) feel the pain, the suffering and the helplessness of each and every Iraqi victim of the barbaric US aggression, and I hope he is similarly victimized in this life as well...

Here is how this snake tahmed began his "Open letter to those opposing the Iraq War"

(Quote) http://www.chowk.com/articles/6036

Bush says that after the war is over, the US (along with UK)will focus on introducing democracy in Iraq. The question then is: do you think democracy
is a good idea? If your answer is "no", then clearly there can be no more discussion.
If you answer is "yes", then the next question is: Can Bush be trusted to make a reasonable effort at doing what he says he will for the Iraqis?
If your answer is "no", then ponder this: Many of you trusted the US enough to come an live here (I wont get into the reasons you left). Others trust the US enough to apply for immigrant visas and wait in long lines hoping to come here one day. If you can trust your life and the life and future of your children with the US, why do you find it so hard to trust the elected President of the US when he says that aims to introduce democracy in Iraq and has no intention of turning it into a colony?

http://www.chowk.com/articles/6036 "


----

So the fool thinks that when America talks about invading (and killing and displacing millions), it is all about democracy, which is still missing in Iraq like the WMDs, and the electricity, water and sewage and a good percentage of the population as well. This snake in his bs rhetoric just to support and worship the white man unconditionally, because he pays him a few $$ and saved him from a Pakistani existance, is totally and completely responsible for those killings together with his masters for which Allah will assing this hypocrite to the lowest portion of hell, with the rest of his kind. May God damn him, destroy him and make whatever he loves a source of anguish for him...

in #192 read "that the institutions that produce such invasions will do so inspite of the person occupying the oval office, and have done so with similar barbarity as they have shown in Iraq..." as


that the institutions that produce such invasions will do so regardless of the person occupying the oval office, and have done so with similar barbarity as they have shown in Iraq... the lies they use before invasions have been used consistently as well, only the details that make those lies have changed

truth writes "Does the Islamic identity over rides all other identity?.."

Those elite chose to use the "Islamic" identity because in India the other identities could not have been used for separation due to their blurred nature.

Tahmed peon of the West writes in response to Majumdar"you continue: "But I believe you supported this invasion, didn't you?"

Yes I did. From the point of view of the Iraqi people mentioned above. And it makes as much sense today as it did then. The only thing I did not predict is the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration which I outlined below and which everyone knows today."

I suggest you all read his dimwit article in support of the Iraq war before it occurred, he did not support it for the Iraqi people (except as slogan similar to the "incompetant" Bush Admn that he is talking about deliberately to save face for his barbaric masters who regardless of the person in command would have done more or less the same), he supported it because of his belief in the inherent superiority of the white man and his ability to civilize and to legitimize his baseless nonsense. If people were the concern why Iraq, why not Saudi Arabia or other nations supported by the US and much less progressive than Iraq before the US invasion? And how can he say the Bush admn is incompetent when it was painting similary rosy pictures regarding the people of Iraq and their offers of candy and flowers. Now this fool is supporting the US troops rampaging inside Pakistani territory using much the same bs of "flowers and candy". Know these snakes and know them well, whenever the barbarism of their masters is revealed for all to see they try to save face by blaming individuals knowing full well that the institutions that produce such invasions will do so inspite of the person occupying the oval office, and have done so with similar barbarity as they have shown in Iraq...

Re: # 190 Dost What's The Matter

"Do not ask a non-muslim to read the quran; it is not exactly of the "how to win friends and influence people" type."

Bad reading habits ruin men. Read it (Iqra) to educate yourself about what is true. Now that the whole world is anxious to understand it, why shouldn't you do the same instead of forming opinions based on junk writers at ChowQ?

"After reading it, a non-believer will either 'submit' or regard Islam as his enemy."

If I can read about all other religions, why can't you? If you submit, it'll do you tremendous good, and if you regard God's Word as your enemey, then may God alone help you!

"Of course, if he reads it in the company of someone who can put a proper spin (aka contextualise) on certain verses, it could have a different effect"

God has made his Word easy to understand; try a detailed translation 'mitra'.

tahir#188:

Here is a friendly advice from a non-believer. Do not ask a non-muslim to read the quran; it is not exactly of the "how to win friends and influence people" type. After reading it, a non-believer will either 'submit' or regard Islam as his enemy. Of course, if he reads it in the company of someone who can put a proper spin (aka contextualise) on certain verses, it could have a different effect.

Re: # 187 Truth Serem

"What is this Guddu? there is a grammatical mistake"

I meant to show you how weak your question was if you replaced certain words, that's all.

I understand all your questions; they require many articles to explain. Why don't you find your answers by reading the Qur'an. Don't be afraid now.

ChowQ is not the place to gain wisdom; 'chalaki' yes but not truth!

Re: # 172 Sachal Sarmast

"Does the Islamic identity over rides all other identity? If so, then is it something in the doctarine/koran?"

I can't believe you're still stuck with these questions! Of course, once you completely submit to Allah's Will and admit He is the Creator, everything else is secondary. THIS Muslim identity has been allowed to corrode, thanks to liberal education. And if you read the Qur'an, you will find out many things.

Do it now.

Re: # 186: Tahir,

What is this Guddu? You are write there is a grammatical mistake.

"But do you think political Islam is the problem? Or, is Islam political by design?"

May be you can enlighten on this:
Is it easy to use Islam for ulterior motive of few? Does it ask for separate identity in terms of your political power, names, language, festvals, cultural expressions, etc that it perceives threats to itself from seemingly innocuous events such as cartoons, Amarnath land lease?

Does Islam like to rule even if it is in minority in a particular land? Isn't that the reason for Pakistan. Chrchill and Jinah only capitalized on this trait of Islam.

Re: # 158 Sach SaiNkRa (truth 100)

"But do you think political Islam is the problem? Or, is it Islam is political by design?"

Question: Do you think a very loving Guddu is the problem or is Guddu loving by nature?

See how silly your original question sounds!

Try and separate politics and Islam and see what you're left with; nothing but Changezi!

Regards.

Re: # 177 by Majumdar
The part about Paul Bremer disbanding the police in the article you posted reminded me of the recently released official history of the Iraq war. I heard an NPR report on it a few days ago: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92086362&ft=1&f=5
The actual report is 720 pages or long or something, so too long to read, but it sounds very interesting because it is especially critical of Bremer and Tommy Franks.

Sort of tangential, but also interesting is this article in US armed forces journal: http://www.afji.com/2008/06/3468975 about how, since the Korean War and the firing of MacArthur by Truman, all the subsequent political leadership of the US has refrained from firing military leadership for incompetence.

tahmed#130:

My comments were mostly about the Arab world and did not apply to Pakistan so much. You guys never tire reminding us Indians how Maudoodi's party never won more than a few votes in elections. And I disagree with you that the arabs failed to develop a middle class; the problem from the western perspective was that this middle class was of Edward Syed types who believed in a secular, socialist, Pan-Arabic nationalism that did not suit western interests.


#131:
"127 dm: How the hell was I supposed to know that Bush would turn out to be so totally incompetent? "
Vadde bhra dee gal sunade tay ajj ay na kehnday. :)

#133:
Regardless of the immorality and illegality of the aggression against Iraq, I agree with your analysis here. But, as I have said before, I do not think that this was an accident but attribute it to the neocons whose objective from the very beginning was to demolish the state of Iraq to provide greater security to their friend in the Middle East.

#181 you may think so, but a moments reflection should clarify why you are on the worng track.
read #182 where I make the same point (i.e. intentions of decision makers are irrelevant, it is their actions and the likely result of those actions that are relevant)

majumdar #177 I am arguing not on the basis of the majority opinion in India thinks, but based on simple logic (i.e. how likely was the US attack to result in overthrow of Saddam and replacement with democracy and the rule of law).

The arguments presented below are not based on the above goal - thus, e.g., the instincts of the Indian people are not necessarily based on the above goal - the epic and ongoing struggle for democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan has drawn at best a tepid response from the Indian public, as even Aitezaz Ahsan admitted when questioned while addressing the US lawyers association in NY. Nor was the above the goal of the other side in India mentioned in the writeup, i.e. those who " warned that there was no profit in antagonising the US" (i.e. their goals was India's relations with the US, not freeing Iraqis from a dictatorship.

Only by carefully establishing goals and weighing the likelihood of a given set of actions meeting those goals (regardless of intentions), can we have a realistic basis for an opinion

Tahmed sahib,

(By "stated goals" I was referring to goals I had stated )

It would have been fine had you ordered the invasion of Iraq, sir!

(In fact, musharraf is a proven liar anyway)

Mr. Sanghvi, who can hardly be accused of being anti-West, is stating almost the same thing about Mush's ally- Bush.

Regards

Re: # 177: Saddam was the only friend of India in Arab world. Many IIT profs used to go on sabattical to build engineering institutions in EyeRaq.

in #178 it should read "replacement of dictatorship with democracy and the rule of law".

majumdar #176: By "stated goals" I was referring to goals I had stated (i.e. replacement of democracy and the rule of law in Iraq), not what anyone else had stated which, contrary to what you believe, I am in fact totally ignoring as being unreliable.

Your reference to Mush's stated goals is thus off the mark for the same reason. In fact, musharraf is a proven windbag and liar anyway - and if I ignore public statements made by far better men then him then rest assured I have no interest in what he claims. Actions speak louder than words.


Please think about this for a second before giving a knee-jerk reaction.

Tahmed sahib,

Hindoos are about as pro-US as you wud get and no can accuse Hindoos of being pro-Muslims but this is what Indian opinion about Iraq invasion was. I will reproduce an article written by Vir Sanghvi (who is neither commie nor a jihadi) in HT.

{{{Vox Populi and the Iraq Invasion - Counterpoint by Vir Sanghvi: A few months before America and Britain invaded Iraq, my colleague Aditya Sinha had an idea. In those days, Aditya was editor of the Sunday Hindustan Times — he has since moved up in the world and become Editor-in-chief of the New Indian Express — and he was keen to commission an opinion poll for the paper.

At that stage, nobody had polled the Indian people about our attitude to the US invasion of Iraq, and many journos — hard as this is to believe now — thought that there might be public support for military action.

The reasons seemed self-evident then. Memories of 9/11 were still fresh. The invasion of Afghanistan had been popular. There was a pro-American mood in India. The first Gulf War had evoked no sympathy for Saddam Hussein among most Indians. The NDA was in power and Hindutva sentiment was at a height. Which Hindu, many know-alls argued, would support a Muslim military dictator against America? Even the central government was humming and hawing about criticising the planned invasion and one view was that India might even send troops (under a UN mandate) to fight in Iraq. (Which we nearly did.)

When the results of Aditya’s poll came in, they revealed how wrong journos (and those in government) had been about the public mood. I forget the exact figures now but an overwhelming majority of Indians were bitterly opposed to any invasion of Iraq.

We talked about the results of the poll in our office and our broad conclusion was that Indians were more sensible than journos sometimes believed. It was not a Hindu-Muslim thing or a pro or anti America response. The US had simply failed to convince the world of the need for an invasion. Afghanistan was different — that operation had been directly linked to 9/11. So was the first Gulf War — it had been fought to liberate Kuwait.

But, this time around, the only reasons that Washington could offer were that a) Saddam was a military dictator and b) that he probably possessed weapons of mass destruction. Neither reason was enough to justify an invasion. America was friends with nasty dictators all over the world (let’s start with the Saudi royal family) and even if Saddam did possess chemical or biological weapons, so did many others. As I argued at the time: given this reasoning, the US should have invaded Pakistan where a nasty military dictator was not only in power but had also publicly admitted possessing nuclear weapons. (Plus his government had links with terrorists who had murdered many more people than Al Qaeda.)

As the months went on and the invasion seemed imminent, many distinguished Indian journos (with foreign affairs backgrounds that I lack), tried to persuade us that we should align with Washington and that the invasion made sense. Those of us who said it was about oil or establishing US power in the region were being intellectually lazy; we were told there were compelling reasons for taking out Saddam.

I thought back last week to Aditya’s poll and to the common sense of the Indian people. When Parliament passed a resolution opposing the invasion, many foreign policy experts sneered at our “Cold War mentality� and warned that there was no profit in antagonising the US. The central government made informal promises of support to Washington and we came perilously close to sending troops but for the good sense of AB Vajpayee who finally told his colleagues that the Indian people would never stand for it, and scuppered the proposal when it was already at a fairly advanced stage.

But the foreign policy experts and the well-connected journos were all wrong. It was the people of India who had the right instincts.

Just look at the devastation the war in Iraq has caused.

Not one person has emerged from that conflict with any credit. First of all, the weapons of mass destruction on which the war was predicated were never found. In his new book, George Tenet, who was director of CIA at the time, says that his agency had actually warned the White House that there was no authentic intelligence about such weapons. But George W Bush and Dick Cheney went ahead and lied to the
world anyway.

Secondly, the US administration was not just venal, it was stupid. There were no plans for administering Iraq after the conquest. Paul Bremmer, Bush’s viceroy, took the disastrous step of disbanding the police force and the army and plunged a whole country into lawlessness, chaos and anarchy. Even now, something like 50 people die every day on the streets of Iraq because of terrorist attacks.

Thirdly, none of the men who talked so convincingly about the need to invade Iraq now stands by those claims about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction or his links to terrorists. Tony Blair steps down in a few months, his reputation in tatters only because of his misjudgments about Iraq. Nearly every member of his cabinet now admits that the decision to invade was wrong.

Donald Rumsfeld, cheer leader for the invasion, has been sacked. Paul Wolfowitz, the neo-con ideologue who provided the rationale that the White House needed for the invasion, has been kicked out of his next job, as head of the World Bank, for manipulating the system to give his mistress a raise.

Dick Cheney, who told most of the lies about weapons of mass destruction, is a reviled figure whose political career will end the moment he steps down as Vice President. George W Bush is struggling to regain the initiative as polls show that Americans, usually the most patriotic people in the world, especially when their country is at war, are turning against him.

Fourthly, far from spreading democracy and making the world a safer place, the invasion has actually put us all at risk. We saw what form democracy took in Iraq when a lynch mob hanged Saddam, under American sponsorship. And Washington is terrified that democracy might actually lead to the election of Shia extremists now so even those plans are on hold.

All over the world, otherwise peaceful Muslims who had been persuaded that the invasion of Afghanistan was a necessity warranted by the events of 9/11, now believe that the West is waging a war against Islam. What other justification, they ask, could there be for the invasion of Iraq?

Between them, George W Bush and Tony Blair have created millions of more Islamic extremists than Osama bin Laden could ever have managed on his own. That radicalisation makes young Muslims more susceptible to the preaching of militants and fanatics. Thus, terror will actually increase in the long run, and it is you and me who will pay the price for the stupidity of Bush and Blair.

So, how could Washington and London have got it so wrong? How could George W Bush have taken a historic opportunity — with American power at its height, American economic might all-pervasive and American popular culture the new idiom for the whole world — and destroyed it so completely? At no time in its history has America been so hated all over the world.

I’ve never been able to find an answer to those questions. Nor have I worked out how and why so many Indians in high places and in positions of influence believed that the invasion was worth supporting — or that it would succeed, even if it was unjustified.

It does, however, confirm my overwhelming faith in the good sense of the Indian people. At a time when the journos, the experts and the best and the brightest got it so wrong, the man on the street got it completely right. }}}

Regards

Tahmed sahib,

What matters is the logic of an action in light of stated goals.

Well, Mushy had a stated goal when he imposed Emergency, didn't he?

Seriously, if you believed that USA's reasons for invading Iraq was it stated goals i.e. to provide security to its own population and to liberate the people from a dictator, well I will leave it at that.

Regards

Masadi & PM,

Thanks for your replies. Really trying to understand you guys!

"The USE of Islam for ulterior motive (rather misuse), does not make it any more "political" than any other religion."

Is it easy to use Islam for ulterior motive of few? Does it ask for separate identity in terms of your political power, names, language, festvals, cultural expressions, etc that it perceives threats to itself from seemingly innocuous events such as cartoons, Amarnath land lease?

Does Islam like to rule even if it is in minority in a particular land? Isn't that the reason for Pakistan. Chrchill and Jinah only capitalized on this trait of Islam.

majumdar #141 "So what was the motive for invasion of Iraq? "

I lack the god-like abilities possessed by so many on chowk to determine "what evil lurks in the minds of men" (only The Shadow knows that!). More important, motivations are not even relevant. What matters is the logic of an action in light of stated goals. And there I have already made my point below in comparing the logic from the goals of providing security to the US population and the goal of getting rid of a dictator and restoring the rights of the Iraqi people to a democratic constitution and the rule of law.

you continue: "But I believe you supported this invasion, didn't you?"

Yes I did. From the point of view of the Iraqi people mentioned above. And it makes as much sense today as it did then. The only thing I did not predict is the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration which I outlined below and which everyone knows today.

cheema sahib #140 You make a very good point when you say that "one has to present a substantial alternative rather than rhetoric; ....oh they invaded our brothers....oh how bad...oh...oh....then the emotive pictures to go with that rubbish"

True. What you say inspires me to come up with the ... bugles..drums...
The Second Law of Chowk Thermodynamics: We cant think with your emotions.

Explanation: Thinking is a function assigned to the brain, not to the hormones.

You continue: "truth is, it is Iraqis being killed by Iraqis in the name of insurgency day in day out; I am yet to see any condemnation of this here by anyone!...."

True. This is an example of what happens when we violate the above-mentioned Second Law of Chowk Thermodynmaics.

Masadi,

"Only when faced by an external enemy (constructed or otherwise) which was supposed to exterminate their identity."

Does the Islamic identity over rides all other identity? If so, then is it something in the doctarine/koran?

truth writes "Pakistani people supported Muslmim League and Pakistan army because it is Islamic...."

Only when faced by an external enemy (constructed or otherwise) which was supposed to exterminate their identity. Now when they are opposing it, opposing the Army and its supporters are they doing it because they all of a sudden became non-Islamic?

maj writes "MAJ (pbuh) had envisaged India and Pak to be friendly countries post demerger.."

A very dumb man would envisage the above by chopping off the process that led to Pakistan. I doubt that Jinnah was that dumb, he knew that Pakistan would be a whore in the hands of the colonials to control India when need be, his immediate political career leading up to the partition did not reveal a friendly coexistance...

Truth writes " knew you are going to write this standard disclaimer. You skipped my first few sentences: But do you think political Islam is the problem? Or, is it Islam is political by design?"

There is nothing standard about the disclaimer, in a nation where dictation is from on high (no democracy exists) and no instruments of conveying the will of the people exist, the actions that occur are the responsibility of such a non democratic establishment and not the people. The USE of Islam for ulterior motive (rather misuse), does not make it any more "political" than any other religion.

truth100:

I'm sure masadi sahib will get back to you once he's unbanned but I thought I'd take the liberty of stating what I think he meant when he wrote that "the actions of a establishment/military controlled Pakistan cannot be equated with the actions of Pakistanis."

In 'actions', he must have included motives, and therein lies the difference. Besides, while the masses may actually have believed the Islam khatrein meiN canard, I'm sure the guys pulling the strings didn't.

PM,

Re: 164

Thanks for taking interest. The only reason I wanted to avoid discussing here was 'cos it may be tangential to the Board. But if you guys are interested I will do so right here.

Regards

Masadi,

"Truth mian, the actions of a establishment/military controlled Pakistan cannot be equated with the actions of Pakistanis."

I knew you are going to write this standard disclaimer. You skipped my first few sentences: But do you think political Islam is the problem? Or, is it Islam is political by design?

Pakistani people supported Muslmim League and Pakistan army because it is Islamic. Pakistni people were easily fooled by Jinnah and his cronies by saying Islam is Khatren Main Hain. It seems Islam has to survive at any cost.

Like he was very naive in assuming that Punjab and Bengal (along with Assam) would fall into Pakistan as whole entities because they apparently share the same "culture".

Re: # 163

MAJ (pbuh) had envisaged India and Pak to be friendly countries post demerger. And that indeed wud have been the case had Kashmir not intervened (a fiasco for which incidentally he too is culpable) If you would recall he even did not dispose off his Bombay property and intended to spend his last days in Bombay, which hardly suggests that he expected to see India as a hostile enemy from which Brit sceurity cover would be required.

:-) If Jinnah really thought that he must be very naive.

re. majmumdar #163

"Bit pressed for time but we can discuss #159 later possibly over email."

No, No! Please exchange whatever you have to (minus bodily fluids) right here. It's interesting!

Masadi sahib,

he knew Pakistan as a weaker nation would always be dependent on the British for defense

No, this is not quite correct. MAJ (pbuh) had envisaged India and Pak to be friendly countries post demerger. And that indeed wud have been the case had Kashmir not intervened (a fiasco for which incidentally he too is culpable) If you would recall he even did not dispose off his Bombay property and intended to spend his last days in Bombay, which hardly suggests that he expected to see India as a hostile enemy from which Brit sceurity cover would be required.

Bit pressed for time but we can discuss #159 later possibly over email.

Regards

One quick clarification before I leave, even though I have clarified this many times before but Majumdar repeats it again: He writes :

"( and considering how things have panned out in India he can only be considered right in hindsight)."

You cannot interpret events by chopping off their context in the way you are doing. The condition of Muslims in India cannot be interpreted today by ignoring the history of the partition and the results it produced, chopping by half the Muslim political voice, evoking hatred of the majority against the minority who now considered these people traitors, and the resulting conflict with Pakistan. Were the partition not to happen the conditions of the Muslims of India might well have been much different and much better. You cannot use the condition today as proof of the speculations (for ulterior motive)of MAJ before the partition, logically speaking....

later...

Truth mian, the actions of a establishment/military controlled Pakistan cannot be equated with the actions of Pakistanis. That Pakistan would continue on its path as a non-sovereign whore of the colonials was a foregone conclusion known well to the MAJ, now it is changing because the people have woken up, wait and see what happens...

Maj writes "He raised the TNT banner becuase he felt that Muslims SECULAR, WORLDLY interests would be hurt in INC's vision of undivided India"

Not so, he knew Pakistan as a weaker nation would always be dependent on the British for defense which would keep it an impoverished nation, so much for the "worldly interests of the Muslims", next, an entire theological imagery was constructed by his side kick the Allama for this purpose in order to monopolize the Muslim vote, and at threat of them being excluded from the community, third, knowing full well the consequences and its effect when the nation would be created, you cannot just give a speech and expect the dynamic of these actions you undertook to go away, as they say, actions and their consequences speak much louder than words. Musharraf speaks so-called "enlightened" words too, talks the democracy and moderation talk, but the sob has done to this nation what no dictator before him has, f'kd it up completely....

Masadi,

You are right. But do you think political Islam is the problem? Or, is it Islam is political by design?

FYI, After 1857 Muslims didn't lift as much as their little finger to fight the colonialists. Your Quaid-e-Azam and his thugs in the Muslim League never went to jail fighting for your freedom. OTOH, they collaborated with the colonial masters to get Pakistan on a platter.

Pakistanis willingly submitted themselves for such manipulation, blinded as Pakistani were by an obsession to destroy India. They thought membership of MEDO, SEATO, CENTO and the Mutual Defence Agreement with the US will all help not only in procuring arms but also getting assistance in case of a war with India. With that false sense of security they embarked on misadventures against India. After starting the 1965 war, Pakistanis cried for assistance under these treaties but none were forthcoming because their calculation wasn't accepted by other members of these treaties.

FSU crossed Amu Darya on Christmas eve, 1979. On Jan 4, 1980 Carter publicly announced military and economic support to Pakistan. What did Pakistan demand anticipating an improved bargaining position and a willing US? It demanded the waiver of sanctions already imposed under the Glenn Amendment. It demanded the 1959 Mutual Defence Agreement with a more comprehensive and formal treaty akin to the 1971 Friendship Treaty between FSU and India. Gen. Zia initially dismissed the US aid efforts as peanuts. He said "Pakistan will not buy its security for $400 Million". Nobody asked it to. Pakistan could have simply walked away but it decided to arm twist and squeeze the last penny out of the US fist. On March 5, 1980, Foreign Minister Aga Shahi said, "It was felt on our side that acceptance of the US offer, unless substantially modified, would detract from rather than enhance the security". The rest is history. Again, Pakistan walked into the 'cold war intrigues' knowing fully well what it wanted. It wanted nuclear weapons, a pliant Afghanistan, a US treaty as a defence against India later, it wanted arms to attack India later etc. It got all of these in the end.

Masadi sahib,

OK I will leave aside ZAB for the moment.

But coming back to MAJ (pbuh), I must tell you what I keep telling my Hindoo compatriots. That it was not he who began the politics of mobilisation on communal lines. He raised the TNT banner becuase he felt that Muslims SECULAR, WORLDLY interests would be hurt in INC's vision of undivided India ( and considering how things have panned out in India he can only be considered right in hindsight).

I will let matters rest at that.

Regards

Re: # 82 How do you pronounce your name?

"BTW, I love the fairness of Chowk regarding portraying Islam. Two articles on the front page; One by an Ahmadi and the other by a Parsi. Way to fucking Go Chowk! You're real SOBs when it comes to painting Islam in a fair way!"

My comments to this were consumed as lunch by the Hungarian ChowQ-Stuff!

Maj #152, when you use religion for political purposes to monopolize the Muslim population's representation under that banner using all kinds of religious imagery and stuff like MAJ did, it lays the foundations of invoking "Islam khatray me hai" whenever the powers that be try to counter the people in their manipulations. This is what happened regarding ZAB, he merely tried to counter those manipulations, he was not to blame, he was a victim of the colonials and those with the MAJ mindset. We have discussed all of this before in hundreds of posts in multiple threads, no need to go over them again...

Dear Mr. Hamdani,
your piece was such a good read! I've been at Arizona State Univ. for the past three years, and before I even came here I had made up my mind not to embed myself in the desi community. I have never regretted my decision and I love the diverse group of friends I have and all that I have learnt from them. However the desi community has labeled me (but of course) - I'm "too good" for them, obviously I have some sort of a gora-complex and I will burn in hell because I'm a scar on the face of Muslim women around the world. Muslims will be Muslims and desis will be desis - no matter where.

tahmed writes "the US population was attacked by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan."

Firstly, the frankenstein Al-Qaeda was a convenient scapegoat, whose complicity in the attack was never proven, just based on the claims of liars who then lied about the Iraq WMDs is no proof.

Second, the US population was not attacked in Afghanistan

Third, Criminal negligence on part of the US national security apparatus at the very least, and criminla complicity to ensure that this attack happened by having total knowledge of its perpetrators but letting them get away with it, not to mention the material and other support through the ISI, an American agency through and through, and its own CIA down the network chains, makes this a case of the US admn attacking the US population

Fourth, What the US did to Afghanistan and its population in its proxy war, turning it through its acts and lack thereof into a stone-age parking lot was a much more serious offense against a nation state than the attacks of 9/11

Fifth, regardless of your cheerleading for the Iraq war in 2003 in your dimwitted article, using 9/11 to do to Iraq and the entire Iraqi population in that war was the height of inhumane, illegal, barbarism, and cannot be justified using that fictitious "attack" on the US population...

Now those barbarians plan to escalate the war into Pakistan using the same BS of a preceived plan to attack the US from Pakistani soil, and then take it into Iran. Not to mention that their trade policies and other domination of global institutions using their military might when needed has converted the world into an impoverished ghetto, these direct destruction of entire countries with populations in the tens of millions tells us that these elite are not deserving of membership in the human species. They are rabid dogs and pigs that need to be exterminated like cockroaches with impunity if humanity is to live...

Masadi sahib,

(ZAB had nothing to do with)

On the contrary, sir, he had. By pandering to the mullah's whims on the Q-community imposing prohibition and such stuff. In time soft Islamism gave way to hard Islamism just as soft Hindutva of MKG, Indira and Rajiv gave way to hard Hindutva.

(but not before MAJ had laid the foundations of it )

Both you and Hindoos on chowk accuse MAJ (pbuh) of encouraging just the same forces which actually opposed him all his life including calling him Kaffir-e-Azam. Please refer to the Lahore Resolution, 1940 and his 8/11 speech.

It is true his creation has taken the path towards Islamic fundoosim but has done so by neglecting his teachings. How is he responsible?

Regards

tahmed writes "and the mullah virus was activated in Pakistan by ZAB and zia -"

You miserable fool, ZAB had nothing to do with something he was a victim of. Zia working on behalf of the white man in his proxy war did it but not before MAJ had laid the foundations of it in the new nation, before that the white man's colonial bs of destroying India and its institutions gave rise to mullahism as the fallback- regardless of all of these the people have still rejected them...

PM,
I think in 2003 Bush made it clear that he was not worried about OBL.

Just remember if the US had captured OBL in 2001 or 2002, the whole WOT wouldn't have lasted long. The Bushies were interested in Iraq only...The Sage Cheney said, there weren't enough targets in Afghanistan.

PM, Majum,AKCheema...
Iraq war was definitely bad and even the sacnctions before that...It was punishment to Iraqis by US for not overthrowing Saddam Husseine and act according to US whims. The only way left for Saddam was to make friendship with Israel and submit to US axis.
Even during Saddam era, everything was not hunky dory in Iraq. Kurd problem, Shia-Sunni problem etc...was not creation of US. Somehow Saddam was able to control the Shia thugs (Muqtada -Al Sadar) and kurd rebellian. US invastion has destroyed the power equilibrium. Now, it is the duty of the Iraqis to find a peaceful solution within themselves. Still, I will not prefer to blame US invastion as the main reason for anarchy in Iraq (same way bloodshed in 1947 should not be attributed to Brits).
Regarding OIL stuff, USA attacked so many countries, without looking into the economic fallout. So, Iraq should not be judged from the oil reserve angle, alone.

This from an editorial in yesterday's Dawn. it should put to rest any silly ideas about the War on Terrorism being about stamping out extremism (except, of course, the extremism of the U.S./Iraeli war machines).

http://www.dawn.com/2008/07/03/ed.htm#5

Because the rise of Al Qaeda coincides with the above-mentioned development in the world’s economic history, and because it has been used as the pretext for invading countries not involved in 9/11, it is reasonable to assume that a certain degree of political engineering has originally gone into its making. The windfall profits from the dotcom bonanza of the nineties allowed the US intelligence comfortable access to tax payers’ money for financing covert operations that would plant the timed eruptions of terrorism in key strategic locations in the Middle East, thereby producing a moral Disney show that would lead the world to approve of the US invasion and occupation of otherwise much weaker countries in distant lands.

Osama bin Laden was ejected out of Sudan into Afghanistan at the behest of Washington. According to the 9/11 commission report, Sudan offered his custody to the US embassy but the ambassador declined. So did the Saudi government which works in close collaboration with the US in matters related to security. The fact that a dangerous international terrorist who openly called for worldwide attacks on US military and civilian assets, besides his involvement in the assassination attempt on the US ally Hosni Mubarak, was made to leave his known residence for an unknown one — no one yet knew he would land in Afghanistan — that too without the US embassy obtaining as much as even his fingerprints, casts aspersions on the sincerity of CIA’s pursuit of him.

Instead of arresting and interrogating bin Laden about his network, or getting the Saudi government to hang him, the US chose to rain 68 cruise missiles on Afghanistan from the Indian Ocean in 1998 because bin Laden now lived there. It highlights the theatrics that have gone into the making of CIA’s war on terror.

The writer is an energy consultant and analyst of energy geopolitics based in Washington DC.

Okay, for anyone still clueless about the real motives behind the war:

(same source as earlier)

some insight into why there was so little offical itnerest in tstoppiing the looting ahs since been provided by two men who played pivotal roles in the occupation -- Peter McPherson, the senior economic advisor to Paul Bremer, and John Agresto, diretor of Higher Education reconstruction for the occupation. McPherson said that when he say Iraqis taking state property-- cars, buses, ministry equipment -- it didn't bother him. His job, as Iraq's top economic shock therapist, was to radically downsize the state and privatize its assests, which meant that the looters were just giving him a jump start. "I thought the privatization that occurs kinda naturally when somebody took over their state vehicle, or began to drive a truck that the state used to own, was just fine," he said. a veteran bureaucrat of the Reagan admin and a firm believer in the Chicago School economics, McPherson termed the pillage a form of public sector "shrinkage."

re. majumdar:
"That leaves us with one motive- Oil. And at the end of the day, oil has only become dearer..."

If you're suggesting that this part of the plan didn't work, you're probably working on the questionable logic that U.S. National interests (you know, We the people, yadda yadda..) the the interests of those who control its foreign policy (esp wrt war) are one and the same.

They're not.

"... and the AQ has got a (potential) safe haven in a country where it had not much of a presence"

Sometimes "stuff [really does] happen"

truthoo:

I'm very well aware of Buchanan's image in the popular imagination-- that of a rightwing bigot. Chalk that down to the stupid liberals who wouldn't know a a true patriot from a neo-con just because they both happen to be Republican.

Trust me, I have actually READ Buchanan, and see much merit in much of what he says. If you'd like to, I'd be happy to send you some links.

In any event, I didn't suggest the he was an economist; Craig is. I kinda knew that that sentence would be misread, even though I used a crucial comma. :-)

"truth is, it is Iraqis being killed by Iraqis in the name of insurgency day in day out; I am yet to see any condemnation of this here by anyone!...."

Yes, Iraqis are being killed Iraqis. Let's pretend now that this has nothing to do with jostling for power in a vacuum created, even orchestrated, by the occupation forces, which takes --and switches-- sides.

Let's also conveniently forget the case of the British soldiers caught red-handed PLANTING bombs, and the disgraceful action by the occupiers in attacking and destroying the prison in which they were held in order to free them. Sure, that was just a one-off thing, right??

PM,

Pat Buchanan is not an economist. He is conservative white supremist. Just google supremist buchanan. Desi white wannabes (MAJ was #1) foolishly fall to their propaganda. Churchill and Jinnah need to be tried for genocide just as Pol Pot was.
"http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE2D71338F937A3575 1C0A961948260

Churchill came to San Francisco in the early 1900s and spoke at the Commonwealth Club about the dominance of the Anglo-Saxon race and the key to it being India for next five hundred years. Apparently Atlantic Weekly has a transcript in its archives. Jinah had similar views about Muslims being ruling race. Jinah and Maulvis are one and the same thing for non-muslims. He and feudal Muslims wanted to be Junior partner to the British.

More:

During the 1991 Gulf War, thirteen Iraqi museums were attacked by looters, so there was every reason to believe that poverty, anger at the old regime, and the general atmosphere of chaos would soon prompt Iraqis to respond in the same way (especially given that Saddam had emptied the prisons several months earlier). the Pentagon had been warned by leading archaeologists what it needed to have and airtight strategy to protect museums and libraries before any attack, and a March 26 Pentagon memo to coalition command listed "in order of importance, 16 sites that were crucial to protect in Baghdad." Second on the list was the museum. Other warnings had urged Rumsfeld to send an international police contingent in with the troops to maintain public order -- another suggestion that was ignored.

even without the police, however, there were enough of U.S. Soldiers in Baghdad for a few to be dispatched to the key cultural sites, but they weren't sent. There are numerous accounts of US soldiers hanging out by their armored vehicles and watching as trucks loaded with loot passed by -- a reflection of the "stuff happens" influence coming straight from Rumsfeld. Some units took it upon themselves to stop the looting, but in other instances, soldiers joined in. The Baghdad International Airport was completely thrashed by soldiers who, according to TIME, smashed furniture and then moved to the commercial jets on the runway: "U.S. soldiers looking for comfortable seats and souvenirs ripped out many of the planes' fittings, slashed seats, damaged cockpit equipment and popped out every windshield." The result was an estimated loss of $100 million worth of damage to Iraq's national airline -- which was one the first assets to be put on the auction block in an early and contensious partial privatization.

Tahmed sahib,

the US population was attacked by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

So what was the motive for invasion of Iraq?

WMD was spurious wasn't it, an official publicly admited that the report was "sexed-up".

Saddam alone was not the issue- tyrants are dime a dozen in the Third World.

That leaves us with one motive- Oil.

And at the end of the day, oil has only become dearer and the AQ has got a (potential) safe haven in a country where it had not much of a presence.

And so it was a strategic mistake from day 1.

But I believe you supported this invasion, didn't you?

Regards

Re: # 138; tahmed sahib

basically what you wrote makes sense....yes the invasion may have been a mistake...but in all this "bitterness", if Iraqis choose to continue to self-destruct, there is no force in the world that can stop that

unfortunately from the failure of this venture the Iraqis have a lot more to loose than the US or any of its allies. I am yet to see anyone here speak of a viable alternative?

one has to present a substantial alternative rather than rhetoric; ....oh they invaded our brothers....oh how bad...oh...oh....then the emotive pictures to go with that rubbish

truth is, it is Iraqis being killed by Iraqis in the name of insurgency day in day out; I am yet to see any condemnation of this here by anyone!....

....maybe it is to the advantage of these lunatics to have all these pictures available for their own warped purposes

Regards

Passages from The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Captilalism by Naomi Klein.

WHen the war began, the residents of baghdad wer esubjected to sensory deprivation on a mass scale. One by one, the city's sensory inputs were cut off; the ears were the first to go.
On the night of March 28, 2003, as U.S. troops drew nearer to Baghdad, the ministry of Communications was bombed and set ablaze, as were four Baghdad telephone exchanges, with massive Bunker-busters, cutiing off millions of phones across the city. The targetting of phon exchanges continued - twelve in total - until, by April 2, there was barely a phone working in all of Baghdad.* During the same assault, television and radio transmitters were also hit, making it impossible for families in Baghdad, huddled in their homes, to pick up even a weak signal carrying news of what was going on outside their doors.
Many Iraqis say that the shredding of their phone system was the most psychologically wrenching part of the air attack. The combination of hearing and feeling bombs going off everywhere while being able to call a few blocks away to find out if loved ones were alive, or to reassure terrified relatives living abroad, was pure torment...."

* the author explains why the 'logic' of the annihilation of the phone system to sever Saddam's ability to communicate was completely bogus. Will reproduce if anyone's interested.

More later, on clues to the actual intent of the occupation...

PM: sadly, we cant all be geniuses like you.

majumdar #136 From the point of view of the US population, it was obviously the wrong country - the US population was attacked by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. And so it was a strategic mistake from day 1.

From the point of view of the Iraqi population, if the result had been the removal of Saddam and the restoration of a democratic constitution and the rule of law, then it would have given the Iraqi people what any sane people would like.

OK?

Tahmed sahib,

Re; 132/Others

So basically there was nothing inherently wrong in the American invasion of Iraq, it was basically a noble and disinterested project. But went wrong because of tactical mistakes made by Bush's incompetent team. Is that what you are arguing?

Regards

re. tahmed #131:
#127 dm: How the hell was I supposed to know that Bush would turn out to be so totally incompetent? So that was a cheap shot, if I may respectfully say so.

The "failure" in Iraq has everything to do with Mr Bush & Co.'s competence in milking wars for personal gain. You'd have to be a complete idiot not to see that by NOW.

Maybe you could not have foreseen the way things would turn out in Iraq. That's because you (and I admit myself) are/ were ignoramuses who thought you could enter one of the oldest, proudest civilizations in the world, lay bare it's institutions, get control of its vital assets (this was clear from Day One of the occupation, btw, so claims of ignorance won't wash) deprive its citizens of electricity (even to this day!), water, respect (at home and in prison) and the right to live without the fear of a bomb going off any given hour in their neighbourhood -- all completely forseeable and predicted outcomes to the occupation -- and install a democracy in its place (with the spoils of the war of course by now firmly in you-know-who's hands ??

that should be "sectarian hostilities", not "sectoral hostilities", btw.

BJ2 #132: I must regretfully differ with you on this, guruji. These "sectoral hostilities" are a convenient excuse used the republicans to put responsibility on Iraqis for the mess, rather than in the Bush incompetence.

The basic mistake Bush admin. made was to sack the entire Iraqi military (rather than using it to supplement its own forces after the fall of Saddam); sack the entire Baathist membership (which meant sacking civil servants down to schoolteachers. This basic weakness gave rise to further problems (e.g. the insurgency, which combined with lack of discipline, led to Abu Ghraib) that fed on one another.

Re: # 131

There is no way GWB (or any prominent Western leader) could ever have imagined the depth of sectoral hostilities in Iraq (and elsewhere) which have queered the pitch everywhere and ruined the efforts to bring about peace and prosperity to that region.

#127 dm: How the hell was I supposed to know that Bush would turn out to be so totally incompetent? So that was a cheap shot, if I may respectfully say so.

dost mittar #126 You are right that during the Cold War the US saw right wing religious parties as being natural allies against a Godless Communism. And you are right that Nasser (allied with communists) fought "maudoodi's chehlas", primarily Syed Qutb who read arab translations of maudoodi's ideology while jailed by Nasser. To what extent this translated into US help in the growth of maudoodism in Pakistan is anybody's guess though. While jamaatiya student groups tended to be well organized in the 1960's and also well equipped with jeeps, I dont recall any evidence of funding (let alone US support) to these groups. The US dealt with Ayub Khan in the 1960's, and any funding to religious parties would have been with Ayubs agreement.

So: While you are right on Cold War alignments, I think you go too far in assuming that it was because of the US that Maudoodism flourished.

So, what caused Maudoodism (in Pakistan, and its offshoot the Islamic Brotherhood which gave rise to Al Qaeda) to flourish? Any objective look at middle east history will tell you that it was the failure of these societies to modernize.

Example: in Egypt as far back as the early 19th century the royal family was trying to be "western" in the superficial sense of clothings, mannerisms, and spendthrift ways. But it failed to develop a significant middle class that "westernized" in a deeper sense of education - as happened in Meiji Japan, e.g., or in the education among hindus in India (as opposed to the muslims who failed here due to opposition by the echobooms of the 19th/20th century to western education).

Bottom line: Dont blame the US for religious extremists. The failure rests squarely on the elite (both the corrupt sheikhs and rulers, and the regressive theocracy). And thus, the US cannot fix what muslims can only fix themselves - by giving the boot to the "superficial westerns" of the hamidm kind, as well as to the "regressive islamists" of the echoboom kind as well as the "clueless marxists" of the masadi kind. And learning something that progressive people have done throught history - namely, have the humility to learn from others.

Sattar sahib, there are issues which can be understood through discussions here among friends, in a friendly way.

And there are issues which can only be understood on Dr. Sohail's couch. :((

The persistent need to bad-mouth others without provocation falls in the latter category.

DM (#127),

Don’t remind tahmed of Iraq – it’s something he’s trying to forget.

But really, Iraq is merely an experiment with democracy gone awry. Pre-war intelligence was not bad either - just a bit misunderstood. Surely we weren’t expecting perfection. Millions of Iraqis suffered, but hey, they got to vote! And that's what counts - no, really ...

+++

YLH (#69),

Minor point: That really was not necessary. While you criticize momineens for dragging in the Ahmadi issue for no reason, you yourself can’t help badmouthing Ahmadis unnecessarily. You both need help.

I don't want to get into another useless discussion with you, but you may want to think things over. Just a thought ...

[contd]

..and do you remember some of us warning you four years ago that the attack on the most secular and woman-friendly country in the arab world (yes, sadaam's Iraq) would turn it into a theocracy? And my asking you then if you would support the US if it attacked Pakistan? Sadly, we are now getting the answer to that question.

tahmed32:

No sir, you cannot blame Maudoodi for every problem in the world. He was against the creation of Pakistan and was more or less restricted to bringing Pakistan under Nizam-e-Mustafa as he believed that this is what the awaam thought that they had gotten regardless of the intentions of the founder. And when Nasser went after Maudoodi's chelas in Egypt, it was your American friends who supported them. In fact, they also opposed the reformist Saudi Sheikh (the son of the founder of the dynasty) who had introduced reforms like making photographs and movies legal in Saudi Arabia.

dost-mittar,

.... have you read "maps for lost lovers" by nadeem aslam ?...... i recommend it highly - it is a beautifully written book .... some of the most poetic prose i have ever read and it also gives you some insight into the djinns that posess the ummah .....

correction to emergency alert below: "Intruder sighted". Not "Sighed".

Sigh...:-(

"Attnetion Masadi!! "White Man Defense Alert!! Man your Battle Station!!"

Intruder sighed at co-ordinate #122, and believed to be that arch-villain tahmed!

dost mittar: while it is convenient to blame "the white man" for everything, the fact is that the mullah virus came to Pakistan from India in the form maudoodi. and the mullah virus was activated in Pakistan by ZAB and zia - and after years on chowk where this is all that seems to be discussed, why am I having to remind you of this?

#116 hamidm: you forgot to mention the muslims whose women can only dress in long cloaks in any color they want as long as it is black; who insist on living in the past and reject all the benefits of modern civilization; read the good book every day; and who dont go anywhere near your Colt 45 or any other booze; refer to the rest of the country as "English" and insist on speaking their own language..and..horrors.. their numbers are increasing as they produce lots of babies!! and spreading beyond their original immigration to other parts of the country.

Wait, those are not muslims I am talking about, but the pennsylvania dutch (who are actually not dutch, but a deutsch speaking christian sect from switzerland, but those are details).

And then we have this bunch of immigrants in Brooklyn whose women shave their heads and put on wigs made from...ugh..human hair...but let me stop here.

Since I know your muslimphobia is not solved by mere counselling...

hamidm#116:

Seriously, the islamist virus was quite dormant in most muslims until your white man activated it to fight his war against the godless commies. Ab bhuto karmon ka phal!

hamidm#116:

Have you been reading the scientific fiction Invasion by Allen?

Incidentally, the horrible Hindoos will survive even under this scenario, just as they did earlier ones.;)

Masadi,

just check this out, http://www.resist.com/other/border_patrol.swf

another reason for you to complain about the US-elite.

masadi,

.......... americans will rue the day they let moslems into the country .....

........it is easier to convince a headhunter from papua new guinea to discard the bone through his nose and give up cannibalism, than to convince a moslem from gujranwala to shave his chin (instead of his pubic hair), give up washing his feet in a sink and suicide bombing .....

..... brooklyn already smells and looks like bradford and as soon as sharia is implemented in nyc, public executions will be conducted at yankee stadium every friday and matinee shows featuring ritual stoning and whipping will be held on saturday ..... this, most certainly, will result in the demise of broadway and the eventual collpse of the entertainment industry ........ paris hilton and nicole ritchie will join the dawa circuit with farhat hashmi and tahmed ............ pigs will be exterminated and you will not be able to get a decent blt sandwich or baby back ribs ....... black people will go hungry because they won't be able to get pork rinds and chitlins and many will die of thirst because they won't be able to get ripple and colt 45 malt ....... barbers and plastic surgeons will go out of business and indian code coolies will be put to death for writing bad code and worshiping false dieties .......

re. #111

truthoo, thanks for posting that article. It would've been interesting if you'd stated that it was something from masadi's pen. We'd then no doubt be entertained by the spectacle of Western baboos spitting venom on the (supposed) author. As it were, this is from what I call a True Conservative, a la Pat Buchanan, who served as Regean's Secy of Treasury, and is a giant of an economist.

Re: # 110
"In my opinion, unfortunately for the Muslim world, the destruction of the Ottoman Empire created these Arab nation states. Now these Arab nation states totally disregard the prevailing international behavior of a 21st century society."

You're also ignoring the role of the European powers between the world wars in shaping many of the problems of the modern Middle east. Unless you think that the mandate system was also another glowing example of the kindness of the Western powers towards the Islamic world which the backward Arabs failed to sufficiently take advantage of.

In #112, let us start by the US paying its dues to the UN

Bubba writes "The war in Iraq clearly showed the regimes in the Arab world that there is a new Sheriff in the world, and the UN resolutions would definitely be enforced. "

Ignorning the rest of your BS post that is full of personal attacks and insinuations regarding my person without addressing a single point in any of my posts, points regarding the US position viz a viz the other nations of the world that do not and cannot operate in vacuum like conditions even though the barbarians present that in their popular propaganda, the fact that none of the so called peon countries with Muslim majority populations, which are non democratic and whose lack of democracy is wholeheartedly supported both materially and otherwise by America are somehow to blame is totally disingenuous.

Now regarding UN resolutions, let us start by the US paying its dues to the US, not using it as its whore and making Israel follow the resolutions before it invents BS regarding Iraq. What the US did in Iraq was itself a violation of international law and circumvented the authority of the UN in deciding what is to be done with its so-called pending resolutions regarding Iraq, it was BS on the part of the US through and through, and what is your escape? You call for my banning from chowk, just because intellectual pygmies like you cannot match a single one of my posts in argumentation and reasoning, and come up with the same old lame BS about "UN resolutions" in a most hypocritical manner, especially where it concerns Israel...

Pakistani friends are worried about what to do and how to do in US, while Indians are saying this http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1174759

Masadi,

For all these years at chowk, for me you have provided minimum knowledge for any worthwhile interaction. The most that I got out of interacting with you is your hypocrisy. You are perennially anti-US (although you may continue fooling some of the readers that you are an intellectual worth being accepted).

Of course you hide behind your invented US elite concepts, etc. Unfortunately for you and those who agree with your rhetoric, are exactly those rickshaw drivers who do not have any choice but to accept your kind of rhetoric.

It is a sad commentary that the Muslim world has been entangled with the US hegemony for a long time.

In my opinion, unfortunately for the Muslim world, the destruction of the Ottoman Empire created these Arab nation states. Now these Arab nation states totally disregard the prevailing international behavior of a 21st century society. Of course as you know, that Muslim rickshaw driver is too scared in his own society to speak out against the powerful layers of his own people stacked up against his dreams and wishes. And it is people like you who have constantly disgraced these downtrodden people of your own society using one excuse after the other.

But, of course, you blame the so-called US-elite.

Sometimes, I have read your opinion in favor of your own religious theology and sometimes I have read your total Marxist-communist philosophies. You are almost like the Mujahideen-e-Khalq of Iran, without any takers of your brand of society within Pakistan.

Also, it appears to me that you are one of those who actually want this site to be totally confused and convoluted. It seems to me that maybe you are the one who has been assigned by these so-called US-elite to infiltrate this site, and to fish out the un-suspecting anti-west interactors of this site.

Hence, the constant demand from some of us to ban you permanently from this site. Hopefully chowk staff would know better.

Whenever it suits your fancy, you do not accept the nation states created after the demise of the Ottoman Empire. You, as a person who lacks integrity and authenticity, waffle around many issues that have been settled around this world for a long time. Unfortunately for you, the world is moving ahead, without the baggage of the Muslim nation states. You may not understand this, because you are the one who just do not want to accept the nation state and its existence.

Having a medium like this is suitable for a person like you, because at every board your opinion and interaction changes, and there is no way to understand what your pov regarding any matter is. What comes across loud and clear, however, is your total disregard of general human values and of humanity.

It is quite obvious to me that you are an Arab by birth. Some of my Arab friends have warned me regarding this Arab style, that they would answer a question before the question being asked is completed. It is suggested that most Arabs, as a general rule, would not allow the question to sink in, ponder over the answer, and then respond. Is it true in your case?

Most of the condemnation of the US, that you have asserted, came during the late Yassir Arafat’s political maneuvering and the terrorizing ability of the PLO. Even those condemnations were inside the General Assembly, which for the most part became inconsequential. Human rights organization within the UN has been held by Sudan for a number of years, and which had Libya as its member. The war in Iraq clearly showed the regimes in the Arab world that there is a new Sheriff in the world, and the UN resolutions would definitely be enforced.

Pakistan's founder Jinah was buddy of Churchill, because of which it was gained Haste Haste. That kind of explains his ruthlessness and megalomania. Millions killed, Milion raped, and tens of millions uprooted. Pakistan is hugging similar people of similar psyche.

We, The Salt Of The Earth, Take Precedence
By Paul Craig Roberts
7-2-8

Which country is the rogue nation? Iraq? Iran? Or the United States? Syndicated columnist Charley Reese asks this question in a recently published article.

Reese notes that it is the US that routinely commits "acts of aggression around the globe." The US government has no qualms about dropping bombs on civilians whether they be in Serbia, the Middle East, or Africa. It is all in a good cause--our cause.

This slaughtering of foreigners doesn't seem to bother the American public. Americans take it for granted that Americans are superior and that American purposes, whatever they be, take precedence over the rights of other people to life and to a political existence independent of American hegemony.

The Bush regime has come up with a preemption doctrine that justifies attacking a country in order to prevent the country from possibly becoming a future threat to the US. "Threat" is broadly defined. It appears to mean the ability to withstand the imposition of US hegemony. This insane doctrine justifies attacking China and Russia, a direction in which the Republican presidential candidate John McCain seems to lean.

The callousness of Americans toward the lives of other peoples is stunning. How many Christian churches ask God's forgiveness for having been rushed into an error that has killed, maimed, and displaced a quarter of the Iraqi population?

How many Christian churches ask God to give better guidance to our government so that it does not repeat the error and crime by attacking Iran?

The indifference of Americans to others flows from "American exceptionalism," the belief that Americans are graced with a special mission to impose their virtue on the rest of the world. Like the French revolutionaries, Americans don't seem to care how many people they kill in the process of spreading their exceptionalism.

American exceptionalism has swelled Americans' heads, filling them with hubris and self-righteousness and making Americans believe that they are the salt of the earth.

Three recent books are good antidotes for this unjustified self-esteem. One is Patrick J. Buchanan's Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War. Another is After the Reich: The Brutal History of the Allied Occupation by Giles MacDonogh, and a third is John Pilger's Freedom Next Time.

Buchanan's latest book is by far his best. It is spell-binding from his opening sentence: "All about us we can see clearly now that the West is passing away." As the pages turn, the comfortable myths, produced by history written by the victors, are swept aside. The veil is lifted to reveal the true faces of British and American exceptionalism: stupidity and deceit.

Buchanan's strength is that he lets the story be told by Britain's greatest 20th century historians and the memoirs of the participants in the events that destroyed the West's dominance and moral character. Buchanan's contribution is to assemble the collective judgment of a hundred historians.

As I read the tale, it is a story of hubris destroying judgment and substituting in its place blunder and miscalculation. Both world wars began when England, for no sound or sensible reason, declared war on Germany. Winston Churchill was a prime instigator of both wars. He seems to have been a person who needed a war stage in order to be a "great man."

The American President Woodrow Wilson shares responsibility with Britain and France for the Versailles Treaty, which dismembered Germany, stripping her of territory and putting millions of Germans under foreign rule, and imposed reparations that Britain's greatest economist, John Maynard Keynes, correctly predicted to be unrealistic. All of this was done in violation of assurances given to Germany that there would be no reparations or boundary changes. Once Germany surrendered, the assurances were withdrawn, and a starvation blockade forced German submission to the new harsh terms.

Hitler's program was to put Germany back together. He was succeeding without war until Churchill provoked Chamberlain into an insane act. Danzig was 95 percent German. It had been given to Poland by the Versailles Treaty. Hitler was negotiating its return and offered in exchange a guarantee of Poland's frontiers. The Polish colonels, assessing the relative strengths of Poland and Germany, understood that a deal was better than a war. But suddenly, the British Prime Minister issued Poland a guarantee of its existing territory, including Danzig, whose inhabitants wished to return to Germany.

Buchanan produces one historian after another to testify that British miscalculations and blunders, culminating in Chamberlain's worthless and provocative "guarantee" to Poland, brought the West into a war that Hitler did not want, a war that destroyed the British Empire and left Britain a dependency of America, a war that delivered Poland, a chunk of Germany, all of Eastern Europe, and the Baltic states to Joseph Stalin, a war that left the Western allies with a 45-year cold war against the nuclear-armed Soviet Union.

People resist the shattering of their illusions, and many are angry with Buchanan for assembling the facts of the case that distinguished historians have provided.

Churchill admirers are outraged that their hero is revealed as the first war criminal of World War II. It was Churchill who initiated the policy of terror bombing civilians in non-combatant areas. Buchanan quotes B.H. Liddell Hart: "When Mr. Churchill came into power, one of the first decisions of his government was to extend bombing to the non-combatant area."

In holding Churchill to account, Buchanan makes no apologies for Hitler, but the ease with which Churchill set aside moral considerations is discomforting.

Buchanan documents that Churchill's plan was to destroy 50% of German homes. Churchill also had plans for using chemical and biological warfare against German civilians. In 2001 the Glasgow Sunday Herald reported Churchill's plan to drop five million anthrax cakes onto German pastures in order to poison the cattle and through them the people. Churchill instructed the RAF to consider drenching "the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany" with poison gas "in such a way that most of the population would be requiring constant medical attention."

"It is absurd to consider morality on this topic," the great man declared.

Paul Johnson, a favorite historian of conservatives, notes that Churchill's policy of terror bombing civilians was "approved in cabinet, endorsed by parliament and, so far as can be judged, enthusiastically backed by the bulk of the British people." Thus, the terror bombing of civilians, which "marked a critical stage in the moral declension of humanity in our times," fulfilled "all the conditions of the process of consent in a democracy under law."

British historian F.J.P. Veale concluded that Churchill's policy of indiscriminate bombing of civilians caused an unprecedented "reversion to primary and total warfare" associated with "Sennacherib, Genghis Khan, and Tamerlane."

The Americans were quick to follow Churchill's lead. General Curtis LeMay boasted of his raid on Tokyo: "We scorched and boiled and baked to death more people in Tokyo that night of March 9-10 than went up in vapor in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined."

MacDonogh's book, After the Reich, dispels the comfortable myth of generous allied treatment of defeated Germany. Having discarded all moral scruples, the allies fell upon the vanquished country with brutal occupation. Hundreds of thousands of women raped; hundreds of thousands of Germans died in deportations; a million German prisoners of war died in captivity.

MacDonogh calculates that 2.5 million Germans died between the liberation of Vienna and the Berlin airlift.

Nigel Jones writes in the conservative London Sunday Telegraph: "MacDonogh has told a very inconvenient truth," a story long "cloaked in silence since telling it suited no one."

The hypocrisy of the Nuremberg trials is that the victors were also guilty of crimes for which the vanquished were punished. The purpose of the trials was to demonize the defeated in order to divert attention from the allies' own war crimes. The trials had little to do with justice.

In Freedom Next Time, Pilger shows the complete self-absorption of American, British and Israeli governments whose policies are unimpeded by any moral principle.

Pilger documents the demise of the inhabitants of Diego Garcia. The Americans wanted Diego Garcia for an air base, so the British packed up the 2,000 residents, people with British passports under British protection, and deported them to Mauritius, one thousand miles away.

To cover up its crime against humanity, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office created the fiction that the inhabitants, which had been living in the archipelago for two or three centuries, were "a floating population." This fiction, wrote a legal adviser, bolsters "our arguments that the territory has no indigenous or settled population."

Prime Minister Harold Wilson and Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart conspired to mislead the UN about the deported islanders by, in Stewart's words, " presenting any move as a change of employment for contract workers--rather than as a population resettlement."

Pilger interviewed some of the displaced persons, but emotional blocs will shield patriotic Americans and British from the uncomfortable facts. Rational skeptics can find a second documented account of the Anglo-American rape of Diego Garcia online at http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/time ... ego_garcia An entire people were swept away.

Two thousand people were in the way of an American purpose--an air base--so we had our British dependency deport them.

Several million Palestinians are in Israel's way. Pilger's documented account of Israel's crushing of the Palestinians shows that our "democratic ally" in the Middle East is capable of any evil and has no remorse or mercy. Israel is an apt student of the British and American empires' attitudes toward lesser beings. They simply don't count.

Those who are the salt of the earth take precedence over everything.

re. nkg #99
"Though USA knows that Talibs and islamic extremists are hiding in Pakistan, they have not used any major arsenal on these areas. Rather provided money to Pakistan and assisting in big way."

Two things here: One, However outrageously the US manages to defy International treaties and UN resolutions (or lack of mandate for a given action), bombing civilian populations in a nominallly allied country is just not on... the Bush Admin would just not be able to withstand the force of Public opinion-- this is learned amply from the Vietnam experience.

Secondly, you're working on the assumption here that the US would actually like to put bring an end to this bogus War on Terrorism (read Private Profiteering Bonanza). Given what we know about abortive attempts to (not) capture Bin Laden when he was well cornered back in December 2002, as well as what we know about who's profiting most from these wars, it's hard to believe that at least this admin would want it to end any time soon.

Enjoy while it lasts, soon these morons are going to ban me again....

Khurram pardon my intrusion but having argued with this moron YLH for a long time, I will attempt to answer your questions based on my understanding of his psyche.


1. Not only that he claims to be the king of the world and the choice spokesperson of the BBC

2. They have done sh** for the Muslims and for minorities, as part of the Republican party they will do all to legitimize the policies of the barbarians within the US elite while gaining all the benefits that cheap sellouts attain while losing their own personality (as they mould it after a cheap image of the white man) and self respect....they are the new brown sahibs that will sell their mama just to get a smile out of the white man, if you own a tv set tune in to GEO when they broadcast VOA live, those two sh*** that are working for it personify the Hasans and other wannabe sellouts....

akcheema writes "and yes I have admitted many a times before that if the shoe was on the other foot and any single one of the muslim countries was "in-charge" as it were, things would be a whole lot worse....and they have been (historically speaking) "

Really, now you're really being ignorant, the "Muslim countries" of today serve in a system dominated by the US, if you take the US out of the equation, you have no idea what that setup would be like only speculation that cannot rely on the current state of Muslim nations just the past history when there was no US and the setup was not the same colonial sh** we see today in a new garb, which leaves us with a much better setup a much more humane setup than the current BS the US is perpetrating around the globe, for one thing the means of destruction available today is unmatched, and for a second, inequality among nation states and the power state is also unmatched to what existed in the past.....

YLH,
Two questions for you.

1. Are you really claiming credit for founding the progressive muslim movement of North America?

2. What have the Hasans done for the muslim community in America?

In #102 "like the Iraq WMD case or the "we will save the women and give them rights" case of attacking Afghanistan.....Goddamned sobs the whole lot of fools that support that BS... including the sellout moron, the sell your mama for a chance to live in the US and earn a few $$, piece of sh** Bubba...

Bubba the illiterate writes "Let me assure you that within the confines of the US State Department, there is a whole lot of world that admire and respect the US and her foreign policy. Unfortunately, up until now, partially because of the globalization of information, the US was not able to take care and expose the crooks of the developing world, who manage their ill-informed population. Case in point is the rulers of Zimbabwe, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Pakistan, Eygpt, Somalia etc.

And of course, today’s Iran.

Do I need to name more countries?"


What kind of BS is this? Within the state department is a whole lot of world? Man learn English first before you talk about reading. US foregin policy is condemned world over for its barbarism, its selfishness and arrogance. The UN condemns it, nations always vote against its BS (except for Israel and a few bough Island states), and even within it its own people have come to understand its shenanigans and most oppose its war propaganda. What books have you been reading about the US, the one's authored by celebrities like Ann Coulter? Read some real books about US society and its power structure then you will know the meat on the bones of the anti-US rhetoric, on the other side, the side of the pro US foreign policy barbarians, its only fluff and propaganda that even a rickshaw driver can disset through for its baseless lies, like the Iraq WMD case of the "we will save the women and give them rights" case of attacking Afghanistan.....Goddamned sobs the whole lot of fools that support that BS...

Re: # 98 Posted by akcheema on July 3, 2008 1:49:49 am

akchema sahib,

If you have accepted and consider yourself as not well-read about US and her population’s relationship with her government set-up, then would it not be reasonable for a person like you to get a better knowledge of the whole truth, before spouting anti-US rhetoric?

In my opinion, knowledge is the first step towards wisdom, and that can only come through being a well-read person. One can only achieve wisdom through knowledge. It is very difficult for those who aspire to reach wisdom through faith, by circumventing knowledge.

Let me assure you that within the confines of the US State Department, there is a whole lot of world that admire and respect the US and her foreign policy. Unfortunately, up until now, partially because of the globalization of information, the US was not able to take care and expose the crooks of the developing world, who manage their ill-informed population. Case in point is the rulers of Zimbabwe, Sudan, Palestine, Syria, Pakistan, Eygpt, Somalia etc.

And of course, today’s Iran.

Do I need to name more countries?

#83 Matloob...
Until Iraq war (2003), USA have never sided with Russia regarding Chechenia problem and never condemned islamist/terrorist barbarism in Russia...

Re: # 83
Matloob...

Re: # 60 Bubba
The biggest historic joke by Bubba ever posted on Chowk

Buba is right. Don't you think USA is very lenient on Pakistan?
Though USA knows that Talibs and islamic extreamists are hiding in Pakitstan, they have not used any major arsenal on these areas. Rather provided money to Pakistan and assisting in big way. If US have bombed Pakistan from the aircraft carriers in Arabian sea, that would have been appropriate action from a super power (Vietnam, Korea war experience).
USA had risked its involvement in Balkan conflict and sided with moslems, rather than serbs....

Re: # 60; bubba mian,

I take your point and I never claimed to be well-read ayway....somethings are just common sense and reading too many books doesn't always equate with wisdom

with that out of the way, I wasn't just referring to US policies towards the muslim world; there is a whole lot of 'world' out there that is NOT muslim....its been there for a long time in case you hadn't noticed!

and yes I have admitted many a times before that if the shoe was on the other foot and any single one of the muslim countries was "in-charge" as it were, things would be a whole lot worse....and they have been (historically speaking)

Re: # 75
Arjun...
"kuldip nayyar: you can put really expensive lipstick on this pig but it'll still be a pig.."

Correct....(I tell it in different way. You can domesticate a dog and change it's food habit. But its canine nature should not be ignored).

You can not change a moslem to think like a civilised person, when he/she is under the influence of Islam...
The liberal value system in democratic world make space for moslems to pracise mediaval arab barbarism and that in turn harms these societies. India and UK are living example of it. So far US was insulated. Couple of millions more moslems in USA and the trouble will start...

This is nice vedantic example...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3_LEYwGHqo

#94/95 Posted by PM,

You're all over the place. Kya hua? The wild boar invited you to a family dinner?

He's dead. Can't be insulted? should have read He's dead. Can't be insulted!

Re: # 80 Zee
"It's a pity masadi sahib is repeatedly banned for...., while lowlifes like.....who disguises gross and injurious insults in nauseatingly clever humour is allowed to roam about like a wild boar."

I agree that, from what I've read of Masadi sahib, Chowk is unjustified in banning him. That said, "the gross and injurious insults" charge sounds like so much of waiN waiN-ing yaar... Who is being insulted? The Holy Prophet? He's dead. Can't be insulted? Who is being injured? His followers? Well, skip over the wild boars posts in that case. This isn't a case of some missionary going around spreading falsehoods among the unknowing masses, for crying out loud.

And suggesting that hamid shouldn't use his satire on Supersize coz she's half his size is only so much more waiN-waiNing. Or perhaps you'd to believe his post didn't make a serious point?

#38 Posted by bulleya
Bulleya sahib, your post goes some way into explaining the basic philosophy of social Islam. Your thesis that Islam, in effect, did away with the Church, is compelling. However, with State as the only institution to oversee law and order (and, obvious to anyone who knows the least about Islam, personal morality too) how do you keep a clergy (in some garb or other) from arising?

The difference between the ulema and the (secular) law establishment is merely where they each consider soveriegnity lies.

Re: # 80 Zee
"It's a pity masadi sahib is repeatedly banned for...., while lowlifes like.....who disguises gross and injurious insults in nauseatingly clever humour is allowed to roam about like a wild boar."

Include this dressed-to-thrill brother in the list. Not everyone makes it to this 'roll of honour'!

Thank you CHOW-Q!

Re: # 57 Zee
"Ao-Pao = Americans Of Pakistani Origin i.e. mostly clueless types"

More like AMMI-PAKAO (mommy cook please)!

:)

Re: # 82 Ziggy
"I love the fairness of Chowk regarding portraying Islam. Two articles on the front page; One by an (edited) and the other by a (edited again). Way to fucking Go Chowk! You're real (expletive deleted) when it comes to painting Islam in a fair way!"

Look, I tried to reason (REASON!) with them several times without resorting to using such flowery language!

Look out, here comes the Q-Brigade...!

re. bubb #60:
"[The U.S.] still has the best foreign policy towards the muslim world generally, and towards Pakistan in particular."

Hahahaha!! ROTFL, LMAO!! Good one!!

re. #52: SupersizeMe
"sharia law is actually a common sense law system which is quite the practical and common sense whilst meeting the sensibilities of muslim living, it would even crack down on all these rishwat systems that go on and other complaints that we have nowadays. how individuals implement it is another thing altogether."

I am not going to open a can of worms by arguing the merits and demerits of Shariah Law, but would like to point out here that "cracking down on rishwat systems that go on" is one of the objectives of the secular law in any country, including Pak. Heard of the Anti-Corruption Establishment here (Yes, yes, the same estab whose officers recently shook the Tessori family down for a cool 30 mil rupees, coz they were feeling neglected.)

So tell me how introducing Shariah would lead to anything different from the current situation, apart from having petty thieves and hungry food-stealers potentially lose an arm every now and again?

re. tahmed #44:
That is exactly what I am saying: all fanatics (or unreasoning individuals of any other kind) are not islamic. nor even religious!! and merely presenting masadi as an example.

Masadi is unreasoning? hmmm... If you can't beat him, just label him unreasoning, huh?

re. "Asra went on to publish her own “Islamic Bill of Rights� which included the right to consensual pre-marital sex – alienating those who were otherwise willing to support the progressive Muslim cause. A better approach would have been to insist that a person’s sexuality was their own business and between the believer and his or her god."

I can tell you're a lawyer, Yasser ;-)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#38 Posted by bulleya
Dear Bulleya
Sir thank you so much for your elaborative & comprehensive post on this curse of Clergy that has been haunting Islam & Muslims.
I was too tired last night to clarify these matters for eklavya and was going to respond tonight however you have covered all bases here in even a much better manner than I could have done and I appreciate that.
Like you said I personally feel that there is no need for these tons of publications which are sold for making profit and instead of leading inquirers and intrigued ones in the right direction they appear to be somewhat misleading source for those who are intrigued, as well as, there appears to be as many varying opinions as many Mullahs each describing things in their own sense and then capitalizing on those like a cult or clique.
Thanks and best regards.

Re: # 60 Bubba
The biggest historic joke by Bubba ever posted on Chowk
Re: # 43 Posted by akcheema on July 2, 2008 5:27:23 am

akcheema sahib,

{like I said before...I am anti-US policies too....does that make me an Islamist?}

NO, that makes you an ignorant person. This country still has the best foreign policy towards the muslim world generally, and towards Pakistan in particular.

Bubba:Sir, you are just not a well-read person.

BTW, I love the fairness of Chowk regarding portraying Islam. Two articles on the front page; One by an Ahmadi and the other by a Parsi. Way to fucking Go Chowk! You're real SOBs when it comes to painting Islam in a fair way!

#63 Hamza,

LOL!! Thank you for saving me the effort of responding to this idiot YLH.

#79 Posted by majumdar,

It's a pity masadi sahib is repeatedly banned for calling people fools and peons etc., while lowlifes like hamidm2 who disguises gross and injurious insults in nauseatingly clever humour is allowed to roam about like a wild boar.

Beej bhaiyya,

If YLH asks me to post on his behalf I shall gladly do so. I consider it a privilege that thinking people like YLH and Masadi sahib choose to use me as a courier.

Regards

#77 Majumdar

While you are in form, why don't you post Yasser's response as well?!!

You know Yasser, the person who thinks chowkies are all fools!

Posting this on behalf of Masadi sahib

"Did somebody mention my name? It must be my spider sense! Since Chowk staff banned me for 24 hours and has kept me blocked after 48, I wont be able to respond to the BS about me going on, on this thread. However, I'd like to convey that this article is first rate BS. The Muslims in the US just like African Americans with a very long history, segregate and congregate together because they discover first hand through their intitial experience that the wider society rejects them, and does not consider they equal, it distorts the image they created of themselves while in their home societies to one that is of a third rate person. It is not the Pakistani that isolates himself, he unfortunately worships the ground the white man walks upon and would love to be part of his circle. This rejection and alienation is the result of the wider social structure designed to show all non whites/non chiristians that they are alien, which is translated into bureaucratic fact by describing some as resident aliens and others as illegal aliens. Throwing out a cheap stat like akcheema did without checking the socio economic status of those students of indian origin does not prove anything. Now tahmed and anil have problems with me because I bust their objects of worship, the white man and his capitalistic society, so instead of countering my arguments which they cannot approach, they use ad hominem against me.



The US elite commandeer the pinnacles of global institutions and man the biggest guns to ensure the probability that what they desire happens to the detriment of their opponents, their efforts to that end are quite visible except to their diehard worshippers like tahmed. Someone who makes those plain for all to see and will not be "impartial" to barbarism and will call it evil does not make me either a fanatic or an Islamic fanatic. The fanatics are those that side with the fanatical, racist, quite illiterate Republican Party of the USA, they are those that push the US style of capitalism that will not refrain from destroying the earth for their profits, they are those that due to ego (like YLH and MAJ) will sell the nation to the colonials and feudals, they are the REAL fanatics....."

Regards

PS: The Regards is my own addition. I do not subscribe to the personal assault made on MAJ (pbuh) and Mr. YLH. I am just repeating Masadi sahib verbatin.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#73 Posted by dost_mittar on July 2, 2008 7:58:08 pm


There is no dearth of moderate voices in the community


kuldip nayyar: you can put really expensive lipstick on this pig but it'll still be a pig..

25% of US Muslims under 30 support suicide bombings in some capacity..seriously...whatever the "moderates" are saying, it ain't getting through..

This is a post by ali eteraz...let me do the needful..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/us-muslims-and-suicide-bo_ b_49286.html

Only 40% of all US Muslims believe that Arabs carried out the 9/11 attacks.
25% of US Muslims under 30 support suicide bombings in some capacity.

In fact, a favorite refrain among US Muslims about Bin Laden has been that he manipulated the Islamic sources to justify anarchist political violence. Yet 25% of American Muslim youth -- the future of Ameican Islam -- think political violence of this kind is OK? That is a problem, to say the least.

#72 "how effectively these JI people of al-shams and al-badr have penetrated MQM"

so crap mixed with crap. all you get is more crap.

yasser:

While you have described your experience as a student, it also reflects to some extent the experience of the community in general. There is no dearth of moderate voices in the community, but they are drowned out by the more powerful voices who are supported by the petro-dollars and accentuated by the stupid WOT waged by Bush. Petrodollars have played havoc with the community; while in India and Pakistan, you have all kinds of masjids and mullahs catering to deobandis, barelilvis, shias, sunnis or pirs, in Canada, at least, all masjids seem to be taken over by the wahabis who hire only wahabi imams, the exception being the imam of the little mosque in the prairies in the CBC comedy series.
Unfortunately, political leaders think that these imams can deliver Muslim votes to them and so cater to them instead of the more moderate elements in the community.

Yasser sahib, once again you have highlighted issues with Muslims of Pakistani origin, who have come to the west. Your evaluation and analysis about this group has always been consistent and correct. I just want to add a few lines of my opinions and observations about this group in the US.

In my evaluation, especially for the US, there has been an unusual number of lower income Pakistanis, who have come in this society, through many available US immigration policies. In my opinion, the one item in this policy that has been most detrimental to the US society in the last three decades has been the policy of family reunions. Little did the US policy makers know that in the case of Pakistani Muslims, this could mean reuniting twelve siblings and their families.

As we all know, from Pakistan any “doodhwalla� could hop on a plane and come here on the visitor visa, stay here illegally for a while, and get married to an American citizen, and “viola� he becomes an American citizen. And shortly thereafter, he starts applying for his twelve siblings and their families’ immigration paperwork to get them to the US, which is all perfectly legal, of course.

What has been missing in this process of reuniting the families of immigrants is for the American immigration policy system to evaluate what added social benefit our American society gets with this policy.

Also, in my opinion, those Pakistani muslims who arrived in the 1970’s, were better English speakers and were from a Pakistani society who did not have that level of religiosity amongst them, or maybe because of their low numbers in the US, they assimilated quite liberally. And then all the “rift-rafts� of Pakistan started coming. Actually these days there is a large number of JI amongst the un-suspecting Pakistanis. It seems, now, that JI has a vibrant participation in Pakistani diaspora.

Amongst Mohajirs, I am surprised to see, how effectively these JI people of al-shams and al-badr have penetrated MQM. Amongst Punjabis, it is difficult to identify, but I suspect chowk’s interactor might be one from JI. Of course, you and/or hamidm mian are better able to gauge the interactors on chowk.

ylh: actually it drives indians of the japy persuasion beyond their usual insane level to see their beloved vision since 1947 of Pakistan as a failed state where Ahmedis are treated the way the weak are treated in India being dashed by your presence. So, as a gesture of kindness to them, you should periodically pretend that you are very unhappy with being in Pakistan - this way they may temporarily return from the elevated level to their more normal level of insanity.

(Sigh)

Foolish Yasser trying to appear macho!

(end of sigh)

I do not wish to interact with fools here, but since momineen and their Hindu bed fellows are continuously trying to bring in Ahmadis etc into this, let me say this: when it comes to dogma - Ahmadis are nutcases just like wahabis ... Ahmadis also believe that women ought to be covered head to toe in a burqah and that music is haraam.

So this is not about Ahmadis or any other sect or community try as you may. I do not represent Ahmadis and the only link I had with that community was snapped on Dec 10 last.

Ofcourse that doesn't mean I would stop telling the truth about the discrimination that goes on against them...stop me if you can you sobs.

Now go back to giving each other head for which you guys are world famous (on the internet).

Fullbright lota #12351

Re: # 66

yeah, you are right... a "self-obsessed midget" is what YLH is, no doubt on that...

Behind the sarcasm, That was my point actually. Yasser Mian simply doesn't get it... he just runs his big mouth in all directions, barks up wrong bushes, and generally makes a fool of himself...

he is going to get himself really hurt...

mohar1l,

Your sarcasm is noted but you are giving far more
credit to YLH than he actually deserves.

The Pakistani republican "examples" he cited are
actually not the people to emulate. The "moderate"
son did couple of apperances on Bill Maher's show
and he was uninspiring to say the least - not some
one to emulate. He acted like a lecher and could
barely put a noun and a verb together to speak
coherently.

Had YLH mentioned people like Reza Aslan, I'd have
given YLH and this article some credence but no.

There are Muslim moderates out there who can articulate
a vision for Islam and Muslims (everywhere) as well
as talk intelligently about the history and politics
of the religion as well as the culture of its people.
YLH is a self-obsessed midget who is not one of those
people and neither are the people he cites as
beacon of modernity for the Muslim people.

=====

#64 Posted by mohar1l on July 2, 2008 12:51:52 pm
Re: # 63

hamza is right...

YLH mian - as an ahmedi, you have no right or place to lecture real momins what to do and how to conduct their affairs... if you want to live and be alive in pakiland - you have to follow real bedouinism as practiced by real pakis - you can not peddle your "moderation" stuff, you just can not...

I have told you so many times, you got a big mouth and it's going to get you into serious trouble, sooner or later...

moahr ..so have u taken out that fetus out of ur biwi yet..or still looking for a hanger..besides daughter or no daughter..what chances r that its urs anyway..so u doin the right thin shorty

Re: # 63

hamza is right...

YLH mian - as an ahmedi, you have no right or place to lecture real momins what to do and how to conduct their affairs... if you want to live and be alive in pakiland - you have to follow real bedouinism as practiced by real pakis - you can not peddle your "moderation" stuff, you just can not...

I have told you so many times, you got a big mouth and it's going to get you into serious trouble, sooner or later...

Yasser..i think u r still pissed that not only in pakistan but even in america american muslim community shunned u because of ur own confusion. Getting a lecture from you on how the Muslim community should behave is like getting a fatwa from Bal thackrey about Islam.

your angst is justified, i know you try hard to fit in..but any moron who thinks that asma hasan the opportunist who tries to be the mouthpiece of neo-cons just like u did at rutgers..is some how God's gift to Muslims in america is laughable.....they r irrelevant...just like u were. Our representative orgs are ISNA, CAIR, MAS etc...i know u dont like that would rather have QWSSC (qadiyanis would sell sole for citizenship) be the org that would have the muslim memebership in millions like isna n cair...but life is a bitch ..wat can i say my friend

Simple people of Pakistan are deceived in so many ways..Like

Yasser Latif is " Pakistani " also and " Hamdani " also ..

Yasser Latif is Muslim also and Westernized Ahmadi also..

Syed Yousaf Raza is Gillani also and Pakistani also..

Yousaf Raza is a Muslim also and Westernized Pir also

Dawn is a Muslim newspaper also and publish anti muslim crap of Cowasjee also..

Dawn staff pretend to be Muslim also but instigate and provoke Westerners against Muslims also

Musharraf is a zani womanizer, Sharabi alcoholic , a dog lover also and a Muslim head of a Muslim country also

Can we say that People of Pakistan are deceivers also and deceived also .. ??

Re: # 46

ms supersize,

..... i think you will make a fine fourth wife for a momin ... you might have to put up with a light beating now and then for making his tea too hot or his porridge too cold, but it is a small price to pay to keep the moon god (aka allah mian) happy ..... as long as you don't insist on being treated like a person and don't have too many headaches, you will be fine, inshallah .....

Re: # 43 Posted by akcheema on July 2, 2008 5:27:23 am

akcheema sahib,

{like I said before...I am anti-US policies too....does that make me an Islamist?}

NO, that makes you an ignorant person. This country still has the best foreign policy towards the muslim world generally, and towards Pakistan in particular.

Sir, you are just not a well-read person.

What is the punishment for adultery according to Sharia Law.Any one?

There are all types of Muslim communities in US. If you limit yourself to dhaiR eent ki masjid and its mullah then of course you'll be disappointed--but at the same time THERE ARE a lot of volunteer/outreach organizations within Muslim communities who reach out to other communities be it of different religion/elasticity. It's only a matter of trying to find an organization where you feel you are a fit.

The way I see it is that there are all types of muslims migrated to US from various countries with various backgrounds. Most of them are just simple worshipers and all they want to do is just go to a mosque and worship and be part of the identity--so most mainstream mosques will cater to their needs. It's like supply and demand. It is true that when it comes to religion (any religion) most emphasis by worshipers is put on just worshiping/spiritual or identity part of it--the other aspects require more ambitions and practical efforts. And that fact is evident from your experience.

SupersizeMe,

Ao-Pao = Americans Of Pakistani Origin i.e. mostly clueless types. Just thought I should explain because you're new to the Chowklish language!

#48 Posted by akcheema,

Oh actually I don't read all posts, you see, and I thought supersize was just another Ao-Pao ... but obviously I was wrong. My loss. She's a great addition to Chowk, and an anathema for murtids as I see from her posts ... :)

Re: # 49

Khuda Hafiz tahmed sahib.....always a pleasure but late I am afraid

Re: # 52; and supersize

do check with your "brethren" what they think of YOUR version of this wishy-washy shariah you speak off!....I am afraid they want to go the whole hog!!

Re: # 46; supersize
(you seem to be following me around from post to post dont you?)

Chance'd be a fine thing!!

cheema sahib,
i have a life to get on with and will not sit here dissecting bits of info excerpted from hither and tither just because you refuse to believe sharia law is anything beyond one or two overbearing mullah's you may have met.
sharia law is actually a common sense law system which is quite the practical and common sense whilst meeting the sensibilities of muslim living, it would even crack down on all these rishwat systems that go on and other complaints that we have nowadays. how individuals implement it is another thing altogether.

and yes i have many shia friends and treat them with respect, in fact i dont like dividing up sects in islam, i just accept that there are those that wont necessarily agree with me, and i them. the prophet (pbuh) didn't follow any sect and i choose to follow their example. God knows best :)

thanks tahmed32; i couldn't agree more!

Re: # 49; tahmed sahib

may be you are right...who knows?

we all make and live with our individual judgements afterall; only thing is (just like all the "faiths" in the world)...they can't all be right

where is hamidm sahib when you need him?

Re: # 46; supersize sahiba

before you do any of that....I believe there are a hell of a lot of questions I put to you guys in my post No 42....do work on them for me won't you?.....and give us the wisdom of your "literacy".

Regards

#45 cheema sahib: islamic fanatics will be a footnote to history. i have always maintained this. They lack broad popular support (as witnessed in elections), they have no ideas to offer (burning girls schools, burning videos, ramming planes full of people into buildings full of people, defacing posters, putting suicide belts on dimwits are not particularly inspiring or constructive ideas!!). And they lack physical strength of the kind that Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan or Soviet Russia possessed when they challenged the democratic nations of the world.

that of course does not mean we should ignore them - it simply means that we should demand that the government not make a meal out of it (as musharraf was doing when using terrorists as his job security) but to go after them the way the FBI went after the mafia.

I am looking beyond these "religious" thugs and focussing on what YLH writes about "secular" Pakistanis who also refuse to learn anything outside books in the US (and about the "secular" Pakistanis you mentioned below in UK who also refuse to step out of their mental ghettoes).

this is usually the time when Zee introduces me to the new-comers!

Re: # 46; supersize sahiba

would you care to quote examples from the last 1400 (or so)years of history perhaps?

and if you do insist on including the first 40-50 years of the 'salaf', please do consult with your Shia brethren first......they are your brethren aren't they?....or are you one of them yourself?....then you are at an even greater disadvantage I am afraid

Re: # 42

akcheema, hi again, you seem to be following me around from post to post dont you?
religious groups are one thing ideot, the but a country living under guidance from sharia law (which doesn't bite) is actually positive!
you're obviously ill-educated as to what a sharia government actually entails, go do some research.

for 'literates' here on chowk a hell of a lot of you are ignorant!

Re: # 44; tahmed sahib

you wrote in your post;
(it is not Islam that makes Masadi what he is, but his own problems.)

that implies what I thought it implied!

and NO I donot think religion is the only form of fanatacism there is but increasingly in OUR TIMES it is!

wake up and smell the Starbucks....oh wait; I heard they are slowly closing down.....sorry it'd have to be instant!

cheema sahib #43 "I don't think masadi sahib can be classed as an "islamic fanatic" by any standards....so why you keep going at"

That is exactly what I am saying: all fanatics (or unreasoning individuals of any other kind) are not islamic. nor even religious!! and merely presenting masadi as an example. other examples abound on chowk (i mentioned jay thakeray below).

You seem to see religion as the root of all evil, and thus are having difficulty grasping this concept.

Re: # 40; tahmed sahib

I don't think masadi sahib can be classed as an "islamic fanatic" by any standards....so why you keep going at it I donot know

opposing the US is NOT the same as Islamism! or is it?

like I said before...I am anti-US policies too....does that make me an Islamist?

Re: # 38 & 39 (Bulleya and Supersizeme)

is this some sort of convention of the wally-brains??!

Here they go....and these are just a few examples:

(with the quran as its only source, islam became such a simple religion that anyone could understand it....with the quran being so abstract, anyone could fit it into his/her life......)

so who provides the guidance on matters of a religious nature? one can just make things up as one goes? how does that fit in within the concept of the coherent running of the affairs of the state? and if that "process of learning" leads to people such as "the learned"; what are they if not the "precursors" of the clergy?

(for example, the quran doesn't even describe a way to say one's prayers......the quran is mostly stories (joseph, noah etc.) and abstract direction......be good, don't lie, give charity etc.....this information is so abstract that you can interpret it into many differnt ways......)

when something can be "interpreted" in so many different ways without someone overseeing the proceedings, what sort of a system or world does one envisage....that of total anarchy??

(.....getting rid of a clergy is not so easy.....islam did it theoretically, however it could not do so practically.....)

are you sure you are talking about a "way of life" prescribed by the "Creator of this almost infinite universe"; how could some'one' of that calibre make a mistake?? and give us something He knew (through his omniscience) to falter....sooner or later?

Supersize sahiba says:

(this is the reason i dont join religious groups, practicing our faith is a journey we take on our own, but yes we should be sociable and be ambassadors for our faith but the thought of groups and groupies is just.)

after stating that, howcome I see you advocating an Islamic system of government on another board here?? If you are never part of any group and "taking the journey alone", why does the whole nation have to travel with you?

#37 Posted by VRV on July 2, 2008 4:38:27 am

There'd a Gay Bar for Malayasians in New York but there'd NOT be one in Kualalumpur (sic).

anil sahib #23: greetings. you say "Religion is a regressive force by nature. It wants a person to believe in somethings, and not challenge those things. "

I think you make the mistake of personifying religion. And thus making religion the "regressive force" rather than the person himself. Thus - to use this example, it was nt religion that was nothing holding back YLH from spending more time learning about and from Americans rather than hanging out with Pakistanis. Just as it is not religion that is responsible for all the negativity and regressive things you see on chowk - it is not hinduism that makes Jay thakeray what he is, but his own problems. Similarly, it is not Islam that makes Masadi what he is, but his own problems.

As I was saying, as a student, I used the time to become familiar with Americans and their culture rather than hang out with "fellow Pakistanis" - and I dont think I was breaking any islamic laws in the process. Indeed, I was merely beng consistent with what the prophet supposedly said about "seek education even if you have to go to China". And education doesnt mean reading books only by any means!!

great article!
this is the reason i dont join religious groups, practicing our faith is a journey we take on our own, but yes we should be sociable and be ambassadors for our faith but the thought of groups and groupies is just.. well not my thing, and thanks for confirming my reasons why.

i dont wear a hijaab but do dress demurely and decently, one can be stylish and cover oneself at the same time, would you believe that?
i believe that being a better believer and a better human being is more important than a piece of cloth covering your hair, but of course that doesn't excuse my not wearing it and i'm certainly no perfect muslim saint.
but this asra female, she is weird.

on another note though, i dont believe we should be so disrespectful to the teachers, i will always be grateful to those who taught me arabic, the qur'an, namaz... i am in no position to disrespect their efforts.

eklavya #: "Why don't Muslims just get rid of this clergy? This class is NOT sanctioned in Islam.....I would really appreciate a serious answer..."

...if you study islam as a philosophy, setting it aside as a religion, i.e. you don't worry about whether it was created by man or God, you will notice two aspects of it, which are very appealing to anyone who is on the lower rung of the social ladder......

1. it carries egalitarianism as its basis, i.e. all mulsims line up in the same row, even today, in a mosque, regardless of cast, creed, wealth, status, ethnicities etc.

2. it gets rid of the clergy and declares every muslim to be equal in the eyes of God, with a direct line to God.....anyone who converts to islam can lead the prayers in ka'aba immediately.....

...it was on the basis of these two concepts that muhammad carried out a massive social revolution in his time.....both these ideas are bound to appeal to the downtrodden masses...

islam is, thus, a religion which goes bottom up....it empowers the lower strata of society and weakens the top (religious and social) strata....it did not separate church and state......it actually got rid of the church all together......

for the past 10 years, i have been to the mosque, perhaps once....i do not follow any religious scholar or imam etc. within islam.....i sit and study it in my own time, and have interpreted it, the best i can, based on my knowledge......according to islam, i am as good a muslim as the next guy.......

there is no history of any clerical figure holding any prominent position in the first days of islam......muhammad was a salesman, his wife a businesswomen......the first four caliphs were businesmen, statesmen, soldiers etc....

.....with the quran as its only source, islam became such a simple religion that anyone could understand it....with the quran being so abstract, anyone could fit it into his/her life......

this made it impossible for anyone in islam to establish himself/herself in any position of power using religion....

....however, this did not last long....around 200+ years after the death of muhammad, the first books of hadith started coming in......the content of these books far outnumbers the content of the quran...

this added another layer to the religion, which complicated its simplicity......now a person had to study all these books if he wanted to understand religion.....

then, certain people made it a profession to further elaborate their views on these hadith (and quran)......this created such a huge volume of information that religion changed from what it was supposed to be, i.e. a simple book which anyone could understand to volumes and volumes of information, which required degrees to absorb......

.....this resulted in the re-birth of the clergy......the clergy, like most clergies, then secured itself by not allowing open debate on islam......in addition, it passed further rulings, even on specific subjects, which totally diluted the simplicity of the quran......this complicated the religion further.....

the quran itself states that religion is completed with the quran - a statement by muhammad on his last pilgrimage....it never sanctions any clergy and encourages its readers to read and discover......the first verse of the quran was, "Read in the name of thy Lord.".......

it doesn't say read just the quran......it says read.....read anything.......

however, with the emergence of hadith and then the tons of volumes of literature, which used it as its base, islam, now, at least in my opinion, is totally different from what it was meant to be.......

for example, the quran doesn't even describe a way to say one's prayers......the quran is mostly stories (joseph, noah etc.) and abstract direction......be good, don't lie, give charity etc.....this information is so abstract that you can interpret it into many differnt ways......

now the clergy is well entrenched because as no common person can figure out the extremely complex religion they have turned islam into.....

.....getting rid of a clergy is not so easy.....islam did it theoretically, however it could not do so practically.....

if computers become simple, us computer scientists would not have job....if religion becomes simple, clergy will not have a job......hence the clergy has huge interests in keeping the relgion complicated.....

'...Asra went on to publish her own “Islamic Bill of Rights� which included the right to consensual pre-marital sex..'

This reminds me of a joke told by David Letterman in one of his Late Shows.

There'd a Gay Bar for Malayasians in New York but there'd be one in Kualalumpur (sic).

...i think the ideal model american citizens of pakistani origin are hamidm and urstruly....

they have made america their home and despite having many opportunities available to them in pakistan, remain totally loyal to the usa....

the usa needs more immigrants like hamidm and urstruly.....

YLH

Honest, progressive very well written article.

I do have one reservation, why not ask the simple question: Does religion have any place on campus? This infatuation with religion is expressed in the title of your article and the well intentioned orgnaization setup. Therefore, you too sir share some responsibility.

Well written, Yasser. I especially liked this bit, because I often wonder why they bother myself.
"a Muslim community in a Non-Muslim majority country leaves very little room to operate for its adherents. The cruelest victims of this are the international students in the US who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars only to have an experience that is little better than attending a school or college in their own country."

I would venture so far as to say that a Muslim woman in a low cut dinner dress or a mini-skirt might be a better Muslim than a Niqabi or a Hijabi if she honestly applies Quranic principles of honesty, justice and equity in her daily life.

ur manifesting striptease..??
the scholars aren't outdated but not updated..

there exists a 'section' which encourages peaceful sublime pursuance of knowledge in every realm..
if it doesn't make to the mainstream media..
it's not their fault..they don't get ads..

that is what..

On the totem pole of curses, the ill-educated educated of Pakistan rank much higher than anyone else. I think at the top of the totem pole are the scum lawyers and thug judges of Pakistan. They all deserve a daily dose of chitrol just in case they get any ideas. So, more chitrol all around for them.

Now, coming back to this article by YLH. Few weeks ago, poor YLH was taken to task for an anonymous article that he claims he didn't pen. It's very possible that YLH wasn't the author but nevertheless he was raked over coals for it. Is it possible that this article is an act of passive-aggressive vengeance by maulana YLH? Things that make you go 'hmmm'.

Matloob Sahib, it IS a curse. This is what one doesn't get. Why can't the educated, resourceful, powerful Muslims just get rid of this clearly anti-Islamic element from within their midst?

One can understand the situation in India. Why not simply ban them outright in Pakistan? Will that cause a rebellion from the masses in defense of this anti-Islam element? Are the educated, powerful, and rich people afraid of this mass rebellion?

What lies at the base of the power of the universally-hated Mullah who is everywhere Muslims say he shouldn't be and who shows no sign of going away anywhere?!

If its true that better educated Muslims don't listen to Mullahs, then education may be the answer...

Re: # 28
Eklavya sahib
This ill-educated clergy is a huge curse, and almost every other Mullah appears to be forming a clique of their own with their own ill or mis-understood basics about Islam.
A friend of mine from India told me a funny real story which was not funny to him, in the villages in India some of the not so literate people don't know how to sacrifice a chicken in the prescribed manner, so they go to the Mullah of their village, this Mullah charges them a nominal fee to slaughter the bird, but he never teaches them how to properly slaughter.
Such is the condition of these Mullahs when it comes to continued receipt of blessings, how can you expect such screwed up leadership to educate the masses with the right things.

A bunch of Pakistani expatriates in USA attempted to become the "Collective Bargaining Agent" for the "Republican" and some for the "Democratic Party" as well in the era that you refer to, and it was all based on their individual inspirations for personal professional gains that adopted the role of savior due to which they brought upon the entire nation the rule of lesser Bush.
Same hypocritical games that people play in Pakistan's feudal politics where they go within their influence circles and command their people to vote because they are hoping for gains if their candidates or parties are elected.
Please dont bring that dirty politics of Pakistan to USA here each person needs to determine who they wish to vote for instead of being collectively bargained for like a herd of cattle.

Matloob Sahib

Why don't Muslims just get rid of this clergy? This class is NOT sanctioned in Islam. No Muslim I know likes cleargy. Clergy are the root of all trouble in Islam. Why don't Muslims just ban them, drive them away?

These aren't the most educated people, nor the richest, nor the most powerful politically. They don't win elections, and are clearly an anti-Islamic element everywhere.

Are they so powerful and so ubiquitous only because the uneducated and uninformed Muslims like them? But there must be many things that uneducated and uninformed Muslims like that other more educated and more informed Muslims have, nevertheless, been able to get rid of!

I would really appreciate a serious answer, because something big seems to be missing, given that the Mullahs are everywhere and constantly cause so much problems for Muslims...

Is there any organization that is actually even fighting this enemy?

Re: # 22
Education in the west isn't just about the classroom instruction or the laboratories and research. It is an opportunity to meet students and thinkers from all over the world."

Thats so true.

Main-streaming begins at home, home that is Pakistan where a lot of streamlining needs to be done before finding a common ground main-stream.
If in 60 years we have not mainstreamed ourselves in our very own homeland, what else can we expect.

A plain and simple equation: Clergy+Islam=Turmoil

If an individual cant read and understand a Do-it-yourself book they cant do anything else, its all in there if one is sincere in their search and approach.

Re: # 1
Beej sahib
"Note: In my view, the rights of the Muslim immigrants are made safe in the same manner in the USA as are the rights of all immigrants – by such immigrants immersing themselves inside the American mainstream, by appreciating this country, and watching out for its interests and well-being as much as any American. It is a mistake for Muslims (and others) to bring in the hostilities, prejudices and other baggage from “back home�!

You condensed it all in a very articulate passage, thank you.

BTW: Mullahs in my own personal opinion are those who impose themselves as scholars and are basically illiterate and ill educated in their very own subjects, those who are scholarly in the real sense don't go around throwing their two cents worth here there and everywhere without asking and never impose themselves on others. It is very important for a Muslim to learn his faith at their very own initiative otherwise it becomes quite contaminated specially with the help of a Mullah.

Re: # 23

Please read

"Blinds then find" in the following as

"Blinds then fight".

My apologies.

Re: # 7

Tahmed sahib:

"..Case in point: our own Mr. Masadi whose views on religion are reasonable.."

I will give you a chance to defend your above statement.
Allow me to give a non-Muslim non-religious person's perspective. I would try to avoid making it personal to Massaddi Mian; as such people are found in all societies.
These persons have very narrow and rigid outlook. They prematurely define their enemy - rightly or wrongly, as if it is binary world. They define the narrow path (7th century to Mills in case of Massaddi Mian), as if anything else will destroy them. They close their mind with an obsession. On the good side many people with traits do become very successful entrepreneurs too if their enemy, path and obsessions are correct and convert their energies in relentless pursuit of their goal.

Elites are not enemy outside Massaddi Mian’s quixotic mind. Elitism is integral part of each society (Islamic during Mohammad's time included) for a reason. Elites are defined as those who have or know something more than the others.

Thus Massaddi Mian can be called an elite too. His need to define his enemy is his obsession. Although, it would be a sad reality.

Religion is a regressive force by nature. It wants a person to believe in somethings, and not challenge those things. This brings an inertia which has some spiritual and curative values too. Its value outside the personal mind space becomes very limited, as the world around us constantly changes. Religions never had and will never have any progressive solutions.

People like Massaddi Mians fail to see that this dichatomy forces an imbalance. When Islam's message was powerful, it was indeed a force that brought huge changes.

Interestingly it was not a religion then, unless you want to call computer a religion too. By the time, a belief system / order becomes a religion, it is no longer is a force of change to better in society-at-large. Unless someone fails to see the reality of what is becoming of the land and people in Islamic countries and insist that for taking them back to Stone Age non-Muslim world is responsible. Who is acting and who is reacting in such vicious circle is impossible to separate. Even history only records the victors. If Muslims of Pakistan and Iran are proud Muslims, then it only proves that the victors get the followers few hundred years later.

“Eye for an Eye� makes us all blind.

This indeed is a powerful saying, no matter who spoke it, Gandhi or not, and Yasser’s feelings about Gandhi notwithstanding.

Blinds then find, that is why many see this take the Islamic countries back to stone age, or economies in non-muslim world to its knees plus whatever else Bush & Co thinks.

Many believers of a religion refuse to accept that, their religions must belong in their personal space. Massaddi Mians are no exception. They want to use it as the reforming force. It is unnecessary to put a black tent or hijab on someone else or grow a Choti on their head. If it has a fashion value then let it be a personal choice.

Therefore, the use a book, injunctions or sermons to defend or attack such practices is counterproductive.

Yasser, a moderate, liberal and secular starts his reasoning with. “For the most part, Quran does not regulate a believer’s everyday life with an intention to choke him..� To a non-Muslim, this seems very odd that such a person must start his reasoning from a 7th century book. I have heard many Hindus and Christians do it, but they will not be moderate, liberal or secular. Yasser may certainly have his reasons. However, he fails to see that this need to start reasoning from 7th century book is differently viewed by non-Muslim majority in the world.

Even Islamic reformers (liberals) seem to act on the defensive, and hence their voices are drowned - Yasser doing so to Asra Nomani. Cliftonbridge, a very smart thinker, elsewhere was talking about “mainstreaming� in Pakistan. Shouldn’t it be tolerant and inclusive pluralist identities as the basis of identity more accurate? This social order cannot be imposed, but allowed to evolve.

Even if Islam’s believers do not recognize the futility to use these instruments to attack or deny such practices, non-Muslim majority in the world see it as very odd. Buddha when he reformed Hindu thoughts and practices were hardly on defensive, for that matter Mohammad was hardly defensive. Islam's reforms can come at a time when a huge wealth of the world is getting transferred to Islamic world, but first the believers have to allow the definition of reform to come from the within.

The changes will come, Massaddi Mians of the Islamic societies need to rethink who they are first and what is there level of tolerance.

Some of the points raised by Yasser cut across religious boundaries. The desire to continue to stick to one's own community is quite strong among other communities as well. I see Chinese people hanging out with their friends from Beijing and Shanghai, desis hanging out with other desis etc.

Education in the west isn't just about the classroom instruction or the laboratories and research. It is an opportunity to meet students and thinkers from all over the world.

Still one of the biggest regrets I have is that I spent way too much time with the Muslim community there instead of reaching out and fully immersing myself in American mainstream.

Apparently you did so at your own free will since no one can impose on anyone not only in USA but anywhere in the world. America is the so-called melting pot and if you feel that you remained unable to immerse in the mainstream it was only due to your very own resilience.

While all ethnic and religious communities have a limiting effect, a Muslim community in a Non-Muslim majority country leaves very little room to operate for its adherents.

Once again adopting Islam as faith and adopting Muslim community is based on one’s free will, it is up to one who they identify themselves with.
Evidently you come from a Muslim background so you stuck with the Muslim community at least for the most part as understood from your writing.
You happen to be a lawyer and must be aware of the court room ethics and discipline as well as those of the Bars, when you present yourself to represent your clientele in the court, you are expected to dress yourself in an appropriate attire prescribed for practicing lawyers, as well as it is a known fact that meticulous dressing plays a big role in the court room, and I am sure you abide by all the written and unwritten in this regard. You must also know that when in the court room you weigh your statements and size them appropriately in order not to volunteer information that may be self-incriminating and cannot use filthy street language when addressing the presiding official of the court. Now this is a human being just like you and me however those presenting themselves in the court room observe all such practices so as not to compromise their matters, I urge you to compare this with the most supreme the Almighty whose bounties are unlimited, you don’t wish to lose a case there while HE is the final authority over all human acts good, bad and ugly; therefore why should not one be as submissive to such a high authority as Almighty Allah? After all HE has promised great rewards for those who are submissive and compliant.
In my four decades of residency in USA I personally find this country to be the best example of what should be expected from a practical Islamic State. Yes there are those anywhere who transgress and attempt to impose but this is where one’s wisdom comes into play as to how they decide at to what extent they are able to submit to such subjects.
Being a father of 3 and grandfather of 2 (one of them being the same age as yourself) who are all born and raised here in USA observing all that is required to be a Muslim including appropriate covering & hijab at their own free will without having been imposed by either of us parents, I take pride in their ability to do so as well as I take pride in being a citizen of a nation where everyone minds their own business and can practice their choice of faith without having to point fingers at others.
This is in my opinion a perfect Islamic environment, since Allah SWT has blessed us humans with a brain and the ability to decide and determine as to what is good and what is bad and progress accordingly refraining from bad or evil and improving our submission to Allah SWT in accordance with HIS commandments, this is what is referred to as TAQWA while each individual strives their best to achieve a better level of TAQWA. According to Islamic faith everyone is accountable for their own acts and deeds and after learning to distinguish good from bad one should be able to practice independently, however it is an act of kindness and a good deed if one believer reminds the other to remain steadfast commensurate with their level of acquaintance and should not transgress.

Not meaning to blame anyone but I suspect that you were not in the right company during your stay in USA.
Regardless, with the faith that you follow one should be able to distinguish and sort out without depriving themselves.
With my vast involvement and experience I am not sure where you got the impression that Hijab is a major issue in the USA, NO, it is not true, as a matter of fact a majority of state laws allow even the driver’s license picture with Hijab on, there is full acceptance of Hijab and dress codes recognized in the Federal , State & Local Government employment rules as well as most major commercial organizations recognize use of Hijab by Muslim women and no one discriminates a Hijabi from performing her duties in Hijab.
It is another thing that you are an admirer of a low cut cleavage demonstrating and mini (so-called dinner dress)dress code, but that is your preference.
However you must remember that as long as you practice law, you must appear in the court room dressed in accordance with the prescribed attire, similarly one who wishes to be identified as a Muslim should prescribe to the appropriate dress code prescribed in clear words in the scripture and if you fail to understand the prescription then either you seek the assistance of a scholar or end up with a Mullah to re-stat e it to you, that is if you care to be considered a Muslim.
Unless your article is meant to trigger some hidden agenda of yours, such a production appears to be overly compromising and undermining to the entire ummah residing in the USA and other western nations and I can only suggest that authors of such articles should think twice before being of such dis-service to their very own faith, while I can only suspect.

"Their parents, immigrants from Pakistan, are successful professionals who have long associated themselves with the Republican Party for which they have been booed by the Muslim community."

Majority of Americans don't like republicans these days so blaming Pakistanis for "booeing" these republican boot lickers is not surprising.

Another reason why YLH's article is HOG WASH!

Wow! I thought, a decent write up with no references to the G-man. How mistaken I was!!

Despite that, a well argued write up. Good one Yasser!

No one has heard of your little "revolt". Nobody had "hijacked" any US college orgs while you were sucking on a pipe in some Lebanese joint. Stop acting like your some "Neo" who's going to wake people up from their sleep. Pup'poo, life doesn't imitate the Hollywood flick The Matrix.

"An even better approach is that of the Hasan family- more notably Asma Gul Hasan – a lawyer and author- and Muhammad Ali Hasan- a budding Republican politician."

I saw young "Hasan" on Bill Maher's show many moons ago. He was salivating at some blonde female guest acting like a little horn dog. Great example you cited. It proves that your article is nothing but HOG WASH!

YLH,

besides your mysterious Gandhi fixation you have this

uncanny ability to convey the right message but to the

wrong people.

I must be getting bitter in my old age and all I can

add is "Don't waste your efforts".

Are you really talking about all American Muslims, or

just Muslims in America from Pakistan?

A very interesting bunch, I might add.


Ras

They will not listen....

cheema sahib: no sir, i was getting ready to call it a day. unlike australia, it is approaching midnight here. i just sent out an email, and am off to bed.

Yet in the US and other western countries, the issue of Hijab is of fundamental importance.

umm..not it's not...not in the US..the US won't pass laws banning the hijab..that goes against the rights of the individual...if women are stopped from wearing the tent niqab, it's because of laws that were passed to prevent the KKK from marching in their white sheet garb..laws that prevent people from wearing clothing that conceals their face..

25% of young american muslims think suicide bombing is ok...yup...1 in 4..

and then there's this being taught in the saudi academy in fairfax..yes..fairfax as in dulles airport is here fairfax..

obviously you won't hear a peep about this from the supposedly liberal and moderate muslim ex-profs..

The academy - a 900-student private school with campuses in Alexandria and Fairfax - has been the subject of renewed scrutiny after an investigation by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom found that textbooks used in the school contained passages that blame Jews for "discord" and say it is sometimes permissible to kill non-Muslims.

The passages found in the review include a 12th-grade Koranic interpretation textbook that states it is permissible for a Muslim to kill those who have left the faith and one that says "the Jews conspired against Islam and its people."

Re: # 12; tahmed sahib

is that a polite way of asking me to leave sir??

and g'day to you too!

dr sahib: on that note...have a g'day. as they say in australia. :-)

Re: # 10;tahmed sahib

fair enough.......point (re # 7 & 10) taken

akcheema: I dont think my post makes it appear that what you wrote was a dig at me. Like I said, you make basically valid points, and I was merely directing your attention to a gap in what you wrote.

You talk about "blame". However, I am not talking about blame or applause for the US or the west. What I am talking about is learning from the west.

That is what progressive nations do - learn from one another. And progressive societies look for and appreciate positive things in other societies, rather than look for way to place blame or find fault. And that is what anyone living in a new country should be doing. That is what I am saying.

Re: # 7; tahmed sahib

I should have included a 'disclaimer' I think! It wasn't so much a dig at YOU but all the so-called 'liberals' around within the Pakistani community......I don't know masadi sahib that well and quite frankly, apart from initially when I first joined up, don't read what he writes (and he is not the only one I don't read so again..not personal).

I don't think it is all black and white with the US; I don't agree with a lot of US policies but one way or the other, the answers to our problems would have to come from our own collective introspection.......blaming outsiders doesn't solve the problems that are rooted 'within'.

I don't see any condemnation on these boards of what went on (and is still going on) in Sudan; same as I don't see anything about the appauling way our Pakistani and Indian brethren are treated in the middle-east....I am talking about the labor class here. Because the perpetrators happen to be muslim?? or is there another reason.

When we talk about social evils in our societies, why is it that all (including yourself) start chanting ad-hominems about similar (or worse) events in the non-muslim world?

and before the Indians have any ideas, there is plenty I can say on that too......this seems to have become a forum where the citizens (and ex-citizens)of two third rate countries regain some individual self-esteem by digging up dirt at one another.

#6 very funny, Kumar sahib. :-) That is not what I meant though.

cheema sahib #5 nice to hear from you. what you say is largely valid. However, while agreeing with your basic point ("religion plays a major part (in muslims not mixing the local community)") I hasten to point out (as you would guess!!) that just saying this does not solve the problem.

Case in point: our own Mr. Masadi whose views on religion are reasonable and do not fall in the category of mullahism by any means, and yet is obsessed with portraying the US as being the problem behind everything, and not part of the solution.

So, while your theory may explain the "Mr. Urstruly Phenomenon" (which first struck to keep muslims backward at the time of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan) no doubt, could you please explain how your theory explain Mr. Masadi sir? He may be an extreme case, but "unlightened moderates" like him about (starting from Musharraf who cleverly painted the US as being the problem rather than trying to explain to Pakistanis the very real menace of al qaeda) abound in Paksitan.

Re: # 5

Cheema sahib, you did not read TAhmed’s narration carefully. You have to read his lines and you also have to read between his lines. Let me help you by reproducing his (rather cryptic) post with the “between-the-lines� part inserted within parentheses for your convenience!

From TAhmed:

When I came as a student and (was afraid nobody would hire me so I) thought I would go back after 2 years (plus maybe 3-4 more if I could stretch it into a Ph.D. program), I purposely immersed myself in the American community by joining a student coop (because I would have been otherwise too much of a chicken). And was rewarded (and I won’t tell you about the sex part (since Mrs. Tauheed is looking over my shoulders (hush!))) by quickly learning a lot of things (especially the things I am not going to tell you about because of understandable (wink) reasons) many Pakistanis never learn even after spending a lifetime in the US (but took me just one night!).

Re: # 2; tahmed sahib,(please don't take this personally; it is my way of addressing an issue I consider very important in this context).

In the UK, some people have spent all their adult lives there and some still can't speak more than a few words of English! Its disgraceful.

What you describe, in the context of first generation migrants, is a minority amongst a good 80% of Pakistanis in Britain who came in the 1960s. They live in these self-styled ghettos and it makes my blood boil when some have the audacity to blame all that on the country they live in!

Some Mirpuris have built "kothis" back home but live under appauling conditions in inner city areas. The difference between them and an equivalent Indian is very apparent. In recent surveys on tertiary institution representations of various ethnic groups, the Indians were 11% of the total intake, way above their white compatriots; Pakistanis and Bangladeshis were the lowest in the league. Other Muslim groups were pretty similar (only their populations are relatively small, though increasing).

Unfortunately, contrary to your previous assertions on the matter, it can't all be put down to the educational background of the parents (as they can be very similar in the two groups mentioned above) but religion plays a major part here. One can deny it 'til the cows come home but the reality is staringly obvious. Issues of "female sexuality" are the cause; they might learn something they weren't meant to etc! An interacter here highlighted this with a personal remark about me when I asked how they'd react if their own daughter would develop ideas contrary to their own....predictably the response I got was that a "kangaroo from down-underwear" couldn't possibly comprehend how "muslim girls" are supposed to be brought up! (taught WHAT TO THINK rather than HOW TO THINK!!).

As for Yasser's point about people from minority groups trying to get together because of common roots etc, that is a very valid point indeed. If I were to join a "muslim" group of one kind or another, the purpose is far from Islam itself..it is more to get together socially with people of similar ethnicities, share 'gup shup' and talk about similar cultural experiences from the past. Unfortunately in Britain the Pakistani identity is so intertwined with that of its religiousity, its not funny. A christian (Pakistani) friend of mine HAD to join a local christian group (majority white) that he had very little cultural commonality with, mainly because the only thing discussed in various Pakistani get-togethers was ...you got it...Islam.

Some so-called 'liberals' are those who would be happy (and eager!) enough to date girls from other backgrounds but would jealously protect the "honour" of their own sisters/daughters etc to do the same.....I am sure, if I have read you right, you may well fall into this category!! (please correct me if I am wrong here). You "immersed" yourself in something (God only knows what) and came up with this 'personal' version of Islam to satisfy your spiritual needs (nothing wrong with that)....because let's face it, the only reason you are "convinced" about the verasity of your "faith" is your 'introduction' and 'respect' for it taught in early years of life....and try as you may, you can't/won't relinquish that come what may.......even if you turned an atheist at heart, you'd find a valid explanation for it in the "good Book"!......what an implausibly flexible book that is!

Wait, there was Evelyn's and then there was the Cedar, which was closer to Douglass campus

"...The progressive movement in the American Muslim community thus kicked off one evening (fall of 2000) over Sheesha in a quaint little Lebanese café on Easton Ave in New Brunswick...."

Yassir, was it Evelyn's Cedar?

"Still one of the biggest regrets I have is that I spent way too much time with the Muslim community there instead of reaching out and fully immersing myself in American mainstream- as I ought to have done as an international student studying in the most scientifically and technologically advanced country in the world."

Excellent point. When I came as a student and thought I would go back after 2 years, I purposely immersed myself in the American community by joining a student coop. And was rewarded by quickly learning a lot of things many Pakistanis never learn even after spending a lifetime in the US.

Yasser, what I do not get about Islam is –

(1) all the talk about liberal, progressive, peace-loving Islam comes from individual adherents who do not have a training in religion,

(2) Those who immerse themselves more and more into Islam start quoting the Book’s verses and become stricter and stricter in interpretation,

(3) the more immersed a person becomes in Islam, the more Mullah-like he/she becomes.

(4) if Mullahs are wrong and without support of the folks (especially in the USA where the educated “elite� supposedly live) then why do the lay people allow them such power? Are the mullahs supermen?

(5) where is the deep, driving desire among the Muslim masses for change in the status quo – (a) status of women, (b) apostasy laws, (c) according to other religions the same rights and privileges that Muslims expect for themselves in the countries where Muslims form a minority?

Disclaimer: I am aware of some of the commendable stances you took while at Rutgers (including against one Ramzi Ahmed Yousef) and there is no intention to belittle the same!

Note: In my view, the rights of the Muslim immigrants are made safe in the same manner in the USA as are the rights of all immigrants – by such immigrants immersing themselves inside the American mainstream, by appreciating this country, and watching out for its interests and well-being as much as any American. It is a mistake for Muslims (and others) to bring in the hostilities, prejudices and other baggage from “back home�!