The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism

shammi #124 ``dowry deaths are now treated very seriously (burden of proof has shifted to the in-laws in the case of any suspicious deaths)``

I dont think dowry deaths are as common in Pakistan as in India. There are of course ``honor killings`` by fathers and brothers of women who marry against their wishes, and while these get a lot of press they are restricted to certain areas and are not that large in number in think (if for no other reason than the fact that it is obviously harder for a father to kill a child in the name of tradition than for a bridegroom to kill a recently married stranger, and the profit motive that drives dowry killings is also missing, as is the fact that while a spouse is replacable a grown up daughter is not).

``and now women are struggling to get to get 1/3 of Parliamentary seats set aside for women.`` In Pakistan they already got them - 1/3 incumbents the local governments have to be women.

I dont mind India-Pakistan competition in the road to progress, and it is in that spirit that I present the above. I recognize of course that it is a long road we have to travel before a decent life can be lived by the majority of women.

I remain convinced though that the biggest enemy we have in India and Pakistan is poverty - fix that and a lot of social evils get fixed.

Yehuda #138 Israel and Pakistan are the only countries in the world formed in the name of providing a homeland for people of a certain religion. One can question the rationale behind this (my Indian brothers on chowk would no doubt have lots to say on this), but the fact is that they are both here and they are not going away and dont need any rationale for their existence any more.

My question (and you should be a knowledgable person as a lawyer from Israel on this) then is: What is the relationship of ``religious law`` as determined by the rabbis to the laws passed by the legislature? How do you reconcile the two?

This is a big issue in Pakistan where religious (or shariah) law sits alongside regular laws, thanks to Gen Zia who introduced it a couple of decades ago.

shammi #126 You know my position on this: the Kashmir dispute is not worth even one life, Indian or Pakistani. The land will always be there regardless of which side of the border it is, but the lives are gone forever. The Pakistan military is under pressure from within Pakistan (see recent articles by Irfan Hussain and Ayaz on Dawn for example) to get it`s act together and come down hard on the religious groups in Pakistan that support such activities in Kashmir. The Indian government should do the same I think, while at the same time stressing that India has no intention of enveloping Pakistan (thus allaying fears of those who think that you are ``either a part of India, or against India`` and so chose the latter course).

Dear Goldsteen:

You write:

``Anyway and whatever you may think of Palestinian violence and bomb blasts, it is going to be answered punitively. Israeli attitude is going to harden and right now emergency meeting is going on and a hammering blow is expected``.

Big deal.

So tell me -- what else is new.

Some more targeted ASSASSINATIONS?

SOME MORE untargeted SUICIDE BOMBINGS.

Can Sharon the Moron do anything else except kill some MORE PALESTINIANS CHILDREN -- and can Hamas the Mass murderers do anything else but retaliate by killing innocent Israeli teenagers?

My heart beeds for both -- damn it.

You two #ucking communities are locked into a

mortal combat -- you guys have been humiliating a whole generations of secular Muslims and Christian Palestinians for decade -- now you have to deal with Hamas -- Hamas is YOUR Rosemary Baby -- NOT Islam`s -- Hamas`s UGLINESS is the reflection of your UGLINESS --you created it -- now you deal with it -- the ONLY way you know -- you assassinate their leaders their children -- they assassinate your civilians -- your children -- the god-damn cycle of violence is never-ending -- the fact is that you two deserve each other.

And QUIT blaming that good-for-nothing Palestinian shripm -Arafat.

Dear Goldsteen:

You write:

``Anyway and whatever you may think of Palestinian violence and bomb blasts, it is going to be answered punitively. Israeli attitude is going to harden and right now emergency meeting is going on and a hammering blow is expected``.

Big deal.

So tell me -- what else is new.

Some more targeted ASSASSINATIONS?

SOME MORE untargeted SUICIDE BOMBINGS.

Can Sharon the Moron do anything else except kill some MORE PALESTINIANS CHILDREN -- and can Hamas the Mass murderers do anything else but retaliate by killing innocent Israeli teenagers?

My heart bleeds for both -- damn it.

You two #ucking communities are locked into a

mortal combat -- you guys have been humiliating a whole generations of secular Muslims and Christian Palestinians for decade -- now you have to deal with Hamas -- Hamas is YOUR Rosemary Baby -- NOT Islam`s -- Hamas`s UGLINESS is the reflection of your UGLINESS --you created it -- now you deal with it -- the ONLY way you know -- you assassinate their leaders their children -- they assassinate your civilians -- your children -- the god-damn cycle of violence is never-ending -- the fact is that you two deserve each other.

And QUIT blaming that good-for-nothing Palestinian shrimp -- Arafat.

And by the way welcome to CHOWK -- and please don`t go away.

``Sometimes I wonder if this cooperation is a result of a cost-benefit analysis that a brown male runs in his mind or is it the inherited slave of a mind from colonial era when he pretended to look the other way while walking in front of a building which used to have the sign reading ``Indians/(Pakis)/blacks and dogs not allowed``.(Urstruly)

Now that`s what I call rubbing salt on an wound of your OWN community.

Well, reading your posts ``Sometimes I wonder`` if you wouldn`t be here on Chowk in a civilized company -- may be you would be flying one of those planes into a tall building.

The fact is this -- ``cooperations`` by ``mhamid, hasan, abdul, mohamed, and Prem`` -- is NOT the ``inherited slave of a mind from a colonial era`` -- it`s a plain simple ``inherited`` instinct also called -- ``It`s self-preservation, stupid`` -- trying to save oneself -- from the likes of you --- the crpto Islamist extremist -- impersonating as an innocent Muslim -- trying to board the plane to take us -- to the ``land`` of houris and ghilmans.

Thanks for ``coming back`` on Chowk.

RE: Dr. Poonwala # 162 and others wrote:

``You will get very little response for the ongoing Kashmir tragedy from the like of Rad Siddiqui, Wadera, YLH and others. These individuals are so indoctinated with hatred, revulsion,and loathing, that they cannot see the Kashmiri (and particularly the Kashmiri Hindu) as human. Furthermore, to them Chowk is one big game. Do you think the actual blood spilling every day in Kashmir means anything more than cocktail talk to them?``

and added to this jibberish with

``Ras Siddiqi may pen an article about Lata or Junoon. But when it really matters, when he as a Journalist should act to raise awareness of a tragedy and should use his penmanship to join in the chorus of protest against this awful genocide that you have cited, he will remain mute and silent.``

Dr. Poon, I have not remained silent in the past and will not be silent in the future. I am already in print on the need to incorporate the Kashmiri Pandits in any future settlement of this problem.
But let me add here that you are a very misinformed individual if you think that I am as you wrote: above: ``indoctinated with hatred, revulsion,and loathing, that they cannot see the Kashmiri (and particularly the Kashmiri Hindu) as human.``
Not only do I not hate Hindus but some happen to be my close friends. What you are writing here is a whole lot of Bull....
Please check out the the CHOWK, The Kashmir Times, Pakistan Link and The Nation (Lahore) archives if you can access them on my writings on Kashmir before you expose any amore of your ignorance.

Ras

Scout # 120

Okay fair enough. Yes it is true that I did not put OBL in negetive light- but does it necessarily mean that I have put him in positive light? No. I think it is called objectivity. My goal is not to poison my reader`s mind but to undersatnd it. The notion that I have put OBL in positive light is your conclusion and why I am being held responsible for your conclusions? I asked the same question from Sadhna but she did not reply, would you?

Sadna # 71

``The thesis is supported by facts-check the references``

You put this quote in your post as if you are quoting me. And then you wrote (your quote)``I couldnot find a reference to your statement.``


First of all Raam Qasam I never said that. Why you make up things. Sharam Nahin aati?

Here is what I wrote (in #43):

``The thesis is supported by facts-check the references through number given in parentheses.``

See how the meaning of the sentence changes dramatically. Shiv Qasam I really want to discuss ideas with you. For this you will have to free yourself of the semantics. I am giving you a chance to grow past your cut`n`paste cadre.

Amit # 68

Good post. I generally agree with your ideas except your contention that the frustration of not meeting upto the challenge is creating the militeraism and extremism. I think this is a very minor factor. The major factor is the never ending extrenal agression which ocassionally turns militaristic is causing more frustration and which in turn results in extremism.

Your comments.

Sarwari # 72

I am always impressed by your ability to look at the bleakest of the situation in the positive light; Plus your vision to see ``what can be done`` rather than ``what should have been done``. This is a great gift.

I agree with your post in general especially the education part. Education and education alone is the key. I would really like to see your opinion how can we change the current system of eduction. Please read my comment in Reason# 3 in the article. How do you see it?

Poonawala # 73

It is a common mistake to equate culture with civilization. According to the textbook definitions culture is one aspect of the civilization. Here is how Huntington defines a civilization. (This definition is not very far off from the text book definitions in the books of anthropology and social sciences). Please comment.

Huntington writes:

``What do we mean when we talk of a civilization? A civilization is a culturalentity. Villages, regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups, all have distinct cultures at different levels of cultural heterogeneity. The culture of a village in southern Italy may be different from that of a village in northern Italy, but both will share in a common Italian culture that distinguishes them from German villages. European communities, in turn, will share cultural features that distinguish them from Arab or Chinese communities. Arabs, Chinese and Westerners, however, are not part of any broader cultural entity. They constitute civilizations. A civilization is thus the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species. It is defined both by common objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs,institutions, and by the subjective self-identification of people. People have levels of identity: a resident of Rome may define himself with varying degrees of intensity as a Roman, an Italian, a Catholic, a Christian, a European, a Westerner. The civilization to which he belongs is the broadest level of identification with which he intensely identifies. People can and do redefine their identities and, as a result, the composition and boundaries of civilizations change.``

Farzana # 79

Thank you for your contribution. I hope I will get the certificate of being ``intelligent`` and not the other one. I know you are very generous.

In the response section I usually encourage people to put forth their ideas to know how they perceived the facts or fiction that was presented to them. So I will be brief. My response to your:

Part 1: Fully agreed

Part 2: Fully agreed

Part 3: The concept of Islamic brotherhood is not a dogma. It has been a reality for the past 1400 years until 1914-24 when Ottoman Caliphate collapsed. One must understand that the post ottoman caliphate era until now is a transitional stage, a period of metamorphsis which will redefine the meaning of universal islamic brotherhood. In the history of nations and civilizations 80, 100, and 150 years mean nothing.
Just imagine in 1940s could anyone have thought that the concept of European Union will ever materialize? But you know the concept is as old as crusades. The concept of Islamic Economic Block is alive, well and thriving since Jamal-ud-din Afghani envisioned it about 125 years ago. It is just a mater of time that it will materialize one day.

Just imgaine, a block of 60+ countries, which has capital, it has human resources, and natural resources, land, and a dream and will to make it come true. Just imagine we will be buying technology as a commodity like tooth brush and toilet papers. Its lot of work but it is POSSIBLE.

Urstruly #71
`` ``The thesis is supported by facts-check the references through number given in parentheses.````

So the figure of 4-5 million refugees post- Sept 11 is fictitious.


`` I really want to discuss ideas with you.``

Interesting phenomenon. Perhaps in your preoccupation, you have failed to notice I am a Hindu.


And Allah Qasam, I was giving YOU a chance to stop hiding the sins of a bloodthirsty murderer like Osama in semantics and your own peculiar hangups with Hindus.

Osama and Osama`ism are bad news, its time to find some other vehicle for your politics than his badly-organised khataara of half-baked religiosity and appetite for violence.


So half-baked in religion and badly organised that he couldnot create Islamic utopia in Afghanistan of 24 million Muslims though he attempts to lead the dialogue of 1.2 billion Muslims? So shortsighted and ineffective, that he is unable to get a single world leader or government on his side even after 10+ years of planning.

Osama may have tried to inspire the `masses`, but mere anger and willingness to kill and die doesnot do it. Grass-roots activity has to be constructive in growing institutions and leaders able to fight for grassroots concerns in all forums, not just automatons for terrorist cells and sloganeering in the streets.

What the `Muslim world` badly needs is organisation and leverage other than violence. Organised and coordinated action from the Muslim world would have helped Iraqi children, either to overthrow Saddam through support to his opposition or through overthrowing/defying sanctions. It would have helped to force the S. Arabian government to reform its inconsistencies. It would have put pressure for settlement in the Middle East.

Only the Muslim world can organise itself and prevent Osama`ism from creating another legacy of violence.

Merely toppling WTC or celebrating and `ball in your courting` the West afterward willnot do it.

Re Fuzair #142

`` According to the NY Times, about 80% of the mosques in the US are controlled by Wahabi/Deobandi type fundamentalists of the stripe of the Omar Abdurrehman who was convicted in the first WTC case.``

The New York Times also claim there are 12 civilian casualties as part of the collateral damage of US bombings in Afghanisatn ... To Date local and regional newspapers report in excess of 1400 civilian casualties mainly women and children ... with explict pictures .... - Perhaps they were self inflicted wounds....

The NY times ( although a respected newspaper) is highly specualtive in its assertions and is towing the Govt line... Actually an Opinion piece even suggested nuking the Afghans...If 80% of the mosques were infiltrated with the fundamentalists.. We would have seen a far higher arrest count.....

One has to wonder at the guile and naivette of the responder or perhaps his motivations to even refer to the NY times in this regard.

URstruly,

{{{but now I realize that you hindus are really really bad people:)

BTW ``bad`` in the above sentence is the white ``bad`` which means bad and not black ``bad`` which means good.}}}

Ahah!!! Caught with your pants down; buddy! And you say its not true that you ``hate hindus``! Dont ask me when; but I distinctly remember you said that---(& tried to explain your stance with your usual bulls *it go-mal logic)!

Also,dont say I dont know how to take a joke .I did laugh aloud at your post, trust me:). There is a nidus of truth in every joke. In that respect , I agree with Freud.

But then, maybe you DID later on become convinced that we hindus are true scum of the earth (I dont read all your posts--esp your interminably long ones).

Hey, thats OK; we hindus think HATRED isnt necessarily as bad as its cracked to be:).

You know the TRUE beauty about hinduism?! (at least as far as I think?) Every hindu is ALLOWED to interpret his/her religion anyway he/she wants. As a hindu;I can be as big a M-Fer as I want. I can follow the religion if I want to; curse it if I want to, eat all the beef my heat desires; NOBODY can ``fatwafy`` me, or ``excommunicate`` me. Other hindus can hate me; but whats so terrible about that?!

Too bad hamidm is`nt a hindu (but then, who among us is perfect?!) He makes no bones about the fact that he hates aspects of Islam, cant stand hindus & feels absolutely no remorse whatsoever. Way to go; hamidm!

I LOVE the fact that someone like you HATES me! Just like your hindu counterpart, Harimou. Now he understands (eventhough he`s a retard). I think only a hindu can truly appreciate the pleasure of a ``khunnas-ka feud``.

PS

Maybe I`m wrong:(