Regarding the Stupid White Men

Following is a relevent article about the state of numbness that Indian middle-class particularly Indian intelligentsia finds itself after Gujrat mayhem. A large segment of Indian intelligentsia did support BJP because of its ``cultural nationalism`` but these people are now dumbfounded after what had happened in Gujrat. This segment is disillusioned after witnessing the horrors of Gujrat unleashed by VHP thugs. IMO, this will in due course of time willtranslate into, the beginning of an end of communal forces. BJP gained legitimacy and strength from middle class and intelligentsia. It will either mend its ways or will die out once this class abandons it.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/250402/detoff01.asp

What else died in Gujarat alongside the women and children? Which idea throbbed to death as rapidly as the foetus which was knifed out of its mother’s womb? ‘Soft Hindutva’. Soft Hindutva is dead. The amorphous category defined as genetically anti-Congress, (thus anti-‘secularist’) instinctively pro-Hindu, vaguely anti-West and secretly (but only secretly) suspicious of ‘Muslims’ are in a torment. Their brand of genteel Hindutva is in crisis.

...

Yet law and order remained soft Hindutva’s crucial need. The basic sanctity of bourgeois life was its central justification. Today, soft Hindutva confronts a different enemy. The enemy of law and order is no longer only the Muslim. The enemies are the Hindu killers of children.

...

Thugs murder in Gujarat but there is silence in other parts of India. There is numbness, a quest for a new way. A quest like Gargi’s. Gargi who in the Brihdaranyaka Upanishad refused to accept the easy answers about religion that the sages gave her. A quest like Akbar’s, who when he debated in his Ibadat Khana, had everybody confused on whether the emperor was a Christian or a Zoroastrian or a Hindu or a Jew. A quest like Gandhi’s who said, “I will fight it out with my life if a Muslim can’t walk with self respect.” On the debris of soft Hindutva, a new quest has begun.

Tahmed: Ur 160 went rite over my head, however, i did find ur first point on #157 do be highly debatable.

teMporal: iM sure this is gonna Make ur day. How would u like to share a blunt with yours truly (not that other guy, iM talking about the Man who`s cooler then a dead penguin)? Get back at Me. Regards! (Hundred points if u get the subliMinal hint)...

Scout: Im glad u said ``gay`` urself, cuz thats just what i was thinkin. What in the hell kinda natural high do u get when u look at the ocean??? (Were u ``naturally high`` when u posted that)? Being blunted teachs u self control, and all kinda of other spiritual lessons i cant explain to people who`ve never tried it. Anyways, next time my dealer gets arrested, i might try that beach thing. it better work. Shalom.

The Anti-American

by Ian Buruma

1 | 2

Printer friendly

Post date 04.18.02 | Issue date 04.29.02 E-mail this article

Power Politics

by Arundhati Roy

(South End Press, 132 pp., $40)

The Algebra of Infinite Justice

by Arundhati Roy

(Penguin Books India, 299 pp.)

Brilliant people can be remarkably obtuse. The critic and novelist John Berger declares, in his introduction to Arundhati Roy`s collection of political essays, that the American war in Afghanistan is an ``act of terror against the people of the world.`` He also states that the nineteen hijackers ``gave their lives`` on September 11 ``as did three hundred and fifty-three Manhattan firemen,`` as though there were no difference between people who die to commit mass murder and those who die to save lives. And the killings in New York and Washington, Berger informs us, were ``the direct result of trying to impose everywhere the new world economic order (the abstract, soaring, groundless market) which insists that man`s supreme task is to make profit.``

The soaring market in Algeria? The new world economic order in Sudan? Profit-making in Afghanistan? Ah, if only. There were no doubt many reasons for the suicidal murder spree at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but global capitalism surely comes low on the list. Islam ism flourishes precisely in places that are relatively or even absolutely untouched by IBM or Motorola or even, strange to say, McDonald`s. If the new economic order were the problem, why didn`t the terrorists come from Bangkok, or Hong Kong?

Still, John Berger is the right man to introduce Arundhati Roy`s collection of political polemics. Few intellectual voices have been as ubiquitous as Roy`s after September 11, and few quite so shrill. Roy is the author of The God of Small Things, a novel read by millions all over the world. Her articles have appeared all over the world, too, in--among other publications--The Guardian, Le Monde, El País, and Der Spiegel. One reason people listen to her, apart from her literary fame, is that she has positioned herself, successfully, as an authentic Third World voice. And like Lee Kuan Yew, a very different kind of Asian voice, she is highly articulate in English, a winning combination.

Roy does not like to be called an ``activist,`` but she has stuck her neck out for a variety of causes. Some of them, such as the protest against potentially catastrophic dam-building projects in India, are certainly worth fighting for. So for that she should be commended. Yet, at the same time, Roy has a tendency to sound preposterous. Her reaction to the events of September 11 was that we would never know what had motivated the hijackers, but that ``Mickey Mouse,`` that is to say, the United States, was not a viable alternative to ``the mullahs.`` (She made this pronouncement on ``Nightline`` on November 3, 2001.) The snobbery of her tone alone betrays the lingering, if perhaps unconscious, influence in India of British lefties from the end of the Raj. It is the language of the Bloomsbury drawing room. You could well imagine Bertrand Russell taking this line.

The question is whether Roy`s preposterousness undermines the causes that she promotes. Ramachandra Guha, a well-respected scholar and writer in India, thinks that it does. In a sharp attack on Roy`s political statements, published in the newspaper The Hindu in November 2000, Guha argued that Roy should stick to writing novels, because her vanity and her self-indulgence devalues the work of more serious activists. He mentioned as an example her efforts on behalf of the movement against the huge expensive dams in western India, which will displace hundreds of thousands of poor people. The cause is just, but Guha believes that Roy`s grandstanding on its behalf, which recently earned her a well-publicized night in jail, made a spectacle of her at the expense of the anti-dam movement.

The quarrel between Roy and Guha has implications that go beyond the Indian borders. It touches upon celebrity culture, on the uses of literary fame in political causes, on the public role of the writer in a democracy, and on the intellectual roots of anti-Americanism. For these reasons alone, Roy`s recent writings merit closer attention.

Arundhati Roy may have come late to the anti-dam movement, as Ramachandra Guha says, but she did so in 1999, when the movement was in poor shape. She revived flagging spirits among the activists and put their goals back in the public eye. Building huge dams has been almost a fetish of Indian governments since Nehru, who made the famous statement (later regretted) that dams were ``the temples of modern India.`` The Hoover Dam was the original model for this kind of thing, but it was Soviet-style nationalist machismo that inspired developing countries such as India. Dams are the very models of Stakhanovite enterprise, the perfect symbols of massive modernity. The Chinese are still at it, too.

The results, as Roy has been at pains to point out, have often been disastrous. During the last fifty years, as many as fifty million mostly poor, low-caste Indians have lost their homes and livelihoods as a consequence of big dam projects. The benefits go mostly to the urban rich, while many peasants still have no access to safe drinking water. And even the benefits are often exaggerated. In the case of one big Indian dam, only five percent of the area that was promised irrigation actually received any water.

All this is bad enough, especially for the dislocated poor. There is really no need for tasteless comparisons. But Roy writes: ``Shall we just put the Star of David on their doors and get it over with.`` It is not immediately clear what gallery she is playing to here--her essays were written for Indian readers--but the effect diminishes the power of her message.

The Sardar Sarovar plan to build 3,200 dams on the Narmada River, which runs through three states in western India, is designed to be the biggest dam project of all. Roy says that it will submerge and destroy 4,000 square kilometers of forestland, and displace hundreds of thousands of people without adequate plans for re location or compensation. The other odd aspect of this huge irrigation scheme is that it will benefit only one of the three states, Gujarat, while the sacrifices are all to be born by villagers in the other two, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Guja rat is naturally all in favor of this, as was the World Bank, at least initially. An enterprise that began as a form of Third World mimicry of Soviet methods now finds its most vociferous defenders among free-marketeers, right-wing Hindu chauvinists in the Indian government, and Western corporations. One of the most disturbing stories in Power Politics, Roy`s essay against the dams, is about the way Enron squeezed billions of dollars out of the state of Maharashtra for a power plant that most local industries cannot even afford to tap.

Critical studies of big dam building began to appear in India in the 1980s. The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), a movement of protest specifically against the Sardar Sarovar dam, organized demonstrations and strikes through the 1980s and 1990s. Independent reports, commissioned by the Indian government as well as by the World Bank and the World Conservation Union, were highly critical of the dam, for environmental reasons as well as social reasons, and after much pressure from activists the World Bank withdrew its support. Still, the Indian Supreme Court, after being petitioned by the NBA, decided to let the project go ahead anyway.

Anti-dam activists, including Roy, were smeared in the pro-government press as traitors, and accused of assaulting a group of lawyers at the Supreme Court. There was no evidence for this, but the case went to court, and Roy wrote in her affidavit that this showed ``a disquieting inclination on the part of the court to silence criticism and muzzle dissent.`` As a result, she was charged with contempt of court, spent her night in jail, and paid a fine. Unwise, perhaps; but more people read about the dam problem because of her than would otherwise have been the case.

When Roy got involved in the anti-dam movement, she was already a famous writer. But it was not her first brush with organized protest. Her mother, Mary Roy, is a well-known promoter of women`s rights in India, so Arundhati imbibed dissent with her mother`s milk. But she is also rather melodramatic about the public role of the writer. To be a writer, she says, ``in a country that gave the world Mahatma Gandhi ... is a ferocious burden.`` Quite where Gandhi fits in is unclear. Still, Roy writes about politics not as a famous novelist, but as a citizen, ``only a citizen, one of many, asking for a public explanation.`` She has no ``personal or ideological axe to grind.`` She has no ``professional stakes to protect.`` It is simply ``time to snatch our futures back from the `experts.` ``

There is nothing wrong with this. Experts are fallible. Famous novelists are citizens, too. But there is in fact something professional at stake here. For Roy goes further than saying that a writer should use her fame to promote worthy causes. She believes that what ``is happening in the world lies, at the moment, just outside the realm of human understanding.`` But help is at hand: it is ``the writers, the poets, the artists, the singers, the filmmakers who can make the connections, who can find ways of bringing it into the realm of common understanding.`` Some of the reactions among the writers, the poets, and the artists to the events of last September make this kind of special pleading less than convincing.

Roy`s efforts on behalf of the victims of dam-building show her to be a good citizen; but if her aim, as a writer of political essays, is to promote common understanding, she is less than a success. The essays express her convictions and her prejudices with great passion, but by her own account she aims higher. Roy wants language to cut through platitudes and lies: ``As a writer, one spends a lifetime journeying into the heart of language, trying to minimize, if not eliminate, the distance between language and thought. `Language is the skin of my thought,` I remember saying to someone who once asked what language meant to me.`` If so, her thoughts could do with a course of Clearasil.

Roy showed a fondness in her novel for overlush imagery and showy stylistic flourishes. The same thing is true in her essays, where her literary mannerisms often obscure understanding. The text is pockmarked with flip haiku-like clichés of the following kind: ``My world has died. And I write to mourn its passing.`` (This is about India`s development of the nuclear bomb.) Or this tired old dictum: ``One country`s terrorist is too often another`s freedom fighter.`` There is also the constant hyperbole, which actually weakens the power of language. Privatization, Roy writes, is a ``process of barbaric dispossession on a scale that has few parallels in history.`` Really? On the same topic: ``What is happening to our world is almost too colossal for human comprehension to contain. But it is a terrible, terrible thing.`` Well, perhaps it is, but this judgment does little to help my own human comprehension of international economics. And if we are really dealing with matters outside human understanding, then human reason is obviously an inadequate tool, so why bother to write an essay at all?

Next: Roy`s ``foaming-at-the-mouth, eye-rolling quality of the mad evangelist.``

1 | 2

Global Vigil for Peace Between

Pakistan and India

Organized under the banner: People for Peace Between Pakistan and India

When: Saturday, April 27, 2002, 7:00p.m.-7:30p.m.

Where: Lytton Plaza, 220 University Ave., Palo Alto, CA. 94301



Background

As the military standoff between India and Pakistan enters its fourth month, a fourth of humanity lives under the threat of nuclear annihilation, and concerned people are continuing their vigils for peace in South Asia. The build-up of troops and arms along the India-Pakistan border can lead to a disastrous war--a war, that like previous wars, would only bring death, destruction, misery and impoverishment to the citizens of the two nations.

Peace-loving people in Pakistan, India, and all over the world, are demonstrating for peace. SIMULTANEOUS PEACE VIGILS are being held in India and Pakistan, and around the world, on the last weekend of every month. In Bay Area, these vigils are being organized by Friends of South Asia.



Memorandum

We urge the governments of both Pakistan and India to:

1. Reopen all communication and travel links between the two countries.

2. Sign a No War Pact.

3. Set up a Permanent Dialogue Process for continued and uninterrupted negotiations to settle all outstanding issues, including Kashmir (involving Kashmiris from both sides of the border) and cross border terrorism.

4. End and reverse the nuclear weapons race, actively engage in Global Nuclear Disarmament initiatives.

5. Establish long-term trade and commerce links.

We would like to call upon all peace-loving people to come to this peace vigil and we request you to sign on the above memorandum of demands.

PLEASE COME TO THE SIMULTANEOUS GLOBAL PEACE VIGIL

BRING YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY ALONG

COME AND STAND UP FOR PEACE



Friends of South Asia 408-265-2795 FOSA_US@yahoo.com

Qaumantri Punjabi Bhaichara Group of California 408-935-9160 newsmailus@yahoo.com







Information on Past Vigils:

Report and pictures of first vigil:

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/custom3.html

Report and pictures of second vigil:

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/custom4.html

Report and pictures of third vigil:

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/shopping_page.html



Important Note:

Whereas previous vigils were arranged in different cities around the Bay, we now plan to keep the venue of the vigil fixed—vigils will be held on the last Saturday of every month at Lytton Plaza in Palo Alto. Please come on time as we plan to break up at 7:30 p.m. sharp to hold our monthly meeting at Stanford.

scouty,

{{smoking weed? i believe in natural highs....the kind you get when you walk on a beach, see the a vast blue ocean heaving, smelling it, feeling the warm softness of sand underneath your feet....i know it sounds gay but it works for me.}}

Aw, scouty, you know nothing about natural highs:)...

You should try sex...sometimes..(AFTER youre married, ofcourse)...you`ll feel mundane activities like sniffing a stupid ocean totally boring.:)

Unless ofcourse , by luck of the draw , your husband turns out to have a personality similar to Saxena`s...oops ..sorry..I would`nt wish that on my worst enemy!

I sincerely hope pretty Pakistani punjabi nuns are allowed to marry:)

t,

As always M B Naqvi makes a cogent case. I wouldn`t be surprised if there is some truth in his thesis.

Prem

Paging Sigalph,

Kindly sir, Your perspective as an upstanding Bangladeshi is required on the Post 913 posted by Rsidhar on `Mahatma`s progeny`.

Sincerely

Yasser

Sadna,

You think the following was the result of the deployment of your terrorist Army on our borders?

How naive can you be... It is this kind of an arrogant and bigoted statement which drives people like me to take a more militant course against your country... You people don`t seem human when you make such tall order claims.

``1. Musharraf`s Jan 12 speech``

He didn`t say anything new in that speech for your information. Please compare to his speeches pre-9/11. Progressive democratic Pakistan has been expressed as a goal by many leaders, and indeed that is what our final objective is? You are a liar if you believe that to be the case.



``2. No major terrorist attacks in India``

So you think it is your bullying that is behind that.. Why don`t you try saying out in the open and maybe you will see the results...



``3. There is almost no talk of UN resolutions

or `disputed` territory by foreign commentators and media, now the talk is of reduction of tensions ``

So what you are saying by bullying people around.. you have managed to suppress a right given to the Kashmiri People.. what wonderful sense of fairness you Indian bigots have... UN RESOLUTIONS STAND.. and they will CONTINUE to stand... Not even a severe incident like the creation of Bangladesh could dampen our resolve to see the justice and fairplay being done in Kashmir!

This statement alone captures the fundamentally bigoted and stupid mentality of the Indian people... because bigots like you are actually supposed to be moderates... You are extending us a challenge.. we will heed that challenge .. this war will go on...

``4. If dialogue or UN resolutions are mentioned, the list of 20 is also mentioned.``

You know quite well where you can shove that list of 20? don`t you... how about handing over the terrorist interior minister to us first who is wanted for attempted murder of Pakistan`s first Governor General.



``5. Meanwhile jihad is no longer as low cost an option as before because the counterdeployment of Pakistani troops costs money``

The counter deployment of Pakistani troops might cost money.. as for Jihad... jihad against bigotry fanaticism, oppression be it the Mullah version , or the Gandhian Hinduvtist version of oppression .. it will continue...

Ladies and gentlemen with her post Sadna has shown the ugly face of India and its policies yet again... this is the face of Gandhiism.. lies, more lies, more propaganda, even more lies, even more propaganda.. bullying around with an army... and suppressing the rights of a nation... Shame on the Hindu Fundamentalist Theocracy beyond our East Border.

-YLH

re: spout

{gay but it works for me}

...way too much information...

tahmed

..... i really don`t understand how islam, or any other religion, can be secular .... some muslims could be secular in that they don`t let god interfere with their political life or sex habits ..... if islam is secular why was it necessary to destroy the idols in the kaaba and turn it into a mosque? ... i am sure the kafirs did not see that as a secular act .....

....and what is this about ``First rate universities often produce third rate individuals and vice versa``...... for your kid`s sake, i hope you don`t really believe this .....i have been involved in recruiting for the last ten years - the top consulting companies and investments banks will only hire from the top-10 business school and if you check the executive ranks of fortune-500 companies you will find that a vast majority of them have ivy league credentials ...... and regardless of whether it is fair or not, a fresh stanford or mit grad still commands a thirty to fifty percent premium in starting salary .......that is why i keep on telling my kids that unless you are black one-legged lesbian you have to go to a top-20 school to really make it in the corporate world........but if you are a black one-legged lesbian you can get away with a degree in communications from howard or tuskegee .........

re: TAHmed

{{check out some of the Pakistani heads of corporations in the US and you wont find any ivy leagues among them}}

...you assume that the best jobs are in large 9-5 corporations...that`s usually not true...also, just b.c. the CEOs of these places made it without pedigree, doesn`t mean that pedigree doesn`t make a difference...

Shireen Mazari exposes the hindu/secular thuggery_______________________________________________

Rising extremism in the non-Muslim world

The writer is Director General of the

Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad

smnews80@hotmail.com

What an irony! Even as the tirade against ``Islamic extremism`` continues from different parts of the world, those very spots are seeing the rise of extremist politics. The latest victim is France, under threat from the fascism of Jean-Marie Le Pen. He has called into question the hypocrisy of the French electorate who it is clear pay lip service to the form of ostensible liberalism but in reality are becoming increasingly right-wing and extreme in their politics. For some of us this has been clear for a while now - what with the intolerance shown to Muslim girls covering their heads to school as against Christian girls wearing the crucifix in their necks in school, and the general anti-Islamic sentiment that found an easy outlet post-September-11. Yet the facade of a liberal, ``secular`` France continued till the Le Pen success in the first round of the French elections. Amongst other things, Le Pen is known for his anti-Semitic remarks including declaring the Nazi gas chambers as a mere ``detail of history``! He is also strongly anti-immigrant and a committed racist. Imagine the global hysteria if in a similar election Maulana Fazlur Rehman had achieved the same sort of success! We would have been branded all manner of obnoxious labels and sanctions of multiple kinds would have been threatened!

Nor is this the first instance of extremism succeeding at the polls in Europe. There is Mr Joerg Haider in Austria and in Denmark the extreme right-wing People`s Party is part of the ruling coalition. In Norway also, the extremist Progress Party is the second largest party in the country. So, Le Pen is only the latest addition to this rise of political extremism in the non-Muslim world.

There is the long-standing figure of Mr Vajpayee - reflecting the rise of militant Hindu extremism which has been showing its true colours, since his rise to power in India, by killing minorities (Christians and Muslims) and burning their places of worship. The massacre of Muslims in the state of Gujarat was the natural progression of this extremism as it continued to be tolerated both by the Indian leadership and the international community. And now Mr Vajpayee himself has lost the image of being the acceptable face of the Hindutva creed, not only by his continued acceptance of the Modi government in Gujarat despite the clearly established complicity of Mr Modi with the Hindu murderers, but also by his tirade against Islam in Goa on 13th April. It was in Goa that he declared: ``Hindus stay in millions but never hurt other`s religious feelings. But wherever Muslims are they do not want to stay peacefully... . It is happening in Indonesia, Malaysia, everywhere. They (Muslims) stay by threatening and frightening others.``

Of course, had Mr Vajpayee not used the word Muslim, his description fits the Israelis to the tee! For this is precisely what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians since they terrorised them out of their land - aided and abetted by the West. And now under the ultra-Zionist, Mr Sharon, Israeli extremism is at its peak. But the history of this extremism goes back to the origins of the Israeli state. The first Israeli Prime Minister, Ben Gurion stated in 1948: ``We must do everything to insure they (Palestinians) never do return`` and he assured his followers that the Palestinians will never come back to their homes. ``The old will die and the young will forget.`` But just in case the young did not forget, Zionists like Sharon felt it necessary to kill them all. As Sharon stated, in an interview with General Ouze Merham, in 1956: ``...I vow that I`ll burn every Palestinian child (that) will be born in this area. The Palestinian woman and child is more dangerous than the man, because the Palestinian child`s existence infers that generations will go on, but the man causes limited danger. ... With one hit I`ve killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah in 1956). I wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian woman is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do.``

True to his word, Sharon has continued this policy whenever he has had the chance. And he has the US to shelter him from international censure. After all, as Sharon told Peres on October 3, 2001 - according to a report on Kol Yisrael radio - ``Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that ... I want to tell you something very clear: Don`t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America and the Americans know it.`` While many may debate this assertion in the US, the fact is that presently, in the face of the massacre at Jenin, two US senators have ironically introduced a bill to declare the PLO as terrorist and have their funds frozen in the US!

Nor is it just the rise of extremists in the non-Muslim world that is extremely worrying. There is also a pervasive extremism prevalent at the level of state and society in these countries and most of it is directed against the Muslims. In fact, official acceptance of violence against Muslims has allowed the extremists to act with impunity. The carnage in Gujarat is only one such example and Jenin is simply another addition in what has become common place after 9/11. While the world supposedly watches intently the trial of Pearl`s killers in Karachi, has anyone followed what happened to the British soldiers who shot dead a pregnant Afghan woman in a cab in Kabul? Well, nothing except their transfer back to Britain. And soldiers represent the state so obviously the message from the British state was - and probably still is - that it was okay to kill Muslim civilians in Afghanistan. After all, the US forces had done the same with no expression of regret. As for the massacre of POWs at Qila-i-Jhangi, the irony is that Amnesty International - that proclaimer of the high moral ground - had managed to get in and produce a report which showed that it was clearly a massacre with the dead prisoners still having their hands tied behind their backs but the bosses of this NGO will not allow the report to be published. They are still ``going through the process`` as one Amnesty person explained to a group in Peshawar! Ultimately, these reports will come out but the delay is damaging.

In the US itself, there is a systematic targeted harassment and often killing of Muslims - including children - with little being done against the perpetrators. The present US Attorney General, John Ashcroft, is himself a Christian fundamentalist who referred to the US Supreme Court as a ``robed elite`` that ``have taken the wall of separation built to protect the church and made it a wall of religious oppression.`` In the course of his political career - he lost the senatorial race in Missouri - he has attacked Black Americans and other segments of American civil society.

As non-Muslim extremism rises, the most shameful aspect is those in the Muslim world who have been either willy-nilly or deliberately co-opted to keep quiet on the issue of the basic rights of the Muslims. For instance, the HRCP, like the Government of Pakistan, has an obligation to ensure that the Pakistani prisoners in Kabul and in Guantanamo Bay are given due legal process - in the case of the latter, the example of Nuremburg and The Hague should be cited - yet so far they have not so much as whimpered on this subject. Why? Because they find the creed of these prisoners unacceptable, or because of the pressures of donor funding, or perhaps a combination of both?

The silence and self-imposed helplessness of the Muslim world has led the Muslims to become attractive targets of the growing extremism in the non-Muslim world - both at the level of the state and civil society. The greatest irony is that the only place where extremism is not flourishing in any form is in the Muslim states where obscurantism is a minority creed. Fifty-seven years after countless Muslims died to defeat the rise of fascism in Europe and Japan in World War II, Muslims are now confronting new forces of fascism that are on the ascendancy in the non-Muslim world from Europe to Asia.

THE CONSPIRACY OF LITTLE MEN & BIG SATANS

temporal # 161

``The enigma of India`s coercive diplomacy

Could it be that the Indian troops are on the borders to mainly ensure there is no rebellion against General Musharraf?``

I have a half-written article (for Chowk) sitting in my C drive since last month where I have tried to explore the reasons for this ridiculous amassing of Indian troops at the borders. Damn my Carpul Tunnel, I can`t sit on my computer for long; so I left it in the middle. According to my info, Musharaf is purging middle level leadership from Army which has normally a leaning towards Islamism etc. At some sectors the troops are facing enemy without a commanding officer. On the home front this amassing of troops pacifies internal political resistence. It takes no genius to understand that this was the logical next step of America`s so-called ``war on terrorism``. It doesn`t take a genius either to see that in near future we should expect Egyptian style persecution of ``opponents of civilization``, where dissent is crushed by sodomizing dissidents with dogs. The new so-called ``police reforms`` (effective May 1) are nothing but a Paki version of POTA.

By the way the title I chose for my article was ``THE CONSPIRACY OF LITTLE MEN & BIG SATANS``; now I see that I wasn`t alone in my thinking. Once this refrendum nonsense is done and this little man gets a ``legal status``, the ordinary Pakistanis should brace themselves, get ready, and oil themselves up, cuz the dogs are coming.

cemendtaur #168:

…thanks for providing this info…would you know of similar activities in southern Ontario?


DRUMZ #166:

[…teMporal: iM sure this is gonna Make ur day. How would u like to share a blunt with yours truly (not that other guy, iM talking about the Man who`s cooler then a dead penguin)? Get back at Me. Regards! (Hundred points if u get the subliMinal hint)...]


(make that double if u get this;)


like we are told
exhaling is bad
as is inhaling
veddy veddy bad
ere to fore
mentioned
and oft repeated
like …er hammered
or being blunt(ed) is
no good
excuse.

rgds.

t

re: shrinker

...stop dropping my good name in all your posts before i make the imprint of my shoe on your behind even bigger....

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