USA and Muslims

``And at this point in time, GWBush and his cowboys look indistinguishable from their sworn enemies in their blind pursuit of triumph irrespective of the costs accompanied by their own version of mumbo-jumbo and fudging facts.`` (SADNA)

EXACTLY.

Romair # 68

``The living standard of the Islamic civilization, as well as its per-capita income, is higher than some civlizations, while lower than others. It is lower than the Christian and Judiac civlization, but higher than the Hindu civilizations and African civilizations (civilizations as described by Huntington). ``

Huntington`s Islamic civilization exists only in a superfical negative sense. The way I see it fortunes of Muslims in South East Asia, Black Africa, India are probably interwined with non-Muslim inhabitants of those regions than Muslims lviing all over the world. That cuts the strength of Islamic civilization by 50%.

The remaining 50% will stay divided because some Muslims countries have been blessed with too much oil. They are unlikely to join a larger entity if it means giving up control of their oil wealth.

Actually, those who say `Islamic civilisation` is doing good are viewing the world with the same Western blinkers of resources and oil.

The other day I heard some shocking statistics about subsaharan Africa which includes countries like Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Senegal etc which are either Muslim countries or have sizeable Muslim populations.

One shocking statistic was that in a Subsaharan population of 400 million, there is a total of only 75 yes 75 health care professionals( including all doctors, nurses, technicians, nursing assistants) specialising in treating cancer.

35 countries among these donot have even a single pathologist per country.

In the supposed centre of `Islamic civilisation`, Saudi Arabia, with all its oil wealth, the infant mortality is approx 38 per 1000 which is worse than Mexico(24) and Sri Lanka(16).

shankar #88: ``For the ``record``, I think it was primarily the fault of Hindus themselves that they got their asses kicked by Muslims, Portugese, British etc etc.``

I don`t agree with this line of thinking. You are blaming the wrong party in each case.

One cannot look at the world, specially the third world, in terms of one nation giving out its joint view through its leaderships. That can only happen in well-functioning democracies, which are almost non-existent in the third world.

How can you blame a poor lower caste Hindu peasant living eight hundred years ago, in India, for allowing Ghaznavi to invade his home? How can you expect that person to take on his own Hindu dictator, much less take on an even more powerful Ghaznavi? Its` not that easy. The deck was heavily stacked against him.

One cannot view the third world in terms of nations either, in my opinion. One has to view it in term of social classes, i.e. the Brahmans of any religion vs. the Shudars of any religion. Only the Brahmans of the third world can be blamed.

For example, in Pakistan, I deplore nearly every leadership Pakistan has ever had. The only person I give a few good marks to in my lifetime is Musharraf (primarily because he himself is honest). All other rulers that I can remember from Bhutto to Zia were scoundrels. The current PML(Q), PPP, MMA and MQM, barring a few exceptions, are scoundrels or the children of the same scoundrels.

I am a very well-off Pakistani (by Pakistani standards) with a family that is quite well established - not quite at the feudal level or General level, but we can look after ourselves against any threat. However, I cannot do anything to change the leadership of Pakistan. I spoke out against faults in the military system while I was in the military, and lost my job. I am a member of a political party currently led by the most charasmatic and well-known face in South Asia. My father is a very active member of this party. But even then, we cannot change anything.

How in the world do you expect normal Pakistanis, 99.999% of whom are worse off than my family, to do anything? They can barely get a job to support themselves. Is it there fault that the feudals rule over them (believe me the Genrals and maulvis are bad, but not nearly as bad as the feudals).

The reason you can make such comments is because you live in a US system, which is sophisticated enough to let public opinion change govts. But look how long it took Blacks in the US to gain there rights. Can you blame Kunta-Kinte for not overthrowing the plantation owners?

It takes time to change systems.

The more I read on third world affairs, the more my views are shifting from nationalistic boundaries to social divinding lines. I think the Brahman countries (like USA) and the ruling elite Brahmans of the third world (like feudals in Pakistan, Kings in Saudi Arabia, Saddams in Iraq etc.) are all part and parcel of the same system. They are all in it together, screwing the Shudars of the poor countries. And as long as the USA Brahman elite were able to screw USA Shudars, they did that as well. But now the USA Shudars are too powerful, and thus cannot be screwed by their own Brahmans. They have infact joined their own Brahman leadership in screwing Shudars of other nations.

The Shudars of the world consist of the Afghani kid dying in the Soviet invasion or in the post Sep 11 US bombing, the Pakistani peasant girl working in the fields to send the feudal`s daughter to Harvard, the Hindu laborer dying in a flood because the Indian govt. was too busy buying French aircraft, the Iraqi child killed due to the sanctions from the US, the Kurd lady killed by Saddam`s gas attack, the Irani activist targeted by the US supported Shah`s SAVAK, the Palestinian youth bombed by an Israeli F-16, the African Christian killed by an Muslim African govt, the Gujrati Muslim burned alive by a BJP Brahman, the Pakistani soldier sent into a misguided battle by a clueless Brahman Prime Minister, the innocent American secretary killed in the World Trade Center etc.

These people will retaliate. On many occasions, they will retaliate with terrorism. But they are by far the biggest victims of terrorism. The social, economic and physical terrorism against them is far far higher than any terrorism they will carry out. They cannot be blamed as the primary cause of the problems in their own socieities, or their reaction to these problems. It is their Brahman leaderships and the Brahman nations who subjugate them, that should both be blamed. In such situation, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the Shudars, not to the Brahmans.

Had WWII not occured and charismatic leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Jinnah etc. not simultaneously appeared on the horizon, you and I would still be second rate citizens in a British empire. According to many historians I am now reading, the British raped India like no previous invader. It took two hundred years to kick them out. They controlled the Indian Hindu and Muslims Shudars through Indian Hindu and Muslim Brahmans.

Similarly the US is raping the poorer nations, with the help of local Brahmans. That is what superpowers do. Otherwise what is the benefit of being a superpower. If Pakistan was a superpower, it would do the same. That is what Brahmans do to Shudars.

All superpower power military escapades are self-serving and should be opposed. Similarly and simultaneously all local Brahmans should be opposed. As far as I am concerned if Bush orders an attack on Iraq, he will knowingly kill innocent Iraqi Shudar civilians who have not attacked his country. How is he any different than Osama Bin Laden, if he orders such an attack? And how is it the fault of the Iraqi Shudars that both the Brahman Saddam and the Brahman USA is killing them?

adnan_rafiq,

.{{{.. Payback`s a reeeaaal bitch, aint it?!}}}

Aw, c`mon yaar, it was a joke...a tasteless one perhaps, but not said with vindictiveness:(

I never said ``payback`` was JUSTIFIED & I regret you took it that way...
If you know where I stand on Chowk, I hate those hindutva bas*ards as much as anyone else.

The point I was making is that when a civilisation is oppressed or bullied; before the victims whine about the oppressors, they should stand up against those on ``their side``, who weaken & corrupt their own societies/countries & make them vulnerable to ``oppression`` or hegemony.

For the ``record``, I think it was primarily the fault of Hindus themselves that they got their asses kicked by Muslims, Portugese, British etc etc. Its ridiculous for today`s BJP bums to blame Muslims. It was the caste system, sati, dowry, corrupt maharajahs etc etc who made Hindu India (if there ever was such an entity) vulnerable. So if these ``born again`` Hindu militants want Hinduism to rise up like a Phoenix from the ashes, they better blame the social/religious/cultural ills that go with Hinduism, NOT Muslims or Pakistan!

similarly, before Pakis blame the US, fight those Pakistani whore generals who give Uncle Sam a BJ. Ofcourse, every General that has taken over Pakistan has alluded that the MAIN reason they bend their knees in front of Uncle Sam is to ensure that the country is strong enough to withstand an attack from those indecent, evil, marauding idol worshipping pagans on their eastern border....yeah, right!! Get over it!! Pakistan aint no Shangri-La that India covets! Man, those Paki soldier boys really know how to brainwash its masses....If you guys hadnt botched up the Lahore peace process--who knows? maybe you would`nt be in such a vulnerable situation..

...And, while I`m on a roll, fight those idiots in the Islamic world who buy OBL T-shirts & claim the WTC bombing was a Mossad plot to discredit Islam....

It isnt America`s fault that it bullies. Its human nature..every civilisation, when it has a Golden Age, bullies weaker civilisations. Hey, I didnt make those rules! Why blame Americans for being human?

Just open your eyes & try & understand that Muslims are wasting their breaths trying to preach ``fairness`` & ``morality`` to Americans today. Its like taking a pee in a headwind. If anything, it pisses them off more.

Lets see...
has America distanced itself from Israel after 9/11..NO!..if anything its gotten closer...
has America reconsidered treating the citizens of its most allied ally like common criminals...NO!..if anything, its getting worse!

Thats what happens when you piss off the sole superpower & then whine about its ruthlessness. The Japanese did that 50 odd yrs ago & got its butt nuked. What Al-Qeeda did to America on 9/11 is a 1000 times worse than what Japan did in Pearl Harbor. Never in their 200+ history has the US been so suddenly & deliberately been assaulted RIGHT in the HEART...You think theyre in a mood to be forthright & magnanimous? Right now they are in a mood to settle a whole bunch of scores (both real & imagined)...& a millions of innocent human beings are going to die; let alone be humiliated....

The only way this is going to be salvaged is if the American people themselves see that they have gone overboard with revenge...the Vietnam war was primarily won by Vietnamese because America`s own citizens stated to the govt...``thats it! were fed up!``..These guys in the White House arent going to let up until Americans themselves rise up & say ``enough``..the Muslim world`s whining will mean didley squat to them....

American Express #64
Recently when I listed killings by Muslims in conflicts all over the world, I was called anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan for doing so and was told that all Hindus are liars. Didn`t you notice the author of that article you posted is another dirty lying Hindu maligning Muslims who are perfect creatures who never kill innocents? Better watch out or your Pakistani mother ship will leave you behind during the Qayamat to come.

Sameer
Protesting INS procedures and protesting the war can perhaps be viewed as two separate things. If anything the opposition to war is not coherent enough, the pacifists in Europe are not pacifist enough, the leftists are not leftist enough, Islamic countries are not being ummah-ish enough to formulate a thoughtful/meaningful POV to force the US govt.to put preservation of the lives and future of the Iraqi people at the head of the priority list.

And at this point in time, GWBush and his cowboys look indistinguishable from their sworn enemies in their blind pursuit of triumph irrespective of the costs accompanied by their own version of mumbo-jumbo and fudging facts.

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

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

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

#74 by adnan_rafiq on January 11, 2003 5:00pm P

++++++++++
This about sums up Hindu attitudes towards Pakistanis and Muslims. What this guy is saying is that since Aurangzeb kicked their collective asses a few hundred years ago, all Muslims should be crucified for his sins. Even the ACLU calls the Special Registration process unfair, except our friends from across the border. In their minds, its payback and therefore justified. They`re even altering their history textbooks to justify the payback theory.
++++++++++++

Pakistanis are being targetted because Pakistan is a hotbed of Islamic terrorism. It is payback for supporting Harkat, Lashkar, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Taleban, Osama and Jehad in general. Auranzeb has nothing to do with this.

+++++++++
Pakistanis and Muslims.
++++++++++

No....this is the Indian attitude toward pakistanis not muslims. Indian muslims are not on the list, they should not be.

++++++++++
Even the ACLU calls the Special Registration process unfair
+++++++++++

Obviously it is not fair to the ordinary ``economic immigrant``(read illegal immigrant) pakistani. The fact remains Pakistan has trained thousands of Islamic militants over the years. Terrorists are apprehended in pakistan on a daily basis. The US can not turn a blind eye to the reality just because Musharraf is whoring his country out.

adnan_rafiq #74

Shankar`s point is about an irrational Pakistani tendency to pronounce moral judgements on others, not about Aurangzeb. For instance, what saved West Pakistan in 1971 was America`s 7th Fleet, but you would not find any reference to it by any America-baiting Pakistani analyst. Aurangzeb is relevant only for those who consider him their hero. Definitely these people are not very convincing when they complain about religious discrimination. Shankar is saying that sympathy and respect can be expected only when it is also given. For example, if you name your child Aurangzeb, you would be unreasonable to expect a Hindu not to feel very happy seing you in trouble.

Ref Zero Credit #64

[FOR THE SELECTIVE BLEEDING HEARTS HINDIANS ,ITS THE MUSLIMS OF KASHMIR WHO ARE DYING MANY TIMES MORE THAN KASHMIRI HINDU]

It is not Hindus who are killing Kashmiri Muslims; it is Pakistan-supported Islamist thugs.

Can you get that through your thick head? Or, are you going to rationalize this by saying these women will be the houris reserved in Jannat for shahids as promised by Allah Himself?

...ohhh, this one`s really put romair`s and adnan`s asses on fire too, not just urstruly`s...

#68 by Romair on January 11, 2003 3:23pm PT

++++++++++
Pakistan used its miltiary to stop an attack from India for over six months. I strongly support that action. If Pakistan was to send its military into Kashmir to kill people, I would oppose that.
++++++++++++

You must be kidding or testing if people are really paying attention to your post. Pakistan army trained people are present in Kashmir in large numbers.

I hope you are not going to continue with the ``Mujahideen not Paki army`` logic that you guys used in Kargil.

Sameer....I initially didnt comment about the article because I got bored after the first paragraph. Didnt see anything I dont view on FOX news or read on your mainstream American press. Infact I am quite surprised it made it on Chowk. Then I read your reply #73 to Saminashah and found it, for lack of a better word, quite pathetic.
In your reply you wrote
>>Imagine if Germany and Japan had lived and believed the life of a >>lion or some other Iqbal`s verse about shaheens (eagles). There >>would be no Sony walkman, no Toyotas, no Hondas and no Karuna >>Shinsho.......Aren`t Japanese glad for not standing up to bully like >>Gen. McArthur at that moment in history?
Is this the culmination of an intellectual debate? set aside your principles because otherwise there will be No walkman, No Toyotas, No Hondas for you! And then that statement about the Japanese not standing upto McArthur...what are you on drugs? By the end of the war the Japanese had been decimated, it is not that they didnt want to standup to McArthur, they COULDNT.
At the end you state>>Irritiating politics and irritating stands are >>hallmark of Muslim extremists
As if extremists of all other ilk are warm and fuzzy and tend to compromise on irritating stands. That is why they are called EXTREMISTS! because they have extreme views i.e. views not shared by the vast majority.
In order to fully digest your reply I had to endure through reading the full article. Your reasoning, or lack thereof, is at best juvenile and reminds one of a drawing room chat with a teenage adloescent.
I would like to take this opportunity to plead with Chowk editors to hold published articles to a certain literary and academic standard.

Ref Field Marshal #68

[The living standard of the Islamic civilization, as well as its per-capita income, is higher than some civlizations, while lower than others. It is lower than the Christian and Judiac civlization, but higher than the Hindu civilizations and African civilizations ]

You guys are pumping oil and so you have money. There wasn`t much money before the 1920s in Saudi Arabia. After the discovery of oil, the nomads built themselves palaces, traded in their camels for Cadillacs and are pretending to be civilized. You haven`t got a single product coming out of all of the Arab countries that is not related to oil or terrorism. The only Nobel prize was for literature to a guy who lamented the state terrorism inflicted on the Arab people themselves.

[I don`t know of any Muslim (other than Adan Sami Khan) who has migrated from a Muslim civlization to a Hindu civilization. Even though the total population of Muslims and Hindus in the world is about the same (1.2 billion each).]

Muslims don`t need to migrate to India. 120+ million Muslims are refusing to migrate to Pakistan. That is a good enough certificate.

[Not to mention what the Brahmans did (and still do) to the Shudars - to the extent that many Shudars switched their religion to Islam or Christianity voluntarily.]

Yes 5% switched to Christianity but the overwhelming superiority of Islam was so evident that over 30% switched voluntarily to Islam. The inconvenient fact is that 300 million Dalits are NOT converting today to Islam or Christianity though the law in India permits religious conversions.

[As for 71: It is obvious that Pakistan was the wrong party. ... The Kashmir conflict has been going on a lot longer than the 71 war (had the Kashmiris gotten their independence in 47, there may never have been a 71 war). Indian actions in Kashmir are no different than Pakistani actions in Bangladesh. How many Indians, other than you, accept their own country`s faults? Most actually go out of their way to justify it. At least give the Pakistanis this much credit.]

Has Pakistan officially apologized to Bangladesh? Have you actually settled the debts you owe them because the assets of Pakistan were never equitably divided after 1971 between the rump state of West Pakistan and Bangladesh? Have you paid reparations for killing millions of people and raping thousand of women? Have you guys attempted to pay for the exploitation of East Bengal between 1947 and 1971?

Didn`t the Chowk poll show that 90% of interactors don`t think Pakistan owes an apology to Bangladesh for the events of 1971?

As for independence for Kashmir in 1947, that was never envisaged by the India Independence Act. And all your cocodile tears does not alter the fact that Pakistan requires every candidate for elected office in ``Azad Kashmir`` to swear fealty to Pakistan and not to an independent Kashmir.

[In 71, India was also looking after its own strategic interests. It wasn`t out to liberate Bangladesh. It was out to split up Pakistan. Why would a country that was doing its best to suppress the Kashmiri Muslims be interested in, ``liberating`` Bangladeshi Muslims. A bit hypocritical, don`t you think?]

In 1971, no one was suppressing Kashmiri Muslims. The fact that the Pak Army infiltrators during Operation Gibraltar in 1965 were identified to the Indian Army by Kashmiri civilians is proof enough; nor did Kashmiris open a new front when India was otherwise occupied in Bangladesh. So stop this BS about ``oppression``. All the violence in Kashmir started in 1989 when Pakistan decided to send in unemployed Afghan-Arabs into Kashmir in a policy of death by a thousand cuts. Yep, the Indian Army gets tied down but primarily Kashmiri Muslims are the dead.

[The US did not stop Bangladesh from being liberated. It could have done that by threatening India over that. It just stopped a war on the Western border with West Pakistan. There is nothing wrong with that. Would you have rather had a war on the Western front also?]

Yes. A war on the western front with occupatiuon of Sindh and Balochistan would have given the US a different route into Afghanistan in 1979. Instead, they now have to put up with a nuclear-armed, mullah-crazed, Army dictatorship who have shown themselves capable of conquering only the Pakistani people and trading nukes with North Korea.

[If Pakistan was to send its military into Kashmir to kill people, I would oppose that.]

But it is okay to send in mujahideen to kill Kashmiris, I suppose.