A Challenge to My Co-religionists
Rasheed Talib April 29, 2003
#88 Posted by pmishra2 on May 2, 2003 10:29:06 am
#83 oh!greatly!Flatulent
[quote]
What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world??
[end-quote]
You sound more and more like a ten year old and less and less like an adult. Is the muslim world a collection of babies and sheep that others must address their feelings one way or the another? What kind of a mindless statement is this?
Why is ANYTHING owed to a muslim or a christain or a hindu????? Why are you unable to get up on your own two feet and achieve SOMETHING?
It is clear that serious political discussion is far beyond you. You belong completely to a certain kind of victim culture, a culture which does not take responsibility for its own development, a culture which believes it can get ahead by threatening violence against progressive societies.
Your comments are a vivid demonstration of the pakistani mindset. It is composed in equal parts of nonsensical use of phrases like ``freedom struggle`` for mass murder and repeated sectarian babbling about muslim this or muslim that. And the whole world understands the mindlessness of such an approach today....
[quote]
What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world??
[end-quote]
You sound more and more like a ten year old and less and less like an adult. Is the muslim world a collection of babies and sheep that others must address their feelings one way or the another? What kind of a mindless statement is this?
Why is ANYTHING owed to a muslim or a christain or a hindu????? Why are you unable to get up on your own two feet and achieve SOMETHING?
It is clear that serious political discussion is far beyond you. You belong completely to a certain kind of victim culture, a culture which does not take responsibility for its own development, a culture which believes it can get ahead by threatening violence against progressive societies.
Your comments are a vivid demonstration of the pakistani mindset. It is composed in equal parts of nonsensical use of phrases like ``freedom struggle`` for mass murder and repeated sectarian babbling about muslim this or muslim that. And the whole world understands the mindlessness of such an approach today....
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#87 Posted by sadna on May 2, 2003 10:29:06 am
HisExcellency #83
``What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world??Muslims feel that slogans of democracy, peace, freedom and human rights are just meant to serve ulterior political motives of America, India and Israel. ``
Exactly why is democracy in the Muslim world(for example in Pakistan) not a problem which Muslims must address , but a problem that NONMUSLIMS must address?
Afterall everytime an Indian even talks of democracy in Pakistan on chowk, he/she is pooh-poohed by people like you. Even say in the last discussion you and I had on primary education to be provided by government, for example, you as a Pakistani kept telling me a nonMuslim nonPakistani how ignorant and wrong I was to say that one of the priorities of state wrt its people should be basic education.
Still on education, the foreign-funded NGOs and the girls schools set up by them are the target of fundamentalists ire in Pakistan. The fundamentalists are demanding that these NGOs wind up and move out. Why am I responsible as a nonMuslim Indian for this state of affairs, but you being a Pakistani Muslim are not responsible?
Why am I as a Indian responsible for the MMA coming to power in NWFP? Why am I responsible as a nonMuslim for the hundreds of millions of dollars Arab countries provide to Pakistani religious organisations for religious propagation which provides the impetus to fundamentalism, but you as Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why am I as a nonMuslim Indian responsible for the corruption which has resulted in loan defaulters being let off in Pakistan, in elections being rigged, in the constitution being violated repeatedly, in the Army shunning BB and NS but cuddling up to MMA, but you as a Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why am I as nonMuslim Indian responsible for the blasphemy law in Pakistan where judgements are passed with fundos shouting in the audience and for the Hudood ordinances under which women are punished for being raped, but you as Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why the heck did you folks demand a separate state if you are not willing to take responsibility for anything?
``What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world??Muslims feel that slogans of democracy, peace, freedom and human rights are just meant to serve ulterior political motives of America, India and Israel. ``
Exactly why is democracy in the Muslim world(for example in Pakistan) not a problem which Muslims must address , but a problem that NONMUSLIMS must address?
Afterall everytime an Indian even talks of democracy in Pakistan on chowk, he/she is pooh-poohed by people like you. Even say in the last discussion you and I had on primary education to be provided by government, for example, you as a Pakistani kept telling me a nonMuslim nonPakistani how ignorant and wrong I was to say that one of the priorities of state wrt its people should be basic education.
Still on education, the foreign-funded NGOs and the girls schools set up by them are the target of fundamentalists ire in Pakistan. The fundamentalists are demanding that these NGOs wind up and move out. Why am I responsible as a nonMuslim Indian for this state of affairs, but you being a Pakistani Muslim are not responsible?
Why am I as a Indian responsible for the MMA coming to power in NWFP? Why am I responsible as a nonMuslim for the hundreds of millions of dollars Arab countries provide to Pakistani religious organisations for religious propagation which provides the impetus to fundamentalism, but you as Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why am I as a nonMuslim Indian responsible for the corruption which has resulted in loan defaulters being let off in Pakistan, in elections being rigged, in the constitution being violated repeatedly, in the Army shunning BB and NS but cuddling up to MMA, but you as a Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why am I as nonMuslim Indian responsible for the blasphemy law in Pakistan where judgements are passed with fundos shouting in the audience and for the Hudood ordinances under which women are punished for being raped, but you as Muslim Pakistani are not responsible?
Why the heck did you folks demand a separate state if you are not willing to take responsibility for anything?
#86 Posted by ZafarA on May 2, 2003 8:45:12 am
``Its understandable as you`re probably a kid. But you`ll learn as you`re inquisitive.``
Mashallah, Mr Al-Talib. A questioning mind and open-ness to ideas is a sign of youthfulness - clearly a cause for envy among some of our more constipated friends here. IMO you received a backhanded compliment, albeit an unintended and somewhat smallhearted one?
I, for one, salute you. Please keep it up.
Mashallah, Mr Al-Talib. A questioning mind and open-ness to ideas is a sign of youthfulness - clearly a cause for envy among some of our more constipated friends here. IMO you received a backhanded compliment, albeit an unintended and somewhat smallhearted one?
I, for one, salute you. Please keep it up.
#85 Posted by zeemax on May 2, 2003 8:45:12 am
#71 by HisExcellency “Occupation IS the disease. Fundamentalism is just its symptom.
Well said. After all it all started with the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. Now Iraq is turning into another Gaza Strip. Hosni Mubarek was correct in saying to the effect that now there is one Osama Bin Laden, afterwards there’ll be 100.
The events in Fallujah are significant. After the Americans killed 17 unarmed civilians, who were only protesting to get their kids back to the school sequestered for use as a dormitory for the Americans, the crowd was back again the next day, and another two were picked off. Someone had thrown a shoe at a Humvee and they answered with a barrage of machine gun 32 calibre bullets. The explanation was how could the soldiers differentiate between a shoe and a grenade? Marvelous. All when these guys are equipped with binoculars and were watching each one in the crowd all the time. Why they did it was because the entire protesting crowd was nothing but ‘damn eyeraqis’ whose lives are not worth anything. It was 17 less for them.
There was an account from one of the US soldiers of the first incident. He said “There was this eyeraqi with a Kalashnikov and he shot at us. So I put a round in him. He fell down but was trying to hand another eyeraqi his weapon. So I put another round in him. After that he didn’t move”. The tone was dismissive.
Bullets are ‘rounds’. Sounds technical and less stigmatic than ‘bullets’, which are associated with killing.
Who knows the Kalashnikov even existed? The media is questioning that as no arms were seized by the Americans from that crowd.
Quite illustrative of the mindset.
Then someone tossed two grenades into the American compound, so they moved out of there. It`ll continue.
When you said in #67When somebody enters your home, seizes your property and refuses to leave, you have a natural, universal right to resist with whatever means necessary. Such resistance is self-defense and self-preservation, not terrorism. You actually wrote the definition of the circumstances only when Jehad is justified as proscribed in the Qura’an. I don’t know whether you did it unwittingly or with full knowledge, but that is exactly it.
In any event, now that Vajpai and the Pakistani PM (now Jamali) are on a mutual flirtation course again, let the process continue. I wish there would be a thaw on Chowk as well between the Indian/Pakistani interactors. After all, some of us may even be opinion leaders in our respective countries.
Rgds
Well said. After all it all started with the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. Now Iraq is turning into another Gaza Strip. Hosni Mubarek was correct in saying to the effect that now there is one Osama Bin Laden, afterwards there’ll be 100.
The events in Fallujah are significant. After the Americans killed 17 unarmed civilians, who were only protesting to get their kids back to the school sequestered for use as a dormitory for the Americans, the crowd was back again the next day, and another two were picked off. Someone had thrown a shoe at a Humvee and they answered with a barrage of machine gun 32 calibre bullets. The explanation was how could the soldiers differentiate between a shoe and a grenade? Marvelous. All when these guys are equipped with binoculars and were watching each one in the crowd all the time. Why they did it was because the entire protesting crowd was nothing but ‘damn eyeraqis’ whose lives are not worth anything. It was 17 less for them.
There was an account from one of the US soldiers of the first incident. He said “There was this eyeraqi with a Kalashnikov and he shot at us. So I put a round in him. He fell down but was trying to hand another eyeraqi his weapon. So I put another round in him. After that he didn’t move”. The tone was dismissive.
Bullets are ‘rounds’. Sounds technical and less stigmatic than ‘bullets’, which are associated with killing.
Who knows the Kalashnikov even existed? The media is questioning that as no arms were seized by the Americans from that crowd.
Quite illustrative of the mindset.
Then someone tossed two grenades into the American compound, so they moved out of there. It`ll continue.
When you said in #67When somebody enters your home, seizes your property and refuses to leave, you have a natural, universal right to resist with whatever means necessary. Such resistance is self-defense and self-preservation, not terrorism. You actually wrote the definition of the circumstances only when Jehad is justified as proscribed in the Qura’an. I don’t know whether you did it unwittingly or with full knowledge, but that is exactly it.
In any event, now that Vajpai and the Pakistani PM (now Jamali) are on a mutual flirtation course again, let the process continue. I wish there would be a thaw on Chowk as well between the Indian/Pakistani interactors. After all, some of us may even be opinion leaders in our respective countries.
Rgds
#84 Posted by HisExcellency on May 2, 2003 8:45:12 am
#81 by arjun_m
++
So the Paki army forced the taliban down the throats of the Afghans because it was thinking about the welfare of the Afghans? The Paki wet dream of strategic depth had nothing to do with it?
++
Agreed that during the last 3-4 years of Taliban rule, Afghans suffered a lot. But you still didn`t answer the question: What about the remaining 8 years?? Where was America during those crucial years??
Afghan war was thrust upon Pakistan, but for America there was no compulsion to fight the war. Why did America enter the fray?? Why did America leave without even saying ``see ya``??
++
So the Paki army forced the taliban down the throats of the Afghans because it was thinking about the welfare of the Afghans? The Paki wet dream of strategic depth had nothing to do with it?
++
Agreed that during the last 3-4 years of Taliban rule, Afghans suffered a lot. But you still didn`t answer the question: What about the remaining 8 years?? Where was America during those crucial years??
Afghan war was thrust upon Pakistan, but for America there was no compulsion to fight the war. Why did America enter the fray?? Why did America leave without even saying ``see ya``??
#83 Posted by HisExcellency on May 2, 2003 8:45:11 am
#75 by dost-mittar
#74 by Saminasha
I am not aware of the Jan Sangh speech so can`t comment on it.
My point in stoking debate on fundamentalism is simply this..
It is very convenient & hypocritical for non-Muslims and Muslim liberals to blame Islamic fundamentalists and radicals for the terrorism and a likely clash of civilizations. What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world?? Muslims feel that slogans of democracy, peace, freedom and human rights are just meant to serve ulterior political motives of America, India and Israel. Any government or international body (e.g. UN) that tries to check their abuse of power, is deemed ``irrelevant`` and ``biased``.
Practically there is no peaceful way left for Muslims to resolve their conflicts. Even in places where Muslims are in a majority (e.g. Kashmir) or in their homelands (e.g. Palestine), they are denied human rights. The average Palestinian has to go through dozens of checkpoints, and travel several miles on foot every day just to get from one part of the city to another.
Violence is seen as the only alternative left for a nation that perceives itself as being pushed against the wall in the name of so-called democracy, freedom and America`s new world order.
I believe non-Muslim nations, especially Israel and India ought to reflect on their attitude as well. By keeping their side of the promises and UN resolutions, Israel/India can smash the fundamentalist bubble. This is the only way of depriving fundamentalists of the moral high ground that they are winning all over the Muslim world.
Otherwise, these people will grow from strength to strength. With each Palestinian and Kashmiri death, and fresh US invasion or threat to a Muslim state... a moderate Muslim switches over to the fundamentalist side. Liberals are losing faith in America.
#74 by Saminasha
I am not aware of the Jan Sangh speech so can`t comment on it.
My point in stoking debate on fundamentalism is simply this..
It is very convenient & hypocritical for non-Muslims and Muslim liberals to blame Islamic fundamentalists and radicals for the terrorism and a likely clash of civilizations. What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world?? Muslims feel that slogans of democracy, peace, freedom and human rights are just meant to serve ulterior political motives of America, India and Israel. Any government or international body (e.g. UN) that tries to check their abuse of power, is deemed ``irrelevant`` and ``biased``.
Practically there is no peaceful way left for Muslims to resolve their conflicts. Even in places where Muslims are in a majority (e.g. Kashmir) or in their homelands (e.g. Palestine), they are denied human rights. The average Palestinian has to go through dozens of checkpoints, and travel several miles on foot every day just to get from one part of the city to another.
Violence is seen as the only alternative left for a nation that perceives itself as being pushed against the wall in the name of so-called democracy, freedom and America`s new world order.
I believe non-Muslim nations, especially Israel and India ought to reflect on their attitude as well. By keeping their side of the promises and UN resolutions, Israel/India can smash the fundamentalist bubble. This is the only way of depriving fundamentalists of the moral high ground that they are winning all over the Muslim world.
Otherwise, these people will grow from strength to strength. With each Palestinian and Kashmiri death, and fresh US invasion or threat to a Muslim state... a moderate Muslim switches over to the fundamentalist side. Liberals are losing faith in America.
#82 Posted by Saminasha on May 2, 2003 6:45:04 am
12 head,
No it is not easy for you, brcause unlike Hammad, Talib and countless others with whom you disagree, instead of living with the complexity, contradiction and negotiation of having many identities as a human being, you`d rather reduce it to one. You are a Muslim, as you write, and nothing is as important. Unfortunately, while others can be Muslims AND leave themselves open to other identities AND think and act critically between their identities, you have to make every identity secondary to an interpretation of Islam that in essence is in conflict with them. That is why WE have to deal with your 25 odd manifestations of ideas that you cannot reconcile with Studebaker-instead we are pestered by Tipu, Shah, Brad Cruise, Kamala, Sadhana, etc.
Your problem is not ours, and we should not have to hear your excuses of why your intolerant interpretation of Islam has made you a cyber schizo.
No it is not easy for you, brcause unlike Hammad, Talib and countless others with whom you disagree, instead of living with the complexity, contradiction and negotiation of having many identities as a human being, you`d rather reduce it to one. You are a Muslim, as you write, and nothing is as important. Unfortunately, while others can be Muslims AND leave themselves open to other identities AND think and act critically between their identities, you have to make every identity secondary to an interpretation of Islam that in essence is in conflict with them. That is why WE have to deal with your 25 odd manifestations of ideas that you cannot reconcile with Studebaker-instead we are pestered by Tipu, Shah, Brad Cruise, Kamala, Sadhana, etc.
Your problem is not ours, and we should not have to hear your excuses of why your intolerant interpretation of Islam has made you a cyber schizo.
#81 Posted by arjun_m on May 2, 2003 6:45:04 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#80 Posted by arjun_m on May 2, 2003 6:45:04 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#79 Posted by zeemax on May 2, 2003 6:45:03 am
#77 by Studebaker “Zeemax He is your Buzurg .unless you are over 80 yrs old your self.He is your fathers age. Plz opologize for being flippant no matter what you may think of his article
He’s really? I do have great respect for age and experience, though a degree of contempt for uninformed upstarts that shows sometimes. But at that age surely he knows many things we don’t.
My unconditional and profuse apologies to Rasheed Saheb. I hope these will be accepted in due magnanimity. Thanks for pointing it out.
Rgds
He’s really? I do have great respect for age and experience, though a degree of contempt for uninformed upstarts that shows sometimes. But at that age surely he knows many things we don’t.
My unconditional and profuse apologies to Rasheed Saheb. I hope these will be accepted in due magnanimity. Thanks for pointing it out.
Rgds
#78 Posted by Studebaker on May 1, 2003 10:24:30 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#77 Posted by Studebaker on May 1, 2003 10:20:15 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#76 Posted by Studebaker on May 1, 2003 10:20:15 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#75 Posted by dost_mittar on May 1, 2003 9:47:39 pm
His Excellency:
``When somebody enters your home, seizes your property and refuses to leave, you have a natural, universal right to resist with whatever means necessary. ``
By a strange coincidence these were almost the exact words (in shudh hindi, of course!) that I heard from the mouth of a Jan Sangh speaker back in the `60s wrt India and you-know-who. He wanted his audience to emulate Shivaji and Pratap who, according to him, were doing the same.
OF COURSE HE WAS WRONG!
``When somebody enters your home, seizes your property and refuses to leave, you have a natural, universal right to resist with whatever means necessary. ``
By a strange coincidence these were almost the exact words (in shudh hindi, of course!) that I heard from the mouth of a Jan Sangh speaker back in the `60s wrt India and you-know-who. He wanted his audience to emulate Shivaji and Pratap who, according to him, were doing the same.
OF COURSE HE WAS WRONG!
#74 Posted by HisExcellency on May 1, 2003 8:01:54 pm
re: #66 by arjun_m
++
Of course, Pakistan forcing the taliban down the throats of the Afghans had nothing to do with it
++
Dude, get your history right. Taliban came to power EIGHT years after the Americans left Afghanistan in totters. During those eight years, Afghanistan slipped into civil war.
In 1992, Pakistan facilitated an Islamabad Accord under which Burhanuddin Rabbani, Ahmed Shah Masoud and Hekmatyar agreed to share power. Rabbani promised to hold general elections and then cede power to the elected leaders.
In less than 14 months, Rabbani went back on his word. He tried to marginalize the other factions. Since Pakistan had underwritten this Accord, it was natural for Pakistan to punish Rabbani for violating the peace agreement.
Between 1988 and 1996, there were thousands of civilian casualties because of internecine warfare. Kidnapping for ransom increased tenfold in South Waziristan and parts of Baluchistan. Despite these kidnappings of Pakistani civilians by Afghan warlords, Pakistan govt. supported reconciliation of Afghans.
Taliban ruled Afghanistan for only 5 years. Despite their brutality, they maintained peace and stability in Afghanistan. What about the remaining 8 years?? Where was America during those crucial years??
++
Of course, Pakistan forcing the taliban down the throats of the Afghans had nothing to do with it
++
Dude, get your history right. Taliban came to power EIGHT years after the Americans left Afghanistan in totters. During those eight years, Afghanistan slipped into civil war.
In 1992, Pakistan facilitated an Islamabad Accord under which Burhanuddin Rabbani, Ahmed Shah Masoud and Hekmatyar agreed to share power. Rabbani promised to hold general elections and then cede power to the elected leaders.
In less than 14 months, Rabbani went back on his word. He tried to marginalize the other factions. Since Pakistan had underwritten this Accord, it was natural for Pakistan to punish Rabbani for violating the peace agreement.
Between 1988 and 1996, there were thousands of civilian casualties because of internecine warfare. Kidnapping for ransom increased tenfold in South Waziristan and parts of Baluchistan. Despite these kidnappings of Pakistani civilians by Afghan warlords, Pakistan govt. supported reconciliation of Afghans.
Taliban ruled Afghanistan for only 5 years. Despite their brutality, they maintained peace and stability in Afghanistan. What about the remaining 8 years?? Where was America during those crucial years??
#73 Posted by pmishra2 on May 1, 2003 8:01:54 pm
#67 His!Great!Flatulence
Thanks for your lecture on peaceful resistance. As you come from a culture that has no history of peaceful resistance or democratic functioning, it is most appropriate that you should give us a lecture on
peaceful resistance. A butcher giving instruction on vegetarianism would be more credible.
As for your beliefs that that jihadist terrorism in J&K is freedom struggle, well, that must mean the murders and bombings in Karachi and elsewhere in Pakistan are also forms of freedom struggle. I hope you are supporting these forms of extremism. Who knows maybe one of these days you or your family may get liberated by a ``freedom fighter``. Wouldnt that be delightful? Remember, just cause justifies everything.....
Till 9/11 your friends in China and the USA were A OK with this freedom struggle crap. Why? Because only indians were being killed. Today that story is over. Everyone undersytands the poision of terrorism originating from Pakistan. Nonsensical statements that attacking the State Legislature in Srinagar and killing civilians are ``freedom struggle`` can only help you get added to the list of terrorism sympathizers.
Thanks for your lecture on peaceful resistance. As you come from a culture that has no history of peaceful resistance or democratic functioning, it is most appropriate that you should give us a lecture on
peaceful resistance. A butcher giving instruction on vegetarianism would be more credible.
As for your beliefs that that jihadist terrorism in J&K is freedom struggle, well, that must mean the murders and bombings in Karachi and elsewhere in Pakistan are also forms of freedom struggle. I hope you are supporting these forms of extremism. Who knows maybe one of these days you or your family may get liberated by a ``freedom fighter``. Wouldnt that be delightful? Remember, just cause justifies everything.....
Till 9/11 your friends in China and the USA were A OK with this freedom struggle crap. Why? Because only indians were being killed. Today that story is over. Everyone undersytands the poision of terrorism originating from Pakistan. Nonsensical statements that attacking the State Legislature in Srinagar and killing civilians are ``freedom struggle`` can only help you get added to the list of terrorism sympathizers.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- dost_mittar: KaalChakra: This is from your... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- sadna: kaal For many years I've... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- mohar11: countless maass murders have... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- KaalChakra: first, and to what... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- KaalChakra: I think our discussion... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- KaalChakra: rahul, there has never... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- rahul_capri: sadna,I just read it,thanks.I... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- KaalChakra: Sadna, ok, a question. We... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
