London Targeted: Numbers Game
Temporal July 7, 2005
#98 Posted by anil on July 10, 2005 2:56:01 pm
Re: # 96
Romair: ``... simply is NOT ISLAM`` is something I have said. Your interacts generally carry 100,000 people in Iraq, etc. tagged and give an indication of cluttering up the issue.
I notice that ISLAM is being assigned different qualifiers.... by different people at different times. Like political ISLAM, peaceful ISLAM, and then obvious claims to ISLAM and in the name of ISLAM being made to commit murderous and terrorist acts. It is in this context that I am trying to raise my questions. Why allow such qualifiers, and acts being performed for ISLAM or in the name of ISLAM. Its believers should not permit it, and expel those who perpetrate such act while within the tent.
For example, Political Islam has been implied to mean extremist activities of the type I am calling Binladinism or Al-Qaidaism. My question, then how about the peaceful and democractic election in Iran too. This alsow showed a peaceful transfer of power to a democratically elected new government, which is more rigid. So was the peaceful transfer of power in India earlier from Congress to BJP and then back Congress. Hardly, anyone can substantiate that Rafshanjani would have tempered the election process to defeat itself. What legs any arguments against Iranian elections will have. Even the White House was found searching for words to describe the Iranian election process.
Project from here, and ask why no one terms political hinduism to Indian democracy, or political christianity to the U.S. politics and British politicals. Church of England at one time was very strong in England and English politics, and now it is side lined altogether. This process of side lining is needed in Islamic countries too.
Accepting or allowing any group to add qualifier eventually prevents a natural evolution of separation of church and state, and prevents reforms. This is my point. There must be people within the Islam tent who are fed up of Al Qaidaism and Bin Ladinism, if not, both the West and the East will then continue to put pressure, till such group emerges to lead peaceful Islam out or throw Al-Qaidism and Binladinism out of the Islam tent. Until then we all will have to put up with it whether we live in Canada, England, the U.S., Pakistan or India.
I think you are misreading Blair statement. The Brits have the grits to ensure, a come back even after Dunkirk. The laws their are not as open as in the U.S. State has greater and wide ranging powers to control and act in secret. God forbid, if the bombers are from the British-Pakistani group. They would ensure that the mosques, and madrasas there are purged and cleaned as part of this cancer treatment to the extent that is not possible in the U.S. due to bill of rights. Brits have no such bill of rights. It is all common law.
Anil Kapuria
Romair: ``... simply is NOT ISLAM`` is something I have said. Your interacts generally carry 100,000 people in Iraq, etc. tagged and give an indication of cluttering up the issue.
I notice that ISLAM is being assigned different qualifiers.... by different people at different times. Like political ISLAM, peaceful ISLAM, and then obvious claims to ISLAM and in the name of ISLAM being made to commit murderous and terrorist acts. It is in this context that I am trying to raise my questions. Why allow such qualifiers, and acts being performed for ISLAM or in the name of ISLAM. Its believers should not permit it, and expel those who perpetrate such act while within the tent.
For example, Political Islam has been implied to mean extremist activities of the type I am calling Binladinism or Al-Qaidaism. My question, then how about the peaceful and democractic election in Iran too. This alsow showed a peaceful transfer of power to a democratically elected new government, which is more rigid. So was the peaceful transfer of power in India earlier from Congress to BJP and then back Congress. Hardly, anyone can substantiate that Rafshanjani would have tempered the election process to defeat itself. What legs any arguments against Iranian elections will have. Even the White House was found searching for words to describe the Iranian election process.
Project from here, and ask why no one terms political hinduism to Indian democracy, or political christianity to the U.S. politics and British politicals. Church of England at one time was very strong in England and English politics, and now it is side lined altogether. This process of side lining is needed in Islamic countries too.
Accepting or allowing any group to add qualifier eventually prevents a natural evolution of separation of church and state, and prevents reforms. This is my point. There must be people within the Islam tent who are fed up of Al Qaidaism and Bin Ladinism, if not, both the West and the East will then continue to put pressure, till such group emerges to lead peaceful Islam out or throw Al-Qaidism and Binladinism out of the Islam tent. Until then we all will have to put up with it whether we live in Canada, England, the U.S., Pakistan or India.
I think you are misreading Blair statement. The Brits have the grits to ensure, a come back even after Dunkirk. The laws their are not as open as in the U.S. State has greater and wide ranging powers to control and act in secret. God forbid, if the bombers are from the British-Pakistani group. They would ensure that the mosques, and madrasas there are purged and cleaned as part of this cancer treatment to the extent that is not possible in the U.S. due to bill of rights. Brits have no such bill of rights. It is all common law.
Anil Kapuria
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#93 Posted by HP on July 10, 2005 11:11:23 am
#79 by ferozk
Feroz,
All your points from a moral pov may have some significance but from a political and social pov have no meaning. This pontification against a political reality that exists today appears little out of place or may be way before its time.
Last night I was in a party where one visiting Pakistani poet was asked to read his poems. One of the poems was titled “Bush” and it went on to depict Bush pretty much a monster. I was amazed by the response this poem got from about 150 well educated and well placed Pakistanis. About 70% of them were enthusiastic in praising it and pretty every verse got a huge Wah, Wah and encore requests.
If this is the kind of response you see from a crowd that we assume should be at least discerning and judicious about terrorism and legitimate political struggle and If these people are the representative of the people in Pakistan or may be the all Arab world, then I am afraid none of the ten items in your post will be heeded to by anybody in the so called Muslim world at least not now.
The position we must ponder is whether the conflict between the two forces has reached a point where talks of some truce are viable? Your ten action items could be the beginning of a truce where both parties are ready to review some of their actions before they come to the table.
In my opinion that point has NOT reached yet and the likelihood of both parties persevering with the conflict are promising.
When we peel thru the gibberish of Islam, Muslims, victimhood and the so-called root cause Palestine wild theories, what do we actually find is that the whole Jihadi effort is to gain political legitimacy either in the form of acceptance by the Muslim countries or share of some power in Saudi Arabia or the power itself in Saudi Arabia. The control of the Oil wells in the Arab world and political power especially in Saudi Arabia or may be Pakistan are the ultimate and stated goals of the Jihadi supporters and various organizations that support the Jihadi effort and provide a tacit legitimacy to the act of terrorism in the eyes of the general Muslim masses.
The obvious Jihadi goal of control of Oil, control of Muslim holy places, and the political power in the Arab world cannot sit well with the US and the west. So the conflict would continue and any talk of acceptance or denouncement of any thing by Muslims at this point appears mute and not plausible.
Muslims would probably be more inclined to consider your proposals when they see two things:
1. The West has found a way to counter the Jihadi ability to inflict a low- tech but high impact offensive such as the London bombing.
2. The political set up in the Saudi Arabia or the ME countries with oil has been sufficiently altered to reflect at least some of Jihadi political demands OR deprive them of the ability to control them.
The West so far has not been able to effectively deal with No.1 and as long as the Jihadi have this ability to rattle a few windows every now and then, I see no chance of any remorse showing up in the Jihadi supporters.
The US recognizes the importance of Number 2 above. The first US instinct was to secure oil supplies and the weakest link was Iraq. The US went in Iraq. The other two countries that Jihadi covet are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for obvious reasons. Both have strong US support and the US is also pushing them for some reforms in the system to increase participation of centrists in Pakistan. The lack of any moderate political group within the Saudi Arabia has been a thorn on the US side. The monarchy can go as far and removal of the monarchy may open the powder keg.
Since it will take a while for the West to find and implement solution for both 1 and 2 above, the likelihood of this conflict continuing for unforeseeable future are tremendously bright and your proposed actions are not viable options.
AFA Muslims in the West are concerned; they have to fend off for themselves as they too overwhelmingly oppose the West due to their victim mentality. There numbers are not large enough for the Jihadis to worry about them nor do they pose a huge problem for the West. The West can always put enough pressure on them to make them take pro-west stand eventually.
#80 by ozerkhalid
Ozer,
Don’t twist what I said in my post. Don’t try to out smart yourself.
Feroz,
All your points from a moral pov may have some significance but from a political and social pov have no meaning. This pontification against a political reality that exists today appears little out of place or may be way before its time.
Last night I was in a party where one visiting Pakistani poet was asked to read his poems. One of the poems was titled “Bush” and it went on to depict Bush pretty much a monster. I was amazed by the response this poem got from about 150 well educated and well placed Pakistanis. About 70% of them were enthusiastic in praising it and pretty every verse got a huge Wah, Wah and encore requests.
If this is the kind of response you see from a crowd that we assume should be at least discerning and judicious about terrorism and legitimate political struggle and If these people are the representative of the people in Pakistan or may be the all Arab world, then I am afraid none of the ten items in your post will be heeded to by anybody in the so called Muslim world at least not now.
The position we must ponder is whether the conflict between the two forces has reached a point where talks of some truce are viable? Your ten action items could be the beginning of a truce where both parties are ready to review some of their actions before they come to the table.
In my opinion that point has NOT reached yet and the likelihood of both parties persevering with the conflict are promising.
When we peel thru the gibberish of Islam, Muslims, victimhood and the so-called root cause Palestine wild theories, what do we actually find is that the whole Jihadi effort is to gain political legitimacy either in the form of acceptance by the Muslim countries or share of some power in Saudi Arabia or the power itself in Saudi Arabia. The control of the Oil wells in the Arab world and political power especially in Saudi Arabia or may be Pakistan are the ultimate and stated goals of the Jihadi supporters and various organizations that support the Jihadi effort and provide a tacit legitimacy to the act of terrorism in the eyes of the general Muslim masses.
The obvious Jihadi goal of control of Oil, control of Muslim holy places, and the political power in the Arab world cannot sit well with the US and the west. So the conflict would continue and any talk of acceptance or denouncement of any thing by Muslims at this point appears mute and not plausible.
Muslims would probably be more inclined to consider your proposals when they see two things:
1. The West has found a way to counter the Jihadi ability to inflict a low- tech but high impact offensive such as the London bombing.
2. The political set up in the Saudi Arabia or the ME countries with oil has been sufficiently altered to reflect at least some of Jihadi political demands OR deprive them of the ability to control them.
The West so far has not been able to effectively deal with No.1 and as long as the Jihadi have this ability to rattle a few windows every now and then, I see no chance of any remorse showing up in the Jihadi supporters.
The US recognizes the importance of Number 2 above. The first US instinct was to secure oil supplies and the weakest link was Iraq. The US went in Iraq. The other two countries that Jihadi covet are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for obvious reasons. Both have strong US support and the US is also pushing them for some reforms in the system to increase participation of centrists in Pakistan. The lack of any moderate political group within the Saudi Arabia has been a thorn on the US side. The monarchy can go as far and removal of the monarchy may open the powder keg.
Since it will take a while for the West to find and implement solution for both 1 and 2 above, the likelihood of this conflict continuing for unforeseeable future are tremendously bright and your proposed actions are not viable options.
AFA Muslims in the West are concerned; they have to fend off for themselves as they too overwhelmingly oppose the West due to their victim mentality. There numbers are not large enough for the Jihadis to worry about them nor do they pose a huge problem for the West. The West can always put enough pressure on them to make them take pro-west stand eventually.
#80 by ozerkhalid
Ozer,
Don’t twist what I said in my post. Don’t try to out smart yourself.
#92 Posted by Romair on July 10, 2005 10:34:16 am
Dost-mittar #76: ``You don`t want to be like the driver of the volkswagon in the right lane who refused to swerve upon seeing a truck coming in the same lane from the opposite direction. He was right. Dead Right!.......Since you are prone to misread/misinterpret my posts, please don`t think that I am predicting your death. It`s just an expression. :-)``
Thanks for the clarification.........
You may have a point. Though I think you are greatly underestimating my driving skills. If the truck is in the wrong lane, I think I can swerve and avoid it, and then get back in my lane again.
Another thing you may want to keep in mind: I can swerve and avoid the truck, or take an exit and go onto a different highway. However, sooner or later, if the truck does not get into its correct lane, it is bound to crash.......
One has to have certain principles in life. And a certain set of core values. And one should be willing to stand by them, regardless of the pressures. And one should be willing to apply them, consistently, across the board, regardless of religion, creed, race, nationality, etc. For example, one cannot support occupations by one`s own country and oppose the occupation of one`s own country.........
Everytime, in my life, when I have comprimised on my principles, under the kind of pressure, you have mentioned, I have lost out. And whenever I have stuck to my guns, on my principles, I have won out. If not in the short run, then in the long run.
Two years ago, I was against the Iraq War, even though many of our, ``hot-airs`` on this site were having a heyday rejoicing over it. I was called all sorts of names, and what not. Now, two years later, 60% of the US population, itself agrees with me. And the, ``hot-airs`` are on the run.
Similarly, while I have called the actions of Al-Qaeda, ``terrorism,`` (as have most other people), I have also called the actions of George Bush and the subsequent killings, ``terrorism.`` I think both Bush and OBL should be put under trial, by an International Criminal Court. Once again, the, ``hot-airs`` are having a field-day. But I can make a bet with you, in five years, or ten years, or fifteen years, the Iraqis, themselves, will set up some kind of a Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal, and they will, themsleves, declare the war on Iraq to be terrorism..........
Similarly, I will never agree to, nor accomodate, guilt by religious association. If I can protect others from it, I will. And if I have to take a stand against it, I will. Regardless of the circumstances or consequences. While I don`t see that happening in Canada, anytime soon, if it were to occur, Canada would be the loser. Not me. And if in the process, my little Volkswagon, despite being on the right side of the street, were to get run over by a Bombardier Go Train; so be it.
But I can make a bet with you: twenty years down the road, or thirty years down the road, when the dust settles, Canadians, themselves, will appreciate what I did, and will put my little broken up Volkswagon in a museum......
Thanks for the clarification.........
You may have a point. Though I think you are greatly underestimating my driving skills. If the truck is in the wrong lane, I think I can swerve and avoid it, and then get back in my lane again.
Another thing you may want to keep in mind: I can swerve and avoid the truck, or take an exit and go onto a different highway. However, sooner or later, if the truck does not get into its correct lane, it is bound to crash.......
One has to have certain principles in life. And a certain set of core values. And one should be willing to stand by them, regardless of the pressures. And one should be willing to apply them, consistently, across the board, regardless of religion, creed, race, nationality, etc. For example, one cannot support occupations by one`s own country and oppose the occupation of one`s own country.........
Everytime, in my life, when I have comprimised on my principles, under the kind of pressure, you have mentioned, I have lost out. And whenever I have stuck to my guns, on my principles, I have won out. If not in the short run, then in the long run.
Two years ago, I was against the Iraq War, even though many of our, ``hot-airs`` on this site were having a heyday rejoicing over it. I was called all sorts of names, and what not. Now, two years later, 60% of the US population, itself agrees with me. And the, ``hot-airs`` are on the run.
Similarly, while I have called the actions of Al-Qaeda, ``terrorism,`` (as have most other people), I have also called the actions of George Bush and the subsequent killings, ``terrorism.`` I think both Bush and OBL should be put under trial, by an International Criminal Court. Once again, the, ``hot-airs`` are having a field-day. But I can make a bet with you, in five years, or ten years, or fifteen years, the Iraqis, themselves, will set up some kind of a Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal, and they will, themsleves, declare the war on Iraq to be terrorism..........
Similarly, I will never agree to, nor accomodate, guilt by religious association. If I can protect others from it, I will. And if I have to take a stand against it, I will. Regardless of the circumstances or consequences. While I don`t see that happening in Canada, anytime soon, if it were to occur, Canada would be the loser. Not me. And if in the process, my little Volkswagon, despite being on the right side of the street, were to get run over by a Bombardier Go Train; so be it.
But I can make a bet with you: twenty years down the road, or thirty years down the road, when the dust settles, Canadians, themselves, will appreciate what I did, and will put my little broken up Volkswagon in a museum......
#91 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 10:27:55 am
further to #90 and so, unless he responds, and unless that response is a simple ``Yes`` or ``No``, i am afraid the answer to your (hamidm`s) question is that Mr. Romair indeed is a monkey in the peanut gallery.
#90 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 10:23:03 am
hamidm #87 Am I calling romair a monkey? Lets see how he responds:
Mr. Romair: Do you think that the London bombings is the work of criminals?
No response to the above would prove Mr. Romair does not understand plain english. A reponse other than a simple ``Yes`` or ``No`` would prove that field marshall romair cant tell his rear from a hole in the ground.
Mr. Romair: Do you think that the London bombings is the work of criminals?
No response to the above would prove Mr. Romair does not understand plain english. A reponse other than a simple ``Yes`` or ``No`` would prove that field marshall romair cant tell his rear from a hole in the ground.
#89 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 10:19:10 am
mt t: Please dont misrepresent the facts here by drawing parallels between George Bush and Osama bin Laden. These are too important issues - real people, innocent people, are being targetted and killed - to play word games here.
When ben laden refers to ``Us`` he means the ``Muslim Ummah`` (i.e. all muslims who sympathize with him). And by ``Them`` he refers to ``Crusaders``, and the actions of his followers make it clear that ``Crusaders`` includes all those who are not the ``Muslim Ummah``.
When Bush refers to ``Us``, he refers to all those who do not follow ben Laden`s creed. This includes muslims - after 9/11, Bush spoke out loud and clear before Congress about the muslims being a decent people. Then he visited the washington mosque to re-assure muslims. And ordinary americans around the country went out of their way to express solidarity with the US muslim community.
So, please dont fall into this trap of following the rut that too many muslims are following. Leave this is moral equivocation and misrepresentation of facts to lesser individuals than yourself.
When ben laden refers to ``Us`` he means the ``Muslim Ummah`` (i.e. all muslims who sympathize with him). And by ``Them`` he refers to ``Crusaders``, and the actions of his followers make it clear that ``Crusaders`` includes all those who are not the ``Muslim Ummah``.
When Bush refers to ``Us``, he refers to all those who do not follow ben Laden`s creed. This includes muslims - after 9/11, Bush spoke out loud and clear before Congress about the muslims being a decent people. Then he visited the washington mosque to re-assure muslims. And ordinary americans around the country went out of their way to express solidarity with the US muslim community.
So, please dont fall into this trap of following the rut that too many muslims are following. Leave this is moral equivocation and misrepresentation of facts to lesser individuals than yourself.
#88 Posted by Romair on July 10, 2005 10:13:54 am
hamidm mian #80: You are rapidly turning into the Bill O`Rielly and Rush Limbaugh of this site. It is about time that the hot air was pricked out of all of you. All of you have made a living attacking others, by putting words in their mouths. And by claiming a moral upper ground, through no rhyme or reason. You are always on the offensive, and never take any blame, yourself............
I will repeat again, the people in London would be alive today, had you and your ilk not been on the forefront of invading Iraq..........While you consider the 100,000 deaths in Iraq to be, ``vermin,`` at least please take some responsibility for the dead in London.
For two years, I have been debating this issue with you. And for two years, you keep refereing to the war in Iraq as the best thing, since sliced bread. It will solve this problem and that problem. It will make the world safer and what not.........Has any of that happened?
Isn`t it about time that you and your partners in crime, put a cork in it. And realized that all their war-mongering is just causing problems......
Luckily the demise of you and your ilk is going to occur organically in the USA. 60% of the USA already agrees with what I am saying. And is starting to see those of your mind-set for what they are. When the tipping point occurs and the neo-cons get the boot, I would be very interested to see your reaction and comments; as well as the reaction of the Bill O`Riellys and Rush Limbaughs.
Though I have a feeling, you will swing with the wind, and be on the other side, denouncing the same Evangelicals that you currently support........
So, kindly stop with your moral superiority and start taking some blame..........It is time to put you on the defensive. You have had your run, and have caused enough problems........
I will repeat again, the people in London would be alive today, had you and your ilk not been on the forefront of invading Iraq..........While you consider the 100,000 deaths in Iraq to be, ``vermin,`` at least please take some responsibility for the dead in London.
For two years, I have been debating this issue with you. And for two years, you keep refereing to the war in Iraq as the best thing, since sliced bread. It will solve this problem and that problem. It will make the world safer and what not.........Has any of that happened?
Isn`t it about time that you and your partners in crime, put a cork in it. And realized that all their war-mongering is just causing problems......
Luckily the demise of you and your ilk is going to occur organically in the USA. 60% of the USA already agrees with what I am saying. And is starting to see those of your mind-set for what they are. When the tipping point occurs and the neo-cons get the boot, I would be very interested to see your reaction and comments; as well as the reaction of the Bill O`Riellys and Rush Limbaughs.
Though I have a feeling, you will swing with the wind, and be on the other side, denouncing the same Evangelicals that you currently support........
So, kindly stop with your moral superiority and start taking some blame..........It is time to put you on the defensive. You have had your run, and have caused enough problems........
#86 Posted by temporal on July 10, 2005 9:46:52 am
tahmed:
:)
as i wrote to alephnull in #74:
…i consider 9/11 and its aftermath a blessing in disguise…i know we differ…but it is alright…there are many paths that lead to the stream…and the righteous…pls. note the righteous…muslims or non muslims alike have their rewards…
the us vs them argument is cited by george and osama both...that says something to you?
rgds
t
ps: 83: don`t be so harsh on monkeys;)...oonhON nay kya bigaRa hay aapka
:)
as i wrote to alephnull in #74:
…i consider 9/11 and its aftermath a blessing in disguise…i know we differ…but it is alright…there are many paths that lead to the stream…and the righteous…pls. note the righteous…muslims or non muslims alike have their rewards…
the us vs them argument is cited by george and osama both...that says something to you?
rgds
t
ps: 83: don`t be so harsh on monkeys;)...oonhON nay kya bigaRa hay aapka
#85 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 9:34:59 am
on #83 Any relationship between the afore-mentioned monkeys in the peanut gallery and chowk interactors ``explaining`` why the london bombing was ok, exiled field marshals, is purely intentional.
#84 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 9:30:08 am
Mr t: writing poetry again I see. the rest is fine, but whats that last part about the ``futility of fragmenting one into us and them``?
You are not calling for NOT fragmenting between ``us`` (those who dont wake up planning to plant bombs to kill innocent people) and ``them`` (those who do), by any chance are you??
Please say it aint so, t-bro!!
You are not calling for NOT fragmenting between ``us`` (those who dont wake up planning to plant bombs to kill innocent people) and ``them`` (those who do), by any chance are you??
Please say it aint so, t-bro!!
#83 Posted by tahmed32 on July 10, 2005 9:25:48 am
hamidm: you write ``in this war against terror one cannot afford to be part of the peanut gallery ``
This rule applies only to humans, who can actually tell the difference between difference of opinion and criminal actions. Not to monkeys, who cant tell their ass from a hole in the ground, let alone the difference between right and wrong.
This rule applies only to humans, who can actually tell the difference between difference of opinion and criminal actions. Not to monkeys, who cant tell their ass from a hole in the ground, let alone the difference between right and wrong.
#87 Posted by hamidm2 on July 10, 2005 9:53:35 am
Re: # 83
tahmed,
are you calling romair a monkey ? ...... shame on you !
tahmed,
are you calling romair a monkey ? ...... shame on you !
#82 Posted by temporal on July 10, 2005 8:18:15 am
thank you chowk-ed for putting up with some poets
am sure there are celestial or cosmic rewards involved:)
( see i could have said god-bless ... but no, .....)
am sure there are celestial or cosmic rewards involved:)
( see i could have said god-bless ... but no, .....)
#81 Posted by temporal on July 10, 2005 8:12:03 am
dost sahib #79:
thank you sir for the first inadvertent smile this fine morning;)
thank you sir for the first inadvertent smile this fine morning;)
#80 Posted by hamidm2 on July 10, 2005 6:55:44 am
......the amen corner and the peanut gallery
.......... romair mian exemplifies the ummah`s dilemma ...... like a billion other lost souls, he cannot make up his mind whether he is a shameless apologist and part of al-qaeda`s amen corner, or a shameless voyeur and part of the peanut gallery ?
.........but in this war against terror one cannot afford to be part of the peanut gallery - as they say nowdays, ``you are either with us or aginst us``........... the problem with most of the ummah is that even though their head tells them to part ways with the bombers, suiciders and dead-enders, their soul, which has been been mortgaged to a vengeful and arrogant god, keeps them from making the right choices ............ it is not just the biryani - it is the the incessant call of the muezzin and the cheap chinese azan clocks that fogs their minds five times a day and confuses them .........
.............as alephnull, who may have many other trishuls to grind, but is right on this account, correctly points out , ``it is the religion that has hijacked the minds of perfectly normal human beings `` ................
......... a ban on those chinese clocks would be a good start in the right direction ........... we need a respite .......
.......... romair mian exemplifies the ummah`s dilemma ...... like a billion other lost souls, he cannot make up his mind whether he is a shameless apologist and part of al-qaeda`s amen corner, or a shameless voyeur and part of the peanut gallery ?
.........but in this war against terror one cannot afford to be part of the peanut gallery - as they say nowdays, ``you are either with us or aginst us``........... the problem with most of the ummah is that even though their head tells them to part ways with the bombers, suiciders and dead-enders, their soul, which has been been mortgaged to a vengeful and arrogant god, keeps them from making the right choices ............ it is not just the biryani - it is the the incessant call of the muezzin and the cheap chinese azan clocks that fogs their minds five times a day and confuses them .........
.............as alephnull, who may have many other trishuls to grind, but is right on this account, correctly points out , ``it is the religion that has hijacked the minds of perfectly normal human beings `` ................
......... a ban on those chinese clocks would be a good start in the right direction ........... we need a respite .......
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- jayp: Many pakistanis are insulted... US Commando Strike in
- jayp: Leaders of pakistan, It was... US Commando Strike in
- quin: thanks for your comment... Bihar & Louisiana: A
- Aarpan: Hi A.Jaleel.What a pathatic... Between Sanity and Insanity
- muqaddam: The recent blockade by... US Commando Strike in
- rf786: Re: # 91 ahmedmadani sahib {Can... US Commando Strike in
- HP: Asadi, My use of the... There is no ‘honour’
- iron_mask: There is no honor... There is no ‘honour’
