London’s Hour of Reckoning

dostmittarji (#192):

i will not try to put things into perspective for YOU, because i do see the fact that where you see certain things from and where i see certain things from is vastly different.

i am not certain how you see this as a balanced article. and i have already voiced my issues with this. not everyone here is being hateful towards the writer. we have issues with what he wrote, and some of us do look at the text rather than the writer.

what mr. khalid has written about indeed is happening in certain parts, the BNP is attacking mosques, and spewing its vitriol against muslims in hate-mail. that IS happening, as was feared it would. and this racist ``vengeance`` should not be tolerated by anyone.

if mr. khalid`s intentions were indeed well and good, then there was no need for him to talk about ``toying`` with certain people, no matter who they are, and how much they are disliked. mr. khalid DOES obfuscate the issues behind metaphor. . . and expressive prose, and one should not be faulted for expressiveness. it is what is behind these words that is questioned when for one, the use of the term ``hour of reckoning`` is no less potent than the words we accuse our leaders of hiding behind.

why is it good that the innocent islamic citizenry escape from the recrimination of islamic misinterpretation alone?

why again is harmony dependent on what happens in the ``middle east`` alone? you spoke of moral equivalence on another board. why use the ``middle east`` as a justification for why the sleeper cells might increase over the years?

the hour of reckoning dostmittarji, is for all of us, at some point, in some time, and it has never been up to the G8, and it has never been up to those will build their cells and wreak their violence on innocent lives regardless of nationality, color or creed. and it has never been up to us to declare that. judgment is not on london alone. . . reconciliation is not up to london alone.

i do not question mr. khalid`s credibility based on the number of ``identities``. . . i question mr. khalid`s credibility vis-a-vis his words in the article and his responses. words he has twisted, and misunderstood in his attempt to make his case.

you are welcome to consider his article balanced. you are not alone. as many of those who choose to remain silent are uncomfortable, there are most likely just as many who agree. and they all know who they are.

Re: # 175
...i see!! you are undercover... couldnt decide if it was you or the turkish bhaRva...;)

temporal, hamidm, tahmed32:

I generally try to look at the message rather than the messenger. And I do agree with the author that there will be some repercussions for innocent, law-abiding Muslims because of the London incident.

I have not read any of the other articles by Ozer. But after temporal pointed out, I did look at his post#175 and it does appear to be whacky. And after going through his various interacts, he could very well be barachotta in a new avatar. But I still do not find the article itself to be too askewed.

``A tensely dark mood redolent of September 11 swept over Londoners. Rolling newsflashes about casualties roared as the grey skies to which they once looked is now a covering of debris and ashes of dashed hope. A surreal silence and eerie calm haunts Europe. Yet Londoners display steely resilience in the eye of the terror tiger.``

......... i would have got my head slapped by ms flannagan if i wrote that in my 9th grade english class ! ........... and then she would have put a dunce hat on my head and made me stand in the corner ........... after all these years, i finally see the point she was trying to make .........

....... and to think i once got smacked for writing ``babbling brook`` and `` the sun was shining feebly in the clear blue sky`` ! ......... where is saminasha when you need her ?

re: # 203

Inimitable is a descriptor that applies justly not only to ozer, but also to one Salim Chauhan :)

# 186 Ferozk

I have a degree of bias against Islam, so my comments can also be construed as such,

But 186 is One of the best posts I have seen so far in Chowk...

Hope guys like you will be able to set the agenda for Islamic community..

- Avkrishna

Ozer effendi #188,
I may not agree with everything you have to say, but I defend your right to have your opinion and to express it in the inimitable way you do. Sir, you are talented and please keep up your interesting literary expressions.

The tragedy caused by the horrid terrorism in London, NYC, and Iraq is cause for all of us to realize that violence begets violence. Death in any form is sad. I guess that is why there was so much admiration for Gandhi and his peaceful resistance approach.
Peace.
Allah smaladik.

Re: # 195

Romair, for the record, I gladly accept my mistake.

For the record, you might think that what is said next to your name is not important, but I do, because I was taught to accept the consequences of my actions and not to deny the responsibility for my actions. My name and what it represents is very important to me that is why I am very critical of manner in which name is associated and with whom and what it is associated.

Romair, would still feel the same way, if for example, your name is placed next to a commision of a crime? Would you still feel the same way, if your name is associated with a hate group or a militant organization? Would you still feel the same way, if your name is attributed to a cause of action, which results in violence and loss of life?

I accept my mistake, because I believe, we learn from our mistakes and as I mentioned, I welcome being corrected, because unlike some people, I do not consider my opinions to be infallible or sacrosant and neither do I consider myself to hold the monopoly on the truth. I am secure in my knowledge to know that there is much, which I do not know, but I am willing to learn and I will always thank the people, who have the good grace and patience to teach and offer me knowledge.

As to the debate, I feel that I have said all I wanted to on this topic and there is nothing further for me to add to this dicussion. I honestly feel that this debate has reached its conclusion and everyone, who has followed is entirely free to agree or disagree, with my comments.

Romair, you are welcome to have the last word.

Ciao

Temporal #193,
While I don`t care about the argument at hand, your nonsense about questioning people`s credibility is the biggest joke here. You, of all people, have no right to question anyone`s credibility. Mr. Temporal, sir, you are a testament to nepotism, favoritism, foul play, selective censorship, and many other ills confounding Chowk. I am just glad that your pet causes are taking a battering. Curse on you and all people like you. You are simply a big fraud and resemble an unmentionable cavity.
Regards,

ozerkhalid #20

`` Any form of terror, as hideous as such acts of Holocaust are, always have an underlying root-cause. Denial and massacre in Palestine is the root-cause of spineless terror. So are you saying that we should negate any attempt toward a peaceful resolution in the Gaza and West Bank ? ``

It is certainly one of the most vexing problems in international affairs. By no means it is the cause of other problems in the world. People may hide behind the Palestinian problem to hide their own incompetence.

Re: # 192

dost-m,

.......... i am surprised that a man of your experience would fall for a charlatan like ozer - i doubt the man exists outside the confines of his own imagination ......... there are a lot of dubious characters on chowk - the good, the bad and the ugly - but after a while you can figure out the posers from the real items ......... unfortunately, some of the ``real`` guys are a disgrace to mankind and its women, but, as unfortunate as it might be, they are for real ............ just yesterday, i was talking to my friend tehseen abbasi who used to grace this forum a few years ago and pops up his ugly head now and then ....... the reason he quit is because he thinks most of the folks on chowk are not ``for real`` - he might have a point .............

romair,

...... you are not in the same league as feroze, so give it up and move on ........ the sooner you accept your intellectual limitations the better off you will be ............. trust me, geopolitics courses taught at kakul and risalpur do not constitute a ``real`` education .......... jaisay thaayp !

ozer

It`s just my opinion, but it is based on years of reading people`s posts.

Tahmed and temporal are the very best representatives of their religion. Their dedication to Islam is unquestionable, and their personal Islam is far more enlightened and humane than my own Hinduism. They are also among the most respected and balanced interactors here.

I should know. As someone who believes that the core of Islam has both great wonders and great problems, I studiously avoid discussing Islam with one, and have carried out a long and frustrating dialogue with the other.

Dost Mittar #192 While some of the indian posters may have their own reasons (since they many of them lose no opportunity to berate muslims), here is my reason: Because the title indicated the author saw this as a ``day of reckoning`` for Londoners. Not a day of a major crime committed on the Londoners, and indeed on civilized society around the world.

I read his article just now to see what balance you are talking about - there is no balance. It whines about possible retribution against muslims: e.g. ``Innocent Muslims are viewed through a distorted prism and yesterday’s act of savagery is a baptism of fire to further enflame a misconceived version of Islamic history that emphasizes with persecution. Trigger-happy “Orientalists” will be nimble to tar the “whole” Muslim community with a brush of harebrained terror-invoking zealots. ``

This is exactly the smug, stupid, inhuman view of the world that points to the characterless ``muslims`` who enjoy the fruits of the west while spitting on the west at the same time. They cry ``wolf`` at every opportunity, even when the wolves call themselves ``muslims``.

Ferozek #186: ``Romair, I take things or words attributed to me very seriously. Every time, my name is mentioned next to any words or thoughts; indirect or direct, I am accountable for what is being said in my name and the final responsibility is mine.``

Hmm....still unwilling to accept your mistake........As I said, that is a bigger problem amongst, ``us,`` then any Al-Qaedas of the world........I have mentioned yours and others` name next to my text, about a hundred times on this site. Everyone has understood the use and lack of use of quotation marks. As I said, mentioning one`s name next to something, is not the same as quoting someone. The reason I am belabouring on this is because I want to figure out, why we are so hesitant to accept our faults...........

``Please explain, how will correcting my grammar help you in your agruments on this issue?``

It is the not the grammar that is important. That is not my point. My point is to try to figure out, whether we are willing to accept a mistake, i.e. are we willing to be proven wrong. If we are unwilling to accept a mistake or be proven wrong, on something as obvious as grammatical quotation marks, then convincing someone to a point of view, differing from their own, on much larger issues, like Islam, one way or the other, becomes almost impossible.

dost #192:

read the interacts of the writer for yourself bhai saheb...specially #175...it is clear that a writer that `plays` with the reader has some deep seated insecurities and motives that should be questioned...hamidm has taken him to task earlier as did khamkhwa...

it is apparent that chowk and its readership are a joke for this delusional person...and even such a tragic event like the london bombing cannot be spared his narcissistic shenanigans

look at this:

with his first article here..2005 UK General Elections May 7, 2005 ...he merrily started exchanging views with:

* spiritualgypsy - Member since: May 8, 2005
* thunder - Member since: May 8, 2005
* sarahhashwani - Member since: May 9, 2005

then comes Dusk May 12, 2005 ...and we witness exchanges between the esteemed writer and:

* husnaangelique - Member since: May 11, 2005
* kulsumbeig - Member since: May 11, 2005
* moazammudasar - Member since: May 11, 2005
* ravighose - Member since: May 12, 2005

bhai saheb...with your experience you know what they used to say about those `who talk to themselves?` don`t you?

..this is why credibility irks some people;)

rgds

t