Muslims and The West After 11th September

re DRUMZ

``Reading comprehenion is another item in the long list of what are not your strong suits.``

Fortunately, your list is fairly short, (just like your vocabulary which is increasingly made up of one contrived word with an `f`). Seems your posts follow a certain law of physics: the lengthier they are in verbage, the smaller they are in logic, civility, and sense. I thought you guys had socialized medicine in Canada-why don`t you check into the local mental health department for a visit to de-stress you.

Now, for the `sellout` part. What you guys call `sellouts` in French-Canadian, we call `patriots` in the normal world. All freedom loving people are `Americans` after what happened on 9/11 (remember the Kennedy speech at Berlin?). Frankly, I wish the US and England had let Framce and Canada be run over by Nazis and/or the Russians; I mean the ungratefulness is monumental.

Why don`t you guys point fingers where the real blame lies? How about burning Saddam in effigy? Or criticizing that great champion of human rights Muammar Gaddafi? Or questioning the personal dictatorship of Yasser Arafat?

Oh no, that would be too much to ask of dyed-in-the-wool leftists who still want to find an emotional sugar-daddy after the sad and sudden demise of their Communist Comrades.

``We will not waver, we will not falter, we will not fail. We will prevail because ultimately our cause is just``-George W. Bush

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!

re urstruly #120:

You can`t keep away your dirty hands even from charity organizations. Here is the breakdwon for the 3 organizations that you allege spend ``80%`` of their collections on administrative and collection expenses.

American red cross: 17%

United way : 9%

Unicef : 11%

For reference purposes checkout www.give.org

If ones preference is for particular charities be it Edhi or Burney`s trust thats fine. Making up figures is not.

For a more substansive discussion of charities worth giving and those to avoid, check out the current issue of Worth magazine(Nov 2001). I think the list is online too.

later

-sac

ylh #22: Very nice, I must say. Couldn`t have said it better myself.

On occassion, I have been quite harsh on SameeJB. But that is only when he makes racist replies regarding a religion or a profession. I think in this article there is no such thing.

I think he has started a very useful debate, based on the vast knowledge he possesses. One cannot target a person for being popular with Indians. Nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with criticising Pakistan either, as long as it is factual. I do think his analysis is relatively valid in what is going on in France, etc. But I, like yourself, cannot agree with the analysis regarding Pakistan. I think the author has let his dislike of religion effect his objectivity, in regard to Pakistan (as, usual).

Your visit to Pakistan, seems to have added ten years to your maturity :-) Are you interested in joining the Tehrik. It is not as secular as you would prefer, but it is center-left according to the Pakistani society.

Pakistan military government has come up with this weird Press policy.

It would not allow -- any correspondent of Hindu Indian parentage -- born anywhere else -- to enter Pakistan as a -- reporter.

Pakistan did not allow Canadian born CNN correspondent Satindre Bindra to report from Pakistan.

Now they have expelled -- a US born correspondent -- of one of the world`s most

influential and powerful newspapers -- Washington Post -- because his name is Chandrasekaran.

Only a foolish PR man from the Information Ministry of Pakistan army -- could come up with this brilliant idea of exclusive -- Press Apartheid -- against American and Canadian reporters with a Hindu name -- antagonizing such press giants like CNN and Washington Post -- in the process.

And this is at a time -- when Pakistan`s tattered image requires some badly needed face lift around the world.

Now -- how stupid -- and crass -- can you get, really.

Sac # 129

I will stick to my point. My source of initial information was an article in Detroit News/FreePress (dont have link to the article). The way I read the expenses and income confirms the writer`s assertion.

Take for example United way at:

http://www.give.org/reports/uwa.asp

As of Dec31, 2000 their total income was reported as:

Total income $41,444,000

and Fund Distribution is reported as:

Funds distribution 368,000

You do the rest of the math.

Dr. Hoodboy`s prescription for Pakistan, is ``secular humanism`` - Is not fair to ask,

What is secular humanism? and how will effect culture? Is it really ``neutral``?

All the so-called ``secular humanist``, please answer these questions - once we have our terms defined, we can better think of it`s relvance to our situation.

RE: Reply #: 137 nasah

``Pakistan military government has come up with this weird Press policy.

It would not allow -- any correspondent of Hindu Indian parentage -- born anywhere else -- to enter Pakistan as a -- reporter``

Not very surprising. This is due to the visceral hatred of anything Hindu that the govt. of Pakistan perepetuates to keep it`s illegal hold on power. Take this hatred away and the concept of Pakistan will collapse of it`s own accord, or at the very least the ruling elite will be booted out of power.

Ironically Satinder Bindra started reporting from within Afghanistan itself on the s * *t being beaten out of the hapless Pakistanis in Mazar-e-Sharif.

Don`t also forget the edict imposed by the Taliban on Pakistan`s behalf on Hindus of Afghanistan having to wear identifying marks.

The Pakistani Govt. is nothing but a Nazi regime.

AnNy

``should they not know better than killing so many innocents because of one man who everyone knows the man is a dictator and does NOT REPRESENT those getting killed and bombed.``

I have had this point made to me earlier. Let us extrapolate. Mussahraf is a dictator. He has not stood for elections. He has taken power through a coup.

Let us assume he drops a couple of Nukes over major Indian cities. Would you now say that the Indians do NOT have the moral right to nuke Pakistan back because he is a dictator and therefore ``not a legitimate`` representative of the people of Pakistan.

For all practical purposes, nations are held responsible for the actions of their governments.

Now, let us take the issue of Genocide. You ask who is America to demand inspections? The inspections were a required condition of the ceasefire after the Gulf War that Iraq signed. This treaty was ratified by the United Nations. From a strictly legal point of view, the ceasefire becomes null and void once it`s conditions are not met. and Iraq becomes a legitimate target of military operations.

From a humane point of view, regardless of the sanctions being in place, Iraq is allowed to trade oil for food and essentials. Yet, the people starve. Why? Because the people of Iraq are Saddam`s weapon.

To give you another example, similar sanctions were placed on Libya for many years, again with an exception on essentials. Why did the people of Libya not reach starvation levels. Why were Libyan babies not dying of malnutrition and sickness. Libya is hardly self-sufficient. Inspite of Gaddafi being a dictator, he showed a modicum of regard for his people. He gave up the terrorists for trial, where mind you, the trial was held in open, and as a consequence the sanctions were lifted.

Saddam is a misfortune on the Iraqi people. My personal belief is that the present policy of sanctions is wrong. The United States should instead attack Saddam with overwhelming force, dismantle it`s armed forces and weapons of mass destruction, and then lift the samctions, bringing an Iraqi democracy back into the comity of nations. A situation similar to what has happened in Afghanistan. Strong medicine is sometines required.

Regardless, I think it`s a travesty to blame the united stats, but not even mention Saddam at all. That is what Drumz does, and I think he is fundamentally wrong.

Re sac 129

Didn`t you know that give.org is a zionist entity tied directly to groups affiliated with Meir Kahane? Urstruly`s droppings are typical of his despicable genre. Make an attack and move on. The smarter ones catch the drift and see the excreta for what it`s worth.And then, there are some who swallow that crap as if it were dessert.

re: afaqui

``The purpose to bring this to attention has nothing to do to peddle Islam per se.It was to point out that if such understanding is ingrained at school level then ad hoc emergency inter-faith meetings & iftaar parties can be avoided.``

Afaqui Sahib,

Within their borders, the westerners are quite tolerant of other people/religions without being taught dua-i-qanut in their curriculum. Whereas, I am sure in the next iftar party I`ll have to listen ad-nauseum, momins complaining about all the terrible traits of the infidel ferranghis and the evil feranghiland they don`t have the guts to leave for the misery of their respective former homelands.

The foriegn policy, etc. is something else and can be debated (and for many it is deeply flawed as pointed out by the Prof. himself).

``What prevents Pakistan to teach Religion as such to all school going children esp.the 0-level kind?``

Are you kidding me? As a student of Islamiat for more than a decade coupled with all those long jumma khutbas coming from idiots of the highest order - I have had enough religious education to last a lifetime. What else do you want?

``It is in my opinion the most important curriculam item to be addressed because religion brings about the most havoc AND the most benefit to mankind.We ignore it at our own peril.``

By religion I assume you mean any religion - I hope you are not suggesting that every Pakistani student should become a master of Talmud, New Testament, Veda along with Quran, Hadith and Shariat - Surely my good man you must be familiar with the concepts of elementary arithematic. This leaves very little time for enaging in diabolical activities such as Physics and Engineering. Lets assume for a minute that religion is as important as you think it is ``for everyone`` - who`s stopping them from practising it - The secularists only ask that you don`t impose it on others and that you don`t sanction it by the state apparatus - what in the hell is wrong with that - One of the biggest success of jamati types has been in their equating secularism with heresy/athiesm (or to use Dubya`s favourite ``evil``). Which in my opinion is an absurd notion. Especially disturbing are those hypocrites who have lived and flourished in the western secular society and would be the first one to get a boot up their bottoms under President Falwell, yet they want a hypothetical ``Truely Islamic State`` which no one has cared to define and is uttered in vague mumbo-jumbo coming out of retards such as Qazi Hussain.

``If prof.Hoodbhoy is not so obnoxious in his disdain for religion & Islam then he will not get equal & opposite reaction in obnoxiousness.``

I don`t find anything in his writing which shows disdain for religion or Islam and nothing that can be characterised as ``obnoxious``. Can you please point out the part which you find so objectionable.

Urstruly #108,

i`m sorry you feel that way. in retrospect, i feel i was being unduly harsh and mean spirited.

i apologize, for what it`s worth. bye

``Regarding your comment, I must agree with you; an atmosphere of learning combined with a good economy must be there for science to flourish.``

An atmosphere of learning requires that the scholars and students be able to question anything and everything without fear of being lynched for heresy - and that for starters requires the Fazloos of this world to be consigned to loony bins at the best or in their masajids at the least - When the chairman of the Physics Dept. starts calculating the speed of heaven there`s something terribly wrong.

DRUMZ 131:

1. Kuwait was building oil pipes on a slant from their land to Iraq (before the gulf war).

---

Use your brains. How far can Kuwaitis build a pipeline diagonally without entering Iraqi territorry.

---

2. Saddam asked the american ambassador to Iraq (three times) if it would be okay to invade iraq (which was part of Iraq till the 60s). America each time said that it wouldnt matter cuz they dont want to interfere in the mid east. And this does not mean that Im a supporter of Saddam in any way.

---

To the best of my knowledge Saddam never used the pharse that he was going to invade Kuwait. All the American ambassador said was that USA does not take sides in disputes between 2 Arab states.

USA does not take sides over Kurile island dispute between Russia and Japan. That does not mean the Russians have a green light to invade Japan.

---

I hate to be an apologist for a US government that is less than perfect in its behavior. I think Pakistani media`s whining about Iraq has to do with the fact that Pakistani government has one less potential client to sell nukes to as long as Iraq is under UN sanctions.

Keep in mind Iraqi state is happy denying 75% of the population Shites and Kurds their fair share. Imagine the uproar andf chest thumping if non-Muslims did that to Muslims. Never mind the use of chemical weapons against villages. Not to mention a vicious war against Iran that undermined Muslim unity.

Hamidm: Ustruly`s sophistry is clear to you. Who`s else`s is as obvious?

``...i know it is easy and quite fashionable to blame the americans for the miserable state that muslims find themselves in ...``

Nice tactic, group everyone you`re debating with into the same category. Unfortunately, its quite obvious the urstruly and samina dont have the same views on this topic. Its not apparent to those who think in black and white but there is a grey area. Not all Muslims are responsible (like you think) nor are all Americans/jews responsible (as u accuse others of thinking). Samina has blamed the ummah for what they`ve done and blamed America for what it`s done.

``...... as for the iraqi children, do you really think that sadam hussein is not the real culprit ? ......``

You really cannot see the truth in this matter? Lets think for a moment. If America was interested in saving Kurds, why does it not mind the abuse they suffer from its Nato ally Turkey? Why silence on Copts in Egypt, shias in Pakistan, etc etc. Its clear that americas involvement in not a humanitarian one. Saddam was not killing 5000 people a month. These are from AMERICAN sanctions.

``sure the US bears some responsiblility because bush senior did not finish the job when he had the chance``

Americans are not stupid. Why do you think they didnt finish the job?

``... there will be starving children in somalia, pakistan, bangladesh - who will take care of them ?``

Another great tactic. Link peoples concern for sanctions with a larger uncontrollable plight. Unfortunately sanctions are killing none of those people. American involvement is not killing no one in pakistan, somalia etc.

``...... while the ummah minashah

wallows in self-pity and continues to believe in conspiracy theories and plans the defeat of the infidel``

-Again linking samina in with the idiocy of the ummah...

Sigalph: Please do not respond to me after this post.

``Why don`t you guys point fingers where the real blame lies? How about burning Saddam in effigy? Or criticizing that great champion of human rights Muammar Gaddafi? Or questioning the personal dictatorship of Yasser Arafat?``

Again the so called intelligentia on chowk decides to lump everyone into the same box. Because I fault America on some things (I feel the need to mention that most americans are great people and not all american foriegn policy is genocidal nor self serving) doesnt necessarily mean i dont fault Ghaddafi, yasser etc for what they do. That you even quoted a post of mine when I explained this exact same thing speaks VOLUMES.

``Oh no, that would be too much to ask of dyed-in-the-wool leftists who still want to find an emotional sugar-daddy after the sad and sudden demise of their Communist Comrades.``

Link all of us with communism, great strategy.

PS: Am I the only one who sees the rhetoric here? If so Im not even gonna bother with these people.

If you cant understand this, how would you react if some killed 5000 people in your city? And then he defended the act using rhetoric? Get the analogy?

Prem: I feel the need to explain myself to you of all people. This will be my final post on this thread. I want you to know that I believe everything happens for a reason. Karma tells me that if I mock I will be mocked back (by either: OTHERS or by CIRCUMSTANCE). The former is not likely to happen on this thread so ill await the latter. I have my opinions yall have yours.

My negative vibe exists only because Im being real. If someone killed another human being for no reason at all, id be pissed at him. Now if he did it to 5000 people each month, (and then had the audacity to justify it!) well you can just imagine...

PS: Id like to talk to you about something on another thread.

Silence speaks volumes, now scuse me as I kiss the sky...