Dance of the wolves

singularity:

obviously you have not read farzana`s last article. . . because she does mention imrana on more than one occasion. she doesn`t have to write an article about imrana to see that what is being decided about imrana is wrong. singularity. . . you should read a little more before you make such remarks. her last article is still on the front page.

as for your other remarks re: farzana. i see what you`re trying to say here. you are saying that if farzana is concerned about indians, and bangladeshi muslim refugees, then as an indian she should be concerned about hindus and hindu refugees as well. a sense of balance is not an unfair thing to ask of anyone. but here on chowk. . . a sense of balance has also been all but impossible. not just by a writer of farzana`s calibre.

why just the hindus? why haven`t we asked why farzana hasn`t written about the christians, another minority, who has been attacked in india. farzana hasn`t written about a lot of things that don`t involve muslims, mainly in india. do we see a lot of people writing here that don`t focus mainly on ``their own,`` balanced writing? no. i know i would like to see more of that happen. it`s not wrong to want to see more of a balance. it is also not wrong to write mostly about one`s own community, provided one doesn`t fall into an us vs. them trap even if some politicians manipulate and capitalize on that. and as i have said before, farzana is not immune to that trap. and writing about one`s own community still has an impact and a message for everyone as a whole. what you want is that when she says, ``you and i are only as different from each other as we want to be`` that she not emphasize on her difference from other indian communities. that is something more than a few indians could work on here. good luck!

Re #76, 74, 72

Singularity - You have theory and you reason to it. There are a billion muslims who disagree with your line of thinking.

If muslims are questioning Islam, good for them to know more about Islam.

#72 by CheGuevara on July 5, 2005 4:58pm PT

``I thought Islam was meant to put an endto prevailing A-RAB tribal customs that were seen as primitive and ``immoral``?``

Wasn`t slavery abolished in ME much much before the west? I have to do a google on that to get the exact dates?

Ref Kashmakash #6

[....Farzana, your badluck, you were born as a muslim in a hindu country.]

It could have been worse.

She could be born a Hindu or Christian in Pakistan.

PS. She is NOT making a beeline to the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi for a green card. She knows what happens to Shias and would happen to Ismailis in Pakistan. Or even just to women.

#74 by Singularity

Great post. Don`t waste your time though ``no amount of logical reasoning can convince blind emotion``

Kannaraja:

So if the PROPHET behaves much like a tribal arab then whats the difference between him and the others. There is none. He is just one of them, except he had these recurring delusions and voices he kept hearing from GOD. It is a simple case of some version of delusive schezoprenia. Many people have suffered from such psymptoms. Go to a psychaitric asylum and you can meet people who hears gods voices and have even composed books. Are they all prophets? Too bad the tribal arabs of 600 AD didn;t have asylums or psychiatrists.

Grunge #61

Dont think you can get away with that patronising tone.

I said,`` There has never ever been any semblance of the UTOPIAN, DELUSIONAL ISLAM you are talking about. NEVER.``

You said: Well there was. It was during the times of Prophet (PBUH). I am sure you are going to come back with some puerile refuttion calling him a polygamist pedophile and warring tyrant. And I see very clearly the futility of engaging in a belated forum based conversation with you about a time when neither of us were born.

The so called prophet was just an opportunistic trader who married an older widow for her wealth. The whole life he had problems with his on and off delusions. It later became a recurring problem. He was having this delusions of hearing gods voices and he was called as INSANE by the arabs around him. He went to caves and in the loneliness the problem became acute. Thats why he starts the Koran with right from verse 2:006 about Non-believers. These non-believers are the ones who calls him insane coz of his delusions. He basically called ANYBODY who questions his delusions as NON-Believers.

But luckily for him, his wife and a small motley group of followers hung on to his delusions as true words of god. It was afterall 600 AD and the arabs were il-literate and superstitious.
But the biggest turn for him is the call from Medina to fight a rival tribe. Since he was anyways harassed as insane by the meccans , he went to Medina and faught the tribal war with his group o committed warriors who faught with fervour since they were promised paradise upon death. He won the battle in Medina with a small number of warriors. This the Medina tribesmen took as miracle of god and took to his DELUSIONS. Now with his army of followers considerably increased he came back and killed ALL THE MECCANS who called him as insane. So now he had the wealth by plunder, army of BLIND followers and had some decent leadership skills. So First Arabia was conquered and converted to Mohamad`s delusions( also called as Islam) and then Persia and Egypt. So by then there was a critical mass. Thats all there is to the history of Islam.

You say : That you are right about. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9704/14/egypt.islam/

It only means that there are enough poor and ignorant people in the world who simply wants something to hang on to something, anything, to keep their life of misery afloat.

I have read Koran. Unlike the muslims who never read anything other than the Koranic propaganda about Hindu philosophy, Koranic lies about buddism and taoism.....THATS ALL THEY READ AND THEY THINK that is absolute truth..Thats like I READ CHRISTIAN VIEW about ISLAM and then believe that MohaMAD is paedophile/satan cult. WILL ANY MUSLIM ACCEPT A CHRISTIAN VIEW about ISLAM? So why is that YOU guys BLINDLY follow the KORANIC views about HINDUS BEING SATAN/EVIL without doing research on ur own.

Mohamad was just a successful warrior who lived JUST like any other people of those times. It is common to marry kids among the arab tribals and Mohamad did the same. Nothing wrong with that. But it only proves that he was NO Model or no prophet. he was just as ordinary and ignorant as any other arab tribal. The only difference is he had the power and wealth to impose his delusions as gods words on unquestioning followers. He didn`t want to create a religion. But his followers created one in his name.

Mohamad was a paranoid Megalomaniac who in his delusional rage imagined he was talking to god and imagined he is a prophet. Hitler also exhibited the same psymptoms and also wrote a book. if you go to a psychiatric asylum, you can see many such delusional cases who have spoken to God and written gods words as Book. Are they all prophets? Too bad the Ancient Arab tribals didn`t have psychiatrysts OR asylums in those days.

It is simple logic. I am not saying this. Many muslim historians like Anwar Shaikh, Ibn Warraq are saying that Mohamad was a delusional megalomaniac and that Islam was just Arab imperialism. Go check out www.faithfreedom.org to see how many muslims question the credibility of Mohamad. Just keep in mind anything that CANT STAND rational questions of credibility will fail. This is not 600 AD where Mullahs have control and a fatwa can silence any questioner by death. This is INTERNET age, information can be had in seconds. More muslims will ask questions and eventually ISLAM will come out of its dark age.

Re: # 70
I disagree.

#69 by Kannaraja

``For what ever reasons Ayeshas marraige happenned, it was according to the prevailing conditions. What does it get you to pick on certain specifics in Mohammeds life? ``

I thought Islam was meant to put an endto prevailing A-RAB tribal customs that were seen as primitive and ``immoral``?

Re #68, #67

Singularity, Cheduevara, Mike:

I am a hindu and I do not know very detailed specifics about Mohammads life and I am least bit concerned about his marriage to Ayesha or being an ideal prophet. All I am saying is Ayeshas marriage could be due to prevailing conditions.

Child Marriages are illegal now, but in the past it was very much acceptable. What are the conditions in the 6th or 7th century Arabia, I do not know.

Sri Rama is considered an ideal man, inspite of leaving his wife during pregnancy for the sake of his people for reasons he best knew.

Raja

Kannaraja...you sir are the perfect dhimmi...

Re: # 65
A young girl marrying an adult man is still a child marriage? Do not you think? Sure they are illegal now. But they were very rampant in earlier societies even in India. Take a guess what could have been acceptable in society several centuries ago.

For what ever reasons Ayeshas marraige happenned, it was according to the prevailing conditions. What does it get you to pick on certain specifics in Mohammeds life?

#64 by Grunge

``Well there was. It was during the times of Prophet (PBUH). ``
Got any proof of this other than the Quran?

#60 by Kannaraja
``It doesn`t bother me. I am least worried. And I am NOT a PEDO.``

But the man you hold as your exhalted prophet was very much a PEDO, and if this does not bother you than you have serious problems dude.

#60 Kannaraja:

Child marriage is il-legal and NOBODY takes to it as the model. But Mohamad is considered a model PROPHET. Being a model and a prophet means he should set the morals but instead just like ANY TRIBAL ARAB of the period he had many wives, married a kid, had a harem full of slave women and his many wives. Whats the Model behaviour of the Model prophet?

#57 Ana

Take a look at my post # 29 to avoid repeatition

The fear of Farzana and other minorities is something i can relate to. But the same Farzana NEVER EVER writes any articles about the bigotism and discrimination of non-muslims indulged by muslims where ever they are in high number. She has never written one article about the plights of millions of hindus either killed or converted or forced into as refugees by the PAKI and Bangladeshi Mullahs. Neither does she even care about the plight of her fellow muslims if they are raped by their father-in-law and the mullahs issue fatwa to marry the rapist.

I asked her a range of questions in my post and I VERY well know she is going to ignore me or at best reply in so many words WITHOUT answering anything.

``What do you think of child marriages in India which are still rampant in some states? ``

They are illegal. Happens in far away villages to poor illiterate low caste people. What to do ? Atleast I dont see their life as being `ideal` as muslims consider that of their man Muhammad. Also as far as I know , in child marriages , both the boy and girl are children. While Muhammad was 55 when he married 6 year old Ayesha.

Re: # 62

Except for the ``again`` part. dont you just love jack Nicholson?. it must have entered my sub-conscious. Good call:)