Islamism - 7

[Pandyan]

"While the Hindu elaborates his argument, the Moslem sharpens his sword. Between these two races and creeds…the gulf is impassable.
1931, 18 March. Albert Hall, London." (Broad, 231.)

-- Churchill

[Husky]

<!--QuoteBegin-Pandyan+Dec 20 2008, 03:17 AM-->QUOTE(Pandyan @ Dec 20 2008, 03:17 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->"While the Hindu elaborates his argument, the Moslem sharpens his sword. Between these two races and creeds…the gulf is impassable.
1931, 18 March. Albert Hall, London." (Broad, 231.)

<b>-- Churchill</b>
[right][snapback]92030[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Said the christoterrorist Churchill while he and his kind loaded their guns to shoot the Hindus.
Christians always play neutral to buy themselves time and clandestinely pursue their own terrorist agenda.

[Shambhu]

<b>Mumbai terrorists promised sex with virgins in heaven</b>
23/12/2008 11:44:23 http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20081222/808/....html?printer=1

New Delhi, Dec.22 (ANI): The lone surviving terrorist of the Mumbai terror attack Ajmal Amir Kasab has admitted that he along with his militant partners were lured into the terrorist camps by the Pakistan army officers as they were made to believe that the ‘Jehad’ in which they are going to take part will offer them a chance to put an end to their quest for ‘holy virgins’.

The 10 Pakistan terrorists who attacked Mumbai were indoctrinated by the Pakistan terror establishment.

Jehad-for Virgins Scam <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> was used to cheat teenage muslims to become terrorists.

During the training Pakistan Army officers and Lashkar-e-Toiba commanders repeatedly told the terrorists that “<b>the moment you are killed in the Jehad against India in Mumbai attack,your body will emit divine glow and an intoxicating fragrance, before the body rises to heaven, to enjoy sex with beautiful virgins waiting for you</b>,” The Political Party.com quoted Kasab’s confession with the Mumbai Anti-Terror Squad (ATS).

Kasab now believes that Jehad is an unholy quest for sex withy virgins in heaven.((no!! you dont say!!))

According to Political Party.com Kasab was horrified to see the dead bodies of his colleagues killed in the Mumbai attacks.

<b>Kasab is now accusing the Pakistan army officers and Lashkar commanders of cheating the teenager terrorists with promise of sex with beautiful virgins in the heaven.(</b>ANI)

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Kasab is now accusing the Pakistan army officers and Lashkar commanders of cheating the teenager terrorists with promise of sex with beautiful virgins<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Now, now...I think the pak army officers cannot be accused of lying in this case. There will be lots of sex with virgins...the only cherry being popped will be kasabs and any other puki terrorists as their fellow prisoners from cell block C come at them from behind.

That is if they are not hanged first....

[Guest]

Kasab can take Anutlay along with him.
Paki Army really cheated him, they only promise sex but no talk on dates and camel urine as cocktail party with Virgin. Damn 20% commission even on houris visit.

[Guest]

Recently ran into this interesting fellow on youtube. He has nice collection of Masood Azhar , Hafiz Saeed etc speeches.

http://www.youtube.com/123umer

This one is pretty amusing.. Azhar says -> pehle TV ki musibat ayee, fir cable network ki musibat ayee. He talks about some kafir, kalaa, gandaa, badboodaar sikh (?) buying his girls ? Who is he referring to ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgRZgePUJIw...re=channel_page

Another one i found interesting was the one where he gloats about when he was escorted by Jaswant Singh to Kandahar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rXzVXEIgnI...re=channel_page

Admins, if against forum guidelines please remove..

[Shambhu]

Muslims, listen to your own:

-----------------------------------------------------
<b>Why are Jews so powerful, and Muslims so powerless?</b>

Author: Dr Farrukh Saleem
Publication: irfanpermana.wordpress.com
Date: April 11, 2007
URL: http://irfanpermana.wordpress.com/2007/04/...s-so-powerless/

There are only 14 million Jews in the world; seven million in the Americas, five million in Asia, two million in Europe and 100,000 in Africa. For every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims. Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together. Ever wondered why?

Jesus of Nazareth was Jewish. Albert Einstein, the most influential scientist of all time and TIME magazine's 'Person of the Century', was a Jew. Sigmund Freud -- id, ego, superego -- the father of psychoanalysis was a Jew. So were Karl Marx, Paul Samuelson and Milton Friedman. Here are a few other Jews whose intellectual output has enriched the whole humanity:

Benjamin Rubin gave humanity the vaccinating needle. Jonas Salk developed the first polio vaccine. AlBert Sabin developed the improved live polio vaccine. Gertrude Elion gave us a leukemia fighting drug. Baruch Blumberg developed the vaccination for Hepatitis B. Paul Ehrlich discovered a treatment for syphilis (a sexually transmitted disease). Elie Metchnikoff won a Nobel Prize in infectious diseases. Bernard Katz won a Nobel Prize in neuro muscular transmission. Andrew Schally won a Nobel in endocrinology (disorders of the endocrine system; diabetes, hyperthyroidism). Aaron Beck founded Cognitive Therapy (psychotherapy to treat mental disorders, depression and phobias). Gregory Pincus developed the first oral contraceptive pill. George Wald won a Nobel for furthering our understanding of the human eye. Stanley Cohen won a Nobel in embryology (study of embryos and their development). Willem Kolff came up with the kidney dialysis machine.

Over the past 105 years, 14 million Jews have won 15-dozen Nobel Prizes while only three Nobel Prizes have been won by 1.4 billion Muslims (other than Peace Prizes).

Why are Jews so powerful? Stanley Mezor invented the first micro-processing chip. Leo Szilard developed the first nuclear chain reactor; Peter Schultz, optical fibre cable; Charles Adler, traffic lights; Benno Strauss, Stainless steel; Isador Kisee, sound movies; Emile Berliner, telephone microphone; Charles Ginsburg, videotape recorder.

Famous financiers in the business world who belong to Jewish faith include Ralph Lauren (Polo), Levis Strauss (Levi's Jeans), Howard Schultz (Starbuck's), Sergey Brin (Google), Michael Dell20(Dell Computers), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Donna Karan (DKNY), Irv Robbins (Baskins & Robbins) and Bill Rosenberg (Dunkin Donuts).

Richard Levin, President of Yale University, is a Jew. So are Henry Kissinger (American secretary of state), Alan Greenspan (Fed chairman under Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush), Joseph Lieberman, Madeleine Albright (American secretary of state), Casper Weinberger (American secretary of defense), Maxim Litvinov ( USSR foreign Minister), David Marshal ( Singapore 's first chief minister), Issac Isaacs (governor-general of Australia ), Benjamin Disraeli (British statesman and author), Yevgeny Primakov (Russian PM), Barry Goldwater, Jorge Sampaio (president of Portugal ), John Deutsch (CIA director), Herb Gray (Canadian deputy PM), Pierre Mendes (French PM), Michael Howard (British home secretary), Bruno Kreisky (chancellor of Austria ) and Robert Rubin (American secretary of treasury).

In the media, famous Jews include Wolf Blitzer (CNN), Barbara Walters (ABC News), Eugene Meyer (Washington Post), Henry Grunwald (editor-in-chief Time), Katherine Graham (publisher of The Washington Post), Joseph Lelyyeld (Executive editor, The New York Times), and Max Frankel (New York Times).

Can you name the most beneficent philanthropist in the history of the world? The name is George Soros, a Jew, who has so far donated a colossal $4 billion most of which has gone as aid to scientists and universities around the world. Second to George Soros is Walter Annenberg, another Jew, who has built a hundred libraries by donating an estimated $2 billion.

At the Olympics, Mark Spitz set a record of sorts by wining seven gold medals. Lenny Krayzelburg is a three-time Olympic gold medalist. Spitz, Krayzelburg and Boris Becker are all Jewish.

Did you know that Harrison Ford, George Burns, Tony Curtis, Charles Bronson, Sandra Bullock, Billy Crystal, Woody Allen, Paul Newman, Peter Sellers, Dustin Hoffman, Michael Douglas, Ben Kingsley, Kirk Douglas, Goldie Hawn, Cary Grant, William Shatner, Jerry Lewis and Peter Falk are all Jewish?

As a matter of fact, Hollywood itself was founded by a Jew. Among directors and producers, Steven Spielberg, Mel Brooks, Oliver Stone, Aaron Spelling (Beverly Hills 90210), Neil Simon (The Odd Couple), Andrew Vaina (Rambo 1/2/3), Michael Man (Starsky and Hutch), Milos Forman (One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest), Douglas Fairbanks (The thief of Baghdad ) and Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters) are all Jewish.

To be certain, Washington is the capital that matters and in Washington the lobby that matters is The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC. Washington knows that if PM Ehud Olmert were to discover that the earth is flat, AIPAC will make the 109th Congress pass a resolution congratulating Olmert on his discovery.

William James Sidis, with an IQ of 250-300, is the brightest human who ever existed. Guess what faith did he belong to?

So, why are Jews so powerful? Answer: Education.

Why are Muslims so powerless?

There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas . Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew there are one hundred Muslims. Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?

Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around 500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims. The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407. In 2004, Shanghai Jiao Tong University compiled an 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' , and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500.

As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent. A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent. Some 98 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world had completed primary school, while less than 50 per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same. Around 40 per cent of the 'literates' in the Christian world attended university while no more than two per cent of the 'literates' in the Muslim world did the same.

Muslim-majority countries have 230 scientists per one million Muslims. The US has 4,000 scientists per million and Japan has 5,000 per million. In the entire Arab world, the total number of full-time researchers is 35,000 and there are only 50 technicians per one million Arabs (in the Christian world there are up to 1,000 technicians per one million). Furthermore, the Muslim world spends 0.2 per cent of its GDP on research and development, while the Christian world spends around five per cent of its GDP. Conclusion: The Muslim world lacks the capacity to produce knowledge.

Daily newspapers per 1,000 people and number of book titles per million are two indicators of whether knowledge is being diffused in a society. In Pakistan , there are 23 daily newspapers per 1,000 Pakistanis while the same ratio in Singapore is 360. In the UK , the number of book titles per million stands at 2,000 while the same in Egypt is 20. Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge.

Exports of high technology products as a percentage of total exports are an important indicator of knowledge application. Pakistan 's export of high technology products as a percentage of total exports stands at one per cent. The same for Saudi Arabia is 0.3 per cent; Kuwait , Morocco , and Algeria are all at 0.3 per cent while Singapore is at 58 per cent. Conclusion: The Muslim world is failing to apply knowledge.

Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't producing knowledge. Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't diffusing knowledge. Why are Muslims powerless? Because we aren't applying knowledge.

And, the future belongs to knowledge-based societies. Interestingly, the combined annual GDP of 57 OIC-countries is under $2 trillion. America, just by herself, produces goods and services worth $12 trillion; China $8 trillion, Japan $3.8 trillion and Germany $2.4 trillion (purchasing power parity basis).

Oil rich Saudi Arabia , UAE, Kuwait and Qatar collectively produce goods and services (mostly oil) worth $500 billion; Spain alone produces goods and services worth over $1 trillion, Catholic Poland $489 billion and Buddhist Thailand $545 billion. (Muslim GDP as a percentage of world GDP is fast declining). So, why are Muslims so powerless? Answer: Lack of education.

<b>All we do is shout to Allah the whole day and blame everyone else for our multiple failures.</b>

- Dr Farrukh Saleem. The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance columnist


http://pseudosecularism.blogspot.com/

[Bodhi]

<span style='color:red'>The other side of Sufism</span>
R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd)

A reappraisal of the role of Sufis working as missionaries of Islam

For centuries the Sufi creed and Sufi music have been tom tomed as great symbols of spiritualism and promoters of peace and harmony between the Hindus and the Muslims. The cleverly marketed concept of Sufi spiritualism has been unquestioningly accepted as the hallmark of Hindu-Muslim unity. It is time we studied the history of Sufis, tried to track the narrative of their coming to India and analysed their explicit missionary role in promoting conversions to Islam. More importantly, it needs to be assessed how did the Sufis conduct themselves during reckless killings and plunders by the Muslim invaders ? Did they object to the senseless mass killings and try to prevent unremitting plunder of Hindu temples and innocent masses? Did the Sufis ever object to the capture of helpless men and women as slaves and the use of the latter as objects of carnal pleasure ? These are some of the questions to which answers have to be found by every genuine student of Indian history.

Most Sufis came to India either accompanying the invading armies of Islamic marauders, or followed in the wake of the sweeping conquests made by the soldiers of Islam. At least the following four famous Sufis accompanied the Muslim armies which repetitively invaded India to attack the Hindu rulers, seize their kingdoms and riches and took recourse to extensive slaughtering of the commoners. Almost all Sufi masters were silent spectators to the murderous mayhem and reckless plunder of temples ands cities by the marauding hordes across the sub-continent. Taking advantage of the fact that the Hindu masses are deeply steeped in spiritual tradition and mysticism, the Sufis used their mystic paradigm for applying sort of a healing balm on the defeated, bedegralled and traumatized commoners with a view to converting them to the religion of the victors. The following well-known Sufi masters came to India along with the invading Muslim armies which repetitively invaded India in wave after wave:

Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer had accompanied the army of Shihabuddin Ghori and finally settled down at Ajmer in the year 1233 A.D.

Khawaja Qutubuddin came to Delhi in the year 1236 in the train of Shihabuddin Ghori and stayed on to further the cause of Islam.

Sheikh Faridudin came to Pattan (now in Pakistan) in the year 1265.

Sheikh Nizamuddin Auliya of Dargah Hazrat Nizamuddin came to Delhi in the year 1335 accompanying a contingent of the Muslim invaders.

Additionally, the famous Sufi Shihabuddin Suhrawardy of Baghdad was brought to India for carrying out the missionary work of conversions by Bahauddin Zakariya of Multan several decades after the Hindu ruler had been defeated and the kingdom laid waste after repetitive plunder and manslaughter. Like all Sufi masters, his main task was to apply the balm of spiritual unity on the traumatized Hindu population and then gradually persuade them to convert to Islam. Not a single Sufi, the so-called mystic saints, ever objected to the ongoing senseless manslaughter and wreckless plunder, nor to the destruction of temples, nor for that matter to the ghoulish enslavement of the so-called infidel men and women for sale in the bazaars of Ghazni and Baghdad. Operating from the sidelines of spiritualism they even participated in the nitty-gritty of governance to help the Muslim rulers consolidate their authority in the strife torn country. And significantly, their participation in the affairs of the State was not conditional upon the Muslim rulers acting in a just and even handed manner. On the contrary, the Sufis invariably tried to help the Sultans in following the path shown by the Prophet and the Shariah. Another important objective of the spiritual and mystic preachings of the Sufi masters was to blunt the edge of Hindu resistance and prevent them from taking up arms to defend their hearth and home, their motherland and their faith, through the façade of peace and religious harmony. The Naqashbandi Sufis had very close relations with Jahangir and Aurangzeb. The well known Sufi Saint of Punjab, Ahmad Sirhindi (Mujadid) of the Naqashbandi order (1564-1634) held that the execution of the Sikh leader Guru Arjun Dev by Jehangir was a great Islamic victory. He believed and openly proclaimed that Islam and Hinduism were antithesis of each other and therefore could not co-exist. Even the Chishti Sufi, Miyan Mir, who had been a friend of Guru Arjun Dev, later on turned his back on the Sikh Guru when the latter was arrested by Jahangir and sent for execution.

It may be recalled that the great Sufi master of the eleventh century, Al Qushairi (A.D.1072) had unambiguously declared that there was no discord between the aims of the Sufi ‘haqiqa’ and the aims of the Sharia. The definition given by Al Hujwiri should be able to quell any doubt about the commitment of Sufis in upholding the supremacy of the Islamic faith over all other religions. That dogma has been the key component of the philosophy of Sufism not only in India, but across the world - from India to Hispania (i.e., the Spain). The great Sufi master, Al Hujwiri, laid down the golden rule that the words “there is no god save Allah” are the ultimate Truth, and the words “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah” are the indisputable Law for all Sufis. In other words, the Sufism and the ulema represent the same two aspects of the Islamic faith which are universally accepted and obeyed by all Muslims. By definition therefore Sufi masters could be no exception. The renowned ninth century Sufi master, Al Junaid, also known as “the Sheikh of the Way”, and widely revered as the spiritual ancestor of Sufi faith, had categorically proclaimed that for Sufis “All the mystic paths are barred, except to him who followeth in the footsteps of the Messenger (i.e., Prophet Muhammad) [Source: Martin Lings, What is Sufism, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London, 1975, p.101].

As pointed out by Reynold A. Nicholson in the Preface to the famous tome, ‘Kashaf al Mahjub’ (Taj & Co., Delhi, 1982). “no sufis, not even those who have attained the highest degree of holiness, are exempt from the obligation of obeying the religious law”. In fact, the famous tome, ‘Kashaf al Mahjub’ written by Ali bin Al-Hujwiri, who was also known as Data Ganj Baksh, was widely regarded as the grammar of Sufi thought and practice. Most Sufis have invariably drawn on the contents of this treatise for preaching the sufi thought ( also known as sufi silsilas). As already stated, on page 140 of Kashaf al Mahjub Al Hujwiri loudly proclaims that “the words there is no God save Allah are Truth, and the words Muhammed is the Apostle of Allah” are the indisputable Law.

K.A. Nizami in his celebrated book, The Life and Times of Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya (Idarah-I Adabiyat-i-Delhi, Delhi) has stated that the Auliya openly used to say that “what the ulama seek to achieve through speech, we achieve by our behaviour.” The Auliya was a firm believer in the need for unquestioned obedience of every Muslim, every Sufi, to the dictates of the ulema. According to K.A. Nizami, another Sufi saint Jamal Qiwamu’d-din wrote that though he had been associated with the Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya for years, “but never did he find him missing a single sunnat …… ”. The well known authority on Sufism, S.A.A. Rizvi has recorded in his book, ‘A History of Sufism in India’ that Nizamuddin Auliya used to unhesitatingly accept enormous gifts given to him by Khusraw Barwar which implied that the Auliya was unconcerned with the source of the gift, provided it was paid in cash. Yet the Auliya was a firm believer in the need for a Muslim’s unquestioned loyalty and obedience to the ulema. As reiterated by K.A. Nizami, Auliya used to preach that the unbeliever is the doomed denizen of Hell. In his khutba he would leave no one in doubt that Allah has created Paradise for the Believers and Hell for the infidels “in order to repay the wicked for what they have done”. It has been categorically stated on page 161 in the famous treatise, Fawaid al-Fuad, translated by Bruce B. Lawrence (Paulist Press, New York, 1992) that the Auliya confirmed on the authority of the great Islamic jurist, Imam Abu Hanifa, that the perdition of the unbelievers is certain and that Hell is the only abode for them, even if they agreed to confess total loyalty to Allah on the Day of Judgment.

In the above mentioned treatise on Sufi philosphy, Fuwaid al-Fuad, a very interesting instance of enslaving the kaffir Hindus for monetary gain has been cited which shows how another Sufi, Shayakh Ali Sijzi, provided financial assistance to one of his dervishes to participate in the lucrative slave trade. He had advised the dervish that he should take “these slaves to Ghazni, where the potential for profit is still greater”. And it was confirmed by Nizamuddin Auliya that “the Dervish obeyed”. Obviously therefore, neither spiritual ethics and nor justice to all, including the infidels, were the strong points of Sufi saints.

If the narrative of the preachings and acts of Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer are taken as indication of his religious philosophy and deeds, he emerges as a sufi master who nursed a deep hatred against the infidel Hindus and showed utter contempt for their religious beliefs. As elaborated by S.S.A. Rizvi in ‘A History of Sufism in India, Vol. 1 (Munshiram Manoharlal, 1978, p. 117), there is a reference in the book, Jawahar-i- Faridi, to the fact that when Moinuddin Chishti reached near the Annasagar Lake at Ajmer, where a number of holy shrines of Hindus were located, he slaughtered a cow and cooked a beef kebab at the sacred place surrounded by many temples. It is further claimed in Jawahar-i-Faridi that the Khwaja had dried the 2 holy lakes of Annasagar and Pansela by the magical heat of Islamic spiritual power. He is even stated to have made the idol of the Hindu temple near Annasagar recite the Kalma. The Khwaja had a burning desire to destroy the rule of the brave Rajput king, Prithviraj Chauhan, so much so that he ascribed the victory of Muhammad Ghori in the battle of Tarain entirely to his own spiritual prowess and declared that “We have seized Pithaura alive and handed him over to the army of Islam”. [Source: Siyar’l Auliya, cited by Rizvi on page 116 of ‘A History of Sufism in India’].

Throughout the Muslim rule all Sufis enjoyed full confidence, royal favour and patronage of the cruel Muslim rulers. Though foolishly accepted as “secular” by most Hindus seeking spiritual solace after being battered, bruised and marginalised, almost all Sufi saints dogmatically followed the commandments contained in the Quran, the Hadith and Sharia. Historians have recorded that many Sufi saints had accompanied armies of the Muslim invaders to use their spiritual powers in furtherance of Islam’s conquests. Not one of them raised even a little finger to forbid slaughter of the innocents, nor did they question the imposition of jiziya by Muslim rulers. In fact, most of them guided the

Muslim rulers in carrying forward their mission of conquest and conversion by furthering their campaigns of plundering the wealth of Hindus of which many Sufis willingly partook share. It was almost a taboo for Sufis, the so-called saints, to accept a Hindu ascending the throne of any kingdom during the heydays of the Muslim rule. . In an example narrated by S.A.A. Rizvi on page 37 of his well researched book, The Wonder That Was India (Vol.II, Rupa & Co, 1993, New Delhi) it is pointed out that when the powerful Bengali warrior, king Ganesha, captured power in Bengal in the year 1415 A.D., Ibrahim Shah Sharqi, attacked his kingdom at the request of outraged ulema and numerous Sufis of Bengal. In the ensuing strife, the leading Sufi of Bengal, Nur Qutb-i-Alam, interceded and secured a political agreement to the benefit of the Muslim community and satisfaction of Sufis. Under dire threat King Ganesha was forced to abdicate his throne in favour of his 12 years old son, Jadu, who was converted to Islam and proclaimed as Sultan Jalaluddin - to the satisfaction of the Sufi masters. Similarly Sultan Ahmed Shah of Gujarat (1411-42), though a practitioner of Sufi philosophy, was a diehard iconoclast who took delight in destroying temples, as stated in the same tome, by S.A.A. Rizvi. The Sultan also used to force the Rajput chieftains to marry their daughters to him so that they would become outcastes in their own community. And the endgame of the Sultan could as well be that perhaps some of the outcaste Rajputs might then opt to become Muslims.

Unfortunately due to relentless colonization of the Hindu mind during 1000 years long oppressive Muslim rule, the Hindu masses till date have failed to realise that the so-called Sufi philosophy of religious harmony is a one-way street. This trend of Hindus praying at tombs and dargahs has been nurtured by the strong undercurrent of belief in spiritualism among Hindu masses, even educated classes. That is the crux of the matter. Deeply steeped in their traditional belief in spirituality and mysticism, the Hindus have developed the custom of visiting dargahs and continue to pray at the tombs of Sufis, no Muslim, nor any Sufi, has ever agreed to worship in a Hindu temple, nor make obeisance before the images of Hindu Gods and Godesses. For them it would be an act of grossest sacrilege and unacceptable violation of the basic tenets of Sufism. That is the truth about the Sufi saints and their philosophy of inter-religious harmony.

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.p...pid=234&page=38

[Shambhu]

More "venom" according to our psec intellectuals. Anything which even remotely hints at the truth is "venom", but anything praising jehadis or missionaries and denigrating hindus is great onlee..
(Sagarika Ghose recently was concerned about the "venom" being "spewed by blogs").. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo-->
----------------------------------------------------
Dec 26, 2008

<b>Unraveling the Sufis of India: Villains in the Guise of Saints:</b> Ibrahim Lone

from Sanatan Dharma
date Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 7:47 PM
subject Unraveling the Sufis of India: Villains in the Guise of Saints by Ibrahim Lone

India Has always was a land of diversity. Secularism and peaceful co-existence is not a concept in this land, it is a way of life. The credit goes to the understanding of our great Vedic ancestors (I count Hinduism as practiced today as not Vedic in spirit or essence) who were men of great letters and a mighty spirit. Christianity reached the Indian shores much before it reached Europe. There are Christians, know as Syrian Christians, whose links with the Christian doctrine far outdates that of any other country outside the Middle East. Jews, Zoroastrians, Bahai’s all have found home and safe refuge in this great country.

However the only exception to these immigrants was the Muslim, who did not come here to adapt himself to the local culture and live in peace and harmony. He had only one aim, which was to subdue the native populations and wave the flag through the length and breadth of this once great Nation which extended from Dhaka in the East to Khyber in the west.

Islam changed smeared the face of this country with a paint so horrific that the colours still refuse to wither out. While there is no denying the fact that Islam was spread in India mostly by the sword, there is another aspect of Islamic proselytization, which is ignored. This face is that of Sufism and the Sufis.

Most people in the India have been mislead into believing that the Sufis mostly by their own soft-headed scholars, to cherish the fond belief that the Sufis were spiritual seekers, and that unlike the Mullahs, they loved Hindu religious lore and liked their Hindu neighbors. The Chistiyya Sufis in particular have name chosen for such fulsome praise. The orthodox among the Muslims protest that the Sufis are being slandered. But the gullible Hindus remain convinced that they themselves know better. Professor Aziz Ahmad, a renowned scholar of Islam in India, clinched this matter in the following words: "In Indian sufism anti-Hindu polemics started with Muinal-din Chisti. Early sufis in Punjab and early Chistis devoted themselves to the task of conversion on a large scale. Missionary activity slowed down under Nizam al-din Auliya, not because of any new concept of eclecticism, but because he held that the Hindus were generally excluded from grace and could not be easily converted to Islam unless they had the opportunity to be in the company of the Muslim saints for considerable time." In other words the native Hindus were as a nation, not fitting to become Muslims. This is the sort of hatred that the Sufis had for the Hindus.

Of course, the Auliya who lived in a sprawling mansion and received rich gifts out of plunder was convinced that he himself was such a Muslim saint. His temper and teachings can be known easily from the writings of Amir Khusru, the poet, and Ziauddin Barani, the historian. Both of them were leading disciples of the Auliya. Both of them express intense hatred for Hindus, and regret that the Hanafi school of Islamic Law had come in the way of wiping out the "curse of infidelity" completely from the face Hindustan (India).

A similar Sufi saint who died a mere 79 years before Waliullah's birth, was Ahmad Sirhindi (1564-1624). He was always foaming at the mouth against Akbar's policy of peace with the Hindus. He proclaimed himself the Mujaddid-i-alf-i-sdni, (renovator of the second millennium of Islam). Besides writing several books, he addressed many letters to several powerful courtiers in the reign of Akbar and Jahangir. His Maktiibctt-i-Imdm Rabbant have been collected and published in three volumes. According to Professor S.A.A. Rizvi, "Sharia can be fostered through the sword' was the slogan he raised for his contemporaries.

Let us see a few specimens of his writings in which he expressed the love for the Indian infidels: "The honour of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs. One who respects the kafirs dishonours the Muslims. The real purpose of levying jiziya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain terrified and trembling. It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honour and might of Islam." In Letter No. 81, he said: "Cow-sacrifice in India is the noblest of Islamic practices. The kafirs may probably agree to pay jiziya but they shall never concede to cow-sacrifice." After Guru Mun Deva had been tortured and done to death by Jahangir, he wrote in letter No. 193 that "the execution of the accursed kafir of Gobindwal is an important achievement and is the cause of the great defeat of the Hindus."

Sirhindi ranks with Shah Waliullah as one of the topmost sufis and theologians of Islam. Referring to his role, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the first Education Minister of independent India, writes in his Tazkirah: "but for these letters Muslim nobles would not have stood by Islam and but for the efforts of Shaikh Ahmad, Akbar's heterodoxy would have superseded Islam in India."' Later on, when K.A. Nizami published a collection of Shah Walilullah's letters addressed to various Muslim notables, including Ahmad Shah Abdali, he dedicated it to Maulana Azad. The Maulana wrote back, "I am extremely happy that you have earned the merit of publishing these letters. I pray from the core of my heart that Allah may bless you with the felicity of publishing many books of a similar kind." That should give us a measure not only of 'Muslim Revivalism' but also of many Maulanas who masqueraded as ardent nationalists in order to fight the battle for Islam from within the Indian National Congress.

It is strange that most of the present-day Muslim scholars refuse to cite the actual statements made about Hindus and Hinduism by their heroes such as Ahmad Sirhindi and Shah Waliullah while praising them to the skies as saviours of Islam in India. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Allama lqbal were shining examples of this intriguing silence. The late Professor Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi published two significant books on the history of Islam in India - Ulema in Politics (1972), and The Muslim Community of the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent (1977). He has devoted many pages to Ahmad Sirhindi and Shah Waliullah in both the books. But he has not cited a single sentence written or spoken by the 'great sufis' on how they looked at Hindus and Hinduism. I have no doubt that Nizami has also suppressed those letters of Shah Waliullah in which the latter has poured out his heart about kufr and the kafirs. It is only Professor S.A.A Rizvi who has taken us into the secret chambers so to say. Professor Rizvi is a Shia. And the venom which characters like Ahmad Sirhindi have poured on Hindus and Hinduism is quite comparable to that which they poured out on Shi’as and Shi’ism.

Professor Rizvi has cited select passages from the original Persian of Ahmad Sirhindi's letters. It is only recently that the letters have become available in Urdu translation. Ahmad Sirhindi wrote to many Muslim notables in the reign of Akbar and Jahangir. Some of these letters were in strong protest against Akbar's liberal, equitable policies vis-à-vis Hindus. One of Sirhindi's patrons was Abdul Rahim Khan-i-Khanan whom many Hindus cherish as a Hindi poet and a devotee of Krishna. It is unfortunate that quite a few recipients of these letters cannot be identified straight away because they are addressed by their titles and not by their names. As the letters are not dated, it is difficult to say whether the bearer of a particular title belonged to the reign of Akbar or Jahangir. The same title was given to several persons in succession. I reproduce below some passages from these significant letters in order to show how the mind of this great sufi functioned. He was the leading light of the Naqshbandi sufi silsila, and the foremost disciple of Khwaja Baqi Billah who brought this silsila to India in the reign of Akbar. I may add that the Prophet appeared quite frequently to both Baqi Billah and Ahmad Sirhindi in their dreams or states of trance, and gave guidance to them.

Some of his statements translated from the original Urdu script have been reproduced below:

"It is said that the Sharia prospers under the "shadow of the sword" (al-Shara' tahat al-sait). And the glory of the holy Sharia depends on the kings of Islam."

"Islam and infidelity (kufr) contradict one another. To establish the one means eradicating the other, the coming together of these contradictories being impossible. Therefore, Allah has commanded his Prophet to wage war (jihad) against the infidels, and be harsh with them. The glory is Islam consists in the humiliation and degradation of infidels and infidelity. He, who honours the infidels, insults Islam. Honouring (the infidels) does not mean that they are accorded dignity, and made to sit in high places. It means allowing them to be in our company, to sit with them, and talk to them. They should be kept away like dogs. If there is some worldly purpose or work which depends upon them, and cannot be served without their help, they may be contacted while keeping in mind all the time that they are not worthy of respect. The best course according to Islam is that they should not be contacted even for worldly purposes. Allah has proclaimed in his Holy Word (Quran) that they are his and his Prophet's enemies. And mixing with these enemies of Allah and his Prophet or showing affection for them, is one of the greatest crimes."

"The abolition of jizyah in Hindustan is a result of friendship, which (Hindus) have acquired with the rulers of this land... What right had the rulers to stop exacting jizyah? Allah himself has commended imposition of jizyah for their (infidels) humiliation and degradation. What is required is their disgrace, and the prestige and power of Muslims. The slaughter of non-Muslims means gain for Islam. To consult them (the kafirs) and then act according to their advice means honouring the enemies (of Islam), which is strictly forbidden."

"The prayer (goodwill) of these enemies of Islam is false and fruitless. It should never be called for because it can only add to their numbers. If the infidels pray, they will surely seek the intercession of their idols, which is taking things too far. A wise man has said that unless you become a dewanah (crazy) you cannot attain Islam. The state of this mania means going beyond considerations of profit and loss. Whatever one gains in the service of Islam should suffice..."

"Ram and Krishan whom Hindus worship are insignificant creatures, and have been begotten by their parents... Ram could not protect his wife whom Ravan took away by force. How can he help others? It is thousands of times shameful that some people should think of Ram and Krishan as rulers of all the worlds. To think that Ram and Rahman are the same, is extremely foolish. The creator and the creature can never be one... The controller of the Cosmos was never called Ram and Krishan before, the latter were born. What has happened after their birth that they have come to be equated with Allah, and the worship of Ram and Krishan is described as the worship of Allah? May Allah save us!"

"Our prophets who number one hundred and twenty four thousand have encouraged the created ones to worship the Creator. The gods of the Hindus (on the other hand) have encouraged the people to worship them (the gods) instead. They are themselves misguided, and are leading others astray. See, how the (two) ways are different!"

"Before that kafir (Guru Arjun Dev) was executed, this recluse (meaning himself) had seen in a dream that the reigning king had smashed the skull of idolatry. Indeed, he was a great idolater, and the leader of the idolaters, and the chief of unbelievers. May Allah blast him! The Holy Prophet who is the ruler of religion as well as the world, has cursed the idolaters as follows in some of his prayers - "O Allah, demean their society, create divisions in their ranks, destroy their homes, and get at them like the mighty one."

"It is required by religion (Islam) that jihad should be waged against the unbelievers, and that they should be dealt with harshly. It is obligatory on Muslims to acquaint the king of Islam with the evil customs of false religions. Maybe the king has no knowledge of these evil customs. Some Ulama of Islam should come forward, and proclaim the evils present in their (unbelievers') ways... It will be no excuse or, the Day of Judgment that they did not proclaim the tenets of the Sharia because they were not called upon (to do so)."

"Therefore, it is necessary that infidelity should be cursed in order to serve the faith (Islam). Cursing unbelief in the heart is the lesser way. The greater way is to curse it in the heart as well as with the body. In short, cursing means to nourish enmity towards enemies of the true faith, whether that enmity is harboured in the heart when there is fear of injury from them (infidels), or it is harboured in the heart as well as served with the body when there is no fear of injury from them. In the opinion of this recluse, there is no greater way to obtain the blessings of Allah than to curse the enemies of the faith (be impatient with them). For Allah himself harbours enmity towards the infidels and infidelity..."

"Once I went to visit a sick man who was close to death. When I meditated on him, I saw that his heart was layered with darkness. I intended to remove those darkness. But he was not yet ready for it... When I meditated more deeply, I discovered that that darkness had gathered due to his friendship with the infidels. They could not be dispersed easily. He had to suffer torments of hell before he could get purged of them."

"Every person cherishes some longing in his heart. The only longing which this recluse (meaning himself) cherishes is that the enemies of Allah and his Prophet should be roughed up. The accursed ones should be humiliated, and their false gods disgraced and defiled. I know that Allah likes and loves no other act more than this. That is why I have been encouraging you again and again to act in this way. Now that you have yourself arrived at that place, and have been appointed to defile and insult that dirty spot and its inhabitants, I feel grateful for this grace (from Allah). There are many who go to this place for pilgrimage. Allah in his kindness has not inflicted this punishment on us. After giving thanks to Allah, you should do your best to ruin that place and their false gods ... whether the idols are carved or uncarved. Let us hope that you will not act slow. Physical weakness and severity of the cold weather, comes in my way. Otherwise, I would have presented myself, and helped you in doing the job. I would have liked to participate in the ceremony and mutilate the stones."

This is short history of the love that Sufis has for the native Indians. With the advent of Wahabism in India more and more Muslims are abandoning the practice of going to the tombs of these Sufis and offering Fatiha to them. However the funding to these shrines continues as Hindus visit these tombs. In fact many of these tombs in India get more Hindu visitors than Muslim visitors. Needless to say large amounts of money are dolled out by the gullible non believers at these tombs. What exactly this money goes on to fund is anybody’s guess. However all I can say here is that : Viva Hindus keep it up!

-- Ibrahim Lone
http://www.islam-watch.org/Ibrahim.Lone/Su...e-of-Saints.htm

Labels: Conversion, Ibrahim Lone, India, Islam, Sufis

[G.Subramaniam]

Excerpts from faith freedom
( why even educated muslims are impossible to reform islam )

I am creating this thread to showcase modern and educated Muslims' thoughts and opinions regarding Muhammad and Islamic teachings. Let the world see and ponder about the mindset of Muslims. Let the world understand what Islam does to a Muslim human being's sense of morality and ethics.

We do not need to add any comments for their statements; they are self-explanatory and convey their thoughts perfectly.


There's no such thing as leaving Islam openly, safely nor freely. There can only be leaving Islam mockingly. To leave Islam means to ridicule Islam. Apostates are treating Islam as a game, blaspheming Allah's name when they're supposed to be the one upholding Allah's name. Those who treats Allah's religion as a parody deserves death. - Orangupahan


It is NOT IMMORAL for muslims to have non-muslims as slaves and sex slaves; But it is definitely IMMORAL for non-Muslims to own Muslim slaves. -- Allah Diya, MTD & NAV (Thanks to infidel_01)


I'm an advocate of pedophilia. Its legal according to Allah's law, there's nothing wrong with it. - Orangupahan


If a nine year old girl is mentally and physically capable for marriage and sexual intercourse, and if she is okay with her marriage, then sure sex with her is acceptable, why not? - The Infamous


I believe that Muslims are the purest strain of humanity - Orangupahan



What separates people within the government are their religions; Allah worshippers vs Satan worshippers. Its clear that within an Islamic government, Satan worshippers are considered second-class citizens. This is discrimination towards Satan and his worshippers. This discrimination will weaken the position of Satan and his followers thus making Islam strong. A world of better sharing and understanding will finally be achieved when Satan's evil traits fades away from the minds of people. - Orangupahan

The non-Muslim women's marriage is nullified when their husbands lost the war with Muslims, thus placing them as among the spoils of war. It is okay to have sex with them. I'd like to sex with captive women as "Legal rape".

I'm perfectly okay with the fact that our enemies took our women when we lost a war. - Orangupahan

There can never be brotherhood between Jesus-worshipping Christians and Muslims. Doctrine of Trinity sums up the justification for them to burn eternally in hell.
- Orangupahan

[Shambhu]

Senator Levin seems to be a little Sonia...

Anyway, this American Lance Silver (letter-writer) gets it.
---------------------------
<b>Carl Levin’s Support Of Muslims Explained</b>

<b>Letter to the Editor</b>
Published: Monday, December 29, 2008
To The Editor:

Carl Levin is the senator from the state of Michigan, which is considered the Islamic capital of the United States of America.

As of 2005, Michigan held the largest and still growing Muslim population in the United States and the second largest Arab population outside of the Middle East. Demographers estimate that more than 8 million Muslims live in the United States, making them the second-largest religious community in the country. About half of Arab Americans are Muslim, while the other half are Christian. In the past few decades, Islam has become the fastest-growing religion in the United States.

It is no wonder that Sen. Levin takes the ridiculous positions that he has about prosecuting Republicans for war crimes, for Abu Ghraib, etc. and his pandering and patronizing attacks from the left aimed at Americans doing whatever is necessary to save even one American life, maybe even Sen. Levin’s and those in his family…

He represents the Muslim viewpoint; plain and simple.

President Bush and the current administration have prevented Islamic Terrorist attacks in our mainland. These insane anti American, anti democratic, anti-Western, anti-Hindu and anti-non-Muslim cultural lunatic murderers have been prevented from murdering more Americans by the Bush administration being pro-active in the defense of existential America with the Patriot Act, electronic surveillance, financial monitoring etc.,.

I’m afraid the Obama administration, Sen. Levin and the new Congress will, unfortunately, have much American blood on their hands; because of their insane politically correct positions concerning Islam.
<b>
Islam is the problem, not the Western cultures, nor even India’s Hindu culture; it is Islam against the West; Islam against Hindu India and all of non-Islamic civilization</b>. Americans must read the foreign papers and read history books either current or historical will do.

It seems that most American papers didn’t and still don’t have the courage to print the Muhammad cartoons fiasco, the Geert Wilders story, the Van Gogh massacre in Europe and report about Islamic massacres throughout the world on a daily basis. The real reasons behind the African massacres and genocide ...

The American media institute must ask the simple question, how does the U.S.A. foreign policy make Muslims attack and butcher other Muslims, Hindus, Israelis etc… ?????

<b>The reasons are replete in the Koran, Hadith and in Shariah Law. These atrocities are permitted. Read and learn. Not all Muslims are bad; just those who enable violent Islamic fundamentalism.</b>

Therefore, it is impossible for Carl Levin to be unbiased in his attacks against the sane Americans who unfortunately were voted out of office by well intentioned naïve, misled, ill-informed, ignorant well intentioned American voters who just don’t understand the Imperialistic nature of radical Islam and it’s goals in America and the world.

The Supreme Court and all jurisdictions should nip in the bud this disgusting war criminal, war crime diatribe and pandering by the ACLU crowd against those of us who protect those of us who are totally incapable of doing or thinking about how to do so.

We are in deep trouble in this country ... not from the right.

Lance Silver

Cherry Hill, N.J.

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2008/12/29/...b5390553479.txt

[Shambhu]

<b>Attack by Hundreds of Muslims on Hindu travelers in Train!</b>
December 30, 2008

Paush Shuddha Trutiya

Jalgaon (Maharashtra): Hundreds of Muslims attacked by stopping the train before it reached Jalgaon the Hindu travelers for confronting the Muslim traveler who was not allowing a Hindu lady to enter the train. (Rake up an issue first and when confronted by the Hindus then attack them, is a new strategy used by Muslims now a days. 2 days ago at Pangao (District Latur) too similar incident had taken place. Hindus should be alert henceforth; they should be fully prepared to face any attack by Muslims before confronting them! – Editor)

At Dharangao when one Hindu lady was trying to enter the Surat-Bhusaval train a Muslim fellow was obstructing her. Hindu travelers in the compartment took the lady in the train and confronted the Muslim asking reason for obstructing the lady from entering. They also beat them a little for being so disdainful. Thereafter the Muslim travelers called their relatives at to come to the gate of the railway station near Jalgao. (Usually Hindus contact the police if any untoward incident occurs in the society; but the Muslims contact their people for rioting. That is how they create fear among others by behaving like this! – Editor)

When the train reached that place the Muslim travelers in the train stopped the train by pulling the chain. (O, Hindus! establish a Government of pro-Hindus in the next elections and get prepared to teach a lesson to such disdainful Muslims to bring them to their senses! – Editor) When the Muslim travelers were asked by Hindu travelers in the compartment reason for stopping the train they tried to answer them rudely. Later Mob of 200-300 Muslims entered the train and started beating the Hindus badly by pulling them out. (How do hundreds of Muslims gather as soon as they are contacted? Hindus should suffer the beating of the Muslims and nourish them too. This is how the Congress gives in to their demands! – Editor)

This was going on for 15 minutes. (It is very shameful that when Hindu brothers suffer at the hands of Muslims the others coolly watch without going for their help. Hindus should remember that it was the turn of those who suffered then; but they who were watching coolly were also not safe. They also would suffer some day or the other later. – Editor) When someone informed the police the Muslim attackers ran away before their arrival; hence no crime was registered against anyone.

Source: Daily Sanatan Prabhat
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/6036.html

[Shambhu]

<!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> Understatement from down under:

From the "No sh1t, Sherlock" department:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

<b>Prophet not perfect, says Islamic scholar</b>
02/01/2009 10:47:42 http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...46-2702,00.html

An article written by Richard Kerbaj | October 04, 2006 @

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au

A LEADING adviser on Islam, Ameer Ali, has attacked Muslims who "blindly" follow their faith and fail to question the veracity of the Koran, saying that even Mohammed had "flaws". ((Stone this bloody blasphemer. Now!!))
4oct-ali

Muslim minds 'closed': Ameer Ali, doctor of economics at Murdoch University in Perth, says the Koran must not be read literally but reinterpreted for today. Picture: Colin Murty

The chairman of John Howard's Muslim advisory board yesterday warned that Islamists would continue to breed jihadis unless the Koran was "reinterpreted" for today's society.

He also said mosques were increasingly being used by imams to deliver sermons that were not open to discussion.

Dr Ali said the majority of Muslim clerics had for centuries imposed a "literalist" teaching of Islam, telling their followers that deviating from the written message would ultimately lead to their admission into hell.

"The times are changing and with the change of times, you also have to reinterpret the Koran," he told The Australian.

"Because if you believe that it's a book for all the times and all the nations, then that book must be yielding new meanings.

"There are verses about slavery, and the Koran says you must be kind to the slaves. So are the Muslims saying we must have slavery to be kind?

"The jihadists are interpreting the Koran literally and that's the problem ... Popular Muslims, because of their lack of knowledge about religion, are vulnerable to these sort of teachings."

Dr Ali, who is writing an academic paper entitled "Closing of the Muslim Mind", said even Mohammed was not the "perfect model" as most Muslims believed. Asked if the prophet had character flaws, he said: "Of course - you must look at him as a human being also."

His call for moderation comes 11 days into Ramadan, the holy month that requires Muslims to fast, give to charity and become more spiritually accountable.

His comments came as a French philosophy teacher was forced into hiding after describing the Mohammed as a ruthless warlord and mass murderer. Robert Redeker has been under police protection, moving between secret addresses, since threats against him appeared on Islamist websites last week. His home address was published with calls to murder.

Dr Ali criticised community members for playing victim when Muslims reacted violently against criticism, as after the publication of the Danish cartoons and the recent comments by the Pope.

He said it was time for Muslims to "confront this challenge head-on and look critically at their behaviour and mode of response to alleged blasphemy".

Dr Ali called for Hezbollah to be removed from the Government's terror organisations list two months ago, saying they were freedom fighters defending their country against Israeli invasion.

The former president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils said there were sections of the Koran that were relevant to "everybody at every time".

But he said people needed to read into the scripture and not merely accept it as the final word.

Dr Ali - who heads the Muslim Community Reference Group set up last year following the London bombings to improve communication channels between the federal Government and Australia's 300,000 Muslims - labelled the idea of going to hell for questioning the Koran a "load of rubbish".

"Because we cannot decide who's going to go to hell and who's going to go to heaven - that's left to the creator," he said.

Dr Ali criticised Muslims who react violently towards any depictions of Mohammed while aspiring to emulate his ways.

"True, Islam prohibits any drawing or a statue to be carved out representing the figure of the prophet. Still, it has not prevented the Muslims from imitating the physical features of Mohammed," he said.

Dr Ali said it was "ridiculous" that some Muslims believed God would judge them on the "length of (their) beard". He said Muslims would be judged on their "character, their knowledge, their contribution to society". Who the F are you to invent rules, eh? Bloody mushrik, you think you are Allah (SAW) ?
He said young Muslim Australians were slowly becoming more inquisitive about their faith. "Therefore they are going to ask questions when they grow up and that's a healthy trend," he said.


http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx...eID=7932&SKIN=W

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Husky]

Was looking for a thread on FOIL, FOSA and other candy, but couldn't find it. Anyway, the following is islamania, so here's as good as anywhere:

http://pseudosecularism.blogspot.com/2008/...i-hindutva.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hours of Anti-India, Anti-Hindutva Rhetoric at “Indian” Muslim Meet</b>

Author: Yatindra Bhatnagar
Publication: www.internationalopinion.com
Date: July 1, 2003
URL: http://www.internationalopinion.com/IMC_Co..._Anti_India.htm

It was a marathon session by any standard. Fifteen hours of lectures by over three dozen speakers, and a little poetry at the end, only meant that the first Annual Conference of Indian Muslim Council-USA succeeded in hardening the stand of Muslim groups against Hindu groups in the United States. That does not bode well for the country and the community, contrary to the stated aims of the IMC-USA: Defending India’s Freedom, Democracy and Pluralism.

They even warned the United States and other countries that the “growing Hindu extremism” was far more dangerous than the so-called terrorism that America and the free world was fighting against. It was charged that India is turning over democracy to religious fanaticism.

In sum, the long-daylong conference helped not to soften the blows of communal rioting in Gujarat early last year, not to heal the wounds among both the Muslims and the Hindus. Instead, it looks certain that an ugly period of confrontation between the two communities has been started by a determined group of “Indian” Muslims that is resolved not to let Muslims forget the period when hundreds from their community were killed mercilessly by angered Hindus. But it also will not help Hindus forget the brutal burning of a train by a huge crowd of Muslims that saw 58 Hindu men, women and children perish in communal fire.

The voices that want Hindus to forget Godhra massacre would continue to be stifled with the roars reminding what happened after Godhra – a bigger riot that saw more Muslims killed and more ugly scenes.

The more disturbing aspect of the “Indian Muslim’s” conference – with a generous sprinkling of Pakistanis – was that the whole event highlighted the sufferings of Muslims and leveling of charges against the governments of Gujarat, and also the center, at New Delhi. Nobody shed a tear on the brutal burning alive of Hindus on that train at Godhra. Nobody gave any credit to the Gujarat government that speedily sent for 90 companies of para-military forces the same day and asked for - and got - the help of military within 72 hours. This was a record quick period when the military was summoned to bring a very ugly situation under control.

Also nobody was prepared to accept that Godhra train-burning started all the angry and merciless reaction from the Hindus. The speakers kept on asserting that Hindus – and groups such as the VHP, RSS, Bajrang Dal, coupled with the state government’s full support – had planned the massacre of Muslims and succeeded. They blamed chief minister Modi – and Deputy Prime Minister LK Advani - for “masterminding the state-sponsored genocide and pogrom of Muslims in Gujarat.” They Compared RSS – the world’s largest volunteer organization in India – with the violent terrorist organization Hamas in the Middle East. Some likened RSS to the infamous American racist body KKK of yesteryears.

Of course, it was something unique to see that the organizers of the conference were able to rope in people from many faiths and ideologies to share the same platform. They included Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Imams and priests too. They included known leftists, liberals, peace activists also. The only common thread that bound these seemed to be hatred for Hindu groups, BJP-led Gujarat government and BJP-led coalition government at the center. Many singled out Modi and Advani from among the elected leaders of the state of Gujarat and India. Not a single speaker even remotely suggested that Pakistani agents, hard-line Mullahs at the mosques, anti-social elements – and of course the spark of hatred at Godhra train-burning – also might have contributed to the tragedy.

<b>A majority of the speakers, including India’s Praful Bidwai, San Francisco-based Angana Chatterji, Human Rights Watch representative Smita Narula and Amnesty International’s Govind Acharya, used the words “genocide and pogrom,” against Muslims resorted to by Hindu groups.</b> They alleged active connivance of Gujarat police, judiciary, bureaucracy, government and of course RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal etc – all Hindus in killings of Muslims – and even Christians. They did not mention that out of those killed were nearly 150 Hindus – killed by Muslims and Police bullets - and nearly 200 Policemen – mostly killed by the Muslim rioters.
(The christoislamicommunitwit terrorists can stop lying now. So many of the Gujarat riot' witness statements turned out to be such SCAMS which the above people and their buddies like Teesta Seetalvad had sponsored - referring to posts 201 to 205 of the Godhra thread and Express India's "Victims say earlier statements were fabricated" - that no one can believe the above congregation's lies anymore. All that is left for them to do now is to have christoislamic FAITH in their own lies: for which they first they need to do deeply draw in some air and then <i>hold it</i>.)

They said Muslims are being marginalized, boycotted economically, socially and educationally, and are facing acute hardships, humiliation and harassment. There is no justice, security and hope for them. These complaints might be true but is that the whole truth?

Speaker after speaker mentioned that there is a deep conspiracy against the Muslims spearheaded by the Hindu groups to Hinduize India, drive out or kill all the minorities, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Dalits – the backward classes. They appealed to build a strong coalition of Muslims, Christians, Dalits, Sikhs, Buddhists, and all the other smaller minorities and fringe groups against this state-sponsored scheme of Hindu groups.

The conference wanted a strong movement against those Hindu conspirator groups such as RSS, HSS, VHP etc, to infiltrate and penetrate into various strata of American society and other forums. The speakers warned of dangerous consequences of not doing anything against it.

They charged that Hindu groups wanted to spread their campaign against Muslims – they called it the Gujarat experiment of killing Muslims – to other parts of India. They had to admit that communal riots did not spread to even the neighboring states but were not willing to give full credit to the efforts of others- mainly the Central Government – for prompt and preventive measures.

The conference also emphasized the need to build a viable, effective and robust coalition of minorities to fight the “menace of Hindu extremism” keeping in view the coming elections in India.

The IMC-USA is working to research the efforts of RSS, HSS, VHP and other Hindu groups to raise funds in the US for their programs in India. These groups have clearly explained that all the funds they raise are spent on humanitarian activities such as relief for earthquake, flood and other natural disaster victims, education, health and hygiene in backward and tribal areas, without discrimination. However, some of the speakers at the IMC-USA conference charged that the funds are sent to promote extremism and hatred against minorities. Naturally, no mention was made about funds collected and sent to India by Muslim governments and Muslims organizations that might be falling into wrong hands and used for conversion, subversion and disruption.

The day-long meet, starting with a modest gathering in the morning, was well organized, well publicized and saw a large audience of nearly 400 people at peak hours. There was a big photo exhibition of violent scenes of rioting and killing in Gujarat and a generous distribution of Islamic literature, and writings on the “Gujarat genocide of Muslims,” as the organizers termed the tragedy. One could label some of the flyers as “provocative,” but in a free country free expression of views is a normal part of life.

Dissent is also natural and the right to express it is accepted. However, in the IMC-USA conference dissenting voices were conspicuous by their absence. Probably the comments I made during a feedback that if “Godhra had not happened, larger Gujarat tragedy would not have occurred,” and “Hindus should be allowed to forget about Godhra where 58 of their own people were mercilessly burnt alive,” would help in averting what happened as a strong reaction, later, were the exception.

It was obvious that everything was blatantly one-sided. When I accosted one of the speakers, Satchit Balsari, about his ignoring the stories of, and interviews with, Hindu victims of Godhra, he admitted that he had not done so. He promised to keep my opinion/suggestion in view. That does not answer the charge that the whole meet was one sided.

I accosted Praful Bidwai also who had implied that all the alleged social and economic disasters in India are because of Hindutva and Hindu BJP-led governments. He first tried to evade, run away and ignore but, when squarely confronted, admitted that he did not blame BJP for all the ills, the Congress party was also guilty.

Later, I asked Smita Narula of Human Rights Watch why she had not included a single interview with a Hindu victim of Godhra train burning? She tried to sidestep the issue. She also admitted the lapse but said something she wanted off the record. I am not divulging the reason she gave for the oversight, but the excuse seems to be absolutely unconvincing.

Meets, such as these aimed at coalition of minorities against groups of the majority Hindus, only make the task of forgetting and forgiving more difficult. As I remarked to a Muslim lady, later, that now it seems you have succeeded in drawing out the dagger of hatred, it will only make the other side also come out with its own dagger drawn.

There was no attempt to spread the idea that Muslims- and other minority communities have to live with the overwhelmingly large number of Hindus in India and so it is much better, and wiser, not to spread further hatred against them. It’s also futile to blame Hindus for the killings of Muslims as, one of a Muslim attendees himself opined, more Muslims are killed in the world by Muslims, than by others.

And that is indeed a stark naked – though sad – fact, not to be pushed under the carpet by organizers of the conferences and campaigns against Hindu groups.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[G.Subramaniam]

Dhimmiwatch

Afghanistan: Mother, brother cut fetus out of rape victim to protect family's "honor"

This sort of conduct is a result of the Qur'an's requirement of four male witnesses to prove rape has occurred. It is also the result of a culture in which the honor of a man and his family depends on their "control" over women (with Qur'an 4:34 sanctioning violence to quell "rebellion"), and in which reputation and the external appearance of piety trump individual rights.

"Afghan family rip out five-month-old foetus: Governor," from Agence France-Presse, January 7 (thanks to Dumbledoresarmy):

An Afghan teenager is in a serious condition in hospital after her mother and brother allegedly sliced open her belly to remove a five-month-old foetus from a rape, officials said.

The girl's relatives, who are farmers, had apparently decided to remove the unborn child to protect the family's honour, a local Governor told AFP.

Rape and pregnancy outside marriage are seen as a disgrace in the conservative society.

Bamiyan Governor Habiba Sarabi said the girl had not told her family she was pregnant.

"When the family realised two days ago, the mother and brother of the girl tied up her hands and legs and took her to a stable where they sliced open her belly with a blade and took the foetus away," she said.

They then sewed up the wound with a large needle of the sort used to seal flour sacks, Ms Sarabi said.

It became infected and started bleeding and the girl fainted, prompting the family to take her to hospital.

"She is not in good health now," she added.

Authorities had arrested the alleged rapist and were investigating, Ms Sarabi said.

Provincial health director Nadir Ali confirmed the girl was in hospital.

"Her wound is badly infected and we are trying to control that first. We don't know how bad are her internal wounds," Dr Ali said.

The nature of the wound showed the procedure was not carried out by health workers, but further investigation was needed to establish what had happened to the girl, he said.

[G.Subramaniam]

Jihadwatch

First, from the Koran, Botros read verses unequivocally stating that Muhammad is the paragon of all virtue and morality, such as “And most surely you [Muhammad] conform (yourself) to sublime morality [68: 4].” He further quoted the ulema, such as Ibn Kathir, all insisting that Muhammad was the “Noblest of all humanity, and the greatest of prophets.”

Botros and his ex-Muslim cohost—the priest had insisted that it be a man for this particular show, lest he be too ashamed to delineate Muhammad’s sexual habits—discussed Koran 4:3, which “limits” a Muslim's wives to four, plus “what your right hands possess,” that is, slave-girls.

That was apparently not good enough for Muhammad, asserted Botros; an entire verse had to be “revealed” justifying more women for him (Koran 33:50). In fact, Father Botros has carefully compiled a list of all the women—66 are known—to have had sexual relations with Muhammad.

Botros said that was only normal: according to Sirat Al-Halabi, Muhammad can have a woman no matter what, even against her will; and if Muhammad desired a married woman, her husband would have had to divorce her. According to Ibn Sa’ad, who wrote another authoritative biographical account of Muhammad, “The prophet did not die till all women were permitted him” (see Kitab Al Tabaqat Al Kubra, v.8, 194).

The co-host, rather abruptly, interjected – “What of all those rumors that Muhammad exhibited homosexual tendencies?”

Botros dropped his face in his hands and mumbled, “So you still insist we discuss that?” The co-host was adamant, saying it was for Muslims’ own good to know everything.

Thus Botros, after profusely apologizing to his Muslim viewers, saying how embarrassing this was for him, declared: “Look! We’re merely readers here, bringing up what we have read in Islam’s own books! If Muslims don't like it, they should go and burn these books.”

The first anecdote discussed by the priest revolved around a hadith that, while some ulema say is “weak,” is, nonetheless according to Botros, present in 44 Islamic books—including some highly respected collections, such as Sunan Bayhaqi and Al Halabi.

According to this hadith, a man named Zahir, who used to declare that “the prophet loves me,” said that one day Muhammad crept unawares behind him and put him in a bear-hug. Zahir, alarmed, yelled, “Get off me!” After turning his head and discovering that it was Muhammad, he stopped struggling and proceeded to “push his back into the prophet’s chest—prayers and blessings upon him."

Another curious hadith contained in Sunan Bayhaqi and which traces to Sunan Abu Dawud (one of the six canonical hadith collections), has Muhammad lifting up his shirt for a man who proceeded to kiss his entire torso, “from his bellybutton to his armpits.”

Botros looked casually at the camera and said, “Imagine if the sheikh of Al Azhar [nearest Muslim equivalent to the pope] went around lifting his shirt for men to kiss his torso” (he proceeded to make smacking kissing noises, for effect).

[Husky]

^ Facts can be more hysterical than fiction.


Let me get this straight (first two taken from Shambhu):
1. Not only did Mohammed probably not exist (as per Islamic theologian, covered by Wall Street Journal)

2. Had Mohammed existed, even then, another faithful has had to admit that Prophet not perfect, says Islamic scholar (covered by the The Australian )

3. Had Mohammed existed, he was a bisexual dude? (From above post.)
Personally, as a heathen, the gay angle is not an issue. Naturally I only have a serious problem with Mohammed's paedophilia, genocidal mania, his rapist and terrorist behaviour. And of course with the fact that his being deranged was <i>not</i> a private affair, but was instead made a danger to the world by his gaining influence.
However, islamism is <i>incredibly</i> anti-gay/anti-bisexual, even while it is all pro-paedophilia and raping and looting and terrorising and genociding.

I see that in points 1, 2 and 3 islamism is once again shown to be IDENTICAL to christianism:
1. Jeebus certainly never existed.
2. Had Jeebus existed, he would be a terrible terrorist (eternal hell, anyone?) and created the greatest terrorist threat ever.
3. Biblical scholars have it that several parts of the traditional christian account portray the Jeebus' character as unmistakably gay, next to there being a dedicated Gay Jeebus Gospel (apocryphal).
Meanwhile christos are hyper anti-gay too - just like their twins the islamics. And again, just like their islamic twins, christos are all into paedophilia, genocide, terrorism and rape - like mohammed and the gawd of the christian OT.

I don't know why heathens still distinguish between these two religions at all. Obviously they're one and the same.



Crossposting the following, since it is about islamism in general:
<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+Jan 13 2009, 07:45 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ Jan 13 2009, 07:45 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Danielpipes.org
Europe's Stark Options
by Daniel Pipes
National Interest
March-April 2007
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/4323
[Title and text differ from that published, "Eurabian Nights," which can be read at http://www.nationalinterest.org/PrinterFri...y.aspx?id=13710]

Europe's long-term relations with its burgeoning Muslim minority, the continent's most critical issue, will follow one of three paths: harmonious integration, the expulsion of Muslims, or an Islamic takeover. Which of these scenarios will most likely play out?

Europe's future has vast importance not just for its residents. During a half-millennium, 1450-1950, this 7 percent of the world's landmass drove world history; its creativity and vigor invented modernity. The region may have already lost that critical position sixty years ago, but it remains vitally important in economic, political, and intellectual terms. Which direction it goes in, therefore, has huge implications for the rest of humanity, and especially for its daughter countries, such as the United States, which historically have looked to Europe as a source of ideas, people, and goods.

Here is an assessment about the likelihood of each scenario.
I. Muslims Rule

The late Oriana Fallaci observed that, with the passage of time, "Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam." The historian Bat Ye'or has dubbed this colony "Eurabia." Walter Laqueur predicts in his forthcoming Last Days of Europe that Europe as we know it is bound to change. Mark Steyn, in America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, goes further and argues that much of the Western world "will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries." Three factors – faith, demography, and a sense of heritage – argue for Europe being Islamized.

Faith: An extreme secularism predominates in Europe, especially among its elites, to the point that believing Christians (such as George W. Bush) are seen as mentally unbalanced and unfit for public office. In 2005, Rocco Buttiglione, a distinguished Italian politician and Catholic believer, was denied a position as Italy's European Union commissioner because of his views on such issues as homosexuality. Entrenched secularism also means empty churches: in London, researchers estimate, more Muslims attend mosques on Friday than do Christians churches on Sunday, although the city is home to roughly 7 times more born-Christians than born-Muslims. As Christianity fades, Islam beckons; Prince Charles exemplifies the fascination of many Europeans with Islam. Many conversions could be in Europe's future, for as the saying is ascribed to G.K. Chesterton, "When men stop believing in God they don't believe in nothing; they believe in anything."

Europe's secularism shapes its discourse in ways quite unfamiliar to Americans. Hugh Fitzgerald, formerly vice president of JihadWatch.org, illustrates one dimension of this difference:

    The most memorable utterances of American presidents have almost always included recognizable Biblical phrases. … This source of rhetorical strength was on display this past February [2003] when the Columbia shuttle blew up. Had it not been an American but a French shuttle that had blown up, and were Jacques Chirac having to give such a speech, he might well have used the fact that there were seven astronauts, and evoked an image of the Pleiades first named in pagan antiquity. The American President, at a solemn national ceremony that began and ended with Biblical Hebrew, did things differently. He took his text from Isaiah 40:26, which led to a seamless transition from mingled wonder and awe at the heavenly hosts brought forth by the Creator, to consolation for the earthly loss of the crew.

The buoyant faith of Muslims, with its attendant jihadi sensibility and Islamic supremacism, could not differ more from that of lapsed European Christians. This contrast leads many Muslims to see Europe as a continent ripe for conversion and domination. Outrageous supremacist claims result, such as the statement of Omar Bakri Mohammed, "I want Britain to become an Islamic state. I want to see the flag of Islam raised in 10 Downing Street." Or the prediction of a Belgium-based imam: "Soon we will take power in this country. Those who criticize us now, will regret it. They will have to serve us. Prepare, for the hour is near."[1]

Population: Demographic collapse also points to Europe being Islamized. The total fertility rate in Europe today averages about 1.4 per woman, whereas sustaining one's population requires just over two children per couple, or 2.1 children per woman. The existing rate is just two-thirds of what it needs to be; one-third of the requisite population is simply not being born.

To avoid a severe diminution of population, with all the woes that implies – and specifically, an absence of workers to fund generous pension plans – Europe needs immigrants – lots of them. That imported third of the population tends to be Muslim, in part because Muslims are close by – it's only thirteen kilometers from Morocco to Spain, only a couple of hundred to Italy from Albania or Libya; in part because colonial ties continue to bind South Asia to Britain or the Maghrib to France; and in part because of the violence, tyranny, and poverty so prevalent in the Muslim world today, which prompts wave after wave of emigration.

Likewise, the high fertility of Muslims complements the paucity of children among indigenous Christians. Although the Muslim fertility rate is falling, it remains significantly higher than that of Europe's indigenous population. No doubt, the high birth rates have something to do with the premodern circumstances in which many Muslim women of Europe find themselves. In Brussels, "Muhammad" has for some years been the most popular name given to infant boys, while Amsterdam and Rotterdam are on track to be, by about 2015, the first major European cities with majority Muslim populations. The French analyst Michel Gurfinkiel estimates an ethnic street war in France would find the children of indigènes and of immigrants in a roughly one-to-one ratio. Current predictions see a Muslim majority in Russia's army by 2015 and in the country as a whole by about 2050.

Sense of heritage: What often is depicted as Europe's political correctness reflects what I believe is a deeper phenomenon, namely, the alienation of many Europeans from their civilization, a sense that their historic culture is not worth fighting for or even saving. It's striking to note differences within Europe in this regard. Perhaps the country least prone to this alienation is France, where traditional nationalism still holds sway and the French take pride in their identity. Britain is the most alienated country, as symbolized by the plaintive government program, "ICONS - A Portrait of England," that lamely hopes to rekindle patriotism by connecting Britons to their "national treasures," such as Winnie-the-Pooh and the miniskirt.

This diffidence has had direct and adverse implications for Muslim immigrants, as Aatish Taseer explained in Prospect magazine.

    Britishness is the most nominal aspect of identity to many young British Pakistanis. … If you denigrate your own culture you face the risk of your newer arrivals looking for one elsewhere. So far afield in this case, that for many second-generation British Pakistanis, the desert culture of the Arabs held more appeal than either British or subcontinental culture. Three times removed from a durable sense of identity, the energised extra-national worldview of radical Islam became one available identity for second-generation Pakistanis.

Immigrant Muslims widely disdain Western civilization, and especially its sexuality (pornography, divorce, homosexuality). Nowhere in Europe are Muslims being assimilated, rarely does intermarriage take place. Here is one colorful example, from Canada: The mother of the notorious Khadr brood, known as the country's first family of terrorism, returned to Canada from Afghanistan and Pakistan in April 2004 with one of her sons. Despite her seeking refuge in Canada, she publicly insisted just a month earlier that Al-Qaeda-sponsored training camps were the best place for her children. "Would you like me to raise my child in Canada to be, by the time he's 12 or 13 years old, to be on drugs or having some homosexual relationship? Is it better?"

(Ironically, in centuries past, as the historian Norman Daniel has documented, Christian Europeans looked down at Muslims with their multiple wives and harems as overly-sexualized, and therefore felt morally superior.)

To sum up: this first argument holds that Europe will be Islamized, quietly submitting to the dhimmi status or converting to Islam, because the yin of Europe and yang of Muslims fit so well: low and high religiosity, low and high fertility, low and high cultural confidence.[2] Europe is an open door through which Muslims are walking.
II. Muslims Rejected

Or will the door be shut in their face? American columnist Ralph Peters dismisses the first scenario: "Far from enjoying the prospect of taking over Europe by having babies, Europe's Muslims are living on borrowed time. … predictions of a Muslim takeover of Europe … ignore history and Europe's ineradicable viciousness." Instead, depicting Europe as the place "that perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing," he predicts its Muslims "will be lucky just to be deported," and not killed. Claire Berlinski, in Menace in Europe: Why the Continent's Crisis Is America's, Too, implicitly agrees, pointing to the "ancient conflicts and patterns … now shambling out of the mists of European history" which could well trigger violence.

This scenario has indigenous Europeans – who do still constitute 95 percent of the continent's population – waking up one day and asserting themselves. "Basta!" they will say, and reclaim their historic order. This is not so remote; a chafing among Europeans, less among elites than the masses, loudly protests changes already underway. Illustrations of that resentment include the anti-hijab legislation in France, irritation over the restrictions of national flags and Christian symbols, and the insistence on serving wine at state dinners. A movement spontaneously developed in several French cities in early 2006 to serve pork soup to the poor, thus intentionally excluding Muslims.

These are minor issues, to be sure, but insurgent anti-immigrant parties have already emerged in many countries and are beginning to demand not just effective control of borders but the expulsion of illegal immigrants. A nativist movement throughout Europe is forming largely unnoticed beneath our eyes. However meager its record so far, it has huge potential. Parties opposed to immigration and Islam generally have neo-fascist backgrounds but are growing more respectable over time, shedding their antisemitic origins and their dubious economic theories, focusing instead on the questions of faith, demography, and identity, and learning about Islam and Muslims. The British National Party and Belgium's Vlaamse Belang offer two examples of such a move toward respectability, which may one day be followed by electability. The presidential race in France in 2002 came down to a contest between Jacques Chirac and the neo-fascist Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Other parties have already tasted power. Jörg Haider and the Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs were briefly in office. The Lega Nord in Italy was for years part of the ruling coalition. They will likely grow stronger because their anti-Islamist and often anti-Islamic messages resonate, and mainstream parties will partially adopt their messages. (Denmark's Conservative Party offers a model; after 72 years in the wilderness, it returned to power in 2001 due basically to anger concerning immigration.) These parties will likely benefit when immigration to Europe surges uncontrollably to ever-higher levels, including perhaps a mass exodus from Africa, as many indications suggest will happen.

Once in power, nationalist parties will reject multiculturalism and try to re-establish traditional values and mores. One can only speculate about their means and about the Muslim reaction, but the French riots of late 2005 give a possible taste of what lies ahead. Peters dwells on the fascistic and violent aspects of some groups and expects an anti-Muslim backlash to take ominous forms. He even sketches a scenario in which "U.S. Navy ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe's Muslims."

For years, Muslims have worried about just such incarceration and brutalization, followed by expulsion or even massacres. Already in the late 1980s, the late Kalim Siddiqui, director of London's Muslim Institute, raised the specter of "Hitler-style gas chambers for Muslims." Shabbir Akhtar warned in his 1989 book, Be Careful With Muhammad that "the next time there are gas chambers in Europe, there is no doubt concerning who'll be inside them," meaning Muslims. A character in Hanif Kureishi's 1991 novel, The Buddha of Suburbia, prepares the guerilla war that he expects will follow after "the whites finally turned on the blacks and Asians and tried to force us into gas chambers."

But it is more likely that European efforts at reclamation will be initiated peaceably and legally, with Muslims – in keeping with recent patterns of intimidation and terrorism – being the ones to initiate violence. Multiple polls confirm that about 5 percent of British Muslims endorse the 7/7 bombings, suggesting a general readiness to resort to force.

However it happens, a European reassertion cannot be assumed to take place cooperatively.
III. Muslims Integrated

In the happiest scenario, autochthonous Europeans and Muslim immigrants find a modus vivendi and live together harmoniously. Perhaps the classic statement of this optimistic expectation was a 1991 study, La France, une chance pour l'Islam ("France, an Opportunity for Islam") by Jeanne-Hélène and Pierre Patrick Kaltenbach. "For the first time in history," they wrote, "Islam is offered the chance to waken in a democratic, rich, laic, and peaceable country." That hopefulness lives on. An Economist leader from mid-2006 asserts that "for the moment at least, the prospect of Eurabia looks like scaremongering." Also at that time, Jocelyne Cesari, associate professor of Islamic studies at the Harvard Divinity School, claimed a balance exists: just as "Islam is changing Europe," she said, "Europe is changing Islam." She finds that "Muslims in Europe do not want to change the nature of European states" and expects them to adapt themselves into the European context.

Such optimism, unfortunately, has little foundation. Europeans could yet rediscover their Christian faith, have more babies, and cherish their own heritage. They could encourage non-Muslim immigration or acculturate the Muslims already among them. But such changes are not now underway, nor are their prospects good. Instead, Muslims are cultivating grievances and ambitions at odds with their indigenous neighbors. Worryingly, each generation appears more alienated than its predecessor. Canadian novelist Hugh MacLennan dubbed his country's English-French split the "Two Solitudes"; one sees something similar, but far more pronounced, developing in Europe. Those polls of British Muslims for example, find that a majority of them perceive a conflict between their British and Muslim identities and want Islamic law instituted.

The possibility of Muslims accepting the confines of historic Europe and smoothly integrating within it can virtually be dismissed from consideration. Even Bassam Tibi, professor at the University of Göttingen, who has often warned that "Either Islam gets Europeanized, or Europe gets Islamized," has personally given up on the continent. Recently, he announced that he is leaving Germany after 44 years' residence there, to move to Cornell University in the United States.
Conclusion

As the American columnist Dennis Prager sums them up, "It is difficult to imagine any other future scenario for Western Europe than its becoming Islamicized or having a civil war." Indeed, these two deeply unattractive alternative paths appear to define Europe's choices, with powerful forces pulling in the contrary directions of Muslims taking over or Muslims rejected, Europe an extension of North Africa or in a state of quasi-civil war.

Which will it be? The decisive events that will resolve this question have yet to take place, so one cannot yet make the call. Decision-time is fast approaching, however. Within the next decade or so, today's flux will end, the Europe-Islam equation will harden, and the continent's future course should become apparent.

Correctly anticipating that course is the more difficult for being historically unprecedented. No large territory has ever shifted from one civilization to another by virtue of a collapsed population, faith, and identity; nor has a people risen on so grand a scale to reclaim its patrimony. The novelty and magnitude of Europe's predicament make it difficult to understand, tempting to overlook, and nearly impossible to predict. Europe marches us all into terra incognita.

    Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and visiting professor at Pepperdine University. This article is adapted from a talk for a Woodrow Wilson Center conference on "Euro-Islam: The Dynamics of Effective Integration."

[1] De Morgen, Oct. 5, 1994. Cited in Koenraad Elst, "The Rushdie Rules", Middle East Quarterly, June 1998.
[2] It's striking to note that in these three ways, Europe and the United States were much more similar 25 years ago than today. This suggests that their bifurcation results less from historical patterns going back centuries and more from developments in the 1960s. However deeply that decade affected the United States, it had a far deeper impact on Europe.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apr. 12, 2007 update: In two-part essay titled "Is European Civil War Inevitable by 2025?" Paul Weston calls it inevitable that Europe will find itself engaged a civil war so bloody it would make "WWII look like a bun fight." In part I, he makes this argument on the basis of demographic projections. In part II, he focuses on Islamic imperialism and predicts quite specifically when the European reaction will set it: "Somewhere between 2017 and 2030, during a period of heightened tension, Islamists in France, Holland or Britain will blow up one church, train or plane too many. Retaliation will begin and they, in turn will respond."

Apr. 16, 2007 update: In a major review of Philip Jenkins ' new book, God's Continent: Christianity, Islam, and Europe's Religious Crisis,.Richard John Neuhaus writes skeptically of the roseate views of the continent's future. Writing in the May 2007 issue of First Things ("The Much Exaggerated Death of Europe"), Neuhaus concludes the review with this anecdote:

    At a recent dinner party with European intellectuals, I put to an influential French archbishop Daniel Pipes' projection: Either assimilation or expulsion or Islamic takeover. That, he said, puts the possibilities much too starkly. "We hope for the first," he said, "while we work at reducing immigration and prepare ourselves for soft Islamization." Soft Islamization. It is a wan expression. Whether soft or hard, the prospect is that, in the not-so-distant future, someone will publish a book titled Allah's Continent.

May 7, 2007 update: The violence predicted by Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate for president of France, upon a victory by her opponent, Nicolas Sarkozy, did come to pass, though not very strongly. Both her warning and the reality of the violence take the country another step toward the protracted quasi-civil war scenario sketched out above.

July 1, 2007 update In "Baby Bust," Noah Pollak takes the theme of my footnote 2 and turns it into a short article. He asks why Europeans have so few children and replies:

    The current generation of child-bearing Europeans came to view their lives through the cultural revolutions engendered by the generation of 1968, the great mass of young people who, ironically, were products of the postwar European baby boom and ascended to power and influence by virtue of their own demographic weight. The cultural upheaval of '68 was an incongruous synthesis of revolutionary hedonism, political and economic collectivism, and a firm conviction that the West had become or had always been a force for imperialism, warfare, and environmental destruction. To a far greater degree than their counterparts in America, the '68ers achieved real political power and with it a cultural hegemony which dominates much of French and European political and intellectual life to this day.

Sep. 26, 2007 update: Interviewed in "Europe's failure to integrate Muslims called a 'recipe for civil war'," Bassam Tibi expands on his problems in Germany and gives a more balanced view than the headline suggests of why both indigenous Europeans and immigrant Muslims are at fault.

Oct. 6, 2007 update: Interviewed 48 minutes into The Third Jihad documentary, Bernard Lewis joins the predictors of Eurabia: "Europe is already, I think, a lost cause."
[right][snapback]93043[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[G.Subramaniam]

Sheikh Yermami

What Muslims pray, how Muslim pray:

Muslim School Prayer for Children: O God, destroy the infidels and polytheists, thine enemies, the enemies of the religion. O God, make their children orphans, and defile their abodes, and cause their feet to slip, and give them and their families, and their households and their women and their children and their relations by marriage and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as booty to the Muslims.

The above prayer above is translated from a contemporary 19th century text Arabic text, containing a typical curse on non-Muslims, recited daily by Muslim elementary school children.

[Shambhu]

Mohammed-worshippers "prayed" in mass in front of a cathedral in Manmohan's chosen native country. The citizens there are not amused.
http://www.ansa.it/site/notizie/awnplus/en..._121302588.html

[G.Subramaniam]

General Patton on islam

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...93941-2,00.html

"To me it seems certain that the fatalistic teachings of Mohammed and the utter degradation of women is the outstanding cause for the arrested development of the Arab. . .