Islamism - 7

Shambhu · 02-25-2009, 03:43 AM

Jews-Arabs - A Comparison
The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000 (One billion two hundred million or 120 crores), i.e. 20% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1988 - Najib Mahfooz
Peace:
1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1994 - Yaser Arafat:
1990 - Elias James Corey
1999 - Ahmed Zewai
Economics: (zero)
Physics: (zero)
Medicine:
1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad
Total: 7 (Seven)

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000 (One crore forty lakhs), i.e. about 0.02% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer World
Peace:
1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin
Physics:
1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - William Howard Stein
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Bu! rton Richter
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - Peter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1979 - Herbert Charle S Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Roald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1989 - Sidney Altman
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1995 - Martin Perl
2000 - Alan J. Heeger
Economics:
1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 - Robert Fogel
Medicine:
1908 ! - Eli e Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abra ham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita
Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1995 - Edward B. Lewis
Total: One hundred & twenty nine!
The Jews are not promoting brain washing the children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims!
The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is not a single Jew that has destroyed a church. There is not a single Jew that protests by killing people.
The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels.
Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems.
Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, even if you believe there is more culpability on Israel's part, the following two sentences really say it all:
'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel ' - Benjamin Netanyahu.
P. Deivamuthu
Editor, Hindu Voice
210 Abhinav, Teen Dongri
Yeshwant Nagar, Goregaon West
Mumbai 400062.
Tel: 022-28764418, 28764460.
http://www.sanghparivar.org/arab-israeli-c...ry-2009-8-03-pm

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-03-2009, 08:11 AM by Husky.)

Islam.

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/wom...ecruit-her.html
QUOTEWoman set up rapes to recruit her martyrs
mar 1, 2009

lovely. iraqi woman 'creates' 'martyrs' and thus suicide-bombers by having young women raped and then ostracized.

why isn't renuka chowdhury screeching about taliban in this instance? perhaps the same modus operandi is followed in kashmir too.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Shahryar

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...37-2703,00.html

Woman set up rapes to recruit her martyrs

Correspondents in Baghdad | February 05, 2009

A WOMAN accused of recruiting dozens of female suicide bombers in Iraq has told how she helped plan the rapes of victims before convincing them martyrdom was the only way to escape the shame.

... deleted

Posted by nizhal yoddha at 3/01/2009 10:11:00 PM 0 comments

Husky · 03-03-2009, 07:41 PM

Guess all those ads on PukeTV pleading for islamania not to attack Britain aren't working out too well. Maybe the British muslims didn't watch the SlumMovie dawaganda? Or they didn't like it?

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/02/fro...fghanistan.html
QUOTEFrom Londonistan to Afghanistan
Looks like the British invasion of Afghanistan is in full swing. I'm not talking about the British Army, nor even the Beatles, but instead the increasing numbers of Taliban with Yorkshire accents being detected on radio chatter in the warzone. Maybe Her Majesty will have to knight this new bunch of lads from Liverpool, Leicester, etc, for spreading British culture around the world.
Posted by san at 2/27/2009 05:24:00 PM 1 comments 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...fghanistan.html
QUOTEArmed Forces 'are fighting British Muslims with Yorkshire accents' in Afghanistan

By Ian Drury
Last updated at 6:27 PM on 25th February 2009

The Armed Forces are increasingly fighting British Muslims with Midlands and Yorkshire accents on the battlefields of Afghanistan.

Intelligence reports show that rising numbers of home-grown jihadists have joined the Taliban so they can kill British soldiers.

Senior military sources say UK troops are engaged in a 'surreal mini-civil war' in the dusty badlands of Helmand Province.

The revelations came as the Ministry of Defence announced another three British soldiers had been killed in a roadside bomb attack in southern Afghanistan today.

Image caption: UK troops in action in Helmand are now fighting fellow Britons, it is believed

The soldiers, from 1st Battalion The Rifles, were hit by the blast near Lashkar Gar on Wednesday morning. It brings the British death toll in Afghanistan since the war began in October 2001 to 148.

Surveillance operations from the warzone has picked up voices talking with West Midlands and Yorkshire accents, according to official briefing documents.

The electronic 'chatter' confirms mounting fears that young disaffected Muslims are travelling to southern Afghanistan to commit violence against British targets.

MI5 has estimated that up to 4,000 British Muslims had travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan for military training, with 'dozens' switching to the front-line.

One senior military source said intelligence officers had been hearing more voices speaking in Pakistani accents such as Punjabi, Urdu and Kashmiri Urdu rather than Pashtu, the official Afghan language.

He said: 'There appears to be more men from other parts of Pakistan fighting with the Taliban than just the Pashtuns who have tribal allegiances with the Afghan Pashtuns.

'It is this group, the Urdu, Punjabi speakers, etc, who fall back into English in, for example, Brummie accents.

'You get the impression that they have been told not to talk in English but sometimes simply can't help it.'

Tory MP Patrick Mercer, the chairman of the Commons anti-terrorism sub-committee which has been examining British Muslim extremism, said: 'We know the problem we have with UK-based jihadists.

'We also know that a number of them have been arrested trying to leave the country.

'With the UK intelligence services at full stretch, it is not surprising some of these jihadists have ended up in Afghanistan.'

The main concern of the security services about British Muslims travelling to Pakistan has been the part they played in terrorist atrocities and plots in the UK.

But after RAF spy planes 'listened in' to the conversations of Taliban fighters, officials now believe the jihadists are mounting missions against British and Western targets in the warzone.

The Ministry of Defence refused to comment on the reports.

Meanwhile, the MoD confirmed that another three UK soldiers had been killed when a homemade bomb exploded and ripped through their patrol in the Gereshk district of southern Afghanistan.

A medical helicopter was scrambled but all three were pronounced dead. Next of kin have been informed.

Commander Paula Rowe, spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said: 'Today has been incredibly sad for the whole of Task Force Helmand, and particularly for The Rifles.

'We will all feel the loss of these brave soldiers, whose role was to build the capacity of the Afghan National Army.

'But it is their family, friends and loved ones, as well as the men and women who served alongside them, who feel the greatest pain and we offer them our deepest and heartfelt condolences, thoughts and prayers.'

The report came as Royal Marines claimed a shortage of troops meant Taliban fighters were re-capturing ground lost in recent battles.

Members of 42 Commando who took part in December's huge operation to flush out the enemy in the western Helmand region of Nad'Ali said they feared the Taliban were making progress.

But Brigadier Gordon Messenger, Commander of Task Force Helmand, said: 'The Taliban have not 'retaken ground' that was secured by British and Afghan forces.

'By no means is the whole area free from sporadic Taliban influence, but the security challenge in manageable by the available forces and the overriding mood of the local population is one of optimism and hope.'

Comments (by Brits) are interesting:
QUOTEPlease see Max Hastings offering with regard to the people we allow into the UK and why we should be getting rid of most of them.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 204

- Howard Leech, Gdansk,Poland, 25/2/2009 20:55
Â Â Â

British? British my foot! Just because you somehow by default end up living in this free-for-all country, does not make you British. To be British is to be a subject of the Crown which these scumbags certainly are not. To be British is to pay taxes and to live on this island whilst observing its laws and traditions which these scumbags certainly do not. I am British and I take exception at these people being called British. If these so-called British go to Pakistan and end up fighting and killing members of our Majesty's Armed Forces then they (and their families) should be told to stay out of Britain and live in the countries of their origin. Simple. But we know that that won't happen, will it? Oh no. They will come and go as they please whilst taxpayers like you and me pay for their air fare and their homes in Britain. And it is all thanks to our wonderful PC government who are wonderfully cosseted and protected and will never have to face a Taliban bullet or the terrorist bomb.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 349

- Eric, Telford, 25/2/2009 21:02
Â Â Â

If a "British" national is in Afghanistan, then I feel that they should not be allowed back into the UK unless they can prove they were there for legitimate reasons. If this point was highlighted prior to leaving the UK then they have no grounds to complain if they cannot get back into the country. If there is reason to believe they are betraying this country they forfeit the right to live here, British born or not! Simple. The same should go for Iraq. There are genuine cases, but if you have nothing to hide, you won't mind sharing the information with the authorities. We are looking like idiots letting these people in and out. Start clamping down.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 271

- Sarah, UK, 25/2/2009 21:02
Â Â Â

If it is found that members of familys in this country are fighting with the Taliban and whose aim is to kill our troops...then when found out who they are ...then they should be tried as traitors and their familys expelled from this country for all time.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 297

- john, oxford0oxon, 25/2/2009 21:03
Â Â Â

How long will it be until our troops are battling these jihadists on the streets of Britain, as opposed to in a foreign land? The way things are going this scenario is becoming more and more likely.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 297

- Frank, Edinburgh, 25/2/2009 21:06
Â Â Â

'....some Taliban fighters active in Helmand and southern Afghanistan have 'West Midlands accents'

No worries there, if any are apprehended, it seems the 'government' here are happy to charter a private jet to bring them home.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 468

- m collins, Leeds, England, 25/2/2009 21:07
Â Â Â

why are we so surprised about this news.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 395

- fly, london, 25/2/2009 21:08
Â Â Â

If and when they can identify these low lifes, then they AND THEIR ENTIRE FAMILY should be deported immediately. No arguing OUT. That would send a really strong message, they are visitors here and must abide by our rules or LEAVE.
Click to rateÂ Â RatingÂ 563 The empire is falling to pieces. Quick, make another SlumMovie. Or more ads on TSP TV. That way they can:
Point to the ads: "See TSP, Britain is your friend. Don't hurt us!"
Point to SlumMovie: "Kill the Hindoos, attack kaffiri Hindustan instead!"

How condescending. Even I didn't think TSPers/Indian islamis were that stupid.

To think, if only christoBritain had not continued in being so virulently anti-Hindu, islamania in the Indian subcontinent might have been contained instead of being exacerbated by christowestern indulgence and blatant encouragement. Oh well, they can always keep repeating: "islam means peace, islam means peace, islam means peace". Replace the daily Pater Noster with that one.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-04-2009, 10:26 AM by Husky.)

Rajeev2004 refers to some Turkish page trying to supposedly 'expose' Geert Wilders - Dutch politician - who is anti-Islam. Apparently they imagine his writings somehow prove he is 'fascist'. Well, for that, they better get some *real* evidence. The christonazis were against Jews just for being Jews, even those that had converted to christianism (in which case, I'd have thought they were not Jews anymore, just ethnically Semitic still...).
From Wilders' writings, all I can make out is that he's not against muslims, but islam - the thing that brainwashed muslims and is driving their terrorism. And he says he's against real fascism - not the modern make-believe kind, where a realistic recognition of christoislamism as being nothing but a terrorist ideology is dubbed 'fascist'. Moreover, Wilders correctly calls the koran fascist, which it is (so is the babble by the way, but I won't expect too much from Europe in acknowledging this).
Time for Mira Nanda, Teesta and Shabana to have fits.

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/sel...s-ideas-on.html
QUOTETuesday, March 03, 2009
Selections of Geert Wilders Ideas on Islam: Is the Problem Islam or Wilders?
mar 3, 2009

www.turkishweekly.net/news/65853/selections-of-geert-wilders-ideas-on-islam-is-the-problem-islam-or-wilders.html

QUOTESelections of Geert Wilders Ideas on Islam: Is the Problem Islam or Wilders?

Encyclopedia of Social Science

FASCHISM and RACISM IN THE NETHERLANDS SELECTIONS:

According to a recent opinion poll, if the Dutch parliamentary elections were held today, the Freedom Party (PVV) headed by right-wing racist leader Geert Wilders would become the largest party in the Netherlands. It would win 27 seats in the 150-seat parliament, as opposed to the nine it currently has. The Christian Democrats - the largest party in the governing coalition - would win only 26 seats.

It is clearly understood that we should more concentrate on Mr. Wilders' opinions on immigrants and Islam to understand the Ducth politics, because now nobody can claim that Mr. Wilders is a marginal man in the Netherlands politics.

You will find a selection of Mr. Wilders' politial opinions below:

---

* Wilders: "The problem is Islam itself. I see Islam more as an ideology than as a religion."

* Wilders: "I believe we have been too tolerant of the intolerant. We should learn to become intolerant of the intolerant." (5)

* Wilders: "I have a problem with Islamic tradition, culture, ideology. Not with Muslim people. My intention is to show the real face of Islam. I see it as a threat. I'm trying to use images to show that what's written in the Koran is giving incentives to people all over the world. There is no equality between our culture and the retarded Islamic culture. Look at their views on homosexuality or women" (1)

* He wants the 'fascist Koran' outlawed in Holland, the constitution rewritten to make that possible, all immigration from Muslim countries halted, Muslim immigrants paid to leave and all Muslim 'criminals' stripped of Dutch citizenship and deported 'back where they came from'. (1)

* Wilders: "Its minarets are six floors high, higher than the floodlights of the Feyenoord soccer stadium,' he said of a new mosque being built in Rotterdam. 'These kinds of symbols have to stop." (1)

* Wilders: "My allies are not Le Pen or HaideÃÆÃÂ¢ÃÂ¢Ã¢â¬Å¡ÃÂ¬ÃâÃÂ¦ We'll never join up with the fascists and Mussolinis of Italy. I'm very afraid of being linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups." (1)

* Wilders: "Our Prime Minister is a big coward. The government is weak,' says Wilders. 'They hate my guts and I don't like them either." (1)

* Wilders: "Islam is something we can't afford any more in the Netherlands. I want the fascist Koran banned. We need to stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims." (1)

* Wilders: "I don't create hate. I want to be honest. I don't hate people. I don't hate Muslims. I hate their book and their ideology." (1)

* Wilders: "The chief sponsor of Wilders's National Press Club event is Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration Pentagon official who now runs the Center for Security Policy, a prominent neoconservative think tank. Others who hope to meet with Wilders include David Horowitz, a well-known conservative activist who promotes campaigns to fight Islamic extremism. (2)

* The leader of a right-wing Dutch political faction called the Party for Freedom, Wilders has transformed himself into a political performance artist, pursuing a high-profile, high-risk personal crusade against what he asserts are deeply rooted violent tendencies in Islam. When Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker (and descendant of the painter) was murdered by an Islamic extremist in 2004, Wilder used the crime to rail against Islam and Muslim immigrants. (2)

* Wilders: "As the terrorist attacks in Mumbai proved, there's no moderate Islam and it is time for the West to realize it is in a conflict with the Muslim faith at large." (3)

* Wilders: "Our Culture Is Better" (4)

* Wilders: "We are a country of consensus. I hate consensus. I like confrontation. I am not a consensus politician. . . . This is something that is really very un-Dutch." (4)

* Wilders: "Everybody knows me. . . . There is no other politician -- not even the prime minister -- who is as well-known. . . . People hate me, or they love me. There's nothing in between. There is no gray area." (4)

* Wilders: "We were like children going to their parents if they did something wrong, because every week they hassled us. . . . We really didn't care what anybody said. If the factional leadership said, 'Well, you cannot go to this TV program,' for us it was an incentive to go, not not to go. So we were a little bit of two mavericks, rebels if you like." (4)

* Mr. Wilders quit the party over its support for opening negotiations to admit Turkey into the European Union in September 2004. "Two months later, Theo van Gogh was killed, and the whole world changed," says Mr. Wilders. (4)

* Wilders: "We believe that -- 'we' means the political elite -- that all cultures are equal. I believe this is the biggest disease today facing Europe. . . . We should wake up and tell ourselves: You're not a xenophobe, you're not a racist, you're not a crazy guy if you say, 'My culture is better than yours.' A culture based on Christianity, Judaism, humanism is better. Look at how we treat women, look at how we treat apostates, look at how we go with the separation of church and state. I can give you 500 examples why our culture is better."

* Wilders: "I accept the majority of Muslims in Europe and America are not terrorists or violent people. But it really doesn't matter that much, because if you don't define your own culture as the best, dominant one, and you allow through immigration people from those countries to come in, at the end of the day you will lose your own identity and your own culture, and your society will change. And our freedom will change -- all the freedoms we have will change."

* Wilders: "The day before the verdict, I broadcasted ['Fitna'] . . . not because I was not confident in the outcome, but I thought: I'm not taking any chance, I'm doing it. And it was legal, because there was not a verdict yet."

* An organization called The Netherlands Shows Its Colors filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Wilders for "inciting hatred." In June, Dutch prosecutors declined to pursue the charge, saying in a statement: "That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable." The group is appealing the prosecutors' decision. (4)

* In July 2008, a Jordanian prosecutor, acting on a complaint from a pressure group there, charged Mr. Wilders with blasphemy and other crimes. (4)

* Wilders: "The principle is not me -- it's not about Geert Wilders. If you look at the press and the rest of the political elite in the Netherlands, nobody cares. Nobody gives a damn. This is the worst thing, maybe. . . . A nondemocratic country cannot use the international or domestic legal system to silence you. . . . If this starts, we can get rid of all parliaments, and we should close down every newspaper, and we should shut up and all pray to Mecca five times a day." (4)

* Wilders: "Geert Wilders... incites hatred against Muslims, and Pim did not do that: he had sex with Moroccan boys in dark rooms." (5)

* Wilders: "Madam Speaker, the Koran is a book that incites to violence. I remind the House that the distribution of such texts is unlawful according to Article 132 of our Penal Code. In addition, the Koran incites to hatred and calls for murder and mayhem. The distribution of such texts is made punishable by Article 137(e). The Koran is therefore a highly dangerous book; a book which is completely against our legal order and our democratic institutions. In this light, it is an absolute necessity that the Koran be banned for the defence and reinforcement of our civilisation and our constitutional state. I shall propose a second-reading motion to that effect. Madam Speaker, there is no such thing as "moderate Islam". As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said the other day, and I quote, "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it". (6)

* Wilders: "1400 years ago war was declared on us by an ideology of hate and violence which arose at the time and was proclaimed by a barbarian who called himself the Prophet Mohammed. I am referring to Islam" (6)

- About Him:

* Born in the Limburg town of Venlo in 1963, Geert Wilders came from a Catholic background and went to a Catholic secondary school. (5)

* Because of his party's support for Turkish entry into the European Union, he left the liberals in 2002 and struck out on his own. (5)

* He set up his Freedom Party (PVV), later attracting widespread political support for his call for a ban on the burqa - which covers most of the body - even though the measure would have affected only around 50 women. Mr Wilders' greatest success was in picking up nine seats in the Dutch parliament in 2006 elections, and securing 20% of the vote in his home town of Venlo. (5)

* Wilders faces prosecution by an Amsterdam court for inciting hatred and discrimination. (7)

* Geert Wilders had wanted to show a short film, "Fitna," which accuses the Koran of inciting violence, in the British parliament, but said the British authorities had told him he was excluded from the country. "This is something you expect in Saudi Arabia but not in Britain. I think this cowardly position of Britain is very bad," he wrote. (7)

-----------------------------------
NOTES:

(1) Ian Traynor, 'I don't hate Muslims. I hate Islam,' says Holland's rising political star, The Guardian, 17 February 2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/1...therlands.islam

(2) Mark Hosenball and Michael Isikoff, "The Flying Dutchman, Free-speech hero or an anti-Islamic publicity hound? Geert Wilders is coming to America", The Newsweek, URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/185216

(3) Cnaan Liphshiz, 'There is no moderate Islam,' says far-right Dutch legislator Geert Wilders, Haaretz, 15 December 2008, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1046505.html

(4) James Taranto, "Our Culture is Better', 28 November 2008, WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122792271890965883.html

(5) Paul Kirby, "Profile: Geert Wilders', The BBC News, 27 March 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7314636.stm

(6) Geert Wilders speaks to the Dutch Parliament last September, http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/628317EB-0E7...7-5A8F55003287/

(7) "Dutch anti-Islam MP says Britain refuses him entry", Reuters, 10 February 2009, http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/i...E5197O320090210

Tuesday, 3 March 2009Strange how the islamics commenting on the above at the Turkish site call him a racist and a fascist. The above in no way indicates Wilders is a racist either: going by what's written above, he'd be as against the islam of a Dutch convert as against the islam of someone from the Indian subcontinent, since islam is the constant and that appears to be what he's against.

Besides, who are the Turkish muslims calling fascist? It's a historical fact that islamis from Turkey genocided Armenians and continue to deny the genocide they had committed (massacre-and-deny is what christoislamics are good at, after all). And then, they charged that Armenians had committed a genocide of muslims instead. Where have I seen these islamic reversals of facts before?

ramana · 03-06-2009, 02:13 AM

X-posted...

QUOTEThere is something in what you say about India drawing its enemies inside. When the frontier is breached at Khyber, the Indics combat the 'other' at Panipat even in Maratha times (3rd battle of Panipat). Yes India did envelope and assimilate its conquerors but the colonial tinkering with the ideologies for their own geo-political puroposes (Deobandi and Wahabi mollycoddling) has led to the reversal force of history in modern times. In fact this reversed flow is being presented as the true flow of the force of history.Â <!--emo& Sad

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' />

BTW the West was on the rise only after Islam had gone thru its Arabic phase, Periso-Arabic and then the Seljuk Turkic phase. What Islamization of Middle East did was to end the scourge of Persia towards Mediterranean just as Orthodox Russia ended the other scourge of the horde from Central Asia. It was the elimination of the twin scourges that allowed the rise of Europe. And the paradox is the Central Asians even adopted Islam and thus got pacified to kismet!



So Islam really did stop the Westward flow of eastern peoples since time immemorial. So was that the idea behind Islam?

03-06-2009, 07:52 AM

QUOTEIslam's Useful Idiots
By Amil Imani
Islam enjoys a large and influential ally among the nonâMuslims: A new generation of 'Useful Idiots,' the sort of people Lenin identified living in liberal democracies who furthered the work of communism. This new generation of Useful Idiots also lives in liberal democracies, but serves the cause of Islamofascismâanother virulent form of totalitarian ideology.

Useful Idiots are naive, foolish, ignorant of facts, unrealistically idealistic, dreamers, willfully in denial or deceptive. They hail from the ranks of the chronically unhappy, the anarchists, the aspiring revolutionaries, the neurotics who are at war with life, the disaffected alienated from government, corporations, and just about any and all institutions of society. The Useful Idiot can be a billionaire, a movie star, an academe of renown, a politician, or from any other segment of the population.

Arguably, the most dangerous variant of the Useful Idiot is the 'Politically Correct.' He is the master practitioner of euphemism, hedging, doubletalk, and outright deception.

The Useful Idiot derives satisfaction from being antiâestablishment. He finds perverse gratification in aiding the forces that aim to dismantle an existing order, whatever it may be: an order he neither approves of nor he feels he belongs to.

The Useful Idiot is conflicted and dishonest. He fails to look inside himself and discover the causes of his own problems and unhappiness while he readily enlists himself in causes that validate his distorted perception.

Understandably, it is easier to blame others and the outside world than to examine oneself with an eye to selfâdiscovery and selfâimprovement. Furthermore, criticizing and complainingâliberal practices of the Useful Idiotârequire little talent and energy. The Useful Idiot is a great armchair philosopher and 'Monday Morning Quarterback.'

The Useful Idiot is not the same as a person who honestly has a different point of view. A society without honest and open differences of views is a dead society. Critical, different and fresh ideas are the life blood of a living societyâthe very anathema of autocracies where the official position is sacrosanct.

Even a 'normal' person spends a great deal more energy aiming to fix things out there than working to overcome his own flaws and shortcomings, or contribute positively to the larger society. People don't like to take stock of what they are doing or not doing that is responsible for the conditions they disapprove.

But the Useful Idiot takes things much farther. The Useful Idiot, among other things, is a master practitioner of scapegoating. He assigns blame to others while absolving himself of responsibility, has a long handy list of candidates for blaming anything and everything, and by living a distorted life, he contributes to the ills of society.

The Useful Idiot may even engage in willful misinformation and deception when it suits him. Terms such as 'Political Islam,' or 'Radical Islam,' for instance, are contributions of the Useful Idiot. These terms do not even exist in the native parlance of Islam, simply because they are redundant. Islam, by its very nature and according to its charterâthe Quranâis a radical political movement. It is the Useful Idiot who sanitizes Islam and misguides the populace by saying that the 'real Islam' constitutes the main body of the religion; and, that this main body is nonâpolitical and moderate.

Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to believe that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and nonâpolitical.

But Islam is political to the core. In Islam the mosque and state are one and the sameâthe mosque is the state. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even the 'moderate' Islam is radical in its beliefs as well as its deeds. Muslims believe that all nonâMuslims, bar none, are hellfire bound and wellâdeserve being maltreated compared to believers.

No radical barbaric act of depravity is unthinkable for Muslims in dealing with others. They have destroyed precious statues of Buddha, leveled sacred monuments of other religions, and bulldozed the cemeteries of nonâMuslimsâa few examples of their utter extreme contempt toward others.

Muslims are radical even in their intrafaith dealings. Various sects and subâsects pronounce other sects and subâsects as heretics worthy of death; women are treated as chattel, deprived of many rights; hands are chopped for stealing even a loaf of bread; sexual violation is punished by stoning, and much much more. These are standard dayâtoâday ways of the mainstream 'moderate' Muslims living under the stoneâage laws of Sharia.

The 'moderate' mainstream of Islam has been outright genocidal from inception. Their own historians record that Ali, the first imam of the Shiite and the sonâinâlaw of Muhammad, with the help of another man, beheaded 700 Jewish men in the presence of the Prophet himself. The Prophet of Allah and his disciples took the murdered men's women and children in slavery. Muslims have been, and continue to be, the most vicious and shameless practitioners of slavery. The slave trade, even today, is a thriving business in some Islamic lands where wealthy, perverted sheikhs purchase children of the poor from traffickers for their sadistic gratification.

Muslims are taught deception and lying in the Quran itselfâsomething that Muhammad practiced during his life whenever he found it expedient. Successive Islamic rulers and leaders have done the same. Khomeini, the founder of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, for instance, rallied the people under the banner of democracy. All along his support for democracy was not a commitment of an honest man, but a ruse. As soon as he gathered the reins of power, Khomeini went after the Useful Idiots of his time with vengeance. These best children of Iran, having been thoroughly deceived and used by the crafty phony populistâreligionist, had to flee the country to avoid the fate of tens of thousands who were imprisoned or executed by the doubleâcrossing imam.

Almost three decades after the tragic Islamic Revolution of 1979, the suffocating rule of Islam casts its deathâbearing pal over Iranians. A proud people with enviable heritage is being systematically purged of its sense of identity and forced to think and behave like the barbaric and intolerant Muslims. Iranians who had always treated women with equality, for instance, have seen them reduced by the stoneâage clergy to subâhuman status of Islamic teaching. Any attempt by the women of Iran to counter the misogynist rule of Muhammad's mullahs is mercilessly suppressed. Women are beaten, imprisoned, raped and killed just as men are slaughtered without due process or mercy.

The lesson is clear. Beware of the Useful Idiots who live in liberal democracies. Knowingly or unknowingly, they serve as the greatest volunteer and effective soldiers of Islam. They pave the way for the advancement of Islam and they will assuredly be among the very first victims of Islam as soon as it assumes power.

Amil Imani is an Iranianâborn American citizen and proâdemocracy activist. He maintains a website at AmilImani.com

ramana · 03-06-2009, 11:29 PM

One question. When Muhammed came up with the limit of four wives for the faithful did he have a description or what was his basis?
Serious replies only please.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 03-07-2009, 03:50 AM by dhu.)

Taliban blows up poetâs shrine

QUOTEPESHAWAR: Islamist terrorists in Pakistan blew up the mausoleum of a 17th century poet revered in both Pakistan and Afghanistan on Thursday, apparently because women visited the shrine.

Dedicated to the Pashto poet Abdul Rehman, commonly known as Rehman Baba, the shrine drew thousands of followers, particularly at gatherings where his mystical love poetry was sung.

Reports said that the poetâs grave was totally destroyed and the surrounding marble building was badly damaged. However, there were no casualties.

A letter delivered to the mausoleumâs management warned against âshrine cultureâ three days before the attack, said Sahibzada Mohammad Anees, a government official in Peshwar.

Local residents also
..

In October 2007, still-unidentified terrorists set off bombs at the mausoleum of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti at Ajmer Sharif, one of South Asiaâs most revered shrines. Two people were killed and 17 injured in the bombing.
Arson attack

Earlier, in May 2005, the Lashkar-e-Taiba was alleged to have carried out an arson attack that gutted the 14th century shrine of the saint Zainuddin Wali at Ashmuqam. The following month, a Lashkar operative was alleged to have attempted to assassinate the north Kashmir-based mystic, Ahad Bâab Sopore.

G.Subramaniam · 03-07-2009, 07:17 AM

QUOTE(ramana @ Mar 6 2009, 11:29 PM)One question. When Muhammed came up with the limit of four wives for the faithful did he have a description or what was his basis?
Serious replies only please.
[right][snapback]95247[/snapback][/right]


As long as Mohd's rich wife Khadija was alive, he was monogamous
After she died, he remarried a middle aged to old woman to take care of his household

Then per Ali Sina, Mohd developed Acromegaly, of which a side effect seems to be of
excessive sex drive

Polygamy seems to have been absent in Pagan Arabia

So Mohammed started getting revelations from Allah on allowing him to take more wives
Mohd probably initially thought that 4 wives were more than enough
so Allah allowed 4 wives

Then as more kafir women fell into Mohammeds hands
( right hand possession rule ), Allah relaxed the limit just for Mohammed

Allah also banned adoption for muslims so that Mohd could marry his adopted son's wife Zainab

Ali Sina writes that Mohd had 66 wives and concubines
He had sex with his wives female household slaves such as the coptic slave Maria

When Maria became pregnant, Mohd married her

Of this 66 wives and concubines, 2 or 3 wives were middle aged women married for political reasons, the rest were for sex

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-07-2009, 08:04 PM by Husky.)

Every know and then, there comes an article that everyone just has to read. Hysterical - perhaps true even, since Daniel Pipes is generally considered a good researcher I think? - but hysterical definitely! Especially with all the pictures of Charles in islamic costumes to go with it. The best one is where he's in the long black dress with the turban on the head and the purple scarf.

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/11/is...t-to-islam.html
QUOTEIs Prince Charles a Convert to Islam?

by Daniel Pipes
November 9, 2003
updated Fri, 14 Mar 2008<!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

Found via
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/sen...limey-land.html
which is a good read and has an interesting graph:
QUOTEThursday, March 05, 2009
send Sachar to limey-land?

HareKrishna · 03-08-2009, 12:09 PM

QUOTE(Husky @ Mar 7 2009, 07:52 PM)Every know and then, there comes an article that everyone just has to read. Hysterical - perhaps true even, since Daniel Pipes is generally considered a good researcher I think? - but hysterical definitely! Especially with all the pictures of Charles in islamic costumes to go with it. The best one is where he's in the long black dress with the turban on the head and the purple scarf.

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/11/is...t-to-islam.html
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTEIs Prince Charles a Convert to Islam?

by Daniel Pipes
November 9, 2003
updated Fri, 14 Mar 2008<!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

[right][snapback]95272[/snapback][/right]
</div>
Politicians are a type of people who like power.So they like powerful religions like islam and christianity.No wonder that this religions have the same armonic whit their minds.
Islam have the avantage over xianism becouse its dogmatic and ritualic minimalism.
Like minimalism in art and arhitecture there is also a tendince in religios minimalism.
They like buddhism because is the minimalism of hinduism and zen because is the minimalism of buddhism.
Protestantism is the minimalism of catholicism and islam is the minimalism of christianism and judaism.
After xianism demise,euro-politicians are in search of a new powerful religion and that is islam.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-08-2009, 12:48 PM by Husky.)

If I wanted true minimalism, I'd choose (Thomas Paine's) Deism. Looks to be a good religion.
Following the sort of patterns you've made, Deism would be the minimalism of Greco-Roman philosophy streams. Plus: in Deism, the Nature's God is consistent with NA native American Grand Spirit.
Not even American atheists and agnostics could be against Deism I think, as it is an individual's private religion and presents no dogma, nothing but good conduct is expected. What exists in another's mind - concerning the existence of the Deist Creator - cannot be offensive to atheists and agnostics, since it will not be imposed on them.

03-11-2009, 05:48 AM

Muslim anti-war protesters abuse British soldiers as 'baby killers' during homecoming parade

HareKrishna · 03-11-2009, 08:59 AM

QUOTE(Husky @ Mar 8 2009, 12:42 PM)If I wanted true minimalism, I'd choose (Thomas Paine's) Deism. Looks to be a good religion.
Following the sort of patterns you've made, Deism would be the minimalism of Greco-Roman philosophy streams. Plus: in Deism, the Nature's God is consistent with NA native American Grand Spirit.
Not even American atheists and agnostics could be against Deism I think, as it is an individual's private religion and presents no dogma, nothing but good conduct is expected. What exists in another's mind - concerning the existence of the Deist Creator - cannot be offensive to atheists and agnostics, since it will not be imposed on them.
[right][snapback]95285[/snapback][/right]

Deism is not suited because it wont offer power to the ruler and it doesnt have large folowing in masses.The hidden Demiurg of deism doesnt justify their ruling in eyes of the masses.
Christianism is to full of greco-roman maximalist influences(trinity,saints,idols etc),some even belive that islam is the judaism of non-jews( nevermind jews have no future among muslim fanatics).
And they are folowers of Constantine-one god,one empire,one ruler.This semitic ideea ( of absolute and gelous ruler) is very well imbebed in their christian minds and the neo-christianism( islam i mean) is their choice.
The assyro-babilonian rulers were absolutist whit their subjects and gelous whit their harem ;this ideea expand in the metaphysical ground rezulting absolutist and gelous monotheism.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-11-2009, 02:47 PM by Husky.)

1. http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/hit...-hand-over.html
QUOTEHitchens on the Swat Valley hand-over
http://www.slate.com/id/2213246/?from=rss

This is not even a postponement of the coming nightmare, which is the utter disintegration of Pakistan as a state. It is a stage in that disintegration.

This Hitchens is one Limey that everyone can like (actually he is Limey no more - he took out American citizenship)

but this article does leave me wondering if anyone in India is thinking of what the Pakistani meltdown means for us.

i see millions of bearded fundamentalists on the march to refugee camps in our country. they are mostly men, young and disaffected. they do not mind our hospitality - indeed they demand it as a right (along with their 'secular' fellow-indians)- before they proceed to tell us that we must now embrace the one faith. then they close down all girls schools in india (with loud cheering from 'secular' banshee's) and tell the men - sorry you have to die.our 'secular liberals' will say â âsee it is the logical undoing of the partition, as we are one peopleâ.
Errrrâ¦..actually it is not.
it will be completing the job of islamification of india. the refugee crisis will leave india hobbled and all her energy will go in simply keeping herself together. there will be "rivers of blood" to paraphrase enoch powell - as the people who unashamedly want the destruction of india land up on her shores under the cloak of a humanitarian crisis
Posted by Ghost Writer at 3/10/2009 09:31:00 AM 5 comments
Labels: pakistan

2. http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/man...n-pakistan.html
QUOTEMan Stoned to Death in Pakistan
And here we have the sight of a man being stoned to death in the Land of the Pure:
<Youtube video. Apparently removed now, see comments below>
Islam is truly a stone age religion, in more ways than one.Poor man.
Comments:
QUOTE Anoop's Blog said...

Â Â video is removed from youtube. it says 'This video has been removed due to terms of use violation". Whose terms Youtube or Dhimmis?

Â Â 3/10/2009 9:30 AM
Blogger TambiDude said...

Â Â Youtube has been removing anti islam clips for quite some time. I got one clip from a paki apostate and went on to load it. It was deleted same day and my account locked for 'abuse of terms'.

Â Â This is how it works. Youtube has automated system to remove an offending clip if X number of people flag it as offensive. What the muzzies are doing is to look for such clips, inform each other and one by one all mark it as offensive/abusive. when the counter hits the magic number, the clip is removed.

Â Â 3/10/2009 11:39 AM
Blogger san said...

Â Â The Religion of Peace Â are quick to complain.

Â Â 3/10/2009 2:13 PM

3. http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/oba...ack-to-pak.html
http://www.business-standard.com/india/new...-pak%5C/351497/
QUOTEWednesday, March 11, 2009
Obama May Hand Afghanistan Back to Pak
Obama's administration is heading in a direction where he may hand Afghanistan back to Pakistan, after cutting some deals with the local tribal leaders.

If that happens, Pak would revive its Taliban campaign to conquer the north, and then India's only recourse would be to resume support for Northern Alliance. The campaign to conquer the northern territories would only result in Taliban turning to AlQaeda for help again. Then the whole cycle would repeat itself, including even another 9/11 attack.
Posted by san at 3/11/2009 01:15:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: alqaeda, jihad, pakistan, taliban, terrorism, usa 

4. QUOTE(HareKrishna @ Mar 11 2009, 08:59 AM)Deism is not suited because it wont offer power to the ruler and it doesnt have large folowing in masses.[right][snapback]95390[/snapback][/right]I was speaking only of what appeals to me. As in, Paine's Deism would suit me. And it could even be my next choice after Hindu Dharma, Shinto, Tao, Hellenismos, Native American Tradition and Mahayana Buddhism.

HareKrishna · 03-11-2009, 09:11 PM

QUOTE(Husky @ Mar 11 2009, 02:46 PM)
speaking only of what appeals to me. As in, Paine's Deism would suit me. And it could even be my next choice after Hindu Dharma, Shinto, Tao, Hellenismos, Native American Tradition and Mahayana Buddhism.

Posible misunderstanding.
I was talking about respective politicians and what they tink suits them.
Deism is also one of my favorite religion.

G.Subramaniam · 03-14-2009, 04:00 AM

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article...ils.php?id=6992

Butt: There is a speech by the Prophet in which he says: Allah gave me five things. One of them was the power to strike fear, to strike terror into the heart of the enemy from a mile's distance, and this was a reference to a battle he had commenced. The way the warriors had prepared themselves was so terrifying that the enemy didnât even turn up to the battle. Besides that, in the Koran the word irhab is the root word for terror in Islam, and irhabiyun is the word for terrorist. Allah mentions the word in the Koran many timesâthe one who strikes terror into their hearts is an irhabiyun. If I could have that title Islamically then I would be more than happy to take it and be proud of it. But unfortunately, I haven't reached that level yet.

G.Subramaniam · 03-18-2009, 06:47 AM

An excerpt from GNXP.com by Razib Khan a muslim apostate from bangladesh

The fleeing social capital of Bangladesh

A quick look at the economic statistics of Bangladesh will tell you that it isn't the most prosperous of nations. A comparison to Malaysia is positively embarrassing. I bring this up because a cousin of mine asserted that many people in Bangladesh believed they needed their own Mahathir Mohammed to whip their country into shape. I pointed out though that Bangladesh does not have a productive and industrious minority that it can bleed to further the quality of life of the majority.

But this was not totally true 50 years ago. Just as individual humans display variance in abilities and inclinations, so do groups. For example, the taboos and restrictions placed upon Orthodox Jews by their religious beliefs created a situation where many became jewelers (the same can be said of Indian Jains). In 1947, eastern Bengal (what is today Bangladesh) was professionally and economically dominated by a minority group, Hindus. Today, Hindus form about ~10% of Bangladesh's population (down from 30% 50 years ago), and it is likely that this proportion will keep dropping in the near future.

The Hindu domination of the professions and trade was so great that 1947, marked by the partition that resulted in East Bengal becoming part of Pakistan, resulted in the decapitation of the educated elite of what would become Bangladesh, as prosperous Hindus streamed toward Calcutta

--

One uncle of mine has tied the public squalor dominant in much of Bangladesh to the decline in the Hindu population (his ideas are presented in a series of books, so I can repeat them easily). His reasons are two fold:

1) Since Hindus formed much of the "advanced" segment of the populace, their decline could only but result in a regression.

2) Hinduism by its nature, in contrast with Islam, fosters national pride and this-world-ness.

Point one seems trivially obvious, but point two is more contentious. From what I know of Bengali Muslims, I would say there is a tension in their mental life between being Bengali and being Muslim. I have noted before that my uncles who are the most thoroughgoing fundamentalists are the most open to rejecting traditional modes of Bengali life (whether that be arranged marriage or abandoning use of the language abroad). Bengali Muslims in many ways live a dual mental existence, on the one hand, proud of Hindu Bengali thinkers like Tagore, but on the other hand, enthusiastic members of the Dar-al-Islam. This sort of national schizophrenia can not but have serious consequences for nation building. In contrast, Hindus have no problem embracing Bengali culture, as by and large they are the creators of this culture, and Hinduism is open to regional variations and ways.

--

I do recall that one story that my father likes to tell is of the Bengali Muslim who goes to a Hindu area, and sits on a rock, at which point the local villagers attack him. The joke is this: they worship the rock! This sort of dismissal of nature worship is fine and good, but I can not but help think that without this sort of mentality the environmental situation in much of India would be even worse than it is, and the situation in Bangaldesh suffers from the lack of spiritual significance Muslim Bengalis see in their environment (American South Asians who are Hindu also have displayed and environmental awareness that I have found positively shocking for those who have immigrated from materially deprived Third World nations-the same sentiments are totally absent among immigrant Muslim South Asians).

Of course, Bangladesh has many Muslim professionals and business-people, aren't they as good as the Hindus? The economic statistics above speak for themselves. I don't doubt that many Muslims are sincere, but it may take generations for social capital to accumulate. The transfer of business to native Africans after the expulsion of Gujarati traders in the 1970s in Uganda is a reductio ad absurdum of the process that I'm referring to, that is, the emigration of a Hindu businessman with decades of international contacts is not going to be balanced by the emergence of a local entrepeneur in his place who takes over his property (often acquired through connections). The flight of the Hindus has resulted in more poverty for the people of Bangladesh.

So why do they flee? There are two primary causes:

1) external
2) internal

The external pull is Calcutta, or more broadly speaking, Hindu Bengali regions just across the border. Calcutta is the cultural mecca of Bengalis, as well as the commercial capital of eastern India. In West Bengal Hindus can live in an area where their temples are revered, and the old traditions of Bengali culture do not have to co-exist in a constant state of tension with the pull of international Islam. The fact is the only difference between a Hindu Bangladeshi and a Hindu West Bengali India is A) a difference of paper nationality B) locale. The latter might matter a lot to many individuals, as families might have resided in the same village or city for generations. But migration is part of human history, and after multiple generations, I find it implausible that a given Hindu family will not flee to the more congenial lands of India when given the chance.

The other push is internal. Bangladeshi Muslims obviously discriminate against Hindus (and then there are the occasionally violent outbursts). Knowing that Hindus are over-represented in urban areas, and disproportionately educated, I got the impression that they were rather non-existent in public life. Hindus are marked out by their names (which are Bengali rather than "Muslim," that is, Turkic, Persian or Arabic), and I noted that of the 17 bank directors at a local financial institution since 1871, all were Muslim.

--

So you get the tendency of Muslims who complain that their nation is filled will illiterate beggars, who simultaneously drive out a religious minority of co-ethnics who bring a fair amount of social capital to the table. These sort of paradoxes abound in Bangladeshi life (another common one is to bemoan nepotism while socializing only with your family).

The terrible economic situation in Bangladesh results in migration to India of Muslims. They go not for liberty, but for economic opportunity that is lacking in their homeland. So, the flight of the Hindus to India, which is a partial cause of the deprived economic situation in Bangladesh, results in Muslims fleeing to India!

Back to Malaysia. Thank god for the Malays that:

1) China is further away from Malaysia than West Bengal is from Bangladesh.
2) China has been a basket-case for much of the 20th century. Discouraging back-migration.
3) The Malay attempts at chauvanism have been mild enough to prevent the Chinese from fleeing.

As it is, the Malaysian state expelled Singapore in the 1960s to get rid of the spectre of Chinese demographic dominance, at the cost of losing a strategic port that brough a lot of economic benefits to the union.

HareKrishna · 03-19-2009, 02:09 PM

http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/2009/03/...to-report-.html

AUSTRALIA'S most controversial sheik, Taj Din al-Hilali, has been caught on videotape kicking in a door at his own mosque before calling police to report an act of vandalism.

The head imam at the Lakemba mosque, who caused outrage in 2006 by comparing scantily clad women to uncovered meat, was shown on a CCTV security tape kicking open the door just minutes before reporting the incident.

The Nine Network's A Current Affair last night broadcast the videotape from March 9, showing the incident, which Sheik Hilali initially denied.

"There is a trick in this camera. There is a trick in this film," he told ACA.

But in a letter sent by Sheik Hilali's lawyers to ACA yesterday, he admitted kicking the door, saying the damage had already been done to the door before he kicked it.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 03-30-2009, 08:44 PM by Husky.)

Could go in the media thread too, I suppose.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/18/AR2009031800144.html
Washington Post doing some PR for Islam and GangRapistan - sorrrrry, I meant Terroristan.
Check this hilarity - can they advertise any more for how a supposed romantic happy end undoes the islamic villainy preceding it, or for islamic oneway polygamy (though only polygyny - no polyandry, no polygynandry. Begs the question: where are the fembots?)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9031800144.html
QUOTEFamed Pakistani gang-rape victim gets married
By KHALID TANVEER
The Associated Press
Wednesday, March 18, 2009; 2:57 AM

MULTAN, Pakistan -- A Pakistani gang-rape victim who shunned custom and rose to global fame by speaking out about her case has defied another local taboo _ she just got married.

Mukhtar Mai is now the second wife of Nasir Abbas Gabol, a police officer who was assigned to protect her as her case gained notoriety. He said she was reluctant to accept his offer and that he threatened suicide when she turned him down.
(Oh great, a Stalker Boy. "I will keeel misself, keel misself, keel misself." Sure. Sayonara.)

Mai was gang raped at the order of a tribal council in the eastern province of Punjab in 2002 to punish her family for her brother's alleged affair with a woman from a higher-caste family. There were also allegations that the boy had been molested by members of the other family, and that the accusations of the affair were used to cover up the crime.
(Islamic casta system. No blaming Hindu Dharma for this casta system since it's pious muslims doing islamic things.)

Rape victims in Pakistan face severe social stigma and diminished marriage prospects, prompting many to commit suicide. But Mai went public and challenged her alleged attackers in court, attracting international attention and becoming a women's rights activist.

She was named Glamour magazine's Woman of the Year, and now runs a school in her southern Punjab province village of Meerwala. The case against her attackers is still in the court system.
(Huh? Are they mocking her tragedy? Please tell me it's not more of the west's sham pity. Eewww.)

Mai told AP Television News after the nuptials that she'd never completely ruled out marriage.

"When you do marriage you have to have faith in your partner," she said.

Her new husband told the AP on Wednesday that he was enraptured by Mai's "extreme courage."

"I will do whatever is possible to help my wife in her efforts aimed at raising her voice for the rights of women," he said.
(Here's a thought: He and his family can convert to a Dharmic tradition or some other Natural Tradition. That will help with all creatures' rights.)

Mai initially refused his offer because Gabol was already married and discouraged him from divorcing his first wife. Pakistan is a majority Muslim nation, and Islamic law allows men to have up to four wives.
(Oh, what a trustworthy loyal entity he is. She had to discourage him from divorcing and leaving his first wife for her. Mai ought to have second thoughts, especially as she had declared "you have to have faith in your partner". Am assuming loyalty/trust is 'faith' here. Also, he seems mentally unstable. Doesn't it worry anyone? Mai can do better.)

Gabol said he was so desperate to marry Mai that he threatened to kill himself unless she relented. Fearing he would carry out his threat, Gabol's first wife met with Mai and persuaded her to marry.
(An Ahhhh, How Sweet moment. Western readership brought to sympathise with polygamist islam where a very islamic gang-rape incident "is not so bad after all" since it ends on a happy note of being second wife to some nearly-disloyal dude. And look how happy the Islamic Marriage System is: the first wife nearly jilted by him for the would-be second wife *wants* the second wife to marry the apparently mentally-unstable husband (never mind he got wife #1 to beg on his behalf by threatening with his suicide). That nicely mirrors how the intended second wife pleaded with him not to abandon the first wife.
Is it just me, or is the promised 'romantic islamic fairytale' not really romantic?)

The wedding took place Sunday and a reception is planned for the weekend.Anyone else touched by the drama? Come on, fellow TSPers. TSPers? I mean fellow Indian islamics? Oh drat. I registered in the wrong forum. You kaffirs don't have any taste in the romantic. Don't you know Islam means Romance and Peace.

Good luck to the poor woman though. Things could have been worse. I'm trying to think *how*, but in the meantime, this placeholder: things could have been worse.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?