• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Islamism - 7
#41
IMO:

The solution lies in the problem itself: Islam cannot tolerate Jesus as The One Way, and Christianity is not amused by Mohammed. At all. Both paths my be Abrahamic, but there is little common between them for practical purposes.

1. Once parts of the truth slowly grind its way out, "club religions" will not be able to get along all that well (not that they are getting along today).

2. Islam and Xtianity are making great efforts at keeping Hindus as well as their own flocks in the dark (to prevent anyone from asking questions).

The collapse will come, and it will be spectacular. But as long as booze sells, easy solutions will have a ready market waiting for them, ie hawking Xtianity/Islam will be easy. But *how* Xtian/Islamic those new converts remain beyond the inital week of conversion is something I look forward to following... <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> But if there is money to be made by getting converted, money will be made..In Mumbai we call it "Yeda banake peda khilaana"..

Meanwhile, assuming the truth keeps coming out at its present pace (and I cannot see how that pace can be decreased, indeed, I cannot see how that pace can be kept from increasing rather substantially), it is only a matter of time before milk becomes milk and water becomes water onlee..Look for more diluted converts who love Indian History (the real history, not the MacCaulay-written one), Yoga, etc. Dharma will absorb everyone, though people will cling to their labels for a while (old habits die hard)..and then there is the Law. (I know a Pakistani who hates PBUH with a venom that few possess, bar none. However, he cannot get rid of his Muslim name because of the monumental amounts of paperwork and time involved; he said as much when asked by Muslims).
  Reply
#42
<!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Aug 16 2007, 03:58 AM-->QUOTE(Shambhu @ Aug 16 2007, 03:58 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->"But I do not believe in any religion.." Gunter Nyquist replied sheepishly. "Then why do you have a Christian name?" demanded Bilal[right][snapback]72135[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Very entertaining <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
(But before you publish, change Gunter into something else. It's not at all christian, it's old Germanic and a very heathen name. And Nyquist, as far as I am aware, is typically W-Scandinavian - Swedish or perhaps Norwegian. Can make first name Christiaan or Lukas or something like that instead.)
  Reply
#43
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Aug 18 2007, 05:44 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Aug 18 2007, 05:44 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Aug 16 2007, 03:58 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Shambhu @ Aug 16 2007, 03:58 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->"But I do not believe in any religion.." Gunter Nyquist replied sheepishly. "Then why do you have a Christian name?" demanded Bilal[right][snapback]72135[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Very entertaining <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
(But before you publish, change Gunter into something else. It's not at all christian, it's old Germanic and a very heathen name. And Nyquist, as far as I am aware, is typically W-Scandinavian - Swedish or perhaps Norwegian. Can make first name Christiaan or Lukas or something like that instead.)
[right][snapback]72190[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Thanks..this is not serious work, I just made it up when I saw the post about the Dutch guy..

Yes, Christiaan or Ruud is better...
  Reply
#44
Question, What does Allo Upanishads claiming Allah has to do with Islam in Hinduism? As I understand the concept of Allah is its there and its not there type concept? I think there is already such a sect in Hinduism....

The sick psy-ops of Islamists to tie up the relation between concept of allah and Doctrine of the Quran to that of Hinduism is getting nastier.

By the way, a nice observation, I dont normally visit much orkut dick contest communities but one day I came through a community labelled 'Hindu girls for Muslim boys' or something like that, Nothing wrong here but it simply exposes the fascist mentality of Islamiyat (note I'm not defaming Islam) that many Muslims posesses, of slavery/rape/bondage of girls of other religion and ofcourse breed , breed and breed and convert the girl and increase the numbers.

Dont you think in long term India might face a issue from such population factor as normally I have seen almost every other Muslims having more kids than a saner society/family wants to have.
  Reply
#45
Two things.
(1) Very very funny, even though initially it seemed so silly I couldn't believe it was true. But the miracle of islam makes it only too real.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Sid60226.htm
<b>How to Sow the Seeds of Doubt</b>

It's about a dialogue with a muslim on whether allah loves pigs too. Watch the faithful go into a tailspin on that one. (I've heard of former-christians having fun with christians about whether gawd loves the devil too, but this is even more ridiculous!) A little shocked that it was an Indian muslim who was so dense...


(2) Shambhu, keep writing (about anything, not necessarily about islami stuff). At least in your spare time. Don't spend all your time on school/research/work. Not everyone can write (I can't, but don't feel bad for me: I can read!) or paint or compose or whatever, so don't waste any skills.

Now if everyone in India put their unique talents to use, our perspectives can gain visibility against such excuses-for-artists like MFHs, Meera Nairs and Arundhati Roys. My toes can scrawl better than MFH (that's not hard, is it) and - well I can't write, so best leave off comparing myself to Roy whose work I've never had the misfortune to read anyway.
AR was apparently christened Margaret Roy (not Suzanne?) according to Richard Crasta (K.Ram mentioned the latter's book "Impressing the Whites: The New International Slavery" reviewed at link to follow). And another author accuses the Keralite christian Roy of having slept her way toward eventually getting the Booker Prize for her 'gawd of small stuff'. Sorry if this is all old news.
http://www.sandeepweb.com/2005/08/05/impre...tional-slavery/
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->And then there’s an insight into the politics of names. This is extremely subtle but powerful. Arundhati Roy’s real name is Margaret Roy but the West refuses to publish books authored by an Indian who has a non-Hindu name. From experience, Crasta says he was promised a hefty advance for one of his novels the moment he said he was contemplating a change of his name to Avatar Prabhu.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Richard Crasta too is a Indian christian according to the above link.
Bet Margaret didn't change her name on account of the west though; she's just a crypto.

http://www.exile.ru/2002-April-05/great_li...f_our_time.html
"Great literary frauds of our time: Arundhati Roy"
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->And she is a fraud. A literary careerist who has parlayed an overwritten melodrama into unearned fame; a child of privilege whose early experiments in poverty were no more than a smart career move; a Yuppie whose real job was aerobics instructor, not slum bottle-recycler; a world-travelled, overeducated dilettante posing as a regional writer; and a fake saint who f*cked her way to fame and survives, in spite of her complete lack of talent, because her crude scolding warms the heart of old British lefties who love it when their tame Indian slaves get up on their hind legs to denounce the bloody Americans, who oppress the world so much less skillfully than they used to.

Her most public, most embarrassing slip came in her noble struggle against the dam. She was given a three month jail sentence for obstructing the builders. Gandhi-like, she went to jail...then slunk out after 24 hours, opting to pay a 75-rupee ($1.50) fine rather than show solidarity with the humble prisoners. It seems she found an Indian prison much less spiritual than she had imagined. Rather dirty, in fact. 24 hours was just time enough to be photographed behind bars, looking fierce and defiant; after that there was no point in staying in such an unsanitary place.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Arundhati Roy, moral crusader.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Other than the excerpt pasted, this last link - an article by one John Dolan - is practically useless with all its raving about the 'Oryan' Arundhati Roy (they're obsessed with that, what?). He's particularly angry at her lame anti-Americanism. More generally, he paints her character as representative of the regular Indoo and from what I can make out, he seems to imply she's Hindu. He even manages to insert a sentence about her being 'like Kaali' or something. Doesn't he know she's a good ole christian like him? <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> Ridicule her by all means, but get it right: she's a christo, like D'Souza and many another whiny attention-seeker.
(It was them who gave the monsters the microphones in the first place and then they complain about it....)
And if Americans like Dolan (even when their writings are posted on a Russian site) don't like what their whiny Indian pets like AR are writing against the US, they should tell the US govt to stop sponsoring the Indian left. We'd all be grateful.
  Reply
#46

[center]<b><span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'>Britons ‘more suspicious’ of Muslims : Daniel Dombey in London and Simon Kuper in Paris</span></b> <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo--> [/center]

<b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Britons are more suspicious of Muslims than Americans and other Europeans are, according to a poll for the Financial Times.</span></b>

Only 59 per cent of Britons thought it possible to be both a Muslim and a citizen of their country, a smaller proportion than in France, Germany, Spain, Italy or the US – the other countries polled by Harris Interactive.

British citizens were also the most likely to predict a “major terrorist attack” in their country in the next 12 months; to consider Muslims “a threat to national security”, and to believe Muslims had too much political power in their country.

However, on more personal measures of integration – having Muslim friends and accepting the marriage of their child to a Muslim – Britons showed more enthusiasm than some other countries.

The findings suggest that terrorist plots against the UK, including the London bombings of July 7 2005, have hardened British attitudes towards Muslims. Osama Saeed of the Muslim Association of Britain blamed the findings on what he called “a vicious campaign” by the press against the Muslim community,.

Most British respondents – 52 per cent – expected a “major terrorist attack” in their country within a year. Even in Spain where the Basque extremist group Eta has recently abandoned a ceasefire, only 32 per cent predicted a big attack. The numbers fell to 30 per cent in the US and 15 to 18 per cent in France, Italy and Germany.

France emerged as the country most at ease with its Muslim population. The French were most likely to say they had Muslim friends, to accept if their child wanted to marry a Muslim, and to say Muslims in their country had received unjustified criticism and prejudice.

Patrick Weil, political scientist at the University of Paris 1- Sorbonne, said: “In France we are very good at cultural integration. We are very bad in fighting discrimination, especially in high-level jobs. In the UK it is the opposite.”

In the US, which has proportionally fewer Muslim inhabitants than France, Britain or Germany, 21 per cent saw the presence of Muslims as a threat, while 20 per cent said Muslims had too much power.

Harris conducted an online poll between August 1 and 13 of 6,398 adults, broadly split among the six countries surveyed.

<b>The Harris poll data:</b>

<img src='http://media.ft.com/cms/374248a2-4e60-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

<img src='http://media.ft.com/cms/52c4a840-4e60-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

<img src='http://media.ft.com/cms/67f99c84-4e60-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

<b>Fourth Table on the next post</b>

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  Reply
#47


<b>Fourth Table from Article posted above - Aug 20 2007,02:10 PM

The Harris poll data:</b>

<img src='http://media.ft.com/cms/7ddfce4c-4e60-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  Reply
#48
Huskyji, Thanks..I will..

Meanwhile here is something I found out over the weekend:

A white american friend of mine was reading this book:
"PIG ( Politically Incorrect Guide) Series: Islam"

It condenses quran, life of pbuh, fatwas etc..very highly recommended. Paperback, about 200 pages, must be $20..Bullet points, made for easy reading. And it *is* politically incorrect (what the ancients used to call "absolutely, fearlessly true")

I spoke to him and to another white american friend about everything from quran, pbuh, pak, kashmir, mush , taliban, taj mahal...both were very appreciative and were nodding in agreement throughout, becos what I was telling them resonated with their own (short) experience with the Religion of Peace.

<!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  Reply
#49
How Islamists are testing India's tolerance


Islamists are testing the tolerance level of Indians. A number of examples can be cited. Their recent violent attack on Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen is one. Change is the law of nature and there are no exceptions to it, not even in Quranic Law - the Shariat. Yet, there are millions of Islamic fundamentalists and other Islamists who shun reforms.

Today, in the entire world outside of the ummah, Islam is hated. Muslims are most unwelcome in the US, Europe and Australia. In China's Sikiang province they are dealt with a heavy hand. In more than 24 countries, they are in a warlike situation. In Iraq, for months now, there are more than 100 casualties a day. Similar conditions are reported from Afghanistan and the NWFP in Pakistan. The only Muslim majority State of India, Jammu & Kashmir, too, is gripped by Islamic terrorism.

An insightful administrator of colonial India had once noted on the file that "Muslims are a tyrant majority and troublesome minority". It can safely be said that Muslim society has lost 60 years of opportunity of reforms in independent India, the most favourable country. There may be numerous reasons for this.

Lack of reformist leadership, ghettoisation, Muslim votebank politics and the grip of fundamentalists over their societal behaviour. Muslim political parties, too, are unfavourable to a reformist leadership.

The Congress has long fed the Muslim society with ever increasing appeasements. Before 1947, it did so in the name of Hindu-Muslim unity and afterwards for getting votes. Its unity efforts resulted in Partition and bloodbath of innocent people. Its votebank measures resulted in intensively competitive votebank politics.

It was by sheer chance that the Congress came to power in May 2004 and embarked upon the appeasement policy yet again. The first task it performed after coming to power was ordering repeal of POTA. The result of its competitive votebank policy was seen in the Kerala Assembly which unanimously passed a resolution for the release of Maulana Madni. This week, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has demanded the enactment of law for women as per the Shariat. It has not done any good to Muslims in the past nor is it likely to do so in the future.

Through violent activities, the Muslim society is drifting away from the mainstream. After all, any act of riot, violence or terrorism leaves an impression on Indians. Recall, when Afzal Guru, chief conspirator of the attack on Parliament, was given death sentence by Supreme Court after a three-tier judicial process. Objections were raised by Congress Chief Minister of J&K Ghulam Nabi Azad. Now, he may die in jail but will not be hanged. One can also recall that it was this attack over which India and Pakistan were on the brink of war.

Coming to Taslima Nasreen. She went to Hyderabad to release the Telegu edition of her book. The Muslim fundamentalist organisation MIM organised an attack on her at the Press Club. Video clippings show MIM people attacking her and the hosts trying to protect her. To cap it all, the police registered a case against Taslima for creating communal disharmony and hurting Islam. The cops gave in to the wishes of MIM leader Akbaruddin Owaisi.

The Minority Commission condemned the incident but, at the same time, recommended not to extend Taslima's visa. Taslima advocated for women's rights. Her book Lajja was a hit. The Andhra Pradesh High Court, while dealing with the PIL filed against her, issued notices to Police Commissioner of Hyderabad, Union Home Secretary and State Home Secretary. The MIM leaders regretted that they could not kill her. They threatened that if she came to Hyderabad again, she would be done to death. Till now, nobody has apologised to her for the security lapse. In Bangladesh she is unwelcome. She wants an Indian citizenship. Surprisingly, the so-called champions of human rights and freedom of expression are quiet this time.

A couple of years back, a Danish newspaper published a series of cartoons of Prophet Mohammed provoking worldwide Islamist protests. India had nothing to do with the cartoons. Yet, protesters in Lucknow attacked and killed traders. An Islamist leader offered Rs 51 crore to anyone who would kill the cartoonist.

Salman Rushdie wrote Satanic Verses. Iran's Islamists vowed to pay huge money to the one who killed Rushdie. The Japanese translator of the book was killed. Publishers and booksellers, too, were in the firing line. India did nothing except banning the book. Many people in India were killed in protest demonstrations. That is how they resist reforms that come their way.



  Reply
#50
Husky for you!

url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jwh/18.1/br_1.html]Book Review[/url]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization. By RICHARD W. BULLLIET. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. 187 pp. $24.50 (cloth); $18.95 (paper).

      World historians will enjoy and profit from this wise and wonderful book with an eye-opening approach succinctly captured in its title: The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization. <b>Richard W. Bulliett</b>, professor of history at Columbia University and former director of its Middle East Institute, <b>offers a startlingly original interpretation that challenges not only conventional wisdom but the historical master narrative of the last fourteen centuries. No one who has digested this little volume will be able to look at Islam and Christianity again in the same way.  </b>
      At the first glance, Bulliet's book appears to be a rebuttal of Samuel Huntington's "clash of civilizations" thesis. In fact, the real target is Bernard Lewis, sage of Middle Eastern studies, who originated the term in an article on "The Roots of Muslim Rage" in 1990 and whose baleful influence on the Bush administration helped spur the American occupation of Iraq in 2003. <b>It is a distinguished Arabist's response to the academic and policy-making drum beaters of American empire whose misunderstanding of Islam and Middle Eastern history have led to talk of a generations-long war with radical Islam and trying to make Mesopotamia safe for democracy. </b> 
      <b>To this task Bulliet brings many a qualification.</b> For more than three decades he has taught at Columbia University, establishing a reputation as an innovative scholar in Islamic and Middle East studies. Since the publication of his first book, The Camel and the Wheel (1975), he has demonstrated time and again an ability to see things in a new way, to take a view from the edge, and in doing so has enriched the fields of medieval Islamic and modern Middle East studies. His contributions to world history include a survey, The Earth and Its Peoples (1997), an essay titled "Themes, Conjunctures, and Comparisons" in Teaching World History: A Resource Book (1997), and editing The Columbia History of the Twentieth Century (1998). He has also published four novels, and he recently returned to where he began with Hunters, Herders, and Hamburgers: The History of Human-Animal Relations (2005). 
      <b>His case is composed of four essays, each of which can stand alone but taken together make an ingenious argument that Islam and Christianity should be thought of as two versions of a common socioreligious system, like Orthodox Christianity and Western Christendom.</b> Recalling that <b>"Judeo-Christian civilization" is a term originally coined by Nietzsche to deride both </b>and was adopted only after World War II, when its acceptance changed the master narrative, he hopes to do the same by proposing an Islamo-Christian kinship that will help Americans find a common ground with the Muslims in their midst. <b>Against perceptions of the "otherness" of Islam, he argues the two are sibling civilizations, actually fraternal twins, sharing more similarities than differences. While it seems a stretch to argue for a twinned relationship when they were separated by births six centuries apart, Bulliet's re-narration demonstrates how the two civilizations exhibit similar historical trajectories, went through the same developmental stages, and confronted similar internal challenges. From the seventh to the fourteenth centuries, Latin Christians and Middle Eastern Muslims traveled parallel, even overlapping, paths, until divergences developed in the later Middle Ages</b>. 
      Bulliet founds his case on a slow model of religious conversion, arguing that both faiths had roughly the same start lines as they expanded into regions beyond their core areas.<b> "Islamization" and "Christianization" were centuries-long processes that only gradually won over the vast majority of populations in the Middle East and Europe north of the Mediterranean. From the ninth century onward, they mirrored one another in the growth of bodies of religious specialists, the ulama and monks; the adoption of a single language of religion, Latin and Arabic; organization of religious studies in madrasas (religious colleges) and universities; and the rise of lay religiosity that spawned Sufi brotherhoods and the Beghards and Beguines. These innovations offended religious authorities, but whereas in Christendom the confrontation with popular piety led to the Protestant Reformation and split, in Islam though the ulama often opposed Sufism they couldn't stamp it out. "Islam bent and accommodated" (p. 38) as Sufism became a primary focus of Muslim piety.</b> 
      <b>After about 1500 the two parted ways, "like fraternal twins that are almost indistinguishable in childhood but have distinctive and not necessarily compatible personalities as adults" (pp. 15–16). Muslim dynasts tried to recreate the Eurasian land empire of Genghis Khan, while Europeans other than the Russians expanded overseas. By proselytizing new-caught peoples deemed idolatrous, Islam and Christianity became the world's dominant religions, a success at least as great as the triumph of European empire.</b> In the conventional narrative, while the West surged ahead, the Muslim world went into decline. But there is another way to measure success: compare percentages of the two faiths made up of descendants of converts between 1500 and 1900. The answer for Islam would be 50 percent, versus 20 percent for Christianity. "In the great Afro-Asian land bloc and the adjoining region of southeast Asia," says Bulliet, "European Christianity and Islam went head to head in a contest for the souls of the indigenous peoples, and Islam unquestionably won" (p. 41). For Islam, this is what went right. 
      "What Went On," the second chapter, is another rejoinder to Bernard Lewis, who also coined "What Went Wrong?" <b>Justice, stresses Bulliet, is the supreme value in Islamic political discourse. Traditionally, the threat of tyranny was restrained by Sharia law, upheld by the ulama monitoring rulers, interpreting the law in judicial proceedings. In Christian civilization, the contest between crown and clergy ended in separation of church and state, but in its sibling it developed into "a malignant rivalry in which personal tyranny, accompanied by suppression of critical religious voices, developed as a self-fulfilling prophecy" (p. 62). Modernizing reformers seeking to emulate Europe adopted authoritarianism and anticlericalism—mislabeled "secularism" by Western observers—and sought to eviscerate Sharia and the ulama. By the 1960s, most governments in the Muslim world had become "secular" dictatorships. Their policies of marginalizing the ulama, promoting print media to disseminate government views and modern knowledge, and instituting mass education had unintended consequences. New religious interpreters, their authority established by publishing and able to reach an international readership through print and other media, have supplanted the credentialed religious authorities. Anticlericalism and modernization backfired on the authoritarians, empowering a new generation of Islamic revivalists, including the likes of Sayyid Qutb, Osama bin Laden, and Ayman Zawahiri, who have issued a flood of fatwas (nonbinding religious opinions) against the tyrants and their foreign supporters. That's what really went wrong</b>. 
      The third chapter, "Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places," is a critique of Middle East studies in America, reflecting on Bulliet's student years in a fledgling field, then later as executive secretary of the Middle East Studies Association. <b>In the shadow of the Cold War, under the spell of the magic words "development" and "modernization," academics created an American Orientalism that assumed Islam was a relic destined to pass away. Westernization was inevitable, and the future was being shaped by men on the move. In their quest for an Arab or Iranian Mustafa Kemal, "the founders of Middle East studies ignored recommendations that they focus on contemporary Islam and focused instead on Middle Easterners trying to act like westerners. There weren't a lot of these just as there hadn't been a lot of converts, but the conviction was strong that those few would be pioneers in bringing western modernity to the region. . . . The people we supported as agents of modernity became tyrants, their societies police states" (p.123). </b>Completely missed were "the middle ground of people deeply wedded to their religious traditions, but eager to share in at least some of the benefits of the modern world, [who] gave birth to the Iranian Revolution, a multitude of Islamic movements and political parties, and, sadly, the jihadist plots of Osama bin Laden. But with rare exception, Islamic activism went unobserved and unanalyzed in the early days of Middle East studies, and remains disturbingly puzzling to the present day" (pp. 111–112). <b>This blinkered approach continues, as policy makers and their academic advisors such as Bernard Lewis persist in trying to find a "Shia-in-a-suit" to lead Iraq and "shun alternative visions of modernity that might embody a Muslim rather than a western perspective"</b> (p. 115). Though the Japanese developed their own model of modernity, "policy circles seem incapable of imaging a Muslim model of modernity.... Like later day missionaries, we want Muslims to love us, not just for what we can offer in the way of a technological society, but for who we are—for our values. But we refuse to countenance the thought of loving them for their values" (p. 116). 
      Chapter 4, <b>"The Edge of the Future," takes a long view of what lies ahead. Islam, says Bulliet, is in a "crisis of authority" that will take several generations to resolve (p. 135)</b>. For Sunni Islam in particular, which lacks an ecclesiastical hierarchy, the radical breakdown in the structure of authority has created a free market in belief, leading many Muslims to believe that they are free to whatever brand of Islam best suits their situation. <b>Resolution will come eventually, but this period of crisis is also potentially a time of renewal. Islamic renewal movements have historically emerged on what he calls "the edge," interfaith frontier zones that have given rise to remarkable diversity under the name Islam and spawned institutions such as madrasas and numerous Sufi brotherhoods. Predicting that the next Islamic revitalization movements will come from the peripheries, he identifies the Islamic diaspora communities of America and Europe, democratic Islamic political parties in certain Muslim countries, and new religious universities in Indonesia and Turkey as sources that could generate the creativity and vitality to transform the Islam of the twenty-first century.</b> He further expects that "conservative voices from the center—including both governments in majority Muslim countries and the marginalized traditional ulama—will weigh less in the future spiritual balance than some of the new expressions of Islam on the edge" (p. 146). Islam, now at the beginning of its fifteenth century, awaits its renewer. <b>The next two or three decades should, he thinks, "see religious leaders of tolerant and peaceful conscience, in the mold of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela, eclipse in respect and popular following today's advocates of jihad, intolerance, and religious autocracy" (p. 161). </b> 
      Short, thought provoking, and available in paperback, this is a perfect piece for generating lively discussion in world history, Middle East studies, and comparative religion courses. 

HOWARD J. DOOLEY 
Western Michigan University

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Sort of explains the US search for en-mo leaders in Pakistan- Ayub, BB and Mushy- Its Enlightened Orientalism American style.
  Reply
#51
<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Aug 25 2007, 02:41 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Aug 25 2007, 02:41 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Husky for you![right][snapback]72469[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->But it isn't even my birthday yet! <!--emo&Wink--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jwh/18.1/br_1.html]Book Review[/url]

<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization. By RICHARD W. BULLLIET. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. 187 pp. $24.50 (cloth); $18.95 (paper).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yes, they are of one body.
Calls to mind an old Ivanhoe movie. Not the technicolour one with the two Taylors trying to outdo each other in hamming-it-up. I mean the 80s one (with Anthony Andrews, Sam Neill, Olivia Hussey-Langenecker). Taped it off the tv some years ago, can't point to a dvd link.
It's based on Walter Scott's book Ivanhoe, and is set in the early 12th century I think, with the faithful christian lads returning from the crusade in the ME.
In the movie, the characters Isaac of York and Rebecca are Jewish. The rest of the characters - all being faithfully christian - keep referring to Isaac and Rebecca as 'Infidels', 'infidel dogs' and other variations on the same. Change this word to the islamic term 'kaffir' and you have islam. And there you have the fundamental doctrine of both.

They have so much in common, islam and christianism: never-ending and violent hatred for Judaism; and of course a determination to wipe out all other ways of life on the planet (all other religions); a mindset that does not shrink from employing mass-genocide and which uses gruesome means of murder (islamaniac tyranny in India and elsewhere; christomaniac inquisitions and crusades).

Civilisation is a word that I myself would never have connected to this new term 'islamo-christian'. I just call it the christoislamic meme or just christoislamism. But if they want to refer to it as a single body of 'civilisation', then it doesn't change a thing: it entails the same genocide and utter intolerance for other religions as before.

That doesn't mean that the two religions that consider each other as heresies will get along. The Islamic Conquest - Crusades/Reconquista is proof enough of that.
Islam and christianity are two heads of the same monster. And they relentlessly bicker; each trying to plot the other's demise. I wish them both good luck in this, from the depths of my heart.


I'm sick of western armchair intellectualisation of the unintellectual islam, the kind that speaks without experience of the real thing, but hypothesizes from a safe distance. Enough with their apologetics for islamic 'excesses' (violence). While they use flowery words to excuse mass-murder, terrorism and other stuff, I suspect it's only in order to simultaneously excuse their own christian tradition of genocide and terrorism. They wouldn't want to appear as hypocrites, would they. Because every christian accusation against islam (veils, oppression of women, slavery, anti-semitism, violence and bloodshed) is all there in christianity.
No wonder people of the christo faith are attracted to islam: they recognise their own scary religion therein.

But I just hope such apologetics won't be used to condition the American mindset with respect to islam such that Americans start accomodating it with their eyes closed. Else one day they will open their eyes in the United States of Dar-ul-islam.
The 'embrace brother islam' message, if implemented and taken seriously, will do nothing more than lull Americans into a stupour. The US civilian population won't thank the 'scholars' who paved the way for that. Then again, the same population already has to contend with mad christo attempts to take their country; islam is little different.


But it's like others in this forum have been telling us over and over again: islam and christianity might hate each other to death, but they'll always band together to destroy everyone else, precisely because they recognise (perhaps grudgingly at times) that they're of a kind.
Can you imagine such an article as above written about Hindu Dharma and christianity? Nah. All we get from them is a constant churn-out of lame Wendy books or those by her children, telling Hindus what Hinduism supposedly is. But it would be even scarier if we were to receive the "Hinduism is like christianity" 'compliment' from them - because ours is not part of a murderous tradition.
  Reply
#52
Quran inscribed on India map!
August 28, 2007

Kolkata: Shiraz Hussain, a 38-year-old artist of Garden Reach in South Kolkata, will present an aluminium map of India to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on which he has painstakingly inscribed the verses from the Quran.

"It is my humble tribute to the people of India to mark the 60 years of Independence," Shiraz Hussain told Deccan Herald here.

Shiraz had laboured hard for days on end to inscribe verses from the Quran on a 20-inch x 24-inch aluminium map and make five copies of them. While the other four dignitaries to whom he wishes to present copies of the map are former president A P J Abdul Kalam, Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, Congress chief Sonia Gandhi and Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, Hussain declined to reveal the name of another "important personality" who also figures in his list.

Shiraz had gone to New Delhi twice — April and July, to personally hand over his creation to the Prime Minister before the Independence Day but had no luck. "I received a call on August 9 last from the PMO and was asked to visit Dr Singh to present the map," Hussain said.

Domestic hitches
But he could not undertake the travel owing to some domestic hitches. "I hope to meet the Prime Minister soon and present him the map," Hussain claimed.

In 2006, Shiraz entered the Limca Book of Records for engraving the full text of the Quran on an aluminium sheet. He is keen to make another bid for an entry into the record books for being the first to engrave verses from the holy book on the map of India.

"Actually, Hazrat Imam Hussain, the grandson of Prophet Mohammed, wanted to come to India in the 60th Hijri as per the Islamic calendar, when the army of Yazeed stopped him in Iraq. After his martydom at the beginning of the 61st Hijri, his followers used to recite 'Sura-e-Kahaf', volume 15-16, from Quran," he said.

"Hazrat Imam Hussain began his journey from Medina in Saudi Arabia in the 60th Hijri and got martyrdom at the beginning of the 61st Hijri. Our country is going to complete the 60th year of independence this year on August 15, 2007 and will enter the 61st year," Shiraz said, explaining the significance of his effort.

(Hindus should realise that this is of grave concern and Muslims ploy to convert India into Islamic Country.If a Hindu had inscribed any of the Hindu scriptures on Indian flag, then,they would have labeled this communal and called this defacing of Indian flag.As a Muslim has inscribed Quran, it is called patriotism. - Editor)




  Reply
#53
<b>Opus Cartoon strip</b>

Now Washington Post towing new owner's view. No surprise. <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>Washington Post, Other Newspapers Won't Run 'Opus' Cartoon Mocking Radical Islam</b>
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294779,00.html
  Reply
#54
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shiraz had gone to New Delhi twice — April and July, to personally hand over his creation to the Prime Minister before the Independence Day but had no luck. "I received a call on August 9 last from the PMO and was asked to visit Dr Singh to present the map," Hussain said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

We know PMO is anti-Hindu, so no surprise.
  Reply
#55
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Aug 29 2007, 11:01 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Aug 29 2007, 11:01 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shiraz had gone to New Delhi twice — April and July, to personally hand over his creation to the Prime Minister before the Independence Day but had no luck. "I received a call on August 9 last from the PMO and was asked to visit Dr Singh to present the map," Hussain said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

We know PMO is anti-Hindu, so no surprise.
[right][snapback]72620[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think PMO is acting logically. Back in April and July, Moron Singh and UPA did not need this photo Op of the PM receiving koran versed indian flag (although it could just be better event planning, they knew they are going to lose support of muslims over N-Deal and just postponed photo op to when the heat is on), but now UPA and moron singh need every straw to show their muslim-ness. I think this will be instructive of how gullible the indian muslims really are. If they get placated with the flag gesture with respect to N-deal, UPA will be happy.

What is missing in india is a hindu lobby to make UPA and moron singh act responsibly.
  Reply
#56
The more I think about this the more I arrive at the same conclusion:

Why does the Indian Muslim identify with islam as something to be identified with first, before Indianness etc..?

My Answer:

Because he sees islam as having brought something positive to India. This pseudo-smugness has to be destroyed bit by bit by laying down the facts before the IM, and then hammering them into his head (this latter process can only be accomplished on a generational scale, a lie perpetuated over a millenium cannot be undone in a year. Look, for example, how many people -muslim and hindu- believe that the Tejo mayhalay was built by shahjahan).

Similarly, look how many South Korean immigrants in the US drill their kids on Western Culture: piano lessons etc. Look how they fall over each other to be seen as Church-going. All to fit in. South Koreans have a reputation, well-deserved in my opinion, of being extremely xenophobic. But as far as Xtian-Western things go, they want to fit in.

Would IM consider Saudi their home and India a Dar-ul-Harb if Islam was demonstrably shown (see below) to be far smellier than the septic tank of a Mexican restaurant?
What can show the real islam to IM?
1. Massive inter-islam killing
2. The real History, Achievements of India (the word Hindu is not to be used too much in the *initial* stages when telling them all Hindus achieved, IM -and even psec Hindus- have an allergy to "Hindu", and anyone with allergies can tell you, allergies are literally built into your blood..you can't get rid of them overnight..)
3. Terrorism-Islam becoming correlated with an r squared of .99999 ie terrorism comes from islam, and nowhere else

Will SKorean immigrants extol the west if and when the west starts going down the drain?
  Reply
#57
<!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Aug 30 2007, 02:30 AM-->QUOTE(Shambhu @ Aug 30 2007, 02:30 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Similarly, look how many <b>South Korean immigrants in the US</b> drill their kids on Western Culture: piano lessons etc. Look how they fall over each other to be seen as <b>Church-going</b>. All  to fit in. <b>South Koreans have a reputation</b>, well-deserved in my opinion, of being <b>extremely xenophobic</b>. But as far as Xtian-Western things go, they want to fit in.[right][snapback]72639[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->If S Koreans in the US are by and large christian, then that would be the only thing I can think of that explains any xenophobia.
I know a number of S Koreans, and they're all most particularly non-christian and as unxenophobic as you could wish for. Model human beings in every respect. They're grown that way by their unchristian parents/grandparents. <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
As one can expect by now, can chalk another detestable trait to christianism. Shouldn't tar S Koreans with what only christos are guilty of. The still-majority population can't help that some of their number have been bitten by the christo virus and have gone all zombie on everyone. Same as how we wouldn't want others to judge all Indians based on christoislamis of India. (Now that's a deeply scary thought.)

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->3. Terrorism-Islam becoming correlated with an r squared of .99999 ie terrorism comes from islam, and nowhere else<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Terrorism comes from christoislamism. (History of christianism reads like history of islam, but timescale set back about 300/400 yrs.) But that's practically what you said.
  Reply
#58
Sorry, I meant christo SK only..
  Reply
#59
<!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Aug 29 2007, 05:00 PM-->QUOTE(Shambhu @ Aug 29 2007, 05:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The more I think about this the more I arrive at the same conclusion:

Why does the Indian Muslim identify with islam as something to be identified with first, before Indianness etc..?

My Answer:

Because he sees islam as having brought something positive to India. This pseudo-smugness has to be destroyed bit by bit by laying down the facts before the IM, and then hammering them into his head (this latter process can only be accomplished on a generational scale, a lie perpetuated over a millenium cannot be undone in a year. Look, for example, how many people -muslim and hindu- believe that the Tejo mayhalay was built by shahjahan).

Similarly, look how many South Korean immigrants in the US drill their kids on Western Culture: piano lessons etc. Look how they fall over each other to be seen as Church-going. All  to fit in. South Koreans have a reputation, well-deserved in my opinion, of being extremely xenophobic. But as far as Xtian-Western things go, they want to fit in.

Would IM consider Saudi their home and India a Dar-ul-Harb if Islam was demonstrably shown (see below) to be far smellier than the septic tank of a Mexican restaurant? 
What can show the real islam to IM?
1. Massive inter-islam killing
2. The real History, Achievements of India (the word Hindu is not to be used too much in the *initial* stages when telling them all Hindus achieved, IM -and even psec Hindus- have an allergy to "Hindu", and anyone with allergies can tell you, allergies are literally built into your blood..you can't get rid of them overnight..)
3. Terrorism-Islam becoming correlated with an r squared of .99999 ie terrorism comes from islam, and nowhere else

Will SKorean immigrants extol the west if and when the west starts going down the drain?
[right][snapback]72639[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Shambhu,

It is a bit of over-simplification to blame all bad things on lies being perpetuated and smugness etc. I dont think IM have the self-realization to see islam as having brought good things to india and therefore is a valid way of life. Allah has told them that all the world's land and world's women belong to muslims and kafirs are just using their resources and muslims can use any means to take back what is rightfully theirs.

All terrorism is not islam. I believe terrorism comes from divine rights and sense of entitlement. There are three ideologies in the world today that give these rights and entitlements: Islam, Christianity and Communism. In the last 60 years, you can probably add western imperialism, which does stem from christianity, to this list. If you see all terrorist related instances will be associated with one of these 4 ideologies, because these ideologies are concerned only about results/ends and not the means. Can you lie/cheat/kill to achieve your goals? Sure, Islam says you can, Christianity says you are only a confessional away from purity, communism says "what? Those are only strategies" and western imperialism has been long using covert operations that include assasinations and other psy-ops.

So, where does this leave us? Before we can tell IM that they are wrong, it is important to get hindus on board. Achieve this should be our first priority.
  Reply
#60
<!--QuoteBegin-LSrini+Aug 30 2007, 08:25 PM-->QUOTE(LSrini @ Aug 30 2007, 08:25 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Aug 29 2007, 05:00 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Shambhu @ Aug 29 2007, 05:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The more I think about this the more I arrive at the same conclusion:

Why does the Indian Muslim identify with islam as something to be identified with first, before Indianness etc..?

My Answer:

Because he sees islam as having brought something positive to India. This pseudo-smugness has to be destroyed bit by bit by laying down the facts before the IM, and then hammering them into his head (this latter process can only be accomplished on a generational scale, a lie perpetuated over a millenium cannot be undone in a year. Look, for example, how many people -muslim and hindu- believe that the Tejo mayhalay was built by shahjahan).

Similarly, look how many South Korean immigrants in the US drill their kids on Western Culture: piano lessons etc. Look how they fall over each other to be seen as Church-going. All  to fit in. South Koreans have a reputation, well-deserved in my opinion, of being extremely xenophobic. But as far as Xtian-Western things go, they want to fit in.

Would IM consider Saudi their home and India a Dar-ul-Harb if Islam was demonstrably shown (see below) to be far smellier than the septic tank of a Mexican restaurant? 
What can show the real islam to IM?
1. Massive inter-islam killing
2. The real History, Achievements of India (the word Hindu is not to be used too much in the *initial* stages when telling them all Hindus achieved, IM -and even psec Hindus- have an allergy to "Hindu", and anyone with allergies can tell you, allergies are literally built into your blood..you can't get rid of them overnight..)
3. Terrorism-Islam becoming correlated with an r squared of .99999 ie terrorism comes from islam, and nowhere else

Will SKorean immigrants extol the west if and when the west starts going down the drain?
[right][snapback]72639[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Shambhu,

It is a bit of over-simplification to blame all bad things on lies being perpetuated and smugness etc. I dont think IM have the self-realization to see islam as having brought good things to india and therefore is a valid way of life. Allah has told them that all the world's land and world's women belong to muslims and kafirs are just using their resources and muslims can use any means to take back what is rightfully theirs.

All terrorism is not islam. I believe terrorism comes from divine rights and sense of entitlement. There are three ideologies in the world today that give these rights and entitlements: Islam, Christianity and Communism. In the last 60 years, you can probably add western imperialism, which does stem from christianity, to this list. If you see all terrorist related instances will be associated with one of these 4 ideologies, because these ideologies are concerned only about results/ends and not the means. Can you lie/cheat/kill to achieve your goals? Sure, Islam says you can, Christianity says you are only a confessional away from purity, communism says "what? Those are only strategies" and western imperialism has been long using covert operations that include assasinations and other psy-ops.

So, where does this leave us? Before we can tell IM that they are wrong, it is important to get hindus on board. Achieve this should be our first priority.
[right][snapback]72666[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

LSrini,

Getting Hindus on board should be our priority, yes, it is one of the 3 things I listed..

When I said that all terror comes from islam, I meant in modern times. Yes, the Western degradation of Hindu culture is a major cause of the ignorance of Hindus, but clear-cut overt instances of terror (like bombings, killings, temple desecrations etc) are almost entirely muslim in origin (christos may have some temple desecration bragging rights here, though)

Getting Hindus on board without having clear communications with IM (the fraction that still worships Aurangzeb etc) will be viewed as a "Hindu conspiracy" or something. If we do the *exact same thing* but with open talks with Muslims (at least open on our end, the other party may or may not want to talk; our invitation is open), then it will be more transparent, and more credible to Hindus, and also will give less fodder to the FOIL types, who, unfortunately, have to be factored in when formulating any plan.

Muslims believe the Koran largely because of the "success" of muslims elsewhere. (Oil wealth, "1000 yrs of Mughal Rule", "Muslim mathematics", the old glories of Islami from Spain to whatever..) The "divine" sanction for jihad is then clear to them: Allah is on our side. I am saying that this needs to be systematically pulled down...

As I see it, appeasement of Muslims has emboldened Christos and marxists; muslims being the more violent of the lot. Once other terrorist-wannabbees get the message that India is getting wise to the Islamic tricks, the rest will make some noises and slowly melt away..IMO
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)