text:
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
In the last Opium Wars ,same way Thugs Cutthroats Killers Renegade Mercenaries Corrupt Officials all were put to work by South African Companies showing under British Banner,until Jiji Khan Commissioner of Nanking wrote Queen Victoria a letter .It wasn't until The Khans revolted and brought in Queen Victoria and Chosen Princes to India in 1850s and the terror war ended!
Why dont we look into the inland and border fighting as Opium Wars .In modern age some excuse has to be given for fighting,so these are labelled Sectarian or Religious! The International community must come out of the hush and act on what white house labelled the fighting and terror.1 International Drug Trade 2 International Weapon Trade and 3 International Human Beings Trade, then they will definitely fall into one lap.....
It would seem that the sectarianism between Hindu & Muslim, Sunni & Shia, (never mind how Wahhabi & Salafi fit in) is as entrenched as that between Catholic & Protestant in Europe in the 16th & 17th C, or in Belfast in the 20th. Anyone who doubts this need only look at the exchanges below, particularly those between Bahrat1/pp & AllahKaBanda. Whatever the causes, that's how it is. The questions are, "How will the creeds involved resolve their differences?" & "Who will be bold enough to drop the first stone, instead of casting it?" It can, & must be done, but how?
Good point raised by you. Yes, how??
let all stake holders sit together and decide. This is what I am trying to say but some extremists here are bent upon supporting warring and cussing others only to spread more hate and disharmony among others
good lord, why does every story of Pakistan include an image of bomb blast, smoke and bloodied people filled with rage? It almost make me feel grateful for my home country.
Do no evil in this life, else be warned, you will be reborn in Pakistan.
When people don't believe history they cannot deal with it.
Such is Pakistan.
They do not realize that there is a strong relationship between their army's duplicity and theory terrorism.
In this, I have noticed that none of the expat Pakistani's correct these misconceptions.
Eventually the problem is theirs... If they are not honest with themselves, they can not deal with their problems.In effect they are actually condoning these evil acts. And when they condone evil, they actually give approval to their terrorists.
I have shown this to be in accordance with 'The broken windows theory'.
I also think that their blaming the Americans for all their trouble is also in keeping with ignoring their history.
If I am right, there is no salvation for this country.
With my last point, I compare this civilization with the European civilization, and even the Indian one.
In Europe they have prosecuted their acts of genociide... Both in Neuramburg, and in the Yoglaslavian fiasco as well.
India has prosecuted against the minister responsible for the death of several Muslims in Gujarat.
To date the Islamic countries continue to reject their own criminality. For this reason, they will continue to sink into a morass.
For this reasoning, I point to a similiar situation in Sudan. I will guarantee that they will reject any assertions of Genocide that is happening there at this very moment.
Amnesia is easy... Dealing with your problem is very very hard.
I am a Dwija and now an expat and thus have been repeatedly favored in the lucky draw of life. If I was to consider myself using Warren Buffet terminology then I would use the term - lucky sperm - especially when I consider my life in India since I was born in upper caste family and then had the good fortune to be educated at the tax payer's expense.
Thus I consider it my duty to be engaged in this discussion so that I can repay the debt I owe to the society.
ISI pumps in counterfeit currency into India thus increasing the supply of money leading to increasing upward pressure on the price of essential items. Thus they manage to hurt the poor the most.
If I cannot point this out, I would fail in my duty.
As I stated in my earlier post to an Indian, the Indian Hindus have an inherent hatred for Pakistan and Muslims. You have evidently failed in your duty to your motherland because Pakistan's foreign minister Rehman Malik is in India and being entertained by your high lords but none of them laid on him the accusations you and your like are dissipating on this site to satiate your grudge and bias against Pakistan and its citizens.
Why don't you catch Malik and tell him of your self-made grievances enabling you to cool down and to him to mend his ways?? Please leave the world in peace by stopping your blame game!!Nobody is so naive or foolish to believe Grimm's Fairy tales anymore!!
A quarrel that began in early Islam, at the end of the Islamic Prophet's time, never abated - 'whom do you favour as the Caliph, the direct descendant or a military commander who was really the usurper, a killer of the Prophet's direct line of descent?
Not merely in Pakistan, in Iraq, Syria, kuwait, Bahrain and in many other Islamic majority countries there is violence, more often AGAINST, the Shias. Do you know how many times the Shia Sacred Sites, such as Karbala, have been bombed, how many hundreds of Shia pilgrims killed?
If Sunni pressure comes down, Shias may remain peaceful, one is made to think.
The stricter your view of your religion, soon expect violence between the 'stricts' and the 'not-so-stricts' or simply 'different'. Every religion has gone through that stage, especially, Mid-East religions such as Christianity and Islam.
It is wise to be a little 'loose' or 'easy-going' on religious matters.
For a long time now, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists stopped asking any of their fellows as to whether they are 'true' Hindu, Jain or Buddhist - they know that direction to be dangerous for peace.
Thank you for an observation that I find particularly apposite and pertinent. Without any direct knowledge of the theological arguments, my empirical feeling is that persecution is meted out to whichever theology is in the minority (either numerically or in terms of the balance of power). Radical elements and zealots, although they maybe in a minority, always attract the most attention in the media, and may well gain power through intimidation
The real problem with Islam is that each person thinks tha they are the fastest gun in the West.
What I mean is that each Muslim wants those 72 virgins in heaven , with nubile oys serving them. Sex is the ultimate reward for piety.
So therefore, as the Koran says, all Kaffirs should be converted, and if they don't convert, kill them.
Therefore, any person wh does not observe Islam to the fullest, is a kaffir. They must be killed, so that the killer Muslim can attain his sexual goal.
It also means that if a person or a country has not succeeded , it is because Allah has not favored them, and that is because they have not been Islamic enough.
Therefore the reason for Pakistan's failure as a nation is because they have not observed Islam too well. It will. E a better country when the Islamic Taliban take over.
Hope they keep on thinking like this.
Apologies for my fine motor skills.
The other thing that one notices is that newspapers are always wrong, that google is always wrong, and that wikedia gets everything wrong.
Statics are never used, because anecdotal incidents are all the evidence that Islamic people need.
Therefore one can always deny facts, since such horror can never be true.
Such is the argument of the purest of religion.
I have actually had these Pakistani's claiming that the killing of 22% of their non Muslim population is not true. They refuse to find the true answers through neutral means, and they only believe in Pakistani history books.
A lot of them actually claim that Pakistan has won every war against the infidels.
Such is the Pure culture, with the Purest of religions.
And once they kill off all the shias, and the Ahmedias, they only have other Kaffir sunnis left. And who judges that they are not Muslims ?
Why, of course, the most pious are the only ones allowed to judge!
And who are the most pious?
Only the Taliban can decide that!
The understanding of the importance of tolerance and Pluracy escapes them.
At this point I would like to re,ind the most pious Pakistanis here, that the most successful Islamic emperor was 'Akbar' who was also very disillusioned with Islam. He accepted Pluracy and was the most tolerant one.
The least successfull emperor was 'Aurangzeb' who was also the most pious.
And in fact. It was because of his piety that India became subjugated to Britain.
It was his piety hat ncpst him so much money and that eventually led of a type of bankruptcy. India never recovered from the purity of this faith. Pity that the Hindus were not so adapt at reigning .
Of course things have changed altogether.
Bharat1, as your name suggests, is overflowing with the inherent Indian hatred and prejudices which are the patent hallmark of your people. It would be desirable if you kept the discussion withing limits of decency and without self-styled surmises and conjectures about the Muslims or Pakistani's.
Muslims are allowed by their faith to take as many as 4 wives at a time. This excludes the need for them to vie for 72 houris in the hereafter. Moreover, no where it is suggested in the Muslim faith that sex will also be a factor in the hereafer. I do not wish to discuss the Hindu concept of Awagon or Reincarnation which is a fraud set by the higher Brahmin caste to make the Untouchables believe that they were destined to born as they are only to make them serve them.
Pakistan is NOT Taliban nor Taliban is Pakistan. Talibans is a very small group of radicals who operate independently of state policy. This doesn't warrant your maligning the billions of Muslims as bad as this propaganda is not going to help bring up world peace. (ie yours is negative approach)
People akin to the Taliban are already found in some Muslim Sultanates....which have stringent laws for the safety of their monarchy under the banner of half baked Islamic laws. Why doesn't the free world talk against them and force their own type of democracy on others, fully knowing it is not beneficial there due to conditional variance??
A kafir is one who points a pistol at a Muslim. In that case or in case of war a Muslim or any other sensible person has the right to shoot back. Any objections?? Even the Buddhists who are presumed to be peaceful community are butchering their Muslim nationals. Why doesn't that move your conscience ??
Success is relative to hard work and diligence. A team may be better than another. It nowhere has to be this religion or that.....success comes to the team who played well. Muslims are not playing as they should, others are ,,hence the winners for the time being. Success and defeat are cyclic...ever seen two pugilists fighting??? One on the top needn;t be the winner nor the one below be the loser in the long run!!
You are talking to yerself, that doesn't reflect your healthy inherent condition.
Hope your motor skills were finer.......
Why don't you look at the stats given by the US on the number of innocent people killed by the Nato drone attacks? Shame that they are now stating that the killing of innocent children is okay! No greater insult to humanity than this!
Whatever my stance towards Pakitsan, my statements are resourced and rationale
And that is the way you should treat them.
Consider me as a friend of Pakistan, but also a Devil's advocate.
Then also consider the fact that I see things very clearly,... I am well resourced.
Firstly let us tackle the issue of the size of the problem.
The problem consists of a majority of the Population because star polls show us that they support the Taliban.The proof of this lies in the fact that no one goes out there marching against these horrid killings and bombings.
Secondly, no one demands that the most important issue of the killing of 15% of your Hindu population be researched by a Parliamentary commission.
Also included in the fact is that, recently 5 ISI officers have made en statements in court that L.E.T. Trained those Mumbai terrorists. And yet you tell us that Hafiz Saeed, the L.E.T chief is innocent. He must be as incometent as your army .
You guys seem to reat history with this genocide .... Probably because you hide history so that ordonary people never know about this army conducted Genocide.
You also become dishonest about your support of the terrorists, although the world seems to know about it.
And it is this support that has caused so much terrorist based chaos in Pakistan. Eventually the terrorists will always get out of controll, as they have now done.
Your Justice system stinks.
It has never prosecuted the genocidal tendencies of the army.
It has never brought to trial the people responsible for the two major genocides in your history... The Sikh/Hindu/Jain and the Bangladesh genocide.
It means that most of the perpetrators of the second genocide are now in power... Including Musharaff and
So why are you so concerned about an uncotrollable riot in Gujarat, where the reonsible people have been jailed, but have absolutely no care about your army's genocidal tendencies.??
Fourthly. Your holy book promises you that the reward for Jihadists in heaven is 72 virgins (and history shows us that your Prophet also promised you 28 boys!
Here-- Two points occur to me.
// 72 virgins and 28 boys means sex for males.
// So what is the reward for women???
Thirdly your country is hated by all. The other countries of Islam, as polls have shown us.
And lastly, with your Sharia law, I am taken as an animal, and a christian is worth half a Muslim. So is a woman.
In heinous cases, such as rape, women can never ever produce 4 male witnesses, so they are risking death with stoning, because they confessed adultery.
This is horrible ... Totally savage.
Again you have begun to play off side....wrong. Bragging about your socalled store of resources and rationale sinks like a stone when I tell you that I am living in Pakistan and what I state here is straight from the horses mouth. Which statement then would you or anyone for that sake take as true and authentic?? Your comments are aspersive and biased. You come up with the same cliche's which are regurgitated time and again at almost every anti Islamic or even at some Muslim forums by the so called liberal or secular Muslims. Nobody is going to believe your hackneyed and prejudicial
bent of mind.....as the lines you are thinking upon are equally or even more found in Indian Hindu's as well.
Once for all let me say that the Pakistani majority consists of
peace loving Sunni majority and it is NOT with the Talibans.
Talibans are concentrated in the border areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan ( wish you had learnt some geography in school!!) and they iniitally rose from Afghanistan mainly consist of a Single Ethnic race called the Pakhtuns or Pathans. After the Nato began droning the war ridden zone of their concentration they fled and spread all over Pakistan as refugees, millions of them. Noting their misery a few other ethnic races also joined them to help their cause, viz to fight against the invaders and occupiers and killers of innocent men, women and children and to drive them out of their land. This counterproductive effect gave rise to violence in one form or the another so much so that the affected also began to target anyone who sided with their enemy. More then 50000 Pakistani soldiers and civilians have died so far fighting against the Taliban,,,,what more can one do to prove its conviction to eradicate extremism?? It;s the imposition of so called war on terror that has brought Pakistan to its present poor condition. All the aid that came from outside was given to the dictators and the military ...nothing was spent on the civilians or for the civilian cause.
As I told you before a Muslim is allowed by his faith to take as much as r4 wives at a time. So this rules out the need for any sexual lurement in the hereafter. Young boys and houris may be to serve those in heaven ,,,not for sex as there is no mention of any sexual cohabition in the hereafter. So what you whine about is simply bullshit.
Why are you so concerned about the reward to woman in the hereafter?? I don't know how they will be rewarded but am sure God has His own plans to reward those He wants and they needn;t be Muslims, pious or scoundrels as He is the Lord of this Universe and All that is above and under it.
India is also hated by many. Does the liking or hate of anyone make him bad?? Your topmost leaders were assassinated does that mean they were hateful?? Ever thought you Hindu's were institutionally killing millions of female foetus before they came into the world?? Did it ever occur to how inhuman you caste system is and how you treat the Dalits, the Untouchables?? How your widows are forced to burn on the pyre or jump from the high castles?? Where was your conscience when you burnt Muslims alive and committed state organized arson to Muslim properties in Gujarat??
By virtue of your so called secular democracy you destroyed Muslim mosques such as The Babri Mosque by cruel state sponsored force and collusion?? Where were your tall claims of laws and norm of justice ridden?? Google for stats and you will find India nO.1 in child abuse and if you watched the serials against child abuse in India on you tv conducted by one of your super star that would be enough to open up the eyes of world conscience if not yours. There is so much averse to Islam and Christianity or Judaism that none of them will ever feel safer in Hindu India.
Genocide was not committed by the brass ....it were you who massacred millions of Muslims during the Partition in 1947. Army action in today's Bangla Desh military action was a result of insurgency and mutiny at the behest of India, moreso because the Bengali's were seduced by India to break off from Pakistan which had its civil administration paralysed due to mutiny at that time in that wing.
All these things you are babbling are past the beaten track, rhetorical, either false or exaggerated or baseless cliche's.
Keep to the topic and don't issue Hindu fatwa's for Muslims.
It appears you know all only visit this thread to stir the pot with your ridiculous parrot talk..
It is interesting that you deduced a hatred for Islam from my. Name. My comment is purely a theory that seems to fit very well with the facts.
In coming up with the theory, I read a book on Central Asia. The question that arose in my mind is that all of them were dictatorships. They all feared the rise of extremist Islam, in countries where Communism had given them wide based education and religion had been downgraded.
The only reason why all ,these dictators, all over the Islamic world are afraid of extremists has to be because they believe that there is always a gun faster then they are...meaning that there is always a Muslim who thinks that they are so pious that the rest are kaffirs.
In Pakistan, this comes down to the fact that the State is not implementing all the strictures of the Koran, including keeping women barefoot and in the kitchen (as has been shown with Malala recently)
This man Masood obviously thinks that his brand of Islam is the only acceptable religion. And so he is going to impose it on you.
The ot.her point I would
Ike to make is that Pakistan's history and the doctoring of it's history books tells us that the founding principle of Pakistan is a homogenous community, even with violent conversion and genocide .
Unfortunately, every ruler comes up with the same problem. ...How do they deal with the Masoods of Islam.
At the moment, less then 30% of the Pakistani population beleives that the Shia and the Ahemdias are Muslims, and so they are kaffirs. ... They need to be converted or killed
The Pakistani majority consists a peaceful silent majority.
I do agree with you. But what you have not told me is also very true.. They all sympathize wit h anything that is Islamic.
Therefore they are actually synthetic to the Taliban, and they will not act against them.
To reach a civilized standard, one has to face one,s good deeds and one,s bad deeds. You come out to be a very low standard when it comes to prosecuting against your evil people.
Let is take a few examples.
A.. 5 ISI officers recently confessed to your court that the L.E.T was rein single for training the Mumbai terrorists. And yet they have not prosecuted Hafiz Saeed. Where exactly is this disconnect?
B.. You still give refuge to Ibrahim Dowd. That is incredibly stupid. Govern,ends should never give refuge to known criminals
Allah'a friends
Ou ask me as to who should be believed?
Unfortunately for you it has to be me.
Because your country is reonsible fo your history books. I read from all over the world.
Your country was hiding Bin Laden.
Your army lost every single war .... But from what your compatriots tell me, most of you do not realise that.
Your army was for the invasion of Kashmir. Most of you deny that.
Your people continue to deny the genocide of 15% of your Hindu population.
And what is worse .. Your army owns a very large number of businesses. When did they you that they owned most of the large construction companies Pakistan.
If they have not bothered o tell you -- They have taken away all your credibility.
You raise a lot of points. I try not to make one comment too long.
Let us talk about the Hindu Muslim problem in your country.
During separation, there was a lot of anger. There was a lot of killing on both sides. This was uncotrollable.
We will not discusss that, because we can not blame anyone for that anger.Suffice it to say that It made Jinnah cry... He had never realised hat could happen.
After the separation, and after 1950, they started targeting the Hindu population of Pakistan. Remember that at that stage, a lot of cities had Hindu majorities.
At that stage over 15% of your population was Sikh/Jain/Hindu. Every newspaper outside Pakistan will tell you that they killed/forced out thisopulation. Pakistan has a problem with openess
Had you read only Hindustan Times of India you would have been a different brain. But you talk out of the wind....side issues which have no relevance to the topic in hand.
All you come up with is false or half baked information from classified media and television sources dinned into your conscious and sub subconscious mind. I live in Pakistan and you have No reason to challenge my observations and findings in so far as the topic is concerned. Let the so called 'war on terror ' end so that Pakistan can mind its affairs more efficiently though I can't say they are ideal at the moment.
Peace through negotiations is one of the norms of democracy, not war or killing of innocent people to catch a criminal.
Had you read only Hindustan Times of India you would have been a different brain. But you talk out of the wind....side issues which have no relevance to the topic in hand.
All you come up with is false or half baked information from classified media and television sources dinned into your conscious and sub subconscious mind. I live in Pakistan and you have No reason to challenge my observations and findings in so far as the topic is concerned. Let the so called 'war on terror ' end so that Pakistan can mind its affairs more efficiently though I can't say they are ideal at the moment.
Peace through negotiations is one of the norms of democracy, not war or killing of innocent people to catch a criminal.
Had you read only Hindustan Times of India you would have been a different brain. But you talk out of the wind....side issues which have no relevance to the topic in hand.
All you come up with is false or half baked information from classified media and television sources dinned into your conscious and sub subconscious mind. I live in Pakistan and you have No reason to challenge my observations and findings in so far as the topic is concerned. Let the so called 'war on terror ' end so that Pakistan can mind its affairs more efficiently though I can't say they are ideal at the moment.
Peace through negotiations is one of the norms of democracy, not war or killing of innocent people to catch a criminal.
I really don't understand the reason behind your bias.
Who is Dawood Ibrahim?? No one knows him in Pakistan. Musharraf also replied to the Americans that he never heard of him!! But I know he is an Indian hiding somewhere in Dubai. Why don;t you claim him from the Sheikhs?? There are reported to be many Indian terrorists hiding in the Middle East as well as in London. Why don't you go after them rather than thrust all your ill founded
suppositions and accusations on Pakistan and Muslims?
Like everybody may hold Mosad, the CIA , RAw or the ex gestapo responsible for all ills in the world you may accuse ISI as well.
All these agencies fall in the same class!! Go and ask them rathr than rely on baloney and second hand information. Crazy!!
In Islam all Muslims belong to a common universal brotherhood. This quality is not seen in any other faith, hence having good feelings for the good works of brethren is natural. As regards the Taliban only a handful of radical Muslims mainly the clerics
like them. General public is averse to their doctrine or policies. Talibans is another word for the tribal Pushtuns or Pathans? Ever heard of them?? 90 per cent Pakistan is NOT Pathan!!thus no question of sympathizing with the message or actions of the Talibs. Masses do not even know them in greater part of Pakistan!! Are you still wondering?? Okay, then do visit Pakistan and be my guest. I will take you around and I swear by my foot I have never seen a Taliban in my town though some radical element is there who may be siding with the Talibs.
Don;t see the trees for the forest.
I tell ya if you don't stop the killing of innocent people you will be adding to your enemies. No one wants anyone to kill his entire family and if that does happen you know how revengeful the Pathans are. Read good history books to clear your bias and realize the truth.
Again you are writing imaginary stories, half baked and mostly incorrect and exaggerated. The Quran guarantees full rights to women withing the limits prescribed. So does the Law, isn't it??
Who is Masood?? You seem to know that cleric better than me!! Ok, why don't you catch him and send him to hell?/ You know he and his brothers were raised and tutored in the US...yet if they are what they are it reflects the failure of the US or western culture to impress or influence others in a good way. Blame that culture which produced men like Masood and his brothers and Dawood the Indian for yet another.
Pakistan has been under military rule for more than half of its life. The civil democratic rule for the rest of its life has brought only corruption just as it has in India....then dictators were always supported strongly by the US and the West. For example who supported Zia ul Haq during his reign??
Who supported the Mujahideen warriors against the Russians?? The answer is US and the West! Listen to Hillary's speeches , they are on record and when differencees betwn the US and the Mujahideens arose the same warriors were condemned as Taliban and terrorists. If they are so it is due to their own fault ..the fault of the US policies. No one hates Americans or the Europeans......they are only made to suffer the brunt if any due to their country's policies and the failed 11 year abstract war on terror firstly passing over as against Al Qauida and Laden and now switched over to the Talibans ...I wonder who will be next??
What about the crimes and brutalities committed by 6 million Indian armed forces on innocent Kashmiris??? Indians don't even think them as humans, what a pity!! You better take care of your own problems (problems in India) and if you continue with poor rhetoric (playing offside) it would be deemed nothing more than trolling.
Again you are writing imaginary stories, half baked and mostly incorrect and exaggerated. The Quran guarantees full rights to women withing the limits prescribed. So does the Law, isn't it??
Who is Masood?? You seem to know that cleric better than me!! Ok, why don't you catch him and send him to hell?/ You know he and his brothers were raised and tutored in the US...yet if they are what they are it reflects the failure of the US or western culture to impress or influence others in a good way. Blame that culture which produced men like Masood and his brothers and Dawood the Indian for yet another.
Pakistan has been under military rule for more than half of its life. The civil democratic rule for the rest of its life has brought only corruption just as it has in India....then dictators were always supported strongly by the US and the West. For example who supported Zia ul Haq during his reign??
Who supported the Mujahideen warriors against the Russians?? The answer is US and the West! Listen to Hillary's speeches , they are on record and when differencees betwn the US and the Mujahideens arose the same warriors were condemned as Taliban and terrorists. If they are so it is due to their own fault ..the fault of the US policies. No one hates Americans or the Europeans......they are only made to suffer the brunt if any due to their country's policies and the failed 11 year abstract war on terror firstly passing over as against Al Qauida and Laden and now switched over to the Talibans ...I wonder who will be next??
What about the crimes and brutalities committed by 6 million Indian armed forces on innocent Kashmiris??? Indians don't even think them as humans, what a pity!! You better take care of your own problems (problems in India) and if you continue with poor rhetoric (playing offside) it would be deemed nothing more than trolling.
You constantly bring in issues which have no relevance.
Let me start with your beliefs.
(1) assume that this article sis true. Why are you getting more and more trouble as the population side mor with this extremists?
(2) as for your beliefs on the 15% of your Hindu population.... I care not as to weather you believe me or not, the rest of the world does. Recently there was an article in a very respected newspaper 'The Guardian' and ' wikepedia' about this.
Honestly ... You can reject this heinous crime, but it happened, and to reject it, you refuse to deal with it, and the eventual consequences of it .... Which is terrorism inside Pakistan.
In effect this type of rejection fits well with 'The Broken Windows theory' which says that if you condone criminality of that type, you will have given free rein to criminals.
As to the Bangladeshi genocide, I really don't care if you do nt believe me.
The concern should be yours, not mine. India prosecutes bad people, Pakistan sponsors them. The problems is that they come from a problem of Atticus. With an attitude where you reject real incidents
You have no right to talk about my beliefs. Even in a country like Pakistan which you hate so much NO one can dare ask me my Beliefs. Talk about yours ....vehemently biased, hate provoking and blown up to beat the peace mission.
Did you read the Indian newspapers?? See what your Indian general are upto?/ How your so called democracy is disintegrating into a disaster.
I already told you terrorism is where the war on terror is going on and where the Nato and Pakistani army are in action.
Law and order situation is not good in some cities of Pakistan such as Karachi but for this as well the war on terror is to be blamed along with bad governance.
Pakistan sponsors the criminals as much as UK or the Sultanates do. All Indian thugs and some Pakistani rogues are given asylum by these countries and they control so much of everything sitting back there like a mafia.
Except blame game you have No point to make ...you are just beating about the bush , not mentioning how India is faring nowadays in corruption and heading towards an ethnic, Hindu sectarina and military revolt paving way for a break up soon...
If his name shows his biases, what do you think of yours?
And you really think having 4 wives is a good thing? Wake up and listen to yourself. We haven't even begun to talk about the plethora of nonsense one finds in your religion of peace.
hardly any Muslim can afford to have 4 wives at a time...eventhough it is allowed by his faith. What's wrong with enjoying human rights you are so proud of?? One wife or 4 wives under marriage ---what's wrong with that?? The Mormons keep more than 4 wives!! Why do you want to stifle the 'human right' through man made laws??
Women would certainly not like this but they must also realize that only a man can maintain 4 wives under wedlock at one time, a woman cannot. If a woman thinks she can then she must be living in the days of Gilgamesh!! Hindu men too keep scores of apsara's and baandi's....without wedlock and out of the chics they eye in their lower castes. That is sheer insult to humanity and women!
Isn't It better to have 4 legal wives than indulge in illicit sex with stranger women out of wedlock!!
Bharat... Now this man Allahkabanda whateva would say, "of course your statments are wrong, unwarranted.. The testimony of that ISI officer is wrong since he has accepted a responsibility of intruding Indian Sovereignty through Mumbai terror attack.. Of course you are wrong, as it was not an attack it was their version of Jihad..
This man is profusely talking about peace, humanity for the children killed in drone attack conducted by US military forces.. Had he ever seen images of terror attacks where those animals were walking with guns blowing bullets everywhere, it is now when they get kicked at their asses they feel what pain is... Mr AllahKaBanda You reap what you sow and this is what you choose to have... Be thankful to almighty as India has chose not to invade to clean dirt you have spread around... Shukra manao mian...!!!
Bharat... Now this man Allahkabanda whateva would say, "of course your statments are wrong, unwarranted.. The testimony of that ISI officer is wrong since he has accepted a responsibility of intruding Indian Sovereignty through Mumbai terror attack.. Of course you are wrong, as it was not an attack it was their version of Jihad..
This man is profusely talking about peace, humanity for the children killed in drone attack conducted by US military forces.. Had he ever seen images of terror attacks where those animals were walking with guns blowing bullets everywhere, it is now when they get kicked at their asses they feel what pain is... Mr AllahKaBanda You reap what you sow and this is what you choose to have... Be thankful to almighty as India has chose not to invade to clean dirt you have spread around... Shukra manao mian...!!!
There killing shia, and they have a border with iran. This wont end well....
You cannot change neighbors.....on country wide level. Iran is Shia, Pakistan is Sunni.....Shia's being in minority want to spread out at the behest of Iran, hence the trouble.
This is how ''Evil begets evil'....
The US Military Approves Bombing Children
Hope you continue to find excuses for Islam. It will keep ou where you are
I hope you will do away with your inherent enmity towards Muslims and talk sense.
This man Allahkabanda is so touched with humanity for children bombed by drone attacks from US military but he is totally away from rest of the world... I hope even though being in all senses he never heard about the incidents of several terror attacks conducted from pakistani territory... Never mind, lets educate him... since you have sent a link, proceed with this link and I would love to hear from you after watching an animals called Terrorists walking along with guns spraying bullets all over and killing innocents..
We do feel very bad for those innocent children who died in drone attack which is why India chose not to invade you even this time.. Pray Almighty and be thankful to him for this grace but this massacre is a result of what you sowed...
This man Allahkabanda is so touched with humanity for children bombed by drone attacks from US military but he is totally away from rest of the world... I hope even though being in all senses he never heard about the incidents of several terror attacks conducted from pakistani territory... Never mind, lets educate him... since you have sent a link, proceed with this link and I would love to hear from you after watching an animals called Terrorists walking along with guns spraying bullets all over and killing innocents..
We do feel very bad for those innocent children who died in drone attack which is why India chose not to invade you even this time.. Pray Almighty and be thankful to him for this grace but this massacre is a result of what you sowed...
There you go.. Have this link....
the fact is that the sectarian killings in Pakistan are due to mutual hatred dissipated by both the factions. These killings are more of a political agenda than anything else.
As far as Hindus and Christian minorities are considered my observation is that they are much better off, in many cases, than the Muslims themselves. However, these minorities which usually do not indulge in political or religious activities to much extent are doing fine in Pakistan. While the political activists of any faction fight against each other for their vested goals innocents too get under the feet of these 'murderous elephants'.
These activities of violence can be greatly controlled but due tolack of rule of law and dearth of justice. Also, minorities must refrain from oppressing the rights of the majority---which phenomena is also apparent in Pakistani culture and society. Each must be given his due share...ie a policy of 'masavaat' must be observed by one and all.
'As far as Hindus and Christian minorities are considered my observation is that they are much better off, in many cases, than the Muslims themselves'.
You are quite right, in most societies where there Muslim /others mix the Muslims are the losers in social and economic prosperity and I believe that this a direct function of that faith. The problem is that the Muslims see their poor performance as the result of discrimination and never that their striving for success is inhibited by suborning all responsibility to some divine being.
I disagree. If the economic and social prosperity was linked to their faith, Islam, Muslims won't have marveled in history even for a day. But history is witness that they enjoyed rich economic and social well being during the Golden Age Of Muslims at which time the whole of Europe was sunk in Darkness.
The apparent reason about Muslims downfall is thus something else , some other factor and in my personal view it relates more to their deviation from the right path suggested by their faith; lack of hard work and discipline, unity and justice.
You are right but I think for the wrong reasons. Firstly history though interesting is not a determinant of the future but objective analysis can offer interesting explanations. Having lived and worked for some 18 years in Muslim countries and more recently in Scandinavia and northern Europe I am firmly of the opinion that the Northern European Protestant Ethic is the most successful model for any society. Certainly the dark ages of Europe and the appalling doctrines of the Catholic church and the struggle of the enlightenment by such strongly principled people such as John Barneveld and William the Silent in the Netherlands separated church and state and gave freedom of belief to all. The subsequent 400 years have only enhanced that division and yet that ethos is largely the bedrock of those individuals apart from any divine considerations. The requirement of Muslins to wish to live under Shariah law being an example but that suborns the individual decision to some other being. I do not steal because I know it is wrong and not because of the impending risk of losing a hand. As divine retribution does not occur so the Muslims actually have no sanctions nor responsibilities and the result is sadly conspicuous. For that reason I consider that the Islamic faith is a failure.
Absolutely, no Muslim should chose to live under any theocratic law - they should separate religion from the functioning of the state, like Christianity has done. Having said that, your comments about the failure of Islam are a bit premature in historical terms. Most of these countries have emerged from the "dark ages" of several centuries of colonial rule - much of that period was a unique form of sustained ethnic cleansing done by several Christian countries, in the name of religion. The after-effects of this psychological trauma has been profound. It will take them a while to create a balanced political order - a post-colonial world order is emerging quite rapidly. Witness the emergence of China (and Asia) as the economic growth engine of the world. In Asia, Israel is the last colonial territory left. As discussed in an earlier exchange, all 3 Abrahamic religions are deeply flawed - the author of these holy books either never existed or has "fled the scene". There is no exception - all 3 of them have committed heinous hate crimes in the name of religion.
Economic and social well being are highly related to religion, in the case of Islam. The evidence is very easy. Every Islamic community not into oil dos very badly economically. Socially, almost every Islamic community is prone to dictatorship. Even Egypt seems to hae sunk into a dictatorship.
If you look at every Islamic community in Europe is doing very badly, in economic terms, even though they have the same opportunities as say, the Hindu community, or the Jewish community.
In fact, most European countries count on Islamic communities as bad luck.
Germany talks about the heav dependency of Muslims on welfare, and here are heavy hints of sexual crimes. (not much is written about, because of political correctness)
In Denmark, they are vey concerned. Figures are more easier to get hold of. 5% of their population is Muslim, that lot is accountable for 40% of their sexual crime, and 35% of their petty crimes, as well as about 35% of welfare takings. They have similiar problems in almost all the European countries.
On op of that, this newspaper did a study of education f the ethnic classes of the UK. They found that the Pakistanis were the worst performers, worse then the west Indians, for education and eventually for income. The Hindus did he best, even better then the locals.
Every finger points to religion being the cause of almost all your problems. Reasoning and logic, as well facing the facts, o matter how terrible they seem, will point p Islam being the cause
If I were you, I would stop looking at the past. The reason why Islam was the centre forroerity is because it covered very large areas with reasonable peacefulness, and therefore progressed to more trade and prosperity.
The Roman Empire was even prosperous then Islam became in The later years. Therefore thatroerity was related to each and lawfulness ... Not to religion.
Don't think that you can get away with the wishy washy 'Other Reasons' as good argument.
I don't doubt that the colonial age had it's dark side, and many colonists were arrogant and cruel, but I need to protest your view that "much of that period was a unique form of sustained ethnic cleansing several Christian coutnries." In fact I cannot think of a Muslim country that was colonised and "ethnically cleansed". On independence, India was partitioned into India, West and East Pakistan precisely to try and stop the assorted ethnicities\religions (Muslim/Hindu primarily) from cleansing each other. I can't see the relevance of China and Asia either: China, Japan and Thailand weren't colonized, Singapore, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Burma, Laos, Indonesia, Australia, NZ, and the Phillipines were,by westerners, and Korea by the Japanese. Indonesia is predominantly Muslim, but the ethnic cleansing there was of Christians, by Muslims after independence. In fact the only ethnic cleansing of Muslims I know of (apart from Red on Red), is in Kosovo/Serbia in the late 1990s, and it was a UN force led by the UK and US that fought to prevent Christians massacring Muslims.
Please explain how Islam has suffered "profound psychological trauma" from "centuries of colonialism"?
Now you have begun to sway .....
There is a plethora of illth existing in Indian democracy which I would rather leave for you to research and evaluate. I agree that the Indians are pulling out the richest benefits from the free world by dancing to their tune. Keep dancing in abandon as you may but talking ill of others is bad. Listen to some of Hillary Clinton's speeches eulogizing the Mujahideens now you call terrorists and see how apologetic she is on behalf of the Americans. Bad policies bring bad result and this is exactly what is happening with the US and its dear allies.
Are you sure the Muslims in Europe and America are living there in violation of their laws?? If so, throw them out rather than accuse them of all rubbish. The fact is that best of Muslim professionals are serving the International community in the Free world and they do not
lag behind the Indian Hindus in any way. Accusing someone is not as good as speaking the truth.
The international community must reconsider its Islamophobic outlook as it is counterproductive and doesn't serve the ends of International or inter communal harmony and peace. It is foolish to expect miracles from any economically weak country, be it a Muslim one or Bhutan or Kashmir.
Take you eye off their resources, stop being policeman of the world and all would settle down for good.
What a couple of Muslims are doing or presumed to do is not commanded to them by Islam. The basic problem rests on politics,,,,,,not religion.
Pakistan or Afghanistan were not parties to 9/11 but they have been dragged into it. If some renegades hide in their loosely governed territories it is not their fault. But to attack and kill innocent is totally unfair and uncalled for. It is this counterproductive phenomena which is adding fuel to the fire and tends to turn even the common Muslim to sympathize with the oppressors and occupiers as they are generally known.
I think we have to look at history in chunks of centuries - and not in terms of years and decades. My contention is that all 3 Abrahamic religions are deeply flawed. Judaism is a bit different from Christianity and Islam. In Christian and Muslim nations, national identity has normally been more important than religious identity. In Judaism, religious identity was much more important than national identity - i.e., "the chosen people" syndrome. Judaism has very violent roots - just read the OT and the Torah. However, during the past several centuries, the Jews were not an expansionist ideology - they were content to live as minorities in Christian and Muslim countries. Their expansionism began a century ago with the advent of their Zionist ideology. On the other hand, Christianity and Islam chose a path of evangelicalism and geographic expansion. Islamic expansion was much more peaceful and enlightened - Islam's "dark ages" are from the 17th century onwards. History is counter-intuitive - from the 17th century onwards, Christianity started becoming more enlightened and started shedding "the baggage" of religion. Colonialism and ethnic cleansing took place over several centuries and it changed the psychological map of the world. In particular, the legacy of horrendous violence will take several more decades to erase - many countries/nations took part in this "sport":
- Germany (mass murder of the Jews).
- France, Belgium, Netherlands and England (colonialism).
- Spain and Portugal (mass eviction of the Jews).
- Italy (ethnic cleansing of the Jews).
- Spain (ethnic cleansing and genocide in South America).
- England (ethnic cleansing and genocide in North America).
- Several countries (slave trade and racial abuse in Africa).
- Etc., etc.
In so far as Islam is concerned, you have a point (partially) - Muslim countries survived ethnic cleansing because the "tools" of genocide which were so effectively used in South and North America were not possible in Asia. The Asian countries were strong enough to defend themselves. But the psychological damage in terms of an inferiority complex lingers - it will take a few more decades to gain sociological and political maturity. However, Asian (and Islamic) cultures were able to handle the economic and military onslaught of the West very well for several centuries. Even recently in the 20th century, poverty-stricken Asian countries were able to defeat super-powers. My personal favorite is Vietnam's General Giap - the only military commander in world history who defeated 2 super-powers (the French and the USA). Less spectacular were the failed interventions in Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan - nonetheless, they were also military defeats for the USA.
Having grown up with colonial guilt I have visited many of the ex-colonies over the years and I do not feel so bad. Indeed the Commonwealth has a beneficial and benign influence and when countries, not even previously colonies like Mozambique join it cannot be other than an endorsement. The Islamic faith is a perpetual victim, it is probably one of their few unifying ideas, blame everyone else but themselves for their failure. Every non Muslim minority in a Muslim country is under threat even within the Islamic faith it is a problem, you do not want to be a Shia in Malaysia or Pakistan. I am afraid that "profound psychological trauma" is ongoing and is induced from the Koran but keep blaming others, it keep them miserably happy.
I believe that you need to read up on history - rather than just quote your travel experiences. You also need to study a bit of economic history. I think you mentioned that you are originally from the UK - therefore, here are a few relevant numbers. Ming dynasty China was at peak 31% of global GDP. In 1945, China was 3% of global GDP. In a post-colonial world, China is now expected to overtake the USA in GDP terms in about 8-9 years from now - all this in a few decades. From a "European perspective", you will recall that last year when the Euro crises was at a peak, several EU heads of state visited China requesting them to invest in Euro-bonds to help in the bailout of the PIGS economies. Likewise, in 1650, the Indian sub-continent (under Islamic rule) was 28% of global GDP. In 1947 (when the British left), it was 2% of global GDP. Now, in a post-colonial world, India is the biggest investor in the UK!!! In the meantime, the UK (in 18880) was the worlds largest economy. In 2014, the UK will not even be in the top 10. Look at the decline in merely 2 centuries!!! Portugal was a mini super-power in its own right in the 17th century. The largest investor in Portugal in 2011 was Angola, an ex-colony. So Islam is not the real issue. Greece was an important European country a few centuries ago. Now the bond rating of Greece is worse than most African countries. In the meantime, the bond ratings of Turkey, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia, the Gulf countries, Kazakhstan, etc. (all Muslim countries) are better than several European countries. All post-colonial countries (including Muslim, Buddhist, atheist countries) have suffered from post-colonial trauma. The "path to recovery" is very choppy indeed - but, the upward trajectory is rock solid, particularly all across Asia (regardless of religion). Asia is the biggest employer of UK nationals - 1.8 million at last count - from air hostesses in Dubai to bankers in Singapore, to pastry chefs in Shanghai, Asia is a big support to the UK economy. The Commonwealth is a club - but, not of much use to either the UK or the former colonies. However, it could become much more useful if there was some co-ordination on issues - e.g., climate change, voting in the UN, key foreign policy issues, etc. Another advantage of reading history is that you might get rid of your racial prejudices, and develop a more open mind.
All interesting and probably true. There have been many economic changes throughout the world over time, many induced by foolish or reckless behaviour, having just read about the turmoil over the Tulip-mania in Holland being a small but disastrous event. Again, whereas history is interesting it is not a precursor of the future. You mention various countries but their prosperity is almost entirely due to extractive industries, a temporary advantage in the scheme of things. The future of a country is, I repeat the sum total of the populations education, ability and desire to work and defined by an ethos of correct social responsibility. Your implication of my racial prejudice is misplaced, Islam is not a race it is but one faith amongst many. My concern is that its influence is actually malign, aggressively intolerant and saps the life spark from people who are in turn denied a future. Lee Kwan Yew in Singapore said that the Malays (Muslim) in Singapore had not been a success; I do not think that is a prejudice but an accurate observation. It is not the DNA, it is the faith and an objective study of the Islamic Diaspora would not ascribe their sum total failure to colonial oppression but something else. Your admiration for General Giap is an anti western prejudice but I look to the future and I would like all counties to be like Norway and the disproportionate failure of Muslim communities within Europe is a serious matter. 20% of the prisoners in the UK are Muslim compared with 4% in the national population? Why, what can we do? Do not deny the facts but offer objective solutions.
I'm sorry, but the string of events you list as facts are not at all related, and do not support your irrational thesis, that all the ills in the world are due to the post-traumatic stress caused by centuries of colonial ethnic cleansing and genocide ("CCECGPTS"). Yes, the three Abrahamic religions are flawed and violent, and, please, we're grownups here, and understand that they are different. Ethnic cleansing and genocide are highly emotive words. They imply a specific intent on the part of the slaughterer to slaughter people based on ethnicity. Germany and the Jews, qualifies as genocide, but what's its relevance to CCECGPTS? Bosnia/Kosovo was attempted ethnic cleansing. Rwanda was genocide, but they don't seem to be anything to do with CCECGPTS either. Rwanda was a German (1884 -1916) then Belgian (1916-1962) colony. So that's 78 years, hardly centuries. Similarly with the Congo: Congo Free State (1885-1908), Belgian Congo (1908-1960). So that's 75 years. The word genocide was invented in 1943, and the phrase "ethnic cleansing" only gained acceptance and common use in the 1990s. In North America, the British first established a settlement in 1607, and the Declaration of Independence was 1776 (again,169 years, hardly centuries). I haven't noticed the USA suffering any signs of CCECGPTS. Of course, many Native Americans were slaughtered, but not under colonial rule. To give you a clue, the Colt 45 didn't come onto the market until 1873. Modern Pakistan was colonised by muslims from the 13 Century, who spared India from the mongols, but were overrun by the mughals. The mughals who were also muslims, but with a very laissez faire attitude. 1765 to 1820 saw the (British) East India Company establish economic control, leading to the appointment of Lord Dalhouise as Governor General in 1848. So British Indian Colonialism ran from 1848 to 1947, 99 years, or at most 127 years, as opposed to 500 odd years of muslim colonialism. On that note, I notice you haven't cited any of the colonies of Osman 1 (1271) through Mehmet 6 (1922), the Ottoman Empire, the collapse of which became a major cause of WWI. Up to 651 years of CCECGPTS !
British colonialism was, like Dutch, primarily a commercial activity. They only killed people when they obstructed what they saw as their right to exploit the natural resources, or when they felt threatened by the locals. They had no reason to commit mass murder, because the labour was usually needed to extract the gold, silver, diamonds, nutmeg, tea, sugar, whatever. Hence the Indian population in Natal. Any colonial killing was rarely, if ever, done solely in the name of religion. That went out with the Crusades, which was between muslim & christian, with the jews caught in the middle. In the case of slavery this was certainly the case: There was no genocide or ethnic cleansing there, those poor people were the commodity, and as such very valuable.
The allegations you make against Spain and Portugal are not relevant to the article, nor indeed to the question I asked. In fact, nothing you have pointed out, or opined, has come anywhere close to answer this question:
Please explain how Islam has suffered "profound psychological trauma" from "centuries of colonialism"?
Part 1: to be continued........
Part 2, ctd from Pt1, @L6QjhvJGVki
I too have the greatest respect for Vo Nguyen Giap. Manhandling artillery to the heights surrounding Dien Bien Phu was the decisive moment in the defeat of the French in 1954, but I think the American War was more complex. The 1968 Tet Offensive broke the will of the American people and elected leaders, but was a decisive American victory, militarily.
I'd say that the Korean war was fought to a draw. Korea was divided on the 38th parallel in 1945 after WW2 ended 35 years of colonial rule by Japan. Having crossed the 38th in June, the KPA drove the UN (NOT US btw) forces into the Pusan Peninsula in August 1950 . The UN forces crossed the 38th, heading North in September, and by November were threatening the Chinese border. The Chinese committed combat divisions in escalation from September to December. Stalin committed two air force divisions and logistics support. Korea was divided by the Armistice in 1954, by a DMZ that runs from slightly South of the 38th in the West, to considerably North of the 38th in the East
So I don't see how this fits your picture of a defeat of the US superpower by a plucky little poverty stricken Asian country. North Korea was overrun within 6 months of the start of the war, and that's how it would have ended without the direct commitment of combat forces by two of the three superpowers at the time. Territory was lost by North Korea and 70m people condemned to incarceration, poverty and starvation. Remember, locals on both sides were subject to CCECGPTS after their 35 years under Japanese rule. Oh no, sorry, they're not, because 35 years isn't centuries, and the Japanese are peaceful, nurturing, asian colonists, who weren't at all disposed to genocide and barbarity as the europeans are.
Iraq and Afghanistan are, like Vietnam, examples of failure of political will, not military defeat.
I had hoped you would come up with a cogent argument to support you emotive generalization, but I am afraid you've disappointed me. Lists of generalisations, without any hard facts, or logic to tie them together will not cut it I'm afraid. I really was interested in what might have been a different paradigm to mine.
The core of your argument seems to be that all ethnic cleansing and colonisation can be attributed to European nations. Some nationals survive, but are psychologically damaged. Somehow, Muslims and Asians are not only "strong enough to defend themselves", but are able to colonise other nations without causing CCECGPTS.
I notice you advise others to "Read up on history", "open your mind" and to "get rid of your racial prejudices".
I agree, but would add that travelling can broaden your mind and challenge your preconceptions of the world. One is rarely of any use without the other.
"You mention various countries but their prosperity is almost entirely due to extractive industries, a temporary advantage in the scheme of things" - your comment. In the economic history of the last 3-4 centuries (perhaps longer), most prosperity was linked to the control over natural resources - e.g., oil, metals, etc. Imperialism was to a greater extent designed to control these resources. Now these resources belong to individual countries. Witness the decline that this has caused to the economic fortunes of the major colonial powers. For example, Britain has slipped from No. 1 to No. 11. France - likewise. The other major strength of the "old world" was manufacturing. The structure of colonialism was designed to prevent Asian (and African) countries from setting up their own industries. In a post-colonial world, manufacturing is also moving rapidly away from the "old world" to Asia. The only winners are countries like Germany and Switzerland - with a very strong background in precision engineering - very difficult to replicate. The "financial system" is still headquartered in London (and to a lesser degree, in Frankfurt). It will take a decade or so for Shanghai, Hong Kong, Sydney and Bombay to take over the top slots. It is bedtime here - hence, a brief response to your other points - details later. Gen. Giap - it is not my prejudice. Military strategy and asymmetrical warfare are one of the subjects that I teach - Giap destroyed a lot of myths about air superiority in war. And yet the US neocons like Bush and Rumsfeld thought that "shock and awe" were viable war-winning strategies. Weird!!! Just look at the failure in Iraq and now the "withdrawal" (euphemism for defeat) from Afghanistan. Norway - I totally agree with you - great culture - but difficult to replicate in larger countries. On the prisoners. I will research this issue. However, consider the following:
- "The number of former servicemen in prison or on probation or parole is now more than double the total British deployment in Afghanistan, according to a new survey. An estimated 20,000 veterans are in the criminal justice system, with 8,500 behind bars, almost one in 10 of the prison population" - The Guardian, London, September 2009.
- The UK armed forces are 0.2% of the UK population - they are 10% of prisoners. Does that mean that British soldiers are mentally retarded like the Muslims??
- At the turn of the century, in New York, "60% of all white prisoners were Irish and Italians". Does that mean Catholics have a greater propensity to commit crimes than Protestants??
- In the financial sector, nearly half the big scams ($ 1 million and above) are done by Jews. What conclusion can we derive from that statistic??
I think that global issues are much more complex than anecdotal statements like Muslims are lazy idiots, Christians love slaughtering people, Jews only adore money, etc. It is true that many Muslims are lazy idiots, likewise many Christians love killing "the natives" for sport, many Jews love money and money-lending (e.g., Shylock) - however, my experience is that all religions and all nations have gone through very dark periods - some in the past tense, and some in the present tense!!! The Jews and the Muslims are currently going through a "dark period" - this is not likely to be a perpetual state of affairs. We can look for "objective solutions" (your words) - but, the first hurdle is to agree that racial (or theocratic) stereotypes cannot be used to explain the complexities of the world we live in.
Now I am confused: The Abrahamic generalizations seemed to be the bedrock of your argument. I admit you didn't call the Muslims lazy, in fact I can't see any criticism of Islam at all, As you say "What can we derive from that"? I hope you aren't teaching the CCECGPTS as fact: It seems to form part of a world view that absolves a culture, and the individuals within it, from any acceptance of its own responsibility.
You are obviously confused - because I have not responded to you (yet). I was merely responding to points raised by Left and Right. I will get back to you later, as we might be in different time zones. Are you in the USA?? I am in Mongolia. You are right - all 3 Abrahamic religions have a huge history of violence - it is merely a question of degree.
Dozens of issues - but, given my time zone (Mongolia), I have only time for 1 issue today. Incidentally, from your comments it seems you think I am a Muslim - I am agnostic. "Ethnic cleansing and genocide are highly emotive words. They imply a specific intent on the part of the slaughterer to slaughter people based on ethnicity" - your comment. I get the impression that you live in the USA. Therefore, we can discuss ethnic cleansing in South America and then North America.
In South America, the Spanish went on a killing spree, most of it was senseless, but religion played a huge role. A few examples of how Spain did it are as follows:
1. "I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of Their Highnesses. We shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as Their Highnesses may command. And we shall take your goods, and shall do you all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey and refuse to receive their lord and resist and contradict him."
A statement Spaniards were required to read to Indians they encountered in the New World.
2. Bartolome de Las Casas the best known of the missionaries who accompanied Christopher Columbus to the New World
"Once the Indians were in the woods, the next step was to form squadrons and pursue them, and whenever the Spaniards found them, they pitilessly slaughtered everyone like sheep in a corral. It was a general rule among Spaniards to be cruel; not just cruel, but extraordinarily cruel so that harsh and bitter treatment would prevent Indians from daring to think of themselves as human beings or having a minute to think at all. So they would cut an Indian's hands and leave them dangling by a shred of skin and they would send him on saying "Go now, spread the news to your chiefs." They would test their swords and their manly strength on captured Indians and place bets on the slicing off of heads or the curting of bodies in half with one blow. They burned or hanged captured chiefs."
3. "Here, as in the Caribbean and Mexico and Central America, one could fill volumes with reports of murderous European cruelties, reports derived -from the Europeans' own writings. As in those other areas that they visited, Indians were flogged, hanged, drowned, dismembered, and set upon by dogs of war as the Spanish and others demanded more gold and silver than the natives were able to supply. One ingenious European technique for getting what they wanted involved burying Indian leaders in earth up to their waists after they had given the Spanish all the goods that they possessed. In that helpless position they then were beaten with whips and ordered to reveal the whereabouts of the rest of their treasure. When they could not comply, because they had no more valuable possessions, more earth was piled about them and the whippings were continued. Then more earth. And more beating. At last, says the Spanish informant on this particular matter, "they covered them to the shoulders and finally to the mouths." He then adds as an afterthought: "I even believe that a great number of natives were burned to death."
I agree that the terms genocide and ethnic cleansing are late 20th century inventions and that "the Colt 45 didn't come onto the market until 1873". However, all this is irrelevant. This was genocide on a "continental scale". Next we can look at North America.
In North America, ethnic cleansing was "official policy". In terms of comparison, the Spanish were better on all fronts - terror, genocide and sleeping with local women. The British were left behind on all three fronts. In fact, they passed laws forbidding sexual intercourse with "locals" - see below:
"... from the earliest days of settlement the British colonists repeatedly expressed a haunting fear that they would be "contaminated" by the presence of the Indians, a contamination that must be avoided lest it become the beginning of a terrifying downward slide toward their own bestial degeneration. Thus, unlike the Spanish before them, British men in the colonies from the Carolinas to New England rarely engaged in sexual relations with the Indians, even during those times when there were few if any English women available. Legislation was passed that "banished forever" such mixed race couples, referring to their offspring in animalistic terms as "abominable mixture and spurious issue," though even without formal prohibitions such intimate encounters were commonly "reckoned a horrid crime with us," in the words of one colonial Pennsylvanian." It is little wonder, then, that Mercy Short described the creature that possessed her as both a demon and, in Slotkin's words, "a kind of Indian-Puritan, man-animal half-breed," for this was the ultimate and fated consequence of racial contamination."
They were nearly as good at killing as the Spanish. The founding fathers of the US agreed that this genocide had to be "completed". See below:
"Thomas Jefferson's first inaugural address delivered less than two centuries since the founding of the first permanent English colomes:
A rising nation, spread over a wide and fruitful land, traversing all the seas with the rich productions of their industry, engaged in commerce with nations who feel power and forget right, advancing rapidly to destinies beyond the reach of the mortal eye-when I contemplate these transcendent objects, and see the honor, the happiness, and the hopes of this beloved country committed to the issue, and the auspices of this day, I shrink from the contemplation, and humble myself before the magnitude of the undertaking.
It was in pursuit of these and other grand visions that Jefferson later would write of the remaining Indians in America that the government was obliged "now to pursue them to extermination, or drive them to new seats beyond our reach." For the native peoples of Jefferson's "rising nation," of his "beloved country"-far from being Bolivar's "legitimate owners"- were in truth, most Americans believed, little more than dangerous wolves. Andrew Jackson said this plainly in urging American troops to root out from their "dens" and kill Indian women and their "whelps," adding in his second annual message to Congress that while some people tended to grow "melancholy" over the Indians' being driven by white Americans to their "tomb," an understanding of "true philanthropy reconciles the mind to these vicissitudes as it does to the extinction of one generation to make room for another."
Before either Jefferson or Jackson, George Washington, the father of the country, had said much the same thing: the Indians were wolves and beasts who deserved nothing from the whites but "total ruin." And Washington himself was only repeating what by then was a very traditional observation. Less than a decade after the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1630, for example, it was made illegal to "shoot off a gun on any unnecessary occasion, or at any game except an Indian or a wolf." As Barry Lopez has noted, this was far from a single-incident comparison. So alike did Indians and wolves appear to even the earliest land hungry New England colonist that the colonist "fell to dealing with them in similar ways":
He set out poisoned meat for the wolf and gave the Indian blankets infected with smallpox. He raided the wolf's den to dig out and destroy the pups, and stole the Indian's children .... When he was accused of butchery for killing wolves and Indians, he spun tales of Mohawk cruelty and of wolves who ate fawns while they were still alive.... Indians and wolves who later came into areas where there were no more of either were called renegades. Wolves that lay around among the buffalo herds were called loafer wolves and Indians that hung around the forts were called loafer Indians.
As is so often the case, it was New England's religious elite who made the point more graphically than anyone. Referring to some Indians who had given offense to the colonists, the Reverend Cotton Mather wrote: "Once you have but got the Track of those Ravenous howling Wolves, then pursue them vigourously; Turn not back till they are consumed.... Beat them small as the Dust before the Wind."
There, the reason that only 3% of Americans have native ancestry is that the British preferred to sleep with British women - and sometimes, British men!!!
On Gen Giap. My interest in North Vietnam's military tactics stems from one of my favorite subjects - i.e., asymmetrical warfare in the post-nuclear era. Will write about this tomorrow. However, Gen. Giap is hugely important for only 1 very major reason. He proved to the world that "shock and awe" as a military strategy is not a war-winning strategy. In spite of this, Bush Jr. and his neocon teams (Rumsfeld et al) went into Iraq and Afghanistan with the same failed strategy. At a huge cost in terms of lives - and the cost to the US tax-payer. There are huge foreign policy implications of the post-neocon era. If you are an American, and you are in this subject, we can discuss this further. Good night.
Thanks for your considered responses: I too am pressed for time, being at work in Australia. I was born in England, but until the last decade have never lived in one town for more than 8 years. After graduation in 1980 I have lived and worked in 4 continents, and again, never lived in any one country for more than 5 years. I have always made a fairly pathetic effort to learn a language wherever I go, something ex-pat Brits are notorious for not doing. Yes I did work in Newark NJ for a while, but that was 15/20 years ago. I see the US as being, on balance, a force for good in the world, but paradoxically oppose a lot of their foreign policy. That's the trans atlantic/pacific cousin thing I guess. I did not necessarily think you were a Muslim, that couldn't be deduced from your pro-muslim/Asian, anti-European position. My point there was that I'm not sure what you want us to deduce from your comment about the Jews. I'm an atheist btw.
I wholly agree with your recent comment on Vietnam. I see the Vietnam/America war as the single most important event in the second half of the 20th C. Yes America was defeated, but not militarily.
"The Tet objectives were beyond our strength… we were not able to retain the gains we made" Col-Gen Tran van Tran
"Hanoi was guilty of grievous miscalculation, which squandered the strength of the Southern Forces" PLF Duong Quynh Hoa
"That was our biggest victory: to change the ideas of the US" Gen Vo Nguyen Giap
This is way way off topic for this article, though, much as I share your interest and would like to continue with this thread.
As for the Americas, I agree that the Spaniards in South America were particularly brutal. Right off the bat, I stated that the colonial age has its dark side and many colonists were arrogant and cruel . Perhaps the Spaniards were suffering CCECGPTS, after 781 years of being colonised by Muslims (711 -1492) ? Maybe that's where they learnt their barbarity from? Yes, the speeches refer to God a lot, but in the 16th and 17th centuries anyone who didn't invoke the name of god wherever possible would find themselves accused of heresy pretty quickly, and suffer unimaginable torment before dying. The conquistadores were usually vastly outnumbered, so their strategy was to kill as many "enemy" as possible before they worked out that a muzzle loader takes a minute or more to reload. This was the early application of shock and awe, and it worked.
As for North America much the same applies: It's telling that "Indians" and wolves were spoken of in one breath. They were both seen as a threat, and rightly so. The "Indians" were more numerous, far better at living off the land and the bow was a more effective weapon in the woods of the eastern seaboard than muskets, massed or single. Yes, the colonists were fearful, superstitious, barbarous and racist, but that was a result of the time they lived in. It's plain that white Europeans at the time considered anyone of a different skin colour as belonging to a different species. Hence the conflation with wolves, and the ability of the slave owners Theodore Sedgewick, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington to avow that all men are created equal and have the right to liberty. To be fair, Sedgewick did get a jury to agree that his slave should be freed on that very basis. The Declaration of Independence was made in 1776. Jefferson, Jackson and Washington were post-colonial figures, so cannot be part of your theory, nor can the colonial period of North America be defined as anything other 1607-1776. That's why I mentioned the Colt: If ever anything was a symbol of the wild west, and driving both the bison and indigenous people close to extinction. (or perhaps the Winchester, 1866) it's the Colt 45. Before you accuse me of semantics, I'd point out that I am trying to understand your logic, and your words.
Again, this is way off topic. What do the rights and wrongs of the colonial age in America have to do with the persecution of the Shia minority by the Sunni majority in Pakistan? There is absolutely no connection.
As for what appears to be a racist and homophobic comment at the end, I'll let I pass.
I was confused because, in your first reply to me 7/12, you make a number of generalisations about the Abrahamic religions "My contention…… ….. the baggage of religion" 11 comment lines. You then put up the concept of populations, countries and religions specifically suffering from "profound psychological trauma" from "centuries of colonialism"
L&R replies to your generalizations, and I honestly can't see that he says "Muslims are lazy"
You then reply to Left and Right (Thanks for pointing that out, btw. Don't know how I missed not getting an e-Mail and obviously I couldn't read the comment banner . O no, wait, I DID!), and quickly make three anecdotal statements, that no one else has made, and go on to explain that this may be a simplistic worldview and that "racial (or theocratic) stereotypes cannot be used to explain the complexities of the world we live in." You got that right, but, you seem to be the only person (of these three) who is basing their worldview on those stereotypes.
This is a simple article about the persecution of the Shia minority by the Sunni majority in Pakistan. I fail to see how anything you've written has any relevance to that. You have assembled disconnected facts and written them as if the act of writing them will make your theory true. Sorry, brah, I don't see the connection. I'd appreciate a short and simple reply, answering my original question:
Please explain how Islam has suffered "profound psychological trauma" from "centuries of colonialism"?
That is the only way you could connect your opinions to this article. I'll even allow Pakistan as well as Islam in the question.
Also, please chose just one example of as British colony to illustrate how "All post-colonial countries (including Muslim, Buddhist, atheist countries) have suffered from post-colonial trauma."? Choose your best example, and make it a good one. It should be easy, right ?
I found your response refreshing - partly because of a shared interest in world politics. I am not British, but I know your country reasonably well - studied at LSE and Kings College in the early 1970's - and subsequently frequent visits to the UK and dozens of other countries. It appears that I am older - by nearly a decade!!! Wiser?? Btw, I am agnostic and militantly against the 3 Abrahamic religions. I enjoy going to Catholic churches - but, only because I enjoy the music. "I see the US as being, on balance, a force for good in the world, but paradoxically oppose a lot of their foreign policy" - your comment. Actually the answer to this is much more "systemic" and "structural". Foreign policy in a unipolar world (e.g., the USA in the 1950's) may be good for "world order", but the ideology of the super-power is crucial. The USA fought senseless wars and lost most of them. What was the objective?? To make the world safer for capitalism?? Super-powers in history very often forget that their status has changed - the current buzz word for that is "imperial over-reach". That is the current predicament of the USA. The world power structure is effectively multi-polar, and yet George Bush and the neocons thought that "shock and awe" is a war-winning strategy. There have been a few occasions when US foreign policy was a "force for good", but they have been very rare. For me the litmus test in the current scenario is whether Obama can create the conditions for a two-state solution in Palestine. The tail (Israel) has been wagging the dog (USA) for the past few decades. In my book, Palestine is "the last colonial war". On a more macro level, it would be interesting to see how the boom-bust cycles inherent in US capitalism can be modified into a 21st century global growth model - i.e., where GNP measures social (and welfare) indicators in addition to just production and consumption numbers.
We can get back to foreign policy in a day or two. But, let us discuss Pakistan. Pakistan and Israel are the only 2 religious states born in the post-colonial era. There are several differences - but there are similarities as well. The main similarity is that both these countries are "unnatural creations" - i.e., theocratic man-made states in an era of global secularism!!! Both are bound to fail. On the Shia and Sunni issue, it is highly deplorable. I have visited Pakistan - the majority of the people are liberal living ordinary (but difficult) lives - they are not fundamentalists. Their brand of Islam is "sufi Islam" - liberal and inclusive. Sufi Islam (found in Turkey as well - whirling dervishes) is what convinced many nations (including the Hindus) to convert to Islam. The most vicious (and deplorable) kind of Islam originates in Saudi Arabia - the Wahhabi and the Salifi movements. The Saudi's got a "golden opportunity" to infiltrate their brand of Islam into Pakistan with the help of the USA (the CIA). The Americans needed brainless idiots to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan. They funded the creation of various Saudi-backed jihadi fighters (and organizations, including Al Qaeeda) and then the CIA (guess what) created all their training camps in northern Pakistan. The poor Soviets were defeated - I personally wish that the Soviets should have won. I think some Islamic countries need a dose of atheist rule. More on that later. However, the downside of all this CIA-backed activity was the Talibanization of Pakistan. These idiots are in a minority, but heavily armed and funded by the Saudi's. Liberal Pakistanis are in the majority - but, like liberals everywhere are docile and unwilling (or unable) to take up arms to defend their liberal values. Based on my travels, I think that this is a big mistake - by liberals everywhere. Liberal forces will have to defend liberalism in a militant fashion!!! Sounds weird - but, that is the only way that the "forces of darkness" can be defeated. Israel has a similar problem. There are 14 million Jews in the world - 5 million in Israel. The liberal Jews (and there are many) are living in the USA and elsewhere. In the meantime, the right-wing militant (and expansionist) Jews dominate the political landscape of Israel. God help both Pakistan and Israel - both these countries are a "burden" on secular values!!!
Right the ol' Golden Age of Islam. Proof that more islam is what the world needs.
I know you suffer from Islamophobia .....what do you want me to do to get you out of the forest??
There is surely something good, yes good, in Islam which is more than Hinduism that it is flourishing ......there is no need for anyone to be biased against it as mere bias is not going to change the facts. As far as terrorism is concerned it was started by the Hindu Tamil Tigers....and who doesn't know how harakiri doomed the strongest and largest war vessel in WWII?? The point is that grievance of any one ought to be addressed through talks as war has never come out with anything but destruction and mass killing of innocent people. It's beyond rationale to provoke criminals (though not all Muslims) as that is criminal provocation as well and tends to destroy the world peace.
Good that after failed war spreading over a decade in Afhganistan and by default in Pakistan the world conscience is awakening and they have invited at least two member of the Taliban to a dialogue in a moot held in France. learn from this and just don't rattle all the time!
I know you suffer from Islamophobia .....what do you want me to do to get you out of the forest??
There is surely something good, yes good, in Islam which is more than Hinduism that it is flourishing ......there is no need for anyone to be biased against it as mere bias is not going to change the facts. As far as terrorism is concerned it was started by the Hindu Tamil Tigers....and who doesn't know how harakiri doomed the strongest and largest war vessel in WWII?? The point is that grievance of any one ought to be addressed through talks as war has never come out with anything but destruction and mass killing of innocent people. It's beyond rationale to provoke criminals (though not all Muslims) as that is criminal provocation as well and tends to destroy the world peace.
Good that after failed war spreading over a decade in Afganistan and by default in Pakistan the world conscience is awakening and they have invited at least two member of the Taliban to a dialogue in a moot held in France. learn from this and just don't rattle all the time!
I found your response concerning the role of a super power interesting and I would certainly agree with most of it. I think we need to consider the intention and motivation behind the deployment of US power. No-one has ever held that much power, enough to destroy the planet, before, so the intention of the man/system with the big red button is critical. After Vietnam, the US turned inward, apart from semi covert operations(Nicaragua), and local bullying (Grenada) After the Falklands conflict they flexed their muscle a bit and got involved in The Balkans (undoubtedly good), and Desert Storm (Questionable: again, lack of political will stopped the military from rolling it up, and resulted in GB2 feeling he had to finish what Daddy had started. I believe the intentions of the US are good, but their execution is often flawed. It reminds me of a big Rottweiler pup, who just wants to say hello or to help in some way, but doesn't understand how, or know it's own strength, and the impact it can have. This is way off topic though.
I found the post on the sectarianism in Islam informative. The Sunni/Shia schism is known about here in Aus, but the distinction of Sufi, Wahhabi, Salifi less so. My guess is that most Aussies would think that wahhabi was something to do with sushi. The CIA seem to make a habit of supporting people who return the favour by kicking their butt. The OSS supported Giap and Minh, against the Japanese occupation in WWII, as I'm sure you're aware.
Thank you. You are right - in many western countries, a Wahhabi could easily be a more lethal form of horse-radish - in fact, that could be considered to be a fairly accurate description by some of my liberal Muslim friends. Lol. However, on a serious note, I think the 3 Abrahamic religions are a major issue in history. I will not go into Christianity - but, would like to hear your views. One issue perplexes me the most - i.e., Jesus. He was a very pleasant Palestinian gent (very Asian in looks and disposition), who was a pacifist. How was he transformed into a European character, whose disciples were so militant and blood-thirsty?? The other 2 religions are a victim of holy personalities and the texts themselves. Of all the Abrahamic prophets, Mohammad was the most "modern" - in fact, in Lincolns Inn (one of the 4 inns of court) he is carved in stone as a great law-giver, which he was. His main weakness was (a bit like Bill Clinton) women and sex. If you read the hadiath (i.e., anecdotes about the life of Mohammad), he comes across as a brilliant (but flawed) human being.
From the Koran itself and the Haddith - here are a few examples:
(5:268) – "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the
day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, 'Had the Prophet
the strength for it?' Anas replied, 'We used to say that the Prophet was given
the strength of thirty men.' "
(4:232) – Muhammad's wives would wash semen stains out of his clothes, which
were still wet from the spot-cleaning even when he went to the mosque for
prayers. Between copulation and prayer, it's a wonder he found the time to slay pagans.
(6:300) – Muhammad's wives had to be available for the prophet's fondling
even when they were having their menstrual period.
(62:6) – "The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all
his wives in one night, and he had nine wives." Muhammad also said that it
was impossible to treat all wives equally
- and it isn't hard to guess why.
(93:639) – The Prophet of Islam would recite the 'Holy Qur'an' with his head
in Aisha's lap, when she was menstruating.
Tabari IX:139 – "You are a
self-respecting girl, but the prophet is a womanizer." Words spoken by the
disappointed parents of a girl who had 'offered' herself to Muhammad (he accepted).
(4:24) – "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those
(captives) whom your right hands possess." Allah even permitted Muhammad
and his men to have sex with married slaves, such as those captured in battle.
(33:50) – "O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom
you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of
those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your
paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of
your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you;
and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired
to marry her– specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what
We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right
hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; " This is another
special command that Muhammad handed down to himself that allows virtually
unlimited sex, divinely sanctioned by Allah. One assumes that this "revelation"
was meant to assuage some sort of disgruntlement in the community over
Muhammad's hedonism.
It is interesting that with 1 exception (Ayesha), he always preferred experienced women - not into virgins at all!!! And yet, in the depiction of heaven, virgins are mentioned - virgins are so boring. Several years ago, I did a brief course on comparative religion. I was struck by how modern Islam was as a religion - and very practical. It has been totally waylaid by the Wahhabi and Salifi elements. Judaism (the OT and the Torah) is both violent and racist. Will address this in my next comment.
I will address the violence and racism inherent in Judaism tomorrow. But, here is where it all started - i.e., with Abraham and his crazy sex life. The holy books have a lot of violence and illicit sex, particularly the Old Testament. Try this for size - it is hilarious:
"[1] Now Sarai Abram's wife bare him no children: and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar.
[2] And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the LORD hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
[3] And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.
[4] And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.
[5] And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee." Genesis 16:1-5.
In contemporary English:
"Barren! How dare you call me barren! Who's to say it's not YOU who's at fault. Your dried up old twig couldn't get even the youngest sapling pregnant."
"Sarah, calm down. I'm just saying, it'd be nice to have an heir."
"Fine! You've been eyeing the maid Hagar. Don't deny it, I've seen you. Go spill your rotten seed inside her, see if I care."
So that night, after Sarah was fast asleep in her own room, Abraham called Hagar into him. "Hagar, come here and sit by the bed, there's something I'd like to discuss."
Oh Mr. Abraham, should I really be alone with you at night? You know how jealous Miss Sarah can be!"
"Shhhhh… Don't worry. Come closer"
As he said these words, he pulled her close to him, and kissed her passionately. "Oh Mr. Abraham, I've wanted you for so long" she moaned, as he deftly removed her panties. He loved looking at her in that maid outfit she always wore; oh how many nights he stayed awake dreaming of putting his hand under her little skirt. And now finally, he was feeling her moist warmth.
Hagar reached down under his tunic and felt the hardness. "What is that, a stone idol under there?" She asked, as she slid down and fellated Abram's obelisk. He enjoyed her expert tongue, but soon he couldn't bear it. He lifted her up and placed her on top of him.
As he entered Hagar's supple moistness, Abraham flashed back to how Sarah's dry gullet reminded him of the hot desert sand, and he shuddered. Hagar grabbed onto his collar and rode him like a camel, bouncing up and down, drilling him deeper into her with each movement.
Abraham then grabbed hold of her and flipped her over. Finally in control, he pounded her vigorously.
"Oh Mr. Abraham, you are so strong."
"You know it, baby. I'm not too old yet. You want it? You ready for my to plant my seed?"
"Oh yes! Yes! I am your fertile ground! Fill me up with your seedlings!"
As she said those words, Abraham spewed forth with the river that was to form a nation. "I got it! I got it!" she yelled, as they both fell exhausted onto the bed".
Religion should not be taught to children - they might actually start believing that the prophets were "role models"!!!
If this is how they treat their fellow Muslims, imagine how they treat the Hindu and Christian minorities. Pakistan (not extremists, the majority of Pakistan) systemetically persecutes religious minoritis with government connivence and the whole just ignore their plight.
At the time of formation of Pakistan, in 1947, Hindu-Sikh minorities made up almost 22 percent of the population of the then newly formed country. Today, less than one percent of the population adheres to that religious denomination.
Pakistan has in the intervening years from 1947 to date, carried out ethnic genocide of the scale which is worse in history than the genocide of Hitler and genocide in China during Mao (1958-1962).
Pakistanis made similar attempts on Ahmadiyas and Ismailis.
A similar attempt is now being made with respect to Shia minority.
You are wrong. Muslim, Hindus and Christians drink and eat in the same plates and there is NO bias against them in Pakistan. What you come across in the media or web is mere propaganda. The Muslims are infact much more enemies of themselves than followers of any other faith. A few incidences do occur between Muslims or othrs but those are oddities as they mostly related to personal vendetta's or dispute over personal matters. such oddities do not reflect the general condition of minorities in Pakistan.
Oh, if just a tenth of what you wrote would be true, that would be a manyfold exaggeration of reality. If it was a wish; well, keep on wishing. Since there are no Ten Commandments for the Muslims that would forbid them to lie, so they can write anything they want without fear of retribution. Pakistanis are masters of Taqiya, without a doubt...
you are expressive of the inherent enmity of the Indian Hindu's againt the Muslim feigning sympathy for the mimorities there.
How would India for that sake any country greet enemies of their country who demonstrate open disloyalty and non allegiance to the nation, who have no regard for the will of the majority??|
Your sympathy for the Shia's and Mirjai's is ostentatious.....in fact they are bitter clerical minded sects and if they come into majority they would atonce claim their 'Israel' in Qadian and Lucknow!!
Civilized and sensible people don't behave like you did.
Come with rational thinking and argue if you have any point to make. It is people like you who are averse to reasoning that the whole world has been plunged into the darkness of fear and terrorism.
Your philosophy has more holes than a block of cheese and your transparent attempt to hide behind a veneer of impartiality and rationality is fooling no one.
I am certainly not talking to a faithless people, especially the inimical and bigoted Hindu's of India!
Screaming with all Caps is uncivilized and against the rules.
No, I believe they are as good humans as anybody else. The whole emphasis of Islam is on Accountability....as you sow so shall you reap ...here as well as in the hereafter, goes the simple rule! However, repentance is withing everybody's reach and it's for the God to tackle it.
I hope I have made my point clear.
For all those commenting here, please do not bring India into this. There is no comparisn between the two. India is a countey. It is poor, corrupt, mismanaged, dirty. But it IS a country.
Pakistan is a hell, a pure, pristine, unadulterated hell. It is pure evil.
Why not talk about India when all can talk about others?? If you enjoy freedom of speech you have No right to snatch this freedom from others.
India is not a heaven on Earth. It is a disintegrating mass of a capitalistic oppressive chunk ruling the the poor Hindu's!
That is a very civilized response. I see that you are true to your faith's teachings. Keep it up, become even more pious.
You are good at making off hand remarks, keep up the good work!!
Indian Hindu's have disallowed their women to use cell fones....is this your 'democracy' and touting of 'human rights'??
The dalits are craving for freedom of speech disallowed them by the high caste Hindus....so much filth there to clean up before India gets out of its sham democracy, the democracy of the filthy rich and corrupt leaders chosen on linguistic and ethnic bases...the ugly lineage of your dynastical politics!!
You are good at making off hand remarks, keep up the good work!!
Indian Hindu's have disallowed their women to use cell fones....is this your 'democracy' and touting of 'human rights'??
The dalits are craving for freedom of speech disallowed them by the high caste Hindus....so much filth there to clean up before India gets out of its sham democracy, the democracy of the filthy rich and corrupt leaders chosen on linguistic and ethnic bases...the ugly lineage of your dynastic politics!!
In a bizzare suggestion to crack down on terrorism, a former British Labour defence minister has suggested to drop a neutron bomb on the Pak-Afghan border for creating an impassable barrier between the two countries.
Speaking in the House of Lords, John Gilbert said Britain could use the radiation warheads "to create cordons sanitaire along various borders where people are causing trouble".
"Your Lordships may say that this is impractical, but nobody lives up in the mountains on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan except for a few goats and a handful of people herding them," he said last week.
"If you told them that some ERRB (Enhanced Radiation Reduced Blast) warheads were going to be dropped there and that it would be a very unpleasant place to go, they would not go there.
"You would greatly reduce your problem of protecting those borders from infiltration from one side or another."
"These things are not talked about, but they should be, because there are great possibilities for deterrence in using the weapons that we already have in that respect."
Neutron bombs are a type of thermonuclear weapon designed to kill people while leaving physical structures such as buildings in tact.
Responding for the government Jim Wallace said the coalition did not share the "rambunctious views" of Gilbert.
Gilbert, who served Tony Blair in the late 1990s as a defence minister and was a member Intelligence and Security Committee while he was an MP, said he did not favour a nuclear-free world.
"I am absolutely delighted that nuclear weapons were invented when they were and I am delighted that, with our help, it was the Americans who invented them," he explained.
"If we think of a world in which they had not been invented, it is very easy indeed to see world war three starting on many occasions after 1945."
Lara Logan, the chief foreign affairs correspondent for CBS News- in a provocative address before 1,100 in which the foreign correspondent and 60 Minutes star skewered American policy in Afghanistan and Libya, called for a ramped-up military campaign against terrorists, and criticized the Obama administration and others for both underestimating the Taliban's strength in Afghanistan and for tolerating Pakistan's obvious coddling of terrorists killing American soldiers.
The Taliban and al Qaeda, she made clear, "want to destroy the West and us," and we must fight fire with fire, She appeared to leave the assembled alternatively riveted and just a bit troubled by a critique with interventionist implications clearly drawn from her reporting.
As one nonprofit executive, a former magazine editor, put it the next day when asked to describe her speech: "Shoot 'em, bomb 'em, fuck 'em. They will kill your children."
There is a rich history of foreign correspondents being outspoken and passionate in offering political commentary, especially those who have been caught in harm's way. Logan herself was a victim of brutality; in 2011 the South Africa native was beaten and sexually assaulted by a mob in Cairo's Tahrir Square while she covered the demonstrations prompted by President Hosni Mubarak's resignation. Such a harrowing experience would surely impact even the most politically cautious of journalists. Still, the sharp advocacy from such a prominent network reporter caught some in the Chicago crowd by surprise.
Logan's address was linked to a significant dispatch for 60 Minutes two days earlier in which she chronicled growing terrorist attacks on American soldiers in Afghanistan. She showed a portion to the audience.
It included the top U.S. commander, Gen. John Allen, voicing frustration over attacks by Afghan troops whom we've trained and President Hamid Karzai declaring that terrorist attacks are only increasing as America winds down its presence. Allen was also publicly candid, in ways predecessors arguably have not been, about his obvious chagrin over his battlefield enemies having what Logan called "complete freedom of movement inside Pakistan and with the blessing of the Pakistanis."
In front of the Chicago audience, Logan contended that the terrorist presence in Afghanistan is continually understated. She scoffed at the numbers routinely used by many in the government and think-tank communities to describe the Taliban's presence in country.
There is sympathy within certain State institutions for the LeT as its trained warriors are available to the Pakistani State. Third, due to a number of reasons the judicial system seems to have lost its capacity to try terror suspects.
A glance at the history of convictions in terror cases, especially those involving high-value suspects, shows that there have been very few decisions. In the last 15 years, there have been only two convictions in terror cases. The first to be convicted was the leader of Lashkar-e-Jhangavi (LeJ), Malik Ishaq. He was wanted in 43 cases and accused of killing 70 people including an Iranian diplomat in the 90s. He was wanted in 43 cases. The anti-terror court judge was forced to escape Pakistan and settle abroad after announcing a life sentence for Ishaq, which was upheld by a higher court. However, the Supreme Court set him free in 2011 for lack of evidence. The real story is that in the intervening years between his initial conviction and appeal before the apex court, Ishaq managed to get rid of evidence and people who deposed against him including a senior police officer. Some police sources also claimed that the LeJ threatened one of the Supreme Court judges which resulted in the bench taking a lenient view in the Ishaq's case.
The other instance of conviction pertains to Mumtaz Qadri case, the police guard who shot the former governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer. The anti-terror court judge who was handling the case also had to leave the country after delivering his judgement and has not been heard of again. Thus, it is possible that the anti-terror court judges hearing the LeT cases will try to prolong them to ensure that they don't have to deliver a judgement.
Then there is a major lacunae in the law of evidence because it has never been revised after the British left. The courts depend on first information reports and identification parade that even the police in Pakistan believe is a farce.
Police officials ask how they can produce people who can identify a culprit, especially in cases of suicide attacks. Hence, it is not surprising that when it comes to terrorism cases in Pakistan, evidence is either lost due to the attitude of the court or is not entertained by the court, resulting in the culprits going scot-free. Interestingly, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who otherwise is proactive when it comes to delivering justice, turns a deaf ear to the idea of the court reviewing its own mechanism.
The State does not appear inclined to send a strong message to the terrorists, who have access to cellphones and other facilities inside jails. It was, in fact, in 2008 that one of the jailed terrorists, Omar Saeed Sheikh, used his phone to call Pakistan's president pretending to be India's foreign minister and threatening Islamabad with retribution, thus, heightening tensions between the two States.
At this juncture, there is little possibility of anything substantial happening in the Mumbai case. The case will probably drag on till it becomes convenient to free the seven suspects. There is no possibility of the accused being handed over to India. Such a move will not be popular in many circles in the government and society in Pakistan.
IN the following responses I will expound the reasons why US and NATO allies must take hard measures to respond to the evil of the Feudal Lords in Pakistan.
The references from which some of the deductions are made are provided below:
1. Author Bruce Reidel; name :Deadly Embrace - Pakistan, America and the future of Global Jihad
2. Author Bruce Reidel; name : The search of AlQaeda
3. Author Sebastian Rotella; name : Pakistan & the Mumbai Attacks: the untold story.
4. Author Ahmed Rashid; name : Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil & Fundamentalism.
I have also from time to time read up blogs of Amir Mateen and Najam Sethi and some of the information has been culled from those sources as well.
Pakistan receives billions of dollars in aid from US/NATO and yet, it arms and supports the Haqqani network who have killed hundreds of US/NATO soldiers in Afghanistan. It is time that decision makers in Washington and Ottawa took note of these facts and stopped treating the Feudal lords of Pakistani Army with kid gloves.
Pakistan is a basket case which can never improve its social indicators. Pak is an artificial country being pumped with oxygen(in form of US/China /IMF subsidy ) and some Arab petro dollars(notably UAE and SA who have purchased thousands of acres of Pakistani fertile land for sovereign use of that land for the use of the purchaser). If even two entities out of these four five entities that are pumping and propping up the regime in Pakistan decide to do away with the Chamberlain's Policy of appeasement of extremists, in nine to tenth months time, Pakistan will have no money left to pay for its troops(army), forget its paramilitary officers/jawans and bureaucrats.
Over the years Pakistan's (Income) Tax Base has been more or less stable at 1% or less of the total population. In the United States, 72 million Returns of Income are filed annually with the I.R.S which, given a population of 300 million, translates into a tax base of just over 24%. In Malaysia, the tax base is about 20%. In Turkey, 5%. In India, 5%. The 'tax to GDP' ratio has a direct correlation with the tax base size and Pakistan's poor tax base therefore means a poor tax to GDP ratio [ 10%] which ofcourse means poor tax revenues. In fact Pakistan is placed at the lower end of the 'T2gdp' spectrum whereas those at the higher end – typically, the Scandinavian countries led by Sweden and Denmark- score well over 40%.
To begin with, the largest single sector of the Pakistan economy, agriculture, generating 22% of GDP , occupied by 50% of the total population [ ie 80 million plus] and 42.5% of the total labor force [ ie 20 million] pays zero income tax to the federal exchequer because it is 'exempt' from payment of income tax under the statute ie the Income Tax Ordinance of 2001 – in fact this sector has been 'exempt' since 1947 and the Income Tax Ordinance of 2001 is the third income tax statute to 'renew' the exemption originally available for agriculture in 1947 when the Income Tax Act 0f 1922 was adopted as the Income tax Statute for Pakistan.
Secondly, Pakistan's huge and burgeoning 'Informal sector' – also known as the 'black economy' and the 'parallel economy'- appraised variously at 35 to 55% of formal GDP- and employing some 20 million out of the total labor force of 47 million. Thus between them, these two sectors, take away 110 million out of the total population of 165 million from the 'tax net' leaving barely 55 million to bear the burden of tax on income.
Its so sad, that Pakistan's "All weather friend", did not jump to the rescue operations.
The Pakistanis have earned enough curses from Bangladeshis in 1971 to live through couple of generations. It is to early to predict if Pakistan as a country will outlive those curses?
The creation of Bangla Desh was due to ugly folly of Pakistan's
leadership of that time and before, and it included the Bengali leaders too. Hence, If the Bengalis will cuss Pakistan they would be cussing themselves as well!
Governments of many countries in the world believe that Pakistan is the most dangerous country IN the world and TO the world.
It is a matter of time before the religious nuts FULLY control Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Madness is just that, no matter whether it was brought about by religion or some other addiction or schizophrenia.
I have argued that India should prepare for a sudden nuclear attack from Pakistan. My take is that India should show CLEAR EVIDENCE of its readiness to retaliate MASSIVELY.
Unfortunately, the present government of India is based on the ineffective model of "the Dowager Empress and her court of eunuchs". The most un-Sardar-like Sikh gentleman-premier still dreams of a India-Pakistan bon ami, recalling centuries of past peaceful co-existence.
With the Sunnis having gone berserk, even folks who call themselves 'Muslims' are not safe in Pakistan.
For evidence of how far the religious nuts have infiltrated the Pakistan Army and ISI, see what torture and hatred they inflicted on a 22 year old Indian army captain, Saurabh Kalia, captured by the Pakistan Army at Kargil, just a week or so prior to the start of the Indian Army commencing the 'Operation Flush Out'.
His eyes gouged out, penis cut off, lips ruptured through repeated punching, body marked with cigarette burns....
India must psyche itself to strike hard at these nuts... no pulling of punches. These nuts are BEYOND REASON AND REASONING...
There is nothing India can do to help the moderates in Pakistan. No scope for Aman ke Asha... it is a waste of time, I believe.
The basic problem with Pakistan is, that though it was founded by Md Ali Zinnah, a secular man and hardly a practicing muslim, the foundation was built with negative energy.Pakistan was based on past hatred of Hindus and not on having a good future of Muslims.It denied the tolerant south Asian Islam of sufis and became a pawn in the hands of West and Saudi Arabia by encouraging terrorism abroad.
Forget others, Pakistan is responsible for death and humiliation of thousands of innocent Muslims and even then, it has the audacity to claim itself champion of Islam! It has even refused to accept bihari muslims who are living in wretched camps in Bangladesh.Thankfully, the world now fully understands Pakistan's leaders blatant use of Islam to serve their own interest and enjoy life.The day Pakistani people understand this, and they will, that will be a great day for global peace.
What utter rubbish.
Which part of the post by 'sidr1' is 'utter rubbish'?
Eleven people seem to agree with him or her.
You Pardeshi people have nothing intelligent to say?
Better nt to show your lack of iq problem is that Pakistan and almost every other Islamic country, inc
Using Egypt is a big mess
Your clure has a boggy of a problem.
Now remember.. Try not to show your lower IQ levels to anyone.
Try and be like the other Paks. Fool everyone.
Ah the man with nothing to say except abuse..... You must be Muslim.
The Economist explains: Who would pay a "mansion tax"
The Economist explains
Football and British politics: David Cameron's own goal
Game theory
Britain's election campaign: April 26th: The deafening silence of David...
The week ahead: A very normal affair
Football and politics: David Cameron's own goal
America's Ukrainian mission: Training wheels
Have you listened to The Economist Radio on Facebook?
The Economist Radio is an on-demand social listening platform that allows you to listen, share and recommend The Economist audio content
Test your EQ
Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines
Want more from The Economist?
Visit The Economist e-store and you'll find a range of carefully selected products for business and pleasure, Economist books and diaries, and much more