FGM

Mar 3rd, 2008, in IM Posts, by

View the original article here.


446 Comments on “FGM”

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 »

  1. avatar Shloka says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 1:22 am

    Oh sorry, I meant 1865, I wrote later it was 100 years before Saudi in 1962. Apologies.

    Also, that increased sex drive was a joke. I meant to say something in the Islamic beliefs, circumcision or otherwise causes their sex drive to become so great that in Muslim majority countries women go about like walking talking genitals, while in free Western countries, women with normal clothes are raped. Also in Pre Islamic Ancient Egypt, women recieved equal inheritances, could lodge court cases, could travel without a “mahram” and daughters were as loved as sons. King Cyrus an Iranian Zoroastrian, abolished slavery and gave complete freedom of religion to all his subjects a millennia before Mohammed’s birth. Cyrus was an absolute Zionist and returned the Jews their land. Iran should look to their glorious pre islamic past instead of Islam’s wreched legacy. Also, a few Zoroastrians fled to India at the time of the Islamic conquest. India with its religious pluralism sheltered them. They are among India’s richest and their women most advanced, while Muslims India’s poorest. There have NEVER been any conflicts between Gujrat’s Hindus the state where they settled and the Parsees as they are called. The Muslims are however locked in eternal conflict with everyone around, as are Muslims in Phillipines and Thailand.

  2. avatar justin et says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 5:10 am

    Shloka, you’re right about the oversexualization of Arab society, which I’m not sure is fair to generalize to all Muslims, but Pakistanis (who aren’t Arabs) certainly. Nonie Darwish talked about that in one of article I linked to earlier. Everything in Muslim culture revolves around sex. Even circumcision is a part of the sexualization process of children, as opposed to Judiasm, where it is a mere religious requirement that has nothing to do with sex. And whenever I see a woman with a rag on her head, a burqa or a niqab, all I can think is that she actually believes herself to be 96-99% vagina and is ashamed of her very existence. There’s a difference between head hair and pubes. Darwish talked about how she always feared the eyes of people growing up, that she felt that everyone was out to either judge her as being promiscuous for absolutely no reason (they don’t seem to need one in Arab culture) or of simply being preyed upon by pervs. SOunds absolutely horrible to me, like she was robbed of her childhood. Pretty ironic, huh? I mean, that Muslims go to such lengths to preserve women’s chastity, but that innocence is something they never really get to experience like normal little girls. It never occurred to me that anyone would think of me in a sexual way until puberty. I think that’s the natural order of things. And I apologize if I sound like I’m harping on the marriage thing, but Muslim marriage really is about nothing more than getting creepy dudes laid. Sex is the #1 reason for marriage in Muslim culture (or at least Arab culture) and all other reasons are merely incidental. Even the ceremony revolves around sex and money. The purpose of polygamy is to make sure that men get enough, should a wife get sick or pregnant or just get her period or whatever (since Muslim men won’t have sex with a woman on her period, which would mean that they are gay by definition in Western culture). Even sex is strictly about male pleasure. Women aren’t allowed to be on top, and you know that Muslim women never receive oral sex. Again, gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with being gay, but marrying a woman to prove something is something else and anything latent is just creepy.

    And you’re right about Persian culture being spectacular before Islam. Their art, music, and way of life was something else. And Zoroastrians (from Zanzibar) produced my favorite guy ever, Mr. Freddie Mercury. If they never did anything else, that would be more than enough for me. Interesting factoid of which Shloka is apparently already aware: they are called the Parsees, but because of Arabic influence the people and the language came to be called Farsi because Arabic has no P.

    Have the Hindus ever had any problem with anyone besides the Muslims, who no doubt always started it? They seem like a very peaceful bunch to me.

  3. avatar timdog says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 5:16 am

    I am NOT going to let myself get sucked into this particular thread, but I do feel the irresitable urge to attempt to fling a few – ultimately futile – sandbags into the all-consuming torrent of Shloka….

    I have to protest a couple of points – yes indeed the Parsees of India are extremely successful and wealthy (Tata is one of the biggest corporations in the world)… why? Quite simple: the Parsees maintained their “foreign” identity and later allied themselves very closely with the British colonial authorites, positioning themselves as business people and investors, and did very well in consequence (in the same way that the Lebanese Christians allied themselves closely with France and ensured the partition of the French Syrian mandate into Lebanon as a separate country to maintain and ensure their political and ecconomic dominance).

    Meanwhile, the Muslims of India are indeed one of the poorest communities in the country – why? Mainly because the people who converted to Islam in India largely came from the very lowest rungs of the caste ladder and converted due to the fact that Islam presented itself to them as an emancipating religion… saddly, thanks to India’s f*&^ed up social system, many centuries later their lowly position remains – even the thoroughly unIslamic idea of “caste” has lingered on (caste is very much an issue in Pakistan even today). Add to that the prejudcie and discrimination that Muslims suffer in India today it’s no wonder that the benighted community continues to struggle.
    There are, incidentally, Muslims very well up the social ladder in India – but they are generally the decendents of Afghan and Persian immigrants (a good number of them are Bollywood stars)…

    As for honour killings and arranged marriages, those sure aren’t Muslim monopolies… honour killings probably represent the vestige of a clan and tribal culture found from North India to Asia Minor long before Islam – which is why they crop up among Sikhs and Hindus too…
    At least one modern Indian Hindu Chavinist fruitcake believes that India’s Hindu culure was polluted by foreigners – “The British and the Muslims imported love marriages and homosexuality” (Google Bal Thakeray – he’s a c*nt).

    Geographically speaking Western Turkey sure was Christian, once upon a time, but the Turks who now live there were NOT (pre-Islam they were thundering around the steppes several thousand miles to the East).

    I could continue endlessly picking holes in your rants – a little historical and cultural knowledge is a dangerous thing if you are using it to back up wild – and hate-driven – generalisations – but anyone not intimidated by the authoratative tones can usually dismantle it with ease.

    Curiously, I think you and would-be-al-Qaeda nutjobs have at least one thing in common (actually, probably far more than one thing, but I’ll just point out one): when you shriek about the common “Muslim element” of various global trouble spots you make a mistake – you choose to paint the aspirations of Kashmiris, Thai-Malays, Palestinians, Chechnians as part of a global “Muslim problem”… This is exactly the same mistake made by the sweaty-palmed would-be teenage Islamist, hunched over his computer in the bedroom of a Bradford council house… by doing this you debase, devalue and dismiss the genuine, individual and unique grievences and desires of these people just because thay have the misfortune to be Muslim rather than Naxilites, Maoists, suicide-bombing Tamil Tigers, Akali-Khalistanis, Shining Path, LRA, IRA, ETA etc etc
    You readily co-opt them into “global Islam” without pausing for a moment to view them as individual and diverse people… you and the Islamists both…

  4. avatar justin et says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 6:09 am

    timdog, maybe that’s because they’re Fascist terrorists and that’s how Fascism works. It never allowed any room for individuality or progress because that’s Fascism. Crazy-ass people who believe they are God’s chosen ones seek to impose their will (the installation of the Caliphate) upon anyone and everyone via terrorism. They see everyone else as “filthy infidels” and they act as one (dumbass) mind with the same motivation. And they have the same problems no matter who they are culturally or where they live. It doesn’t matter where or who. Regardless, they’re always the most violent, least educated people and they invariably ghettoize and bring down every society they cleave to. It’s just how they are. All of them. It’s not like there are several different ways of interpreting the Koran literally when one will be hanged for apostacy for criticizing, questioning, or trying to reform it. And even the “moderate muslims” feel guilty toward the radical extremists, not ashamed of them, so they’re part and parcel of the same phenomenon. And they could all be taken out in one fell swoop too, since they all have the same Achilles Heel. Nuke Mecca.

  5. avatar Shloka says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 10:21 am

    Timedog, see same Muslim issues- Parsees allied themselves with British Christians and Lebanese Christians with Christian French, no use of their own intellect right? Maybe the Jews secretly employed Djinns to carry out their inventions but the Muslims didn,t get that supernatural support. Coming to the caste sysyem, yes the unfortunate thing did exist and much like racism in America, it has been formally abolished. India’s biggest state today has a woman dalit Chief Minister. Also there was an Indian alternative to caste- which came into existence 1000 years before Islam- BUDDHISM. Much of the region with thriving Muslim communities in the Indian Subcontinent- Bengal where the Pala rulers patronized Buddhism or Sind where the Majority population was Buddhist. Muhammed of Ghazni destroyed Buddhist temples and loads of Hindu Temples. Incidentally, who else in the World but the Muslim Taliban would destroy a World Heritage Site like the Bamiyan Buddhas today? So the Buddhists who converted to Islam and there were indeed a large number of Buddhists who became Muslim, they were already free from caste. Al Beruni writes about the Hindu King of Sind as a very wise ruler but ” he went straight to hell as he was a Hindu.” Mohammed of Ghor’s armies dertroyed the great Buddhist University of Nalanda. Islam destroyed this alternative to Hinduism’s caste system totally and Buddhism vanished from India.Also if most of those who converted to Islam came from the lower castes, how would you explain Harihar and Bukka, who were forcibly converted to Islam and ran away to the South to find the glorious Vijaynagar empire. They were prisoners of war in Islam and apostasised at the first opportunity. Even Shah Jahan destroyed 67 Hindu temples. Aurangzeb destroyed Hindu temples with a zeal and whatever remained of Buddhist temples. So Sind ,Afghanistan etc were Buddhist places and many of today’s Muslims are ex Buddhists, prisoners of war not oppressed lower caste Hindus as you would like to believe.

    Timedog you say two very strange stuff next. One- Continued discrimination in India and two very successful bollywood film stars. Why are the non Muslim minorities like sikhs, christians, buddhists doing so well in terms of income and education? Just like successful Hindus in U.K.?Incidentally jews lived in India for 2500 years and NEVER faced discrimination at the hand of Hindu\ Buddhists.Does the WORLD only discriminate against Muslims? Also its to India’s credit that they made Bollywood, Pakistan and Bangladesh makes Z Grade movies and even Bangladeshis watch West Bengal’s movies. Why would a discriminating India take Muslims as film stars and give them a big fan following. How many Hindu\ Chrstian superstars in Pakistan? As to Afghan and Persian immigrants, I’ve seen what islam did there, officially stoning women for adultery. Incidentally the invention of zero and other achievements in Islam’s Golden Age and Arab Numerals were made by Indians and Buddhists in their universities, the Ikhtiyar ud din Bakhtiyar Khalji asked if there was a Koran in Nalanda University before destroying it! Sure honor Killings do crop up among Sikhs and Hindus in the North West just like among Jordan and Palestine’s Christians, but they are not part of Christina\ Hindu nations’ penal codes, nor are they endemic like Muslims. Its simply the geographical proximity of Sikhs to Muslim lands like Christians in Muslim dominated Middle East. And I know Western Turkey was Christian( Hagia Sophia anyone?) and as to the people there not being Christian sure Indians are a mix of mongoloid, aryan and dravidian too. Lots of Turkish peoples ancestors were Christians. The Khalistani problem has ended unlike the never ending Muslim problems. The rest like LTTE was not in a conflict of Hinduism v. Buddhism in Sri Lanka, it was over jobs and land. Ditto Naxalites and Maoists who aren’t even religious. However ” Al Queda nutjobs” have a definite Islamic agenda, and are doing it for ISLAM’s protection and propagation. And none of them beat women for not wearing tents, stone women for adultery, behead women as witches or want to kill them for unwed motherhood like Amina Lawal in Nigeria. A cartoon for depicting Marx or Mao badly would not result in hundreds of deaths or death threats globally to the cartoonist. Hitler’s Christianity was doubtful, Stalin was an outright atheist when they fought the World War. Osama was a devout Muslim and self declared protector of Islam!

    Timedog, here is what Pakistani Muslims are doing today.http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=38,5349,0,0,1,0

  6. avatar justin et says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 2:09 pm

    Shloka, I was totally with you until you wrote that “Hitler’s Christianity was doubtful.” Germany, oddly, tried to use “Christianity” as a tool in order to help win hearts and minds, but actually, like Communism, Islam, pure Fascism, and all other totalitarian regimes, religion is completely antithetical to the core beliefs of the movement, whose point is that “God’s chosen people” are just that because they are the ones who are supposed to carry out God’s work, thus undermining any belief in God as God, or any purpose or meaning in religion. As if God would create people just so they could be destroyed. Like God would create people in her own image and then declare some people to be superior to others and thus allowed to destroy their culture and rule over them. “God’s” purpose in a totalitarian movement is nothing more than that of mirror to reflect the narcissistic mentality of the movement’s believers. I already explained how Islam isn’t religion, since it lacks any concept of morality, in no way abides by the Golden Rule, and fits all 17 criteria of a cult, plus it’s a Fascist/Nazi political movement.

    Also, one can’t hate Jews – or anyone for that matter – and rightfully call her/himself a Christian. But especially Jews, since Christ was one. Christianity is based on loving one’s neighbor, the Golden Rule to the extreme. That’s why I can’t be a Christian. I couldn’t bring myself to pray for the Muslims after 9/11 like real Christians, I guess because I don’t have infinite generosity in my soul for people who seek to destroy everything good and worthwhile in the world. Had it been my finger on the button I would have nuked Mecca then and there. I really think that’s the way to go. It’s like the Japanese in WWII. They believed that they were God’s chosen people. Their faith was so unshakable they thought they could take out a country I don’t even know how much bigger and more populous, with 20x its GDP. They too were so devout that they were also suicide bombers. And like Muslims and Mecca, they thought that God protected Japan and that it was immune from attack. Their surrender had nothing to do with the apparence of the inevitability of defeat. It was the fact that their faith was completely crushed after the US destroyed two of their cities and occupied the rest of the country. I don’t think it should have to go that far this time, or even as far as it has. Call me crazy, but it’s the right thing to do, refusing to waste another innocent life in Afghanistan or a London subway or an NYC office building in order to not allow evil to prevail by laying down and being useful idiots.

    Also, the “Arab innovations” were also stolen from/built off of Roman and Byzantine knowledge, not just that of the Indians and Buddhists. Incidentally, Islam even stole antisemitism. Yep. The Koran preaches hatred toward all “infidels,” and if anything less so toward the Christians and Jews (the monotheistic “People of the Book/sons of apes and pigs”). Ardent Islamo-Nazism came about in the early 20th century through Hitler’s disciple Amin Al-Husseini, who never had an original thought, idea, or plan, and who even stole his speech style from Hitler. He was largely responsible for many of the genocidal campaigns in Eastern Europe in the 20th century. Muslims can’t even hate people in an original fashion. http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/

  7. avatar timdog says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm

    Ahhhhh!
    I rather like Indonesia Matters, but to maintain that liking it is necessary for me to avoid the threads like this one – or I’ll end up howling with hysterical frustration…

    Shloka – the erudition of your earlier posts seems to have collapsed somewhat. Quite frankly I can’t make any sense out of the gibbering of your last contribution, echoing as it does like the sound of a deranged buffalo slamming its own head repeatedly against a concrete wall…

    Still, a couple of gems shine through! So instead of acknowledging that the tendency to honour killings in Northwest India and Pakistan represents a deep-rooted pre-Islamic system of tribal mores (still extant in the Biraderi clan system of central Pakistan and the Pashtunwali honour code of NWFP and Afghanistan), you accept that Hindus and Sikhs sometimes engage in such horrors – but – hah! They caught it from the Muslims! The deranged buffalo is attempting to do a somersault! Hilarious!

    So Parsees and Lebanese Christians gained their position purely through power of intellect – unlike the mentally deficient Muslims (who still managed to have enough mental wherewithal to “introduce honour killing to Hindus and Sikhs”?)… just thought I’d raise the case of the Arabs in Indonesia – regarded as “foreign Orientals” – a step up the ladder from “natives” – by the Dutch, they established themselves as a successful business and landowning community, and despite the tiny size of the community, they remain significant in business today… for every example there is a counter-example, for every action a reaction…

    So the struggle of the Tamil Tigers (who, incidentally, invented the regular use of the suicide bomb as a tool of insurgency) is only about land and jobs, while the struggles of Kashmiris and Palestinians have nothing to do with land and jobs and everything to do with the fact that the participants are shrieking demonic Muslims! Brilliant! Genius! Another somersault from the buffalo!

    And what the hell is all the jabbering about Jews for? Who mentioned Jews? Not me!

    This is absolutely pointless, but before I go Shloka I’ll say this: You clearly suffer from an obsession; you clearly fuel that obsession by wasting huge amounts of time frantically leafing through the Koran and through various history books, not to expand the breadth of your general knowledge, but to fuel your absurd obsession – no expansion here, but a distinct narrowing – a shameful squandering of knowledge if you ask me. What a shame! What a shame you don’t use your time more profitably.
    What a shame that you have become so obsessed that you are unable to differentiate between a vague idea and a billion individual human beings…
    You and the Islamists both…

    da-da!

  8. avatar djoko says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    @ Shloka and Justin

    Hey I’m a Muslim and I’m just putting my thoughts out there. I’m sorry if its not in line with what you understand about Islam, but I can only speak from my experience, my research and my contacts within the community as I have lived it.

    Going back to some of the points you did mention though. On wife beating there’s this explanation which you can have a read of: http://www.jannah.org/sisters/end.html

    Its actually interesting that on that page there is a hadith also from Aisha which says that the Prophet never assaulted anyone ‘except while fighting in the cause of God’ (ie in battle). Contradiction perhaps? Then again this is what happens all the time in debates on Islamic practices within the community, particular over hadith, as some quarters take one hadith to be authentic while another to be weak or inauthentic. I don’t have the background to be able to analyse each and see which is authentic or which is not (or if in the case they are both authentic, what Aisha meant in both those hadith which seem to contradict one another), but as I was trying to point out originally, things are not as clear cut as you are trying to make them out to be.

    On heaven and so on, once again thanks for pointing out what that scholar said, and once again that view is definately out there. Its not one that I follow though. Of course lacking a church-style institution (such as in Catholicism) I’m quite free to ignore that particular scholar’s point of view, as it is in the form of a fatwa (advice) as opposed to being actual law. Instead I take the view I mentioned in the previous post on the basis of another ustadz’s view as well as my own understanding of the issue from texts and Islamic understandings of the afterlife.

    Of course you might expect me to take the reactionary position and go around defending all the countries you listed off with discriminatory laws and so on, which (maybe to your disappointment) I won’t. If anything the U.S. didn’t go far enough for example in getting rid of the dictatorship in Iraq. If its really serious about spreading democracy in the Middle East it will also go ways to getting rid of its buddy Hosni Mubarok in Egypt as well as monarchies in Jordan and Saudi Arabia to name just three countries. Do a lot of these countries have backwards, discriminatory laws? Yes. Are they based on understandings of Islam in these countries? Without a doubt. Do they necessarily represent the essence of Islam or what Islam should be in my view? Absolutely not.

    Timdog puts things in a bit more perspective by showing how there are other factors at play in a lot of conflicts outside of religion. Religion usually exacerbates existing problems, but on its own is not enough to generate conflict.

    The one and only thing I truly worry about is that it is increasingly the case that those who should be standing up for freedom are increasingly taking a very fascist approach to their ideals. You need only see Justin’s post which went on for a bit about how Muslims are fascists and then ended with this nice sentence:

    And even the “moderate muslims” feel guilty toward the radical extremists, not ashamed of them, so they’re part and parcel of the same phenomenon. And they could all be taken out in one fell swoop too, since they all have the same Achilles Heel. Nuke Mecca.

    There’s not really much more you can add to that, it seems pretty self-evident what’s going on there.

    Ultimately as I’ve tried to get across I’m just putting out my point of view as a Muslim. I’m not saying it’s a majority view, nor am I apologizing for the views and actions of other Muslims which are intolerant, hate-filled and violent. In fact I see my own views as a challenge to that both within and beyond the Muslim community. Though as the posts here show, its increasingly the case that views like mine are not only met with derision from some Muslims, but also from non-Muslims who have grown so comfortable with the idea of an evil cultish Islam (perhaps because it makes them feel better about their own fascist tendencies, as exemplified by the ‘let’s nuke a major city and religious site comment’) that they just cant fathom that a Muslim can both live in an Islamic way and yet be a tolerant, functioning member of society.

  9. avatar Cukurungan says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm

    Cuk, a few words of Ayatollah Khomeini for you. “A woman may legally belong to a man in one of two ways; by continuing marriage or temporary marriage. In the former, the duration of the marriage need not be specified; in the latter, it must be stipulated, for example, that it is for a period of an hour, a day, a month, a year, or more.” And is this not prostitution and immoral sexual behaviour in a pious patriarchal Islamic nation?

    Khomeini word is just man word, it could be wrong and it could be right and I do not care. But how can we talk about the moral matter while there is big mismatch between you and me, we consider 76 virgins in our after life is our ultimate dream while you consider the sexual desire of your mother in law is your ultimate dream.

    And Shloka, don’t forget to mention that 200 Nobel prize winners are Jews, 139 are Christians, and while 6 have Muslim names, only 2 are actually Muslim. One was educated in the US, and the other in the UK. One did his research in the US, at a US university, with US money, and the other in the UK, at a UK university, with UK money.

    This evidence proved one again that the hand of Muslim is still clean because we only made very small contribution in the fast destruction of our planet. It is scientifically proven that the most planet destruction and environmental issue today are either direct or indirect result of the modern human life style in which causing excessive utilization of natural resources and energy beyond the nature ability to replenish itself. Today modern human lifestyle become available after extensive application of the scientific discovery by the Nobel Prize Winner therefore we have only small share in the criminal destruction againts the nature harmony.

    Cukurungan, don’t you think that the fact that nothing is considered rape in Muslim countries has anything to do with the fact that the rape stats are higher in civilized nations? That maybe the fcat that sex and violence are the same thing to Muslim men has any effect on the stats? Like, that maybe the fact that it is literally impossible to prove rape in Muslim countries might influence those statistics, since one would need 4 male witness to prove it, and since it is still the year 650 in every Muslim country, and as such, there is no access to rape kits which convict on the basis of DNA? Or maybe that if women admit to being raped they them get abused at police stations and then murdered by their families? Or the fact that husbands are allowed to rape their wives because they are slaves whose bodies they own? Huh?

    You can say anything as long as no evidence it meant the rapes in Muslim majority countries almost does not exist and sorry I have to say that the faithfreedom.org is not independent institution, therefore their data and anything in their website can not be used as the evidence.
    Frankly speaking, I am quite upset with the faithfreedom.org because their mission does not compatible with their resources and capability. How can they set a big mission to destroy the Islam if their member and leadership are only blabbering their mouth on the internet while masturbating.

    Also, I’m not married, nor will I ever be. Marriage is for pathetic losers desperate for some sense of approval or so insecure that they fear being left, and would prefer to spend their lives with someone who doesn’t want to be with them than be alone. Ew.
    Muslims commit the vast majority of rapes in civilized countries, which actually have factual rape stats, dumbass: http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Fjordman51213.htm
    And my mom is a hot piece of ass for a 64-year-old, and a well-accomplished attorney who takes nothing from noone, and way too much woman for you, buddy.

    My Girl, It is smart decision because you know exactly if you get married likely you only can get a nice kissing from your husband in the weeding ceremony while your husband would be more interesting to spent most his time to satisfy the sexual desire of his mother in law. However, you do not so pessimistic about your future what you need to do just very simple submit your life to Muslim Man like me, if you are beautiful enough I would consider you as my fourth wife and do not worry because we Muslim man does not interest in the mother in law and if you still worry, I will ask my little brother from Bali to take care your mother. Believe me that with us your life will be full of glory and enjoyment.

    djoko, taqiyya is an unconscious phenomenon among Muslims. Judeo-Christians call it taqiyya. Muslims call it normal. Muslims are trained to lie to themselves and everyone around them, particularly non-Muslims,

    Ha ha ha ha but now even Mr George Bush also love to play “taqiya” see below:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html

  10. avatar Shloka says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 4:37 pm

    Timedog and Djoko I really understand there are moderate Muslims and I will deal with each of your allegations one by one.

    First Timedog,
    I totally acknowledge the existence of honor killings in Punjab among Hindus and Sikhs. These stuff happen among Christians in Jordan and Palestine too. But NO CHRISTIAN, BUDDHIST,HINDU NATION HAS ENSHRINED HONOR KILLING IN ITS PENAL CODE.India is a federal state, the states make laws just like the centre and Punjab doesn’t sanction honor killing in its laws. And its strange that you put the blame on pre islamic tribal customs in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Honor killings are not an exclusive Paki\Afghan thing. They stretch over much of the Muslim world from Morocco and Egypt( African Nations), all Middle East, AND I GAVE THE LAWS FROM THE PENAL CODES OF JORDAN AND SYRIA,Pakistan, Afghanistan etc in South Asia. Such a large portion of only Islam’s territory following these supposedly ” pre Islamic laws” and even enshrining them in their Penal Codes? Islam must be a very bad teacher not to have taught anything in 1400 years right. Honor Killings are rare in Indonesia and Malaysia and Sub Saharan Africa but they have genital mutilation instead. Prof. Hs Istibjaroh of the MUI in this article itself said its purpose is to ” reduce sex drive of women”In Africa Muslims practice infibulation, the whole external genitalia is chopped off. It takes 15 minutes to urinate, the vagina is sewn after each childbirth. So genital mutilated women seldom have sex out of wedlock its an indifferent experience for them at best and terrible pain at worst, no need to honor kill them.
    Of course for every example there is a counter example, I would myself say I was amazed to read that the Aga Khan’s daughter is happily married to an Anglican while many Christians won’t let their daughters marry Muslims! However the point of Muslims making more of the jail population everywhere from France, Netherlands,Italy, India to U.K. while the Jews and the Hindus in these nations prosper are true too. Its true that Hitler banned smoking while Churchill was an avid smoker. Just like that one point doesn’t make Hitler a better person than Churchill a few rarities don’t change the larger picture.
    Coming to Tamil Tigers who I am aware invented suicide bombing, they are a self proclaimed non religious organization. The Islamists in Algeria who opposed secular democracy were self proclaimed ISLAMISTS. The al Queda and Osama are Self proclaimed ISLAMISTS. What exactly is the problem with lands and jobs that Kashmir faces? The Sri lankan Constitution reserves some jobs for ethnic Sri Lankans, all Indians are free to travel, reside and hold jobs anywhere in India irrespective of race, religion, gender, caste etc. Palestine is also about land and jobs, but why is Malaysia’s Mahathir so bothered about it. Just read his foolish speech. During the Danish Cartoon controversy, Pakistanis held up slogans called ” God Bless Hitler!” They certainly have little to do with Arab lands, only with Arab religion! Please point out anything any Indian Minister said regarding Sri Lankan Buddhists or Buddhism due to support for Sri Lanka’s LTTE. What protests were ther on India’s streets after Bali Bombings which cried out for butchering Indonesia’s Muslims because they damaged Hindu Bali’s tourism? NONE!
    Yes the Ireland issue was religious, between Catholics and Protestants, however did Catholics from Goa in India to Phillipines go about shouting death to Ireland’s Protestants? They treated it as a local issue. Why is Mahathir and his countrymen so bothered of another land, another race’s problems?

    Again while Ireland suffered from religious problems like Spain, in neither of these countries’ were adulterers stoned, unwed mothers like Amina Lawal sentenced to beheading, witches and sorcerers beheaded after the 18th century nor honor killing laws enshrined in the Penal Code.
    O.K. I read through religious books, not just the Koran. And I won’t call my reading obsession, just interest. The lack of democracy in much of the Muslim world, they army has to routinely step in to rescue democracy from Islamists in Indonesia and Turkey, the stonings, amputations, witch beheadings in Saudi Arabia,ex Muslims like Lina Joy and Revathi Masoosai in Malaysia forced to eat beef, separated from their little babies, murders of Theo Van Gogh, the fact that in my country I have read and seen Da vinci Code( the Christians did not kill anyone) but Rushdie’s Satanic Verses is banned, that in many countries in the Muslim world apostasy is a capital offence, that in Maldives TOURISTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BRING THEIR HINDU BUDDHIST CHRISTIAN IDOLS, however in Christian majority Seychelles and Hindu majority Mauritius they freely can proves something. Islam’s MISOGYNY, INTOLERANCE AND BARBARITY.

    Also last, by writing about the destruction of Buddhism in Pakistan and Afghanistan and about Harihar and Bukka- forced converts to Islam who fled to South India to establish the flourishing Vijaynagar Empire I wanted to show they many Muslims were not oppressed low castes but part of another caste less religion Buddhism or war captives forcibly converted to Islam.

    Djoko,

    Thank you for posting that link. I am glad Muslim women are thinking about that. Here’s something I read Ibn Warraq, an Islamic scholar say about wife beating.” To give you an example of dishonest tinkering, take Sura IV.34: “As for those [women] from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge [or beat] them.” This translation comes from a Muslim. Another Muslim translator, Yusuf Ali, clearly disturbed by this verse, adds the word “lightly” in brackets after “beat,” even though there is no “lightly” in the original Arabic. Every Arabic dictionary or lexicon (such as, for example, the famous one by Ibn Manzur compiled in the thirteenth century) has glossed the Arabic verb daraba to mean hit, strike, or beat. Every Muslim translator until 1987 has thus translated daraba to mean hit, beat or strike. However, in 1987 Ahmed Ali translated the above verse as: “As for women you fear are averse, talk to them suasively; then leave them alone in bed (without molesting them), and go to bed with them (when they are willing).” For Ahmed Ali daraba is a euphemism for “to have sexual intercourse.”

    Since the Koran is not in Indonesia, not that many Indonesians may have read it in original arabic. However if Ibn Warraq is true, and he had to be substantially well read to criticize the Koran in his many books then if ” daraba ” had always been translated as beat strike and hit probably they are more right than Muslim evangelists in the post feminist world don’t you think? Also its worth noting that no scholar or site, including the one you posted disagrees about the existence of wife beating, only the force allowed to be used.Another important point, the site says wife beating is fine in extreme cases. But don’t you feel that sometimes the wife may as well be in the right and the husband at fault. When we beat anyone, be it our child or an animal( both are wrong according to me) we assume they are more ignorant than us and in an inferior position compared. The problem with Islamic wife beating is, it assumes that the wife is more foolish and less capable of taking wise decisions compared to her husband, and must always be rightly guided by her LORD!
    Again as to the contradiction in little Ayesha’s words, maybe Ayesha meant striking any other person, not a spouse. It reminds me of something I read in Not Without My Daughter when Betty Mahmoody gets beaten by her husband and her sister in law says that all men are like that and her husband does the same thing to her too. sometimes women in all communities( not only Muslims) so much accept second class treatment at the hands of their spouse that they find it normal and acceptable, and violence does not mean violence to them only to the outside world.

    Joko, I agree that I should stick to the topic which is Female genital Mutilation On the site last posted by you, I came across thename yusuf al qaradawi. as Timedog rightly asserts I am well read and its a name I heard before. Here’s what he says on female circumcision-”whoever finds it [FGM] serving the interest of his daughters should do it, and I personally support this under the current circumstances in the modern world.”
    Since he’s Egyptian I presume he is talking about the Egyptian style circumcision which ranges from cliterectomy, excision to infibulation not the Indo variety. As he says “modern world” I presume the sex obsessed Americanized globalized bad world where daughters will be subject to grave temptations so chopping off their genitals ” will preserve their chastity” and serve their( their fathers?) interest. Sorry, I cannot read any of his articles anymore.

  11. avatar Hitam Tapi Cina says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 4:49 pm

    That’s what happen when religion overrides common sense.
    That’s what happen when you are religious but are not educated in a sensible way.
    That’s what happen when religion is misinterpreted in an extreme way.
    That’s why today we have terrorism.

    Being religious without common sense is dangerous.
    Common sense, people

  12. avatar Lairedion says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    Well said, HTC, some thoughts on religion I relate to….

    “My own view of religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of
    fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race.” – Bertrand Russell

    “You can safely assume that you’ve created God in your own image, when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” – Anne Lamott

    “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.” – Seneca

    “Faith is believing what you know isn’t true” – Arthur C Clarke

    “Religion encysts past mythologies: guesses, hidden assumptions of trust in the universe, pronouncements made in search of personal power, all mingled with shreds of enlightenment. And always an unspoken commandment: Thou shalt not question! We break that commandment daily in the harnessing of human imagination to our deepest creativity.”

  13. avatar timdog says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 10:49 pm

    Shloka, I simply didn’t have the energy to go through your post in detail…

    I suggest you dedicate a little of your time to researching the history of the Kashmir crisis – and I do suggest you choose sources other than those produced by Indian nationalists, obviously…

    You certainly do see depressing slogans mentioning Hitler in the hands of over-excited Muslim protesters, but again, that’s no Muslim monopoly… On a bus travelling between Brahmour and Dalhousie in Himachal Pradesh I once met a charming Indian man from Calcutta who was “on tour” with his wife and children. He told me that all Muslims were subhuman, and that he admired Hitler; “What we are needing in this India,” he told me, “is Final Solution for Muslims like Hitler was having for Jews in Germany…”
    Mussalman ke do hi stan – Pakistan ya kabristan - know what that means do you? It’s a popular chant with many in India… for every example there’s a counter-example…

    Palestine certainly is about land and jobs; why is Malaysia’s Mahathir so bothered about it? Why are various western countries concerned about the conditions in Burma? About Tibet? And quite frankly, why the HELL are you so bothered about any of this?

    There is no purpose in me engaging with you further, but I will state this quite firmly:

    The likes of you Shloka, are very much part of the problem.

    Unlike you, I base my opinion of Islam and Muslims first and foremost on my own extensive personal firsthand experience of Muslims as INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS and of Muslim countries …

    When faced with reactionary rants a liberal like myself who is not a hysterical Islamaphobe, is forced into a defensive position… there is no chance for reasoned, productive discussion; I am obliged to trot out defensive, protestory examples from the non-Islamic world of all the “horrors” you list from the Islamic world (though I absolutely refuse to give over my time childishly to digging out the nasty bits from the bible in response to your scriptural quoting – though I know they’re there)…

    There are problems in the Islamic world today. They absolutely require reflection and sensible discussion, they need to be approached sensibly, rationally, and productively. But when the terms of the debate are dictated by inflexible, mud-headed bigots driven by a stubborn pre-decided position of blanket condemnation – people like you – we can end up with nothing but ceaseless, unhalting attack from your side, and an initially defensive, and ultimately confrontational position from mine… nothing productive lies in that direction… no solutions are founded, no compromise or consensus reached…
    “With us or against us” anyone? A half-wit child could tell you such an attitude can only be destructive… part of the problem, not the solution…

    And I’m just a non-religious liberal; you force me into that position, so how do you expect Muslims – even “moderate” ones – to react? Of course they will respond defensively to your barrage of hate…
    And coming under sustained intellectual attack is hardly healthy for morals or outlook… how can you possibly expect any Muslim to pause, to consider his own religion and society calmly when he is faced by a daily barrage of attacks from the likes of you? Is it any surprise if he retreats defensively into a corner and spends his intellectual time cooking up silly Zionist-conspiracy theories…
    YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM SHLOKA…

    I must say, it’s reassuring to compare the level, calm and rational tone of Djoko to that of Shloka, and that of the ridiculous Justin… but the Shlokas of this world, with their pseudo-scholarship and unhearing, unblinking machine-gun torrent of condemnatory “facts” and quotations, and the Justins with their absurd, hate-fuelled howling, are doing their very best to bring about a self-fulfilling prophecy, to wipe out and eliminate the Djokos (whether consciously or unconsciously I can’t say), and to replace them with nothing but an Islamic mirror of their own unflinching, uncompromising position of hate… and where do we go from there? It depresses me endlessly.

    You Shloka, and you Justin you gibbering baboon, are very much part of “the problem with Islam”, and in no way part of the solution…

  14. avatar dewaratugedeanom says:
    May 28th, 2008 at 10:29 pm

    Cukurungan

    4) We consider threesome is disgusting while the westerner consider, it is amazing

    Qur’an 33:51 “You may put off whom you please, and you may take to you whomever you desire. You may defer any of them you please, and you may have whomever you desire; there is no blame on you if you invite one who you had set aside. It is no sin. They should all be pleased with whatever you give them. Allah knows what is in your heart.”

    QED

    Timdog said

    Unlike you, I base my opinion of Islam and Muslims first and foremost on my own extensive personal firsthand experience of Muslims as INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS and of Muslim countries …

    If people from France, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Poland etc. had to base their opinion of Nazi-Germany on their own extensive personal firsthand experience of Germans as INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS they would now all wear Lederhosen, eat only Sauerkraut, raise their right arm while shouting ‘Heil Hitler’ and believe in the supremacy of the Arian race.

    As an educated man you certainly understand the analogies.

  15. avatar timdog says:
    May 29th, 2008 at 6:02 am

    Dewa – I certainly get the analogy; what I don’t get is the inference. Is your position then that we ought not to view Muslims as individual human beings? That we ought instead to view them as generic constituents of some “evil force” simply because they happen to have been born a Muslim? And if that is the case do you suggest following Justin’s absurd offer and “nuke Mecca”?

    To cast an analogy of my own, as I believe you are aware, I have a problem with Hindu-fundamentalism in India (actually I have a problem with all religious-fundamentalisms, but you’ll always find me more vociferous on little-known issues – for example, there’s no need for another voice on the subject of Tibet, but who has ever heard of Xinjiang?).
    I think Hindu-extremism in India is a disturbing phenomenon; it is certainly one capable of prompting bloody violence (though hopefully its moment of mainstream political ascendancy has passed – we shall see).
    However, I certainly do not for a minute consider there to be a pan-Hinduism “problem”. I wouldn’t for a moment be so absurd as to suggest that Indonesia’s 1965-66 violence reached its most frenzied apogee in Bali because of some innate savagery in the “Hindu character”; nor would I for a minute suggest that the suicide-bombing antics of the Tamil Tigers has anything to do with some special Hindu propensity towards violence. I wouldn’t blame decades of social and political turmoil in Nepal on “Hinduism’s incompatibility with organised society”, and I wouldn’t even point to the massacre of 2000 Sikhs in Delhi in 1984 as a “Hindu atrocity”. None of it; not for a moment. In fact, I would consider to do so to be absurd, offensive, dangerous and unhelpful.

    To my mind there is no decent, civilised option other than to continue viewing people, of all varieties, as INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS. Over the years in many Muslim countries (not least that “hotbed of fundamentalism” Pakistan) plenty of Muslims with every reason to be angry with “the West” have successfully managed to view me, a “Westerner”, as an INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEING. I return the compliment and view them the same way; I will continue to do so, and will continue to take issue with those who don’t.

    And as I argue above, I believe very strongly that ranting about “global Islam” from the likes of Shloka is very much part of the problem, and risks a self-fulfilling prophecy… When you do rant about “global Islam”, be you a raging Islamist or a bigoted Islamophobe, you debase, devalue and disenfranchise the individual humanity of Palestinians, Kashmiris, Chechnians, and ultimately, everyone…

    I wonder where Shloka’s gone?

  16. avatar Ron Low says:
    May 29th, 2008 at 9:37 am

    ^^ Over the years in many Muslim countries (not least that “hotbed of fundamentalism” Pakistan) plenty of Muslims with every reason to be angry with “the West” have successfully managed to view me, a “Westerner”, as an INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEING. I return the compliment and view them the same way; I will continue to do so, and will continue to take issue with those who don’t. ^^

    I THANK YOU for not lumping me in with the dopey half of the US population that voted to Bush in 2004.

    On what moral planet do we need to discuss whether it’s ok to cut peoples’ genitals?

  17. avatar Shloka says:
    May 29th, 2008 at 6:21 pm

    Timedog some violent acts in India with Muslims behind it, in recent years:

    29 October 2005 – 29 October 2005 Delhi bombings. Over 60 killed and over 180 injured in a series of three attacks in crowded markets and a bus, just 2 days before the Diwali festival. No Hindu violence on Muslims.
    7 March 2006 – 2006 Varanasi bombings. An attack attributed to Lashkar-e-Toiba by Uttar Pradesh government officials, over 28 killed and over 100 injured, in a series of attacks in the Sankath Mochan Hanuman temple and Cantonment Railway Station in the Hindu holy city of Varanasi. No Hindu response or violence.
    11 July 2006. Mumbai, India. 11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings were a series of seven bomb blasts that took place over a period of 11 minutes on the Suburban Railway in Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay). 209 people lost their lives and over 700 were injured in the attacks. No Hindu counter attacks.
    13th May 2008, Jaipur 5 blasts including one outside Hanuman Temple in Jaipur, killing 68 and injuring 180. Muslim terrorists have claimed responsibility for the attacks and vowed” to wipe out the religion of infidels” No Hindu counter attacks.
    And the LTTE has itself claimed it is a secular” Marxist” organization. Hinduism has no punishment on apostasy, so if the LTTE itself wants to call itself Marxist what can Hindus do. The Latin Shining Path calls itself Maoist. Since Catholicism no longer kills apostates, if the Shining Path calls itself non religious, who can object.
    All the above mentioned terror attacks were done by groups who called themselves Islamists. Maybe Muslims can excommunicate or denounce them, but they believe themselves to be Muslims. Please feel free to email me at shreya.d@rediffmail.com

  18. avatar dewaratugedeanom says:
    May 29th, 2008 at 10:02 pm

    justin et said

    Had it been my finger on the button I would have nuked Mecca then and there.

    Given a 7 days notice, why not? Less costly in terms of finance and collateral damage than the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  19. avatar Janma says:
    May 30th, 2008 at 10:25 am

    I am NOT going to let myself get sucked into this particular thread,

    Ahhhhh!
    I rather like Indonesia Matters, but to maintain that liking it is necessary for me to avoid the threads like this one – or I’ll end up howling with hysterical frustration…

    Timdog, consider yourself sucked! howling yet?

  20. avatar timdog says:
    May 30th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

    Howling like a rabid hyena Janma – can’t help myself… still, seems my howling might have scared Shloka off, not a bad thing… ;-)

  21. avatar Cukurungan says:
    May 30th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

    justin et said

    Had it been my finger on the button I would have nuked Mecca then and there.

    Given a 7 days notice, why not? Less costly in terms of finance and collateral damage than the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    I do not agree, there is no financial damage because of IRAQ WAR, imagine with more than 200,000 PTSD or psychiatric casualties, there will booming for US Health Care Service Industry.
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/565407

    And nuking Mecca, it will not happen anytime soon while Mr Bush and US Commander are still playing TAQIYA with Saudi Ruler

    I wonder where Shloka’s gone?

    He is taking taqiya course at white house

  22. avatar dewaratugedeanom says:
    May 30th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    timdog

    Dewa – I certainly get the analogy; what I don’t get is the inference. Is your position then that we ought not to view Muslims as individual human beings? That we ought instead to view them as generic constituents of some “evil force” simply because they happen to have been born a Muslim? And if that is the case do you suggest following Justin’s absurd offer and “nuke Mecca”?

    Sure we ought to consider Muslims as individual human beings to the same extent as we do others and I don’t consider them as generic constituents of some ‘evil force’ but as victims who had the bad luck to be born and raised in environments that were infected by the evil force called ‘Submission’, just like the Germans came under the influence of the evil force called Nazism. Now I’m not going to give a lecture about what I find so despicable about ‘Submission’, but suffice it to say that submission is the result of induced fear and that once you succeed in making people believe that submission is the only way to salvation you can do with them whatever you want. It’s a way to make people believe they are slaves, slaves of Allah (and by extension of his messenger) or of some self-appointed interpreters of a book that is considered ‘holy’. Slaves have to submit to their master and follow his orders and as the master doesn’t speak himself the orders have to come from those who believe they are his mouthpiece. In short, the whole idea of ‘Submission’ and prostration stinks.

    What happens in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka are local conflicts and can be dealt with as such. The difference is they don’t have an agenda to establish a worldwide Caliphate nor do they shout “Allahu akbar” when killing and raping. And if after 1400 years you still believe that interfaith dialogue will solve the problem you better review your history books and read the Qur’an and hadith.

  23. avatar timdog says:
    May 30th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

    Dewa – I don’t think we’ll get anywhere with this, but anyway – with your statement above you make it quite clear that you are not prepared to countenance the idea of Muslims as diverse, multifaceted, individually unique human beings – whether you view them with hatred or pity is besides the point…
    There are as many different kinds of Muslim as there are kinds of people in general: there are those for whom there religion is little more than a vague and rarely considered part of their identity; there are those for whom it is central; there are those for whom it is utterly private and personal, those who are demonstrative, those who are politicised, those who are mystical those who are fanatical – what a shame that you see them all as represented by a handful of shrieking fanatics… you and the Wahabbi nutjob both…

    You’re damn right that what happens in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka are local conflicts and can be dealt with as such… Why are you incapable of considering the idea that Kashmir or Palestine might also be local, territorial conflicts that can only be dealt with as such?
    Once again you and the politicised “global Islamist” join hands to dismis and brush aside the individual humanity of the people involved and to co-opt them – without asking for their consent – into “global Islam”. In the case of Kashmir in particular there have long been complaints from the Kashmiris that they have been used as political playthings by governments and non-Kashmiri Islamist forces – to the detriment of their cause for self-determination…

    You and the bin Ladens of this world, hand in hand, united in your quest to create, simply by convincing yourself that it exists, a “global Islam” at odds with everyone else… your views are, ultimately, destructive, and , as I have said before, part of the problem, not the solution…

  24. avatar Shloka says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 1:14 am

    Timedog, please respect the wishes of LTTE to be called a secular organization, even if you do not respect me. The founder Pirakaran named his son Charles Anthony, and even though Hindus are cremated, LTTE are buried. The LTTE does not cite any religious materials in their propagandas. How would Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Ali Hirsi or Ibn Warraq feel if someone forced them to identify themselves as Muslims? A Hindu fundie commented to me that, Salman Rushdie’s string of younger girlfriends in U.K. is typical of wealthy Muslims. I took pains to inform him that, Rushdie has renounced Islam and his actions or lifestyle should not be blamed on his ex faith.

  25. avatar Lairedion says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 6:47 am

    timdog said:

    You and the bin Ladens of this world, hand in hand, united in your quest to create, simply by convincing yourself that it exists, a “global Islam” at odds with everyone else… your views are, ultimately, destructive, and , as I have said before, part of the problem, not the solution…

    Your comment is highly offensive and disgusting. You have the nerve to put somebody, who have witnessed two terrorist bomb attacks on his home soil, on the same level as a mass murderer whose goal is to kill as many kafirs as possible.

    Why don’t you go on and chit-chat with Super PC Bule Rowan Williams back in the UK on how to implement Sharia Law in British Law in stead of trying to lecture non-Muslim Indonesians on the diversity of Muslims and the Religion of Peace?

    We don’t want to understand why churches are burnt down, why Ahmaddiyah people are harassed, why women in Aceh are caned, why all kafirs must be put to death, why the PKS is holding a party congress in Bali, why women traveling alone after dark are considered as whores, why non-Muslim schoolgirls in Padang must wear kerudung.

  26. avatar Shloka says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    Cuk, Shloka’s a she, not a he. And sure Timedog, I’ve heard of Xianjiang and I sympathise with the plight of the Muslim Uighurs just as much as Tibetan Buddhists. Both have a right to practice and preserve their distinct religious and cultural identity. Everything that I read about Muslims doesn’t automatically lead me to infer that Muslims are at fault. America as you must be aware, is dead against communism which in my opinion is the root cause of the overwhelming sympathy for Tibet. Why isn’t there a similar sympathy for Uighurs? Had militant Buddhists flown planes into WTC and bombed London, Madrid and Paris, undoubtedly there would be little sympathy for Tibetans too. However, since Uighurs are not responsible for any violence globally, they have my heartfelt support. If you are aware about any online petitions to the Chinese Government supporting either Tibet or Xianjiang, remind me to sign them.
    And Timedog, you didn’t scare me off, I was just busy. However, terrorism in my country sure scares me off. Every year there are terrorist bombings in a couple of places in India, almost invariably done by Muslim terrorists leading to the loss of hundreds of lives.Muslim terrorist groups clamor to take responsibility for them
    After the Jaipur bombings, I’m scared to go to popular tourist spots. As a history buff I loved my trip to Egypt but was scared stiff after the Luxor bombings which happened while I was in Egypt. Don’t forget my country is just next door to the nation you dub the “hotbed of fundamentalism” Pakistan. And Nepal has just 3% of the global Hindu population. Anyway, Nepal’s socio economic stagnation did not lead them to bomb neighbouring Muslim Bangladesh or Kashmir. Bangladesh’s terrorist outfit Huji is behind the Jaipur bombings in India a fortnight ago. Goodness knows what grievances the Bangladeshis have against this popular tourist site in Western India!

  27. avatar dewaratugedeanom says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 5:24 pm

    timdog
    You seem to have put your mind on coercing me to admit that I consider all Muslims as subhumans. Once again, and this for the last time, it’s the ideology which I criticize and attack. Please read my posts carefully and unbiased.

    You’re damn right that what happens in India, Nepal and Sri Lanka are local conflicts and can be dealt with as such… Why are you incapable of considering the idea that Kashmir or Palestine might also be local, territorial conflicts that can only be dealt with as such?

    Kashmir is also a local conflict, Palestine is much more.

  28. avatar timdog says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 5:42 pm

    Shloka, I have no problem calling the Tamil Tigers a secular organisation; the PLO is a secular organisation with…

    Lairedion, plenty of the comments about Muslims here are “highly offensive and disgusting”; many of them have genocidal undertones, or genocidal overtones for that matter (“nuke Mecca” anyone?).

    “Someone who has witnessed two terrorist bombs on his homeland whinge whine grouch grumble”? You’ve not got any monopoly on that buddy – how about four devastating co-ordinated Islamist suicide bombs in the capital of my homeland (a several others foiled since)? Doesn’t make me a raging bigot; the contrary – it makes me all the more determined to resist any course that exacerbates and entrenches divisions…

    The bin Ladens of this world believe that one billion Muslims worldwide are a single entity (absolute nonsense), and that they are, as an entity, under attack, and that they must resist that attack as a unified entity; the howling Islamaphobes here believe that one billion Muslims are a single entity (absolute nonsense), and that they are, as an entity, a force singularly wicked and hostile to “us” and an entity that must be… what exactly? Killed? Destroyed, anihilated? “Nuked”?

    The bin Laden’s and the Islamophobes, hand in hand, skipping down the path to destruction merrily chanting “Global Islam exists! All Muslims are the same!”, working towards the same goal, part of the problem, not the solution…

  29. avatar Lairedion says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 6:01 pm

    Spare me your PC bule crap. Westerners constantly fail to grasp the magnitude of the danger of Islam.

    Why would I take a soft approach on an ideology which message is bigotry? Islam has separated humans in three groups, Muslims, Book People and kafirs. For the Book People there is a wonderful invention called dhimmitude, for kafirs there are two options, forced conversion or death.

    And you call critics of Islam bigots? I think you need a wake-up call, buddy.

  30. avatar timdog says:
    May 31st, 2008 at 6:12 pm

    Dewa – sorry, we were typing at the same time… I’m fine with that if you do agree that the various local conflicts worldwide that happen to involve Muslims are just that – local conflicts…

    I think it is dangerous – from whichever side you come – to spend too much time considering Muslim “ideology”, especially when you then transfer that onto your considerations of real-life Muslims and their real-life problems and conflicts – it’s the same thing as the old colonialist tosh about “the oriental mind”…

    Despite what Islamists and Islamophobes will have you believe, Islam is no more monolithic in its effect on the outlooks of its adherents than other faiths. There are plenty of Muslims who are utterly, flawlessly morally good people, and who draw that from an intense faith (and this is coming from a comitted non-believer by the way); there are Christians, Jews, Hindus who are likewise. On the other hand there are Muslims, Christians, Hindus who are utterly wicked, and who likewise find the genesis of that wickedness in their faith…

    People have an enormous capacity for individual imagination and interpretation, no matter how apparently simple and monolithic the object you place before them… I’d rather not trot out the hoary old fable about the blind men and the elephant – I’m sure you know it… Now, if the blind men are surrounded by people yelling at them, telling them that there is something inately wicked about their blindness then they are likely to congregate together in search of defensive shelter, and will, perhaps find themsleves, all clustered around the elephant’s trunk – in which case they are more likely to concur in their interpretation of the elephant…
    Part of the problem, not the solution…

    Lairedion – so what then is your solution, may I ask? I fear that from your position you will find it impossible to offer one that is not bigotted, intolerant, or even genocidal…

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 »



Your view on “FGM” :


RSS
RSS feed
Email

Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-14
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact