Suicide in the name of Religion

[Muslimwoman]

How do you know that you are much more likely to be raped, robbed or murdered in the West than elsewhere?

Because I have lived in both places, have read the statistics and continue to read both English and Arabic newspapers.

Let’s be honest. Religious fatwas’ can be the impetus for peaceful inner strugglers to go hunting humans in observance of the fatwa. Did you ever hear of Salman Rushdie as one example?

You are correct, it can be the impetus for people turning to or supporting violence. Just as Bush's administration lied to the whole world about Saddam's regime and their weapons capabilities ... lies uncovered by the UK press I do believe and yet gathered tremendous support in the US and Europe for a war that has killed countless civilians. Now tell me which has caused more human deaths, the Rushdie fatwa or the Bush lies?

You’re hoping to side-step the question. In the KSA, for example, it’s reported that 100% of the population is Islamic. Are you really going to assert that every member of that society is Islamic by choice?

I am not attempting to side step anything, I am using a different example to make a point. Now can you deal with my argument .. you were suggesting that if Muslims are using suicide attacks that demonstrates that it MUST be taught by the faith. My argument is that if people are committing murder in the US then by your argument that must be ingrained in your laws or constitution.

As for the KSA I would imagine that a vast majority are Muslim by birth.

The question posed previously remains fully unanswered. There is overt discrimination toward competing religions in moslem lands™. There are numerous sources to document that so there really isn’t a conflicting argument. There are numerous sources to depict historical examples as well.

It does not remain unanswered, I stated my opinion very clearly, as you quoted "deciding that "come one, come all" is right for your country does not mean that the rest of the world is duty bound to agree with and follow you". If I live in a Muslim country and the population decides that it does not wish to open it's doors to all other faiths or people of no faith then that is up to the people of this country .. you can't force us to accept what we find unaccpetable just because you chose to have a come one come all society.

Well, according to the record, Mohammad led how many wars of aggression? I think three is the number.

and you accuse me of side stepping arguments. We were discussing slavery not wars, I gave you a statistic from historical data and you changed the subject.

Slavery is dehumanizing and attempting to claim that slavery is acceptable if the slaves are “Islamic slaves” is ridiculous.

Yes it is, which is why Islam dealt with the issue while your country was still an open landscape with Red Indians and buffalo wandering around it.

We are talking 1400 years ago, when Islam required Muslims to free slaves for the slightest thing. To treat slaves with dignity and fairness, to feed them and dress them in the same way as their masters, for their masters to help them with arduous work .. it was a requirement not a request.

Now show me any of that in your countries history of slavery, which was far more recent than the 7th century.

It's still tacitly and literally accepted in the Arab world, though. We see that in places such as the Sudan.

Yes shamefully for Sudan, and the KSA for that matter, forms of slavery still go on.

Of course it also still goes on in the UK too, where eastern european women are smuggled into the country and forced into prostitution (of course without English men willing to pay the price it would not happen). There are also the sweat shops, which despite a couple of decades trying to stamp out still do unfortunately exist. There is also the issue of western companies continuing to buy in products produced by small children (effectively slaves) earning a few pence a day in countries like India so that westerners can have cheaper products and keep the economy rolling along by shopping.

That in no way excuses the Sudan or KSA but perhaps demonstrates that these seemingly Muslim attitudes have much more to do with greed and petty human base desires than with religion.

Here’s an object lesson toward that. 1962 sounds correct. Almost fifty years ago.

Exscuse me but you were the one that wanted to point to what a group of Muslims were doing in KSA and Yemen in 1962 (when slavery was made illegal) .. when I counter that with what was happening in your country in the same period it is suddenly an issue of history.

I’ll say that as a nation, the U.S. can be proud of the progress it’s made in the correction of attitudes and prejudices regarding race. Did you ever hear of a guy named Obama?

Yes and I have also been on US military bases (as recently as 10 years ago) where whites and blacks have seperate disco's .. I also listened to the news reports and even commented on this forum about my astonishment that the US still allowed news reporters to say "America isn't ready for a black President". I believe I even started a thread on this forum asking Americans whether race was still such an issue in the US.

In Iran, they’re considering casting people off of cliffs for certain offenses.

This is the first I have heard about this so I did a search. I found a number of blogs and forums discussing the same article but can't find a reliable news source that talks about it at all.

I looked up "This is a chilling sentence," said Iranian human rights activist and lawyer Mohammad Ali Dadkhah" as I thought this would be quoted in news articles but the search returned 4 entries, all blogs.

The searches for Iran+casting (or cast) of cliff bring back 7 sites and all blogs or forums.

Maybe this is like the thread about "Jew calls Americans stupid and says they will kill every man woman and child in Palestine"?

Can you find a reliable news source for it?

However that said .. the discussions I can find say the punishment is for rape .. so I have to ask if the punishment is so cruel and revolting how many men will be willing to risk the punishment and rape a woman?

People are entitled to their religious beliefs, but when a belligerent group has the ability to cause death and destruction on a massive scale (and in fact has announced that goal), I’d just feel a lot safer if I knew they are operating on the basis of rational principles and the customary rules of logic. Once people with money and power begin to think they are being inspired to do gods work through mayhem, then we are at risk from mad men dictating policy. This is particularly onerous when you consider the virulent hatreds espoused by the islamist jihad all-stars.

To be honest I agree with you, I would like to see religious belief as a private individual matter and not a political system.

However, from where I sit in the middle east I can verbally condemn the radical extremists within Islam for their actions but must also do the same with the US and their actions in the ME. To us here Bush and his policies regarding the ME also appeared to be a mad man dictating policies and trying to force American accepted culture on us. He was trying to achieve his goals through total mayhem in Iraq, Afghanistan and in support of political Israel.

The Middle East is filled with nations that went from warring bedouin tribes to insanely wealthy ruling regimes in what-- 20 years (mid 1940's to OPEC in 1968 I believe)? The rest of the world gradually grew up out of its saber rattling over the course of centuries, and even we in the west aren't fully in control of our emotions versus our technological might. That there hasn't been a nuclear war since WW2 is astonishing, almost miraculous. But moslems are only now going through their theocratic crusade period, and the problem is it's not just with horses and swords. Add a jihadic mindset, a martyrdom desire and genetically altered biological weapons, and all humanity is at risk!

This is a discussion I have had before with Bobx. I accept that places like KSA are exactly as you describe but places like America demanding they grow up tomorrow and tow the party line is not the answer. Remember Bush's posturing about bringing rights to Afghan and Iraqi women ... how many are now dead in his crusade and yet in both countries the rights for women are drastically diminished now.

The crusades of islams past maybe could have killed a few million people over the course of a few centuries, but the crusade of al-Qada could take out billions and leave nothing but a tattered shoe flapping in the silent wind as the human race's epitaph.

and yet history shows that your country to date is the only one that has been insane enough to use weapons of mass destruction against another countries civilian population.

What is more scary, an imagined threat that someone could maybe do it or proof positive that they will and have?

This mustn't be allowed. I have no intention of dying because someone else's "god says" I should.

Good and we in the ME have no intention of dying because the US wants ME oil or wants to provide Israels military might in creating a Jewish state and wants to impose it's standards on ME culture. Is that stalemate then?

You see there is something you seem to be missing in your argument. Imposing America's worldview of what is right and proper on countries by military force or political power is an exact mirror of what creats Islamic extremism. This "we are right and you will conform to our views or else".

This is best demonstrated in two ways:

1) French cheese .. sounds silly I know but bear with me. Because Europe refused to import hormone filled beef from the US because of health concerns the US retaliated by upping import taxes on one brand of French cheese by 300%. That is what the outside world see's of the US .. a petty administration that will listen to nobody but itself, we WILL accept hormone laden beef or we WILL be punished.

2) UN resolutions .. we see US representatives in the UN purple faced with incredulity that Iran will not adhere to UN resolutions .. yet "their mate" Israel has ignored (I believe) every single UN resolution ever issued regarding Israel and we hear not a peep out of the US administration.

So how can the US then stand on the world stage and say we are the champions of equality and fair play?

So I stick to my assertion that the US should get it's own house in order before it runs around the world playing chess with other countries and slaughtering civilians in the process of it's world vision.

Then you have people like Ms Rice turning up in the ME and saying astoundingly arrogant things like "we are creating the new map of the Middle East" .. then wondering why Arabs get a bit aggravated and tell the US to sod off and mind it's own business.

 

[Muslimwoman]

It hardly seems fair because it doesn’t make sense. I don’t see yanks plowing cars into crowds of other yanks to the intonation of Jesus is Great.

Perhaps you would like to present that view to the population of Iraq!!

I hardly think we’re badly dressed, anyway.

Har har har, I know jokes about the way American tourists dress in at least 7 different languages. But thank you for making my point, people tend to get defensive when you generalise about them due to the way they dress.

Further, in case you missed it, these references to the American Indian are just a little dated. Are you hoping to justify the racist genocide being committed currently by Arabs in the Sudan with references to the America west of 150 years ago? It may make you fell better about yourself but the comparisons are a little childish.

How interesting, you continuously point to Islamic behaviour dating back to 1400 years ago and everything in between but mention 150 years ago in the US and I am getting childish.

I never attempt to justify racist genocide by anyone and I have pointed out many times on this forum that Islam is indeed judged externally by the actions of Muslims. So shall we now discuss the billion or so Muslims that live peacefully in the world with no political agenda or doesn't that fit with your argument?

I suppose if people need to be reminded why they have to 'hate Jews', moslems are best to do that. Your comments really do tend to reinforce stereotypes about moslems and their (as you so eloquently described it), “inbred hatred for Jews.”

Actually the feeling here towards Judaism and is one of respect (plus comments about calf worshipping thrown in for good measure). The hatred towards Jews stems largely from the issue of Israel. Most Egyptians hate Israel and fear their claims to have a G-d given right to the land from wherever it starts to the far side of the Nile .. that is a big chunk of Egypt. They are also still smarting from the war with Israel and will not easily forget it, so yes they teach their children hatred as I have stated on this forum before.

scripturally sanctioned revulsion for Jews.

Prove it but don't get testy when I explain the accepted meaning of the passages or add the historical context of which tribe of Jews the verse was refering to.

It is through this lens that the islamist faithful view the world.

Wow I had better have a good rethink about how I treat non-Muslims then and thank you for telling me how wrong I have been getting it. I shall be sure to instruct all my Muslims friends and religious teachers on where we are going wrong. It is an absolute pleasure to be lectured by you on our belief system!!

That’s interesting because if Western nations seek to silence these purveyors of hate or prepare to depot them, we’re marked as racist™ or even islamophobic™.

Actually the reason the UK had so much trouble deporting captain hook is two fold:

1) the Arab nations wouldn't take him back. They had every intention of silencing him permanently before the cuddly UK stepped in to offer him his human rights and free speech.

2) the human rights activists in the UK went to court stating he would be killed if returned to the ME.

Most Muslims in the UK were desperate to be rid of him but of course his radical supporters shouted islamophobia as would be expected.

Actually, no. It’s important to remember that the acts of terrorism seem to far outweigh the “good articles”.

and of course that is evidence that all Muslims are evil and planning to kill non-Muslims and Islam is rotten to the core. Or could it simply be that the bad stories are much more sensational news copy?

Now look up news articles about Israel and Palestine, then look up news articles about peace groups and their works in Israel and Palestine .. which make the headlines?

I will also repeat that when told on this forum that no Muslims in the ME protested after 9/11 I posted numerous articles from Arab news sources about marches against terrorism, including a huge march in the middle of Tehran .. right after 9/11. Many members of this forum stated that none of these marches had been in the western media and it was the first they had heard of them. I also posted a link to the 29 page letter from Saudi clerics explaining to bin Laden and crew that their act was unIslamic. Yet some imam in some outback says "death to the kaffir" and it's on the front page of every western media outlet in minutes.

It’s s shame that your feigned righteous indignation at these Wahabbi institutions is simply ignored by moslems who are tainted by them.

"Feigned righteous indignation" ... why do you come to an interfaith discussion forum and then throw insults and stupid assumptions around, it just makes you look silly.

Let’s remember the methods that Hussein used to control the internecine hatreds. Those methods were discovered when mass graves were unearthed and bodies of dead moslems began popping up like fields of summer dandelions.

You are still avoiding the request for evidence. You asserted that Muslims are attacking non-Muslims on a daily basis and I asked you for proof, so far you have offered one attack by a Muslim against Muslims of another sect and now you offer Saddam killing Muslims.

So again, where is your evidence to back up your claim that Muslims are attacking and killing non-Muslims on a daily basis?

It’s fine to denigrate me with the “you hate all muslims”, charge but that doesn’t explain anything and it doesn’t reflect the truth. I’ll remind you that it’s not me, using a politico-religious ideology that is wreaking havoc with suicide bombings.

The evidence so far is that you do hate Muslims, are convinced they are a danger in the world and that all of this is sanctioned if not demanded by our faith.

and I shall remind you that it is also not me, or another billion or so Muslims that are not doing it either .. so have we all got it wrong?

Why do you feel a need to interpret verses to me? These are always subjective and open to interpretation by whomever wants to interpret them.

I do hope that is a joke. You post verses of the Quran and hadith with no knowledge of what they mean and then state what you believe they are evidence of but when pointed out that your understanding is incorrect (according to Muslim scholars for 1400 years and no they have never changed their mind as I took the meaning from the oldest Islamic tafsir book) it is suddenly subjective.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Ever since the Taliban blew up that 3000 year old buddha statue carving, and thinking that Islam is only getting started, I`ve been convinced that Muslims will not stop blowing up things until there is a Mosque on every holy ground in every holy place in the world. Like how once Christians wanted with Churches.

Am I wrong in thinking that thats what Taliban wants?

Salam TK

I am afraid I can't tell you what the Taliban wants, they are a total mystery to me. When they were burning books and music they even burnt music by Muslims praising Allah .. the mind just boggles sometimes.

However, it is my understanding that they would only allow Islamic religious symbols in Afghanistan, seeing anything else as idol worship .. which shows their total lack of understanding of who and what Buddah was.

To me it would be like blowing up the pyramids or the Sphinx ... I shudder to think about it.

p.s. I find good Muslims to be quite pleasant btw.

Thank you, there is good and bad in all societies.

Then I must ask why the black cape?

Thank you for asking. This thread may help you understand.

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/why-do-you-think-i-6954.html

as a general question towards all westernized Muslims? I don`t really want to get into a major argument but I think the black cape is only trouble, as its those kinds of traditions the Taliban wants to preserve(kill) correct?

The Taliban have a perverse view of women, during their regime they actually made women paint their windows black so men passing in the street were not in "danger" of seeing them, women had to travel on buses with blackened windows, all but one hospital in the capital city refused to treat women and the women only hospital had no supplies or clean water and religious police would beat women with sticks in the street if their shoes made too much noise.

Unfortunately it's issues like this that makes the non-Muslim world see the outer clothing (as well as Islam itself) as a symbol of oppression .. it isn't but in some instances has been used that way.

Then I`d like to ask Muslims why some of them chop peoples heads and hands off for petty crime, and expect to be accepted worldwide.

Firstly Muslims really aren't that concerned with what is accepted worldwide, we don't buy into this one world vision led by the US and Muslim countries live by their laws.

Many punishments in Islam were intended to be cruel and severe, the idea being that very few people would commit such crimes knowing what the punishment was. Someone in the UK might decide to steal knowing the worst that would happen is a couple of months in prison with 3 meals a day and a colour tv .. would they do it if they knew their limbs would be cut off?

Also there is a system in Islam of charity which if implemented correctly means the very poorest person should never need to steal, thus stealing would be through desire not necessity. Whilst the Prophet implemented this system fairly it is only honest to say that modern Muslim countries fail to do so as they are almost as wrapped up in capitalism as the west is now.

To name a few, I don`t know about Egypt but I have a feeling that in most Middle Eastern countries adultery can be ligitimate reasons to be executed. Isn`t it those kinds of things that brings or will bring tension between people?

The accepted punishment (by all 4 schools of Islam .. although I tend to argue against it as the word rajm does not exist in the Quran but that's another topic) for adultery is rajm (stoning to death) of both the man and woman if both are married or rajm for the married person and 100 lashes and banishment for 1 year for the unmarried person.

Again this punishment is often quoted but without the rest of the information. For example, in order to prove adultery you must:

a) confess to the crime and refuse to withdraw your confession

b) produce 4 male reliable witnesses (ie their testimony has never been proven false before) that actually saw the male genitals entering the female genitals and if one of the witness statements is slightly different to the others the case is not proven .. bear in mind that anyone found falsely accusing someone is subject to punishment themselves and their testimony can never be used for anything in the future

c) a woman becomes pregnant and has never claimed to be raped

Again the idea is to stop adultery within our society, not to go around killing people. If you know the punishment is death then why would you do it?

Now those are the rules set out in Islam and confirmed by the Prophets actions and you can see that it would be virtually impossible to hand down the punishment of rajm ...

BUT what some Muslim countries do is far removed from that, as we can see with the case of Aisha the 13 year old rape victim that was stoned to death by the militia in Somalia and the countless rape victims killed under the old hudood laws of Pakistan (there is no punishment for a rape victim in Islam by the way only for the rapists).

Even if she was a willing participant the punishment could only be 100 lashes so where the hell do they get stoning to death of an unmarried girl from .. it just proves they may call themselves a sharia court but are not using sharia law, they are just a militia trying to terrorise people.

And if I may ask I`d like to know what prompted you to go that orthodox, while you know what the modern world is about.

Firstly because I do know what the modern world is about and I am not a huge fan, I believe we (in the west) have gone too far on a number of issues so have retreated to a place where I find peace, solitude (when I want it) and a way of life that personally suits me.

I made the choice to cover my face here because I look nothing like an Egyptian and live in a place with virtually no other westerners so get a lot of unwanted attention. When I cover completely I go largely un-noticed .. in fact men actually make a point of not talking to or looking at me because I have made it obvious by my mode of dress that I do not want that form of attention.

The first time I wanted to travel from here to the UK I went to Al-Azhar (the oldest Islamic university in the world) and discussed my concerns about the reaction of people 'back home'. I was informed that my dress is a form of protection and if I feel my dress has the opposite effect then of course I should not wear it but should cover as much of myself as I can without standing out.

So when I travel to the UK I dress in trousers, a long loose shirt, coat or long cardigan .. as I said to Redesigned when in Rome and all that.

Women covering up was ordained as a form of protection, not as a form of oppression or punishment and I am living proof that it does precicely that, I dress as I need to in order to get the least attention possible for wherever I am.

Oh, btw, when I see orthodox Jews dressed up in their outfits at the airport it annoys the hell out of me. They can have horse carriages take them where ever they want to go.

Why does it annoy you? It is only clothing, it has no effect whatsoever on your life.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Note to self .... write shorter replies ... sorry everyone

 

[Resigned]

Note to self .... write shorter replies ... sorry everyone

Not at all. It’s actually refreshing to see someone write out their responses without silly one-liners and cutting / pasting banners.

At any rate, the thread has traveled far and wide from the original premise and there are other posts I’ve neglected to respond to as this thread has taken time to maintain. I’ll let your last post sit for a bit unless there is something specific that you would like addressed.

 

[Netti-Netti]

At any rate, the thread has traveled far and wide from the original premise .

Would be the premise you have yet to defend?

 

[TheKhan]

Hi Muslimwoman,

Thanks for the response. It has definitely informed me better.

Just to note a couple responses from my heart. Don`t take it personally I may be talking to Muslims in general in some instances.

If a Japanese imperialist got extreme(and they are probably just like Hamas..), they cannot defy the top authority or it means utter destruction handed down by one or all of us at all costs. Meaning a Japanese extremist cannot do what they want once a general course is set. And the general course that has been set is non-violence.

I was wondering why those Muslims who are committing those crimes against humanity are not put in check by other Muslims. Maybe this has been tried, but I do feel I have not heard enough of it, as most likely if a Jihad-like movement took place at those like the Taliban it would probably end in 2 days. So to hear that the Taliban is not Muslim is rather not convincing for me to think that Muslims are doing everything they can to restrict their fundamental movements.

I would rather like to hear that Muslims are doing everything they can, but frankly it doesn`t look that way to me. And just like if a Japanese extremist happened to do extreme things the Japanese be held responsible, I think Muslims are responsible for their extremist.


Well, with regards to the Muslim punishments. It is from at least the 1700`s correct? In the UK they banned their cruel form of punishment in the 1800`s and in Japan late 1800`s people with licenses to kill at will was banned. For reasons that I think whole books could be written on. And I`ve been wondering for some time why only in the Middle East 1700`s practices have not been banned? Although in some areas like having more than one wife seems will change rapidly.

To note, these practices I feel should be reformed as when our cultures get closer, and that will happen, as for example if Muslims are stoning a women to death from another culture, that women`s brothers and relatives will not be standing by in most cultures, actually they might be doing suicide rampage runs. While Muslims may feel that what they do is right, in other places it may be considered wrong and reason to Jihad back. And under those circumstances why would Muslims not reform themselves to create the least tension? if that is the case.

It`s probably not that simple but I hope you get a general sense of what I`m trying to say. Putting it blunt, if a friend of mine got his hands cut off for stealing (and people steal all the time, ideas, plans etc..) by a Muslim, that Muslim will die. And from there it will never stop until all of us are dead. Under those circumstances would Muslims still want to fight to the death and cut off my friends hands? As they generally feel is right if one crimes at this present?

And any Muslim I`ve come across would not be cutting off anyone`s hands.

Why does it annoy you? It is only clothing, it has no effect whatsoever on your life.

It annoys me because I feel that they are scared. Maybe that a bomber might come around anytime, I don`t know. Because I know ancient Jews did not dress like that, yet they chose to freeze time on their fashion and ideals. Some Christians are like that in the US, but I don`t think they travel, keep it to themselves, I heard that these days they have mobile phones. Maybe it upsets me because they are not trying their best to create the least tension between them and other people. While they uphold their religious beliefs in the name of religion (part of it is envy, as I can`t walk around with a sword).


TK

p.s. the black cape. when I see them, my first response is they look like angels of death. then I wonder if I have to worry about any bombings, with a cool face so nobody notices. maybe that`s the reason why people might leave those women alone these days. frankly, I`ve never seen my dentist without his or her mask on, and because of that I`ve not yet said "hi" to them which I feel is unfortunate, if we talk we just talk, probably because they know what I look like but I don`t know what they look like so I`m never sure who I`m talking to.

I already know that going orthodox is trouble, that`s why my grandparents went to world war II. We called back the traditions we banned in the 1800`s (ritual suicide, beheadings etc..), and IMO went partially communist to counter communists. But when you check into it, my great-grandparents were more naturally Japanese but their thoughts were more liberal, while the colonists like Russia were agressively working their way towards Japan. You`ve gotta watch out when orthodox comes back, it could be a sign of troubled times when the masses do that.

Hey, maybe you could invent a digital display sign to put on your black cape so that you absolutely don`t even have to talk to men when wearing it.

And absolutely not how Eden was laid down. I wonder what the Muslim goal is?　Besides the obvious.


TK

 

[Netti-Netti]

The description (a black sack), is accurate.

Here are some examples of Pakistan's "Black Sack" fashion trends. Btw, thanks for this assignment.

 

[Netti-Netti]

If you choose to take offense, that is up to you.

Why would you feel that your willful ignorance and self-styled cultural hubris would be offensive? Are you trying to tel us something about your motives/agenda here?

 

[Resigned]

I was wondering why those Muslims who are committing those crimes against humanity are not put in check by other Muslims. Maybe this has been tried, but I do feel I have not heard enough of it, as most likely if a Jihad-like movement took place at those like the Taliban it would probably end in 2 days. So to hear that the Taliban is not Muslim is rather not convincing for me to think that Muslims are doing everything they can to restrict their fundamental movements.

I would rather like to hear that Muslims are doing everything they can, but frankly it doesn`t look that way to me. And just like if a Japanese extremist happened to do extreme things the Japanese be held responsible, I think Muslims are responsible for their extremist.

TK

I though the part above was really insightful.

Terrorism is a vital component of the modern fundamentalist terrorists' religion. And so is propaganda and the familiar claim of innocence and pointing the finger of blame at the West. When terrorists instill fear in their enemies through random acts of violence, they have won the psychological war. When terrorists play the victim and quell the international community's will to retaliate, they have won the political war. Isn't it funny how we see all these moslem "victims" running around with machine guns, complaining of discrimination, whining about being unfairly accused of terrorist bombings, and warning their enemies of the innocent civilians that would be killed in a military reprisal? They justify their murderous acts by claiming to be oppressed by non-moslems. But if they were truly fighting oppression, they would surely lash out at their own oppressive governments first. On the contrary; they seem to be doing their oppressive government's bidding. When terrorists are given the chance to run their own governments, the first thing they do is lock down their society, remove all human rights, and oppress everyone within their borders with intolerable religious laws and vicious, cruel, and ruthless enforcement. "Oppression", indeed. It's no accident that these patterns are seen over and over again; it's a well-thought-out, effective strategy, and it will continue to succeed unless and until their lies are exposed. These are not random acts perpetrated by insane criminals; they are deliberately orchestrated by well-organized, deeply religious, petrol-funded terrorist organizations, many of whom operate under the guise of Islamic "charities" and receive direct aid from Arab governments and oil companies.

 

[Netti-Netti]

Terrorism is a vital component of the modern fundamentalist terrorists' religion.

How vital?

And so is propaganda and the familiar claim of innocence and pointing the finger of blame at the West. When terrorists instill fear in their enemies through random acts of violence, they have won the psychological war.

You think 9/11 was random?

When terrorists play the victim and quell the international community's will to retaliate, they have won the political war.

Which terrorists have played the victim?

Isn't it funny how we see all these moslem "victims" running around with machine guns, complaining of discrimination, whining about being unfairly accused of terrorist bombings, and warning their enemies of the innocent civilians that would be killed in a military reprisal?

You think it's funny?

They justify their murderous acts by claiming to be oppressed by non-moslems.

I gather you don't believe there is any oppression of the Palestinians. Starving them is not oppressive? Controlling their movements is not oppressive? Kidnapping and jailing them capriciously is not oppressive? Killing and maiming women and children and babies is not oppressive?

But if they were truly fighting oppression, they would surely lash out at their own oppressive governments first.

Maybe you should send them a memo to that effect.

On the contrary; they seem to be doing their oppressive government's bidding.

It is said that the US has been fighting a proxy war for Israel and Saudi Arabia.

When terrorists are given the chance to run their own governments, the first thing they do is lock down their society, remove all human rights, and oppress everyone within their borders with intolerable religious laws and vicious, cruel, and ruthless enforcement.

Example?

"Oppression", indeed. It's no accident that these patterns are seen over and over again; it's a well-thought-out, effective strategy, and it will continue to succeed unless and until their lies are exposed.

Which lies?

These are not random acts perpetrated by insane criminals; they are deliberately orchestrated by well-organized, deeply religious, petrol-funded terrorist organizations, many of whom operate under the guise of Islamic "charities" and receive direct aid from Arab governments and oil companies.

Example?

As usual, a zero substance post.

 

[farhan]

Terrorism is a vital component of the modern fundamentalist terrorists' religion.

This is rather funny. So who exactly was funding billions to create those terrorists a few decades ago? Wasent it your own mass-murdering government & intelligence. And religion? comeon. Its for oil & real-state. A few more settlers today in the west-bank. I am sure Israeli spokesman would say, "and kheemaas eez to bee held reesponseebal for that"......... some cultures consider truth-o-phobia a virtue.

 

[Netti-Netti]

These are not random acts perpetrated by insane criminals; they are deliberately orchestrated by well-organized, deeply religious, petrol-funded terrorist organizations...

Was there a reason why you omitted the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which the Wiki describes as

"a coalition of Palestinian militias in the West Bank. The groups name refers to the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. Unlike other Palestinian groups, they are not Islamists despite their name."
​

And why do you overlook the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)? The Wiki describes them as

"a Marxist-Leninist, secular, nationalist Palestinian political and paramilitary organization, founded in 1967. It has consistently been the second-largest of the groups forming the Palestine Liberation Organization (the largest being Fatah)."
​

And wasn't the PLO secular/nationalistic?

One other thing: how do you measure "deeply religious"?

Is there a single claim in your most recent post that you can attest to based on available facts?

 

[Resigned]

This is rather funny. So who exactly was funding billions to create those terrorists a few decades ago? Wasent it your own mass-murdering government & intelligence. And religion? comeon. Its for oil & real-state. A few more settlers today in the west-bank. I am sure Israeli spokesman would say, "and kheemaas eez to bee held reesponseebal for that"......... some cultures consider truth-o-phobia a virtue.

I understand you’re in denial of facts but that doesn’t shelter you from the truth.

I know if I were you, I'd hate to have someone think that cliche' ridden, barely readable nonsense was my creation.

 

[farhan]

I understand you’re in denial of facts but that doesn’t shelter you from the truth.

....ahem....facts? what? where? so US didn't sponsor militants in Afghanistan? They didnt give WMDs to Saddam? They didnt use him to kill Abdul-Kareem either? Where do you get all your truths from ... Cave News Network?

I'd hate to have someone think that cliche' ridden, barely readable nonsense was my creation.

It is slowly dawning upon me that you type just for the fun of it. Too many useless words thrown irresponsibly in every sentence. And if you cant read my simple English, you better work on your comprehension skills.

 

[Resigned]

....ahem....facts? what? where? so US didn't sponsor militants in Afghanistan? They didnt give WMDs to Saddam? They didnt use him to kill Abdul-Kareem either? Where do you get all your truths from ... Cave News Network?

It is slowly dawning upon me that you type just for the fun of it. Too many useless words thrown irresponsibly in every sentence. And if you cant read my simple English, you better work on your comprehension skills.

That's all quite the side step in regard to Islamic terrorists using charities as fronts for terrorist activities. Did you hope that no one would notice your poorly executed attempt at evasion?

 

[Netti-Netti]

They are the product of an ideology that creates and nurtures the conflicts we see today. Scared women hiding in their homes or under a shapeless black sack...

More examples of virulent, politically motivated clothing from the Muslim world:

 

[Resigned]

I suppose the throngs of people in a funeral procession presented the target rich environment that makes a holy warrior™ want to strap on a bomb vest and mass slaughter adherents of the competing religious sect.

Not that a fair portion of the Middle East is bothered by such occurrances. In fact, as far as some folks in the region are concerned, it's all martyrdom and sweets from here on out.

Of course, though, not everyone is quite so sanguine about the prospects of a revival of the wholesome medieval Islamic values of sharia, jihad, and... holy mass murder.

Fortunately, this reprehensible suicide bomber is done with any additional infliction of suffering. Unfortunately, however, there are still human high explosives/nail delivery devices… I mean martyrs to throw onto God's bonfire of hatred.

Subhan Allah.



Suicide blast kills 30 at Pakistan Shiite funeral

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090220/wl_sthasia_afp/pakistanunrestnorthwestblasttoll_20090220093250

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AFP) – A suicide bomber attacked a funeral procession for an assassinated local Shiite Muslim leader in northwest Pakistan on Friday, killing 30 people and putting furious mobs on the rampage.


The explosion took place near a Shiite mosque in Dera Ismail Khan, a town on the edge of Pakistan's restive tribal areas with a history of sectarian violence, which has been on the rise in the Sunni-majority country.


"Thirty people have died and 65 are injured," Saadullah Khan, a police official in the town, told AFP by telephone.


Hospital and police officials earlier put the death toll at 20, with dozens of others wounded. Police said the attack was carried out by a suicide bomber.


Soldiers were ordered to deploy and a curfew enforced after intense volleys of gunfire from panicked mourners at the funeral for the late Sher Zaman degenerated into angry riots.

The attack came two weeks after 35 people died in a suspected suicide bombing against Shiite worshippers in the Punjab town of Dera Ghazi Khan on February 5 in one of the country's deadliest sectarian attacks.


Around 90 people have been killed in suicide and bomb attacks across Pakistan so far this year and more than 1,600 since government forces besieged militants holed up in a radical mosque in Islamabad in July 2007.

 

[Netti-Netti]

I suppose the throngs of people in a funeral procession presented the target rich environment that makes a holy warrior™ want to strap on a bomb vest and mass slaughter adherents of the competing religious sect.

...there are still...martyrs to throw onto God's bonfire of hatred.

So tell me, who is this "holy warrrior?"

The bomber hasn't even been identified and here you are already with your usual cliche' ridden characterizations about a nameless person.

Report back when you have some information to share. Hint: an isolated news story will rarely tell you anything about religious or sectarian motives, so you'll have to do some work to get essential details.

Of course, though, not everyone is quite so sanguine about the prospects of a revival of the wholesome medieval Islamic values of sharia, jihad, and... holy mass murder.

I dont have much of a sense for the scale of the so-called "revival." Maybe you have some actual information on that??

In light of the imagery about "medieval Islamic values," I'd be curious how how you'd explain up 97% of contemporary Muslims endorsing Democracy and pluralism. Do Westerners share these same medieval values regarding Democracy and pluralism?

 

[Netti-Netti]

Subhan Allah.

Are you a Muslim?

If not, how dare you masquerade as one in your continued efforts to mock Muslims and Islam?