Twin gifts for india

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

You did not convert, the alternative is death brought to you by the religion of "peace".

Until we together, as the rest of the world, banish this religion we shall be assaulted from the seeds of its teachings.

You would seem more intelligent if you read and looked into things before you posted. The article cited the ISI, which had nothing to do with "that" religion.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes...rticleshow/2310796.cms

NEW DELHI: Central security agencies on Saturday night said that banned Harkat-ul-Jehadi Islami militant outfit of Bangladesh was possibly behind the twin blast in Hyderabad in which 30 people were killed.

You should apologize.

The original story said that the ISI was most likely responsible. That is what you had to work with when you made your statement. Obviously you didn't read or comprehend the original reference. You NOW come up with something else that says it "possibly" could be someone else, dated 26 Aug. Your reference is dated a full day later, and it's based on a supposition.

Now since we have determined that the original suspicion was the ISI, you of course know that Musharraf took great pains to remove the Islamicists (who are a personal threat to him) from positions of power.

From FAS

"Pakistan's military leader, General Pervez Musharraf, has attempted to rein in the ISI. Since September 11th, Islamic fundamentalists have been purged from leadership positions. This includes then-ISI head Lieutenant General Mahmood Ahmed, who was replaced in October 2001 by Lieutenant General Ehsanul Haq."

There MAY be religious involvement here, but there is an ongoing fight over territory both sides claim. This is about politics and land just as much or more than anything else.



No apology is needed.

A good dance to move from the fact that it was Muslims who carried out this act of war, to saying their motivation has no relation to their ideological profile. Yet I do not agree, so hear me out.

Islamists believe the implementation of Sharia law across the planet is a mandate, so you?re correct about it being about politics and land. The question I pose to you, is why?

Do you say ?This is about politics and land? for Pakistan, India, Thailand, Afghanistan, Iraq, Darfur, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Chechnya, and every nation facing a Muslim insurgency? Their ideology and teachings, brought forth by religion, separates them from the nation in which they live. These separatist teachings turn into an insurgency, which turns into civil war, which usually results in a new hardcore Islamic state.

You mention Pakistan and Musharraf, but he is one man who took control by military might. A strongman like Saddam who stands against the disease that plagues Islam. Yet, just listen to his Ministers: Pakistani Minister tells Parliament: Jews behind 9/11, Qur'an says Jews and Christians can never be friends of Muslims From the horse?s mouth, you get a self proclaimed motivation and sentiments of radicalization from Pakistani government.

I would argue Musharraf goes against the will of his people, and will soon find himself dead or replaced. Maybe I am wrong on Pakistan, we will see.

We will also see further acts of war across the globe, carried out by the assailants for their god. I would argue it has everything to do with ?that? religion.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

 

[athithi]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

Which planet was that again?

In a population of 1.1 billion with about 85% Hindus and about 13% Muslims, the fact that the number of Muslim attacks are significantly greater, equal, or at the very least, comparable to Hindu attacks, speaks volumes for the extent of hate groups in either one. The Muslim community overwhelmingly bears the burden for the presence of vast numbers of terrorists in their midst. Now, obviously, that doesn't mean innocent Muslims are responsible for the creation of these terrorists, but they have an obligation to the rest of the world to look inward and fix what's so obviously broken in their religion and communities. The same standard applies to Hindus, no doubt. But the truth is, Hindu terrorism is a fraction of Islamic terrorism - even in India, where Hindus are the overwhelming majority.

The ISI, just as Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, has eternally used Islam and Islamic groups to propagate their terror. It is the intelligence arm of an Islamic fundamentalist state. Let alone ISI, if the nation of Pakistan participates in terrorism, it is by definition an Islamic act of terrorism.

Hayabusa Rider is just splitting hairs here.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

Which planet was that again?

In a population of 1.1 billion with about 85% Hindus and about 13% Muslims, the fact that the number of Muslim attacks are significantly greater, equal, or at the very least, comparable to Hindu attacks, speaks volumes for the extent of hate groups in either one. The Muslim community overwhelmingly bears the burden for the presence of vast numbers of terrorists in their midst. Now, obviously, that doesn't mean innocent Muslims are responsible for the creation of these terrorists, but they have an obligation to the rest of the world to look inward and fix what's so obviously broken in their religion and communities. The same standard applies to Hindus, no doubt. But the truth is, Hindu terrorism is a fraction of Islamic terrorism - even in India, where Hindus are the overwhelming majority.

The ISI, just as Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, has eternally used Islam and Islamic groups to propagate their terror. It is the intelligence arm of an Islamic fundamentalist state. Let alone ISI, if the nation of Pakistan participates in terrorism, it is by definition an Islamic act of terrorism.

Hayabusa Rider is just splitting hairs here.

thanks for your biased post.

 

[athithi]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

Which planet was that again?

In a population of 1.1 billion with about 85% Hindus and about 13% Muslims, the fact that the number of Muslim attacks are significantly greater, equal, or at the very least, comparable to Hindu attacks, speaks volumes for the extent of hate groups in either one. The Muslim community overwhelmingly bears the burden for the presence of vast numbers of terrorists in their midst. Now, obviously, that doesn't mean innocent Muslims are responsible for the creation of these terrorists, but they have an obligation to the rest of the world to look inward and fix what's so obviously broken in their religion and communities. The same standard applies to Hindus, no doubt. But the truth is, Hindu terrorism is a fraction of Islamic terrorism - even in India, where Hindus are the overwhelming majority.

The ISI, just as Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, has eternally used Islam and Islamic groups to propagate their terror. It is the intelligence arm of an Islamic fundamentalist state. Let alone ISI, if the nation of Pakistan participates in terrorism, it is by definition an Islamic act of terrorism.

Hayabusa Rider is just splitting hairs here.

thanks for your biased post.

No, your post was biased, claiming that Hindus are just as much terrorists as Muslims are when most reasonable people understand that Islam is a religion in crisis and does indeed provide context to the vast majority of terrorist attacks internationally in a manner that no other religion does so today.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

Which planet was that again?

In a population of 1.1 billion with about 85% Hindus and about 13% Muslims, the fact that the number of Muslim attacks are significantly greater, equal, or at the very least, comparable to Hindu attacks, speaks volumes for the extent of hate groups in either one. The Muslim community overwhelmingly bears the burden for the presence of vast numbers of terrorists in their midst. Now, obviously, that doesn't mean innocent Muslims are responsible for the creation of these terrorists, but they have an obligation to the rest of the world to look inward and fix what's so obviously broken in their religion and communities. The same standard applies to Hindus, no doubt. But the truth is, Hindu terrorism is a fraction of Islamic terrorism - even in India, where Hindus are the overwhelming majority.

The ISI, just as Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, has eternally used Islam and Islamic groups to propagate their terror. It is the intelligence arm of an Islamic fundamentalist state. Let alone ISI, if the nation of Pakistan participates in terrorism, it is by definition an Islamic act of terrorism.

Hayabusa Rider is just splitting hairs here.

thanks for your biased post.

No, your post was biased, claiming that Hindus are just as much terrorists as Muslims are when most reasonable people understand that Islam is a religion in crisis and does indeed provide context to the vast majority of terrorist attacks internationally in a manner that no other religion does so today.

biased?
I am not the following:
A) Hindu
B) Muslim
C) Indian
D) Have any family or relatives in India that I keep in-touch with on a daily basis.

There are a handful of Hindu attacks on Muslims as well. You are trying to make one side look better than the other. Why? Because you can relate to that side. Therefore, I called your post biased.
Sorry, but I am not going to debate with you how one group's acts of violence is less severe than another group's acts of violence.

 

[athithi]

Originally posted by: Aimster
biased?
I am not the following:
A) Hindu
B) Muslim
C) Indian
D) Have any family or relatives in India that I keep in-touch with on a daily basis.

There are a handful of Hindu attacks on Muslims as well. You are trying to make one side look better than the other. Why? Because you can relate to that side. Therefore, I called your post biased.
Sorry, but I am not going to debate with you how one group's acts of violence is less severe than another group's acts of violence.

You are biased against anyone who points out the connection between Islam and terrorism. I am not trying to make one side look better than the other. I am merely dispelling the myth that Hindu terrorism is on a scale comparable to Islamic terrorism, which was the import of your post. I am satisfied that I have done that and don't really care if you want to debate it further or not.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster
biased?
I am not the following:
A) Hindu
B) Muslim
C) Indian
D) Have any family or relatives in India that I keep in-touch with on a daily basis.

There are a handful of Hindu attacks on Muslims as well. You are trying to make one side look better than the other. Why? Because you can relate to that side. Therefore, I called your post biased.
Sorry, but I am not going to debate with you how one group's acts of violence is less severe than another group's acts of violence.

You are biased against anyone who points out the connection between Islam and terrorism. I am not trying to make one side look better than the other. I am merely dispelling the myth that Hindu terrorism is on a scale comparable to Islamic terrorism, which was the import of your post. I am satisfied that I have done that and don't really care if you want to debate it further or not.

terrorism is terrorism.

Hindus commit acts of terrorism because they hate.
Muslims commit acts of terrorism because they hate.

The only cure is mass murder of the human race.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

Which planet was that again?

In a population of 1.1 billion with about 85% Hindus and about 13% Muslims, the fact that the number of Muslim attacks are significantly greater, equal, or at the very least, comparable to Hindu attacks, speaks volumes for the extent of hate groups in either one. The Muslim community overwhelmingly bears the burden for the presence of vast numbers of terrorists in their midst. Now, obviously, that doesn't mean innocent Muslims are responsible for the creation of these terrorists, but they have an obligation to the rest of the world to look inward and fix what's so obviously broken in their religion and communities. The same standard applies to Hindus, no doubt. But the truth is, Hindu terrorism is a fraction of Islamic terrorism - even in India, where Hindus are the overwhelming majority.

The ISI, just as Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, has eternally used Islam and Islamic groups to propagate their terror. It is the intelligence arm of an Islamic fundamentalist state. Let alone ISI, if the nation of Pakistan participates in terrorism, it is by definition an Islamic act of terrorism.

Hayabusa Rider is just splitting hairs here.

I think there are important distinctions to be made. Remember the point I responded to in context, and that the leader of Pakistan needed to get the Islamic fundamentalists out of the ISI if for no other reason than his survival. I am not saying that religion does not play a place in what is going on, but it's simplistic or more accurately disingenuous to say that this example shows that Muslims must all be eliminated. The US has used extremists for it's purposes from all religions and political affiliations. If one then extrapolates from that, then every group which had been used should be eliminated. A good part of South America, Asia etc. Why? Because they need to be wiped out. The words are their own justification.

I happen to have worked in the US with a Muslim after 9/11 and saw him outrageously treated by people who ought to know better. He and I have shared meals and he's been in the US for decades. He happens to be from Pakistan and has never shown any tendency to violence. Now why does this man have to die?

 

[athithi]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

You did not convert, the alternative is death brought to you by the religion of "peace".

Until we together, as the rest of the world, banish this religion we shall be assaulted from the seeds of its teachings.

You would seem more intelligent if you read and looked into things before you posted. The article cited the ISI, which had nothing to do with "that" religion.

Hayabusa Rider, this is the post where you claimed that the ISI had nothing to do with Islam and I was pointing out that, in fact, it did.

I am not saying that religion does not play a place in what is going on, but it's simplistic or more accurately disingenuous to say that this example shows that Muslims must all be eliminated.

Strawman argument right there. I didn't claim that Muslims should be eliminated. And having grown up around people from various religions, I have never treated anybody callously because of their religion.

If you agree that religion does play a role in terrorist attacks, then we only differ in our opinions as to what the extent of this role is in reality. When a suicide bomber stops yelling 'Allahu Akbar' and yells, "Peace to Palestine/Liberation to Kashmir/Education for Iraqi kids" instead, I will perhaps consider the possibility that this might be less about religion and more about politics. Until then, IMO, it is and will remain about religion. Yes, "that" religion!

 

[maverick44]

First of all there is little or no Hindu "terrorism". Hindu extremists dont need to blow up people. They simply vote for the BJP or RSS or Shiv Sena... etc etc take you pick..


Aside, from the hideousness of this act, I think the bigger problem is this anti muslim sentiment that seems to be spreading everywhere..

There is no indication of who did this by the way. ... could be the ISI.. could be our own homegrown bunch of wackos.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

You did not convert, the alternative is death brought to you by the religion of "peace".

Until we together, as the rest of the world, banish this religion we shall be assaulted from the seeds of its teachings.

You would seem more intelligent if you read and looked into things before you posted. The article cited the ISI, which had nothing to do with "that" religion.

Hayabusa Rider, this is the post where you claimed that the ISI had nothing to do with Islam and I was pointing out that, in fact, it did.

I am not saying that religion does not play a place in what is going on, but it's simplistic or more accurately disingenuous to say that this example shows that Muslims must all be eliminated.

Strawman argument right there. I didn't claim that Muslims should be eliminated. And having grown up around people from various religions, I have never treated anybody callously because of their religion.

If you agree that religion does play a role in terrorist attacks, then we only differ in our opinions as to what the extent of this role is in reality. When a suicide bomber stops yelling 'Allahu Akbar' and yells, "Peace to Palestine/Liberation to Kashmir/Education for Iraqi kids" instead, I will perhaps consider the possibility that this might be less about religion and more about politics. Until then, IMO, it is and will remain about religion. Yes, "that" religion!

I never said YOU claimed that Muslims should be eliminated. The only way to "banish" a religion is to kill those who practice it. That's never worked. My disagreement was not with you, more Jaskalas. You quoted me, and I responded in that I don't think the issues are splitting hairs.

As far as the ISI, goes it certainly has been an arm of Islamicists in the past. I suppose the organization of the ISI is important. There is the ISI, and there are branches which have been cut off because of the danger to a relatively secular Pakistan and it's leader in particular. Now the original article made reference to the ISI which Musharraf runs. He isn't fostering a religious war. He may indeed be interested in controlling Kashmir, because he's an SOB (my sympathies are more in line with India's), but power has no religion. Remember my point was in response to Jaskalas based on the information and statements at the time of his post. The ISI proper is a political arm of Musharraf, not a religious organ. I agree that there are factions once under the control of the ISI that are causing problems, but again they weren't referenced in the OP's piece. The relationship between these groups is highly complex and not entirely cooperative. Knowing who is involved with these attacks is important to be able to properly respond.

 

[athithi]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: athithi

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

You did not convert, the alternative is death brought to you by the religion of "peace".

Until we together, as the rest of the world, banish this religion we shall be assaulted from the seeds of its teachings.

You would seem more intelligent if you read and looked into things before you posted. The article cited the ISI, which had nothing to do with "that" religion.

Hayabusa Rider, this is the post where you claimed that the ISI had nothing to do with Islam and I was pointing out that, in fact, it did.

I am not saying that religion does not play a place in what is going on, but it's simplistic or more accurately disingenuous to say that this example shows that Muslims must all be eliminated.

Strawman argument right there. I didn't claim that Muslims should be eliminated. And having grown up around people from various religions, I have never treated anybody callously because of their religion.

If you agree that religion does play a role in terrorist attacks, then we only differ in our opinions as to what the extent of this role is in reality. When a suicide bomber stops yelling 'Allahu Akbar' and yells, "Peace to Palestine/Liberation to Kashmir/Education for Iraqi kids" instead, I will perhaps consider the possibility that this might be less about religion and more about politics. Until then, IMO, it is and will remain about religion. Yes, "that" religion!

I never said YOU claimed that Muslims should be eliminated. The only way to "banish" a religion is to kill those who practice it. That's never worked. My disagreement was not with you, more Jaskalas. You quoted me, and I responded in that I don't think the issues are splitting hairs.

As far as the ISI, goes it certainly has been an arm of Islamicists in the past. I suppose the organization of the ISI is important. There is the ISI, and there are branches which have been cut off because of the danger to a relatively secular Pakistan and it's leader in particular. Now the original article made reference to the ISI which Musharraf runs. He isn't fostering a religious war. He may indeed be interested in controlling Kashmir, because he's an SOB (my sympathies are more in line with India's), but power has no religion. Remember my point was in response to Jaskalas based on the information and statements at the time of his post. The ISI proper is a political arm of Musharraf, not a religious organ. I agree that there are factions once under the control of the ISI that are causing problems, but again they weren't referenced in the OP's piece. The relationship between these groups is highly complex and not entirely cooperative. Knowing who is involved with these attacks is important to be able to properly respond.

I understand how Musharraf is not necessarily an Islamist. But he is running an Islamic country. Everything Pakistan does is in the name of Islam. Characterizing ISI's activities as Islamic terrorism is to merely use Pakistan's own understanding of the Islamic state. To extend your statement to its logical conclusion, the ISI is the political arm of an ostensibly secular dictator of an Islamic nation.

If you thought power had no religion, surely you would not expect a nuclear weapon to have one either. Guess what Pakistan's nuclear programme is affectionately called all over the Muslim world? 🙂 That's right, the 'Islamic Bomb'!

I do understand your contention that ISI involvement in terrorism does not always directly arise from Islamic dogma. But the politics between India and Pakistan is itself seeded in the Islamist goal of hegemony. And to my recollection there has never been an ISI-backed attack on India that didn't involve radical Muslim groups. Fix Islam and the ISI would lose most of its potency and purpose.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Pakistan and the "insurgency" in India share something in common do they not? Something to do with ideology and teachings. What could that be.....

You make it sound as if Muslims are the only people attacking and Hindus are not.

Do go on, tell us who they are attacking, and if you wouldn't mind some examples.

You do know there is violence in Indian where Hindus attack Muslims, right?

Unless you actually believe a population of 900 billion has NO HATE CRIMES or HATE GROUPS associated with it.

So you?re generalizing and playing the equality card at the same time. It was not Hindus who killed us on 9-11, it will not be Hindus who slaughter our people again. I might speak in generalizations but it is not used in favor of those who have sworn to kill infidels. It is not used to facilitate my own demise ? I cannot say the same of the side you take.

You mention Hindus, I?m sure there are those among them killing Muslims, you condemn a people for fighting back when killed? That tends to happen in war - the only real relevance is whose side you are on. You use that condemnation to force ? through any means necessary ? the cessation of hostilities and the surrender of those who fight to kill you, who you should have condemned.

Unfortunately for us, far too many people here provide protection and cover for those who have sworn to kill us, as if they are equal in morality and should be given a right to fulfill their sworn vows. A serenade of suicide echoes through the postings here, as if it gives us some higher ground to burry our heads in the sand and turn a blind eye to an obvious and growing threat.

The only fruit of these seeds you sow shall be the fulfillment of the Islamists vows. You, in your eagerness to provide such aid and comfort, are the instrument necessary for their acts of war.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
The only way to "banish" a religion is to kill those who practice it. That's never worked.

Alright then for the sake of argument let us say ?banish Islam from our land? is as bloody as you say, what would you have us do? Maybe we can find a more common and reasonable approach.

I think ANY approach would require the absolute cooperation by moderate Muslims to persecute and cut out the supremacist cancer from their religion before it infects it too deeply.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I think ANY approach would require the absolute cooperation by moderate Muslims to persecute and cut out the supremacist cancer from their religion before it infects it too deeply.

The trick is getting them to recognize that cancer and then to actually admit it in public...

It is definitely sad that outspoken moderate Muslims are few and far between these days... I've been waiting for one of them to rise up and lead their peaceful majority in a cleansing of their own, but it's just not happening... 🙁

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I think ANY approach would require the absolute cooperation by moderate Muslims to persecute and cut out the supremacist cancer from their religion before it infects it too deeply.

The trick is getting them to recognize that cancer and then to actually admit it in public...

It is definitely sad that outspoken moderate Muslims are few and far between these days... I've been waiting for one of them to rise up and lead their peaceful majority in a cleansing of their own, but it's just not happening... 🙁

too bad they don't show you all the Muslims standing up on jihadwatch.com

shame.. or you'd actually learn a little about the world

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I think ANY approach would require the absolute cooperation by moderate Muslims to persecute and cut out the supremacist cancer from their religion before it infects it too deeply.

The trick is getting them to recognize that cancer and then to actually admit it in public...

It is definitely sad that outspoken moderate Muslims are few and far between these days... I've been waiting for one of them to rise up and lead their peaceful majority in a cleansing of their own, but it's just not happening... 🙁

careful with him palehorse - he'll say 99 things about how we need to destroy islam as a whole as that is the problem, and then make 1 statement about a "small cancer" within the religion

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

But I think it is a bigger tragedy that India blames all its problems on Pakistan. Little does everyone realize India having problems fighting an insurgency of its own.

That is right to an extent but most of the terorist attacks in india are ISI backed or by terorist groups from pakistan and bangladesh

Bush said Saddam was connected to 9/11.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

A good dance to move from the fact that it was Muslims who carried out this act of war, to saying their motivation has no relation to their ideological profile. Yet I do not agree, so hear me out.

What proof do you have that muslims were involved? It's like your brains have been blindfolded and you can not see anything.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: maverick44
First of all there is little or no Hindu "terrorism". Hindu extremists dont need to blow up people. They simply vote for the BJP or RSS or Shiv Sena... etc etc take you pick..


Aside, from the hideousness of this act, I think the bigger problem is this anti muslim sentiment that seems to be spreading everywhere..

There is no indication of who did this by the way. ... could be the ISI.. could be our own homegrown bunch of wackos.

Since when is "terrorism" blowing up people? Should we all ignore the terror that US bombs and guns have been spreading in Iraq ad Afghanistan. By some of your definitions of all muslims being terrorists, all Americans are terrorists too. In fact, they support terrorizing populations. The war in Iraq was illegal and all those civilians that died from US bombs are equal to those Americans killed on 9/11.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
I think ANY approach would require the absolute cooperation by moderate Muslims to persecute and cut out the supremacist cancer from their religion before it infects it too deeply.

The trick is getting them to recognize that cancer and then to actually admit it in public...

It is definitely sad that outspoken moderate Muslims are few and far between these days... I've been waiting for one of them to rise up and lead their peaceful majority in a cleansing of their own, but it's just not happening... 🙁

The same thing is happening with America. Too few have spoken against the illegal wars and threats of war made by America. It is them that must realize their cancer first.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

There is no substance to your statement...what did we....who is we?
As Americans it has totally nothing to do with us....

That`s like me finding an article about 25 people being killed in Uraguay and then posting -- What did we do to deserve this?


Did you read the article....
Just because something happens in the world that is bad such as a bombing doesn`t mean or even indicate the United States had anything to do with or was even the cause....

sheese....... 😀

Me thinks we have a troll in the house..lol

JediYoda

I'm not an American. I'm an Indian.

ThAT`s nice...but how many people know your an Indian...see my point.......

No because all you'd have to do is look at his profile. From my perspective as a Moderator it seems your post was more like a troll.

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn

After I read what he said...and understood that he was Indian...so whats the issue again??
yet we know my post was not trolling it was an honest post....go figure!
Would you have looked at his profile first? probably not....
Who looks at everybodys profile before they post or read a post?duh......
We all are entitled to our perspectives!! 😀

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Braznor
Text

What did we do to deserve this?

There is no substance to your statement...what did we....who is we?
As Americans it has totally nothing to do with us....

That`s like me finding an article about 25 people being killed in Uraguay and then posting -- What did we do to deserve this?


Did you read the article....
Just because something happens in the world that is bad such as a bombing doesn`t mean or even indicate the United States had anything to do with or was even the cause....

sheese....... 😀

Me thinks we have a troll in the house..lol

JediYoda

I'm not an American. I'm an Indian.

ThAT`s nice...but how many people know your an Indian...see my point.......

No because all you'd have to do is look at his profile. From my perspective as a Moderator it seems your post was more like a troll.

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn

After I read what he said...and understood that he was Indian...so whats the issue again??
yet we know my post was not trolling it was an honest post....go figure!
Would you have looked at his profile first? probably not....
Who looks at everybodys profile before they post or read a post?duh......
We all are entitled to our perspectives!! 😀

Yeah, I believe you.

I wouldn't have clicked on the profile myself.

So let the matter rest.