
"Global Islamist terror is indeed global. In the media focus on the Great Satan (America) and the Lesser Satan (Israel), we often overlook the jihadist terror directed at India. Nothing at all to do with Israel or the Palestinians.
"The Hindu, a major newspaper in India, carries an account of a jihadist communication regarding a recent terror incident there. The next time a Ron Paul or a Noam Chomsky attempts to blame American policy in support of Israel for the hatred Islamists express toward us, remind them of the jihad against India."
More Islam bashing from the extremist right, I see.
More Islam bashing from the extremist right, I see.
More information:
" Were it any other week, the terrorist attacks that killed 61 people and wounded more than 200 in Jaipur Tuesday would have occupied international headlines for days. That says more about the breadth of catastrophes in Asia recently than it does about the significance of Tuesday's attack.
Like other free nations, India is under severe and growing threat from Islamic jihadists, and has been for decades. New groups such as the Indian Mujahedeen, which yesterday claimed responsibility for the Jaipur attacks, appear regularly. More than 1,000 people died in India last year from terrorists attacks by Islamists and others. Only Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan suffered more casualties over the same period.
The vast majority of Indians -- Hindu and Muslim alike -- are horrified by this violence, and rush to condemn it. "
Just more of your one sided b.s.
You neglect to mention that in the Kashmir region killings have been going on from both sides since the British arbitrarily set up the borders when they pulled out.
Just more of your one sided b.s.
You neglect to mention that in the Kashmir region killings have been going on from both sides since the British arbitrarily set up the borders when they pulled out.
Thank you for your comment :)
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
Well, of course this isn't anti-Islamic-- but rather anti-Islamic extremism. (There is a difference! Not all Muslims are extremists-- in fact, only a very tiny minority are. Apparently you are unaware of it-- but attacking Islamic extremism, therefore, is not the same as attacking all Muslims),
However, I have seeded quite a few things about Muslims who are not extremists-- in fact, I have seeded a few things about Muslims who are not only against extremism-- but actively work to end it! For example, I have posted articles about Irshad Manji-- a devout Muslim who is also a reformer. Islamic Reformer: ''The Challenge Today is to Transform the 'Us vs. Them' of Identity Politics & Religion'' . Cerainly not "one sided anti Islamic bigotry". (If anything, it tends to contradict the unfortunate sterotype that some bigots have that all Muslims are extremists).
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
Another example-- Muslims who are moderate-- and speaking out against extremism, bigotry, and intolerance. Another seed that tends to paint Muslims in a very favourable light.
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
Here's another--IMO opinion it it is not anti-Islamic-- in it seems to me that, if anything, it would tend to clear up some of those (false) negative sterotypes: Who Says Muslims Don't Speak Out Against Extremism?
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
He's another one-- again, it certainly is not anti-Islamic bigotry, and like so many others I've seeded, contradicts many of the negative stereotypes some people have:
There is a widespread misconception that Muslims do not speak out against Islamic extremism. However, more and more progressive Muslims are indeed speaking out.
One such person is M. Zuhdi Jasser , founder and chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix. He is a physician in private practice and a community activist.
Here's the LINK
I was about to post links to more of the articles I have seeded like these-- there are quite a few. But-- I think its quite clear-- your assumption (and it is an assumption) that I never post positive articles about Islam is incorrect-- in fact, quite the reverse is true!
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
I was going to stop responding to this false and misleading charge-- but I couldn't resist posting this link-- fascinating article, plus a great discussion: This Is A Kosovar Muslim
You're welcome. Maybe someday you will seed something which is not one sided anti Islamic bigotry
As I mentioned-- there is a difference betwee anti-Islamic-- and anti-Islamist. There is a difference (which I would imagine that you are aware of?). This seed is not anti-islamic-- but it is anti-Islamist.
The reason I seeded it was not because I thought it was merely another interesting article-- but, rather, becasue it clears up another common misconception. Some people think that all acts of Islamist terrorism are caused only because of Israel or the U.S. This is not the case-- the concern of the jihadis in India and Kashmir is not Israel/Palestine...or Iraq. In fact, if those situations were resolved-- these terrorists would not change their barbaric ways.
And- similarly-- the Moscow subway bombing-- or the Beslan massacre. Nothing at all to do with the U.S. or Israel. Violent Jihad-- while involving only an extremely tiny percentage of the world's Muslims-- is a worldwide phenomena-- look at their violence against-- and beheading of, Buddhist monks in Thailand-- that has nothing at all to do with Palestine or the U.S.! Or-- their ongoing horrific acts of terrorism in Algeria. And the list goes on and on.
These acts are in no way representative of the vast majority of the world's Muslims-- and, in fact, it often gives peopole a bad (although totally erroneous) impression of Islam.
I see how you like to inflate the numbers on your own boards but in fact you do post one sided antiIslamic bigotry for example: this seed here.
You do not mention how the Kashmir region is Islamic by population or how it is more of a case of independence from a foreign government, in this case India, not some attempt to convert all of India.
I see how you like to inflate the numbers on your own boards but in fact you do post one sided antiIslamic bigotry for example: this seed here.
No-- I'm not inflating anything. These are real seeds-- and there are many, many more. I've just posted a few examples here-- in answer to your accusations-- by way of illustration. (If you continue to insist that my column is so anti-Islamic-- I can keep on posting more examples. But I have a feeling that you are looking for an argument-- and that no matter what I post you find find something to accuse me of: if its not anti-Islam, then its inflating numbers. What's next?
And-- btw-- here's anotjher excellent example-- your portrayal of my column, as well as your personal attacks, are untrue:
Who cares what Bush said?
Your seed is misleading and anti Islamic. The fight over Kashmir has nothing to do with Jihad.
Do you even know what Jihad means?
Who cares what Bush said?
1.Well, a lot of people are now quoting the his foreign policy advisors re the meaning of the term.
2. I did not change it, that is the exact title of the original article.
3. Here's the meaning of the word:
"Jihad did have two variant meanings through the centuries, one more radical, one less so. The first holds that Muslims who interpret their faith differently are infidels and therefore legitimate targets of jihad. (This is why Algerians, Egyptians and Afghans have found themselves, like Americans and Israelis, so often the victims of jihadist aggression.) The second meaning, associated with mystics, rejects the legal definition of jihad as armed conflict and tells Muslims to withdraw from the worldly concerns to achieve spiritual depth.
Jihad in the sense of territorial expansion has always been a central aspect of Muslim life. That's how Muslims came to rule much of the Arabian Peninsula by the time of the Prophet Muhammad's death in 632. It's how, a century later, Muslims had conquered a region from Afghanistan to Spain. Subsequently, jihad spurred and justified Muslim conquests of such territories as India, Sudan, Anatolia, and the Balkans.
"But jihad's most ghastly present reality is in Sudan, where until recently the ruling party bore the slogan "Jihad, Victory and Martyrdom." For two decades, under government auspices, jihadists there have physically attacked non-Muslims, looted their belongings and killed their males.
"Jihadists then enslaved tens of thousands of females and children, forced them to convert to Islam, sent them on forced marches, beat them and set them to hard labor. The women and older girls also suffered ritual gang-rape, genital mutilation and a life of sexual servitude."
(And, before you start in with your accusations, name-calling, and other personal attacks, let me once again state that this applies to only a very tiny minority of extremists-- the vast majority of the world's Muslims are not-- repeat not-- jihadis--- and do not commit any acts of terrorism.!!!)
You need to learn a few facts: study Dennis McCann's definition of what jihad really means.
You might learn something.
As for the rest: I made my point: the seed you posted is anti Islamic and the fight in Kashmir is not about the conversion of Hindus its about independence for the Moslems living in the region.
I am done here.
Bye!
( stop tracking)
You need to learn a few facts: study Dennis McCann's definition of what jihad really means.
You might learn something.
As for the rest: I made my point: the seed you posted is anti Islamic and the fight in Kashmir is not about the conversion of Hindus its about independence for the Moslems living in the region.
I am done here.
Kashmir? And.., Algeria...and Morocco..and Egypt...and Beslan...and..it seems there's always some excuse...but the violence is unusally sever (ever notice how its almost always the deliberate targeting of civilians?)
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |