How muslims think!!!!

[Nicholas]

To find out, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press carried out a large-scale attitudinal survey this spring. Titled "The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other," it interviewed Muslims in two batches of countries: six of them with long-standing, majority-Muslim populations (Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Turkey) and four of them in Western Europe with new, minority Muslim populations (France, Germany, Britain, and Spain).

The survey, which also looks at Western views of Muslims, yielded some dismaying but not altogether surprising results. Its themes can be grouped under three rubrics.

A proclivity to conspiracy theories: In not one Muslim population polled does a majority believe that Arabs carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001, on America. The proportions range from a mere 15% in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible, to 48% among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined to 16% today from 46% in 2002. In other words, in every one of these 10 Muslim communities, a majority views September 11 as a hoax perpetrated by the American government, Israel, or some other agency.

Likewise, Muslims are widely prejudiced against Jews, ranging from 28% unfavorable ratings among French Muslims to 98% in Jordan (which, despite the monarchy's moderation, has a majority Palestinian Arab population). Further, Muslims in certain countries (especially Egypt and Jordan) see Jews conspiratorially, as being responsible for bad relations between Muslims and Westerners.

Conspiracy theories also pertain to larger topics. Asked, "What is most responsible for Muslim nations' lack of prosperity?" between 14% (in Pakistan) and 43% (in Jordan) blame the policies of America and other Western states, as opposed to indigenous problems, such as a lack of democracy or education, or the presence of corruption or radical Islam.

This conspiracism points to a widespread unwillingness in the umma to deal with realities, preferring the safer bromides of plots, schemes, and intrigues. It also exposes major problems adjusting to modernity.

Support for terrorism: All the Muslim populations polled display a solid majority of support for Osama bin Laden. Asked whether they have confidence in him, Muslims replied positively, ranging between 8% (in Turkey) and 72% (in Nigeria). Likewise, suicide bombing is popular. Muslims who call it justified range from 13% (in Germany) to 69% (in Nigeria). These appalling numbers suggest that terrorism by Muslims has deep roots and will remain a danger for years to come.

British and Nigerian Muslims are most alienated: Britain stands out as a paradoxical country. Non-Muslims there have strikingly more favorable views of Islam and Muslims than elsewhere in the West; for example, only 32% of the British sample view Muslims as violent, significantly less than their counterparts in France (41%), Germany (52%), or Spain (60%). In the Muhammad cartoon dispute, Britons showed more sympathy for the Muslim outlook than did other Europeans. More broadly, Britons blame Muslims less for the poor state of Western-Muslim relations.

But British Muslims return the favor with the most malign anti-Western attitudes found in Europe. Many more of them regard Westerners as violent, greedy, immoral, and arrogant than do their counterparts in France, Germany, and Spain. In addition, whether asked about their attitudes toward Jews, responsibility for September 11, or the place of women in Western societies, their views are notably more extreme.

The situation in Britain reflects the "Londonistan" phenomenon, whereby Britons preemptively cringe and Muslims respond to this weakness with aggression.
Nigerian Muslims generally have the most belligerent views on such issues as the state of Western-Muslim relations, the supposed immorality and arrogance of Westerners, and support for Mr. bin Laden and suicide terrorism. This extremism results, no doubt, from the violent state of Christian-Muslim relations in Nigeria.

Ironically, most Muslim alienation is found in those countries where Muslims are either the most or the least accommodated, suggesting that a middle path is best - where Muslims do not win special privileges, as in Britain, nor are they in an advanced state of hostility, as in Nigeria.

Overall, the Pew survey sends an undeniable message of crisis from one end to the other of the Muslim world

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3706

[Baz91]

A proclivity to conspiracy theories: In not one Muslim population polled does a majority believe that Arabs carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001, on America. The proportions range from a mere 15% in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible, to 48% among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined to 16% today from 46% in 2002. In other words, in every one of these 10 Muslim communities, a majority views September 11 as a hoax perpetrated by the American government, Israel, or some other agency.

This is understandable. For example, Mohammed Atta, who flew the plane into the first tower, was born in Cairo but carried a Saudi Passport, while registered as a United Arab Emirates citizen. People are bound to get confused.

Likewise, Muslims are widely prejudiced against Jews, ranging from 28% unfavorable ratings among French Muslims to 98% in Jordan (which, despite the monarchy's moderation, has a majority Palestinian Arab population).
This is probably because the Jordanians fought a war against Israel.

Further, Muslims in certain countries (especially Egypt and Jordan) see Jews conspiratorially, as being responsible for bad relations between Muslims and Westerners.
Finding someone to blame, quite common. Just like the BNP (Ethnic Minorities) and the Nazis (Jews).

Conspiracy theories also pertain to larger topics. Asked, "What is most responsible for Muslim nations' lack of prosperity?" between 14% (in Pakistan) and 43% (in Jordan) blame the policies of America and other Western states, as opposed to indigenous problems, such as a lack of democracy or education, or the presence of corruption or radical Islam.

Of course. The USA's foreign policy, which includes mining other nation's resources, imposing their culture on unwilling nations, is deeply unpopular, and causes social problems.


But British Muslims return the favor with the most malign anti-Western attitudes found in Europe. Many more of them regard Westerners as violent, greedy, immoral, and arrogant than do their counterparts in France, Germany, and Spain. In addition, whether asked about their attitudes toward Jews, responsibility for September 11, or the place of women in Western societies, their views are notably more extreme.

Of course they'll view westerners as greedy and immoral people! Under Sharia law, alcohol and gambling is banned. Contrasting their society with ours will obviously make them view us with suspicsion.

[WESTERN RANGER]

This is something which has puzzled me since i first learned about the Muslim
nation of Islam.Why do the Shiah detest the Sunnis so much and when the roles are reversed as now in Iraq why all the dirty nasty executions etc.I thought they were one big happy family under Allah.Not the Bloodthirsty killers
of fellow Muslims.Since i began studiying Islam 20 years ago i have never found a satisfactory answer,the all try to play it down.

[Baz91]

This is something which has puzzled me since i first learned about the Muslim
nation of Islam.Why do the Shiah detest the Sunnis so much and when the roles are reversed as now in Iraq why all the dirty nasty executions etc.I thought they were one big happy family under Allah.Not the Bloodthirsty killers
of fellow Muslims.Since i began studiying Islam 20 years ago i have never found a satisfactory answer,the all try to play it down.
It's the same with christians, though..there were huge wars in europe and mass persecution regarding Catholic/Protestant...so sunni/shia is just like that!

[Nicholas]

Well more people have died in Iraq from shia and shiite infighting than from american or british forces since the Iraq occupation.:)

[humanconscience]

Well more people have died in Iraq from shia and shiite infighting than from american or british forces since the Iraq occupation.:)

http://www.orlyowl.com/orly.jpg

Source of figures, proof?

[veerar]

Well more people have died in Iraq from shia and shiite infighting than from american or british forces since the Iraq occupation.:)
The British are pastmasters in using Religion , intra-Religious , ethnic and cultural differences to create situations to their advantage.
The infighting is a creation of the British and the USA.
It has started with such intensity only after the invasion of Iraq by the USA and the western allies,lead by Britain.
In addition to creating Shia Sunni misunderstandings,the invaders have taken advantages of other ehtnic minorities like the Kurds etc to stir up trouble and confusion,so that their troops can stay in Iraq for a longer period.
Link added on 21-07-06.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060720/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_060720171045
A better caption for this thread could have been,"HOW MUSLIMS ARE INDOCTRINATED?"

[Nicholas]

Last year their were only 370 known civilian deaths from military action by US-led forces

[WESTERN RANGER]

baz 91 I would seem that you are right all of my trying to learn the reasons for this mutual hatred.It all points to the Catholic/Protestant nonsense that we even in this country have had to suffer through the Irish troubles.The IRA
blowing horses/kids/women/anything in fact that was unlucky enough to be around when their devices detonated.This in fact is the muslims great weakness a golden reason to get one or the other at their throats.Divide and
rule O,B,L, himself knows this is the wests best chance of stopping further muslim bonding sesions!!!! So mohammed tariq kick the shit and bomb each other back to the stone age and do everyone a big favour.

[WESTERN RANGER]

Has anyone noticed the bird featured on the text by humanconscience is the
same as the worm and trogan horse that was active at the end of every month.I forget the name for the moment but it keeps reforming when in your
PC and fires up periodicly to take controll and hijack your details.BEWARE!!!!!
This is a real pesky intruder and takes some getting rid of.

[humanconscience]

Has anyone noticed the bird featured on the text by humanconscience is the
same as the worm and trogan horse that was active at the end of every month.I forget the name for the moment but it keeps reforming when in your
PC and fires up periodicly to take controll and hijack your details.BEWARE!!!!!
This is a real pesky intruder and takes some getting rid of.


Eh? Worry not its an image location not a file from my pc.

[von-Scharnhorst]

Originally Posted by Nicholas
A proclivity to conspiracy theories: In not one Muslim population polled does a majority believe that Arabs carried out the attacks of September 11, 2001, on America. The proportions range from a mere 15% in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible, to 48% among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined to 16% today from 46% in 2002. In other words, in every one of these 10 Muslim communities, a majority views September 11 as a hoax perpetrated by the American government, Israel, or some other agency.
This is understandable. For example, Mohammed Atta, who flew the plane into the first tower, was born in Cairo but carried a Saudi Passport, while registered as a United Arab Emirates citizen. People are bound to get confused.

Why should they be confused as to whether they were ARABS or not then?

Maybe as to what SORT of Arab, but I would have thought the fact that they were ARAB, was quite clear for any one with an I.Q greater than their shoe size.

[janahitwadi]

The fundamental requirement for survival of human race in this world is brotherhood. Religions and the God were created by the

wise persons to fulfil this requirement. There is nothing universal n everlasting in this world except need of brotherhood.

We forget this and try to judge people based on the religion they follow. We forget that rules, regulations and laws of any

religion had been developed by wise persons to suit a particular group of people at a particular place and time. When these

ware made they had been excellent. This means with changes in any factor these must change. We experience this in science

and technology. Yesterdays truth becomes false today and may be today's truths would be found false tomorrow. No religion is

exception to this phenomenon.

Development of western world is solely related to this. History shows that progress had been achieved only after dependence

on the religion was reduced or religion was modified to suit the environment. It is so well-known that their is no need to give

proof.

Unfortunately their are some religious groups who are blind to this truth. They have made themselves as targets of hatred

without any rhyme or reason. They are suffering and making others to suffer. They must understand that their is a limit to

tolerance. Once this limit is crossed there would be a war and those blind people would be targeted by all others. The result

would be loss of human lives and destruction of economy all over the world.

Mahatma Gandhi the great saint of the last century had shown the way. Insist on truth and be prepared for sufferings while

convincing others. When you find others can not be mended just neglect them. Do not have any relationship with them.

To route out the terrorism every one in this world must accept fundamental principle of religion that is brotherhood, follow rules, regulation and laws of the nation where they live and worship the God the way they find the best but in their private place or accepted place of worship. No one need to pry in to other's religion or compare some religion with other. The day this happens there shall be peace all over the world.

[von-Scharnhorst]

janahitwadi , THAT sir, is a bloody good post.

You have increased a thousand fold in my estimation of you.

[janahitwadi]

Thank you very much von-Scharnhost for the complements. May I request you to go through an article referred in my signature?

I have come to conclusion no religion is superior or inferior to any other religion. Religious rules are framed to suit certain time, place and people. So every one must accept the need to revise. As far as worship is considered it should be treated as private matter. If we can establish such a condition where is reason for conflicts among religions.

If the article does not open try this link (http://janahitwadi.s5.com/brotherhoodenglish.htm)

[von-Scharnhorst]

I certainly will. At the moment I am running on four cups of coffe you could use as glue, it is so strong.

I feel that I could not give the article proper thought right now.

I WILL, however, do as you ask tomorow.

May I ask what religion you are yourself?

If you do not want to answer that I understand, OR if you want to send it as a Private message, thats good.

Just curious if your views are shapped from your religious up-bringing, or if you have put great thought into this, and come up with your own ideas.

[james]

How do Muslims think and do they worship a real God.

[von-Scharnhorst]

What is meant by "a "real" god"? All worship is irrational.

[kieronantony]

Well firstly James, Muslims worship thier god Allah and only Allah as they are a monotheistic religion ( they only have one god) and secondly, as to your question "How do muslims think?" that may be one of the most generalised questiond I've ever heard, everyone is an individual and everyone thinks differently no matter what his or her religion.

[janahitwadi]

Mr. von-scharrnhorst Would it make any difference whether I belong to a particular religion? Brotherhood is an Universal religion. All so called religions are sub-sects. All religions were born under specific conditions, in a specific location and for specific society. Communication being the fundamental factor in having many religions in this world. Now we have fastest communication system, Our lives are interconnected through global economy which makes us one as a society. Hence it is futile to say that I am a born Hindu from India.

Great Indian philosophers of past and present believe in there is only one super power in the universe that is 'Shakti' literally meaning ENERGY. Shakti has no particular form but has inherent properties and laws. The whole universe works as per these laws. Many of these laws are known to us but there are many unknown. There had been efforts made to understand these laws and it may take unlimited time to understand all the laws. We do experience this in practice. What Sir Issac Newton thought was modified by Einstein. This process shall continue till eternity.

Giving name to the GOD or RELIGION are futile efforts.

If Indian philosophy supports only one GOD then why 330 million GODS exists in India? This ma be your next question. We believe that any one who selflessly help others even at his or her own cost is no less than the God. So we have 330 million Gods and the number would increase with time.

Karma is the basis of worshiping the God. The benefits what one receives or punishment one gets is based on karma. Choosing and giving effect to one's karma is in his/her hands but the effects are not in his/her hands. There cannot be any other philosophy than this if you wish to have peace in the universe. For more details read here (http://janahitwadi.s5.com/brotherhoodenglish) If the link in my signature does not work.

[von-Scharnhorst]

[COLOR=#fffacd]Great Indian philosophers of past and present believe in there is only one super power in the universe that is 'Shakti' literally meaning ENERGY. Shakti has no particular form but has inherent properties and laws. The whole universe works as per these laws. Many of these laws are known to us but there are many unknown. There had been efforts made to understand these laws and it may take unlimited time to understand all the laws. We do experience this in practice. What Sir Issac Newton thought was modified by Einstein. This process shall continue till eternity.
That is a very similar nterpretation to what my own "religion" believes. As yourself, I dslike labeling of a religion.

Germanic Heathenism is not just a religion, but also a way of life. As Germanic Heathens we object to being labelled. But in modern "society" labels are power. Or, more to the point, nothing can be achieved without them. Before Christianity, Judaism and Islam were invented all religions were similar in content. In that they where Earth and ancestor related (Particularly between local tribal groups.). It was only when a different group of people appeared that we were forced to make a distinction between ourselves and the invaders from the East.

Because the Christians felt it necessary to separate their newly invented way of life from that of the original inhabitants of, at this point, Europe, it became imperative to separate ourselves from the invader. For it was only then that we were called upon to defend our ways. To defend yourself from verbal, rhetoric attack, you must define yourself. To define means to label. In effect we were expected to justify ourselves without having done anything wrong. Heathens believe we are responsible for our own actions. We don’t answer to anyone except our own conscience and morality.

Up until this point, religion was an abstract thought, something that the tribe accepted, as breathing and hunting food. All equally necessary. It is only modern philosophy that forces us to label an abstract principal as "religion". Even to give your name is a surrender to the power of others. That is why, when you ask a Heathen his name, the answer will not be fast in coming and the answer may well be "why?"

We believe that the interaction between man and spirit is an automatic process, the same as a new born child taking it's first breath. Contrary to popular opinion they do not need a smack on the behind, this is only a midwifes way of saying; "you kept me from my supper, you little bugger".

Labelling shows a need to separate the spiritual powers from every day life. This is why we have no "church", or "temple". Our religion happens all around us. The wind in the trees, the sprouting seedling etc. It is why most of our summer ceremonies are outdoors and winter ceremonies in the house. They happen where they find us. It is this acceptance of "oneness with nature", without the need of labelling, that separates Germanic Heathens from the monotheistic beliefs. This over powering need to divide and separate by labelling is we feel, if not the driving force behind bigotry. Then it is the enabler.

Therefor why do our Gods have names? The world is a collection of abstract ideas and principals. An example of this is "the problem of Oðin". On the face of it personal and place names show a surprising lack of evidence for Oðin.

As is apparent the world is a place made up of spirits. Each with their own power over a particular realm. The spirit of family, food, warmth and shelter is called the Odal spirit and is represented by the rune Odila;

The spirit of the defence of the "home" and family is Tyr, or Tiwas;

This and other examples of "Gods/esses" show a joining of spirits to become something else. Similar to the genes of both people making a third. They are still individual but work conjointly for the purpose or task given them.

In this way the joining of all the spirits becomes Oðin. The naming of a person after a God, or spirit is inferring that that person is responsible for living up to that name and, Thereforee honouring the spirit in question. Logically one single person, or place (the same applies), can not represent, or live up to the responsibility of representation, of all the spirits. Thereforee the name would not be given to a child. The responsibility of being Oðin’s priest would be over bearing and impossible to live up to. The acceptance of a name implies an oath of doing that spirits work. Any person who implies they are able to do the work of Oðin is not only deluding himself but is an oath breaker.

Likewise a place or area can not be sacred to everything. There are, Therefor few, if any Oðin place names. Most that do exist lay in South Sweden, Norway, and North Denmark. Oðin goes under many aspects, or names. It is, Therefor possible to find a place or person named after an aspect of Oðin much more easily than those containing "Odin" in the name.

Thorr, Tyr, Freya etc. are not originally names, rather words describing complicated abstract principals of natural science, relationships between our selves other people and the environment.
In "The masks of Odhin" (pp 33) Elsa-Brita Tichenall puts it thus: “As we study mythologies in the light of the theosophical ideas we recognize that their Gods are personified natural forces which are not static or perfect but represent evolving intelligences of many grades. Some are so far ahead of our condition that they surpass our loftiest imaginings, having in the past undergone the phase of rudimentary self-consciousness wherein we find our selves at present and gained a spiritual stature we have yet to reach. Others may even be less evolved than the human kingdom. These would be on the way "down" towards matter, having not yet attained our stage of material development.

The Eddas’ Gods and giants are the two sides of existence, the duality from which worlds are formed. Gods are conscious energies, intelligences of many grades. They embody in stars, planets, humans - in every form of life. This would include seemingly lifeless organisations of matter - rocks, storm clouds, ocean waves - that we do not generally think of as living but which, being organisations of atoms, possess the dynamism of the atoms that compose them, as well as their own unique characteristic structures and motion. The energies that supply this dynamism in the universe are the individually evolving consciousnesses the myths call "Gods.”

The family is probably the most important aspect of life to the Germanic tribes. But not only the family. They need food, warmth and protection from the environment. Thereforee, the means of production, i.e. forests for food, fire wood and building material, the fields for food, sea lakes and rivers for fish and, later trade, and the home are all of equal importance to that of the family its self. It is from these needs that the Gods sprang.

As can be appreciated, in the earliest times the Gods were pastoral, agricultural deities. These came to be called the Vanir. When it became necessary to expand land usage to feed larger families, (perhaps as an inevitable result of the Vanir being pleased with the people and giving good crops for healthier families) then conflict between neighbours became inevitable. Warriors and weapons then became an important addition to food warmth and shelter. The art of war fare brought the need for other Gods. Here was the birth of the Äsir.

The stories that grow around these Gods to explain how they came into being, their particular import and the tools they use, i.e. sun, rain, snow etc. have come to us as mythology. These mythologies also explain the scientific thought of the time. A lot of it more advanced than the science of today. (It is my contention that electric circuitry and black hole theory were well known by the Germanic tribes, and are shown in the mythologies as glaringly obvious when read in the light of modern scientific "discovery”:

The science and workings of the world must be passed to younger generations, in the way of mythology, fairy tales etc. The Gods have become "names" in the myths because it is easier, and more interesting for people to learn by story telling. This is not the same as labelling the whole religion.

[janahitwadi]

Mr. von-Scharnhorst, You have given perfect information of religion. There is no need to give a label to religion as all religions fit in the frame you constructed. My belief is all religions think in the same frame. However there is still a difference among different labels.

In ancient Bharat (i.e. India) we believed traditions change every 12 KOS (KOS is the measure of distance prevailing prior to entry of Europeans in Bharat. 12 KOS = 24 Miles = 38.4 km). This had been totally because of communication limitations. Probably this had been true every where in the world. With improvements in communications this distance increased. However, people used to certain traditions do remained attached to their own traditions. This does not mean people did not change their traditions. They did. Some were changed/modified and some were accepted from others.

Theory of spirit believed in Germanic Heathenism is similar to what was believed in Bharat. We did see god in tree, animals, birds, humans, rocks, seas as per our ancient belief. The basic concept being whoever selflessly helps making one's life more bearable is a 'God' These Gods are miniature form of energy. Even in modern world we respect our teachers, elders, promoters and many more. We may not call them god or goddess but o feel nearer to them. May be we have different method of accepting them than what our
ancestors followed.

We do have examples of combined Gods. Trimurti Dutta is a combination of Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma. Brahma is believed to be the Creator, Vishnu Care Taker and Shiva Destroyer. In fact this is what we see now and existing since time unknown. In Bharat we believe that every matter in this world has soul and soul never dies. Modern science proves this. However, I am afraid I can't claim our ancestors knew the modern physics. This might have been their imagination based on logic.

Bharat was invaded in past many times. First invaders were Dravids. They were followed by Aryans, Hoons, Kush, Persians, Muslims, Europeans. However, all those predecessors of Muslims accepted local culture and traditions and made this as their home. Not that they did not bring with them their culture and traditions. They did. Some survived and some lost. Culture of Bharat did change because of these invaders. They never differentiated themselves from the locals. Therefore, there had been no conflict. The conflict started when Muslims started differentiating themselves from the locals. If Muslims and Christens would have not differentiated themselves then they would have become part of the general mass.

Baudh, Jain, Christianity, Islam are more recent religions in that order. Baudh and Jain
religions are totally Indian and as old as over 3000 years. They were needed under specific conditions and hence flourished. However they never separated from the Indian culture and traditions. So with time conflicts between religions subsided. Islam is the youngest religion among all modern religions. Mohamed Paigambar, the God's envoy did the best for the people at that time and location. He not only developed perfect rules and regulations for the population then residing in that region, but propagated result oriented laws too. He did excellent work to establish peace. Think about his efforts to tame men who believed in grabbing food and women for their own pleasure. Mohamed Paigambar is great by any standards.Problem with Islam is his successors believe in using the same stick to measure in the present conditions. Probably the god's envoy should have lived longer to correct this.

The day Muslims understand to change with time that would be the greatest day in the history of the world.I believe in that all religions are perfect, their rules are perfect, their laws are perfect, if one examines these with time, location and the people (society). These do need modification if any of the factor changes. This is a simple fact. Laws of physics for the Earth and Moon cannot be exactly the same. There has to be some variation.

There shall be peace in this world when every one understands this and practices in his/her life. We all need to be 'God's Son' or 'God's Envoy' or the God to achieve this. There is no necessity to wait for some one to help us.

I have uploaded the file Here (http://www.yourfilehost.com/media.php?cat=other&file=Brotherhood.doc) also.

Long live the world.

[von-Scharnhorst]

I allways suspected our traditions were very similar. It is nice to have a long held view, more or less confirmed.:)

[janahitwadi]

Thank you for your positive thinking. I have given one more link to read the article. It was an appeal to a Muslim scholar. He had tried to put his views that only Islam is suitable for brotherhood. My view point is all religions profess brotherhood. Just think what is good for your nation and the population.

[WESTERN RANGER]

Shortarsed snarling Home Sec John Reid is at it again.The sawn off little git is
saying that Osama and his Beardy pals are a greater threat than Hitler????.
For gods sake what has this prick being taking,Whisky,L.S.D,Rock Cocaine?.The f***ing moron must get hyped before his pathetic warnings are
foisted on our long suffering populance.I have only heard simmilar SHIT from
Bush/Rice/Powel at the UN/Rumsfeld.When they were stumbling around for reasons to blame Saddam for 9/11.Reid is a shithead in a long line of reactionary shitheads who were Home Sec before him[remember Bluncket]f**k
me,this cretin wanted to jail the entire world for eating lolipops or some such
shit.Anyway folks be warned SHORTARSED SCOTSMAN ALERT.Oops he's done
it again.

[janahitwadi]

If my post is not visible on default screen either select it or change skin to eutopia. Then the text would be visible. Sorry for the trouble.

[Madison Marie Cruz]

Finding someone to blame, quite common. Just like the BNP (Ethnic Minorities) and the Nazis (Jews).


I know! The BNP are having a field day with Islamic extremism LMAO. It's the answer to all their 'prayers'. I'm pretty sure they secretly get a warm, glowy feeling in their hearts every time they hear of an attack or bombing in England. Sickos.

[Laura]

I know! The BNP are having a field day with Islamic extremism LMAO. It's the answer to all their 'prayers'. I'm pretty sure they secretly get a warm, glowy feeling in their hearts every time they hear of an attack or bombing in England. Sickos.

I'm pretty sure they secretly get a warm, glowy feeling in their hearts every time they hear of an attack or bombing in England.

I'm obviously not a BNP member, however you know, I really don't think ANYONE rejoices at the thought of terrorist attacks in Britain, nobody can be that twisted....the only ones who rejoice at barbarism are the nutters who plan and wish to execute such terrorist attacks.

[Battleborne]

In a 7th Century philosophy/mind set...until Islam moves forward into the 21st Century, war with Islam will continue...the Ottoman Empire mentality!
Thats it in a nutshell!

[WESTERN RANGER]

I really can not believe that any "sane" Person English or otherwise would get a "warm glow" from any of the Terrorist strikes so far.Battlebourne is quite right,the Islam of today has not moved with the times,therefore it still preaches and reflects the lives of
people who died over 2 thousand years ago??.Like the Church over here the Muslim teachers are merely a means to an end.The Church or the Mosque only try to point people in the right direction.They are like PR men if you like,it should be and it is up to
the individual how they interpret the message they get from their respective places of
worship.Because some **** tells you to go and blow somebody to bits,does not mean it's
the will of the Almighty,that is simply the crazy arseholes interpretation of what God
wants.I notice Bin Laden and the mighty (sic) Mullah omar never ever offer their services
or their families services for any "Suicide Bombing" they seem to leave this kind of thing
to the ignorant fools who believe their nonsense.

[Nicholas]

I know! The BNP are having a field day with Islamic extremism LMAO. It's the answer to all their 'prayers'. I'm pretty sure they secretly get a warm, glowy feeling in their hearts every time they hear of an attack or bombing in England. Sickos.


Being a BNP member myself it leaves me sick to the stomach seeing what untold destruction and mayhem Islamic terrorism is causing to our great country. Terrorism isn't the answer to anyones ' prayers' except to the Islamic nutters that are intent on killing us. The reason the BNP point the finger at islam is plain for all to see. The evidence is there right in front of you - 7/7 , 9/11 , madrid bombings, german train bombings, american embassies being blown up. Would you let say a million muslims into your country if you knew dam well that around 10% of them may well want to do you untold harm?

[Mr Pink]

In a 7th Century philosophy/mind set...until Islam moves forward into the 21st Century, war with Islam will continue...the Ottoman Empire mentality!
Thats it in a nutshell!


Succinct as ever. !

You never were one for wasting words Mr Eastwood. I can hear the chimes of the watch playing away threateningly in the background.

I just know you're wearing an iron plate under that poncho. 'The heart, aim for the heart'.
:cool:

[janahitwadi]

India is constantly fighting against terrorists for over 6 decades. India warned the world that this is a danger not only to India but the entire world. None of the countries paid any attention to the pleas till 9/11. Specially Americans supported terrorists till 9/11. Weapons and equipment used by terrorists had been supplied by USA. Due to short sightedness of USA, Pakistan had been and even today is supporting terrorists. Pakistan is now trying to show the world that she is fighting against terrorists. This is only her outer cover. Inside Pakistan is providing all support to the terrorists. Now the same terrorists are making her a target.

USA advertises that she is the supporter of democracy. So she constituted organisations like NATO to fight Communism. In fact USA never supported democracy in other countries. She always supported dictatorship and military governments. USA is the basic cause for grooming terrorists.

There is no point in targeting certain religion or people from a religion. Need of the hour is to deal with the basic cause of terrorism.

Terrorists can be wiped out if America stops her selfish politics and supports democracies in the world.

[Spades]

While I liked your talk about philosophy with von which i found rather interesting, it is your view of America that makes me displeased.

America does not support 'false' democracies like Chavez and doesn't really support people like Putin but we can't do anything about that. Chavez with his ambition to stay in power which failed, or putin's manipulation of the polls. Give me a dictator that we supported that wouldn't have hurt us in some fashion (economically) if we didn't support them?

Why point the finger at us when all China and Russia care about is getting more powerful? Let Saddam siphon the funds from Oil for food as long as we get what we want is their motto.

[MarkMuses]

The British are pastmasters in using Religion , intra-Religious , ethnic and cultural differences to create situations to their advantage.
The infighting is a creation of the British and the USA.
It has started with such intensity only after the invasion of Iraq by the USA and the western allies,lead by Britain.
In addition to creating Shia Sunni misunderstandings,the invaders have taken advantages of other ehtnic minorities like the Kurds etc to stir up trouble and confusion,so that their troops can stay in Iraq for a longer period.
Link added on 21-07-06.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060720/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_060720171045
A better caption for this thread could have been,"HOW MUSLIMS ARE INDOCTRINATED?"

Has it not occurred to you that under Saddam's regime infighting might have been somewhat suppressed? It's not like the Western media could just stroll around and report it either. Totalitarian states can do that you know. Yugoslavia after Tito? FFS.

[nicky mondiego]

WHEN I WAS IN KASHMIR I RECIEVED ALOT OF ENTHUSIASTIC WELCOMES FROM WHAT I HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE WERE ANTI WESTERN PEOPLE. THIS HAD BEEN SPREAD BY THE VILE AND EVIL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA THAT PUPPETEERS US TODAY.
ONCE ON ONE OF MY MANY TREKKING EXPEDITIONS WE WERE JOINED BY TWO WESTERN MUSLIMS BOTH OF WHOM HAD QUITE EXTREMIST VIEWS AND REGARDED ME AND MY TRAVELLING ENGLANDER AS KAFFIRS OR INFIDELS.
LATER ON IN THE TRIP WE HAS TO CROSS A MOUNTAIN RIVER AND HALFWAY THROUGH ONE OF THE MUSLIMS IN QUESTION PANICKED AND LOST HIS HOLD ON THE CROSS LINE. OFF HE WAS SWEPT MANAGING TO GET A HOLD ON SOME DRIFT WOOD. HE BEGGED ME AND MY FRIEND FOR HELP AS WE WERE THE ONLY SWIMMERS IN THE GROUP. WE DECLINED.
STILL HE BEGGED. CRYING FOR ALLAH. WHO SURPRISINGLY DIDN'T WANT TO HELP THIS RACIST PRICK. OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR GROUP CALLED ON US TO HELP THIS STRANDED *******.
STILL WE DECLINED. BUT I SAID IF THE STRUGGLING FOOL COULD NAME ALL OF ALLAHS 99 NAMES I WOULD SWIM OVER AND RESCUE HIM.
HE AGREED, BUT WAS UNABLE TO NAME ALL OF THE NAMES DUE TO THE SHEAR PANIC OF HIS SITUATION. MY FRIEND TOSSED ROCKS OVER TO THE BRANCH THAT HE CLUNG TO AND EVENTUALLY WE SUCCUMBED AND JUMPED IN TO SAVE HIM. THE WHOLE THING LASTED ONLY A COUPLE OF HOURS BUT BY THE TIME WE REACHED HIM HE HAD GONE INTO A HYPOTHEMIC STATE AND DIDN'T EVEN KNOW HIS OWN NAME. WHAT A C***.

[janahitwadi]

While I liked your talk about philosophy with von which i found rather interesting, it is your view of America that makes me displeased.
America does not support 'false' democracies like Chavez and doesn't really support people like Putin ...
Why point the finger at us when all China and Russia care about is getting more powerful? .....

Firstly, my apology for hurting your feelings. Believe me I had no intention to hurt any one. Indian philosophy never accepts hurting any one. At the same time Indian philosophy calls "spade a spade" I just brought out the facts. I understand it is difficult for any one to see 'own mistakes' I also understand that every nation works to safeguard her own interests. I don't find any thing wrong in it. What I found had been the way USA works.

There is a short cut and a longer path for doing any task. USA had always found short cut. This is the reason why others find fault with USA and USA gets in to trouble.

Let's take 'Iran' Way back in sixties USA supported Shah of Iran. People of Iran never liked the dictator and were looking for getting rid of him. Without support from USA, Shah would not have retained power even for a day. Even if USA would not have supported Shah, people of Iran would have felt obliged to USA. However, for short term achievement i. e. 'Oil' USA supported Shah and made people of Iran her enemy. I need not say any thing about other nations like Iraq etc. You have full knowledge and if you think on above lines you will not feel offended.

The present case is Pakistan. Most of the world understands, Pakistan is a terrorist state. Pakistan is using USA to continue with her aim of spreading Islam all over the world. Pakistan is so called partner of USA against 'war of terror' Do you really believe that 'Osama' cannot be located and arrested? Its very clear that he is under protection of Pakistan. He can be nabbed in moments Pakistan wishes to do so. I fail to understand what is the reason USA does not understand this. I am forced to believe that externally USA says she will support democracies but internally she supports only dictators.

If USA would have trod path of peace in Afghanistan the present crises may not have been there. Raising Taliban against USSR, USA created an organisation which is threat to whole world. USA never probably thought that her creation would one day fight with her!

I hope I am able to clarify my thinking. I would like to express that my intention is not to harm or ridicule any one but to point out to events which were not conducted in a way to bring and maintain peace for a long time. In Indian philosophy there are certain examples like those USA followed and the bad effect on the people. I have learnt from the mistakes shown in Indian philosophy. As an Indian I don't believe in short term goals but long lasting achievements.

[Spades]

Firstly, my apology for hurting your feelings. Believe me I had no intention to hurt any one. Indian philosophy never accepts hurting any one. At the same time Indian philosophy calls "spade a spade" I just brought out the facts. I understand it is difficult for any one to see 'own mistakes' I also understand that every nation works to safeguard her own interests. I don't find any thing wrong in it. What I found had been the way USA works.
I am sorry but I meant it just pains me to have someone think ill of America which most people of their own country would feel the same. Although I do not know if you are being genuine or Sarcastic here. As for own mistakes we have them but we don't support false democracies Ex: Chavez and his attempt to gain more power or Putin and his 'free election.' Our handling of certain situations has shown to be poor or turn out terrible.

There is a short cut and a longer path for doing any task. USA had always found short cut. This is the reason why others find fault with USA and USA gets in to trouble.
USA is a country with a selfish ideology of "I want it now." While this is a bad ideology most people run into conflicts with it for the wrong reasons.

Let's take 'Iran' Way back in sixties USA supported Shah of Iran. People of Iran never liked the dictator and were looking for getting rid of him. Without support from USA, Shah would not have retained power even for a day. Even if USA would not have supported Shah, people of Iran would have felt obliged to USA. However, for short term achievement i. e. 'Oil' USA supported Shah and made people of Iran her enemy. I need not say any thing about other nations like Iraq etc. You have full knowledge and if you think on above lines you will not feel offended.
The shah wasn't a good choice but he was the alternative to Moussadegh i think his name was. Who gained power at first in the incorrect manner I believe. He then choose to seize a British company and they asked us for help to oust him. Just because a country likes their leader, if he acts that way he WILL find trouble warranted or not.


If USA would have trod path of peace in Afghanistan the present crises may not have been there. Raising Taliban against USSR, USA created an organisation which is threat to whole world. USA never probably thought that her creation would one day fight with her!
Nope, but we don't have a history of using good long-term plans now do we. This is an instance the here and the now comes back to bite us.

I hope I am able to clarify my thinking. I would like to express that my intention is not to harm or ridicule any one but to point out to events which were not conducted in a way to bring and maintain peace for a long time. In Indian philosophy there are certain examples like those USA followed and the bad effect on the people. I have learnt from the mistakes shown in Indian philosophy. As an Indian I don't believe in short term goals but long lasting achievements.

While I have always been taught about the importance of planning ahead, I have to agree that our long-term solutions just don't seem to work out very well. I also understand that we seem to have added expectations placed upon us, because at the very least we appear to be in the spotlight the most.

[janahitwadi]

... Although I do not know if you are being genuine or Sarcastic here. .....
Believe me I am not sarcastic. Genuinely I feel so.

USA is a country with a selfish ideology of "I want it now." While this is a bad ideology most people run into conflicts with it for the wrong reasons.
I already said being selfish is not bad in the sense every one has right to find what suits the best. What I said was One should think for a long term gain rather than short term gain. In case of any country this period would be say 50 or 100 years. History shows that nations suffer badly because of implementing short term solutions. In present scenario USA repeated mistakes many times. Repetition is never forgiven.

The shah wasn't a good choice but he was the alternative to Moussadegh i think his name was. ...
In that case better solution may be to find some one or don't get involved till some one is found. Without external help no dictator can survive. USA should think what she should sell 'arms' or other utility goods'

Nope, but we don't have a history of using good long-term plans now do we. This is an instance the here and the now comes back to bite us.
I would say you have hardly any history. a few hundred years is a small period in life of a nation.

While I have always been taught about the importance of planning ahead, I have to agree that our long-term solutions just don't seem to work out very well. I also understand that we seem to have added expectations placed upon us, because at the very least we appear to be in the spotlight the most.

Long term solutions would bear fruits after a long time. But those will last for 100s of years. Long term planning may result in short time losses many times. These should be understood properly. Politicians make use of such losses to gain power. People should ignore them. USA being most powerful nation in many respects would like to control others. Your President once said 'either you are on my side or you are my enemy' Other nations like UK, France did support USA but unwillingly. Such partners would wait for appropriate opportunity. They cannot be good friends but slaves who would rebel once they find an opportunity. Philosophy says one should be proud of ones achievements, strength but not overdo it. USA believes there is no one in universe who can hurt her. She forgot a small ant can kill elephant when it gets opportunity.

In my personal opinion if USA likes democracy then in no case she should support dictators. May be there would be losses but overall she will gain.

[Spades]

I already said being selfish is not bad in the sense every one has right to find what suits the best. What I said was One should think for a long term gain rather than short term gain. In case of any country this period would be say 50 or 100 years. History shows that nations suffer badly because of implementing short term solutions. In present scenario USA repeated mistakes many times. Repetition is never forgiven.


Yes but one must understand that what suits them best may not suit someone else the best and thats where problems seem to occur. Long term gain is always the best choice but its usually the harder to predict. If we cannot predict the outcome of our poor short term choices how can we be expected to have good longterm plans?


In that case better solution may be to find some one or don't get involved till some one is found. Without external help no dictator can survive. USA should think what she should sell 'arms' or other utility goods'
Well the longer you wait the worse things will get. As well as someone may never be found because to find a replacement leader that person needs more than to be an ideal candidate. He needs legitmacy, authoriy among other things. Something I doubt we would have found if we just wanted a simple coup.



[COLOR=black]Long term solutions would bear fruits after a long time. But those will last for 100s of years. Long term planning may result in short time [COLOR=green]losses many times. These should be understood properly. Politicians make use of such losses to gain power. People should ignore them. USA being most powerful nation in many respects would like to control others. Your President once said 'either you are on my side or you are my enemy' Other nations like UK, France did support USA but unwillingly. Such partners would wait for appropriate opportunity. They cannot be good friends but slaves who would rebel once they find an opportunity. Philosophy says one should be proud of ones achievements, strength but not overdo it. USA believes there is no one in universe who can hurt her. She forgot a small ant can kill elephant when it gets opportunity.
Trust me we know what the French are like, and I doubt even with a strong sense of loyalty would prevent them from seizing any big opportunities they got. But yes you are right, I would call it humility.


[COLOR=black]In my personal opinion if USA likes democracy then in no case she should support dictators. May be there would be losses but overall she will gain.

Well US is a democracy but we hate 'false' democracy leaders as much as dictators. Often times we instil dictators who we thought would turn out to be better or would at least play by the rules for the time being (This isn't always the case). Sometimes we try to instil democarcies but that is a costly endeavour (Iraq). It would be nice if every country had free and fair elections but sometimes this just isn't the case because people in power will manipulate it.

Personally, I think the US shouldn't get involved unless a country does something illegal or unfair (Because there isn't really laws between countries) to us. When we do have to go and do our job and leave. How many times in history have you seen another country try to rebuild the defeated country at an expense to them?

[janahitwadi]

Yes but one must understand that what suits them best may not suit someone else the best and thats where problems seem to occur. Long term gain is always the best choice ..
I meant if USA wishes to help some nation, there is no harm if she safeguards her interest while helping others. However I feel there is no need to arbitrarily accept 'Police' duty. It should be decided only on request from some body and after consulting other nations. Else no need to get involved.

Well the longer you wait the worse things will get. ...
There is always a chance you get the best solution. Nature has its own rules and mostly things get sorted out in nature's way.

Well US is a democracy but we hate 'false' democracy leaders as much as dictators. ...
You may hate false democracies. There is no need to support them. However on ground things are different. Present example is Pakistan. Pakistan is a terrorist nation and the theme is extreme belief in 'Sharia'
One day the whole world would suffer on account of this extremist belief.

Personally, I think the US shouldn't get involved unless a country does something illegal or unfair ...
In my opinion USA need not force her will on any other nation, whether big or tiny.

[Spades]

I meant if USA wishes to help some nation, there is no harm if she safeguards her interest while helping others. However I feel there is no need to arbitrarily accept 'Police' duty. It should be decided only on request from some body and after consulting other nations. Else no need to get involved.
Well if a nation lets say like Iraq comes along who will request help? Saddam wouldnt request us to take him out and how would any other request be legimate?


There is always a chance you get the best solution. Nature has its own rules and mostly things get sorted out in nature's way.
How long are you willing to wait? Rome had plenty of era's of dictatorship before it finally fell. Granted in today's society we probably would have better luck but still.


You may hate false democracies. There is no need to support them. However on ground things are different. Present example is Pakistan. Pakistan is a terrorist nation and the theme is extreme belief in 'Sharia'
One day the whole world would suffer on account of this extremist belief.
Yes, I agree but I also understand that if any nation was to grow to be a big threat to the world (Just saying) the US right now is the first if not main concern and to every other country we are their buffer zone. But yes we should avoid Policing the world just to police the world. But we should enforce treaties and agreements that countries fail to recognize for some made up reason.

Question: Did Iran sign the UN agreement that would prevent anymore countries from pursing nuclear arms? I do not remember.



In my opinion USA need not force her will on any other nation, whether big or tiny.

We try not to at I least I think not intentionally, but we view for instance the muslim treatment of women as wrong. Some even vocalize/threaten against it but that would be considered trying to force our will against them however right we may believe.

[janahitwadi]

In my opinion, USA should not bother about others unless some one bothers her.

[Spades]

In my opinion, USA should not bother about others unless some one bothers her.

Bothers to what extent?

[janahitwadi]

Bothers to what extent?
As far as I know, enemy of USA is in western Pakistan. Nuclear technology had been sold to Iran by Dr. A. Q. Khan. They are the only people bothering USA. There is no one else except China who would dare to bother USA. I need not explain more than this.

[WESTERN RANGER]

HOW MUSLIMS THINK?????
PAKISTANS Opposition Leader Mrs Banazir Bhutto has just been blown to bits by a (hero)
suicide bomber!!!!!!.

Has anybody got any kind of "EXPLANATION" for this outrage,what is wrong with these
arseholes???,do they think the "MAD MULLAHS" have the answer?? or do they want to be
under a Millitary strongman Dictator forever??.Leave them in squalor and poverty with no
access to weapons of any kind is the only way to treat these hardline head the balls.

Perhaps their deference for the bearded old perverts is the way they want it,why should
we give a shit???.Keep our defences very strong and our eyes and ears open and kill any
one of the b******S who even looks like they are going to attack,also make damned
sure they are disarmed by using our Nuclear option before they have the chance to use
theirs (Pakistans) on us.

[Spades]

Ha I agree. Let them decide their own fate as long as they leave us the h*** alone.

[janahitwadi]

HOW MUSLIMS THINK?????
PAKISTANS Opposition Leader Mrs Banazir Bhutto has just been blown to bits by a (hero) suicide bomber!!!!!!.
Mrs Benazir was not opposition Leader. There can be no opposition Leader in Military dictatorial rule.
Has anybody got any kind of "EXPLANATION" for this outrage,what is wrong with these arseholes???,do they think the "MAD MULLAHS" have the answer?? or do they want to be under a Millitary strongman Dictator forever??.
You are mistaken. They want to create Pakistan as Islamic state.
Leave them in squalor and poverty with no access to weapons of any kind is the only way to treat these hardline head the balls.
They shall face no problem what you think. USA is taking care of finances. Recent reports say all money given by USA to fight against terrorist has not been spent for that purpose. This means the money is used for developing missiles and nuclear weapons.
Perhaps their deference for the bearded old perverts is the way they want it,why should we give a shit???.Keep our defences very strong and our eyes and ears open and kill any one of the b******S who even looks like they are going to attack,also make damned sure they are disarmed by using our Nuclear option before they have the chance to use theirs (Pakistans) on us.
Your idea of defence is wrong. Whatever you are doing is just depending yourself on weapons. Era of weapons is long past. Muslims are dependent on trained manpower. Trained to hate every one who is not Muslim. Trained to suicide while killing others. Just not concerned the killer also dies.

Your weapon should be secularism. To me secularism means liberty to worship in a manner which doesn't harm or disturb any one else. Propagating Christianity in the manner Islam is propagated would only give rise to conflicts. Today we need Gandhian ways to fight terrorists and not nuclear weapons which can never be used.