Just hours after a truck bomb created a monstrous crater and killed dozens of civilians at the Marriot Hotel in Islamabad, Muslims the world over took to the streets. Thousands marched in Turkey carrying placards that read … “not in the name of my Muhammad!”
In Canada, Muslim leaders were quick to condemn those who carried out the attack, saying that only fanatics and degenerates would carry out such an act in the name of Islam. Further abroad, in London, where many Pakistanis have immigrated, a throng of thousands marched in an act of solidarity with the victims of the blast.
From Saudi Arabia to Indonesia, Muslim leaders joined to distance themselves from this, and other, wanton acts of violence perpetrated in the name of the Prophet Muhammad.
When asked why the sudden outrage against terror, one Muslim women protesting in Paris exclaimed … “We need to show the world that Muhammad is the prophet of peace … not pieces!”
*
Since anger has fuelled Islam’s hatred against humanity over the centuries, they continue to be angry and hateful.
Since their ignorant desire to destroy has gone unchallenged, they believe it is OK to be ignorant and violent.
They hide behind their own shortcomings, always blaming somebody else.
Their anger is sparked when these thin-skinned imbeciles are insulted. It is always they who define what insults them and what insults them most is their inability to control others.
See this middle finger? Control that, you jackass!
If you think we don’t like you, you’re right.
You are lower than a dog’s dung.
Interesting feature on CNN right now: In the footsteps of Bin Laden.
He is quoted as saying: I am angry and I hate the president of the United States of America.
His inspiration, as he himself has said, is a man called Sayyid Qutb, who was executed in 1966 for allegedly plotting to overthrow the Egyptian government.
Apparently, he was also angry and hated the United States, saying that America was a primitive country because of jazz, which had been inspired by negroes (it’s on Wikipedia, along with many other entries).
I believe our friend is also full of hatred and energized by anger, much like those mongoloid jackasses who are blowing up their fellow Muslims in Islamabad.
The anger and smug superiority clearly shows in his incomprehensible rants.
Cjunk – love the post. I’m used to checking my preconceptions when Kate posts. Good to see the tradition continues.
Hey, jackass, I’ll talk Muslim topic whenever I damned well please. This is a country where free speech is not allowed and you will not tell me what I can or cannot talk about.
Here’s a topic I’d like you to look at, if you dare:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Making the world a peaceful place … one body at a time.
Killers! Dogs!
Have you not heard to the Jihad doctrine, where radical Muslims must kill innocents?
Read all about it, you lying son of a collie.
Sayyid Qutb is a racist dog and you are his follower.
We are on to you, you filthy flea-carrying shaggy dog.
You cannot hide your lies and your intention to dominate the world any more. Crawl under a rock where you belong, you son of an insect.
Even you Muslim brethren are turning against you and spit on your canine breath.
At least there is some hope for them, those who still have a semblance of morality.
The consequences of your hatred is your death.
The consequences of your anger is your death.
Nobody else is to blame.
When you die, a thousand dogs will urinate on you.
Angry mos:
There’s a reason the Muslim world hates Danes.
It reminds them of their fathers, the Great Danes, who had consentual sex with their mothers.
If those islamic extremists want to see the great satan they had better look in the mirror and especialy at their own leaders BECUASE WHERE THEIR GOING THEY DARE NOT SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT THE GREAT SATAN BECUASE THEIR IN HIS REALM SMELL THE BRIMSTONE BUB
The US spends trillions on their war economy. With the current state of things overseas, there’s something very comforting about that.
Set you free,
Where did you get that dialog? Marvel Comics? Sounds a lot like Dr Strange.
Very funny and tres insulting to the muzz.
The Pakistanis are already starting to blame the Americans as they had the nerve to stay at the Marriott and that is the reason , so they say, for the bomb.As long as the Taliban or Bin Laden can blame the West, and our media broadcast their propaganda, then they will continue slaughtering muslims and non-muslims.
Well I think we have established that Cjunk sees only what he wants to see. Can’t do much about that.
No, wondering, theres nothing self-righteous or leftard. This bomb blast isn’t just another play in the grand scheme of Islamists to take over the world. Yes, I am aware that there are millions of crazy pan-Islamists out there. Shocking, eh? But to write this off as just another bomb blast, and God knows there have been many in recent times, is to miss the point altogether.
This one is significant – very significant. This is the first real brazen attack on the establishment. And the targets are not just the establishment, but their families too. It is a raising of the stakes, in Pakistans context. The War on Terror may just have gotten very personal. The Pakistani power players waking up today will know that the war has come home.
How this is a leftard or self-righteous stance is beyond me. Do explain. This is, however, the reality. America’s War on Terror may very well have become Pakistan’s War on Terror, and while that is unlikely to distract some on this board, it is worth paying attention to.
I know, I know, Islam is to blame. Doubt anyone knows the difference between Sunni and Sufi – its all one big green blob. And you are entitled to enjoy it, but don’t miss the nuances of this particular event – it is a huge deal, quite unlike anything Pakistan has faced before.
Stephen Reeves, the Pakistanis know who would have been at the hotel at the time of the blast – the big players of the capital of Pakistan and their families were eating Iftar there.
The significance is all in the details here. They hit a hotel, not an embassy or army outpost or government building. They are targetting the families, not just the government.
This may very well be one of the major turning points. For all those who remember the Sikh insurgency in India, which ultimately culminated in the Air India bombing, there is an interesting parallel here. When that ‘independence’ movement started, it had broad appeal amongst the youngsters. For young Sikhs, it was all about targetting the Indian government. Anything goes, and anything went.
And then the Police Officer in charge decided to change tack. Sikh officers in the police, killed by militants, were buried in their home villages with full honors. The emotions of their families were subtly broadcast. The war came home. It stopped being about killing ‘Indian policemen’, it started becoming about ‘killing one of ours’. Support dwindled, and now the only support for an independent state comes from those sitting in Canada nad the UK.
I suspect this same mindset is going to take a hold over the Pakistani elite, who frankly have been untouched, so far, by the ‘American’ war on terror.
The war just came home.
And, on an entirely separate note, there is a huge difference between shooting (or indeed biting)a rabid dog, and barking at every dog that barks at you.
Who is ‘set you free’ talking to? He keeps referring to a jackass who isn’t here.
Sounds slightly schizo.
Were mos’ comments erased?
Tenebris,
You mentioned that he threatened me. I would like to know what he said, because I would attempt to place charges.
ATYW,
“Yes the Wahabi strand is quite retarded, and proliferating dangerously fast, but to try and treat Muslims like a bloc is to draw to make a serious error in judgment.”
There are some 72 strands of Islam. Nonetheless, most Muslims are either Sunni or Shia. The most virulent strains of those being Diobandis and Wahhabis. Despite small differences, all these sects learn from the same trilogy and are commanded to emulate the same prophet. Smaller sects may have chosen to reject the Hadiths and/or reinvent what is actually said. Some may take a less literal view. But the facts remain the facts.
Occam’s razor applies here.
The ideology of Islam, especially the actions and sayings of their prophet – who they are commanded to emulate – make Islam fundamentally violent. It incites Muslims to hatred and the most vile and horrible atrocities as a consequence.
We have 1400 years of absolute evidence.
ATYW,
I might also add that despite certain political leaders secular lifestyle, they all use the political tool of Islam to demand, take and control.
From the first Caliphs onwards, political Islam has and is still very much used to satisfy and maintain power. This top down approach was what made Mohammad so successful after the Mecca period. He simply promised converts what they wanted. Unlimited rape and wealth through conquest, here and as reward in the next life.
Islam is the root problem.
and then you wonder
thanks for the clarification, perhaps i was reading a tone into your writing that wasnt there. I would still love to hear your answer as to what we do with all these crazy bastards
John V:
Thanks for the complement.
Somebody had to take mos, or whatever name he’s going by, on.
After scrolling by him for months, the opportunity was there to jump down his throat with both feet.
And, since his ilk have this irrational hatred of dogs, it seemed like I could hit our friend hard.
I see his posts have been removed.
The moderator can remove my responses if he wishes, since they now appear out of context, but I had more weapons in my arsenal.
I hope we’ve seen the last of him. He’s taking up valuable space. I’ll move on to the newer post on this topic.
irwin daisy,
Thats an interesting usage of Ockham’s razor, though not neccessarily a correct one. Ockham would, in this case, point out that the root problem isn’t necessarily just Islam, but any religion that claims exclusivity and divides the world into believers and non-believers.
This would, of course, be a bit ironic given Ockham’s own religiosity – after all few did as much as him in undermining the corrupt Catholic Church of the middle ages. But I digress.
wondering,
There is never any solution to this dilemma. It is a moral dilemma – even annihilating those who want to annihilate you involves murdering innocents within their ranks (lest the innocent, galvanized by the purges, take the place of those removed). I know as well as anyone else here what is written in the Koran. But I also know that literal intepretations are rarer than some of the folk here would like you to believe. To put it mildly, I don’t think we can simply wipe them out.
The Sikh example is the most significant example of religious terrorism in recent history, and it provides one important lesson – that local affiliation can override religious affiliation. When the cost of these wars goes from statistics to relatives, the game changes.
The only way to win this war is to make it personal and to make the human cost count. The terrorists are playing right into our hands now. It will take time. Maybe a decade, maybe more. But this bomb blast provides a window for that shift within the Pakistani power circles. In a sense, they have no choice. Terrorists don’t just kill Americans. Now they kill Pakistanis too. The kind of Pakistanis who matter (forgive my crudeness). The Khalistani movement in Punjab took over a decade to die. And it was tiny compared to this one.
Winning this battle is all about focusing on opportunities to drive home the human cost. The terrorists are going to continue to kill. Pakistan’s elites were initially unaffected by this. Now they are the targets. I expect they are going to start being just that little bit more proactive – and the terrorists, like all terrorists, will play into their hands, because terrorists often fail to realize when they ve crossed the line. Only this time, expect the elites to act more freely, since the terrorist sympathizers within their own ranks have likely been neutralized.
irwin daisy: Yes … I erased Mos/note There is only so much space dedicated to guano that people should be forced to endure. It leaves a smell I don’t like.
taqiyya
the koran is the guide book for all that islam does.
Cjunk,
Smell is right. However, he does give a fascinating look into what most would consider a ‘moderate’ Muslim mind.
ATYW,
“Ockham would, in this case, point out that the root problem isn’t necessarily just Islam, but any religion that claims exclusivity and divides the world into believers and non-believers.”
Funny, I thought we were talking about Islam, not all religions. If indeed Occam responded as you suggest, he would be going against his own rule. Regardless, the moral/cultural equivalence meme is feeble in any debate.
In this case, I’ve asserted that Islam is foundationally violent as proven in their texts and through their prophets sayings and examples (whom they are required to emulate). Regardless, of however many sects, there is only one Quran and one prophet, shared by all. This root cause is what incites them to hatred and the resulting consistent atrocities performed throughout history to the present day.
Geopolitics are quite secondary and typically used as a ruse, or deflection. The same as blaming the US, western imperialism, etc.
“Geopolitics are quite secondary and typically used as a ruse, or deflection. The same as blaming the US, western imperialism, etc.”
The irony lies in the fact that Pakistan was created by a secularist and never tried to be a muslim nation till Zia’s rule in the 1980s.
Thats geopolitics, not religion.
If it was all about religion. East Pakistan would never have become Bangladesh, and Pakistan would not have had to invade Afghanistan by proxy, or fear Indian collaboration with ‘Islamic’ Iran.
Geopolitics, again.
It’s neither a ruse nor a deflection. The people who make decisions in countries such as Pakistan (which stopped being a democracy in 1948, one year after its inception), are western-educated, and, generally, secular. Few of them buy into the idea of an Islamic world – a pan-Islamic world would be detrimental to their personal interests. The men I am talking about are the Nawaz Sharifs and Zardaris and Musharrafs of Pakistan. They are not religious by any stretch of the imagination. They deal with politics, not religion. How else do you explain Sharif’s willingness to turn over fellow Muslim Musharraf, India’s bete noire following the Kargil crisis (May to July 1999), in October 1999. Musharraf painted that war as a religious war against Hindu oppression, and then his fellow Muslim deliberately tried to force his plane to land in India by banning it from Pakistan, knowing it was low in fuel.
Thats politics, not religion.
Benazir Bhutto, recently painted as the great secular hope, sanctioned the creation of the Taleban. Ironically enough, the Taleban hate Shiias, and Bhuttos mother was/is a Shiaa. She did not sanction their creation because she was religious, but because she bought into the idea of Pakistani ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan.
That, again, is geopolitics, not religion.
Either you are deliberately trying to paint it with a broad brush, or you are woefully mis/under-informed. If it is the latter, you are best advised to study the region.
Oh, and Ockham would identify Islam’s exclusivity as the problem. No equivalence or anything intended – the problem would be identified as the division between believer and non-believer and not on how the believer is to treat the non-believer. I suspect you know that already.
Well, it seems you’re not familiar with the West Pakistani Islamic pogroms against East Pak Hindu’s in the early 70’s, where upwards of 2.5 million were slaughtered.
Moorthy Muthuswamy, PHD nuclear physics, author of ‘The Art of War on Terror: Triumphing over Political Islam and the Axis of Jihad’ and an expert on terrorism in India, has this to say:
During the last sixty years, from every Muslim majority area of South Asia – without exception – be it Pakistan, Bangladesh or from India’s own Kashmir valley, non-Muslims have been massively driven out to India. This occurred when the Muslim population there achieved political power through majority status. Also, laws and conditions have been put in place to deliberately marginalize non-Muslims. In almost all of these cases, mosques and the clerics played a major role in facilitating this “conquest”.
In India the Muslim population percentage has increased from about 10 percent in 1951 to about 15 percent now. Even within 85 percent non-Muslim India, in some Muslim majority towns this phenomenon is getting repeated. These South Asian populations share language, food habits and culture but differ in religion. Clearly, these Muslim populations are influenced by political Islam.
Written orders were issued by Pakistan’s military high command to kill Hindus in the then East Pakistan in 1971. The largest religion-based genocide of the past fifty years was conducted as a result. Most of these expulsions and genocides occurred before 1972 – well before the large-scale infusion of petrodollars and Wahhabism.
Those who claim that oil money, Muslim “grievance” or “freedom fighting” are responsible for terror should think again. As noted earlier, political Islam’s fundamental emphasis on conquest is traced to the scripture level.
This data of non-Muslim expulsions from every Muslim majority area of South Asia implies that Muslims of this region do not believe in coexistence. This also points to intolerance among Indian Muslims (also substantiated in other ways). But due to their minority status they have not been able to completely impose their will on non-Muslim Indians. Still, Indian Muslim leaders have managed to lay siege to Indian democracy and have started to marginalize majority (to be discussed later) Hence, a fast-growing Muslim population within India can be seen as a looming genocidal threat to non-Muslim Indians.
———-
Of course, all of this was proceeded by hundreds of years of Muslim conquest, resulting in some 80 million non-Muslim Indians butchered.
Once again, Islam is the problem. The rest is a sideshow.
Irwin,
You obliquely refer to Operation Searchlight, but you are waaaaaaay off target, and I am afraid I am going to have to call you on it.
The West Pakistani Operations against East Pakistan were not religion based. Yes, atrocities were carried out against Hindus, but Muslims bore the brunt too. They were ethnically motivated. The West Pakistanis, especially the Punjabis, looked down on Bengalis. When Operation Searchlight went into effect, the first action taken by the Pakistani army was to disarm Bengali soldiers within their ranks. Please don’t make unsubstantiated statements.
I have never heard of Murthy Muthuswamy PhD Nuclear Physics, but if we must engage in name-dropping, I can assure you, you don’t stand a chance. I dont just read books – I actually know the people who conducted the war. Lets leave it at that. I haven’t a clue who this Muthuswamy chap is. He sounds like he has been reading too much Bajrang Dal material.
All the stuff he says can be drawn off a VHP or RSS site- I wouldn’t pay attention to them. They detest Muslims, and I can understand your affinity for them. They are interesting to listen to, but they also think all of mankind (and everything good about it) originated in India, and in recent times they have taken quite a liking to burning Churches and, well, Christians.
Muthuswamy is playing to an audience in the standard ‘your enemies enemy is your friend’ but I would be a tad bit weary of what he has to say. Particularly on the basis of what he has written – he sounds eerily similar to Praveen Togadia.
I would suggest reading a serious scholar of India, like Stephen Cohen, a Brookings Scholar, whom I admire. He wrote a book about India in 2001 : Emerging India, and he recently published a book on Pakistan. Oh, and unlike this PhD nuclear physics, Cohen also served as George W. Bush’s special Envoy to India and Pakistan. He knows a few things and represents a good starting point for understanding the region. If you are interested, that is.
Irwin,
Apologies for not addressing this in my last post, but I just noticed it.
“Of course, all of this was proceeded by hundreds of years of Muslim conquest, resulting in some 80 million non-Muslim Indians butchered.”
I doubt you knew that the death toll of British rule in India is remarkably similar (70 million according to one British author). They were killed in a number of setitngs – for instance the death toll of Indian soldiers and civilians in the Anglo-French wars in India is estimated to be between 5 million and 7 million. And then there were the forced sunjugations, such as that of Seringapatnam. And of course, the British revenge after the Great Mutiny of 1857, when Delhi and Lucknows populations were decimated. And it rises if you factor in the avoidable famines ( th ones that gave the world the term “Rice Christians”) that wracked India under British rule. And then you can add on the many hundreds of thousands who died fighting Britains world wars. The British didn’t kill all of them, but the cause of their death can be directly linked to British rule. I would be wrong to say that the British intended to kill 70 million. I think you are making that mistake.
When you put forth an estimate such as this, you have to be careful. Were these 80 million Hindus killed because they were Hindu, or killed because of circumstance. How many of them were Hindu soldiers who died while fighting in the ranks of Muslim armies? And so on. Don’t forget the role played by Hindus during Muslim rules – many of the top generals were Hindu Rajputs and Muslims had many alliances with Hindu rulers. The greatest of the Muslim Rulers of India, Akbar the Great, was born in the house of the Hindu King of Mewar when his father temporarily lost control of Delhi to the brilliant Afghan Sher Shah Suri.
I didn’t say just Hindu. Buddhists would be among the dead, as well as other non-Muslims. Dr. Andrew Bostom has written well researched articles about the Indian holocaust by the Muslims. You might begin there. Jamie Glazov is another.
There is no real or imagined comparison to the British. The Muslims were quite intentional in their butchery of pagans. As they are commanded in the Quran. Unlike their treatment of Christians and Jews who are offered dhimmi status and jizya, as an extra option to conversion or death.
Look no further than the Islamic trilogy, with special regard to the actions and sayings of their prophet. This is all verified in historical record up to the present.
It’s what they are commanded to do as good Muslims. It is in their actions and what they still say to this day.
And then you wonder
do not answer Irwin Daisy and few more later i tell you espcially him, we know him from so manyother blogs did the same thing and write agaisnt Muslim intentionaly he has job which is not like Muslim come up and can be hurt his busienss he does say all wrong intentionaly . he is using wrong book and say all number intentionaly wrong and with hate Muslim and Islam
he thinks all Muslim seat and think to kill nonMuslim he is not normal of think this way and nobody can stop him someone brain wash him
some of non Muslim extrmies exatly act similar like Muslim extremist they have not logic and reason for what they say and action they do !
I am gussing he must be Solman Rushdi friend!!
I despise the Islamic ideology for what it does to humanity. Muslim and non-Muslim. I reference exactly what is in your texts. As well as accepted historical accounts.
Here’s an idea. Prove what I say is wrong.
And, I might add, you had best stop with the personal threats.
We need more muslim immigration to Canada…. don’t we.
My final and best recommandation to
west regard Middle east is that do not
force peopel to change of what you like as name of “freedom” esepcially west extremist
I recommanded Paksain look for step by step freedom not too much west freedom not to stay in Taliban and Wahabi freedom act more honest with regiona and tehir people especailly to governement of Pakstian to stay real Muslim and cut the all corrption nd think inside their country not the outside and leave Afganstan alone and take care of their border and do nto let USA fly free there and talk to Muslim countreis
I recommanded to extremist Muslim
just STOP that SHIT enough is enough you are embrasse us here Never prophet Mohamnd kill innocent people try to let Afanstan go to reform and election adn talk inside and ask help from one of Muslim neighbor nad do not let West and Canda and USA interfer to your country except build teh city and help you get independ fincialy and cut the drug and criminal out of your counry. YOu can not revenge bad by worst act
you destroy all security and this is more personla than religion and nothing come out of it
made your border and your profit and do not talk near nonmuslim so much about your belif you donot need to keep it in your home talk what is require to fix Afganstan and bring people back home Muslim should not kill other muslim taht is wrong and evil act then STOP IT .Thanks
How about rather than “Muslim should not kill other muslim taht is wrong and evil act” – Muslim should not kill anybody?
Oh, come on, guys. We’ve been waiting for YEARS for moderate Muslims to take to the streets to protest against Muslim extremists, and now they have. We should be cheering them and shouting, “Thank you! More of the same, please!”
The moderate Muslims are more in danger of intimidation by extremist Muslims than anyone else is, so let’s back them up when they talk back.
Oh, come on, guys. We’ve been waiting for YEARS for moderate Muslims to take to the streets to protest against Muslim extremists, and now they have. We should be cheering them and shouting, “Thank you! More of the same, please!”
The moderate Muslims are more in danger of intimidation by extremist Muslims than anyone else is, so let’s back them up when they talk back.