Walled off...

[lonewolf]

CtrlAltDel and Mayavi, your posts on this board are very much true and thought provoking.

[DQ]

DQ, you never answered my question about what prompts terrorism and kidnappings of innocent people in the Philippines by the Abu Sayyaf. Many of those terrorists are trained in Afghanistan. And all of them are ethnic Filipinos who have the same blood flowing through their body as the Catholics and Protestants. Never in that country's history has there been a communal fight, but you have terrorism out of nowhere, and sponsored by the same groups that are screwing India, the US and other parts of the world.

First : Why is this query directed to me.
Second : Does this query arise due to something that I have penned earlier? If so what ?
Third : Be it Abu sayyaf, be it the Kashmiri extremists. From where does this extemism flow and who is respnsible for creating them?

All these were trained in Afghan ok.
Who funded and financed and assisted in spreading this ideology?
What was the motive behind this funding?
What did the world do when this was being spread? These are my queries dude. Donno what point you are trying to maake?

Anyway to Mayavi

You cannot comprehend the difference between a geo-political conflicts like first gulf war/Afghan war and a religious conflict like Bosnia/serbia conflict.

Hmm so around 8000 men and children can be led away from under the protection of the UN and Slaughtered?

Now what is the sense of belonging and protection the world is demanding from the Muslim communities?

From time and again in recent times they have been betrayed, slaughtered and massacred, their lands looted. Communities burnt, Mosques razed. Practices ridiculed and then lets classify between geo/political and religious.....huh. To what exxtent will you go to protect your ideology MM.

[crypt]

I may be off topic.. Pardon me for that..But I really find it disgusting how teenagers are roped in by these extremists and trained to be suicide bombers - Regardless of the failth n religion....Yesterday the Duch cops arrested a 17 year old making bombs in his home to blow up something...



http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1528029,00.html?gusrc=rss

(More links on Google news)



I find it hard to understand how well off teenagers get into this rut...Someone said it right Religion is a tinderbox...

[lonewolf]

First : Why is this query directed to me.
Second : Does this query arise due to something that I have penned earlier? If so what ?
Third : Be it Abu sayyaf, be it the Kashmiri extremists. From where does this extemism flow and who is respnsible for creating them?

All the questions are just offshoots of what Mayavi mentioned earlier. You mentioned people turning to terrorism because of being denied their rights or whatever. I wanted to know what rights the Filipinos in Mindanao were denied that they have to take to violence, like in other countries. And as far as I know, in India, minorities have a greater freedom to express themselves. I can put up a Christmas star on top of my house during the Christmas/New Year season. In many other parts of the world like the US, doing that is illegal. My friends wish me a "Merry Christmas" back in India, whereas in many states in the US, "Merry Christmas" has been replaced by "Happy Holidays" for whatever darn reason. I don't even have the freedom to use those two words on my festival.



From what I have seen, oppression of minorities in India exists on a very very small scale and most of them are limited to isolated incidents. The major cause for minorities' rights being denied is minorites themselves!



About the Abu Sayyaf's creation and involvement, its all about brainwashing the local Mindanao resident. It again has nothing to do with anyone's rights being denied.

[AHA]

First : Why is this query directed to me.
Second : Does this query arise due to something that I have penned earlier? If so what ?
Third : Be it Abu sayyaf, be it the Kashmiri extremists. From where does this extemism flow and who is respnsible for creating them?

All the questions are just offshoots of what Mayavi mentioned earlier. You mentioned people turning to terrorism because of being denied their rights or whatever. I wanted to know what rights the Filipinos in Mindanao were denied that they have to take to violence, like in other countries. And as far as I know, in India, minorities have a greater freedom to express themselves. I can put up a Christmas star on top of my house during the Christmas/New Year season. In many other parts of the world like the US, doing that is illegal. My friends wish me a "Merry Christmas" back in India, whereas in many states in the US, "Merry Christmas" has been replaced by "Happy Holidays" for whatever darn reason. I don't even have the freedom to use those two words on my festival.

From what I have seen, oppression of minorities in India exists on a very very small scale and most of them are limited to isolated incidents. The major cause for minorities' rights being denied is minorites themselves!

About the Abu Sayyaf's creation and involvement, its all about brainwashing the local Mindanao resident. It again has nothing to do with anyone's rights being denied.

AHA!!! And did you read after what you have quoted from my post?

[lonewolf]

AHA!!! And did you read after what you have quoted from my post?

Did you mean these?

All these were trained in Afghan ok.
Who funded and financed and assisted in spreading this ideology?
What was the motive behind this funding?
What did the world do when this was being spread?

I didn't have the energy to answer them all because I have more important things to do, anyway where did Afghanistan come in? Abu Sayyaf was started in the Philippines by Afghans and yes, while the early batch were trained in Afghanistan, most of the current recruits are trained IN the Philippines, just like how there are many training camps in India itself; you don't need to go all the way to Afghanistan or Pakistan if you want to have a career in terrorism.



About the funding and financing, well, there are some things in life you can't buy with a Mastercard.



About motive, there is technically no motive for a terrorist. For example, why did the Dutch teen get into bomb making? Did he have a motive? Looks more like brainwashing.



What did the world do when this was being spread? Are you blaming the world for preventing the rise in terrorism?

[CtrlAltDel]

And who defines mainstream.
Mainstream is shuunning Hijaab. Mainstream is not celebrating Ramadhan and Bakrid. If this is your definition of mainstream it aint gonna happen. YOu might as well deny Visas and ask the existing Muslims to leave the nation. Simple.
.
.
.
Hmm, so now why is there an ever increasing demand to Join the "SO CALLED" mainstream. What does that mean. Start idolatry, that aint gonna happen.
.
.
.
A secular islamic country that bans people from practising their religion. "Banning of Hijaab"
The Muslims have every right to be sceptical when these calls of freedom and mainstreamisation only target them.

"Mainstream" i am talking about is not shunning your religion.



"Mainstream" is what i am seeing my Muslim friends and co-workers to be a part of.



"Mainstream" is what i see Malaysian Muslims to be a part of.



They are proud of their religion and are devout. At the same time, they respect the rights of followers of other religions and do note try to impose their code of conduct on non-muslims. They do not fantasize and work towards the goal of an Islamic caliphate from Spain to China or all over the world for that matter. Live and Let Live.



I hope i am clear now.



The solution u gave does make sense. but we are somewhat digressing from the topic of this thread. This was to discuss why muslims citizens of western countries have ppl among them who are upto no good and why they turn that way, inspite of being given all rights.



read Mayavi's original post again.

[DQ]

AHA!!! And did you read after what you have quoted from my post?

Did you mean these?

All these were trained in Afghan ok.
Who funded and financed and assisted in spreading this ideology?
What was the motive behind this funding?
What did the world do when this was being spread?

I didn't have the energy to answer them all because I have more important things to do, anyway where did Afghanistan come in? Abu Sayyaf was started in the Philippines by Afghans and yes, while the early batch were trained in Afghanistan, most of the current recruits are trained IN the Philippines, just like how there are many training camps in India itself; you don't need to go all the way to Afghanistan or Pakistan if you want to have a career in terrorism.

About the funding and financing, well, there are some things in life you can't buy with a Mastercard.

About motive, there is technically no motive for a terrorist. For example, why did the Dutch teen get into bomb making? Did he have a motive? Looks more like brainwashing.

What did the world do when this was being spread? Are you blaming the world for preventing the rise in terrorism?

Take a wild Guess!! HUH

[DQ]

And who defines mainstream.
Mainstream is shuunning Hijaab. Mainstream is not celebrating Ramadhan and Bakrid. If this is your definition of mainstream it aint gonna happen. YOu might as well deny Visas and ask the existing Muslims to leave the nation. Simple.
.
.
.
Hmm, so now why is there an ever increasing demand to Join the "SO CALLED" mainstream. What does that mean. Start idolatry, that aint gonna happen.
.
.
.
A secular islamic country that bans people from practising their religion. "Banning of Hijaab"
The Muslims have every right to be sceptical when these calls of freedom and mainstreamisation only target them.

"Mainstream" i am talking about is not shunning your religion.

"Mainstream" is what i am seeing my Muslim friends and co-workers to be a part of.

"Mainstream" is what i see Malaysian Muslims to be a part of.

They are proud of their religion and are devout. At the same time, they respect the rights of followers of other religions and do note try to impose their code of conduct on non-muslims. They do not fantasize and work towards the goal of an Islamic caliphate from Spain to China or all over the world for that matter. Live and Let Live.

I hope i am clear now.

The above post shows how one eyed view of the globe you have CAD.
Good that you talk about Malaysia, FYKI, Malaysia runs on a much more hardline policy then the Saudi Kingdom my friend and both are hardline supporters of the same theology.
That is where the globe errs ! It continues to go hand in glove with

Turkey - Where you are not allowed to practise your religion. (It has been proved in the earlier threads).
Saudi Kingdom - Grossest Human rights violation take place. First country in modern history to bomb mosques and mousleums.
Malaysia - Again where freedom of religion is a farce, with strict controls on muslim practices. Do you also want to read their theology,

“We can go to war, but we have no capacity to go to war. That’s the problem. We (Muslims) have allowed ourselves to become weak. People bully us”,
He said that Muslims should master science so the world of Islam can stand up to the West. "We need modern weapons. We need tanks, battleships, fighter planes, knowledge of rockets," he told the delegates. "These are the weapons that can strike fear into the hearts of our enemies and defend us."

All this is from your mainstream, moderate nation CAD.

The solution u gave does make sense. but we are somewhat digressing from the topic of this thread. This was to discuss why muslims citizens of western countries have ppl among them who are upto no good and why they turn that way, inspite of being given all rights.

read Mayavi's original post again.

That is where I am trying to draw your attention.

Move a little bit away from the one eyed and small time politics view. (stop the islam / muslim rant at the drop of the hat.)

Look at the wider issues, you agree the matters are mixed up, determine the cause and you will have a solution.

[lonewolf]

Take a wild Guess!! HUH

Honestly, your arguments don't make sense anymore and they've just entered the boring phase...

[DQ]

****** PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM PASTING THIS ARTICLE OF AN EXTERNAL LINK. I DO NOT FULLY CONDONE OR AGREE WITH THIS ARTICLE. BUT AS WE HAVE CHOSEN TO READ WALL STREET JOURNALS AND OTHER RESOURCES TO FORM OUR OPINION, LET US ALSO READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY.ASSISTING US TO MAKE AN INFORMED D******



I’m sending this letter to the British people and in particular to the residents of London. For a period of hours, you have lived through moments of desperate anxiety and horror. In those hours you lost a member of your family or a friend, and we wish to tell you in total honesty that we too grieve when human lives pass away. I cannot tell you how much we hurt when we see desperation and pain on the face of another person. For we have lived through this situation – and continue to live through it every day – since your country and the United States formed an alliance and laid plans to attack Iraq.



The Prime Minister of your country, Tony Blair, said that those who carried out the explosions did so in the name of Islam. The Secretary of State of the United States, Condaleezza Rice, described the bombings as an act of barbarism. The United Nations Security Council met and unanimously condemned the event.



I would like to ask you, the free British people, to allow me to inquire: in whose name was our country blockaded for 12 years? In whose name were our cities bombed using internationally prohibited weapons? In whose name our loved-ones are being killed in daily blasts and explosion and through beheadings? In whose name did the British army kill Iraqis and torture them? Was that in your name? Or in the name of religion? Or humanity? Or freedom? Or democracy?



What do you call the killing of more than two million children? What do you call the pollution of the soil and the water with depleted uranium and other lethal substances?



What do you call what happened in the prisons in Iraq – in Abu Ghraib, Camp Bucca and the many other prison camps? What do you call the torture of men, women, and children? What do you call tying bombs to the bodies of prisoners and blowing them apart? What do you call the refinement of methods of torture for use on Iraqi prisoners – such as pulling off limbs, gouging out eyes, putting out cigarettes on their skin, and using cigarette lighters to set fire to the hair on their heads? Does the word “barbaric” adequately describe the behavior of your troops in Iraq?



May we ask why the Security Council did not condemn the massacre in al-Amiriyah and what happened in al-Fallujah, Tal‘afar, Sadr City, and an-Najaf? Why does the world watch as our people are killed and tortured and not condemn the crimes being committed against us? Are you human beings and we something less? Do you think that only you can feel pain and we can’t? In fact it is we who are most aware of how intense is the pain of the mother who has lost her child, or the father who has lost his family. We know very well how painful it is to lose those you love.



You don’t know our martyrs, but we know them. You don’t remember them, but we remember them. You don’t cry over them, but we cry over them.



Have you heard the name of the little girl Hannan Salih Matrud? Or of the boy Ahmad Jabir Karim? Or Sa‘id Shabram?



Yes, our dead have names too. They have faces and stories and memories. There was a time when they were among us, laughing and playing. They had dreams, just as you have. They had a tomorrow awaiting them. But today they sleep among us with no tomorrow on which to wake.



We don’t hate the British people or the peoples of the world. This war was imposed upon us, but we are now fighting it in defense of ourselves. Because we want to live in our homeland – the free land of Iraq – and to live as we want to live, not as your government or the American government wish.



Let the families of those killed know that responsibility for the Thursday morning London bombings lies with Tony Blair and his policies.



Stop your war against our people!



Stop the daily killing that your troops commit!



End your occupation of our homeland!



Iman al-Saadun

[CtrlAltDel]

FYKI, Malaysia runs on a much more hardline policy then the Saudi Kingdom my friend and both are hardline supporters of the same theology.
..
..
..
Malaysia - Again where freedom of religion is a farce, with strict controls on muslim practices. Do you also want to read their theology,

“We can go to war, but we have no capacity to go to war. That’s the problem. We (Muslims) have allowed ourselves to become weak. People bully us”,
He said that Muslims should master science so the world of Islam can stand up to the West. "We need modern weapons. We need tanks, battleships, fighter planes, knowledge of rockets," he told the delegates. "These are the weapons that can strike fear into the hearts of our enemies and defend us."

Mahathir Mohammad is perfectly right in saying that weak nations shud arm themselves to stand up to the rich western nations and defend themselves. even we say the same...how is that linked to their being a muslim nation? he is not talking of Jihad or any such nonsense. what he says holds good for all.
FYKI, mahathir mohammad has fought against islamic fundametalism during his rule and has strictly suppressed it from raising its head in malaysia. minorities are not prosecuted and enjoy all rights. native malays of corz enjoy some 'reservation', but thats based on ethnicity and not religion. but this does not mean the non-malays suffer restrictions.
malaysia does not impose prohibition on alchohol, nightlife etc and prevent people from having a good time. they do not forcibly close restaurants in Ramzan. they uphold their religious principles without imposing their codes on non-muslims.
thats why i consider malaysia as a model islamic nation...even better than Turkey which tries to be a pseudo-european country.

stop the islam / muslim rant at the drop of the hat.

why? why dont the moderate silent majority of muslims ask these hot-heads not to take ithe name of Islam while carrying out their activities? if they do that, this problem would disappear.

Look at the wider issues, you agree the matters are mixed up, determine the cause and you will have a solution.

IMO, the only issue we are discussing here is how to bring the muslim citizens of western countires into the mainstream and remove the suspicion in the minds of the other citizens.

[CtrlAltDel]

****** PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM PASTING THIS ARTICLE OF AN EXTERNAL LINK. I DO NOT FULLY CONDONE OR AGREE WITH THIS ARTICLE. BUT AS WE HAVE CHOSEN TO READ WALL STREET JOURNALS AND OTHER RESOURCES TO FORM OUR OPINION, LET US ALSO READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY.ASSISTING US TO MAKE AN INFORMED D******

a good article i must say, but it does not tell why a British citizen Hasib Mir Hussain had to bomb his own fellow countrymen and put his entire community under suspicion.



it just says why Al-Qaeda is attacking the western countries.

[DQ]

****** PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM PASTING THIS ARTICLE OF AN EXTERNAL LINK. I DO NOT FULLY CONDONE OR AGREE WITH THIS ARTICLE. BUT AS WE HAVE CHOSEN TO READ WALL STREET JOURNALS AND OTHER RESOURCES TO FORM OUR OPINION, LET US ALSO READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY.ASSISTING US TO MAKE AN INFORMED D******

a good article i must say, but it does not tell why a British citizen Hasib Mir Hussain had to bomb his own fellow countrymen and put his entire community under suspicion.

it just says why Al-Qaeda is attacking the western countries.

Hmm yes, but your views also do not explain, the same Al-Qaeda has attacked and killed over 100 civilians over this weekend in Iraq.



In one attack all 34 dead being children.



Innocent lives were lost in London, millions held vigil.

The Media was arift...all guns out stamp out "these muslims" "these extremists" "these terrorists".



Same bloody time 100 other innocent citizens (this time being muslims) were bombed in the same bloody way neither the media cared to comment nor the world stood shoulder to shoulder to hold "a vigil" "a minute of silence".



No world leader had the time to condemn it.

No community rallied to stop these atrocities.



This indifference my friend is assisting in the spread of extremism.



This goes on to show "dost" that the society we live in is a single body, if we stay indifferent to the needs of one part, as time passes that one part will lead to the death of the entire body.



It is really a narrow minded view to blame "muslims" and "muslim societies" for these current affairs. The balme lies in us all of us to what is happening around us.



If we choose to stay mum on one atrocity we might as well stay mum on all until it annihilates us, or speak out against all sorts of atrocities.



FYI: "Did you hear recently India has signed a deal with the US, a security pact, such deals could gradually phase out the powers of the UN."

[CtrlAltDel]

the same Al-Qaeda has attacked and killed over 100 civilians over this weekend in Iraq.

In one attack all 34 dead being children.
.
.
.
.
If we choose to stay mum on one atrocity we might as well stay mum on all until it annihilates us, or speak out against all sorts of atrocities.

yes u r right. there is this double standard in the west. but i also do not hear any universal condemnation of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda from prominent religious or social leaders in the Muslim world. if the 'silent majority' dowsnt take upon itself to condemn such people and acts the image of the community would be as it its now in the western countries.
that is the point i have been trying to make till now.

if terrorists of other religions indulge in an act of violence, no one equates their act with their religion because they do not enjoy support of the respective religious leaders, general public and people who matter.

at least in UK, after 7/7 the situation is slowly changing for the better. the muslim citizens are getting vocal and condemning the blasts and the terrorists. thsi has been hilighted by the local media too. there were reports that in a mosque in a UK Town, an Imam was physically evicted from there by the local community leaders when he started giving a vitriolic Anti-British sermon. in many muslim communitites in UK, they have banned certain people with known extremist views from attending or speaking at mosques.

if the attitude of the people changes like this it goes far in improving race relations.

FYI: "Did you hear recently India has signed a deal with the US, a security pact, such deals could gradually phase out the powers of the UN."

well..its time for us the think of our own self-interest. anyway the UN is a joke...its impotent in most matters and serves only as a talking shop to de-stress world leaders.

[Sharjeel]

Please people, we should be presenting our own opinions/experiences. It is really no use if we keep on quoting external news or talking about something we saw on CNN (the bithc).



A nice quote from the Quran, in passing, which may shed light upon the 'violent' nature of muslims. The Book is full of these sort of messages, but this is one of the most poular verses:



IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE MOST GRACIOUS, THE DISPENSER OF GRACE:



SAY: "O you who deny the truth! (referring to non-muslims in general)



I do not worship that which you worship,



and neither do you worship that which I worship!



And I will not worship that which you have [ever] worshipped,



and neither will you [ever] worship that which I worship.



So, unto you, your faith, and unto me, mine."



Another point which may a very big shock to the people who always call Islam a conversion based religion, is that conversion to Islam was forbidden until a lot later, around 200 yrs after the faith was born. I may expand on this point, if the need arises.

[DQ]

yes u r right. there is this double standard in the west. but i also do not hear any universal condemnation of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda from prominent religious or social leaders in the Muslim world. if the 'silent majority' dowsnt take upon itself to condemn such people and acts the image of the community would be as it its now in the western countries.
that is the point i have been trying to make till now.

if terrorists of other religions indulge in an act of violence, no one equates their act with their religion because they do not enjoy support of the respective religious leaders, general public and people who matter.

well..its time for us the think of our own self-interest. anyway the UN is a joke...its impotent in most matters and serves only as a talking shop to de-stress world leaders.

1. Lets not balme the west for everything. As I said before all of us are responsible, "east - west - developed - third world"



How?



You clairify it further, by saying that when attrocities are carried out by any body else there is no mention of religion. When a "so called muslim" is involved all guns are out, "Koran" "Prophet" "Caliph" "Mullah" ......

Ahem and this veriy attitude is alienating the muslims and driving the youth into the hands of the extremists.

"The vilification of Muslims"



Then you go on to stay we have to look after our self interest. Has not all this started because regions thought about their own self interest ? Name it occupation, name it operation freedom, time and again on the boards we have concurred that it is self interest.

Ridicule UN ! Ridicule International Law ! Ridicule Set Boundaries ! Work for self interest, "Survival of the fittest" leads to some rule...what was that "The rule of the ......."



And to the condemnation by the leaders, please google "condemantion" and you will find the answer.



Good point raised by Sharjeel here. Comming down to acts of individuals, if the world or atleast the media and world leaders knew a little bit about Islam they would stop the rant.



"La ikhrahifdin" "Deen me koi Jabar nahi" "There is no compulsio in religion" You cannot force any one to follow a relegion, a father cannot force his son to.

First tenant that every muslim child knows,

Before quoting a Mullah about his desire to establish whatever rule, if the media also quoted the million other mullahs whose call is the above, this mistrust wouldn't have spread.

[CtrlAltDel]

...if the world or atleast the media and world leaders knew a little bit about Islam they would stop the rant.

"La ikhrahifdin" "Deen me koi Jabar nahi" "There is no compulsio in religion" You cannot force any one to follow a relegion, a father cannot force his son to.
First tenant that every muslim child knows,
Before quoting a Mullah about his desire to establish whatever rule, if the media also quoted the million other mullahs whose call is the above, this mistrust wouldn't have spread.

good point.

the world doesnt hear all that because the terrorists who spout everything opposite to what Sherry quoted have higher publicity due to their acts.

after every act of violence, the terrorists quote Quran to justify the acts. They claim their 'Islamic' acts get them a ticket to heaven, 72 virgins etc. unfortunately this is what the world hears the loudest.



the solution to this is not to rant against double standards of the west but to suppress the voice of the terrorists. like what is happening in UK now, if the majority of the muslim citizens and religious leaders take it as an urgent issue and silence the radicals, it wud go a long way in correcting the image.



instead of issuing fatwas against crackpots like Rushdie or poor innocents like Imrana and making a laffing stock of themself, the clergy shud issue strong fatwas against terrorist acts and terrorists. this has happened now in UK (or is going to happen...).

[DQ]

the solution to this is not to rant against double standards of the west but

Yes ranting about the double standards of the "Globe", will help no one. Keeping people informed and well aware does.

to suppress the voice of the terrorists. like what is happening in UK now, if the majority of the muslim citizens and religious leaders take it as an urgent issue and silence the radicals, it wud go a long way in correcting the image.

Yes suppressing and also speaking against the voice of extremists is important, what is also important that in the process of supressing these voices we should not also suppress the voice of the supressed and the innocent.

instead of issuing fatwas against crackpots like Rushdie or poor innocents like Imrana and making a laffing stock of themself, the clergy shud issue strong fatwas against terrorist acts and terrorists. this has happened now in UK (or is going to happen...).

Here again we err, we have based our opinions on ill informed information.

When the world accepts that Rushdie is a crackpot why does it not condemn him.

Why in the garb of protecting freedom and opposing Khomeni, does it continue to support his views and gives him maximum leverage?

Blasphemy is a crime in every part of the world, why do governments who beleive in Social Justice, equality and freedom continue to give Rushdie legal immunity. Ok your justice system does not beleive in coporal punishment, punish him according to your legal system, then there will be no need to issue an Fatwa.



Imrana yes it is that Deobandi school, that has taken upto itself in the past atleast 50 yrs to ridicule Islam. FYI until the war on terror started, this was the same school that owed allegiance to the same school of Mr Osama. The Islamic world has been condeming their actions since their inception but the politcal gurus and the world powers continue to support them.(Ask them where they are funded from even today, A qari registered with this school gained instant visa to US as a Imam until US had a good relationship with Mujahideen of Afghanistan who were fighting Russia)

[CtrlAltDel]

When the world accepts that Rushdie is a crackpot why does it not condemn him.
Why in the garb of protecting freedom and opposing Khomeni, does it continue to support his views and gives him maximum leverage?

that so called "support" is just to show that the world does not agree with the death threats on his head. even if a criminal receives a threat from someone, he is given protection by the cops.

Blasphemy is a crime in every part of the world, why do governments who beleive in Social Justice, equality and freedom continue to give Rushdie legal immunity. Ok your justice system does not beleive in coporal punishment, punish him according to your legal system, then there will be no need to issue an Fatwa.

Rushdie lives in a society where insulting anything or anybody does not carry a death penalty nor any punishment, unless the person insulted sues for slander. it is called freedom of speech. is what he wrote such a big crime that he deserves a bounty on his head?



if u dont like his book, condemn him, picket his home or public appearances, condemn the book, burn it, ban it....but its barbaric to prosecute or kill him. even tho Rushdie's books are boringly unreadable, Satanic Verses became a best seller only thanx to this controversy. before that who has heard of rushdie?



and yes, on topic, this is one of the things that has damaged the image of Islam and Muslims in rest of the world.

[DQ]

Rushdie lives in a society where insulting anything or anybody does not carry a death penalty nor any punishment, unless the person insulted sues for slander. it is called freedom of speech. is what he wrote such a big crime that he deserves a bounty on his head?

There you err again my friend. Let me quote this before proceeding.



The last man to be sent to prison for blasphemy was John William Gott. In 1922 he was sentenced to nine months' hard labour for comparing Jesus with a circus clown. In Scotland, there has not been a public prosecution since 1843.



In 1977 moral campaigner Mary Whitehouse brought a private prosecution against the Gay News for publishing a poem, The Love That Dares To Speak Its Name, depicting a centurion's love for Christ.



Some British Muslims unsuccessfully called for author Salman Rushdie to be tried under the law after the publication of his controversial novel, The Satanic Verses. But the law only recognises blasphemy against the Church of England.



Though being Biased as it holds good only if blasphemy is against the church of England, but still a law existed in the same society that Rushdie lives in where a person can be tried and a "penalty of hard labor imposed." Laws could have been amended as Britian in 1984 was a Multi cultural Britian, and not a Christian nation of 1847.

Rushdie could have been tried or reprimanded, but no on the contrary, he was protected and lauded for his works under the garb of freedom of speech.

[CtrlAltDel]

The last man to be sent to prison for blasphemy was John William Gott. In 1922 he was sentenced to nine months' hard labour for comparing Jesus with a circus clown. In Scotland, there has not been a public prosecution since 1843.......
In 1977 moral campaigner Mary Whitehouse brought a private prosecution against the Gay News for publishing a poem, The Love That Dares To Speak Its Name, depicting a centurion's love for Christ.
Some British Muslims unsuccessfully called for author Salman Rushdie to be tried under the law after the publication of his controversial novel, The Satanic Verses. But the law only recognises blasphemy against the Church of England.
Though being Biased as it holds good only if blasphemy is against the church of England, but still a law existed in the same society that Rushdie lives in where a person can be tried and a "penalty of hard labor imposed." Laws could have been amended as Britian in 1984 was a Multi cultural Britian, and not a Christian nation of 1847.
Rushdie could have been tried or reprimanded, but no on the contrary, he was protected and lauded for his works under the garb of freedom of speech.

that was a 19th Century Law when ppl were religious fanatics and Church of England was almost the sole religion in England.

the question is....is it being implemented these days?

about Mary Whitehouse, this is what the Former controller of BBC1 and Channel 4 ex-chief executive Michael Grade had to say about her:

She really wanted television to be propaganda for a very moral view of the world, not the imperfect world we live in.
"She was really detached from the reality of the creative process.

abt her case against Gay News, it was the first such suit since 50 years and the editor of Gay News Denis Lemon was convicted and fined a token amount. he was also handed a suspended jail sentence (which in effect means he walks free) but even that order was quashed later.



but the result of his case was that Ms.Whitehouse faced unprecedented ridicule in the British Media and society, except among the conservatives who supported her.

[DQ]

that was a 19th Century Law when ppl were religious fanatics and Church of England was almost the sole religion in England.

the question is....is it being implemented these days?

A 19th Century law, why is it not being repealed ?



About Ms Mary Whitehouse, 1977. She did manage to get the guilty a sentence by an english court, irrespective of what the media had to say. Did the court rule in her favor.

A right was upheld, why then does the world today not accept that Salman Rushdie should atleast be tried?

Why is he still given a VVIP status ?

Why is the world being blinded by portraying it as a fight against Khomeni and Rushdie.?

Why is Mr Rushdies blasphemy not being talked about?



There has been a recent tendency in Western countries towards the repeal or reform of blasphemy laws, and these laws are only infrequently enforced where they exist. Such laws still exist in several countries, such as in Austria (Articles 188, 189 of the criminal code), Finland (Section 10 of chapter 17 of the penal code), Germany (Article 166 of the criminal code), Italy, Ireland (See: Irish Constitution), The Netherlands (Article 147 of the criminal code), Spain (Article 525 of the criminal code) and United Kingdom. In the United States, the First Amendment guarantees a relatively unlimited right of free speech, although some US states still have blasphemy laws on the books. Chapter 272 of the Massachusetts General Laws states, for example.



So what this means is countries will continue to have blasphemy law, will not extend to include "Islam" under it.

Will go to any extent to bring in anti semetic law, in the bargain protecting every world religion, except Islam.

Not only will we continue not to continue protecting the rights of Muslims, but we will go to any extent to protect those Blaspheming against Islam.

[CtrlAltDel]

A 19th Century law, why is it not being repealed ?

do u knw that almost all countries have odd laws written abt 100 years ago? no one cares to go thru nor repeal them mainly coz theyare too busy to do so or have forgotten abt them. i read recently that the present indian union law minister has ordered a reveiw of such meaningless laws.

these laws were passed in a particular time when it was thot of as important in that society.

About Ms Mary Whitehouse, 1977. She did manage to get the guilty a sentence by an english court, irrespective of what the media had to say. Did the court rule in her favor.

and that order was quashed immediately on appeal to a higher court. his life was not in danger

Why is he still given a VVIP status ?
Why is the world being blinded by portraying it as a fight against Khomeni and Rushdie.?
Why is Mr Rushdies blasphemy not being talked about?

thats coz he has a death threat hanging over his head. any rational person will support him in this situation.
it gave one more reason for the western countries to close ranks and talk abt the barbarism of Khomeni and his ilk.
what else do u think they would do? "Off with his head" might have been a common punishment once upon a time, but do u seriosuly think such a punishment pronounced now by a known fanatic on a citizen of another country wud be ignored?

if Khomeni & Co. remembered that this was the 20th century, Rushdie wudnt have garnered this much publicity and wud leave the Muslims with enuf time to sue him anywhere the books were sold. they might have even generated sympathy for their cause.

Will go to any extent to bring in anti semetic law, in the bargain protecting every world religion, except Islam.
Not only will we continue not to continue protecting the rights of Muslims, but we will go to any extent to protect those Blaspheming against Islam.

:lol: u make me laff...a typical paranoid delusional prosecution complex!

[lonewolf]

Since Ayatollah Khomeini's name cropped up here, let me point out that he is disliked by the average Iranian (ethnic Iranians who are born and brought up in Iran). Two of my Iranian professors gave me a little background about the fall of the Shah and rise of fundamentalism in Iran. One of the professors is pro-Shah and the other is anti-Shah. The one who is anti-Shah actually hates Khomeini because even though he feels that the country needed a revival of Islamic values, Khomeini literally talebanised the then relatively moderate country. They refer to Khomeini as a nutcase.



It was very nasty of Rushdie to write derogatory material in the name of literature. But since he is a British citizen, he should have been sued by the British Muslims. Thats the legal and decent way to have Rushdie punished. A religious leader in another country issuing a fatwa against Rushdie is ridiculous. Going by the same lines, how would you react if the Nepal king issued a fatwa against MF Hussain for his indecent portrayal of Hindu goddesses in the name of art?