Walled off...

[CtrlAltDel]

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.

i second that ^^^



Iranians are actually moderate and forward looking muslims and its really sad to see them saddled with a Fundoo governments. My uncle lived in Iran for 2 years (on an industrial project) and according to him, a large number of Iranians (from his rich friends to a poor cabby) are not fanatical and do not approve of Khomeni and the theocratic state. if anyone notices there is no Iranian terrorist anywhere. its all mostly arabs, central asians or south asians.



Iranians are mistaken for Arabs and clubbed together with them, whereas they are of a seperate ancient Persian race. Sadly, we see the US prop up a theocratic dictatorship in Saudi Arabia (and once upon a time Saddam in Iraq too) and oppose a democratic Iran just coz Iran does not bow down to the US.

[Mayavi Morpheus]

if anyone notices there is no Iranian terrorist anywhere. its all mostly arabs, central asians or south asians.

actually, there are no afghanistani, Iraqi or Iranian terrorrists!!

and there are no south asian terrorrists either, jsut pakistani terrorrists.



One more difference between Iranians and rest of the muslim world is that the Iranians are nationalists. They think they are iranians first and then muslims. May be its because of their persian roots.

[CtrlAltDel]

...there are no south asian terrorrists either, jsut pakistani terrorrists.

South Asia = India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives (SAARC)

[Mayavi Morpheus]

...there are no south asian terrorrists either, jsut pakistani terrorrists.

South Asia = India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives (SAARC)

yep, thats why I said there are no south asian terrorrists, jsut pakistanis. I dont want to be clubbed with those jerks.

[CtrlAltDel]

...there are no south asian terrorrists either, jsut pakistani terrorrists.

South Asia = India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives (SAARC)

yep, thats why I said there are no south asian terrorrists, jsut pakistanis. I dont want to be clubbed with those jerks.

:lol: ok...ok....i apologize!

[Mayavi Morpheus]

yep, thats why I said there are no south asian terrorrists, jsut pakistanis. I dont want to be clubbed with those jerks.

quoting myself,



Egypt hunts Pakistanis over bombs



Egyptian police are searching for six Pakistani nationals in connection with the triple bombing at Sharm al-Sheikh.



They have distributed photographs of the six men, news agencies report.



The blasts on Saturday killed at least 64 people, according to Egypt's health ministry, although hospital officials put the toll as high as 88.



Police have questioned more than 70 people over the bombings, with investigators pursuing connections with an attack in Taba, Egypt, last October.

[DQ]

Egypt hunts Pakistanis over bombs

Police shot Brazilian eight times



For all you know, you running late for work, a dash to the train and then ****Thud Thud Thud***** "Terror and the Worlds war against it" RIP***[/url]

[CtrlAltDel]

ah! DQ!!! i was actually missing yr presence last couple of days!

Police shot Brazilian eight times

For all you know, you running late for work, a dash to the train and then ****Thud Thud Thud***** "Terror and the Worlds war against it" RIP***[/url]

that incident was a criminal murder alrite, but what were u trying to prove with that bit of info...? that Brits cops are "Christian Terrorists"?



does it help your arguement, in the topic under discussion?



does it take away the fact of the Paki fundoo hand behind 7/7 and the Egypt incidents?



does it take away the fact that some "exploited and illtreated" Pakistanis decide to show their brainwashed intelligence in fighting western expoits in Iraq by blasting a bomb in Muslim Egypt...?

[Mayavi Morpheus]

It's a crowded train in central London, and I'm sitting opposite an Asian man carrying what looks like a large laptop bag.

Is it a coincidence that no one else is sitting near us? Is it an accident that he's pushed out his corporate ID card so that it's clearly visible over his jacket, hanging like the open page of a passport?

Public transport can be a world of unspoken signals and gestures - but am I right in thinking that he looks self-conscious, sometimes burying his face in his arms as though asleep?

When that woman getting into the carriage half-turned towards us and then moved away, was that a deliberate decision, or was it a random commuter choice? How would it feel to have someone literally turning their back on you?

There are flickers of bigotry and thinly-disguised racism, but there are also convincingly understated descriptions of people's edginess - and examples of how it is changing people's behaviour, including a number who say they have stopped taking Tube trains.

Thanks to the author for bringing up the subject. However, in my opinion many people are trying to justify this kind of behaviour by 'reasonable fear'. Reasonable as it might be, it is no reason for racism. Not sitting next to someone on the train is nothing but racism. It is not new, I think. People who know what Asian culture is, what Islam is, the difference between Islam and Hinduism, who have Asian friends, who truly have never been racist will not behave like that. Those who will not seat next to Asains these days have always been racist and only need a 'justifiable' reason to show it. Shame on them. Fear is no good reason to make London tube a racially segregated form of transport!
Natasha, Birmingham. UK

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4717251.stm



Is it really racism? Looking through the same prism which DQ sees the rest of the world, it doesnt not look like racism to me. Those people who are avoiding sitting next to muslim-looking asians or any asians cannot be racisits because they are not doing anything outward to hurt the sentiments of others. They are not asking asian looking people to get off the trains. They are not discriminating against them. They are just chosing to sit next to a white man/woman, non-muslim, because they feel more comfortable. Isnt this same as what muslims in europe and the rest of the world are doing? Not integrating into the society and holding contempt for anything percieved unislamic, yet working "shoulder to shoulder" with others and "contributing to the society"? If that isnt contempt for a society, its culture, and the nation itself, then what britishers are doing is also not racism. Reminds me of a person who argued with me that the word 'kafir' is not derogatory at all. It is only used for people who donot follow islam and non-muslims should not take offence at being called kafir.

[DQ]

I must say you are ridiculously funny, you will go to any extent ....he he guffwas of laffs.

Is it really racism?

No it is not. A buffon would claim it to be racism.

Looking through the same prism which DQ sees the rest of the world, it doesnt not look like racism to me.

Wether you look through a DQdised Prism or a natural "OPEN" "FREE" Glass, or the saffron sheet, no way should it look like a Racism.

Those people who are avoiding sitting next to muslim-looking asians or any asians cannot be racisits because they are not doing anything outward to hurt the sentiments of others.

Exactly you are talking sense.

They are not asking asian looking people to get off the trains.

Hmm good. (just a note, if Moditva prevailed in UK, they probably would have, anyway thats not being discussed here)

They are not discriminating against them. They are just chosing to sit next to a white man/woman, non-muslim, because they feel more comfortable.

Any sensible, muslim - asian or whatever sould do the same. If you see any suspicious looking person with a backpack avoid him, don't board the carriage or even the train for the matter of fact.

Isnt this same as what muslims in europe and the rest of the world are doing? Not integrating into the society and holding contempt for anything percieved unislamic, yet working "shoulder to shoulder" with others and "contributing to the society"?

Din't we settle this a couple of posts back, if integration meant, marijuana, booze, strip clubs, porn that aint gonna happen.

In the free world that we live in today, countries can come up Visa Norms.

You can enter "XYZ" if you pledge that,

- You will visit a strip club atleast once.
- One person in your family will voluntarily get addicted to marijuana.
- Your women will not wear hijaab.
- Your men will not marry 4 times but will have a minimum of 1 adultreous relationship.
- You beleive that piety and prayer are not acts of indulgence.
- You will worship more then one god, or you will not call your god "Allah".

Then the muslims have a choice to not visit, not stay or live in those countries.

You invite and constantly taunt them of not integrating,

If that isnt contempt for a society, its culture, and the nation itself, then what britishers are doing is also not racism. Reminds me of a person who argued with me that the word 'kafir' is not derogatory at all. It is only used for people who donot follow islam and non-muslims should not take offence at being called kafir.

Again as I said, society, culture and nation let those who blame muslims for non integration define ....Society - Culture - Nation then muslims have a choice to stay or leave.





Again as I said, not sitting next to a suspect looking person is not racism, but not sitting next to a person, because he/she is black / olive, because he /she is mozi,hindu,sikh etc surmounts to racsim.

[DQ]

Reminds me of a person who argued with me that the word 'kafir' is not derogatory at all. It is only used for people who donot follow islam and non-muslims should not take offence at being called kafir.

HMM. Yes. Kaafir is a person who is a non beleiver.



A person who does not beleive that there is only one God. The decliner of Tauheed (oneness of god).

[CtrlAltDel]

Isnt this same as what muslims in europe and the rest of the world are doing? Not integrating into the society and holding contempt for anything percieved unislamic, yet working "shoulder to shoulder" with others and "contributing to the society"?

Din't we settle this a couple of posts back, if integration meant, marijuana, booze, strip clubs, porn that aint gonna happen.

did mayavi say that? why are u automatically assuming that 'integration' automatically assumes that the immigrant has to adapt the vices of the new society. u are being very childish....u are also assuming that every non-muslim in the western world is prey to one of the vises u listed...this is also racial stereotyping that u accuse the westerers of.



first step towards integration is showing loyalty to the new country. this need not be specified in visa rules. it is expected by default.

[DQ]

did mayavi say that? why are u automatically assuming that 'integration' automatically assumes that the immigrant has to adapt the vices of the new society. u are being very childish....u are also assuming that every non-muslim in the western world is prey to one of the vises u listed...this is also racial stereotyping that u accuse the westerers of.

first step towards integration is showing loyalty to the new country. this need not be specified in visa rules. it is expected by default.

I thought it was my query, I said if integration meant that.! "it aint gonna happen"?

I have not blamed any community or group of adapting to these vices.

It is just a query ? Do you mean this to be integratio? Is the answer a simple no?



If it does not then where don't you see the muslims integrating.



As a muslim I ask the globe why the sceptisim and the band wagon (media) of critisism for the actions of individuals you helped create.



Holding a community responsible for acts of individuals ?



That ever increased demand for every muslim to rise up to fight a war that you help create?



The basic tenant of a Muslim is to care (caring does not mean bombing innocents) about whats happening and to provide help where needed?



A couple of posts back I have listed that the greatest injustice of times have befallen the muslims. Look at the incidents around the globe ? Why shouldn't the muslims be concerned about that?



I ask every individual why do you expect the muslims to give up what they beleive in the name of loyalty and integration?



Does loyalty mean supporting unjust causes, if it does you will find vast majorities muslims disloyal to your cause?



FYI, all this while it was foriegn trained, london bombings have portrayed another factor, people born - bred - educated - integrated (FYKI, one was a social worker another a playboy) in Britian carried out this attack. Which has prompted for a shift in policy, from a war on terror (which has annihilated more then 200,000 people) to a battle of ideologies ?



Hmm now this does not need a Arab - Paki target, the war of ideology can engulf anyone !!! It can be Mr Ramnarayan (Opposed to nuclear weapons) to Mr Harry (opposed to Globalisation) to Mr Siddiq (Opposed to War on Iraq) to Mr Singh (Opposed to Gay Marraiges) to Mr Chen (Opposed to industralisation).

[Mayavi Morpheus]

But there is something more subtle. Too much of the internal conversation within the Muslim community at present nurtures a sense of guilt, inadequacy and alienation. "Young people are told: everything you do is wrong - you don't pray, you drink, you aren't modest, you don't behave. They are told that the only way to be a good Muslim is to live in an Islamic society. Since they can't do that, this magnifies their sense of inadequacy and creates an identity crisis. Such young people are easy prey for someone who comes along and says, 'there is a way to purify yourself'. Some of these figures even keep the young people drinking to increase their sense of guilt and make them easier to manipulate."

http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article301486.ece

The alternative is to teach them to develop a critical mind. "On the arts, literature, the way we eat, our sense of humour, the second generation feel close to the non-Muslims they went to school with. That's right. That's the Islamic way. The universality of Islam is shown by the way you can integrate into the local culture. Our young people need to be told, you can dress in European clothes - so long as you respect the principle of modesty. Democracy and pluralism aren't against your Islamic principles. Anything in Western culture that does not contradict the message of Islam can be accepted and integrated."

To promote this it is essential to break what Tariq Ramadan calls "this binary vision of reality - the Us versus Them, the idea that everything Western is decadent and unIslamic."

This is for Sharjeel, our resident sharia expert

If all of this sounds uncontroversial to most Western secularists it has got Tariq Ramadan into hot water with fellow Muslims - most particularly for speaking out against Islamic punishments such as the cutting off of hands for theft, stoning for adultery and the use of the religion to oppress women.

His arguments for this are all Islamic. These penalties are Koranic but, he argues - in a way designed to persuade Muslims who fear they will appear to betray the Islamic scriptural sources - the original social conditions under which they were set are nearly impossible to re-establish. The penalties, therefore, are "almost never applicable". He cites historical Islamic precedents for the suspension of such punishments.

"Islam is being used to degrade and subjugate women and men in certain Muslim societies," he says. And the collusion of Muslims around the world in this "literal and non-contextualised application" of sharia law is a betrayal of the teachings of Islam.

[Sharjeel]

This is for Sharjeel, our resident sharia expert

If all of this sounds uncontroversial to most Western secularists it has got Tariq Ramadan into hot water with fellow Muslims - most particularly for speaking out against Islamic punishments such as the cutting off of hands for theft, stoning for adultery and the use of the religion to oppress women.

His arguments for this are all Islamic. These penalties are Koranic but, he argues - in a way designed to persuade Muslims who fear they will appear to betray the Islamic scriptural sources - the original social conditions under which they were set are nearly impossible to re-establish. The penalties, therefore, are "almost never applicable". He cites historical Islamic precedents for the suspension of such punishments.

"Islam is being used to degrade and subjugate women and men in certain Muslim societies," he says. And the collusion of Muslims around the world in this "literal and non-contextualised application" of sharia law is a betrayal of the teachings of Islam.

Nuclear weapons are a deterrent.



Although, the way in which USA used it was heinous, but the thing to be understood from this is that once a person sees someone having his hand cut off for stealing, he will think 10 times before commiting a crime. Rapes and defamation of dignity of women (and men too) will decrease. There are 150 cases of rapes in hte USA per day, and that is a very optimistic value, it may be a lot more than that, and most of the criminals are reapeat offenders. The court cases drag on for years, during which the rapist satsifies hismelf on maybe 10 more victims. Such people need to be given a strong deterrrant. Once these people see the result of their actions, they will get more impetus to clean up their act.



I know this may sound a it barbaric, but this is the only thing which will work. You have the examples of everything that has failed to control crimes.



The analogy to nuclear weapon may be a bit extreme, and you may have other poiints in your posts as well, but i picked this, as it is one of the most commonly misunderstood practice of islamic law.

[DQ]

Again as I said earlier you are ridicou LOUSY ly funny dude.



You pull up excerpts from media (articles) are not facts. They are just opinions like you and me debating on this forum.



Another call if Sharia is so intolerable (blech blech blech for you). Why dont you ignore it ?



In this age if some nerd some where came up with the idea that the candle is the best source of light, I do not need the halogen or the bulb or tubelight, what would you do ignore him and his call will soon die off.



Likewise if you so strongly opiniate that Sharia is so outdated, just ignore it and it will soon die off.



Or is it that it poses a challenge to the industries you back and support, it is the only answer left today to stem the rise of Porn industry, the rise of illegal flesh trade, or the gambling industry ah ahemm.... now blam me to be a pucca mullah. He He.



FYKI, Iraq was the only country in the middle east that did not run on (some sort of) Sharia law prior to invasion, and still was the most dangerous of nations that it deserved to be cluster bombed.



So is it Sharia or your own support all these years to Tyrranise and Talibanise nations that led to the present scenario. I hope this starts driving sense. Huh.

[Mayavi Morpheus]

but the thing to be understood from this is that once a person sees someone having his hand cut off for stealing, he will think 10 times before commiting a crime.

Do you really feel that cutting-off hands is the ideal solution for robbery? Does anyone deserve such harsh punishment as cutting off hands irrespective of what they stole - a diamond or some food. Read the part I bolded.

[CtrlAltDel]

I thought it was my query, I said if integration meant that.! "it aint gonna happen"?
I have not blamed any community or group of adapting to these vices.
It is just a query ? Do you mean this to be integratio? Is the answer a simple no?

:roll: there u go again....we have already discussed this in before in this thread abt what i think is 'integration'. go back n read them again.

If it does not then where don't you see the muslims integrating.

ok...since we are going round in circles here, i have a small exercise for u. u r living in australia i suppose...ask any impartial white friend why muslim citizens are viewed with suspicion in western countries (this is the actual topic of this thread in case anyone forgot). i think his answer wud make it all clear.



after u get his answer ponder what the muslim immigrants abroad can do to dispell this notion and destroy the stereotype.



if a certain muslim immigrant citizen disagrees with the foreign policy of his country of domicile, he can have a thousand avenues to register his protest. he need not take to the bomb. even thousands of whites support the muslim cause in palestine, iraq etc...do they feel the necessity to explode bombs or join terrorist movements?



finally, the muslim society shud persuade the terrorists not to take the name of islam to justify their acts. that wud go a long way in correcting the image.

[CtrlAltDel]

You pull up excerpts from media (articles) are not facts. They are just opinions like you and me debating on this forum.

ok...reading Tariq Ramadan's "opinions" quoted by Mayavi, can u please tell us what u feel is false or anti-islamic in them? i am esp interested in the parts abt integration.

...is it that it poses a challenge to the industries you back and support, it is the only answer left today to stem the rise of Porn industry, the rise of illegal flesh trade, or the gambling industry...

do u really think those vices dont exist in countries where Sharia is applied? they exist even in Saudi Arabia my friend
no one can quell basic human nature....

FYKI, Iraq was the only country in the middle east that did not run on (some sort of) Sharia law prior to invasion, and still was the most dangerous of nations that it deserved to be cluster bombed.

So is it Sharia or your own support all these years to Tyrranise and Talibanise nations that led to the present scenario. I hope this starts driving sense. Huh.

since u r on iraq, tell me who started the Gulf War? Why did the west turn against Saddam in the 90s...?

[Sharjeel]

since u r on iraq, tell me who started the Gulf War? Why did the west turn against Saddam in the 90s...?

Just as an aside, Iraq was sort of encouraged into invading Iraq. The developed countries sort of double-crossed that madman Saddam Hussein. He was an idiot anyway, and did not need second invitation.

[DQ]

ok...since we are going round in circles here, i have a small exercise for u. u r living in australia i suppose...ask any impartial white friend why muslim citizens are viewed with suspicion in western countries (this is the actual topic of this thread in case anyone forgot). i think his answer wud make it all clear.

Ok I get it where you have it wrong.

I have held discussions with varied people and none seem to view muslims with suspect nor do their thoufhts reflect the media excerpts being pasted.

This goes on to show the scare mongering being created by the media, and the "So called Rashtravadis", "Evangilists" and "every other TDH(Tom _ Harry)" jumping on the band wagon to gain maximum mileage out of these biased reports.

after u get his answer ponder what the muslim immigrants abroad can do to dispell this notion and destroy the stereotype.

I think the above answers the notion.

if a certain muslim immigrant citizen disagrees with the foreign policy of his country of domicile, he can have a thousand avenues to register his protest. he need not take to the bomb. even thousands of whites support the muslim cause in palestine, iraq etc...do they feel the necessity to explode bombs or join terrorist movements?

Correct. Has this ever bee debated by muslims or even on this thred, no.

finally, the muslim society shud persuade the terrorists not to take the name of islam to justify their acts. that wud go a long way in correcting the image.

Thats where you err, my friend. Read all the posts and try to summarize! Time and again I have proved to you that it is not the muslim communities responsible but support of the very governments that are fighting this war that has given rise to extremism and terroism.

[DQ]

ok...reading Tariq Ramadan's "opinions" quoted by Mayavi, can u please tell us what u feel is false or anti-islamic in them? i am esp interested in the parts abt integration.

All that can be said here is what he said is open for discussion. Not accusation of anything being false or unislamic. Though would want to start a dialogue on a different thread to clarify misconcepts that form the banner of critisicm any way thats for another thread.

...is it that it poses a challenge to the industries you back and support, it is the only answer left today to stem the rise of Porn industry, the rise of illegal flesh trade, or the gambling industry...

do u really think those vices dont exist in countries where Sharia is applied? they exist even in Saudi Arabia my friend
no one can quell basic human nature....

The existing of the vices in no way relates to sharia being outdated, or inept. It only shows that it is not implemented the way it should be.
For e.g. before you jump to conclusions,
- if a commoner is stoned to death for commiting adultery so should a member of the royal family.
It is injustice that a member of the royal family goes on a cruise with the best of women onboard and a commoner is stoned to death on suspicion. This breaks the basic principle of Sharia Law that every individual is equal and the law of the land holds good to every body.
No law can prevail where there is injustice / corruption, Sharia cannot be blamed for that.

FYKI, Iraq was the only country in the middle east that did not run on (some sort of) Sharia law prior to invasion, and still was the most dangerous of nations that it deserved to be cluster bombed.

So is it Sharia or your own support all these years to Tyrranise and Talibanise nations that led to the present scenario. I hope this starts driving sense. Huh.

since u r on iraq, tell me who started the Gulf War? Why did the west turn against Saddam in the 90s...?

Exactly, is it not the same question I am asking ?



When Saddam attacked Iran what was so different that the entire West Supported him ? When He attacked Kuwait what was so different that the entire West opposed him ?



He was a US ally when he killed 1000s of his own men, a tyrannical rule you supported ?

Until Osama fought Russia, he was a Mujahid worth respecting by the same forces that today have declared a war on him, and are now holding every muslim responsible for his actions. Another tyrant you helped create. Huh!!!



Does this not prove that the Narrow view of democracy that you hold and your foriegn policy needs a major overhaul, not for muslims to stop practising their religion.

[CtrlAltDel]

Ok I get it where you have it wrong.

I have held discussions with varied people and none seem to view muslims with suspect nor do their thoufhts reflect the media excerpts being pasted.

i too had long discussions with aussies, kiwis, americans, brits, a german and an italian on this topic. what came out was that they dont have anything against Islam or muslims as such, but the recent acts of home grown terrorism is making them suspect anyone who seems muslim by looks or by name.

all they ask is why many muslim immigrants to their countries allow people to come in and preach hatred from mosques?

maybe yr friends dont want to hurt yr feelings or are in no mood for a debate with u...

This goes on to show the scare mongering being created by the media, and the "So called Rashtravadis", "Evangilists" and "every other TDH(Tom _ Harry)" jumping on the band wagon to gain maximum mileage out of these biased reports.

those guys take advantage of something existing and pump it up to full volume.

Has this ever bee debated by muslims or even on this thred, no.

thats what i also thot...but why r u going on and on abt atrocities in palestine, iraq etc whenever this subject is brot up. it sounds like a justification for those acts.

Thats where you err, my friend. Read all the posts and try to summarize! Time and again I have proved to you that it is not the muslim communities responsible but support of the very governments that are fighting this war that has given rise to extremism and terroism.

no, my friend, u r erring again. i am not talking abt why terrorism started. i am asking why the terrorists are allowed to claim that their acts are justified by their religion. is this too much to ask? dont u think this is damaging the image of an entire religion?

The existing of the vices in no way relates to sharia being outdated, or inept. It only shows that it is not implemented the way it should be.......No law can prevail where there is injustice / corruption, Sharia cannot be blamed for that.

i am not questioning Sharia. all i am saying that blaming those vices on the west is unfair since even religious laws cannot control human instinct to be 'immoral' (Immorality is also defined by religion, its not anything definite or concrete, but thats a topic for another thread)

Does this not prove that the Narrow view of democracy that you hold and your foriegn policy needs a major overhaul, not for muslims to stop practising their religion.

:lol: i dont believe it!



u r again going on abt muslims being asked to stop practicing their religion! no civilized nation has done that. no one here has asked for that!



also this thread is not abt muslims in Iraq etc. it is about muslim citizens in western countries!





i am tired...

[DQ]

all they ask is why many muslim immigrants to their countries allow people to come in and preach hatred from mosques?

Yes they should not allow for that matter no one should be allowed to preach hatred.

AND

All the muslim community asks of these people is why do they not so vociferously oppose any vilification of the Muslims in the media, or by world leaders.
Why do they not object ?

thats what i also thot...but why r u going on and on abt atrocities in palestine, iraq etc whenever this subject is brot up. it sounds like a justification for those acts.

Why does it sound as justification.
Why do you have to view it as blameworthy.
Is it that difficult for the world to stop and think, to reflect and see where we have gone wrong ?
Right here on this very thread of discussion, accusations have been laid
- It is the Muslim Communities.
- It is the Mullahs
- Its is the Sharia. Huh.
Does this mean that you have laid the blame on all whats happening today onto the Muslim Communities and now expect them to come up with a Magic Formula ?

No my friend you are further alienating them(by giving credence to such thought), you are creating further breeding grounds for extremism.
The world has to unite.
Yes it has to unite not to oppose Islam but to oppose extremism in whatever form it may be.

- Be it a US congrass man calling to bomb the Kaaba.
- Be it an entire state machinery annihilating a community (AKA Gujrat)
- Be it a super power whamming nations after nations
- Be it an extremist group("So called Al Qaeda"), bombing innocent lives after innocent lives.

Yes when all this is included and the World joins Shoulder to Shoulder then we can fight extremism. We cannot be selective in battling extremism.

no, my friend, u r erring again. i am not talking abt why terrorism started. i am asking why the terrorists are allowed to claim that their acts are justified by their religion. is this too much to ask? dont u think this is damaging the image of an entire religion?

Thats exactly what I am asking. Why is this claim being supported. The more you keep drawing the line claiming that its either A or B the greater danger it poses.

u r again going on abt muslims being asked to stop practicing their religion! no civilized nation has done that. no one here has asked for that!

also this thread is not abt muslims in Iraq etc. it is about muslim citizens in western countries!

Ok now this starts the intracises.

- Why dont you leave the Middle East as it is dude, simple query.
- If democracy has to come it will be a natural process.
- Why is this call to spread freedom and democracy.
- Before you come back with blaming the middle eastern nations, dude nothing spreads with war. History time and again has proved that war is nothing but annihilation.
- If there is an ideology that you belive in, spread it with education. If your "ideology of freedom" is "true and strong" it will be adapted. You cannot eliminate an entire race just to prove that the ideology that you propose is the best. HUH.

If you are there to do trade do that and get out of there, Why TF do you finger around in all aspects of life there, and the more you finger the further you alienate yourself.

i am tired...

i am disgussted but not tired....

[CtrlAltDel]

All the muslim community asks of these people is why do they not so vociferously oppose any vilification of the Muslims in the media, or by world leaders.
Why do they not object ?

arent they doing so? do u think the military adventure in Iraq has a massive public support in UK...? this is reflected in the reduced majority of Tony Blair this term in office. if u ask why he won, its coz people anywhere are more concerned abt local issues and Blair has a good record of governance in Britain.

Right here on this very thread of discussion, accusations have been laid
- It is the Muslim Communities.
- It is the Mullahs
- Its is the Sharia. Huh.
Does this mean that you have laid the blame on all whats happening today onto the Muslim Communities and now expect them to come up with a Magic Formula ?

the only 'blame', if u call it that, that has been laid in this thread is tht many in the Muslim immigrant community are not understnding the culture of the host country and developing loyalty. they expect the host country to change and adapt to the immigrant's attitude and culture. that is not good.

No my friend you are further alienating them(by giving credence to such thought), you are creating further breeding grounds for extremism.

no, they are alienating themselves and giving credence to the rhetoric of the rightwing loonies.

look what is happening in Britain now. after 7/7, Blair and the local media have been very mature and controlled in their reactions. they never allowed the defaming of an entire community. and the reaction of the musilm immigrants was also noteworthy. they cooperated and took steps to fight extremist ideas within their society. if this happened proactively long ago, the problem wudnt have come to this level. now it wud be difficult for any extremist to come and influence young muslim britons, at least for the time being (they might pick other methods...)

it has to unite not to oppose Islam but to oppose extremism in whatever form it may be.

- Be it a US congrass man calling to bomb the Kaaba.
- Be it an entire state machinery annihilating a community (AKA Gujrat)
- Be it a super power whamming nations after nations
- Be it an extremist group("So called Al Qaeda"), bombing innocent lives after innocent lives.

agreed...but why the "So Called" for Al Qaeda? do u seriosuly its a fiction invented by CIA?

Thats exactly what I am asking. Why is this claim being supported. The more you keep drawing the line claiming that its either A or B the greater danger it poses.

:? i dont understand...what does tht mean? u asking why non-muslims support the claim? if all the non-muslims hear is a terrorist saying what he do is islamic and the peaceful lot of muslims keep silent, what do u think they wud believe?

- Why dont you leave the Middle East as it is dude, simple query.
- If democracy has to come it will be a natural process.
- Why is this call to spread freedom and democracy.
- Before you come back with blaming the middle eastern nations, dude nothing spreads with war. History time and again has proved that war is nothing but annihilation.
- If there is an ideology that you belive in, spread it with education. If your "ideology of freedom" is "true and strong" it will be adapted. You cannot eliminate an entire race just to prove that the ideology that you propose is the best. HUH.

If you are there to do trade do that and get out of there, Why TF do you finger around in all aspects of life there, and the more you finger the further you alienate yourself.

waitaminit...u r drawing a connectin between all that and what hapnd to those british muslim youths on 7/7...? isnt that proving my point? doesnt that show that they dont feel any kinship and connection to UK inspite of being born there and living a good life there? they rather feel they have to avenge a war happening thousands of miles away by bombing their own country. if this is how many british muslims feel...kinship with Iraqis rather than UK, how do u think the local Brits wud react? that, my friend, is the problem.

i am tired...

i am disgussted but not tired....

dont worry! i am refreshed again!