a debate between christopher hitchens and tariq ramadan

by Kris Wed May 07, 2014 8:55 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

>>>Hitchens hits the nail on the head with the 'totalitarian' reference. Other religions have gotten away from the idea of religion not circumscribing everything. Islam's idea of blasphemy has kept the societies tethered to the past in terms of how they view the world.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed May 07, 2014 9:34 pm

i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.

by Hellsangel Wed May 07, 2014 9:40 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.

You are such an apologist, Il Professor-ai. Look up what happened in Glasgow.

by rawemotions Wed May 07, 2014 9:49 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.

You are such an apologist, Il Professor-ai. Look up what happened in Glasgow.

You are a classic example of what Edmund Burke says about men ignoring evil. It does not matter what the Indian Muslims thinks or does. The problem is he (the women never have any voice or even freedom to wear proper clothes) is never able to oppose the few who have hijacked the religion of Islam mixing it with political components, with Islamic Supremacist doctrine.

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:20 pm

The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:23 pm

Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:32 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----

Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

You have given a breif interpretation of a few verses of quran by Swami Sivananda. Likewise, is there an interpretation of the whole of Quran?

by Kris Wed May 07, 2014 10:36 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.

>>>>For starters, Kashmir does have a foreign power angle to it, i.e Pakistan. Pakistan's ISI is also active in energizing terror in India. There need be no connection to global jihadism to discuss this aspect. With regard to terrorism in other theaters, if the possible underlying basis is Islam and India (or America) faces Islamic terrorism, it is entirely reasonable to probe the potential religion/terrorism correlation, as long as it is an honest investigation. The disenfranchising of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh as well as Christians *is* discussed. I am not sure how that and global jihadism have been connected, at least in the threads I have seen.

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:43 pm

Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out. Kind of like what happened in India to the Charvakas. Charvaka philosophy flourished in ancient India but it too was finally subjected to persecution and for a long time logic was considered something evil or wicked by the orthodoxy since logic automatically results in developing a questioning mind which means that what is present in the Vedas may also not be accepted by a person who depends on logic for his thinking. There are many references to Charvaka texts in the writings of various ancient and medieval Indian philosophers but no Charvaka text exists today probably because they were all destroyed by the orthodoxy. We know about the Charvakas only through what their opponents have written about them.

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:54 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out.

So....there ARE interpretations and commentaries written on each verse of the quran. So, where is the problem? Which school of thought and interpretation do these ppl who turn into terrorists follow? The problem is that school of thought and their interpretation. They need to be addressed and tackled by the rest of the muslims.

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 10:57 pm

Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out.
So....there ARE interpretations and commentaries written on each verse of the quran. So, where is the problem? Which school of thought and interpretation do these ppl who turn into terrorists follow? The problem is that school of thought and their interpretation. They need to be addressed and tackled by the rest of the muslims.

i am not able to answer your question authoritatively but i agree with your general thought process.

by Guest Wed May 07, 2014 11:05 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out.
So....there ARE interpretations and commentaries written on each verse of the quran. So, where is the problem? Which school of thought and interpretation do these ppl who turn into terrorists follow? The problem is that school of thought and their interpretation. They need to be addressed and tackled by the rest of the muslims.

i am not able to answer your question authoritatively but i agree with your general thought process.

i suspect that a lot of blame should go to this movement though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi_movement

by Kris Wed May 07, 2014 11:59 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out. Kind of like what happened in India to the Charvakas. Charvaka philosophy flourished in ancient India but it too was finally subjected to persecution and for a long time logic was considered something evil or wicked by the orthodoxy since logic automatically results in developing a questioning mind which means that what is present in the Vedas may also not be accepted by a person who depends on logic for his thinking. There are many references to Charvaka texts in the writings of various ancient and medieval Indian philosophers but no Charvaka text exists today probably because they were all destroyed by the orthodoxy. We know about the Charvakas only through what their opponents have written about them.

>>>I was not aware of this. If this school of thought had flourished, we would have presumably seen a very different history.

by Idéfix Thu May 08, 2014 10:41 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.

I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.

by Idéfix Thu May 08, 2014 10:43 am

Kris wrote:I was not aware of this. If this school of thought had flourished, we would have presumably seen a very different history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu'tazila

by Idéfix Thu May 08, 2014 10:49 am

Kinnera wrote:So....there ARE interpretations and commentaries written on each verse of the quran. So, where is the problem? Which school of thought and interpretation do these ppl who turn into terrorists follow? The problem is that school of thought and their interpretation. They need to be addressed and tackled by the rest of the muslims.

There is not one, but several schools of thought within Islam that rely on a fundamentalist / literalist interpretation of the Quran. Salafi, Wahhabi, and (in our neighborhood) Deobandi are examples. There are others that are more moderate. One of the big stories of the 20th century is how one of those fundamentalist schools of thought systematically displaced many more moderate schools around the world, thanks to petrodollars. If Saudi Arabia did not have as much oil as it does, or if the Soviet Union wasn't the world's other major source of oil at the time, the US would not have propped up the Wahhabis, thereby facilitating the export of that ideology to far-flung places like Bosnia, Kashmir, and the Philippines and displacing the more moderate strains of Islam in those places.

by Guest Thu May 08, 2014 11:07 am

Kris wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kinnera wrote:The problem i see with Islam is that it doesn't allow for any analysis, questioning, debate or interpretation of Quran. Has anyone written a commentary on quran? The muslim professor says that the problem is with the interpretation of the Quran. So, is there a piece of work by someone which interprets the verses of the Quran correctly so that they are not commonly misinterpreted and used by the extremists to justify their actions?

Hinduism was revived and revolutionized when Adi Sankara wrote his commentary on the cryptic verses of the Upanishads and made them more comprehensible to the common man.

We have so many commentaries on The Gita too.

Any commentaries on the Quran?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches#Schools_of_jurisprudence

----
Are these the different sects/orders/traditions/schools of thought of Islam? Has anyone interpreted the Quran verses? Has anyone interpreted and wrote a commentary on each of the Quran verses, like it's done for the Upanishads and the Gita?

these include the four standard schools (and also some other schools or sub-schools besides the four standard schools) of jurisprudence in Islamic law. many commentaries have been written on the Koran down to modern times. India's first Education Minister Maulana Azad was also an Islamic scholar; he has written his own commentary on the Koran. in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari the mughal emperor Akbar is quoted as saying that he is surprised at the existence of numerous commentaries on the Koran which differ with one another and that it may have been better to have resolved all philosophical differences while the prophet was still alive rather than for various Islamic scholars to keep quibbling about the real meaning of what is present in the Koran.

what fascinated me most was a group of thinkers who were called muztakils (think my spelling is wrong--will check up on this later) who are described in the book 'The Age of Faith' by Will Durant. These people were rationalists who insisted that whatever is present in the Koran must be interpreted in accordance with reason/logic and experience. Unfortunately, although some of the earlier Sultans encouraged and promoted the muztakils they were later subjected to persecution and wiped out. Kind of like what happened in India to the Charvakas. Charvaka philosophy flourished in ancient India but it too was finally subjected to persecution and for a long time logic was considered something evil or wicked by the orthodoxy since logic automatically results in developing a questioning mind which means that what is present in the Vedas may also not be accepted by a person who depends on logic for his thinking. There are many references to Charvaka texts in the writings of various ancient and medieval Indian philosophers but no Charvaka text exists today probably because they were all destroyed by the orthodoxy. We know about the Charvakas only through what their opponents have written about them.
>>>I was not aware of this. If this school of thought had flourished, we would have presumably seen a very different history.

This is a nice reference on the role of reason and logic in Islamic philosophy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam

by confuzzled dude Thu May 08, 2014 12:25 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.
I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.

But.. but.. this particular style of argumentation has been classified and annotated as straw man in Islam-is-root-of-all-world-problems grandh(am) penned by NRI-patriotic-brianiacs

by Hellsangel Thu May 08, 2014 12:29 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.
I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.
But.. but.. this particular style of argumentation has been classified and annotated as straw man in Islam-is-root-of-all-world-problems grandh(am) penned by NRI-patriotic-brianiacs

I don't think anyone ever said that. Since you are learning from the spinmaster, let me unspin it for you.

I think every one agrees that:

Radical Islam is a major world problem now.

by Propagandhi711 Thu May 08, 2014 1:10 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.
I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.
But.. but.. this particular style of argumentation has been classified and annotated as straw man in Islam-is-root-of-all-world-problems grandh(am) penned by NRI-patriotic-brianiacs

comrade on the contrary it's you and your kebab klatch ilk to blame america, the west, israel and everyone else for all the problems islam is facing. what you're doing is projecting

by SomeProfile Thu May 08, 2014 3:21 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

Excellent point. As long as Indian muslims are creating troubles locally, killing people locally, and don't bother recent US citizens in America, all is well and good. The fact that local Muslim terrorists receive philosophical indoctrination, financial and logistical support from global terror network is totally irrelevant as long as only locals are getting killed. Great point!

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu May 08, 2014 4:33 pm

SomeProfile wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

Excellent point. As long as Indian muslims are creating troubles locally, killing people locally, and don't bother recent US citizens in America, all is well and good. The fact that local Muslim terrorists receive philosophical indoctrination, financial and logistical support from global terror network is totally irrelevant as long as only locals are getting killed. Great point!

leaving aside kashmir which has its own complicated dynamics, what proof do you have that indian muslims are connected to the global jihadi network?

by Guest Thu May 08, 2014 4:49 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

Excellent point. As long as Indian muslims are creating troubles locally, killing people locally, and don't bother recent US citizens in America, all is well and good. The fact that local Muslim terrorists receive philosophical indoctrination, financial and logistical support from global terror network is totally irrelevant as long as only locals are getting killed. Great point!

leaving aside kashmir which has its own complicated dynamics, what proof do you have that indian muslims are connected to the global jihadi network?

As a starter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Mujahideen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harkat-ul-Jihad_al-Islami

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Mumbai_bombings

by Guest Thu May 08, 2014 4:57 pm

For the ones who are too lazy to open the links, here's a glimpse. The first paragraph from my first link:

Indian Mujahideen (IM) is an terrorist group based in India. The group has carried out several attacks against civilian targets in India.^[4]
Police investigations have revealed the group to be a front for the Pakistan based Lashkar-e-Taiba.^[5] The Indian Mujahideen on 4 June 2010 was declared a terrorist organisation and banned by the Government of India.^[6]^[7]^[8] On 22 October 2010, New Zealand declared it a terrorist organisation.^[3] In September 2011, the United States officially placed the Indian Mujahideen on its list of terrorist organisations, with the State Department acknowledging that the group had engaged in several terrorist attacks in India and had regional aspirations with the ultimate aim of creating an "Islamic caliphate" across South Asia.^[9] The terror group was banned by UK as it aimed at creating an Islamic State and implementing Shariat law in India, by use of indiscriminate violence.^[10]

by rawemotions Thu May 08, 2014 7:43 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

Excellent point. As long as Indian muslims are creating troubles locally, killing people locally, and don't bother recent US citizens in America, all is well and good. The fact that local Muslim terrorists receive philosophical indoctrination, financial and logistical support from global terror network is totally irrelevant as long as only locals are getting killed. Great point!

leaving aside kashmir which has its own complicated dynamics, what proof do you have that indian muslims are connected to the global jihadi network?

For the Political Islamists, India itself is an unfinished Jihad. Why would they go outside ? The Big issue here is that, the bulk of the silent majority of Muslims may not care about Political islam, but at the same time are perfectly fine with it when they are in a majority. So they do not oppose it when Political Islam is unleashed on Non-muslims. Young Muslim minds are being imbibed with the poison of Political islam and Islamic Supremacism and thus this trend is continued. In the name of identity politics, this is being sustained by major political parties, who look the other way instead of taking on these nefarious activities. This is a clear and present danger for India.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu May 08, 2014 10:14 pm

one of hitchens's persistent claims is that there aren't moderate critical voices within islam. that's probably true by and large, but people like the guy in this video get drowned out, and deserve to be listened to:

by rawemotions Thu May 08, 2014 10:35 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:one of hitchens's persistent claims is that there aren't moderate critical voices within islam. that's probably true by and large, but people like the guy in this video get drowned out, and deserve to be listened to:

Given that Indian Muslims stayed back in Secular India, India should have had millions of folks who should advocate muscular secularism like Turkey, to keep away Political Islam. Instead we see the opposite. They are becoming like Pakistanis and sometimes even worse than them.

BTW it is not me and you who needs to listen to this, but the Muslims masses. Does it happen. No ? Instead people listen to folks like Zakir Naik who advocate Islamic Supremacism.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu May 08, 2014 10:42 pm

there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

by rawemotions Fri May 09, 2014 12:29 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

Meaningless drivel and completely unconnected to the point. The point is not that normal muslims exist. They do and we all know that. I call them the silent majority. BTW Please do not include Bohras and Ahmediyas here. They are persecuted themselves, and are thankfully in India and not in Pakistan.

The issue is that Muslims cannot combat Political Islamic ideology that forces a PhD in Biochemistry Muslim Woman to wear a Veil against her wishes, because they use the doctrine mentioned in the extremist book. None of the worthies you mention could take on these kind of folks and the complete domination of Political Islamists on ordinary muslims. They acquiese to Political Islamism and do not defend true secularism even in muslims majority areas. Aamir does not dare to do a Satyameva Jayate on the many issues in Muslims society and lack of reforms in their laws, including the most discriminatory and infamous one , which allows one man to marry 4 women. Let me see, which one has the guts to do that.

by Kris Fri May 09, 2014 1:16 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

>>>The mullahs fueling hindutvavadis' agenda is a secondary concern. If the mullahs are not preaching mayhem and violence, the HVs will be peripheralized. The latter's attraction now is in the face of a do-nothing power structure.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri May 09, 2014 5:29 am

Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.
>>>The mullahs fueling hindutvavadis' agenda is a secondary concern. If the mullahs are not preaching mayhem and violence, the HVs will be peripheralized. The latter's attraction now is in the face of a do-nothing power structure.

convenient ignoring of first point in the post, re moderate muslim voices who take on the mullahcracy duly noted.

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 7:33 am

Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.
I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.
But.. but.. this particular style of argumentation has been classified and annotated as straw man in Islam-is-root-of-all-world-problems grandh(am) penned by NRI-patriotic-brianiacs

I don't think anyone ever said that. Since you are learning from the spinmaster, let me unspin it for you.

I think every one agrees that:

Radical Islam is a major world problem now.

How about this and this

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 8:29 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have always liked hitchens's strident views and thoughts on religion. i don't necessarily have a problem with what he says about the state of islam today. what i do have a problem with is our own worthies piggybacking on the problems islam has on a global scale and use that to demonize indian muslims. i am yet to hear of an indian muslim committing terrorist acts on the global stage. kashmir etc. are local problems with local dimensions. what i mean is that indian muslims have not signed on to the global al qaeda type, the rest of the world against us muslims kind of narrative.

the multitudes of discussions on this board about pakistani terrorism, palestinian terrorism, disenfranchising of hindus in bangladesh and pakistan by the majority muslim population, and boko haram in my opinion are intended to desperately find a way to hitch the indian muslim to the global jihadi outfit. hence my deep skepticism of the motivations of the people who post about such issues here.
I agree with Hitchens regarding Islam. The religion is in serious need of reform. But at the same time, the vast majority of Muslims live their lives like the vast majority of adherents of other religions -- paying very little attention to the more archaic and stupid portions of their religious texts. Ordinary Muslims don't go about trying to slay infidels wherever they find them, as Allah commands in the Quran. Treating all Muslims as terrorists is just as bad as treating all Irish Catholics or all Sri Lankan Tamils as terrorists. When NRI Patriots blame all Indian Muslims for the actions of a few, they play right into the hands of political Islamists and terrorists.
But.. but.. this particular style of argumentation has been classified and annotated as straw man in Islam-is-root-of-all-world-problems grandh(am) penned by NRI-patriotic-brianiacs

I don't think anyone ever said that. Since you are learning from the spinmaster, let me unspin it for you.

I think every one agrees that:

Radical Islam is a major world problem now.

How about this and this

And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 8:41 am

Hellsangel wrote:And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 8:43 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

I didn't think you would get it , Comrade. Maybe bring up the discussion at today's Kebab lunch if moderate Muslims criticize the Mullahs enough and look at the chuckles you will elicit.

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 8:51 am

Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

I didn't think you would get it , Comrade. Maybe bring up the discussion at today's Kebab lunch if moderate Muslims criticize the Mullahs enough and look at the chuckles you will elicit.

How are you so sure when you've never ventured out for kebab lunch. I get it.. I get it .. all this profound knowledge comes from years of watching faux news.

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 9:07 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

I didn't think you would get it , Comrade. Maybe bring up the discussion at today's Kebab lunch if moderate Muslims criticize the Mullahs enough and look at the chuckles you will elicit.

How are you so sure when you've never ventured out for kebab lunch. I get it.. I get it .. all this profound knowledge comes from years of watching faux news.

Unlike you Pravda-on-the-Potomac quoting comrades, I check more than one news source, Comrade.

by Kris Fri May 09, 2014 9:49 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kris wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.
>>>The mullahs fueling hindutvavadis' agenda is a secondary concern. If the mullahs are not preaching mayhem and violence, the HVs will be peripheralized. The latter's attraction now is in the face of a do-nothing power structure.

convenient ignoring of first point in the post, re moderate muslim voices who take on the mullahcracy duly noted.

>>>That is a struggle within the Islamic community and doesn't seem like the terrorist acts have abated. My point was and is that that this hindutvawadi issue you referred to is not central to the problem or even figures in anywhere . If the core of the problem is dealt with i.e. terrorism, the HV types will lose massive ground. It is an action-reaction thing.

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 10:32 am

Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:And until apologists such as you and the majority of moderate Muslims forcefully condemn radical Islam, it will continue to be a major security problem in the world.

You think if the Catholic church were to say something radical, most of the Western world won't come down on it heavily?

Heck, abortion is legal in most Catholic countries.

You think Muslim countries would move away from Sharia?

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

I didn't think you would get it , Comrade. Maybe bring up the discussion at today's Kebab lunch if moderate Muslims criticize the Mullahs enough and look at the chuckles you will elicit.

How are you so sure when you've never ventured out for kebab lunch. I get it.. I get it .. all this profound knowledge comes from years of watching faux news.
Unlike you Pravda-on-the-Potomac quoting comrades, I check more than one news source, Comrade.

Like what, Limbaugh, Meakem?

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 10:38 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:

Typilcal necon blather.. ignoring the main point.

I didn't think you would get it , Comrade. Maybe bring up the discussion at today's Kebab lunch if moderate Muslims criticize the Mullahs enough and look at the chuckles you will elicit.

How are you so sure when you've never ventured out for kebab lunch. I get it.. I get it .. all this profound knowledge comes from years of watching faux news.
Unlike you Pravda-on-the-Potomac quoting comrades, I check more than one news source, Comrade.

Like what, Limbaugh, Meakem?

Nah. Like Michael Moore and his opinions and Melissa Harris-Perry and her tear jerkers.

by Propagandhi711 Fri May 09, 2014 10:51 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit

by Guest Fri May 09, 2014 5:29 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

https://such.forumotion.com/t23036-my-fellow-american

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 6:19 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit

Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 6:26 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.

Well on the way to be the new Spinmeister I see.

by Guest Fri May 09, 2014 6:44 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.

As a muslim, were you treated better in US or in India?

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 6:46 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.
Well on the way to be the new Spinmeister I see.

Are you suggesting that your buddy's comparison is out of place to begin with

by Hellsangel Fri May 09, 2014 6:49 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.
Well on the way to be the new Spinmeister I see.
Are you suggesting that your buddy's comparison is out of place to begin with

He didn't compare them. But nice spin there from you.

by confuzzled dude Fri May 09, 2014 6:52 pm

Kinnera wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.
As a muslim, were you treated better in US or in India?

Another pearl of wisdom! tells more about you than me.

by Guest Fri May 09, 2014 6:55 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there are lots of moderate indian muslims -- shabana azmi, naseeruddin shah, the bohri muslims who were our college classmates, the nice anesthesiologist who was a neighbor and a colleague of my father and on and on. but you see they are boring, because they aren't the crazy, wahabbi financed crazy old mullah who gets all the press attention and helps fuel the hidutvavadi's agenda.

this somehow reminds me of "I know black people" skit
Is that because the treatment meted out to muslims in India is on par with what blacks were subjected to America.
As a muslim, were you treated better in US or in India?
Another pearl of wisdom! tells more about you than me.

I am what i am. do not dodge. If you can't answer it here, answer it to your conscience.

by Sponsored content